Tell me how the Palins are "like everyone else" again? The Palin Compound in Wasilla.

by: Celtic Diva

Wed Dec 09, 2009 at 10:19:56 AM AKST

A friend paid a visit to the Palin Compound yesterday and snapped these pictures.  The building in the middle was the one some folks thought would be a airplane hanger while it was being constructed.  Obviously, it's a house even larger than their previous one (on the left).

Old house on the left, new house on the right and you can see the "shop" behind.

I'm not particularly interested in what the Palins are going to do with any of this...they can do what they want.  However, there seems to be this recurring drumbeat from her fans and spin-blogs that "Palin is just like you and me" or "Palin has sacrificed so much for others" and then my favorite "Palin cares about each and every one of us!"  

Yet, as Palin returns to Alaska this weekend and brings her traveling medicine show of a book tour to Elmendorf, I ask you to take note of these pictures.  Understand that the Palins have multiple properties...one with a nice cabin (allegedly) stocked with many snow machines.  Reports also claim they have more than one plane.  Don't forget that Palin is biding her time, counting on the Personnel Board to do nothing until the 2-year statute of limitations is up on the Alaska Fund Trust.  In addition, we've seen that Palin is collecting as much money as possible on her book tour--defying the tradition of REAL authors and only signing books that are bought at that location as well as openly collecting money for SarahPAC through solicited donations and "selling" photo opportunities.

So, someone explain to me exactly how Sarah is "one of us"?  More importantly, show me ANY evidence that Palin has done ANYTHING besides line her own pockets!

The Palin house on the left, new house in the middle, unidentified house on the right.

How are the "Palin books" handling the ex-Gov's legal challenges? **UPDATE 2** HarperCollins email!

by: Celtic Diva

Sun Nov 15, 2009 at 14:37:30 PM AKST

I have been watching the emergence of the various books on Palin...from "journalists" who followed her campaign, to "writers" who don't understand the first thing about non-fiction and research, to Palin's own book.  My interest has been purely in determining how each will handle the information about the state Records Requests (FOIAs), the Personnel Board, Ethics Complaints and the APOC investigation.  The books I'm looking at are "Sarah from Alaska," released several weeks ago, "The Persecution of Sarah Palin" released this week and, because of a kind gentleman who gifted me with the pages, "Going Rogue," Palins own book not set to be released until Tuesday.

1)  APOC Investigation:  NOTHING.  Not ONE of these books even mentions that Alaska Public Offices Commission is investigating Sarah Palin's lack of sponsorship/Arctic Cat monetary information on Calendar Year 2008's Financial Disclosure form.  They also don't mention her non-compliance in revealing that information to them even though they have asked multiple times.

So, one of the most important and damning issues regarding Palin isn't mentioned in any book so far!  Hmmmmm...

2)  Ethics Complaints:  "Sarah from Alaska" covers it in just two pages...basically  including Arctic Cat...which is how my name got in the index (page 240!).

Here is PAGE 239 and PAGE 240.

As you can see, it was mostly rehashing Palin's bogus assertion of "frivolousness," and they were critical in their interpretation of their interview with Andree McLeod.  However the book did take her to task for her high-schoolish responses to each complaint's dismissal.  The authors also chastise Palin for her inappropriate response to me when the Arctic Cat complaint was filed.

Regarding Matthew Continetti's book...

I went to Barnes and Noble yesterday, grabbed his "persecution complex" book and a cup of coffee and sat down to speed read/skim.  

That's an hour-and-a-half of my life that I want back.

Continetti occasionally talks about having "lunch" with someone to get inforamtion, like AK Republican Party head Randy Ruedrich.  However, overall his book has a) no index b) no footnotes c) no endnotes d) no references and e) frequently uses sources like "a University professor" or "an Alaska insider." (Even his friends on Conservatives4Palin bust him for it.) When he reams Charley James for lousy sourcing last year, I laughed out loud.  When he talked about progressive blogs "linking" to James' article anyway, without mentioning those of us that took him to task, I just got angry.  

With all of that in mind, I was not surprised that basically one paragraph on one page (211) is dedicated to the entireity of Palin's legal challenges.  Continetti's presentation of the ethics complaints can be summed up in this factually challenged "quote" from the book, attributed to Legislator Gene Therriault:

"That was part of the Democratic plan to grind her up; use the ethics law as a blunt instrument to club the administration."

I guess the fact that of the 20+ ethics complaints filed, only 3 (that I know of) were filed by folks who are actual Democrats.  As Mr. Therriault knows quite well, Andree McLeod is strongly Republican, and I believe the rest were filed by non-partisan folks.

The thought of trying to get Andree McLeod to join a "Democratic Plan" just makes me laugh.

At least Continetti fixed his mistake regarding what my Artic Cat claim was about.  In his original article on the subject (that was riddled with inaccuracies), "Out of Alaska" in The Weekly Standard, he claimed that Palin was wearing an Arctic Cat "t-shirt."

I also found it interesting that he tied this line from Palin in with the Arctic Cat complaint:

"I got to the point where I said, 'May I just plead guilty?'?" she told me.

While Palin also attributes that line to the Arctic Cat complaint, parts of her "ethics" story is somewhat different in her own book, "Going Rogue."  The first two pages were posted early this morning which showed the direction her explanation was going...Andree McLeod-bashing.  We see much more of that nastiness in the next two pages:

HERE and HERE.

First off, Palin lied...there was never an official "complaint" about the dress code from McLeod and the target of the letter wasn't Palin.  Since her previous job with the State of Alaska Department of Labor was helping people prepare for the workforce, Andree McLeod was hyper-aware of what clothing was not appropriate for the government workplace...especially those folks who regularly deal with the public.  The letter was intended for Annette Kreitzer who dealt with those issues for the Office of the Governor.  When they decided misconstruing this was great way to attack McLeod, they passed this email to Alaska Ear gossipper Sheila Toomey.  The rest led to several records requests.

Considering all of the ethics complaints, I found it interesting that she spent the most amount of time lying (and bitching) about Arctic Cat.  

--She claimed that she'd been wearing "the logo and team colors for years."  Not while she was Governor and starting the Iron Dog race, she wasn't!  I went back three years and she never had a sports jacket on during that race.  

--She says the jacket "happened to be the team colors"...actually, it wasn't for 2009.  Team Davis/Palin's snow machines and outfits were orange and black while hers were yellow and green.  It's the big HUGE Arctic Cat logos all over the jacket and pants that made the difference.

A little worried about the eventual outcome of the APOC investigation, are we?

Of course, the other ethics issue she spends a little time on is the Alaska Fund Trust, that she "covers" on PAGE 374.

Wait a sec...did she just insinuate that the ethics complaint against her over the Alaska Fund Trust was the last straw in her decision to quit her job?  Where did I read that before?

So far, the authors have not bothered to achieve a working understanding of Palin's legal issues and the problems that still face her. I look forward to the more accurate books coming out from Geoffrey Dunn and Joe McGinness to see what they have to say about her legal troubles.

You can also look forward to future posts on the blog!

*******************************************UPDATE*************************************************

--As "EyeOnYou" pointed out in the comments (and I forgot to emphasize) Sheila Toomey insinuated via email that the way she got the Andree's memo was through a records request.  Nice that Palin cleared that up for us.

--Forgot to point out the rehashed lie that the ethics complaints were all dismissed.  There are still several complaints out there BESIDES the AK Fund Trust issue that should have dragged her in front of a hearing by now.

--The official Arctic Cat complaint cited her for vioation of AS 39.52.120 Misuse of Official Position.  You can read it HERE.

*******************************************UPDATE*************************************************

I found this in my email (and it seems that PALINGATES got one too):

I act as legal counsel to HarperCollins Publishers. I have just learned that you have posted substantial excerpts from our as yet unpublished book, Going Rogue, by Sarah Palin, on your web site. We view your posting of these excerpts as an infringement of our and Governor Palin's exclusive rights under copyright.  Accordingly, we demand that you remove them from your web site.

Christopher Goff
Senior Vice President & General Counsel
HarperCollins Publishers
10 East 53rd Street
New York, NY  10022
Voice:  212 207 7127
Fax:    212 207 7552

******************************************************

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute and delete the original message. Please notify the sender by E-Mail at the address shown. Thank you for your compliance.

As you can see, I took the pages off the site.  However, the real story here is this:

--The Senior Vice President of Harper Collins,

--ON A SUNDAY,

--Sent emails to two specific blogs, one little blog based in Alaska, another based overseas,

--ignoring the multiple other outlets (many of which were larger or were "Palin-positive") that have pages or "extensive excerpts" from her book on the site.

They didn't do this on their own.  Palin  picked the ones she wanted them to email.  Perhaps not-so-coincidentally, my posts in question leaned towards fact-checking/lie-refuting than some of the others that were more for entertainment.

In other words, this was Palin-flattery!

I was once asked if, God forbid, Palin ever did become President, what would her first act be?  I stated that she would gather up the considerable resources available to a U.S. President and use them...to go after her "enemies" in Alaska and the media.  

I rest my case.

And in light of all this, the question I have for Mr. Goss and HarperCollins: HOW DOES IT FEEL TO BE PALIN'S BITCH?

Undisclosed--what Palin's Financial Disclosure left out--Pt. 1 Alaska Fund Trust

by: Celtic Diva

Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 12:27:56 PM AKDT

Sarah Palin filed her final POFD (Public Officer Financial Disclosure) on time according to APOC (Alaska Public Offices Commission) rules.

However, Palin has proven herself to be selective as to which rules she chooses to follow and how completely she follows them.

For example, we've seen nothing "disclosed" nor have we heard anything about Palin's AK Fund Trust (for which her website is still collecting money) since the summer revelation that Investigator Daniel found Palin cannot spend the Fund Trust without probably violating a pesky Statute or two.  While the Personnel Board is a separate issue from APOC, it is still important to note that the Board IS NOT following the Executive Branch Ethics Act. How do we know?

...the attorney general shall initiate formal proceedings by serving a copy of an accusation upon the subject of the accusation. The accusation shall specifically set out the alleged violation. After service, the accusation is a public document open to inspection. Except as provided in AS 39.52.370(c), all subsequent proceedings are open to the public.

1) Palin "blew off" Investigator Daniel in July.  By sometime in August, he should have "served a copy of an accusation" upon Palin.  If he had, the Personnel Board would no longer be able to hide behind the "confidentiality" claim, as all further proceedings would be public.

2) If Palin and the Board, as Debra English may have hinted they were trying to do during the last Personnel Board Meeting, had reached a "settlement," that too would become public information and would have required an announcement.

According to the ADN, Kristan Cole (fund trustee) did not respond to their questions.  Back in July, she said the fund would be "frozen" until the legal issues were "resolved."

Readers may remember that an East Coast lawyer did an exhaustive analysis of the "trust agreement" that Palin's people have out for inspection on the AK Fund Trust website:

There is NOTHING in the official purpose of the AFT related to legal defense or legal proceedings or ethics complaints. In fact, the purpose of the trust is for any expense at all incurred by Sarah Palin "as a result of the fact that she is Governor . . . or as a result of the performance of her duties as Governor."  Those are the only limitations instilled by the purpose clause.

So the purpose of the AFT is to collect money for...basically anything and everything, short of overt criminal activity. This includes legal expenses, of course, along with everything else under the sun. It also covers her family and staff, as well as "any other person determined by the Trustee."

Like I said, the Personnel Board is a separate issue from APOC.  However, Why was this trust not listed on her APOC Financial Disclosure?

Trusts valued at more than $1,000 must be identified on the Public Officer's Financial Disclosure (POFD).  Palin didn't bother to list a Trust containing hundreds of thousands of dollars designated for her and her family's personal use.

So, what is the future of this debacle?  

It seems the Personnel Board is paralyzed, I'm guessing by fear:  Palin won't budge and give up the money and they are loathe to drag her as a national figure back to Alaska for a hearing that could forever damage any political aspirations.  After all, she keeps making those erroneous claims that she cleans up corruption.  (Also, it seems that everyone and their friggin' cat thinks that Palin is going to "take them with her" when she makes it big.)  

The AK Fund Trust faces other hurdles.  Again, according to legal analysis:

The AFT's purpose, as ambiguous as it may be, is clear about one thing - the purpose was set up for Palin "as Governor." As soon as she resigns, the trust loses its purpose. Even if she drags her feet and says that the funds are being used for expenses "as a result of" her being Governor, that excuse will only last for so long. For example, even if she says that moving expenses and consulting lawyers about new ethics complaints and a hiring a masseuse to relieve her stress all resulted from her actions as Governor, eventually, at some point in the future when her excuses run out, the AFT will have to be dissolved and the funds donated. I originally thought that Cole could just set up a new trust; but according to the trust language, the funds would have to be given away to charity.

So, since she is no longer Governor, they will have to dissolve the Trust and donate it to charity.  However, I doubt they can do anything with the money until the legal issues are "resolved."

And now we have a brand new business reported on the Disclosure form and started by Palin/Stapleton--"Pie Spy, LLC."  Paperwork claims it will be a "marketing business" geared towards "Services for the Elderly and Persons with Disabilities."

I have speculated all along that:

1)  Palin quit when she found out she couldn't access the AK Fund Trust in order to start making money to pay her legal debts

2)  Palin has absolutely no intention of letting go of that money whether or not it's legal, because,

3)  If the Personnel Board does not move forward, she can just let the money sit there for a very short statute of limitations of two years (from July 26th)...and;

4)  She can simply donate the Trust to whatever "friendly" 501C3 happens to be around **coughSamaritan'sPursecough** who would probably be only too willing to make donations to a business geared towards "the elderly and disabled."  501C3 donations are not public information.

Unless, of course, they can actually turn the LLC into a 501C3.

Of course, this is only speculation...

(next installment...Sarah Palin's letter to APOC contradicts her Financial Disclosure form.)

The Alaska Fund Trust...an analysis from one of those dreaded East Coast lawyers!

by: Celtic Diva

Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 01:00:00 AM AKDT

JHop does an incredible job of keeping the legal jargon to a minimum (unlike the purposely-unintelligible-piece-of-crap she's analyzing) and I highly recommend that everyone read her very enlightening conclusions at the end.  When I first read the AFT "legal document," I have believed from the very beginning that this "fund" has little to do with legal defense and everything to do with the Palins trying to use her position to increase their wealth...my opinion.  I believe this analysis comes to a similar conclusion.)  

I thought that I would take a closer look at Governor Palin's Alaska Fund Trust (hereinafter "AFT"). I am not writing to contest any specific finding in Mr. Daniel's report; for my purposes here, I accept them as valid. Instead, I want to highlight some of the issues that were not properly analyzed or, in some cases, mentioned at all in Mr. Daniel's report.

The Law & Ethics: To understand any of this, we need to know at least some legal basics. Trusts have specific, quirky legal rules; each state is different. It is not my specialty and I do not purport to be an expert; but I have a general knowledge, and enough of it to have genuine concerns about the AFT.

In brief, there are common requirements for a valid trust: 1) a settlor; 2) delivery of legal title; 3) property in the trust; 4) a trustee: who holds legal title for benefit of beneficiary; 5) at least one beneficiary; 6) intent: to create the trust for a lawful purpose; and 7) a lawful purpose: a trust cannot call for commission of crime, destruction of property, or a violation of public policy.

The purpose of the trust is the sole reason for its existence and it must be followed closely. Once a trust's purpose is established, it cannot be changed or modified without dissolution or court intervention. As for the Executive Branch Ethics Act (hereinafter "EBEA"), there is only one vital provision for analyzing the AFT. Under AS § 39.52.120, 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."  The EBEA also states that "a public officer may not . . . accept, receive, or solicit compensation for the performance of official duties or responsibilities from a person other than the state." AS § 39.52.120(b)(2).

Issues & Concerns: The most fundamental flaw with Mr. Daniel's report is that it is not based on the trust instrument that created the AFT; it is based upon the website that describes the AFT. He quotes the website to state that the AFT:

"is the official legal fund created to defend the integrity of the Alaska Governor's Office from an onslaught of political attacks launched against current Governor Sarah Palin, the First Family, and state-employed colleagues. These baseless accusations have cost Alaska more than $1 million in public monies to defend, and Governor Palin has incurred more than half a million dollars in personal debt defending her official actions as Governor."

Mr. Daniel cites this as fact and continues to quote from the website throughout his report. The website, of course, was designed, written, and is maintained by Governor Palin and her staff. It is obviously based in self-interest, and in particular, to generate donations for the AFT. It is, by no means, a neutral source for legal analysis or for an unbiased conclusion of law.

Ironically, the trust document is posted directly on the AFT's website; thus, there is no reason why Mr. Daniel's report is not based on the AFT's legal document. It should be noted that the original complaint does not cite directly from the trust document. Nevertheless, when considering the trust language itself, the allegations against Governor Palin are seen under a much different light - specifically, a darker, shadier, murkier light.  

The Trust Language & Details: Rather than analyzing the AFT on quotes written by Governor Palin's staff, the legal and ethical issues associated with it must be analyzed using the specific language that created the trust. Below, in italics, are several key portions of the AFT; my brief comments follow:

"KRISTAN CHERYL COLE, as Settlor, and KRISTAN CHERYL COLE, as Trustee, establishes THE ALASKA FUND TRUST, a trust for the payment of expenses or amounts incurred, undertaken or paid in connection with claims, allegations, investigations, accusations, complaints, legal inquiries, requests, and proceedings, including the response and defense thereof, arising out of or by virtue of the activities of or performance of duties as, or on Governor Sarah Palin, in her capacity as (or as a result of her being) the Governor of Alaska."

This introductory clause is the only language that mentions a legal defense fund or anything to do with legal proceedings at all. It ambiguously includes anything "arising out of or by virtue of the activities of or performance of duties" for Sarah Palin "as the Governor." It is an umbrella clause and catch-all. This, however, is not the purpose of the trust. It may be used to circumstantially demonstrate the intent of the trust. But it is not the official and stated purpose of the AFT.

SARAH PALIN, who is the current Governor of the State of Alaska, has incurred and is responsible for various expenses in connection with or otherwise as a result of SARAH PALIN's service as Governor of the State of Alaska including without limitation, various investigations of her conduct as Governor of Alaska.

Here, in the first section, there is no mention of a legal defense fund. It simply says the funds can be used for "various expenses" (anything that has monetary value) . . . "in connection with or otherwise" (having anything at all to do with being Governor) . . . "including without limitation, various investigations" (for an infinite list of expenses which happens to include investigations of any kind).

It is the desire of the Settlor to provide the legal and proper means to accept transfers of money, property, and services (including pro bono legal services) for the purpose of defraying, paying, or satisfying the fees and costs that have been and will be incurred by SARAH PALIN and others (hereinafter "Covered Individuals") in connection with or otherwise as a result of SARAH PALIN's service as Governor of the State of Alaska, all in a manner consistent with and in compliance with the laws of the United States and the State of Alaska.

Also in the first section, the ATF further omits any mention of a legal defense purpose, instead morphing into an overly ambiguous and seemingly unlawful instrument. Here, the language simply states that the trust will collect anything valuable, no matter what it is or its intended use, to pay all "fees and costs" by Palin for anything "in connection with or otherwise as a result" of her position as Governor.  There is no purpose or clarifying clause to explain why money is being collected.

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.* [...] 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 . . . Trust funds may be used for no purpose other than those specifically provided herein. *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.

This is the most important clause in the AFT document (or any trust document). It is the reason for the trust's existence and necessity. There is NOTHING in the official purpose of the AFT related to legal defense or legal proceedings or ethics complaints. In fact, the purpose of the trust is for any expense at all incurred by Sarah Palin "as a result of the fact that she is Governor . . . or as a result of the performance of her duties as Governor."  Those are the only limitations instilled by the purpose clause.

So the purpose of the AFT is to collect money for...basically anything and everything, short of overt criminal activity. This includes legal expenses, of course, along with everything else under the sun. It also covers her family and staff, as well as "any other person determined by the Trustee."

After close interpretation, there is nothing stated about the AFT that could infer its specific intent was a legal defense fund. It is disingenuous to imply otherwise - as the AFT's website does, and consequently, Mr. Daniel's report echoes.

Rights of Withdrawal (a) Each of the beneficiaries of this trust, shall, in each calendar year, have an absolute and unrestricted power to withdraw from this Trust . . .

Without even a hint of ambiguity, this clause gives Sarah Palin (and her family and staff) the "absolute and unrestricted" power to withdraw funds from the AFT. It spells out in simple, clear, and concise language that no limitations exist for Palin's ability to use the AFT however she pleases. It says nothing about an intent for legal defense or a purpose to be used to defend against ethics complaints.  

Qualification of the Trustee. The Trustee hereunder, or any successor trustee appointed in accordance with this instrument, if an individual, shall be at least 25 years of age. Such Trustee shall not be a member of the SARAH PALIN's immediate family, her counsel in any pending legal proceeding, or a member, partner, associate, or employee of the firm employing that counsel [...] In addition to said powers enumerated above, the Trustee shall, subject to applicable law, determine in her sole discretion what is income and what is principal, to allocate to income or principal or apportion between them any receipt, gain, loss, or expenditure as is deemed just and equitable in the circumstances of each case, as it arises. The exercise by the Trustee of any discretion granted hereunder in good faith shall be binding and conclusive on all persons.

Who is Kristan Cole, does she have an association with any firm that has ever advised Palin? A trustee is entrusted with fiduciary duties to the trust, not an individual beneficiary. The trustee here is given the specific powers to determine what is income and principal, what is profit or loss, and what is "equitable in the circumstances of each case."  She is given complete, full reign of all business decisions connected with the AFT - including disbursement of funds, investment of funds, and the revocation of the trust itself. She even determines who the beneficiaries are. It is unconscionable the amount of power she has considering her close relationship with the beneficiary and the personal benefits they both gain through their professional/personal relationship.

Disclosure Provisions. The Trustee is authorized and directed to release information to SARAH PALIN and any other beneficiary hereunder and the public the name, amount and date of each donation every thirty days. The Trustee is authorized and directed to release the amounts and categories of expenditures for the benefit of any beneficiary hereunder and the public on a quarterly basis.

A small silver lining to take away from this cloud of corruption. According to this provision, the Trustee is directed to make quarterly reports to the public about amounts and categories of expenditures. The trust was created April 22, 2009. Ironically, today, July 22, 2009, is the three-month or quarter-year mark. We can request a disclosure starting today.

Trust Term and Disposition of Residual Funds. The term of the Trust shall be for an initial period of ten (l0) years and shall be irrevocable. In the event, in the sole and absolute discretion of the Trustee, the purposes for which the Trust is created are fulfilled or no longer exist prior to the expiration of ten (l0) years from the date of this instrument, the Trustee shall terminate the Trust . . . 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.

This is why I think the trust is unlawful on its face and was going to be an eventual problem, even without Mr. Daniel's report. The AFT becomes revocable only when the "purposes for which the Trust is created" are either "fulfilled" or "no longer exist." If that happens, the trust must be revoked and its assets must be donated to 501(c)(3) charity organizations.  The AFT's purpose, as ambiguous as it may be, is clear about one thing - the purpose was set up for Palin "as Governor." As soon as she resigns, the trust loses its purpose. Even if she drags her feet and says that the funds are being used for expenses "as a result of" her being Governor, that excuse will only last for so long. For example, even if she says that moving expenses and consulting lawyers about new ethics complaints and a hiring a masseuse to relieve her stress all resulted from her actions as Governor, eventually, at some point in the future when her excuses run out, the AFT will have to be dissolved and the funds donated. I originally thought that Cole could just set up a new trust; but according to the trust language, the funds would have to be given away to charity.

Analysis & Thoughts: I have been primarily focused on the intent and purpose of the AFT. I think the AFT's purpose is unethical on its face. As Mr. Daniel asserted: "There is no doubt that the [AFT] will provide a "gift" to the governor because the trust will provide money that is a benefit to the governor's financial interests." Thus, based on the law and the trust itself (i.e. that it was set up for her "as Governor"), it seems clear that Governor Palin's actions violated the EBEA by receiving personal benefits, if not also violated state and federal law (for example: a misappropriation of funds, corruption or abuse of office, or tax fraud in relation to under-reported gifts). The potential criminal violations are not my purpose here; but I do not think the severity of wrongdoing should be completely ignored as it was in Mr. Daniel's "recommended actions." While Mr. Daniel found "probable cause" that Palin violated the EBEA, he somehow recommended no formal hearing on this matter. He just investigated what he found to be a clearly unethical trust; he also alleged that the under-reporting of gifts could be an issue. But then he recommends the dissolution of the AFT and that this should just be swept under the rug without further exploration. How curious. Mr. Daniel also states that he has "sympathy" for Governor Palin and her multitude of ethics complaints. His personal feelings have no place in an official investigation; they have little effect here anyway, considering the AFT was not created as a legal defense fund at all. It should be noted that if he doesn't recommend formal proceedings, the Personnel Board most likely will not recommend them to the Attorney General. So, unless the AG pursued it on his own, formal hearings would not happen here. This leaked report may change that. Nevertheless, Mr. Daniel's recommended action is a mere slap on the wrist, giving Governor Palin a way to avoid ever taking accountability other than dissolving the AFT.  It is a legal whitewash, giving her a graceful exit, and ultimately determining that she is above the law - or at the least, should just not be formally investigated (or punished) in a manner consistent with it.

I think the idea of dissolving the AFT and refusing its funds is a good enough reason for Sarah Palin to quit. Especially if she, as Governor, decided not to ever waive confidentiality, so no one would ever know what ethics decisions were pending or why she was really resigning. And she could just keep her slush fund. Oops.

Bottom Line: Keep an eye on AFT. In my opinion, this is only the beginning --by JHop

Palin, Van Flein and their unethical spin about ethics Part II--explaining the report

by: Celtic Diva

Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 11:22:42 AM AKDT

AKGovSarahPalinLegal Fees Fund trustee's press conf yest set record straight w/facts/truth re:recent complaint;read transcript in case press chooses not to
(about 4 hours ago from Twitterberry)

  AKGovSarahPalinjudge investigation,destroy integrity of process&strip rights;Abuse WILL cont til leaks/friv filers r held accntble&press reports accurately
(about 5 hours ago from TwitterBerry)

  AKGovSarahPalinThis wk saw add'l violation of law:filer of friv ethics complaint leaks confidential documents out of context 2 create false headlines, pre-
(about 5 hours ago from TwitterBerry)

I could not pick a better lead-in to demonstrate the title of this post!

In Part I, I discussed the Executive Branch Ethics Act (EBEA) and the process that an ethics complaint goes through.  I focused mostly on the points in the process when a complaint can be dismissed.  Here, I want to explain Tom Daniel's leaked report regarding the Governor's defense fund (AK Fund Trust) and where in the process they REALLY are, not where the Governor wishes.

The EBEA is extremely poorly written and it bounces all over the place.  The Act seems to jump around in its explanation of the process.  As I've also touched on in Part I, there are several ethics processes:  one where an employee or their supervisor asks if something is a violation, one complaint process for most of the Executive Branch employees and then a second complaint process if the subject of the complaint happens to be the Governor, the Lt. Governor or the Attorney General. The main difference between a complaint against the Governor, Lt. Gov. or AG and a complaint against a regular Exec. Branch employee is that the Attorney General cannot get involved. The Personnel Board hires an independent investigator to fill his role.

The problem is that the EBEA does not seperately explain each process, probably because they are mostly the same.  However, they leave it up to the reader to fill in those blanks or, more accurately, make the mental substitutions in the areas where they follow the same path. So, when reading the process, one must mentally substitute "independent investigator" for "Attorney General" or "designated ethics supervisor." Understandably, most people not intimately familiar with the Act find it difficult to do so.

After that rather lengthy explanation, here is where that report from Tom Daniel fell in the process (emphasis mine):

Sec. 39.52.335. Summary of disposition of complaints and review by personnel board.

(c) If a complaint is dismissed under AS 39.52.320 or resolved under AS 39.52.330, the attorney general shall promptly prepare a summary of the matter and provide a copy of the summary to the personnel board and the complainant.

Investigator Tom Daniel was acting as the Attorney General.  According to the EBEA above, he was the one attempting to "resolve" the complaint.  His almost fearful insistence in the report that the Personnel Board "has the final say" is technically correct, but they already knew he was attempting this resolution and according to this part of the Act, it is already considered "resolved" once it's sent to the Personnel Board.

He was attempting this resolution through this part of the Act:

Sec. 39.52.330. Corrective or preventive action.

After determining that the conduct of the subject of a complaint does not warrant a hearing under AS 39.52.360, the attorney general shall recommend action to correct or prevent a violation of this chapter. The attorney general shall communicate the recommended action to the
complainant and the subject of the complaint. The subject of the complaint shall comply with the attorney general's recommendation.

Investigator Daniel was EXTREMELY lenient, just like Petumenos regarding the "remedy" he offered the Gov. to reimburse the State for some of her children's travel. His findings would allow her to avoid a Personnel Board hearing, thus keeping her meme that she was not found to have done any "wrongdoing."

Where Tom Daniel came up with the "remedy" is found in another section of the EBEA (emphasis mine):

Sec. 39.52.210. Declaration of potential violations by public employees.

(b) A public employee's designated supervisor shall make a written determination whether an employee's involvement violates AS 39.52.110 - 39.52.190 and shall provide a copy of the written determination to the public employee and to the attorney general. If the supervisor determines that a violation could exist or will occur, the supervisor shall,
(1) reassign duties to cure the employee's potential violation, if feasible; or
(2) direct the divestiture or removal by the employee of the personal or financial interests that give rise to the potential violation.

Again, here we have to substitute "designated ethics supervisor," which applies to the other Exective Branch employees, with "independent investigator."  Sending the very final report (per Investigator Daniel) was an offer of a "remedy" that required her simple acceptance of the terms (think "settlement") to avoid further action.  Tom Daniel was once again trying to give the Governor an "out," passing over the fact that she had actually collected the money under the conditions he found in violation of the Ethics Act and giving her the opportunity to walk away scott free if she would NOT SPEND THE MONEY.  Tom Daniel was acting with the full powers of the Attorney General, with the full knowledge of the Personnel Board and was allowing the Governor to avoid a hearing.

Her response?  She sat on it...and sat on it...and sat on it...for a week.  I believe she had every intention to continue to sit on it until after Sunday.  And then, I STILL believe she has EVERY INTENTION to start spending that money AS SOON AS she steps down, even though it will be considered a violation for up to two years, according to the Act.

Finally, let's put that "ethical Sarah" fantasy to bed right now.  They (Palin, Van Flein, Cole, Stapleton) are claiming that of THEIR OWN ACCORD, they decided not to spend a dime of that money.

Bullshit...

Sec. 39.52.210. Declaration of potential violations by public employees.
(a) A public employee who is involved in a matter that may result in a violation of AS
39.52.110 - 39.52.190...

This includes a public employee...a Governor...who has had a complaint filed against him/her.

...shall
(1) refrain from taking any official action relating to the matter until a determination is
made under this section

SHE WAS TOLD NOT TO SPEND THAT MONEY or the consequences would be that she WOULD be found to have done wrongdoing if the complaint went against her.  She probably was ALSO TOLD to stop collecting money...probably around the time that SOMEONE had C4P do the dirtywork for her!

The reason I'm so sure of this is I have the emails between my investigator and Van Flein for my own (Arctic Cat) complaint, as well as the emails my investigator sent me.  There is a constant dialogue that goes on, giving the Governor every opportunity to protect herself. I know this because of my experience with my investigator who, by the way, was Tom Daniel.

It's the same reason that I believe that she knew what was coming.  Her glaring self-interest made her resignation far from altruistic; she resigned because SHE WANTS THAT MONEY.  She resigned because little Sarah doesn't feel she should HAVE to spend her hard-earned book deal cash for the hours and hours Van Flein spent being her spokesperson on Eddie Burke, MSNBC, and for the time he was doing work she could have done but didn't want to do.  

It's amazing! The more we see behind the curtain, the more we find that Sarah Palin isn't a mystery at all!