News Report From Chicago Where They Know Barack Obama & Tony Rezko Best

[anonymeme]

Run time: 03:43 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4R-RBNxr73s   Posted on YouTube: March 06, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: March 11, 2008 By DU Member: anonymeme Views on DU: 1523

 
All I ask is that you watch and listen to what this News reporter has to report about Barack Obama, and to read this quote from writer Larry Johnson:

"beyond the corrupt influence-peddling and Obama’s exploitation of the associations mentioned in the video for his own personal and political gain -- there were poor people in Chicago who did not get decent housing (as shown fairly graphically in the video) even though Rezko got millions in government monies for supposed rehabilitation.

So why didn’t it infuriate Obama? Why did he hang around Rezko, giving him a tour of his prospective new home and getting Rezko to buy the adjacent lot, knowing that this man misused millions and denied people decent housing – including heat in the winter?

How could Barack Obama bear to be in the same room with such a man who’d put his OWN consituents through hell? Let alone cook up a cozy home purchase with him since he couldn’t afford the home and lot on his own — when there were surely other wealthy patrons and friends who might have helped instead? Why choose the man who’s under active federal investigation? Does such a man have any morals?

In my book, such a man does not have morals and is only interested in the influences and monies that a 'fixer' like Rezko can bring him."

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/03/11/the-rezko-saga-two-videos/

[Skittles]

1. blind ambition

very common in politicians

[anonymeme]

6. blind ambition...

blind ambition... more common in their mesmerized followers, I believe.

[Skittles]

8. I believe the adulation has been unwarranted, yes

but somewhat understandable considering the desperate situation the country seems to be in

[anonymeme]

23. Well... Skittles... That's Why It's a Bad Idea...

Well... Skittles...

That's Why It's a Bad Idea If You've Been Starving To Go to the Buffet Table... and eat as much as you can of what looks best... you need to slow down, take a few breaths and approach the table slowly and cautiously...

Otherwise you could rupture your own stomach.

Sometimes people need what they really need more than they need what they think they want.

Understandable, yes... but I'm not letting the hunger and the SWOON pick my President if I can help it.

We really need Hillary, imho.

[ihavenobias]

25. Yes, we really "need" Hillary

to steal the election and destroy the party.

We "need" someone who is willing to go after PLEDGED delegates to win.

We "need" someone who uses fear mongering, Republican style commercials that Bill Clinton himself derided in the past when it was Republicans doing the fear mongering.

We "need" someone who is willing to employ an insanely short-sighted strategy of making her fellow Dem seem unqualified to be president while also boosting up her Republican opponent making it less likely that either Obama OR Hillary will win in November (especially since McCain already starting referencing the 3am ad on 60 minutes with much more to come).

Yes, that it clearly what we "need".

[Tellurian]

30. What we "need" is a candidate to beat the Republicans...Obama IS not it!

[ihavenobias]

33. I like how I bring up some different points

And you come back with that "argument".

[Tellurian]

38. Too bad, " we're just not that into you!"

Hillary is the best candidate against the Republicans, negatives and all!

[anonymeme]

47. TELL HIM, Tellurian! And Tell It Like It Is!

TELL HIM, Tellurian! And Tell It Like It Is!

Man, I Love Our Hillary-Peeps!

[Tellurian]

50. and I Love the people who LOVE Hillary peeps!

[anonymeme]

46. Face It, "ihavenobias," You DO in fact HAVE a Bias...

Face It, "ihavenobias," You DO in fact HAVE a Bias...

So do I but I have the honesty to admit it!

See, I may be playful at times, but I'm not really here to play.

This is my life and future generations I'm working for.

I am here to inject the meme that will hopefully protect us from the BHO virus, and bring people out of -- and save them from -- the deadly blindness-inducing SWOON.

[Skittles]

48. Oh I know the adulation is a bad idea

I find it extremely disconcerting that people just suck up to this guy and seem to have NO RESERVATIONS - it is very disturbing. Hillary - well, her stance on the war and TATA just bother me no end. Overall I am quite disgusted with our choices.

[liberal1973]

2. This seems like a video posted

by a right-wing person.

[anonymeme]

4. liberal1973, Never. Not The Longest Day I Ever Live...

liberal1973, Never. Not The Longest Day I Ever Live... Will I Ever Be a "right-wing" Person.

And since when does seeking Truth qualify someone for membership in the Right-Wingers Club?!

I thought Truth and decency were OUR province, the province of the Left-Wing.

It's a NEWS report.

But I can immediately post 3 more videos on the subject from different sources and types of sources -- of course I'm not sure what the rules of hogging video space are in here!

[liberal1973]

39. I will support the Democratic nominee

I haven't given funds to any candidate. Just the DNC. I fully support Howard Dean.

[Up2Late]

3. You must have missed the memo on Obama's double standards...

...it reads, "It's O.K. when Obama does it, because he's dreamy.":crazy: :silly: :sarcasm:

[anonymeme]

5. Up2Late...

Up2Late... Dreamy? :spray: <~*spit-take*

Did somebody mention the word "blind?" *L*

The man is plain goofy-looking!

And like Larry Johnson says, no quarter for Obama or anyone else!

[zabet]

7. Typical politician...

something he claims
not to be.

:puke:

[lapfog_1]

9. OK, I watched it. What facts are in this that prove any

unethical conduct by Obama? Absolutely nothing.

It says that Rezko was involved in housing projects in Chicago. It says that 11 of the buildings were in (then) State Senator Obama's district. It doesn't say AT THE TIME the buildings were run down or mismanaged. It doesn't say AT THE TIME residents of those housing units complained to Obama about it. Then the report talks about the house that Obama purchased and the lot next to it purchased by Rezko's wife... it says that Rezko was "under indictment" (not convicted of anything)... and it DOESN'T say that Obama KNEW Rezko was under indictment. Furthermore, it doesn't say what, if anything, the land purchase at the time of the Obama house purchase, did for Obama. After that, it snarks about how Obama didn't want to take questions. Boo hoo.

About the land deal... here is the most likely scenario.

Obama wants to buy the house that's for sale. On his and Michelle's income, they can swing the house. The seller has the house AND the lot next to it for sale... and would rather sell them together. Obama wants to buy both, but can't afford it. So he calls his friend Rezko (who is under indictment, but Obama doesn't know that) and asks him to buy the lot... probably with vague promises on both sides (Obama... "yeah, after Michelle and I get settled, we'd probably will buy that from you for what you paid plus a little" Rezko... "OK, I can swing it, no problem, and I won't sell it off or develop it for, what, 5 years?") Obama probably didn't even know that it was Rezko's wife that actually purchased it... and probably wouldn't care (except to ask his old friend "what's up with that?").

Later, when he found out that Rezko was under indictment... he figured out THAT'S why Rezko had his wife buy it. "oops, boneheaded move" (the bonehead part was not looking into it at the time of the house/land deal and finding out that Rezko was indicted... and then backing away from that).

Absolutely nothing illegal or even unethical. Hell, I'VE DONE THE SAME THING with long time friends of mine... and without looking into their recent activities. The only problem is that Rezko, somewhere along the line, decided to pocket the money from his "renovations" rather than spend it. Happens a lot in businesses (sadly)... someone starts out to do something, make a little money, work hard. Then these BIG checks start flowing through your hands and the money hits your accounts. Now you have this money (which you are supposed to spend and keep a little for yourself for managing it)... and it's tempting to spend it elsewhere or "hey, if I take that money that's not owed for ninety days and I buy some stocks... I can still sell the stocks in ninety and pocket the capital gains for myself and no one is the wiser!". So you do it. Something goes wrong and now you are behind but you say "no problem, I can cover it from the next check" only now your ass is in the crack. You can't ever catch up. And it's illegal... but like a lot of these types of crime, it takes years to track down and produce indictments... and you don't go around telling your friends because you are hoping that you can make this all go away somehow.

Obama? Absolutely nothing wrong, as far as I can tell. He would have to have said something like what they videotaped the Keating 7 saying on tape... or the Abscam corruption probe. I'm pretty sure that Obama would have tried to hide the whole thing a lot better if it had been something like "I'll buy that land you want if you vote on X for me" or similar. And the FBI would have had video and audio of the bribery. After all, Rezko was under indictment, you think he WOULDN'T have offered to wear a wire to entrap Obama if he thought it would either get him off or do something for him at trial and sentencing? You know he would have flipped on Obama if he even thought that Obama would fall for it. He would have tried. And if he had and Obama was corrupt... Rezko would be out of jail having already plead guilty and Obama would be thinking of starting over as something other than a politician and lawyer... just as soon as he gets out of jail. Had Obama been corruptible.

[anonymeme]

19. Shall We Go Point By Point lapfog?

Shall We Go Point By Point lapfog?

Re: "unethical conduct by Obama? Absolutely nothing."

How ethical or unethical Obama's conduct is, will prove itself out.

However, I have the same quesions about Obama's conduct that Larry Johnson does. Obama knew Rezko for at least 17 years, he knew this guy was getting $ MILLIONS for contracts to make those housing projects into habitable living quarters for poor families, and wasn't fulfilling his contracts -- which Obama helped him get, BTW, by writing him favorable letters to those making the decisions to award the contracts...

If that's not unethical conduct, it sure skates along the edge.

What about a decency factor, a humanity factor, from the standpoint of those things, how humane and decent IS Barack Obama?

Re: "It says that Rezko was involved in housing projects in Chicago. It says that 11 of the buildings were in (then) State Senator Obama's district. It doesn't say AT THE TIME the buildings were run down or mismanaged. It doesn't say AT THE TIME residents of those housing units complained to Obama about it."

Wow, you sound like a real humanitarian in the mold of Obama himself. I tell you what, why don't you research those items you questioned and I'll research them and we can compare notes.

Also, aaroh, did you SEE the dumps that were supposed to be homes in those pictures?!

Re: "Then the report talks about the house that Obama purchased and the lot next to it purchased by Rezko's wife... it says that Rezko was 'under indictment' (not convicted of anything)... and it DOESN'T say that Obama KNEW Rezko was under indictment."

Everyone in Chicago who could read a newspaper or watch a TV knew about Rezko's being under investigation, because the Chicago Tribune ran weekly stories on it and the local TV stations' broadcast news brought it out about as frequently.

There is NO WAY Obama could NOT have known about Rezko being investigated.

How can someone bean effective leader in government if they don't know that there is slum-sprawl in their own district and that one of their friends is ripping off the government and the people and is not only involved in all kinds of fraud, graft and corruption, but under indictment for it?!

Shouldn't' his powers of observation be better than that? Someone who wants to be President?

Re: "Furthermore, it doesn't say what, if anything, the land purchase at the time of the Obama house purchase, did for Obama."

It most certainly DID say how it helped Obama, he was able to get a $1.95 MILLION home for $1.65 MILLION which even if they had dropped the selling price by $300,000. He still could NOT have gotten it if Rezko's wife hadn't bought the adjoining lot and then sold part of it back to the Obamas.

Oh, and here's another little shady thing going on: The dealings were all in the names of Michelle Obama and Rezko's wife -- and that smells a lot like the menfolk trying to set things up the way they wanted them while letting the wives look like the active principles on these dealings, so if things got sticky, the two men could deny their parts in it.


Re: "After that, it snarks about how Obama didn't want to take questions. Boo hoo."

What's snarky about noting the guy wouldn't answer questions? Is it the Truth or isn't it?

Re: "About the land deal... here is the most likely scenario."

You want to run scenarios? You can run scenarios all day and all night. Go for the Truth. The Truth is Better.

Re: "Obama wants to buy the house that's for sale. On his and Michelle's income, they can swing the house. The seller has the house AND the lot next to it for sale... and would rather sell them together. Obama wants to buy both, but can't afford it. So he calls his friend Rezko (who is under indictment, but Obama doesn't know that"<~ Oh but he DOES know that Rezko is under investigation as I explained.

Re: This batch of hypothetical blather: "and asks him to buy the lot... probably with vague promises on both sides (Obama... `yeah, after Michelle and I get settled, we'd probably will buy that from you for what you paid plus a little` Rezko... `OK, I can swing it, no problem, and I won't sell it off or develop it for, what, 5 years?`) Obama probably didn't even know that it was Rezko's wife that actually purchased it... and probably wouldn't care (except to ask his old friend `what's up with that?`).Later, when he found out that Rezko was under indictment... he figured out THAT'S why Rezko had his wife buy it. 'oops, boneheaded move' (the bonehead part was not looking into it at the time of the house/land deal and finding out that Rezko was indicted... and then backing away from that).

Forget the scenarios! Forget the hypotheticals! You weren't there so don't put stuff in quotes that was never actually said, and don't be saying *if this, if that, if this, than that,* because there are a couple of expression that fit here: "If wishes were horses a poor man could ride," and, "if a frog had wings it wouldn't bump its butt when it hopped.


To be continued. I've been up all night writing and I need to take a break -- at least from this post at this minute.

[lapfog_1]

36. Again, you completely failed

your blind hatred of the man shows you for who you really are.

Obama isn't named as a witness in the Rezko trial, Obama isn't a target of the investigation.

Does ANYONE seriously believe that either a) Obama has such clout that he can squash the investigation? (if he did, then why didn't Spitzer do the same thing?) or b) they just decided that they couldn't get Rezko to flip on Obama so they didn't bother to ask... and instead let a major case of official corruption slip.

And under investigation is NOT THE same as indicted.

Hell, lots of people are under investigation. The Clintons were under investigation for years over White water... were they guilty of something, too? (using your standards) Obama wasn't even a target of the investigation...

But hey, Clintons are INNOCENT, but Obama is GUILTY (at least, in your tiny mind).

Try this one for size:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm

Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday.

The computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader.

The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account, Leo Melamed, a former chairman of the Merc who reviewed the records for the White House, said in an interview. He said the discrepancies in Clinton's records also could have been caused by human error.

[Windy]

24. Bottom line... the prosecutor does not find any wrongdoing on obama's part

He is NOT on the witness list for the trial which is public record and must be submitted BEFORE a trial begins and therefore he will not be called to testify.

There is NO there there!!!!!

Now on the other hand, lets talk about the Bank of America donation of 500,000 to the Clinton Library from an official with the company whose son was pardoned by Clinton. Lets talk about the UAE donated significant dollars to the Clinton Library...

And the list goes on.

Face it Clintonistas. There is nothing in Obama's closet!!!

[WDIM]

10. Now show us something on the People...

The Clintons associate with!. You find a lot more criminals with them. This is meaningless. If there was a whole list (like the clintons have) of these unsavory people associated with Obama you might be on to something. But one name! Its just one name.

[anonymeme]

21. WDIM, See Response #20...

WDIM, See Response #20... Same goes for you.

[madrchsod]

11. he`s just another crooked politician from chicago

that deserves to go to jail.the sooner he gets indicted the better off the democratic party is. we need to sweep the corruption from the partry..the governor new york,obama,and anyone else who`s hands are dirty.

[ihavenobias]

12. Jail? Crooked politician? Based on what proof?!

How biased can you get? Lumping him in with Spitzer? Unbelievable and sad. And even if this really did mean he was just another politician, does that not mean just another politician like Hillary?

The difference is still that he's a better speaker who inspires more people, that he was against the war from the start, that he's more interested in publicly funded campaigns and that he has better foreign policy.

Oh, and he's going to review each and every Bush signing statement.

[madrchsod]

14. i have all the proof i need

i have sources like larry johnson , "rezko watch" ,and many people here at du that have insider information about the rezko trial. michelle`s corruption is getting a pass but just wait-- she`s next--i expect the court to be issuing an indictment for her any day now. yes they will both be serving time while their children go to foster care...this is what happens when politicians are judged and convicted by the du kangaroo court of opinion.

[ihavenobias]

16. Kangaroo Court is right

Now I think you're being sarcastic, in which case I'm glad.

[Kittycat]

29. Okay - I guess you were joking, LOL.

It's just hard to wade through the sarcasm these days ;)

[Kittycat]

13. Then start with the Clintons.

Based on you methods that we convict based on lack of any evidence or proof - The clinton's are far more guilty.

[madrchsod]

15. no kittycat don`t.........

read post 14...:rofl:

[anonymeme]

17. That's a Tired Old Argument, KittyCat...

That's a Tired Old Argument, KittyCat... When at a loss for a Good and True defense, bring up the Clintons.

Usually, it's used on us Lefties by the Right-Wingers, so are some of us stooping that low as to use the tactics of the other side against our own?

[ihavenobias]

18. Hold on a second

When right-wingers do it, they're bringing up stuff Bill Clinton did in the 90's that is totally unrelated to the topic at hand.

That's not exactly the same thing as someone bringing up things Hillary Clinton may have been involved in (that are just as irrelevant or relevant depending on how you look at it) when she's fighting for the Dem nomination.

[anonymeme]

20. Decades Of Hounding Hillary Have Produced NO Malignant Dirt That Will Stick....

Decades Of Hounding Hillary Have Produced NO Malignant Dirt That Will Stick...

Obama the greenhorn has already blundered -- if not worse -- showing at best a very poor lack of judgement.

He's corrupt and it's gonna catch up with him.

Oh, and there's nothing you can show that Hillary has done comparable to Obama's missteps, or you'd be slapping it right up here with the documentation.

[ihavenobias]

22. This Rezko story is as irrelevant

as that Norman Hsu story, or whatever that guy's name was.

I didn't bother to ever talk about Norman (because it was a pointless story) and I have no interest in Rezko, unless I see some explosive headline (which I highly, highly doubt will happen).

In the meantime if we're talking about sleeze, we need look no further than Hillary's latest divisive and destructive campaign tactics that are indefensible (to anyone not desperately wanting Hillary to win the nomination) and quite Republican.

[anonymeme]

26. NO, It's NOT Irrelevant. Heavy Weight Distinctions Should Be Made in Your "Comparison."

NO, It's NOT Irrelevant. Heavy Weight Distinctions Should Be Made in Your "Comparison."

Obama has been friends with Rezko for at least 17 years. Hillary never really knew Hsu, other than a brief introduction and many, many sophisticated people were taken in by him. And you know that important people doing important jobs for the people who they were elected to work for, physically do not have the time to "vet" all the people who might ever give a contribution, BUT in 17 years, Obama should have been able to "vet" a friend.

[virtualobserver]

31. I've been surprised by my friends before

A friend that I have known for decades recently revealed to me that he couldn't vote for Obama because he was black. I didn't see that coming.

The funniest thing about the REZKO thing is that we've gone way past the fact that nobody believes in the old "innocent until proved guilty" thing anymore.

Now it's guilty because you know someone who has been indicted. You can't escape the fact that if anyone followed that logic, the Clintons would have been guilty many times over. After defending the Clintons for so many years myself, it disgusts me that Democrats would stoop to that kind of attack on Obama.

[anonymeme]

49. "I've been surprised by my friends before" So We Should Trust Your Judgment on a Candidate, Because?

"I've been surprised by my friends before" So We Should Trust Your Judgment on a Candidate, Because?

Yes, you know, actually the same thing upsets me about presumed guilt instead of innocence... But I'd be somewhat -- tho' only a tiny bit -- relieved from that if there were just even application of standards with that...

Oh... but then there's the old saw: If if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, odds are pretty good, it's a duck, you know?

[WDIM]

42. And the Rezko junk won't stick either. nt

[TomClash]

27. Do you know Larry Johnson used the same tactics against the Clintons?

And now he has joined forces with Hillary - for the time being. Johnson has his own long and sordid history.

It is now 2008 - those apartment buildings were supposed to be rehabbed 20 years ago. Were they rehabbed and then neglected? If Rezko was supposed to rehab the buildings but didn't, why hasn't the Chicago media been on this during the past 15-20 years? Or the Buildings Department? Or any number of other state and federal officials? We saw one building in the video. What about the other eight?

The Obamas paid fair market value for the home and fair market value for the strip of land they bought from Rezko. Rezko didn't get anything but land that was increasing in value. 35 witnesses are listed by the prosecution for Rezko's trial. You would think he would have flipped Obama long ago if he had incriminating evidence against him. But he hasn't. Why?

[ihavenobias]

28. Explain that to anonymeme n/t

[anonymeme]

43. Well, His Site or Column is Called "No Quarter" So Better He Give None to Anyone.

Well, His Site or Column is Called "No Quarter" So Better He Give None to Anyone.

And little anonymeme here, doesn't need to have these things explained.

Really, I get it.

I'm pro-truth and let the chips fall where they may...

So far they seem to have made a carpet Hillary can walk across without disturbing the crispy potato slices, grasshopper.

However, I do not believe, Barack Obama will fare so well... I guess we'll see.

[underpants]

32. What a complete POS report that was-first of all what does a State Senator have to do with Federal

rehab loans?

Nothing.

The rest is just inuendo and statement of timing coincidences.

I THOUGHT this might be something but it isn't. Oh and standing outside, where she knows damn well his car isn't going to stop, holding a microphone and waving "Senator OBAMA!" made her look quite foolish.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

34. Rezko is Obama's Jack Abrahoff & Kenny Boy combined

[tabatha]

35. What a load of BS.

[anonymeme]

44. Excellent Point There, ElsewheresDaughter...

Excellent Point There, ElsewheresDaughter...

Thank You for Getting a good and apt analogy in here.

Much appreciated. O8)

[mopinko]

37. the illinois legislature does not inspect buildings.

so, it would not be a state senator's job to buildings. that is the city of chicago's job.

[Yes We Did]

40. Do me a favor, if he gets indited, then you can bring this back up.

Until then, this is nothing. And MUCH less than all the PROVEN clinton scandals.

[WDIM]

41. Peter Paul

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QPxtv6kcn7s
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EVb1ioV010U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rTyhVQKI-UY

[anonymeme]

45. Peter Paul?! Oh, There's an Honest Reliable Source... NOT!

Peter Paul?! Oh, There's an Honest Reliable Source... NOT!

Okee-Dokee, Artichokee...

Guess We'll See Whose Allegations Prove Out.