Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Did you catch that? No? Then back up the video to about 3:20 and listen again.
John Coale, who set up Sarah's Legal Defense Fund and apparently runs SarahPAC, told Carlson that THEY reimbursed the state for the children's travel expenses and paid her legal bills for the other ethics charges. In other words Sarah Palin has paid NO out of pocket money due to these charges!
So where does she get the $500,000 amount that she claims she and the First Dude have to pay for their part of the legal bills? Apparently in the same place she gets her other "facts", right out of her skinny lying Alaskan ass.
Hey want to play a little game?
Ask yourself when was the last time that you believe Sarah Palin actually told the TRUTH? About anything?
"Whose baby is that Sarah?"
"Mine."
"Where did you get the boat Sarah?"
"Todd and his friends built it!"
"What happened to those campaign clothes Sarah?"
"Gave em to charity, don'tcha know."
"Why are you leaving office Sarah?"
"Gonna go help help America.....and uh....Alaska! Yeah that's the ticket! Certainly not because of any impending scandal or investigation."
How can you tell when Sarah Palin is lying? Well you know the rest.
There you go with the FACTS! Good for you... but then you have to dive into the rumor pool...why?
ReplyDeleteClarification: Margaret Carlson said that the Alaska Fund Trust paid the legal fees and amounts owed to the state. (not SarahPAC)
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine having to LIVE with that?
ReplyDeleteYes, I did Gryphen. KO is part of my day as you are. They really did a great job with the discussion. Oh, and I watched MSNBC earlier where Sally Quinn from Washington Post and Founder of On Faith, said Palin "exploited" her children. She really did a good job expressing her views on that, too.
ReplyDeleteOT...You know them by their fruits, well the fruits sent emails, nasty, filthy, disgusting, horrific emails which Linda has posted on her blog. When you see Linda, give her a hug from me.
I...think...my...head...is...going...to..explode!
ReplyDeleteShe is such a user. Can't wait to hear more.
ReplyDeleteLevi speaks to Sarah's fav AP.
http://blow-pop-palin4.blogspot.com/2009/07/levi-speaks.html
He claims he heard the governor several times say how nice it would be to take advantage of the lucrative deals that were being offered, deals that included a reality show and a book.
Isn't there anything in that oath of office where the inductee faithly promised to uphold the office for the full term?? In the movie "A League of Their Own" Tom Hanks says, "There's no crying in baseball." There also should be a rule "There's no quitting in politics because I don't like it any more and I want to make more money."
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, it's going to cost the state extra money for the Legislature to come back and approve your Lt.Governor. Sarah should be charged for that expense. Next, she still has to pay the state back for the reimbusements she received for her per dieums and kids' travel. No matter if the Fund or PAC repays, she profitted by $8,000. or more. What a piece of work!
Well, since *SHE* did not pay back those $8K... I.R.S., ARE YOU LISTENING???
ReplyDeletewow..lots of Anony here...well, it was funny I missed that she was repaid - so actually she had todd spent nada...wow..thanks for picking up on that...when does she lie ? ahh, when her mouth moves ?
ReplyDeleteyeah....there is more to come...for sure...but glad she quit...thanks for keeping us updated..good job...
Maybe that $500,000, or is it $600,000 now? is what she anticipates she's going to owe the IRS after they get done with the audits.
ReplyDeleteHow do you expect her to get any money out of the Palinbots if she says she doesn't have any expenses?
ReplyDeleteOT maybe but a must read; just a very bare bones look at Palin's career in politics from mayor onward. Very well done and very insightful...I read it ALL and this really did it for me as far as her motives are concerned.
ReplyDeletehttp://alaskadispatch.com/palin-watch/1283-palin-how-she-gained-control-and-then-lost-it?start
Re: Lucrative deals for Gov from books and speeches and TV appearances after leaving office. Found this on Christian Science Monitor. Here is the meat of the ultimate ethics violation:
ReplyDelete"The only reason she’s quitting is she’s got to cash in while the getting’s good,” says Palin foe Andree McLeod, an Anchorage activist.
That cashing in – reaping financial rewards from her book deal and potential speaking engagements – is itself a violation of the spirit and letter of the state Ethics Act, which precludes public officials from personally profiting for two years after leaving a government position, Ms. McLeod says."
Here's the link to the article, it's a good read:
http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/07/09/alaskas-tab-for-ethics-complaints-about-palin-19-million/
She might not be "making hay in the sunshine" as quickly as she thinks!
So where does she get the $500,000 amount that she claims she and the First Dude have to pay for their part of the legal bills? Apparently in the same place she gets her other "facts", right out of her skinny lying Alaskan ass.
ReplyDeleteI don't usually go for potty humor but I must say, the freeze frame on the video before you play it appears to show her passing out some of those facts.
AKPetMom, I agree, the Alaska Dispatch article is excellent and it offers a way to impeachment. If they did, the SOA would not have to reimburse her for legal fees for the ethics complaints dismissed or found to not have merit.
man y'all have cotton in your ears. Much as I CANY STAND palin, Carlson said that Coale said the LEGAL BILLS FOR THE KIDS TRAVEL WERE PAID BY sarahpac, not the bills themselves...correct me if I am wrong and if I am right please fix the record here.
ReplyDeleteSJK, I believe you are correct.
ReplyDeleteI apologize for getting that detail wrong, but she did indeed say that the defense fund paid the LEGAL bills concerning the children's travel, not the actual travel expenses.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
It is good to see MSM starting to call Sarah on her many lies.
ReplyDeleteStill wish more was being done to find the truth in housegate. "Todd and his buddies built the house" is most likely one of the bigger lies still to be exposed.
Does anyone know if Sarah quit her sports reporter job?
Yes Gryphen I did watch Margaret Carlson on Count Down last night and my eyebrows shot off my head! LOL
ReplyDeleteWhat I find most interesting is that John Coale told Margaret this information. Seems the rats are starting to jump ship. Hmmmmmmm Can you see the rats swimming as fast as they can to get away? I can from my front porch no less! ROFLMAO
Can you imagine if the Palin's did a reality show? There would be so much editing out going on the show would be a mere 15 minutes a week!
ReplyDeleteGryphen, thanks!
ReplyDeleteHi Gryphen! Andrew Sullivan just linked to your post! Congratulations!!!
ReplyDeleteAs Anonymous properly pointed out, it was the Alaska Fund Trust that paid the legal bills, not SarahPac. That is the stated purpose of the Trust.
ReplyDeleteA couple of additional details, because accuracy is everything and I am surprised at the number of people who are being 'sloppy' with the facts:
1. Margaret Carlson says John Coale setup the Alaska Fund Trust. This is news to us all, I think, as John Coale actually setup SarahPac.
I would like to hear some confirmation of Margaret's claim - or was it simply an error?
2. Margaret stated clearly that 'most' of Sarah's legal bills were paid. I didn't hear 'all'.
3. As SJK pointed out with no small amount of exasperation...it was Sarah's legal bills that have been paid - NOT the travel expense reimbursement or the taxes on the per diems.
I have seen these same misstatements on other websites...please let's all correct them as we see them. Otherwise, REAL issues get clouded, and people with valid points get discredited
Rob in Ca
Um, this makes no sense. Those $500,000 may have been paid by the legal defense fund, but that is money that people have donated ot her to help her. I seriously doubt the Palin's have $500,000 sitting around. SO, I don't understand how this matters. If I were hit with $500,000 in legal fees, I'd also go out and try to get donations (of course, it'd only be from friends and family, not fans I didn't know), a=but I would still consider those to be my expenses since I'm the one who ultimately has to make sure they get paid. This whole article is such a twisting of the facts,. You're no better than the lies you claim Palin tells.
ReplyDeleteThanks AKPetMom for the Alaska Dispatch piece. I think this is spot on; Sarah Palin has no interest in any political office. She knows she doesn't have the intelligence, nor does she want to put in the incredibly hard work in Iowa and New Hampshire. Those people bore her. She can now be a celebrity and rake in lots of cash. Money is all she is interested in - and of course being adored by her bots. A Palin Reality show. That's her calling.
ReplyDeleteAnd without being a Governor, she doesn't have to publicly declare her income (and the family's income) any more...
ReplyDeleteI have to admit I would love to know how much she got for the book deal, and how much Bristol got for People Magazine, "Abstinence promotion" etc.
"John Coale, who set up Sarah's Legal Defense Fund and apparently runs SarahPAC, told Carlson that THEY reimbursed the state for the children's travel expenses and paid her legal bills for the other ethics charges.
ReplyDeleteUh, what?
"John Coale who set up Sarah's Legal Defense Fund"
What's the "Legal Defense Fund"? SarahPac or Alaska Fund Trust?
"Coale...told Carlson that THEY reimbursed the state for the children's travel expenses and paid her legal bills for the other ethics charges."
"THEY" Who? John Coale? SarahPac?
What I read:
1. Someone paid $8,000 to the state for the amount that Sarah was obliged to repay, from the ethics complaint about kids' expenses.
2. Someone paid Sarah and Todd's legal bills.
'Who' paid is not clear.
As a US citizen, I find it offensive that Palin makes a distinction of the cost for ethics accusations made against the governor of Alaska vs. against the POTUS. (see below for actual Palin comment) Since both have a budget for their respective "Departments of Law," wouldn't the same cost yardstick (ie based on lawyer hours) Palin used for Alaska also apply to the US? Of course, the answer is "yes". The only difference is that SP thinks it would be less bothersome to her if she were POTUS than what she is now. (Maybe she should check that assumption with Bush and Clinton and Nixon). In any case, it's all about Sarah. What damn does she give about the cost!
ReplyDeleteHere's the quote from PoliticsDaily.com:
Palin went on to say that that those kinds of ethics accusations wouldn't be such an issue if she were president because of the White House "Department of Law."
"I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we've been charged with and automatically throw them out," she said.
Obermann is a legal illiterate who I'd bet the rent never read the Branchwater report.
ReplyDeleteFact: The purported investigation was ultimately not supported or endorsed by a SINGLE member of the Alaskan sub-legislature (or any proper adjudicatory body) because its assumptions demonstrated that Palin acted within the scope of her powers of her office as established by state statute:
Branchwater: "I find that, although Walt Monegan’s refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin’s firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads."
Branchwater, thus, initially suggests Palin abused her powers of office by insinuating herself into Wooten's firing. He then acknowledges she had "constitutional and statutory authority to hire ad fire executive branch department heads."
Legal reasoning for idiots: a governor cannot violate state ethics while lawfully acting within the scope of his or official powers. I realize such simple legal realities confound many people, which is probably why Barack Obama occupies the Oval Office.
I realize also, that some attorneys have conveniently ignored Alaskan Statute Sec. 39.52.110 b)1.: Scope of code; prohibition of unethical conduct.
This statute states,
b) Unethical conduct is prohibited, but there is no substantial impropriety if, as to a specific matter, a public officer's
(1) personal or financial interest in the matter is insignificant, or of a type that is possessed generally by the public or a large class of persons to which the public officer belongs.
The key phrase here is "a type that is possessed generally by the public or a large class of persons to which the public officer belongs."
Officer Whooten had demonstrated on numerous occasions that he was
a potential public menace. An investigation, 482 pages in length concluded:
"The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,"
Put simply, Whooten had exhibited behavior in his capacity as a state trooper that put the public at risk (i.e., using a taser on his child). It was in the citizenry's best interest that such an officer be relieved of his duties. More importantly, once aware of his illegal actions, Sarah Palin had a public duty to insinuate herself into the issues.
Insofar as Walter Monegan's termination goes, he attempted to stymie the power of the governor on at least four different occasions:
12/9/07: Monegan holds a press conference with Hollis French to push his own budget plan.
1/29/08: Palin’s staffers have to rework their procedures to keep Monegan from bypassing normal channels for budget requests.
2/ 2008: Monegan publicly releases a letter he wrote to Palin supporting a project she vetoed.
6/26/ 2008: Monegan bypassed the governor’s office entirely and contacted Alaska’s Congressional delegation to gain funding for a project.
As I said, Obermann is a legal illiterate given to extremely prejudiced tirades, who frequently conceals important facts, thereby misleading the public he believes he is serving. He counts on the herd mentality
to simply acquiesce to his often defamatory tirades.
The left would be far better off if it had more trustworthy conduits to the truth.
@John Carpenter
ReplyDeleteFinding #1 Sarah Palin abused her power
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/132565
Speaking of illiterate, you might want to learn how to spell his name.
Anonymous@6:58am
ReplyDeleteThe only proof that Sarah Palin has $500,000.00 in legal bills is her word. We all know how good her word was on the "millions" in costs to the state.