And Rogerr Ailes is paying Morris a substantial sum, wau above market value for this bozo. This Rezko thing has allredy been discussed by his pals at FOX ad infinitum in the not too distant past. Obama is a good person who is realizing the american dream, something not possible for adult whiners to accomplish..

Ahhh..... Prostitute Toe Sucker Dick Morris (another fake journalist) knows this as fact and a judge and lawyers from both sides and all other parties involved were not smart enough to bring this up, if it were true?

It is exactly this kind of drivel that comes out of Morris' mouth that will only be found on......... FOX Noise!

And Rogerr Ailes is paying Morris a substantial sum, wau above market value for this bozo.

"Market value for this bozo" ... that would still be below minimum wage.  :-)

Yet even more dishonesty from MM here. Here's why:

Even Obama himself has called this episode a "bone-headed mistake."

The "appraisal" line by MM is also tremendously misleading and dishonest. Properties are not often appraised for years, often decades. An appraisal means nothing unless it's current.

Not cool, MM. Not cool. 

The fact that Obama might now think that the process was flawed has no bearing on the lies that Dick Morris is telling.

 

Talk about "Not cool," Shoes!!!!!  What's "not cool" is your slamming MMFA about "the 'appraisal' line."  Check out the documents link provided by MMFA and you'll see the $40,500 value for the 10' strip (a 1/6 portion of the whole lot) purchased by Obama was established in an appraisal dated Nov 21, 2005.  Mrs. Rezko's June '05 purchase established the market value of the whole lot at $625,000.   In a purchase agreement dated Jan 4, 2006, Obama bought 1/6 of the lot, paying 1/6 of the June '05 purchase price (i.e., market value), rather than the Nov '05 appraised value.  Looks pretty current to me!!

So you are telling me Rezko paid $625k or a piece of property worth $240k.  And Obama paid $100K for property worth $40k.  Can't wait until he is charge of buying hammers and toilet seats for the Pentagon.

Nice try Mr Shoes. Properties are appraised almost every year by sattelite photos of your house. Google earth has a subliminal devilish alternate purpose. It is the Patriot Act in the sky.

The details are all out there.  There's no evidence of wrongdoing.  If we bring this up every time Obama is mentioned, shouldn't we bring up the 'Keating Five' whenever we talk about McCain?

The answer is no, to both. 

Does FOX have an actual "News" program? Is it all just rumor, hearsay, spin? Dick Morris is a d**k, that's for sure. Where did they dig up Cavuto? The obvious lies heard on this segment are so easy to expose. The blanket charge is that since Obama is part of the Chicago political world, and Chicago is corrupt, then Obama MUST be corrupt.

Isn't it possible, just POSSIBLE, that not ALL Chicago politicians are corrupt? DUH!

Now I am waiting for the right-wing sillies to come to the defense of Cavuto and his paramour, Richard Morris.

NO.

The lapdogs will wait for someone's comments on this topic to derail the thread.

Bring it on ! 

To its credit I'm sure FOX will present an alternative explanation to Obama's purchase of the property allegedly for well below its true value...THAT OBAMA SWINDLED REZKO!  ;>)

Is Dick Morris ever right about anything? His track record in predicting Hillary's movements (his supposed expertise on the Clintons has been his meal ticket for years) has been abysmal. He predicted she wouldn't run for the senate. When she ran he said she wouldn't win. He wrongly predicted that her reelection bid versus Jeannene Pirro in 2006 would be a "nightmare" for Hillary and that Hillary would drop out of that race. He then wrote a whole book about how 2008 would likely be a Hillary vs Condi Rice match-up.

My favorite "prediction" of his was when Hurricane Katrina occurred, Morris predicted that Bush would master the disaster and "show how it is done." Why anyone listens to this guy about anything would be a mystery, but I guess his partisanship outweighs the fact that he is seldom correct (at least on Fox).

"His track record in predicting Hillary's movements (his supposed expertise on the Clintons has been his meal ticket for years) has been abysmal"

Exactly why you find Toe Sucker Morris on FOX...... and only FOX!

If Dickie Morris puts his foot in his mouth is that considered masterbation?

My question to you, Sir Dick, what is your take on Scott McClellan? Since you are an expert on being a snivelling, crybaby tell-all kind of guy and your books are the TRUTH, I would guess that you concur with Scottie and his book.

Hey, Little Dick, here is a prediction...Obama will be the next POTUS. Try and tiptoe away from that one.

CHRISTOPHER HOWARD:

Terrific summation of Prick, er, Dick Morris and his bottomless pit of knowledge. There are a couple of guys here in New Orleans who could rival "pundits" like Cavoto and Morris. One stands at the corner of Canal and Camp Streets yelling at cars. My favorite is the preacher with the multi-colored umbrella hat. He uses a mike and a loud sound system. He is actually Rev. Hagee's black cousin.

@CHRISTOPHER HOWARD:  An excellent summary of Dick Morris' "career!"  Nicely done!

"That is one of the most corrupt places on earth". Right up there with Iran, Iraq, Fox New Headquarters and lest we forget, North Korea, the Evil country which was "appeased" by the Bushies.

Dick, Chicago is begging for you to visit and help them correct their problems. If you want to do something good for this nation other than talk, go to Chicago and walk the walk. As an aside, beware of the gentleman named Toeny "Big Toes" Antoenetti. Or do you have vacation plans to search for Big Foot?

Dick will go to any place where people where sandals. ;>)  

...where people wear sandals. (Jeez...it's too early.)  ;>)

Now that was funny.

I try...   ;>)

IRONY,

Don't sweat it, Bro. I noticed that at the time you were posting that, I was just getting to bed. Long night (and day) on Frenchman Street.

what's interesting about this whole story is that, if true, it makes no sense really. if the rest of the rezko parcel would still be developable, absent the 10 foot strip, then i question the veracity of the appraisal. that strip should have appraised higher, unless there was some compelling reason to the contrary, and i've not heard of it yet.

bear in mind, this was long before the collapse of the housing market, but even chicago has minimum building code standards; removing a sixth of the lot would seem to make that parcel less, not more or the same, developable, as it was in whole, causing the remaining section to lose value. again, as a consequence, the strip should have appraised at a higher value, even above it's 1/6 allocable share of the purchase price.

this whole thing just doesn't pass the smell test. or it was poorly worded.

that strip should have appraised higher, unless there was some compelling reason to the contrary, and i've not heard of it yet.

Rest easy. The rules related to property appraisal are very explicit. The appraiser would have been required to follow one of two methods for arriving at the value.  Perhaps he used the lower of the two and the 10 foot strip  could have been valued higher.  An increase factor of 2.5 based on actual sale price is extremely rare and is unlikely to increaase the appraised value of similar 10 foot strips in the area.

I have only barely followed this story but first guess is that the buyer offered more for one (or two) possible reasons. 

@CPINVA:  I don't understand your logic.  A parcel of land upon which a home can be built clearly has one value.  Now take a 10 foot strip from one side of that parcel - why would it have much, if any, value other than to (a.) The entity owning the remainder of that parcel; or (b.) the owner of the adjoining parcel.  Because the marketability if so limited, it would not be possible to produce an unqualified appraisal of the 10 foot strip.

Let's say the respective owners decide on a price for that 10 foot strip.  One-sixth of the total value of the original parcel seems quite fair to me.  The owner of the remainder can still build on it - it's impossible to build on a 10 foot strip of land - and there would not be any other logical buyer.  For what, a spaghetti farm? 

 

simply put, if i'm giving up a part of a parcel, that makes the remainder that much less useful to me, especially in residential property, where the building codes are (supposedly) stricter. as a consequence, i would charge more for that part, by itself, because its loss reduces the value of the remainder by far more than its allocable basis.

any responsible appraiser will take this into account, when valuing a parcel of land. at least, they do in va. maybe IL is different.

Logic is logic - in Illinois or Virginia.  The value of the land is obviously driven by the fact that one could build on it.  Why do homes in the US go up in value (at least, when they do)?  Not because of the home - that's an asset that depreciates.  It's the land value that increases.

Just as long as the residual parcel is buildable, that's where the value will remain.  Stripping off 10 feet from one side, as long as it doesn't change the fact that one could still build on the remainder, doesn't reduce the value by a proportionate amount.

Virginia and Illinois have very different title laws and procedures.  Land is still valued the same way in both states (and the other 48, of course)!

 

Yeah.  100,000 < 40,000.  That must be that special / fuzzy /whatever math that Republicans use.  (Or did they accuse us of doing that?  I'm can never rememebr. I'm an engineer by profession, so I'm not very good at Republican math.)  Wow.  Purchased 1/6 of a plot for 1/6 of the price paid by a friend (at the time.)  What a scandal.  Makes the TeaPot dome look like Monica Lewinski.  Whatever.  Where do they find these hacks?

Yeah.  100,000 < 40,000.  That must be that special / fuzzy /whatever math that Republicans use.

I believe it was the Clinton campaign that brought this subject into the debate, not the republicans.

And your point is?  Morris is the one making the claim NOW.  The past is passed.  I'm replying to what's going on TODAY.  I don't care who started it (as I often have to tell my 6 year old) this right-wing @ss-clown is the one that's keeping it (or trying to keep it) alive.  It was BS when the Clinton campaign first floated it, and it still BS, and this hack should recognize it.  If he can't let it go (or refuses to recognize BS when he sees it) then it's his smear now.

Better get used to it.  Everything the Clintons used against Obama will be trotted out by those who want Obama defeated.  This is only the beginning.

And MMfA will slap them all down, as the posters here do to you when you constantly bring up lies.

Why are real estate deals (Obama's with Rezko, the Clintons with Whitewater) more important in the scheme of things than oil and weapons deals?

How much did the Clintons or Obama make in their real estate deals compared to Cheney's Haliburton profits, or the money GW has made all of his life from failed business deals?

How about Neal Bush's involvement in the S&L crisis or Prescott Bush's dealings with the Third Reich. McCain also has his baggage to carry from the Keating 5.

The point is that even if the Clintons and Obama profited from their deals, how many people were hurt because they profited?

I'm sure the answer if a lot fewer than those who've been hurt by the present regime's dealings.

WK, thanks for always seeing the bigger (and much more important) picture. I wish there was somebody that brought up your points every time this stuff about Obama/Clinton was brought up. It would make it look like the silliness that it is. 

Excellent post.  Dead on.

Why are real estate deals (Obama's with Rezko, the Clintons with Whitewater) more important in the scheme of things than oil and weapons deals?

Simple.  Those [real estate] deals were made by Deomacrats and Oil/Weapons deals are (generally) made by Republicans.  That's the difference.  End of story.

Stick a fork in Dick Morris - he's done.  Now that Sen. Clinton isn't running for President we'll quite happily see him disappear from the scene.  For a while he will keep on making very expensive speeches to private groups, but that will pass as well.  In a few years you'll be able to find him at Powell and Market Streets in San Francisco, carrying around a 9 Galexies sign.

Did anyone else hear Dick Morris call Sen. Obama "boy" on Sheer Insannity's show last night (Wednesday - June 4, 2008)?

Yaaaawn.  I grow weary of these feeble attempts to highlight character flaws in Obama.  Wake me up when they come out with something substantial, like a sex tape "Senators Gone Wild," and Obama is on the cover with Reverend Wright, wearing a turbine, layed up with the blondest woman they could find.  Until, then they're just filling up time between commercials. 

Why are you writing the GOP's advirtisments for them? ;)

SSSHHHH!!! DON'T GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!!!

(I mean... It's not like they have any anyway!)

Obama is on the cover with Reverend Wright, wearing a turbine

Now that's what I call spin! 

WHIIIIRRR

Every time the republic party brings up this deal, the Keating Five, Neal Bush, Halliburton, etc. SHOULD be brought up. Hit them back every time. Hard. Don't ever let them get away with this kind of garbage. I get so tired of seeing Liberals get beat up over this stuff, when there are so many more republicans with far worse stuff going on.

what does neal bush or halliburton have to do with the lying obama

appraised for tax purposes iw not the same as appraised for market value.  this deal is dirty and it was a way to pay off the husseinies. 

Media Matters plays “gotcha” catching Dick Morris in an error, but ignores the basis of the controversy.  The possible financial gain by Senator Obama from Rezko came at the purchase of the home, not the purchase of a portion of the adjacent lot five months later.

 

The seller of the home and adjacent vacant required both properties to be sold at the same time.  Senator Obama purchased the home at $300,000 less than the asking price and Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent vacant land $382,000 greater than the appraised value of  $243,000 (6 x $40,500).  This gives the appearance that Rezko essentially paid for a portion of Senator Obama’s home.

 

Senator Obama’s purchase of 1/6th of the vacant land from Rezko a few months later at Rezko’s price would help to cover Senator Obama so he could claim he thought Rezko’s portion of the initial purchase was fair.  The net benefit to Obama would still be about $230,000.