MotherJones Blog: Obama and Rezko: Any There There?

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

Obama and Rezko: Any There There?

In emails, on conference calls with reporters, on the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton and her aides have repeatedly raised the issue of Barack Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko, a developer now on trial on corruption charges. Clinton aides have said over and over that there are "unanswered questions" about this relationship and have encouraged reporters to dig, dig, dig (even though several reporters have already done so). Clinton referred to Rezko during the debates. Though Obama has been accused of no wrongdoing in the Rezko affair, he did--as he has acknowledged--screw up by getting into a personal real estate transaction with Rezko when the developer was under federal investigation.

For anyone wondering if there is any there there to the Rezko matter (as it concerns Obama), the Associated Press has put together a handy primer on Obama and Rezko. A few Q & As from the piece:

Q: What is his relationship to Obama?

A: He's been friendly with Obama for years, even offering him a job after Obama finished law school. Obama turned down the offer, but a political friendship developed. Rezko and his family donated at least $21,457 to Obama - and helped raise tens of thousands more -- for his campaigns in Illinois, though not for his presidential bid. He also advised Obama on the purchase of a new Chicago home and, in his wife's name, purchased a vacant lot next to the new Obama home at the same time....

Q: What does [the Rezko trial] have to do with Obama?

A: Nothing....

Q: Did Rezko help Obama buy his Chicago home?

A: Yes and no. Obama says he sought Rezko's advice as a real estate developer and even toured the property with him but got no financial assistance from Rezko. Instead, Obama paid $1.65 million for the house in June 2005 by using money from a book contract and taking out a mortgage.

But Rezko's wife did buy the vacant lot next door, which made it easier for Obama to buy the house. Both pieces of property were owned by the same couple and they insisted on selling them at the same time, but Obama couldn't afford both. Rezko's purchase of the empty lot allowed the home sale to go through, although Obama says Rezko wasn't the only person interested in the lot....

Q: Does Clinton accuse Obama of any specific misconduct?

A: No. Her campaign suggests there must be something improper in Rezko's involvement but doesn't say what. "If the relationship was aboveboard, why won't Sen. Obama address basic inquiries about it? What is it that he is hiding?" said a spokesman.

Q: Has Obama refused to answer "basic inquiries"?

A: No, but he hasn't been completely open either. For instance, he did not disclose until last month that Rezko actually toured the home with him before the purchase. He also has released the e-mail from the home's seller to only one news organization. Obama hasn't provided details of the fundraisers Rezko held for him, nor has he released documents related to the property, such as the appraisal of the strip of land he bought from Rezko.

So how big a deal is this? Obama was dumb to enter into a deal with Rezko after news accounts disclosed he was under investigation for corruption. Does this show Obama's judgment was faulty? Certainly to a degree—especially since he has made ethics and clean government a top-of-the-list issue. And he has not been as transparent as possible in addressing questions about the deal. But are there major "unanswered questions," as the Clintonites insist (hoping to portray Obama as yet another sleazy pol with something to hide)? There may be. But there's no proof such questions truly exist outside the fevered imaginations of Clinton's oppo research team.

Even if nothing new emerges, the Rezko business will continue to trouble the Obama campaign—because it provides just enough material for Clinton aides to work with. And they don't need much.

Comments

Clinton knows from her own experience (Whitewater) that simply asking questions about a real estate deal no matter how baseless can tie the media up in knots...

The media falls for it everytime (because there could always be more to a story than people currently know...how can one disprove a negative?)

Meanwhile the media are so busy investigating a non-story that they give Hillary a pass on her shady/indicted/convivted asian donors...

Posted by: disdaniel on 03/11/08 at 12:37 PM Respond

But now there's an email proving that he was involved in corruption. It was released today. Also, read the article posted Mar.1st on realclearpolitics.com entitled "Who is Nadhmi Auchi, and what are his ties to Obama?" Obama has ties to many questionable characters, bringing his own character into question.

Posted by: susan leff on 03/11/08 at 4:35 PM Respond

There clearly are many unanswered questions. Sellers would not sell unless they could sell both home and lot. Home sold to Obamas (title hidden in name of trust) for about 300,000 less than asking price, while Rezko's wife (at this time Rezkos had no money) bought lot for full purchase price of 695,000. Only access to lot was through Obamas' property. No developer in his or her right mind would buy this lot. What was the consideration for Rezko? A bribe? A gratuity? Where did the money come from? Apparently Nadhmi Auchi. This is not a boneheaded mistake. This is graft caught red-handed. Sure other candidates have problems, but they don't portray themselves as holier than thou, and agents of change. And the press is scared to death of this guy.

Posted by: Steve Kauffman on 03/11/08 at 6:08 PM Respond

susan,

do you have a link to this explosive email proving corruption? i can't find anything.

Posted by: homer on 03/12/08 at 4:56 AM Respond

never mind susan, i found it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/us/11rezko.html?ex=1362888000&en=6aa749cc8db841ff&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

doesn't look like a smoking gun to me, but you can read it for yourself.

Posted by: homer on 03/12/08 at 5:53 AM Respond

Isn't it funny how every day David Corn wakes up and figures out a new way to smear Hillary Clinton? Isn't it funny how David Corn can't do his own research but wants us to be proud and thrilled that he found a Q&A from AP? Wasn't he once considered an investigative journalist?
David Corn is boring.
David Corn is making Mother Jones boring.
Fire him and let him go back to The Nation where opining passes for reporting.

Posted by: Miguel on 03/12/08 at 9:43 AM Respond

If Ms. Clinton steals the nomination from Obama, we are staying home in November and then you will get 8 more years of the GOP. What will it be?

Posted by: Tyrone on 03/12/08 at 10:31 AM Respond

The AP report leapfrogs over much history. Although Obama indeed turned down Rezko's offer, he accepted employment at a small Chicago law firm, Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland, which represented a series of Mr Rezko's partners in a series of transactions to build and rehabilitate low-income housing.

The firm handled all the legal paperwork for the transactions, which involved government contracts and grants. The transactions are now partly the subject of federal criminal indictments against Rezko.

The law firm helped a Rezko company (Rezmar) obtain more than $43 million in government funding to rehabilitate 15 of their 30 apartment buildings for the poor. The "rehabilitation" left the squalid buildings without water and heat during a brutally cold Chicago winter.

To learn a little more about Obama's relationship with Rezko, you can start by reading the April 23, 2007 investigative report from the Chicago Sun Times titled,
Obama and his Rezko ties.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

The Chicago press has been doing a lot of digging for years about Obama, and they've not come up empty -- which doesn't mean there's enough to indict him.

But investigative reporters who are the most knowledgeable about the Obama-Rezko relationship keep getting stonewalled by Obama when they ask probing questions.

Posted by: Pundita on 03/14/08 at 6:06 AM Respond

Mrs Rezko bought that side lot for $625,000. She then sold a portion to the Obamas for $104,500 and the rest for $575,000. If you do the math the Rezkos made $54,500. Not bad for just holding on to a lot for 2 years.

Posted by: Kewalo on 03/22/08 at 4:37 PM Respond