obama helped slumlord buddy put out poor people onto freezing Chicago streets (campaign, legal)
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.
obama is having a luxury mansion built in Hawaii; I wonder if the poor he helped put out into a freezing Chicago street survived
For the slumlord's defense, Barack Obama, Esq
There was indeed "something more" to Obama's legal career, but it wasn't civil rights litigation at the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, where he was employed for a decade.
Obama defended a Chicago slumlord and powerful political ally who was charged with a long list of offenses against poor residents. The defendant was the Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corp., controlled by Bishop Arthur Brazier, a South Side Chicago preacher and political operator.
Brazier's burgeoning real estate empire included a low-income housing project at 6223 South University. Today, MapQuest describes the Woodlawn neighborhood as "quaint and sedate." But in the winter of 1994, it was a frigid hell.
Brazier was closely allied with Obama and his firm, not least because Davis was on WPIC's Board of Directors. Davis was also the corporation's registered agent, and he received the court summons when the city filed suit on the South University apartments.
Brazier's WPIC had failed for nearly a month to supply heat and running water for the complex's 15 crumbling apartments. On Jan. 18, 1994, the day the heat went off, Chicago's official high temperature was 11 below zero, the day after it was 19 below.
Yeah because conservative rags (and when I mean rag is when the owners instructions are clear about having nothing BUT conservative views or liberal if that were the case akin to Rupert Murdoch and FixNews). That's a loss of credibility which is why the Examiner has very little of it. Pull the docket and read it for yourselves as to what truly transpired.
Yeah because conservative rags (and when I mean rag is when the owners instructions are clear about having nothing BUT conservative views or liberal if that were the case akin to Rupert Murdoch and FixNews). That's a loss of credibility which is why the Examiner has very little of it. Pull the docket and read it for yourselves as to what truly transpired.
Pull the docket and read it for yourselves as to what truly transpired.
Extremists and racists who oppose the President, and who have been offering anti-American values statements aren't interested in facts. They get confused with facts. Why? Because they get their "news" and "information" from souces such as the one linked in the OP and Fox News, etc.
Extremists and racists who oppose the President, and who have been offering anti-American values statements aren't interested in facts. They get confused with facts. Originally Posted by msamhunter
Pull the docket and read it for yourselves as to what truly transpired
Why didn't he or you post the docket info to bolster your argument or do you expect to profit from someone elses' labor
Didn't attack the messenger, just made a valid comment. It's a rag purposely slanted to the conservative side by its own owners admission. Nothing to attack about it. That's their job. I stated pull the docket and read for yourself instead of following headlines and why would I have to do your work for you. You pull the docket or stay a blind follower. It's that simple.
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.