Tony Rezko Convicted of Corruption
June 5th, 2008 at 11:58am Matt DiBari
Barack Obama’s friend and contributor Tony Rezko was convicted of sixteen felony corruption charges yesterday in Chicago.
This is another crack in the armor of Barack Obama’s vaunted “judgment.” For a man that wishes to be elected President of the United States based on his judgment, he seems to be a really horrendous judge of character. Between his decades long associations with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, to his friendships with Rezko and Michael Pfleger, either Barack Obama has very low standards when choosing whom to associate himself with, or his judgment is so weak that these people have completely pulled the wool over his eyes.
This quote suggests that it’s the latter.
“I’m saddened by today’s verdict,” Obama said in a statement Wednesday. “This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew, but now he has been convicted by a jury on multiple charges that once again shine a spotlight on the need for reform.”
If Barack Obama can’t see through Tony Rezko, why do I want Obama sitting across a table from Raul Castro?
Entry Filed under: Barack Obama
15 Comments
1. Joe | June 5th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
If Barack Obama can’t see through Tony Rezko, why do I want Obama sitting across a table from Raul Castro?
— Raul Castro is such a major threat to the U.S.A.!!! LOL
Anyway… another non-issue that the right will continue to bring up over and over again.
Rezko was convicted. Obama was not. Did anything show that Obama was involved? No. Yes, Rezko was an admitted acquanitence, so what?
Wright was a friend of Obama and said some racist things. Obama did not. Topic for an older thread, but unless you lived throught the 60’s as a black man, do you really have the authority to judge what he said?
As for Obama, if you can point to anything Obama has said that can be constituted as racist, please point it out. Otherwise… so what?
Ayers? They were on a board together. I didn’t know you got to chose who you served on a board with. What Ayers did way back when, Obama was what? 3 years old? Another non-issue.
Pfelger? He spoke at the Church. Does that mean Obama was friends with him? Was Obama there? Did he recommend Pfelger to speak? Good grief. Yet another non-issue.
So……….
Domestic:
In (or on the brink of) a recession
$4/gallon for gas.
Home foreclosures.
Food costs.
Jobs going overseas.
Loss of basic freedoms (i.e. Patriot Act).
Foreign:
Iraq War
$12 bil a month
4000+ soldiers dead
Sabre-rattling with Iran
Declining clout world-wide
Did you see the Iraqi legislature wants us out of their country? Yet McCain wants to stay on the George W Bush course in Iraq.
And on and on it goes. Real issues that affect real people.
Meanwhile… Let’s talk about Rezko, Wright, Ayers and Pfelger. Let’s talk about things THOSE PEOPLE did and find a way to make it look or sound like Obama is as guilty as any one of those people.
2. SEW | June 5th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
“If Barack Obama can’t see through Tony Rezko, why do I want Obama sitting across a table from Raul Castro?”
Years of crack cocaine does that to the brain. Barry, not Raul.
3. Matt DiBari | June 5th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Fine. If you don’t think blindly trusting the Castros is a bad idea, fill in the blank. Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Assad, I don’t care. If Barack Obama is so naive that every two-bit con in the greater Chicago area can gain his trust, I don’t want Obama anywhere near the dictators and madmen of the world. He can’t be trusted to handle these men with the proper caution.
You can list all the problems you want. If Barack Obama wanted to be honest and admit to the American people that his plan was to used failed Jimmy Carter policies, we would not be having this discussion.
But since Obama isn’t dumb enough to *openly* run as Carter 2, he’s running on “judgment.”
*Barack Obama*, not John McCain, not George Bush, not Sean Hannity, not Matt DiBari made this an election about judgment.
The fact that Barack Obama doesn’t have the judgment to leave that church for 20 years, that he doesn’t have the judgment to avoid Tony Rezko, and that Obama’s judgment is such that he launched his political career in Bill Ayers house makes me question whether or not Barack Obama has the judgment necessary to lead this country anywhere good.
4. SEW | June 5th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
““I’m saddened by today’s verdict,” Obama said in a statement Wednesday. “This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew” BO
Why would BO be saddened when a sleazeball is convicted on 16 counts? No more sweet house purchases? Not the Tony Rezko Barry knew? Not the Tony that bankrolled his house purchase? Not the same Wright he knew? Snippets of Wright, the same snippets 2 weeks later, THEN threw him under the bus! Why would Barry’s congregation rock and roll when hearing racist remarks, and Barry was clueless after 20 years?
5. Geoff | June 5th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Tony Rezko’s conviction today only goes to the fact that Sen. Obama is not only a typical politician, contrary to his pretenses in this campaign, but a typical Chicago politician who has played ball to get ahead. Once again, with Barack Obama word and deed are not one and the same.
6. Matt DiBari | June 5th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
The funniest part of the campaign may be the idea that a Chicago Democrat represents the “new politics.”
7. Geoff | June 5th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
His words offer a new post-partisanship, his deeds offer old sixties and seventies liberalism.
8. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 7:38 am
Tony Rezko’s conviction today only goes to the fact that Sen. Obama is not only a typical politician, contrary to his pretenses in this campaign, but a typical Chicago politician who has played ball to get ahead.
Again I ask……. what has Obama done that was illegal here? An acquaintence was convicted. Did anything come out of the trial that points to Obama as having been bought by Rezko? Nope.
So calling him a “typical Chicago politician” would imply that he is corrupt and has taken bribe money. I eagerly await your proof of any of that. If there is none, then the only true thing would be you claiming he is guilty of something that you want to believe he has done. aka… lying.
9. js | June 6th, 2008 at 10:08 am
poor joe, he justdoesnt quit grasp what it means to be a politician from Chicago….then again, to be a stooge is to be a stooge, right?
10. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Still spewing the “stooge” remarks, huh? I guess you haven’t really grown up yet.
I ask again….. prove to me Obama is a corrupt politician. Just saying he is from Chicago doesn’t cut it for thinking human beings.
11. Matt DiBari | June 6th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
There is the…unique way that Obama went about buying his house.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article
12. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Yes. We all know about the “unique way that Obama went about buying his house”.
We all know the article you refer to. Of course, digging in deeper, lets look at the deal…
The seller of Obama’s house wanted to sell the house and the side lot on the same day.
Rezko paid $625k for the side lot. That was the market value. There was another bid of the same amount proving it was market value.
Rezko agreed to buy the lot on the same day. That is what the seller was looking to do… sell the house and lot on the same day.
Obama bought 1/6th of the lot for $104,500. That is 1/6th of what Rezko paid for the lot.
A year later, Rezko sold the rest of the lot for $575000. So apparently Obama paid fair market value.
So looking at the facts shows that the only thing Obama is guilty of is knowing Rezko. I will grant you that he showed poor judgement in even doing any land deal with Rezko, but last I checked that is not illegal.
So again I ask…. Prove that Obama is corrupt. Otherwise, you are using innuendo and trying to link Rezko’s crimes to Obama. Again… just saying he is a “Chicago Politician” does not make him corrupt no matter how badly you want that to stick.
13. Geoff | June 6th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Joe, no one here or anyone else should contend that Sen. Obama has engaged in any illegalities. There is absolutely no proof of that. But the preponderance of all of his shady connections built through the decades leads to the conclusion that Sen. Obama is and always has been a conventional, opportunistic politician willing to do what is necessary to get ahead. This is only confirmed by his duplicitous pleadings of ignorance regarding the views of Rev. Wright and Trinity United and his sudden decision to leave that church when his membership there became too politically embarassing.
14. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Geoff,
You and I both know that to call him a “Chicago Politician” implies he is corrupt. If your definition of a “Chicago Politician” is someone that is opportunistic and willing to do what is necessary to get ahead, then 95% (or more) of the politicians must be from Chicago.
Let’s see…… it was convenient when McCain actively sought the endorsement of Hagee and Parsley, but then it wasn’t convenient any longer, so now he condemns them.
Geoff, your issues with Obama go well beyond him being opportunistic.
15. Geoff | June 8th, 2008 at 2:33 am
“Geoff, your issues with Obama go well beyond him being opportunistic.”
Something we can agree upon, Joe.
To address your larger point, and hopefully not to get into too tedious a semantic argument, calling Sen. Obama a “Chicago Politician” does not need to mean he committed a crime himself in his political career, only that he has associated with shady, disreputable, and sometimes criminal individuals—Rezko, Ayers, Wright et al—without it piquing his sense of ethics and propriety in his effort to ascend the political ladder.