Wednesday, 29 April 2009
How are you going to spend the money, Sarah Palin?
I've seen many comments from Sarah Palin's supporters regarding her legal fund on various blogs.
They claim that all these frivolous ethics complaints against Sarah Palin are an attempt to bankrupt their darling governor, that none of the accusations have stuck so far, blah blah.
The ethics complaints are not lawsuits and don't cost Sarah Palin a penny unless they are found to be justified and she chooses to employ an expensive attorney. The Attorney General looks at the complaints and if he considers them worthy of an investigation, they are passed on to the Personnel Board.
If the accusations are indeed baseless, as claimed by Sarah Palin, they wouldn't get past the AG and would cost her absolutely nothing. Zero, zilch, nada, niente, rien... you get my point. Which means her supporters are coughing up money for nothing, if she's so innocent and the allegations are worthless.
Many of the complaints have not been assessed for validity yet. But one in particular springs to mind: it was filed in October 2008 by Frank Gwartney and concerned Sarah Palin charging the state for her children's travel. The result? She had to reimburse the state nearly $10,000 for dodgy travel expenses.
Sarah Palin used the services of Thomas Van Flein on this occasion, as she did when Troopergate blew up in her face. He's very expensive and an expert on spinning, which suits the governor really well. The fact that she was found to be in breach of the rules and had to pay money back means that the "baseless", "frivolous" ethics complaints only cost her money when she's guilty!
The bulk of the $500,000 that are bankrupting Sarah Palin went on the Troopergate investigation, which wasn't the result of a frivolous complaint by an anklebiter. She spent this astronomical amount of money for political reasons, after she pulled the little stunt of filing the complaint against herself. We all know what a mess Troopergate turned out to be. To this day, her "innocence" is highly debatable. Sarah Palin was exonerated of any wrongdoing by a far from impartial Personnel Board.
The transparent, ethical, spotless governor had to pay tax on $18,000 worth of per diems collected for staying in her nice, warm home, make a few phone calls and give interviews to Fox News. This wasn't a result of any complaints from anklebiters, it was to do with the IRS, not known as anklebiters by any stretch of the imagination. No legal expenses in this case, but it shows a pattern.
From the Alaska Fund Trust website:
Statement of Trustee Kristan Cole
"Over the past months it became increasingly clear that supporters of Governor Palin needed to help defend against the onslaught of frivolous attacks against her. These baseless accusations are designed to inhibit her ability to focus on the issues Alaskans truly care about and force massive personal debt on her and her family."
Well, as baseless and frivolous accusations cost the governor absolutely nothing, I think they should reword the whole thing and tell the truth: the Fund was created to pay for expenses incurred during her quest for the White House. That failed and the RNC, having given Sarah Palin bad advice regarding Troopergate, left her on her own to face the music and pay the bills.
Considering that both the AG and the Personnel Board are at Sarah Palin's beck and call, the odds of any Fund money being used to fight any new battles would seem to be very low. If any of the ethics complaints make it past the AG, they can't be deemed to be baseless and frivolous.
I rest my case.
Please read this very logical post about Sarah Palin's attorney fees.
Recall Sarah Palin