Barack Obama! SO YOUNG & SO NEW & Already crooked?Bust the Demo's bubble

[AFE7FATMAN]

He should have taken a page from the Harry Reid Land Deal

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko in a deal that enlarged the senator’s yard.

Rezko is going to bring down the gov of Illinois and a lot of other in the next few weeks.

The following is a quote from Mr Obama


But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct,

I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko.

It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politic...bama05.article

[PixelPusher]

But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct,

I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko.

It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.

so he paid above appaisal value for the land?

um...ok.

[BIG IRISH]

Read the entire article. Hillary, I bet, has all of this ready just in case he hopes to run in 2008.

Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake

November 4, 2006
BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND CHRIS FUSCO Staff Reporters
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko in a deal that enlarged the senator’s yard.



“I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it,” Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an exclusive and revealing question-and-answer exchange about the transaction.

In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood. The state’s junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot. Both closed on their properties on the same day.

Last January, aiming to increase the size of his sideyard, Obama paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land.

The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves from him.

In the Sun-Times interview, Obama acknowledged approaching Rezko about the two properties being up for sale and that Rezko developed an immediate interest. Obama did not explain why he reached out to Rezko given the developer’s growing problems.

Last month, Rezko was indicted for his role in an alleged pay-to-play scheme designed to fatten Gov. Blagojevich’s political fund. Rezko also was accused of bilking a creditor.

“With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that everything was handled ethically and above board. But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko,” Obama said.

“It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor,” the senator said.

The land deal came up in a court hearing Friday that delved into Rezko’s finances. Obama said he has not been approached by federal prosecutors about the transaction nor has plans to go to them about it.

Obama and Rezko have been friends since 1990, and Obama said the Wilmette businessman raised as much as $60,000 for him during his political career. After Rezko’s indictment, Obama donated $11,500 to charity—a total that represents what Rezko contributed to the senator’s federal campaign fund.

After the controversy surfaced on Wednesday, the Sun-Times presented Obama’s office with a lengthy set of questions about the land deal, Obama’s relationship with Rezko and the story’s impact on a potential 2008 bid for the White House.

Here are his responses:

Q: Senator, when did you first meet Tony Rezko? How did you become friends? How often would you meet with him, and when did you last speak with him?

A: I had attracted some media attention when I was elected the first black President of the Harvard Law Review. And while I was in law school, David Brint, who was a development partner with Tony Rezko contacted me and asked whether I would be interested in being a developer. Ultimately, after discussions in which I met Mr. Rezko, I said no.

I have probably had lunch with Rezko once or twice a year and our spouses may have gotten together on two to four occasions in the time that I have known him. I last spoke with Tony Rezko more than six months ago.

Q:. Have you or your wife participated in any other transactions of any kind with Rezko or companies he owns? Have you or your wife ever done any legal work ever for Rezko or his companies?

A: No.

Q: Has Rezko ever given you or your family members gifts of any kind and, if so, what were they?

A: No.

Q: The seller of your house appears to be a doctor at the University of Chicago . Do you or your wife know him? If so, did either of you ever talk to him about subdividing the property? If you ever did discuss the property with him, when were those conversations?

A: We did not know him personally, though my wife worked in the same University hospital. The property was subdivided and two lots were separately listed when we first learned of it. We did not discuss the property with the owners; the sale was negotiated for us by our agent.

Q: Did you approach Rezko or his wife about the property, or did they approach you?

A: To the best of my recollection, I told him about the property, and he developed an interest, knowing both the location and, as I recall, the developer who had previously purchased it.

Q: Who was your Realtor? Did this Realtor also represent Rita Rezko?

A: Miriam Zeltzerman, who had also represented me in the purchase of my prior property, a condominium, in Hyde Park. She did not represent Rita Rezko.

Q: How do you explain the fact your family purchased your home the same day as Rita Rezko bought the property adjacent to yours? Was this a coordinated purchase?

A: The sellers required the closing of both properties at the same time. As they were moving out of town, they wished to conclude the sale of both properties simultaneously. The lot was purchased first; with the purchase of the house on the adjacent lot, the closings could proceed and did, on the same day, pursuant to the condition set by the sellers.

Q: Why is it that you were able to buy your parcel for $300,000 less than the asking price, and Rita Rezko paid full price? Who negotiated this end of the deal? Did whoever negotiated it have any contact with Rita and Tony Rezko or their Realtor or lawyer?

A: Our agent negotiated only with the seller’s agent. As we understood it, the house had been listed for some time, for months, and our offer was one of two and, as we understood it, it was the best offer. The original listed price was too high for the market at the time, and we understood that the sellers, who were anxious to move, were prepared to sell the house for what they paid for it, which is what they did.

We were not involved in the Rezko negotiation of the price for the adjacent lot. It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less.

Q: Why did you put the property in a trust?

A: I was advised that a trust holding would afford me some privacy, which was important to me as I would be commuting from Washington to Chicago and my family would spend some part of most weeks without me.

Q: A Nov. 21, 1999, Chicago Tribune story indicates the house you bought "sits on a quarter-acre lot and will share a driveway and entrance gate with a home next door that has not yet been built." Is this shared driveway still in the mix? Will this require further negotiations with the Rezkos?

A: The driveway is not shared with the adjacent owner. But the resident in the carriage house in the back does have an easement over it.

Q: Does it display a lack of judgment on your part to be engaging in real estate deals with Tony Rezko at a point his connections to state government had been reported to be under federal investigation?

A: I’ve always held myself to the highest ethical standards. During the ten years I have been in public office, I believe I have met those standards and I know that is what people expect of me. I have also understood the importance of appearances.

With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that everything was handled ethically and above board.

But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko. It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.

Throughout my life, I have put faith in confronting experiences honestly and learning from them. And that is what I will do with this experience as well.

Q: Why did you not publicly disclose the transaction after Rezko got indicted?

A: At the time, it didn’t strike me as relevant. I did however donate campaign contributions from Rezko to charity.

Q: Have you been interviewed by federal investigators about this transaction or about your relationship with Rezko? If not, do you intend to approach them?

A: I have not been interviewed by federal investigators. I have no reason to approach them.

Q: Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever discuss casino matters with you?

A: No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business interests. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony Rezko were interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation. (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/vote...99_001000C.PDF)

Q: Has this disclosure about your relationship with Rezko changed your thoughts about a White House run?

A: No. As I have said, how I can best serve is something I will think about after the 2006 election next Tuesday.

Q: Did Rezko ever discuss with you his dealings with Stuart Levine, Christopher Kelly or William Cellini or the role he was playing in shaping Gov. Blagojevich's administration?

A: No.

Q: Are the Obamas the only beneficiaries of the land trust?

A: Yes.

Q: Are you aware of any efforts by previous owners to develop what is now the Rezko lot, possibly as townhomes?

A: I was not aware of any prior effort by the seller to develop the property, but always understood the other lot was to be developed upon sale.

Q: Did Rezko have an appraisal performed for the 10-foot strip?

A: I had an appraisal conducted by Howard B. Richter & Associates on November 21, 2005.

Q: Was there a negotiation? Did he have an asking price, or did he just say, whatever you think is fair?

A: I proposed to pay on the basis of proportionality. Since the strip composed one-sixth of the entire lot, I would pay one-sixth of the purchase price of the lot. I offered this to Mr. Rezko and he accepted it.

Q: How many fundraisers has Mr. Rezko hosted for you? Were these all in his home? How much would you estimate he has raised for your campaigns?

A: He hosted one event at his home in 2003 for my U.S. Senate campaign. He participated as a member of a host committee for several other events. My best estimate was that he raised somewhere between $50,000 and $60,000.

[ChumpDumper]

A non-story when it comes to voters. Nice try though.

[JoeChalupa]

A non-story when it comes to voters. Nice try though.

Won't hurt him one bit. Well, unless you're a republican.

[cecil collins]

Those guys are good at bull attack strategy.

[T Park]

Hes smooth no question.

Hes got the Clinton _ull down too.

[AFE7FATMAN]

Hes smooth no question.
Hes got the Clinton _ull down too.

Smooth=Slick


Slick=Slime

Givehim time

[Hook Dem]

ALL politicians are crooked!!!!!!!!!!

[Hook Dem]

Joe........loosen your grip on Obama's jock! He can hardly breathe!

[RandomGuy]

He bought a strip of land to make his yard bigger?

If this is the worst dirt on the guy that the right-wing attack machine can muster, I nominate him for sainthood.

[johnsmith]

I was all for this guy until I listened to him talk and realized he's the same as every other politician.

[RandomGuy]

I was all for this guy until I listened to him talk and realized he's the same as every other politician.

He is a LOT different from every other modern politician. He bends over backwards to not insult the other party.

[johnsmith]

He is a LOT different from every other modern politician. He bends over backwards to not insult the other party.

That's true, and I do like the guy. But he lost my vote when someone asked him if he'll run for President in 2008 and he replied, "I'll do whatever is best for the party".............how about doing what's best for your ing COUNTRY.


That's my problem with our government, not just him.

[AFE7FATMAN]

My My My how the time they are not changing but staying the same.
Nothing new here, just move along, follow the sheep, ok now good democrats "lock-step MARCH!"

Update on the original
If Barack Obama decides to run for president, we're going to hear a lot more about Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the senator's neighbor.

Rezko is the kind of neighbor you want—the absent kind—and he might be absent for a long time—in the federal pen. That move upriver might keep Obama from his own residential upgrade to that big white house he's got his eye on in Washington.

OK, I'll stop. When you read the Chicago columnists having fun with the relationship between Obama and Rezko, the wiseacre rubs off on you. Here's the story, without the mus : Barack Obama has a little real-estate scandal that raises questions about his judgment.

The Chicago Tribune broke the story back in November. It begins in 2004 with Obama's $1.9 million book advance for The Audacity of Hope. In June 2005, Obama used the money to purchase a $1.65 million Georgian revival home on Chicago's South Side—$300,000 less than the asking price.

On the very same day, Rezko, a Democratic Party fund-raiser and developer, bought the adjacent empty lot at the asking price from the same owner (the house and the lot were previously owned by the same person). Rezko, who had raised money for Obama and known him since the senator attended Harvard Law School, did not develop the empty lot. In January 2006, he sold a 1,500-square-foot slice of it to Obama for $104,000, a fair sum in that market.

Here's the question: Did Rezko orchestrate his same-day purchase of the lot at full price so that the seller would give Obama a break on the price of the adjacent house? Was Obama in on the deal? And did Rezko never intend to develop the lot, giving Obama a nice roomy side yard, a favor which he'd call in later?

Obama says he did talk to Rezko before the purchase, but only because a person who had renovated it for a previous owner had once worked with Rezko, who owns other properties in the South Side. He didn't arrange the joint purchase with him. He bought the house at such a good price, Obama has told the papers, because it was being unloaded in a "fire sale."

There's no evidence that the senator is fibbing or that the indicted fund-raiser asked anything in return for his neighborly behavior (though that might have been just a matter of time). Obama hasn't tried to change his story, even though Rezko is now talking to investigators.

What about Obama's judgment? Chicago politicians with national aspirations have to think a little harder about appearances than their colleagues from other cities that don't have reputations for corruption. Shouldn't Obama have known not to get anywhere near a sketchy character like Rezko?

When Obama bought his house, Rezko was not as radioactive as he is today. Newspaper accounts contained allegations about his business practices, but he was regarded as a typical power broker who cannily cultivates politicians. But by the time that Obama bought the strip of land, Rezko was glowing. The papers were reporting that he was under investigation by federal prosecutors. In October, he was charged in a 24-count indictment with trying to obtain kickbacks from companies seeking state business.


Obama presents himself as a squeaky-clean politician, so the dubious association with Rezko has caused him more trouble that it would, say, anyone else in the history of Chicago or Illinois politics.

To diffuse the issue, the junior senator has done a good John McCain imitation: swamping critics with apologies, admissions, and candor. "This is the first time this has happened and I don't like the feeling," Obama said at a press conference in November. "It's frustrating to me, and I'm kicking myself about it." He told the Associated Press: "Purchasing a piece of property from somebody who has been a supporter of yours I think is a bad idea. It's an example of where every once in a while you're going to make a mistake and hopefully you learn from it." He told the Chicago Sun-Times that he made a mistake and, "I regret it. ... One of the things you purchase in public life is that there are going to be a different set of standards, I'm going to make sure from this point that I don't even come close to the line."

As the scandal stands, this is not Obama's Whitewater, the Arkansas land deal that bedeviled Bill and Hillary Clinton during the early part of President Clinton's first term. It doesn't help an inexperienced national politician to have to admit a stupid rookie mistake before the cameras, but there's nothing here so far that seems politically life threatening. Of course, if Rezko tells a different story to investigators or Obama's statements turn out to be unture, that's it for him—you can't run for president on your keen judgment and then show a lack of it by lying and covering up.

If Obama decides to run for president, he'll fail because he'll show in other ways that he lacks experience, or he can't handle the rigors of a campaign, or because he turns out to speak only in pleasing generalities.

The Rezko business is also not likely to hurt him, because his principal rival will probably be Hillary Clinton, and she's not going to bring up the topic of questionable land deals.
http://www.slate.com/id/2155501?nav=wp

I was all for this guy until I listened to him talk and realized he's the same as every other politician.

So SAD the rest of the country and the media can't come to this simple
conclusion.

[ChumpDumper]

Thanks for keeping us updated on this nonstory.

[AFE7FATMAN]

Thanks for keeping us updated on this nonstory.

A non-story when it comes to voters. Nice try though.

Your repeating yourself CHUMP What part of :
My My My how the time they are not changing but staying the same.
Nothing new here, just move along, follow the sheep, ok Now good democrats "lock-step MARCH!"


did you not understand, or did you understand but could not accept it.





I'm well aware that The majority of Americans are looking for someone on
a white horse to come along and save the US, sort of like when they flocked to JFC "Jimmy flipping Carter" well BHO is not the Knight on a white horse.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm repeating myself because there's nothing new to say, just like there was nothing new in your latest post.

What part of that do you not understand?

[AFE7FATMAN]

I'm repeating myself because there's nothing new to say, just like there was nothing new in your latest post.

What part of that do you not understand?

I stated there was nothing new in my latest post
i.e. "Nothing new here......"
It was just an update that this dirt
will not go away. some folks can remember things from a couple of months ago, when it come to politicans; but the majority of them don't lean so far to the left they can't stand up.

Maybe some folks didn't see the article the first time. I haven't seen it mentioned on V and since Obama won't appear on FOX, where he would be grilled & toasted the majority of folks will never hear of it.

[ChumpDumper]

You'll have to find something else, dude. This has no legs. I certainly agree he's just another politician, but the fact that you're pissing your pants about this guy a full two years before the election is nothing short of hilarious.

[AFE7FATMAN]

You'll have to find something else, dude. This has no legs. I certainly agree he's just another politician, but the fact that you're pissing your pants about this guy a full two years before the election is nothing short of hilarious.

THIS 2ND QUOTE APPEARS IN ANOTHER THREAD.

Since he currently seems otherwise bulletproof, the only thing Republican talking heads can do is utter Obama's moniker with repeated, comically exaggerated emphasis on his middle name.

I guess they hope voters are as ignorant as they think they are.

I'm not pissing in my pants, because I know that Obama will NEVER get the
nomination and if he does he just might be better than some, i.e. Wes Clark
for instance. However, I am a little bit flabbergasted that so many people
like your self are flocking to Obama- I wonder why?

IMO and from the above article:"If Obama decides to run for president, he'll fail because he'll show in other ways that he lacks experience, or he can't handle the rigors of a campaign, or because he turns out to speak only in pleasing generalities."

[101A]

Obama buys fire sale on the same day his neighbor, a crooked political slimeball - old pal with Obama, buys the adjacent lot at full price - AND doesn't develop it.

Libs on the board are right: won't affect Obama's election prospects.

Fatman is also right: It smells - there ARE NO coincidences.

[Spurminator]

Wow, between this and Jenna Bush's partying I'm not sure which party to vote for.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Moral of the story. If you have ever had a lapse in judgement or made a mistake your f*cked when it comes to politics. You need to be pure and 100% perfect

[boutons_]

you ing radical right s love to play picayune gotchas on the personal/morality level, but whistle past HUGE corruption, ear marks, and quid-pro-quo influence peddling like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/wa...rtner=homepage

" WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 — By slipping four sentences into a big bill passed last week, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert secured a major change in Medicare policy avidly sought by a few health insurers, in particular a multinational company with headquarters in his home state, Illinois.

Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, got special treatment for a ho e in his state.

In the final hours of the 109th Congress, the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, also got special treatment for a ho e in his state. The bill did not name the ho e, but specified the Medicare provider number for the intended beneficiary, the Nathan Adelson Ho e in rural Pahrump, Nev."

================

ALL politicians and the entire system are guilty of corruption until proven innocent.

Even if Pelosi gets her outside ethics watchdog panel, it will be toothless and as corrupt and compromised as the house it is supposed to watch.

And we all know self-regulation NEVER works which is why corps fight for self-regulation and the corps and Repugs fight against/destroy regulation, unprotecting the consumers and the environment so the corps can game the system unhassled by regulations and transparency.