Palin disputes 'fantasies' in new book

The Politico ^

[Sub-Driver]

Palin disputes 'fantasies' in new book By: Andy Barr February 18, 2009 01:18 PM EST

The newly released “Trailblazer: An Intimate Biography of Sarah Palin,” written by People magazine Assistant Editor Lorenzo Benet, contains an intriguing claim that runs counter to previously published reports about how the Alaska governor ended up as GOP presidential nominee John McCain’s running mate.

According to the new book, the Alaska governor learned that she was on the vice-presidential shortlist at a February 2008 governors’ meeting in Washington — six months earlier than recounted in a statement released in August by the McCain campaign.

But Benet’s account has been disputed by Palin, whose camp is accusing the author of writing “fantasies” and practicing “bad journalism.”

“She had spent the previous few weeks increasing her national profile,” an advance copy of the book reads. “She had traveled to Washington, D.C., for the National Governors’ Conference, where she met privately with John McCain and learned she was on the short list as a running mate.”

In a statement provided to Politico, Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton said there was no movement on the vice presidential selection until August, a story corroborated by accounts from within the McCain campaign. According to several sources familiar with the February meeting, it marked the first time Palin met McCain in person.

“The author has his facts wrong on this one. Nothing happened on the VP selection until August,” Stapleton said. “Getting such an important fact wrong casts doubts on whatever else might be in the book. And attributing his conjecture to the governor is bad journalism. The governor did not authorize this book and is not responsible for whatever fantasies the author might conjure up.”

[skeeter]

Politico is a disreputable source, where the subject of Sarah Palin is concerned.

[Badeye]

She needs to get her own book about her life, and the last two years specifically ‘out there’, ASAP.

[Diogenesis]

Someone bought a Most Beautiful Person Award from People Magazine,
and got them to mount their attack squad against Gov. Palin.

[library user]

There’s no way Palin was on McCain’s short-list a year ago. That would have been months before we even knew who was going to get the Dem nomination.

[GQuagmire]

I agree except for outing the McCain staffers that hamstrung her on the campaign trail.....I have the link somewhere ....Standby

[dools007]

I’m sorry, why exactly is important now to know when Palin discussed VP Choice with McRINO, was notified of VP choice or accepted VP slot?

[Blind Eye Jones]

Because of his height Romney was on the long list.

[skeeter]

The objective is to keep her name associated with controversy until she’s no longer a political threat.

[joesbucks]

Well, he could have been planning ahead with a “what if I win scenario”. chances could be slim about that, but it’s possible.

[leilani]

Because of his height Romney was on the long list.

LOL!

And because of all his BS, Huckabee was on the s#!*-list.

:-)

[Nephi]

February matches up with the screenshots you will find on my profile page of the incorporation and subsequent March 1, donation to the McCain-Palin victory fund. Her denial suggests that she is in on the “August surprise.”

[RegulatorCountry]

Politico is a disreputable source, where the subject of Sarah Palin is concerned.

Right up there with LGF, LGBT or whatever else that unhinged Charles guy's problem is.

[the long march]

Nope you are a dolt. The incorporation date for a campaign is for the McCain campaign plus unnamed other to be filled in when nominated. This is standard in politics. You have left off the DATE of posting for your cute little piece of nonsense.

[bicyclerepair]

Romney’s not very tall. I met him here in S. FL. He’s only like 6’ or so. Then again you all are short.

I donated to SarahPAC did you?

[euram]

Every time I read a hit piece about Gov. Palin, I make a donation to SarahPAC. At the rate it’s going I will reach the maximum $5,000 donation in one year long before the year ends.

http://www.sarahpac.com/

[Nephi]

Nope you are a dolt. The incorporation date for a campaign is for the McCain campaign plus unnamed other to be filled in when nominated. This is standard in politics. You have left off the DATE of posting for your cute little piece of nonsense.

No. A dolt is a coward, such as yourself, who when confronted with the evidence resorts to personal attacks from the security of their anonymity. I provided screenshots for ease of viewing and to preserve the record.

[TAdams8591]

"She needs to get her own book about her life, and the last two years specifically ‘out there’, ASAP."

Absolutely! She cannot allow the left to continually define and redefine her.

[DesertRhino]

Amazing,, My Sarah hasn’t written a biography yet? Obama already wrote TWO before he had even accomplished anything!

She needs to quit slacking! sarc/

[DoingTheFrenchMistake]

I suggest freezing her till the next election, besides its Bibical... “Some are cold and few are frozen”. :)

[Badeye]

She’s done a series of interview, primarily with Greta on Fox, but yes she does need her own book out.

I guarantee it will be a best seller. As we get reminded three times per week, she’s got America’s attention one way or the other.

[Badeye]

(chuckle)

[AFreeBird]

and Ron Paul was on the loonie list.

[the long march]

A screen shot with no date. And you didn’t address the issue. Fact is incorporation papers would have been filed by the McCain campaign to later include his running mates name. SOP. Get over yourself and your so called ah ha moment

[dools007]

I guess I’m obtuse. Why is this “when did she know what” nonsense controversial?

[Nephi]

A screen shot with no date. And you didn’t address the issue. Fact is incorporation papers would have been filed by the McCain campaign to later include his running mates name. SOP. Get over yourself and your so called ah ha moment

Okay, Richard...the incorporation date is clear. It says, February 25, 2008. Bruckhiemer's contribution says 3/1/08.

If you have evidence to the contrary, post it. Otherwise...

[the long march]

Do you even read what anyone else writes. Mine is self-explanatory

[Rameumptom]

Who keeps adding the Romney keywords to the Gov. Palin threads?

I voted for Romney in the primary and Palin the general. Just like many of the reddest states did. I would be fine with Romney or Palin in 2012. Though I will make this observation.

Palin's primary concenrn in the primaries won't be Romney it will be Huckabee. He is going to play spoiler to her in the early states as they go after some of the same constitutencies. He will get the moderate populist and some southern Evangelicals while she gets the more conservative northern and western ones. Huck's tactic was to camp out in Iowa and the south. Which is why he never gained much ground after his initial numbers even though he stayed on for months. And stay on he did and he will next time too.

Palin has much broader appeal but will need to make early headway against Huck in key early states where he already has the advantage of on the ground organization set up. Best of luck to her I would love to see her stomp Huck.

Of course at this point today I'd be happy for even a Pres. Huck today instead of Obama. but that is my 2012 identity politics prediction.

[Nephi]

Okay, Richard, let’s say I captured the screenshot yesterday. So what? Refute the dates showing in the screenshots. Both of them. The inc date and the date Bruckhiemer’s donation is recorded as going to a corporation you are saying didn’t exist. Refute it.

[leilani]

Who keeps adding the Romney keywords to the Gov. Palin threads?

Can't say for sure, but my suspicion is that most of the anti-Romneyism (& the truly repugnant anti-Mormonism) we see at FR is being perpetrated by the Hucksters. They were the ones who spread the false rumor around here that it was Romney's people who leaked all the embarrassing (& false) information that Palin was a diva. Turned out to be a few of McCain's campaign staffers of notoriously questionable allegiance to either conservatism or the Republican Party. That's not stopped some of the hucksters, bless their cold black evil hearts, from trying to keep that falsehood alive around here to this day, however.

I agree with your assessment that, if things stand as they are now, Huck will probably be playing the spoiler against Palin in the early primes.I think he's just a tool of the left-wing power establishment even if he's too dumb to recognize it & he'll unwittingly carry their water for them again to try to knock out any candidate who has a prayer in the general election.Whether or not that's Palin we shall see; four years is a very long time to make predictions on who will be the one with the best chances to prevail across our very divided electorate. Right now I'm fond of Eric Cantor but I realize ten minutes is a lifetime in US politics.

But I vehemently disagree with your statement that Hucklebee would have been any better than Obama. I'm not sure about that at all. He's essentially a big-government socialist who happens to believe in God (or rather he says he does - given the decidedly unchristian way he & his supporters chose to attack some of his political rivals, I'm about as sure of that as I am that Elmer Gantry was a humble God-fearing man.) I'm not convinced in the least bit that just because Hucklebee says "Amen" after he sells off our unborn grandchildren's patrimony to the entrenched bureaucracy in DC it will make it any more palatable to them as they are forced to bow down at the altar of big government every day of their natural lives than they would be as a consequence of what the unholy trinity of Obama+Pelosi&Reid are now doing.

[leilani]

Nephi, take a deep breath and step back from your theory for a second. You're not married to it, so you can do that. ;-)

If that screen shot accurately represents what you think it does, that the decision to select Palin was made back in February of last year, do you actually believe no reporter (let alone sharp-eyed Freepers) would have noticed that glaring detail on FundRace or Open Secrets?

No, McCain's campaign incorporated the fund under a temporary 'placeholder' name & then legally changed it when the nominee was selected. That's SOP for compliance with campaign disclosure laws, my FRiend.

Just think about it for a second here: even if it is the case as you believe that McCain was just a tool for Obama, Inc., it was still not known at the time which VP nominee would have offered the best prospects to LOSE against Obama way back then so it would have been absurdly incompetent in the extreme for them to have 'selected' her that far in advance if your own theory is gonna hold up under scrutiny.

[the long march]

I am sure you think you are being clever calling me “Richard” (nudge nudghe wink wink). You are as clever as your so called screen shots. Number one indicator, the state of Delaware web site does not use the header you have. Moreover, you have not addressed my point. You in fact show no indication of even understanding it. And with that, this will be my last post to you.

[Nephi]

You're right. I'm not married to it. And it isn't my theory. It is merely evidence that gives reason to investigate further. It certainly doesn't merit being called names by other freepers just because they don't want to believe it, or are too lazy to post refuting evidence.

Which is the real reason Richard is moving on. He's realized his attempts at attacking me personally don't faze me. He wants us to take his word for it that the dates that are right there in black and white in the screenshots are a fiction, but he doesn't offer any documents to back up his own claim that Team McCain merely filled in the blank later. Did Bruckhiemer fill in the blank, later, too?

You make a reasonable case, in a way that Richard couldn't, but it still amounts to us having to take your word for it. Like Obama's birth certificate, it isn't necessary for us to give him the benefit of the doubt. Both of them are too untrustworthy. I'm no lawyer, but the idea of fill in the blank legal documents is questionable. Again, I recognize that I'm no lawyer.

The real question, after all that McCain has done to betray Republicans, why is it that I am under personal attack for posting something that, in the very least, is informative as to how the system works. Why isn't it McCain that is under scrutiny?

I suppose since we haven't heard about this:

. . . it isn't true, either? (Note: "court ordered inactive status"

[Big Horn]

Every time I read a hit piece about Gov. Palin, I make a donation to SarahPAC. At the rate it’s going I will reach the maximum $5,000 donation in one year long before the year ends.

You and me both. These hit pieces PO me. She never authorized it and says it is wrong and there are only about 30 pages of the 350 that are about her campaign for VP.

[leilani]

It certainly doesn't merit being called names by other freepers just because they don't want to believe it, or are too lazy to post refuting evidence.

I agree with you there! If it weren't for suspicious freepers raising 'crazy' questions, Dan Rather's bogus National Guard documents for GWB's service would never have been established as forgeries.

First, I can't offer as proof any documents proving the filing of a name change for the fund, but it's self-evident that presidential candidates require a mechanism collect to money in that limbo period after they are nominated but before their veeps are selected. In order for them to comply with finance laws dictating that those who donate are limited to certain amounts during that time, the fund name must be allowed to change retroactively, otherwise how else would they do it & still comply, as well as ensure that their donors comply, with the law?

Secondly, how can you be sure the entity you've got a screenshot of is the official campaign finance law compliant one they eventually used? Looking in the same place at DE Division of Corporations where you got you screenshot at an earlier date, I found this this morning, in addition to an "Obama for America" fund:

Does that mean Hillary is the real Vice President and any minute now Joe Biden is going to tear off 'his' mask & put on a pantsuit to reveal her true identity? Of course not. These entities are incorporated by all sorts of people across the country to raise money well in advance of the veep selection but it doesn't mean they are the "official" one which the campaign will use to comply with the law. They're kinda like temporary piggy banks from which funds would eventually be transferred to the final, officially filed one to comply with CF disclosure laws.

I have no doubt that there were funds registered in the name of, and funds were collected for, McCain-Palin, McCain-Romney, McCain-Pawlenty not to mention Obama-Ayers, Obama-bin Laden Obama-Mickey Mouse etc etc all over the place last year before his veep was selected.

[leilani]

Whoops, I forgot to include the link to the page from which I grabbed that screenshot this morning:

Deleware Department of State Division of Corporations

[leilani]

Number one indicator, the state of Delaware web site does not use the header you have.

The site design has changed, but if you check the wayback machine for the State of DE's site, it conforms to the screenshot Nephi has provided - the side photo was seasonal & would change. (I checked so you didn't have to!) ;-) Example from 2007:

State of DE website via Internet Archive

[the long march]

Except of course that the actual date of the so called screen shot does not exist on the way back machine site ( and no I never let others do for me what I can check myself). Either you are also missing the point or merely feckless

[leilani]

Either you are also missing the point or merely feckless

Huh? Oh boy, I'm actually on your side of the central argument, but I've got to agree with Nephi on your *ahem* questionable talents for logically persuasive argument.

To review: You claimed the header of Nephi's screenshot didn't match the state of DE's current site, which implied that the screenshot was a fraud. I was clarifying that it does indeed match the official site in its previous design incarnation.

In other words, it was YOU who asked readers of your post to infer that the screenshot was fraudulent, based on that which you are now implying was a deliberately false premise (viz this statement: "no I never let others do for me what I can check myself" wherein you would seem to imply that you knew full well that the DE site conformed to that design in the past & yet nonetheless raised the question of its authenticity based upon the alleged nonconforming design).

I simply pointed out the error of your claim. So how does that make ME feckless?

And under which terms of debate would the logic by which you allow yourself to maintain a false assertion be acceptable anywhere else?

[the long march]

The start of this was simply that incorporation dates and names are in fact meaningless unless you also have the change activity. Filler names and dummy names are used all the time in political campaigns, precisely because the final ticket is not known. This poster was trying to prove something about Palin “knowing” she would be on the ticket with a web site that showed a corporate name. The web archive does note have the archive this poster screen shot. And I was suggesting that the headers for what was being claimed don’t match for the searches done.

Now you can call that illogical if you wish. The point of WHEN the name was actually changed to “McCain Palin” seems to me to be more pertinent than the confederate wonder calling names and providing nothing other than a screen shot. Stuff on the computer is easily hacked and changed and sent out into the ether. I appreciate your helpfulness in finding a way back page. I was and am only trying to get the other poster to please provide something other than a screen shot.

[Nephi]

First, I can't offer as proof any documents proving the filing of a name change for the fund, but it's self-evident that presidential candidates require a mechanism collect to money in that limbo period after they are nominated but before their veeps are selected.

Go back to my earlier reply to you for the Bruckhiemer link. Isn't that why there is a John McCain 2008, Inc AND a McCain/Palin Victory Fund?

I have no doubt that there were funds registered in the name of, and funds were collected for, McCain-Palin, McCain-Romney, McCain-Pawlenty not to mention Obama-Ayers, Obama-bin Laden Obama-Mickey Mouse etc etc all over the place last year before his veep was selected.

Well, this is certainly interesting, but not nearly as surprising as a McCain/Palin incorporation because no one had heard of Palin even in August when we were surprised by her nomination. Obama/Hillary wasn't a surprise. The date it was formed would be interesting, though. It would be interesting to know if there was a McCain/Romney. I doubt it and that would be telling. If there are other McCain/blank incorporations the only other thing to look at would be the date they were formed.

This has turned into a very interesting discussion and has been informative. Thanks.

[leilani]

And there we can agree, but I'd actually bring it further.

The name of that fund could have been incorporated as early as the screenshot indicated & need not ever have been changed, because multiple funds created for multiple veep possibilities are routinely incorporated as much as a fund raising tool to appeal to these veep candidates' fans as anything else, & they are routinely created long before Veeps are selected and in fact long before the decisive criteria by which a potential veep's selection would even be seriously considered - whether the presidential nominee intended to win OR throw the election. It's immaterial.

As I intended to demonstrate when I posted above the screenshot of the ObamaHillary fund incorporated in 2007, also retrieved from the DE Dept of State, the names of these funds & their dates of filing are pretty much irrelevant and dispositive of nothing.

[leilani]

Well, this is certainly interesting, but not nearly as surprising as a McCain/Palin incorporation because no one had heard of Palin even in August when we were surprised by her nomination

Gonna have to disagree with you there. I am a member of a website where the owner & many members were actively advocating for her selection immediately after McCain won the nomination. She was not an unknown among politically connected Republicans. Quite the contrary! In fact, she was a popular contender among many Republicans way back when Hillary was still the presumed DEM nominee, because she offered the tactical prospect of neutralizing HRC's appeal to women.

[the long march]

Yup I understand. Sorry for snapping at the hand that fed me. I guess I am just getting a little sick of the let’s trash Sarah Palin band wagon

[leilani]

'Sokay! I'm a little cranky about that myself.

(Understatement of the year,lol!)