Obama's associations may haunt bid

Originally Posted by This_person

Nope, not grey at all Most everyone pays just over a million and a half for a two million dollar piece of land, and then just over 100,000 for property that 6 months earlier was bought for well over 600,000. Certainly that doesn't look at all like a million dollar (total) bribe by the seller, who just happens to be under indictment, and the buyer, who happens to be a state senator! How could that be grey in any way?

Well, you could be right, but then again all we know of the facts is what a lot of people with agendas have said. How much of it is true... who knows? What I do know is the authorities did get all the facts and found no wrongdoing.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

Well, you could be right, but then again all we know of the facts is what a lot of people with agendas have said. How much of it is true... who knows? What I do know is the authorities did get all the facts and found no wrongdoing.

You do know there's a difference between "no wrongdoing" and "insufficient evidence to prosecute a crime", right?

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

You do know there's a difference between "no wrongdoing" and "insufficient evidence to prosecute a crime", right?

Weird how that property deal went down, huh?

The Campaign Spot

Thursday, June 05, 2008
BARACK OBAMA
Why Did Obama Pay Rezko an Extra $64,000 For That Strip of Land?


From Steven Spruiell's must-read piece on the Rezko guilty verdict this morning:

Obama may have thought all of his interactions with Rezko were above-board, but they weren’t. One of the counts against Rezko detailed how he funneled the proceeds of an illegal kickback scheme into Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign. Rezko’s co-conspirator, a former trustee of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS) named Stuart Levine, told the jury that he directed the TRS to invest $50 million with a firm called Glencoe Capital. In exchange, Levine arranged for himself and Rezko to be paid a fraudulent $500,000 “finder’s fee.” Levine routed Rezko’s half to an associate named Joseph Aramanda in March of 2004. That month, Aramanda wrote a $10,000 check to Barack Obama’s campaign.

Of course, Obama may well not have known the details of such a shadowy transaction, and his campaign has donated that $10,000 — and all other Rezko-related money — to charity. But what became clear over the course of the Rezko trial is that this kind of scheme exemplified Rezko’s way of doing business. It’s hard to believe that Obama could be so clueless about Rezko’s character, just as it’s hard to believe that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright’s pews for 20 years and had no idea that the man was a radical black nationalist.

Gabe Malor, over at Ace of Spades, notices Obama is using the same "he's not the man I once knew" line that he used with Jeremiah Wright.
Obama has returned $157,835 in campaign funds that Tony Rezko and his associates donated in his career.
But will he return the land that he bought from Rezko?
I can hear it now. "But Jim, this isn't a donation from Rezko to Obama," because the senator bought the land for a lot more than it was worth — "an appraiser valued the slice of land Rezko sold at $40,500, Obama decided it would be fair to pay Rezko substantially more: one sixth of his original purchase price, or $104,000."

Precisely. Rezko "widely known to be under federal investigation at the time." Paying substantially more than the land was appraised creates the appearance of a $64,000 payment to a person who, if found guilty, could discuss his longtime association and business dealings with a U.S. senator with federal law enforcement.


06/05 09:39 AM


The Campaign Spot on National Review Online=

[Sonsie]

Originally Posted by Bann

Weird how that property deal went down, huh?

The Campaign Spot

Thursday, June 05, 2008
BARACK OBAMA
Why Did Obama Pay Rezko an Extra $64,000 For That Strip of Land?


From Steven Spruiell's must-read piece on the Rezko guilty verdict this morning:

Obama may have thought all of his interactions with Rezko were above-board, but they weren’t. One of the counts against Rezko detailed how he funneled the proceeds of an illegal kickback scheme into Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign. Rezko’s co-conspirator, a former trustee of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS) named Stuart Levine, told the jury that he directed the TRS to invest $50 million with a firm called Glencoe Capital. In exchange, Levine arranged for himself and Rezko to be paid a fraudulent $500,000 “finder’s fee.” Levine routed Rezko’s half to an associate named Joseph Aramanda in March of 2004. That month, Aramanda wrote a $10,000 check to Barack Obama’s campaign.

Of course, Obama may well not have known the details of such a shadowy transaction, and his campaign has donated that $10,000 — and all other Rezko-related money — to charity. But what became clear over the course of the Rezko trial is that this kind of scheme exemplified Rezko’s way of doing business. It’s hard to believe that Obama could be so clueless about Rezko’s character, just as it’s hard to believe that Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright’s pews for 20 years and had no idea that the man was a radical black nationalist.

Gabe Malor, over at Ace of Spades, notices Obama is using the same "he's not the man I once knew" line that he used with Jeremiah Wright.
Obama has returned $157,835 in campaign funds that Tony Rezko and his associates donated in his career.
But will he return the land that he bought from Rezko?
I can hear it now. "But Jim, this isn't a donation from Rezko to Obama," because the senator bought the land for a lot more than it was worth — "an appraiser valued the slice of land Rezko sold at $40,500, Obama decided it would be fair to pay Rezko substantially more: one sixth of his original purchase price, or $104,000."

Precisely. Rezko "widely known to be under federal investigation at the time." Paying substantially more than the land was appraised creates the appearance of a $64,000 payment to a person who, if found guilty, could discuss his longtime association and business dealings with a U.S. senator with federal law enforcement.


06/05 09:39 AM


The Campaign Spot on National Review Online=

It's pretty obvious that Rezko was Obama's bagman.

.

[cwo_ghwebb]

Originally Posted by Sonsie

It's pretty obvious that Rezko was Obama's bagman.

.

Do you think it really matters to those who think this dude is the Messiah?

[Sonsie]

Originally Posted by cwo_ghwebb

Do you think it really matters to those who think this dude is the Messiah?

Hey, CNN noticed Obama's less than perfect past so there is hope.

The Dirty Politics That Started Obama's Political Career

[ImnoMensa]

I certainly don't believe that Obama's political career nor his personal connections are as pure as the driven snow. In fact I dont believe any politician is very pure. You dont get to be that high in politics in that short a time without making some deals that are under the table.

However pure or not in his dealings, there are enough reasons ,things that arent pure that he stands for to turn me off.
Partial birth abortion being one of them. Nothing is as impure as that. Murder of innocents simply isnt that pure. Certainly I believe him to be racist. His own writings and his choice of Churches and the words of his bride should make that pretty clear.His tax proposals will hurt America, His appeasement with terrorists isnt good. What will he do with the military if he does pull them from Iraq and why would he stop research on weapons that make our country strong?

When you place this guy in the White House , with Pelosi in the House, and Reid in the Senate ,it will mean a triumvirate of Democratic idiocy that will be historical in its ineptitude, its partisanship, its liberalism, and its tax and spend agenda.

Hopefully we can survive 4 years of it.

Well, they had no problem prosecuting Rezko, and they investigated Obama and others. If there was any wrongdoing there, I'm sure the authorities would have made it public, or at least offered one of their "not enough evidence to convict" statements. The fact that they did neither, that I am aware of, tells me there's nothing there but rampant speculation and rumour mongering.

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

I certainly don't believe that Obama's political career nor his personal connections are as pure as the driven snow. In fact I dont believe any politician is very pure. You dont get to be that high in politics in that short a time without making some deals that are under the table.

I'm guessing that's what the Clintonistas thought too, and I believe that if there was any dirt to find, however minor, they would have found it. So what does it tell you when the best muck rakers in the business can't find anything?

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

I'm guessing that's what the Clintonistas thought too, and I believe that if there was any dirt to find, however minor, they would have found it. So what does it tell you when the best muck rakers in the business can't find anything?

That there's not enough of a trail in the person they're looking at, because he is inexperienced, with very little record to check.

But, the record that is there is, of course, riddled with suspiscious activity, socialist leanings, horrific CLOSE personal associations, etc., etc.