Let me call you sweetheart…
Barack Obama, sweetie, do tell us how your $1.32 million home loan below market rates without paying the normal extra fees demonstrates “new politics,” please.
Funny, Mrs. O neglected to mention this special home loan break while whining about her college loans and kids’ piano/ballet lesson bills.
***
WaPo has the details.
The RNC sends its bullet points on Obama’s glass houses:
Today, The Washington Post Reported That Obama Received A Sweetheart Mortgage Deal For His Chicago Mansion:
Obama Received A Discounted Rate On His $1.32 Million Mortgage For His Georgian Mansion In Chicago. “Shortly after joining the U.S. Senate and while enjoying a surge in income, Barack Obama bought a $1.65 million restored Georgian mansion in an upscale Chicago neighborhood. To finance the purchase, he secured a $1.32 million loan from Northern Trust in Illinois. The freshman Democratic senator received a discount. He locked in an interest rate of 5.625 percent on the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, below the average for such loans at the time in Chicago.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
* “The Loan Was Unusually Large, Known In Banker Lingo As A ‘Super Super Jumbo.’ Obama Paid No Origination Fee Or Discount Points, As Some Consumers Do To Reduce Their Interest Rates.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
Obama’s Discounted Rate Could Have Saved Him More Than $300 Per Month. “Compared with the average terms offered at the time in Chicago, Obama’s rate could have saved him more than $300 per month.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
The Obamas Secured Their Discounted Home Loan Despite The Fact That They Had “No Prior Relationship With Northern Trust When They Applied For The Loan.” “The Obamas had no prior relationship with Northern Trust when they applied for the loan. They received an oral commitment on Feb. 4, 2005, and locked in the rate of 5.625 percent, the campaign said. On that date, HSH data show, the average rate in Chicago for a 30-year fixed-rate jumbo loan with no points was about 5.94 percent.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
NOTE: Obama Also Has Received $71,000 In Campaign Contributions From Northern Trust Employees. “Since 1990, Northern Trust employees have donated more than $739,000 to federal campaigns, including $71,000 to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
FLASHBACK: Obama Paid $300,000 Less Than The Asking Price For His Mansion, While Tony Rezko’s Wife Paid Full Price For A Vacant Lot Next Door On The Very Same Day. “Two years ago, Obama bought a mansion on the South Side, in the Kenwood neighborhood, from a doctor. On the same day, [Antoin 'Tony'] Rezko’s wife, Rita Rezko, bought the vacant lot next door from the same seller. The doctor had listed the properties for sale together. He sold the house to Obama for $300,000 below the asking price. The doctor got his asking price on the lot from Rezko’s wife.” (Tim Novak, “Obama And His Rezko Ties,” Chicago Sun-Times, 4/23/07)
* The Seller Of Obama’s Home “Wanted To Sell Both Properties At The Same Time.” “On the same day Obama closed on his house, Rezko’s wife bought the adjacent empty lot, meeting the condition of the seller who wanted to sell both properties at the same time.” (Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz, “The Rezko Connection,” ABC News’ “The Blotter” Blog, abcnews.go.com, 1/10/08)
* Obama Later Purchased A Portion Of Rezko’s Land For $104,500; It Was Valued At $40,500. “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.” (Peter Slevin, “Obama Says He Regrets Land Deal With Fundraiser,” The Washington Post, 12/17/06)
Jim Johnson, A Former CEO Of Fannie Mae And Former Top Campaign Adviser, Also Received Sweetheart Housing Deal:
Obama’s Former Top Adviser, Jim Johnson, Resigned “After His Favorable Countrywide Loan Became Public.” “Within Obama’s presidential campaign organization, former Fannie Mae chief executive James A. Johnson resigned abruptly as head of the vice presidential search committee after his favorable Countrywide loan became public.” (Joe Stephens, “Obama Got Discount On Home Loan,” The Washington Post, 7/2/08)
Johnson Received Special Loans From Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo. “Countrywide Financial Corp. makes mortgage loans through a vast network of offices, brokers and call centers. But a few customers have gotten their loans a special way: through Countrywide Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo. These borrowers, known internally as ‘friends of Angelo’ or FoA, include two former CEOs of Fannie Mae, the biggest buyer of Countrywide’s mortgages, say people familiar with the matter. One was James Johnson, a longtime Democratic Party power and an adviser to Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign, who this past week was named to a panel that is vetting running-mate possibilities for the presumed nominee.” (Glenn R. Simpson and James R. Hagerty, “Countrywide Friends Got Good Loans,” The Wall Street Journal, 6/7/08)
* While CEO Of Fannie Mae, Johnson And Mozilo Worked Closely And Maintained A “Close Friendship.” “From 1991 to 1998, Mr. Johnson served as CEO of the Federal National Mortgage Association, also known as Fannie Mae, which worked closely with Countrywide, one of the nation’s leading lenders and loan servicing companies. In 1996, Mr. Johnson named Mr. Mozilo as chairman of Fannie Mae’s national advisory council. A 1999 article in the American Banker said the two men had a ‘close friendship.’” (Josh Gerstein, “Top Talent Scout For Obama Tied To Subprime Lender,” The New York Sun, 6/9/08)
“Property Records Show Mr. Johnson Has Received More Than $7 Million In Loans From Countrywide Since 1998, The First Coming In The Waning Days Of His Fannie Mae Tenure.” (Glenn R. Simpson and James R. Hagerty, “Countrywide Friends Got Good Loans,” The Wall Street Journal, 6/7/08)
* At Least Two Of The Mortgages Were At Rates “Below Market Averages.” “The Journal said at least two of the mortgages, among a series of loans made available to people Countrywide officials called ‘friends of Angelo,’ were at rates below market averages, though it is difficult to predict a market rate without access to nonpublic information about a borrower’s credit history and other factors that can reduce interest charges on a loan.” (Josh Gerstein, “Top Talent Scout For Obama Tied To Subprime Lender,” The New York Sun, 6/9/08)
NOTE: Penny Pritzker, Obama’s National Finance Chair And Campaign Bundler, Owned A Failed Bank That Specialized In Subprime Lending:
Penny Pritzker Is The National Finance Chairman For Barack Obama. “And Penny Pritzker, a Chicago philanthropist, serves as Mr. Obama’s national finance chairman even as her brother, Jay Robert, holds fund-raisers across town for Mrs. Clinton.” (Jodi Kantor, “In Democratic Families, Politics Makes For Estranged Bedfellows,” The New York Times, 2/4/08)
* Pritzker Is A Bundler For Obama’s Presidential Campaign And Has Committed To Raising Over $200,000. (Obama For America Website, www.barackobama.com, Accessed 5/19 /08)
The Pritzker Family Co-Owned Superior Bank FSB. “Ms. Pritzker, who declined to be interviewed, has confronted other challenges, including the 2001 collapse of Superior Bank FSB, which the Pritzker family co-owned, resulting in a $460-million payment to federal regulators, and a rift over family assets that settled out of court in 2005. She oversees the Pritzker family’s non-hotel real estate interests and chairs its TransUnion LLC credit bureau.” (Steven R. Strahler, “Penny Pritzker,” Chicago Crain’s Business, 5/7/07)
“Superior Bank Specialized In ‘Sub-Prime Lending,’ Which Is Making Loans To Underserved Borrowers, Who Are Often Poor Minorities.” (Kathleen Day, “Regulators Probe Bank Loan To Co-Owner,” The Washington Post, 7/31/01)
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Another Stupid Obama smear….
- Dewey Napoleon - bring me the horizon » Obama getting sweetheart deals on mortgage loans. But, he’s a different kind of guy so its OK ??
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- Let me call you sweetheart… « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Did Barack Obama get a sweetheart loan? Or what any other rich dude would have gotten? | Outside The Beltway | OTB
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama, Subprime crisis
Gateway Pundit
» John McCain's Mother and Daughter Abused By Leftist (Video)JustOneMinute
» Now The Surge Is Succeeding?Little Miss Attila
» Well, You Know: G.W. Bush Didn't Vet His VP, Either.Weekly Standard
» Newest Palin Smear: She Cut Special Needs BudgetStop The ACLU
» Call Obama (Uh-bama) a WAAAAH!bulance!JustOneMinute
» Boys Will Be Boys?Redstate
» The Maverick Does It His WayWeekly Standard
» A Shrum Victory at Last?
Draining the swamp, Democrat style.
Oh, look, Obama is one of “us”.
Change indeed.
Ther is, indeed, two Americas.
One for elitist, liberal Democrats.
And one for everyone else.
For Obama, real estate appears to be all about vocation, vocation, vocation.
My photoshop skills aren’t that great, but someone should ’shop Obama’s head onto Bob the Builder’s body for “Obama the Bailer”. They do share the “Yes, we can” theme.
The elitist Democrat ideology is to let the minions pay more taxes, but it’s not okay for Democrat party snobs. Paying what everybody else, is paying is not snobobama enough.
Sounds to me like an “inartful” acceptance of a loan that “Was not the loan he once knew”.
“This is not the loan with political perks that I knew.”
Hey, he just needed the 10′x150′ lot to park his bus when he’s not busy throwing everyone under it.
Is it any wonder why liberals love socialism? Rob the rich to give to the “poor.” Poor in this case are our elected officials who use our tax dollars to live life high on the hog -all the while telling us how we ought to live, what to drive and what to eat.
I pay less than average for rent, I paid less than average for my car, and I pay less than average for groceries. It’s called shopping around, which the Obamas apparently do too.
Do any of you seriously consider getting a loan at three tenths of a percent below average (as in, the middle of good and bad, not universal) to be a sweetheart deal?
Obama put his financing details on his website long ago. He isn’t hiding anything here. Republicans are desperate.
Thats backwards. Obama paid 40,500 for Rezkos property. The same Rezko who Obama wrote letters for enabling him to steal millions of taxpayer dollars that were intended to re-hab housing for the poor in Chicago but instead got pocketed.
Hope’n Change.
Barack Obama> I am the Great Messiah, questioning my actions is pure Blasphemy!
Obama’s mortgage loan was 30 point below the average rate. Whoop-dee-do. You do realize what average means, right? It means some will be higher and some will be lower.
My guess is that 1) he and Michelle have far better than average credit rating and 2) the bank was looking at a potential new customer of above average means that they were trying to land. Both are entirely common and neither is any indication of anything other than ordinary business practice.
A wonderful analogy I read of this is that because A-Rod has a batting average 40 points higher than the average major leaguer, one can infer some bias by the umps in his favor.
Change! Change! Change! *blech*
Does that translate as a “Democrat politician”?
I would say that translates into “wealthy individual.”
And seeing as how apparently the Obamas have done a nice chunk of business with them subsequently, according to the article, seems like a prudent decision.
So Obama has saved $10,000 more or less in interest so far. He also gave an extra $60,000 or so to a political manipulator who arranged bribes and deals for other politicians. Obviously if anything indicates a quid pro quo from any of these parties then this may have more legs.
Do banks give out $1.3 million loans to people with less than perfect credit?
Again, “Democrat politician?”
#10 and #13 In this case, I think I have to agree with you. 30 basis points below average doesn’t sound like such a sweetheart deal. However, no points, no origination fee, and the fact that Northern Trust employees donated a lot of money to his campaign does make one wonder. The financial shenanigans of many of his associates seem to be much worse.
Does anyone suppose this is the WaPo’s attempt at being “fair and balanced”?
Simply a coincidence. Friends will be friends.
The standards and qualifications to be a shepherd are not very high…
Sure you can shop around and get a better interest rate than the market average.
But what the Obama defenders are missing is that discounted loans almost always have larger upfront costs in the form of points (prepaid interest) and origination fees. To get that rate you’d expect to pay 1-2% of the total mortgage at closing.
In other words, it looks like the lender waived $10-20k at closing AND gave the Obama’s a sweet interest rate.
The questions are WHY? and was this unusual for this specific lender?
Something doesn’t smell right…
Whoop! Looks like the democrats have a false prophet on their hands.
…..But we have Mcinsane….Sigh.
Well, when you sell your soul to Satan, you can get anything you want and then some.
However, payback is HELL.
…with juice.
J S Ragman is the only one who seems to get it. It’s not that Obama got a mortgage for a better rate than average. That’s interesting, but not a smoking gun by any means.
It’s that he got it on a super super jumbo with none of the fees you’d expect him to pay.
*That’s* what smells bad.
I think what you are missing is that you can’t conclude it was a “discounted” loan simply because it was below the average interest rate. If someone with perfect credit goes in and gets a loan only 5 or 10 points below the average, one would not say that person was lucky to get a “discount”. You would say that person is stupid because they could have gotten a better deal somewhere else.
Again, I am assuming here the Obamas have very good credit, but all indications are that they would. And working on that assumption, 30 points below average is right in line what anyone in a similar financial situation would expect to receive.
And MO has never been proud of this country in her adult life? You could give these clowns an amazing life on a silver platter and they would complain that the platter wasn’t big enough.
Ragman and RobM, the real question is obviously, is the bank making money off this? The O’s obviously couldn’t have been a more attractive pair of borrowers without being Cindy McCain rich. I’m not in the lending business, and I don’t even own a house — you know, I’m a liberal
— but it doesn’t strike me as odd in any way that a bank would say, OK we’ll give you a little better rate and we’ll waive some fees if it means we get your business.
Again, if they’re making money (which I can’t imagine they aren’t on a loan this huge) there’s nothing wrong with it. Aren’t conservatives supposed to support capitalism and competition?
The data missing from the article, to say if this was an unusual deal, is the loan rate normalized against the borrower’s credit and the upfront costs.
The other thing they should do is compare the rate to the average rate of the discount houses and not the rate of all lenders. There are big banks that charge too much regardless of the borrower’s finances.
What we need to know is if the loan terms, not just the rate, were typical for a customer with the Obama’s financial situation. If they were, this is a non-issue. If it was unusual, it suggests a quid pro quo.
I’m almost sure this is helping her kids . . .
BS on both counts.
Obama has told the story many times of being maxed out on his credit cards, so much so that he had some trouble meeting expenses for his speech at the 2004 Democrat Convention.
Banks are always looking for “new potential customers”, but they operate under a very strict set of rules and regulations regarding loans. If Obama had no prior relationship with the bank, there would be no reason to offer any type of “good customer” discount. In addition, it is illegal for a bank (the Bank Bribery Act) to provide anything of value to someone of influence with a view toward influencing their decisions on business matters involving the bank.
And what about the “lock”? Every mortgage originator in the country at the time was charging a fee to lock in the rate of a loan to protect themselves from interest rate movements between the time of the rate quote and the time of the loan closing.
Businesses giving breaks to people of affluence, or other businesses based on the amount of money they are spending, isnt anything new.
I’d be more upset if Obama got a loan at something like 2.5%, but in this case, he got a slightly better loan. Granted, it makes him look a little more hypocritical in some respects, but its nothing really over the hedge to foam at the mouth about.
i’d rather focus on d’obama and his campaign, and the other important issues, than this one frankly.
I am looking forward to the day that B. H. Obama throws B. H. Obama under the bus. I don’t know how he will do it, but it will be entertaining.
They can pay for the offsprings’ piano lessons with that, I guess. So, yes?
I guess we need to dig through his votes on banking legislation or his earmarks…like the money he earmarked for his wife’s employer right around the time she got a new title and huge pay raise.
To be fair, in 2005 it seems every bank in the country was intent on making the worst loans possible, so no points just might be stupidity, but I don’t believe it.
I agree. Different lenders have different rates. That’s what makes a market. Who do you suppose slipped the seller the 300k under the table, hmmm?
He is a master contortionist.
It’s called Private Banking. Most banks have divisions specially geared towards serving the wealthy. And its common practice to give Private Banking clients better rates because of the deposits they keep and the fees they pay for things like asset management, or for the potential to get additional business from them. Private banking is Northern Trust’s specialty. In fact, George and Laura Bush have their blind trust managed by Northern Trust.
http://austinmayor.blogspot.com/2005/04/george-w-bush-chicagoan.html
Do you think the Bushes, Clintons, McCains, or any other rich person pays retail rates for their loans? Rich people are desired banking clients, so they have the ability to negotiate.
Wrong.
Read the linked article. It answers all the questions you and chap raise.
Chapoutuer said: “A wonderful analogy I read of this is that because A-Rod has a batting average 40 points higher than the average major leaguer, one can infer some bias by the umps in his favor.”
You are an idiot. A-Rods batting average has much more to do with skill than anything. How do the umpires get hits for him? By giving him a smaller stirke zone? Your analogy is quite poor for baseball. As for Basketball, I could see how some refs gave Jordan more calls and that lead to him getting more free throw attempts and a higher scoring average. But in Baseball you have a split second to make a decision to swing or not and the umpires have much less of a roll in your success.
All in all, your analogy is quite different than getting a lower rate on a loan. That would have much more to do with who you know and who you are…and when you a a big whig in the crooked world of Chicago politics it obviously does.
I bet Laura Richardson could get one!
Well, this is not the Northern Trust I know.
You too miss the point. It’s not whether “other rich people” receive better rates, it’s whether public officials receive preferential treatment due to holding office.
As someone in the industry, I believe Obama’s savings were significantly larger than merely $300 per month. The WAPO article says that industry averages for JUMBO loans were about 6% at the time. A three hundred dollar a month savings would be about .375% on a loan of about 1.32 million dollars. His loan was NOT jumbo. His loan was far greater than that. In fact, WAPO didn’t have averages for his loan because there aren’t enough loans his size to make a market to guage averages. His loan, in my opinion, would have been up to a half a percent higher than the average jumbo loan, and thus his savings would have been over a thousand dollars monthly.
This reminds me of when Lebron James got a hummer 3 for his birthday, which his mother bought using a loan, even though they lived in poverty and in section 8 housing. Everyone in Cleveland was frothing at the mouth about it and calling it unfair, and about a day later no one could care less. Looks like the same situation here.
I’m pretty sure that Chap is saying that of course A-Rod hits 40 points better because of his skill (but not brains if he is cheating on his wife with Madonna). Similarly, to say that Barack got better terms because of favorable treatment, instead of just being really rich, is ridiculous.
Read twice the next time you want to call someone an idiot (and y’all like to say conservatives are the civil ones).
It is as much about what might have happened if he did not get a sweetheart deal.
It is Chicago….
But giving non-trivial breaks or gifts to politicians is verboten. I don’t know the exact limits but I think members from the Congress or Senate can’t accept gifts worth more than a one or two hundred dollars. Since the Obama’s mortgage is over a million, even tiny discounts can easily exceed the limit.
Remember - “Do as I say, not as I do”
And that is a legitimate concern. But the problem here is that public officials are more often than not wealthy, so it is very difficult ascertain whether they are receiving preferential treatment based on their position or the fact that they are a good investment for the bank and able to attract competing lenders.
This being the case the WaPo article is woefully shabby in its reporting. There simply are not enough facts here to ascertain that this was anything other than good loan terms made in the ordinary course of business based upon Obama’s credit risk. I mean come on…30 points and a few waived fees beyond the average?
I am not saying that Obama did not receive favorable treatment based upon his position. Maybe they should have been paying 6.5%. But it is really difficult to make that leap based upon the facts provided here.
Come on…where are our resident bank owners to sort this all out?
Obama can join Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad in getting sweetheart loans and then railing against the mortgage industry. Portfolio and the Hartford Courant have done a great job in nailing Chris Dodd. Dodd had to fess up and sah he knew he was on the Countrywide VIP list but said he thought everybody was on it. Then he said “yeah, I guess my wife Jackie knew about” thereby throwing his own wife under the bus. Then Dodd said everything is already in the local land records so how can there by a coverup? Actually only the actual mortgages are put on the land records. Dodd won’t release his HUD RESPA statement, his commitment letter or his good faith estimate. Nor will Dodd authorize Countrywide to release its internal documents on the Dodd loans. The guy is crooked as a corkscrew. Maybe he is teaching Obama how to do it.
playing devils advocate tho..
technically, since its something he has to pay back, its not (again, *technically) considered a gift.
just saying.
i think its shady and he’s a tool anyway, but…i do have to be fair in that respect.
According to Congressional gift rules, discounts that have a monetary value are considered a gift and subject to ethics rules.
If he got a discount on his rate or closing costs because of his position in the government, that is wrong.
That’ll be what we’re all be saying. Standing on street corners. With our pockets empty and hands out. Not soon after the Obamessiah is in the White House and his adoring minions destroy the economy.
Those quoting rates need to realize that jumbo and super jumbo loans are “non-conforming” loans and always have a higher rate than smaller, conforming loan rates published in newspapers and on-line. So the benchmark for comparing his rate with the market rate should be based on the much higher super jumbo rates. Also, waiving origination fees and points? Sweetheart deal if there ever was one.
It is curious that once Obama was elected to the Senate his wife’s salary was more than doubled by her employer, and soon after the size of federal grants to her employer also grew substantially.
Maybe Northern Trust expected some “love” in return.
“Ear”marks.
Michelle,
What exactly are you trying to say with this post? If Obamanation received special treatment as a politician as opposed to just having connections with rich people then there is a problem. But you don’t come out and say that so this comes across as a conservative smear. We are better than that.
Not really. If I remember correctly it was a little over 1 million dollars. Thats nothing. One local hospital here received 75 million to upgrade the ER. When they got the money and five years went by and no new ER appeared the Feds hired BCBS to audit them. Shortly after the hospital broke ground on the new ER.
Well, speaking of Obama, here’s an interesting article off the local NBC affiliate’s site today about a record number of felons making application to have their voting rights restored, before November…
Well, there’s a campaign group for you - Burglars for Barack.
Democrats seek power to deny us freedom. If they get a few freebies along the way, it’s because they deserve it.
Your library card is no longer their concern.
This won’t make me popular here, but I don’t think this is an important issue.
Sounds to me like two banks were competing for this rich mans business. And he got a good deal because of it. And even the Post article admits that there are not comparables to this type of loan because most homes purchased at this level are paid for in cash. I.E. The McCain’s don’t have a mortgage because they paid cash for their home.
I don’t have issue with his mortgage. I have issue with his class warfare when he’s clearly a millionaire.
regardless of the propriety of Obama’s home loan … I did notice that, unless I missed it, he never once commented in any way on the Country Wide loans given to Dodd and Conrad at special rates … suppose he was trying not to draw any attention to himself on this issue?
The link to B. Hussein Obama and M. Obama (now proud her country- WEW) >muti-millionaires <and the Rezko family (hasn’t T. Rezko been indited for …..)
The COMPANY the OBAMAS KEEP!!!!
Shall I make a list of dishonorable “folks”?
Hmm, so Obama takes out a loan for 1.3 million for a property with a purchase price of 1.65 million. Sounds like he had cash on hand for a $350,000 down payment. Banks are far more willing to give better mortgage loans to 1.) people with good credit and 2.) people who contribute a down payment.
Nothing new, and Obama isn’t immune. These are the types of perks all of our elected kings and queens enjoy. Just makes O’Bummer part of the club. The rest of us peasants Im sorry to say dont get to vote for our own pay raises in the middle of the night, and dont get to enjoy $180,000 yearly pensions after a term or so in elected office.
You mean the Senate Ethics Committee? In an election year? With one of their own leading the ticket? ROFLMAO.
No. I meant (jokingly) “Where are our MM readers and commenters who also happen to own a bank that can tell us with some sort of authority whether or not Obama’s deal was out of line with what would normally be offered to someone in his financial position (setting aside the potentially powerful influence he could have).”
Christian Soldier #66
For the list you are compiling:
“In a May 1953 hearing before the New Mexico State Racing Commission, the Hensley brothers concealed the existence of an equal partner, Clarence “Teak” Baldwin, who had been banned from any ownership role due to illegal bookmaking activities. A 1953 New Mexico State Police investigation found further that Kemper Marley was a financial backer for bookmakers and had connections with Baldwin and with the bookmaking operations of organized crime, a conclusion echoed decades later by the Arizona Project investigative reporting team.
Hensley was given a state liquor license despite his normally disqualifying past felony conviction. In 1981, Hensley hired his new son-in-law John McCain, recently married to his daughter Cindy, Vice President of Public Relations for Hensley & Co. McCain soon left to begin his Congressional career. Jim Hensley’s past record with the law, as well as his connection to Marley (who was suspected by some in the 1976 car-bomb murder of Arizona Republic investigative reporter Don Bolles), became issues in McCain’s 1986 campaign for the U.S. Senate.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Hensley
And another skeleton in the McCain closet:
“But Keating was more than a constituent to McCain–he was a longtime friend and associate. McCain met Keating in 1981 at a Navy League dinner in Arizona where McCain was the speaker. Keating was a former naval aviator himself, and the two men became friends. Keating raised money for McCain’s two congressional campaigns in 1982 and 1984, and for McCain’s 1986 Senate bid. By 1987, McCain campaigns had received $112,000 from Keating, his relatives, and his employees–the most received by any of the Keating Five. (Keating raised a total of $300,000 for the five senators.)”
http://www.slate.com/id/1004633/
Should we make a:
THE COMPANY THAT MCCAIN KEEPS, list as well?
Or should we focus on the issues like fixing the economy?
Shares of General Motors Corp. plunged Wednesday to their lowest level since September 1954.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080702/auto_stocks.html
the difference between republican and democrats is in the tone of their speech.. their actions to me seem to be pretty much spot on
I would still maintain the difference in interest rates is relatively small potatoes compared to the 300k discount he got on the property. The same seller sells two lots at the same time to related buyers and one gets a 300k discount? Still have to ask why. The most obvious answer in light of the fact that Obama later bought another piece of the property, also at a substantial discount to worth, is that someone (and we are talking about known corrupt people here) slipped the seller the 300k under the table. That would amount to a substantial bribe. Sure would like to get a look at that doctor’s financial records.
Absolutely agree with you. This info definitely disqualifies McCain. I’ll throw him under the bus if you do the same with the Obamessiah.
Personally - I’d prefer the gov’t didn’t fix the economy. The best they could do is get their greedy ignorant little hands off it and let GM figure it out. I’m pretty sure GM would be fine if Gov’t didn’t intervene. Things like CAFE rules. Get rid of them and watch what happens. Get rid of different emissions rules for different states. Just watch what would happen if gov’t even allowed things like nuclear power or heaven forbid, drilling for oil.
I’m pretty sure if Gov’t fixes things for GM, they will screw up at least 10 times that amount otherwise. Gov’t is not the way to solve problems.
Look at history - what has gov’t done well?
Outside of GM shareholders, WGAF (who gives a…fig)? Send a thank you note to the UAW, ask your broker to buy shares in Toyota and zip yo lips.
OK. That may have been harsh. I’ll retract if you can point to the article in the Constitution that compels the government to bailout GM shareholders. G’head.
Talk about a story you will never see on NBC. Andrea Mitchell would never make time taking her lips off of BHO’s butt, or taking off her kneepads to report this story.
Just what our country needs, another corrupt,
lowhigh rent politician. And a democrap to boot./Sarcasm off
hippie, I am not advocating a bail out for GM or its shareholders. I don’t believe the government should bail out auto manufactures or Wall Street firms. I’m taking about fixing fundamentals of the economy, not bailing out an individual company or industry.
And DanGrantTx #77, you won’t hear about his loan with Northern Trust because there is no story. Any millionaire (and yes Obama is one) with an ounce of sense knows that every bank in the country is salivating to get their business. I bet if you took a poll, nearly every member of Congress (heck, hey are all millionaires), media personality, political pundit and lobbyist are Private Banking customers. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that Ms Malkin is a Private Banking client. I’m sure Karl Rove, Hannity, Bill O and Rush are. Banks even have special Private Banking divisions to handle doctors, lawyers, media types, sports figures, etc. And they all probably get better rates on loans and deposits than the average person standing in a teller line. The reason, it’s called fee income. Private Banking clients pay big bucks in fee income and its not illegal for a bank to give its best customers preferential rates. Or to give a potential client a good teaser rate to get their business.
You should check out Northern Trusts latest CEO presentation if you want to learn something about the business and how they make money.
http://www.northerntrust.com/popups/popup_noprint.html?http://www-ac.northerntrust.com/content//media/attachment/data/presentation_speech/0806/document/ntrs_william_blair_june_17_2008.pdf
I really like the scowl on Barack Hussein Obama’s face in this story. He is one evil looking dude. Is a scowl like that relly good for mamaBama’s kids? But then mamaBama can be one nasty [person] herself.
Must be Chicago.
Pray tell, what does the stock price of any one firm or any one commodity have to do with the general health of the economy?
So hippie, one firm, any one commodity. So you think we’re in the middle of a healthy economy?
Les, I cannot speak for ‘hippie’ but I can say the economy is just fine! As evidence, I point to the ability of the economy to withstand the absolute derisive biased report by many media propagandists!
I guess all the “impending recession” lies will be repeated by the same political hacks right through the election.
Seems from your comments les, you are at least a wanna-be media propagandist.
Think I have this one explained to me by a mortgage expert and Liberal Hater. With Obama and mama’s debt to net ratio this loan was most likely standard. So this story falls apart and Presto! the story about Senators Dodd and Conrad falls too. Other words she thinks the story was a plant.
Clever these Liberals, so are sewer rats. We are allowed to poison sewer rats.
Please don’t underestimate this man’s socialist streak. The things most my (black) community in Queens expects of him (and YOUR wallet) would curl your hair double. This is why, the Thompson man I am, I HAVE to vote McCain, even if just to say I tried to stop the tank. There’s no ifs, ands or buts here. Fed offices in Queens are already drooling for mass expansions of entitlement programs. No, I’ve just GOT to vote the right way…
James Greenidge
Queens NY
Obama, and the rest, show exactly how they want their “new” country to run. They live in discounted mansions, rake in the money, get special favors, work for more and more power, while the rest of the country struggles under dominating government control and rationing, for their “benefit”, of course. Just like the communist countries.
RED STATE Ding a ling:
Ok let me s-p-e-l-l it out for you.
1. Banks make money on all loans large and small. They make the “Spread.” The difference between the cost of their funds and the rate charged for the loan.
2. Fair Credit Laws require that similar loans be treated with equal requirements. This means that a US Senator, Obama, Dodd, etc… cannot receive a discount loan without raising serious ethical questions.
Nevertheless, I do think this argument is a lot weaker than the charge of pure corruption with Tony Rezko.
What ever happened to the “appearance of impropriety?”
Shouldn’t the “messiah,” particularly one as ambitious as this one, be smart enough to at least suck up the regular costs of getting a mortgage? He can always “refi” with “favorable” terms after the fact.
Apply the test: if it is a Republican doin the exact same thing, is the treatment the sames?
And why in hell is a so called “man of the people” like Obama doing buying a 1.65 MILLION dollar home? Jim M. relates the story Obama likes to tell:
How do you go from “maxed out credit cards” to a $1.65 million home in roughly the same time frame? Banks (for regular people anyway) like to see a decent credit score and income track record. It doesn’t sound like that is the case here. Special treatment? You be the judge.
Just as an aside: I don’t thing any really rich person, like Gates, Limbaugh, Heinz-Kerry take a loan when they can pay cash. Why give any money to a bank when you don’t have to, particularly under the hideous “interest up front” method banks use? Now maybe there is some “rich person’s insider tip” that makes this a reasonable course of action, but it can’t be for the tax deduction!
I’m not passing judgement until we learn what Obama’s credit score is…