Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Don't Mess with Texas! | Main | Deval Patrick's Timeline Doesn't Mesh with Reality »

Morning Rezko Reading

February 19, 2008 11:00 AM

The Chicago Tribune weighs in today with a deeper look at the controversial land deal Barack Obama entered into with since-indicted political fixer Tony Rezko.

Turns out before Obama bought the mansion (Rezko helped him by buying half the land), Obama took Rezko "on a tour of the premises to make sure it was a good deal, Obama's campaign revealed Monday. Weeks after saying he'd answered all questions about his controversial dealings with the now-indicted Rezko, Obama released new details about their purchase of adjacent lots from the same seller on the same day. But the disclosures by Obama's presidential campaign left unanswered questions and raised new ones."

Recall that Obama bought the house for $300,000 UNDER the listed asking price while at the same time Rezko bought the adjacent property for the full asking price -- $625,000 -- under Mrs. Rezko's name.

Bloomberg News' Tim Burger also takes a look at this today.

Burger's take is a bit different, noting that the "couple who sold Barack Obama his Chicago home said the Illinois senator's $1.65 million bid 'was the best offer' and they didn't cut their asking price because a campaign donor bought their adjacent land, according to e-mails between Obama's presidential campaign and the seller."

- jpt

February 19, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (51)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26280544

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Morning Rezko Reading:

User Comments

is it true that Rezco owned the house next to the vacant lot next to Obama's house? That he bought the lot and sold off a piece of it (at a nice profit) in order to increase the privacy, yard space and value of his own home?

Posted by: Paul Randall | Mar 7, 2008 3:46:17 AM

Sources close to the case say Obama is the "unknown political candidate" named in the Rezko indictment.

Obama takes time off from campaigning to return to Chicago to spend Valentines Day with his wife and kids?? Give me a break. How much do you want to bet he HAD to return to Chicago for another reason? Deposition anyone?

Posted by: Baggem | Feb 22, 2008 10:21:46 AM

This stuff needs to be put on the evening news. If you do not think this is important, then I've got some beachfront property to sell you in Oklahoma!!!! Wake-up people!!! What is it going to take for you to see that he is not all he appears to be. Some of you are being very naive or deliberately putting your heads in the sand. I do not want to see this man elected and then see what happens. This is our country, and it needs help right now. We do not need inexperience, especially someone who accidently pressed the wrong button six times and voted the wrong way? I hate to think of that inexperience in the Oval Office costing us dearly.

Posted by: Anne Marie | Feb 20, 2008 11:23:34 PM

Will the media please research all of the information about Obama,his money,Rezko etc. Why is there a cover-up on this. Because he is black o because the someone doesn't want Hilary elected. ??????

Posted by: beth | Feb 20, 2008 10:20:51 PM

sure, obama made mistakes with this guy. he's corrupt and flawed like any other candidate. it's 2008 and we live in the US. they're all corrupt.
dig a little bit on any of the 3 right now and there's plenty.

Posted by: joe b | Feb 20, 2008 5:24:48 PM

why is obama's campaign not releasing the entire text of the seller's e-mail??it seems like the obama campaign is trying to do some damage-control by releasing just a bit of information in hopes of satiating curiousity on the matter. it's not working - it's raising more questions.

Posted by: jose | Feb 20, 2008 2:51:44 PM

no, Tom.

Trying to show that turn-about is fair play in politics.... you Obamanations
have been outrageously unfair and small minded an downright slanderous towards Hillary.

now it's time for Barack to take his turn in front of the dump shovel; it'll prepare him for the Republican onslaught.....

Posted by: questioner | Feb 20, 2008 12:51:19 AM

February 19, 2008 11:00 AM

"The Chicago Tribune weighs in today with a deeper look at the controversial land deal Barack Obama entered into with since-indicted political fixer Tony Rezko.

Turns out before Obama bought the mansion (Rezko helped him by buying half the land), Obama took Rezko "on a tour of the premises to make sure it was a good deal, Obama's campaign revealed Monday. Weeks after saying he'd answered all questions about his controversial dealings with the now-indicted Rezko, Obama released new details about their purchase of adjacent lots from the same seller on the same day. But the disclosures by Obama's presidential campaign left unanswered questions and raised new ones."

Recall that Obama bought the house for $300,000 UNDER the listed asking price while at the same time Rezko bought the adjacent property for the full asking price -- $625,000 -- under Mrs. Rezko's name."

hmmmmmmm.....

Posted by: questioner | Feb 20, 2008 12:45:02 AM

Rezko was either a father figure to the abandoned child inside Obama, or Rezko was an object of contempt to Obama who used him like an ATM machine whenever Obama needed money for his campaign or a luxurious home. Buying the "lot," which was really the yard to Obama's house was at the least a "gift in kind" even if the discount on Obama's house is not considered. Obama could not afford the house if Rezko had not bought the "lot."

"Every politician in Illinois—except for Obama—figured Rezko to be leprous with federal subpoenas. By dancing with Rezko, Obama impeaches his own judgment, and raises questions as to whether he has the presidential stuff." - John Kass, chicagotribune.com. February 10, 2008.

Posted by: vee | Feb 20, 2008 12:27:19 AM

This is not the end of this. He's dirty. It will come out.

Posted by: doyenne49 | Feb 19, 2008 10:57:21 PM

Can someone shed light on the disposition of the lot purchased by Reszko which he then subdivided and sold a portion of to Obama to create a larger yard. Does it meet zoning rules that would permit someone to build a house on it?

Posted by: Mass voter | Feb 19, 2008 9:27:28 PM

Having worked in Chicago/IL politics, I've run across Tony Rezko. He doesn't just give contributions. He gives contributions, and then does anything he can to cozy up to the candidates he supports, e.g. phoning alot (even multiple times a day), discussing strategy & politics, setting up rallies and walk teams and phone banks, and in general just being a go-to political guy. This "walk through" makes the Rezko-Obama relationship make a lot more sense to me, and it's one of those things that, unless you can really remember every little detail, there's always going to be more there to come out.

Posted by: Martin | Feb 19, 2008 7:50:15 PM

The next question needs to be: Was the Obama's offer the best they received on just the house, or was it the best they received on the combined house and adjacent property *because* the Rezko's stepped into the deal? Sounds to me like the latter. That would mean Tony and his wife facilitated the purchase. Nothing else makes sense, given that they then sold a slice to the Obama's and sold off the rest promptly.

Posted by: samantha reidel | Feb 19, 2008 3:44:11 PM

All of you do me a favor, google Obama, Rezmar, Iraq contract

Posted by: Ali | Feb 19, 2008 3:03:42 PM

But I thought Obama spent only 5 hours of legal work for a church that was in business with Rezko. If he in fact took Rezko "on a tour of the premises to make sure it was a good deal" seems to me their relationship was more than just business as usual. First the flop of using someone else's words on his speeches, then changing his mind about campaign funds and now this. Stitches are starting to show...

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." Abraham Lincoln.

Posted by: Tony | Feb 19, 2008 2:53:57 PM

I don't have a dog in this Hillary/Obama fight, but it certainly is an interesting one.

One of the facts that came out of the news reports on the real estate deal was this: Both the lot and the house were required by the seller to close simultaneously.

This shows irrefutably that the two buyers were linked. The seller did not want to sell Obama the house at a steep discount unless he was certain that Rezko would not renege on his full price offer. This strongly implies that Rezko was doing a favor to Obama, and the seller realized that. What other reason could the seller possibly have to require simultaneous closure?

These kinds of linked deals are not inherently illegal. Usually the full price buyer is a parent helping their kid buy a house at an affordable price. I've even seen a parent overpay on one house in exchange for the seller dropping the price on another so that their son or daughter can buy the discounted property.

When the discounted buyer is a politician, however, it certainly moves the burden of proof onto the politician to prove it isn't a payoff. Has Obama met that burden? Doesn't seem like it to me.

But of course he's running against the Queen of Sleeze, so maybe ethics doesn't enter into it.

Posted by: DaMav | Feb 19, 2008 2:43:29 PM

Living in Chicago, I've read every scrap published on this by the Trib and Sun-Times. I have yet to read anything shocking.

The sellers wanted their privacy, and it's clear that everyone directly involved has tried to respect that. Why should they have their financial details dragged into public? All they did was sell their house. But it's also clear that facts don't matter to the posters here, and posters elsewhere - they're hoping to twist everything into some conspiracy or fraud or scandal.

It's a sad commentary on people so paranoid they can't accept the simple truth that a family bought a house with the proceeds of two book deals. Instead of being happy for them, you attack. It's like some witch hunt.

What exactly are you trying to prove? That you can drive ANYONE out of politics? That's it, isn't it?

Posted by: Tom J | Feb 19, 2008 2:17:44 PM

Self confessed druggie – marijuana, cocaine, etc, etc.
Self confessed cigarette smoker
Self confessed unorganized politician
Self confessed “boneheaded” real estate transaction with indicted slumlord
Self confessed liar about everything being out about aforementioned real estate transaction
Self confessed plagiarism in stump speeches
Self confessed neophyte in the world of ruff and tumble politics
Self confessed voter of “Present” over 130 times
Is this the profile of a cult leader? Nope, just a candidate for President of the United States

Anything else you want to confess to Barak before you get vetted by Karl Rove and the GOP vetting machine?

Posted by: Jerry in Ohio | Feb 19, 2008 2:16:40 PM

But I thought Obama only did 5 hours of work at his law form for a Rezko connected case?? He must have spent as much time with Rezko at this house tour. This will be a much bigger issue during the general as Rezko is on trial.

Posted by: Eric | Feb 19, 2008 1:59:30 PM

Two debates ago, Obama maintained that he only did 5 hours of legal work for a church that was in business with Rezko. Has the media gone back and confirm that assertion? For a guy who had business dealings with for over 17 years, you only had 5 hours of work with him indirectly?

Democrats will lose this election big in the fall if they nominate Obama, because you know, it won't take much for the Republicans to swiftboat him to oblivion.

Wake up Democrats! Wake up!

There is still time to salvage this election. Don't blow it.

Posted by: SAMO | Feb 19, 2008 1:52:11 PM

Unless I'm confused, Rezko then sold a sliver to Obama and the rest to someone else, so didn't even speculate on the property, just got rid of it. So now someone else owns an empty lot. (And if you're going to speculate on property as being in prime location, why would you get rid of 1/6th of it?)

Posted by: Desider | Feb 19, 2008 1:43:33 PM

Obama supporters don't really care who this guy is. They are only interested in defeating Hillary. So, I take it that they would back the devil also as long as the devil will be able to defeat Hillary.

That is scary stuff.

My advise to these guys is, take a deep breath and take a step back a bit and ponder the situation. Is their hatred for Clinton really worth putting just anybody in the whitehouse?
Common!

Posted by: SO1 | Feb 19, 2008 1:43:08 PM

You have to wonder why the Obama campaign released more information about the real estate transaction after they had maintained for so long that everything had been released before. It reminds me of the stories about his past drug use. Obama feels that if he or his campaign is upfront about negative information, that he's then inoculated and can foreclose any further discussion about it.

Also, I'd like to know more about the adjacent lot. Does the second transaction (when Rezcko sold the small strip of land to Obama)render that lot "unbuildable"? If it does, then the effect of that is to make Obama's house worth a whole lot more since there won't be a house sitting adjacent to it. As far as I know, I've never seen anything about the ultimate disposition of that lot. Anyone have any information?

Posted by: Mass voter | Feb 19, 2008 1:39:16 PM

Eh?

How relevant is this minor blip compared with Clinton's sleazy Uranium deals with the dictator of Khazakstan? How come ABC news just ignores that?

No wonder Hillary refuses to release her tax returns.

It might hurt her standing somewhat if we knew they make tens of millions of dollars from influence-peddling and dictator-coddling. I hope people see through their lies.

Posted by: Kansas Jack | Feb 19, 2008 1:32:56 PM

Behold Jake Tapper and the rest of the Clinton establishment spin-machine going into full desperation mode.

I think these "news" sources should reveal their allegiances up front.

Tapper has been pounding out slime-job after slime job on Obama for about a month. WAKE UP, FOLKS!

Posted by: mg | Feb 19, 2008 1:29:27 PM

"Rezko, an Arab-American, is sitting in jail right now because of a $3.5 million wire transfer he received from Syria,and the money is traced to exiled Iraqui Billionaire and Saddam Hussein's friend and supporter Nadhmi Auchi. Auchi's wife contributed directly to Obama's campaign.........there's much more to the story, but the press isn't reporting on it until after Obama gets the nomination...."


I assumed Obama was George Bush in a democratic suit. It is even worse than I thought. God help us.

Posted by: Firefighter | Feb 19, 2008 1:22:00 PM

Mike, you must not be aware that the Chicago Tribune endorsed Obama. Also, journalists don't get a license.

If you represent the brain trust that comprises the bulk of Obama supporters, God help you.

I'm so glad someone is finally digging around in Obama's closet. Also, you know how Obama always mentions he was the first black president of The Harvard Law Review? Are you aware that was a LONG time ago and he served for one stinking year? That's it. He's not qualified to be president. VP yes, leader - no way. Our country is in too much trouble to allow someone so inexperienced to drive.

Posted by: mojo | Feb 19, 2008 1:18:00 PM

There is nothing new here. All of this has been gone over with a fine tooth comb again and again. Obama did nothing illegal. Why can't you come up with some real news??

Posted by: Adnora | Feb 19, 2008 1:15:26 PM

i'm less worried about rezko and obama's mansion than about rezko failing his duties to his tenants who lived in obama's district, yet went unpunished...

Posted by: chris | Feb 19, 2008 1:08:17 PM

I can't believe we are reading yet another story about this ridiculous Obama/Rezko thing, and yet, we have seen very little reporting about Bill Clinton's uranium deals in Kazakhstan.

Posted by: BT | Feb 19, 2008 1:05:32 PM

Interesting how Obama fans are attacking the media and are not questioning whether there's a bit of truth here. Like the Clinton fans, it doesn't seem to matter whether the scandals are real as long as the lemmings feel secure in their candidates arms. Corruption doesn't seem to amount to much for some.

So, we have two candidates mired in scandal and neither can attack the other without exposing his own dirty-dealing. How far can one candidate sink and how willing are the loyalist on either side to intentionally soil themselves?

Posted by: Surelock Homes | Feb 19, 2008 1:00:21 PM

Rezko, an Arab-American, is sitting in jail right now because of a $3.5 million wire transfer he received from Syria,and the money is traced to exiled Iraqui Billionaire and Saddam Hussein's friend and supporter Nadhmi Auchi. Auchi's wife contributed directly to Obama's campaign.........there's much more to the story, but the press isn't reporting on it until after Obama gets the nomination....

Posted by: rg | Feb 19, 2008 12:58:30 PM

Hillary Clinton's failing campaign strategegy of "inevitability" only postion her indubitably the loser in this race toward nomination.

Posted by: Rebecca | Feb 19, 2008 12:55:57 PM

This so-called "scandal" pales in comparison to Bill Clinton's trading influence for cash with a mineral developer and the Kazakh dictatorship.

Posted by: John | Feb 19, 2008 12:45:49 PM

This is certainly something that needs further exploration. I am getting very worried that the Democrats are going to be hoodwinked by Obama and left holding the bag if he gets the nomination. Let's vote for a known quantity. We know all about Hillary...Ken Starr wasted $55 million trying to find dirt on her and came up empty handed...that says something!

Posted by: Two-cats | Feb 19, 2008 12:45:45 PM

I am glad we are questioning Obama dealings, we must know the full truth before we vote him in.

Posted by: Pat | Feb 19, 2008 12:45:03 PM

hmmmm.....lets see I wonder if Rezko is singing in prison and therefore Obama's campaign is releasing these details so people will think, " Oh it is Honest Obama again, NOT!!!" Barack Hussein Obama has played Americans for far too long in this campaign. I have always found it interesting that he wrote 3 tell all books about himself right before he decided to run for office. Books that readily tell about his pot smoking days and his Muslim daddy's. And because he has written these tell all books no one questions him because there it is my life for you all to read.Hmmm... I wonder why he didn't include his Rezko friend in his tell all books?

Real Change is a woman in the white house.
Hillary 08

Posted by: mona | Feb 19, 2008 12:36:54 PM

Obama has received $300,000 bribe from Resko

Posted by: bancha | Feb 19, 2008 12:32:55 PM

What took so long for the truth?

Posted by: Bryan J. Shuy | Feb 19, 2008 12:09:14 PM

What about Obama and Rezko's connections to Nadhmi Auchi? Why aren't you and every other journalist looking into this Jake? If there is no paper trail on a candidate, and no record of his mothers' marriages, shouldn't that be sending off a few alarms?

Posted by: tz | Feb 19, 2008 12:05:58 PM

Obama campaign should stop dancing around this, and put the truth out there. Doing it this way just boosts suspicions. Why can't politicians just tell the truth? Is there really an honest politician out there?

Posted by: Elizabeth | Feb 19, 2008 11:58:02 AM

Honey I dont care if I've known the man(Rezko)20 years when I know hes under grand jury inditment I'm not going to invovle him in my personal affairs financial or other wise at that time Obama was in the state legislature,most politicans would avoid Rezko like the plague but not Obama.

Posted by: girlinvt | Feb 19, 2008 11:55:55 AM

PLEASE WAKE UP AMERICANS...
This rookie car salesman is PHONY...
1.Plagiarism...2. REZKO connection... 3. Present Votes...

The American people deserve better!

Posted by: greg limes | Feb 19, 2008 11:37:58 AM

Oh Please! The Trib is a republican conservative newspaper. They endorsed GW Bush -Twice.
They have been attempting to dig up stuff on Obama and the IL dems for ages - hence the insinuations and slant. Notice that after over a year of trying they still have not been able to say that Obama did anything wrong. The best they have been able to do is insinuate and make leading statements.

Obama has admitted numerous times that he & Rezko were friends for years and years. As Rezko was a REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, it would make sense that a)Obama asked for his opinion on the house and b)that Rezko saw the undervalued lot as a good deal and snapped it up.

Sadly you can't always control the things your friends do so Obama isn't responsible for Rezko's greedy dealings. He should have distanced himself the minute he knew about the charges which as he said was bone-headed but isn't worth as much ink as is being given to it.

Posted by: carrie | Feb 19, 2008 11:32:01 AM

Right in law suit happy america the Chicago tribune is going to print slanderous material or facts that have no truth.After all Obama is to poor to hire a lawyer to defend himself,or start a suite on defamation. Sounds like your willing to close your eyes to reality and really most people are not going to involve someone who is under investigation for selling political favors and other unsavory acts in thier business dealing.

Posted by: girlinvt | Feb 19, 2008 11:31:58 AM

No Mike, it isn't shocking that an Obama supporter wants the journalist penalized for reporting obvious graft, but that you find Obama pocketing a $300,000 bribe OK.

Posted by: JR | Feb 19, 2008 11:23:12 AM

Rezco paid more becouse he was stupid and he was never planning to use the lot. Obama is smart and he is a good talker , thats why he got a better price. That only shows me that Obama is a better business man then Rezco. YEAH RIGHT!

Posted by: Carlos | Feb 19, 2008 11:20:50 AM

Is anyone surprised to hear that a politician from South Chicago may have done something dishonest. I'd be more surprised to hear otherwise. The entire political machine in the Chicago area is known for corruption. Just happens one of them is running for President. People should have cared before they voted for Barack but its not too late to make sure he doesn't get ahold of a bigger office to do more double dealings.

Posted by: Brenda Montgomery | Feb 19, 2008 11:20:41 AM

Obama paid $300,000 UNDER the listed asking price , while Rezco paid the full asking price -- $625,000 -- under Mrs. Rezko's name for the other half. You asking us to believe this doesn't stink to high heaven, I'm not stupid.

Posted by: David | Feb 19, 2008 11:14:39 AM

What's pathetic is how you cannot defend Obama's not having revealed this before. I think the information is coming out in dribbles because it shows such a lack of common sense. Note that when Obama was showing this house to his friend Rezko, the Chicago newspapers had already reported that Rezko was being investigated. Boneheaded indeed.

Posted by: Silvia | Feb 19, 2008 11:14:23 AM

The Chicago Tribune is just desperate to make this into a scandal after all the time and effort they put into digging into it and coming up empty.

It's pathetic really. Wow, Obama went on a tour of this house with Rezko. Shocking! Not.

They should really have their journalist licenses taken away. Oh, that's right, journalists don't have to get licenses to peddle their crap. That explains quite a bit.

Posted by: Mike | Feb 19, 2008 11:06:48 AM

Post a comment