But Burris insisted Wednesday to reporters he never engaged in a “pay to play” scheme for the job.

And he told reporters Thursday that he shouldn’t be blamed for any lack of candor to the state panel because lawmakers asked the wrong questions.

“You all have got it backwards,” said Burris, a former state attorney general. “It is not upon a person who is testifying to go out of his way on anything. It is the person who has to ask the questions.”

(CQ Politics)

Charming, the high level of standards to which some people hold themselves….

Burris has raised $845 in the first 3 months of this year for his 2010 campaign war chest.

I agree with Mad Dog @2. Senate Ethics Committee will at most censure Burris. But I think the chances of Sangamon County prosecutor going after him for perjury are better than 50%.

Wonder how many in Chicago, especially, are connecting the Burris and Carothers stories in that way?

[Suggested thread music: “Meditation” from Thaïs by Massenet, or “Dance of the Blessed Spirits” from Orfeo ed Euridice by Glück; believe me, almost everyone’s heard these pieces, whether you recognize the names or not.]

Here’s the most recent example of the state bringing the feds in on a case which the latter then charge:

Feds probe city pension deals with Daley’s nephew

The nephew in question, is the same developer who’s supposed to get the lion’s share of contracts for tearing up the south Washington Park neighborhood (mine) to put in the Olympic stadium.

I must say, all by itself the announcement was pretty breathtaking, showing as it does a committed persistence by the state (a former Fitz assistant) and feds in rounding up the problem. But also this week in federal indictments,

Ald. Carothers indicted on fraud, bribery charges

Isaac Carothers being what’s iz name’s chief gospel shouter in the City Council. His story has too many mordantly humorous sidelights to go into, here or anywhere, but quite relevant was a masterpiece of a buried lede that only got headlined the next day:

Ald. Isaac Carothers wore wire for a year

A fascinating pair of cases. I suppose the Carothers pinch signals that whatever he was wired for has borne whatever fruit it will.

This is abject nonsense. As Marcy pointed out in several excellent threads on here well before Burris was seated, he was playing fast and loose with the truth about his contacts with Blago, and it was as plain as day that he was doing it.

And as I posted on here several times, only days before his appointment, Burris was calling for Blago’s removal from office. When it turned out that Blago was willing to put HIM in the Senate (or try to) then Burris’s opinion of Blago’s ability and right to fullfil the duties of his office changed 180 degrees. Burris was and is, a political whore of the first order. And it was apparent to everyone.

But that wasn’t enough for you, as you posted repeatedly that we HAD to seat him.

And for you now to scold the Senate for the “feckless” qualities that you now profess to see coming, is nothing but outrageous, frontrunning, hypocrisy. It’s as bad as Burris, himself.

After all of the convoluted logic from you about how the Senate had no right to keep Burris on hold while the piano landed on Blago, you have no right to criticize the U.S. Senate nor really, now that you’ve discovered your distaste for his being in the Senate, Burris, himself.

I mean, we already knew, indisputably, what a political hooker and charlatan Burris was, but that didn’t stop you from flacking for his seating like he was young Abraham Lincoln, when the issue was in doubt. In fact, I’m pretty sure that you fell back on the “they’ll vote him out of office at the mid-terms” idea, as the correction for this. But now you evidently have decided that we need to get him out sooner. I’m just wondering if you’re privy to information not available to anyone else.

No, only aware of the information in the public record, and it was insufficient at the time to prove or do what you wanted. That would have been effectively extra-legal. In the Senate where it would have been legal, it would have been the most inapt and worst precedents imaginable. It was mob-mentality based. I could not support it then and nothing has demonstrated to me that I was incorrect on that. Your mileage may vary.