Obama's ability to strike a conciliatory tone was completely absent in yesterday's press conference. It was clear that answering questions that deal with controversial issues are outside of his comfort level. Why didn't Obama answer the questions head on? Why did he run away from questions that were asked by those most familiar with the Rezko case? Moreover, why did the Obama campaign release information about the Rezko land deal to Bloomberg News instead of releasing it to the Chicago news outlets like The Tribune?
MSNBC Video here
WSJ notes:
Mr. Obama has strenuously denied suggestions that the same-day sale enabled him to pay $300,000 under the house's asking price because Mrs. Rezko paid full price for the adjoining lot, or that he asked the Rezkos for help in the matter. Both actions would be clear violations of Senate ethics rules barring the granting or asking of favors.
I don't know how much longer Obama can continue to avoid this issue. The more he tries to avoid it, the more obvious it becomes that this is a much larger issue than he letting on:
Mr. Obama will eventually have to talk about Illinois, if only to clear the air. After John McCain last month was attacked for cozy ties to lobbyists, he held a news conference and answered every question. Hillary Clinton held a White House news conference on Whitewater and her cattle futures. Mr. Obama must do the same for questions about Mr. Rezko and "the Chicago way" of politics. If he doesn't, they may increasingly haunt his candidacy.
Mrs. Rezko had a salary of only $37,000 and assets of $35,000. In court proceedings at that time, to explain how much his bail should be, Mr. Rezko declared that he had "no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets."
So where did the money for Mrs. Rezko's $125,000 down payment -- and the collateral for her $500,000 loan from a local bank controlled by Amrish Mahajan, like Mr. Rezko a Chicago political fixer -- come from?
The London Times reports that, three weeks before the land transactions, Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi billionaire living in London, loaned $3.5 million to Mr. Rezko, who was his Chicago business partner. Mr. Auchi's office says he had "no involvement in or knowledge of" the property purchase. Mr. Auchi is a press-shy property developer (estimated worth: $4 billion) who was convicted of corruption in France in 2003 for his involvement in the Elf affair, the biggest political and corporate fraud inquiry in Europe since World War II. He was fined $3 million and given a 15-month prison term that was suspended provided he committed no further crimes.
Mr. Auchi was also a top official in the Iraqi oil ministry in the 1970s. He has for years vigorously denied charges he had dealings with Saddam Hussein after the first Gulf War. However, an official report to the Pentagon inspector general in 2004 obtained by the Washington Times cited "significant and credible evidence" of involvement by Mr. Auchi's companies in the Oil for Food scandal and illicit smuggling of weapons to the Hussein regime.
In 2003, Mr. Auchi began investing in Chicago real estate with Mr. Rezko. In April 2007, after his indictment, Mr. Auchi loaned another $3.5 million to Mr. Rezko, a loan that Mr. Rezko hid from U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's office. When Mr. Fitzgerald learned that the money was being parceled out to Mr. Rezko's lawyers, family and friends, he got Mr. Rezko's bond revoked in January and had him put in jail as a potential flight risk.
Let's pretend that a Republican presidential candidate was caught up in this story and not a Barack Obama. What would be the tone on this board? Since Mr. Auchi is definitely a controversial figure, we'd likely want to know whether or not that Republican presidential candidate met with Mr. Auchi. If that Republican candidate answered that he has "no recollection" of ever meeting Mr. Auchi, we'd all be waiving our BS flags. Saying you have "no recollection" is a pretty flimsy response. So, then why are we prepared to excuse Obama when he responds this way?
To make matters worse, the Obama campaign e-mailed reporters a YouTube clip that pretty much confirms what Obama is being accused of doing!
If this story isn't a big deal and if Obama has answered all the questions about Rezko, why did the Obama campaign send a staffer to take down notes of the Rezko trial?