Yes he has.  There are questions of interpretation about what money was associated with "Rezko's circle."  The Sun and Tribune reporters give no indication of their methodology for their calculations.

This is a repost of another comment I made in another thread:

"Obama bought the house on the basis of the advance from his book.  He did not have the money to buy the house and the lot.  

He probably approached Rezko, or perhaps Rezko heard of the situation and approached him.  Obama bought the house and paid 300k under the asking price.  Mrs. Rezko bought the lot at full price.  If Obama got a sweetheart deal because of the Rezko's actions, then he should be criticized.  

My point is that I have seen no evidence that he paid less than fair market value.  I am sure that an appraisal must have been done at the time of the sale or that even now, comparable sales at the time could be used to evaluate whether he paid a fair market value. If he did not receive a "quo" and did not offer a "quid," where is the wrong doing?

I agree that it does not look good and that the Repubs will try to exploit it, but it is not as if HRC is as clean as the driven snow.  It seems to me, we should be talking about relative vulnerability.

Regarding the five hours, Hillary's attack specifically raised the issue of him doing legal work for his "slumlord contributor."  Obama's reply specifically addressed the issue of how much legal work he had done for Rezko.  

If any one has been overreaching, it is the Clintons with their efforts to distort Obama's record on the war, and his comments on Reagan and the Repubs.  Do you think you are applying your standard evenly?"