In Palin's Legal Defense Fund Debacle, She Has Only Herself To Blame

FR | 6-25-10 | Bob J

[Bob J]

Information in this post is gleened from two sources;

http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/the-cost-of-legal-warfare-a-few-words-about-todays-defense-fund-agreement/401885808434

http://www.adn.com/2010/06/24/1339431/settlement-of-ethics-complaint.html

Yesterday, Sarah Palin's legal defense fund was judged to be in violation of State ethics laws. I have followed this controversy and to be fair, I found the objections to it to be a little thin, but most of us don't live in Alaska and are not famliar with the subtle tones of their ethics laws and issues.

I will say this, IMO most if not al of the problems with it could have been avoided early on but Palin in concert with her advisors made several bad decisions and missteps that brought it to this point.

1. Alaska State Ethics Laws

Much is made of the back bencher dems in Alaska who filed ethics complaint after ethics complaint which "hounded" Palin out of office. But we have to remember this severely flawed ethics law was one that was championed by Palin and which she signed into law.

Now it happens that sometimes flawed laws get passed and signed but when they are discovered it is possible to go back and fix it. From the beginning of these ethics charges right up until now I've never understood why a Republican Governor with a 2/3rds majority in the State Congress couldn't just go back and amend the law allow the State Attorney General the ability to handle and defend these issues (like most states) and also if the charges are thrown out or deemed without merit allow the politician in question to recover any legal costs incurred.

Seems reasonable to me, why was this never done, maybe never contemplated by Palin or the pubs in Alaska? Palin supporters make much hay about how the law is flawed, how it was used to harass and bankrupt her, just fix it, dammit!

2. Rejecting sound legal advice

Supporters repeat over and over how Palin was only following the advice of her attornesy, fair enough, that's what most do. But this isn't entirely true. Yes Palin accepted what ammounted to the final product of her advisors but early on it was "strongly advised" by her personal attorney to have the fund vetted by the Alaska Department of Law to make sure it was legal under Alaska ethics law.

"But Palin instead chose to follow the advice of another attorney who recommended against seeking input from the attorney general, and instead to simply contest the "inevitable" ethics complaint when it came, Petumenos wrote in his report."

Huh? Why?

3. The "Alaskan" Connection

Next, Palin asked that "we keep it Alaskan".

Now I'm not exactly sure what this means but I guess it means that it be controlled and staffed by Alaskans. It seems to me a competent chief executive would want to get the best possible people to handle affairs no matter where they come from. But this led to her team turning down an offer from a former White House Special Counsel to serve as trustee. Instead she chose a personal friend and community volunteer, Kristan Cole.

Huh? Why? The stated reason was that Cole was someone Alaskans would know, but what difference would that make? Probably 95% of donations would be coming from outside the state, it seems those donors would recognize and a former White House Councel over some soccer mom friend of Sarah's. The only reason I can think of is because it has been the case (although who knows in this one) that trustees of these kinds of fun receive a considerable salary to market, manage and disburse the fund. Maybe Palin wanted to "keep it in the family" like Hillary did when she made the famous White House Travel Office scandal comment "We have to get OUR people in these spots".

Whatever, that decision was involved in her losing this ethics complaint because Palin had appointed Cole to several volunteer boards and therefore "worked" for Palin and the relationship could engender a political payback down line.

Thin, I agree, but could have been avoided if she hadn't rejected good sound advice and offers.

4. The Name and Website.

This one I just don't understand. They decided to call this the "Alaska Fund Trust".

Huh? Why not call it the "Sarah Palin Legal Defense Fund" so no one would be confused as to it's purpose? Second, on the website created for the fund they described it as "Official". Well the word "official" has legal connotations. By slapping that lable on it they gave the impression it was sanctioned not only by the Governor but by the State of Alaska.

Just a dumb move. But that's what happens when you have your volunteer personal friends handling things and making decisions instead of experienced, competent professionals. And if it wasn't her frinds making those decisions then it means Palin was, which is even more disturbing.

Palin supporters want us to believe she is ready for the oval office. I've researched her history and find these kind of missteps and bad decisions throughout her career. In this case it wasn't five or ten years ago, these things happened in the last year or so.

If Palin can't handle and make good decisions in something as simple as a legal defense fund, how can we trust her to make the right decisions sittig in the oval office with her finger on the button?

[section9]

This is where I stopped reading:

1. Alaska State Ethics Laws

Much is made of the back bencher dems in Alaska who filed ethics complaint after ethics complaint which "hounded" Palin out of office. But we have to remember this severely flawed ethics law was one that was championed by Palin and which she signed into law.

Now it happens that sometimes flawed laws get passed and signed but when they are discovered it is possible to go back and fix it. From the beginning of these ethics charges right up until now I've never understood why a Republican Governor with a 2/3rds majority in the State Congress couldn't just go back and amend the law allow the State Attorney General the ability to handle and defend these issues (like most states) and also if the charges are thrown out or deemed without merit allow the politician in question to recover any legal costs incurred.

Seems reasonable to me, why was this never done, maybe never contemplated by Palin or the pubs in Alaska? Palin supporters make much hay about how the law is flawed, how it was used to harass and bankrupt her, just fix it, dammit!

You claim to have followed Palin closely. As a Romney toady, I suspect that you have done some of that.

Yet your post conveniently ignored the fact that most of the Republicans in the Legislature at the time were clients either of the Murkowski Administration or the Oil Companies (Exxon-Mobil, Conoco-Philips, or our old friends, BP, as in "Beyond Petroleum").

So what you dishonestly, and quite conveniently omit in your post is that there was no incentive for these Republicans to go back and amend the law that they deliberately fixed to omit them, but not a Governor who had fought them tooth and nail on many reform issues.

Alaska has a corrupt political culture. Good people like Palin and her successor, Sean Parnell, cannot for long serve in that system and hope to bring fundamental reforms to it. Parnell survives because he does not rock the boat. Palin fell because there was no incentive for Republicans in Alaska to help her out.

Too many of them were corrupt.

And you just apologized for them. Which makes you part of the problem. Just like them.

Best,

Chris

p.s.: Now you can go back to your Sarah bashing, not that it will do you any good. If the G.O.P. is foolish enough to nominate a soggy cucumber-and-mayonnaise Bushie Republican like Teh Mittens that you apparently so eagerly want to inflict on the Conservative Movement, we will deserve to get beaten like the proverbial Rented Mule by Obama and his minions.

[rbmillerjr]

Great post.

Good luck to all of you MittCare supporters lol.

Yeah, that will work.

[hennie pennie]

When I first heard about this, my immediate thought was that perhaps she'd taken advice from Greta van Susteren and her husband John Coale - both of them are long term Democrat fundraisers and are scientologists.

However, I've not heard their names come up in the meantime.

I am curious whether any of the people advising her were actually 'plants' meant to sabotage her?

It seems there'd be a long line of willing volunteers for that.

[hennie pennie]

>>> "Bob J is heading for Freeper 'legendhood' as the classic anti-Palin role model." <<<

I'd bet money that Governor Palin and her husband read EVERY single comment that either Bob J and mkjessup ever post here.

Anything resembling onstructive criticism is not something she can find anywhere else; the stuff the far leftie libs write is normally way off the wall insane, and to her fervent supporters she is Perfect, so they are entirely uncritical.

[wtc911]

I seriously doubt that the palins lurk at all.

[RobbyS]

You are making much out of nothing. The people who set up the fund included lawyers who read the law one way, which was in the opinion of the investigator, not the right way.

[VeniVidiVici]

Bob J did a hit and run thread. Last post was at 1:15pm or around 70 posts ago.

Sarah Palin even has more staying power than Bob.

[sickoflibs]

Getting the mob angry chasing you with pitchforks and torches again?? I have picked up a few tips that might help you:

1) Never say that “ Palin is not qualified “ or “ not ready to be president.“ That is the greatest sin.
2) Don't say that she is “not electable”, jeeze, that's generating negative Karma.
3) Don't say she is not interested. Alternatively she is not obligated to run either. But we need her to run to save us, even if she doesnt want to, but she doesnt have to. All clear??
4) Don't say she is a RINO just because she campaigned for a RINO. She had to do that because .... OK this will be understood later, Have faith!

[stephenjohnbanker]

” 3) Don’t say she is not interested. Alternatively she is not obligated to run either. But we need her to run to save us, even if she doesnt want to, but she doesnt have to. All clear?? “

LOL!

[Oztrich Boy]

She is only reimbursing up to the point of her resignation and has already set up a new LDF.

So? The point of the complaint was the word "official" might lead to confusion with her position as Governor. If she is not Governor, it only means "personally authorized"

[mkjessup]

I'd bet money that Governor Palin and her husband read EVERY single comment that either Bob J and mkjessup ever post here.

Don't be dragging my ass into this slow motion Mongolian Cluster Post.

But now that you have...

BobJ could post the weather report for Wasilla Alaska, and the Palin Rabid Response Team would scream that he was organizing an Indian rain dance just to mess up Sarah's freshly coiffed hair. What the Palinbots will never understand is that in politics, the attention span of the average reader/viewer is limited to about 15, maybe 30 seconds of a sound bite or video clip. If Sarah Palin were to end up the 2012 GOP nominee, the 'Rats would pummel her with all sorts of stuff, most of it inaccurate but including a few hard kernels of truth. The voting public however, will generally NOT filter out the extraneous material, they will hear only the basic and simple statements, i.e., "Sarah Palin quit, 0bama has not quit", "Sarah Palin's Legal Defense Fund ruled Illegal", there is still an enormous tendency among the population to accept what is said on TV as being accurate because the human mind still tends to default to that "well if it wasn't true, they couldn't say it on TV could they?" when we ALL know that the TV talking heads lie like Hell all the time. FR posters are a microcosm of the media, we challenge, question, doubt, research, refute, etc., because most of us ARE thinking Americans.

Don't worry about what BobJ has posted, worry about how the 'Rats will take that same data, and turn it into a mallet to beat her over the head with if she is the GOP nominee. And remember too, when claiming that "well, we'll just tell the truth and set the record straight", nobody ever cares about a headline that says "So-and-So did not beat their Wife", all they remember is "So-and-So was accused of beating his Wife".

Life isn't fair. Neither is politics.

[stephenjohnbanker]

A keeper.

[Bob J]

“Your argument is fine, except that Sarah Palin had nothing to do with the defense fund, never asked for it, never touched it, and didn’t make any of the decisions about it.”

That’s just not true Charles, she obviously was involved in many of the decisions in starting it up.

“She was acting on the advice of her attorneys.”

What advice? “Her” attorneys? “Acting on”?

The language in the ruling makes it apparent Palin was receiving legal opinions and had the final decision on whether to go forward. In addition she was setting conditions like “keep it Alaskan”. The trustee was a close, personal friend.

None of this points to an arm’s length distance on what was going on.

[Bob J]

What's funny, although not unexpected, is that very few who have chosen to post on this thread probably read what I wrote.

I didn't accuse Palin of doing anything illegal in fact I stated I thought the charges were pretty thin. The point of my article is that all of these problems with the LDF that led to it being judged a violation of Alaskan ethics laws could have easily been avoided early in the process but bad and quite suspect decisions by Palin led to this debacle. Now she has to return most of the money and start over.

I see very few if any addressing these points, just the usual fanboy personal attacks and diversionary responses. But I bet there are several hundred, maybe more, who read this thread and didn't post, but agree with my evaluation.

[Bob J]

It seems that you are suggesting the pubs in Alaska purposely wrote a flawed law in an effort to encourage harassment from the dems leading to multiple ethics complaints forcing Palin to resign?

Ouch.

BTW - Who signed that legislation into law?

[mnehring]

There you go humping a Palin thread again (bumping it right back up to the top).

Pleas sir, may the thread have another?

[Bob J]

Post 87 - “Bob J did a hit and run thread. Last post was at 1:15pm or around 70 posts ago.”

You - “There you go humping a Palin thread again (bumping it right back up to the top).”

Reading and comprehension are your friends.

[EveningStar]

I'd bet money that Governor Palin and her husband read EVERY single comment that either Bob J and mkjessup ever post here.

I doubt that the Palins even know about FR. If they did, they'd be embarrassed by their so-called supporters here. With supporters like the loony Palinistas, who needs detractors?

[mnehring]

And there you go humping the Palin thread once again (bumping it right back up to the top).

Pleas sir, may the thread have another?

[stephenjohnbanker]

To: mnehring

Post 87 - “Bob J did a hit and run thread. Last post was at 1:15pm or around 70 posts ago.”

You - “There you go humping a Palin thread again (bumping it right back up to the top).”

Reading and comprehension are your friends.

97 posted on Saturday, June 26, 2010 8:34:30 AM by Bob J

Yes Bob, by all means, quit humping your OWN thread ;-)