Apparently there is a new plot twist in the Obama-Rezko saga:
A former Illinois bank official, now claiming whistleblower status, says bank officials replaced a loan reappraisal that he prepared for a Chicago property that was purchased by the wife of now-convicted felon Tony Rezko, part of which was later sold to next-door neighbor Barack Obama.
In a complaint filed Thursday in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Kenneth J. Connor said that his reappraisal of Rita Rezko's property was replaced with a higher one and that he was fired when he questioned the document.
...
According to the complaint, Mr. Connor reviewed the appraisal of the Rezko property by another firm, Adams Appraisal, which had set the value at $625,000. Mr. Connor's complaint said that he told his bosses in a report that the property had been overvalued by at least $125,000 and that a "reasonable and fair evaluation" should have been no greater than $500,000.
Later, the complaint states, Mr. Connor observed that his lower appraisal was not in the Rezko file and that he notified his supervisors that it had been replaced. He said, according to the complaint, the new file had been reviewed by the FBI and "if the FBI were to ask me about such matters, I would tell them the truth. I never rescinded my original findings."
Critics of Mr. Obama's dealings with Rezko charge that the senator may have gotten a deal on his property purchase, noting that Mrs. Rezko paid the full asking price for her property on an adjacent lot. Both of which were sold by a single seller. Mr. Obama bought his house for $1.65 million - $300,000 below the asking price.
When the property was sold, Mr. Obama knew Rezko was under investigation on fraud charges.
The complaint said the Rezko loan was approved by Mutual Bank President and CEO Amrish Mahajan and others so that Mrs. Rezko could buy a 9,090-square-foot vacant parcel of real estate. It said that in January 2006, Mrs. Rezko and Mr. Obama, along with his wife Michelle, signed an agreement to sell a 10-foot strip of the property to the Obamas. At that point, according to the complaint, Mr. Connor's firm asked him to conduct the reappraisal.
The complaint said Mr. Connor is seeking $4.2 million for compensatory damages, plus unspecified punitive damages.
So the controversial re-appraisal occurred when the Rezkos sold a 10 foot wide strip of land to the Obamas, and the original appraisal put a lower value on the property.
Well. If the Rezkos sold that strip of property at a sweetheart low price, having the bank come back with a high appraisal would not be what they want, at least as far as minimizing embarrassment to the Obamas is concerned. Of course, a higher appraisal might allow the Rezkos take some cash out in a refinancing, but that has nothing to do with the Obamas.
And I suppose that if the Obamas were financing the purchase of the 10 foot strip that a higher appraisal would be helpful for that, but in that scenario surely the reappraisal would have been done on their entire new and improved property, not the Rezko lot? I don't care how much of a real estate bubble we are talking about, no one was getting separate financing for a ten foot strip of land connected to their main property.
I am straining to see the scandal here. And a bonus thought (say it with me) - Obama is our President - Suck it up. I'll get behind a real scandal if need be, but this isn't it.
FOREST V. TREES In other news, Drudge offers my old buddy Patrick Fitzgerald a Merry Fitzmas and links to reports of a Senate seat for sale by the Illinois Governor. Marc Ambinder and Ben Smith have fascinating details about this trip down shakedown street.
And I would say he is of a very different temperament, but NY Governor David Patterson also has a Senate seat available. Something for someone to keep an eye on.
And I’m not going to start saying ‘did anyone ever talk to anyone?’
Fitz said that?
Posted by: bgates | December 09, 2008 at 03:13 PM
So it begins with a Senate Seat up for sale, right aroud the time that the Presidency was up for sale; that's not a metaphor, in light of the credit card AVS disabling, the funny money from all over the world, the money and support from the subprime sharks, which allowed saturation slander and disinformation of a good man and public servant, and the decent woman and anti-corruption crusader. It's kind of funny how in 'All the President's Men', they made such a big deal about Segretti and his little schemes, what did they call it colloquially, oh yes, rat @#$%#$^$, well Ethan Winner and David Axelrod turned that into a fine art. This is the kind of thing
that led to Nixon being sent back to San Clemente, one step ahead of the hoosecow. They contaminated virtually every media with their lies like 'arsenic in the water supply', poisoning the well of information, for years to come and yet they were only able to pull 53% to 47%. There has to be an
accounting for this.
Ironically, Fizgerald made this possible in part. First he let himself be a party to James Comey 'the dragon slayer of Martha Stewart's ill conceived probe, of the Plame gate which almost immediately pointing to Armitage. Then he let Libby, become a subject of the investigation almost entirely a partisan enterprise to lead to the indictment and conviction of Libby, despite the evidence. Than he went after Conrad Black, whose peccadilloes are small in the big scheme of things. A good deal of the center right oppostion in Britain, Canada, & the US, was handicapped by that move. You see some of the garbage that the Telegraph threw up this autumn for proof of this. Now he follows yet another path of corrupt practices, and he's probably met his match; as he will likely be forestalled
from further investigations.
Posted by: narciso | December 09, 2008 at 03:16 PM
So where do you come off with 'spying' in your original rant, charlie? You've got to be unconfused and honest in order to gain credibility.
==========================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Unhinged name calling?
Is that what you read? Huh. I was merely stating facts.
Sorry, I understand you are struggling with facts over fiction. I'll leave you to it.
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 03:17 PM
I'm against the domestic spying initiated during the Bush administration and I am worried that Obama will continue it. That's why I was dissappointed and a little alarmed at his FISA vote.
Posted by: charlie chocks | December 09, 2008 at 03:19 PM
I can't see why this matters in this context either.Certainly there was something behind this--Maybe Rezko wasnted to pay less in property taxes, but the link to Obama is less than clear. TM
Posted by: clarice | December 09, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Gawd. Somebody stop me. It's too easy.
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Obama gives new meaning to the word 'probe', and Bush to the word 'probity'. The 'Good Old Days', charlie, I think you yearn for them. You've seen the last of them.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Find a citizen hurt by Bush's 'domestic spying', charlie. You can't. You've been lied to, desperately.
=================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:22 PM
Now, while you are concentrating, imagine what Obama and Company will do with the power of the NSA.
===================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:23 PM
the Blagovich case will open Pandora's box in both Chicago and Illinois. He was a county prosecutor and congressman. It's going to be very interesting. It's a culture of corruption that seemingly doesn't know right from wrong.
The book on the Ryan case, "The man who emptied Death Row" is a fascinating insight into the Illinois mess.
Posted by: matt | December 09, 2008 at 03:23 PM
Can anybody say "Whitewater" and where's Ken Starr when we need him?
Posted by: Andrew | December 09, 2008 at 03:25 PM
"Rezko bumps up his portion of the property by $125,000 while Obama et al get $300,000 off from the asking."
Exactly. Obama's purchase of his home was a three-way deal. Rezko's purchase of the next door property was a requirement of Obama's purchase agreement. Rezko pays the full inflated price for the one piece while Obama gets a $300,000 discount on his. It's a way of hiding a money transfer (a.k.a. payoff, bribe, etc.) -- as long as a grand jury doesn't look into it.
Posted by: George | December 09, 2008 at 03:27 PM
According to the complaint, Mr. Connor reviewed the appraisal of the Rezko property by another firm, Adams Appraisal, which had set the value at $625,000. Mr. Connor's complaint said that he told his bosses in a report that the property had been overvalued by at least $125,000 and that a "reasonable and fair evaluation" should have been no greater than $500,000.
Tom Maguire-
The allegation is this guy made the appraisal, which was then taken out of the file. What we don't know is whether there was also something hinky about the appraisals in the original purchase. I think we are being pointed in that direction.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 03:29 PM
Over at Texas Darlin' they speak of Evelyn Pringle and her expose on therealbarackobama. So maybe Fitz can catch the whale after all.
I think Fitz's hand was forced. Yesterday Blag was talking about how he only had lawful conversations on the phone so if he were being wiretapped his conscience was clear. This was about to blow up, anyway. At least, I hope that explains the timing.
Gad, I wish I trusted Fitzgerald.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:29 PM
I don't care if it happened yesterday, last year, or many years ago. They're putting a governor in jail for being corrupt - he wanted to get his wife a job with more money, the same way Obama's wife tripled her salary and then Obama funneled millions to her employer. That is wrong, it's corrupt, it's immoral, it's a message to everyone in the country that only criminals can be succesful.
Most people I know have college degrees, some from very expensive schools but they all had to pay for it. After that they had jobs where they had to work years before getting promotions - Michelle made more money than people performing life saving procedures on people but did she earn it? How much time did she spend actually working during the day? Obama billed in four years what most lawyers bill in a year.
They both expect everything to be given to them and they don't want to work for it - I can't stand that attitude.
Posted by: nonetoday | December 09, 2008 at 03:30 PM
Gawd. Somebody stop me. It's too easy.
Consider this an intervention.
Posted by: Jane | December 09, 2008 at 03:32 PM
We might consider the possibility that Fitz was quick on the trigger because Blag could appoint as soon as "The Price Was Right". Then we would have a newly minted (or newly counterfeited) Senator whose ChicagoStink might overpower that coming from Zero - far fetched as that possibility may seem.
Fitz can see that far ahead. Perhaps he didn't want to tarnish the good name of the prettiest of the Chicago whores who are up on the auction block?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 09, 2008 at 03:33 PM
Hannity just played a clip of Obama saying he has not talked to the governor and then a clip of Axelrod saying of course Obama has spoken with the governor. All in relation to the senate seat replacement. We have Ayers all over again. Confuse. Conflict. Complicate. Story over.
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2008 at 03:33 PM
"I'm against the domestic spying initiated during the Bush administration and I am worried that Obama will continue it."
Why,who have you been calling, Chucky?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Sue:
"I think republicans will be more effective going after Obama on his lack of experience, policy, etc."
Because it's been working for us so well! Oddly enough, you were the first one to bring up impeachment here.
I'm certainly not hoping that Obama will screw up foreign or economic policy in order to put Republicans back in office. But if he was, in fact, the knowing product of corruption in Chicago and we give him a free pass on it, is there any reason -- or incentive -- for him to operate differently when he's in control of the entire executive branch? Other former colleagues with ambitions may not be as easy to flip off as a "crazy" Blago is.
I may like some of Obama's cabinet picks, but he's not exactly leaving his pre-election cohorts out in the cold. We've seen Secretaries who are the public face of departments they don't control before. David Axelrod and Emanuel are apparently as close as Chicago twins, and they're both getting offices in the White House Don't worry, I won't be elevating Axelrod to Rovian menace status, but I'm not sure he even knows how to run a clean operation. I think he knows a whole lot about making it look clean, which is not exactly reassuring. The pressure of some public skepticism, if not suspicion, may induce at least a salutory level of caution.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Hey, does anyone remember why it was only a 10-foot strip that the Obamas bought from Rezko?
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 03:38 PM
You should not write this off yet. Obama made Rezko's fortune by helping him get city/state contracts to build and run affordable housing projects (he made Valerie Jarret a fortune too; she was "Senate Candidate 1" on the wiretaps). Rezko then buys the yard for the Obamas' mansion. This may not be the biggest scandal in terms of the laws broken, but it ties Obama to the bigger corruption. There are other shoes to drop on this.
Posted by: Brilliant 47-Year-Old | December 09, 2008 at 03:39 PM
Obama is saying he didn't know anything about this, which means Valerie Jarret and Andy Stern are keeping secrets from him.
And if Rahm was the whistleblower as people are claiming, Rahm was keeping secrets from Obama as well.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 03:39 PM
None of the lefty blogs are reporting on SEIU's involvement in this whole sordid mess.
Heh.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 03:41 PM
He seems to have some issues - he wants a relationship with a smart woman he can talk to, but he wants a different kind of women in the bedroom
Bwak!!! "Clinton relationships" is as oxymoronic a term as you can find. Start off with his Mama being the town slut of some glorified Arkansas crossroad and take it from there to being an unconvicted rapist. Slick's story of how he stood up to his step-daddy when he was drunkenly bouncing Virginia off the drywall is probably the biggest whopper he ever came up with; taking notes on how to treat women was a more likely activity.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 09, 2008 at 03:42 PM
Enlightened - you have softened CC up and he/she/it may actually be ready for FACTS instead of EMOTIONAL RESPONSES to PERCEPTIONS based on FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real).
You can do it!
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 09, 2008 at 03:42 PM
One thing you can absolutely count on, MayBee, is that Obama's lying. He can't help himself. Look at that cigarette smoking bullshit. He thinks he's cute, and he's had cover for it all his life. This too shall pass.
===============================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:43 PM
Charlie Rangel is up to his eyeballs in tax evasion, Chris Dodd took gifts from the industry he regulates, William Jefferson had $90K of cold cash in his freezer, Kent Conrad got special mortgage rates, Gerry Studds had sex with an underage Congressional page, there was a gay prostitution ring running out of Barney Frank's apartment.
It's the soft bigotry of low expectations, I tell you. "Yeah, I know...but they're DEMOCRATS. What do you expect?" Do you have a history of buggery, skullduggery, homocide, grand theft? Why not run for office as a Democrat?
Posted by: PD Quig | December 09, 2008 at 03:44 PM
I can actually see the press getting irritated about how sandbagged they get by him. Brokaw's caught on.
=============================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:45 PM
If Obama has his way, and is able to enact his policies, he will do more harm than we probably realize. Certainly more harm than good. Therefore, isn't it true that weakening him by whatever means is good on balance? (I've learned a lot in eight years, progs.)
If we absolutely insist on being better than them, we could always just stick with the truth.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 03:47 PM
What you all neglect to realize is that Tony essentially gave him the whole lot for that price.
As I remember the photos, the lot is a fairly standard Chicago lot. If you slice 10' off it (lengthwise along the Obama property) then the Obama's end up with a nice little addition to their side yard, nothing much of consiquence by itself.
However, on Tony's side the property is essentially worthless - and thus ends up being essentially a full empty lot for the Obama's.
With a lot that narrow, you can no longer build anything on it. He's provided the Obama's with a full lot for a trivial price. (By Hyde Park values.)
Posted by: Potter Palmer | December 09, 2008 at 03:47 PM
"Fascinating, but old news, hashed out by our watchdog press before the election and investigated by Fitzgerald."
Just great. My Bosch Ironiedektor is fused to the desk top, the 50 amp circuit I use for it now shows up as a scorch mark all the way to the subpanel and the circuit breaker is now welded in place.
Nice going.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 09, 2008 at 03:48 PM
Obama is saying he didn't know anything about this, which means Valerie Jarret and Andy Stern are keeping secrets from him.
I thought it was big news that, according to the complaint, the incoming administration was serious about putting a crony in the Senate.
Posted by: Elliott | December 09, 2008 at 03:49 PM
Oddly enough, you were the first one to bring up impeachment here.
The first to say the word on this thread, for sure.
But if he was, in fact, the knowing product of corruption in Chicago and we give him a free pass on it, is there any reason -- or incentive -- for him to operate differently when he's in control of the entire executive branch?
That is my point. He is the knowing product of corruption in Chicago. And was elected anyway. Unless it is on tape, in Obama's own words, we will get burned again and Obama will spend 8 years in the WH, not 4. And leave with approval ratings that match or exceed Clinton's.
I would be willing to bet money that no corruption will land at the feet of the first black president. A white man with Obama's baggage wouldn't have made it out of the primaries.
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2008 at 03:49 PM
Ironiedetektor (it's not in spellczeck)
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 09, 2008 at 03:51 PM
Thanks, Potter Palmer. That's what I was trying to remember. Seems relevant to the question about the appraisals, too.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 03:51 PM
They better make sure nobody from Obama's campaign is associated with this - they already paid $3 million in CASH for their new house, the Secret Service has been there, they're all ready to move. I don't want to them to be delayed - there are millions left from that $750 million and not lots of time left to use it.
There is going to be years of this - lots of "scandals" and then Obama makes a statement, Axelrod say something else, Rahm says something different, there will be "leaks" to the press every week but reporters will be given different stories, nobody will know what to believe.
It's all part of their games - the same as the "we know the BC is valid but we enjoy watching people fight about it" game. I don't want these people in our government - this isn't about playing games.
Posted by: nonetoday | December 09, 2008 at 03:53 PM
He can't help himself.
You're right, kim.
The only way he didn't know about this is if his staff knew he didn't want to know.
And if they knew he wouldn't want to know, it would be because it's behavior he's expecting.
And if it's behavior Obama was expecting, it's because it's behavior he has seen before.
And if it's behavior Obama has seen before, it's behavior he's never done anything about.
He's just benefited by associating with some of the players.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 03:53 PM
I can't help but think, Sue, that his tangled webs will suffocate him. It isn't just the dead tree press, but they might snap to him too, especially since there will lots of blame to spread around for the coming disasters.
========================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 03:53 PM
"Hey, does anyone remember why it was only a 10-foot strip that the Obamas bought from Rezko?"
Unless contiguous with a house a ten foot strip is valueless.
I agree with Potter Palmer,the sale of the 10 foot strip devalues the rest of the lot.
Are
slum landlordsdevelopers as altruistic as that?Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 03:56 PM
"I would be willing to bet money that no corruption will land at the feet of the first black president. A white man with Obama's baggage wouldn't have made it out of the primaries."
That is certainly true, but no reason to lay off Obama. I disagree that because he is black he is immune from corruption charges, I would say the D after his name helps more than race. If just the truth about this guy gets out it should be at least enough to damage him politically. Baby steps, baby steps.
Posted by: ben | December 09, 2008 at 03:57 PM
I don't mind discussing Obama's problems. I think there is plenty to talk about in that regard. I'm just not as interested in his trips to syria or his birth certificate as some of you seem to be.
Rezko has been visiting Syria, not Obama. Nobody serious cares about the birth certificate. The Rezko story is typical of Chicago and that is why there is a lot of concern about who Obama is. Emil Jones "made" him a Senator. Rezko made him money and worked it so he could buy his "dream house."
If I was a conspiracy buff, I would be interested in how he got into Harvard Law, not in his birth certificate. He is a man of mystery. Some of them may be solved after the bloom is off.
Posted by: Michael Kennedy | December 09, 2008 at 03:58 PM
The (D) after any politicians name in Illinois stands for?
DEFENDANT
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 09, 2008 at 03:59 PM
Well, Potter, that's obvious, but why does NOT filing an appraisal for the lot for less than the former higher appraisal, help anyone? It's a bribe if it's worth $350k or $200K
Posted by: clarice | December 09, 2008 at 04:00 PM
I know why they struck at 6:15 AM. Yesterday, when asked about corruption charges and wiretapping, Blagojevich said there was "nothing but sunshine hanging over me". The early bird gets the worm, I guess.
===========================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 04:04 PM
What you all neglect to realize is that Tony essentially gave him the whole lot for that price.
Yes, that's exactly the case.
That's why it is possibly quite important that Rezko's original purchase price was too high. The more he paid for his part of the lot, the less the Obamas paid for the house and the lot.
The current allegation is interesting because it illustrates that someone was willing to hide the true value of the Rezko lot. Was the original appraisal jacked up on purpose? That's the question.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 04:05 PM
Walter,
Good point about [President-elect Advisor]. I am adopting your excellent interpretation as my own.
As to Rezko's cooperation, the impression one gets from the footnotes,¹ is that he's hardly wearing himself out.
_________________
¹Natch.
Posted by: Elliott | December 09, 2008 at 04:05 PM
Ok I think TM has it wrong....the re-appraisal did not occur when the Bambi's wanted to purchase the 10 foot strip -
"TM: So the controversial re-appraisal occurred when the Rezkos sold a 10 foot wide strip of land to the Obamas, and the original appraisal put a lower value on the property."
Bambi said HE arranged the appraisal on that parcel - 2006:
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.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article
Bambi continues to say he paid roughly 1/6th of the purchase price $625,000 or $104,500 - which really was $104,167 or thereabouts....
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.
Just one minute. Was this "strip" 151 feet long? Meaning it was 10x151 = 1515 Sqft? because Bambi paid for 1515 sqft of a roughly 1/6th portion of 9090 sqft.....
WTH does this double speak mean?
"But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, (But I probably violated something ethical, forgive me I am stupid and you are too if you believe this crap)I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko. (An innocent purchase of land was mis-gauged?) It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me.
And funnily enough - Bambi says he got an appraisal for the land strip, then he says he paid more than the appraisal amount (stupid me) then he says he OFFERED to pay 1/6th of the purchase price, so what was the "strip appraisal" about??? Where is that appraisal? If that was appraised at say - $75 - $80K that would corroborate the guy saying he valued the whole property at $500K or less fair market...Lying liars and the lies they tell!
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 04:09 PM
""I would be willing to bet money that no corruption will land at the feet of the first black president."
It will, though,land in the dossiers of the world's intelligence agencies.No doubt organised crime will also have its information.
In the interests of America and the free world could not Obama have the decency to reveal his true person?
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 04:10 PM
This is good, from Jake Tapper.
Posted by: MayBee | December 09, 2008 at 04:10 PM
Consider this an intervention.
Thank you - I needed that, or be subject to the Pistola.
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 04:12 PM
Just great. My Bosch Ironiedektor is fused to the desk top, the 50 amp circuit I use for it now shows up as a scorch mark all the way to the subpanel and the circuit breaker is now welded in place.
That's why I buy the cheap ACME ones by the pallet now. They spin wildly for a few minutes whenever a troll shows up, then turn to ash on my desk. Just brush it off and install a new one.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | December 09, 2008 at 04:13 PM
Do we know who the sellers were? They were obviously privy to the coordinated overall purchase deal, would have had to be the ones subdividing the original lots, etc.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 04:16 PM
Attention. Alexander Butterfield? Please call your office. The tape needs to be changed.
Posted by: sbwaters | December 09, 2008 at 04:18 PM
From p. 64:
The wiretaps certainly have shown she's at least as angry.
Posted by: Elliott | December 09, 2008 at 04:19 PM
"With a lot that narrow, you can no longer build anything on it. He's provided the Obama's with a full lot for a trivial price. (By Hyde Park values.)"
Correct.
If Bambi's lot was 151 long, then we can safely assume so was Rezko's adjoining lot.
So if we minus the 1515 sq ft Bambi bought, from the 9090 Rezko purchased, and the remaining 7575 sq ft is 151 long - then we have a roughly 50.17 foot wide piece of property...worthless. No wonder the doctor originally owning it - who BTW worked at Mrs. Bambi's university hospital, but alas they did not know each other - sold both parcels, and the land had to go first. he wanted to unload the piece of carp.
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 04:19 PM
I wonder who the specifically named individual is?
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2008 at 04:21 PM
Sue:
You're worrying about elections; I'm worrying about corruption in the White House. I certainly wouldn't want to see a lot of Republican officials running around shouting for impeachment or yet another Special Prosecutor at the drop of every hat, either. But I also don't see how giving Obama a preemtive pass is going to make his favorables go down, and unless the story gets to big to ignore, I don't think Obama detractors will be getting much coverage anyway.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2008 at 04:24 PM
he needs to find a way to take the “financial stress” off of his family
Given what I've heard about the price of ballet and piano lessons in that part of the country, I'm not surprised.
I've heard earrings in Chicago can run $600 a pair.
Don't even get me started about fresh fruit.
Posted by: bgates | December 09, 2008 at 04:24 PM
Rezko has no reason to cooperate any more. He has friends in the highest of places. However, the Blagojevich case is going to turn over a lot of rocks in Chicago that should have been turned over long ago.
This may be a tipping point for the country. A governor openly auctioning off a Senate seat is a little too much corruption for almost anyone.
Rangel, Dodd, et al may all get their comeuppance yet....
Posted by: matt | December 09, 2008 at 04:24 PM
"she's at least as angry"
Elliott,
I'd pay a dollar for the transcript of her remarks when she found out that Bucky Bulldoggy was getting $350K from the hospital gig. They would probably be suitable for framing, if not for showing.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 09, 2008 at 04:25 PM
Drudge now highlghting the conflicting statements:
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 04:28 PM
JMH,
There are already those calling for a special prosecutor. But, whatever. We either learn from our past or we don't. You will be right or I will and only time will tell. I certainly don't have a problem with us tearing Obama up daily. I just want to keep it out of the halls of congress.
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2008 at 04:29 PM
Elliott:
I noticed that "Presidential" Advisor too. Freudian slip, if ever there was one. Or could FitzCo be secretly longing for the good old days? Nah.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2008 at 04:34 PM
I just want to keep it out of the halls of congress.
Suggested rebuttal to the first weekly radio address (/hourly YouTube, whatever):
"We all applaud the uncommon decency and high ethical standards President Obama brings to his office. It ennobles us all. If I persist in opposing any of his wise and benevolent policies, it is only because as a Republican I hate children."
Posted by: bgates | December 09, 2008 at 04:34 PM
Ok woah...Bambi's appraisal came in at $40,000???????
"Obama told the Sun-Times that a 10-foot strip of the 60-foot lot appraised for $40,000. The Obamas nevertheless paid Rita $104,500 (or 1/6 of the total purchase price of her lot) for the strip. In 2007, Rita sold the remaining lot for $575,000 (or roughly a $54,500 profit on the overall property).
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/rezko_reality.html
But fact check goes on to say:
"It says Rezko "helped him buy his million-dollar mansion" by "purchasing part of the property he couldn't afford." That's true, but only because the seller wanted to sell the two parcels as a unit and the Obamas couldn't afford both." Bullshit.
The Bambi's paid $300K under the asking price. Rezko paid $625K - allegedly over the appraisal price. But we've never seen the Seller's previous appraisals? Bambi had the strip appraised at $40K - making the whole empty lot only worth about $240K...so Rezko paid the Seller $300K or thereabouts more than the property warranted.
So where are the SELLER's previous appraisals? For the home and the lot? A simple mortgage broker scheme to up the appraisal of the lot - Seller gets his asking price for the house and lot, Rezko helps Bambi, Bambi pays back payment number 1 of 3 - $104,500.....
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 04:41 PM
The Axelrod vs. Obama contradiction is troublesome. Either Axelrod was dissembling to show Obama as being very hands on in the Illinois situation, or Obama, wanting to rise above Scandal, fibbed.
Oh dear.
Posted by: Appalled | December 09, 2008 at 04:46 PM
Stupid Chuck said: "Bush did a great job of keeping us safe after Hurricane Katrina. That was a heck of a job."
Your a moron... Katrina was a product of more Democrat Corruption then anything else. It wasn't Bush's fault that the ignorant fools of NO were screwed by their own! Willy Jefferson got out with a "cool" $90K
Posted by: BobM | December 09, 2008 at 04:47 PM
Sue: I agree with you when it comes to Congress. I sure hope we don't have any Waxman wannabes, and I don't think some of the Puppet Master/Manchurian Candidate conspiracy mongering is helpful either -- so I think we're probably standing on plenty of common ground.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2008 at 04:47 PM
A governor openly auctioning off a Senate seat is a little too much corruption for almost anyone.
Hey, I think it's great that our new govt is taking on more Capitalistic overtones.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 09, 2008 at 04:48 PM
Here's a link for the visually inclined. It does appear the remaining lot is the same length as the 10' strip and the one the house sits on.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 09, 2008 at 04:48 PM
Appalled,
"Oh dear."Oh dear.Oh dear.Oh dear.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 04:49 PM
Appalled, you sound shocked, SHOCKED!, I tell you. LOL
Posted by: fdcol63 | December 09, 2008 at 04:50 PM
In 2007, Rita sold the remaining lot for $575,000 (or roughly a $54,500 profit on the overall property).
Anybody know who the buyer was in that deal? That's a lot of money for a locked up lot.
Posted by: Pofarmer | December 09, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Yeah, Pofarmer, it's nice to watch a free market work.
=================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Well, it didn't take long to rsolve the contradiction -- an update at Tapper says:
(UPDATE: An Obama Transition Team aide says that Axelrod misspoke on Fox News Chicago.)
Guess that means when Axelrod boasts about Obabma's hands-on role in something, that statement may later be revised as necessary.
Good to know.
Posted by: Appalled | December 09, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Did y'all know that Ms. Gov. Blago is a real estate broker? And, she and Rezko are connected?
Posted by: Sue | December 09, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Extraneus,
That is a very fine looking dacha.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Appalled, you know Obama's lying. Now go tell the other 66,000,000 people.
=============================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 04:53 PM
As the shirt says:
"I see your lips moving, but all I hear is BLAH, BLAH, BLAH."
Where BLAH = lies.
Posted by: fdcol63 | December 09, 2008 at 04:55 PM
kim:
I'm actually agnostic on the question on who was stretching the truth. Given everything else that's going on, it would be plausible that Obama would be out of the loop on hs successor, unless he was locked in to rewarding one of his long-time supporters with a position.
Posted by: Appalled | December 09, 2008 at 04:57 PM
Appalled,
Obama has not even been sworn in yet.A sad state of affairs.
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 04:59 PM
Obama is a silly ass. It strains credibility to believe he wasn't interested in determining his replacement. C'mon, people, why so willfully stupid.
This is the sort of thing that will eventually founder Obama. Who believes Obama compared to who believes Axelrod?
=================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 04:59 PM
Hah - Rev Wright "mispoke" for twenty years...
Lot's of people surrounding The One misspeak on a fairly regular basis.....
Posted by: Enlightened | December 09, 2008 at 05:00 PM
they all know each other from the state house or Chicago Denmocratic circles. C'mon....of course Obama would have at least had some input on the matter. He's the freakin president-elect. Not too many governors wouldn't want to polish that apple.
Posted by: matt | December 09, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Wow,
I have a question for anyone to answer....what are facts? Where do y'all get yours? Washington Post? NY TImes? Washington Times? 60 Minutes? FOX? Yourselves?
I'm curious because I'm not sure how you all conduct your "research" to verify your "facts"....
Posted by: curious | December 09, 2008 at 05:01 PM
And of course, Appalled, technically I must be agnostic, too. But, what, really, are the chances he wasn't involved? I happen to think he was pushing Jarrett, and when he didn't get a promise, he turned on Blagojevitch. This guy is dirty, dirty, dirty, and the press will eventually decide there is a story there, particularly when he delivers exactly zero on hope and change.
====================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 05:02 PM
Whoever purchased the remaining lot would be recorded and easy to track down.
Hope someone does this:-)
Didn't the Zeros agree to maintain the lot until it was purchased?
Posted by: glasater | December 09, 2008 at 05:02 PM
Enlightened,
We have an old saying here,"Everyone is out of step but Mary".
Posted by: PeterUK | December 09, 2008 at 05:03 PM
"Find a citizen hurt by Bush's 'domestic spying'"
Joe the Plumber
Posted by: dk70 | December 09, 2008 at 05:03 PM
It's those pesky expiration dates, Appalled. Apparently Tapper forgot to check 'em. What's really amazing is that Tapper only published the original column 90 minutes ago. Somebody at the Office of the President-elect has a team of folks equipped with magnifying glasses to watch this story.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 09, 2008 at 05:04 PM
curious, it's distributed intelligence gathering. If you can't stand the heat, go wash your hands and sit down at the table.
==============================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 05:04 PM
Kim...
Please explain how your method of determining truth telling works...I'm curious because I teach 150+ students a day, and at any time they could be lying to me...would love to have the formula for determining truth at my fingertips...Could you tell when President Bush was lying? If so, how? Or have you determined that he never lied?
Posted by: more curious | December 09, 2008 at 05:04 PM
Mutual Bank President and CEO Amrish Mahajan
There's probably a connection with Rezko with Mr. Mahajan. Wonder if he contributed to Obama's campaign?
Posted by: dk70 | December 09, 2008 at 05:05 PM
Blag is kicking himself right now for not doing exactly what Obama wanted.
=============================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 05:05 PM
A little Blog tango video (NSFW):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhJNvDDc3fU
Posted by: clarice | December 09, 2008 at 05:06 PM
Hey, curious, I'm hardly perfect, but I look all around and I compare what I see with my life experience. Then it gets kicked around here, and further refined. It's not easy, but the truth is not easy to find anymore, I'm sorry to say. It's not as if there are trustworthy news outlets any longer. It's also useful to remain skeptical.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Curious;
LA Times
Wapo
NYT
Telegraph
The Times
South China Morning Post
WSJ
20-30 magazines, 20-30 web sites, professional & general interest
and I'll bet many of the other posters here are as widely read.
Bite me
Posted by: matt | December 09, 2008 at 05:08 PM
Better yet, curious, you show me what you think a Bush lie was.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | December 09, 2008 at 05:10 PM