UPI baselessly asserted that Obama paid "substantially lower than market value" for Rezko property
SUMMARY: United Press International reported that Barack Obama "closed a real estate deal in 2005 with [indicted businessman Antoin] Rezko's wife while the families lived next to each other," and "paid Rezko's wife a price substantially lower than market value for an adjoining parcel." In fact, Obama purchased the land from Rezko in January 2006 (not 2005, as UPI reported), he paid substantially more than what an Obama spokesman reportedly said was the land's appraised value, and the Rezkos sold the remainder of the vacant lot before developing it and thus never "lived next to" Obama.
A January 24 United Press International article reported that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) "closed a real estate deal in 2005 with [indicted businessman Antoin] Rezko's wife while the families lived next to each other," and "paid Rezko's wife a price substantially lower than market value for an adjoining parcel." The article provided no support for the assertion. In fact, Obama purchased the land from Rezko in January 2006 (not 2005, as UPI reported), and he paid $104,500 -- substantially more than what an Obama spokesman reportedly said was the land's appraised value. Obama purchased one-sixth of the lot adjoining his own property that the Rezkos had purchased in 2005 for $625,000. The Washington Post reported on December 17, 2006, that an Obama spokesman said the strip of land Obama purchased from Rezko had been appraised at $40,500, "but Obama considered it fair to pay one-sixth of the original price for one-sixth of the lot."
Moreover, the Obamas and the Rezkos did not "live[] next to each other." As the Chicago Tribune reported on November 1, 2006, the Rezko's property was a "vacant lot" next to the Obamas' house "which once was the estate's lush side yard." The Chicago Sun-Times reported on February 24, 2007, that the Rezkos had sold the remainder of the lot in late 2006 to one of their attorneys, who "plan[ned] to build a six-unit condominium building south of Obama's house."
From the January 24 UPI article:
Obama, now the junior senator from Illinois, and Rezko met in 1990. Rezko offered Obama a job, which he turned down.
The Sun-Times said in 1993 Obama joined a Chicago law firm, Davis Miner Barhnill, which counted a low-income housing developer affiliated with Rezko among its clients.
Rezko in 1995 contributed $2,000 to Obama's bid for the Illinois state Senate and hosted a "lavish fundraiser" for Obama's 2003 campaign for the U.S. Senate, the Sun-Times said.
Obama closed a real estate deal in 2005 with Rezko's wife while the families lived next to each other. Obama paid Rezko's wife a price substantially lower than market value for an adjoining parcel.
From a December 17, 2006, Washington Post article:
When Obama and his wife, Michelle, a hospital executive, decided to move with their two young girls from their Hyde Park condominium, they chose a spacious three-story Georgian revival home on a tree-lined street in the Kenwood neighborhood, not far from the University of Chicago. The owner had listed the house -- nearly 100 years old, with four fireplaces and a wine cellar -- and an adjacent lot as separate parcels.
The Obamas purchased the house, which had been on the market for several months, for $300,000 below the list price. On the day they closed, Rezko's wife, Rita, closed on the 9,000-square-foot lot next door for the asking price of $625,000.
Obama said Rezko, who knows the neighborhood, was one of several people he called for advice on the real estate market. Rezko told him he knew the developer who renovated the house. In a later conversation, Rezko said he intended to buy the empty lot and build on it.
Later, the Obamas bought a 10-foot-by-150-foot piece of the lot for $104,500. An appraisal put the value of the strip at $40,500, a spokesman said, but Obama considered it fair to pay one-sixth of the original price for one-sixth of the lot.
"It wasn't something we needed to have," Obama said. "It was something I thought would be nice, if it worked economically for him."
1. Do we have an official record of what the land was appraised for, besides one of Obama's aids word on it?
2. Did Obama punch Rezko for selling the rest of the land to people looking to build condos?
1) Well, the info is in that Chicago Tribune link above, but no source is named in that article.
2) Perhaps in his mind. :-)
"In fact, Obama purchased the land from Rezko in January 2006 (not 2005, as UPI reported), and he paid $104,500 -- substantially more than what an Obama spokesman reportedly said was the land's appraised value."
Come on, MMFA.
I like you, but this is not evidence in favor of Obama!
"Obama spokesman reportedly said" is not evidence at all-- it's a second hand re-telling of a special pleading claim made by an Obama source.
Gimme a break!
Sure looks like a young Bill and Hillary.
http://thepage.time.com/2008/01/25/on-the-morning-shows-14/
Good point.
Be sure to read:
The Ideas Bill Forgot
By E. J. Dionne Jr.Friday, January 25, 2008; Page A19
As usual, E.J.Dionne nail it!
And Bob Somerby nails EJ Dionne:
"Fifteen years after the Whitewater hoaxings; fifteen years after the murder charges (later rerun on Hardball, of course); eight years after the war against Clinton’s vice president (the one who’s now honored all over the world); after a full year of rank gender-trashing; E. J. finally notes a few facts about “certain parts” of his cohort! Finally! “The press is tougher on Hillary Clinton than it is on Barack Obama,” he finally tells us; “the old, irrational Clinton hatred is alive and well in certain parts of the media.” "
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
Excellent article. Bill and Hill want a win at any costs. There going to end up regretting this when they reach the point of ticking off a substantial portion of the Democratic constituency and the Independents that they MUST HAVE to win, because Republicans aren’t voting for a Clinton. If they don't change their own wayward trajectory they're going to have a long time to sit at home and watch President McCain on the tube thinking about what they did wrong. They’re playing a dangerous game. This election is Bill and Hill’s to F-up.
You guys give the Clintons way too much credit.
Besides, Bill C.'s attacks on the Press sound like they come right from some of MMFA's articles.
I'm glad someone is rebutting these guys, besides MMFA.
A photograph of Antoin Rezko, an indicted Chicago businessman, standing between Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton, which surfaced on NBC’s “Today” show on Friday, might have been taken at a 1997 fund-raiser in Chicago for former United States Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, political insiders say.
Mr. Rezko, who was once a major fund-raiser for Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton’s top rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, has never donated money to either President Clinton or Mrs. Clinton, records show.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/the-rezko-clinton-connection/
Yeah, Athiest - And I can’t understand how ANYTHING gets done in Washington when it seems that all politicians do nowadays is spend their time fighting off baseless scurrilous charges. It seems that every day I find myself shaking my head and thinking, “Why would anyone want to be a politician?”
Sure – he wants his wife to get on with the real issues, but instead it’s some new personal squabble each day. The media seems to be playing it for all it’s worth just so they can get the 10 second sound bites as commercials for their news blips. For example, in the last Democratic debate – the questions asked spurned the friction, and it was probably done intentionally.
Last night’s Republican debate really made the Dems look bad. The right questions were asked and some interesting and enlightening answers were given. This is the kind of thing that can happen when candidates aren’t so damn busy slinging mud at each other!
It's much easier to be objective when you haven't yet decided on "your" candidate. All I know is mine won't be a Republican, hehe.
I admire your zeal though!:)
Clinton is taking on the media for their stupidity. I love it. Somebody should.
If Hillary wins the nomination, expect more of this-- and it will work! People hate the MSM and reporters in general. The more they attack the Clintons, the bigger the backlash will be.
Do you think that Republican management has had any negative effect on the economy? Have you actually looked at the economy under Democratic administrations compared to Republican administrations? For example, George Bush has borrowed more money from foreign governments than all our previous presidents COMBINED, and you think that our economic problems are due to anticipating a Democratic president?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801240005#comments_bottom_nav
How has Bill sliced and diced? SPECIFICALLY, where has he been wrong?
You Obama supporters are lightweights-- any criticism of Obama-- any strong campaigning against him at all-- is seen as a moral outrage. Gimme a break.
What do you think the Repubs and the MSM would do to him in November? Talk about a vegematic....
You Obama supporters are lightweights-- any criticism of Obama-- any strong campaigning against him at all-- is seen as a moral outrage. Gimme a break.
GROW UP!!!!!
WE are all DEMOCRATS!!!!!! There is no need to sling mud to your fellow Democratic. You wonder how Republicans do it? You should have watched the debate last night. WHAT makes your opponent and his supporters want to vote for Hillary after all the lies and mudslinging? NOTHING!!!!!!!
Agreed Lynn. If Hillary hadn't brought this up it would be a non-issue. Now the prom picture shows up and of course Hill & Bill start popping chaff as fast as they can.
They never know WHERE that money comes from!
A photograph of Antoin Rezko, an indicted Chicago businessman, standing between Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton, which surfaced on NBC’s “Today” show on Friday, might have been taken at a 1997 fund-raiser in Chicago for former United States Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, political insiders say.
Mr. Rezko, who was once a major fund-raiser for Senator Barack Obama, Mrs. Clinton’s top rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, has never donated money to either President Clinton or Mrs. Clinton, records show.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/the-rezko-clinton-connection/Ok, who here believes Obama paid $140k for a piece of land worth $40k because an unnamed spokesman said Obama thought that was fair.
Are all of Obama's spokespersons certified real estate appraisers?
This is the best article I've read on this subject, it epresses my exact sentiment. Bill started "helping" his wife and the tone of the debate went to hell:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-guttman/bill-clinton-take-a-vaca_b_83311.html
That's right, the "tone" with Obama in the race should have stayed deferential.
I forgot-- he's our moral compass.
I have my own moral compass because I'm a thinking adult and I set the rules that I will follow not Obama, not Edwards, not Bill Clinton and most of all not some annonymous poster talking shit and being obnoxious in a chat room. All I know is from this point on nobody and I do mean nobody can take my vote for granted. So if someone violates the rules of behavior I have set for a candidate I'm not voting for them, and it wouldn't matter to me if a candidate I previously supported encouraged me to support a candidate. I have a line that can't be crossed and it's a line that I draw, nobody else. Now so far the line hasn't been breeched but if it is I will withhold my vote because it is mine and it has to be earned by meeting MY standards, not Obama's and certainly not yours baby.And I for one don't care how you feel about Obama or Nader supporters.
Lynn, he's a young and simply clueless one who is caught up in the hype of a election. He obviously does not understand the difference between a primary and a general election.
There is a reason for the saying "Knowledge is the Key". He needs not only a history lesson but a political science lesson as well.
You all are ignoring the real import of the story. Obama himself has said this real estate deal was a really bad idea. And that is an understatement.
The implication of the whole deal is that Rezko bought the adjoining lot so Obama could get $300,000 off on the house. That is how UPI got the less than market value info, they just got the facts scrambled. I believe Rezko was under indictment at the time or about to be. Obama must by that time have known what a shady character he is. He was leaving people living in his buildings in deplorable condition. Rezko had given Obama a lot of money, much from kickbacks, over the years and there are many things Obama would have been able to do for him. Obama has just now donated the money to charity, when the story began to break, though he has known the situation for some time.
UPI didn't get it right, but the real story isn't pretty, and not good for his saintly image.
It seems that no one can this Obama/Rezko land deal right, especially the national media, which does not want to touch it. CNN dismissed it yesterday as a simple land deal and besides, the Clinton's had their own land deal twenty years ago. It's not like that hasn't been investigated. The Chicago Sun Times has been on this story for over a year. They have never been able to get Obama to give them a personal interview. They chased him for five weeks back in '07 and were finally able to get him to agree to written Q&A, which the Sun Times described as being vague and incomplete. Obama has avoided them, but given various conflicting answers to others. He is going to be on ABC's This Week on Sunday. If he is asked then, I expect him to have another answer. The last one that he gave This Week was that it was just a "bone headed" mistake. What follows in a condensed version of the Sun Times findings to date. Obama and his wife found a house in Chicago that they wanted to purchase, their first home. What stood in their way was the requirement of the seller who owned the lot next door was that both properties be closed on at the same time. The seller wanted roughly $1.9 million for the house and $625,000 for the vacant lot. Obama, as the story goes, could not afford to buy both properties. What seems to have happened is that Obama went to his friend Rezko with his problem. The outcome was that Rezko would purchase the vacant lot at the same closing at which Obama would purchase the home. Obama has said that he mentioned the lot to Rezko, as he was a developer. The problem here is that Rezko was under Federal investigation/indictment. This fact was all over Chicago because Rezko had been so involved with the city in developing properties for it. As well he had been a contributor and fund raiser for Obama and others. Obama has claimed that he did not know of the indictment. So on the day of the closing, Rezko's wife shows up for the closing (remember, Rezko is under indictment - not a good idea for him to be there personally) with full payment of $625,000 for the vacant lot. Obama, on the other hand, receives a $300,000 discount on the home property, leaving roughly $1.6 million for him to pay. If I were asked to pay $625,000 for a lot in a what has been described by CNN as a "soft" real estate market, I would be asking for a discount. The question, which follows for me, is: did Obama and Rezko decide to move all of the potential discount to Obama's side of the purchase? The issue for me is not about the purchase of 10 feet of land (although one has to wonder why he would pay $56,000 more than it was worth. Would he have done so had the other purchaser been someone unknown to him?), but the manner by which Obama was able to purchase the home. To me, it raises serious questions about Obama's claim to political cleanliness. You will find in the Good Morning America archives a story by their investigative reporter, Brian Ross, in which he openly questions Obama's ethics because of this land deal. It is indeed strange to me that the piece has never appeared on the ABC evening news. All of this is at the Chicago Sun Times web site. They do not accuse Obama of anything illegal. But they do have questions, as we all should have if we are perhaps preparing to elect Mr. Obama to be our next president. What follows is an NPR interview aired on 1/23/08.
"Cindy Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform explains Rezko's place in Illinois politics.
'He's kind of been like a virus in our political culture, if you will, and he has given money to candidates on both sides of the aisle,' she says.
When Obama bought a mansion in Chicago's Hyde Park neighborhood in 2004, Rezko's wife bought the lots next door and then sold a portion of it to Obama to expand his yard.
It happened at a time when Rezko was under federal investigation — for his fundraising activities on behalf of Illinois Gov. Rob Blagojevich, and his role on a couple of state boards and commissions.
Though there are no allegations of wrong-doing by Obama, Canary says the relationship may hurt him.
'I think this will stand out in Sen. Obama's career as the date he wishes he'd never gone on,' she says.
Tony Rezko goes on trial Feb. 25, three weeks after much of the country votes in the Super Tuesday Democratic primaries."
Obma did pay a lower price for the property. This thas been researched aand the amounts printed in the Chicago newspapers for almost a year. All any reporter has to do is look it up.
Obama is my senator. I voted for him. But I will not support hiom again. He is a lightweight and a liar. He said he came into politics to raise the level of discourse. Ha! He has not experience and no balls to stand up to what the republicans will do to him. I can here him whining already.
If Obama is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for Nadar. I want no part of him again - ever.
my next button doesn't work.
anyway, we need to make the tax cuts permanent.
I trust MM FA will post the necessary update from trust able sources concerning the land value. So we won't have to rely on the MSM version. Strange how the article is about Barack Obama real estate dealings and the blog post end up bashing the Clintons. What good can become of such hatred, it almost seems personnel, sure glad some of you can get your hand on WMD. Seems like our current President had some shady business dealing too. But the liberal MSM choose not to cover those stories.
From the Chicago Sun-Times
'Boneheaded' deal in 2005
Since announcing his presidential bid, Obama has faced repeated questions about his 17-year relationship with Rezko, one of his earliest political contributors, who has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama.
Rezko backed Obama's election to the Illinois Senate in 1996, his successful re-election bids and his 2004 election to the U.S. Senate.
Two years ago, the two men were involved in a real estate deal that Obama later apologized for, calling it "boneheaded" and a "mistake" because the transaction occurred while Rezko was widely known to be under federal investigation. Rezko's wife paid full price for a vacant lot in Chicago's historic Kenwood district on the same day Obama bought the mansion next door from the same property owner for $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife subsequently sold a sliver of the land to Obama.
http://tinyurl.com/yswykx
My comment: $300,000 below the asking price?
So, in the interest of helping them out:
According to the Chicago Sun Times (which has been hunting Obama over this since 2006. Thus I wouldn't expect them to minimize the figures. The secret to cutting through bias is to know the agenda of who you are hearing/reading)...
Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent undeveloped lot.
Obama bought the 1/6 strip for $104,500...
625,000/6 = $104,167
So, if by substantially more the spokesman means like 300 bucks, then yeah. Keep in mind I do not have the actual appraisal document for the land ;). I wish the unnamed spokesman wouldn't try to do that mainly because if he just paid "fair market" that actually sounds less strange. And the numbers support that.
P.S.:
"Why would anyone do that"?
1) Desire to improve your lot. Many homeowners I'm sure know you are sometimes willing to pay more to make your home the way you want... and
2) Simply real estate math. Even though the FM value of that lot may be 104k, if your house has a small yard etc., adding to it can substantially boost the value of your home because buyers look at the "whole package". Theoretically, having that extra yard could boost the asking price more than 104k. The sum greater than the parts thing...
"I had an appraisal conducted by
Howard B. Richter & Associates on November 21, 2005."
The article is an interview with Sen. Obama. He's quite forthcoming, but the piece is by no means a puff piece. You can see it here:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article
Disclosure: Obama supporter. However, I don't feel you win for your candidate by trying to cover up stuff that isn't complimentary. You honestly deal with reality as it is... and I think the facts overall tend to be favorable to Sen. Obama.