Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Unsurprisingly Palin could not resist tweeting her feelings about this latest charge.
AKGovSarahPalinRe inaccurate story floating re:ethics violation/Legal Defense Fund;matter is still pending;new info was just requested even;no final report
However Thomas Daniel said the report was final.
Here is the pdf courtesy of KTUU.
So here is my take on this story after a number of e-mails ping ponged back and forth between the progressive bloggers.
Sarah had this document a WEEK AGO and did nothing to stop her supporters from continuing to donate to the Defense Fund. Since she has had this for a week she knows damn good and well that it is indeed FINAL.
So why would she suggest that there is any question on whether or not she violated Alaska's ethics laws? Because she was hoping the Personnel Board would dismiss the charge (you know like usual) that's why!
It is pretty obvious that Palin NEVER expected this report to become public. And I believe that the reason it was leaked is because somebody on the inside was afraid it would never see the light of day if it was left up to the Personnel Board.
In my opinion that was some smart thinking on our mysterious benefactor's part.
By the way Daniel's suggestion that Sarah Palin refuse the money is an indication that he knows NOTHING about Sarah Palin. There is no way in hell she is rejecting this money!
But here is a further thought. John Coale, the man behind the Defense Fund, said that it is "well on its way" to paying off the $500,000 that Sarah Palin incurred in legal charges. (These charges it is important to note were accrued BEFORE Sarah Palin returned from the campaign trail. So they are not the result of the any ethics charges except perhaps from the one she filed against herself.) So does that mean he has ALREADY paid these costs? Or that he was so sure that the Personnel Board would reject the findings of this report that Sarah could receive this money?
It sounds to me like he has already paid most of them, but not quite all of them. So where did that money come from and isn't THAT a gift? I find myself a little confused by Coale's statements and those made by Margaret Carlson on Countdown back on July 9 where she claims that Coals said that most of the money for the children's travel and the legal expenses were ALREADY paid for by the legal defense fund.
Something just does not smell right here..
It drives me crazy how the ethics complaints have been blamed for all of the costs both State & her personal, when it turns out that most costs have nothing to do with the complaints. On the State's accounting most of the costs were attributed to FOIA requests with no mention of how much they were charging for those requests, and then with her personal fees it appears only 1/6 was attributable to ethics. It would be so great if that came out highlighted in the MSM.
ReplyDeleteAlso, too DZ is claiming this as the iceberg... For some reason I was hoping for something different especially when he said a dirty scandal was headed her way. And reading all the defensive remarks by her bots on ADN's article they don't have a problem with it at all. So truly not dirty enough!!!
Wow no comments.
ReplyDeleteCan Palin be this blatant?
The guy signed it, isn't that final?
Stall tactic?
She is still signing bills, what is going on up there?
" capitalize on our strategic location on globe "
huh?
Most people get fired for what she does
Yep something stinks to high heaven! As with all things involving her twitterness there are more questions than answers.
ReplyDeleteHubby and I were watching Rachel last night and hubby was actually paying attention when this story came on. He does not follow the Palin stories and spin as closely as I do. He actually thinks I am a little looney about SP.
He was struck by the whole story as he is a state employee in WA and in his job he has to be very familiar with our states ethics laws. He was flabbergasted that Alaska allows the Gov. to appoint the Ethics board. His comment was are they crazy? In WA the board is appointed by three different branches. If I remember right the State Secretary appoints a member. The OFM (Office of Financial management) and the AG's office. The AG in our state is also an elected position just like the Gov. Currently our Gov is a democrat and the AG is a Republican. It is not a perfect system but much better than allowing one person to control the whole show.
Hubby saw the referenced ethics code and said it was basically the same one used here. His comment was that if any money was accepted into the fund in Sarah's name it was already an ethics violation.
I kept wondering like you, if any of the money had been already spent on legal bills, salaries etc.... ? His response was that then the invesitgation should tick up to a criminal investigation if this were the case.
The fact that she had a copy of the final report is very telling and we both felt she was hoping she would leave office next week and no one would be the wiser. Hmmmmm wonder if all of the money is still in the account?
Anyway like I said more questions as usual. My biggest one is when will the teflon wear off??
Gryphen.. Have you seen this Newsweek blurb.. some interesting little tidbits here.. Someone said they thought the $500,000 in legal fees were due to the McCain legal people.. wasn't that paid by the Liberty Group from Texas or where ever they were from that Dobson or someone sent up there to help her out...I am trying to remember..Sure seems like there was some Legal Group..I thought it was called Liberty Group..Does that ring a bell? Anyway.. read this from Newsweek..
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newsweek.com/id/207398
The report by Sean Cockerham in the ADN dated yesterday seems to say that the report is NOT final, according to Thomas Daniel.
ReplyDeleteThe matter isn't settled. Daniel said in an interview that his report to the state personnel board was a preliminary "probable cause" finding. He said the case won't be final until Palin resolves it, possibly by refusing to take money from the fund, or it goes to a formal board hearing.
His report was dated July 14. The report said copies were going to Palin and Kim Chatman, the Eagle River resident who filed the complaint. Palin's lawyer, Tom Van Flein, said Tuesday that he's been working with Daniel providing "supplementary information" on the fund.
"There has been no board finding of an ethics violation and there is a detailed legal process to follow before there is a final resolution," Van Flein said.
Palin issued a statement late Tuesday taking issue with the idea that she has taken any action involving the fund.
"In short, I have not 'acted' relative to the defense fund and it is misleading to say I have," she said.
I, for one, would really like to see the other independent investigative reports released, especially the one on Arctic Cat. I have this suspicion that the recommendations of the independent investigator and the actions of the personnel board have little in common.
ReplyDelete$P had better start practicing, "I am not a crook," but she'd never stop with five words. Doesn't Twitter give you 140 characters?
ReplyDeleteWhenever I read about $P receiving "illegal gifts," even though they most likely involve checks or a pile of cash or electronic fund transfers, I keep envisioning an actual gift box with a big glossy ribbon tied in a bow, like this:
http://www.commercialchristmasornaments.com/shop/images/categories/GiftBox.jpg
WV: czarist!
An investigator does NOT make decisions regarding ethic complaints. He makes recommendations which may or may not be presented to the Personnel Board.
ReplyDeleteThis REPORT is NOT a final decision and was leaked to the media which is in violation of the ethics law.
Wondering if there can be any campaign contributions for re-election of elected candidates in Ak. without ethic complaints being filed.
It seems that campaign contributions could influence a candidate. Isn't this the same reasoning that the investigator used for his recommendations regarding Gov. Palin. What do you think? Guess it might have to be tested during the election year.
More to come, while the iceberg once again has become a little ice cube melting as we speak.
There's speculation elsewhere that it was actually someone in Palin's inner circle, or someone authorized by Palin herself, who leaked the investigator's report; hoping to throw yet ANOTHER red herring out there to distract from the actual meat of the report, and start everyone talking about (shock!) the alleged confidentiality of the report and (for shame!) that someone -- hinting at Kim Chatman herself -- VIOLATED THE LAW (tsk!).
ReplyDeleteGee, who might the culprit be? Could it be someone who has close ties to a supporting blog, and who flew up to AK to meet with Palin recently? Someone who has spearheaded raising funds for Palin's personal use? Anyone? Bueller?
That's just rumor, mind you, started by me. And a personal opinion. I don't know any of the above for a fact. So don't quote me.
I think it's high time someone started investigating in depth some of these high-profile Palin supporters.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least if it turns out that Palin leaked this herself in the hopes of passing the blame onto someone else (which is her M.O.) and getting this dimissed.
ReplyDeleteNo matter who leaked it, there is not a question as to the fact that Meg Stapleton quite openly and publicly stated that "this" fund was the only offical fund, and advised people not to donate to other funds, but to wait for this one to be set up.
It is also quite clear in the ethics laws that the Governor cannot use her position to benefit herself personally which is exactly what this fund does.
Even if she never touches a penny, she is still in violation simply by virtue of the fact that she allowed it, and encouraged it. She was using her position to obtain money for her personal bills.
It really is pretty clear cut.
juju is scared. I can sense it from her ranting comments.
ReplyDeleteIt's over, juju.
It's good to have you back juju. You are looking forward to years of herculean audits from little cubes opening of her Pandora's box? I missed juju's defense of Jessica Steele Beehive. It ain't over until fatso sings.
ReplyDeleteSarah's favourite radio talk show host Eddie Burke twittered yesterday:
ReplyDelete"@Dasani_01 No reason to get started.. ur a socialist and im not. We will never agree.. My job is to eliminate you. Hitler did this once."
Eddie Burke's twitter:
http://twitter.com/talkradiohost
Anyone surprised?
juju, you live in California. You are not the GO-TO person for AK political procedures.
ReplyDeleteYou sound as manic as Sarah Crooked Palin.
Here's a rumor. Pass it on. Romney supporters infiltrated pro-Palin fan clubs? Maybe? They are the ones branding Palin as a crook? There will be more activity in this regard.
ReplyDeleteHitler is seeming to be mentioned an awful lot lately by Republican types, and NOT in a bad way, and this has me feely this awful sense of nausea and dread deep inside me. Is it really going to come down to having a group of people in this country who think that Hitler wasn't such a bad guy? This has me very concerned.
ReplyDeleteShould we give Mr. Burke the benefit of the doubt and assume he couldn't possibly have meant what his twitter seems to imply?
Oh, and for whomever cares--Lynne Cheney, who I heard argue against James Carville about both Palin and the Obama birther thing, is just as much a divider and "only Republicans are REAL Americans" as the worst of them. I could barely stand to listen to her, with her blonde hair (sorry any blondes I offend) and her fake smile and her divisive thoughts. Instead of clearly stating that the Obama birther people are nuts (as opposed to Carville, who said "those poor people" are uninformed, they listen to all that crap on Fox...(I don't think he actually said Fox but you know...) where was I....anyway, she did not say they were nuts, she said she UNDERSTOOD how they felt about having a president who "was not interested in defending our country overseas"....who "wanted this country to return to it's former values".. and other nonsense. Carville was a gentleman through the whole thing and I just wish he had managed to say that this country is attempting to return to its former values, and MOST Americans voted for Obama, so MOST Americans are happy that Bush and Cheney mentality is no longer in power. Lynn Cheney is as awful as her Dad, and unfortunately, she can put a sentence together so she will probably be the new "rising star". Aren't we lucky.
Oh, and Carville thought this last ethics complaint thing is no big deal, because what are they gonna do to her? She's leaving office anyway, and if Sarah is on top of the list of influential Republicans, that shows what a sorry state they are in. :)
I agree with posters who say this latest ethics thing, if it hadn't been leaked, would never have seen the light of day, and Sarah would have claimed it had been dismissed, just like the one about her children's travel was dismissed, although she had to pay money back. So, in Sarah World, no, this report is not the final world, because the Personnel Board has not had their say--which, I am sure, will be that IF Sarah complies with their recommendations, no harm no foul, and Sarah can say the complaint has been dismissed. And she will be technically correct. Because Lord knows, the letter of the law is so much more important than the spirit of the law. I think Sarah "I'm a Jesus Freak" Palin might want to check her bible for a clarification on that one.
Oops I said "Lynne" Cheney. It's Liz. I think Lynne is the mother.
ReplyDeleteReading the pdf file, it looks like, if this is the document leaked, it was sent via email from Daniels office to Ms. English's office. So, it isn't what was sent to Chatman or Palin. This report says they will be notified, not they were copied on this email, or that they have already been notified.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts is that based upon the language of the letter/report, the leak had to come from either the Daniels office or the Personnel Boards office.