Roland Burris - will perjury charge take him down?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

Poll question: Roland Burris - will perjury charge take him down?

In the movie Mars Attacks, Jack Nicholson rues the death of Congress and the Supreme Court, saying that we still have the Executive branch left, "One out of three ain't bad!"

The appointed junior senator from Illinois lied. Twice. Only after he was advised that even Gov. Rod Blagojevich's brother was also caught on wiretaps did he fess up and admit that he, (just like Jesse Jackson and others who were caught on tape), discussed the price of the senate seat. Yesterday. Months after the negotiations. Long after he lied under oath to the Illinois House. Twice. And a long time AFTER he was sworn into office as senator.

The Illinois house is now investigating perjury charges.

Jesse Jackson Jr, currently a pretty decent congresscritter from Chicago, withdrew his name under almost identical circumstance. He, unlike Roland, does not have an ego the size of freight train carrying 200 cars of coal to a power station.

Well, after a great job by Chicago's Suntimes, the story has gone viral, yet another example of the reach of Gov. Rod's foul stench of corruption. I would not be surprised if he is indicted for perjury, even though the Democrats hold a majority. Even in the ego-driven arena of Illinois house members, there is no love lost for Burris, and more importantly, there is not enough room for the Illinois House Democrats's egos and Burris' ego.

So, the question is, will Roland Burris resign from the US Senate, and if so, when?

[BlooInBloo]

1. I haven't the slightest.

[eleny]

2. i voted 50-50 because i just couldn't get off the fence about it

it appears that he did lie. and we can still get a dem for the duration since the new governor is a dem.

burris should have told the truth since he also says that he didn't fork over any cash.

the way i figure it, they might decide to sacrifice burris to appear upstanding in the senate. even if it's just for show. it depends on the political climate in d.c. when the issue comes to a head.

i think it's too early to tell, thus my 50-50 vote.

[ThomWV]

3. I think his performance in the original seating shows he he'd never quit of his own accord.

[JDPriestly]

4. I think that Burris will resign very soon.

There is more to his lie than meets the eye. He may not have paid something, but he may have encouraged someone else to give assistance. And I think there is a political agenda behind this whole thing -- such as someone somewhere having a particular someone else in mind for that Senate seat. We shall see.

[cherish44]

5. I think they'll try like hell to bring him down

but in the end he'll stay. I think he shouldn't run in 2010 if we want to keep that seat Democratic though...

[NashVegas]

9. It's the Worst Sort of Hypocrisy

Gillibrand's NY friends donated some $600k to Paterson's re-election campaign. Biggest difference is he was smart enough to not get caught asking for it on tape.

[Radical Activist]

6. No. He didn't perjure himself.

The media is spinning that way, but that's only because they're assuming any conversation about fundraising was also a conversation about the Senate seat, even if the seat wasn't specifically discussed.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. I disagree. The coverage here in Illinois was pretty strong

on the issue, after jackson, was obvious. Did anyone offer or demand anything for the senate seat? Burris, UNDER OATH, said no. he lied.

This is not spin. this is a small minded, egotistical man who finally saw a senate seat in his grasp, and he would (and did) say and do anything to get it.

[Radical Activist]

11. Burris' statement doesn't support your claim.

Burris said he was asked for fundraising help. He DOES NOT say he was asked to help in exchange for the seat AND Burris said he would not help because of how it would appear.

You wrote: "Did anyone offer or demand anything for the senate seat?"
NO, according to the information we have now.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

15. sigh. You obviously don't speak chicagoese.

Hell, 20 yrs ago, it was pencils for police. May I see your license? I have three pencils. a $10 pencil, a $20 pencil, and this here great $50 pencil. Are you SURE you don't need a pencil?"

Just google the Hired Truck scandal, or read page two of today's Tribune. John Kass kicks ass again about the culture here.

If I may, you miss the whole culture and the major point. When he is talking about donations for fund raising, WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK HE WAS DOING?

Jeez. Blogo is going down because he sold many state offices for $40,000 per. they called those campaign fund donations, too.

[Radical Activist]

18. Do you know the definition of perjury?

The OP is about perjury. If the Senate seat and fundraising, or an exchange for the two, were not discussed in the same conversation then there is no perjury. Everything else you write is irrelevant to the perjury charge.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

22. I'll take that as an admission

that you know I'm right but are unhappy with the facts.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Occam Bandage]

30. I think you win, I think you make strong points, and more importantly,

this is the first I've seen your new name, and I like it quite a bit.

[Radical Activist]

34. Then you should notice

that Burris was not asked questions at the hearing that forced him to contradict what he released in his statement today. The fact that he refused to do fundraising doesn't support the perjury charge. It supports the claim that the appointment wasn't done in exchange for anything, especially since the fundraising and Senate seat conversations did not coincide with each other. Your lesson about how Chicagoese works is true but it isn't a basis for perjury based on what we know now.

[Inuca]

13. "a small minded, egotistical man "

very well put. Burris is an embarrassment. I have no idea what will come out of the recent revelations, but I hope he will get his due one way or another. As to the "only black in the Senate argument", IMHO it is a BS. There was only one black senator until very recently, and we all know why (prior to Burris) there was none. I would of course love to see more in the Senate (keeping my fingers crossed for Arthur Davis in Alabama, I think I read somewhere that he decided to run, love the guy, smart, competent, thoughtful) but on the other hand the Senate is not the place for affirmative action.

[babylonsister]

28. He has a presser on cnn now, and boy, is he defensive. I think

he knows he's in deep doo-doo.

[Inuca]

29. I missed it

Hope they will replay it. Any more details?

PS: WOW!! look at all those (well deserved) hearts :-).

[babylonsister]

31. It's still on, and has been for awhile. Just go listen to his tone. He's

rattled.

[MADem]

7. I said "other" because he can't be impeached

See link, 2nd question: http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html

But even if he's censured or punished by his own in the Senate, I don't think he'll put resignation at the top of his priority list. He'll either pull the "I forgot" defense, the "I didn't take him seriously/wasn't listening to him"/wasn't paying attention routine, or he'll obfuscate.

How far will the Senate want to take this, too? Do they want to come after the only black Senator with pitchforks and torches? Are "We, The People" EVER going to be able to hear all these "awful" tapes, and see if they are, indeed, as clear-cut as others are telling us they are?

Hey, we didn't believe Bush when he TOLD US there were WMD in Iraq. Why should we believe anyone who TELLS US what is on a tape?

Who are we going to believe? Our own lying ears...or someone else's?

[SoCalDem]

10. Every elected official "asks" for donations from other elected officials

It's the Official Good-Ole-Boy-Network way to do things..

Unless Burriss' voice is on the tape ofgfering to pay for the senate seat, he'll stary there..and he'll run again in '10.. He'll probably lose, but he'll run

[Inuca]

14. Burris has not been an elected official

for a while.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

16. not for the want of trying. But Illinois did not want any more of him.

[SoCalDem]

20. That's true, but every dem has a rolodex of possible donors

and I'm sure they contact everyone.. BUT if Burriss is on tape, he's probably toast..

[Inuca]

25. About toast

I hope that's what he is, though I am far from confident. IMHO what he did was DESPICABLE. It may sound too strong, but I truly believe so. Politicians are supposed to pu country before party. Very few do. He put himself way above both party and country in a pathetic and embarrassing ego trip.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

12. Never. If there's a sliver of wiggle room everyone will grab it.

He'll have an opportunity in 2010 to step aside gracefully and chisel 'US Senator' on his Tomb of the Unbridled Ego.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

17. already chiseled there.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

21. Get out! Really?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

24. WBEZ made a reference to that a few days after he was sworn in.

[Inuca]

26. If true

it's... it's... un-describable.

[Occam Bandage]

27. I hope so, but it probably won't. nt

[bridgit]

32. A perjury 'charge'? No. But a sustainable act of perjury will

[saltpoint]

33. If I ran the universe -- and people, it's just a matter of time -- I'd seat

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky in that job as soon as possible.

If that means a challenge to incumbent Burris in 2010, then I'm still for Schakowsky.

If the perjury charge is borne through to proof, then yes, I think it will damage Burris' claim for full election to that seat.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

35. she would be a kick ass choice.

A couple of others, too.

Then again, Quinn may simply try a local twist and select Lisa Madigan solely to preserve and protect his seat.

[saltpoint]

36. Yes. Governors do the darndest things.

I wonder if Lisa Madigan would accept, concentrating as she likely is on Quinn's job.

Things are going to get interesting in Illinois real soon, looks like.