Sen. Roland Burris in hot water: GOP demands resignation, perjury probe; Update: Burris blames questioner for not asking him about Rob Blago; Reporters laugh at Burris
Scroll for updates…4:30pm Eastern Burris scheduled to address press…5:00pm Eastern press conference is a disaster for Burris…press laughs at Burris for his dubious rationalization for omitting Rob Blago contact…
Welcome to “As the Worm Turns.” In the wake of news this weekend of possible perjury by Blago crony Sen. Roland Burris, the Illinois GOP is demanding an investigation — and now, resignation:
An Illinois Republican leader says the state’s freshman U.S. senator should resign over contradictory statements regarding Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s impeachment.
State Rep. Jim Durkin told reporters Sunday that Democrat Roland Burris should resign over an affidavit contradicting statements he made earlier to a House committee.
Durkin also wants Burris investigated for possible perjury.
Gov. Pat Quinn also says Burris owes a full explanation. Burris plans a news conference later Sunday.
An affidavit released Saturday indicates Blagojevich’s brother asked Burris to host a fundraiser for the governor before Burris was appointed to the vacancy left by Barack Obama. That reflects a major omission from January testimony.
Race card-waving in 3, 2, 1…
***
4:29pm Eastern. Burris will be holding a press conference shortly to explain his amnesia.
4:38pm Eastern. Burris says he has made “no inconsistent statements.”
He says he had contact with 6 individuals about the seat, including Robert Blagojevich (Rod’s bro). Says he made clear he was not interested in donating money or doing favors for governor.
“Anyone who would suggest others…is simply playing at partisan politics.”
“Rob called me in October and as we said in the affidavit, that we advised him we would could not raise any money for him because we were raising money for other candidates…I couldn’t raise any money.”
Reporter asks why Rob Blago was not mentioned in first affidavit, but Lon Monk was. Lawyer says supplemental affidavit followed up and mentions that “he talked to friends” and that it was his intention to mention Rob Blago later.
Uh-huh.
Burris blames questioner for not asking specifically whether he spoke to Rob Blago.
***
Time asks: Liar or fool? You decide:
Burris gets appointed to the Senate by Rod Blagojevich, a self-made cartoon of political ineptness and alleged corruption. The U.S. Senate won’t seat Burris until he testifies under oath that he is unblemished by the Blagojevich stain. Burris does this–under oath–knowing that any disclosure of contacts with the Blagojovich camp could jeopardize the Senate acceptance of his nomination. He submits a sworn affidavit saying “there was not any contact between myself or any of my representatives with Governor Blagojevich or any of his representatives” about the Senate seat before he was offered the job. A few days later, he testifies under oath that he did, after all, talk about the job previously with “some friends about his desire to be appointed.” He is asked specifically about conversations with Blagojevich aides and associates Doug Scofield, Bob Greenleaf, Lon Monk, John Wyma and John Harris. He says he spoke with Lon Monk, a state lobbyist with ties to Blagojevich. Based on this information, he is accepted into the U.S. Senate.
Last Friday, the Burris story changes again–big time. (To see the new affidavit, click here.) His new story, includes these salient details: As far back as June, at a fundraiser Burris attended for Blagojevich, Burris told two of the governor’s aides, Wyma and Scofield, that he was “interested” in the Senate job. He also talked to Blagojevich’s brother about the post, not once but three times in October and November, and Burris, as part of the same conversations, discussed raising money for Blagojevich with the brother. (Burris claims he declined, saying it would look bad.) In October he called Blagojevich’s chief of staff, John Harris, in an attempt to get his own nephew a state job, and then asked about the Senate appointment. He also called Ed Smith, a “friend and supporter” of Blagojevich’s, to ask if he had a chance of getting the Senate job.
Burris, still under oath in a sworn affidavit, now says that he did not bring these facts up during the January testimony because he was “asked another question,” and did not have a chance to more fully explain himself. At best, this makes Burris a political fool, because he knowingly allowed his new Senate colleagues to be played for fools by denying them all the information they sought. Uncovering these facts, after all, was the entire purpose of his testimony, and he knew that. Did he think he could get by without bringing them up? Did he not feel the responsibility to clear the air, if not at the hearing, then immediately following the hearing? Did he think no one would notice, or that the information would not eventually come out?
Full transcript of original testimony here.
***
5:00pm Eastern update. The press just laughed at Burris for trying to defend his incomplete answer in his original affidavit.
REPRESENTATIVE DURKIN: Did you talk to any members of the Governor’s staff or anyone closely related to the Governor, including family members or any lobbyists connected with him, including let me throw out some names, John Harris, Rob Blagojevich, Doug Scofield, Bob Greenleaf, Lon Monk, John Wyma, did you talk to anybody who was associated with the Governor about your desire to seek the appointment prior to the Governor’s arrest?
MR. WRIGHT: Give us a moment.
MR. BURRIS: I talked to some friends about my desire to be appointed, yes.
REPRESENTATIVE DURKIN: I guess the point is I was trying to ask, did you speak to anybody who was
on the Governor’s staff prior to the Governor’s arrest or anybody, any of those individuals or anybody who is closely related to the Governor?MR. BURRIS: I recall having a meeting with Lon Monk about my partner and I trying to get continued business, and I did bring it up, it must have been in September or maybe it was in July of ‘08 that, you know, you’re close to the Governor, let him know that I am certainly interested in the seat.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Sen. Roland Burris in hot water: GOP demands resignation, perjury probe; awaiting press conference — But As For Me
- Chicago politics at its finest. More problems for Ronald Burris - GOP demands resignation, perjury probe, Burris naturally blames someone else | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- Roland Burris (D-IL): Liar Liar Pants On Fire | Democrat = Socialist
- threedonia.com » Blago: The Gift that Keeps on Giving.
- Chew on this: CNN a go-go, Brangelia gets creeped out « Chockblock’s blog
- Random-American » Ahh, Illinois Politics
- Remembering the Music: Van Halen « JoHNBRoDiGaNDoTCoM
- Sen. Roland Burris in hot water: GOP demands resignation, perjury probe; Update: Burris blames questioner for not asking him about Rob Blago; Reporters laugh at Burris | The 2008 Elections
- The Obamaworld Watch: Sen. Roland Burris in hot water: GOP demands resignation, perjury probe « Jim Blazsik
- The TIW Blog » Blog Archive
- Sen. Roland Burris in hot water: GOP demands resignation, perjury probe; Update: Burris blames questioner for not asking him about Rob Blago; Reporters laugh at Burris — But As For Me
- Illinois GOP leader calls on Sen. Burris to resign « Peace and Freedom Global Future
- Tel-Chai Nation
- The Democrats, the Chicago Machine, and Illinois politics… an update! More now and I am sure more to come! | Robert Opyd (baghdad-bob)
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Corruption
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Founding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularDoug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksDoug Ross @ Journal
» The CRU Climate Scam In 90 SecondsHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%Mudville Gazette
» Threatswatch: US Embassy Denies Secret Eikenberry Talks With Taliban
MrScribbler said:
Sure he put the cup to his lips, but he didn’t take a sip.
Kinda like how Clinton smoked without inhaling.
Reid controls the Senate. He couldn’t just schedule the vote on Porkulus for the following week when nobody was going to be at a funeral?
(I know the answer- the huge rush was to ensure the more egregious elements didn’t get publicized and before home state opposition might sway one of the Treason Trio or one of the less radically Marxist senators.
The second Senate vote was on the bill approved with the markups added back on by the conference committee.
With all the so called compromises supposedly needed to get the Treason Trio on board removed, and all the pork added back.
The Nelson-Collins ‘compromise’ was a farce, the Treason Trio was always going to vote with their caucus in all but name, they just needed some cover to call it bipartisan.
BTW, if Kennedy’s illness is serious enough he can’t attend to Senate business except in the most extreme cases, he should retire. If Princess Caroline moves now she may be able to establish Massachusetts residency fairly quickly.
Maybe that is why the unrepentant DWI Killer is holding out and not retiring, come to think of it.
Although I had heard he planned for the latest Mrs. Kennedy to inherit her rightful place in the House of Lords if he went off to answer for his crimes.
Ya think?
In other news, Satan himself met with President Obama and tempted him three times. however, since President Obama was completely free of Original Illinois Sin, he was able to resist the Dark Lord’s temptations and shun the devil and his advances.
Yes, it sure is great to know Obama is the only politician to come out of Illinois who has nothing in his closet to hide. What a great messiah he is.
*Senator Oprah Winfrey; S.O.W.; Yea, that’ll work.
sorry chap but any bill that raises the national debt must pass by 60 votes
Chaps:
If this freakin’ pathetic excuse for a bill was so “transparent,” debated by both members of the Congress and the public, then why were so many things that were taken out in the Senate version put back in the final version? Why was the Universal Healthcare provision sneaked in?
Or are you asserting that every member of the Congress and the public have read the bill and still don’t care that it’s going to put this country’s debt threshold at an unsupportable level?
Nah, if you’re going to totally deny that this bill is a ploy to capitalize on people’s fears instead of discussing the implications of risking a AAA credit rating and making the US a debtor nation that’s your perogative. Too many Americans would rather turn a blind eye to politicians that offer them freebies in return for their political/economic servitude for generations to come.
Sorry, but we will BE the Japan of the 1990’s. And you can take that to the bank.
One thing you gotta say, the culture of corruption is pretty transparent in Illinois, and Chicago in particular. No way there’s a Democrat out there who isn’t tainted one way or another.
So Chap, are you saying the Dems just threw everything they had on the shelf for the last several years was tossed into this EMERGENCY bill?
At what point did debate happen if the Republicans were locked out of the process?
As for reading or debating any of it, the final bill was being changed right up to the last hours before it was voted on.
Collins, too stupid to realize she was a pawn, didn’t get her pet issues in the bill, yet still voted for it so I doubt she read it.
I’m sure Collins and the other 2 got something… maybe someone should take a peek in their freezers.
So just exactly happened to the “Minority Rights” that the Democrats whined and cried and threw tantrums about from `94 until `06?
Am I the only one who remembers this> It was how they forced things through when they were not in power. They would throw a tantrum and declare they had the right to have their policies and laws go through, otherwise it was discriminatlry, based on the fact that they were the minority party.
They would claim that they had every right to be heard. There was none of this, “We won, so STFU.” There was no keeping the Democrats locked out of rooms, locked out of policy and proceedures. Hell, they were demanding to be the Chair of committees based on the fact that they were in the minority and if they did not head whatever committee then it was unfair, discriminatory etc.
Exactly what is going on over there? Why can this thing be passed if both sides were not involved in it? How is it that the Republicans can be locked out of the room when it is being discussed etc., and that not be illegal?
Is there anyone in Washington who even has READ the damn Constitution?
How can this be freaking happening in this country, in this day and age and NO ONE IS DOING ANYTHING TO STOP IT!!!!!
Right on RetFireman!!!! Strange how the tables turn when they are in power isn’t it?
Hey CCC…Nice to see another Californian. Northern here.
Northern Calif for me too. Bet you’re not as North as I am!
No…not that far North.
Looks like the hero of Liberalism and friend of certain people in Congress and elsewhere won his “referrendum”.
This was the headline, but I am going to change it and you guys tell me if what it is changed to is not that far off.
Now tell me, is that not a headline that will be seen in a couple of years…if not sooner?
I don’t think it will even come to a vote here in the USA. He will simply claim it when things get bad enough.
RetFireman:
You’re right that the Democrats are being hypocrites. Is it really a surprise though? That’s how politics seems to always work, for both parties. Whoever is in the minority whines about how they’re being shut out, and how if they had the power they would be more inclusive. Then, once they do have the power, they do the same stuff they whined about.
You can’t just blame the Democrats for that, though they are the ones doing it right now.
That’s the playbook. Offer free everything to the masses in the guise of compassion, and then when they are convinced of your eternal concern, take over every aspect of their lives.
THe thing is, the Reps WEREW inclusive of the Dems…to a fault. They were forced into it whether they wanted to or not. That is why “bi-partisan” means Reps doing what Dems want…NEVER the other way around. This was supposed to be and promised to be the most bi-partisan administration ever…however, less than a month in, it is anything BUT. This is already showing all the signs and symptoms of becoming a one party dictatorship, with anyone who opposes or speaks against The One and his minions being ostracized and penalized. The writing is on the wall and people in the Congress and this country are willingly allowing it to happen.
You cannot compare the two parties and how they treat each other equally. The Dems act like spoiled little children who don’t get their way. What has been happening since Now. 4th is TERRIFYING and will only get worse as the days go on. If people are not concerned by all that has been happening, they are either uninformed and ignorant, complicit, or just plain stupid.
RetFireman – I amd many others agree and have been calling on people like Michelle who is already a Conservative icon to work with other icons for a conservative version of moveon.org.
The only way to stop this since we cannot get past the MSM is to fight it through ads on TV/Cable and the airwaves.
Noone seems interested. Everyone is still a little too comfortable to really care. Let’s hope they decide to care before hussein puts his National Sercurity Forces out there.
It is due to people’s unbelievable lack of historical knowledge that something like “The National Security Force” could even be suggested, let alone have the person who proposed and promised such a thing get elected President. It is 1932 Germany, and people are too incredibly stupid to know it.
Yeup. That’s why a good sound knowledge of history is important. This guy is following right in those same footsteps and most people don’t see it because they didn’t pay attention in history class.
Elimination of the 22nd amendment hasn’t been brought up, but it will, I’m sure. The proposal will state something along the lines and continuing “government stability” in this “economic crisis”. They’re looking at Chavez. First, pass a rule, allowing “run for life”, then get rid of the “run” part and make Chavez another dictator. As far as Burris goes, I wonder if there is an honest politician at all, in the Illinois “Tammady Hall”? If there is, that person is looking for a job somewhere, other than politics.
It was brought up during the Clinton Administration, and Bill himself ststed his dismay that the Amendment was there for he desired to run again. As Der Fuhrer has created “Clinton Admin. II”, how long do you think it will take them to try and make his dream a reality?
Which brings up yet another example of Liberal Hypocrisy. When Pres. Bush brought on members of his fathers admin, the Liberals all complained about it and mocked it. Yet now, with Der Fuhrer using damn near every last one of Clinton’s who can barely scrape past vetting, he is called a “visionary”, “incredibly intelligent”, and “Amazingly astute”. You know, I am not a violent man, but this crap is getting to the point that it makes you want punch one of these hypocrites right in the neck when they say this filth.
I will catch up on a couple points:
No. The actual debate on the bill was fine and I have zero issue with anyone not supporting it on ideological grounds. What I do have an issue with is 1) insisting on cloture numbers when it is entirely clear that one side has the numbers, but has Senators indisposed for very very good reasons and 2) Representatives and Senators, or anyone, trying to shroud their objection to this bill under the guise of “not enough time to read” or “not enough time to debate.”
rightisright, Again, there is no rule requiring 60 votes for legislation to pass. If one side threatens filibuster, it takes 60 votes to invoke cloture. But, as far as I understand, this is completely voluntary. Republicans could have voluntarily, knowing the Dems had at least 60 votes, not forced the Senate to invoke cloture on the final bill.
Congress is now on scheduled recess, so no he couldn’t.
Then again, all of us who oppose Der Fuhrer, those of us against this Socialist/ Narxist grap for a One Party Totalitarian power grab, who speak out against what is happening to our country, our Constitution, and everything that made this nation great, everything that hundreds of thousands of our people died fighting to protect and ensure, are nothing but “sore losres” and “jealous”, and whatever kindergarten playground names they wish to use in order to silence and marginalize us.
The anti-American Left, who for 7 years attempted to redefine patriotism to mean being in direct opposition of all standards and norms that worked for over two hundred years, who tried to make patriotism mean hatred of your country and defamation of it’s people and leaders, who refused to allow ANYONE to question their “patriotism” are now claiming that anyone who does not drink of Der Fuhrer’s Red Kool-Aide and who don’t take a huge bite of the crap sandwich buffet they are continually serving us are now “un-patriotic” and worthy of scorn and ostricization. How long before people begin to be forced from their jobs and careers, harassed on the streets and in their homes, businesses protested and vandalized the way they have done and continue to do to people who donated to Prop. 8?
It is not paranoia if it is reality…and it has already been happening in schools and elsewhere.
Agreed. And not just for this bill, but anything. It is B.S for either side to do it. If you have not had time to read it, then you do something about it. Don’t hide behind a chicken feces excuse.
If there were any justice at all, NO politician coming from Chicago would EVER be allowed in DC again! That includes,most of all, Presidents! The corruption is in-born and they just can’t help it.
Okay, all of that said, I guess I have to agree with the posters here re: Kennedy. If he is not healthy enough to be there for votes, he should give up his seat.
But even without Kennedy, they still had 60. And I still stand by my comments wrt Sherrod Brown.
Perish the thought that these freakin’ politician’s cancel a vacation to actually read and debate a bill that is going to cost “the little people”. And in the same comment you say your problem is with people using the excuse “not enough time to read”?!?!?!?
Please step back for a minute and think about that for a moment. Which do you think is a more valid reason…actually knowing and understanding what is in the bill and doing what we actually voted them into office to do, or making sure it was a finished deal so they could go on their vacations. I mean, you seriously can’t believe that, can you?!?!?
And please understand…this is not a D or R issue. I would say the same thing if the tables were turned. They did not have to take those positions….they voluntarily chose to run for public office. That entails sacrifice to do the work of the people. Get it done, but get it done right.
It sesms over the recent past, USA has decided to find the worst models and follow them. Look at kids – they pick the lowest and that kid is cool. Then as adults, they watch Japan fail through government intervention and want to emulate that. They watch Chavez and want to emulate. They watch every failed activity/policy/world view and choose to follow.
Of course following successful activities/policies/world views takes effort and an acknowledgment that self is not the center of the world.
I have stated I think this is a spurious argument considering the vast majority of the bill had been available well before February 12. Of course there were changes that came out of committee, but as far as I can tell, those changes were pretty well known and Representatives should have had ample time to absorb them before voting.
I haven’t finished reading all the comments yet so forgive me if this has already been said. Chap…the reason it needed to be read in its entirety when the final draft was completed was that the corrupt democrats kept sneaking things back into it after taking them out! They are not to be trusted. Having said that, I think we should refrain from calling Chap nasty names. Those names should be reserved for lgm, ihatemycountry, etc. We know Chap is a liberal, but he is not one of the nasty ones and we should be respectful of his opinion, even as we argue our side!
vtskydiver:
exactly!!!!
Chap – you a lawyer of all people expect to believe that the document didn’t change? You expect to just trust the “summary”.
I can assure you that any attorney that I ever hired or retained that did that would be IMMEDIATELY dismissed.
I’m willing to guess that you don’t just trust in your practice so please explain to us why it’s ok for legislation (since we all know politicians are so trustworthy?).
No I didn’t. But I would have, if I had to!
More lies from our resident liar. We had actual Congressmen complaining that the lobbiests had copies of the bill while they themselves did not. The only people who knew what was in the bill were Reid, Pelosi, and the Rat leadership.
Chappy’s mission here is spread the left’s talking points. He “believes” whatever is expedient for him to believe at any instant.
Of course the document changed. And I am not asking anyone to rely on summaries. But if you’ve had the opportunity to read 95% of something before hand, and then told you only have 2 days or so to real the last 5%, you really shouldn’t complain.
Also, there were 4 Republicans (2 Senators and 2 Representatives) that sat in that conference. Are you telling me they can’t keep track of the substantive changes to report back to their party and point out the provisions that have been added/deleted/changed?
Then why couldn’t we see it “well before” the bill was passed? Why was it kept in the dark?
Forget the Representatives. Your Messiah promised an open and transparent law-making process, with bills posted on the WH web-site for all of us to examine well in advance of any legistative action.
He’s been in office less than a month and has already broken more promises than Bush did in eight years.
That is funny seeing as early drafts of the bill were posted on this very site as early as January 15, flenser. Don’t blame me for your ignorance because you are too lazy to search.
Of course there were changes along the way, but again if you have 95% of the bill on front of you almost a month ago, I don’t think it is too much to ask to keep up with the evolving 5%.
He said five days. The conference bill came out Feb. 12. He is signing it on the 17th. Do the math, genius.
Chap – your logic ?might? be good – but does ANYBODY know what changed?
Given the players involved – politicians (of both parties) I’m fairly safe in stating that the “official list” of changes is missing some.
These people can’t run a cafeteria or a brothel – what makes you think they they can keep track of changes in a document?
Sigh, civics 101, what branch is the legislature??? Who do you think actualy wrote this law????
Well to be fair, nobody really know s who wrote all of it I guess, since nobody actualy READ it.
Congresscritter: “There were changes??? duhhhhh when”
Huh? Obama promised that any bill would be available online for 5 days before he signed it. It has been available online since the 12th. I don’t know what arguing about who wrote the bill has to do with anything.
So Obama is going to claim that he’s read the whole thing in 5 days?
Uh huh.
Isn’t that dereliction of duty?
Why is Obama now waiting until Tuesday to sign the bill? Perhaps he thinks that his “historic” signing will be overshadowed by President’s Day? So much for his EXTREME URGENCY to get this thing passed.
So what if he has? He can’t change it, he can only veto or sign it.
or let it pass into law without being signed.
Would you rather he break his promise to post legislation for at least 5 days before signing? Seems to me that, under the circumstances, he is doing this as expediently as possible.
Why not? He has before.
What sonofdy said.
So he lied???
Hillary. If she ever told the truth just once, her own tongue would leap out of her mouth from shock..and she is the Sec. of State.
Biden, he withdraws twice from running for president because of blatant lies and Plagerism. Then he goes on TV during the VP Debate and tells about 20 out right lies (not little ones but BIG ones)… and this dog excrement is the current Vice President.
Burris is just doing what all Democrats do… Lie & Lie and if that doesn’t work, just return to the old democratic party standard… More Lying.
Maybe he’s reformed now.
Just saw this and I had to laugh. Get overshadowed by President’s Day? President’s Day? The ugly redheaded step child of federal holidays?
How many here even remembered Presidents Day was coming up until some time last week?
hand goes up, mainly because my wife got the day off and I didn’t.
As opposed to “community organizer day” Jan 19 this year?
I’ve asked many times which is more significant in history – the presidents we’re honoring or the one with the dream.
Having a dream is not an accomplishment.
This is lengthy, but interesting. Remind you of anyone?
Pathological liars, or “mythomaniacs,” may be suffering from histrionic personality disorder or narcissistic personality disorder. The following comments basically reflect a pathological liar who has the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder.
Some characteristics:
1. Exaggerates things that are ridiculous.
2. One-upping. Whatever you do, this person can do it better. You will never top them in their own mind, because they have a concerted need to be better than everyone else. This also applies to being right. If you try to confront an individual like this, no matter how lovingly and well-intentioned you might be – this will probably not be effective. It’s threatening their fantasy of themselves, so they would rather argue with you and bring out the sharp knives than admit that there’s anything wrong with them.
3. They “construct” a reality around themselves. They don’t value the truth, especially if they don’t see it as hurting anyone. If you call them on a lie and they are backed into a corner, they will act very defensively and say ugly things (most likely but depends on personality), but they may eventually start to act like, “Well, what’s the difference? You’re making a big deal out of nothing!” (again, to refocus the conversation to your wrongdoing instead of theirs).
4. Because these people don’t value honesty, a lot of times they will not value loyalty. So watch what you tell them. They will not only tell others, but they will embellish to make you look worse. Their loyalty is fleeting, and because they are insecure people, they will find solace in confiding to whomever is in their favor at the moment.
5. Obviously, they will contradict what they say. This will become very clear over time. They usually aren’t smart enough to keep track of so many lies (who would be?).
Here are some ways to tell someone is a pathological liar:
They lie about even the smallest things. For example, saying “I brushed my teeth today,” when they didn’t.
They add exaggerations to every sentence.
They change their story all the time.
They act very defensively when you question their statements.
They believe what they say is true, when everyone else knows it isn’t.
Here’s an alternate “checklist”:
Lies when it is very easy to tell the truth.
Lies to get sympathy, to look beter, to save their butt, etc.
Fools people at first but once they get to know him, no one believes anything they ever say.
May have a personality disorder.
Extremely manipulative.
Has been caught in lies repeatedly.
Never fesses up to the lies.
There are few differences between pathological liar and a “slime ball” liar (like the Schumers of the world). Pathological liars cannot tell that they are lying they actually believe the lie as soon as it comes out of their mouth. They lie about unimportant things that don’t really matter to anyone. This can be caused by mental defect but isn’t always. Slime-ball liars lie about things that make them look better or embellish to get attention. They also lie to keep their butts out of trouble and to get what they want.
It is very hard to tell when one is a pathological liar. Some people just are liars and lie to lie because they can and they don’t care about getting caught and aware that you know they have lied. These people care not about lying, it’s no big deal. It’s like “ok, so what? I lied”. The pathological liar on the other hand, IS aware that they are lying BUT will go to extremes to make you believe that they are truthful. They appear to believe their own lies BUT in truth, they know their lies are just that, lies. But because their efforts are constantly backing up their lies, it appears to us that they actually believe their lies, when we eventually do find out about them and then we tend to feel sorry for these people. Then they have an excuse, “I am sick, I don’t know why I lie, I believed what I was saying etc.” The only truth was the fact that they don’t know why they lie. Other than that it’s crap.
Other indicators: 1) Rage attacks after they realize you’re questioning their lies. 2) Distraction techniques, e.g. hanging up the phone when you catch them in lie, playing word games, or even just running out of the room. After using the distraction technique, or rage attack, or sometimes both, they will pretend that nothing ever happened. They re-write history, so it never did happen in their minds. Normal people do it too, but these people take it to the extreme.
Chap…I live to make you laugh!
Oh I knew today was presidents day( not capped on purpose)…. It’s because every year since they stole Washington and Lincoln’s rightful days for the good of stinking unions and the PC crowd, I get pissed every year.
I’d bet that the Burris lied leak came from either harry Reid’s office or Rahmbo Emmanuel’s office.
Yep, certainly.
Good, interesting post.
And then what? So a bill that has ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON is finally posted on-line for people to read…but it is too late for anyone to do anything about it.
What about putting it on-line BEFORE it is voted on so that the PEOPLE of this country can find out what is in it BEFORE it is voted on so that the proper vetting of said bills can be done?
Oh yeah…you can’t sneak an agenda through that way.
You still have till tomorrow to call Obama’s office and encourage him to veto the bill.
Now that’s funny, you made laugh chap, good one.
Obama just might veto the bill after all. Rush just said that the “buy American” clause is STILL in there, even though Obama asked them to take it out. This is the clause that got a lot of countries mad at us and threatened trade wars. Well, if Rush is right and this thing is still in there…should be interesting.
Correct me if I’m wrong–wasn’t Burris an attorney before being fauxpointed by Blago to the Senate?
Yup…graduated from law school: Juris Doctorate, Howard University.
Liar. Corruptocrat.
The First 100 Holy Days of the Messiah have produced nothing less than the worst 100 days of a presidential administration since Jimmy Carter–or ever.
…Smell the roses.
I joked at the time Burris came in that the reporters needed to ask him, “what did you pay for the position?”
It was an obvious question. Be careful what you joke about…
The whole reporter corpse is so idiotic. Un f-in believable.
Depends on what your definition of “is” is.
Sound familiar?
re. chap’s comment (#148) about President Obama and lying:
chap: This is from the Bible, so it may offend with the reference to “the Ethiopian..”