Chicago Sun-Times
Inside the Rod Blagojevich investigation and related cases

Burris: 'I've always conducted myself with honor'

| 15 Comments | No TrackBacks


In a contentious news conference, U.S. Sen. Roland Burris says he did not perjure himself and has been completely forthcoming with a House impeachment committee.
Burris said he amended his statement for the house committee in an effort to be complete and any effort to say otherwise "is simply playing in partisan politics."
Burris was besieged with questions about why he failed to mention to the committee that he had three discussions with the ex-governor's brother before he was appointed to the U.S. Senate.
Burris and his lawyer, Timothy Wright, repeatedly defended the senator's answers, saying they were only incomplete because of a lack of follow-up on the part of the questioner.
"I thought we were absolutely transparent in this matter," Wright said. He then said the new, Feb. 5 affidavit wasn't about being transperent because they had nothing to hide. "For me, it was about being thorough."
Burris said his three sworn statements didn't contradict one another. He said in his first affidavit, dated Jan. 5, where he said he had no prior contacts with Rod Blagojevich or his staff before his appointment to the Senate he was speaking only of the appointment process. His testimony on Jan. 8 dealt with a different question, he said.
"You all are writing inconsistent news," he said. "If you all report this correctly, this is not a story."
Burris said he refused to contribute to Blagojevich, that he never promised any money or favors.
"I've always conducted myself with honor," he said.

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL: http://blogs.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/20006

15 Comments

He had plenty of time to answer questions honestly and he had plenty of time to prepare for his testimony...he should not have even waited to be asked if he was approached with pay to play offer, that is what the entire hearing was about how could he not think it was important.

These folks sound like Aunt Bess and her sewing circle talking about anyone they want. What isn't the truth is that not saying something under oath is the same as lying. If that's true then EVERY single person testifying under oath is a liar, because as we all know you ONLY answer the questions you are asked. He didn't answer the non-question about the weather that day there fore he lied about the weather. As much as Durkin, whom if I recall correctly NEVER, EVER asked George Ryan to resign and oh yeah never requested he be impeached, that makes him a "A" number one hypocrite, but what do you expect.

Could this be the tombstone for Tombstone? Mr. Burris is attentive to detail when it suits him. Why is Mr. Burris so confounded when it comes time to tell the truth? Children can tell the truth without splitting legal hairs. Mr. Burris, did you update your tombstone before updating your testimony with yet another version of your "truth"? Illinois needs recall vote provisions ASAP.

People would do well to read the whole transcript of the impeachment committee hearing. It can be found at the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/us/politics/16burris.html?hp

What it shows is the incompetence of the people asking the questions, including Rep. Durkin. Like the lawyer that he is, and a former AG of Illinois to boot, can you blame Burris for answering the questions he was asked without volunteering additional information? The committee members seemed so intent on showing how important they were that they forgot to ask the simple, pointed and straight-forward questions that would have elicited the answers they were looking for, or even wait for complete answers before asking competent follow-up questions. Perhaps he should have offered the additional information he has provided now, but since he hadn't done anything wrong, and must have really wanted the job as the junior senator from Illinois, Burris didn't do so.

Bottom Line (if you read the whole transcript and Burris' affidavit)...before Obama was even elected, be was approached about raising fund for the former Governor and he said no. Where is the harm in that? Then after Obama was elected and he had expressed an interest in replacing him as senator, Burris was approached again by the former Governor's brother. And again Burris said no, precisely because he thought it would be improper. Again, what did he do wrong here? I think the committee members are mad because of the fool they made of themselves.

When Senator Roland Burris of Illinois stands up to address the members of the United States Senate in Washington, D.C.-----will any senator listening, seriously believe anything he says?

Near the end of Mr. Burris' testimony he was asked if he had anything else to add or say and he chose to reply no. My god, the man is no different that Blagojevich....he lies through omission and perjures himself in the process by omitting information that would be direct answers to previous questions, simply because it may cause him to not get his Senate seat. How contemptous!

The U.S. Senate should make a motion and vote this pretentious and lying jerk out....this is not who the citizens need in office. Blagojevich is just out and we get his sidekick Burris now.

The comment I like the most from Burris is that he hasn't given Blago a single dollar, then what is up with all the non-responses to questions regarding conversations with Blago associates...and I would also like to know what is up with the comments in the affidavit regarding "getting his nephew a job"?

Geez, file perjury charges, vote him out the U.S. Senate and let we citizens of Illinois get off the news and start to regain our pride in our State already.

Signed,
Embarrassed to be from Illinois

P.S.

Great Blues Brothers reference...so true!

I didn't think anything could have topped the staged appearance of race-baiting terrorist Bobby Rush and the comedic value it provided during the Blago/Burris press conference, but I was wrong. This performance today was, quite possibly, the funniest 30 minutes I have ever witnessed. Who does this hack/token/incompetent boob think we, the electorate of Illinois, are? Obviously, he has reason to believe we're not too bright, having previously elected and reelected people like him, Daley, the Strogers, Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson Jr, Danny Davis, Dan Rostenkowski, Carol Moseley-Braun, Dick Durbin, Mel Reynolds, George Ryan, Jim Thompson, Luis Gutierrez, Emil Jones, Mike Madigan, James Meeks...But does he really believe we are this stupid? Does he really believe we're dumb enough to lap up his excuses, that he answered the questions fully, this is partisan, and the press is at fault for misreporting what he has said? Hard to believe this state could be reaching new lows, what with the depths we have gone to with Blago, but we don't seem to have reached bottom yet.

A Liar and clown and as disillusioned as Rod is

Burris the liar has turned the senate into just another clown show
he should have never been in office and turning the state of Ill into a laughing clown show once again. Burris: 'I've always conducted myself with honor' yea sure, sic of rotten lying politicians he is as disillusioned as Rod is.

Burris is a lying liar who lies.

Hey, ho, it's time for this crook to go!

He reminds me of John Belushi in The Blues Brothers. The scene where he tries to explain his innocence to Carrie Fisher, "the car had a flat tire, the tux was late.....IT WASN'T MY FAULT!!"

Burris lied during the impeachment questioning and now is blaming the questioners for supposedly leading away from the original question. He is so involved with himself and his desire to get the senate seat and remain there, he will go to great lengths to deny any wrongdoing. A decent man would admit he "misspoke" and resign! Not only is Blagojevich' choice for the senate seat tainted, Mr. Burris himself is tainted. He is old Chicago politics so what can one expect from that type of corruption?

Maybe he can turn to Bill Clinton for advice.

In defining a word in a dictionary, there is the primary understanding of that word and then the following secondary and so on of that word's definition. So, the question wasn't asked. Is this the game of 20 questions? What's your definition of a definition? English class 101 Please Stop. Now we are to have the contributor's and the contributee's each knowing what the other person is thinking about doing? Or, running for office? My god no one is responsible. Just show up at the steps of Congress and get a seat. Plus or Minus a few thousand dollars of course. And by NOT saying anything is that omission? or an admission of ethical behavior? The polls have spoken before, the public is only about 15% honest in anything political we do in this country. Ethics and honesty is at the bottom of the cesspool. sad sad sad

He needs to bring Bobby Rush to his next news conference.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Natasha Korecki published on February 15, 2009 5:30 PM.

Burris to address media about perjury questions was the previous entry in this blog.

Burris to make another statement is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.