Chicago Tribune from Chicago, Illinois • Page 1-4

HOME DELIVERY RATES Weekly rates MON-FRI 7 DAYS $2.30 $1.79 $4.50 rates are for the 9-county area (Cook, Lake, DuPage, Will, Kane, Kendall and McHenry Counties in Illinois, Lake and Porter Counties in Indiana) and are also available outside the area in communities served by Chicago Tribune contractors. Rates in other areas vary. All subscriptions now include the Thanksgiving Day issue A TRIBUNE PUBLISHING COMPANY 435 N. MICHIGAN CHICAGO, ILL. 60611 DELIVERY BY MAIL (12 weeks) SUNDAY 7 DAYS $51.96 $99.96 U.S.

rate $58.20 $116.76 five-state area is Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa Chicago Tribune (USPS 104-000) is published daily (7 days) at Tribune Tower, 435 N. Michigan Chicago, IL 60611-4041, Chicago Tribune Company, Publisher; periodicals postage paid at Chicago, IL, and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send changes to the Chicago Tribune, Mail Subscription Division, 777 W. Chicago Chicago, IL 60610. Unsolicited manuscripts, articles, letters and pictures sent to the Chicago Tribune are sent at the risk.

Copyright 2008 Chicago Tribune Company. All rights reserved as to the entire content. For questions about delivery, billing, a new subscription or to suspend your subscription while on vacation, please call ADVERTISING INFORMATION All advertising published in the Chicago Tribune is subject to the applicable rate card, copies of which are available from the Advertising Department. The Chicago Tribune reserves the right not to accept an order. Only publication of an advertisement shall constitute final acceptance.

E-mail: Online: chicagotribune.com/customerservice Hearing impaired can call: (312) 222-1922 (TDD) Main operator: (312) 222-3232 To call in news tips: (312) 222-3540 News tip e-mail: Public Editor: Timothy J. McNulty (312) 222-3348 Public e-mail: Classified advertising: (312) 222-2222 or advertising: (312) 222-4150 or Interactive advertising: (312) 527-8267 or How to contact us 1-800-TRIBUNE (1-800-874-2863) CHICAGO TRIBUNE ARCHIVES Stories published after Jan. 1, 1985, are available to users of chicagotribune.com. There are nominal charges for access. Complete editions of the Chicago Tribune from 1985 to the present are available on CD-ROM through: NewsBank CD at 1-800-762-8182.

NEWS IN EDUCATION For questions relating to the Chicago News in Education program, call 630-368-4200 7:00 a.m. 3:00 p.m. Monday Friday. 4 CHICAGO TRIBUNE SECTION1 By Bob Secter and David Jackson TRIBUNE REPORTERS As Barack Obama is finding out, not as easy to dump politically toxic campaign donations as it might seem. For the third time in more than a year, presidential campaign announced this week it was shedding more donations tied to indicted fundraiser Antoin Rezko.

Calculations by the media and own staff of Rez- financial impact on his past political campaigns have been all over the map and shifting. The reason: The numbers depend on assumptions made about why a donor gave in the first place. In total, Obama has promised to give to charity more than $150,000 he collected through Rezko. His campaign said the latest installment of $72,650 was raised for his 2004 U.S. Senate raceat an elegant dinner at square-foot Wilmette mansion.

It remains unclear whether campaign has dragged out the process of shedding Rezko money because it was having a difficult time determining the nature of those donations, or if the campaign was reluctant to look hard for them. Connecting the dots between a political fundraiser and any specific donation, though, is not always simple. Experts say it is more art than science, and precision can be elusive. campaign still has not offered a clear explanation of how it determines Rez- ko-linked donations or why he has dealt with them piecemeal, apparently in reaction to bad publicity. No campaign explanation On Wednesday, campaign spokesman Bill Burtonsig- naled the latest divestment would be the last.

campaign directed a thorough review of these contributions and did our best to identify any received as a result of the June 2003 fundraising event hosted by Tony Rez- Burton said in a statement. refunding these donations, the campaign has returned any and all funds that could be reasonably credited to Mr. political Still, Burton offered no explanation of why the campaign took more than a year to shed all the donations it now says are tied to Rezko, especially funds gathered at the party in home five years ago. Rezko was indicted in 2006 on federal bank fraud and corruption charges. He has pleaded not guilty and goes on trial Feb.

25. prolonged struggle to rid his campaign of Rez- ko money contrasts with how his Democratic rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, said shehan- dled a controversy over one of her fundraisers, Norman Hsu. Less than two weeks after disclosures that he was wanted in connection with a fraud case in California and had for years been a fugitive from justice, Clinton last year returned $850,000 in contributions collected for her by Hsu. In the case of Obama, public records make clear every Rezko connection.

The records show that since 1995, $74,500 came from Rezko, his relatives or contributors listed on official disclosure forms as employees of one of his businesses. Rezko has not raised money for presidential campaign. Various media outlets have reported much larger numbers, though they clearly explained their methodology. The New York Times has pegged Rezko political cash for Obama at $150,000, the Sun-Times at $168,000 and the Los Angeles Times at $200,000. Last weekend, a report by ABCNews.com suggested more than $185,000.

The ABCNews.comreview was accompanied by some detail, and that demonstrates the difficulties of assigning motive to donors. For example, it included money given to Obama over several years by Kelly King Dibble, a onetime Rezko employee whom he helped place at the helm of a state housing development agency. But before Dibble worked for Rezko she struck up a friendship with wife, Michelle, when they worked at the Chicago Planning Department. Dibble could not be reached for comment Wednesday, and it was not clear whether donations from her were among those shed. Burton declined to release names of donors whose gifts the campaign considered tainted by Rezko.

degrees of Campaigns face difficult choices in sorting out which contributions are troublesome. To fill the room for a fundraising party, an organizer will call, say, 25 associates and ask each of them to call 25 others. So someone who showed up at a fundraiser at house may never have met Rezko or been solicited by him. ends up becoming six degrees of can connect all the dots but still not find a clear link to every particular said Paul Houghtaling, a campaign-finance expert who set up the Democratic National effort to research backgrounds after mid-1990s fundraising scandals rocked the party. By divesting the contribution of every person who merely attended a fundraising event, the campaign risks casting aspersions on perfectly legitimate donors, Houghtaling said.

Because fundraising scandals can undermine a credibility, federal campaignsspend enormous sums vetting contributors. The campaigns staff in-house compliance teams who quickly scour public databases to determine if each large donor has criminal convictions, civil court judgments, tax liens or negative publicity. can easily run into the hundreds of thousands of is just not a quick Google there is a high political and legal cost to not doing said campaign finance lawyer Kenneth Gross. Giveaways questioned The event at home resembled a posh dinner party, complete with valet parking and catered dinner. Obama spoke after the meal, and told the crowd about how when he was still in Harvard law school Rezko, a developer, had tried to hire him.

Obama staffers set up shop around the kitchen table, where they collected checks. One donor at the event was Michael Sreenan, a former attorney for a Rezko company. Sreenan gave Obama $2,000 that night, but heard if the campaign now plans to give it away. Still, Sreenan said he was baffled by the notion of giving money raised at home to charity. wants to give my donation back to me or let me give it to a charity, fine with he said.

I see how this makes a difference money still got him elected. And how do I know not going to a charity offensive to Tribune reporters Ray Gibson and Stacy St. Clair contributed to this report. Funds tough to figure for Rezko aid Calculations of Obama cash vary AP file photo by Charles Rex Arbogast Antoin Rezko faces charges of federal bank fraud and corruption. from clear what the natural lines of attraction would be for those voters newly without their candidate.

Exit polling from the four early primaries offers mixed signs. Voters friendly to Edwards share some demographic similarities to Clinton backers, but they also bear resemblance to Oba- with an affinity for the antiestablishment, outsider rhetoric like his. vote demographically is like in some ways, said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, of Lake Research Partners. message of change resembles Edwards said he would need to speak with the other candidates in private before making a decision on an endorsement, I am going to Slight tilt to Obama National polls suggest a slight lean toward Obama among Edwards supporters, but the difference is small enough to suggest the key will be in how each campaign reaches out to the unattached voters. is a little bit of a lean to Obama, but not said Andrew Kohut, president of the non-partisan Pew Research Center.

In a Jan. 9-13 national Pew poll shortly after the New Hampshire primary, 44 percent of Edwards supporters said Obama was their second choice versus 31 percent for Clinton. In the same poll, 67 percent of Edwards voters said they had a favorable view of Oba- ma versus 60 percent who said they had a favorable view of Clinton. issue is: he were to endorse one of these candidates, would that make a Kohut said. a small but potentially loyal group because they were willing to back even though he was not one of the two Exit poll results clear up the picture much.

In South Carolina, Edwards voters were equally likely to say they would be with Clinton or Obama as the Democratic nominee. But in New Hampshire, where a slightly different question was asked, Edwards voters were more than twice as likely to view Clin- ton negatively as Obama: 38 percent of Edwards voters said they have an view of Clinton versus 14 percent who said so of Obama. Despite populist campaign focused on eliminating poverty, he did not pull particularly strong support from lower-income voters. In Iowa and South Carolina, he did best with voters making more than income bracket that generally gravitates toward Obama. supporters were concentrated among middle- ageand older voters, an age group that tends to support Clinton.

He did best among groups that tend to be more socially conservative: married men, middle-agevoters and white men, particularly in the sole Southern primary in South Carolina. Clinton talks to Edwards Aides to Obama and Clinton said they alter their strategies to appeal to Edwards voters, but it was clear by the end of the day that both were developing their own outreach to Edwards and his camp. Clinton said she spoke to Edwards, but that she explicitly ask for his endorsement. Obama and Edwards have talked more frequently in the last couple of weeks. The two spoke on Tuesday and again on Wednesday, said Robert Gibbs, communications director.

At a rally in Denver Thursday, Obama paid homage to the candidates who have left the race, including Edwards. had class acts across the board an all-star Obama said. But his speech was not conciliatory toward his remaining opponent. He argued Clinton would fail to provide a in a campaign against John McCain because of her vote to authorize the Iraq war. And he turned a signature line of Bill 1996 reelection promise to build bridge to the a jab to suggest his opponent was a candidate of the past.

know tempting to simply turn back the Obama said, look backwards and try to build a bridge back to the 20th Clinton strategist Mark Penncalled speech a collection of his attacks against Clinton. campaign has been accused of its own spate of attacks over the last couple of weeks, but the New York senator on Wednesday notably dropped from her stump speech at least one of her usual jabs at Obama, in which she presents her opponent as someone who passively for change. Tribune correspondents John McCormick contributed from Denver and Jason George contributed from North Little Rock, Ark. AP photo by Elise Amendola Elvis impersonator Dwayne Turnerentertains Hillary Clinton in Little Rock on Wednesday. EDWARDS CONTINUEDFROMPAGE1 AP photo by Charles Rex Arbogast had class acts across the board an all-star Barack Obama said of the presidential contenders during a campaign speech Wednesday in Denver.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will meet in a debate Thursday in Los Angeles to be broadcast on CNN at 7 p.m. CST. Debate tonight By Jo Becker and Don Van Natta Jr. NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying Canadian mining financier Frank Giustratouched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in Kazakhstan.

Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap it. Unlike more established competitors, Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a midnight banquet with president, Nur- sultan Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for Nazar- bid to head an international organization that supports democracy even though poor human-rights record was criticized bySen. Hillary Clinton of New York. Within two days, corporate records show that Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by state-owned uranium agency. The deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Giustra a place in inner circle. In separate written responses, both men said Giustra traveled with Clinton to see the philanthropic work done by his foundation. A spokesman said Clinton knew that Giustra had mining interests in Kazakhstan but was unaware of particular and did nothing to help him.

Giustra said he was there as an and there was of the deal with Nazarbayev or Clinton. Clinton charity got windfall after trip to Kazakhstan ILLINOIS MiddayEvening Jan. 30 Pick 3877980 Jan. 30 Pick 469716051 Jan. 30 Little Lotto0103070923 Jan.

30 Lotto051721253650 Jan. 30 Lotto jackpot $10.25 million Feb. 1 Mega million INDIANA MiddayEvening Jan. 30 Daily 3139358 Jan. 30 Daily 417697638 Jan.

30 Lucky 5 mid.0506072125 Jan. 30 Lucky 5 eve.0211123033 Jan. 30 Lotto031630313343 POWERBALL Jan. 30 0217415455 17 Jan. 30 Powerball jackpot $34 million MICHIGAN MiddayEvening Jan.

30 Daily 3980199 Jan. 30 Daily 437674944 Jan. 30 Fantasy 51518303638 Jan. 30 Classic Lotto052136394146 Jan. 30 Keno020910111218 232627293240 414245485557 64737579 WISCONSIN Jan.

30 Pick 3756 Jan. 30 Pick 48415 Jan. 30 Badger 50111202630 Jan. 30 Jan. 30 Megabucks020511374243 WINNING LOTTERY NUMBERS Product: CTMAIN PubDate: 01-31-2008 Zone: MW Edition: HD Page: 1-4 User: jgoodrich Time: Color:.