Friday, September 17, 2010
Analysis: Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr's Opponent Demands His Resignation
Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) told an interesting tale to Don Wade and Roma this morning on WLS 890 AM. Jackson talked about a meeting he had very recently with Rahm Emanuel, who is considered likely to run for mayor of Chicago. The real news, however, is Jackson speaking of himself as a potential candidate. Keep in mind that Jackson is currently running for re-election to Congress in the 2nd Congressional District. Listen to the entire phone call, as broadcast on WLS. Jackson's opponent, Republican nominee Isaac Hayes, was quick to pounce on the congressman's remarks. The Hayes release is reproduced below, which I've interspersed with my comments and additional excerpts from the Jackson phone call to WLS. HAYES URGES JACKSON TO RESIGN AND STOP THE EMBARRASSMENT September 17, 2010 - Chicago - Republican nominee for Illinois 2ndCongressional District Isaac Hayes today urged Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. to resign. Jesse Jackson Jr., speaking on WLS radio’s “Don Wade & Roma” show this morning about an Oct. 28, 2008, meeting with two Indian fund-raisers said, "another gentleman showed up and started having another conversation practically in Hindu, because I don't speak Hindu." He went on to say, "I didn't participate in any of that part of the conversation, nor do I even remember hearing it." COMMENT: Don Wade pointed out that the second Rod Blagojevich trial will be in early January, at the peak of the mayoral election campaign (the election itself is on Feb. 22, 2011). Wade then brought up the alleged case of an Indian businessman offering one million dollars to Blagojevich in return for naming Jackson to the U.S. Senate seat that was ultimately given to Roland Burris. Federal prosecutors indicated that they thought Jackson was aware of, as Wade put it, "the efforts by his allies to swap campaign cash for his appointment to the Senate seat." That led Wade to ask Jackson, "Were you sitting down with some important Indian businessman in a Loop restaurant.... [having a] discussion over money for you to get that Senate seat?" In response, Jackson said, "Let me be clear about this," but went on to give an answer that only caused more confusion - and further damage to his credibility. He acknowledged that both his name and Rahm Emanuel's name came up in the first Blago trial, and that "I'm not on any tapes, uhm, but he is. But neither one of us has been accused of any wrongdoing. In addition to that, I'm not alone in the meeting." Jackson said he did meet with the Indian and others at the restaurant "for 30 minutes, in the presence of other people, and discussed the third airport when another gentleman showed up and began having a conversation practically in Hindu, because I don't speak Hindu or Swarmi, and I did not participate in any part of that part of the conversation, nor do I even remember hearing it." I believe that Jackson lied through his teeth, and I'll explain why after we finish with the Hayes press release: Hayes responded with perplexity to the Congressman's statement, “If Congressman Jackson wants us to believe that he participated in a meeting with Indian businessmen who discussed a $1 million bribe on his behalf but failed to tell him about it, he needs to have his head examined because it is clear he lacks the cognitive capacity to serve as a United States Congressman. He should resign now and save himself further embarrassment.” Jackson said he did meet with the Indian and others at the restaurant "for 30 minutes, in the presence of other people, and discussed the third airport when another gentleman showed up and began having a conversation practically in Hindu, because I don't speak Hindu or Swarmi, and I did not participate in any part of that part of the conversation, nor do I even remember hearing it." One of the participants in the same meeting, Rajinder Bedi, testified at Blagojevich’s trial that Jackson was sitting with him and another fund-raiser, Raghuveer Nayak, when the $1 million was discussed. Bedi, a government witness, did not say he was speaking in Hindu. Bedi then testified he paid a visit later that same day to Rod Blagojevich’s brother, Robert, and passed along a message that the then-governor would receive campaign money if Jackson were appointed. Back to my comments. You'll recall that Jackson said he with the Indian and others at the restaurant "in the presence of other people," which he later called "witnesses." He was saying that had he done anything wrong, those "witnesses" would know about it. The logic flaw there is simple: Al Capone had plenty of meetings in which he plotted illegal activities "in the presence of other people," and everyone at those tables was always a "witness." This statement by Jackson is completely devoid of any real meaning. It's a red herring, a diversion, a smoke screen. This makes me believe that Jackson is lying. Furthermore, he claims innocence by virtue of not being on any of the Blagojevich trial tapes. But how many conservations, in which crime is plotted, are actually ever taped? The lack of tape does not mean a lack of guilt. Again, more smoke. Jackson not only shows himself to be a bad liar, but an ignorant, uncultured fool. He said that "another gentleman showed up and began having a conversation practically in Hindu, because I don't speak Hindu or Swarmi." That is sadly amusing. "Hindu" is a religion, not a language. Jackson probably meant to say "Hindi," India's official language and one of many spoken there. As for "Swarmi," there doesn't seem to a language anywhere by that name. Was Jackson thinking of "swami?" That's "a Hindu religious teacher; used as a title of respect," according to Princeton University's Wordnet. There is one more reason to believe that Jackson was lying on WLS. He went to some length to say that he "did not participate in any part of that part of the conversation" in which one of the men was speaking "Hindu or Swarmi." Oddly, however, Jackson said of that portion of the meeting "nor do I even remember hearing it." Really? He has no recollection of hearing it, yet he's certain it was in "Hindu or Swarmi?" Now, how can that be? Anybody?