From Family Security Matters Link

Obama-Rezko and Media Ignorance of ?The Chicago Way?

Rick Moran

Many of us familiar with Chicago politics have been wondering for months at the apparent disconnect of the media regarding Obama?s relationship to the Chicago political machine. Where did they think this guy came from?

The lack of curiosity by the press about Obama?s connections to one of the most corrupt city governments in the United States should be one of the big media stories of this campaign. While it is true that Obama?s connections to the Machine are not as extensive as many other politicians, I?ve got news for you Obama apologists: try running for any office in Chicago ? local, state, or federal ? and see how far you get without support from the regular Democrats.

Besides, examining Obama?s first state senate race should have been a tip off to the national press that this fellow can play the game of politics ?The Chicago Way? as well as any corrupt Daleycrat:

The day after New Year?s 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners.

There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist from the city?s South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama?s four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot.

Fresh from his work as a civil rights lawyer and head of a voter registration project that expanded access to the ballot box, Obama launched his first campaign for the Illinois Senate saying he wanted to empower disenfranchised citizens.

But in that initial bid for political office, Obama quickly mastered the bare-knuckle arts of Chicago electoral politics. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer.

A close examination of Obama?s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it.

Don?t you think that information like this might be included in any standard media bio of the candidate, MSNBC? Or have you guys at Fox never heard of the internet and Google?

This is politics ?The Chicago Way,? as John Kass points out in this ground breaking column:

The Chicago Way.

What is it? Is it easily abused? Is it dangerous in the wrong hands?

This is critical, as the nation?s eyes turn toward Chicago?s federal building, where Barack Obama?s personal real estate fairy, Tony Rezko, stands trial on federal corruption charges.

The phrase must be put in context, something the national media fails to do when they portray Obama as the boy king drawing the sword from the stone, ready to change America?s politics of influence and lobbyists, ignoring the fact that Chicago ain?t Camelot.

With opening statements expected Thursday, the court will be packed with journalists foreign to our idiom. In the past, a few reporters have applied ?The Chicago Way? to our pizza, theater and opera, thereby embarrassing themselves beyond redemption.

?Chicago ain?t Camelot? may be the understatement of this political year. Chicago is?well, Chicago. For instance:

Chicago?s mob ? we call it the Outfit ? was slapped last summer by federal prosecutors in the Operation Family Secrets trial that convicted Outfit bosses, and cops and put political figures in with them. We?ve had our chief of detectives sent to prison for running the Outfit?s jewelry-heist ring. And we?ve had white guys with Outfit connections get $100 million in affirmative action contracts from their drinking buddy, Mayor Richard Daley, who must have seen them pink and white and male at some point.

That?s the Chicago Way.

Are you getting the picture New York Times? Do I have to spell it out for you Washington Post? Wake up and smell the coffee, CNN!

?This country was built on taxes,? said a Democratic machine hack, Cook County Commissioner Deborah Sims, as she and other Democrats prepared to slap Chicago with the highest sales tax of any major city in the country?.

?There?s not that many political hacks in Cook County,? Sims insisted after the tax hike.

Not that many hacks? The only one reporters need to bother about is also involved at the same federal building: the mayor?s own Duke of Patronage, Robert Sorich.

Sorich has been found guilty by a jury, but the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals above the Rezko courtroom is still deciding whether to redeem the jury or redeem the mayor, who?d much rather have Sorich happy than Obama in the White House.

Sorich was convicted two years ago of running the mayor?s massive and illegal patronage operation, and he?s still not in prison. Thugs, morons, idiots, and convicts were put on the city payroll to work the precincts so that Daley could keep getting elected. Obama?s spokesman, David Axelrod, defended Daley patronage in a Tribune op-ed piece.

As an aside, for a while there it looked like Fitzy might be targeting hizzoner himself, measuring him for prison coveralls. But the Daleys have always been too smart to get caught doing anything really illegal and the Mayor?s luck held.

But seriously LA Times, this is the political culture Barack Obama matured in. Would it do any harm to perhaps, you know, pretend that you?re doing your job and send a reporter down here to look into a few things?

Maybe you folks at ABC News could start by looking into those letters Obama wrote to city and state officials on behalf of his now indicted patron, friend, and fund raiser Tony Rezko to get a $14 million contract to build senior housing ? a development located outside of his senate district:

The deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and his partner, Allison S. Davis, Obama?s former boss, according to records from the project, which was four blocks outside Obama?s state Senate district.

Obama?s letters, written nearly nine years ago, for the first time show the Democratic presidential hopeful did a political favor for Rezko?a longtime friend, campaign fund-raiser and client of the law firm where Obama worked?who was indicted last fall on federal charges that accuse him of demanding kickbacks from companies seeking state business under Gov. Blagojevich.

The letters appear to contradict a statement last December from Obama, who told the Chicago Tribune that, in all the years he?s known Rezko, ?I?ve never done any favors for him.??

And lest there be any doubt CBS News, here?s Obama?s ?Chicago Way? response:

On Tuesday, Bill Burton, press secretary for Obama?s presidential campaign, said the letters Obama wrote in support of the development weren?t intended as a favor to Rezko or Davis.

?This wasn?t done as a favor for anyone,? Burton said in a written statement. ?It was done in the interests of the people in the community who have benefited from the project.

?I don?t know that anyone specifically asked him to write this letter nine years ago,? the statement said. ?There was a consensus in the community about the positive impact the project would make and Obama supported it because it was going to help people in his district. . . .

Um, no, Boston Herald, the project was not benefiting people in Obama?s district. It was benefiting his buddy Rezko to the tune of $855,000. But hey! It sure sounds good when you can say that you don?t know ?that anyone specifically asked? Obama to write the letters. That?s the key to any ?Chicago Way? denial: be as vague as possible so just in case evidence surfaces later that you?re lying through your teeth, you have an out.

The same goes for the shady deal on the house, Philadelphia Inquirer:

Naturally, there are some squares who don?t think taxpayers should pave the Chicago Way to make it easy for Rezko to help purchase the senator?s dream house in a kinky deal exposed by the Tribune and still not fully explained.

?It?s really the Old Chicago Way,? said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Better Government Association. ?In the old days they would pretty much admit it up front, and now they deny it. It?s essentially about power, access to government jobs, government contracts and taking care of your own.?

?Taking care of your own? was something Obama was very good at. How good we probably won?t know for a while. That?s because it?s not only what Obama did for Rezko and vice versa that should be occupying the press as they write about the potential next President of the United States. It?s what he did for Rezko?s cronies and other contributors that should also be examined. And the candidate himself isn?t volunteering any information. That too, is ?The Chicago Way.? Be smart and keep your mouth shut.

Perhaps the Rezko trial, now underway at the Federal building downtown, will change this dynamic. But I guess I shouldn?t be too optimistic. Kass explains:

One secret DaVinci Code-type sign for the Chicago Way is in the back room of the Chicago City Council chambers at City Hall, where a portrait of George Washington looks down at the crookedness below, and extends his own hand, palm up, itchy, needing that special grease.

When even sainted George Washington is on the take, you know that something is really rotten in this town.

# #

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing editor Rick Moran is a free lance writer and contributes to several websites. He is the proprietor of the blog Right Wing Nuthouse.

Obama's Syrian Connection Link to Front Page

By Andrew Walden
FrontPageMagazine.com | 3/11/2008

Most politicians try to keep their financial backers un-indicted until after the election. But Obama?s biggest early sponsor, dual U.S.-Syrian citizen Antoin ?Tony? Rezko, is already indicted by a federal grand jury. Now he is going to trial in a Chicago federal court.

Rezko, along with co-defendants Ali Ata and Abdelhamid Chaib, face federal grand jury charges presented in October 2006 by the U.S. Attorney for Northern Illinois, Patrick Fitzgerald. The case centers on allegations of fraud between 2000 and 2004 in the sale of 17 Papa Johns? Pizza parlors in Detroit, Chicago and Milwaukee. The case may begin with pizza, but it leads to Europe, Syria, Iraq, and the UN Oil for Food program.

Fitzgerald is the prosecutor who won perjury convictions against Vice President Cheney?s Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, in March, 2007. Chaib is an officer of several of Rezko?s restaurant chains including Chicagoland Panda Express franchises. Ata was appointed Executive Director of the Illinois Finance Authority by Illinois? Democratic Governor, Rod Blagojevich. Ata was also a former president of the Chicago Chapter of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, and had a financial interest in Rezko?s restaurants. Ata reportedly donated as much as $60,000 to Blagojevich and $5000 to Obama. Rezko reportedly raised as much as $500,000 for Blagojevich and at least $70,000 for Obama?s various campaigns.

Arab American Media Services reports: ?In 1997, Panda Express won the right to open a lucrative concession at O?Hare International Airport under the city?s Minority Set-Aside program which directs large contracts to companies owned by Women, African Americans or Hispanics. The city awarded a 10-year contract for O?Hare Airport to Crucial Inc. in 1999, which the city believed was owned by an African American, Jabir Herbert Muhammad, the son of the late Elijah Mohammad.?

Elijah Mohammad led the Nation of Islam until his death in 1975. Jabir Herbert Muhammad was sued in 1999 by boxer Muhammad Ali for unauthorized use of his name in connection with the Muhammad Ali Foundation. Rezko served as Executive Director of the Foundation.

According to the Associated Press, ?U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve jailed Rezko Jan. 28, saying he had disobeyed her order to keep her posted on his financial status. Among other things, he failed to tell her about a $3.5 million loan from London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi ? a loan that was later forgiven in exchange for shares in a prime slice of Chicago real estate. Rezko gave $700,000 of the money to his wife and used the rest to pay legal bills and funnel cash to various supporters.?

According to the ChicagoTribune December 24:

Rezko?began cultivating a friendship with Obama around 1990, becoming a key fundraiser?.

In June 2005, even as Rezko was widely reported to be under federal investigation, the Tribune reports, ?Obama bought a $1.65 million South Side home on the same day that Rezko's wife purchased the adjoining garden lot for $625,000. Obama and Rezko then engaged in a series of private transactions to redivide and improve their adjoining parcels.

The Times of London has uncovered ?state documents in Illinois recording that Fintrade Services, a Panamanian company, lent money to (an) Obama fundraiser in May 2005. Fintrade?s directors include Ibtisam Auchi, the name of Mr. Auchi?s wife. Mr. Auchi?s spokespeople declined to respond to a question about whether he was linked to this business.?

Auchi, an Iraqi Chaldean Christian, was a life-long Ba?athist who had been charged with supplying a machine gun for Saddam?s 1959 failed attempt to assassinate then-Iraqi Prime Minister Abdul Karim Qasim. As Saddam?s Baath party took power, Auchi prospered. He went to work for Saddam?s Ministry of Oil in 1967. He rose to be Saddam?s Oil Ministry Director of Planning and Development before leaving Iraq in 1979. His brother was apparently killed by Saddam?s regime as were family of many high-ranking Baathists. But there are also claims that Auchi continued secretly working for Saddam?s intelligence services. What is certain is that Auchi prospered mightily collecting ?commissions? on sale of weapons and other goods to Iraq in the 1980s and 1990s. Living in the UK, he is now listed as Britain?s 13th-richest man.

Auchi held an interest in the French banking giant PNB Paribas through his General Mediterranean Holdings company. According to the New York Times, ?As recently as 2001, General Mediterranean Holdings described itself in an annual report as one of largest single shareholders in BNP Paribas.? Until 2001 Saddam insisted that all ?Oil for Food? payments?$13 billion dollars?would pass through Banque Nationale de Paris which in 2000 merged with Paribas to become PNB Paribas. Auchi has played a role in PNB since the late 1970s. Saddam used Oil for Food fraud to channel millions of dollars to heads of state, activists, terrorists, and journalists who then returned the favor by backing Saddam when the US finally invaded Iraq.

In 2003, Auchi was convicted in France for receiving about $100 million in illegal commissions as part of a scandal involving the French oil giant ELF Aquitane. The UK Guardian termed the scandal, ?the biggest fraud inquiry in Europe since the Second World War. Elf became a private bank for its executives who spent ?200 million on political favours, mistresses, jewelery, fine art, villas and apartments."

Auchi?s General Mediterranean Holdings financed a 250 megawatt power plant in the Kurdish town of Chamchamal, Iraq along with Rezko and Iraq's former Minister of Electricity (and Chicago resident), Aiham Alsamarrae.

Returning in 2003 to post-Saddam Iraq, Alsamarrae had been made Minister of Electricity under the occupation government of Paul Bremer. Alsamarrae escaped ?the Chicago way? from the Green Zone in December, 2006 after being held for four months in relation to a $2 billion Iraqi reconstruction corruption case. He is now living in his Chicago mansion.

Writing in Human Events, John Batchelor reports on another Alsammarae-Obama-Rezko connection:

??in April 2005, one month before Mr. Alsammarae left his post, his Ministry of Electricity signed a contract for $50 million with Companion Security to provide training to Iraqis to guard electrical plants by flying them to Illinois for classes.

?Companion Security was headed by a former Chicago policeman with a troubled history, Daniel T. Frawley, in partnership with Mr. Rezko and in association with Daniel Mahru, the lawyer for the original contract and Mr. Rezko's former business partner. In April 2006, Mr. Frawley entered negotiations with Governor Rod Blagojevich's staff to lease a military facility in Illinois to be a training camp. In August 2006, Mr. Frawley started negotiations with Mr. Obama's U.S. Senate staff to complete the contract?.

?The timeline of Companion discussions in 2006 is important to note: April 2006 Frawley speaks to governor's office; August 2006 Frawley speaks to senator's office; October 2006 indictment of Rezko revealed; October 2006 Rezko arrested upon return from Syria; October 2006 Alsammarae convicted in Baghdad and makes his first escape attempt; December 2006 Alsammarae escapes from Baghdad. ?

?(In 2004) Mr. Auchi traveled by private aircraft to Midway Airport in Chicago and then to a fete at the Four Season Hotel, where he met with his business partner in Chicago real estate, Mr. Rezko, as well as with Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Also present that night, according to a fresh report by James Bone and Dominic Kennedy of the London Times, was State Senator Barack Obama, who had recently won the Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate seat?.?

Jay Stewart of the Better Government Assn. in Chicago told the LA Times: ?Everybody in this town knew that Tony Rezko was headed for trouble. When he got indicted, there wasn't a single insider who was surprised. It was viewed as a long time coming. . . .Why would you be having anything to do with Tony Rezko, particularly if you're planning to run for president??

Link to PR-Inside
Andy Martin
2008-03-07 14:00:34 - Martin says Tony Rezko could walk from the criminal charges he faces in Chicago; federal prosecutors presented a dispirited opening day of evidence and argument. Legal expert Martin analyzes the complex issues involving the presidential candidate and his former supporter. Andy says the worse is yet to come for Obama.

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

?Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct?

ANDY MARTIN ON THE REZKO TRIAL: THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING

MARTIN?S PREDICTION ON THE OUTCOME: TONY COULD WALK

CHICAGO?S RESIDENT EXPERT ON FEDERAL COURTS, ANDY MARTIN PROVIDES NEW INSIGHTS AS PART OF HIS TWO YEARS OF CONTINUING COVERAGE ON THE REZKO-OBAMA CONNECTION.

MARTIN SLAPS CHICAGO?S MEDIA FOR SELLING AMERICA A ?PIG-IN-A-POKE? PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

(CHICAGO)(March 7, 2008) We had scheduled a pure ?Obama? column for today, but it will have to wait a day. People want to know where I stand on the Rezko trial. Rezko, of course, was Senator Barack Obama?s long-time friend, promoter and financier.

Obama may have to invoke Shakespeare?s Macbeth as the Rezko parade proceeds, ?Out damned spot! Out I say.? But the Rezko spot is not going away. Tony Rezko was an integral part of Barack Obama?s rise to power over the past two decades in Chicago politics.

Obama may want to pretend Rezko was a nothingburger, with a ?who me?? shrug. The only answer, ?Yah, you.?

First, a couple of ?caveats,? or legalese for ?warnings.? I have not been in court during the Rezko proceedings, and I have never met any of the participants. I don?t believe I have ever spoken to anyone involved in the trial.

Second, you must forgive me the temptation to say ?I told you so.? I have been screaming about the extent and depth of the Obama-Rezko connection since November, 2006. A long time. No one cared. No one believed. No one outside the case knew the true extent and expanse of the relationship, except me.

Now, slowly, the truth is coming to the surface. And truth is often not a pretty sight in Chicago politics. Over the past couple of months we have been providing special insight into the progress of Rezko?s federal case and, again, no one was noticing. But it?s all there on my net postings to see.

I have been involved in the federal court at 219 S. Dearborn for thirty-nine years (no, I?m not that old, but Jack Benny would approve, at least in my 39th year). I know how federal courts and federal prosecutors and federal judges operate. They want to win, and they will do virtually anything to win. Some judges let prosecutors get away with it.

With those caveats, here are my observations. I must also stress that these are my conclusions after the first day of trial. As the case unfolds my views could, obviously, change.

First, I think the federal government has a weak case against Antoin ?Tony? Rezko.

Governor Rod Blagojevich is the obvious target of the proceedings, the invisible Great White Whale in the courtroom. But I sense something happened. For some reason, the case broke too soon.

I was stunned by the tepid way the prosecutors opened. In any solid prosecution, a prosecutor wants to wake up the jury and sound the alarm. THIS IS A BAD, BAD, MAN! The government?s opening witnesses in Rezko?s case were pedestrian, almost subdued. The FBI agent?s testimony was peripheral.

Some of my columns on the pre-trial prosecutorial corruption and abuse fall can now be understood in context. I wrote that Rezko was thrown in jail before trial on trumped up allegations. Borrowing money to pay your lawyers is not, after all, a crime. It is hardly evidence of an intent to cut and run (earlier columns have addressed these shenanigans, see links below).

And so the federal government, facing a weak case and uncertain evidence, as well as a highly unstable key witness, decided to torture Tony Rezko to soften him up for trial. They asked the judge to jail him before trial, and locked him in a dungeon, 23 hours a day, and degraded him in every way possible, to the point of even denying him a belt for his pants in court, all ?for his own protection.?

Hey, it's the American way. Wherever we go in the world, we take our torture and our prisons with us. It sad, but true. Abu Ghraib was not an aberration. The people committing the abuses were as American as apple pie. Guantanamo? You don?t need to go there. Just look at Tony Rezko, on trial in Chicago and jailed 23 hours day to prevent him from preparing his defense. We will have to see if the prosecutors? dirty trick works. The whole idea of jailing Rezko was to smear and demean him, not because the government had a strong case but because prosecutors came to the realization they had a weak case, and wanted to punish Rezko before he was convicted of anything.

How did the defense open on Thursday? Just the way I predicted weeks ago. By playing the Obama card. The Obama card was played softly, but it was there in counsel?s opening statement. Rezko?s attorney linked Tony to Republicans and Democrats and, among them, to Mr. Obama himself. Obama promptly issued a press release saying ?this case is not about me.?

Indeed the case is very much about Mr. Obama.

The Chicago media have sold the nation the biggest pig-in-a-poke in recent political history. They have sold Obama as the great savior, the Teflon ?hope,? when Obama is merely just another glib Sammy Glick, who challenged the Chicago Democratic Machine until he got his own slice of the pie, and then quietly slept with Emil Jones and the other slimy machine hacks in The Party.

If there was such a tort (legal wrong) as journalistic malpractice, all of Chicago?s media should be put on trial and charged with defrauding the American people about Barack Obama. They wanted him to win, because he was a good story, and a great local story, and they engineered his ascent while fully aware of the cancer behind the curtain.

And so while Obama might claim the Rezko trial is not about him, and he is not actually a part of the scheme in which Rezko and Levine are charged, Rezko was linked to Obama in ways far deeper than Obama has yet admitted.

And that leads me to my second conclusion:

Obama?s links to Rezko will cut both ways. They may persuade some jurors that Rezko was merely a ?politician,? and vote not to convict him. Or they may decide Rezko?s sleaze tainted Obama, and convict anyway. Both prosecutors and defense counsel have to careful how they use and defend against the Obama connection. Prosecutors don?t want to appear to be smearing Obama in the midst of an election, even if that is what they end up having to do to win their case.

Because I know that prosecutors holding a weak hand will invariably try to bolster their case with irrelevant smears, I read the judge?s Rule 404 (b) order carefully. Nine single-spaced pages of rope-a-dope. The 404 (b) motion was an admission that prosecutors knew they had a case with big holes. Federal Rule of Evidence 404 (b) allows the admission of what is essentially ?smear? evidence, because the evidence is irrelevant to the real charges on trial. So 404 (b) allows parties to introduce evidence, with court approval, that ?links? the ?other acts? to the defendant in a criminal case.

It was clear from the prosecutors? 404 (b) claims that they need extraneous and extrinsic evidence to bolster their presentation. A 404 (b) motion is not a sign of prosecutorial confidence; it is evidence of prosecutorial concern.

When you combine the government?s desperate plea to the judge to admit smear evidence, together with the very tepid opening day of the trial, the Department of Justice has only one way to go: down.

Stuart Levine, the government?s key witness, is a prosecutor?s nightmare. Levin has apparently overdosed on drugs for decades. Some drugs I have never even heard of. Special K? Got me. I never heard of it before the Levine case.

In a drug prosecution you do expect druggies and dealers and lowlifes to testify against a defendant. Absolutely. Common sense leads a jury to accept the reality that lowlifes testify against lowlifes in drug prosecutions.

In a white collar case, a prosecutor wants squeaky clean witnesses, not drug addicts who arrived at the office each morning and starting ?using.? The jury is going to have a difficult time accepting Levine?s testimony as a basis to convict Rezko, never mind what Assistant U. S. Attorneys say.

At the end of the day, when jurors went home Thursday (I don?t believe they are sequestered even though there is secrecy about their identities) many of them must have asked, ?Is this all there is?? Clearly, the government did not put on a strong opening against Rezko.

Rezko could still be convicted. Innocent people are convicted of trumped up charges every day.

But Rezko has one ace to play against the government?s jokers. The State of Illinois itself. One of the ironies of the case is that Republicans are as dirty as Democrats. The evidence in Rezko?s case does not reflect a Democrat-thing or a Republican-thing. Both parties are all mired in the same thievery, corruption and conflicts of interest. Here in Illinois we call these bipartisan pirates ?the Combine.? Rezko?s defense will be he was engaging in routine Illinois politics, not criminal activity.

And although I am still somewhat confused by what money went where, and why, at the end of the day Rezko is going to appear to be acting as the agent of ?Public Official A,? i.e. Governor Blagojevich. Juries develop a collective sense of fairness. In a case where the government?s witnesses are sleazy and bargained for leniency, and where the ?big enchilada? is not a defendant sitting in the dock alongside his minions, juries have a harder time convicting the underlings. Which is why I feel Rezko could very well walk.

All of which brings me full-circle to where I started. Something tells me this case was ?brought before it?s time.? The case is not fully formed; the evidence is not as strong as it should be. Rezko is a big fish, but he is not the big fish.

Finally, if I may be indulged to repeat some comments I have previously made, the worst blow for Obama is that whichever way the numbers are crunched in the Rezko trial or outside the Rezko courtroom, it is now clear that Barack and Michelle Obama bought their ?dream home? in Kenwood with money indirectly provided by an Iraqi wheeler-dealer.

The ultimate twist of fate: Obama brags about opposing the war, then has his own home partially financed by someone who was, depending on whom you believe, a Saddam Hussein stooge or a Saddam victim. Either way, an Iraqi appears to have helped finance the purchase of the Obama ?compound? in Chicago. Yekkkh.

Obama?s defense will be (here it is!) ?I didn?t know.? But people are finally waking up to the fact that there are a lot of things Barack Obama ?doesn?t know? these days.

My colleague John Kass calls all of this corruption ?the Chicago Way.? Indeed it is. For myself, I am much more sympathetic to the victims of the national press who are finally beginning to see Obama?s puss ooze to the surface. To them I say, ?Welcome to Chicago. Welcome to the real Obama.? And, sadly, ?Welcome to Illinois.?

Public officials here still do things the old fashioned way. They steal. They lie. They take favors and give favors. They don?t ask no stinkin? questions about where the money is coming from in a complicated real estate transaction. And when they get caught, they say ?I don?t know.? Welcome to Barack Obama?s Chicago.

Chicago?s Mayor Richard Daley is the true master of the Chicago Way. Given how gullible the media are, maybe Daley, not Obama, should be running for president. At least people would be under no illusions about what they were getting in a candidate.

Welcome to Chicago. And, oh, ?Book?em Danno.?

-

Chicago-based Internet journalist, broadcaster and media critic Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. ? Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin covers regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He has been a candidate for U. S. Senator from Illinois. www.AndyforUSSenator.com. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Columns also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Comments? E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com. Media contact: (866) 706-2639.

From The Times Link to The Times UK
March 7, 2008

Boneheaded deal haunts house Obama built

James Bone in Chicago

Barack Obama's daughters used to frolic with the other children in the common garden at a gated condominium complex in the Hyde Park area of the South Side of Chicago.

Ann Gottfried, an IT specialist and neighbour whose child used to play with the Obama girls, says that once he was elected to the Senate in 2004, he decided to move out ? and up. ?He had security concerns. He had a growing family. He has two kids,? she said.

In 2005 the Obamas sold their ground-floor flat at 5450 South East View Park to a jazzman, Kurt Elling, for $415,000, property records show. They moved into a spacious mock-Georgian mansion about a mile away at 5046 South Greenwood Avenue. It was a deal that Mr Obama would come to regret.

Rather than purchase both the house and garden, the Obamas paid $1.65million for the mansion by itself. The garden was sold by the same seller on the same day to Rita Rezko, the wife of Mr Obama's longtime friend and fundraiser Antoin ?Tony? Rezko.

Mr Obama's presidential run and Mr Rezko's current trial for corruption have revived interest in the property deal tying the Democratic front-runner to a Syrian-born political fixer.

The candidate has called the transaction a ?boneheaded mistake? and donated $150,000 in campaign contributions linked to Mr Rezko to charity. The Obama campaign strongly denies that the Obamas received any discount in the transaction even though Mrs Rezko paid the full asking price of $625,000 for the garden, while the Obamas paid $300,000 below the asking price for the house.

But Mr Obama is coming under pressure to answer lingering questions about the property deal.The Chicago-Sun Times printed its phone number above an editorial headlined: ?Sen. Obama, time to call us about Rezko.? Its rival Chicago Tribune opined:?Rezko?s trial now is the background music to Obama?s campaign. And the volume will surely increase before it fades.?

The Obamas bought the mock Georgian mansion in a trust that concealed their identity behind the name Northern Trust No 10209. Bill Burton, Mr Obama's spokesman, told The Times that they did so for ?a measure of privacy? and said they were the only beneficiaries of the trust.

The sellers were Fredric Wondisford and his wife, Sally Radovick, both professors at the University of Chicago hospitals, where Michelle Obama served as head of external affairs. Mr Burton said that the sellers and the Obamas were not friends. Mr Burton insisted that Mr Wondisford and his wife had decided to split their property into two lots before the Obamas got involved in the deal.

?I don't recall exactly what our conversations were,? Mr Obama told the newspaper. ?I may have mentioned to him the name of [a developer and] he may at that point have contacted that person. I'm not clear about that.? Donna Schwan, the real estate agent who handled the sale, said that the Obamas only wanted the house, not the adjoining garden lot.

But the sellers insisted that the two pieces of property be sold at the same time. A copy of the sale contract shown to Bloomberg News disclosed that the Obamas submitted three bids: $1.3million on January 15, 2005; $1.5million on January 21; and $1.65million on January 23.

Ms Schwan says that she sold Mr Rezko his first condominium when he first moved to the Hyde Park area of Chicago. Court papers revealed that Mr Rezko sought to use his influence to get Ms Schwan an unpaid job on the Illinois Council on Developmental Disabilities in 2003 or 2004. She says that he might have done so because he knew of her work with disabled children.

Mr Obama said that it was ?already a stretch? to buy the house and his family could not afford the garden lot as well. The Obamas took a $1.32million mortgage from Northern Trust to help to pay for the house.

The Illinois senator's own financial disclosures suggest, however, that he was prospering at the time. He reported that in addition to his Senate salary he earned $378,239 in book royalties from Dystel & Goodrich and an $847,167 book advance from Random House in 2005.

?With the permission of the Ethics Committee in January 2005, a $1.9million advance against royalties was agreed to by the senator and Random House for writing 2 non-fiction books and 1 children's book ($200,000 of which is to be donated to charity),?

he wrote. ?In addition, with the permission of the Ethics Committee, a $370,000 advance against royalties ($40,000 of which had already been previously paid pursuant to the original publishing agreement) was agreed to for work published in 1994.?

Mr Burton said that it would be wrong to view Mr Obama as flush with cash. Mrs Rezko, by contrast, appeared to have very little money of her own with which to purchase the garden lot. The following year, she told a court that she got by on a salary of $37,000 and had $35,000 assets. Prosecutors said last week that Mr Rezko, despite leading an ?opulent lifestyle?, was deeply in debt. The following year he told a court that he had ?no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets, no unencumbered assets [and] is significantly in arrears on many of his obligations.?

In a January 2007 court hearing, Mr Rezko told the judge that he already knew he was under federal investigation in 2004 - long before the property transaction involving the Obamas. The Obama campaign said last week that the senator and Mr Rezko viewed the property together.An investigation by The Times determined that three weeks before Mrs Rezko's purchase of the garden lot, Mr Rezko received a $3.5million loan from the British-Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain's richest men. Mr Auchi, who was convicted of corruption in the Elf scandal in France in 2003, says that the money was a loan for Mr Rezko's pizzeria business in which he was a passive investor.

As well as putting cash down, Mrs Rezko also got a $500,000 mortgage for the garden lot from Mutual Bank of Harvey, Illinois. The Obamas' house is now guarded by Secret Service agents even when the couple are not at home. Mrs Rezko sold a 10ft strip of the garden to the Obamas for $104,500 in January 2006. In December 2006 she sold the remainder to Michael Sreenan, a lawyer for her husband's business, for $575,000.

The garden is now again up for sale for $995,000. It would be cheap at the price if it could make Mr Obama's headache property deal go away.

Comments:

If it sounds to good to be true it probably is to good to be true. Lets all be realistic. Using a little common sense should not be that difficult.

Penney, visalia, California

Obama is a dirty Chicago politician. Believing in your heart is not going to make it any different. This guy has risen really fast. Now watch him tank just as quickly.

Mawm, Durham, NC

sure, it is of course the Clinton's who have had the liberty to hide things. It isn't as if there were people ferociously digging into their backgrounds with federal funds and independent authority. It isn't as if they were local politicians making speeches about stuff they weren't fully briefed on.

Someone should tell the obamaites that "sauce of the goose is sauce for the gander" means that they too need to open and honest about their own past. How much of their shady history is out there and why isn't that being volunteered? I'd like to know about Michele's background with the UofC hospital her role in exorbitant drug prices found there and her connections to wal-mart. This resko thing sounds like a stinker, why not be open and upfront about it if you have nothing to hide? Stop hiding from the press and answer some questions (no 8 is not enough).

Ann, Chicago,

? Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.

Democratic Fund-Raiser?s Trial Starts in Illinois Link to The New York Times
By CATRIN EINHORN
The New York Times

CHICAGO ? A prosecutor on Thursday described Antoin Rezko, a businessman and political fund-raiser, as ?the man behind the curtain, pulling the strings? in an influence-peddling scheme to extort millions of dollars from companies that wanted to do business with the State of Illinois.

In her opening statements at a much anticipated trial here, the prosecutor, Carrie E. Hamilton, told how Mr. Rezko and Stuart Levine, a lawyer who was on two state boards, tried to use Mr. Levine?s positions and Mr. Rezko?s influence to obtain kickbacks.

Mr. Rezko?s lawyer, Joseph J. Duffy, told jurors that his client was the innocent victim of Mr. Levine, whom he painted as a devious drug addict who was using Mr. Rezko?s name just to make himself seem more powerful.

Mr. Duffy also accused Mr. Levine, who has pleaded guilty and is cooperating with the government, of lying about Mr. Rezko to lessen his own sentence.

The trial has attracted national attention because of Mr. Rezko?s relationship with Senator Barack Obama, who has not been accused of wrongdoing.

The trial will revolve around the administration of Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, a Democrat like Mr. Obama, who has promised to clean up corruption in the state. Mr. Blagojevich is not charged with wrongdoing in the case.

But Ms. Hamilton told the jury of the close relationship between Mr. Rezko and the governor. Mr. Rezko was one of his biggest fund-raisers, she said, and went on to become an adviser with access to the highest levels in Springfield, the state capital.

Mr. Rezko, the prosecutor said, used his influence to stack a state hospital board with members he chose.

Ms. Hamilton zeroed in on a spring evening in 2004, when Mr. Rezko and Mr. Levine had dinner at a members? only restaurant. The two, she said, agreed there on a plan to extort companies that sought business with a teachers? pension board.

?They sat down and they divvied up millions of dollars,? Ms. Hamilton, an assistant United States attorney, told the jury.

Mr. Duffy said Mr. Levine had lied about his relationship with Mr. Rezko to others involved in the plan, explaining why Mr. Levine spoke of him in telephone calls that the government recorded.

He hammered at Mr. Levine?s credibility, accusing him of abusing board positions to bankroll ?an extravagant lifestyle and two decades of drug abuse,? including cocaine and methamphetamines.

?The government in this case has embraced what will probably be the most corrupt individual you will ever see in your life,? Mr. Duffy said.

In legal documents related to the case against Mr. Rezko, the prosecution lays out a conversation in which Mr. Blagojevich is said to have welcomed the exchange of contracts and other government business for help with fund-raising.

Mr. Blagojevich denies wrongdoing.

?What was described there doesn?t describe me or how I do things,? he told reporters last month at an unrelated news conference.

Although Mr. Obama is expected to have just a tangential role in the trial, his name came up in opening statements, as Mr. Duffy listed politicians whom Mr. Rezko had supported. The lawyer said

The lawyer said Mr. Rezko became a friend of Mr. Obama and gave money to his campaigns.

Government filings have indicated that a $10,000 donation from an associate of Mr. Rezko to Mr. Obama?s Senate campaign in 2004 might have come from the money that Mr. Rezko is accused of extorting. There has been no suggestion that Mr. Obama knew anything about the source.

Mr. Rezko raised more than $150,000 in political donations for Mr. Obama. In 2005, his wife, Rita, bought an empty lot next to a house that the Obamas were buying, and Ms. Rezko later sold the Obamas a 10-foot-wide strip of the property. Mr. Obama has since called the purchase ?boneheaded? and has donated about $150,000 to charity.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Jurors in Rezko Case Hear From Both Sides Link to Washington Post
Lawyer Points to Alleged Co-Conspirator

By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 7, 2008; A03

CHICAGO, March 6 -- Antoin Rezko, a businessman best known as a political fundraiser for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), was too busy making money legally to join an elaborate scheme to cheat Illinois taxpayers and extort millions of dollars from financial firms, his attorney told a federal jury Thursday at the start of Chicago's latest high-profile political corruption trial.

The investigation that led to 24 counts of fraud, money laundering and attempted extortion is built upon the drug-addled imaginings of a con man and political fixer named Stuart Levine, lawyer Joseph Duffy said. He portrayed Rezko as a Syrian farmer's son "pursuing the American dream."

Rezko, a fundraiser for politicians from both parties, was a "somewhat idealistic" campaign supporter who backed candidates he believed in, Duffy said. He cited a handful of prominent Illinois politicians, including Obama, Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D) and former governor Jim Edgar (R). "Not one will come in here," Duffy told the jury, "and tell you he ever asked for anything."

The prosecution described Rezko, 52, as the central figure in an illegal pay-to-play scheme that depended on his role as a Blagojevich partisan in stacking government boards with loyalists. Rezko then plotted with Levine to shake down companies seeking state business, the government alleged.

"Defendant Rezko was the man behind the curtain pulling the strings," Assistant U.S. Attorney Carrie E. Hamilton said in summarizing a case that is expected to allege influence-peddling inside Blagojevich's administration. The two-term governor has not been charged with a crime.

Although Duffy mentioned Obama, saying Rezko "became a friend of Obama's and supported him in his campaigns," the Chicago-based Democratic presidential candidate is a footnote in this trial. There is no connection between Obama and the allegations.

The Obama campaign has returned about $150,000 in contributions made by Rezko, his relatives and his employees, as well as by guests at a fundraiser in his Wilmette, Ill., home. Obama has said that he made a "boneheaded" mistake when he bought a piece of property from Rezko's wife, Rita, in 2005. He said Rezko, who befriended rising political stars, never sought favors and the senator never offered any.

Thursday's opening statements provided a window into the complex charges against Rezko, whose bond was revoked in January when U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve feared that he might flee the country. The case hinges on a wiretap on Levine's telephone and testimony from insiders who are expected to say that Rezko and Levine rigged the permit process for a hospital, and showed that they could steer business to investment firms.

Levine sat on two state boards, including one that oversaw more than $20 billion in teacher retirement funds. In one case, the prosecution said, the pair found an agent willing to share his finder's fee in return for the steering of a $50 million pension fund investment to a private bidder. Rezko and Levine hid their participation, the prosecution said, by directing that a $250,000 payment meant for them go to a Rezko associate who had played no role in the deal.

In an episode that Hamilton called "a full-on shakedown," an executive at a company seeking to invest $220 million on behalf of the teacher retirement fund was allegedly told that he faced a choice: His firm could pay $2 million as a fake finder's fee or it could raise $1.5 million in Blagojevich contributions.

The executive threatened to expose the scheme, forcing Rezko and Levine to back down, Hamilton said.

Later, Hamilton said, Rezko and Levine met at a private club near the Chicago federal courthouse and schemed to share $7 million in payoffs. The FBI cornered Levine in May 2004, before the deals were consummated.

Duffy countered by portraying Rezko as the ambitious owner of two large restaurant chains and an aspiring real estate developer consumed with raising capital for a 62-acre real estate parcel near downtown Chicago. He said "first and foremost on Tony's mind was business, not politics."

Obama's Rezko Ties Escape National Radar Link to CBS News

Politico: Just-Underway Trial Of Obama's Former Fundraiser Evades Intense Media Coverage

CHICAGO, March 6, 2008

(The Politico) This story was written by Kenneth P. Vogel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Four lonesome television cameramen lounged on folding chairs, read newspapers and idly chatted on cell phones in the sprawling marble lobby of the federal courthouse here, hoping to catch the players in the just-underway trial of former Barack Obama fundraiser Antoin ?Tony? Rezko.

The scene was quite a contrast from the circus atmosphere they recalled in the same lobby during the early stages of two other recent high-profile trials -- those of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan and newspaper magnate Conrad Black. In each case, about three times as many TV cameramen jockeyed for position with sound men, photographers and reporters, with another media gaggle waiting outside. ?We were tripping all over each other,? one of the cameramen recalled Tuesday, the second day of jury selection in the Rezko trial.

There are a number of reasons why those cases might have garnered more attention than Rezko?s trial. Those defendants were marquee attractions, and Obama is playing only a bit role in this case. Still, his inability to knock out Hillary Rodham Clinton in Tuesday?s primaries will surely provide her campaign with more opportunities to call attention to Obama?s relationship with Rezko.

He has pleaded not guilty to charges he solicited campaign cash, including $10,000 for Obama?s 2004 Senate campaign, and bribes in exchange for help doing business with the state of Illinois. Though the trial likely will get more coverage if Obama?s name is invoked as expected, few following the case dispute that, so far at least, the media spotlight on Rezko?s case -- and his relationship with Obama -- has been less than white hot.

In some respects, though, the case is becoming something of a proxy for the intense media-bias battle being waged behind the scenes in Obama?s struggle with Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The trial comes as the national media are increasingly grappling with the question -- raised by everyone from Clinton to media critics and ?Saturday Night Live? comedians -- of whether Obama has gotten less press scrutiny.

Though Obama has not been implicated in any wrongdoing in the Rezko case, the trial could yield new details about his ties to the Chicago businessman and political fundraiser who also helped him buy a home. Fresh information about their relationship could trip up Obama in what has been a remarkably rapid ascent in national politics. Or Obama could hurdle it, as he has other controversies.

Much could depend on the tenor and intensity of the media coverage, which likely won?t become clear until opening arguments begin Thursday.

Obama professes to be unconcerned that the trial will reveal anything that could sully his carefully crafted image as a post-Abramoff-era crusader for ethics in government and politics. Still, his campaign sent an aide Monday to monitor the start of the trial.

Cameras and sound equipment aren?t allowed in the courtroom. And Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the aide was there to ?gather information because of all the media inquiries we?re getting.? But, he added, she ?won?t be there for the whole trial.?

Clinton?s campaign also intends to send someone to the courthouse to monitor the trial. And the Republican National Committee is closely following -- and publicizing -- the developments, as it girds for a potential general election showdown between Obama and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee-in-waiting.

As for the press, regulars at Chicago?s Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Courthouse said this week many more media descended on their beats to cover the jury selection proceedings for the trials of Ryan and Black.

Coverage of court proceedings for Ryan -- now in federal prison after his 2006 conviction on 18 corruption-relatedcounts, including taking bribes for state business and doling out campaign funds to relatives and to pay personal expenses -- filled Illinois papers and newscasts for more than two years. Black?s trial, which led to his conviction last year for bilking investors, was comprehensively chronicled by the press in Britain and Canada, where he owned papers.

Though Ryan and Black, also now in prison, had higher profiles than Rezko -- a real estate developer and fast-food franchise owner -- the collateral damage in Rezko?s case could be greater.

A major behind-the-scenes player in Illinois politics, Rezko raised cash for prominent Democrats including Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Obama, who also benefited from a 2005 land deal with Rezko?s wife that expanded the newly purchased $1.65 million Obama homestead in a way the senator?s family otherwise would not have been able to afford.

Obama?s campaign says it has donated to charity about $150,000 in contributions linked to Rezko. And Obama has repeatedly said he regrets the perception created by the real estate transaction, which he called ?a boneheaded move.?

That shouldn?t satisfy voters, say Clinton aides. In targeted telephone calls and open teleconferences, they have chastised national reporters, who, they charge, have failed to hold Obama accountable for his dealings with Rezko.

Howard Wolfson, the bulldog communications director for the New York senator?s campaign, challenged reporters in a Friday conference call to answer a list of questions about Obama?s ties to Rezko: What has the Obama campaign done to root out straw donations from Rezko? How many fundraisers has Rezko thrown for Obama? How much money did Rezko bundle for Obama?s campaigns? How many events did Obama attend on behalf of Rezko?

?As good as the press corps on this call is, I bet that most of you don?t know the answers to those questions,? Wolfson said. ?But I bet at some point, all Americans are going to know these answers to those questions if he?s our nominee.?

Wolfson asserted the Clinton campaign faced more scrutiny over -- and was also more proactive and forthcoming in dealing with -- its own troubled fundraiser, Norman Hsu (alternately pronounced ?soo? or ?shoe?), a fugitive convicted on grand theft charges years ago. The campaign gave to charity $23,000 contributed by Hsu and identified and returned more than $800,000 in contributions he bundled for Clinton.

?I can guarantee you that if the shoe were on the other foot, so to speak, no pun intended,? Wolfson said, ?I would have been getting those calls, those questions, left and right, and having to come up with answers that were satisfactory to a very serious and dogged press corps.?

In fact, a Nexis search of major world newspapers Tuesday yielded 2,568 hits for the words ?Clinton? and ?Hsu? versus only 426 for the words ?Obama? and ?Rezko.? Expanding the search to include all media outlets, the Clinton/Hsu query produced more than 3,000 hits, while Obama/Rezko turned up 1,741.

Early this week, about 20 reporters occupied the long wooden benches in the 12th-floor courtroom where U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve interviewed potential jurors for the Rezko trial. Another handful of reporters watched the proceedings via simulcast in a nearby courtroom. The New York Times, The L.A. Times and The Washington Post all had reporters in Chicago -- if not in the courtroom -- for recent write-ups of the Rezko case. And Chicago-based reporters for The Associated Press and Bloomberg have advanced the story at stages.

ABC, NBC and CNN had producers from their Chicago bureaus in the courtroom, but neither producers nor correspondents from their political or investigative units. CBS did not have anyone in the courtroom, but spokeswoman Sandra M. Genelius said, ?We are closely monitoring [the trial] and will cover it as news warrants.?

All were relying on local affiliates to provide video as necessary and said they expected to ramp up their coverage if the trial touched Obama in any meaningful way.

National Public Radio is dividing coverage duties between its Chicago-based reporter, Cheryl Corley, and Chicago Public Radio, according to NPR Washington editor Ron Elving.

?Local NPR stations generally do a lot with the legal travails of state officials, while national NPR generally does not,? he said. ?But the potential involvement of a presidential candidate is obviously another matter, and that?s why we have reported on this case on national programs as it progressed to trial and twice on the first day of the trial.?

The heavy lifting on the Rezko-Obama relationship has been done mostly by the Chicago media. However, the many column inches and broadcast minutes chronicling the complicated pay-to-play scheme involving Rezko -- but not Obama -- hasn?t gotten much traction outside the Windy City. Still, the Chicago press corps has doggedly pursued Obama for more information.

Obama bristled Monday after a campaign stop in San Antonio when a pack of Chicago reporters peppered him with questions about the land deal and Rezko?s fundraising activities and suggested he has been less than forthcoming with details on those matters.

?I don?t think it is fair to suggest somehow that we have been trying to hide the bone on this,? Obama told Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times.

?There have been several hundred stories written on this issue,? he said, asserting the only reason the story is on anyone?s radar is that the trial started and Clinton?s aides ?have decided to make this a theme the past couple days.?


By Kenneth P. Vogel
Copyright 2008 POLITICO

Rezko lawyer: Don't trust key witness Link to Sun-Times

March 6, 2008
BY CHRIS FUSCO AND NATASHA KORECKI Staff Reporters

Wilmette businessman Tony Rezko raised money for candidates in both political parties -- including Democratic Gov. Blagojevich, former GOP Gov. Jim Edgar and Illinois senator turned Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama -- but he never asked for anything in return, Rezko's lead defense counsel said this afternoon.

In his opening statement to jurors in Rezko's public corruption trial, Rezko lawyer Joseph Duffy described his client as a Syrian immigrant who lived the American dream. Blame for the criminal schemes in which Rezko stands charged should rest with Rezko's co-defendant, Stuart Levine, he said.
? Click to enlarge image
Attorneys for indicted former fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko admitted he raised money for candidates such as Democratic Gov. Blagojevich (left) and Illinois senator turned Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama (inset), but he never asked for anything in return.
(Courtesy/AP)


RELATED STORIES
Gov's name comes up in Rezko case Late juror delays start of Rezko trial Rezko confronts 1st witness today Eye on Rezko: Updates from our blog

Levine, Duffy added, has pleaded guilty and is cooperating with federal prosecutors to save himself and his reputation because of Levine's 20-year-plus drug habit.

"It was all Mr. Levine talking about Mr. Rezko," Duffy said. "Judge [Rezko] by what he said. Judge him by what he did.

"If you do, you will find Tony Rezko innocent of each of the charges in this case."

Rezko, 52, is accused of using his influence with the Blagojevich administration and conspiring with Levine to enrich himself, his associates and Blagojevich's campaign fund. Rezko's case has become an issue in the presidential race because of his ties to Obama, who is not accused of any wrongdoing and has tried to distance himself from Rezko since Rezko's October 2006 indictment.

How Obama is portrayed during Rezko's trial could fuel criticism from Obama rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, and -- should Obama win the Democratic nomination -- expected GOP presidential nominee John McCain. Clinton has raised questions about whether Obama has fully disclosed details about his relationship with Rezko, whose wife sold a strip of land to Obama adjoining Obama's Kenwood house at a time when Rezko was widely known to have been under federal investigation.

Duffy's mention of Obama today seemed to be in the context of telling Rezko's life story. Rezko's entry into politics, Duffy said, came when he raised money for the late Chicago Mayor Harold Washington. Rezko went on to meet Obama while recruiting Obama to come work for his real estate development company, Duffy told jurors.

Duffy also rattled off a list of fund-raisers and philanthropic events Rezko held or helped organize in 2003-04, when the government says the majority of Rezko's alleged wrongdoing had been taking place. Those activities included co-chairing a large fund-raiser for President Bush, a fund-raiser for Obama's U.S. Senate campaign and two fund-raisers for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis.

Duffy, however, noted that Rezko "asked nothing for himself" in exchange. And Rezko's political activities, he said, were secondary to his many business interests, including his development company, Rezmar, and fast-food chains.

Bill Burton, an Obama campaign spokesman, said of the mention of the senator in court today: "It is well established that the trial is not about Sen. Obama, nor was there any suggestion to the contrary today."

Duffy detailed Rezko's close relationship with Blagojevich but disputed prosecutors' assertion that it allowed Rezko to take "behind the scenes" control of two state-government boards that Rezko is alleged to have used to enrich himself and his associates. Levine, Duffy said, shouldn't be trusted when he testifies about those matters, in part because Levine's admitted drug use has clouded his memory.

All eyes will be on Rezko's ties to Blagojevich as the trial continues, but Obama remains a factor, too. Prosecutors could raise Obama's name because Rezko allegedly asked at least one person to make a "straw donation" to Obama's 2004 U.S. Senate run because Rezko had contributed the maximum amount to Obama under federal law.

Prosecutors didn't mention Obama in their opening statement. Obama has donated or plans to donate more than $150,000 in Rezko-related campaign contributions from his Senate run to charity.

From Chicago Sun-Times Link

Obama still owes answers on house deal
If he doesn't speak up, Rezko questions will 'go on forever'

March 6, 2008
BY MARK BROWN Sun-Times Columnist

Even I'm a little leery of writing another Barack Obama-Tony Rezko column at this point.

After Hillary Clinton's resurgence in Tuesday's primaries, the ins-and-outs of the odd real estate transaction involving Obama and Rezko hardly seems the issue on which the Democratic presidential nomination should swing, the missing answers certainly no more pertinent than the missing Clinton income tax returns.

But until we get all the answers, we won't really know, will we?

That's the part Obama doesn't seem to accept, otherwise he'd have known why my colleagues Carol Marin and Lynn Sweet were peppering him with Rezko questions the other day in Texas, which prompted the strange sight of Obama fleeing the news media.

"I don't think it's fair to suggest that we have been trying to hide the bone on this," Obama told reporters prior to his exit.

While I enjoyed the colorful turn of phrase, I have to admit that's exactly what we suspect Obama of trying to do.

From the start, he and his campaign have made it difficult for us.

The Tribune originally broke the Obama house story, and its reporters had the benefit of a face-to-face interview with the senator.

For the Sun-Times, Obama would only respond in writing to questions submitted by our reporters.
Going round and round

This had the effect of allowing his campaign to prepare precise, careful answers, but it also deprived us of the opportunity to ask logical follow-up questions and to press him for clarification. We've been going round and round ever since as our reporters developed their own stories on the Obama-Rezko relationship.

One such follow-up question just occurred to me the other day as I reread Obama's original submission, in which he was asked to explain why the previous owners had dropped their asking price on the house he purchased while Rezko paid full price for the adjoining lot.

"It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less," the senator wrote in November 2006.

I must have missed that at the time. Then why, I wonder, did the sellers accept the Rezkos' offer of $625,000 if it only matched the offer they already had on the table? Or was it no longer on the table?

On one hand, this might buttress the argument Rezko wasn't doing the Obamas a favor by making up for some deficiency in their bid, as many have suspected.

But it also could add to the evidence their respective bids were more closely coordinated than Obama has previously indicated.

It's always possible that the more we know about the transaction the better Obama will look.

One fact that seemed suspicious back on day one of the story -- both sales closing on the same day -- no longer seems as questionable when you look at it from the seller's viewpoint.
Pressure is going to keep building

We now know the undeveloped lot that Rezko purchased was in some demand from developers, while the house had drawn less interest. Under those circumstances, it's logical the sellers would condition the sale of the adjoining lot on having a buyer for the house, in case a potential house purchaser might lose interest if they couldn't control the whole parcel.

The previous owners have refused to talk to the press. You can understand they were just trying to sell their house and don't think they should be caught in the middle of this, but unfortunately, they are.

A couple of weeks ago, the Obama campaign tried to solve this problem by sharing with Bloomberg News some e-mails between the couple and the campaign that seemed to back Obama's story, but then they wouldn't give the same information to anybody else, part of this annoying "hide the bone" strategy.

The overarching questions are whether Rezko did Obama a favor and whether there was some financial benefit to the senator, and until we know all the details of the transaction -- and of Rezko's relationship with the senator -- we can't really say.

And so we keep poking and prodding.

Obama complained in Texas that "these requests can just go on forever."

That's true, but he may have noticed they keep going on this way, too, with the pressure constantly building for him to be more forthcoming.

That's the nature of a presidential campaign. Just because Obama made it past the first level of inquiry doesn't mean the questions will stop. If there's a loose thread, somebody will pull on it. If there's a sore spot, somebody will push on it.

The process only intensifies as he gets closer to his goal.

Did Rezko do Obama a favor, and was there some financial benefit to the senator?

Is Obama open to criticism?

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer 35 minutes ago

Sen. Barack Obama's refusal to wear an American flag lapel pin along with a photo of him not putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem led conservatives on Internet and in the media to question his patriotism.

Now Obama's wife, Michelle, has drawn their ire, too, for saying recently that she's really proud of her country for the first time in her adult life.

Conservative consultants say that combined, the cases could be an issue for Obama in the general election if he wins the nomination, especially as he runs against Vietnam war hero Sen. John McCain.

"The reason it hasn't been an issue so far is that we're still in the microcosm of the Democratic primary," said Republican consultant Roger Stone. "Many Americans will find the three things offensive. Barack Obama is out of the McGovern wing of the party, and he is part of the blame America first crowd."

Opponents of Sen. John Kerry proved in the 2004 election that voters are sensitive to suggestions that a candidate is not sufficiently patriotic. The Democratic presidential nominee's campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, even though he won multiple military honors and was lauded by his superiors.

The Swift Boat campaign started as a relatively small television ad buy that exploded into an issue that dogged Kerry for months. The Massachusetts senator has conceded since losing to President Bush that the campaign and his lackluster response to unsubstantiated allegations he considered unworthy of a reaction likely cost him the election. And the term even became part of the campaign lexicon ? swift boating.

Obama already is the subject of a shadowy smear campaign based on the Internet that falsely suggests he's a Muslim intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a Christian and has been fighting the e-mail hoax, which also claims he doesn't put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance, and he's been trying to correct the misinformation.

"Whenever I'm in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," Obama frequently tells voters.

"I've been going to the same church for 20 years, praising Jesus," he adds.

Retired Major General Scott Gration, an Obama military adviser, said he expects the attacks will only increase if Obama wins the Democratic nomination.

"People are projecting things and taking things out of context," Gration said. "There's absolutely no question in my mind that Michelle and Barack are extremely patriotic, appreciate our freedoms and our values and everything else that the flag represents."

Officials with the McCain campaign and the Republican Party say they won't be suggesting Obama is less than patriotic, and instead plan to focus their criticisms on his record and inexperience if he wins the nomination. Well-funded outside groups, however, consider anything fair game.

Conservative Republican consultant Keith Appell, who worked with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, said Obama's opposition to the war will create a "striking contrast between McCain the war hero and Obama the poster child for the anti-war movement."

"If you are McCain, you want to play up the decorated war hero, loves his country, served his country," Appell said. "You want to play those themes up as much as possible, especially in comparison to Obama and his role in the anti-war movement."

On Monday, Michelle Obama told an audience in Milwaukee, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change."

Cindy McCain, McCain's wife, days later responded by saying, "I have, and always will be, proud of my country." Barack Obama has expressed frustration that his wife's remarks had been taken out of context and turned into political fodder ? both the Obamas say she was talking about politics in the United States, not the country itself.

Last summer, Obama was photographed by Time magazine at an event in Iowa standing with his hands folded during the national anthem. His primary rivals Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson appear beside him, with their hands on their hearts.

It has been repeatedly reported that the moment came during the Pledge of Allegiance, but that's not the case.

In October, Obama told Iowa television station KCRG that he decided to stop wearing a U.S. flag lapel pin during the run-up to the Iraq war because it had become "a substitute for, I think, true patriotism."

"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great and, hopefully, that will be a testimony to my patriotism," Obama said.

Obama's comments led conservatives and media commentators to question his patriotism.

"First he kicked his American flag pin to the curb. Now Barack Obama has a new round of patriotism problems. Wait until you hear what the White House hopeful didn't do during the singing of the national anthem," said Steve Doocy, co-host of "Fox and Friends" on the Fox News Channel.

"He felt it OK to come out of the closet as the domestic insurgent he is," former radio host Mark Williams said on Fox.

Gration said he had a copy of the national anthem photo e-mailed to him by a friend who didn't know the facts and questioned how a military man could support someone who doesn't honor the Pledge of Allegiance.

"I go to baseball games and football games and there's just a minority of us who put our hands over our heart. It's not an indication of patriotism," Gration said. Gration said he personally wears a flag pin, but "if I meet someone who doesn't have a lapel pin, it doesn't mean they are more or less patriotic than I am."

And, he added, "I don't think you can find Barack again not putting his hand over his heart at the national anthem."

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4111483

Obama's Connection With an Accused Political Fixer Raises Questions
By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ

Jan. 10, 2008?

In sharp contrast to his tough talk about ethics reform in government, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., approached a well-known Illinois political fixer under active federal investigation, Antoin "Tony" Rezko, for "advice" as he sought to find a way to buy a house shortly after being elected to the United States Senate.

The parcel included an adjacent lot which Obama told the Chicago Tribune he could not afford because "it was already a stretch to buy the house."

On the same day Obama closed on his house, Rezko's wife bought the adjacent empty lot, meeting the condition of the seller who wanted to sell both properties at the same time.

Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and "efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars."

This week, a federal judge in Chicago ordered the Rezko trial to begin Feb. 25.

Obama maintains his relationship with Rezko was "above board and legal" but has admitted bad judgment, calling his decision to involve Rezko "a bone-headed mistake."

Rezko's behind-the-scenes connection in the Obama house deal became public as Rezko revealed personal financial details as he sought to post bail.

While Rezko's wife paid the full asking price for the land, Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the house. The house sold for $1,650,000 and the price Rezko's wife paid for the land was $625,000.

Obama denies there was anything unusual about the price disparity. He says the price on the house was dropped because it had been on the market for some time but that the price for the adjacent land remained high because there was another offer.

Obama then expanded his property by buying a strip of the Rezko land for $104,5000, which the senator maintains was a fair market price.

Obama later told the Chicago Sun-Times, "It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe he had done me a favor."

Obama had known Rezko long before the house deal, calling him a "friend."

An ABC News review of campaign records shows Rezko, and people connected to him, contributed more than $120,000 to Obama's 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate, much of it at a time when Rezko was the target of an FBI investigation.

"It surprised me that late in the game he [Obama] continued to take contributions from somebody who was under a rather dark cloud in the state," said Cynthia Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, a group that has worked closely with Obama and supported his legislative efforts.

In the wake of the Rezko indictment, Obama says he has given $44,000 of the Rezko-connected money to charity.

There is no mention of Obama in the Rezko indictment. Federal authorities say the investigation is focused on Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, identified in court filings as Public Figure A.

Copyright ? 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/28/rezko.arrest/index.html

CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) -- Indicted real estate developer and political fundraiser Tony Rezko, whose links to Sen. Barack Obama have brought his name into the national spotlight, was arrested Monday morning, an FBI spokesman said.

Rezko was taken into custody by the FBI at his Wilmette, Illinois, home just outside Chicago following a government motion to revoke his bond, said FBI spokesman Tom Simon.

Rezko -- whom Sen. Hillary Clinton referred to in a debate as having run a "slum landlord business" -- has pleaded not guilty to federal charges of conspiracy, influence peddling and demanding kickbacks from companies seeking Illinois state business.

Obama, speaking Sunday to ABC's "This Week," described Rezko as "a friend of mine, a supporter, who I've known for 20 years."

Rezko has contributed to the campaigns of numerous Democrats, including Obama -- though the Illinois senator has vowed to give up all funds connected to Rezko.

Obama has already given to charity more than $80,000 in campaign contributions linked to Rezko.

When asked about news reports suggesting he may have received more money than that connected to Rezko, Obama said, "What we've done is we've traced any funds that we know of that we think were connected to him. And if there any other funds that were connected to him that we're not aware of, then we will certainly return them. It's in our interest to do so."

Obama said in a debate that as an attorney he did just about five hours of work for a Rezko project. Obama has not been accused of any legal wrongdoing.

"I did make a mistake by purchasing a small strip of property from him, at a time where, at that point, he was under the cloud of a potential investigation," Obama told ABC Sunday.

Shortly after his election to the U.S. Senate, Obama bought a house for $300,000 below the asking price. The same day, Rezko's wife bought the lot next door for full price. Months later, Obama bought a sliver of the Rezko land to expand his yard.

As a state senator, Obama wrote letters supporting some Rezko deals.

Obama told ABC Sunday he has "provided all the information that's out there" about his involvement with Rezko.

CNN's Drew Griffin contributed to this report.

Quote:

Actually, that vacant corner lot (the large chromium site in the study) east of the Boys & Girls Club is part of Liberty Harbor North. Gull's Cove is south of that site and was not included in the study at all.

Currently they are selling parcels a few blocks west from that site which were included in the study. That's probably why there is no deed notice perhaps not directly on the site.

Interesting

I wouldn't be concerned with brownfield status originating from spill from underground gas storage tank but chromium???

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/chromi ... rveillance-appendices.pdf

Basically, the whole section of Grand St that is being built is included in that report, including the Sales Office and Medical Center.

Very expensive considering location and brownfield status. Exterior and appliances are nice but layout is so so.

The sales pitches are pretty similar to a car dealer. Lots of pressures but very crude not sophisticated. That also reminds me of Liberty Terrace but Judi was very honest and upfront so I respect her.

don't forget to include crapkins

Quote:

And what exactly do you need, RabbitX2??

Never mind, no need to explain ...

As far as I can see, Sonia always has her own agenda that is to fight against whatever Councilman Fulop has in his agenda. Perhaps she is planning to run for an office and trying to build her own base from getting involved in different issues.

What interest does she have on this parking issue? She just manipulated a poor old guy for getting involved in this situation.

Looking at her discussion board, she appears to be very manipulating and unstable person. Appears like an adult with the mind of a 10 year old. She thinks she represents a group of people as if she were an elected official while in fact she is just a self-centered self-proclaimed 'leader' wannabe. What makes it worse is to see how brainwashed all the people on her message board are.

Keep up the good work, Mr. Fulop!! Fulop for Mayor!!