Posted on 06/26/2010 9:37:58 AM PDT by Bob J
One of the most flogged excuses by both Palin and her supporters for her resignation as Governor of Alaska was that ethics complaints were "bankrupting" her. But the Independent Council Report issued in conjunction with the decision on her Legal Defense Fund says otherwise.
Not only does it show the State of Alaska offered to make payments for her legal costs it shows that even bfore the election the Palin campaign was making alternate plans to not only get the McCain campaign to pay for them but to hit up the Rnc AND set up a legal defense fund.
When confronted with Palin's legal bills in relation to the ethics violations charged against her, the State of Alaska offerred to pay begin paying bills to the tune of 100k. Now this was just the start and 100k was a round number they picked. Once they made the precedent of funding her legal expenses there would have been an obligation to continue...in for a penny, in for a pound.
But Palin and her legal advisors rejected the offer based IMO in a flimsy "accounting problem". It is clear the Palin's had bigger plans for much more money and the Alaskan offer was only going to get in the way of that.
Before you start reading these snippets from the report you must be aware that the first plan of attack from the Palinistas will be to portray the Independent Investigaror as partisan, compromised and corrupt. But you must also be aware that this is the very same IC that ruled in Paln's favor over the much more serious "Troopergate" allegations.
This report is full of eye opening relevations and I will be posting reports on several of them as time goes on. Here is the relevant section on this issue from the report.
"C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
1. Certain ethics complaints and legislative inquiries were conducted involving Governor Palin during the national presidential and vice presidential campaign when Governor Palin was a candidate for Vice President of the United States.
2. A contract for legal services was issued by the State of Alaska to the law firm of Clapp, Peterson, Van Flein, Tiemesson & Thorsness to represent Governor Palin, and others, in connection with these matters, for up to $ 100,000 at public expense.
3. No invoices were submitted to the State by Mr. Van Flein's law firm, pursuant to this state contract, due to the decision by Governor Palin and her attorneys that it would be too difficult to separate the functions of representing Governor Palin in her official capacity in the pending state-related matters, and representing her in other related campaign or partisan matters beyond the scope of the state contract. Thus, to avoid an appearance of impropriety or any allegation that legal fees were being paid for legal services beyond the scope of the state contract, Van Flein's law firm and Governor Palin agreed that funding for these services would be sought from sources other than state funding.
4. Among the sources of funding discussed were the Republican National Committee and the McCain campaign. However, after the conclusion of the presidential campaign, it became apparent that funding from the McCain campaign would not be forthcoming. Governor Palin and her advisors discussed alternative sources of funding to defray the continuing costs of defending past and future Ethics Act complaints, as well as other claims that may be brought as a consequence of serving in the Governor's Office. Among the sources discussed were the Republican Governor's Association and the creation of a trust. The trust would solicit private funding to pay for the past and future defense costs of Governor Palin, and potentially her family, her aides in the Governor's Office, and potentially, future governors and state officials.
“My “assumptions” are based on decades of experience in the practice of law.”
It’s still an assumption you made up, it wasn’t based on known facts concerning Palin’s legal costs.
What part of this is escaping you?
It's disgusting that there are trolls on here who gladly swallow whatever garbage the media serves up.
They said the same thing about Ronald Reagan. She may not be electable, but right now, she represents the front lines in the battle to rid us of Obama. I guess you'd rather have 4 more years of Obama than an effective Sarah Palin?
The media has NEVER said that any conservative is electable. In every election the media tries to push the most liberal candidate possible for the GOP nomination and then as soon as that happens the media turns on them.
Tell us Bob, WHO do you think is the best candidate in 2012? Can you give us a name or is your only purpose to smear Palin?
Check his posting history. This guy is literally obsessed with bashing Sarah Palin. It's like she left him standing alone at the Altar. It seems to me like it is a personal vendetta.
Where do these people come from?
I thought this was a conservative site?
FWIW, the only reason I voted for McCain was because Sarah Palin was on the ticket. I sure as hell did not cast my vote FOR McCain.
What part of no one here gives a crap about your obsession for Sarah Palin escapes you. Idiot. Take a hint. Give it a rest!
And FR software also prevents the complete posting of articles from certain links. Then you state my error in writing “council” instead of “counsel” is “prima facie” evidence of an intent to mislead?
Is this all you got?
My guess is Ron Paul.
Wanna take bets that this guy lives in his mother's basement?
I was thinking Romney or maybe Rooty.
I have done mine... that's why I called you out as full of BS! You got a simple link to back up your BS? Nope! You don't. We're done. Have a nice day.
I hear you. Imho, enough is enough.
‘What part of no one here gives a crap about your obsession for Sarah Palin escapes you. Idiot. Take a hint. Give it a rest!’
Thank you JimRob!! it seems to me that BobJ is pushing his original Freeper status to the breaking point.
No. He’s got me and 300,000 FReepers backing him up. You have become a full-blooming idiot, Bob. How about taking your anti-Palin obsession over to the Huffington Post where you will be considered a national hero and useful idiot
That wouldn't explain the mother's basement living arrangements.
Wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
A much needed and well deserved boot in the pants, imho.
231 is better.
I can’t disagree. :)
Jim, if Bob is outnumbered 300,000 to 1, why not let him talk?
Heck, I was even head of a big homeowners' association and both I and my board had errors and omissions insurance as well as other coverage.
I don't know why Sarah refused to avail herself of the coverage....or if there wasn't any for her to refuse.....or if insurance did not cover what she was being sued for......or what. The details and reasons in the article are a little sketchy.
Leni
I wouldn’t say Obama would be better for the country than McCain, but I would say neither do the country any good.
Both of them are traitors who support and advocate for anti-free speech legislation, amnesty, cap and trade, TARP, etc.
Vote them OUT!!
Rebellion is brewing!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.