Morris baselessly claimed Rezko sold Obama property "for an amount that was substantially below its apparent market value"
SUMMARY: On Your World, Dick Morris claimed that Antoin Rezko sold Sen. Barack Obama a strip of land "for an amount that was substantially below its apparent market value." However, according to documents posted on the Obama campaign website, Obama paid $104,166 for the piece of property -- well above its appraised value of $40,500.
On the June 4 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox News contributor Dick Morris claimed that Chicago businessman Antoin Rezko, convicted that day on federal corruption charges, sold Sen. Barack Obama a strip of land "for an amount that was substantially below its apparent market value." However, according to documents posted on the Obama campaign website, Obama paid $104,166 for the piece of property -- well above its appraised value of $40,500.
As Media Matters for America has noted, the property -- which is adjacent to Obama's house -- was purchased by Rezko's wife in June 2005 for $625,000, and the Obamas subsequently purchased one-sixth of the property. Obama told the Chicago Tribune in a March 14 interview how the price was determined: "[T]he appraisal did note that the other parcel, Rezko's remaining parcel, would be fully developable if he sold this to me. And so rather than pay the appraised price, I paid one-sixth of the cost of his property. He agreed to sell that 10-foot strip."
As reported by the Chicago Tribune, Rezko was convicted on June 4 on 16 counts of wire and mail fraud, money laundering, and aiding and abetting bribery. The Tribune also reported that the "criminal charges against Rezko had nothing to do with his connection to Obama."
From the June 4 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
NEIL CAVUTO (host): All right, we are just learning now that a Chicago jury has found Tony Rezko to be guilty on some counts of corruption and embezzlement. Tony Rezko is the business guy with connections to Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton tried to make a very big deal of that connection. Obama dismissing it, said he was a friend, nothing more. But right now, that's why this gets the attention it does because of the proximity to power to Barack Obama.
There are some 20-odd counts, 24 counts against Rezko. So the jury is going through one after the other right now, but guilty on a few of them. We were going to talk about Barack Obama and the VP situation with Dick Morris, but because this is late-breaking news, I want to switch gears and go to the star, Dick Morris.com, his read on this. What do you make?
MORRIS: Well, the basic vulnerability he has with Rezko is that that he bought this house and Rezko bought the adjacent property. And then he went to Rezko and he said, "Hey, I'd like to buy some of your property." And Rezko said, "Fine, I'll sell it to you." And he sold it to him for something -- for an amount that was substantially below its apparent market value. And the issue is, was that illegal? And --
CAVUTO: Or was he buying influence?
MORRIS: Yeah. And -- but there's a deeper issue here. Obama comes from the Chicago Democratic political machine. That is one of the most corrupt places on earth. And I think that what's going to happen now is a whole series of discussions about business dealings that relate to that machine and relate to Obama. Now, I don't have any advance information about that, and he may be honest as the day is long. But it's -- it'll be a surprise coming out of Chicago.
Ahhh..... Prostitute Toe Sucker Dick Morris (another fake journalist) knows this as fact and a judge and lawyers from both sides and all other parties involved were not smart enough to bring this up, if it were true?
It is exactly this kind of drivel that comes out of Morris' mouth that will only be found on......... FOX Noise!
And Rogerr Ailes is paying Morris a substantial sum, wau above market value for this bozo.
"Market value for this bozo" ... that would still be below minimum wage. :-)
Yet even more dishonesty from MM here. Here's why:
Even Obama himself has called this episode a "bone-headed mistake."
The "appraisal" line by MM is also tremendously misleading and dishonest. Properties are not often appraised for years, often decades. An appraisal means nothing unless it's current.
Not cool, MM. Not cool.
The fact that Obama might now think that the process was flawed has no bearing on the lies that Dick Morris is telling.
The details are all out there. There's no evidence of wrongdoing. If we bring this up every time Obama is mentioned, shouldn't we bring up the 'Keating Five' whenever we talk about McCain?
The answer is no, to both.
Isn't it possible, just POSSIBLE, that not ALL Chicago politicians are corrupt? DUH!
Now I am waiting for the right-wing sillies to come to the defense of Cavuto and his paramour, Richard Morris.
NO.
The lapdogs will wait for someone's comments on this topic to derail the thread.
To its credit I'm sure FOX will present an alternative explanation to Obama's purchase of the property allegedly for well below its true value...THAT OBAMA SWINDLED REZKO! ;>)
My favorite "prediction" of his was when Hurricane Katrina occurred, Morris predicted that Bush would master the disaster and "show how it is done." Why anyone listens to this guy about anything would be a mystery, but I guess his partisanship outweighs the fact that he is seldom correct (at least on Fox).
"His track record in predicting Hillary's movements (his supposed expertise on the Clintons has been his meal ticket for years) has been abysmal"
Exactly why you find Toe Sucker Morris on FOX...... and only FOX!
If Dickie Morris puts his foot in his mouth is that considered masterbation?
My question to you, Sir Dick, what is your take on Scott McClellan? Since you are an expert on being a snivelling, crybaby tell-all kind of guy and your books are the TRUTH, I would guess that you concur with Scottie and his book.
Hey, Little Dick, here is a prediction...Obama will be the next POTUS. Try and tiptoe away from that one.
Terrific summation of Prick, er, Dick Morris and his bottomless pit of knowledge. There are a couple of guys here in New Orleans who could rival "pundits" like Cavoto and Morris. One stands at the corner of Canal and Camp Streets yelling at cars. My favorite is the preacher with the multi-colored umbrella hat. He uses a mike and a loud sound system. He is actually Rev. Hagee's black cousin.
"That is one of the most corrupt places on earth". Right up there with Iran, Iraq, Fox New Headquarters and lest we forget, North Korea, the Evil country which was "appeased" by the Bushies.
Dick, Chicago is begging for you to visit and help them correct their problems. If you want to do something good for this nation other than talk, go to Chicago and walk the walk. As an aside, beware of the gentleman named Toeny "Big Toes" Antoenetti. Or do you have vacation plans to search for Big Foot?
Dick will go to any place where people where sandals. ;>)
Don't sweat it, Bro. I noticed that at the time you were posting that, I was just getting to bed. Long night (and day) on Frenchman Street.
what's interesting about this whole story is that, if true, it makes no sense really. if the rest of the rezko parcel would still be developable, absent the 10 foot strip, then i question the veracity of the appraisal. that strip should have appraised higher, unless there was some compelling reason to the contrary, and i've not heard of it yet.
bear in mind, this was long before the collapse of the housing market, but even chicago has minimum building code standards; removing a sixth of the lot would seem to make that parcel less, not more or the same, developable, as it was in whole, causing the remaining section to lose value. again, as a consequence, the strip should have appraised at a higher value, even above it's 1/6 allocable share of the purchase price.
this whole thing just doesn't pass the smell test. or it was poorly worded.
that strip should have appraised higher, unless there was some compelling reason to the contrary, and i've not heard of it yet.
Rest easy. The rules related to property appraisal are very explicit. The appraiser would have been required to follow one of two methods for arriving at the value. Perhaps he used the lower of the two and the 10 foot strip could have been valued higher. An increase factor of 2.5 based on actual sale price is extremely rare and is unlikely to increaase the appraised value of similar 10 foot strips in the area.
I have only barely followed this story but first guess is that the buyer offered more for one (or two) possible reasons.
@CPINVA: I don't understand your logic. A parcel of land upon which a home can be built clearly has one value. Now take a 10 foot strip from one side of that parcel - why would it have much, if any, value other than to (a.) The entity owning the remainder of that parcel; or (b.) the owner of the adjoining parcel. Because the marketability if so limited, it would not be possible to produce an unqualified appraisal of the 10 foot strip.
Let's say the respective owners decide on a price for that 10 foot strip. One-sixth of the total value of the original parcel seems quite fair to me. The owner of the remainder can still build on it - it's impossible to build on a 10 foot strip of land - and there would not be any other logical buyer. For what, a spaghetti farm?
simply put, if i'm giving up a part of a parcel, that makes the remainder that much less useful to me, especially in residential property, where the building codes are (supposedly) stricter. as a consequence, i would charge more for that part, by itself, because its loss reduces the value of the remainder by far more than its allocable basis.
any responsible appraiser will take this into account, when valuing a parcel of land. at least, they do in va. maybe IL is different.
Logic is logic - in Illinois or Virginia. The value of the land is obviously driven by the fact that one could build on it. Why do homes in the US go up in value (at least, when they do)? Not because of the home - that's an asset that depreciates. It's the land value that increases.
Just as long as the residual parcel is buildable, that's where the value will remain. Stripping off 10 feet from one side, as long as it doesn't change the fact that one could still build on the remainder, doesn't reduce the value by a proportionate amount.
Virginia and Illinois have very different title laws and procedures. Land is still valued the same way in both states (and the other 48, of course)!
Yeah. 100,000 < 40,000. That must be that special / fuzzy /whatever math that Republicans use.
I believe it was the Clinton campaign that brought this subject into the debate, not the republicans.
Better get used to it. Everything the Clintons used against Obama will be trotted out by those who want Obama defeated. This is only the beginning.
How much did the Clintons or Obama make in their real estate deals compared to Cheney's Haliburton profits, or the money GW has made all of his life from failed business deals?
How about Neal Bush's involvement in the S&L crisis or Prescott Bush's dealings with the Third Reich. McCain also has his baggage to carry from the Keating 5.
The point is that even if the Clintons and Obama profited from their deals, how many people were hurt because they profited?
I'm sure the answer if a lot fewer than those who've been hurt by the present regime's dealings.
Why are real estate deals (Obama's with Rezko, the Clintons with Whitewater) more important in the scheme of things than oil and weapons deals?
Simple. Those [real estate] deals were made by Deomacrats and Oil/Weapons deals are (generally) made by Republicans. That's the difference. End of story.
Why are you writing the GOP's advirtisments for them? ;)
SSSHHHH!!! DON'T GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!!!
(I mean... It's not like they have any anyway!)
Obama is on the cover with Reverend Wright, wearing a turbine
Now that's what I call spin!
WHIIIIRRR
Media Matters plays “gotcha” catching Dick Morris in an error, but ignores the basis of the controversy. The possible financial gain by Senator Obama from Rezko came at the purchase of the home, not the purchase of a portion of the adjacent lot five months later.
The seller of the home and adjacent vacant required both properties to be sold at the same time. Senator Obama purchased the home at $300,000 less than the asking price and Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent vacant land $382,000 greater than the appraised value of $243,000 (6 x $40,500). This gives the appearance that Rezko essentially paid for a portion of Senator Obama’s home.
Senator Obama’s purchase of 1/6th of the vacant land from Rezko a few months later at Rezko’s price would help to cover Senator Obama so he could claim he thought Rezko’s portion of the initial purchase was fair. The net benefit to Obama would still be about $230,000.