BT, the link is pointless. It shows a postage-stamp photo of a 3-storey house beside some vacant land, the line between the two being almost totally obscured by a "start video" button with an arrow which does nothing but enlarge the picture somewhat but any "forward" or "Start video" buttons if pushed just reduce the picture frame back down to its original size. Nothing will start the video.
Be that as it may, there is nothing to show the size of the back yard. If the house has a decent back yard, there is no need at all for a side yard, which is what the vacant lot beside the house would be.
<<1) As you can clearly see from the overhead photos in the video, this was clearly NOT an "adjacent" piece of property. This was quite obviously the yard for the Obama house. >>
That is ridiculous. If Obama's mansion had a back yard, it would not need the side yard at all.
<<The only access to the Rezko property is from Obama's parcel. >>
I can't toggle back and forth to your photo once I start to compose this message, but IIRC, BOTH parcels front on the same street. It is absurd to claim that the only access to the Rezko property is from Obama's parcel, unless the Rezco parcel can't be accessed from the street directly in front of it.
<<The intent here was clearly for Rezko to purchase the land and continue making it available for the exclusive use of the Obama family. A $925,000 favor to a sitting US Senator.>>
Could also be an intent to have Rezco build a smaller place beside Obama for himself or a family member. Or just hold the vacant land as an investment.
<<2) Why did Obama buy a strip of "Rezko" land and build a fence? Simple. Obama knew that eventually somebody would photograph the property and the sham nature of the arrangement would be instantly obvious.>>
More likely he just wanted a wider side yard and once he got it, he fenced it in. Most people fence their side yards. Other possibilities are the doctor had muncipal permission to sever the land into two parcels as shown but Obama wanted the house with a wider side yard - - if both Rezco and Obama saw the entire property in various possible configurations as a valuable investment and the doc was anxious to sell without delay, they could have agreed with each other - - You (Tony) take the vacant lot and I (Obama) will take the house on the understanding that later, when there's more time available, Tony will sell Obama the strip at a predetermined rate so that Obama can have the side yard without which he wouldn't have wanted the house.
<<Obviously, the Rezko property was never intended to be a separate piece of land and a fence on the original lot line would have been absurd.>>
That's far from obvious. On the contrary, the fact that title was allowed to be severed prior to the purchase by Obama and Rezco indicates that whatever municipal authority authorized the severance obviously considered the vacant land to be sufficient for the erection of a fully-detached single-family residence or other structure compatible with neighbourhood zoning by-laws.
<<Pause the video and note the SUV parked on Obama's driveway immediate to the right of the fence (the new lot line). This indicates that, initially, Obama's driveway was actually sited on "Rezko's" piece of the property...a strong indication that Rezko intended the use of the land as a gift to Obama.>>
Or the drive could have been a mutual drive with each side having an easement over half the drive, or there could have been laneway-accessed parking behind the house. Or, less likely, the Obama side could have had a driveway easement over the Rezco side. Besides, if both parties had planned the investment but Obama wanted more side yard, they could have just agreed to do the deal as I suggested before, using the existing severance permissions and agreeing to make a further application to sever an "Obama side yard" after the purchase closed.
<<3) Rezko has since transfered title to his land to his attorney. Is this one of the land transactions that landed Rezko in jail yesterday?>>
Maybe it would be if it's a crime to transfer property to your attorney. Is it? And how could Obama have stopped this horrendous crime? How is any of it Obama's fault, what Rezco does with his property? Besides, I thought the parcel belonged to Rita Rezco, Tony's wife.
This whole thing is bullshit. I don't even see any appraisals suggesting that somehow Obama got the property below fair market value. Getting the property below asking price? It's asinine to even mention it. Only a schmuck buys property at asking price. It's always negotiated down, often by substantial amounts. Nobody even knows how long the doc had the property on the market, whether it was bought subject to liens or work orders . . .
This is the shoddiest case anyone could imagine. It's bulllshit. A crude smear by lying bastards hoping against hope to perpetuate a criminal Republican administration for four more years of lies, war and torture, illegal detentions and outsourced torture and murder, continuing corporate rip-offs of the citizens and further exorbitant "bail-outs" or as they are now designated by the fraudsters in charge of the U.S. government, "rescue plans." The desperation of the criminally insane. And it won't help one bit. Because no sane American voter would give a shit about any of this crap. They've had it with the lies and the bullshit and they want to see some new faces.