Tony Rezko went on trial today “for money laundering, fraud, aiding bribery and attempted extortion. He is accused of demanding kickbacks from companies seeking to do business with two Illinois state boards controlled by his friends.”
Who is Tony Rezko? He is a “Syrian-born property developer, pizzeria entrepreneur and political fixer in Chicago.” Earlier this year, Rezko was in prison “for violating bail by failing to declare a $3.5 million loan" from a British-Iraqi billionaire who had been convicted of corruption and with whom Rezko was involved in business and property development.
So what?
Well, it turns out that Rezko is “a long-time friend and fundraiser for Barack Obama…”
Rezko became one of Obama’s “earliest and biggest fundraisers.” Obama and Rezko used to meet “once or twice a year’ for lunch.” In addition, the Rezkos and Obamas have dined together as couples perhaps ‘two to four times’ since they have known each other.” In fact, “As a lawyer, Mr. Obama did six hours’ work for partners of Mr Rezko’s company in state-subsidised apartment rehabilitation projects.”
After Obama was elected as Senator in 2005, he bought a 1.65 million dollar mansion in Chicago. Even though “it was already known that Mr. Rezko was under criminal investigation,” Obama and Rezko viewed the property together.
“Obama is not accused of any wrongdoing. However, money from one of the many alleged kickbacks appears to have ended up as a $10,000 donation to his campaign.” (Read the entire article at
Times Online).
But there’s more. The
Chicago Sun-Times wants to know if Obama used Rezko to find government jobs for Obama staffers in Illinois’ Gov. Blagojevich's administration.
The names of “an Obama presidential campaign staffer” and two other “people who appear to have Obama links” appear on a list of people to whom Rezko “urged Blagojevich to give state jobs.” When asked if the names came “from Obama, his campaign staff’s short answer: Don’t know—but it’s possible.”
Remember, running for president is
not like being tried for a crime where you are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Becoming our President is the ultimate privilege, it is not a right. That being the case, the burden of proof is on the candidate. The candidate needs to
demonstrate that he or she is a person of capability, honor and integrity before getting our vote (if we don’t demand this, we deserve what we get).
Given what we know so far, and what we know of the history of corruption in Chicago's Democratic political machine, I think even Obama supporters should demand a lot of explanation before he gets their votes.