Posted on 09/06/2008 5:22:54 AM PDT by igoramus08
The head of his former firm says he did good work. But not all of it was related to voting and civil rights...
In one instance, Obama defended a nonprofit corporation that owns low-income housing projects against a lawsuit in which a man alleged that he slipped and fell because of poor maintenance. Obama got the suit dismissed.
In another case, Obama appeared on behalf of a nonprofit corporation that provided healthcare for poor people. A woman who claimed income of less than $8,000 a year had sued Obamas client to obtain a $336 payment for baby-sitting services; Obamas client paid up, and the case was settled.
In 1994, Obama appeared in Cook County court on behalf of Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corp., defending it against a suit by the city, which alleged that the company failed to provide heat for low-income tenants on the South Side during the winter.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.latimes.com ...
"Allison Davis, a co-founder of the firm who since has left, is a major Chicago developer... Davis, who could not be reached for comment, has been a partner with other Chicago developers who also are clients of the firm and are Obama backers. One Davis partner was Antoin Tony Rezko, a major Obama patron who is now on trial [now indicted] in a federal public corruption case."
So in the two cases above, he defended the “big something or other”, and got the “little guy” screwed.
Obama still has not released his list of 30 clients.Which he fully intends to do. In a joint press conference with Icabod Kerry, who will, at that time, publicly sign his 180.
3,700 billable hours over four years? As a lawyer, I can tell you that’s about two years of billables. If he was that unproductive, he should have been canned.
LLS
Let's do the math: 1961 to 1993 is 32 years. It takes 7 years after age 18 to get a law degree. That leaves 7 years of smoking dope in between. 3723 billable hours in four years. There's 9000 hours of 8 to 5 work in this time. This guy must have smoked a lot of dope.
Read this if you want to know about the condition of public housing in his own district and the people he had (and has) ties to in that regard:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/
Effective?
The LAT and NYT are so enamored with this clown...it is comedy...
MUST READ ENTIRE ARTICLE!
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article
Obama’s letters for Rezko
NOT A FAVOR? | As a state senator, he went to bat for now-indicted developer’s deal
June 13, 2007
BY TIM NOVAK Staff Reporter
EXCERPT
‘Boneheaded’ deal in 2005
Since announcing his presidential bid, Obama has faced repeated questions about his 17-year relationship with Rezko, one of his earliest political contributors, who has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Obama.
Rezko backed Obama’s election to the Illinois Senate in 1996, his successful re-election bids and his 2004 election to the U.S. Senate.
Two years ago, the two men were involved in a real estate deal that Obama later apologized for, calling it “boneheaded’’ and a “mistake’’ because the transaction occurred while Rezko was widely known to be under federal investigation. Rezko’s wife paid full price for a vacant lot in Chicago’s historic Kenwood district on the same day Obama bought the mansion next door from the same property owner for $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko’s wife subsequently sold a sliver of the land to Obama.
Obama’s relationship with Rezko dates to the senator’s days as a student at Harvard Law School, when Rezko offered him a job, which Obama turned down.
After graduation, Obama returned to Chicago and joined Davis’ small law firm — then known as Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland — which specialized in helping developers build housing for the poor. Five of those deals included Rezko’s company, Rezmar Corp. Those Rezmar projects ran into trouble. Some buildings ended up being boarded up. Some went into foreclosure.
While Obama served in the Illinois Senate, he continued to work for the law firm, which Davis left in 1997 to become a developer.
Davis soon went into business with Rezko, creating a company called New Kenwood LLC to build the seven-story apartment building for senior citizens on a vacant stretch of land once occupied by a gas station at 48th and Cottage Grove. The city of Chicago owned the land — nearly two acres tainted by lead, benzene and other toxic chemicals.
Davis is a member of the Chicago Plan Commission. He was originally appointed to the commission in 1991 by his friend, Mayor Daley. Davis, like Rezko, has been a prolific campaign fund-raiser for politicians including Daley and Obama.
Soon after they incorporated New Kenwood in 1998, Davis and Rezko got letters of support from elected officials — Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th) and state Rep. Lou Jones (D-Chicago), whose districts included the proposed project.
Firm paid city $1 for land
New Kenwood LLC also got letters of support from Obama, who represented a nearby Senate district.
“I am writing in support of the New Kenwood LLC’s proposal to build a ninety-seven unit apartment building at 48th and Cottage Grove for senior citizens,’’ Obama wrote in separate letters, each dated Oct. 28, 1998, to city and state housing officials. “This project will provide much needed housing for Fourth Ward citizens.’’
At the time he wrote the letters, Obama was also a lawyer with Miner Barnhill & Galland, the law firm Davis formerly headed. Among the firm’s clients were several companies owned by Davis and Rezko. The firm did not represent New Kenwood.
Davis and Rezko hired Daley & George, the law firm of the mayor’s brother Michael, to help them get $3.1 million from bonds issued by the city of Chicago.
Rezko and Davis paid the city $1 for the land and spent more than $100,000 to clean it up, including the removal of an underground storage tank. Some tainted land was left behind, but state environmental officials approved construction after Rezko and Davis agreed to cover the polluted areas with parking lots, sidewalks or three feet of dirt, records show.
The $14.6 million Cottage View Terrace was funded entirely by city, state and federal taxpayers.
This would make a good campaign ad. “When it came time for Obama to use his talent and abilities, who did he go to bat for? Not the ‘little guy’ but the ‘big greedy copraorations’”
I think Judge Judy has more law experience that this “would be” President.
So, Obama’s legal specialty as a community organizer was setting the taxpayers up for ripoffs by developers. Who knew?
Change in temperature you can believe in.
In a big law firm, in order to make partner track, you need at least 2000 billable hours per year.
http://www.countercurrents.org/pringle070408.htm
In the interest of fairness, Evelyn Pringle was notified from web sites that carried her articles that they had been contacted by Iraqi-British billionaire businessman Nadhmi Auchis attorney, Alasdair Pepper, with threats to sue. In response, some European websites webscrubbed the information.
He entered law school in 1988 at age 27 and got his JD degree in 1991—there was a two-year interval before he started at that law firm. Apparently that was mainly spent writing his first autobiography.
Thanks for confirming that he spent 14 years between High School and and his first job, 7 of which were in school. What did he do during this time to support himself? Where did he get money for food and housing? He's already admitted to smoking dope during this time.
“Obama logged 3,723 billable hours during his tenure from 1993 to 2004, most of it during the first four years.”
Help me out here, I am not a lawyer. When I have to do a budget a man year is 2080 hours (approx. 1560 after vacations, holidays etcetera). So in eleven years he billed 3723 hours out of 22880. Was he part time? Just asking how this works.
best regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.