Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Burris on the defensive

Posted in:

Illinois
Burris

* The Tribune called for Sen. Roland Burris’ resignation in an editorial this morning. The SJ-R did so as well…

And that lack of judgment, we fear, will keep Burris on his present course — clinging tenaciously to his office, changing his story at every turn, denying the people of Illinois the Senate representation they deserve. We would much prefer that Burris embrace reality here and step aside, but we won’t hold our breath.

The Sun-Times demanded answers…

His political career, effectively, is over, but his legacy, or what’s left of it, hangs on gossamer threads, awaiting his next move.

Phil Kadner called him a crud…

Burris, like Badgojevich before him, says he has done nothing illegal. The senator from Badgojevich is touring the state to tell people his side of the story. He didn’t lie, he just didn’t tell the truth.

He didn’t give Badgojevich any money for the Senate seat because he couldn’t find anyone willing to donate to the governor’s campaign.

Now there’s a stand-up guy for you.

* Mark Brown offers up a theory…

…our new U.S. senator not only was the sucker at the table, but he never even knew it.

And continues…

One of the strange aspects about this to me is that none of the recent revelations — before Tuesday’s — would have necessarily been fatal to Burris’ chances to get the U.S. Senate to accept him as the rightful appointee, if only he’d been honest about it in the first place.

The fact that he’d had conversations with most of the members of the governor’s inner circle to make known his interest in the seat isn’t terribly suspicious, nor would have been brother Rob Blagojevich’s fund-raising overtures to him, if he really had rejected them.

I agree. If, that is, Burris is telling the truth now. We don’t know whether that’s the truth or not.

More…

The fact Burris hid these contacts suggests he always had something else to hide. With the revelation that he tried to raise money for Blagojevich, maybe we’re coming closer to the truth about what that something was.

It now seems clear from looking at the rest of what we know about the Blagojevich case that the governor had devised a system. His inner circle would keep him informed about what favors various individuals were seeking. He would then make some computation of what he thought that favor might be worth and then instruct his brother, newly installed as his fund-raising chief, to put the arm on the potential donor.

If Blagojevich put down Burris for $10,000 because of his interest in the Senate seat, then he was playing him for a sucker.

* Eric Zorn offers up a possible way out…

The best bet, it seems to me, is for voters as well as editorialists to prevail on President Obama and major political and civil rights leaders to apply significant pressure on Burris to step down. First privately, then publicly. Not only is his own reputation crumbling by the day, but he’s hurting the country, the state and his party by staying in office.

But with this stick he’s going to need a carrot; a way to save face and not look like he’s simply fleeing as the media hounds nip at his heels. Offer him a deal in which he steps down but gets the assurance that Gov. Pat Quinn will appoint any one of a number of qualified black politicians to be his replacement. In such a defeat is a shred of honor, and if Burris is as smart as he thinks he is, he’ll see it’s his last chance at political grace.

Dragging Obama into this won’t be pleasant. He doesn’t want to go there. And African-American ministers and civil rights leaders are still solidly (at least publicly) expressing their support.

Even Bobby Rush is keeping things muted…

Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) is standing behind Burris, a spokesman said, although that could change as events continue to unfold. “The congressman is still supportive, but the news is still coming out,” the spokesman said. “He has a responsibility to reserve judgment until everything is known.”

And didn’t completely take the racial bait…

“It kind of reminds me of the environment and atmosphere that existed when Harold [Washington] was running for mayor,” Rush said. “It has the same tenor.”

When asked if he thought there was a racial element involved, Rush did not dismiss the possibility.

“I can’t go standing on innuendos and try to make some kind of determination when I haven’t heard from Roland himself.”

Congressman Danny Davis’ defense of Burris yesterday was tepid, as Bored Now notes…

…But it was still a defense.

* And his friends list is shrinking. Organized labor is also upset with him…

As if he wasn’t dealing with enough this week, newly appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) is coming in for heavy criticism from some of President Barack Obama’s biggest backers in organized labor.

Union leaders are blasting Burris, saying he has not yet taken a clear position on legislation that would make it easier for workers to organize into unions.

* And Sen. Durbin has finally responded, but was more than a bit vague…

ATHENS — U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin says he believes the testimony Roland Burris gave to Illinois lawmakers about his appointment to the U.S. Senate was incomplete. […]

But Durbin says he believes that the public statements Burris has made have raised questions about the circumstances surrounding his appointment to the U.S. Senate by ousted Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Durbin says those statements need to be examined carefully. He says he believes that the investigation the Senate is undertaking is appropriate and that he’ll wait for that investigation to be completed.

* Related…

* Burris to address City Club of Chicago today

* Senate Majority Leader Reid cautious on Burris

* Burris discusses Peoria projects with Ardis

* The never-ending story

* Burris timeline

* Burris’ Senate-seat story changes again

* During ISU visit, Burris says testimony was ‘truthful and consistent’

* Prosecutor reviewing comments about Burris contact with Blagojevich

* State’s Attorney in Springfield Reviewing Burris Testimony

* Burris open to ethics probes, will cooperate with perjury review

* Burris says he’s open to an investigation

* US Sen. committee opens Burris inquiry: report

* ‘I will answer any and all questions’

* Burris Unsuccessful in Attempts to Raise Money for Guv.

* Burris admits he asked friends to donate to Blagojevich

* Burris Tried To Raise Funds For Blagojevich

* Burris should step down, editorial says

* Newspaper demands senator’s resignation

* Senate Ethics Committee Opens Burris Inquiry

* Orr: Open Letter to Roland Burris

* Unfiltered: Orr Asks Burris to Resign

* Burris’ chances in 2010 election: ‘He’s going to get steamrolled’

* Burris before the Illinois House impeachment panel. Jan. 8, 2009. C-SPAN video

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 10:53 am

Comments

If Burris continues to refuse to step down after all this, he truly is delusional. We need a special election, now.

Comment by Jeff Wartman Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:01 am
I’ve always supported Durbin, but Durbin is looking quite bad (in my eyes, at least) here. I was no fan of his waffling with Burris before all this — and I’m even less of a fan now.

The only person (at the moment) that’s meant what he said — and did what he said he was going to do (more or less, I guess) is Jesse White.

Burris seems like an odd bird to me. I don’t get a good vibe from the guy — never did, and certainly not now.

He seems weirdly dim.

Comment by Macbeth Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:02 am
The more I read about the stink that has spread from Blago to virtually everyone and everything he touched, I can’t help but think of the classic tale of David Hogan (lard ass) from the movie Stand By Me.

When the smell hit the crowd Blago had his revenge and sat back and enjoyed what he had created, a complete and total barf’o'rama

Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:03 am
I don’t think that Burris is quite as ‘odd’ as Blagojevich when it comes to reality. I think he’s just really, really desperate. For anything. He was beyond irrelevant six months ago.

Comment by Jeff Wartman Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:05 am
Geez, Zorn, run to daddy? Leave Obama out of it. He’s got enough on his plate, what with wars and the economy.

Worst case scenario, Burris remains senator til the 2010 election. How much damage can he do? I’m sure my GOP friends, publicly or not, would be happy with that.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:07 am
Notwithstanding the question of whether or not Burris should remain as Senator it is very unlikely that he will leave or be removed.

1) Burris doesn’t seem likely to voluntarily resign. Nothing about what he has said throughout this entire process, or how he has acted at any point in his career suggests that he would consider resigning.

2) The US Senate is very unlikely to throw him out, even if he gets charged with Perjury by the local State’s Attorney and even if an investigation proceeds in the US Senate Ethics Committee. The Ethics committee may censure him or some other such embarassment, but they didn’t throw out Ted Stevens who was facing multiple corruption counts (despite a very botched case by the prosecution), they didn’t throw out Larry “Wide Stance” Craig for soliciting sex from an undercover police officer and they didn’t throw out David Vitter who was also caught up in a prostitution ring (with some salacious details) just to name recent Senators. They’re unlikely to throw Burris out even if he gets charged.

3) Prior to the new revelations this week Burris was claiming that he owed $400,000 to lawyers. That figure has likely gone up. He can pay those fees with campaign funds if he can raise the money, but if he’s no longer a Senator and has no ability to pay those legal fees out of campaign funds he’s likely on the hook personally. So he’s got $400,000 and growing worth of incentive to fight for his Senate seat.

He would have a tough time winning re-election and he could be removed if he is charged and convicted in a criminal trial, but newspaper editorials and tough press conferences aren’t likely to cause him to give up his seat. He’s going to be Senator for a while longer, I wouldn’t put him on political deathwatch just yet.

Comment by Scooby Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:09 am
Union leaders are blasting Burris,

I think this is just a reminder to the Senator. One ace he has up his sleeve is that he is (or often will be) the 60th vote.

If people get tooooo nasty on him, well, he might just miss that roll call……

Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:11 am
Last night I dug out my old copy of “The Peter Principle” from my college days. You know the theory which states that everyone rises or gets promoted until their reach their final state of incompetency? In other words, everyone gets promoted once too often and ends up in a position they can’t handle.

In Illinois:

Blagojevich
Burris
Stroger, Jr.
Durbin

Shall we continue with this list? I’m sure we can fill a few pages!

Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:17 am
In other words, everyone gets promoted once too often and ends up in a position they can’t handle.

One of Peter’s principles was that a person should “know when to say when”, and sabotage any efforts for others to help promote them further. So, “everyone” is not promoted to their level of incompetence, just the people whose greed or ego can’t say no.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:21 am
“Shall we continue with this list?”

You forgot the voters.

Comment by True Observer Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:23 am
By presuming Burris will have no chance in 2010, I think we’re all giving the voters of this state too much credit. It’s been proven more than once that the voting public as a whole has a nearly non-existent memory and attention span. He’ll stay in office, this story will be off the pages in a few months, if not weeks, and by the time the Primary rolls around most people will have pushed it out of their mind. Should an opponent bring it up, he’ll pull out the “old news, we need to move on” response, and a chunk of voters will buy that line. He’ll have his pocket of support, and if there is more than 2 candidates in the Primary he’ll have a good shot at the nomination.

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:39 am
Lou, here are two more names, Dan Rostinkowski and Mel Reynolds. Both of them are democrat former congressmen who went to prison.

Comment by ConservativeVeteran Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:40 am
Congressman Davis makes some good points about how Testifying 101 says you don’t volunteer more than you have to. You stay specific and say no more than you have to in order to answer truthfully.

Did Burris lie under oath? I don’t know. I do know I haven’t seen the case made.

The only thing I have seen proven is that Jim Durkin is subpar lawyer.

A first year associate at a small law firm would have conducted a better examination.

Comment by Come down from the ledge Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:49 am
Democrats are in a real dilemma here. They don’t want Burris around until the 2010 election, yet they probably can’t get rid of him. GOP should be happy to have this man remain in the Senate until then to remind voters of the screaming incompetence of the ruling Illinois Democratic Party. Early primary is a problem - candidates will have to start their 2010 campaigns about now! So maybe the Dems in Springfield will move the primary back a few months so they have more time to ‘vet good candidates.

Comment by Legaleagle Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 11:53 am
The only thing I have seen proven is that Jim Durkin is subpar lawyer.

It seems to me that there should have been more sharp questioning, from both sides of the aisle, to serve the interests of all the public.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 12:12 pm
You all blogged many times that the impeachment process was not a court room. But now you want to blame the questioners and make excuses for Burris because they were not more like a criminal prosecutors. WTF?

Burris was told by Reid that in order to be seated in the US Senate to tesitify openly, honestly and tell the whole truth. He also took and oath to do the same. He did not. The transcripts clearly show that he was asked directly about contact with anyone other than Lon Monk, like Gov F- Rod’s brother. Our junior Senator flat out lied. I don’t really care at this point why he lied just that he did. I also don’t care what kind of pressure it will take to rid ourselves of him.

To speed up naming his replacement I suggest we contact the state of Minnesota and make a deal to take whomever looses in the battle between Coleman and Franken!

Comment by Leave a light on George Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 12:16 pm
Lets not lose sight of the other component to the Burris problem, Adams was the go between on this deal. The Burris mess may slam the door open on investigating Admas role. Attorney client priviledge is not a shield or protection for criminal conduct.

Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 12:38 pm
For starters, Burris was wrong, wrong, wrong for accepting the appointment. It was nothing but blind ambition and it has come to bite him on the backside. His story changes day by day, no big surprise to anyone.
Burris will not resign. As stated, his legal bills are growing by the day and the Senate gig is his only source of income.
He wasn’t a very good or effective lobbyist and after this, no one will hire him if he’s out of office so that is no longer an option.
Although some might think it’s too early to call an end to his career, he has virtually lost any chance to fundraise, greatly jeopardizing his re-elect campaign.
Illinois voters were dumb enough to give Rod a second term but we’ve been burned, burned bad and I think the Blagojevich stink is still too fresh to let Burris slip into a second term.

Comment by Hair today, gone.... Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 12:41 pm
Durbin has been in a bad spot since Rod was arrested. He can’t say nothing (the best course) because people expect him to lead. He can’t block a Rod appointment nor can he accept an appointee from a tainted Gov. nor can he reject a colleague he will have to work with.

I would like to have someone explain how Durbin could have navigated this minefield without heaps of criticism. I can’t see how he could have found a good way out.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 1:00 pm
I would like to see someone address these points. Have at it. Seriously, someone needs to sort through. I’ve seen lots of attempts to lynch in the press, but little intellegent analysis.

The issue: when Patrick Fitzgerald had his press conference in December to discuss Blago’s arrest, he said something to the effect that his office wasn’t going to stand by and watch the senate seat be sold. I thought that made sense. Fitz basically stopped a crime from being committed.

So doesn’t the fact that Burris’ appointment was allowed to go through without a peep from the Feds, argue for the conclusion that Burris didn’t pay-to-play, nor had he conspired? And by the same token, doesn’t that tend to argue in favor of a presumption that Burris didn’t commit perjury, because he actually had nothing to hide? Sure, he talked to the Blago people, but he had no criminal motive.

And if the state legislators are so concerned about possible perjury, why no mention of turning over to the Feds. Surely any perjury case from the impeachment hearing would be folded into the overall and ongoing Fed investigation of related Blago matters.

Comment by Open question for the floor Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 1:39 pm
Senator Durbin is once again questioning whether Burris was completley forthcoming, so I suspect that the new Junior Senators position is secure and am awaiting Durbin’s flip flop assuring his support.

Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 1:41 pm
Durbin’s fine on this. He has the ultimate “Get Out of Jail Free” Card (a poor choice of phrase in Illinois at this time, I admit):

“Roland Burris lied to us all.”

I am sure he is enjoying his trip very much. Given this firestorm back home, I’m sure he only regrets that the trip isn’t for a month on the Moon.

Comment by Bubs Wednesday, Feb 18, 09 @ 2:11 pm