Comments on: Re: The $64,000 and $382,000 Obama/Rezko property questions

By: Headless Blogger

Headless Blogger — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 21:38:16 +0000

Oh that … I think it is old news.

Rita got the down payment from Rezko’s corrupt Iraqi buddy Ayham al-Samarie. The mortgage was rubber stamped during the sub-prime fiasco, maybe cosigned by Ayham.

And this …

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/rezko/826685,CST-NWS-rezkofile120320.stng

Can you imagine the MSM uproar if this guy was W’s or McCain’s best friend and next door neighbor?

By: steveegg

steveegg — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:45:07 +0000

Headless – That wasn’t the curious thing; it was how Rita got her $500,000 mortgage on her not-high-level government salary. The reason why I didn’t mention it is the Trib didn’t mention whether Tony co-signed, which would have made that mortgage a good risk for the bank.

My guess as to why the fence wasn’t required when the doctor owned the properties was that both properties were owned by the same person. Once ownership of the properties was split, the ordinance kicked in.

David – I’m but a low-mid-level blogger. It’s something Jim Geraghty sunk his teeth into first, and something I had the ability to run down some info that he didn’t have time to do.

I’d rather work with direct associations than “friends and law partners”. The direct ones tend to stick a little better.

By: DavidE

DavidE — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 03:14:04 +0000

You are looking at the Rezko scandal from the wrong angle. I don’t doubt that there is something very suspicious about Sen. Obama’s deal. It appears to me that a major motivation for the transaction was to have Rezko pay for a part of the house.

But why not look at the overall issue that Tony Rezko raises: What happens when the government offers money for low income housing? Somebody finds a way to walk off with that money.

The City of Chicago awarded Tony Rezko’s companies 100 million dollars in grants and tax credits to build low income housing. Tony Rezko received 7 million dollars in upfront fees. Most of the projects went into foreclosure or were boarded up. In other words, $100 million dollars was provided to Chicago by the federal government for public housing projects. What happenned? Basically, the money was stolen. Rezko got his money. Davis & Minier (Obama’s old law firm) got their money and I am sure that a bundle was kicked back to some Chicago politicians. Is there a more telling example of how government programs work then that? Is there a better illustration then this of the failure of government social programs? Or why Obama’s programs won’t work.

And, if you want to really give an example of Sen. Obama’s duplicity, why not raise the foreclosed Tony Rezko properties. Can we really believe that he never heard about the problems at the Rezko properties where people didn’t receive heat and repairs weren’t made?

Then there are minority set asides. Apparently, Tony Rezko receives them as well. He establishes black straw parties who supposedly own and manage his companies. One of those straw parties is Allison Davis, the partner in Obama’s former law firm.

What does a community law firm do? Go into partnership with crooks like Tony Rezko.

Anyway, there are many things that can be exploited regarding Rezko and some of them actually illustrate how big government programs such as low income housing and minority set asides don’t work. So I would talk about those things rather than speculating about the house deal.

By: Headless Blogger

Headless Blogger — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 02:55:56 +0000

Steve – What is the other thing in the Trib that jumped out at you?

I went through it again and thought this was curious:

“… because a city ordinance required owners of vacant land to install fences.”

Per your research, this was a separate vacant lot before the sale. Why wasn’t a fence required per ordinance?

By: steveegg

steveegg — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:58:59 +0000

I did double-check it, and the only landlocked parcel was the second 5046 one. It is anything but vacant as there is a small house on it. The 5050 parcel once owned by the Rezkos is a corner lot.

There is something potentially-interesting in the Trib article that I didn’t mention because its presentation was a wee bit misleading.

By: Shoebox

Shoebox — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:47:39 +0000

Double check this but I had heard at one point that Rezko’s lot was landlocked which was the main issue of the valuation. i.e. how do you pay $625K for a piece of property that can’t be used?