Blago scandal: Rahm Emanuel and Jesse Jackson Jr face new revelations: Timesonline

[SUSkinsFan]

Now that you're back Truman, it's your turn to respond to the points made by myself and several other posters.

[TrumanB]

Now that you're back Truman, it's your turn to respond to the points made by myself and several other posters.

I haven't seen you make any points, at least not any credible ones.

[SUSkinsFan]

I haven't seen you make any points, at least not any credible ones.

And how is that different than what you have been screaming at the top of your lungs for the last few weeks?

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/14/us/politics/14emanuel.html?_r=1&hp

Mr. Obama has said he has never spoken with the governor about the seat. But Mr. Obama’s aides have declined for five days to answer publicly questions about what discussions they had about the seat, with several saying they were doing so at the request of the office of Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

[Larry]

LOL Larry still flinging the leftist crapola. Here's another source other than "public Records" or the so gentle and kind enablers known as the msm.

http://www.gopmom.com/2008/10/clever-real-estate-strategies-for-politicians/

1) Your "other source" that you've decided is better than public records is GOP Mom? Good thing you're avoiding biased sources like public records and real media.

2) However, thanks for the facts. The article (I admit I've only read about the first 75% of it) does seem to provide a lot more details than I've read, before, and I'm assuming that they're accurate. (Since I don't immediately ignore any report that hasn't been carefully crafted by my political Party's spin machine.)

3) However, that whole, long, detailed, rambling doesn't mention any crime whatsoever. Doesn't even imply any. Not even a hint. All it does is imply (very strongly, and very well reasoned, IMO) that the Obama's and Rezko's purchases were coordinated.

Far as I was aware, no one had ever disputed that. (Although the article does have some quotes that make it look like, at least at one time, Obama did dispute it.)

(Actually, the way I'd read about it was that the owner wanted to sell the two parcels as a package, Obama couldn't afford the package, so he found a "co-buyer" to buy the part he couldn't afford. This article's explanation doesn't exactly agree with that, but it's not that far off, either.)

4) In fact, the long, detailed, explanation about restricted deeds, zoning, and all that, actually explains one of the things that Truman is pointing at:

Gee, Obama paid less than asking price, but Rezko paid the full asking price.

Could that, perhaps, be because between the listing of the properties and their sale, a change occurred (the deed restriction was lifted) which increased the value of Rezko's property, and lowered the value of Obama's?

[Larry]

I'm still trying to figure out what he means by "public records". The "public records" are what got Obama in trouble to begin with because it showed shady and questionable real estate transactions that he had made.

'Course, you haven't shown one.

All you've shown is "Obama once bought a piece of Real Estate, on the open market, for market price. But one of the people involved in the completely legal, public, honest transaction is someone who was, years later, convicted of something."

[SUSkinsFan]

Could that, perhaps, be because between the listing of the properties and their sale, a change occurred (the deed restriction was lifted) which increased the value of Rezko's property, and lowered the value of Obama's?

No Larry, that sounds like a "maybe" to me (but without saying "maybe"), and Truman can't be bothered to deal with "maybes". His astute mind only deals with 100% cold-hard facts/truths.

[IHOPSkins]

....I had three people in mind....

But Mr. Obama’s aides have declined for five days to answer publicly questions about what discussions they had about the seat, with several saying they were doing so at the request of the office of Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/14/us/politics/14emanuel.html?_r=1&hp

For the record

I defended Obamas contact concerning his replacement

I speculated that Rahm might not have the freedom to talk

However

The Liberal Media's release of a portion of the Blago investigation proves some sort of contact with the Obama staff took place (on top of showing Bias towards Obama....Why not exonerate Jesse Jr...etc?)

How the Hell does Obama NOT KNOW whats going on? (despite his quote to the contrary)

If someone on his staff thinks it OK to get a Bribe offer and then NOT tell the Boss.....THAT is suspicious

But

The full story still needs to be told....I hope the Liberal Media tells the WHOLE STORY

Oh, Blago is a DEMOCRAT......sometimes the liberal media misses that point

[Larry]

Exactly. After 8 years of "Bush is Hitler", "Impeach Bush", the left is now crying "why can't we all just get along". :doh:

:secret:Highest job approval ratings in the history of the US.

Remember those?

Hmmmm. What could have changed them? Could it perhaps be the people's actually forming their opinions based on Bush's actual policies, his actual actions, and the actual results?

[aREDSKIN]

1) Your "other source" that you've decided is better than public records is GOP Mom? Good thing you're avoiding biased sources like public records and real media.

2) However, thanks for the facts. The article (I admit I've only read about the first 75% of it) does seem to provide a lot more details than I've read, before, and I'm assuming that they're accurate. (Since I don't immediately ignore any report that hasn't been carefully crafted by my political Party's spin machine.)

3) However, that whole, long, detailed, rambling doesn't mention any crime whatsoever. Doesn't even imply any. Not even a hint. All it does is imply (very strongly, and very well reasoned, IMO) that the Obama's and Rezko's purchases were coordinated.

Far as I was aware, no one had ever disputed that. (Although the article does have some quotes that make it look like, at least at one time, Obama did dispute it.)

(Actually, the way I'd read about it was that the owner wanted to sell the two parcels as a package, Obama couldn't afford the package, so he found a "co-buyer" to buy the part he couldn't afford. This article's explanation doesn't exactly agree with that, but it's not that far off, either.)

4) In fact, the long, detailed, explanation about restricted deeds, zoning, and all that, actually explains one of the things that Truman is pointing at:

Gee, Obama paid less than asking price, but Rezko paid the full asking price.

Could that, perhaps, be because between the listing of the properties and their sale, a change occurred (the deed restriction was lifted) which increased the value of Rezko's property, and lowered the value of Obama's?

L,

I offer this as a resource to this particular episode because IMO you'd never see reporting to this level of detail from the MSM. Of course I cannot in the least vouch for the accuracy or inaccuracy contained within it. The article stands for itself but imo it's a very good synopsis of what transpired between BO and TR. As you may know this specific transaction is under investigation by a Chicago grand jury and it's because Rezko has been convicted of prior acts just like this one. He preforms a politician a favor, however define, and then gets beneficial legislation (ie monetary gain) for himself or a friend. Typical chicago political behavior and it needs to be investigated IMO

[Larry]

L,

I offer this as a resource to this particular episode because IMO you'd never see reporting to this level of detail from the MSM. Of course I cannot in the least vouch for the accuracy or inaccuracy contained within it. The article stands for itself but imo it's a very good synopsis of what transpired between BO and TR. As you may know this specific transaction is under investigation by a Chicago grand jury and it's because Rezko has been convicted of prior acts just like this one. He preforms a politician a favor, however define, and then gets beneficial legislation (ie monetary gain) for himself or a friend. Typical chicago political behavior and it needs to be investigated IMO

But so far, even your completely unbiased source doesn't even allege that Rezko did Obama a favor.

Obama paid market price for a piece of Real Estate.

Rezko paid market price for a second piece of Real Estate, as part of a joint transaction.

Obama later paid Rezko market price for part of his parcel.

He preforms a politician a favor, however define, and then gets beneficial legislation (ie monetary gain) for himself or a friend.

So far, there isn't even an allegation that the first part of your sentence has happened.

Yeah, if, say, Rezko had bought the vacant lot for $800K, then sold it to Obama for a hundred dollars, then there'd be reason to look further, cause there's something fishy going on. (Although even then, there are other explanations besides political corruption. But it would be enough to justify a lot of suspicion and investigation.)

But those awful words "market price" take all of those attempts to create ominous sounding implications off the table.

If Ted Stevens had paid market price for his BBQ grill and his remodeling, and could document that he'd done so, then I'd be saying the same thing about him.

[IHOPSkins]

Update:

Blagojevich may quit on Monday: Illinois official

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Scandal-plagued Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich could announce on Monday that he will leave office, the state's top legal officer said on Sunday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE4BD12M20081214

[Bang]

Attitudes like this that are flushing this country down the global commode.

"Country First" my arse.

QFT.

What are people? Are they Americans or are they Republicans or are they Democrats?

I think it's pretty obvious that people identify themselves with an ideology over their country.

If Obama is involved, it is not a cause for celebration. It would be another embarrassment to America. Guys like Putin and Chavez "love it" when we get egg on our faces.

Americans don't.

It is mind boggling to read the GLEE with which so called Americans HOPE that their new president is a filthy crook.

What is your priority? Your party, or your country?

~Bang

[IHOPSkins]

A story about selling a vacant senate seat before the election that created the vacancy. That is a hell of a conspiracy theory.

"The incriminating conversations took place even before Election Day and continued as recently as last week."

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/dec/10/illinois_governor_arrested64539/

What do you know.....people actually plan on winning!

[Larry]

QFT.

What are people? Are they Americans or are they Republicans or are they Democrats?

I think it's pretty obvious that people identify themselves by an ideology over their country.

If Obama is involved, it is not a cause for celebration. It would be another embarrassment to America. Guys like Putin and Chavez "love it" when we get egg on our faces.

Americans don't.

It is mind boggling to read the GLEE with which so called Americans HOPE that their new president is a filthy crook.

What is your priority? Your party, or your country?

~Bang

Hey, I'll also point out that Americans, as a whole, do, indead take a delight at seeing people fall off of pedestals. Whether it's the President or Tom Cruise.

Try and convince me that you don't find anything funny about an NFL player carrying a gun into a bar, and shooting himself in the foot.

Now, I don't think that's what's happening, here. What's happening here is a few people trying to manufacture the appearance of a self wounding. So far, the closes we've come to the "target" shooting himself in the foot is somebody else complaining that the target refuses to even touch a gun.

Buy some day, it's going to happen. Obama is not going to be the first President in history to never once step in anything for his entire administration. It's going to happen. And when it does, a lot of people are going to get a lot of pleasure out of laughing at it.

(Including both you and me.)

(Your response will likely be more creative than mine, too.)

[Larry]

What do you know.....people actually plan on winning!

I buy Lottery tickets. I plan on winning.

(When I win, I'm not going to tell y'all.)

[81artmonk]

HUH, isn't it odd how these associations that eveyone said didn't matter are now mattering?? interesting?

[Larry]

HUH, isn't it odd how these associations that eveyone said didn't matter are now mattering?? interesting?

Huh, isn't it predictable that those vaporous "associations" that mattered to the most partisan of Kool Aid drinkers, (and nobody else), still matter to those same Kool Aid drinkers, (and nobody else)?

[Bang]

Hey, I'll also point out that Americans, as a whole, do, indead take a delight at seeing people fall off of pedestals. Whether it's the President or Tom Cruise.

Try and convince me that you don't find anything funny about an NFL player carrying a gun into a bar, and shooting himself in the foot.

Now, I don't think that's what's happening, here. What's happening here is a few people trying to manufacture the appearance of a self wounding. So far, the closes we've come to the "target" shooting himself in the foot is somebody else complaining that the target refuses to even touch a gun.

Buy some day, it's going to happen. Obama is not going to be the first President in history to never once step in anything for his entire administration. It's going to happen. And when it does, a lot of people are going to get a lot of pleasure out of laughing at it.

(Including both you and me.)

(Your response will likely be more creative than mine, too.)

I agree completely. But my glee in a millionaire idiot shooting himself in the foot or popping his TE in the mouth (Thanks TO!) is a lot different than hoping that our country's new leader is going to jail.

I do make fun of high profile people, but sometimes I do so shaking my head in partisan sadness, like if I made the one i was thinking on about the Portis/Zorn saga. (again, Thanks TO!).

I also leave the real serious stuff alone. If a player like Plaxico shoots his own leg, OK, but you'd never have seen a cartoon out of me about Rae Carruth if I had been making them then. (I did make one about former Dolphins TE Randy McMichael assaulting his pregnant girlfriend, but only because she was ALSO arrested and charged with assault. That seemed funny to me.)

I have been asked a thousand times why I don't make political cartoons. Well, for one, depending on the tact you take, you automatically alienate half your audience, and two, without trying to sound over-dramatic, I don't see anything funny in a lot of this stuff. Political cartoonists are very good at what they do, and truth is, I can't do it. I find humor in making fun of rich guys who make their money playing a game. Politics has real impact on things.. I can find humor in it, but not very often.

At this juncture in our history, a crook in the White House is the last thing we need.

~Bang

[TrumanB]

'Course, you haven't shown one.

All you've shown is "Obama once bought a piece of Real Estate, on the open market, for market price. But one of the people involved in the completely legal, public, honest transaction is someone who was, years later, convicted of something."

Obama purchased the additional parcel of land from Rezko AFTER it was publicly disclosed that he was being investigated by the Feds. AFTER. Get it?

[aREDSKIN]

But so far, even your completely unbiased source doesn't even allege that Rezko did Obama a favor.

Obama paid market price for a piece of Real Estate.

Rezko paid market price for a second piece of Real Estate, as part of a joint transaction.

Obama later paid Rezko market price for part of his parcel.

So far, there isn't even an allegation that the first part of your sentence has happened.

Yeah, if, say, Rezko had bought the vacant lot for $800K, then sold it to Obama for a hundred dollars, then there'd be reason to look further, cause there's something fishy going on. (Although even then, there are other explanations besides political corruption. But it would be enough to justify a lot of suspicion and investigation.)

But those awful words "market price" take all of those attempts to create ominous sounding implications off the table.

If Ted Stevens had paid market price for his BBQ grill and his remodeling, and could document that he'd done so, then I'd be saying the same thing about him.

Ultimately, we'll see what the Grand Jury decides. Although it will be a "Chicago" grand jury.

[TrumanB]

HUH, isn't it odd how these associations that eveyone said didn't matter are now mattering?? interesting?

But, supposedly, these are "loose" associations. :doh:

[Larry]

Obama purchased the additional parcel of land from Rezko AFTER it was publicly disclosed that he was being investigated by the Feds. AFTER. Get it?

Oooooh, so now the scandal escalates to "Obama preformed a perfectly legal, honest, open, public real estate transaction, at market prices, with someone who, at the time, might have done something wrong."

Problem is those words "perfectly legal, honest, open, public real estate transaction, at market prices".

I assume that at least some of the 9/11 hijackers rented apartments. That doesn't make their landlords terrorists. All their landlords did (in my hypothetical) was to perform a routine financial transaction, publicly, at market prices.

If you want to claim it's a scandal, then show that Obama received something that he didn't pay for.

[Larry]

Ultimately, we'll see what the Grand Jury decides. Although it will be a "Chicago" grand jury.

Translation: "If the Grand Jury doesn't say what I want, I'm going to keep pushing this conspiracy theory, anyway."

[SUSkinsFan]

Tell me Truman, what does Obama engaging in a legal transaction have to do with Rezko being investigated (and in case you don't know investigated ≠ convicted of anything) by the Feds. As Larry pointed out, the conviction came AFTER the land deal was finalized.

Show me evidence that Obama was involved with the things Rezko got convicted for.

And if you want to talk about bad connections, lets talk about George Bush and Kenneth Lay, or George Bush and Jack Abramoff.

Trust me, we all get the fact that you hate Obama and want nothing more than to see him fail, but just because that is what YOU want doesn't mean that is what is going to happen. Why don't you try putting country before ideology and see where that gets you.

And the "Impeach Bush, Bush is a nazi, etc" calls that you love to bring up came AFTER he did something that people felt was illegal and unconstitutional (i.e. warrantless wiretapping, war in Iraq, Valerie Plame scandal). Not before the man ever even took the Oath of Office.

Many people that I have talked too that voted for McCain have never said that they hope Obama fails (or at least implied it as heavily as you do), they want him to be successful, but they are skeptical if he will be. There is nothing wrong with skepticism. But the way you openly call for Barack Obama to fail is absolutely sickening.