Obama Releases New Papers Detailing Rezko Connection

Chicago Tribune:

Sen. Barack Obama's campaign released a new set of documents Saturday in its ongoing effort to paint the Illinois Democrat as more open and transparent in his dealings than Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The documents included the finance committee for his 2004 U.S. Senate bid. That list included Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a longtime friend and fundraiser now standing trial in Chicago on federal corruption charges, as well as Rezko's wife, Rita.

Read the whole story: Chicago Tribune

Comments

[eshalom]

Barack Obama is the most skillful old-style politician produced by Chicagoland in decades. How this man has been able to use his membership in Trinity Church and fundraising by Rezko to his advantage is an example of his remarkable ability to exploit his considerable connections to his advantage. And notice how he produces innocuous documents that tell us nothing while loudly clamoring for the Clinton campaign to match his similar ridiculous examples.

His supposedly "presidential" speech on race was the best example of deft footwork that he's produced yet. I mean this master manipulator managed to draw parallels between his white grandmother and Rev. Wright. And likewise, he took one arguably factual comment by Geraldine Ferraro out of context and equated it with a whole series of outrageously over-the-top comments by his beloved pastor of 20 years.

[dmhkh]

I agree with the above post 100%. I have never seen so much smoozing in my entire life. The entire method of how Obama even got into the IL Senate is a Nightmare in itself, much less how the Chicago good old boys got him elected to the US Senate. And now we are dealing with the same tactic to get him elected as our Presidential nomiinee. There is nothing honest or above board or open here. This guy has got an unbeleivable free ride from everyone. Talk about posturing. I have to vote for Hillary, she is our last best greatest hope for America.

[StephenS]

Huh? Why is this a Rezko headline on HuffPost?
One of the 3 lists Obama's campaign released included the Rezkos as two of the 117 members of Obama's finance committee for his 2004 Senate bid.
This information been public knowledge since Rezko joined in 2003.

[ChiGuy]

"Why is this a Rezko headline on HuffPost?"

****************************************************************

There have been so many outright lies and innuendo flung by the Clinton campaign and supporters, that I'm glad to see anything that further sets the record straight.

[StephenS]

I don't understand your reply. The only mention of Rezko was information in the public for years. That doesn't set any records straight.

[ErikW65]

I agree; misleading headline by HuffPost. The article in the Chicago Tribune says that the complete lists of the "Finance Committees" ie. groups of large donors, from this campaign, as well as the '04 race, both of which Obama had already revealed Rezko was a member. These lists don't "detail the Rezko connection" at all.

[MarieFara]

All I have are Obama's words and actions.

He said he was going to be transparent and he has. Obama releases papers even if they don't make him look good and for that he has my respect. Unlike clinton who keeps stringing us along.

[rwe]

New releases seem to come out more and more abut close personal friends like Wright and Rezkow that Barack says he knows nothing about? Yikes , pretty soon there will be a 45 minute sermon on the mount speech about Rezkow

[zjemi]

Before you repeat the guilt by association stuff check out:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0316edit1mar16,0,2616801.story
on Rezko and
http://youtube.com/user/TRINITYCHGO
or
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon
on those sermons. If anything Obama should have defended Wright more.

From now on never rush to judgment about news on anyone in politics until you know the source and check alternative stories. So much of it is misrepresentation.

[rojo7449]

As citizens of this country we owe it to ourselves to question every politician who speaks for us. We need a healthy dialog that gets to the root of what drives these people. By the nature of their work, it would be impossible to expect them to not fall to the temptation, or the manipulation of the extremely wealthy who want something done in their communities.

zjemi, you are correct. Obama should have defended Wright more. Instead, Obama chose to take a different path; a path the public wasn't on, or questioning. Obama had been trying to get to the topic of race since before SC. It's the card that was bringing him the most votes, and he needed to keep it in play.

The problem with Obama's relationship with the man who was depicted in those crass and vile video clips was not race. It was feeling we were being thrown back to 2004 when we listened to Obama speak and asked ourselves, "who is this man?". Only this time we thought we knew who he was. Whether we supported his candidacy, or not, we were still thrown hard against a wall feeling totally fooled and betrayed.

He should have spoken to who Rev Wright is as a mentor, advisor, and friend. Not given us a laundry loist of excuses for why he might have a particular anger toward this country.

Obama wanted Clinton to apologize and reject Geraldine Ferraro despite his personal knowledge she is not a racist, and putting her words into full context also painted a much different picture. But Obama chooses to play politics with the things that serve him well rather than be the example of the New Politics that he wants us to see in him.

Go to the NY Times web site. Search the archives for the April 2007 article on Obama and his church. Obama should have revived that article rather than give us a speech on race last Tuesday. The article tells everyone, supporter, or not, a lot more about the character of the man. It won't change your opinion of him, but it will tell you a lot more than you can learn from watching him on the campaign trail.

[rojo7449]

As citizens of this country we owe it to ourselves to question every politician who speaks for us. We need a healthy dialog that gets to the root of what drives these people. By the nature of their work, it would be impossible to expect them to not fall to the temptation, or the manipulation of the extremely wealthy who want something done in their communities.

zjemi, you are correct. Obama should have defended Wright more. Instead, Obama chose to take a different path; a path the public wasn't on, or questioning. Obama had been trying to get to the topic of race since before SC. It's the card that was bringing him the most votes, and he needed to keep it in play.

The problem with Obama's relationship with the man who was depicted in those crass and vile video clips was not race. It was feeling we were being thrown back to 2004 when we listened to Obama speak and asked ourselves, "who is this man?". Only this time we thought we knew who he was. Whether we supported his candidacy, or not, we were still thrown hard against a wall feeling totally fooled and betrayed.

He should have spoken to who Rev Wright is as a mentor, advisor, and friend. Not given us a laundry loist of excuses for why he might have a particular anger toward this country.

Obama wanted Clinton to apologize and reject Geraldine Ferraro despite his personal knowledge she is not a racist, and putting her words into full context also painted a much different picture. But Obama chooses to play politics with the things that serve him well rather than be the example of the New Politics that he wants us to see in him.

Go to the NY Times web site. Search the archives for the April 2007 article on Obama and his church. Obama should have revived that article rather than give us a speech on race last Tuesday. The article tells everyone, supporter, or not, a lot more about the character of the man. It won't change your opinion of him, but it will tell you a lot more than you can learn from watching him on the campaign trail.

[rojo7449]

As citizens of this country we owe it to ourselves to question every politician who speaks for us. We need a healthy dialog that gets to the root of what drives these people. By the nature of their work, it would be impossible to expect them to not fall to the temptation, or the manipulation of the extremely wealthy who want something done in their communities.

zjemi, you are correct. Obama should have defended Wright more. Instead, Obama chose to take a different path; a path the public wasn't on, or questioning. Obama had been trying to get to the topic of race since before SC. It's the card that was bringing him the most votes, and he needed to keep it in play.

The problem with Obama's relationship with the man who was depicted in those crass and vile video clips was not race. It was feeling we were being thrown back to 2004 when we listened to Obama speak and asked ourselves, "who is this man?". Only this time we thought we knew who he was. Whether we supported his candidacy, or not, we were still thrown hard against a wall feeling totally fooled and betrayed.

He should have spoken to who Rev Wright is as a mentor, advisor, and friend. Not given us a laundry loist of excuses for why he might have a particular anger toward this country.

Obama wanted Clinton to apologize and reject Geraldine Ferraro despite his personal knowledge she is not a racist, and putting her words into full context also painted a much different picture. But Obama chooses to play politics with the things that serve him well rather than be the example of the New Politics that he wants us to see in him.

Go to the NY Times web site. Search the archives for the April 2007 article on Obama and his church. Obama should have revived that article rather than give us a speech on race last Tuesday. The article tells everyone, supporter, or not, a lot more about the character of the man. It won't change your opinion of him, but it will tell you a lot more than you can learn from watching him on the campaign trail.

[CAPTAIND]

The more you learn of Obama's friends, busines associates, advisors, etc. the more you realize that he has pulled of one of the Great con jobs in American politics. His defenders don't respond to his lack of judgment or or any other flaw, they just point the finger at the other candidates and say well they did similar bad things. I do not rust anyone who has such poor judgement as to be alligned with people like Wright, Rezco, and Malley, and when he is outed Obama whines like a baby claiming he is being picked on or some othe ridiculous spin. Mr. Obama is simply an embarassment and if we are looking for a black leader they are here, they just don't kowtow to liberal fantics or black demagogues. Pathetic.

[Davwbaird]

Captaind, why not tell us all who you want to see, your ideal person, one alive now but not necessarily running for president. What you say?

[MadeinAmericaProud]

The taxpayers were charged millions to investigate the Clintons becasue they were not forth coming

STFU

How much of your taxes has gone to pay for Obama providing this information

One more time STFU

[LyndaWNewOrleans]

OMG! The Clintons trying to "catch" Obama over the Rezko issue is hilarious! It's the ultimate in glass house dwellers throwing stones. And Obama's speech against the Iraq war carried no weight with anyone of influence at the time so it wouldn't have benefited anyone with ties to Iraq. Finally, Ol' Slick Willy knew exactly what he was saying in his patriotic 'argument for her'. And according to Hill herself, a historical reference, like McCarthy, Kenn Starr, JUDAS (is Carville serious?) is perfectly OK to make... as long as it is not an ad hominem attack. So, they just have to suck it up and stop whining... and stop lying while they're at it... there was no sniper fire in Bosnia. Her foreign policy experience is a sham. The Clintons are so egotistical they are willing to let this thing drag on and destroy their own party... if they can't be in power, screw everybody else. Well. Not this time.

[maggieb]

Shhhhhh!!!Are you sure you want to show balance on this site?

[poeticjustice4all]

How dare HuffPo keep calling attention to the is Rezko thing! Obama is GOD. He can do no wrong. He is perfection on earth -- so anyone who dares to be a critic of this deity is EVIL.

[ronspri]

You know, I didn't support Obama over some of the other candidates. The more I see of him, the more I like him. Here's somebody who's depth is actually more than that of your average W bumper sticker. I am sure those on the right won't "get" him, as in understand what he is talking about. Personally I worship only God. Not Jesus, Mohamed or Obama .
You do realize you are mirroring the entire right wing generic play book don't you. No matter who is running against them they are evil, traitorous enemies of the state. Kinda like Kerry you know..or now Obama or Max Cleland or ..
I have no stars in my eyes about Obama. I have no doubt he is quite mortal. I also have little doubt that he will be quite preferable to anything resembling the last 7 years. I am also quite confident that a majority of the world would happen to feel the same way.

[JJRodham]

yeah too bad in the the short term that i have known Obama , he has lied to the public several times. He has turned out to be a liar and a fraud as well as an "angry" black man. Why would we want to have somoen like that in the white house.

[MadeinAmericaProud]

Yes yes yes

No taxpayers money unlike the Clintons costing up millions and years of crap not getting the American business except her ducking from bullets missions with her daughter and she won't let her daughter answer questions on the speech stumps.

I can smell the scent of mccain from here of all the years of his record. His years are no better after all that time. He take pride talking about ear-marks. 99.9 percent of have no clue how ear marks work.

Again, thank you. I am not brainwashed either. Ready to turn the page.

[Jaxxon]

This whole Rezko things goes over so many peoples heads. It's like trying to figure out the mortgage meltdown, the credit crunch, the Bear Stearns catastrophe and the laws of physics all in one. This is something very Chicago-centered that most people only care about it to tear down Obama. If this was happening to Hillary Clinton, I'd probably feel the same way.

[1dogs2]

It DID happen to the Clintons during the Whitewater flap, a "scandal" that turned out to be NOTHING. And I did feel the same way about that flap when it became clear, as it has in the Rezko uproar, that there was no "there" there. What shocked and appalled me, and by the way, turned me off on Clinton, was her willingness to use a very similar non-story to smear Obama as the one that was used to smear her and her husband. I guess Clinton was absent from Sunday school the week the Golden Rule was taught.

[julescator]

Hillary is going to have a bad two weeks. Check out Rev. Manning in Harlem. He is vile. Makes wright look like Mary Poppins. Well it appears that Hillary has $300,000 ear marked to this guy. This is a minister who says "Obama is a long legged Mack Daddy, his father was an african in heat for trashy white women. He is awful and he is connected to Hillary. NOt to mention all the play her "inexperienced" experience will get her. The blatant lies!!!!!! It's Hillary's turn!

[breezeway22]

HELL WHERE DOES ONE GO TO GET SOME UNBIASED REPORTING.

[LittleSanityLeft]

Judging by you comments, Faux News.

[MzTerri]

http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/will_the_media_ever_report_on_the_upcoming_clinton_vs_paul_trial/

HILLARY HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH IN AUGUST '08....FINALLY!

The media won't touch this because Larry King is involved and countless others including Gov Ed Rendell, Chelsea, Cher, etc., etc., but there WILL BE A BACKLASH when this does come to light, so say what you will....the trial happens before the Democratic Convention.

Poetic Justice at it's finest!

[StephenJK]

Peter Paul has a bigtime credibility gap in his life. So does his case against the Clintons. FEC already threw his case out. Now he seeks 42M in damages from the Clintons. Time after time after time, the Clintons get slimed and snared in the courts only to come out smelling like roses. However, all the adventures in and out of the court system have painted them in a bad light leaving lots of room for wild speculation and baseless conjecture in the electorate's eyes. What a shame. What a sham. When will they get anything to stick to the Clintons?

[breezeway22]

BOY HUFFINGTON WILL GO TO ANY LENGTH TO MAKE OBAMA LOOK GOOD. AND ANY LENGTH TO MAKE CLINTON LOOK BAD. WORKED HARD AT FINDING THIS ARTICLE OR DID THE OBAMA CAMP SEND IT TO YOU, LIKE THEY SENT YOU THE FERRARO ARTICLE. I AM MORE THAN SURE YOU IGNORE ANYTHING SENT TO YOU BY THE CLINTON CAMP.

[wilhelmR]

Your keyboard got stuck with upper letters. Or, are you screaming at the world? Maybe you need to spell a word at a time.

[26eaj24]

Wow. This and a crazy preacher is ALL they can dig up. Not too bad.

[changeishere08]

Insanity's credibility is in the toilet. He is a hack ans=d a sniveling coward!

[AZDemocrat500]

I am sure the documents released are not everything to Rezco. GIve this crap a rest and talk about real issues pertaining to the American people, such as the terrible economy and this terrible war. Furthermore, how about counting all of the votes, including Michigan and Florida or have a do over. Why not count all of the votes, no, you do not gain an advantage. That is why! Just another politican.

[pleeezzze]

LOL...I could have Sworn that Obama said there ...were No papers ,from anything he,might have done in Ill .
Wonder where these ( papers ) could have been found ????

[noop]

No, he'd released all relevant documents and spent 3 hours in separate interviews with the Sun-times and Tribune investigative teams (the two major Chicago newspapers). This particular release is probably in response to a Clinton campaign memo demanding more information. Although, it's all part Obama campaign's press on Clinton's honesty gap. They're taking her to task on this issue and she's losing badly.

What makes this so entertaining to me is that I live in Chicago and know that the local media exhausted all the angles on the Rezko link. Even Lynn Sweet is satisfied with the interviews and disclosure, and she's the one who dogged Obama the most on this topic. So, pursuing this angle just makes the Clintons look even more desperate and dishonest.

[ginnypoo]

Well, unless they went into Auchi the Saddam weapons dealer that financially backs Rezko, and had a meeting in Chicago with Obama just before his house purchase......then they didn't answer my questions. I want to know if the house was the pay-off for his making that speech against the invasion of Iraq....they had been giving Obama money for years, did he make the speech for them? Did they pay him off by making the lot naxt to Obama's unbuildable. Did they only give 250K or was it even more, since the number keeps going up. How did Rezmar get a 10 year contract to run a nuclear power plant in Iraq in 2005? Isn't that against US policy if we don't want nuclear materials to get to Iran, why put 3 nuclear plants next door to Iran? And how did Tony get involved? Since Auchi has such shady ties to Saddam and anti-American sympathizers, isn't it antithema to all Obama stands for that he was friends with these guys for literally years? And if he made that speech just to pay them back for all their donations, should he really be elected president because of it?

[CAPTAIND]

At the very least Obama is guilty of as he said himself "bad judgment". But after seeing Obama whine and wiggle over all his "bad judgment" relations (Rezco, Aeyers, Malley, and Wright) I just think he is just another run in the mill "spin master" politician