BS: Rezko Guilty

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 08:02 PM

Not exactly a smoking gun in that link Ebbie gave us. A doctor (not Rezko) sold Obama a bit of land for less than the initial asking price.

Big deal. My son bought his house for a good bit less than the initial asking price.

That's what happens in property deals. People ask for more than they are actually willing to accept.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 08:10 PM

Well, it appears that not only is there no smoking gun but there is no body either... Hmmmmmmmmmm???

As fir Bush's 2nd DUI, I hadn't heard about that one... The first one, if I am not mistaken, was defended by his bud, Gonzalez... Seema the two of them go way back...

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 08:56 PM

This is so funny.
I knew that if I gave you the information (and I did) you would be incapable of absorbing it. (and you are)
It doesn't fit your schema.
This is what drives those who are not for Obama absolutely nuts.
Ah well.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:10 PM

"This is what drives those who are not for Obama absolutely nuts."

Don't lead with your chin . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: kendall
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:28 PM

"Show me a man who has no skeletons in his closet, and I'll show you a man who has never done anything." Abraham Lincoln.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:29 PM

Hannibal Lecter.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:35 PM

"'Show me a man who has no skeletons in his closet, and I'll show you a man who has never done anything.' Abraham Lincoln."


               And that describes Barack Obama completely, until the media finally began to do it's job and found Reverend Wright, Rezko, William Ayers, and etc. If they'd been on the ball earlier, the Democrats would have a candidate who actually had a chance of winning.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:48 PM

The language in the link to rezkowatch uses the same rhetoric as has been shown here by one or two people. No substance. Not any allegations even, really, just smarmy sneers.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 09:56 PM

That's not the Abraham Lincoln I know.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:05 PM

Maybe they're really quoting Jimmy Hoffa, and they just got the name wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: heric
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:30 PM

If you can't get rid of the skeleton in your closet, you'd best teach it to dance.


George Bernard Shaw said that.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:11 AM

"a candidate who actually had a chance of winning"

Obama has an excellent chance.

Far better than Hillary ever had--since she refused to admit she was wrong in authorizing Bush to use force against Iraq--and then efficiently went about otherwise poisoning the well she intended to drink from in the fall.

Obama has an excellent chance---if people who claim to be in favor of separation of church and state, against the Iraq war, for a reform of health care, etc. come out and vote for him.

Unless they want to make it clear they are hypocrites.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:24 AM

I don't get the Rezko thing.

What exactly was the connection between Rezko' malfeasance and Obama's land?

Maybe Jim Lad, who is up on all this, could spell it out for me. Can you?

Whho did what when?

I just don't get the deal here.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:11 AM

Sure but let me deal with this one first... Hypocrites, by their very nature, never really make it clear that they're hypocrites.

Two Doctors (Married I presume) owned a mansion on two lots.
The house was for sale.
Mr. & Mrs. Obama could not afford the one and a half million price tag.
The couple would not sell the house separately from the other lot because without it, there were no grounds.
The Rezkos stepped in and the couple agreed to sell to both families.
The Obamas paying for the house (about $300.000 below market price) & the Rezkos paying for the grounds (now known as the undeveloped, adjacent lot) at a greatly inflated price.
In effect, they bought the grounds for the Obamas.
Rezko was already under indictment when this deal was being made.
Later, when the questions started coming up about the house, the Obamas bought a strip of that land.
They used their connections in city hall to get planning permission and subdivided the lot.
The Obamas paid Rezko $64.000 over the appraised value for that strip of land.
Some perceive that $64.000 as hush money for Tony Rezko. Mr. Fitzgerald will decide whether it warrants investigation.
Obama paid for planning permission and the plans for the fence & Rezko paid for the materials & construction.

Now, Mr. Obama spun his way out of that but at best the Chicago Media called it "Business as Usual" for the political machine they call "The Combine" in Chicago.
Recently, when Obama released his tax statements, he inadvertently left his address (the usually black those out) in plain view on one of those forms.
One enterprising blogger immediately looked up the address on the satellite imagery maps and came up with before and after shots for the property.
Here are some of the findings.
The house and adjacent lot are completely surrounded by one common wall.
Even after the fence was erected, the only access to the adjacent lot is through the front gate of the Obamas' lot.
The Obamas paid for the upkeep of those grounds.
Had they not built the fence, they wouldn't have been able to walk around the perimeter of their own home.
Now: There exists a law that basically says .. if you, in a position of power such as a politician, accept a gift or a favour and the courts deem that the value is so high as to be unreasonably generous then there is no need to uncover whatever favour has been asked in return. It's called Reasonable Practise or something like that and is used quite frequently where corrupt politicians are concerned.
But that's only what we know.
Right now, Mr. Rezko is sitting in jail with a total of 300 years in prison looking him straight in the eye.
Some of his cohorts are there too and Patrick Fitzgerald will talk to whichever one has the most to offer.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 02:19 AM

The above is only one example of Obama's dealings with Rezko but it's one that has set alarm bells off for me since I first read about it and here's why.
If I stole a bike, every time I threw my leg over the crossbar, I'd remember how I got it.
Consequently, I wouldn't end up riding the damn thing at all and I'm sure most of you would feel the same way.
But the Obamas go home to that house every night and it doesn't seem to bother them. That fact in itself creeps me out but there is more.

Much of the money Rezko was pilfering came from pension funds.
Each time he extorted money a portion of it was put into the campaign funds for Governor Rod Blagojevich ( Blah-Goy-O-Vitch) & Senator Obama.
(Campaign fund.. AKA... The perfect money laundering facility.)
Specific individuals were directed to convey these funds and the list of contributors for both men is identical.

The thought that some poor schmuck puts himself through school, works hard all his life just to put a roof over his head and food on the table only to to see the Rezkos & Obamas lick the cream off his pension before he even gets to retire, burns a hole in my gut.

You will forgive me if I do not share the same enthusiasm as you do for your messiah.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:03 AM

I knew that if I gave you the information (and I did)...

But you didn't. That example you came up with just doesn't stand up. There's some kind of accusation there, but nothing that amounts to clear proof of wrongdoing by Obama.

He pays less than the asking price - he's receiving a bribe. He pays more than what's understood to be the market price - he's giving a bribe.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:33 AM

My word is good. I followed Jim Lad's link. It took some work to get past the Fox News rha-rah on the page, and find a link to actual information, but i did. Here it is, unedited, from the Chicago Tribune. sorry this is a long paste, but I want everyone to see what Jim Lad steered us to, so we can all judge the level of malfeasance....
*****************************************************************
" Antoin "Tony" Rezko is a well-regarded, politically connected housing developer, Barack Obama an up-and-coming community organizer. After Obama is named president of the Harvard Law Review, Rezko offers Obama a job building inner-city homes with his Rezmar Corp. Obama declines, but a friendship and political alliance begins.   The Obamas and Rezkos dined occasionally and the Obamas once spent a day at the Rezkos' Lake Geneva retreat.

In subsequent years, Rezko will help bankroll Obama's campaigns, except his presidential bid.

At Rezko's request, Obama drops in at a business meeting for Middle Eastern bankers. The New York Times has cited Rezko business partners who thought Rezko was seeking to impress the foreign guests, potential investors in his business ventures. Obama says he could recall only one instance when he and Rezko discussed recommendations for appointments to state jobs, boards or commissions.

Obama is sworn in to the U.S. Senate. Bolstered by payments for his best-selling autobiography and advances for future books, the Obamas' combined income topped $1.67 million. They go home-shopping and are drawn to a 96-year-old, South Side Georgian revival home with four fireplaces, glass-door bookcases fashioned from Honduran mahogany and a wine cellar with space for 1,000 bottles. The house and the adjoining yard had been owned as a single property. But now the owners are listing them separately, asking $1.95 million for the house and $625,000 for the garden lot. Obama disclosed in the March interview that someone else already had an option to buy the garden lot. But he said Rezko took over that option after Rezko learned Obama was bidding for the house. Obama said he knew next to nothing about those transactions and does not recall when he learned that Rezko was interested in buying the side lot—or even how Rezko learned it was for sale. But they talked about the upcoming sales. "He said, 'I might be interested,'." Obama recalled. "My response was, 'Well, that would be fine.'." Obama added: "This is an area where I can see a lapse in judgment."

Between Jan. 15 and Jan. 23, Obama submits three bids: $1.3 million on Jan. 15; $1.5 million on Jan. 21; and $1.65 million on Jan. 23. He told the Tribune that he does not recall when he learned that Rezko was interested in buying the side lot, or how Rezko learned of the sale. But Obama raised the possibility that he was the first to bring the lot to Rezko's attention. The senator's campaign provided a copy of a previously released e-mail from the sellers. In response to questions from the Obama campaign, the sellers agreed that they "did not offer or give the Obamas a 'discount' on the house price" because Rezko paid their asking price for the yard. "Tony asked me during the course of one of these conversations why I might not be interested in buying the lot and keep the property intact. And I said that, you know, it wasn't worth it to us to spend an extra $600,000 or so on a lot next door when Michelle and I were really interested in the house. So, he said, 'Well, I might be interested in purchasing the lot.' And my response was, 'That would be fine.' "And my thinking at the time, and this is just to sort of flag this, this is an area where I can see sort of a lapse in judgment. Where I could have said, 'You know, I'm not sure that's a great idea.' But my view at the time when he expressed an interest was that he was a developer in this area that owned lots, that he thought it was going to be a good investment. And my interest, or my motivation was here's somebody that I knew who, if this lot was being developed, it'd be better to have somebody who knew, who I knew, who you know would give me schedules, keep me apprised of what was taking place and so forth. So I didn't object."

At some point before the sale closes, Obama tours the property with Rezko for 15 to 30 minutes, a fact the Obama campaign disclosed this February. The campaign said Obama wanted Rezko's opinion of the property because Rezko was a real estate developer in the area. In previous accounts of the purchase, Obama did not divulge the tour. In 2006, he told the Tribune that he recalled talking to Rezko about the potential home purchase "either at an event or some conversation we had where they mentioned to me that they either knew the property or knew the developer or something like that. …I actually asked him what he thought of the house and he thought it was a good house. And I said, 'I'm looking at putting in a bid on it.' And from that point on I just worked through my real estate broker, purchased the property. "He said, 'I'd be willing to go inside and take a look,'." Obama recalled. He said in the March interview that he simply didn't disclose the walk-through previously because he did not feel the information was salient and insisted the tour didn't mean he and Rezko coordinated their purchases. "The fact that he had taken a physical tour was not something that I thought was new information."

In the months preceding Obama's June 2005 purchase of his home, Rezko had already become a controversial figure in Chicago and Illinois politics. In March 2005, for example, city officials alleged that a minority contractor at O'Hare International Airport acted as a front for a Rezko firm. Then in May, Rezko reportedly was among several to receive Cook County grand jury subpoenas in a joint county-state investigation of jobs and campaign contributions in Blagojevich's administration. Subsequent reports showed a federal grand jury asked the state teachers' pension system for records involving Rezko and other political insiders. Obama said he was aware of the growing controversies. "I started reading the reports that were surfacing and — I'll be honest with you, that, on the couple of occasions that it came up, he gave me assurances that ..... he was not doing anything wrong. And that it wasn't a problem. And there's not doubt that, as things evolved, I became more concerned. But again, this is somebody who, in his interactions with me, had always been above board, and so, my instinct was to believe him." And, Obama added, "at that time, the news around Rezko's problems had not elevated to the levels that they did later."
***************************************************************

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:33 AM

Okay, whet we have here is a good business deal in which both parties benefited... Your assertion, Jim, that Rezko got the short end of the stick is the crux of your argument is subjective...

People enter into thse kinds of land deals all the time... I did it myself a couple years ago... If a large parcial of property come on the market it is not uncommon for folks to buy it and split it... It's good business if each party gets out of the deal what they might have had to pay more for had the propert been subdivided prior to being offered and each piece being sold seperately...

If you look at housing developement accross the3 country you usually start with a large piece, which can be purchased cheaper on a per acre basis, then chop it up and each lot becomes expensive as compared to the original per acre price...

In developement it's kind the opposite of an "assmblage" where you assemble several pieces in an developed area and offer them as one. When this is done the per acre price goes up as opposed to what happens when you buy a large piece of property and subdivide...

Econ 101, pure and simple...

Now I know that folks would like to read something very sinister into what Obama did but what he did was good business... Who is to say whether or not Rezko was happy with his side of the deal at the time it was made???

Now if you, Jim, have evidence that Rezko knowingly took a loss for no other reason that gaining influence, plus evidence that Obama made decisions favorable to Rezko in exchange, then you have a story...

Right now you have a conspiracy theory that, frankly, is very weak...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:41 AM

We've taken Fox News out of the loop as an unreliable source, but why would anybody take the Chicago Tribune seriously?

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:02 AM

Bobert,

I think that one might also say

"Now I know that folks would like to read something very sinister into what Bush did but what he did was good business..."

about a number of actions that you and others have been critical of.....


So it is ok now???

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:25 AM

" I'll be honest with you, that, on the couple of occasions that it came up, he gave me assurances that ..... he was not doing anything wrong."

hmmm. He'd better be careful when talking to Chavez or Ahmadinejad.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:29 AM

How many Iraqis died as a result of this transaction, bb???

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:32 AM

or anyone in that sewer of corruption called Washington, DC.

I trust he's read up on the Duke Cunningham story.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:46 AM

Jeepers, people have been saying for months that there is little or no substance to Senator Obama's positions and policy statements. I suppose it should be no wonder that there is no real substance to his scandals either. What - no starlets claiming to have sat upon his lap? No mysterious briefcases full of unmarked bills? As Santa would say, "Bah, Humbug!"

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:02 AM

The funny thing is, a-brroks, is that the same Repub attack PR that has tried to paint Obama as someone who has no positions on issues is the same Repub attack PR that now wants us to believe that he is some kinda crook???

Like Obama says, "It's just the politics of old..."

This is why John McCain is going to loose... People are sick of the politics of old and the more Rezko stories that the swiftboaters cann ***manufacture*** the worse off it will be for the Repubs...

But with their record, I reckon it's all they have... They certainly can't run on policies because they are on the wrong side of just about every concievable issue...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:05 AM

Have I mentioned that Obama will be the next President of the United States?

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:08 AM

Peace

"May " be the next...

Never underestimate the ability of the Democratic Party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.


Especially when the selling point of working WITH the opposition is far more substantially supported by the Republican candidate's record than by the Democrat's

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:21 AM

It's not much of a scandal - certainly nowhere near the level of McCain's Keating Five. Still it's one of the few insights we have as to the real world activities of this man. He has to do what he has to do to rise in politics. Must have a showcase home, I don't deny.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:53 AM

"Never underestimate the ability of the Democratic Party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory."

Yeah. There's that to worry about for sure. I'd like to laugh at this point, but ya know . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 11:19 AM

Like I said.
You are incapable of absorbing any information that taints your unrealistic view of Obama.
The facts are there and there is much more.
You just won't see it.
Patrick Fitzgerald will.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 11:22 AM

Speaking of conspiracy- does anyone remember the thread/poster where a post was linked to the 2004 election? The theme was the various oddities and shenanigans of that particular election. I really would like to read it again but my mind has gone blank as to who, what, where AND when.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: heric
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 11:35 AM

ONE thread??

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Art Thieme
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:03 PM

I grew up in Chicago and have watched the politics of that area unfold for a long time. (Check out the old 'They Came In The Middle Of The Night' thread here at Mudcat ;-) We watch it going down and can often see the humor in it---and in people trying to gain political footing by recounting the machinations of it as is happening in this thread.

I also grew up in an apartment on the second floor of a tall building. In the penthouse of that building lived a Chicago mafia outfit big-shot named Rocco Fischetti. He was killed gangland style in Florida while he was getting a haircut.

It is quite sad to me that I cannot, now, be considered as a candidate for President of the United States because of my connections to these sorry and dangerous people.

But I can live with it!!

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:06 PM

As politicians go Obama seems relatively clean. I don't think that's unrealistic. Who says he's perfect?

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Art Thieme
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:15 PM

Jim,

You are correct---I "won't see it" because it is trivial and simply DOES NOT MATTER!

What matters is that Obama is a good and articulate man who we hope will wipe the doings of this heinous Bush administration's electoral thievery off the map.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:51 PM

"Who says he's perfect?"

Em, er... gimme a second... Damn!
I knew it when I came in here.
Oh, I forget.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:59 PM

Have you ever found anything at all to be wrong with Hillary? I am trying to understand. Why just single out Obama?

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:51 PM

Ebbie - here is THE article on that issue. A long read, but full of incredible (nauseating) info.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

Rolling Stone

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:56 PM

"The New York Times declared that ''there is no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.''"


Sorry. After all the claims that the NYT is such an impeachable souce that even it's editorials are to be taken as gospel ( as opposed to the WSJ), this statement declares the 2004 election to be fundamentaly sound.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 02:27 PM

"Why just single out Obama?"
1) When the race had just got under way, I looked into all of the candidates to see which I would pick.
The Rezko ties came up immediately. So I had to discount him.
b) The candidate who sets himself up as being the only honest one in the bunch will always be a target. Look at your own feelings towards Stephen Harper.
iii) I told you what I thought of the other candidates and who my pick would be and the Pro Obama moderators deleted the thread. Remember that day? You PM'd me and I gave you my full answer by way of that thread and you never got to see it.

I won't do that again.
Oh and 4) I honestly cannot stand the guy. I can't change that. Those who feel the same way about Hillary probably get that.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 02:43 PM

Thanks, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 03:41 PM

1) b) iii) 4) 101)

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 03:43 PM

He's talkin' in tongues.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 04:37 PM

Ya' know whhat I think of when I see the swiftboters here in Mudville with their rather juvenilistic conspiracy theories is Bob Dylan's words "Don't stand in the door ways and block up the halls, for the times they are a changing"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Peace
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 05:08 PM

Well, Rezco has been found guilty. So, the thread title is accurate.

The rest is just speculation.

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 05:27 PM

It's all they have for now, brucie...

But not to fear, there's more fuel in the swiftboaters tank and this is just the beginning...

Google up "American Survival, Inc." which is the organbization that is being paid to come up with several swiftboat fronts over the coming months... Some of the stuff they have thought of is purdy amusing... Like Obama's link to the Weather Underground... Doesn't mch matter that he was 7 years old at the time 'cause yer never to young to burn down ROTC buildings... Right??? That one is going to be fun...

No, what really is going to be fun is the first time that Obama is confronted by a swiftboater in front of cameras...

"learned a thing from Charley, don't ya know
better stay away from Copperhead Road"

Know what I mean... Kerry was a case study in how not to defend yourself... Obama ain't John Kerry... Heck, Bill Clinton couldn't get to him and the swiftboaters won't either...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 05:39 PM

Tia, thank you.   I wish everyone would read that article, written by Robert Kennedy, Jr., no less. They needn't even believe it- IF they then go looking for more information.

What is really scary: IF "they" were that well organized and that criminal in 2004 I have no reason to believe that they won't be able to do the same thing in 2008...

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 05:47 PM

Not to fear, Eb...

There aren't enough dirty tricks in the universe to cover up the Bush/McCian failed policies...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: Jim Lad
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 06:00 PM

Go on then. 99....

Subject: RE: BS: Rezko Guilty
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 06:07 PM

1100100