MEET THE NEW BOSS—SAME AS THE OLD BOSS: Palin Legal Defense Fund Found By Obama’s Legal Team To Be Non-Compliant--Surprise

(This is from the editors) Almost one year after the Obama legal team at the firm Perkins Coie concluded that Governor Palin’s legal defense fund failed to comply with Alaska law, a new investigator dusted off that report and essentially re-issued it. Why are we not surprised?

First, some context. Who is Perkins Coie?

The firm is counsel of record for the Democratic National Committee, and other political clients include nearly all Democratic members of the United States Congress, as well as several Presidential campaigns, including those of John Kerry and Barrack Obama.

Well, we can’t see a problem with the DNC “counsel of record” and Obama’s personal law firm issuing a report on whether Sarah Palin’s legal defense fund is compliant—especially since most of those fees were incurred during the campaign against Obama. And the “ethics” complaints that were filed like clock work after Sarah Palin returned to Alaska—no connection there to the DNC and its cast of miscreant bloggers in Alaska. (Alaska Democratic Party official hate web site against Sarah Palin). No sirree.

Who else does Perkins Coie represent?

The firm also represents the Democratic Leadership Council, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Still, just because they are neck deep in all Democrat Party issues from the President on down to congressional races, I am sure they would be fair to Sarah Palin. After all, its not like they represent Islamic terrorists or Osama bin Laden’s body guard or something . . . er . . . wait. There’s more:

In 2006, Perkins Coie made headlines when . . . it represented Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the alleged driver and bodyguard of Osama Bin Laden.

So Perkins Coie represents Islamic terrorists, and President Obama, and is general counsel to the DNC, and it represents every major DNC electoral committee in the United States. That does not mean it got any money from Obama or his campaign—the very campaign Sarah Palin was fighting against and incurred all these legal fees? Right?

Wrong again. Turns out Obama has paid millions of dollars to this law firm in the last two years:

First quarter of 2010: $261,206.69

(FEC Report, First Quarter 2010) And prior to this, up to October 2009, “Obama has paid Perkins Coie, a single law firm, $2.6 million since he announced his campaign for presidency.” So by now, it is fair to estimate Obama has paid this law firm close to $3 million.

The legal fees incurred by Sarah Palin stemmed from multiple lawsuits and ethics complaints—approximately 26, all of which were thrown out or dismissed. Then there were the dozens and dozens of harassing and frivolous public records act requests, which at last count cost the State of Alaska over $1,000,000. Fortunately, none of the baseless records act requests or ethics complaints were affiliated with the Alaska Democratic Party (itself an arm of the DNC) or their chosen bloggers . . . wait, according to a hate web site paid for by the Alaska Democratic Party: “The Alaska Democratic Party (ADP) joined at least 18 other news organizations and groups filing requests for information . . . .” And what is listed as an official blog for the Alaska Democratic Party . . . none other than Celtic Diva, the blogger herself being the author of several frivolous ethics complaints, including the laughable Arctic Cat jacket complaint.

And what is the primary goal of the DNC and its arm the Alaska Democratic Party? As stated on the ADP website: “Keep Sarah Palin Out of Public Office.”

That brings us back to Perkins Coie, the official law firm for the DNC and Obama, both of whom instruct the ADP to “keep Sarah Palin out of public office” and mobilize their useful idiots like Shannyn Moore, Jeanne Devon, Linda Kellen-Biegle, and the anti-Semitic terrorist loving Phil Munger. Birds of a feather. How was it that Perkins Coie was selected in the first place? Why didn’t the DNC official law firm disclose to the Personnel Board the fact that it was counsel for the DNC, and by extension, the ADP and the many inane bloggers who filed frivolous ethics act complaints? Seeing as this supposedly “independent” law firm was supposed to make a ruling on “ethics” one can rightfully question that firm’s ethics for withholding key information from the public. Maybe they were busy that day, representing Osama bin Laden’s staff and all. (It’s nice to know that the FBI’s number one most wanted can get his staff the same lawyers that represent the President of the United States). What a country.

A lawsuit was filed against Sarah Palin for supposedly forgetting to issue a Juneteenth proclamation--it was thrown out as frivolous. That lawsuit was co-plaintiffed by Eagle River resident Kim Chatman--whose sole claim to fame is her proclamation that her husband is African American and therefore she opposes Sarah Palin. And her co-plaintiff, whose position she endorsed fully and swore was true under penalty of perjury, was an African American trumpet player who claimed he sexually hit on a married and eight month pregnant Sarah Palin and she supposedly refused to "get with him." (We are not making this crap up. This is what the man said). Of course, to Kim Chatman, that makes Sarah Palin racist. The fact that this was all fiction but was sworn to in a court pleading means it is not only fiction, but perjury. But Kim Chatman, is now the star witness for Obama's lawyers at Perkins Coie and Democrat Tim Petumenos.

Today it was announced that Petumenos, in contrivance with prevaricator Kim Chatman, has determined that the legal defense fund set up for Governor Palin violates Alaska law. Hey, where did we hear that before? Oh yeah--Obama's lawyers at Perkins Coie made that same conclusion just a year ago. And our favorite, Kim Chatman--illegally released the Obama lawyers' report to the media. Oddly, however, Obama's lawyers and now apparently Tim Petumenos, wanted to protect their little flunky, Kim Chatman, so she is not charged with her knowing and intentional violation of Alaska law. No, she gets rewarded today--she gets credit for working with Obama's lawyers on this one. So let's recap so far: Kim Chatman violates Alaska law by illegally releasing the Obama lawyer report on July 14, 2009--and the Personnel Board is mum. It's apparently okay to violate the law as long as you are not a conservative. But if you are Sarah Palin--well, you better sit down.

Get this. According to the brilliant minds in Alaska, the legal defense fund set up for Sarah Palin does not comply with Alaska ethics law. You may or may not be surprised that Sarah Palin's legal defense fund is not the first legal defense fund established for a public official. Bill and Hillary Clinton had one. John Kerry had one. Ted Stevens and Don Young have them. And to compound matters, the lawyers who drafted Sarah Palin's legal defense fund also drafted many of those, including Newt Gingrich's and the Clintons. Why are we not surprised that Sarah Palin's identical legal defense fund is thrown out but everyone else's is held up as a model of legality? Isn't this a foregone conclusion when Obama's personal lawyers are put in charge of drafting the first report against Obama's past and potential future opponent? "That is an outrageous lie" you say, there is no way anyone would hire Obama's personal lawyers to write up a report about Sarah Palin? Sorry, it is in fact the sorry truth. And an outrageous public deception and fraud. The Alaska Personnel Board has cleared up all doubt--it is incompetent. When an “ethics board” hires the political opponent to draft a report, that board is neither ethical nor competent.

How was it that Obama's lawyers were put in charge of this investigation? No one knows. It appears that Obama's lawyers may have failed to reveal the millions of dollars it has been paid by Obama to the Alaska Personnel Board. We must assume this, because if Perkins Coie did disclose this to the Personnel Board, and it nevertheless hired Perkins Coie, then we need to open an investigation into the Board to determine what type of corruption could lead to that result.

And as usual, the complicit Alaska press blessed this arrangement. As Don McLean wrote: "Not a word was spoken. The church bells all were broken." So Obama's personal lawyers get "hired" by the state of Alaska to "investigate" and write a report about Sarah Palin. Hmmm. I wonder how that will turn out for her?

According to today’s re-hashed report, Governor Palin's lawyers had to uncover this information. But the harm was done. Obama's lawyers already prepared a report finding Governor Palin's legal defense fund to be violative of Alaska law. So what did the Personnel Board do? It let Obama's lawyers go (but paid them for their work and kept the report) and it hired Democrat Tim Petumenos. And what did he do? He took the Obama report, reshuffled some paragraphs, reviewed some evidence, and decided that he could not change the Obama report now that Kim Chatman had illegally released it to the media--reaching a fair conclusion was out of the question now that everyone in America was already told the legal defense fund was illegal. So he added some facts Obama's lawyers wanted to conceal from the public--but he buried it at the end of his report.

The most important parts of this new report are in paragraphs 24 and 25, where Petumenos concedes:

"Governor Palin was nevertheless following the express advice of one of her attorneys who told her the Trust complied with all laws and was indeed unassailable."

(Report para. 24). In other words, a highly technical legal document is being found non-compliant, but Governor Palin was "expressly advised" by attorneys that "the Trust complied with all laws and was indeed unassailable." No doubt the shrieking hysterical Left will accuse Palin of deliberately violating the law--but the truth is clear in this report: she was advised by competent attorneys that the Trust fund "complied with all laws and was indeed unassailable." Petumenos also states that the problems with the Trust "are not so obvious as to impute knowledge to Governor Palin especially as her attorneys did not advise her of the ethics problems. Therefore, the evidence supports Governor Palin’s contention that any violation of the Ethics Act was not a knowing violation." (Report para. 25).

So what does this really mean? The Trust, as a separate legal entity "violates the Ethics Act" but Governor Palin had no reason to know this. One wonders how Petumenos can blame Governor Palin when in fact he concludes that Palin had no knowledge of any violation, no intent to violate any law, and that she was advised the trust fund complied with all laws? Under these facts--laid out by Petumenos (but omitted in the initial report by Obama's lawyers), how can Petumenos conclude she violated the law? At worst her legal team made a mistake. In all probability, the Palin legal defense fund does not violate Alaska law or any other law. It is no different than Don Young's, Ted Stevens', the Clintons' and John Kerry's. But those of us who have followed Sarah Palin's career have seen one constant--there are rules for her and there are rules for everybody else. This is just one more example of the hypocritical treatment she receives at the hands of her own countrymen.

As for today’s report, the new boss is Democrat Tim Petumenos, but the report’s conclusions are virtually identical to the old boss—Obama’s lawyers and the legal arm of the DNC.

Good work Alaska. It is nice to see the Personnel Board is working in tandem with the DNC and the ADP to “Keep Sarah Palin out of public office.” The problem is, we see through this. We know who authored the report. We can see that Sarah Palin’s legal defense fund is identical to every other public official’s legal defense fund—but only Sarah Palin’s trust fund is attacked.

Here is our message to Sarah Palin—the more the DNC, the ADP and Obama’s lawyers conspire to “keep you out of public office” the more we will gather our troops and fight for you.

* bumped

Read more...

Call to Action; Serial Bogus Ethics Filers Give Testimony on Ethics?

During the tenure of Governor Palin, a whirlwind of ethics complaints blew into the state of Alaska. Both Andree McLeod and Zane Henning were responsible for filing bogus complaints against her. These were an affront to tax payers and illustrated a complete disregard for the ethics system.

It would only stand to reason now that the state Legislature would take a good look at the system, hear from those who can give insight into how it can be improved, and follow through. Obviously, it would make sense to talk to the administration that has been so adversely affected by those seeking to abuse the ethic rules. Instead, in their hearings, they actually chose to receive testimony from Andree McLeod and Zane Henning, chief abusers of the system.

Lisa Demer of the ADN reports:

A legislative committee on Monday took up ethics issues that erupted during the Palin administration, but it's not clear whether the panel intends to take any action.

Attorney General Dan Sullivan has proposed state rules establishing when it's appropriate for the state to pay for the travel of family members of the governor or lieutenant governor. Another proposal sets out when the state should pay legal bills for state officials defending against ethics complaints.

Former Gov. Sarah Palin was hit with numerous ethics complaints during her 2 1/2 years in office. She said she quit in part because of what she called frivolous ethics complaints and personal legal bills amounting to an estimated $600,000.

Most of the ethics complaints against Palin were dismissed. But she settled one by reimbursing the state more than $8,000 for her children's air travel.

[...]

Oversight comes from the joint House-Senate Administrative Regulation Review Committee, which examines regulations to make sure they are allowed under state law.

The panel agreed to hold a public hearing on the ethics measures after being pushed by Palin critic Andree McLeod. House leaders also requested it, said state Rep. Wes Keller, R-Wasilla, who is the committee chairman.

Under the proposed rules, the state could cover the costs of defending a public official against ethics complaints if the official were exonerated, Assistant Attorney General Judy Bockmon told the committee.

[...]

McLeod, who filed a number of ethics complaints against Palin and her staff, urged the committee to reject the changes.

[...]

The Executive Branch Ethics Act is important, and the attorney general shouldn't be trying to change the law, another Palin critic, Zane Henning, told the committee. The Legislature should make any needed changes, he said.

[...]

The Department of Law has solicited public comment and held a hearing on the ethics changes, Bockmon said. The period for comment has ended and the department must now decide what to do. It could adopt the provisions as is or with minor changes, or let the matter drop with no action.

The committee hasn't yet decided how to proceed, Keller said.

Read the full article here.

So Andree McLeod and Zane Henning, serial complainants who cost the state thousands of tax payer dollars while they played out their hellish vendetta against Governor Palin, somehow are credible sources of information? These two Palin anklebiters, whose complaints were thrown out one after another, are taken seriously, but the legislature doesn't want to hear from the administration itself regarding how these ethics abuses can be solved? What sense does that make?

Clearly, these two can't spot a real ethics violation if it smacked them in the face, so how does their one-sided testimony equate to anything remotely helpful in bringing about true ethics reform? And why can't the legislators see what is so apparent? Allowing these two characters to have a say in ethics rules is like allowing children to decide their own punishment. Don't tell me the legislators don't recognize this. They make it hard to take them or these hearings seriously. It seems, instead, to be more of the same Juneau dog and pony show.

Perhaps legislators' approach has something to do with the fact that their own ethics laws protect them from frivolous complaints. Perhaps it's due to the fact that if a complaint is leaked to the public in the legislative branch it is automatically dismissed. No wonder Jay Ramras, chair of House Judiciary, could so flippantly scold Governor Palin for wearing an Arctic Cat coat on a cold Alaska day though he ran multiple ads for his Pike's Lodge while serving in the legislature and running for lieutenant governor. Could it not be argued that this was a political use of airtime? Could these ads not be deemed an improper in-kind contribution? Yet when the absurd Arctic Cat ethics complaint was filed, he chastised the governor for wearing a winter coat on a winter day! The hypocrisy is glaring.

We can look the other way, or we can implore legislators to do the right thing. They need to take up this issue, and we need to let them know how we feel about it. Governor Palin made the selfless decision to resign because she could no longer allow the politics of personal destruction being waged against her to continually cost the state thousands of dollars. And will legislators do nothing? Indeed, something needs to be done, and by "something" I don't mean simply hearing one-sided testimony from the anklebiters themselves.

Governor Palin fought against business as usual in the state of Alaska. Failure to act in the best interests of the state she served is unacceptable. The boneheaded decision to hear testimony on ethics from unethical boneheads makes no sense at all.

I urge you all to call and/or email these legislators and respectfully insist that they take action. Your voice does matter. I've included the contact information for you. (All phone numbers: 907 area code)

* Chair: Rep. Wes Keller - Representative_Wes_Keller@legis.state.ak.us, 465-2186
* Vice-Chair: Sen. Donald Olson - Senator_Donald_Olson@legis.state.ak.us, 465-3707
* Rep. Carl Gatto - Representative_Carl_Gatto@legis.state.ak.us, 465-3743
* Rep David Guttenberg - Representative_David_Guttenberg@legis.state.ak.us, 465-4457
* Sen. Albert Kookeesh - Senator_Albert_Kookesh@legis.state.ak.us, 465-3473
* Sen. Kevin Meyer - Senator_Kevin_Meyer@legis.state.ak.us, 465-4945
* Senate Pres.: Sen. Gary Stevens - Senator_Gary_Stevens@legis.state.ak.us, 465-4925
* Speaker of the House: Rep. Mike Chenault Representative_Mike_Chenault@legis.state.ak.us, 465-3779

* bumped

Read more...

Obsessed Anklebiter Files Another Frivolous Ethics Complaint

During an interview with Greta Van Susteren last month, Governor Palin discussed some of the reasons behind her resignation:

Because it was the best thing for the state of Alaska to be able to progress the conservative agenda up there without the distraction that the new normal in Alaskan politics had become where every time I turned around, there was a lawsuit or frivolous ethics violation charge.

And that was prohibiting my administration from doing the work for the people. It was costing the state millions of dollars, thousands of staff hours to fight these frivolous, adversarial, opposition-researcher efforts that were thrown at my administration while I was there.

And I was not going to run again for governor, so instead of hunkering down, quitting, basically, as a governor by sitting behind my desk and not doing anything, not speaking out for fear of having another ethics violation charge, I said no. They're not going to win and we're going to get out there and fight harder for Alaskans, fight harder to Americans by handing the reins over to our lieutenant governor for my last year in office. He'll progress the agenda. I will get out there and fight even harder.

Andree McLeod and her anklebiting allies continue to prove Governor Palin correct.

The Anchorage Daily News reports that McLeod has filed another baseless ethics complaint against Governor Palin. This comes on the heels of a complaint McLeod just filed against some of Governor Palin's former staffers.

Governor Palin's personal attorney, Thomas Van Flein, responded to a previous frivolous complaint filed by McLeod:

This complainant is known to the Administration as a disgruntled patronage job applicant. What is further obvious is that the ethics process continues to be misused for improper purposes, the law mandating confidentiality continues to be violated, and the state will continue to spend money reviewing these types of complaints, with no public good resulting.

Apparently, McLeod took the rejection of her job application as an impetus to file numerous frivolous ethics complaints against the governor and her administration. And as Thomas Van Flein points out, she does so unethically.

McLeod's latest complaint is based on the false premise that the Alaska Fund Trust, a legal fund set up by Kristan Cole to help pay Governor Palin's and some of her former staffers legal debt (incurred fighting anklebiters such as McLeod), was found to be unethical. No such determination has been made, and only the Personnel Board can make that call.

McLeod based her latest complaint on Democrat investigator Thomas Daniel's preliminary report, which was illegally leaked in July. This preliminary report was the first step in a long process. It's also important to note that Daniel found no violation of the Ethics Act, because Governor Palin didn't remove a single penny from the legal defense fund. How can she be in violation of the Ethics Act for something she hasn’t even done yet? She can't.

This latest complaint will surely end in the same manner as McLeod's previous complaints: dismissal. But not after great expense to the citizens of Alaska and to Governor Palin personally. Many people in the lower 48 are unaware of the unique situation in Alaska that allows anybody to file any ethics complaint for any reason at no cost to themselves, while the governor has to personally incur the legal costs to defend him or herself. Kristan Cole explained the situation in an earlier press release:

There is a loophole in Alaska law. Alaskans can file frivolous complaints against the Governor - violate the law and alert the media they are doing so, all the complaints can be dismissed and yet the Governor has to personally pay for representation. Legislators covered themselves with a law that warrants automatic dismissal of a complaint if it is leaked to the public.

Alaska Attorney General Dan Sullivan has recognized this problem, and we wish him well in his efforts to rectify it.

When Van Susteren asked how Palin would able to deal with these anklebiters on a national scale if she had such trouble with them in Alaska, Governor Palin explained the difference:

PALIN: Is not the same scale, because in Alaska our administration is set up a little bit differently than anywhere else you're going to find in the country or the federal government where the governor is not protected by the department of law when these frivolous ethics violations charges are filed against you. I have to pay personally for the defense, and I am still paying personally for the defense of all the frivolity.

Those charges filed by fake people -- a fake British soap opera actress filed something against me and I am still paying the bill. I am still paying the bill to defend myself against stupid things like that.

That is not going to happen elsewhere because, again, more and more people are realizing that things like that that keep good people away from politics -- people are expecting that kind of change, the ethics reform so that those kinds of actions can't prohibit someone from wanting to serve for the right reasons.

And I do want to serve for the right reasons. I do not know what position it will be, but I will be out there fighting hard, working for everyday, common sense Americans who are sick of things that are going on in the country that really are turning government away from them.

It's becoming more and more, Greta, where the American people are feeling more that they are having to work for the government rather than the government working for them. I want to turn that around in whatever position I can.

Since her political opponents know they can't win on the merit of this ridiculous complaint, they are predictably portraying her as a greedy millionaire who's out to get as much money as she can from her supporters. Nothing could be further from the truth. One of the main purposes of the legal fund is to aid her staff with their legal debt, as well. From the Alaska Fund Trust website (emphasis added):

The Trust Fund is being created to assist the Governor, her family, and staff in paying legal expenses and costs incurred from previous investigations as well as future complaints filed. Her staff is similarly being targeted by these complaints and has also incurred and is incurring significant costs.

As noted above, her former staff members are still being attacked with frivolous ethics complaints as a result of their service in Governor Palin's administration. They have to pay for the legal costs associated with these bogus complaints out of their own pockets. This legal fund was meant to help them as well, but that won't stop Governor Palin's opponents from making fools of themselves in the hopes of damaging her.

Read more...

McLeod Has a Meltdown; Personnel Board Denies Appeals of Dismissed Ethics Charges Against Gov. Palin

While attending a Personnel Board meeting in Anchorage yesterday, Alaska anklebiter Andree Mcleod seems to have had a complete meltdown. From the ADN:

Today’s meeting of the state personnel board offered no shortage of melodrama, with board member Al Tamagni telling Andree McLeod to “just keep bitching” and threatening to sue her.

It started after McLeod, who has had her ethics complaints against Sarah Palin dismissed by the personnel board, tore into the board during the time set aside for the public to speak.

“For anyone to even criticize a person like myself who wants to file complaints and does so and then call me a serial complainer and then complain about the cost? What is the cost of corruption? What is the cost of the culture of corruption that you are now complicit in, of the Palin/Parnell administration. Can you answer that Al?” McLeod told the board.

McLeod went on, declaring that the board is a joke and is dedicated to defending public officials rather than serving the public. Tamagni broke in at one point, saying “just keep bitching, Andree.”

He later told McLeod that “it appears like you have a personal vendetta.”

“How dare you, how dare you, Al.” McLeod angrily responded. “How dare you. For the personnel board to even say that, a personnel board member.”

You may recall that Andree McLeod was denied a position in Governor Palin's administration. Apparently she took this rejection as an impetus to file numerous frivolous ethics complaints against the governor and her administration. She discussed some of these complaints in a recent interview with Grace Jang:



After accusing a board member of corruption without any evidence, McLeod had to be warned about her disruptive behavior:

Board chair Debra English then threatened to call security (she didn’t), saying McLeod was not acting professionally.

"How offensive, Debra, this is offensive, how offensive you are,” McLeod said at the threat to call security. “The culture of corruption continues.”

After McLeod's embarrassing performance, the board was able to accomplish some business, much to her dismay:

Later in the meeting, the personnel board denied appeals -- including by McLeod -- of dismissed ethics complaints.

Among the appeals denied was one from Linda Kellen Biegel:

There is much more to tell...I haven't even touched on the whole part of the meeting about Arctic Cat...they refused to reopen the case.

Yes, you read that correctly. Ms. Kellen Biegel appealed the dismissal of her ridiculous complaint that Governor Palin wore a coat.

Update: Al Tamagni defended his integrity in the face of reckless accusations from an obsessed smear merchant. Go over to the ADN and show him some support. Don't allow good people to be bullied by people with destructive agendas.

Read more...

AP: Ethics Complaint Against Palin's Former Aide Dismissed

From the AP:

An ethics complaint against a top aide of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has been dismissed as lacking merit.

The complaint was dismissed last week by Alaska's deputy attorney general, Craig Tillery. It alleged that former press secretary Bill McAllister worked on state time to benefit Palin's interest during and after her quest as the GOP vice presidential candidate.

A report from the state Department of Law recommending dismissal of the complaint concluded that no evidence was found that state ethics law was violated.

The grievance was among six filed against Palin or her staff by Anchorage resident Andree McLeod. Five have been dismissed, and one is pending.

McLeod calls the latest dismissal "yet again, more whitewash."

(H/T kjanlady)

Read more...

Andree McLeod Still Obsessed

One of my remaining guilty pleasures is scanning the articles and comments at the Anchorage Daily News...in spite of their coming traffic crash. I'm admittedly curious at what will happen to the all dedicated trolls in the comments there, who have spent so much effort attacking Governor Palin in Alaska. Where will they go?

In the process, I noticed that Saint Andree McLeod is still going strong with her ethics complaint hobby.

Back on July 15th, I happened to catch an Andree McLeod interview with KTVA reporter Grace Jang. I asked KTVA to put the video up on their website - it took a while, but they finally did so a few days ago. Take a gander and tell me if this sets off your "creepy stalker" vibe:



Gotta love the stacks and boxes of documents. And all she could come up with were six bogus ethics complaints, all of which have so far been dismissed?

And she's in debt over this? That's just sad.

UPDATE: (h/t narciso) Hmmm. McLeod seems to have a rather shady ethics background herself.

Read more...

Anti-Palin Alinsky Tactics Spread to Lower 48: Frivolous Ethics Complaint Filed Against Michele Bachmann

From Emily Kaiser:

Three Minnesota bloggers filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Michele Bachmann this week, claiming the Republican violated House franking rules in an email to constituents.

[...]

Commenters on MNPublius have tried to call out the bloggers for a purely partisan move, saying it is politics as usual.

UPDATE by RAM: The whole country is now Chicago.

Read more...

Yet Another Andree McLeod Ethics Complaint Bites The Dust

From the Gov's Twitter:

Another victory for my family/my admin/the people of AK; but the wins come @ great cost. Will link to presser when posted.

And here is the presser from the Governor's office:

Another Ethics Complaint Dismissed

July 24, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska – The Personnel Board has announced that another ethics complaint against Governor Sarah Palin has been dismissed.

The complaint, the sixth filed by Anchorage resident Andree McLeod, accused the governor of violating the Ethics Act by receiving her salary while campaigning for vice president. The accusation, lodged Monday, was dismissed as legally flawed and factually devoid of merit.

Governor Palin remained on duty, conducted state business, and communicated with her staff and her constituents. “Andree McLeod has failed to prevail on any of the ethics complaints she has filed against the governor,” said Mike Nizich, Palin’s chief of staff. “It appears her agenda is clear – she’s abusing the ethics laws to harass public officials.”

Our original post on this particular frivolous complaint by McLeod can be found here.

UPDATE: Here's the Personnel Board Report dismissing the complaint.

Read more...

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?

Read more...

Article Points Out Investigator's Ties to Democratic Party

Fox News has a story up about Thomas Daniel, the independent investigator for the Personnel Board on Kim Chatman's ethics complaint about the Alaska Fund Trust, donations to Democrats:

Daniel has contributed $3,500 in recent years to Democratic causes, including $1,500 to Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 and $1,000 to Alaska Sen. Mark Begich's senatorial campaign last year.

The law firm where he is a partner, Perkins Coie, serves as counsel of record for the Democratic Party and its candidates, and attorneys there recently represented Obama's presidential campaign.

[...]

Daniel told FOXNews.com that any lawyer hired to investigate a complaint is going to have political views, but that shouldn't interfere with the task at hand.

"This is not intended to be a political process," he said. "It's intended to make a determination of whether there is probable cause of an ethics violation."

[...]

"I don't know if the guy is straight or not," Coale said. "They should have disclosed this before. It doesn't mean you can't be objective. But in this situation, you don't want the appearance of bias."

The head of the board, Debra English, did not return a voicemail message requesting an interview.

Sharon Leighow, Palin's spokeswoman, said she was unaware of Daniel's contributions and ties to the Democratic Party but added, "I don't have any reason to believe he's unfair."

More here.

Read more...

Parnell Wants to Stop Ethics Complaint Leaks

KTUU reports:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who takes over for Gov. Sarah Palin on Sunday, said that he wants the Department of Law to come up with recommendations on how to stop leaks of confidential reports from ethics investigations.

An unknown source leaked a Personnel Board report Tuesday that found probable cause that Palin violated ethics rules with a legal defense fund, the Alaska Fund Trust.

Now Parnell wants Attorney General Dan Sullivan to come up with suggestions on how to stop future leaks.

"These leaks must stop," Parnell said via press release. "If we allow public officials to be tried and convicted in the press through abuse of the legal process, then the Executive Branch is at risk. The rule of law is threatened."

Better late than never I guess...

UPDATE by Tim: Here is the text of Parnell's press release:

Parnell Seeks to End Leaks of Confidential Information Asks Attorney General to Step In

(July 23, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska) - Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell today asked Attorney General Dan Sullivan to provide recommendations on how to prevent leaks of confidential information in ethics probes.

Parnell’s request comes after the leak of an investigator’s confidential and preliminary report related to an ethics complaint filed against Governor Sarah Palin.

“These leaks must stop,” Parnell said. “If we allow public officials to be tried and convicted in the press through abuse of the legal process, then the Executive Branch is at risk. The rule of law is threatened.”

Parnell said that leaking the investigator’s preliminary report is just like walking into a courthouse, lifting some notes from the jurors’ break room and publishing them before all the evidence is in and before a verdict is reached.

Parnell recognized the need for accountability for public officials, but said the ethics laws are being abused.

“If confidential information was leaked from our courts, there would be an outcry,” he said. “There must be respect for the law when it comes to Executive Branch ethics investigations.”

Read more...

Media Malpractice and the Associated Press Story About the Legal Defense Complaint

The Associated Press story about the leaked report on the legal defense fund complaint is a clear example of media malpractice.

Rachel D’Oro erroneously reported that Gov. Palin was found in violation of the Ethics Act. That is completely false. The leaked document was a preliminary report -- the first part of a long process.

Gov. Palin’s own attorney stated:

“The resolution of the Trust Fund is not final. I have been working with the investigator regarding supplemental information. The matter is still pending. Whatever you have seen was released in violation of law. There has been no Board finding of an ethics violation and there is a detailed legal process to follow before there is a final resolution.”

Only the Personnel Board can make the final determination about whether the Ethics Act was violated. There was no violation because the governor has not taking any money from the legal defense fund. No funds have been dispersed because they were waiting for the resolution of this issue. Therefore, Gov. Palin can not be charged with something she hasn’t even done yet.

Here’s what Thomas Daniel, the independent investigator contracted by the Personnel Board, stated in his report:

In addition, my role as independent counsel for the personnel board is only to decide whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of the Ethics Act has occurred – not to reach a definitive conclusion. See AS 39.52.320. The ultimate determination of whether the governor has violated the Ethics Act can only be made by the personnel board after a formal heating and a report by the hearing officer. See AS 39.52.360-370.

In sum, I find probable cause to believe that payment of the governor’s legal fees by the Alaska Fund Trust will violate the Ethics Act prohibition against a public officer accepting gifts intended to influence performance of official duties.

[...]

I can recommend that corrective action be taken to resolve this complaint without the necessity of a formal hearing on the matter. See AS 39.52.330. My recommendation is that the governor should refuse to accept payment of her legal fees and costs from the Alaska Fund Trust and withdraw her authorization for the trust to be recognized as her “official” legal defense fund. I also recommend that she seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of defending the ethics complaints that have been dismissed.

I also recommend that the legislature consider amending the Ethics Act to require the state to reimburse a public official for reasonable legal fees and costs incurred to defend against an Ethics Act complaint that is dismissed. [emphasis added]

In other words, Daniel is not finding the governor in violation of the Ethics Act. Only the Personnel Board can make such a ruling, and Daniel actually recommends that no ruling is necessary. Gov. Palin has not accepted one dime from the legal defense fund yet. How can she be in violation of the Ethics Act for something she hasn’t even done yet? You can’t charge her with a violation for a future act! The language Daniel uses is future tense “will violate” -- not violated.

He even recommended against having it go to the board for a hearing. Instead, he suggested that the governor simply refuse to take any money from the Alaska Fund Trust.

So, please note, the Associated Press story is totally wrong. Gov. Palin has not been found in violation of the Ethics Act. The Daniel report states that she could be in violation if she accepts the money. But the key word is “could be” -- because Daniel does not have the authority to make that ultimate decision, only the Personnel Board does. The next step in this process is for Gov. Palin’s attorney to respond with his own motion. This is a long process.

Kim Chatman broke the law by leaking this report to the press. In fact, Daniel explicitly warned her not to violated confidentiality. On the final page of the report, he wrote in bold (yes, the bold below is in the original):

Notice of this decision will be communicated to the governor and to Ms. Chatman. However, this decision is confidential pursuant to AS 39.52.340, unless confidentiality is waived by the governor.

So, Chatman broke the law, and the governor’s attorney stated this:

“All options are open in terms of legal remedies. It is a clear violation of Alaska law that Mr. Daniel explicitly reviewed with Ms. Chatman prior to her illegal actions. We will be contacting the appropriate authorities for review and action.”

Thomas Van Flein
Private Attorney for Sarah Palin

Chatman is claiming that she didn’t leak it, but there is no one else who could have. It wasn’t the governor or Daniel.

The reasoning used by Thomas Daniel in his decision is rather laughable. He can't claim with a straight face that the ordianry Americans from around the country who donated in small amounts (ranging from $5 to $150) were seriously trying to influence the governor of Alaska. So instead, Daniel speculates vaguely about the motivations of the legal defense fund's trustee, Kristan Cole, based solely on her background as someone who has been appointed to volunteer boards by Gov. Palin (please note that Ms. Cole served on volunteer boards during the Murkowski administration too).

Daniel wrote:

The relationship between Ms. Cole and the governor could cause a “reasonable person” to conclude that the payment of the governor’s fees is intended to influence the governor’s performance of official duties, actions, or judgment. I cannot read Ms. Cole’s mind and therefore it is possible that her formation of the legal defense fund is entirely altruistic without an expectation of anything in return. But as explained above, the standard for interpreting this section of the Ethics Act is an objective one. The circumstances around the creation of the trust fund suggests that the organizers expect “that when policy decisions are made in the future, the [governor] will be favorably disposed to give more weight to the [their] viewpoint.” In addition, my role as independent counsel for the personnel board is only to decide whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of the Ethics Act has occurred – not to reach a definitive conclusion.

If that is the standard for considering people's motives, it seems fair that we also consider Mr. Daniel's background. After all, we're simply applying the same standard, and we are not making any judgements. For all we know, he might have issued a fair and honest decision when he concluded that it might be a violation of the Executive Ethics Act for the governor to accept funds from a legal defense fund that was carefully vetted by attorneys throughout the country who are experts in such funds. I cannot read Mr. Daniel's mind and therefore it is possible that his decision was completely unbiased. But a “reasonable person” could conclude that an investigator who is a lifelong Democrat, who has given large sums of money to Democrats, and whose law firm, Perkins Coie, “serves as the counsel of record for the Democratic Party and its candidates,” is biased.

It should be noted that the two boards Kristan Cole was appointed to, the Royalty Oil and Gas Development Advisory Board and the Agriculture and Conservation Board, are unpaid volunteer boards. Her only compensation for these rather thankless jobs is "Standard Travel and Per Diem," which ironically is the only compensation the members of the Personnel Board receive. According to Ms. Cole's press release, she has not even accepted the standard per diem and travel compensations for the boards she is serving on. She hasn't received any compensation for her work in any way. It's interesting to note that Daniel acknowledges and ultimately disregards the possibility that Ms. Cole established the legal defense fund for purely altruistic reasons, but he fails to mention that Ms. Cole is a lifelong friend of the governor. Establishing a legal defense fund is the sort of thing a friend does.

These are the facts. But you won’t see them in the Associated Press story. Instead you will read that Gov. Palin “violated” the Ethics Act.

See what I mean? Media Malpractice. This is shameful reporting. It's sloppy, biased, hack journalism.

Read more...

Tim Lindell Talks to Eddie Burke About the AFT

C4P's own Tim Lindell talked to Eddie Burke this evening about the illegal release of Thomas Daniel's preliminary report on the Alaska Fund Trust:

Read more...

Trustee Kristan Cole on the Ethics Complaint and the Alaska Fund Trust

Kristan Cole, the trustee of the legal defense fund set up to help Governor Palin with legal bills resulting from frivolous ethics complaints, issued the following press release at a press conference today:

Press Release

Kristan Cole, Trustee

The Alaska Fund Trust

July 22, 2009


Thank you for being here today. My name is Kristan Cole, Trustee to the Alaska Fund Trust. And this is the Trust's attorney in Alaska, Jon Givens.

I am here to address the unusual letter that was leaked yesterday, the contents of which are unprecedented in the history of our country, suggesting that a legal defense fund could somehow be unethical. This is particularly notable, and concerning, in light of the fact that the Trust, on my instructions, has not paid even one penny to Gov. Palin or her lawyers. I issued that instruction because I was aware the Board was reviewing this matter.

This Trust was created by a team of expert lawyers from around the country. It was thoroughly vetted for compliance with federal and state law and trust law. So far Mr. Daniel is the only lawyer in the country who has questioned a legal defense fund despite the fact that his firm has set up legal defense funds for other office holders. Because his initial review was unprecedented and contained factual errors it was my understanding that Gov. Palin's legal team, including Mr. Van Flein, were in on-going discussions with Mr. Daniel. The matter was not final.

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.

The first and only time I have spoken with the Governor about the Trust was yesterday to alert her that I was responding to this violation of the law and leak of preliminary and confidential materials from the complainant.

There is a loophole in Alaska law. Alaskans can file frivolous complaints against the Governor - violate the law and alert the media they are doing so, all the complaints can be dismissed and yet the Governor has to personally pay for representation. Legislators covered themselves with a law that warrants automatic dismissal of a complaint if it is leaked to the public.

It has been quite obvious to me, and to other every day citizens like me, that over the last several months that something needed to be done to help the Palins with the overwhelming crush of frivolous ethics complaints.

In their own humble way, the Palins never asked for help. The Governor never even asked anyone to contribute to this legal expense fund. This trust, and the thousands and thousands of dollars raised, were the results of hard working Americans and their outpouring of support. It is disgraceful that anyone would assume that the thousands of people who sent in $5, $10 or $50 intended to "influence" the governor's official actions in Alaska! And this in a state where a half dozen legislators have been convicted of corruption as well as the previous governor's chief of staff. Not one ethics complaint was filed against these individuals who were convicted, but this governor is harassed for having her picture taken with a fish, wearing a jacket, answering press questions and giving a speech.

A few select people have abused our ethics act. The public release of a preliminary document in violation of state law follows that pattern. The people of this state are losing hope that the ethics act has any real purpose anymore and that’s incredibly sad as ethics are so important. Mr. Daniel's preliminary assessment, unprecedented in history and harshly criticized by legal scholars, does nothing to restore credibility to this process.

Numerous individuals thought to help the Palins - not just me. But when I was asked, I was doing research of my own and determined that I would put my name on a Trust already going through an intense legal process throughout the country to ensure that this one was airtight and complied with every possible law under the sun. And this one does. It is one of the most restrictive and transparent trusts of its kind. The validity of the Trust is strong. It is unprecedented in every way imaginable... all donations must be under $150, no donations from lobbyists, and nothing accepted from foreign nationals to name a few. No trust has ever been found to be a violation of ethical standards for any governor, former president, senator, or house member, or former member of Congress. But this Trust which has more severe donation and donor limits than any trust in the history of legal defense trusts might violate ethical rules?

Some Trust funds are formed and accepted to defend politicians in true Courts of Law with regard to some very serious criminal charges. And yet, this Fund was created by others to help the Palins pay for their legal bills due to frivolous complaints - each of which has been dismissed thus far. I will let my attorney speak to the legal issues but I wanted to take this opportunity to speak to yesterday's blatant violation of the law.

You know, we have witnessed time and again the blatant abuse of process when it comes to people filing these complaints and illegally discussing them and leaking them to the press- but this latest move further crosses the line and we are all reviewing action for the reputational harm caused by Ms. Chatman based upon the leak of Tom Daniel's preliminary thinking on the matter - a product that may have ultimately been remarkably different and perhaps even dismissed. Where is the accountability for those who blatantly disregard the requirement to keep the issue confidential?

There are many questions which need to be asked following my read of what was leaked.

And, if I may digress - this is how backwards our laws are - I had to go online and read the preliminary letter about the Trust and me because Mr. Daniel and Mr. Van Flein cannot violate the confidentiality of the Ethics Act (even though it appears the complainant has)and therefore cannot even forward the preliminary letter to me. Now that I have read it, I still hope to inform Mr. Daniel of the important information that Mr. Van Flein had requested from me to be shared with Mr. Daniel.

What was the reason for my involvement? The preliminary letter suggests that perhaps I served as Trustee so I could get some job with the state. This is amazingly wrong and so incredibly hurtful. That is the last thing I want. I did this because it believed it was the right thing to do for our Governor. I love Alaska. I have lived here 40 years and I have always served the state when asked - and despite the fact that I am entitled to public monies in the form of expenses, per diem and wages - I have declined every single penny. I have served as a volunteer on others boards, and commissions (The Real Estate Commission and the Agricultural Revolving Loan Fund Board) under a previous Governor so volunteer work has been part of my life for a long time. I was approached to serve as Trustee for the legal defense fund. I did not seek out this position just as I have never sought out any other position but was willing to step up to the plate and serve when asked because that’s what we all do when asked to serve our country, our state and our communities isn’t it? We do it because it’s the right thing to do and by all of us serving where we can, we all benefit. My sons and my husband have served our country. I have served our state and our community here in the Mat Su Valley with the hope that we are making a difference where we can.

So how unfair is it that the Governor can be told she was wrong for putting together the Fund, soliciting Funds, accepting the Funds and spending the Funds when she hasn't been involved at all----And no money has been spent on her legal defense?

If the Governor only accrued the bills because she is a public figure then why is it wrong for a Trust to collect funds to defend her as a public figure? Alaska law specifically states that there is only a problem if there is "intent" to influence the Governor. How can there be intent to influence a Governor in Alaska with a $5 voluntary donation from Kansas? To date, approximately 90% of the contributions are from Outside Alaska and many are $5, $10 and $20 donations. Not one penny has been paid to any law firm or entity for the Governor's financial gain. If the Governor has not solicited or accepted personal gain, how can she be in violation of soliciting and accepting monies for personal gain?

Let’s review what has been deemed lawful. Creation of the PAC and fundraising was deemed lawful. Writing a book was deemed lawful. All other legal defense funds similar, but not as restrictive as this one, have been deemed to be lawful. The very firm who put together Senator Kerry’s legal defense fund which was deemed lawful was put together by the very law firm that Mr. Daniel is employed by. These are inconsistent conclusions and defy common sense. That is why this matter was not final and Mr. Daniel and Mr. Van Flein were discussing these issues.

Potential future gain, based upon no active solicitations, in one of the most stringent legal expense funds in the country does not merit a situation much less a violation. Mr. Daniel says that because the Trust was an "official" Trust he felt it violated the law. This overlooks the necessity of having one "official" fund. The unofficial funds are the very ones that had the potential to harm the public by unscrupulous people.

We knew that in fairness to Alaskans and Americans, this site needed to be official because of the potential scams that could arise. How ethical would it be for a pensioner in Iowa or a single mother in New Hampshire to have their donation diverted by someone who had no intention of helping the Governor and may keep the money for themselves or other equally harmful things?

But let's think through the same logic, if a foreigner wanted to set up his or her own fund, collect a handsome payoff, and accept $5 million donations from rogue groups even, as long as that person did not tell the Governor, that would be okay? That is the conclusion that is being reached here in Mr. Daniel's letter and flies in the face of good logic, common sense, and the good necessity of protecting the public.

Every aspect of the Alaska Fund Trust follows the law. Precedent allows for it. The Palins haven't been involved with it. It is unfortunate that some in the media were so quick to point the finger at the Governor for something others are responsible for and have established to assist her in the fight against these outrageous attacks. And this acceptance that the law can be continually violated for pure political gain ... is wrong.

UPDATE: The Associated Press now has a story about Ms. Cole's press conference. Take a look at the opening sentence for a clear idea of what bad journalism looks like:

WASILLA, Alaska — The trustee for the legal defense fund set up to help Gov. Sarah Palin lashed out at the news media and the Eagle River resident who filed an ethics complaint against the governor.

Lashed out? What? The AP writer is Matthew Daly. He should be reprimanded for that ridiculous sentence.

UPDATE by Daniel: You can find the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman's story on the press conference here.

UPDATE by Mel: Tim talks to Eddie Burke:

Read more...

So Who Leaked the Confidential Ethics Report, If Not Kim Chatman?

As we reported last night, Kim Chatman made a statement to Anchorage NBC station KTUU that she was not the source for the story by Rachel D'Oro of the Associated Press. The story concerned a confidential report by a Personnel Board investigator regarding the Alaska Fund Trust.

Color me skeptical. After all, Chatman is quoted by D'Oro in the piece. And don't forget a couple of additional facts - Chatman already has demonstrated a willingness to violate the confidentiality laws. When she filed her original complaint, she leaked it to, yes, the Associated Press. And only a few days before publishing the story, Rachel D'Oro was interviewing people in Chatman's camp, and writing about her, in regards to another ridiculous complaint that Chatman filed against Palin.

But if Chatman wasn't the source, then who was? Apparently the only people privy to it were Chatman, Governor Palin, and investigator Thomas Daniel. Despite wild conspiracy theories from the Truther Fringe, I can't imagine anyone would think the Palin camp leaked to the AP.

Josh Painter thinks there's reason to take a closer look at Daniel:

So who is Thomas Daniel, and how "independent" an investigator is he?

Daniel is a lawyer employed by the firm of Perkins Coie, LLP. He contributed $1,000 to Democrat John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign. Daniel has also donated to Alaska's Democrat U.S. Senator Mark Begich.

Perkins Coie, as it turns out, just happens to have Barack Obama as a client. More on Perkins Coie here:

Perkins Coie often partners up with the ACLU and groups like MALDEF on such issues as immigration. Much of the political heavy lifting is done by former Kerry/Edwards 2004 General Counsel Mark Elias and Firmwide Chair, Political Law Practice Robert (Bob) Bauer. Both gentleman’s resumes read more like that of DNC staffers than of lawyers at a firm with the motto "Legal Counsel to Great Companies."

And speaking of the leftist ACLU, guess which attorney is a member? That's right. Thomas Daniel, who as an investigator is anything but independent. He's a liberal Democrat who is a member of the leftist ACLU.

Some more on Perkins Coie:

Perkins Coie clients have included many Democrats in Congress, as well as the Democratic National Committee and the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and John Kerry.

The Seattle-based firm also represented Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire in her protracted 2004 recount battle with Republican Dino Rossi, a legal smackdown that many political analysts compare to the Minnesota Senate race.

The firm is also noted for its representation of Salim Hamdan, whose case as the alleged driver and bodyguard of Osama bin Laden led the U.S. Supreme Court to declare the Bush administration’s military commissions unconstitutional.

Personally, I believe in Occam's Razor - the answer is almost always the simplest explanation. Either Chatman is lying about not leaking the report to the AP, or she's only telling part of the truth. After all, she only says she didn't leak the report to the media, saying nothing about whether she leaked it to anyone else. I know how closely the anklebiters in Alaska work with each other, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that she spread the report around to her other ethics-complaint-filing friends, and one of them in turn leaked it to D'Oro.

Regardless of the exact scenario, if Chatman shared the report with D'Oro or anyone else, she's guilty of breaking the law. And even if there turns out to be no readily available criminal remedy, the case would be ripe for a civil suit, in my view. After all, it's pretty obvious the act was carried out maliciously and with intent to cause harm and expense to Governor Palin.

Read more...

UPDATED: Latest Ethics Nonsense: AP Gets It Wrong; Governor Palin Responds

Rachel D'Oro of the Associated Press has a story on Kim Chatman's ethics complaint about the Alaska Fund Trust with a big, splashy headline: "Palin implicated in ethics probe."*

The practical effect of the ruling on Palin will be more financial than anything else. The report recommends that Palin refuse to accept payment from the defense fund, and that the complaint be resolved without a formal hearing before the Alaska Personnel Board.

However, it seems that the report "obtained" by the AP is not the final one from the Personnel Board. The governor just tweeted:

Re inaccurate story floating re:ethics violation/Legal Defense Fund;matter is still pending;new info was just requested even;no final report

And this was just posted on Gov. Palin's Facebook page:

I cannot verify the validity of this claim. There is no final report. The Investigator is still confidentially reviewing this matter. It appears suspect that in the final days of the Governor's term, someone would again violate the law and announce a supposed conclusion before it is reached.

Meghan Stapleton
Palin Spokesperson

UPDATE: The report via the ADN. Of note on the last page (text is bolded in the original):

However, this decision is confidential pursuant to AS 39.52.340, unless confidentiality is waived by the governor.

Given the governor's tweet and Meg Stapleton's statement, it seems pretty clear that confidentiality was not waived by the governor.

UPDATE II: From the governor's Facebook page:

"The resolution of the Trust Fund is not final. I have been working with the investigator regarding supplemental information. The matter is still pending. Whatever you have seen was released in violation of law. There has been no Board finding of an ethics violation and there is a detailed legal process to follow before there is a final resolution."

Thomas Van Flein
Private Attorney for Sarah Palin

UPDATE III: From the AP story:

John Coale, a Washington lawyer who helped set up the fund, called the probable cause finding "crazy," adding that if upheld, it would mean that no governor could ever defend themselves against frivolous ethics complaints.

"If this complaint is true, there's no way to defend yourself" as governor, Coale said. "Anybody can keep filing ethics complaints and drive someone out of office even if you're a nut."

Coale said that unlike other states, Alaska's governor has no legal counsel's office to defend the governor from allegations brought against the governor in her official capacity.

Coale said he recommended creation of the legal defense fund, a common practice in Washington. The Web site for the Palin fund cites similar accounts created for Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and other prominent politicians.

UPDATE IV: From the governor's Facebook page:

"All options are open in terms of legal remedies. It is a clear violation of Alaska law that Mr. Daniel explicitly reviewed with Ms. Chatman prior to her illegal actions. We will be contacting the appropriate authorities for review and action."

Thomas Van Flein
Private Attorney for Sarah Palin

UPDATE V: From Thomas Daniel's report:

In sum, I find probable cause to believe that payment of the governor's legal fees by the Alaska Fund Trust will violate the Ethics Act prohibition against a public officer accepting gifts intended to influence performance of official duties.

You'll notice that Daniel found no violation because no payment has been made. Governor Palin hasn't accessed any of the money from the Alaska Fund Trust. Daniel also made an interesting recommendation as to how Governor Palin can pay for the cost of the frivolous complaints that have been dismissed:

I also recommend that she seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of defending the ethics complaints that have been dismissed.

*The AP changed the headline for their story. It now reads: "Investigator rules against Palin in ethics probe."

UPDATE VI: In the comments, howIroll explains why the AP's new headline is inaccurate and misleading:

That new headline by AP is equally misleading. The investigator doesn't "rule" on anything. He's like a prosecutor in a criminal case (although an ethics complaint is in NO WAY criminal). He investigates an alleged violation or "offense" and issues a report or "summons." It only ALLEGES a violation---it is in no way dispositive. Basically he is suggesting that the Personnel Board take the matter up for hearing (like a magistrate finding probable cause and then certifying a case to the Grand Jury). ONLY the investigator's findings are contained in his report; there is no evidence from the Governor's team. Once her team gets the report, they have an opportunity to assess it for proper application of the law, complete and accurate fact finding, etc. The governor's team can then gather their evidence and questions and approach the investigator who can then review her materials and evidence and either amend/modify his report or stand on his original findings and pass the matter onto the Personnel Board for HEARING (trial). The Board may either hold a hearing (call witnesses, etc. as in a "trial) and issue a ruling OR vote to dismiss as a matter of law upon a motion filed and subsequent argument by the Governor's attorney.

As Mr. Van Flein indicated, this report is but a first step in a very long process, just as a summons is the first step in a very long trial process. There are "miles to go" before there is any "ruling," which would be done by the Board, not an investigator.

UPDATE by RAM: It is being incorrectly reported that Gov. Palin was found to have violated the Ethics Act. This is a complete lie! All you have to do is read the report:

In addition, my role as independent counsel for the personnel board is only to decide whether there is probable cause to believe a violation of the Ethics Act has occurred – not to reach a definitive conclusion. See AS 39.52.320. The ultimate determination of whether the governor has violated the Ethics Act can only be made by the personnel board after a formal heating and a report by the hearing officer. See AS 39.52.360-370.

In sum, I find probable cause to believe that payment of the governor’s legal fees by the Alaska Fund Trust will violate the Ethics Act prohibition against a public officer accepting gifts intended to influence performance of official duties.

[...]

I can recommend that corrective action be taken to resolve this complaint without the necessity of a formal hearing on the matter. See AS 39.52.330. My recommendation is that the governor should refuse to accept payment of her legal fees and costs from the Alaska Fund Trust and withdraw her authorization for the trust to be recognized as her “official” legal defense fund. I also recommend that she seek reimbursement from the state for the cost of defending the ethics complaints that have been dismissed.

I also recommend that the legislature consider amending the Ethics Act to require the state to reimburse a public official for reasonable legal fees and costs incurred to defend against an Ethics Act complaint that is dismissed. [emphasis added]

Did you get that? The independent investigator, Thomas Daniel, is not finding the governor in violation of the Ethics Act. Only the Personnel Board can make such a ruling, and Daniel actually recommends that no ruling is necessary. Gov. Palin has not accepted one dime of money from the legal defense fund yet. How can she be in violation of the Ethics Act for something she hasn't even done yet? You can't charge her with a violation for a future act! The language Daniel uses is future tense "will violate" -- not violated.

Daniel recommends not accepting the funds and instead having the state pay for the legal bills incurred by the dismissed complaints (which is basically all of them). Ordinary Americans from all over the country (and Alaska) gave money to pay these bills, but now the people of Alaska will be stiffed with the bill and forced to pay for Andree McLeod's hobby and obsession.

I'm not at all convinced that the Alaska Fund Trust will be forced to disband and return the money. I'm sure Gov. Palin's attorney will counter this report. I'm sure it will be resolved. But if it does have to be disband and the money returned, then guess what? We'll set up a new one for Sarah Palin as just a plain old citizen. And we'll raise even more!

Congratulations once again to the nutters in Alaska who have turned the state's Ethics Act into a joke. I sure hope that the Democrats up there fix the crazy loop holes in the Executive Branch Ethics Act before any Democrat is elected governor because anyone from anywhere can file an ethics complaint against the governor of Alaska without paying a penny, and there are a lot of people just itching for a tit for tat on this.

UPDATE VII: (h/t TommyReport) From Chris Cillizza at The Fix:

Randy Evans, the attorney who helped Palin set up the Alaska Trust Fund, released a statement moments ago dismissing the allegation that there was any impropriety in its founding as "absolutely untrue".

Added Evans: "It was specifically patterned after well recognized trusts of prior Presidential candidates as well as high profile public servants. As with other public servants, there is no impropriety in the creation or operation of such a trust and any suggestion to the contrary is candidly absurd."

Evans, a partner in the firm of McKenna, Long & Aldridge, is a well known Republican attorney, having served as outside counsel to then Speakers Newt Gingrich (Ga.) and Dennis Hastert (Ill.).

UPDATE VIII: KTUU has Kristan Cole's statement:

"I haven't seen any report and as a matter of fact was just asked for additional information as of yesterday, July 20, 2009," Cole wrote. "Just a reminder that this legal expense fund was thoroughly vetted by numerous attorneys from Alaska to the East Coast. The purpose of the Trust is to help the Governor with the crushing legal fees she has incurred solely because of her public service."

UPDATE IX: Governor Palin issued the following statement on her Facebook page:

"I find the notion that I have taken any action pertaining to the legal defense trust fund misguided and factually in error. I am informed that this fund was created by experienced attorneys in DC and was modeled after other similar funds established for senators and others. The fund itself was not created by me nor is it controlled by me. Neither I nor my lawyer has received a penny from this fund, and I am informed the Trustee was withholding any action or payment pending final resolution with the Personnel Board. This is the hallmark of legal compliance and prudent conduct.

In short, I have not 'acted' relative to the defense fund and it is misleading to say I have. I have no doubt that the Trust will welcome guidance by the Board, as do we all, but it is my understanding that this matter was not resolved and the complainant's violation of law has served to mislead the public and prejudice a fair review of this matter."

Sarah Palin

UPDATE X: At Texas4Palin.blogspot.com, Josh Painter questions how independent an investigator Thomas Daniel really is:

So who is Thomas Daniel, and how "independent" an investigator is he?

Daniel is a lawyer employed by the firm of Perkins Coie, LLP. He contributed $1,000 to Democrat John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign. Daniel has also donated to Alaska's Democrat U.S. Senator Mark Begich.

Perkins Coie, as it turns out, just happens to have Barack Obama as a client. More on Perkins Coie here:

Perkins Coie often partners up with the ACLU and groups like MALDEF on such issues as immigration. Much of the political heavy lifting is done by former Kerry/Edwards 2004 General Counsel Mark Elias and Firmwide Chair, Political Law Practice Robert (Bob) Bauer. Both gentleman’s resumes read more like that of DNC staffers than of lawyers at a firm with the motto "Legal Counsel to Great Companies."

And speaking of the leftist ACLU, guess which attorney is a member? That's right. Thomas Daniel, who as an investigator is anything but independent. He's a liberal Democrat who is a member of the leftist ACLU.

Read more...

Vanity Fair Profiles Saint Andree McLeod

Christopher Bateman at the Palin-hating magazine Vanity Fair profiles the Democrats' favorite "Republican", Andree McLeod. Right in the opening paragraph, we're told that the abuse of the ethics complaint process will continue:

And McLeod has no plans to stop at six [ethics complaints]. “There’s going to be more,” she told VF Daily, including one against staff members of current lieutenant governor Sean Parnell, who is set to become governor when Palin steps down.

Then we get into ridiculous claims territory:

In fact, [McLeod] was integral to Palin’s effort to oust state Republican party chairman Randy Ruedrich from Alaska’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission in 2003 after it emerged that he had used his state email account for political purposes. So important was McLeod that one Anchorage talk show host, Rick Rydell, has said that “Andree’s almost responsible for creating Sarah Palin.”

Integral, really? Maybe in McLeod's own mind. The fact is, in all the media coverage of the AOGCC controversy, McLeod's name appears NOT EVEN ONCE. For example, check out the Anchorage Daily News extensive wrap-up of the controversy. They make it clear that the cleanup at the AOGCC was a joint effort between Palin and Eric Croft. And even Vanity Fair never states what it was that McLeod did!

I frankly have a hard time understanding why even Vanity Fair would give her such serious treatment, except for her value as an attack vehicle against Governor Palin - the same reason why Democrats and Reudrich-style RINOs in Alaska love her. But after all, this is a woman who goes on crusade about dress code enforcement for state employees.

Despite all the laudatory treatment of McLeod, Bateman does hit on a couple of key points:

At least one report traces McLeod's “rift” with Palin to 2006, when Palin became governor (and McLeod was denied a job with the administration).

Oh, yes.

And this:

Maybe I just haven't met enough Alaskans, but she definitely sounds a bit eccentric on the phone.

Ya think? This is a woman who thinks getting pastries or a hockey stick as a gift is a "bribe".

RELATED: State Representative Bob Lynn, who is attempting to reform the loopholes in the Executive Branch Ethics Act that have resulted in these abuses, reports in his newsletter that he's under attack:

Since my Press Release about this bill, I’ve received positive feedback on how to make it better, as well as constructive criticism. Unfortunately, anonymous people (often from outside Alaska) have targeted me for a barrage of threatening, even obscene, “nastygrams.” That goes with the political turf. It also underlines the importance of my bill.

We've also noticed that Representative Lynn's blog suddenly seems to be under attack by nasty anonymous commenters.

Read more...

Kim Chatman: I Didn't Leak the Ethics Report!

Got this in an e-mail "Breaking News" alert from KTUU. Apologies for the full text - they don't have a story up yet. When they do we'll replace the story with an excerpt and a link:

by Channel 2 News staff
Tuesday, July 21, 2009

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- The filer of an ethics complaint that led an independent investigator to conclude there is probable cause of ethics violations by Gov. Sarah Palin told Channel 2 News on Tuesday she did not leak the confidential report to the media, contrary to a statement made by Palin’s lawyer.

Kim Chatman told Channel 2 she was not The Associated Press’ source for the report, which details how the investigator came to his conclusion that the fund established to help Palin pay her legal fees is likely in violation of state ethics laws.

Thomas Van Flein, Palin's attorney, issued a statement Tuesday afternoon saying, “It is a clear violation of Alaska law that Mr. Daniel (the investigator) explicitly reviewed with Ms. Chatman prior to her illegal actions. We will be contacting the appropriate authorities for review and action.”

Chatman declined a more extensive interview, citing a sudden illness in her family.

Watch the Channel 2 News Late Edition for a complete report.

Hmmmm - so a report that's only known to the investigator, the Governor, and Kim Chatman, and is supposed to be confidential, suddenly is published by Rachel D'Oro of the Associated Press. And who is the person quoted by the AP in regards to the complaint? Kim Chatman - who also coincidentally previously violated the law by notifying the press when she filed the complaint in the first place! And it was the Associated Press she used as an outlet that time, too.

Oh, and lest we forget - it's Kim Chatman who has also teamed up with Gregory Charles Royal to file a frivolous race-baiting lawsuit against Governor Palin - and that story was being flogged by Rachel D'Oro of the Associated Press as well.

Read more...

WORLD Magazine: Heat on Palin Will Likely Continue

Writing for WORLD Magazine, Jamie Dean sums up the scorecard on the frivolous ethics complaints filed against Governor Palin, the hundreds of opposition research FOIA requests, and the prospects of continued intense scrutiny after Palin departs Juneau:

As confounded political observers ponder Palin's future, it's worth examining what led the governor to quit. Among other factors, Palin cited the crush of two things she championed as a governor and as a vice presidential candidate: ethics reform and public transparency. And it's worth noting who squeezed hardest: not just the "mainstream media elite" Palin often chides, but also ordinary citizens in Palin's backyard.

The episode raises a central question about politics and public disclosure: Do citizens and the media abuse their right to public information and ethics complaints, or is heightened scrutiny the price of heightened exposure?

[...]

[Andy] Shaw from [the Better Government Association] acknowledges that government offices can face an overload of records requests, especially from citizens: "You do run the risk of a lot of frivolous FOIAs and a lot of people with axes to grind and games to play and time on their hands who could inundate government with a lot of FOIAs of a nonsensical nature."

[...]

While ethics complaints have statutes of limitations, public records requests could go on indefinitely. That means if Palin stays on the national stage, Alaska officials could still face a litany of records requests from interested reporters.

Dean's piece is worth reading in its entirety - a good summary of ethics and FOIA laws, placed into the context of similar rules nationally.

The question of the statute of limitations is an interesting one. We're still checking, but it may be that Palin could have to weather these politically-motivated attacks on her actions as Governor for the next two years. And, as Dean mentions, they can keep filing these FOIA requests forever.

Read more...