The trial of Tony Rezko started this week in Chicago, prosecuted by our favorite bulldog US Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald. So, of course, it’s back in the news.
JohnKWilson over at DKos debunks the 10 most popular Obama/Rezko myths. Absolute required reading. I will include just two of the ten here:
Myth #3: Obama underpaid for his house in a deal with Rezko
Claim: Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote: “Rezko paid more than the asking price for the side lot, and Obama paid less than the asking price for the big house. It’s the Chicago way.” Kass claimed that Rezko was “Obama’s Real Estate Fairy” and this is “the story of the dream house the Obamas wanted and couldn’t quite afford and how the Rezkos helped.”
The truth: None of this is true. The seller decided to divide the lot in offering it for sale, not Obama or Rezko. Rezko had paid the list price for his lot, not an excessive amount (as the resale value later proved). The owner reportedly had already been offered $625,000 for the side lot, so Rezko didn’t offer any more money and there was no way Obama could have gotten a special deal this way. The only special arrangement Rezko provided was selling the two lots on the same day, which simplified matters for the seller. Obama paid $1.65 million for a house originally priced at $1.95 million. His was the higher of two bids for the main property. It’s not unusual at all in the Chicago real estate business to see a 15 percent price cut on an expensive house that’s been on the market for four months. Nor is it unusual that a vacant lot next door would sell to a condo developer without such a discount. In the Hyde Park market, there are a lot of upper-middle-class residents making six figures, but not very many millionaires (it’s not Lincoln Park or the Gold Coast). Therefore, a pricey mansion is very difficult to sell, while a $300,000 townhouse is very common.
So he paid the normal less-than-asking-price for the house; what about that yard???
Myth #5: Obama underpaid (or overpaid) for the slice of Rezko’s lot
Claim: John Kass declared: “Obama’s appraiser told him the fair market value of that slice was $40,500. Since that’s one-sixth of the Rezko side, it means Rezko paid $625,000 for property that was actually worth $243,000. That would make Rezko a complete fool. But he’s no fool.” Fox News Channel incorrectly reported that Rezko “sold half that lot to Obama for 1/3 its original value.”
The truth: The appraiser was clearly wrong (probably basing the low value on the fact that 1/6th of the lot was too small for any house, which would dramatically reduce its value standing alone). That’s why Obama decided to buy 1/6th of Rezko’s lot for 1/6th of what Rezko paid for it ($104,500). A year after the 10-foot-wide strip of land was sold to Obama, a Rezko business associate bought the rest of the lot for $575,000, resulting in a profit for the Rezkos of $54,000 from the two land sales. This sale proved that Obama paid fair market value for his portion of the land.
By the way, do you think the irony of accusing someone else of shady land dealings has hit home with the Clinton Campaign? Well, apparently not:
“When Sen. Obama was confronted with questions over whether he was ready to be commander in chief and steward of the economy, he chose not to address those questions, but to attack Sen. Clinton,” Wolfson said. “I for one do not believe that imitating Ken Starr is the way to win a Democratic primary election for president.”
So now her campaign has likened him to George W. Bush, Karl Rove, and Ken Starr. Man, she does not like Barack Hitler Stalin Hussein Osbama. Next week expect an apt comparison to him as the little boy in the first grade who used to push her down.
Back to Rezko. From DKos via Margie Burns, we relearn that old adage about glass houses and stones:
Since the name of Chicago defendant Antoin ‘Tony’ Rezko has come up in national debate, it seems fair to look at donations from other defendants in Chicago’s “Operation Board Games.”
Of the other five defendants, three have donated to the Clintons or to Clinton supporters, three have donated mostly to Republicans, and at least two have donated to Obama’s political opponents. None have donated to Obama.
Margie compiled the information from the publically available FEC data on opensecrets.org, and it’s well worth the read.
Meanwhile, Obama has given back all of the money that may have ever come within 10 feet of Tony Rezko, but Clinton is refusing to give back $170,000 from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment. In fact, IPA is involved a massive EEOC suit brought by 113 women who detailed shenanigans from comments to groping to sexual assault, at least one RICO suit, an addition 125 individual lawsuits, and the Illinois Attorney General’s office is investigating the company for fraud.
You would think the candidate that has been endorsed by the National Organization for Women (NOW) would give back the money from the contributor under federal sexual harassment indictment, especially after the lead attorney on the case says “This is probably the most egregious case of sex harassment that the Chicago district office has seen.”
