OMG!!! John Edwards SOLD HIS HOUSE And...And...I Dunno But It's WP FRONT PAGE!!!!

[Beetwasher]

Identity of Edwards Home's Buyers Veiled
Assisted-Living Magnates in SEC Probe Paid Candidate $5.2 Million

When former North Carolina senator and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards finally succeeded last month in selling his imposing Georgetown mansion for $5.2 million after it had languished on the market, the names of the buyers were not publicly disclosed.

At the time, Edwards's spokeswoman told reporters that the house had been sold to an unidentified corporation. In reality, the buyers were Paul and Terry Klaassen, according to several sources and confirmed by Edwards's spokeswoman yesterday.

--snip--

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011802077.html

I read the whole article and couldn't figure out what the story was or why this merited front page.

More discussion at TPM about this front page non-story at the WP.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/012014.php

[northzax]

1. gee, someone's running for president

is involved in a $5,000,000 transaction with people who wish to remain anonymous, and you don't think that's funny smelling?

yes, legally there is no obligation to disclose anything, but it still stinks.

[Beetwasher]

3. No, Not At All

You read the article that quickly? Uh huh.

[northzax]

7. yes, this morning over my Cheerios

see, I live in DC and get the Post. it was on page A-1.

[Lex]

13. Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing though.

nt

[northzax]

16. again, the scenario posted below

Bush sells his ranch for $5.2 million to a recently formed LLC. don't you want to know who's money they used? who owns it? who paid him that money?

[Beetwasher]

32. Umm, Was It On The Front Page of The WP?

BEFORE than was any indication at all of any impropriety? And eve AFTER it was pretty clear there was NO impropriety? :shrug:

Please point out the impropriety and WHY this deserves WP front page.

[Beetwasher]

31. Then You Didn't Comprehend What You Read

Maybe the Cheerios got in the way of understanding it, because there's no "there" there. There was no impropriety at all. None. Please point out the impropriety. Maybe people shouldn't be allowed to sell their homes? You do realize, of course, Edwards is a private citizen these days, and even if he wasn't, there's STILL no impropriety.

[northzax]

33. speaking of reading comprehension

it's the APPEARENCE. John Edwards should know better. that's all. you know they are out gunning for stupid shit like this, why give anyone the ammo? dumb.

[Beetwasher]

35. That's The Dumbest Fucking Thing I Ever Heard

WHY the front page? There was NO IMPROPRIETY.

Maybe he should just never sell his house, you know, to avoid anyone being an idiot and making idiotic non-news stories out of nothing and putting it on the front page of a major newspaper.

If you want to report he sold his house and investigate the sale, fine, but when you find NOTHING why put it on the front page? It's fucking stupid.

[northzax]

39. it's because you KNOW it will be on the front page

that you don't do it. that's the point. welcome to the media age.

[Beetwasher]

40. Oh, Really? Bullshit!

Absolute and total bullshit. There's nothing Edwards could have done differently except NOT sell his house. He has no control over what the BUYER does and there's nothing else he could have done to make it appear any more above board. Please, tell me, what else could he have done except to refuse to sell his house to these people? Are you suggesting he shouldn't sell his house except to CERTAIN people? Yeah, that would go over well to. :eyes:

If this was a Bush transaction would Solomon write this article like this? No. Would the Post put it on the front page? No. You know that's the truth so don't even bother denying it.

[Clark2008]

52. That's not bullshit. Northax is correct.

I doubt Edwards did anything wrong, but it's the APPEARANCE of impropriety. Kind of like when the DA is good friends with a guy busted for drugs and the DA doesn't remove himself from the case and the guy gets off on a technicality. The police may very well have made an improper arrest and the guy is free and clear, but unless the DA has removed himself from prosecuting the case, it smells to high heaven.

And, I grant you the media DOESN'T go after Bush like it should, but the flip side to that is that they DO go after Democrats and Edwards knows it, so he should have been more careful.

That's all.

[Beetwasher]

54. HOW???? WTF Are You Talking About??? Seriously, That's Idiotic

How could he have been more careful??? He has no control whatsoever over THE BUYER. Everything in this article is ABOUT THE BUYER. There is NOTHING Edwards could have done differently. Shoud he demand the buyer be an ethical businessperson??? Should he screen buyers for the type of business they are in??? I DEFY you to name one thing, aside from NOT SELLING that he could have done. Go ahead, tell me how he could have been more careful.

What utter crap.

[northzax]

61. how could he have done it better?

his campaign could have leaked the story to the Reliable Source, the gossip column in the Post that often covers the sale of famous people's houses in DC. They should have called the Post and said "Hey look, Edwards sold his house, the price is $5.2 million, and it was to these Pressler jokers, who are hiding behind an LLC because they don't want publicity." then the story is on Page D-4, not A-1. You know it's a story because of who you are, or you should know, so be proactive and minimize it. Edwards is not a novice, he's seen the meatgrinder up close and personal like, he should know better, the fact that he doesn't, or his campaign doesn't, scares me.

And yes, you are goddamn right he should know who he is engaging in multi-million dollar transactions with, he's running for PRESIDENT, not class president. And if his campaign is too bush (pardon the pun) league to handle this stuff, they should get out of the game right now and save everyone a lot of money, cause they're going to get slaughtered. What if the buyer of his house was, say, Abe Foxman, and Edwards comes out strongly in favor of Israel, sure no impropriety, but it would smell funny, right? Don't you think his campaign should know about that?

welcome to the rough and tumble world of national politics. Stupid things come back to bite you in the ass, no matter how innocent. (ever hear of this little thing called Whitewater? it was nothing, absolutely nothing, and made the front page of the Times then became a 8 year debacle.) I know you think it's dreadfully unfair and ridiculous, but it's the way the world works at that level. Edwards joined it voluntarily, he should know better.

[Beetwasher]

62. So, In Other Words

You still can't tell me how this story merits front page of the WP. Gee, all that for nuthin'. Oh well.

[northzax]

65. merits? irrelevant.

who ever said we live in a fair world?

merits? no. predictable? yes.

[Beetwasher]

66. Heh

Better put your prognostication skills to good use. I'm sure Edwards awaits w/ baited breat for your resume. :eyes:

[yardwork]

49. Edwards sold his house - so what?

I don't see the impropriety. Edwards sold his house in D.C. to a wealthy couple. So?

[Lex]

5. They wanted to remain anonymous for this very reason.

So people wouldn't try to drag them into made-up political scandals.

______________

[northzax]

8. ok, that's fair

so when, say, a republican sells his house to someone interested in policies they could deal with for above market value, you think that's cool to keep secret as well?

If, say, a congressman from San Diego sold his house to a military contracter for above market value, that's cool?

[Lex]

11. So what's with this "above market value" you speak of?

Did you read even the very basics of this article? Hmmmm?

Languished on the market, sold below market value. READ the article first.

__________________

[northzax]

15. since market value is what people will pay

by definition, right, it can't be below market value.

anytime a political candidate sells a house that has been languishing on the market for 1.4 million more than they paid (see? I read it) to a newly formed LLC (P Street Partners, LLC, in case you're wondering) and then declares a candidacy THE NEXT DAY, I want to know about it. I want to know everyone who is potentially paying off the political candidates. I'm sure there is nothing there, so report it. If you are running for office, be more open than everyone else. avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

when's the last time you sold a house to a corporation formed for the express purpose of buying that house? a corporation founded by two people who are being investigated by the SEC for criminal activity. Sure, they are free to buy what they want, but if you are running for president, I want you to reveal everything. I want to know who is paying you $5.2 million.

scenario b: George Bush announces that he has sold his ranch for $5.2 million to "Prairie Chapel Partners, LLC" don't you want to know who those people really are? where the money came from? I do.

[Tellurian]

18. Too lazy to do the research yourself..?

then comback and tell us who and what their affiliations are!

The shoot first ask questions later crowd...There otta be a Law!


duh!

[northzax]

22. once again

my point is not that there is anything funny going on here, in fact I doubt there is, but why not make an extra effort to disclose things publically? why not? still a question you haven't answered.

you are running for President in a time when the government is widely seen as corrupt. Why not make that extra effort to disclose EVERYTHING, even if it costs you something to do so?

it's the same thing that Obama did with his Chicago deal, nothing wrong, but the appearance is the problem.

[Tellurian]

23. So, take the time to straighten it out..

If you want peace of mind.

[Lex]

30. Well then by that definition it can't also be "above market value"

which is a term you yourself used.

:shrug:

[Richard Steele]

63. Why must you ALWAYS drag logic and reason into every single discussion?

Nice catch! :thumbsup:

[poiuytsister]

59. Exactly!

I'd be keeping a low profile too, just to avoid being harassed by the media. Altho if I could afford that house I could probably afford to hire someone to answer the phone for me and say "No comment"

[Horse with no Name]

60. What is the appraised value of the home?

If the home is worth $25,000 and someone paid $5 million...then sure.
But if the house appraised at $5m and they received $5m...then nothing was exchanged.

[Greeby]

2. And so it begins

The Three Monkeys Media will talk about anything other than the actual policies of the Presidential contenders :eyes:

[Supersedeas]

55. Paula Hatchwoman Zahn is lobby Osama/Obama bombs and this too

[seemunkee]

4. I read part of that this AM

just the section that was on the front and didn't finish the article. I couldn't get why this was news.

[Wickerman]

6. Well, if elected, we know what they will investigate for 8 years

boo-fucking-hoo. Another non-story story that will send the Republidiots into a frenzy.

[NoSheep]

9. Did he not just build a big house in Chapel Hill? That's probably why he sold it.

[Buzz Clik]

10. Edwards will be moving to Paraguay with the Bushes.

He's going to live in the guest -- he'll be GWB's Kato Kaelin.

[mod mom]

12. why the dissing of Edwards by connecting him to BFEE?

:wtf:

[Buzz Clik]

26. BFEE? What's a BFEE?

Anyway, the spirit of the OP was a bit snarky, so I followed suit.

[GreenPartyVoter]

37. Bu$h Family Evil Empire

[CatWoman]

14. BW

Check out some of the comments from Wash Post readers :)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/comments/display?contentID=AR2007011802077

[Vinca]

20. Many are giving my first reaction -

I've sold numerous houses over the years and for all I know I could have sold one to a serial killer. There are brokers in between for heaven's sake. Many transactions are done with the parties never actually meeting. The Post seems to be leaning a little right these days and I can't figure that out.

[Beetwasher]

36. Yeah, It Seems Like Most of THEM Get It

And MOST of DU'ers also get it. There's no accounting for SOME though (or maybe there is *cough*). :hi:

[CatWoman]

43. Heh

you need to take something for that *cough*

:hi:

:rofl:

[northzax]

17. it's not the impropriety

it's the appearence of impropriety. why not simply keep your nose clean and dot every i, cross every t? why give the wingnuts this ammunition? stupid move to not disclose it.

[Beetwasher]

34. Maybe Edwards Just Shouldn't Sell His House

Geez, maybe no one in politics should own and sell houses. I mean, WTF? Why is it on the FRONT PAGE OF THE POST? There's NOTHING improper about the sale. The article has NOTHING. Why the front page?

:eyes:

[northzax]

41. again, you know it will be on the front page of the Post

stupid as it is, you know it will be. so the smalllest normal things can get blown out of proportion, so you take extra care not to give even the slightest whiff of something.

Imagine you are, say, Chelsea Clinton. your father is president, and you know people hate him. you know that if you make out with a stranger in a bar, it will make the papers. So something completely normal for a young, attractive, smart woman to do becomes a problem, because of who you are. welcome to the media age. unfair, obviously, but the way it is.

[Beetwasher]

42. No, You Don't, That's A Load Of Crap And You Know It

It's only front page if you're a Dem. There is absolutely NOTHING Edwards could have done except NOT sell his house. What else could he have done to make this more above board????

What an utter load of crap. If a Repub did this Solomon would not be writing about it and the Post would NOT have it on the front page and you damn well know it.

"so you take extra care not to give even the slightest whiff of something."

LIKE WHAT???? Not selling your house???? That's idiotic. Then he'll be accused of being discriminatory by Solomon and the Post.

[DURHAM D]

19. Edwards actually has absolutely no say whatsoever about

who buys his house if a qualified buyer makes a good or full price offer to purchase and contract.

Remember red-lining?

[gasperc]

21. probably because it was worth $5.2million

somebody wants to get it out there that Edwards owned a house worth $5.2million to try and pound his blue collar roots

[toddaa]

24. I once sold some stuff at a garage sale

I did not do a full background check on any of the buyers. Does this mean I can't run for political office?

[Buzz Clik]

27. That is correct.

[Blackhatjack]

25. This is definitely a non-story .....

... he let others handle the sale from him, and kept his involvement "at arms length" to avoid any appearance of impropriety.

The fact the buyers created a corporation to shield their identity is not all that uncommon when dealing in properties in this price range.

[mtnsnake]

28. Exactly. We need to be concentrating on more important topics

like impending seatbelt regulations

Sorry, couldn't resist. :evilgrin:

[mtnsnake]

29. No doubt they'll try to penalize him in the press for being successful. nt

[spanone]

38. 'languished' on the market. Not a lot of takers at 5.2 mil.

Thank God this news got to the American people. It reinforces the fact that the librul media is making sure we know that Mr. Edwards is a ambulance chasing lawyer who made fortunes off the backs of the working class.:sarcasm:

The implications of this story are alarmingly obvious.

[politicasista]

44. Like it or not, we are going to have two years of this

If anyone thinks this won't happen to their candidates, then they are only fooling themselves.

[Beetwasher]

45. Doesn't Mean We Shouldn't Call It Out When It Happens

Just for the record, Edwards isn't "my candidate", I just thought the story was ridiculous as well as symptomatic.

[politicasista]

51. No, we should call it out

That's what I am saying.

[Beetwasher]

57. Cool

n/t

[gratuitous]

46. The story's by John "Hatchet Boy" Solomon

What a surprise. Talking Points Memo, as it often does, has the goods here:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/01/post_7.php

Seems that Solomon's "thesis," that Edwards' sale of his house to someone he's never met and doesn't know will wreak havoc on Edwards' relationships with unions. Except that . . . well, Solomon had to rush to print with his story. He didn't have time, you see, to actually find a union official who objected to the house sale. He talked to someone at SEIU, who unleashed the incendiary information that the SEIU didn't see anything wrong with the sale. And darn the luck, but Solomon didn't have time to talk with anyone from the other union that's supposedly up in arms about this cozy arrangement, the UFCW. But the guy at TPM did. And whaddya know? They're not particularly concerned with this transaction, either.

So, where did Solomon come up with the idea that all these unions were honked off at Edwards? Someone might want to tell Mr. Solomon that the voices in his head don't count as "sources."

[Beetwasher]

48. JINX!

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[gratuitous]

53. That'll be a Coke, son

:hi:

[Beetwasher]

47. UPDATE: FURTHER EVIDENCE SOLOMON IS A SHITTY BIASED "REPORTER"

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/01/post_7.php

--SNIP--

I think this is pretty surprising. In his story Solomon is using the fact that these unions are at odds with the buyer of Edwards' home in order to suggest that there was something untoward about what Edwards did. Yet he didn't even contact one of the unions to see if they had a problem with the sale. That's striking.

What's more, we now know officially that the union doesn't have a problem with it at all. So will Solomon do a follow-up story on this fact tomorrow?

This latest Solomon effort is even more striking when you consider Solomon's questionable history of going after Dems -- which is detailed at length here at TPMmuckraker -- not to mention the fact that now one of his Post colleagues has revealed that he thinks today's Edwards story is thin at best.

--SNIP--

[Clark2008]

50. Well, hubby jokes that he's already living in Iowa, so he

should get rid of his home in NC. LOL.

[hyphenate]

56. They are essentially trying to taint

him before the campaign begins. Saying that Edwards knew the Klaassens were dirty, and that he was somehow complicit in selling his home to them. Just another attempt, early in the game, to start eliminating candidates in the Democratic party.

[ChiciB1]

58. What Are They Going To Think Of Next???

This kind of stuff is nothing by more trashing and I think totally unwarranted!

Yep, there ought to be a law saying he can't sell his house!

I have 5 acres of land here in Florida for sale, any takers??

[jsamuel]

64. written by Solomon AGAIN!!! This guy throws shit in Dem's faces on every story without any basis

for anything ACTUALLY ILLEGAL. In other words the whole point of his articles aren't to show that a Democrat did something illegal, it is to give the IMPRESSION to the uniformed reader that a Democrat probably did something illegal.

[Bucky]

67. Oh, I get it. The housing slump is so bad, any home selling is front page news.

If you give me a couple of days, I'll figure out a way to blame Karl Rove for this.