Morning News: "Obama's Shady House Deal Is Serious"

[bidenista]

The Rezko story is getting daily play in the newspapers now:

Obama’s Shady House Deal Is Serious

John Brummett
THE MORNING NEWS

...When Obama wanted to buy his dream house in Chicago, he got Rezko essentially to help him do so, and made this arrangement in 2005, only months after being elected to the U.S. Senate. Look — buy your own blasted house, just between you and the mortgage company. OK? That’s how the rest of us have to do it.

While it appears so far that Obama never did anything tangible while in public office to benefit Rezko, and even opposed him on a gambling issue, there’s a certain principle we have the right to expect from a man of such soaring eloquence. It’s this: If you’re in electoral politics, sometimes known as public service, please take special pains to avoid entanglements that would compromise or appear to compromise you. Here’s the house deal, as related by Chicago’s newspapers: Barack and Michelle took a shine to this particular house. But the seller owned an adjoining vacant lot, and, in a hurry to unload both properties and move, wanted to sell the house and the lot at the same time.

Obama felt he could barely afford the house, much less the lot. He mentioned the availability of the lot to Rezko, who was not in any known trouble at the time, and whose wife then bought the lot. The two deals closed on the same day. Obama got the house for $300,000 less than the $1.9 million asking price. Rezko’s wife paid the asking price, $625,000, for the vacant lot. Later, Obama bought from Rezko a strip of the vacant lot for $104,500, which was a fair price, or even above market. You could argue that this man now under indictment, acting through his wife, paid for part of a U.S. senator’s home, since the seller wanted to package the deals. Obama himself has called his action in this matter “bone-headed.”

It was at least that. It causes me to worry less about his integrity, which he has appeared to maintain in his official actions, than his judgment....

More: http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2008/02/01/columns/john_brummett/020208brummett.txt

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

1. Yes, Obama should never talk to anyone, because someday they might turn out to be a crook.

:eyes:

[thunder rising]

Yep, been here, done this, there's nothing there...sorry Hillary your $hit don't stick to others

[neutron]

20. Thanks for Finally Solving this Mystery

There was never an explanation of exactly why
Obama and Rezko bought these properties at the same time.

In fact, Obama accepted a favor from a sleazeball.

[neutron]

21. Obama is correct - He is Boneheaded

[City Lights]

2. dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4343492&mesg_id=4343492

[Evergreen Emerald]

3. this is the part of the relationship that bothers me, and it shows

Obama is willing to personally benefit from Rezko. Of course he gained lots of money too, for campaigning. We do not know the extent, of course--and may never will. But, dang, Obama gives good speeches.

[Windy]

6. There is no there there. Its not making traction in the national media

Sorry, not working.

Maybe the clinton's stopped bringing this up due to a member of their campaigns own dealings with Resko, Hillary dealings with Hsu, Bills off shore dealings, etc.


The clinton's hands aren't clean either. I don't really think that Bill and Hillary want to get into a debate about who has the most questionable contacts in the business community.

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. what do you mean "no there there?" He got a great deal on a house

with the help of Rezko. He could not have afforded it otherwise. That IS the there.

Clinton's hands. You seem to have a double standard. YOu refuse to vote for Clinton due to her dirty hands, and yet you forgive Obama for his? I have concerns about that deal with Obama...and it has not been covered in the media. There has not been a decade of "independent" neo-con counsel looking under every rock in Obama's life.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. The deal he got on the house itself wasn't "great"

Yes it sold below the asking price but not by that large a percentage. It seems there was a buyers market at the time. The catch is that Obama could not afford both the house and the lot so it seems Rezko's wife purchased the lot for him because the seller would not sell only the one lot Obama wanted with the house on it. One can question whether Rezko's wife paying the full asking price on the empty lot was kosher, but it is possible that a street facing empty lot was a better commodity on the market. Later Obama paid a strong price for a small strip of that lot. The problem here for those who see one is in a potentially too close relationship between Obama and one of his most important campaign donors, a man who now is under indictment who it was known had legal problems at the time Obama bought his house.

[globalvillage]

15. This may have something to do with it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/31/clinton-cochair-took-che_n_84365.html

[Justice Is Comin]

28. What don't you get

that almost sixty million dollars was spent trying to put a finger on Hillary and Bill and they came up with goose eggs. Zero!

Shall we spend 56 million dollars and have that look into Obama's closets? I bet you he would come up with his fingerprints all over patronage and funny money.

We don't know anything yet. Let the trial begin.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

4. Shady house. Sounds nice.

That's what you need here in Chicago. Gets hot in the summer. Damn hot.

And you know, if the Trib can't get me worked up about this, some Arkie gazette's not gonna even come close.

[madrchsod]

10. lynn sweet...need i say more?

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. This opinion piece was more even handed than I expected

Essentially he called into question Obama's judgment for making that deal with the the Rezko's, and does not imply that Obama did anything illegal or that he used his influence to unduly buy his home at a fraction of it's value or anything along those lines.

[pathansen]

8. He also took quite a bit of campaign money from this man

Obama must be smart enough to realize that when people, esp. crooks, do favors for politicans, they usually want something in return.

[madrchsod]

11. he did`t get anything in return.....

....what did he get from the mayor of los angeles?

[pathansen]

18. When criminals gives money to a candidate, they usually expect something in return

after he gets elected.

[madrchsod]

9. so i take it he`s voting republican

republican stronghold?

[rhiannon55]

12. Maybe I'm dense or something

but I don't get why this is a problem. If I wanted to buy a house with a vacant lot attached that made the price too high, could I not ask a friend or acquaintance to buy the lot so I could afford the house? The article says that Rezko "was not in any known trouble at the time", and Obama "never did anything tangible while in public office to benefit Rezko, and even opposed him on a gambling issue...". And apparently the seller got his money, albeit from two buyers instead of one.

Why is this a shady deal? Please enlighten me.

[globalvillage]

14. I don't get it either.

He got the house for 15% below the asking price. Sounds about right to me.

[Hepburn]

16. I agree.

My mom was a real estate broker for years and when I was a stay at home mom, I went with her just to look at houses, etc. A fun way to get out of the house and take a small child. I can tell you that when she listed a house, NO ONE gave the listing price as the price they were willing to take on a sale. They were always willing to take less.

So...he bought his house for 15% less than the asking price??? LOL, that is just how it works: A seller NEVER asks for his/her bottom line!

[creeksneakers2]

25. I'm on Obama's side on this

But the article said Rezko was not in any trouble at the time and other accounts say that's not the case. They say an investigation into Rezko's activities made the front pages of the papers.

Obama apologized for making a deal with a man who was under a cloud of suspicion.

[fenriswolf]

17. oh my whats this

While it appears so far that Obama never did anything tangible while in public office to benefit Rezko, and even opposed him on a gambling issue



'nuff said.

[ProSense]

22. This: Obama never did anything...in public office to benefit Rezko...even opposed him on...gambling

Facts, pffft!

[Cass]

19. Does Rezko's wife still own the vacant lot next door or has she since sold it?

Is that lot buildable and/or marketable now that a portion of it was sold? In some areas a minimum square footage is required to build on. And sometimes even if a lot is buildable its not marketable due to its reduced size.

I ask this because if the lot is not buildable or marketable now that a portion of it was sold, then the lot deal would appear to be a sweetheart deal. If its buildable and marketable and especially if Rezko subsequently sold it for market value, then it looks like it was generous assistance from a friend who ponied up a large amount of cash to help the Obamas purchase a home that would otherwise be out of reach.

[LiberalHeart]

23. It's still buildable...

Rezko's wife sold the lot when Rezko's legal problems built. She sold it to a business partner of Rezko's. Last I heard, that business partner is trying to unload it.

[SoxFan]

24. Please.

Right of center paper in Hillary's old home town. Real credible source.

[Bluebear]

26. Shady House . . . sounds like a B & B :)

[Alexander]

27. Shillbots need to read more. "Obama never did anything...in public office to benefit Rezko"

No wonder the less-educated are flocking to Hillary. Some probably never learned reading comprehension.

[stillcool]

29. John K Wilson's diary...

* JohnKWilson's diary :: ::
Myth #1: Obama did legal work for Rezko

Claim: Hillary Clinton during a debate denounced Obama for "representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago."

The truth: According to Factcheck.org, "Obama was associated with a law firm that represented the community groups working with Rezko on several deals. There's no evidence that Obama spent much time on them, and he never represented Rezko directly. So it was wrong for Clinton to say he was ‘representing ... Rezko.’ That's untrue."

Myth #2: Obama knew Rezko was a slumlord

Claim: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that in 1997, Rezko’s company failed to turn the heat back on in one of his buildings, while giving $1,000 to Obama’s campaign fund.

The truth: There’s no evidence that Obama knew about problems with Rezko’s buildings. A state senator doesn’t deal with tenant complaints, and the Chicago newspapers never reported on Rezko’s problems as a landlord until after he was indicted. According to the Chicago Tribune, "in the years before 2005, Rezko enjoyed a reputation in Illinois as an up-and-coming, even enlightened entrepreneur with a strong interest in the risky low-income and affordable housing markets." http://www.chicagotribune.com/...

Myth #3: Obama underpaid for his house in a deal with Rezko

Claim: Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote: "Rezko paid more than the asking price for the side lot, and Obama paid less than the asking price for the big house. It’s the Chicago way." Kass claimed that Rezko was "Obama's Real Estate Fairy" and this is "the story of the dream house the Obamas wanted and couldn't quite afford and how the Rezkos helped."

The truth: None of this is true. The seller decided to divide the lot in offering it for sale, not Obama or Rezko. Rezko had paid the list price for his lot, not an excessive amount (as the resale value later proved). The owner reportedly had already been offered $625,000 for the side lot, so Rezko didn’t offer any more money and there was no way Obama could have gotten a special deal this way. The only special arrangement Rezko provided was selling the two lots on the same day, which simplified matters for the seller. Obama paid $1.65 million for a house originally priced at $1.95 million. His was the higher of two bids for the main property. It’s not unusual at all in the Chicago real estate business to see a 15 percent price cut on an expensive house that’s been on the market for four months. Nor is it unusual that a vacant lot next door would sell to a condo developer without such a discount. In the Hyde Park market, there are a lot of upper-middle-class residents making six figures, but not very many millionaires (it’s not Lincoln Park or the Gold Coast). Therefore, a pricey mansion is very difficult to sell, while a $300,000 townhouse is very common.

Myth #4: Rezko’s lot was a front (yard) deal

Claim: One blogger declared it was "a $925,000 favor to a sitting US Senator" because "the Rezko property was never intended to be a separate piece of land."

The truth: It’s insane to think that Obama arranged for Rezko to buy the lot as his front yard, and never intended for anyone to develop it. If Obama had arranged such a deal, it would be crazy for him to spend $104,500 to buy part of the land from Rezko. There is not even the slightest evidence to support this notion.

Myth #5: Obama underpaid (or overpaid) for the slice of Rezko’s lot

Claim: John Kass declared: "Obama’s appraiser told him the fair market value of that slice was $40,500. Since that’s one-sixth of the Rezko side, it means Rezko paid $625,000 for property that was actually worth $243,000. That would make Rezko a complete fool. But he’s no fool." Fox News Channel incorrectly reported that Rezko "sold half that lot to Obama for 1/3 its original value."

The truth: The appraiser was clearly wrong (probably basing the low value on the fact that 1/6th of the lot was too small for any house, which would dramatically reduce its value standing alone). That’s why Obama decided to buy 1/6th of Rezko’s lot for 1/6th of what Rezko paid for it ($104,500). A year after the 10-foot-wide strip of land was sold to Obama, a Rezko business associate bought the rest of the lot for $575,000, resulting in a profit for the Rezkos of $54,000 from the two land sales. This sale proved that Obama paid fair market value for his portion of the land.

read more...if you care/dare...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/29/171056/015/838/445627

[dchill]

30. LOTS of people get houses...

for way less than the asking price.

[Freida5]

31. Extremely poor judgement emostrated by Obama at the very least