Matthews: If something goes wrong with Obama in next 7-8 weeks

[unc70]

Around 7:30 on Morning Joe, Chris Matthews and Joe were talking about whether Clinton would drop out if she didn't win one or both of Texas and Ohio. Today, Matthews has changed his position and was stating that Clinton could go on even if she lost Texas.

Joe: ... So she could lose Texas and keep on fighting? The math doesn't add up for her.

Chris (with that look that he knows something we don't): Math doesn't add up NOW. If something goes wrong with Obama in the next 7 or 8 wees, all those delegates could do what they want to.

Matthews later mentioned finding something in Obama's background.

So does Matthews know something, could there be something making the DC rounds on CW, or were they just talking? Could there be something coming in the Rezko trial, at least enough to tarnish Obama's halo?

I have noticed that a few more details coming out about Obama and Rezko in the previews to the start of the trial next week. Obama has had to clarify several details about the house and lot, and it still doesn't seem clear to me.

[Straight Shooter]

1. Matthews always blows smoke.

Take everything he says with a very large grain of salt.

[The Anti-Bush]

41. I know, I can't listen to him anymore.

I don't get MSNBC, so I used to just watch his clips, but I can't even do that now.

I don't know what side he is on. He went from attacking the right to getting petty with the left.

I don't get it.

[Demeter]

2. Trying to Make News

Just the RW spin machine at work.

[Adelante]

3. What are your questions about the house and lot?

I will try to answer them for you. Not this minute, but today.

[unc70]

20. Here are my questions about the house and lot

Here are some of the things I would like to see in order that I and others could understand the house and lot transactions:


1) Detailed property histories for the two properties, deeds, covenants, zoning restrictions, building permits, variances, etc. going back at least through the purchase of the combined propery by the sellers to the Obamas.

2) Detailed property histories from the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) showing the date of the listing or change, details of the offers to sell, etc., offers to purchase including contingencies, names and agency status (seller, buyer, joint) of all Realtors involved, owners and beneficiaries of all trusts, partnerships, or other entities involved.

3) Restrictions (e.g. setbacks, percent impermeable, historic district) that affect the type and size of building allowed on the "vacant" lot. Did the sale of the roughly 10x150 ft piece to Obama reduce the value of the remainder of the lot? In most places I know, a corner lot that is only about 50x150 would be difficult to build in a residential neighborhood. Even the original 60x150 would not be easy. Typical street-side setbacks are 10 or 15 feet, even "row" houses have 5-8 feet side setbacks. The Obama house, typical for the neighborhood, is over 6,000 sqft and has a detached four-car garage.

4) Time line of showings of property to Obama, joint tour of property by Obama and Rezko before purchase, dates and details of offers by Obamas for house, acceptance date, closing date, time on market for property and comps, similar for Rezkos and lot, UCC-1, loan-to-values, etc.

5) Business and political transactions/interactions of either Obama with Rezko, his businesses, and associates. Include Michelle's work for law firm, hospital, city government, commissions, and anything else. Particularly her jobs promoting diversity by arranging contracts in the community.


It is really difficult to look at the property information and the GIS system because the Obama property is partially blocked -- pictures, map, etc. are difficult to get online. Maybe for security reasons. It is available from maps.google.com, including the streetview.

In my local community, I could access 80-90% of the above information on-line within a couple of hours.

[anigbrowl]

38. Wow - lot of questions

> 1) Detailed property histories for the two properties, deeds, covenants, zoning restrictions, building permits, variances, etc. going back at least through the purchase of the combined propery by the sellers to the Obamas.

You'd have to go look on the city of Chicago's website for that. I don't know how easily available such information is for a given city, and I don't want to spend half a day looking for it.

> 2) Detailed property histories from the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) showing the date of the listing or change, details of the offers to sell, etc., offers to purchase including contingencies, names and agency status (seller, buyer, joint) of all Realtors involved, owners and beneficiaries of all trusts, partnerships, or other entities involved.

(Raised eyebrow) you might as well ask what they had for breakfast too! If you're interested in this level of detail, perhaps you should club together with some other people and do a title search, or promote your services and analysis expertise to one o the Chi-town newspapers.

> In my local community, I could access 80-90% of the above information on-line within a couple of hours.

Well, have you tried looking for it on the Chicago websites? It does sound like you're going on a bit of a fishing expedition. You have read the Bloomberg interviews with the seller and Obama's detailed interview with the Chicago sun-times, right?

I looked into the story last year, well before the primaries, and concluded that there was nothing there to make me feel embarrassed about supporting Obama later. Now, I didn't research it to the level of detail you're describing here, but I can't help feeling that you don't really see anything wrong either, you just want to get every detail of the candidate's financial life for the last 2 or 3 years in hopes of finding 'something'.

I'm not even sure what conclusions you could draw if you had all this information. For example, the value of the adjoining lot owned by Rezko might have gone down since the land transfer, but you'd have to check that against citywide property prices to make sure it's not due to recessionary factors. Then again the value might have gone up because Obama is so famous now that living on the same street as him would dramatically increase one's social standing.

As an ex-journalist, I commend your eye for detail, but equally I'd be asking myself how much money it was going to cost to gather and analyze all this information. I suspect that if you got everything you asked for it would be equivalent to a mid-sized textbook.

[unc70]

54. I understand how real estate works

There are various claims and responses by Obama supporters and detractors. Few of these back up their claims with facts or evidence. The few attempts to defuse these issues have actually raised new, harder to explain questions.

For example, the Obama campaign while focused on the price of the house, confirmed that Obama and Rezko had toured the property/properties together before the purchase. That contradicts previous statements by Obama about how there was a chance that maybe he might have been the one to mentioned something about the property to Rezko or one of his aides, but they weren't involved together in making the purchases.

Having the MLS listing timeline and the records about subdividing the property and getting the appropriate permitting would allow one to determine if the had been subdivided at the beheast of the buyers or anyone else. There are claims that Rezko had recommended the seller's agent for some commission or board, so there could be ongoing relationships.

The Times of London this week claimed that the corner lot after the sale to Obama is now too small to build upon. The zoning, setbacks, etc. would allow that charge to be confirmed or refuted or maybe just qualified. If confirmed, then the subsequent sale of the property by Mrs. Rezko to a Rezko associate in a related partnership would certainly be a sham transaction and might qualify as obstruction of justice. Even if still buildable, it looks "unusual". Is having the lot on the market at a high markup following its sale between related parties a continuing effort to disguise its true value?

Several other things are alleged which, if confirmed, would cause other problems for various individuals. Who did the lot appraisal that was used to support Mrs. Rezko mortgage? To support the reported loan amount, that appraisal would need to be twice the size of the one a few months later done on Obama's behalf prior to his buying the ten-foot strip. Depending on the type of loan, it would be easy to break state/Federal banking laws by making a fradulent declaration. There are also issues with sources of funds including those from Auchi.


After writing the above, I just searched for news in these areas and found:

Reformer: Trial Will Reveal 'Cesspool' of Obama's Allies -- ABC

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4365942&page=1

Auchi connection -- Washington Times

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080229/NATION04/643772400/0/FRONTPAGE



Another for background of the attacks that are under way:

Mansion 'mistake' piles the pressure on Barack Obama - Times of London Online

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3433485.ece

[kerry-is-my-prez]

56. I don't like the fact that Obama changed his story - it makes him look like he's lying.

That's the sort of thing that makes people leery and tarnishes the candidate - especially when he's trying to come off as being squeaky-clean and new.

[mopinko]

57. you can build at least 4 units on 50 x 150.

presuming it is zoned in accordance with the usual city zoning standards. this is a big lot by big city standards. the times of london could have looked that up, but they didn't did they/ i wonder why.
not a lot of chicago records are online. here is a site to try. http://www.newschicago.org/index.php?search=single_chicago&menu=chicago
i'm sure if you wanted it so bad you could find the mls records, too.
i don't know the address, and don't really care. hangers on like rezko are a dime a dozen. there is no there there.

[unc70]

68. Thanks for the link. Four units on 50x150 - flats?

As to the possible uses, that was why I was asking the other questions about zoning, setbacks, variances, etc. I haven't done anything yet other than glance at the site you sent, but it does seem to have some info not found on the county and city sites.

How would you do four condos? I can see three. Developing the lot for three "flats" as condos would be possible with a higher density "urban" zoning, but that area of Chicago seems to be a more traiditional residential zone neighborhood. I read where supposedly an attempt to develop condos on the lot was disallowed by some board gpt not fitting the character of the neighborhood. Supposedly, somone now wants to put a single family on the lot. The lot is currently advertised at a $1+ million.

For three condo units of about 2000 sf each, I suppose you could bury the parking and do a three-story with a "traditional" facacde. No idea whether that would make any sense given real estate prices in Chicago.

[elixir]

26. Sounds like you have the inside track on getting info. That's good to know.

[unc70]

30. In NC, most of the property info, deeds, etc. are online

When there was all the talk about the Edwards house and such, it took five minutes to see the building dimensions, property cards, etc.

I know what kinds of things to look for, but I don't have any special access.

[MyNameGoesHere]

4. So he isn't getting a tingling up his leg for Obama anymore? n/t

[leftofcool]

7. Wait until Obama wins the nomination

Tweety will start fawning over Mccain. They all will. We have seen this before when they did it to Gore and to Kerry. The golden child of the moment will lose favor.

Left of Cool

[Neecy]

19. He's been fawning over McCain for years

[superkia]

61. This morning on MSNBC, they were already talking about how...

much of a great guy McCain was. I was just thinking " here they go". As for the OP mentioning the next 7 to 8 weeks, I would be worried about things like what happened in Dallas with the secret service and the Dallas police officers doing security for Obama's event.

[lastliberalintexas]

84. That is what I feared when I read the thread title

Like there was a threat being made. :(

[Occam Bandage]

5. Matthews is bullshitting, as per usual. It's not a very interesting story to say,

"Yeah, I agree. Math doesn't add up. *silence for 15 seconds.*"

[TwilightGardener]

6. Tweety was desperate for a Hillary/McCain matchup--he wanted to

spend the next 6 months fellating his hero St. John of McCain and portraying Hillary as an evil calculating witch who used dastardly deeds to keep the Hero from the WH. Obama's success has really deflated the Tweetster.

[joeybee12]

8. Most of what passes for "news" like this is hearsay, conjecture and

speculation...if we didn't have that kind of "news" CNN, Faux and all the rest wouldn't exist.

I expect BO to come under much heavy scrutiny in the next few weeks, but unless there's sex involved, it probably won't derail him...the real news about McLame was the tit-for-tat relationship with lobbyists, but it was the implied sex that got others talking.

[cali]

9. Matthews has a vested interest in the dem race going on

and on and on. It's a much better story and it makes for much better ratings. I doubt there's anything in the Rezco story that will come out and damage Obama. He'd have to be a psychopath to run if there is. And he doesn't strike me as delusional. In addition, he is not on a witness list and Fitz has said he's not involved. And I haven't noticed any new details and I pay close attention. Please link to these new details coming out in previews of the trial. If you don't, you're assertation is not believable.

[Fire_brand]

10. Math doesn't count

[Alhena]

11. Tweety might have gotten wind of the Larry Sinclair garbage, not knowing ...

that Sinclair has failed a lie detector test and is discrediting himself furhter every time he opens his mouth.

[KittyWampus]

12. Matthews gets wind of his own stench and it affects how his 'commentary' on the news

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

39. Chris "Uncle Creepy" Matthews gets those "feelings" up his leg

whenever talking about men in politics.

[CK_John]

13. Rove has hinted about the first congressional race of Obama. n/t

[anigbrowl]

40. He told me you like to steal candy from babies too.

Post something substantial or don't even bother.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

14. Yeah! And if Obama, Clinton, Biden, Edwards, Dodd, Richardson and Kucinich

are all hit by a meteorite, Gravel has the nomination locked up!

What silly logic.

[BenDavid]

18. i say it again: a coin in an empty suit makes a lot of noise

[ellacott]

23. would you think about what you wrote

[David Zephyr]

24. LOL!

Empty? I feel sorry for Clinton's supporters. They have nothing left in their campaign.

Talk about empty pockets.

[grantcart]

36. why would he start now?

[elixir]

27. Beautiful, I love it.

[OHdem10]

15. There have been a lot hints--Questionable Associates

Not enough investigation by MSM. Serious Conservatives not RW Haters
ie, Tony Blankley. "Hillary had better hang in there" --leaving
impression that some Media may be trying to track down stories
We have heard it but it has been ignored. Obama has not been vetted.

[unc70]

16. That has been my sense before today

My original post was highlighting the subtle change in what Matthews said today versus in the past. I had previously noticed others doing this (e.g. Blankley), but this was the first time I have noticed it with Matthews. Chris has generally been hard on Clinton, particularly of late.

I was an Edwards supporter and have not decided between Clinton and Obama because I have problems with each of them. Those with Clinton are typical of those shared with many others at DU and were brought into focus over many years. In contrast, I only started examining Obama closely about 6-8 months ago and in more detail since Christmas. I have never been that impressed by his speeches, have been angered by his attacks on Baby Boomers and by his use of Helms/Reagan "coded" attacks, and have found his proposals to be weaker than those of Edwards or even Clinton.

Maybe I'm just an old cynic who is depressed that his candidate is out of the race, but none of us want to see any surprises with our candidates appearing after Labor Day. We know the Republicans will not hold back anything.

I have been wary of Obama's life story, his family, his accomplishments, his motivations -- everything. The version he presents in his books and elsewhere doesn't really match up very well with the versions found in documents and in the recollections of others. Over the years, I have evaluated thousands of resumes for professional positions and have become good at spotting the discrepancies, the unlikely time-lines, the improbable accomplishments, the appropriation of the work of others, the things that just don't seem right. That is how I currently feel about Obama.

Various things have made me wary and watchful. I find how he describes his family to be really strange and really different from how others describe themselves and other relatives, particularly his father. Since most of them now live in the UK, the BBC and other UK press have run a lot of stories and interviews with them; these have been mostly ignored here and, when noticed, discounted by his supporters at DU.

The Rezko scandal is so big and involves so much of the Illinois and Chicago governments that spillover onto Obama would appear likely. The "pay to play" environments there makes me think that it would be difficult for any prominent official to avoid being tainted. I have not seen where either Obama has been adequately vetted in these areas.

I will post specifically about the house in response to a post above.

[malik flavors]

53. What exactly are the contradictions you've found in his life story?

It's kinda funny to me that people are so skeptical about Obama and his background, but we've never been so skeptical about any other presidential candidate ever, that I can remember. We don't know anything about Kucinich's family, we don't generally know anything about Bill Richardson's background, I don't personally know a whole lot about even Hillary's childhood and youthful years. It seems undeniable that people are suspicious about him as much for his newness on the scene as they are because of his middle name and such. I don't hold it against people that are a little uneasy about him because of his background, but I just don't think it can be denied that all of the muslim fear mongering starts to creep into people's minds and they want to know as much as possible about him becasue of it. SO they can feel more comfortable with it. How much do we nknow about the life of John Edwards? Not much at all really, but if he were still in the race I doubt people would be looking for contradictions in his life story, and scowering the internet for interviews with his family memebers in other countries.

[goclark]

66. HC has been vetted and Jennifer Flowers

will have her new book out soon.

Judging by the way they have run this campaign, even the cost of donuts and hairstyles should be explored in depth.


They need to shut up and run a decent campaign.

[iconoclastic cat]

17. Matthews is desparate for you to keep tuning in.

He'll always have some surprise waiting for you, if only you'd just keep watching!

[jlake]

21. Yes, big news is going to come out.

Once it does, the Party will NOT Accept Obama as the nominee.
He is not what he appears to be (to many anyway)
There isn't enough koolaid in the world to make up for some things.

[oasis]

22. Hillary's raised a ton of dough. She owes it to her supporters to stay in the race.

"I'm in it to win it."

[carlotta]

28. Do you know something, or are you just guessing?

You make it sound as if you have some info.

[DUyellow]

29. consider the source

that question really does not need to be asked.

[New Earth]

31. really? what?

please tell.

[Vinca]

34. If you really had something and weren't pushing rumor and innuendo,

you'd tell us so we could change our minds and rush out to vote for Hillary. You're not about swaying people to vote for your candidate, only about trashing Obama without saying anything.

[jlake]

35. The Hillary campaign has the info. I trust them to use it or not. She puts the party above personal

gain, so she may not feel it is worth the damage.

[Vinca]

42. Do you, personally, know what it is? If so, please share. nt

[jlake]

43. Yes. No, I won't share because I'll be accused of being a racist and fear monger....

I will say that it is verified evidence of many of the "smear" campaigns run against Obama.

[Vinca]

47. Well, if you - or she - won't put it out there, it will be a huge disservice

to all Democrats who are basing their vote on available information. If she's got dirt, she needs to sling it before the Republicans do in the general election. We'd all be sorely disappointed if there was really something there, but even worse is having whatever it is come to light at the end of October. This is her do or die time, so she should put up or shut up.

[Armstead]

44. If so, she outght to privately tell Obama

If the Clinton campaign is really in it "for the party" and has some hidden dirt that would come out, she ought to have a private secret chat with Obama and bring it to his attention.

[jlake]

45. I'm sure she has.

[Skip Intro]

50. Would he do the same for her, were their positions reversed?

No, he wouldn't.

[RamboLiberal]

49. You Clinton folks seem to have amnesia about Whitewater

Yeah, that was a lot of fun to watch the Repukes drag that one through the mud for years! And while they may have never proven a case against the Clintons, and the Clintons may be innocent, there sure were a few shady characters in that little gem. It's not like the Clintons haven't had their own share of Rezkos. Oh and lets not forget the Marc Rich pardon - Bill tarnishing his own legacy on his way out the WH door.

It's the damn rare politician who doesn't have some shady characters in their background. And very few of them get nominated for president.

Who knows but it also may be the country is tired of this crap and will not pay much attention.

And if this gets drug out - bet Obama campaign has a list of shady Clinton donors including one in jail who was a fugitive - Hu.

And how about this one?

A prominent California attorney who got Bill Clinton to veto legislation that would hurt his business and has donated generously to the Democratic Party will go to jail for two years for conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Crowned “King of the Shareholder Suit,” William Lerach made his fortune winning billions of dollars for defrauded investors in class-action cases against some of America’s biggest corporations, including Enron. He also operated an illegal scheme by filing class actions on behalf of ready-made plaintiffs who received kickbacks.

Lerach’s firm made an estimated $250 million in fees over two decades by filing these kinds of illegal lawsuits and paying people, who agreed to be plaintiffs in actions against companies such as Xerox and United Airlines, a total of $11.3 million.

For years Lerach was among the nation’s top paid attorneys ($7 million a year, according to Forbes) and a generous Democratic donor who befriended Bill Clinton while he was president. Lerach and his wife have given Democrats hundreds of thousands of dollars, including several thousand to Hillary’s Clinton’s various campaigns.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/jail-top-democratic-donor-clinton-friend

And a list of shady Clinton donors: http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e

[CyberPieHole]

72. If Hillary does have info from opposition research...most likely she won't be able to use it...

But McCain could use it and will use it. The RW doesn't have to tread lightly around Obama. They are the party that used Willie Horton against Dukakis and by the time they were through, so was Dukakis. Obama has smeared the Clinton's as racists...something they are not and never have been. If Obama is smeared by the RW it will be Karma and he'll have gotten his just deserts.

[jlake]

82. I agree.

There is info that I know Hillary has - and I am sure the Republicans do as well.... and I am sure the media does too.... and I agree that Hillary will not be the one to release it.
But the media *may* in time to reverse his momentum..... I am hoping.

[elixir]

25. Please share what you've heard about the Rezko trial...

[Bullet1987]

32. The MSM wants this to drag out as long as possible

Obama is being hit on more than 2 fronts now...you have

1. The Clinton campaign
2. McCain
3. Far Right (the President, Cunningham, etc.)

The media has been on and off with regards to Obama too over the past couple of weeks.

[gasperc]

33. yes, that would mean she lost only 13 of the last 15 contests

so she is still clearly viable and can pull off a miracle while giving her campaign time to figure out how to damage Obama.

[grantcart]

37. its been tried out here and failed some of it from stark raving lunatics

[jlake]

46. No, just those in the know or with good intuition.

[Tropics_Dude83]

48. Jlake......

Jlake,

Is your information proof that Obama is a muslim? If you have verifiable proof of that, I would stop supporting him.

Seriously.

[ieoeja]

52. Why would you stop supporting Obama if he is a Muslim? n/t

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jackson_dem]

55. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain by fighting on to PA

The only way to know if the other team will throw a late interception is to be on the field...

[live love laugh]

58. "Something" is always going to come out, you don't think Repug dirty tricks are exhausted do you?

They are going to be hurling shit at Obama and Hillary left and right from now until November.

The sad thing is, people will allow a lot of it to stick.

[TheWraith]

59. There's nothing there.

You really think that if there was anything there, the Clinton smear machine wouldn't have dug it up and used it? The same machine that went through his kindergarden papers? The same one that's been so desperate that they've moved on to wholesale lies?

[mzmolly]

60. "Matthews later mentioned finding something in Obama's background."

Yikes. :(

[malik flavors]

63. I wouldn't get too worked up. If there was breaking news about Obama's past..

It would have broken and it wouldn't come from Chris Matthews, it would come from Drudge or Politico or some Chicago paper or the NYT. I also seriously doubt Matthews would go on Morning Joe and say "I think I found something in Obama's past" and not speak any further on it. If he said that, somebody needs to link me to it, because that would just be wierd.

[mzmolly]

67. Welcome Malik

:hi: I hope it's just puffery from CM if it was said at all. I plan to tune into his program tonight and see if he mentions anything.

[unc70]

69. Whatever it was from CM, I have it on DVR from this morning

I am recording this evenings, just in case. I don't know what to make of all this. While I think Obama will suffer from the Rezko trial, I really doubt that it is the house purchase that could change everything. Short of being given bags of cash for the freezer, it would be hard to get too far with corruption or even bribery. Maybe if you have an incriminating tape of someone.

So that leaves drugs and sex as possiblities. Stuart Levine, the attorney turned prosecution witness (wore a wire for a couple of years) was allegedly into both of them. Even a hint of either of those would be a disaster, but I can't see Obama being that foolish given how longstanding his ambition for higher office. Maybe the pundits are just playing with all of us.

[mzmolly]

70. I dismissed the Lewinsky concerns because I didn't see Bill being "that foolish" either.

But, we all know how that turned out. I hope this is much ado about nothing unc70.

:hi:

[unc70]

75. I know, so did I for a while. I worry that this may come back to bite us all

I have real concerns about Obama, maybe because I hate being rushed into anything, particularly when encouraged do ignore pesky little details.

[anamandujano]

86. My only thought is that Matthews, Drudge and the rest of them have

been trying to hold back the floodgates until Obama had taken the nomination. They are probably sad that it's going to break in time to give dems a chance with Hillary.

Drudge and the like have most likely been sitting on it so that we could nominate a certain loser.

Whatever is out there has been out there and appears to be coming down the pike full steam ahead. There is no reason to blame Hillary. She didn't force Obama to do whatever he did. She may know something but would be better off letting someone else bring it to the table, like the prosecutor or whatever else is making Tweety and his friends unhappy that their little game went bust.

[GeorgeGist]

62. No surpise there ...

Matthews makes his living being gullible.

[TheDonkey]

64. It helps ratings. Why the hell would he want to see this back-and-forth over

[WritingIsMyReligion]

65. Tweety likes to play devil's advocate, so anything he says about anyone is suspect.

I think he'd rather stir the pot than verify that the ingredients are accurate, sometimes.

[CyberPieHole]

71. Puff puff. Sniff sniff.

:evilgrin:

[RBInMaine]

73. The Rezco thing has been vetted. This all you got??

And then of course with Hillary we have her ties to the crooked Norman Hsu, her husband pardoning a plethora of crooks, chief among them Mark Rich. You have Hillary in bed with Walmart, fat cat clients at the Rose Law Firm, and now DEFENDING the gobs of money she takes from the right wing "wealthcare" corporations. (uh, um, I mean "healthcare.") Give me a friggin' break.

[unc70]

74. How has this been vetted? And you mistook me for a Clinton supporter.

Attacking Clinton is not an acceptable response. Neither would be posting the ineffective "ten myths debunked". Since I do not support Clinton, efforts to muddle things by attacking her are not relevant.

If you think the Rezko thing has been vetted, then how do you explain the differences between the two appraisals of the lot? Any comments on Auchi? Care to comment on Stuart Levine? What about any involvement of Michelle?

So grow up and give me a f'in break.

[cooolandrew]

76. ...

[cooolandrew]

77. Eeee by heck, when will you get on with convincing us Clinton is the one ?If something is good I buy

[AZBlue]

78. "does Matthews know something" HAHAHAHAHA

Noooo, Matthews knows very very little, as evidenced on a daily basis.

[Bushwick Bill]

80. Here is what Tweety knows...

LMAO...

16. Chris Matthews

Charges: Calling his show "Hardball" is like rechristening ping-pong "Thermonuclear Warfare." Displays the slurred, unmodulated speech and unfocused antagonism of an aggrieved middle-management drunk. Can read a scurrilous political attack into any paragraph at twenty paces. Continues honing his pointless questions as his guests attempt to answer, cutting them off with an affected imperial weariness when their responses are insufficiently inane. Apparently ignorant of the implications of satellite technology, Matthews shouts louder at geographically more distant guests. Has repeatedly called Ann Coulter "brilliant." Referred to Gerald Ford's yuletide demise as the former president's "Christmas card to the country." Unable to laugh like a normal human, Matthews compensates by simply shouting "ha!"

Exhibit A: "This country is based on generalizations!"

Sentence: Hillary's White House Press Secretary and personal toilet steward.
http://buffalobeast.com/122/50mostloathsome2007.html

[AZBlue]

81. That's funny!

Matthews shouts louder at geographically more distant guests.

That's so true - he's like the people who automatically shout when talking on a cell phone.

[Bushwick Bill]

79. Fuck Tweety.

Put up or shut up with that undocumented slime.

[AX10]

83. Does he know something?

Or is he just being tweets?

[KLee]

85. Its funny how.....

You quote them first in a script, then add your own flavor to it.

Body language just like facial expressions, we can read into it what we want to sometimes, ie (with that look that knows something we don't) Then you go on to emphasize the word NOW, what did he capitalize it himself?

If something goes wrong with Obama.....could also mean he would have to make a mistake over the next few weeks for her to get delegates. (not that he knows it will happen, he's saying what must happen in order for her to turn it around)

Then you go on with "Matthews later mentioned finding something in Obama's background". I have to wonder why you didn't script that too like the rest of the convo.