Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
"Percolating on the blogs and throughout the internet"? I did a quick Google search and I cannot find anything about Bristol and her LLC anywhere. As far as I can tell it has only been reported on this blog. And for the record I NEVER suggested that she was working as a lobbyist or political consultant.
Now the information about what kind of LLC this is can be found here. Yep 541820 = Public Relations Agencies. It is right there in black and white on page 11. It is the ONLY definition offered for this code in the state of Alaska, so I have no idea who came up with those other possible definitions.
And as for Van Flein's suggestion that this LLC is to handle money that Bristol is making in her CURRENT role as a spokesperson for Candies, I have to respond with a WTF? I have not heard a thing about Bristol working as a spokesperson for the Candies clothing line since May of last year. Well before her mother quit as governor.
If she has been working as a spokesperson since then how come there have been NO public appearances? How can you help publicize a company if you are never seen in public? Something about this does NOT add up.
Is there any way to find out if the money for this company comes from the Candies organization? Couldn't it come from somewhere else? Perhaps somewhere that has her mother's name in the title?
I absolutely LOVE Rachel Maddow! She is famous for doggedly going after a story and staying on it until she reveals the facts and exposes the lies. So how can ONE phone call from Thomas Van Flein discourage her from this potentially explosive story? I have to say I am a little disappointed.
However I am still a huge fan and will continue to watch her show every day. Do you think that is enough kissing up?
I believe it is a way to hide money (from Levi). Candies pays Bristol's company and Bristol's company pays Bristol $100 a year (this is only an example), so when child support is being figured out, Mother Bristol make a measly $100 a year, so Tripp needs more money from Levi.
ReplyDeleteI only wish that she would've explored Pie Spy, LLC as well...
ReplyDeleteYou could tie Palin to John Pattee through Dr.Scott Laudon (a dentist, likely connected through Menard) if you really wanted to.
ReplyDeleteTwo other state-backed loans with favorable terms and questionable development benefits went to Palin contributor and local dentist Scott Laudon and his partners. The investors got $1.2 million to refinance debt on Northern Lights Village -- a gritty collection of shops including massage and tattoo parlors, a secondhand-clothing store and a video arcade.
Money from an LLC is "pass through" income. Which means the money is passed through and then taxed as PERSONAL income by the owner.
ReplyDeleteThe only reason to set up an LLC is to protect yourself from being sued and to hide assets.
I have a differing opinion on how Rachel handled this. She had the gotcha twinkle in her eye and her grin was great. She recognizes that this is a grifter tool,and I think that she conveyed that pretty well. But, in the big scheme of what Rachel is watching and reporting on, this is really small. I thought she gave it a longer segment than I would have expected. And the grifter has been put on notice that we are all watching. And Van Flein is digging in deeper and deeper with the grifters.
ReplyDeleteIf Rachel Maddow has been watching the blogs percolating, she already knows that VF will say and do whatever his mistress orders him to.
ReplyDeleteBut in the absence of any evidence, Rachel can hardly suggest that it's merely another of Mrs Palin's money-grubbing schemes.
The only reason to set up an LLC is NOT to protect yourself and hide assets. Protect yourself yes, hide assets NO.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is this LLC was intended to make it appear Bristol is working and not sitting on her butt while she accuses Levi of the same thing.
As a single member LLC all of her income will be reported on her 1040 tax return (if she reports it all)but it can all fall in as services rendered and she won't have to name each party she was paid from.
By the way, just because she is listed as a single member LLC that does not mean she doesn't have employees. It means she doesn't have a partner or partners in the LLC. Of course it also doesn't mean she does have employees either. Might be interesting to see if this business has a phone number or a website. It's mighty hard to do business if no one can find you to hire you.
Gryphen, this might be one place where people are getting "political consulting" from
ReplyDeletehttp://www.naics.com/censusfiles/ND541820.HTM
Oh and Palingates, at least, has been talking about it since yesterday too. But they might have gotten it from here; there are lots of people who read both! Like me.
ReplyDeletemxm, I hope you are right about that.
ReplyDeleteAnd More Cowbell thanks for the link. Those is NOT the definitions used in Alaska so I figured they must come form someplace else. And if I overlooked Palingates I apologize, I did try to search through my blogroll and used Google to see who else was following this story. I did not see anybody else. My bad, if I was incorrect.
The way I see it, Bristol is an ambassador for Candies and an advocate for abstinence. Sarah Palin and the people she appeals to also support that political point of view. So, it seems logical that SarahPAC would generously support a cause they believe in with generous donations. It doesn't matter how few appearances Bristol actually makes; I think it is all about the generous donations.
ReplyDeleteThis is a way to funnel money to Bristol and support Tripp. It is also a way to show Levi that Bristol is raking in big bucks, and that makes her the so-called fit parent to have sole custody.
Bristol can do one interview with Greta and discuss abstinence, and that makes her a lobbyist, a consultant, a spokesperson, an advocate and an ambassador. Maybe Sarah can sign Bristol up with the Washington Speakers Bureau and get her $100,000. speaking engagements. I can't wait for Bristol's book and road tour, too, also. And, she should be coming out with a line of designer baby clothes; maybe Candies will open a junior division. The possibilities for making money are bleeping golden.
What's important about Rachel covering this story is that it takes it out of the blogs and onto TV. It was Rachel's disbelief that a 19 year old with limited experience was able to open and form her own consulting company, surprise! I am glad that Rachel brought attention to this cozy scheme; it deserves to be noticed.
ReplyDeleteI agree with mxm....I thought there was a little sarcasism in her voice. It seemed to me that she was laughing on the inside.
ReplyDeleteActually, Gryphen, after reading about the 'job' you linked to here yesterday, I looked up the classification and it INCLUDES 'political consultant' and 'lobbyists' .. I got that straight from an AK website .. I wrote a post about it ... I think that this BSMP is just a way for Sarah to 'pay out' some of the PAC $$$ she gets to a 'political consultant' who just happens to be her daughter.
ReplyDeleteI did give you credit for the tip about the job, but I didn't put any words in your mouth. However, that NAIS designation describes the 'activities engaged in' as:
"designing and implementing public relations campaigns. These campaigns are designed to promote the interests and image of their clients. Establishments providing lobbying, political consulting, or public relations consulting are included in this industry" NAICS 541820
After I wrote that post, I did go 'tease' many of the Palinbot sites about how their PAC donations were being syphoned off by Sarah through this company.. I always plaster Huffpost with them too!
...... sorry if you feel that words got put in your mouth, that isn't fair. In your thread, you focused on the PR aspect, but the 'political consultant' and 'lobbyist' activities kinda got me interested .. it's a sweet deal for Sarah and easy $$ for Bristol.
I don't buy Van Flein's Candies cover for it .. I am convinced that this is a way to siphon off the PAC $$$ through 'political' expenses, to Bristol.
If you have a few minutes to read the post, you will see where I am coming from.
http://archivist1000.blogspot.com/2010/01/sarahpac-and-keeping-it-all-in-family.html
ALSO: I said pretty much what I said in my blog on that thread, right here at IM yesterday.
ReplyDeleteI just watched the Maddow segment .. she does seem to 'drop' it .. but I still say: If she is 'officially and legally' a political consultant, she doesn't have to be a GOOD one for Sarah to hire her, pay her with SarahPAC $$$ and it's all nice and legal and stays in the family!
ReplyDeleteSarah isn't going to let go of that $$$ easily. These PACs are a goldmine.
Dr. Laudon is tight friends with Leisel McGuire.
ReplyDeleteGryphen, Alaska is using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)-- they don't have their own system. My link was from the NAICS home page. If you click on 541820, you get these subcategories. I haven't been able to find any information about states using the main NAICS categories but not the subcategories. If that's the case for Alaska, then there is NO category for political consultants, because the only other political category is 813940 political organizations. I can't believe that would be the outcome. But then I haven't been able to believe lots of things coming out of Alaska.
ReplyDeleteOh and you didn't miss a post on Palingates-- people are talking about it in the comments. No way you'd have seen that.
ReplyDeleteI got the distinct impression from watching Rachel that she wasn't buying the Candies story a bit, but couldn't say otherwise because of lack of proof right now. IMO the look of glee on her face when she mentioned Bristol's lobbying & being a political consultant for $carah said it all. They wouldn't have spent a day chasing it if they didn't intend to keep an eye out. Palins - you're on notice.
ReplyDeleteBetcha the panties are in a tighter wad now. Are you having fun yet $carah? How will you attach all the hairpieces you've been wearing when you've pulled out the remaining pieces of your real hair? Super glue?
A big one that she can "contract" for and receive a paycheck services is PR for her dad and Scott Davis. She can "manage" them.
ReplyDeleteIf this LLC is set up for Bristol to keep track of the money she receives for being a rep for Candies, then this is just another case of a Palin sitting on their backside and racking in money for doing nothing. I don't know if Bristol signed a contract with Candies and if she did, how long they have to pay her, but she hasn't made an appearance since May of 2009. Easy money for doing nothing. Ah, we should all have to work so hard.
ReplyDeleteI like Archivist theory that this is a way to get PAC money back in the family compound. Bristol's new house and car can be paid for this way. Who knows what else?
ReplyDeleteEventually, the PAC money does need to report how it has paid out it's funds. I'm sure all eyes will be looking for the LLC. Does anyone know if they report on a fiscal year basis? If so, then the 2009 report could be interesting! There is a site that follows the money in PAC's. This is right up Rachel's alley. May be some teeth gnashing tonight at the compound.
I thought Rachel's piece was actually pretty lame. She was overly giddy like there was a juicy story coming, but then all she did was accept Van Flea's explanation, no questions asked. She left the impression that Bristol is actively receiving income from various sources like Candies, and that it made sense to set up the LLC for this purpose.
ReplyDeleteI don't really understand why Rachel chose to cover this at all, when we know it wasn't "percolating" all over the blogs. If one of her producers really worked on it all day like she said, it was a big waste of time because she didn't get any useful information to report. I think it was supposed to have entertainment value.
Too bad that producer didn't come back to her and suggest there was a much better story to be told about the liberal bloggers who were banned from the Wasilla book signing while Obama as Hitler material was allowed to be distributed there. Oh well, maybe next time.
Now, now Gryphen, don't get your boxers in a bind.
ReplyDeleteLook at the big picture here: Rachel Maddow, THE Rachel Maddow has talked about this in a definitely sneering manner. You're going to get people coming to your blog who have NEVER been here before. This will lead them to read all the other stuff you've got up and they'll learn a LOT.
As Martha Stewart would say, "It's a GOOD thing!"
Keep up the great work. I wake up very early here in COLD Central Virginia and you're the very first blog I click on to get the VERY LATEST info on the Palin clan. I feed the dogs, make a cup of tea and sit back and ENJOY this whole thing.
Thanks.
I love RM too, but I don't think she will do much more with the story until there is more evidence in her hands. If she thought of it enough to give it a passing mention, though, it is definitely on her radar.
ReplyDeleteSo I would say, if Gryphen or any of these other mean! ol'! bloggers! can find more dirt and forward it to RM, and she can verify the sources, we would likely see more on her show about it.
I think the fact that it was mentioned at all is great, because it puts Sarah on notice, since she seems to be passing on her flexible ethics to the next generation.
I wonder how those SarahPAC mothers (feeding only rice to their children so they can bankroll Sarah) feel about paying for Bristol's big new house? Ouch.
You need to get a life and a job.
ReplyDeleteIs Bristol hiring ?
Yup, there was plenty of sarcasm there, Rachel will not come out and say directly that it is a way for Sarah to funnel the PAC comes, but her reporting "implied" it. She got this story right from your blog, dude. You need to contact her.
ReplyDeleteShe put it out there, at least. From day one, I have liked Ms. Maddow, and supported her show. Sometimes I'm busy, or not so interested, but, made it a habit to tune in to MSNBC during her time slot, to support her in the ratings.
ReplyDeleteRecently, Rachel Maddow wished Rush Limbaugh well,(during his hospital stay) and a speedy recovery. It is for that reason, that I've decided to stop tuning into her tv show. Don't get me wrong, I didn't wish him death, but I would not have mourned his passing either.
I'm only one person, and won't make or break her. She has a right to say and do what she pleases, and so do I.
Regardless, I respect her still, and wish her continued success.
Archivist@9:59"I don't buy Van Flein's Candies cover for it .. I am convinced that this is a way to siphon off the PAC $$$ through 'political' expenses, to Bristol."
ReplyDeleteActually, I'm sure the correct answer is C.) all of the above
The Candies money could be considered as being for PR, and therefore going through the LLC, but what I don't find convincing is Van Flein trying to think anyone would buy that that's all there is to it "nothing to see here, move along", when the services rendered were done in May and the company was not set up until November! Also, I had been wondering whether the Candies appearances were paid performances or whether they just paid all expenses for their ambassadors. If we are to believe Van Flein, then Bristol MUST HAVE gotten paid, and therefore DID use the very existence of her son (if not his image) for her own financial gain, exactly what they are accusing Levi of trying to do.
I think you guys are making more out of this LLC than it really is...it will not facilitate laundering SarahPAC or ATF money in the least and all income derived from it IS subject to income and self-employment taxes.
ReplyDeleteI DO think the grifters are going crazy trying to figure out how to get all their hard-stolen money out these two funds, but an LLC is NOT going to help them out. Any fiscal shenanigans will be just as obvious whether it's an LLC or a real live person. I was a CPA for 15 years and still work as an accountant in the private sector.
This is a distraction...let's keep our eye on the ball(s)...babygate, housegate, ethics violations and possible prior tax evasion. I personally would like to see the IRS do some means testing on how they can afford to live like they do, in the house they do, on the money that they reported on their disclosed tax returns from the election.
Alaska child support laws are very strict and are designed to protect the child. The income of the primary custodian, almost always the mother, has very little impact on the amount of child support the father will pay.
ReplyDeleteIf, as everyone expects, Bristol is awarded primary custody with some visitation rights granted to Levi, Mr. Johnston will pay 20% of his income to Bristol until Tripp turns 18 and possibly longer if Tripp decides to attend college:
3. How does CSSD calculate child support?
Child Support is calculated according to Court Civil Rule 90.3. You may access Civil Rule 90.3 by clicking on the left side of CSSD's homepage. When someone has primary physical custody, the payments are based on what the noncustodial parent earns. Primary physical custody refers to the parent with whom the child resides at least 70% of the time. That court rule says that the noncustodial parent of one child should pay 20% of his or her adjusted income to support one child. Adjusted income means earning after deductions for taxes, union dues, retirement deductions and other mandatory deductions.
For example, if the noncustodial parent’s adjusted income is $1000 per month and that parent has one child, her monthly support obligation would be $200. If she has two children, the percentage of adjusted income for child support would increase to 27%. For three children the obligation percentage would increase to 33% and it would continue to increase by 3% per child thereafter.
The calculations differ when there is shared or divided custody. Shared custody means that a parent has physical custody at least thirty percent of the year, while divided custody involves multiple children and means that each parent has primary physical custody of at least one child of the relationship.
In Alaska in situations where one parent has primary custody, child support is based upon the earnings of the noncustodial parent. If there is shared or divided custody, the child support is based on the income of both parties.
Levi won't get 30% custody, not even close.
A business organization like a LLC allows the individual to write off as expenses things you normally might not be able to write off...cellphone, computers, travel, household expenses for a home office, car, perhaps even some educational expenses, medical insurance and the list goes on.
ReplyDeleteSeveral years, I quit my job with a major corporation and started a small consulting business. While I don't make the salary I had at the major corporation, my take home pay has been the same...because of being able to write off so many household expenses which I n outside job. It is probably about reducing taxes.
Somewhere it was mentioned that Bristol was paid $300,000 for the People's interview. I can't imagine a young lady getting that kind of money and still be living at home. With that amount of money and funds received from Candies, Bristol could have a nice condo in the city.
If she did get that amount of money.....she has a bunch of taxes to pay same as Quittypants with her book revenue. IRS get ready to receive big checks from the Palins.
I don't buy the Candies excuse either. It sounds like a way for Sarah to get her grubby hands on some of that SarahPac money.
ReplyDeleteHop on over to Celtic Diva's blog and find out what the Beehive owner and that ignorant "talk show" host w/the anti-gay t-shirt are telling people to do online.
ReplyDeleteCD has warned law enforcement with a letter.
Grandma68
I liked Rachel, alot, initially. But, I am disillusioned with and disgusted with any/all MSM journalists who do not expose Sarah, fully, totally, also, too. I have emailed Rachel asking her to discuss the Wild Ride. Crickets. Still waiting. All of MSM is in on the hoax. ALL.
ReplyDeleteThere is no way she isn't siphoning money. She's way, way, way too aggressive in fundraising for her PAC. Who else raises money for their PAC the way she does? Who else has a bucket o'money out at appearances like she does?
ReplyDeleteThe thing is she'll get away with it. Hardly anyone ever gets in real legal trouble from campaign finance illegalities. (Sarah's old running mate could be a lesson in that; see Keating Five). Technically, it was illegal for the RNC to buy her clothes, underwear and luggage in 2008, but nothing came of that.
Maybe the reason Bristol hasn't made very many appearances for Candies is because Candies realized what a polarizing spokesperson they had hired ~ when it was too late to get their money back (because BTQ$ had probably already spent it).
ReplyDeleteSo would this have anything to do with the current concern re: abstinance funding in the Federal budget being reinstated.
ReplyDeleteIs Candies sucking on the Federal tit or getting private donations?
There's that darn socialist thing again!
I have to agree with mxm as well. Rachel's tone was full of sarcasm. You may not have liked the piece, but look at it this way; the seed has been planted! Rachel picked up the story and had a short segment in her show! She's on our side... and she knows this is something pulled right from sarah's lying ass. She's no dummy, as you're quite aware... just give this story some time.
ReplyDeleteGryphen. I hate to tell you this, but IM is not the center of the blogosphere. The BSMP LLP story has been percolating, sub rosa, at other blogs the past couple of days. You really do need to get out more....
ReplyDeleteI strongly disagree with Anon @ 4:41. RM did not diss G - or even mention his blog, nor did she go soft or sympathetic on anything Palin. And so what if she wished The Fat Pig a speedy recovery? It's just her showing that progressives aren't about blind meanness.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anon @ 4:42. And with Archivist @ 9:59. More is being made about the NAICS than needs to be. AK has no state income tax: the feds do. Using the national code therefore makes sense. And that code does have all those other definitions. What of it?
If the last PR appearance by Bristol was in May 2009, why was the LLC not set up until September 2009? Laziness, sloppiness or did she fail to timely file a quarterly return?
That Bristol filed for an LLC is interesting... but I see no smoking gun. At this point, it just looks like she got good advice. As someone else noted, people need to keep an eye out for the PAC filings to see if any money is being funneled to or thru Bristol's LLC.
Has s'error made any of the requisite filings for 2008 or 2009 yet? What do those show?
And, have any of the other Palin's filed for an LLC or similar critter?
If Candies is getting federal money, then there's a paper trail which is subject to a FOIA request.
ReplyDeleteI believe Maddow's version on this. I think this is chasing a bad lead.
ReplyDeleteI believe strongely that there is something going on with this baby situation, but I worry when the blog resorts to discussing her cellulite. I disliker her very much, and get a little queasy when I think of her holding any public office, but if this blog wants to be seen as a rational, legitimate source of information the "witch hunt" tactics have to stop.
I may be projecting though, because I like to share the blog with my friends and I have a desire to come off as having fair criciticisms of Palin.
I don't think rachel is buying van flein's excuse. she's way too smart, she knows the deal. I think her story was full of sarcasm.
ReplyDeleteI think this move is clearly a way to pay bristol with the pac money, the aft money, piespy, and whatever else they grift. seems pretty clear to me that the entire reason for doing this was so that bristols name didn't appear in the disclosures. they probably assumed no one would ever find out if they hid bristol behind the name of some company.
you know it's just eating at her (evidenced in her appearance) that she can't pull her secret shit anymore the way she's done for her entire life. yep, she should have blinked, but instead caved to her ambitions.
anon @ 5:11 - I don't see what you mean here:
ReplyDelete"business organization like a LLC allows the individual to write off as expenses things you normally might not be able to write off...cellphone, computers, travel, household expenses for a home office, car, perhaps even some educational expenses, medical insurance and the list goes on."
you do not need to form a corporation to take these deductions. any self employed person can take them.
again, I think the entire reason was to try and hide (from the public) paying bristol with all the grifter funds.
My take is that Rachael is acting like a spider. She set the web for Palin to land on.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry.... there is more to come!
I think Rachel was putting out the facts here...the paperwork of BSMP LLC, the fact that a 19 yrs old, is doing political consulting per the
ReplyDeletedefinition of NAICS, mommy dearest has a PAC...and she called van flea who said that is was for Candies (PR) which we know is bs but we all have to wait for SARAHPAC info to come out...to see where that money is going! Until then it is conjecture that Sarah is paying Bristol out of the PAC. So I am happy Rachel brought it up and is letting Grifter know, hey We are watching....!
I thought it was great, Rachel was full of sarcasm and snark!!! Love it!!!!
Marvin M: I think the 'Candies PR' spin is the diversion.
ReplyDeleteWith Bristol set up as a 'Political Consultant' office, Sarah can pay for services to that office out of PAC funds.
Doesn't matter if the 'consulting' is good or not: she consults BSMP, gets invoiced for the services, and pays for them out of PAC $$$.
All legal and above board, and a sweet deal for the Palins! Bristol gets paid 'fee' for giving advice and doing a few menial jobs related to a Political Candidate in any way and the PAC pays for it.
www.archivist1000.blogspot.com
I completely agree with Crystalwolf at 8:24. Rachel will keep everything filed, but not filed away, and she will update on the story as necessary. That's what I like about Rachel, she brings updates to her stories. It seems that she doesn't stop investigating after the story is reported, which is excellent.
ReplyDeleteI love her show -- can you tell? she has uncovered so many things like The Family, that horrible Uganda Anti-gay bill -- I could go on and on. She managed to open my eyes to a lot of shady things. I also like her humor and think that helps keep my attention and the show upbeat. It's fun and informative. And (unlike Sarah), she can admit to mistakes and will correct them immediately.
It is nice to know that even if the LLC is legit -- there are a lot of people that are going to be watching that LLC and SarahPAC very closely, which they should be. (And the Alaska Fund Trust, of course)
Haven't the Palins had several "Businesses" on the side in the past, and even new ones this last year. I think they should be watched closely just in case. It will keep the Palins (ahem) honest (cough).
OK, on hindsight, I would suggest they put up the LLC so that Levi will not be able to touch Bristol's income, and neither could anyone else, because an LLC is protecting assets from being attached in any type of lawsuit.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read all the comments yet, but I'm thinking along the lines of sme131 @ 9:25 pm.
ReplyDeleteScarah needs to keep supporting Bristol, for control more than anything. But Bristol is beginning to look like a deadbeat. With this new, fun tool they get to keep money that doesn't belong to them, and make Bristol look like a functioning member of society.
Levi's been so busy, the grifter bunch must think he's making them look bad.
It sounds kind of dumb, but then doesn't Scarah care mostly about superficial appearances - perhaps even more than making money (though it's a tight race).
I loved it that RM even mentioned Bristol's LLC. RM's attention to anything Palin is NOT the kind of attention Mrs. Palin would or should want although I don't think she's smart enough to recognize that.
ReplyDeleteThings just are breaking too well for the Wasillahillbillies are they. And what will tomorrow bring? Or rather what will January 7th bring with their new TeaBagger campaign on harassing the Judges? If the Teabaggers weren't so scary, it would be hilarious.
GRYP, You are always onto something real hot, but it seems you let it drop. Why don't you puy articles in a paper so more people can read about it and pose questions also. you can really start a riot with the information you have.put it in ADN.
ReplyDelete9:51 AM - Levi was talking about joint custody. How does that make him able to touch Bristol's income?
ReplyDeleteHe is the one who shows he will work. Bristol looks like a con. There is no sign that she will do meaningful work. If she makes a fortune as a political consultant or an abstinence only worker, the court needs to know.
Levi has enough on his plate with joint custody. He is not going after another law suit. That is ridiculous.
I agree with those who think Rachel's at least getting it on the airwaves, I've only seen small blurbs on the msm, and she did devote a whole segment on the subject.
ReplyDeleteRachel Rocks!