Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News It seems that Roland Burris committed perjury over his senate seat appointment

  1. Feb 14, 2009 #1
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/us/15burris.html

    15burris_600.jpg

    Is anyone surprised? Will he be indicted, or maybe impeached by the senate?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 14, 2009 #2
    More than likely, nothing big will happen unless they prove that he actually raised some of the money asked of him. Also, it is unclear as to whether Burris was aware of the fact that this fundraising was to go toward bribe money. He could have just thought that Blagojevich was asking a fellow Democratic for financial assistance for his campaign. I'm sure it happens all the time in politics.
     
  4. Feb 14, 2009 #3

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The fact that he said something that was not true does not necessarily mean it was perjury. To prove prove perjury you would have to show that he had intentionally lied and until that is done there exist the possibility that he simply misspoke by accident.
     
  5. Feb 14, 2009 #4
    The point is he made false testimony under oath, in front of the impeachment committee. And about something very serious.

    That's why I qualified with "it seems that".
     
  6. Feb 14, 2009 #5
    I disagree. It does not seem that he committed perjury. It seems he misspoke.

    The fact that he came forth after reading the transcript reinforces the perception that he misspoke.
     
  7. Feb 14, 2009 #6
    i'm not sure it matters whether he did or not. i think certain people are going to do everything they can to unseat him so that they can insert Triple J.
     
  8. Feb 15, 2009 #7

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Apparently Sen. Burris' story has changed three times. He was specifically asked about conversations with Lon Monk and Rob (brother of the ex-governor) Blagojevich and initially denied any contact with them. (One conversation allegedly discussed both the senate appointment and a $10,000 donation to Gov. Blagojevich's campaign) When evidence of these conversations was made public, Sen. Burris'...um...memory was refreshed, and now he admits to have a conversation with them. Um...two...wait, make that three conversations.

    I couldn't say if it's perjury. However, if the Senator's memory needs that much prodding - he seems to only remember things after they are made public - perhaps he should see a doctor.
     
  9. Feb 15, 2009 #8

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Um - please provide the evidence - as in the transcript. What was the context of the questions and subsequent responses under oath to whichever Illinois or US Senate committee such testimony was given?

    If he had contact/conversations with Lon Monk and Rob Blagojevich and then denied it under oath, he committed perjury if he knew/remembered he did and lied about it. What if he forgot about a meeting that was last year or years ago? What if the meeting had nothing to do with nomination to Senate? One conversation allegedly discussed . . . . (the key word is allegedly).

    If Monk or Rod Blagojevich testify they did have contact, and did discuss some quid pro quo for the senate appointment, then it's up to the Congress to take appropriate action.
     
  10. Feb 15, 2009 #9

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    According to the Chicago Tribune, there were three meetings: one in October and two in November. Sen. Burris' latest position is that he was asked for a campaign contribution in meetings where the senate appointment was discussed (this is contrary to previous testimony) but that he refused.
     
  11. Feb 17, 2009 #10

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Burris acknowledges trying to raise money for gov.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090217/ap_on_go_co/burris_blagojevich [Broken]
    I think Burris needs to pack his bags and go home.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  12. Feb 17, 2009 #11
    I second that motion.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  13. Feb 17, 2009 #12

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I can't argue that.

    His response to the Illinois Senate at Blago's impeachment, was apparently intentionally misleading by his failure to specifically answer the question, and not only to answer, but to answer in a misleading way that he now reveals was seemingly crafted too cleverly by half. Too cleverly to the extent that I think intention must be attached.

    I figured him for a tragic figure from a Greek morality play, grasping at something that but for the contretemps of poor lost Blago could never have been his in the first place. It seems he has lived up to my estimation of him.

    He should seek out the dust bin of history at his earliest opportunity. But like Blago I figure he will twist and cling and clutch at his prize and probably won't be removed (though it could be a close one if he does survive). Then he will retire from office in 2 years to seek out the welcome shade of obscurity, as a new Democrat takes the party nomination.
     
  14. Feb 17, 2009 #13

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    It's going to be interesting to look back in 3 or so decades (assuming I'm alive) and see how the history books treat this period. It all seems so surreal. I keep asking myself - "how much more stupid is this whole socio-politico-economic fiasco going to get?"

    I'd like to be around a century or two from now just to see what future generations make of us now.
     
  15. Feb 17, 2009 #14

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Hopefully they won't see this period as the golden age - the blossom of the promise of technology and science that dramatically increased humankind productivity but wasn't balanced by thimble full of sense and resulted in decades of adjustment as it took a number of generations to come to grips with the limitations that our excess came to impose.

    I remain hopeful that the best years are ahead, and common sense will yet be acquired.
     
  16. Feb 17, 2009 #15

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    So now we're at story #4?
     
  17. Feb 17, 2009 #16

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Here is his recent denial. It all seems crafted to play in South Side Chicago, but the intent to mislead seems carefully constructed, apparently with the idea that they could finesse the pre-seating in the Senate period and once in pull a play from the Blago play book and hang on. I'm guessing his re-electability is trashed though. But he can say he served in the Senate on his mausoleum.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecWFKIXGGR8
     
  18. Feb 18, 2009 #17
  19. Feb 18, 2009 #18
  20. Feb 18, 2009 #19

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Did you see the film of his testimony? He looks even worse there - he had to check with his lawyer several times before answering the question with an answer which was, in the most favorable light to the senator, highly misleading.

    I wonder what Harry Reid is thinking now.
     
  21. Feb 18, 2009 #20

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Harry Reid? I doubt he really cares so long as he can control his vote. And at this point Burris is owned by the Democrats. He has no political base. He has no constituency anymore with the departure of Blago - a dubious constituency of 1 to begin with. He has little prospect of being reelected. He's already a lame duck just a couple of weeks into serving.

    But worse than that if he crosses the Dems on any issue they can just convene the ethics committee and boot his behind back to being retired and planning his updated mausoleum.

    In short it looks to me like he is just totally owned. Politics rules out.

    The ones really calling for his departure are the Republicans and Fox News trying to stir up an issue to get indignant about. What else have they got after getting pummeled in the polls for mismanaging government and being reduced to such impotence that the only thing they can do now is whine about bi-partisanship and voting no because they think they have any actual power? You didn't hear these talking heads demanding that Ted Stevens give it up when he was caught orchestrating renovations to his house.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: It seems that Roland Burris committed perjury over his senate seat appointment
Loading...