BREAKING: Tony Rezko Arrested
Former Barack Obama fundraiser (and adviser and buddy?) Tony Rezko has been arrested “after prosecutors alleged he had violated terms of the bond in his fraud case.” “Tony Rezko was arrested without incident at his home in Wilmette,” FBI spokesman Tom Simon said.
He added that “[i]t was pursuant to a warrant issued following a government motion to revoke his bond.”
Rezko has raised money for several Illinois politicians, one of them is Barack Obama. The latter has distanced himself from Rezko lately, he even got rid of $85,000, according to his campaign, that Rezko raised for him, but there are those who believe that there’s more to the Rezko-Obama connection that Barack would like people to believe.
True or not? As of yet, we don’t know. We do know, however, that one has to be careful whom one associates with, especially in politics. This will be held against him, I’m sure, by his opponents: first by the Clintons after that, if he wins the nomination, by the Republican nominee.
In an editorial published recently, the Chicago Tribune already called on Barack to “divulge all there is to know about that relationship.” “Until you do,” the editorial goes on to say, “the journalistic scrubbing and opposition research will intensify. You should have recognized Rezko as a political seducer of young talent. But given that you’ve not been accused of any crime or ethical breach, your Rezko history is not a deal-breaker.”
Isn’t it? For many perhaps not, but the relationship may do him more bad than good. The best way to go forward is to be honest and open about the relationship and then to say that he, like so many others, was betrayed by Rezko.
He already promised to “return all of the contributions raised with help from his embattled early supporter,” but there’s more to this story than money, possibly at least. Not only that, it was already well known that Rezko was a hustler, but that didn’t prevent Obama from hanging “on to a considerable amount.” All in all, “[t]he L.A. Times estimated Rezko affiliates provided Obama more than $200,000 in donations since 1995.”
As for this, let me just say the following: I don’t trust Obama, I think he’s all talk, I think he is playing the race card but that it’s accepted when he does it, I think that people are constantly crying and whining when you dare criticize Obama, yet don’t say a thing when other candidates are (dishonestly) attacked, and on and on. In fact, I don’t have a whole lot of respect for Obama. I think he’s fake. It’s interesting to see that some people call Romney fake: there’s no question in my mind that Romney is actually “for real,” whereas Obama is carefully hiding a liberal agenda behind a moderate tone, for which, then, many American moderates fall.
And so, talking moderately but acting very liberally, Obama will do more damage to the US and to foreign policy than most other candidates could do as president.
The exception being John McCain who would, in addition, also destroy the economy.
Now, I wouldn’t criticize Obama as much if he came across as someone who wouldn’t make foreign policy mistake after foreign policy mistake. The sad reality is, however, that he doesn’t have any foreign policy experience and that he has already said some downright stupid things. You all elected a person without experience once, I hope for the world that you won’t repeat that.
Justin responded to my – admittedly annoyed – response to his post. He, once again, disagrees with me, which is fine, and comes up with a list of which at least one point indicates that he didn’t go through the trouble to actually read what I wrote carefully. He also writes: “Michael has responded with not much at all except his feelings.” Yes unlike Obama supporters who are strictly intellectual and never base their opinions on emotions (such as hatred for the Clintons, racial oversensitivity, and so on). As an aside, I tend not to react in length to posts such as Justin’s original one since it’s tone doesn’t exactly convince me that he wanted an honest intellectual debate. If you publish a post like that, with a title like that, it’s a bit awkward that you demand a reasonable, intellectual response. But that an aside.
I responded to it because Justin’s a friend, but doing so is not my habit.
Anyway, here’s my response to his response to my response:
1. When did Romney say something stupid (Obama: Pakistan? for instance) about foreign policy?
2. Talking to Iran without preconditions is indeed stupid
3. I never said he would destroy the economy, that’s John McCain
4. The people complaining most about it are those of the political correctness police, for whom I have little to no sympathy
5. Moderation isn’t (just) about tone: it’s about policies (as well). A liberal can never be a moderate. Moderately liberal perhaps, but not moderate
In short, you can support Obama, but then just admit that you’re a liberal who likes to debate politics in a civil manner.
Perhaps he can share a cell with Norman Hsu.
Yup!
The media is not coving this story on cable. I wonder is this is why some of the Kennedy?s’ are supporting Obama. They have many skeletons in their closets also. Now if it would be any other candidate than the media demi-gods think can walk on water, Obama, they would be all over it like flies on crap. I can’t believe that people can even compare 20 plus years of a relations to a Arab from Syria who is a member of the Nation of Islam, Tony Rezko, to a photo with the Clintons. Both Obamas have ties to this Rezko person. And for Obama to say he wants to clean up politics, he had better clean his own house first. Fitzgerald doesn’t take orders from the Clintons, but I am sure they will get blamed for this too.
Linda, Obama must certainly clear up the degree of his relationship to Rezko, being that he already gave the fundraising money back. Likewise, people who make claims as to Obama’s relationship to Rezko, and especially those who feel the need to mention Islam in that same context, have to be able to PROVE that such a relationship existed.
Both in the case of Clinton and Obama and pretty much every politician, the likelihood of doing business with someone who turns out to be corrupt is high. That doesn’t automatically make you corrupt, and the burden of proof is on the accusers. However, it IS important to make all relations clear inmediately.
I recall looking at the Rezko allegations many months ago, at some in-depth stories which appeared in several papers, and coming away with the impression that there’s just not that much "there" there.
Right now, nobody is talking about any specifics, making any allegations which Obama could address any more than he already has from the beginning of the campaign, so I don’t see any real need for new comment from him. I’m getting rather tired of the Clinton campaign’s continual "hints" that there’s some other shoe to drop. If there is, drop it already.
Now, we know what kind of change Obama is bringing to the nation. Knowingly, Obama worked for slum landlord Rezko in the court for evicting tenants, purchased property from Rezko by paying less than market price, and received thousands of dollars to his presidential election campaign. We have enough politicians with corrupt history and do we need another guy with same track record? Democrats are good, Remocrats bad but Reaganocrats are worst. Obama found good leadership qualities in President Reagan. Do we need another term of Reaganocracy, which is an extension of George Bush administration?
There is two many unanswered question about Barack Hussin Obama. This guy have a bad past. I dont think he is ready to be presindent. He need to explain this. He lied in the debate when he said that he only dealted with this guy for 5 min. Barack is a liar and I dont truth him. He enjected race into the election not the Clintons. America is ready for a black President but not Barack Hussin Obama. Can someone please tell me what he is talking about when he say we need change. I have no clue. What we need is a smart president not the first black or women president. Barack have not showed me anything about him beening a good President
Let’s remember to deal with all of the politicians (mostly republicans) that are tied to companies like Haliburton and Blackwater too. No wonder our country is screwed up.
Darryll, while trying to subtly paint Obama as a Muslim by using his middle name, it would really help if you spelled it correctly. Good spelling and grammar lends much more credibility to a comment. In the case of your comment your credibility even with the elementary school writing is reduced to zero because:
- You try to imply that Obama is a Muslim, a throughly discredited claim.
- You say Obama "have a bad past" without offering one shred in terms of an example.
- You say Obama is a liar and you "don’t truth him" without offering a shred of evidence.
- You say he "enjected race" into the election instead of the Clinton camp, again no evidence.
If you wish to know his policy positions they are fully detailed in his website. As far as being smart, Obama is brilliant, though Clinton is no dim light herself.
Now run along and play, dear.
I wonder if Daryll uses the middle name whenever he talks about any presidential candidate or only those who have middle names that sound vaguely Muslim?
Actually, I don’t wonder at all. I’m pretty sure.
The similarity among the many grammatical errors in the anti-Obama comments is … interesting. Almost as if the comments were posted by the same person or script….
Jason: IP addresses indicate they’re not the same people. That doesn’t tell the entire story of course; you can fake your IP address.
For what it’s worth: it’s Barack Hussein Obama, not Barack Hussin Obama. I’m someone who believes that it’s perfectly fine to use his middle name, but not if you don’t do it with the others… and especially not in this setting.
What’s more: I couldn’t care less whether he’s Muslim or not. My fiancé is Muslima. But I don’t quite like islamophobes. Try it again and you’ll not be able to comment at this website again.
If this kind of high profile supporter of Clinton’s had been arrested this would have been major headlines and some of the talking heads on cable would have drooled while bashing "the Clintons." Where is the discussion on Obama? Come on, if we are going to disect every move of one candidate then why not do it for all of them? The media is so afraid of being called racist if they take him on that they are paralized. Sad!
DON’T BE SURPRISED IF HILLARY DOESN’T HAVE AN ACE UP HER SLEEVE. IF THERE WAS ANYTHING CROOKED THAT TOOK PLACE WHEN OBAMA PURCHASED HIS HOME FROM THE SLUM LORD FOR 300.000 LESS THEN IT’S MARKET VALUE, WHILE THE SLUM LORDS WIFE PURCHASED THE ADJOINING LOT, HILLARY WILL EXPOSE IT. TO BAD SHE’S SO GOOD AT COVERING UP HER DASTLY DEEDS. BUT THEN AS SHE BRAGS, SHE’S HAD 25 YEARS OF QUALIFICATIONS…..
Obama strikes again with his race games, this time using the words of super Muslim and racist Malcolm X as he was inciting blacks against whites. Coincidence?
"They’re trying to bamboozle you. It’s the same old okie-doke. Y’all know about okie doke, right?… They try to bamboozle you. Hoodwink ya. Try to hoodwink ya.”
– Barack Obama in a speech January 24, 2008 (a video of the speech is on-line through Google)
"You’ve been hoodwinked. You’ve been had. You’ve been took. You’ve been led astray, led amok. You’ve been bamboozled." (Malcolm X)
If any other candidate gave a speech that included the same phrases used to incite whites against blacks, he/she would be berated by the Obama campaign and the media as a racist and the world would come to end.
And Obama claims Clinton is using "racist code words" in her speeches? LOL
It’s this kind of crazy, astounding double standards that will keep America from voting for Obama. You either agree with him and don’t criticize him — or you’re racist. Don’t be fooled by this con man America.
vb,
You have broken it down very well. I commend you and agree with you wholeheartedly.
Thanks for your writing, well done.
I wish everyone would realize what a phony Obama is. Here in Chicagoland, we know what a slacker he’s been. He’s done nothing during his term except give lip service, vote to support the war, and vote to support amnesty for illegals. For everything else, he voted ‘present.’ I will never ever support a candidate (white, black, or purple!) who is such a sleaze. Of course he’s playing the race card — what next? His Muslim card? And hey, I wish I could have a house in Wilmette for $300K less than the asking price. Oh, but I’m not a state senator. What a great ‘buddy’ Rezko must be….
Tony Rezko, not to worry. Your friend of 20 years President Obama will grant you commutation or pardon in no time.
THE NEWS MEDIA MUST COVER THE STORY ON RESCKO AND HAVE OBAMA ANSWER QUESTION ABOUT HIS DEALS WITH THE GUY. THIS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS FOLKS.
COMMON CNN , FOX NEWS, MSNBC
I SAY WE ALL SEND THEM EMAILS ASKING WHY THIS IS NOT BEING COVERED IN THE MEDIA
It’s very simple, maci. THERE’S NOTHING THERE. He’s already BEEN asked questions about Rezko, he answered them long ago, and there’s just nothing there. Why don’t you actually learn to do some research and go back and look at what answers he’s previously given, and then come back and tell us specifically which answers you are not satisfied with.
American people are expecting very straight answers from the prospective presidential candidates. It is not a crime to be a Muslim. Obama should have courage to accept the truth that he was a Muslim before converting as a Christian. It is not unprofessional for an attorney to protect the clients but he should have trust in the people to tell the truth that he represented slumlord Rezko and got financial benefit. Indonesia is not a center of excellence in the education but Obama went to there to study a religious curriculum. He should accept that he was sent by his parents to go to the school and I he did not have an option in the childhood. Nothing is wrong, if the leader comes in front of the electorate and tells the truth, nothing but truth.
Well, mike, what’s the unanswered question? Did Obama represent Rezko? Is that not answered, somehow? It’s not for any lawyer to characterize his clients as "slumlords." If you think Rezko is a slumlord, and you know that Obama represented him, then what question do you actually need answered?
On what basis do you make your assertion that Obama was a Muslim? As an adult, he was pretty much an atheist before he converted to Christianity. You know he went to a school in Indonesia when he was 5. What question is not unanswered?
More importantly, why am I bothering to respond to the blithering morons who have started trolling in here the past day or so? It’s not like they actually want answers, they just want to do some character assasination. I guess maybe the Paul-bots needed new employment after their hero tanked?
Open question to the regular commenters: which candidate do you think these anti-Obama folks are pimping for? Are they just white nationalist trolls? I daren’t suggest that they are pro-Hillary folks. They really do sound like some of the worst of Paul supporters, to me. Any thoughts?
WOW LOOK AT THIS…NOT REPORTED ON THE CLINTON NEWS NETWORK.
A nice cozy pic of who else Billary with none other than…TONY REZCO…I BET the life of my child Rezco will say if asked "I did not have sexuall relations with that woman…LMAO.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080125embarrass-photogallery,1,2429879.photogallery
Does it seem strange to anyone thay the FBI revoked this guys bond after Hillary attacked Obama about him? The republicans do not want Hillary to lose the nomination because she will energize the conservative base to come out and vote in droves. At this point their greates hope is Mcain Vs. Clinton. That is the only chance they have to keep a republican in the white house. Does anyone see the hand of Carl Rove (the consumate republican dirty trickster / manipulator) in any of this?
I think they’re white nationalists who support(ed) Ronnie.
As an aside, they almost make me support Obama.
Jeez, of this is the level of discourse online then I understand why people would believe Obama is a Muslim with absolutely ZERO evidence. It’s rather sad.
Pat, I agree that they are probably Clinton-bots. All campaigns attract flies, and the more savage the campaign, the more savage the flies, obviously.
I vote that we invent code names for ALL the candidates, since it seems we are going to increasingly be visited by hit and run commenters. How about:
Obama- WunderKid
Clinton- Big Mamma
Edwards- Mr. McHair
Romney- Mr. Moneybags
McCain- UniSoldier
Huckabee- HuckaSaint (of course)
Giulianni – Mrs. Trump
LOL, Claudia! Love the nicknames. You left off Paul, though. I guess we should call him John Galt? No, I know: BrokenRecord!
Clauda. I think that John McCain is B.I. UniSoldier; Romney is F.F. Moneybags and Giuliani… well, that’s a perfect one actually.
LOL, Pat, apparently it’s also an ‘unasked’ question. Because you know, it works better if you just make some scary sounding statements and let people come up with their own scary questions!
Christine I didn’t answer Pat’s question, because the "unanswered question" has been made perfectly clear in my post, all the more so because he hang on to money he got from Rezko, even after he found out that Rezko isn’t clean.
Obama’s name show’s up in the prosecutions report. Now picture this, Feb 25 is Rezko’s trail and imagine Obama being call up to testify, now we know he did nothing wrong but this is not what you want in the middle of this election. Obama will have problems with this.
Michael, You’re absolutely right I misread that point about McCain. I thought you meant "in addition" to Barack. Mea culpa. But I will always take issue with broad proclamations of doom, whether they concern McCain’s effect on the economy or Barack’s foreign policy. Especially when you have little to back them up besides, well, more broad proclamations. But that is what it is and we can just leave it at that.Looking back on the title of my post, I do think it can be read as divisive, but I still think it’s fair. The title suggests that you’re gladly repeating talking points of a die hard Hillary supporter, and the post bears out. Marsh’s idea that the media is biased is laughable, and it becomes even more comical because her argument is actually the same one conservatives use, "Why aren’t they covering the news that I want them to cover?" Why? Well, because 9 times out of 10 the person asking that question has a very specific agenda. That proves true in this case as well, since both you and Marsh want Hillary to win. If you were coming from a neutral position, I wouldn’t have written the title the way I did, but you’re not, so I didn’t.As far as being liberal, I’ve never hid the fact that I’m a moderate Dem. I favor more fiscally conservative policies sometimes, but understand that there’s need for a safety net for the less fortunate members of our great society. Some people call this the Nanny State. In some cases I think that’s apt, but not for basic needs like food stamps, early childhood care, healthcare, education and care of the aged. I do, however, favor a less interventionist foreign policy, which I would argue is much more in line with traditional conservative values. And I’d like to point out that Barack has very similar policy stances, but he has never claimed to be anything but a liberal. Instead he talks about changing the tone so we can work together. So that brings us to tone, which seems to be your biggest problem with Barack. Well, I feel that having a more moderate, civilized tone is probably the most important part of our charge in this middlesphere and beyond. I thought we all acknowledged that partisan rancor has delivered us to the spot where we now find ourselves, and I don’t think strict adherence to a mussy set of "moderate" policies will take us out of that. Because, let’s face it, there’s no such thing as moderate purity and even if there was it would land us in yet another partisan trap, with "moderate" becoming some sort of political ideology that you have to adhere to at all costs. That’s why I think it’s a matter of tone and civility, and that’s what Barack (and to some degree McCain) promises. Maybe they won’t ultimately deliver it, but I’m willing to take the chance. Are you willing to take the chance with Hillary or Romney trying to score partisan points for the next 4 years, especially when their campaigns have demonstrated that’s what we should expect?In any event, thanks again for responding to my post and my response. Good luck on Super Tuesday.
Once again, sorry for the lack of HTML. What am I missing here?
Oops, sorry this wasn’t more clear- I’m pretty sure Pat’s question was to commenter "mike" in comment #21. That’s what I was laughing about- that "mike" never did ask a question, he just planted insinuations.