Source confirmed Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in document which outlines case against Rezko
For the first time, Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama has surfaced in the federal corrupton case against his longtime campaign fund-raiser, Tony Rezko, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
For the first time, Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama has surfaced in the federal corrupton case against his longtime campaign fund-raiser, Tony Rezko, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
The Illinois senator isn’t accused of any wrongdoing. And there’s no evidence Obama knew contributions to his 2004 U.S. Senate campaign came from schemes Rezko is accused of orchestrating.
The allegations against Rezko that involve Obama are contained in one paragraph of a 78-page document filed last month in which prosecutors outline their corruption and fraud case against Rezko, who was also a key money man for Gov. Blagojevich and other politicians.
Rezko is set to go to trial Feb. 25. The revelation that Obama’s name could come up in court is a political headache he doesn’t need as he heads into a round of primaries that are likely to determine his party’s nomination for president.
Obama is not named in the Dec. 21 court document. But a source familiar with the case confirmed that Obama is the unnamed “political candidate” referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in “sham” finder’s fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama’s successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source.
Sen. Obama Presidential Campaign Q&A
Sen. Obama Presidential Campaign Q&A
A Chicago Sun-Times Exclusive: Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign gave the following written responses to these questions about the Rezko court filing.
Q. What is Sen. Obama’s reaction to being referred to in the Rezko evidentiary proffer?
A. We have no way of knowing he is the politician named here but we returned this money months ago for other reasons.
A. We have no way of knowing he is the politician named here but we returned this money months ago for other reasons.
Q. Was Sen. Obama aware that Rezko allegedly had directed at least one person to donate to the senator’s campaign and later reimbursed that person, possibly violating federal election law?
A. No.
A. No.
Q. Has the Federal Election Commission or the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago contacted the senator or any of his representatives about these matters?
A. No.
A. No.
Q. Why has the senator donated to charity campaign contributions from Rezko and Rezko-linked people?
A. In keeping with our practice of donating to charity donations from people who have been called into question through the legal process, when he was named in documents as potentially engaging in wrongdoing we thought it was appropriate to return his donation to charity.
A. In keeping with our practice of donating to charity donations from people who have been called into question through the legal process, when he was named in documents as potentially engaging in wrongdoing we thought it was appropriate to return his donation to charity.
Q. Does the senator think this development will have any impact on the presidential campaign or undercut the senator’s message that he is an agent of change?
A. No. In fact, Sen. Obama has been a champion of reforms that have made campaign finance laws more transparent so that the public can more closely follow the source of contributions to campaigns. As with any campaign, occasionally individual contributions are called into question. Sen. Obama’s policy in such instances is to donate that money to charity which is what he did in this case seven months ago when questions first surfaced. More on the story.
A. No. In fact, Sen. Obama has been a champion of reforms that have made campaign finance laws more transparent so that the public can more closely follow the source of contributions to campaigns. As with any campaign, occasionally individual contributions are called into question. Sen. Obama’s policy in such instances is to donate that money to charity which is what he did in this case seven months ago when questions first surfaced. More on the story.
5 comments:
Rezko is going to be a thorn in the side of Obama, and yes he came out right away and donated the questionable funds to charity. But of course it is a small drop in the bucket compared to what campaign funds he has.
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/033
It seems that Obama won the delegate caucuses in Nevada, not Hillary. They are weighted so that people living in rural areas have greater weight than delegates from Vegas. I was surprised.
We'll see how this plays out. I look for Mr. Kitty to give his insight into the matter the wise cat he is. As for me I voted already for Hillary and wish Obama the best. Let's hope the people give Senator Obama the benefit of the drought that and say it's a little more then a person he knew that got in trouble. Nothing to do with him or his values.
Rezko knows everybody who is anybody in Illinois. He and Obama are/were friends then neighbors. Yes, this will be a major headache but not any more than that Asian guy (forgot his name) who donated to Hillary and she gave it back. The questions are like the Nixon questions, what did Obama know and when did he know it? When he found out, he didn't keep the money.
The Rezko thing was already coming out before the announcement to run. Obama isn't a stupid man. If there was a major problem here with Rezko, then he shouldn't have run but he did run. No doubt they already went through the what if scenarios and decided it would be OK to run.
Obama was smart enough to come forward to acknowledge his relationship with Rezko. This is nothing but a smear tactic to bring up Rezko case (which the trial starts after Super Tuesday) to sway the public away from Obama. Interesting timing.
Post a Comment