palin-journal-2012 I’m late on blogging about this, but wanted to give it some attention.  A little over a week ago, an investigator hired by the Alaska State Personnel Board determined that Sarah Palin’s established legal defense fund, The Alaska Fund Trust, broke state ethics laws, and so goes the Catch 22.  It was declared to be unethical for others to raise money on her behalf to defray costs of mounting a legal defense.

Anchorage Daily News reported:

Tim Petumenos, an Anchorage attorney hired by the state Personnel Board to investigate, said Thursday the legal defense fund violated state law because it "constituted using public office to obtain private benefit." He said the fund, which was set up while Palin was still governor, inappropriately said it was the "official website" of Palin, and made reference to her work in public office. Petumenos upheld an ethics complaint that was filed 15 months ago against the trust.

This sounds asinine doesn’t it?  It’s unethical to collect funds to offset legal fees accrued defending against ethical complaints due to her being in office.  It is “unethical” for her to defend herself.  So she was personally on the hook, which essentially means that it cost her money to serve as Governor.   So the fund has 90 days to return the donations it received prior to her resignation as Governor which would be prior to July 27, 2009.  The fund had raised $386,000 of over $500,000 in legal fees the Palins had amassed due to ethics complaints (all of which have been dismissed).  No money of the fund was spent as it was frozen due to the ethics complaint filed in response to its creation.

Kristan Cole, the Fund trustee responded in a statement:

It is a shocking miscarriage of justice to have the investigator conclude that a sitting governor has to incur personal liability to defend herself against malicious and abusive attacks, and to conclude that a governor in that position can’t raise money from the public to help defray these costs. In fact the Alaska law specifically allowed Governor Palin to personally and directly solicit donations up to $150 each with no public reporting and she could have personally solicited donations in excess of $150 if she reported them and did not use her public office to do so. AS 39.52.110-130. It is simply legally unsound to suggest a trust could not do for Sarah Palin what the statute allowed Sarah Palin to do directly herself. A team of lawyers and over 4 law firms cleared the trust and it was reviewed by law professors prior to the launch of the trust in 2009. To our knowledge, no other similar trust fund has ever been ruled invalid under any state or federal law.  Many federal office holders have legal defense funds, and federal law also prohibits an office holder from using one’s office for personal gain. The trust was modeled after many national political figures’ legal defense trusts. In fact language in John Kerry’s trust is identical to language in Sarah Palin’s trust yet none has found his trust to violate any law. Legal defense trust exist for other governors, judges, senators, congress persons, presidents and other political figures. The following is a small handful of political figures with legal defense trusts: John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Ted Stevens, Newt Gingrich and Barack Obama.  Yet no other legal defense fund has been ruled to violate any prohibition on public officials using their public office for personal gain by raising funds for their legal defense.  This unique and unprecedented decision appears specially created for Sarah Palin.

It’s absolutely unbelievable that this decision was made.  Here’s another problem, the attorney who intially investigated worked for Perkins Cole Law Firm which was the Democratic National Committee and the Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign counsel of record.  Yep, no conflict of interest there.  Unbelievable.  Former Palin spokeswoman, Meg Stapleton said in a statement:

The Personnel Board initially appointed an “independent” investigator. That investigator, we later learned, had connections with, and was associated with President Obama. The Personnel Board had hired President Obama’s personal law firm as an “independent” investigator to review whether a fund created to raise money to eliminate a debt incurred as a result of Governor Palin’s opposition to President Obama was appropriate. We objected to both the illegal leak and the blatant political influence, and a new investigator was appointed.

The new investigator spent considerable time reviewing the old information and collecting new, but I think it proved to be too difficult to reverse an already-public decision. He concluded that the Trust fund violated Alaska law in two respects. His biggest heartburn was that we used the word “official” on the website. And he was distressed that we turned down an offer from a former White House Special Counsel to serve as trustee and instead chose an Alaskan whom Alaskans would recognize – Kristan Cole.

Kristan sat on several state boards as a volunteer public servant. The investigator concluded that because she sat on such boards, Governor Palin as governor was technically her boss, and therefore she should not be the trustee of the fund. That is his conclusion and we respect that. The law is not clear on this aspect, and not one member of the legal team saw this as an issue, but again, we respect the conclusion here and it is not worth the time or money to dispute that. But we do want to thank Kristan for taking on that otherwise thankless task. What is it they say about no good deed?

The other conclusion needs context. There was a point where it appeared that people around the country wanted to start legal defense funds for Governor Palin. The support and good will the people of this country have shown to the Palins is inspiring. But a concern was raised whether all these other potential funds would comply with various laws, including donation limits, limits against contributions from lobbyists or contributions from foreign nationals. So we used the word “official” in the website to distinguish the Alaska Fund Trust from ones we were not sure would be compliant. In our view, that was a solid and common sense reason to use the word “official,” but the investigator believes that it made it appear that the website was sponsored by the State of Alaska, and thus would be a use of Governor Palin’s ”official” office to raise money. We are not terribly persuaded that really would be the case or that any member of the public could be confused, but we respect the investigator’s evaluation of this point and it is not worth fighting about. Again, Governor Palin’s prime directive was simple – if this fund could be set up lawfully, she would support it. If not, it would not have her support.

So Governor Palin has reached a point where she decided to agree to resolve this matter with the investigator rather than spend time and money fighting an ethics complaint about a fund that was created to reimburse her for the money she has spent fighting bogus ethics complaints drawn up by insiders and outsiders violating and abusing Alaska law. Really, this is simple pragmatism and common sense. (read the whole statement).

The ethics violations have been dismissed.  They’ve been nothing but political attacks using loopholes within the Alaska Ethics Act to hurt the Palin family personally.  Meg Stapleton said that “no public official should ever have to bear the financial brunt of these attacks.”  I agree.  Like I said before the grand total of her legal fees amount to more than what she earned in her base salary in the 2 1/2 years she was Governor of Alaska.  A new legal defense fund has been created called the Sarah Palin Legal Defense Fund.  If you are able and feel so led, I encourage you to join me in contributing (and people are not limited to the initial $150 per person cap with the last fund).  I’m one of those who will be receiving my donation back and will be more than happy to send it to the new legal defense fund.

51 comments
  1. it is a good time for us to remember that the blogger responsible for most, if not all, of the bogus complaints filed against palin defended herself with the comment that she had as much right to earn a living as anyone else. that told me all i needed to know about the blogger and who might have been paying her to file the complaints.
    dennisintn

  2. I notice that you pass over the true reason this fund was found illegal. There was nothing in the wording establishing it that prevented Sarah Palin from doing whatever she wanted with the money. A defense fund, in and of itself, is not illegal or unethical, but one which allows the possibility of the recipient using the money for purposes other than legal expenses is.
    The ethics concern is based on that finding. Is it ethical for a government official to raise money for their own personal use using his or her “official” position? There is an ex-Governor in Illinois who is on trial for doing just that.
    Assuming the new defense fund is properly worded there is nothing wrong with it. As to the question of why anyone would want to donate to a multi-millionaire’s legal defense; “It’s your money”.

    1. GB, that is incorrect. It was a legal defense fund, not a Palin slush fund. The Palins would never receive a direct payment. This money was to go directly to the law firm representing her. They had legal help setting this up. The issue was the word “official” not how the money was being used.

      Thanks for stopping by and lying.

  3. Oh, it’s all just $arah’s carnival. This will never stop, she can’t be taken seriously or be considered for preznit because the circus just never stops. She doesn’t want to stop it either, CHA-CHING.
    Both sides are enablers and $arah just keeps cashing in.
    The 25 percent that actually takes this PALIN REALITY SHOW seriously should check themselves into a mental hospital. This is a sick joke, $arah is a scam.

  4. The only reason Sarah Palin had personal legal costs was because of HER CHOICE to engage a private lawyer, Tom Van Flein. After all, the Personnel Board was dismissing complaints almost as soon as they came in and the cost to Alaska was NOT millions; real cost was $296,000 with $187,797 attributed to Palin’s own efforts to politicize Troopergate by having her handpicked personnel board handle compalint. BTW, she was found liable for ethics violations by bipartisan legislative council regarding her attempts to personalize the state public safety department. Contrary to Palin propaganda, nobody was paid overtime or extra costs for ethics complaints. State lawyers and investigators were paid same routine salaries that they would have been paid regardless of Palin being investigated or not.

    http://www.adn.com/2009/07/01/850854/ethics-investigations-cost-state.html

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6004368&page=1

    Furthermore, Tom Van Flein ADVISED Palin to have state Department of Law review fund for legality but she elected to accept the advice of another attorney, who is NOT from Alaska; Georgia based Randy Evans, an attorney for Georgia state GOP and a former attorney to Newt Gingrich.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/25/96521/palin-agrees-to-refund-defense.html

    As usual, when things don’t go Palin’s way, play the “Obama is after me” card. Stapleton accuses investigator of being an Obama operative with NO PROOF. The link to the ties between Petumenos and Obama is to Conservatives4Palin, called Sea of Pee by critics, given their penchant for distortions and banning anyone with differing opinions about their goddess.

    Palin is just another charismatic charlatan offering distortions and simple soundbite solutions to complex issues; dividing Americans into segments: her supporters are real Americans and the rest of us who live in large urban areas are sub-human scum. She uses her kids as blunt objects AND as human shields from criticism; tries to gin up symapthy and votes via her kids. She is worse than Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer and as bad as Hitler.

    1. Handsome , educate yourself or quit lying.

      Alaska is the only state where the AG does not defend the Governor, the Governor of Alaska is personal responsible to for her legal bills!

    2. So she’s murdered people as well?

      Not only are you incorrect with your “facts,” you’ve just proven your unhinged. Don’t bother commenting here again. I’m deleting the rest of your comments.

  5. She needs a legal defense fund because she has a habit of bending or breaking the law. Some of it is inadvertant, after all, may of the ethics laws she put in place herself and therefore are new to everyone, including her legal advisors who undoubtedly saw nothing wrong with her bringing her children on state functions and charging the state for their room and board and travel while they ‘worked’ in some official capacity for the state. Others before her had done the same thing. Only her new ethics laws, instated to ward off corruption, made this illegal. (She reimbursed the state.) There are multiple other ethics charges along the same lines, many were dismissed. NONE of those charges, real or otherwise, cost Sarah Palin a dime – because she was governor, she was defended by the state. The initial defense fund was just a good way to raise money, and as someone else noted, she can use it for whatever she wants, which indeed broke the AK ethics laws. So now, this multimillionairess has set up ANOTHER legal defense fund so that her supposed legal needs are met. Let me restate – her defense costs against charges made about her as GOVERNOR are covered by the state. So, my question is, is she planning to reimburse the state with this money? Or is she getting ready for some other, massive lawsuit that she doesn’t want to pay for herself?

    BTW- she was found to have abused her power in office by a non-partisan committee presided over by a Republican appointee. When she did not like that verdict, she replaced the entire ethics review board – her right to do as a sitting governor – and it was this new, handpicked board who reversed the decision. The irony here is twofold: the first outcome didn’t matter, as there would be no consequences at all for an abuse of power decision; and the fact that she used her governor powers to replace the ethics board with people who held a more Palin-favorable view can be construed as an abuse of power.

    Frivolous lawsuits should have been recognized as a possibility when these new ethics laws were instituted. Sarah Palin had successfully campaigned for governor as someone to clean up the corruption in Alaskan government, but failed to bring any kind of intelligent foresight to her administration. She has no one to blame for this misuse of her legislation but herself. Likewise, she should have had competent advisors who foresaw that her own behaviors would trigger the lawsuits. Sarah Palin’s legacy will be costing the state of Alaska for some time.

    1. What kind of kool-aid have you been drinking?

      “she replaced the entire ethics review board – her right to do as a sitting governor – a”

      Where the hell did you come up with that? The same 3 people are still on the board that were appointed by other governors. They all work for free.

      The PP board on November 3 found that Gov. Palin and other state official had NOT violated any state ethical standards with TrooperGate. The PP found that the two liberals running TroopGate had used the a wrong stutue on purpose to get the outcome that they wanted. In other words the liberal dems on order from Obama had their October surpise lie.

      The PP had their cost and the government employees had their cost. The FOIA requests were costing a fortune. The lawsuits were costing a fortune. The state employees were spending all there time pulling this information together and that is called state dollars.

      How many ethics complaints were filed before Gov. Palin was picked as VP?

      How many FOIA requests were filed before Gov. Palin became the VP pick?

      How many lawsuits were filed against the state before Gov. Palin became the VP pick?

      The NEW Ethic law was not supposed to be used for snow jackets, pictures with fish, soap opera characters, Right-To-Life fund-raisers, speaking on national issues, leaving the state…..Stupid stuff like that. After the governor returned and loons started filing their stupid sh## and found out that the legislature’s were not going to do anything about it they went nuts. I would not put it pass the dems and the Rinso as being the ones who set these hounds lose.

      But don’t worry Gov. Palin will have the last laugh. It is only a matter of time.

    2. katie vw – You can’t be as ignorant as you sound. You have to be putting all shelf-shame aside and posting the carp you are simply out of blind hate.

    3. Wrong Katie.

      Riddled with lies. Go back and do your homework.

      The ethics law you refer had nothing to do with the ethics cases filed against her. That law goes way back.

      Don’t come here and lie about the ethics law. You are mixing up that law with the law passed when she was governor.

      Regarding cost, Sarah resigned and saved the state probably millions, and Rahm E. is going to resign soon and part of the reason why is because his Alinsky frivolous ethics charges backfired and freed Sarah up to go national. Now she is the premier champion fighting the lies, broken campaign promises and statism of Obama.

      Obama is wishing he just left her alone. Foolish little man.

    4. Pretty much as soon as Sarah Palin accepted the vice presidential nomination, her critics started filing ethics complaint after ethics complaint against her.
      Palin’s entire administration was paralyzed by those frivolous complaints.
      Sarah saw that if she stayed on as Governor it would cost the state millions of dollars in wasted time and resources to defend against false and maliciously ethics complaints and doom the state to gridlock.
      She instead knew she could fight for Alaskans and Americans outside of office, and she knew the man who would fill her place would follow the same agenda as she had.

      Sarah Palin had to step down for the better of her state and it was the honorable thing to do.

  6. Think it of this way, DEO: if Sarah did not set up the Legal Defense Fund, and did not resign from office, not only would her family be financially bankrupt by now, but the state of Alaska would be far more financially hurt………….and the “Alaska Anklebiters”, as they are properly titled, would consciously choose to continue to attack her by filing far more ethics complaints, after finding the most minute of “faults” in Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin did exactly the right thing for her family and for the state of Alaska by passing over the Governorship over to her Lieutenant Governor. She also did the right thing in supporting her family in writing the Autobiography.
    By the way Deo, what did Sarah exactly do to be called a “sick joke” or a “scam” by you? You should look into the ones filing the frivilous ethics complaints. They are the ones who are the “sick jokes” and frauds. Do better research the next time you comment about this matter.

  7. “She is worse than Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer and as bad as Hitler.”
    WOW, Handsome, stay classy!!!!

  8. “BTW- she was found to have abused her power in office by a non-partisan committee presided over by a Republican appointee. When she did not like that verdict, she replaced the entire ethics review board – her right to do as a sitting governor – and it was this new, handpicked board who reversed the decision.”

    Wrong katie vw, most of the people on the state ethics review board at the time of Governor Palin’s resignation were appointees of the previous Governor, not Sarah herself. You got this and a lot of your other “facts” wrong.

  9. I’m not going to waste my time to respond to everything but just to show how little you people know and how far your hatred towards her goes they you’ll spin things to fit your argument,

    A) Actually Alaska is the only state where the AG does NOT defend the Governor, the Governor of Alaska is personal responsible to for her legal bills.

    B) Palin never said people were paid “Overtime and Extra” what she said it was costing the state money because those staff who were responding to all those freedom of information requests were busy 80% of the time dealing with this crap instead of doing the job they were supposed to. The fact that staff, lawyers and investigators were ANYWAY paid doesn’t justify the wasted money. Yes it was costing the state money because these people were getting paid for dealing with this crap instead of working. To me said means Wasted Money.

    C) Contrary to what the media is selling, Palin does not make millions. All her speaking fees are speculative. And even if we assume she makes $100,000 a speech. That’s Gross, if you take in account the 30% the Speakers Agency takes, the cost of staff etc. By the time she’s done she remains with less than $40,000 then comes the tax at around 30$, what’s she left with? about $20,000 so for an event where she helps bring in over $200,000 a 10% commission is a joke. Anyway even if she does make Money, why is it OK for Obama, the Clintons, Pelosi and all your friends on the left to accept donations to their legal defend funds when they are richer than Palin, I guess there are different rules for Palin.

    D) Palin had nothing to do with the fund, all she had to do was allow the people to set it up under one condition that everything is done legally, those people checked it out with 3 top law firms in Alaska and all of them passed it, it was also verified with law firm in DC the same law firm that dealt with Gingrich. The rules for the fund were much tougher than any other fund.

    E) The link to Petumenos and Obama is a fact, no one is denying it and the C4P article links to all the sources and facts. The fact that you don’t like it doesn’t make it not true.

    No one is asking you to contribute, if you don’t want to support her don’t’ but its none of your business what other people do. It just amazes me how much you people hate her when all she is, is a private citizen making some money and executing her right of free speech, if you don’t like what she’s saying switch the channel you’ll almost always find someone you like speaking off a teleprompter in one of the 57 states claiming Europe is a country and telling you that there is nothing special about America.

  10. It isn’t unethical for Sarah Palin to defend herself. It was unethical to claim the site was an “official” Palin site.

    There’s a huge difference there, which renders the blogged argument disingenuous.

    1. Really? Unethical to keep people from donating to “legal defense funds” set up in her name that she doesn’t have any knowledge of? The intent was to keep people from being scammed if they desired to donate to a legal defense fund that would help her out.

  11. Many followers & supporters of Gov. Palin have already contributed to her new legal defense fund. The haters & defilers will never keep her down. She is the People’s Princess.

    1. The people’s princess? THE PEOPLE can’t stand her. $arah told most of THE PEOPLE in the USA that they weren’t as goood as the SMALL TOWN FOLK, that pissed alot of city people off.
      20 percent of you very gullable TEAM SARAH’s keep her afloat…which is fine, knock yourself out. The lady has to make a living. YOU carry her.
      There is a sucker born every minute….Barnum & Bailey..this pertains to the Palin circus. ALSO TOO.
      It can’t go on for too much longer. As soon as people see she isn’t running for president or that she couldn’t possible win many votes, she’s over.

  12. Seems to me Palin had the counsel at her disposal to advise her how to get the fund set up legally in the first place. Is it a characteristic of Mavericks to act before thinking – and then whine about being victimized when their self-made messes explode?

  13. As expected Sarah Palin did nothing unethical.

    Interesting that even the media hacks are losing interest in these bogus complaints. Only idiot liberal bloggers think this amounts to anything.
    It is too bad that Sarah Palin had to jump through the legal hoops to defend herself from complaints that are now (and were likely then) shown to be baseless.

  14. It’s your money, you can spend it anyway you want to. Me, I have better things to do than support a multimillionaire.

    1. Ok, so stop commenting. She wasn’t a multimillionaire when this fund was set up, and I don’t believe that somebody should have to pay more than what they earned as Governor because of baseless political attacks. Can she pay for the legal expenses out of pocket now? Sure, but she shouldn’t have to and considering there was well over $300,000 donated to help her out they should be able to access that to use for legal expenses.

  15. She’s the cleanest politician we have had in a looooonnnnnggg time.

    It’s funny to listen to the latest attack by the Left.

    Here’s an appropriate quote from Mr. Natural Law himself, Cicero, about the bright light of Sarah Palin:

    “As fire when thrown into water is cooled down and put out, so also a false accusation when brought against a man of the purest and holiest character, boils over and is at once dissipated, and vanishes and threats of heaven and sea, himself standing unmoved.”

    Get’em Cuda!

    Palin/West 2012

  16. Did John Kerry still have a Legal Defense Fund?

    How much is John Kerry worth?

    Does Bill Clinton have a Legal Defense Fund?

    Does Hillary Clintion have a Legal Defense Fund?

    Does Hillary Clinton still have a fund to pay off her campaign debt?

    Isn’t the Clinton’s worth over $100 million dollars?

    Does Sen. Ted Stevens have a Leal Defense Fund?

    Does Rep. Don Young have a Legal Defense Fund?

    Does the NAACP have a Legal Defense Fund?

    Does Sen. John Ensign have a Legal Defense Fund?

    Is Pelosi starting a Legal Defense Fund?

    Does Obama have a Legal Defesne Fund? If not, where is he getting all his millions to pay off legal fees for the crazy birthers that keep filing law suits?

    I could go on and on.

  17. katie vw wrote,

    “It’s your money, you can spend it anyway you want to. Me, I have better things to do than support a multimillionaire.”

    Better things to do, huh!! –Does that include trolling pro-Palin sites like this one???

    By the way, I would rather give money to a multi-millionaire who was wrongfully and mercilessly attacked, than to a penniless person who intentionally means harm to other people.

    Her being a multi-millionaire is actually irrelevant, katie vw. The point is that some people in Alaska who simply personally disdained her tried to bankrupt her and her family financially because they did not like Sarah’s message on the 08′ Campaign. They saw Sarah as a threat to Obama’s message. When she returned home after the campaign defeated, they wanted to make sure that she did not do a double-take, and intentionally made her life a living hell for her, her family and her administration by finding any minute and simple “blunder”. These lawsuits were not truely about eithics, but politics. They simply hid behind ethics to try to ruin her political and natural life. In fact, the ones that were filing the eithics complaints were the truly unethical ones.

    1. Actually, I support myself and my family with my money and I like to think other people should do the same with theirs rather than begging others who have less to help them pay for their own misbehaviors.

      Sarah has no one to blame for her problems than herself. Instead of showing Alaskans (and the rest of the world) that she has integrity and commitment, she walked away from her elected position. Instead of taking the high road in ANY situation, she takes the lowest road she can find, even resorting to slander. When name calling and mockery don’t seem to work, she plays the victim card. Oh poor Sarah, she needs money. Oh poor Sarah. She needs sympathy. Oh poor Sarah people are picking on her. Or her children. Or her religion. Or her statements. Or her inconsistencies. Or her behavior. Oh poor Sarah, poor, poor Sarah. Go ahead, throw your money into her pot. Watch her take it to the bank while you struggle with your own bills. As I said, I’ve got way better things to do with my money.

      1. I read your last comment, and it is pretty obvious that you want harm done to her, not only political and professional terms, but also personal. Furthermore, not only are you not interested in the truth, you intentionally go to great lengths to twist it. This is done to defame her, because of your strong personal hate for her. Contrary to what you write, she has taken the high road. YOU on the other hand, are walking through a very dark valley. The fact that you concentrate much of your time at this blog to defame her with your smug attitude is proof enough. But go ahead and continue to make a fool of yourself.

  18. If she cannot abide by the law, let alon enforce it, why should she be elected to any office?

  19. Boy the trolls have really descended with here, with Dumb (Handsome) Dumber (Deo) and witless, this new one, Clearly the bylaws of the ADF were only to cover expenses for her or her staff, seeing as Kris
    Perry among other figures, were cited for example her appearance at the RGA meetings, for the endorsement of Chambliss, The fact is, the disclosure of said complaints made them void on the face, but the idea was the political hit, the resolution went on A-16 afterwards

  20. so…..in truth…katie vw wants to bankrupt Mrs. Palin. the leftist rabble never quit. Sarah gets the legal defense she wants not what katie wants to toss her. and who is katie to bark?

    so Sarah Palin bends the law? and she breaks it? katie vw has proof? No?

    Alinsky’s school of smear and libel has a graduate here. her name is katie vw.

    Sarah is laughing all the way to bank sweetie.
    The book deals and the speeches-for-cash …CHA-CHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. And so is katievw.

    I don’t know where you people are getting your “facts,” but you couldn’t be more off base if you tried.

  22. I guess Clinton’s legal defense fund and Obama’s legal defense fund were wastes of the little people’s money as well, seeing as they were all rich too.

    1. Yes they are all wastes of people’s money. All politicians should be responsible for their own misbehaviors.

  23. Handsome, as far as I’m concerned, Petumenos is clean.

    However, the rest of your rant is full of bullc***.

  24. It was the same Petumenos who issued a report absolving her of any wrong doing in Tasergate, it happened the day before the election, so it didn’t carry the same impact as the Branchflower star chamber. The AD News and McClatchy is the same syndicate, they carry the same lie downstream
    as far South as my neck of the woods in Miami

  25. As expected Sarah Palin did nothing unethical.

    Interesting that even the media hacks are losing interest in these bogus complaints.
    Only idiot liberal bloggers think this amounts to anything.
    Its too bad that she had to jump through the legal hoops to defend herself from complaints that are now (and were likely then) shown to be baseless.

    1. I’m curious about your definition of “unethical.” So you’re OK with an elected official who charges per diem to stay in her own home? No problem if your governor flies his or her children around the country and puts them up in $700/nt hotel rooms? If your governor promised you to be “accountable” and “transparent,” it wouldn’t bother you a bit to discover that she was conducting state business on a private email account specifically to avoid scrutiny, and furthermore, did everything in her power to make sure the emails were never made public? And then it’s OK if she parades around the country telling everyone to resist a government that isn’t answerable to the people?

      I’m guessing you’re going to say all of that was legal. You’re correct, she exploited some loopholes in the act she herself championed. But a decent person doesn’t confuse what’s legal with what’s right. You know what the right thing is in these cases. You’re just pretending you don’t.

      I’m going to assume you’re already OK with a legal defense fund that Mrs. Palin was able to use as an ATM for her family and friends for any expenses she wished. Really, you should just mail her your check yourself, cut out all the overhead for those many East Coast elitist advisors she’s paying.

      Sensible Alaskans know that the people who filed complaints were not part of some looney-tunes conspiracy with the Obama Administration. The national scrutiny of Palin showed us a lot of things we didn’t know were going on. THAT’s why the ethics complaints started coming. And we’d just endured the actual outrage of having McCain’s campaign operative, Ed O’Callahan, literally running the governor’s office while she was off gallivanting on the trail. Don’t believe me? Google “Truth Squad” and read the Anchorage Daily News. Meg Stapleton is now disliked more in Alaska than even Palin herself.

      Secondly, some of those complaints were slight and silly. But several of them absolutely were not, under any obvious code of government or personal ethics. Does your boss let you use his money to fly your family around on frivolous trips?

      Mrs. Palin’s claim of her legal expenses is quite questionable, considering that her claim that the state was losing millions on her behalf proved to be total bunk. In fact, the Personnel Board stated that the expenses were not quite $300,000 and of that, Mrs. Palin incurred two-thirds of the costs by filing a complaint against herself. Many of the ethics complaints were less than $1,000. But hey, it’s your money. I’m sure she’ll be grateful you’re sending it, since they’re all living in that shack and scrabbling for dinner.

      Finally, why did Mrs. Palin turn down the state’s offer to pay $100,000 of her legal bills? The reasons she gave are nonsensical.

      You can find her spreadsheet of these alleged costs on the ADN site. You can also find some good analyses explaining where it is padded and inaccurate, should you care to look. You can find all of this confirmed on the Anchorage Daily News and elsewhere. Heck, just compare her own words with her own actions.

      I’m assuming you won’t. Sarah Palin’s acolytes have superimposed the idea of Sarah Palin over the reality of Sarah Palin. It takes some really hard work to be that willfully blind. I salute your cognitive dissonance.

      1. She was paid less in perdiem than any previous governor, her not living in Juneau full-time actually cost taxpayers less. She also voluntarily reimbursed the state for several trips with her family that she thought was likely beyond the scope of her duties.

        You know it’s easy to say crap about trips with her family, but wasn’t she the first governor to have kids that were still living at home?

  26. How does that comment on #7, make it past moderation, DEO is a particularly well established troll

  27. The way Gov Palin has been harassed over the years is stunning. Her trust fund is illegal because she used the word official website!. Does anyone really believe the donors donated to Alaska Governor and not for Mrs Palin?
    The previous Troopergate probe during elections was another master stroke. Interestingly, the first charge for which the probe was started she was found not guilty. But the findings in the report were listed in the reverse order than that in the scope of investigation so that media picked up and headlined the second charge. Interestingly second finding was that she could have prevented her husband exercising influence while her husband himself was found not guilty of doing anything wrong as private citizen. How can a Governor prevent a private citizen from doing something which was not wrong or illegal?

  28. We could link the site that shows how Alaskans for Truth, was a cutout by Democratic operatives like Pete Rouse, who was promoted to the Gitmo task force, in part because of it. How Chatman, McLeod
    and a dozen others were tied to the operation. Perkins and Coie, happens to have been the counsel to the Obama campaign, the source of the current White House Counsei, Bauer, who in turn was tied to
    the former Communications Director, Dunn, the one who was suitable impressed by Mao

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Nope, We Can’t All Agree: Bring on the Debates, Yesterday.

Shane wrote “I think  we can all agree that the 2008 presidential campaign…

Ernst Blasts Obama on Expected Immigration Executive Action

Joni Ernst, GOP candidate in Iowa’s U.S. Senate Race, said President Obama has governed with divisive arrogance and that Bruce Braley has given him a pass.

Mike Lee Explains Why He Has Not Endorsed Donald Trump

U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) was asked by Steve Malzberg on Newsmax TV why he was not “out there trumping Trump.” Lee explains why he doesn’t support Trump.

Steve King: Iowans in the 4th District Have Rejected Obama’s Failed Agenda

(AMES) – Congressman Steve King (R-Kiron) today released the following statement regarding…