Obama takes Half-Million dollar bribe

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Obama on Rezko deal (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article)

In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood. The state's junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot. Both closed on their properties on the same day.

Last January, aiming to increase the size of his sideyard, Obama paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land.

The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves from him.


Why is this man not being prosecuted?

[CptColumbo]

Obama on Rezko deal (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article)




Why is this man not being prosecuted?
Because he is "under investigation." It's right there in the article you quoted.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Because he is "under investigation." It's right there in the article you quoted.

Obama is not under investigation. Obama is the politician taking Half-Million dollar bribes.

[Tricky]

Obama is not under investigation. Obama is the politician taking Half-Million dollar bribes.
It looks like a real-estate transaction to me. What evidence do you have that it is a bribe?

[volatile]

Excuse me. How is buying some land equivalent to taking a bribe?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

It looks like a real-estate transaction to me. What evidence do you have that it is a bribe?

Obama bought the land from Rezko for about $100,000 that Rezko recently purchased for $625,000.

How can you not see this.

:confused:

Rezko gave Obama over $500,000 of property.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Obama on Rezko deal (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article)


Why is this man not being prosecuted?

Oh, oh!!! I know! Because he didn't commit a crime?

[volatile]

Obama bought the land from Rezko for about $100,000 that Rezko recently purchased for $625,000.

How can you not see this.

:confused:

Rezko gave Obama over $500,000 of property.

He didn't buy the whole parcel - he "paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land".

Giving money away in return for property is certainly not the same thing as receiving a bribe. In fact, it's the absolute opposite of a bribe, which would have resulted in Obama gaining money, surely?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Excuse me. How is buying some land equivalent to taking a bribe?

You might want to make a purchase from the below link.

Master Math (http://www.amazon.com/Master-Math-Basic-Pre-Algebra/dp/1564142140)

[JEROME DA GNOME]

He didn't buy the whole parcel - he "paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land".

Giving money away in return for property is certainly not the same thing as receiving a bribe. In fact, it's the absolute opposite of a bribe, which would have resulted in Obama gaining money, surely?

A bribe does not need to be in the form of cash.

[volatile]

You might want to make a purchase from the below link.

Master Math (http://www.amazon.com/Master-Math-Basic-Pre-Algebra/dp/1564142140)

Eh?

Obama paid money and received a strip of land. How is that in any way functionally equivalent to taking a bribe, which would, by definition, involve Obama gaining something he did not earn?

What did Obama gain other than a strip of land at fair market prices? What did Rezko gain other than a fair market price for his land? In other words, where the hell is the bribe here? I'm struggling.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

It looks like a real-estate transaction to me. What evidence do you have that it is a bribe?

His friends in home room told him it was.

[volatile]

A bribe does not need to be in the form of cash.

True. So what did Obama gain (i.e, where was the bribe) by buying a strip of land for market value?

You haven't really explained this - and indeed, your whole premise seems to stem from the idea that he bought the whole $600,000 plot for $100,000, which is obviously not the case. The whole "Half a Million Dollar Bribe" of the OP is predicated on your inability to parse a news report properly.

You made a mistake. You were wrong.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Obama bought the land from Rezko for about $100,000 that Rezko recently purchased for $625,000.

How can you not see this.

:confused:

Rezko gave Obama over $500,000 of property.

Genius:

Q: Did Rezko have an appraisal performed for the 10-foot strip?

A: I had an appraisal conducted by Howard B. Richter & Associates on November 21, 2005.

Q: Was there a negotiation? Did he have an asking price, or did he just say, whatever you think is fair?

A: I proposed to pay on the basis of proportionality. Since the strip composed one-sixth of the entire lot, I would pay one-sixth of the purchase price of the lot. I offered this to Mr. Rezko and he accepted it.


Does your high school offer a remedial math course? Take it.

[jammonius]

Bribe? And, I'll bet he gets kickbacks from his book publishers, too.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Bribe? And, I'll bet he gets kickbacks from his book publishers, too.

Yeah. And on top of that, he shares the proceeds with his wife, in exchange for sex.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Obama's letters for Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article)

As a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko's successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens.

The deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and his partner, Allison S. Davis, Obama's former boss, according to records from the project, which was four blocks outside Obama's state Senate district.

The above certainly is a political favor.

The letters appear to contradict a statement last December from Obama, who told the Chicago Tribune that, in all the years he's known Rezko, "I've never done any favors for him.''

[Tricky]

This just in: Obama buys a Big Mac with a five-dollar bill and is bribed two dollars in change.

[Spindrift]

Genius:



Does your high school offer a remedial math course? Take it.

JDG - While you're at it you might want to take a remedial reading comprehension course as well.

[fuelair]

Good try Jerome, but you really should have verified - or did you know and think no one would question? And I support Obama only in the sense that I will vote for whichever of the two is the Dem. candidate for President in November.

[Spindrift]

Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Obama's letters for Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article)



The above certainly is a political favor.

There go the goalposts.

I think this thread was about Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe?

Since it's been shown you completely misread that article, you're flailing about for something else now?

[Pookster]

This just in: Obama buys a Big Mac with a five-dollar bill and is bribed two dollars in change.

This was too funny not to quote. :D

[daredelvis]

This just in: Obama buys a Big Mac with a five-dollar bill and is bribed two dollars in change.

This was too funny not to quote. :D

Is it too short to nominate for the language award?

Just once I would like to see someone who starts a smear thread to ask the mods to change the title to "{poster} misreads article / falls for groundless partisan smear about {target of smear} and mistakenly claims {original thread title}". Holding my breath.

Daredelvis

[Upchurch]

A bribe does not need to be in the form of cash.
But it does need to be to the "bribee's" financial or political benefit disproportionate to what they give up for it. Obama bought approximately 1/6th of a property for approximately 1/6th of the cost of the property.

Given that property values are in decline right now, one could even go so far as to say that Obama came out worse for the deal.

Why are you so concerned about Obama that you will uncritically jump on any criticism of him?

[CptColumbo]

So its like saying that Rezko bought a Pizza for $16, and when Obama wanted a slice he charged him $2. I don't see where the "bribe" comes in.

I bought a lawn mower from my neighbor for $25, did he bribe me?

[varwoche]

I bought a lawn mower from my neighbor for $25 Reported. No, not to the mods. To the feds.

[ImaginalDisc]

Are you going to admit you were wrong, Jerome?

[CptColumbo]

Reported. No, not to the mods. To the feds.
If only you knew what was in the grass catcher.
**wink, wink**

[Pookster]

Are you going to admit you were wrong, Jerome?

This would be like ... surrendering. Why do you hate America so much?


:duck:

[Upchurch]

Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Obama's letters for Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article)



The above certainly is a political favor.

Since it's been shown you completely misread that article, you're flailing about for something else now?
Granting that it is a non-sequitor, let's read a little further down the article than what Jerome quoted:
On Tuesday, Bill Burton, press secretary for Obama's presidential campaign, said the letters Obama wrote in support of the development weren't intended as a favor to Rezko or Davis.

"This wasn't done as a favor for anyone," Burton said in a written statement. "It was done in the interests of the people in the community who have benefited from the project.

"I don't know that anyone specifically asked him to write this letter nine years ago," the statement said. "There was a consensus in the community about the positive impact the project would make and Obama supported it because it was going to help people in his district. . . . They had a wellness clinic and adult day-care services, as well as a series of social services for residents. It's a successful project. It's meant a lot to the community, and he's proud to have supported it.''

If you are interested in learning more about Obama's relationship, I recommend:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-obamafullwebmar16,0,7095608.story
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/844597,transcript031508.article
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/acrobat/2008-03/36768343.pdf
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0316edit1mar16,0,745313.story

Here's an excerpt from that last one:
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama waited 16 months to attempt the exorcism. But when he finally sat down with the Tribune editorial board Friday, Obama offered a lengthy and, to us, plausible explanation for the presence of now-indicted businessman Tony Rezko in his personal and political lives.

The most remarkable facet of Obama's 92-minute discussion was that, at the outset, he pledged to answer every question the three dozen Tribune journalists crammed into the room would put to him. And he did.


Obviously, Obama would never make a good president. He talks to reporters and answers their questions to their satisfaction. That'll never do.
[/sarcasm]

[Undesired Walrus]

Are you going to admit you were wrong, Jerome?

Only if someone isn't distracted by the completely different story he now wants us to look at.

[Upchurch]

sorry

[Pookster]

... Obviously, Obama would never make a good president. He talks to reporters and answers their questions to their satisfaction. That'll never do.
[/sarcasm]

I heard he brought do-nuts. Well, that's what I heard.

[Rob Lister]

[QUOTE=Upchurch;3746893]But it does need to be to the "bribee's" financial or political benefit disproportionate to what they give up for it. Obama bought approximately 1/6th of a property for approximately 1/6th of the cost of the property.

Given that property values are in decline right now, one could even go so far as to say that Obama came out worse for the deal.
/QUOTE]

ah! so obama was the one that actually did the bribing!

[Undesired Walrus]

sorry

I actually didn't notice that!

[boloboffin]

Just once I would like to see someone who starts a smear thread to ask the mods to change the title to "{poster} misreads article / falls for groundless partisan smear about {target of smear} and mistakenly claims {original thread title}".

I'll make this pledge now. If I'm convinced I've seriously misrepresented something I've posted about John McCain in a thread title, I will ask the moderators to change the title to reflect reality. I even expect to have to make good on this pledge. I won't be able to do the exact formula there because it would be too long, but something about "bolo falls for it" should be in there.

[Denver]

I think that with all the negative campaigning and ridiculous spinning that has been going on, there is a growing number of people that will be voting for one candidate simply because they are disgusted with the tactics of the other candidate and the messages and actions of their supporters. This thread is a good example of the type of misinformation and spin that is going to backfire hugely in the next election, and just add that much more disgust at the anti-messages to prompt further conversion to the very candidate it tries to discredit.

[Puppycow]

Are you silly ppl still feeding this troll? :covereyes

[jj]

Bear in mind that the title of this thread is an outright, apparently intentional lie.

So don't expect any meaningful dialog.

[skeptical]

Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?


Jerome, it is obvious that you jumped to a conclusion that Obama paid $100k for a $600K property, when in fact he paid $100K for 1/6th of a $600K property. You misread the article and were wrong. That is crystal clear, the only question that remains is: will you admit that you were wrong?

There is no shame in admitting you made a mistake, everyone does it. However, if you are not willing to admit this mistake, I am not sure why anyone would ever seriously engage with you again.

[Undesired Walrus]

Forget hypothetical bribes, the more interesting question is how Obama afforded 1.5 Million back in 2005! The Harvard Law Review pay well or something?

[Bob Klase]

Jerome, it is obvious that you jumped to a conclusion that Obama paid $100k for a $600K property, when in fact he paid $100K for 1/6th of a $600K property. You misread the article and were wrong.

I believe that in Jerome's world that would mean that he lied.

[chipmunk stew]

This just in: Obama buys a Big Mac with a five-dollar bill and is bribed two dollars in change.
:dl:

[chipmunk stew]

Is it too short to nominate for the language award?

Do we still have the Pith award?

[Lonewulf]

This just in: Obama buys a Big Mac with a five-dollar bill and is bribed two dollars in change.+1

[brodski]

Do we still have the Pith award?

we do, and Tricky runs it.

[chipmunk stew]

we do, and Tricky runs it.
Good. He's a shoo-in, then, isn't he?

Tricky, I'll give you $10 in exchange for something of equal value if you select your post for the Pith award.

[varwoche]

Forget hypothetical bribes, the more interesting question is how Obama afforded 1.5 Million back in 2005! The Harvard Law Review pay well or something? Not counting the two million dollar book deal which alone answers your question, he earns 158k as a senator and Michelle was making over 200k as an attorney. I suspect they'd qualify for a home loan.

[The Painter]

Harry Reed taught Obama about real estate. What would you expect? Check into Reed's real Estate dealings. Why isn't he in jail?


In a May 2004 profile in The New Yorker magazine, Senator Obama is quoted to say that in order for the Obama family to be able to survive financially during his 2004 run for the US Senate seat representing Illinois, he and Mrs. Obama had had to take out a second mortgage on their Hyde Park apartment. The Hyde Park area of Chicago might be described as Bohemian rather than well off or even upper middle class.

The Senator is duly elected and in January 2005 takes his seat in the US Senate.

In June 2005, the Obamas purchase for cash the home in which they now reside when in Chicago. This home cost US$1.65million. It was paid for in cash.

This is a remarkable financial turn around from May 2004 when the Obamas needed a 2nd mortgage on an apartment worth at best US$300,000. There seems to be no explanation for how Senator and Mrs. Obama got the US$1.65million in cash to purchase their home. There is no increase in salary, no gifts, no inheritances, no book deals or additional royalties cited in the released financial records which could account for this inflow of funds which amounts to 8 times the couple's pretax declared income of 2004 and 10 times the salary paid to a US Senator (S162,5000 pa), which the Senator had only earned for 6 months prior to the acquisition of the new home.

The Senator and Mrs. Obama have not addressed the issue of where the money came from which enabled them to purchase the lovely mansion in the best part of Chicago.

[boloboffin]

Yes, they have. With the permission of the Senate Ethics Committee, they received advance royalties from Random House which covered the purchase of that home and then some.

[albion]

Harry Reed taught Obama about real estate. What would you expect? Check into Reed's real Estate dealings. Why isn't he in jail?


In a May 2004 profile in The New Yorker magazine, Senator Obama is quoted to say that in order for the Obama family to be able to survive financially during his 2004 run for the US Senate seat representing Illinois, he and Mrs. Obama had had to take out a second mortgage on their Hyde Park apartment. The Hyde Park area of Chicago might be described as Bohemian rather than well off or even upper middle class.

The Senator is duly elected and in January 2005 takes his seat in the US Senate.

In June 2005, the Obamas purchase for cash the home in which they now reside when in Chicago. This home cost US$1.65million. It was paid for in cash.

This is a remarkable financial turn around from May 2004 when the Obamas needed a 2nd mortgage on an apartment worth at best US$300,000. There seems to be no explanation for how Senator and Mrs. Obama got the US$1.65million in cash to purchase their home. There is no increase in salary, no gifts, no inheritances, no book deals or additional royalties cited in the released financial records which could account for this inflow of funds which amounts to 8 times the couple's pretax declared income of 2004 and 10 times the salary paid to a US Senator (S162,5000 pa), which the Senator had only earned for 6 months prior to the acquisition of the new home.

The Senator and Mrs. Obama have not addressed the issue of where the money came from which enabled them to purchase the lovely mansion in the best part of Chicago.


Barack Obama Lands $1.9 Million Book Deal
James Joyner | Saturday, December 18, 2004

Obama lands $1.9 million book deal (Chicago Sun-Times)

Leveraging his best-selling memoir, Sen.-elect Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is poised to sign a three-book deal landing him a $1.9 million advance. The package includes a $200,000 payment for a children’s volume that will be donated to charity. The deal was announced by Obama’s office Friday but is contingent on the approval of the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, a panel which routinely reviews book contracts for sitting senators for any violation of conflict-of- interest and other rules governing the conduct of senators and their staffers. No Senate regulations prevent Obama from signing a contract for a book before he is sworn into office Jan. 4.


Outside the Beltway (http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2004/12/barack_obama_lands_19_million_book_deal/)

A google search verified that in oh....5 seconds :rolleyes:

[volatile]

Ideology > Truth.

[jj]

It's obvious that the people who obviously have trouble with Obama's genetic background will go to just about any length to lie about his past and present.

The title of this entire thread is still an outright lie, but we still see people, people who have had the evidence shoved in their nose, supporting it.

This is just like the Swifties, never mind the facts, keep lying through the teeth and the people who want to believe it will believe it anyhow.

[albion]

Ideology > Truth.

I bet £50* that we'll see this "how did he afford the house" meme mentioned by at least 3 people in the next week as if it's a death-knell for Obama....anyone?


Remember £50 is worth something like $2m nowadays so it's a worthwhile gamble :p


* I had my fingers crossed

[The Painter]

Outside the Beltway (http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2004/12/barack_obama_lands_19_million_book_deal/)

A google search verified that in oh....5 seconds :rolleyes:

Oh, you see he didn't get the entire 1.9 mil and at the point of your link, 2004 he had not even signed.

In a 10 second search;

He'll be paid an $850,000 advance for each adult book and $200,000 for the children's book, said Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/headlines/obama1219

Hmm, that still doesn't add up to 1.65 Mil

$200,000 for the children's book, said Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs.
Proceeds from the children's book, which Obama will work on with his wife, Michelle, and their two young daughters, will go to charity, Gibbs said.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-128602832.html

Wow now it's even less!! He's down to half. Where did the other half come from???

[chipmunk stew]

Oh, you see he didn't get the entire 1.9 mil and at the point of your link, 2004 he had not even signed.

In a 10 second search;



http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/headlines/obama1219

Hmm, that still doesn't add up to 1.65 Mil



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-128602832.html

Wow now it's even less!! He's down to half. Where did the other half come from???
You missed a number
Obama will write two books for adults...

He'll be paid an $850,000 advance for each adult book and $200,000 for the children's book, said Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs.
Voila.

[albion]

Oh, you see he didn't get the entire 1.9 mil and at the point of your link, 2004 he had not even signed.

In a 10 second search;



http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/headlines/obama1219

Hmm, that still doesn't add up to 1.65 Mil



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-128602832.html

Wow now it's even less!! He's down to half. Where did the other half come from???

Do you understand the concept of an advance?

It clearly said that he would get $1.9m (minus $200k for the childrens book) for 3 books.


Fail.

ETA: Beaten to it :)

[Redtail]

Oh, you see he didn't get the entire 1.9 mil and at the point of your link, 2004 he had not even signed.

In a 10 second search;



http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/headlines/obama1219

Hmm, that still doesn't add up to 1.65 Mil



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-128602832.html

Wow now it's even less!! He's down to half. Where did the other half come from???
2 x 850,000=1.7 mil.

ETA: STUPID SLOW TIME WARNER!!!!...
Ah well, what the munk said.

[Dr Adequate]

So, the plot thickens.

* Did Obama really pay $100,000 for property worth $100,000?

* How could he afford to pay $1.5 million for a house in a year in which he only earned $2 million?

* Did he really receive a two dollar bribe from McDonald's in a sinister burger-related transaction?

These and other pointless un-unanswered questions will continue to dog Obama's campaign as increasingly desperate 'wingers attempt to distract people from any issue of substance.

[skeptical]

Wow now it's even less!! He's down to half. Where did the other half come from???

Others have pointed out that it was a $850K advance each for 2 books, hence the $1.6M (actually that's $1.7M if my math is correct).

But, I have a more serious question: Do you care what the truth is? Seriously, do you? Because from what I have seen, the people who hate Obama, of which you certainly appear to be one, seem not to care at all whether it is true just so long as it validates their opinion of him as a low life.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

No Senate regulations prevent Obama from signing a contract for a book before he is sworn into office Jan. 4.

:covereyes


You guys are really naive.

[skeptical]

:covereyes


You guys are really naive.

Jerome, are you going to admit that you were wrong about Obama taking a bribe or not? Again, if you will not admit this, I don't know why anyone would continue to engage with you.

I have been, I think, very fair to you in all the threads we have communicated and I have never, so far as I know, used ad homs of any sort against you. I am genuinely trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I think it is necessary for you to show that you are capable of admitting when you have made a mistake for people to continue to deal with you in good faith.

[Dr Adequate]

No Senate regulations prevent Obama from signing a contract for a book before he is sworn into office Jan. 4.:covereyes


You guys are really naive. So utterly naive that we fell for the preposterous claim that Senate regulations don't apply to people who aren't Senators.

But I'm sure you think you know better.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Jerome, are you going to admit that you were wrong about Obama taking a bribe or not? Again, if you will not admit this, I don't know why anyone would continue to engage with you.

I was not wrong. He has taken the bribe under circumstances for which his supporters can make excuses, nothing more.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

There go the goalposts.

Bribes have two parts to them. This is certainly on-topic and not a goal-post move.

[Upchurch]

I was not wrong. He has taken the bribe under circumstances for which his supporters can make excuses, nothing more.
Oh. What was the bribe and how did he profit from it?

[Vorticity]

:covereyes


You guys are really naive.

Oh, sweet Jesus.

People: I haven't been hanging around the Politics forum lately. Is this guy always like this?

[CptColumbo]

I bet £50* that we'll see this "how did he afford the house" meme mentioned by at least 3 people in the next week as if it's a death-knell for Obama....anyone?


Remember £50 is worth something like $2m nowadays so it's a worthwhile gamble :p


* I had my fingers crossed Wow. I really overpaid for those Skittles I bought in England.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

So utterly naive that we fell for the preposterous claim that Senate regulations don't apply to people who aren't Senators.

But I'm sure you think you know better.

How many books does the publisher need to sell to make a profit with such a large advance?

[Redtail]

I was not wrong. He has taken the bribe under circumstances for which his supporters can make excuses, nothing more.

... What? He paid $100,000 (roughly) for 1/6th of a property worth $600,000 (roughly) in what way is that a bribe?

[skeptical]

I was not wrong. He has taken the bribe under circumstances for which his supporters can make excuses, nothing more.

Jerome, I will give you one more chance. It has been pointed out to you that he paid $100K (roughly) for 1/6th ownership of a property that was worth $600K (roughly). Are you going to continue to say that this transaction was a bribe? Please bear in mind that everyone reading this knows it was not, and I'm quite sure you now realize it was not. The only question is whether you will admit it.

So, one last time, will you admit that paying $100K for something worth $100K is not a bribe or not?

[Dr Adequate]

I was not wrong. Er ... Jerome ... everyone reading this thread can in fact read this thread.

There is, therefore, no point in claiming that you were not wrong.

We all know that you were in fact utterly, contemptibly, ludicrously wrong.

You were astray, erronous, fallacious, inaccurate, incorrect, inexact, misguided, mistaken, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong. And also apparently unable to divide by 6.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

... What? He paid $100,000 (roughly) for 1/6th of a property worth $600,000 (roughly) in what way is that a bribe?

Did he pay?

I read that it was a trust.

Why did a trust buy the property and why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

So, one last time, will you admit that paying $100K for something worth $100K is not a bribe or not?

That is not the question before us.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Er ... Jerome ... everyone reading this thread can in fact read this thread.

Maybe they should read more than this thread and use discernment to discover reality.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

[roger]

Get back here with that! :mad:

[WildCat]

The Hyde Park area of Chicago might be described as Bohemian rather than well off or even upper middle class.
You've never been to Hyde Park, have you?

[skeptical]

That is not the question before us.

That is the question before you. You said he got a $600K property for $100K, he did not. He got 1/6th of said property for $100K.

Do you stand by your statement that this is a bribe or not. Its a very simple question, yes or no?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

That is the question before you. You said he got a $600K property for $100K, he did not. He got 1/6th of said property for $100K.

Do you stand by your statement that this is a bribe or not. Its a very simple question, yes or no?

Now, I know that you are bright enough to understand this. You have proven yourself as such.


The question is not as simple as you are asking. Political bribes are not usually as overt as your question presents. I know that you know this.

:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

How many books does the publisher need to sell to make a profit with such a large advance? I don't know, I'm not a publisher. I do however know that Obama got $4.2 million in royalties last year, and that you don't start getting royalties until your advance has been covered.

[Redtail]

Did he pay?

I read that it was a trust.

Why did a trust buy the property and why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

He answers why he brought the original property in a trust in the article you cited in the op.
I was advised that a trust holding would afford me some privacy, which was important to me as I would be commuting from Washington to Chicago and my family would spend some part of most weeks without me.

As for the strip of land he brought from Rezko, where did you see that was brought with a trust?

[WildCat]

Guess what Jerome? He didn't actually buy it with or any part from Tony Rezko.

Rita Rezko bought the property and later sold part of it to Obama.

[skeptical]

Now, I know that you are bright enough to understand this. You have proven yourself as such.


The question is not as simple as you are asking. Political bribes are not usually as overt as your question presents. I know that you know this.

:gnome:

I will ask one more time. You said he took at "half-million dollar bribe". Its the name of the thread for Pete's sake. There is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. He paid $100K and he took title to a slice of property worth $100K. It really _is_ that simple.

The question is very straight forward. You clearly thought he took title to property worth $600K when he did not. That you made that mistake is in and of itself no big deal. Its an easy mistake to make reading things quickly. No biggie. However, it _is_ a big deal if you are going to continue to refuse to acknowledge your error. You have now said AGAIN in a previous post that he took a bribe after it has been pointed out to you multiple times that he paid $100k for something worth $100K.

Everyone reading this thread sees you made an error. Everyone. The honorable thing to do is just say "mea culpa", I made a mistake. Then we just move on. Simple. But if you will not, I cannot continue to respond to your posts with substance in good faith for the simple reason that it will be obvious that you do not intend to do the same in kind.

I am giving you every opportunity here to just say you made a mistake, all you have to do is buck up and admit it. So, do you admit that paying $100k for a property worth $100K is not a bribe, yes or no?

[Dr Adequate]

The question is not as simple as you are asking. The question Skeptical is asking is exactly as simple as the question Skeptical is asking.

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

If so, please point out the bit of the transaction that makes him $500,000 better off.

If not, stop pretending that you weren't wrong, because you were wrong.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I don't know, I'm not a publisher. I do however know that Obama got $4.2 million in royalties last year, and that you don't start getting royalties until your advance has been covered.

How many books have been sold?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

He answers why he brought the original property in a trust in the article you cited in the op.

So, he gave away the tax break which would be about $45,000 per year for privacy which is obviously a falsehood as we know where he lives.


This tells me that he is a moron.

[WildCat]

Oh, sweet Jesus.

People: I haven't been hanging around the Politics forum lately. Is this guy always like this?
Oh, you don't know the half of it. Go check out the black hole thread in the science section.

[WildCat]

As for the strip of land he brought from Rezko, where did you see that was brought with a trust?
He did buy it with a trust, Northern Trust.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I feel bad for you guys.

It must be difficult to learn that your Messiah is a nothing more than a typical political Crook.

[Dr Adequate]

How many books have been sold? More than enough to cover his advance.

If you want precise figures I suggest that you go and look for them instead of whining at me to do it for you.

[skeptical]

I feel bad for you guys.

It must be difficult to learn that your Messiah is a nothing more than a typical political Crook.

Are you going to admit that you were wrong about the bribe or not? Yes or no?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

More than enough to cover his advance.

If you want precise figures I suggest that you go and look for them instead of whining at me to do it for you.

Naive: deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment


Should you not be skeptical of such large payments?

:gnome:

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Are you going to admit that you were wrong about the bribe or not? Yes or no?

Already answered.

[CptColumbo]

Naive: deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment


Should you not be skeptical of such large payments?

:gnome:So, we're changing the subject now, since you cannot admit that you are wrong and didn't read the article that you linked to?

[Dr Adequate]

I feel bad for you guys.

It must be difficult to learn that your Messiah is a nothing more than a typical political Crook. "Difficult"? I should say impossible. Unless, of course, you can come up with a shred of a scrap of a scintilla of an iota of a fragment of a particle of a crumb of evidence that Obama has, in fact, done something crooked.

Note that paying $100,000 for property worth $100,000 is not considered crooked. Nor is signing a book deal. Except in your bizarre parallel universe.

[Redtail]

So, he gave away the tax break which would be about $45,000 per year for privacy which is obviously a falsehood as we know where he lives.

You knew where he lived in 2005?


This tells me that he is a moron.
It tells me that you didn't think this answer out any more than you did the op.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

:dl:

Some people need to learn when to stop digging.

[Dr Adequate]

Naive: deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment It's amusing when you use the word "naive", though not as amusing as a few posts back when you used the word "reality".

Should you not be skeptical of such large payments? No, you're confusing large payments with the Loch Ness Monster or something.

In what sense are you "skeptical" of these "large payments"?

[Redtail]

He did buy it with a trust, Northern Trust.
Ah I see, thanks for that.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

More than enough to cover his advance.

If you want precise figures I suggest that you go and look for them instead of whining at me to do it for you.

Got it.


You just:

BELIEVE

[Dr Adequate]

Already answered. Strange lie. I'm puzzled once more as to whom you hope to deceive.

Let's repeat the question that you have refused to answer:

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

It's a simple yes or no question, and as such will drive you into babbling halfwitted hysterics rather than give a straight answer to it.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I may start a new thread.

Why do so many skeptics; sans evidence, have such FAITH in a particular candidate?

:confused:

[Dr Adequate]

Got it.


You just:

BELIEVE Now you are lying to me about the meaning and content of my own posts.

I should advise you that this pathetic attempt at deception will fail as badly as all the other pointless stupid lies you've told on this thread.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

It's a simple yes or no question, and as such will drive you into babbling halfwitted hysterics rather than give a straight answer to it.

But this is not the question for a thinking mind, now is it?

This is a question for a mind that Believes!!!

[Dr Adequate]

I may start a new thread.

Why do so many skeptics; sans evidence, have such FAITH in a particular candidate? ... says the Paultard.

Because, my dear Jerome, the evidence that we are "sans" is evidence of any wrongdoing.

Perhaps you could provide us with some.

Or perhaps you could realize that your sorry lying ass has been pwned on this thread, run away from it as fast as your little legs will carry you, and start a new thread devoted to hysterical whining about Obama supporters.

I suspect you'll go with option 2, but feel free to surprise me by being less than a complete jackass.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

... says the Paultard.


Apparently you lose.


:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

It's a simple yes or no question, and as such will drive you into babbling halfwitted hysterics rather than give a straight answer to it. Sometimes my powers of prediction are uncanny.

Let's do it again, it's fun.

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

[Cleon]

Got it.


You just:

BELIEVE


No.


You just have no:

EVIDENCE

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Sometimes my powers of prediction are uncanny.

Let's do it again, it's fun.

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?


But this is not the question for a thinking mind, now is it?

This is a question for a mind that Believes!!!

:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

Apparently you lose. No, apparently Ron Paul lost. You remember? 'Cos everyone thought that your candidate was a raving nutter and that his supporters were a bunch of annoying jerks, halfwits, racists, conspiracy theorists and whackjobs? Remember that?

Now, do please start this thread on why some people have such faith in their candidates. It'll be even funnier than when you use the word "reality".

[Dr Adequate]

But this is not the question for a thinking mind, now is it?

This is a question for a mind that Believes!!!

:gnome: Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

[Redtail]

But this is not the question for a thinking mind, now is it?

This is a question for a mind that Believes!!!

:gnome:

Good, since you "Believe!!!" that Obama did something wrong you won't mind answering.

Well unless you simply can't admit you jumped the gun...

[JEROME DA GNOME]

No, apparently Ron Paul lost. You remember?

I never claimed, or thought that he could win.


You are preforming fails with each post.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Waiting for the Believers to answer.

:gnome:

[Redtail]

You are preforming fails with each post.

When did Dr A claim that Obama took a Half-Million dollar bribe?

[Redtail]

Waiting for the Believers to answer.

:gnome:

Already answered.

Obama takes Half-million dollar bribe
Waiting for you to show where this happened.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

:popcorn6

[Dr Adequate]

I never claimed, or thought that he could win. You have one last tattered vestige of sanity left?

I'm surprised.

By the way, I have a question for you.

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

[skeptical]

Already answered.

Indeed. Cash me out barkeep, I'm done. Jerome I have given you many substantive responses over the past few months, and I have always striven to be as civil online as I would in person. Despite what I consider to be very odd posts, I have never as far as I know called your character into question.

I will not do so now either, but I am done. You have received the last substantive response from me you will ever get. I am sure you don't care, but if you are not on these forums to learn something and have a bit of fun by interacting with others, I'm not sure why in the world you spend so much time here.

No matter, I suppose, your agenda is your own, and you have now clearly shown to me you have no interest whatsoever in truth and fact, and that is all I need to know.

When you have had some time to reflect on our little exchange, perhaps one day you will realize that this thread was never about Obama's integrity, but your own. I hope you show more of it in real life then you do in the cyber world. Good luck.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Yet to be answered by the Believers.



Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

Yet to be answered by the Believers.



Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko? You have been supplied with Obama's stated reason for buying the property though a trust, [edited]; and you have shown no evidence that he lied, just as you have given no evidence for your fantasy of the "half-million dollar bribe", nor for whatever insane conspiracy theory you were trying to weave around his book deal.

Now, here's a question for you.

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

Attack the argument and civility.

[daredelvis]

Yet to be answered by the Believers.



Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

:gnome:

Your arguments aren't getting by the Obama apologist filters. Try this one. "Obama and Rezko totally copied REO Speedwagon."

No thanks needed,

Daredelvis

[JEROME DA GNOME]

edited

You have failed again.

Infraction reversed but edit remains.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

You have been supplied with Obama's stated reason for buying the property though a trust

That answer makes him a moron as he has lost approx. $45,000 dollars every year in taxes due to not taking the deduction and it is know where the property is. No benifit, big loss.


Why was he clumsily hiding the purchase?


You have set your own trap, he is either a moron or he is corrupt. Which is your choice as to the explanation for his behavior?


Maybe he is stupid and a crook.

:gnome:

[SezMe]

Up to this thread I've always considered JdG kinda interesting with some of his more, er, unusual positions. Kinda like a cute, um, gnome.

But his behavior here has been downright despicable. He's lied. He's put wheels on the goalposts. And he's been absolutely unable to take responsibility for his own words. I'll continue to read his posts for amusement value only but, like skeptical, I will not bother to deal with him again on any subject in any thread.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Up to this thread I've always considered JdG kinda interesting with some of his more, er, unusual positions. Kinda like a cute, um, gnome.

But his behavior here has been downright despicable. He's lied. He's put wheels on the goalposts. And he's been absolutely unable to take responsibility for his own words. I'll continue to read his posts for amusement value only but, like skeptical, I will not bother to deal with him again on any subject in any thread.



Ohh, so you ignore the questions and insult the questioner.

That is a fail.


Nothing but Faith and Belief here.





Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

:gnome:

[jj]

Oh, you don't know the half of it. Go check out the black hole thread in the science section.

And then there's the obvious bad-troll level misconstrusion and evasions in the "... evolution says ..." thread.

Yeah. You know enough, though. What Wildcat and I point to is just more of the same.

The OP title is shown to be a lie. Will the person making it be a mensch or not?

[KoihimeNakamura]

Oh, sweet Jesus.

People: I haven't been hanging around the Politics forum lately. Is this guy always like this?

Yes.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

You have failed again.

I'm reminded of something about a pot and a kettle...

And way to dodge the actual substance.

[LostAngeles]

Your arguments aren't getting by the Obama apologist filters. Try this one. "Obama and Rezko totally copied REO Speedwagon."

No thanks needed,

Daredelvis

I helped you out with that one:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3748765

[Redtail]

That answer makes him a moron as he has lost approx. $45,000 dollars every year in taxes due to not taking the deduction and it is know where the property is. No benifit, big loss.


Why was he clumsily hiding the purchase?


You have set your own trap, he is either a moron or he is corrupt. Which is your choice as to the explanation for his behavior?


Maybe he is stupid and a crook.

:gnome:

Was it known where the property is in 2005?

[Redtail]

Ohh, so you ignore the questions and insult the questioner.

That is a fail.


Nothing but Faith and Belief here.





Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

:gnome:

For privacy

where did he lie?

And last but not least...

When did he take a $500,000 bribe?

[Mobyseven]

So wait a minute...let me get this straight:

Obama paid $100,000 for a piece of property worth $100,000, resulting in a net gain for him of $500,000. He paid for this, as with the original property, with the advance (and subsequently, royalties) for books that he had written, via a trust so as to afford him and his family a bit of privacy, which is obviously a lie because now three years into the future we know where he lives anyway.

I'm not familiar with this play, but I have the strangest feeling it was written by Samuel Beckett...

[Dr Adequate]

You have failed again. We clearly have different criteria for success: in my world stating the bleedin' obvious is not failure.

You should try it yourself sometime, possibly in answer to the following question:

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

[Mashuna]

Ohh, so you ignore the questions and insult the questioner.

That is a fail.


Nothing but Faith and Belief here.


Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

:gnome:

Hey, this is great. I don't normally look in the Politics section, but stay in the Religion or Science areas. Imagine my surprise to find Jerome's inimitable posting style here too!

Anyone can learn it kids, it's easy. Post something stupid, then claim you've won. Repeat claim that you've won forever.

Soon, wherever you go, people will call you a shining wit, and a master debater.

Well, if you don't listen too closely, that it.

[Undesired Walrus]

Jerome. We know, everyone knows, and most of all you know that you have destroyed -nay- decimated any trace, and dot of credibility you may have on this forum. Even WildCat, hardly an enthusiast of Obama, has caught you up in your web of irrelevance. Lie to yourself however much you want, it will not change the fact that a vast majority will soon follow the course of action I will now take.

[Undesired Walrus]

This message is hidden because JEROME DA GNOME is on your ignore list.


That's better.

[The Painter]

You missed a number

Second book, after he bought the house.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

where did he lie?



Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Obama's letters for Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article)

As a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko's successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens.

The deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and his partner, Allison S. Davis, Obama's former boss, according to records from the project, which was four blocks outside Obama's state Senate district.


The letters appear to contradict a statement last December from Obama, who told the Chicago Tribune that, in all the years he's known Rezko, "I've never done any favors for him.''


The above certainly is a political favor.


:gnome:

[volatile]

Second book, after he bought the house.

You understand that the word "advance" means he got the money before he wrote the book, right? In advance.

[Dr Adequate]

You understand that the word "advance" means he got the money before he wrote the book, right? In advance. You know, I'm not certain that he does.

[albion]

Wow. I really overpaid for those Skittles I bought in England.

It's not possible to pay to much for skittles ;)

Second book, after he bought the house.

I'll try and make this simple.

$1.7m advance

Wiki - Advance Payment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_payment)

Read that if you find yourself getting confused again.

[Dr Adequate]

The above certainly is a political favor. Unless the development was actually a good idea.

Robert Grossman, Chairman of the Hyde Park-Kenwood Conservation Community Council, wrote a letter to DOH stating that that “We were encouraged by the New Kenwood proposal. The project will provide an aesthetic and commercial boost to the community …We look forward to their return to the CCC for further consideration and, based on what we have seen thus far, final approval.” [Grossman Letter, 10/21/98]

Henry Webber was the Vice President for Community Affairs at the University of Chicago. Webber wrote, “Your loan proceeds, couple with Trust Fund monies from the Illinois Housing Development Authority, will give the developer an opportunity to turn a vacant lot in West Hyde Park into a community asset. Not only will this project create high-quality housing; it will house a range of social service programs targeted to seniors and create job opportunities for community residents. Cottage View will have a significant impact on West Hyde Park and significantly contribute to the momentum already generated by other positive signs of community revitalization.” [Webber Letter, 10/30/98]

Karl Bradley, Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Housing, City of Chicago, conveyed the city’s approval to IHDA and interest in getting New Kenwood, LLC and Cottage View Terrace the money they needed to complete the project. [Bradley to Novak, 05/3/1999]

The Chicago Tribune reports: “[Obama] was one of several political and community leaders who pushed for funding for the project. Among those sending similar letters of support were Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th), then-state Rep. Lou Jones (D-Chicago) and Robert Grossman, head of the Hyde Park-Kenwood Conservation Community Council.” [Chicago Tribune, 23/1/07]

Here's Mayor Daley cutting the ribbon: “For many years, this lot has been a vacant eyesore, and today we cut the ribbon for 97 beautiful apartments for senior citizens ... These units will provide seniors with a safe, secure, and affordable place to call home.” [Press release from the mayor's office, 2/9/2002]

Rosalyn Banks-Jordan, an Associate Asset Manager for the Illinois Housing Development Authority, wrote in a cover letter to the inspection report, “Please note that this development has successfully completed the inspection without findings or violations of regulations.” [IHDA Letter, 5/15/06]

According to the Loan Rating Form 2006, Cottage View Terrace had No “Tenant Complants Received By IHDA” in the past year. [IHDA Loan Rating Form 2006, 5/1/2006]

According to the Loan Rating Form 2006, Cottage View Terrace received a perfect score in each of nine categories that described the physical condition of the building, including “Decent, Safe, Sanitary Housing.” [IHDA Loan Rating Form 2006, 5/1/2006]

According to the audit grades, the overall Management, Physical and Market categories got “A” ratings, including a perfect score for Physical and near perfect for Management. The Financial aspect was .12 off an “A” rating. [IHDA Loan Rating Form 2006, 5/1/2006]

[Redtail]

The above certainly is a political favor.

What Dr A said.

So are you going to explain how Obama took a "half million dollar bribe" by paying $100,000 dollars for 1/6th of a $600,000 piece of property or are you going to keep digging?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

So are you going to explain how Obama took a "half million dollar bribe" by paying $100,000 dollars for 1/6th of a $600,000 piece of property or are you going to keep digging?

Simple explanations are your only solace. Try thought.

Boneheaded deal haunts house Obama built (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3499430.ece)


Try reading the entire circumstance and the relationships of the people involved.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I'll try and make this simple.

$1.7m advance

Why did he need Rezko to buy the garden which was formerly part of the property?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Unless the development was actually a good idea.

That is nice, but the question was where did Obama lie. That is what I presented.

If it was "no big deal", why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

[OneShotKi11]

That is nice, but the question was where did Obama lie. That is what I presented.

If it was "no big deal", why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

It is too hot and sticky in my room for me to read through this whole debate as well as do my own research, so would someone please answer this dam question so i can see the answer.....

"why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?"

This one as well if it has already not been answered....

"Why did a trust buy the property?"

[Dr Adequate]

That is nice, but the question was where did Obama lie. That is what I presented.

If it was "no big deal", why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko? Please present evidence that Obama supported the development as a favor to Rezko rather than because it was a good idea.

Oh, and could you answer this simple question?

Obama paid Rezko $100,000 for property worth $100,000.

Do you still claim that this transaction was "Obama taking a half-million dollar bribe"?

[Redtail]

Simple explanations are your only solace. Try thought.

Boneheaded deal haunts house Obama built (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3499430.ece)


Try reading the entire circumstance and the relationships of the people involved.

You don't want thought you want imagination. I'm using thought, thus the reason it's so hard for you to answer the question of how Obama took a "half million dollar bribe" when he paid $100,000 for 1/6th of a property that was worth $600,000.

Face it, you screwed up. Sorry your fear of Obama makes you so irrational.

[Redtail]

It is too hot and sticky in my room for me to read through this whole debate as well as do my own research, so would someone please answer this dam question so i can see the answer.....

"why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?"

This one as well if it has already not been answered....

"Why did a trust buy the property?"

There isn't any evidence that he did.

To give his family some privacy when he was in DC.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

There isn't any evidence that he did.

This will be the third time I gave you the link which evidences Obama lying about his relationship with Resko.


Why did Obama lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Obama's letters for Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article)


Faith in the Messiah has many many here very irrational.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

To give his family some privacy when he was in DC.

Yet we know where the house is, and he is losing $45,000 per year in extra tax payments because the trust purchased the home.


Is he just stupid?

:mgduh

[WildCat]

Yet we know where the house is, and he is losing $45,000 per year in extra tax payments because the trust purchased the home.
Evidence?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Evidence?

You have heard of the mortgage deduction?

http://taxes.about.com/od/deductionscredits/a/MortgageDeduct.htm



:mgbanghead

[winnietheblue]

You have heard of the mortgage deduction?

http://taxes.about.com/od/deductionscredits/a/MortgageDeduct.htm



:mgbanghead

http://www.taxresourcegroup.com/library/memo/1299.html

As far as I know, placing a home in a living trust does not affect any possible mortgage deduction, and the above website seems to agree. If trusts did affect taxes negatively, financial advisers wouldn't promote them as heavily as they do.

[Damien Evans]

Up to this thread I've always considered JdG kinda interesting with some of his more, er, unusual positions. Kinda like a cute, um, gnome.

But his behavior here has been downright despicable. He's lied. He's put wheels on the goalposts. And he's been absolutely unable to take responsibility for his own words. I'll continue to read his posts for amusement value only but, like skeptical, I will not bother to deal with him again on any subject in any thread.

And then hooked the wheels up to 6 litre V8's producing over 400 horsepower each.

Those goalposts are long gone.

[TriskettheKid]

Only hooked it up to a couple of V8's?

Try a couple of Saturn V rockets.

[Lonewulf]

From the "evidence" that Barack Obama "did a favor" for Rezko, and then lied about it:

On Tuesday, Bill Burton, press secretary for Obama's presidential campaign, said the letters Obama wrote in support of the development weren't intended as a favor to Rezko or Davis.

"This wasn't done as a favor for anyone," Burton said in a written statement. "It was done in the interests of the people in the community who have benefited from the project.

"I don't know that anyone specifically asked him to write this letter nine years ago," the statement said. "There was a consensus in the community about the positive impact the project would make and Obama supported it because it was going to help people in his district. . . . They had a wellness clinic and adult day-care services, as well as a series of social services for residents. It's a successful project. It's meant a lot to the community, and he's proud to have supported it.''

[...]

Asked about the Obama letters, Rezko's attorney, Joseph Duffy, said Tuesday, "Mr. Rezko never spoke with, nor sought a letter from, Senator Obama in connection with that project."

So, let me get this straight. Obama votes for a bill he agrees with, and this demonstrates incontrovertible evidence that he's "doing a favor" and "lied" about not doing favors?

This makes about as much sense as claiming that voting for Hillary makes you racist, or voting for Obama makes you sexist, or that voting for a white candidate when the opposition is black automatically makes you racist.

This is a fallacy, in a way similar to the False Dichotomy; that if given two choices between two decisions, the decision for one must be because of Reason A, when it could easily be B, C, D, E, or the rest of the letters.

It's perfectly possible to support a bill you agree with, without doing it to "do a favor" for the person proposing it. I do not understand what is so difficult to understand about this. It's elementary-school logic here.


This is even more proof that anti-Obama peeps are so desperate to dig up any kind of dirt as possible on him, that I really think that Obama is sure to win. When the opposition is this frikkin' desperate, it's never a good sign for their side.

[Meadmaker]

Waiting for the Believers to answer.

:gnome:

Even if, somehow, Obama avoided paying one red cent for the property, it would only be a $100,000 bribe, so the thread title would still be wrong.

But if you think this is a scandal, you should read the People Magazine interview with him from earlier this year. He freely admits using his clout as a Senator and Presidential candidate to get tickets for his daughter to the Hannah Montana concert! How can such corruption go unpunished?!?


(I confess, I did read a People Magazine article. I beg extenuating circumstances, as I was waiting in a doctor's office at the time, and there was nothing else to read.)

[Lonewulf]

Jerome calling other people "believers", while supporting Ron Paul 100% and changing his beliefs into whatever Ron Paul's currently spouting out, is kinda hilarious.

[Minadin]

Did he pay?

I read that it was a trust.

Why did a trust buy the property and why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?

Why did a trust buy the property?

Why did he lie about his relationship with Rezko?


You sir, don't know anything about real estate, or the sale, or the sub-division thereof, or you wouldn't have ever asked such a silly question.

[Minadin]

Here's a fairly simple explaination:

http://www.citifinancial.com/glossary/defin/DeedofTrust.htm

A Deed of Trust is one of the 2 available methods for financing the purchase of a parcel of land in the state of Illinois. It's the only one available where I live (Missouri).

Furthermore, for estate purposes, at least here, land is often subdivided into various lots and registered with the AHJ (Authority Having Jurisdiction, usually the municipality or county) to become their own legal parcel of land without necessarily changing the ownership of the original larger property. In such a case a Land Trust (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_trust) is often formed to handle the legal issues that can arise from such an arrangement. This is often done to avoid things like the taxes from when multiple people might gain a portion of the land as part of an inheritence, for instance. Since you typically only pay the capitol gains and such when the property changes hands.

[volatile]

Speaking of Obama, did Jerome post a snivelling apology for saying that Hilary was pre-destined by the sinister powers-that-be to be the candidate?

[nadsat]

:dl: hilarious thread. This JEROME guy is just bizarre.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

http://www.taxresourcegroup.com/library/memo/1299.html

As far as I know, placing a home in a living trust does not affect any possible mortgage deduction, and the above website seems to agree. If trusts did affect taxes negatively, financial advisers wouldn't promote them as heavily as they do.

Did you read your link?

Date Produced: 02/94

In 1993 TP transferred his principal residence to a revocable living trust (the Trust).

Transferred has a different meaning than purchased.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Even if, somehow, Obama avoided paying one red cent for the property, it would only be a $100,000 bribe, so the thread title would still be wrong.

Who has access and use of the $500,000 garden that Rezko purchased?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Here's a fairly simple explaination:

http://www.citifinancial.com/glossary/defin/DeedofTrust.htm



This is a different kind of trust. Your link has nothing to do with Obama and his trust which was used to hide the fact that Rezko brought him a $500,000 garden which Obama could not afford.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Jerome calling other people "believers", while supporting Ron Paul 100% and changing his beliefs into whatever Ron Paul's currently spouting out, is kinda hilarious.

Here you go telling untruth. I do not support the gold-standard. Here you fail.


You attack with untruth the messenger because you can not honestly answer the questions about your Messiah.

[Upchurch]

This is a different kind of trust.
Really? You know the details of how the trust was set up?

What kind of trust was it?

[Lonewulf]

You attack with untruth the messenger because you can not honestly answer the questions about your Messiah.I'd respond, but really the only response your message is worth is an "lol".

[Lurker]

Well, this thread clinches it for me. JdG is clearly a troll. Now he retreats to the letting Obama use the garden on property valued at $500k is the same as a $500k bribe.

[WildCat]

This is a different kind of trust.
Really? Please provide the details of how this particular trust was set up, along with the documents that support your claims.

[WildCat]

Obama's 2005 tax return (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2005_tax_return.pdf).

$32,418 deducted for mortgage interest. (Line 10 on Schedule A)

A collossal failure for Jerome.

[WildCat]

Obama's 2006 tax return (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2006_tax_return.pdf).

$60,449 deducted for mortgage interest, and $16,181 deducted for real estate taxes.

No real estate tax deduction for 2005 because those taxes would actually be accrued in 2004 and are usually paid by the seller at closing.

I predict that Jerrome will completely ignore these last few posts, and will never, ever admit he was 100% wrong on this.

[Suddenly]

The funny thing here is that JDG is missing the only reasonable argument to support his stupid $500K bribe nonsense.

(Although if he did, nobody quoted it... I use the ploinkage feature as a filter...)

If trading away 1/6th of a small lot makes the rest of the lot functionally unbuildable based on possible zoning trouble and/or the market for a home that can be built on the small lot in that area, then for all real purposes Obama has gained far more benefit than simply a static 1/6th of the property if he values privacy...

Or... if the remaining lot later sold for far more than 500K one could argue that the deal involved getting the property assessed for less than market value, etc.

(although Obama's fame may have made the property attractive to speculators as well, which would argue against both)

Do I have any hard evidence for any of this? No. However, these are the real arguments to be made when claiming this was a sweetheart deal....

(I'm an Obama supporter and could largely care less, especially when comparing this sort of thing to McCain's scandal ridden past... but it pains me to see people too stupid to effectively argue their own claims...)

[Darth Rotor]

FWIW, the reason this story will continue to bounce around is the kind of stuff Duke Cunningham tried to pull and got caught at: favorable real estate deals being one of them, similar to but different in detail to what Obama is being called out for here.

Duke's no longer in Congress. IIRC, he's still in jail.

Duke wasn't a lawyer, and IMO not quite as intelligent as Obama. He got caught with his hubris down. I have the read on this that Obama took the pains to make sure that his deal was legal, image considered and risk managed.

FFS, he's most familiar with Chicago politics. He'd be shooting himself in the foot to get into something similar to Whitewater, don't you think, what with all the trouble that caused the Clintons?

[WildCat]

If trading away 1/6th of a small lot makes the rest of the lot functionally unbuildable based on possible zoning trouble and/or the market for a home that can be built on the small lot in that area, then for all real purposes Obama has gained far more benefit than simply a static 1/6th of the property if he values privacy...

Or... if the remaining lot later sold for far more than 500K one could argue that the deal involved getting the property assessed for less than market value, etc.

(although Obama's fame may have made the property attractive to speculators as well, which would argue against both)

Do I have any hard evidence for any of this? No. However, these are the real arguments to be made when claiming this was a sweetheart deal....
I know (because I have seen it) that there was a large "for sale" sign on the property as little as a month ago (I worked on the building directly across the street), don't know whether it is still for sale. IIRC, it was rezoned so condos could be built there - the remaining part of the lot is a corner lot, and has about 180 feet of street exposure on one side.

eta: In 2007 Rita Rezko (who is actually the owner of record) sold her part of the lot to a developer for $575,000. So Rezko actually made about $54,500 on this real estate deal after all was said and done.

[Meadmaker]

Who has access and use of the $500,000 garden that Rezko purchased?


I don't know. Do you?


It seems that the new allegation is that Rezko bought the adjoining land, but did so not for his own purposes, but as some sort of favor so the Obama family could have a big yard.

If that is the case, it would indeed be a pretty major scandal. I vaguely recall a couple of Congressmen being convicted on a similar scandal a few years back, although I can't recall the details. I think one of them involved a boat. So, do you have any evidence that is the case? Or do you just figure that must be it?

As I vaguely recall from news chatter, I think the site was buildable, and Rezko bought it as an investment, but I wouldn't swear to that.

So, the original allegation seemed to be that Rezko bought some property, and then sold it to Obama for much less than he paid. That certainly was not true. The new allegation is that Rezko bought the property with no intention of using it, making it more or less a gift to Obama. Now, is there any reason to believe the new allegation?

[WildCat]

The new allegation is that Rezko bought the property with no intention of using it, making it more or less a gift to Obama. Now, is there any reason to believe the new allegation?
No, see the edit to my last post. Rezko sold the property to a developer for $575,000 over a year ago.

[Suddenly]

As I vaguely recall from news chatter, I think the site was buildable, and Rezko bought it as an investment, but I wouldn't swear to that.




Given Obama's rising star at the time, buying a lot next to him strikes me as solid speculation.

Which raises another point for those hounding Obama with conspiracy theories.... the circumstances of the purchase as to whether/how Rezko in particular was brought in on the ground floor. It kinda sounds like the real estate version of an IPO in a way.

[WildCat]

Here's the record, I've blacked out the addresses and other identifying numbers.

Obama's original purchase:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_01.jpg

Rezko's original purchase:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_02.jpg

Obama buys a portion of Rezko's lot:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_03.jpg

Rezko sells the lot to a developer:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_04.jpg

[Cleon]

Incidentally...Northern Trust is a well-known, national Chicago-based bank that's been around for over a century.

If Jerome is suggesting that it's some outfit set up by Obama for shady deals, he's way off the mark.

[SpitfireIX]

Obama's 2005 tax return (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2005_tax_return.pdf).

$32,418 deducted for mortgage interest. (Line 10 on Schedule A)

A collossal failure for Jerome.


Aw, man, you beat me to it. :mad: I found those this morning, and I was going to post them over lunch.

So, he gave away the tax break which would be about $45,000 per year for privacy . . .


I was also going to point out, as a former accountant with personal tax experience, that even if the Obamas had been forfeiting their home-mortgage interest deduction, Jerome's insinuation that this was costing them $45,000 a year would still be wrong, even allowing for the inaccuracy of his estimate. Mortgage interest is a deduction, which means it's subtracted from taxable income, rather than a credit, which would be subtracted from tax liability. The Obamas' marginal tax rate was 35% for every year since 2005 (the highest individual income-tax bracket), so their actual tax savings has been about $20,000 a year. (n.b. Illinois has an income tax, but a cursory examination of the forms leads me to believe that mortgage interest is not deductible.)

. . . which is obviously a falsehood as we know where he lives.


Did he know that the Rezko deal was going to lead to a scandal? Did he know he was going to run for President? Did you consider that if neither of those events had come to pass, most probably no one would know (or care)?

This tells me that he is a moron.


. . . must . . . resist . . . temptation . . . to . . . say . . . it . . .

[JCL]

Up to this thread I've always considered JdG kinda interesting with some of his more, er, unusual positions. Kinda like a cute, um, gnome.

But his behavior here has been downright despicable. He's lied. He's put wheels on the goalposts. And he's been absolutely unable to take responsibility for his own words. I'll continue to read his posts for amusement value only but, like skeptical, I will not bother to deal with him again on any subject in any thread.

Some of you are going to keep talking at JdG right?

I think as a group you are right on the cusp of a breakthrough.

[SpitfireIX]

I don't know. Do you?


It seems that the new allegation is that Rezko bought the adjoining land, but did so not for his own purposes, but as some sort of favor so the Obama family could have a big yard.

If that is the case, it would indeed be a pretty major scandal. I vaguely recall a couple of Congressmen being convicted on a similar scandal a few years back, although I can't recall the details. I think one of them involved a boat. So, do you have any evidence that is the case? Or do you just figure that must be it?

As I vaguely recall from news chatter, I think the site was buildable, and Rezko bought it as an investment, but I wouldn't swear to that.

So, the original allegation seemed to be that Rezko bought some property, and then sold it to Obama for much less than he paid. That certainly was not true. The new allegation is that Rezko bought the property with no intention of using it, making it more or less a gift to Obama. Now, is there any reason to believe the new allegation?


proud to have supported John McCain for President since 1999

Despite Jerome's blatant horse-changing, even granting for the sake of argument that the Rezkos bought the property just so the Obamas could use it as part of their yard, this still in no way amounts to a $500,000 bribe. At the worst, it would be considered either a gift loan (less likely) or rent-free use of the property (more likely). A rule of thumb is that property rents for 1% of its fair-market value per month, so free use for two years would be worth about $120,000, at the most. I would argue it's worth considerably less, as the market for renting additional yard space is rather limited.

Having said that, the real issues here are somewhat complex.

From a Washington Post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/16/AR2006121600729.html) from December 2006:

In June 2005, in what Obama now describes as a "boneheaded" mistake, Obama and Rezko's wife bought adjacent properties on Chicago's South Side, closing the deals on the same day. Seven months later, wanting a bigger yard for his $1.65 million house, Obama bought a slice of the Rezko property for $104,500.

After news of the deal broke last month in the Chicago Tribune, Obama said he had erred by creating the appearance that Rezko had done him a favor by selling him a portion of the lot. . . .

Later, the Obamas bought a 10-foot-by-150-foot piece of the lot for $104,500. An appraisal put the value of the strip at $40,500, a spokesman said, but Obama considered it fair to pay one-sixth of the original price for one-sixth of the lot. . . .

Rezko and Obama collaborated to build a fence separating the properties, and Obama has paid his landscapers to mow the lawn on the Rezko lot. Obama, who said city code required Rezko to fence the lot, paid for legal and design work to ensure it was done properly, while Rezko paid for the fence. [bolding mine]


There is also some question about whether the seller was willing to come down on the price of the house if the adjacent lot sold at the same time.

It is entirely possible that Rezko had perfectly legitimate business reasons for going along with Obama on this deal, and that Rezko wasn't looking to increase his influence with Obama. But we can't know that, and more to the point, Obama couldn't have known that at the time.

The problem, as I see it, is that Obama did something, as he admits, that created the appearance of possible impropriety. Is that a bad thing? Yes. Does it call into question his judgement? I'd say so. Does it automatically disqualify him from being President? No.

John McCain was in a similar situation with the Keating Five scandal, and as for Hillary Clinton, well, let's not go there. The fact is, these things happen. People make mistakes, and Presidential candidates are no exceptions, though of course most Americans want a President who possesses superior judgement.

There is evidence that McCain has learned from his experience (it's one of the reasons he's become an advocate of campaign finance reform); possibly Clinton has also learned to avoid such mistakes. Whether Obama has truly learned remains to be seen, but I suspect he has.

[CptColumbo]

I cut across my neighbors yard when I take the dog for a walk. Is he bribing me?

[Hokulele]

I cut across my neighbors yard when I take the dog for a walk. Is he bribing me?


He's bribing your dog. If you ever smell kibble-breath after midnight, RUN!

[Lonewulf]

This thread is still going?

Fail.

[CptColumbo]

He's bribing your dog. If you ever smell kibble-breath after midnight, RUN!I'm smelling something alright.

[Shalamar]

Looks Like Jerome hasn't admitted his mistakes yet.

In fact, I've never seen him admit to making a mistake. He just flails about, and sceams 'You're all taking it on FAITH!' And then gibbers a bit that he's right. Even when pointed out that he is very very very wrong.

If caught in a trap, he'll say that we did not understand what he was saying, and that we were too stupid to take the proper meaning of his words (He admitted to writing his posts in a certain way. Possibly to capitalize on that) . Too bad he just can't say 'You're right, I'm wrong, I made a mistake'. He'll just toss the goalposts father out, and claim we have no evidence.

Too bad. It saddens me when someone is so fundamentalist that they flat out refuse to learn from anything, including their own mistakes.

And here, it looks like Obama lost out on the deal, paying too much for a small strip of land, so he could have a slightly bigger lot, with more privacy. Yeah.. that was some bribe...

[Lonewulf]

So the argument is essentially:

1) Obama is crazy or insane.
2) Obama is taking a bribe.

Of course, "He's human, and humans make mistakes" isn't an option in JEROME's book. Then again, to his delusional mind, anyone who supports any kind of candidate besides his own are "faithers" believing in a "Messiah".

[Darth Rotor]

Boneheaded deal haunts house Obama built (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3499430.ece)

Better yet, try looking at the picture next to the article you linked to and tell me she is not grasping his schnitzenbgruben.
11030
His wince is a dead giveaway.

[gnome]

Jerome... me and the other gnomes have had a conference and... this is difficult but, we're going to have to let you go from the organization. You're proving to be an embarrassment. Please henceforth refer to yourself only as "Jerome Da". We appreciate your understanding and discretion.

[Darth Rotor]

Jerome... me and the other gnomes have had a conference and... this is difficult but, we're going to have to let you go from the organization. You're proving to be an embarrassment. Please henceforth refer to yourself only as "Jerome Da". We appreciate your understanding and discretion.

Who do you think you are, a Florida kindergarden teacher?

:duck:

*bonk*

Ouch!

Damnit, I forgot gnomes throw at low altitude.

[gnome]

Does being forced to deal with Florida school social workers count?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Obama's 2005 tax return (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2005_tax_return.pdf).

$32,418 deducted for mortgage interest. (Line 10 on Schedule A)

A collossal failure for Jerome.

What mortgage?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Obama's 2006 tax return (http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2006_tax_return.pdf).

$60,449 deducted for mortgage interest, and $16,181 deducted for real estate taxes.

No real estate tax deduction for 2005 because those taxes would actually be accrued in 2004 and are usually paid by the seller at closing.

I predict that Jerrome will completely ignore these last few posts, and will never, ever admit he was 100% wrong on this.

What mortgage?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

It's obvious that the people who obviously have trouble with Obama's genetic background will go to just about any length to lie about his past and present.

The title of this entire thread is still an outright lie, but we still see people, people who have had the evidence shoved in their nose, supporting it.

This is just like the Swifties, never mind the facts, keep lying through the teeth and the people who want to believe it will believe it anyhow.

Jerome is 14. Hopefully, he'll outgrow it.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Here's the record, I've blacked out the addresses and other identifying numbers.

Obama's original purchase:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_01.jpg

Rezko's original purchase:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_02.jpg

Obama buys a portion of Rezko's lot:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_03.jpg

Rezko sells the lot to a developer:
http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/Obama_04.jpg



Why did you black out public records?

[KoihimeNakamura]

Because he doesn't think we need to know private information? That could posssibly be a breach of forum rules?

[Dr Adequate]

Why did you black out public records? I'll field that one. I don't usually like generalizing about groups, but apparently the forum rules allow me to do so, so here goes.

It would, in principle, be easy enough for foaming, frothing lunatics with a pathetic, twisted, pitiful obsession about Obama to get his hands on Obama's address and start sending their halfwitted puke directly to Obama rather than whining about him endlessly and pointlessly on these forums.

However, people of that kind are invariably hopeless braindead losers, so unless the information is actually spoonfed to these toxic morons, we can rely on them being too lazy and stupid to do so.

In summary, it is a small step towards keeping the next President of the United States from harrassment by witless Paultard filth.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Because he doesn't think we need to know private information? That could posssibly be a breach of forum rules?

Why did you black out public records?


Are you aware that there is a difference between the highlighted words?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

I'll field that one. I don't usually like generalizing about groups, but apparently the forum rules allow me to do so, so here goes.

It would, in principle, be easy enough for foaming, frothing lunatics with a pathetic, twisted, pitiful obsession about Obama to get his hands on Obama's address and start sending their halfwitted puke directly to Obama rather than whining about him endlessly and pointlessly on these forums.

However, people of that kind are invariably hopeless braindead losers, so unless the information is actually spoonfed to these toxic morons, we can rely on them being too lazy and stupid to do so.

In summary, it is a small step towards keeping the next President of the United States from harrassment by witless Paultard filth.


That is the best you can do? That was a poor showing at insulting an entire group, there are much better words in the language than the elementary ones you picked.

[Cleon]

So...Still no evidence of that half-million dollar bribe.

[SpitfireIX]

Jerome... me and the other gnomes have had a conference and... this is difficult but, we're going to have to let you go from the organization. You're proving to be an embarrassment. Please henceforth refer to yourself only as "Jerome Da". We appreciate your understanding and discretion.


:dl: :dl: :dl:

[Dr Adequate]

That is the best you can do? No, it is not.

However, if I am going to laugh at deranged Paultard crapwits, I don't see why I should make any effort on their behalf to write at my highest level.

What do you want, I should write a poem about you?

Feel free to daydream about attracting that level of attention.

[Dr Adequate]

Why did you black out public records? Golly gosh, I do believe that I answered this.

I'll field that one. I don't usually like generalizing about groups, but apparently the forum rules allow me to do so, so here goes.

It would, in principle, be easy enough for foaming, frothing lunatics with a pathetic, twisted, pitiful obsession about Obama to get his hands on Obama's address and start sending their halfwitted puke directly to Obama rather than whining about him endlessly and pointlessly on these forums.

However, people of that kind are invariably hopeless braindead losers, so unless the information is actually spoonfed to these toxic morons, we can rely on them being too lazy and stupid to do so.

In summary, it is a small step towards keeping the next President of the United States from harrassment by witless Paultard filth. BTW, no, that is not the "best I can do". It's just the most time I can be bothered to spend answering you.

[Upchurch]

Why did you black out public records?
Does it matter? Does it effect the pertinent information in any way?

If you are truly interested in the blacked out portions, you could look it up for yourself. It is public after all.

[SpitfireIX]

What mortgage?


The mortgage on the Obamas' home in Chicago. Mortgage interest is only deductible on a first or second residence (see here (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p936.pdf)), and the Obamas own no other homes (Barack rents an apartment (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/432388,CST-NWS-fire18.stng) in Washington D.C.). Futher, Barack has made much of the fact that he and Michelle lived in a relatively small Chicago condominium for the first 13 years of their marriage, until he was elected to the Senate.

Now, Jerome, are you ready to admit that you were completely wrong about this?

[Shalamar]

Jerome will NEVER admit he's wrong. He wants US to admit that followers of Obama worship the man as god on earth, and he's followed from blind faith. In his mind, it is true. In his mind, Obama paid $100k for a $500k parcel of land in evil, vile back room deals. Never mind that the records, evidence, and reality says that Obama paid a little over $100k for a $40 strip of land.

[Upchurch]

He also thinks Obama wants to teach 5 year olds to have sex. He also suspects Obama might be a pedophile.

But this isn't crazy garbage. He's just asking questions....

[KoihimeNakamura]

Just because private information is on a public document, doesn't make it public.

(Read: You can find my address on some public documents, doesn't make where I live a private thing.)

[WildCat]

What mortgage?
Are you now claiming that Obama committed a criminal act by claiming a mortgage deduction when he in fact has no mortgage?

:dl:

[Shalamar]

He also thinks Obama wants to teach 5 year olds to have sex. He also suspects Obama might be a pedophile.

But this isn't crazy garbage. He's just asking questions....

And when he 'questions' don't get his the answers he wants, he simply ignores the answers utterly.. as if they've never been said.

I've been tempted to put him on Ignore. My only one, but he spouts nonsense, and shows no desire to learn at all. He's trying to 'lead' us to the answers he wants. Like trying to 'ask' if Obama is a pedophile.

[SpitfireIX]

Are you now claiming that Obama committed a criminal act by claiming a mortgage deduction when he in fact has no mortgage?

:dl:


Though this is one potential interpretation, I was charitable and gave Jerome the benefit of the doubt. I assumed he might be asking whether the deduction was taken for a mortgage on some other property, which is not a totally unreasonable question, especially for someone unfamiliar with tax accounting. However, as I mentioned, the deduction is only available for a principal or second home, and the Obamas only own their house in Chicago.

As your post implies, the idea that Barack Obama might have committed such a blatant and transparent tax fraud is frankly laughable. First, Obama's returns were prepared and signed by Certified Public Accountants; they would have been unlikely to have missed such an obvious dodge. Second, does anyone honestly believe that Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Republican National Committee didn't have their own CPAs and tax lawyers comb through those returns looking for any possible dirt? Anyone? And finally, does anyone think it's at all likely that a US senator with Presidential ambitions would take such a silly risk just to save $20,000 a year?

[WildCat]

Though this is one potential interpretation, I was charitable and gave Jerome the benefit of the doubt. I assumed he might be asking whether the deduction was taken for a mortgage on some other property, which is not a totally unreasonable question, especially for someone unfamiliar with tax accounting. However, as I mentioned, the deduction is only available for a principal or second home, and the Obamas only own their house in Chicago.
That makes sense.

But now that that's out of the way, will Jerome have the cajones to reappear on this thread and admit he was wrong? I'm not holding my breath.

[VespaGuy]

Sorry to got back on topic, but where exactly is the $500,000 bribe mentioned in the OP? I've read the entire thread and can't seem to find it anywhere.

[The Mutha]

In the title of the thread it is claimed to be a half million dollar bribe, but nothing in the posts shows any evidence of that. JdG has now harnassed rockets to them there goal posts...

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Just because private information is on a public document, doesn't make it public.

Does too.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Sorry to got back on topic, but where exactly is the $500,000 bribe mentioned in the OP? I've read the entire thread and can't seem to find it anywhere.

The property.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

As your post implies, the idea that Barack Obama might have committed such a blatant and transparent tax fraud is frankly laughable.

So, because it is Barack Obama looking like he is committing fraud transparently it can not be fraud.

:rolleyes:

[Megalodon]

Do you have - besides your atrocious mathematics and delusional imagination - any shred of evidence that fraud was committed?

If yes, when are you planning to inform the authorities?

If no, why don't you go suck an egg?

[Redtail]

So, because it is Barack Obama looking like he is committing fraud transparently it can not be fraud.

:rolleyes:

No, because First, Obama's returns were prepared and signed by Certified Public Accountants; they would have been unlikely to have missed such an obvious dodge. Second, does anyone honestly believe that Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Republican National Committee didn't have their own CPAs and tax lawyers comb through those returns looking for any possible dirt? Anyone? And finally, does anyone think it's at all likely that a US senator with Presidential ambitions would take such a silly risk just to save $20,000 a year?

[Shalamar]

The property.

What property would that be? The one where Obama paid $100k for 1/6 of a property, of which the strip of property he bought was worth only $40k? As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in the thread?

[Dr Adequate]

The property. So, let's get this straight. Yes or no.

You are still claiming that Obama took a $500,000 bribe?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

So, let's get this straight. Yes or no.

You are still claiming that Obama took a $500,000 bribe?

Yep.

Let me know why the sellers partitioned the property and sold the two pieces on the same day. Let me know who has access and use of the "Resko" property.

:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

Yep. You are?

* jumps up and down *

It's taken so long to get a straight answer out of you, but now this is gonna be a fabulous, fabulous thread.

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.

Let me know why the sellers partitioned the property and sold the two pieces on the same day. Let me know who has access and use of the "Resko" property.

[Megalodon]

Do you have - besides your atrocious mathematics and delusional imagination - any shred of evidence that fraud was committed?

If yes, when are you planning to inform the authorities?

If no, why don't you go suck an egg?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Do you have - besides your atrocious mathematics and delusional imagination - any shred of evidence that fraud was committed?

If yes, when are you planning to inform the authorities?

If no, why don't you go suck an egg?

Do you have - besides your atrocious mathematics and delusional imagination - any shred of evidence that fraud was committed?

If yes, when are you planning to inform the authorities?

If no, why don't you go suck an egg?


Ahh, so you can not defend your Messiah!

[Tricky]

Let me know why the sellers partitioned the property and sold the two pieces on the same day. Let me know who has access and use of the "Resko" property.
It may have been financially advisable, as well as convenient (since they are all very busy people). That hardly makes it a bribe. Who has access and use is irrelevant.

Your distrust of Obama hardly counts as evidence for bribery. I thought you had stricter standards of evidence than this, based on your belief that you don't think there is enough evidence to prove evolution. I'm sensing an odd dichotomy here.

[Dr Adequate]

Let me know why the sellers partitioned the property and sold the two pieces on the same day. Let me know who has access and use of the "Resko" property. So you're JAQing off? Incoherently, but you are JAQing off.

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Who has access and use is irrelevant.

Access and use of property is relevant.


Would it be against NCAA rules for a booster to give access and use of a new $100,000 BMW to a star football player?

[Megalodon]

Ahh, so you can not defend your Messiah!

Due to your depressing reply, I assume you're searching your fridge, right around now...

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.


It is within your incomprehension of the circumstance.

:gnome:

[Dr Adequate]

It is within your incomprehension of the circumstance. You know, each of those words taken separately has a meaning.

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.

[Megalodon]

You know, each of those words taken separately has a meaning.

Now, please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe.

He's too busy sucking an egg...

[Tricky]

Access and use of property is relevant.

Would it be against NCAA rules for a booster to give access and use of a new $100,000 BMW to a star football player?
It might be relevant to the NCAA, but of course, it is not illegal.

If I gave Obama or his campaign people "access" to my yard and let him put up a campaign sign, would that be a bribe? If so, McCain has been bribed by a whole lot of people around my neighborhood.

[Shalamar]

I want to know how paying $100000 for a piece of property worth $40000 is equal to being given $500000.

[Hokulele]

It might be relevant to the NCAA, but of course, it is not illegal.

If I gave Obama or his campaign people "access" to my yard and let him put up a campaign sign, would that be a bribe? If so, McCain has been bribed by a whole lot of people around my neighborhood.


And if some moRon put up campaign signs for, say, a certain failed Republican contender on public property such as, say, a traffic sign (http://jeannesager.blogspot.com/2007/12/reason-not-to-vote-for-ron-paul-its_03.html), does that mean that the government (or local jurisdiction) is bribing a candidate? Or is this just plain illegal?

[Tricky]

I want to know how paying $100000 for a piece of property worth $40000 is equal to being given $500000.
Well duh, it should be obvious. Barack Obama is taking bribes and then bribing them right back! All those campaign promises about changing things? Bribes. All that talk about discussing problems with our enemies? Bribes. The nice things he's saying about Hillary now? Bribes bribes bribes!


I am reminded of a family joke. It was a trial for rape and the accusor was on the stand.

Prosecutor: Did the defendant rape you?
Witness: You bet he did!
Prosecutor: When did he rape you?
Witness: Lots of times.
Prosecutor: Many times?
Witness: Oh heck yeah! Every time we went on a date it was the same thing, rape rape rape.

Every time Barack has a financial transaction it is the same thing, bribe bribe bribe.

[Megalodon]

It really doesn't matter... apparently he's going to commit suicide till August.

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Well duh, it should be obvious. Barack Obama is taking bribes and then bribing them right back! All those campaign promises about changing things? Bribes. All that talk about discussing problems with our enemies? Bribes. The nice things he's saying about Hillary now? Bribes bribes bribes!

When was the last time you purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of property that you could not afford and had a friend buy part of the property for your access and use?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

If I gave Obama or his campaign people "access" to my yard and let him put up a campaign sign, would that be a bribe?

Nope, and you are much smarter than the failed analogy that you propose.

[Tricky]

When was the last time you purchased hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of property that you could not afford and had a friend buy part of the property for your access and use?
I've done financial deals with friends before. Not on that scale, but then, I'm not wealthy. But even if this did have some element of trying to make Obama like him, this cannot be considered a bribe in any real sense of the word.

Nope, and you are much smarter than the failed analogy that you propose.
I'm no smarter than most of the people who have been replying to you, just less confrontational. But my analogy is no worse than your analogy of the football player.

[Meadmaker]

Let me know why the sellers partitioned the property and sold the two pieces on the same day. Let me know who has access and use of the "Resko" property.

Wildcat already answered the second part, I believe. It has been sold. The developers who bought it have access.

As for the first part, I don't know the answer, but the sellers said they did it before the Obamas expressed interest.

I think what is clearly the case here is that Obama learned a hard lesson. To be fair, he should have known it, and shouldn't have to learn it. He obviously went looking for a house, but instead of just doing things the normal way, he went in on something with a friend. He probably agreed in advance how they would do things. ("Gee, Tony, I found this house, but it's too much." "Oh where is it?" "Well, it's really two lots, but they won't sell one of them without the other. I can't afford both." "Maybe I could buy the other one and develop it. It's empty, right?" "Well, yeah, but...well.. the yard's a little small." "No problem Barak. I'll buy the piece with the yard. I'll sell you a little bit of it, and build something on the rest." "You'd do that? Great!")That's a little bit weird if you are a normal citizen, and each person would really have to trust the other. For a US Senator, that's stupid. It just looks awful. For a Presidential hopeful, that is, in his own words, "boneheaded".

It's boneheaded because, no matter if everything is totally legitimate, you'll have other boneheads insisting that it couldn't possibly be as simple as it appears to be. It appears to me that two guys came to a mutually beneficial agreement regarding a piece of property, and everyone kept their word and did the deal. I don't see any reason to believe anything else.

[Dr Adequate]

Hey, Jerome, I was wondering.

Could you please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe?

[JEROME DA GNOME]

Hey, Jerome, I was wondering.

Could you please provide us with evidence that Obama took a $500,000 bribe?

It is within your incomprehension of the circumstance.

:gnome: