Actually there are two problems. In his testimony before the Illinois House Impeachment Panel on 1/8/2009:
- Burris was asked -- not once but twice -- if he had been contacted by specific people in the Governor's office including Blago's brother. His responses were a complete evasion.
- He was asked if he had been approached with a quid pro quo deal for the Senate seat. He said no.
Here's the relevant transcript. Here's the same bit on YouTube.
In no way was Burris hurried through these questions. At every point he conferred with his attorney.
This was precisely the time when we had every right to expect complete transparency. Indeed, his appointment to the Senate was riding on it. But instead what we got was a performance on a par with Alberto Gonzalez.
UPDATE: Just to emphasize my final point, it's important (and not too difficult) to put ourselves back to the month or so following Blagojevich's arrest. There was all this talk of "Senate Candidate Number 1", "Senate Candidate Number 2", etc. Within a matter of days, we got statements from everyone from Jan Schakowsky and Lisa Madigan to Jesse Jackson, Jr. We even got an official report from the Obama (pre-)Administration.
You'd think in such an atmosphere, the least we could expect was complete candor from the person hoping to become our new Senator. Instead what we got was silence and now months later, arguments over semantics. It's a disgrace.
UPDATE II: And one last thing before I put this post to rest, here's something I only noticed when going over the print edition of the Sun-Times:
Burris on wiretaps?
After contact with federal agents, U.S. Sen. Roland Burris changed his sworn testimony to the Illinois House committee that moved to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
So we were wondering why he started to fess up all a sudden -- even at this late date? Now we know, it was "after contact with federal agents".
