Illinois Governor Arrested

okie wrote:

Joe, anyone that apologizes for a politician's missteps is an apologist for them.

I suppose I should consider that to be an authoritative definition, coming as it does from a confirmed Bush apologist.

okie wrote:

The land deal, as I have researched it, I hope I have the basics right, apparently Rezko's wife and Obama bought land and the house, respectively, from a landowner on the very same day, indicating a bundled pair of purchases represented to the seller of the property.

You're wrong. The bids didn't come in on the same day, and the two transactions were handled completely separately. The bid on the side lot (which Rezko later purchased) actually was made by another developer before Obama made his bid. The two lots simply closed on the same day. Nothing ominous about that: no doubt the sellers just wanted to take care of everything on the same day, rather than make two trips.

okie wrote:

Obviously the seller would not consider each purchase alone, but both in totality in terms of what they would receive for the property. Rezko paid more than the land was apparently worth, the asking price, and this has been strongly indicated by a corrupted appraisal process, as indicated in the following, while Obama paid 300,000 less than the asking price:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/18/whistleblower-hits-obama-friends-appraisal/

Are you that dumb? If the appraisal was crooked, that only suggests that Rezko was trying to defraud the bank into lending more on the property than it was worth. How could an inflated appraisal by the buyer have any effect on the sale (except to screw himself)?

In any event, Rezko paid $625,000 for the side lot, which was the asking price.

As for Obama paying less than the asking price: why wouldn't he? The sellers listed the house for $1.95 million. Obama paid $1.65 million, which was $150,000 more than his initial offer on the property. Two parties to a transaction agree to a price in the middle: where's the scandal?

Quote:

okie wrote:

So while the adjacent land was being purchased for over price,

False

okie wrote:

based upon a corrupted appraisal process, apparently a phony appraisal,

Idiotic

okie wrote:

Obama purchased the house for 300,000 less than asking price, thus the owner received 300,000 less than total asked for both land and house,

Christ! Even your math is fucked up. You said that Rezko paid more than the asking price for the side lot, while Obama paid $300k less than the asking price, so the owner couldn't have received $300k less than the total asked for both properties.

My math is perfect. I never said they paid more than asking price, I said they paid more than the property was worth, probably, because the appraisal was apparently corrupted, and I posted the evidence for it. If Rezko knew the appraisal was high, he would have offered less money, Joe, thats the point. The point is he wanted to overpay for the property as a favor for his political ally, Obama, so the appraisal had to match what he paid, that being part of what people think got the sellers to sell for the prices they did. In parallel, Obama paid less than the house was worth, according to the appraisal. None of this would be real suspicious, except, Joe, Rezko was a political fundraiser, a powerbroker in Chicago that was helping Obama, and a favor is very likely. Remember, Rezko is a convicted felon, Joe, are you that blind? And how likely would it be these two people would independently close on property adjacent to each other on the same day, under questionable terms and circumstances?

Quote:

okie wrote:

indicating the Rezkos helped the Obama's purchase their house at a reduced price by virtue of overpaying for the land, part of which was later sold to the Obama's to add to their property.

It indicates no such thing.

okie wrote:

Now, as an apologist for Obama, you will undoubtedly recognize nothing haywire about this land deal that was engineered by Obama and his friend and political financier, now convicted felon, but I think as a Chicagoan familiar with Chicago politics, you should not be that naive, Joe.

Oh, there's a lot that's haywire about the deal that you describe. That deal, however, has no resemblance to what actually happened -- and very little connection to reality in general.

For more information:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/rezkotimeline.php

I see you get your reasoning from a website titled "talking points," now what could get any more apologetic than that? To be perfectly accurate, proving this was a political favor is perhaps not beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is very likely in lots of peoples opinion. And if Obama did not admit to something wrong, he would never have said it was a "boneheaded" deal he made. Why admit it was boneheaded if he did nothing wrong? That is the clincher to me, he knew it and admitted it. Even Obama admits more than you will, now that is what I call a real apologist!

CHICAGO " President-elect Barack Obama said Monday a review by his own lawyer shows he had no direct contact with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich about the appointment of a Senate replacement, and transition aides did nothing inappropriate.

Obama pledged to make the review public, but said he decided to hold off because prosecutors asked for a delay and "I don't want to interfere with an ongoing investigation." U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald released a statement confirming the request.

Controversy has swirled around the president-elect and his incoming White House chief of staff, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, following Blagojevich's arrest last week on charges he schemed to trade Obama's Senate seat for personal gain.

Obama, fielding questions at a news conference, sidestepped when asked whether Emanuel had spoken with aides to the governor about potential Senate appointees.

Emanuel was one of several aides who watched the news conference from the wings.

The president-elect pledged the results of the investigation by his incoming White House counsel, Gregory Craig, would be released "in due course."

He said the probe was complete and thorough, but did not say which of his aides Craig interviewed, whether any of them was under oath at the time, or any other details.

In personally disclosing the results of the investigation he ordered, Obama said, "As I said in a press conference last week, I had no contact with the governor's office and I had no contact with anybody in the governor's office. What I indicated last week was there was nothing that my office did that was in any way inappropriate or related to the charges that have been brought."

Blagojevich has authority under Illinois state law to name a Senate replacement for Obama, who resigned his seat as he prepares to become president. Senate Democrats have warned the governor not to use his power, hinting they may refuse to allow his selection to take the oath of office.

There also has been talk of the legislature passing a law that would strip the governor of the power to name a replacement, and call for a special election instead.

Separately, Blagojevich has come under heavy pressure to resign, from Obama as well as Democrats nationally and in Illinois. Earlier in the day, the Legislature took the first step toward possible impeachment.

Obama held his news conference shortly after his transition office released a statement by spokesman Dan Pfeiffer saying the internal review had found no wrongdoing.

Like the president-elect, the statement left several issues uncovered.

It did not say whether Emanuel was heard on a wiretap providing the governor's top aide with a list of names that the president-elect favored. Nor did it say who, if anyone, on Obama transition's team had made contact with the governor or his aides concerning a replacement for Obama or whether Craig interviewed people under oath, or to whom he talked.

Pfeiffer said the review "affirmed the public statements of the president-elect that he had no contact with the governor or his staff, and that the president-elect's staff was not involved in inappropriate discussions with the governor or his staff over the selection of his successor as U.S. Senator."

Obama appeared before reporters to announce his environmental and natural resources team.

It was disclosed last week that he selected Steven Chu for energy secretary, Lisa Jackson for Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Carol Browner as his energy and climate "czar," and Nancy Sutley to lead the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Separately, officials familiar with the selection of Obama's Cabinet said the president-elect has selected Chicago schools chief Arne Duncan as education secretary. These officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose any personnel decisions not yet announced.

Earlier in the day, Obama met privately with his national security team, including Vice President-elect Joe Biden, incoming Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The president-elect's transition office said the meeting was held to discuss opportunities and challenges around the globe and was designed to help the new administration hit the ground running as of Inauguration Day, Jan. 20.

In recent days, Obama's staff has declined to respond even to basic questions about the Blagojevich review, like how long it would take, who was leading it and what issues were explored.

Two people who have been briefed on the investigation had told The Associated Press that Emanuel is not a target of the probe. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the criminal investigation is ongoing. One is a person close to Emanuel, who said he has been told by investigators that he's not a subject of their probe.

There are no suggestions that Obama or his aides were involved in the alleged sale of his seat. Fitzgerald has said prosecutors were making no allegations that Obama was aware of any scheming. And Blagojevich himself, in taped conversations cited by prosecutors, suggested Obama wouldn't be helpful to him and called him a vulgar term. Even if the governor were to appoint a candidate favored by the Obama team, Blagojevich said, "they're not willing to give me anything except appreciation."

do you have any relevant experience in Chicago politics, or are you just playing with your balls?

Obama is a constitutional scholar; I imagine he is not stupid enough to put out anything that will get him in trouble. ....

Not only that but the rewards for this alleged action is so miniscule in comparison to the risk, I just don't think the Obama team would be stupid enough to risk it.

Better check yourself into a mental institution real quick. When anybody says they didn't do something, it's not normal to question their honesty based on your own ethics and morals. You have none; you infer the most stupid things about Obama without having any evidence or fact.

The mental institution is the best place for you; you mind find some like-minded sickos there.

Bids are not when you buy the property, Joe, my assertion stands, they bought the properties on the same day.

And lots of people have found that ominous for the reasons I have already tried to explain to you.

When you say no doubt the sellers just wanted to take care of everything the same day, you don't know that to be true at all, in fact it is more likely to me that they wanted to be assured of the total money they received for both properties, it is very logical that the two deals may have been dependent on each other.

In other words, why sell the house for 300k less than asking if the land deal should fall through. I would be curious which deal was closed that day first, I am going to guess the land deal first, then the house.

My math is perfect. I never said they paid more than asking price, I said they paid more than the property was worth...

Rezko paid more than the land was apparently worth, the asking price

...probably, because the appraisal was apparently corrupted, and I posted the evidence for it.

If Rezko knew the appraisal was high, he would have offered less money, Joe, thats the point. The point is he wanted to overpay for the property as a favor for his political ally, Obama, so the appraisal had to match what he paid, that being part of what people think got the sellers to sell for the prices they did.

In parallel, Obama paid less than the house was worth, according to the appraisal.

None of this would be real suspicious, except, Joe, Rezko was a political fundraiser, a powerbroker in Chicago that was helping Obama, and a favor is very likely. Remember, Rezko is a convicted felon, Joe, are you that blind? And how likely would it be these two people would independently close on property adjacent to each other on the same day, under questionable terms and circumstances?

I see you get your reasoning from a website titled "talking points," now what could get any more apologetic than that?

To be perfectly accurate, proving this was a political favor is perhaps not beyond a reasonable doubt, but it is very likely in lots of peoples opinion.

And if Obama did not admit to something wrong, he would never have said it was a "boneheaded" deal he made. Why admit it was boneheaded if he did nothing wrong? That is the clincher to me, he knew it and admitted it. Even Obama admits more than you will, now that is what I call a real apologist!

Well, no amount of argument will solve this.

You drink Obamalade, go ahead, thats your privilege.

One thing I wish to clear up in your arguments however, you quote me:
"Rezko paid more than the land was apparently worth, the asking price"
You cite that statement as meaning I said he paid more than the asking price. No, you read it wrong, I could have worded it more clearly, but it says he paid more than the property was worth, (which was) the asking price. In other words, he paid the asking price, which was apparently more than the property was worth, apparently because of a corrupt appraisal, which I have provided you evidence of, Joe.

Bottom line, you trust Obama, I don't, so I look at what he has done and what he is doing through a different prism than your prism.

Joe, I have not spent my life studying this deal, but from what I have gotten out of it so far is the implication that the sellers were more inclined to sell Obama the property with the house on it at a cutrate price, by virtue of the fact that Rezko's wife was willing to buy the rest of the land, and they ended up paying full price, or an inflated price, for the vacant land.

You say the sellers say no, but of course they are going to say no most likely, they do not want any further trouble out of this, especially if they are Democrats.

After all, the two properties were a result of a large lot that had no acceptable offers, so it was split into two, and the owner stipulated closing on the same day, so the deals are definitely linked, something you have tried to disregard.

Obama had just received 1.69 million from a book deal, so that is about all the money he had to buy the house he wanted at the 1.65 million.

Each deal was contingent upon the other, and it is doubtful Obama could buy the house without his buddy and convicted felon, Rezko, buying the other part of the property. That doesn't strike you as a political favor, Joe? I wish I had friends around that would help me buy a property that I wanted, by buying a portion of a lot if I couldn't buy the whole thing.

In regard to the appraisal that I brought up before, I need more info. on that, but lets look at how Rezko sold the 10 foot strip of land back to the Obamas. An appraiser valued it at about $40,500, but since Obama felt it would be fair to give Rezko 1/6 of the amount paid for the entire lot, since the 10 foot sliver represtented 1/6 of the lot, so he paid Rezko 104,500, which is 1/6 of the 625,000 paid for the whole lot, but more than $60,000 over the appraised price. Why would he want to do that, if these guys were not in this whole mess together?

Now if the appraiser was correct, then the entire lot was probably worth only about 6 times the 40,500, or about $243,000, or about $382,000 less than Rezko paid for the property.

Interesting is it not that this amount is approximately the same as Obama underpaid for his house?

Conclusion Joe, Rezko helped the Obamas purchase their dream house. That is a political favor, Joe.

Beyond that, something I have not even touched on, is the possibility of tax problems in regard to this deal, as mentioned in the following article.
http://makethemaccountable.com/index.php/2008/08/10/more-than-just-a-boneheaded-mistake/