Alaskan Bloggers Uncover A Vast Write-Wing Conspiracy

Well, chalk up a new high (or is it a new low?) in the level of vitriol and sheer frivolous silliness on the Alaskan Palin-bashing blogs. Virtually all of them, including Shannyn Moore, "Doctor Phil" Munger, Celtic Diva, the Mudflats - even Andrew Halcro - are linking to/echoing a claim by a French Trig Truth blog; the essence of the attack is that, because Governor Palin apparently signed thank-you notes to people who donated to help her with legal bills, she therefore must have been involved with the management of the Alaska Fund Trust.
How petty can you get? Wait, what am I saying? These are people who have gone after her on everything from her hair to her toenails - literally - and everything in between, including the logo on her jacket, the length of her skirts, and her childbearing decisions.
But attacking someone, and assuming evil intent, for writing thank-you notes in return for a good deed? Come on.
Halcro's piece sums up the essence of the meme they would like to create - essentially they're attempting to say that the Fund Trustee, Kristan Cole, is a corrupt liar. In order to do so, they misrepresent what she stated at her press conference, and then add in irrelevancies like thank-you notes and the fact that SarahPAC has mentioned the fund in the past.
Halcro:
As soon as the story broke, Palin's fund, the Alaska Fund Trust responded by saying the report was wrong because the governor was as never (sic) informed about the trust.
[...]
But yet today Cole is trying to sell the press that the governor didn't have a clue about the fund she granted permission for Cole to launch?
Halcro can't even present his allegation honestly - he fabricates his argument out of whole cloth, putting words in Ms. Cole's mouth that she never said. Let's look at Kristan Cole's press release:
I want to be clear on a point that has been misrepresented: The Governor is not and was not involved with the Trust. The Governor has never worked on or with the Trust. The Governor has not even accepted or requested one penny from the Trust or quite frankly anything of me. And I have never expected anything from her. Really it’s quite the contrary; as I, and many other caring folks across the country have only sought to help with this legal burden.
NOBODY has ever said the Governor was unaware of the Trust, or that her PAC and political advisers were unaware of it. In fact, that would be a pretty stupid thing to suggest, since the fund was given wide publicity at the time of its creation.
Others, like Mudflats, have tried to make hay out of out the fact that the fund was mentioned by SarahPAC spokespeople and on the SarahPAC website. So what? If you think back to the circumstances at the time of the fund's creation, that notification was probably necessary to protect Palin's political supporters.
When news came out of the huge legal bills placed on Governor Palin due to frivolous complaints, people were clamoring to help out. A Texas man named Clayton Paslay created a fund to solicit donations; however, the fund didn't meet legal guidelines. Now, Mr. Paslay seemed an honorable and sincere guy, but what was there to stop some scam artists from setting up a "Palin Defense Fund" and raising money in the Governor's name? As the organization representing the personal and political sides of Palin's persona (as opposed to the government side), it was perfectly appropriate to direct those people who wanted to contribute to the Alaska Fund Trust, as it is a known, trustworthy, Alaska-based organization with strict guidelines.
The bottom line: Governor Palin did not manage, operate, create or direct this Trust. Just because she's aware of it, or is appreciative of the efforts made on her behalf, doesn't mean she used her position as Governor to benefit personally. And this whole argument proceeds from a dumb assumption - i.e., that's there something wrong with having a legal defense fund to begin with.
I'm mystified by the need these folks feel to personally attack Kristan Cole. Shannyn Moore calls her a "spokesmodel". Mudflats skirts the edge of calling her out-and-out corrupt. And Professional Annoying Weenie Andrew Halcro, who's always up for some woman-bashing, essentially says she's a liar. I won't go through the rest of the pile-on but, looking through comments at all these sites, you even get attacks on her family.
By all accounts, Kristan Cole is a decent, respectable and trustworthy woman. She's a wife and mother and a small business owner. She overcame adversity in her life to achieve success. She takes time away from her family and business to serve on state boards, and is so completely non-corrupt that she refuses to accept travel and per diem expenses that she's entitled to. And, as many of us did, she apparently felt a desire to offer support to Sarah Palin in the face of a wave of politically-motivated attacks. We understand completely. It was the same motivation we had when we organized our own webathon to raise funds for her legal defense.
But apparently she's not entitled to any respectful treatment; she's forfeited that for the crime of being a friend of Sarah Palin.
The people writing these things make me ill, and I've actually been friendly with a lot of them in the past. I guess they're sacrificing everything in one last push before they become irrelevant. After all, who besides Dan Fagan is going to care about Andrew Halcro when Palin has left the Alaskan stage?






33 comments:
This is the first of three posts. I believe that the recent discussions of QC Daniel’s findings have tended to generate more heat than light. For this reason I will first briefly explain why I have been so critical of QC Daniel’s interpretation of the Alaska Ethics Act as it applies to Gov. Palin and AFT. In the second post, I will quote the full text of the sections of the Act upon which QC Daniel based his conclusions. In the third post, I will quote relevant portions of the AFT trust instrument. I will let the readers reach their own conclusions.
Well settled cannons of statutory construction:
The words of a statute have their plain meaning and have the same meaning throughout unless the text specifically says otherwise;
A statute may not be construed so as to create an absurdity; and
A section or phrase may not be construed so as to conflict with the statute as a whole.
It is my reading of the statute that a public officer cannot be in violation unless the conduct in question is related to some ministerial act within the course and scope of the officer’s duties, responsibilities, or privileges.
Defending oneself from an ethics complaint is not a ministerial act. ( An expense incurred in defense of an Ethics Act complaint, or any penalty levied as a result of that complaint, is the responsibility of the public officer who was the subject of the complaint; and, the State will not provide a defense or indemnification for actions under the Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Op.Atty.Gen. 663-94-0289, June 3, 1994, 1994 WL 869572)
I invite attention to § 39.52.110(a)(2) which allows public officers to have private financial interests; to § 39.52.120(b)(6) which specifically authorizes the governor to use the governor’s mansion for partisan political activities; to § 39.52.120(d) which specifically authorizes the governor to engage in partisan political activities during the work day; and to § 39.52.120(f) which specifically authorizes public officers to use state aircraft for partisan political activities.
I also invite attention to the remedies section, § 39.52.410, which, when construed as a whole, clearly envisions that a public officer cannot violate the act unless the conduct in question causes some direct harm or loss to the State of Alaska.
The Alaska Fund Trust is not a legal defense fund.
Read the contract!!! Not the website. The money is not specifically for legal bills, like most legal defense funds are.
Relevant portions of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
AS § 39.52.110
Title 39. Public Officers and Employees
Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
Article 2. Code of Ethics
§ 39.52.110. Scope of code; prohibition of unethical conduct
(a) The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust. In addition, the legislature finds that, so long as it does not interfere with the full and faithful discharge of an officer's public duties and responsibilities, this chapter does not prevent an officer from following other independent pursuits. The legislature further recognizes that
(1) in a representative democracy, the representatives are drawn from society and, therefore, cannot and should not be without personal and financial interests in the decisions and policies of government;
(2) people who serve as public officers retain their rights to interests of a personal or financial nature; and
(3) standards of ethical conduct for members of the executive branch need to distinguish between those minor and inconsequential conflicts that are unavoidable in a free society, and those conflicts of interests that are substantial and material.
(b) Unethical conduct is prohibited, but there is no substantial impropriety if, as to a specific matter, a public officer's
(1) personal or financial interest in the matter is insignificant, or of a type that is possessed generally by the public or a large class of persons to which the public officer belongs; or
(2) action or influence would have insignificant or conjectural effect on the matter.
(c) The attorney general, designated supervisors, hearing officers, and the personnel board must be guided by this section when issuing opinions and reaching decisions.
(d) Stock or other ownership interest in a business is presumed insignificant if the value of the stock or other ownership interest, including an option to purchase an ownership interest, is less than $5,000.
SLA 1986, ch. 87, § 1. Amended by SLA 2007, ch. 47, § 63, eff. July 10, 2007.
AS § 39.52.120
Title 39. Public Officers and Employees
Chapter 52. Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
Article 2. Code of Ethics
§ 39.52.120. Misuse of official position
(a) A public officer may not use, or attempt to use, an official position for personal gain, and may not intentionally secure or grant unwarranted benefits or treatment for any person.
(b) A public officer may not
(1) seek other employment or contracts through the use or attempted use of official position;
(2) accept, receive, or solicit compensation for the performance of official duties or responsibilities from a person other than the state;
(3) use state time, property, equipment, or other facilities to benefit personal or financial interests;
(4) take or withhold official action in order to affect a matter in which the public officer has a personal or financial interest;
(5) attempt to benefit a personal or financial interest through coercion of a subordinate or require another public officer to perform services for the private benefit of the public officer at any time; or
(6) use or authorize the use of state funds, facilities, equipment, services, or another government asset or resource for partisan political purposes; this paragraph does not prohibit use of the governor's residence for meetings to discuss political strategy and does not prohibit use of state aircraft or the communications equipment in the governor's residence so long as there is no charge to the state for the use; in this paragraph, “for partisan political purposes”
(A) means having the intent to differentially benefit or harm a
(i) candidate or potential candidate for elective office; or
(ii) political party or group;
(B) but does not include having the intent to benefit the public interest at large through the normal performance of official duties.
(c) In addition to other provisions of this section, a public officer who is a member of the Board of Fisheries or the Board of Game may not act on a matter before the board if the public officer has not disclosed in the manner set out in AS 39.52.220 all personal or financial interests in a business or organization relating to fish or game resources.
(d) In this section, when determining whether a public officer is considered to be performing a task on government time, the attorney general and personnel board shall consider the public officer's work schedule as set by the public officer's immediate supervisor, if any. A public officer other than the governor and lieutenant governor who, during the work days, engages in political campaign activities other than minor, inconsequential, and unavoidable campaign activities shall take approved leave for the period of campaigning.
(f) Use of state aircraft for partisan political purposes is permitted under (b) of this section only when the use is collateral or incidental to the normal performance of official duties and does not exceed 10 percent of the total of the use of the aircraft for official purposes and partisan political purposes, combined, on a single trip. A public officer who authorizes or makes any partisan political use of a state aircraft under (b) of this section shall disclose the authorization and use under AS 39.52.210 or 39.52.220 for each trip, and the person who uses the aircraft shall reimburse the state for the proportionate share of the actual cost of the use.
AS § 39.52.130
Title 39. Public Officers and Employees
Chapter 52. Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
Article 2. Code of Ethics
§ 39.52.130. Improper gifts
(a) A public officer may not solicit, accept, or receive, directly or indirectly, a gift, whether in the form of money, service, loan, travel, entertainment, hospitality, employment, promise, or in any other form, that is a benefit to the officer's personal or financial interests, under circumstances in which it could reasonably be inferred that the gift is intended to influence the performance of official duties, actions, or judgment. A gift from a person required to register as a lobbyist under AS 24.45.041 to a public officer or a public officer's immediate family member is presumed to be intended to influence the performance of official duties, actions, or judgment unless the giver is an immediate family member of the person receiving the gift.
(b) Notice of the receipt by a public officer of a gift with a value in excess of $150, including the name of the giver and a description of the gift and its approximate value, must be provided to the designated supervisor within 30 days after the date of its receipt
(1) if the public officer may take or withhold official action that affects the giver; or
(2) if the gift is connected to the public officer's governmental status.
(c) In accordance with AS 39.52.240, a designated supervisor may request guidance from the attorney general concerning whether acceptance of a particular gift is prohibited.
(d) The restrictions relating to gifts imposed by this section do not apply to a campaign contribution to a candidate for elective office if the contribution complies with laws and regulations governing elections and campaign disclosure.
(e) A public officer who, on behalf of the state, accepts a gift from another government or from an official of another government shall, within 60 days after its receipt, notify the Office of the Governor in writing. The Office of the Governor shall determine the appropriate disposition of the gift. In this subsection, “another government” means a foreign government or the government of the United States, another state, a municipality, or another jurisdiction.
(f) A public officer who knows or reasonably ought to know that a family member has received a gift because of the family member's connection with the public office held by the public officer shall report the receipt of the gift by the family member to the public officer's designated supervisor if the gift would have to be reported under this section if it had been received by the public officer or if receipt of the gift by a public officer would be prohibited under this section.
SLA 1986, ch. 87, § 1; SLA 1998, ch. 74, §§ 83, 84. Amended by SLA 2007, ch. 47, § 66, eff. July 10, 2007.
AS § 39.52.410
Title 39. Public Officers and Employees
Chapter 52. Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
Article 5. Enforcement; Remedies
§ 39.52.410. Violations; penalties for misconduct
(a) If the personnel board determines that a public employee has violated this chapter, it
(1) shall order the employee to stop engaging in any official action related to the violation;
(2) may order divestiture, establishment of a blind trust, restitution, or forfeiture; and
(3) may recommend that the employee's agency take disciplinary action, including dismissal.
(b) If the personnel board determines that a nonsalaried member of a board or commission has violated this chapter, it (1) shall order the member to refrain from voting, deliberating, or participating in the matter; (2) may order restitution; and (3) may recommend to the appropriate appointing authority that the member be removed from the board or commission. A violation of this chapter is grounds for removal of a board or commission member for cause. If the personnel board recommends that a board or commission member be removed from office, the appointing authority shall immediately act to remove the member from office.
(c) If the personnel board determines that a former public officer has violated this chapter, it shall
(1) issue a public statement of its findings, conclusions, and recommendation; and
(2) request the attorney general to exercise all legal and equitable remedies available to the state to seek whatever relief is appropriate.
(d) If the personnel board finds a violation of this chapter by a public officer removable from office only by impeachment, it shall file a report with the president of the Senate, with its finding. The report must contain a statement of the facts alleged to constitute the violation.
SLA 1986, ch. 87, § 1.
Relevant excerpts from the AFT trust document:
Thereafter, upon the presentation of properly itemized statements for work done and expenses advanced by properly designated counsel for the above purpose, the Trustee shall make payment or disbursement to said counsel and to others, if necessary. The Trustee shall, in the Trustee's sole and absolute discretion, determine the reasonableness and accuracy of said statements which shall contain a certification by said counsel that said services are necessary, reasonable and proper services and/or expenses incurred for the purposes set out herein.
4. Beneficiary. The beneficiaries of this Trust shall be SARAH PALIN. In
addition, the class of potential beneficiaries shall include any "Covered Individual." For
purposes hereof, a "Covered Individual" shall be any other person determined by the Trustee, in
the Trustee's sole and absolute discretion, to (i) hold a "covered staff' position within SARAH
PALIN's administration and/or an employee in the office of the Governor of the State of Alaska;
and (ii) hold a covered relationship with SARAH PALIN, including without limitation, a family
member, such as a parent, spouse, child, grandchild, sibling and other close family relationship.
Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, in no event shall anyone other than
the Trustee exercise control over the Trust property and, in no event shall any beneficiary
receive tangible or intangible benefit from the Trust other than such benefit that is incident to or
may have arisen out of the defraying, payment, or satisfaction of expenses as provided herein.
Upon the completion of the Trust, any funds, assets, or property of any kind, whether the same be principal or income, which may be remaining in the hands of the Trustee at the completion of the purposes of the Trust, shall be donated and distributed by the Trustee, in the sole and absolute discretion of the Trustee, to one or more organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and made exempt from taxation under section 501 (a) thereof.
I expect a lot of payback for my $50 in Georgia I'm telling you that right now.
Even though I will be framing Gov. Palin's Hand written note, that is not enough. I want more. LOTS MORE.
just call me a liberal.
For the benefit of Redhead.
From the trust instrument:
2. Trust Purpose. The sole and exclusive purpose of this Trust is to provide a proper
means for the acceptance of money, property, and services, including, if necessary, pro bono
legal services, to provide for all reasonable, necessary, and appropriate fees or charges incurred
by (i) SARAH PALIN as a result of the fact that she is Governor of the State of Alaska or as a
result of the performance of her duties as Governor of the State of Alaska; and (ii) Covered
Individuals, that may be selected or designated by the Trustee as provided herein, as a result of
or arising out of their association or relationship with or employment by SARAH PALIN, in her
capacity as Governor of the State of Alaska. In addition, the purpose of the Trust shall be to pay
all reasonable, necessary, and appropriate expenses of Trustee's counsel and such other and
usual, customary expenses and services that have been or may be incurred in connection with the
above-stated purpose. In the event that SARAH PALIN or any Covered Individual is considered
to have received taxable income as a result of being a beneficiary of the Trust, the Trustee shall
be permitted to reimburse SARAH PALIN or such beneficiary, as the case may be, from the
corpus of the Trust for the actual amount of taxes incurred by SARAH PALIN or such
beneficiary, as the case may be, as a result of being a beneficiary of the Trust. Trust funds may
be used for no purpose other than those specifically provided.
These trolls are always
embarassingly stupid, that we wouldn't actually check the source
documents
BAM! Take that you ignorant, hate-spewing, vile creatures!
Thanks, Vadm! You are the man/woman...whatever...you be's the best!!!!
If any of you have your thank you note from Sarah, compare it to the one being touted by the muddyskirts at muckyflats.
I suspect the notes are written by one person on notepaper with a facsimile of Sarah's signature at the bottom.
To claim that Sarah Palin wrote each note by hand is ludicrous.
This is another lie of the spider web that will catch the whole lot of them.
They all just po me to no end!
Proof Redhead is a LIAR, from the AFT website:
http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/site/downloads/alaska_fund_trust.pdf
http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/site/downloads/final_legal_qa.pdf
Now that we've established that Redhead (aka Celtic Diva) is a liar, can we get a ban?
The more Palin bashing occurs, it's because of one very important fact. They are scared, and when looney tunes are scared, they lash out. They see Obama's poll numbers and are TERRIFIED. They are watching their messiah, the one they worked so hard in electing, quickly turning into the Marxist ideologue that everyone knew that he was. His poll numbers are sinking faster then the titanic and they KNOW IT. The more they attack Sarah, the more I know that we can talk back this country. Remember, every time they lash out(because that is all they know how to do, they can't talk about facts, because they are dumber then light bulbs) they have to smear, to diss, to say nasty things, because they are scared to death that their beloved messiah's trail of destruction is slowly coming to an end
meant to say "take" back this country
Thak you Vadm Collingwood!!!
From your indepth information it just doesn't seem possible that there is any issue with the AFT. Excellent work. My husband and I each gave the max of $150 and we live in Oklahonma. I don't give a rip about Alaska politics (except for the pipeline)and expect nothing from Sarah in return.
OT - We're famous!! Politico article mentioning C4P.
http://tiny.cc/TvCDo
Changing the subject briefly and begging RAM's indulgence, this should be the end of the birth truthers:
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/jon_klein_on_birthers_it_seems_this_story_is_dead_122546.asp
*In 2001 - the state of Hawaii Health Department went paperless.*Paper documents were discarded*The official record of Obama's birth is now an official ELECTRONIC record Janice Okubo, spokeswoman for the Health Department told the Honolulu Star Bulletin, "At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said.
It just occurred to me that, probably, what Cole meant when she said she hadn't spoken to the guv about the fund was that she hadn't spoken to her about the ethics charges, in particular the finding by the investigator.
Hey REDHEAD...what you got to say now...That is a real attorney writing. Kinda of makes that "so called attorney" on Diva's blog look like a rank amateur. And, I noticed he wasn't even proud enough of his report to put his name to it.
Are you going to stay here and maybe ask him to explain a few things to you???
OT (slightly)
We must never forget that the abuse of Alaska's ethics Legislation was not begun by Moore, or Celtic Diva or McLeod. it was begun by Alaskan Legislaters. They set the tone for this attempt at political assasination. Roll on 2010.
Palin just tweeted about "another victory."
I'm betting the ethics board disagreed with Daniels and tossed the Fund Trust complaint.
Hey everyone, Sarah just posted this on Twitter.
Another victory for my family/my admin/the people of AK; but the wins come @ great cost. Will link to presser when posted.
I wonder what that means. @great cost, maybe the case was dismissed but she can't keep the money and it has to be returned. If it does, that's fine. I will take it, double it, and send it to her new defense fund when designed
I would guess it's another ethics complaint tossed, not necessarily the AFT one. Maybe McLeod's or Henning's.
Ok on twitter it's about the ethics complaint filed by the nutjob Andree MacLeud. Don't know which one they are referring to, but they have concluded that Andree is abusing the system out of her own hated of Sarah's, that she is abusing the system. I don't think this has anything to do with the defense fund
lol...this is the best the ankle biters can come up with? Smells like a desperate attempt to stay relevant to me.
Oh well its comforting to know that by Monday all these Oxygen thieves and their lame attempts to tear down and discredit Governor Palin will become about as relevant to the national political discourse as the latest edition of Us weekly magazine.
I really don't get it, like most hard-working Americans.
The governor has legal bills that she needs help with paying.
Someone sets up a fund to help her pay the legal debt.
People donate to the fund.
Doesn't this happen all the time?
It also seems as if Gov Palin takes 1 penny from this fund the whole Western hemisphere will collapse . . .
So what exactly is the beef ?
I'm not trying to be facetious, I really don't understand it . . . it seems as if the logic is
- Gov Palin takes a dollar out of the fund
- ergo, she is the biggest ethical creep ever to walk the earth
Vadam,
thanks for your research, it looks really good.
I'm convinced there are no good politicians in Alaska, save SP and some of her colleagues.
Sorry about that, good Alaskans.
But you should see the crap that goes on here in the Maryland legislature, it's ridiculous.
The thank-you notes do not prove Palin's involvemnet. Per the terms of the trust, Palin is to receive a list every thirty days of all the donors to the AFT. It is just like our good guv to sit down and write thank-you notes to everyone on that list. That is manners of which my grandmother would be proud.
WOW... What A Waste Of Time and Life...
The "trivia truthers" must really be hurtin' for recognition and acceptance... or somethin'... huh.
Lakerfanalways,
Sounds like a good idea. I also will double any money I get back and get it to her to help defend herself.
And I don't care if my thank you note was personally written by her or not. She certainly requested that it be done even if she didn't have time to do it herself, and that speaks volumes about what a lady she is. Come on, 2013!
Post a Comment