Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And we all know that if Michelle Malkin reported on this, it is absolutely true! Just like the 1.5 million attendees of the 9/12 March on Washington
Nice attempt to derail the conversation from the actual substance. Too bad the 9/12 March has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. Number two, bad for you that the article in the Crain's Chicago Business was not written by Michelle Malkin, but rather Paul Merrion. So why don't you try to find something to tarnish his credibility as well, since you've produced no emperical evidence or facts in your post, but rather paltry opinions.
I think what they were trying to tell you is that instead of just flinging garbage, go and read. If you don't know anything about the topic being discussed, maybe it would be in your best interest to get a clue before spreading your own venom.
that globe article says that jarrett's company no longer owns the property that you guys are claiming she is getting some kind of eminent domain sweetheart deal on.
" Jarrett is the chief executive of Habitat Co., which managed Grove Parc Plaza from 2001 until this winter"
and the article is from june of 2008, so that means the winter before last. and i'm guessing she's no longer the ceo of that company, since she has a new job now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by obo
She needs to have it demolished, she is lobbying for tax payer money to have this all done FOR HER OWN INTERESTS!
can you pull me the quote from the malkin article that says she is doing this, let alone a link to a source confirming your claim?
this is all malkin has to say about grove parc and the olympics:
Coincidentally enough, Grove Parc — now targeted for demolition as a result of years of neglect by Obama’s developer friends—sits in the shadows of the proposed site of the city’s 2016 Olympics Stadium.
no link to back that statement up. no clear explanation of what that means.
so basically, jarrett's company owned a property, let it get run down, and now that property is "in the shadows" of the proposed olympic stadium site, whatever that means, according to malkin. the rest is left to her readers' (apparently very vivid) imaginations. from that you get that jarrett is lobbying for taxpayer money to get grove parc torn down? wow.
Nice attempt to derail the conversation from the actual substance. Too bad the 9/12 March has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand. Number two, bad for you that the article in the Crain's Chicago Business was not written by Michelle Malkin, but rather Paul Merrion. So why don't you try to find something to tarnish his credibility as well, since you've produced no emperical evidence or facts in your post, but rather paltry opinions.
Since I had just read this prior to posting the above, it was easy to find. But would anything prove you wrong? As to why I referred to Malkin, the initial poster linked the post to Malkin's blog.........
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY. Beck asked, "Is it possible that she is going to benefit if the Olympics come to Chicago?" Caddell responded, "Well, that’s the word. She has certainly had a lot of dealings going on in real estate." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: UPON ENTERING GOVERNMENT, VALERIE JARRETT DIVESTED ALL HER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS EXCEPT FOR A SINGLE INVESTMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OLYMPIC BID. Valerie Jarrett divested all her investment real estate holdings upon entering government except for a single real estate holding that she was unable to sell. This single real estate investment has been determined by White House Counsel and the independent Office of Government Ethics to present no conflict of interest in performing her duties as a White House advisor. It has nothing to do with the Olympic bid.
The OP's post is an entire fabrication and has absolutely no truth to it. But don't let that stop you. It never does.
and may I ask how you know this?
I am one that hopes it isn't true, I do not like our President, but I do respect the office and would like to think he isn't doing all the things it appears he might be doing, but for you to say this is a fabrication I think you own it to all of us to prove you are right.
Since I had just read this prior to posting the above, it was easy to find. But would anything prove you wrong? As to why I referred to Malkin, the initial poster linked the post to Malkin's blog.........
RHETORIC: VALERIE JARRETT WILL BENEFIT FINANCIALLY. Beck asked, "Is it possible that she is going to benefit if the Olympics come to Chicago?" Caddell responded, "Well, that’s the word. She has certainly had a lot of dealings going on in real estate." [Transcript, Glenn Beck Show, 9/29/09]
REALITY: UPON ENTERING GOVERNMENT, VALERIE JARRETT DIVESTED ALL HER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT HOLDINGS EXCEPT FOR A SINGLE INVESTMENT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OLYMPIC BID. Valerie Jarrett divested all her investment real estate holdings upon entering government except for a single real estate holding that she was unable to sell. This single real estate investment has been determined by White House Counsel and the independent Office of Government Ethics to present no conflict of interest in performing her duties as a White House advisor. It has nothing to do with the Olympic bid.
--
Who did she "sell" her property too? Hubby, Mom, Dad, some long lost uncle....hmmm?
Jarrett, the Obamas, Ayers, Rezko and Van Jones go way back.
...and the 0bama machine will try its damnedest to pump as many federal dollars in Chicago as humanly possible, (ie... taxpayer money is viewed as free money, to these people)
0bama was forced to put on a show of talking with Gen. Stanley McChrystal, just so he could go lobby for the Olympics in Chicago, so as not be seen as more interested in get tax dollars to flow into Chicago then he was interested in winning the war.
A video conference was good enough for planning to win the war, but not good enough for him to win the Olympics for Chicago.
Who did she "sell" her property too? Hubby, Mom, Dad, some long lost uncle....hmmm?
gee, i dunno. why don't you just make some wild guesses at the most damning scenario and then act as if that's the truth? that seems to be the modus operandi for some people on this board.
...and the 0bama machine will try its damnedest to pump as many federal dollars in Chicago as humanly possible, (ie... taxpayer money is viewed as free money, to these people)
0bama was forced to put on a show of talking with Gen. Stanley McChrystal, just so he could go lobby for the Olympics in Chicago, so as not be seen as more interested in get tax dollars to flow into Chicago then he was interested in winning the war.
A video conference was good enough for planning to win the war, but not good enough for him to win the Olympics for Chicago.
\\
President Obama is taking less than 24 hours out of the country to try to have the Olympics awarded to the city of Chicago. If those naysayers would take their heads out of the sand long enough to see that it is going to provide jobs for years to come in readying the city for the Olympics along with the surrounding area, they might see how important it is. I also think that if we weren't awarded the Olympics, his detractors would be complaining about him not fighting hard enough for the country in having the Olympics being held here in 2016. He can't win when it comes to some of you, no matter what he does.
I can't possibly compare the thought of sending 40,000 troops to Afghanistan with something like the Olympics. It should be contemplated and we don't know all that goes on behind the scenes with his advisors in deciding what to do regarding the possibility of endangering the lives of more of our young men and women by sending them off to continue this war. It shouldn't be a rash decision. As the mother of a son in the military, I'm very happy that he's considering all options and weighing the pros and cons. Don't take the lives of our armed forces for granted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
