KNOXVILLE — A federal jury this afternoon convicted Sarah Palin e-mail intruder David C. Kernell of felony destruction of records to hamper a federal investigation and misdemeanor unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer.
The jury acquitted Kernell, 22, of felony wire fraud.
U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Phillips declared a mistrial on the fourth charge, felony identity theft, after the jurors said they were hopelessly deadlocked.
The records charge carries a maximum 20-year prison sentence, while the misdemeanor maximum sentence is one year.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Weddle said federal prosecutors would decide next week if they would retry the former University of Tennessee economics major on that charge.
Phillips said he would set a sentencing date after prosecutors make that decision.
+++
Therefore, we have to wait and see what happens next. Of course is a positive development that David Kernell was only found guilty on one of the felony charges, but it's too early yet for a final assessment.
In case this report on Fox News is changed, I saved a PDF-copy of it HERE.
+++
Off-Topic:
Our brilliant reader "mrsgunka" has just sent us an amazing PDF-document with a detailed hypothesis regarding the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig accident in the Gulf of Mexico, together with shocking pictures! You HAVE to see this:
In case this link doesn't work, there is an alternative link HERE. But please try the other link first.
+++
UPDATE:
Thanks to the efforts of our brilliant Palingater ella, we now have access to all documents which have been filed about the David Kernell trial in the Tennessee court database.
Therefore I started rummaging through the documents and made some interesting discoveries. I was looking in the first place for the transcripts of the Sarah and Bristol Palin's testimonies, and I found out that it may take several months before they will be published. However, the good news is that we will definitely receive in the near future PRECISE word-for-word transcripts of the proceedings and the testimonies. And there is not one darn thing Sarah can do about it.
There are some very interesting documents for everybody who wants to start digging deeper into the trial. I have collected them all in THIS FOLDER and they are ready for download.
The verdict of the jury is incredibly interesting, because what I hadn't realized so far that the jury had the CHOICE regarding charge 3 between a more severe and a lesser charge - and the jury opted for the lesser charge!
Screenshots:
Also, there is a very exciting affidavit in the documents by David T. Jones, Senior Assistant General Attorney of Alaska (download here).
From this affidavit we learn that we will receive thousands and thousands of more emails from Sarah Palin's administration in the near future! I would call this very good news. :-)
Much speculation abounds regarding the nature and extent of Sarah Palin’s relationship with two high profile Scientologists, John Coale -- who abandoned his usual Democrat sensibilities to support the McCain-Palin ticket when Hillary Clinton lost the nomination -- and his wife, Greta Van Susteren, of Fox News fame. Both Left and Right Wing blog sites have expressed anxiety over the specter of Scientology influencing the political process, most notably among Palin’s Fundamentalist Christian fan base.
Since this story first broke on the pages of the Washington Post, Coale has mostly downplayed his relationship with Palin, characterizing it as just ‘friendly.’ However, he openly admitted a deeper involvement in Palin’s affairs in a May 24, 2009 article by Brian Stelter in The New York Times: “I started the PAC for her over the next month or two, and helped start a legal defense fund for her. That’s about it.” (See also the recent report in New York Magazine HERE.)
Although no record could be found for either Diane Cooley nor Diane Pires in the Scientology internet databases, this is curious, indeed. After all, is Palin not sufficiently well greased, legally? Amply covered by the Baker & Hostetler of campaign compliance fame, in concert with Kim Daniels of the ultra-right wing Thomas More Group, bolstered by the more pedestrian talents of Van Flein, et al. How many attorneys does one gal need?
And what special legal talent could Diane E. Cooley provide, considering her close relationship with powerful Scientologists, that none of the above might offer?
Sarah Palin and possibly also Texas Governor Rick Perry will speak tonight at the Convention Center in Austin, Texas. The event is organized by "Heroic Media". Although the anti-abortion organization "Heroic Media" received some closer scrutiny leading up to this event, for example today by "Think Progress", the media still doesn't seem to be aware that the President of "Heroic Media" is Brian Follett.
On the Heroic Media website, they freely admit they attempt to deceive teens with their advertising (h/t EyeOnYou):
"Heroic Media’s billboards are designed so you can’t tell if they’re pro-life or pro-choice. Our billboards typically showcase young women instead of babies. That’s intentional because women in crisis respond best to photos of women they can relate to."
"It’s totally fine for Palin to do a speaking engagement to raise money for an organization she supports. But if reporters want to attend the event, they also have to buy a $50 ticket and support the organization. You betcha, liberal media! I wonder if the Chron or Burnt Orange Report shelled out any cash for Heroic Media."
So, every journalist has to pay $ 50 to the Swift Boater. How clever!
If there are any readers with a report and photos from these event or the protests, please don't hesitate to contact us.
+++
UPDATE:
Sarah Palin and her special relationship to Texas - More connections
Guestpost by mxm
As Palingates posted previously, Palin will appear in Austin for the Heroic Media organization. This faith-based nonprofit RTL group was founded in 2004 as the Majella Society by Brian Follett. The group changed its name to Heroic Media to reach a broader audience. Little can be found about Follet, other than a single article in a RTL newsletter and a note on the organization's Facebook page that Follett and his wife recently had a new baby.
In that RTL newsletter Follett is identified as a corporate philanthropist from Wisconsin. Follett relocated to Austin from Wisconsin for personal reasons. He founded the organization and named two Directors, Sandy Faucher and Barbara Lyons. Both women have long been involved in the RTL movement. These three are heavily associated with the Catholic Church.
Heroic Media is a registered nonprofit organization and is listed on Guidestar as Majella. The name comes from the patron saint of pregnant women, St. Gerard Mejalla. Who knew.
Their mission statement according to GuideStar: Majella is a faith-based non-profit that reduces abortion by creating a culture of life through television, billboard and Internet advertising and connecting women in crisis with life-affirming resource centers.
According to their tax returns, contributions have been:
2004 $679,265 2005 $880,890 2006 $819,679 2007 $912,472 2008 $998,461 (this is the last year information is available for)
The tax returns indicate the Follett, Faucher and Lyons are not paid any salary for their services. Salaries are listed for others in the organization. Four open positions are currently listed at the organization's site and at least 2 are listed with various online recruiting services: Vice President Marketing, Major Gifts Officer, Director of Development, and National Events Manager. From the titles and job descriptions, a significant growth effort is underway.
Heroic Media promotes prominent GOP celebrity testimonials for their organization and counts among them Bill O'Reilly, who was a featured guest at a fundraising gala. I am sure that they are hopeful that the Palin celebrity will be lucrative for their fundraising efforts.
Follet's donations to presidential campaigns are interesting. As was pointed out the other night, he was a significant contributor to the swift boat veterans. In 2007 he contributed $2300 each to hopeful presidential candidates Brownback, Fred Thompson, Huckabee and Romney. Someone is missing here. Why would a man who donated to the swift boat veterans not donate to Vietnam era hero John McCain?
He did finally donate $2300 to McCain in March 2008, once he had nailed the GOP candidacy. In Oct 2008 he also donated $5000 to The National Republican PAC. Sarah, the guy was just not that into Johnny, but loyal to the big picture. You might want to ask him about that when you see him next. He did not donate to the campaign after you joined???? But he wants you to work for him, although you will get paid and you do like TX.
Majella/Heroic Media lists Douglas Kelly & Associates, Inc., Springfield, MO as the producer of its advertising. In 2007 and 2008 they were paid $430,734 and $408,100 respectively. Other than finding listings for the business, it does not appear to have a website. In its tax returns, Majella reported it conducts "psych-graphic audience research".
In my brief searching, I found nothing suspicious or irregular in this RTL organization. While I do not agree with their mission it seems legitimate. The expansion into FLA and its recruiting for sophisticated positions suggests that they are just beginning. Wouldn't it be nice if NOW was paying attention to them? ______________________
The company was founded by Karl Rove, as Karl Rove + Co. in 1981. He sold the company to Ted Delisi and Todd Olsen in 2000, so that he could dedicate himself to Bush. The company is tightly woven into the fabric of TX and GOP politics.
Delisi has moved on, and now is a partner in Delisi Communications, along with his wife Deirdre and mother Dianne (and a couple other folks as well). Deirdre has been involved in public service/politics and was Gov Rick Perry's chief of staff. Dianne is a former TX state representative.
Many stories about the colorful life of Sarah Palin have been told so far, and many of those by Sarah herself. Sometimes over and over again. However, through experience we know that those episodes which Sarah is shy to talk about, or which she simply likes to "skip", for example in her memoir "Going Rogue", are the most interesting ones.
One of these rarely told stories is the fact that Sarah and Todd took a rare visit to the cinema to see the movie "Juno" on Saturday, March 3, 2008.
So what's wrong with Sarah and the first Dude watching a movie? Don't they have the right to enjoy themselves, too?
Sure! :-)
But let's have a look at the situation on March 3, 2008 in Alaska:
1) Rumors had already been circulating in Juneau since December 2007 that Sarah's daughter Bristol was pregnant. Lyda Green confirmed this to me in a phone conversation in August 2009.
2) In January 2008, a top Republican in Alaska mentions in a private, confidential conversation as a fact that Bristol is pregnant. We know the identity of this Republican politician.
3) From the beginning of October 2007 onwards, Bristol Palin vanished from the face of the earth. Her last public appearance, although this was never ever mentioned in public by Bristol herself, was as a member of the audience during the taping of the MTV show "TLR" with Jennifer Lopez in New York on October 7, 2007.
See my flickr-account with the pictures of Bristol HERE and the youtube video of the MTV-show HERE.
4) Bristol herself was out of school with a "prolonged case of mono" from January 2008 onwards, as a young student from Anchorage, whose identity we know and whose family has political connections, posted on "reddit" on April 8, 2008 - ten days before Trig was "presented" to the world. We have subsequently heard the "mono story" from other young Alaskans as well.
5) The rumors didn't escape the attention of Sarah Palin. Kyle Hopkins confirmed in the ADN on August 31, 2008 that Sarah Palin herself was well informed about the rumor that her daughter Bristol is pregnant - even before she announced her pregnancy with Trig on March 6, 2008:
McAllister was an Anchorage TV reporter before working for Palin. He said Palin once approached him - before people knew she was pregnant - assuming he'd been hearing rumors.
"She said it's not true about Bristol," McAllister said.
At the time, the rumor would have been that Palin's daughter was pregnant.
Sixteen-year-old Minnesota high-schooler Juno MacGuff (Ellen Page) discovers she is pregnant with a child fathered by her friend and longtime admirer, Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera). While at first she intends to have an abortion, she changes her mind and decides to make a plan for the child's adoption. With the help of her friend Leah (Olivia Thirlby), Juno searches the ads in the Pennysaver and finds a couple she feels will provide a suitable home. Along with her father, Mac (J. K. Simmons), Juno meets the couple, Mark and Vanessa Loring (Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner), in their expensive home and expresses a desire for a closed adoption.
Vanessa, while grateful, is somewhat anxious that Juno may change her mind, and their initial interactions are uneasy. However, Juno and Leah happen to see Vanessa in a shopping mall being completely at ease with a child, and Juno encourages Vanessa to talk to her baby in the womb, where it obligingly kicks for her. On the other hand, Juno more easily forms a friendship with Mark, with whom she shares tastes in punk rock and horror films. Mark, who has set aside his rock band youth (now confined to memorabilia displayed in the one room of the house allowed him by Vanessa), works at home composing commercial jingles. Juno hangs out with Mark a few times when visiting the house, ignoring a warning from her stepmother Bren (Allison Janney) that she should not spend time alone with a married man.
As the pregnancy progresses, Juno struggles with the emotions she feels for her baby's father, Paulie, who is clearly — although passively — in love with Juno. Juno maintains an outwardly indifferent attitude toward Paulie, but when she learns he has asked another girl to the upcoming prom, she is hurt and angrily confronts him. Paulie reminds Juno that it is at her request they remain distant and tells her that she broke his heart. He also suggests that she has feelings for him she is unable to admit.
Not long before her baby is due, Juno is again visiting with Mark when their interaction becomes strongly emotional. Mark then tells her that he will be leaving Vanessa. To his surprise, Juno is horrified by this revelation. Vanessa arrives home, and, to her shock, Mark tells her he does not feel ready to be a father and that there are still things he wants to do first — dreams Vanessa does not share. Juno watches the Loring marriage fall apart, then drives away and breaks down in tears by the side of the road before coming to a decision. Returning to the Lorings' home, she leaves a note and disappears as they answer the door.
After a heartfelt discussion with Mac, Juno accepts that she loves Paulie. Juno then tells Paulie that she loves him, and Paulie's actions make it clear that her feelings are reciprocated. Not long after, Juno goes into labor and is rushed to the hospital, where she gives birth to a baby boy. She had deliberately not told Paulie because of his track meet. Seeing her missing from the stands, he rushes to the hospital, arriving to find Juno has given birth to their son, and comforts Juno as she cries. Vanessa comes to the hospital where she joyfully claims the newborn boy as a single adoptive mother. On the wall in the baby's new nursery, Vanessa has framed Juno's note—addressed only to her—which reads "Vanessa: If you're still in, I'm still in. —Juno." The film ends in the summertime with Juno and Paulie playing guitar and singing together, followed by a kiss.
In short: It is about a teenage girl who decides not to abort her baby, but instead willingly gives up her baby to somebody else directly after the birth in a closed adoption - and all parties are happy about it.
Please note that John McCain sealed his nomination as the Republican Presidential candidate one day earlier - on April 4, 2008.
Unfortunately, at this point, Sarah Palin didn't look pregnant at all. This also was directly confirmed to me by Lyda Green in our conversation in August 2009 - and Lyda Green was in the same room together with Sarah Palin when she made her announcement on March 5, 2008.
"The governor, a runner who's always been trim, simply doesn't look pregnant."
In addition, we have been in contact with several other people who met Sarah Palin in person in March and April 2008 and they also confirmed that Sarah didn't look pregnant at that time.
Which is of course what the available pictures also show - for example the footage was which taken by Israeli filmmaker Elan Frank on April 8 and 9, 2008 (with a nice comparison to a pregnant woman, created by our friend Ennealogic):
This particular screenshot of the shootage by Elan Frank is from THIS VIDEO, at 5:08.
More "kitchen footage from Juneau" taken by Elan Frank can found from 3:52 in THIS VIDEO.
Additional scenes shot by Elan Frank are shown in THIS CLIP, which has been discussed in THIS POST on Palingates.
OK...what else do we find in the movie "Juno"?
We find parents who didn't know that her daughter was sexually active:
The first incidence was already the subject of a previous discussion during our reporting about "abortiongate". Sarah's describes in "Going Rogue" how a cold-hearted doctor performed a sonogram before Sarah's first miscarriage:
At my exam, the doctor listened for the baby's heartbeat. When she didn't smile, I didn't worry; she was known for her mellow demeanor. But I noticed that she kept moving the stethoscope around. And she didn't hand it to me as doctors usually do, so the expectant mother can listen to the sound of life.
"Let's do a quick sonogram," she said.
I agreed, eager to confirm that Tad was a boy - or to be surprised.
We moved to another room, and I lay down on a sheet-covered table. The doctor spread gel on my belly and began sliding the transducer back and forth. I waited for the familiar Shoosh-shoosh-shoosh sound of the baby's beating heart.
But it didn't come. And the sonogram picture looked empty.
The doctor said coldly, "There's nothing alive in there."
Her bluntness shocked me. I felt sick and hollow, and burst into tears.
"You have a couple of choices about getting rid of it," she said.
"It." That's what she called our baby, whom we'd been calling Tad for three months.
She went on to explain that I could go home and let "it" pass naturally. Or I could have a D&C.
Later in "Going Rogue", on pages 175 & 176, we have another memorable "sonogram" story. Here, not a doctor, but an ultrasound technician plays a major role. "The technician was a sweet, funny older lady who'd been doing the procedure for decades. She prepped me, and we joked about a lot of things while she pressed the wand across my belly". Sarah then describes that she had a "flashback" to her first sonogram and adds: "Then the technician smiled. 'I see boy parts...would that be good?"
Later, the technician discovers, according to Sarah, that Trig has a "thick neck", a possible sign for Down Syndrome.
Sarah Palin treated the State of Alaska as a travel agent until she had to refund the state for some of her children's travel expenses. Her staff were very helpful, coming up with various "purposes" for the children's trips around Alaska and further afield so the Palins could be reimbursed.
Later her website added a page regarding invitations that specifically asked whether the First Family was invited to events.
Sarah Palin's own statement at the time contradicts earlier assertions that her children travelled on the state dime for state related business:
"This is a big state, and I am obligated to -- and intend to -- keep Alaskans informed and meet with them as much as I can, from Barrow to Marshall to Ketchikan, at the same time, I am blessed to have a large and loving family, and the discharge of my duties should not prevent me from spending time with them. I will do so in accordance with the upcoming rewrite of regulations concerning travel expenses, and despite those who would crimp me from fulfilling either my obligations to the state or my obligations to my family."
Were the children government officials or simply part of her large and loving family? Most of their trips were considered valid as state business and Sarah Palin had to reimburse the state for just a fraction of them, around $10,000.
Yet she defended herself by saying "I am blessed to have a large and loving family, and the discharge of my duties should not prevent me from spending time with them."
Piper was the record breaker, with the most air miles. Of all Palin children, Piper used to be the clear favourite, appearing with Sarah at numerous events and being the recipient of some genuine affection from her mom. The only downside is that Piper didn't seem to attend school on a regular basis long before the vice presidential campaign in 2008.
Looking back (without prejudice) at the Palins before August 2008, they appeared to be a normal family, even though they had very hectic lives and were sometimes scattered across a very large state due to their mother's position.
Sarah Palin's run for the vice presidency was the worst thing that happened in these children's lives. Their family life went from hectic and slightly chaotic to utterly dysfunctional overnight.
Track may have escaped the worst, becoming the dutiful child fighting for American's freedom of speech in Iraq.
Bristol was quickly thrown under the bus and her pregnancy with Tripp was used by the campaign as an alibi for Sarah's rumoured faked pregnancy with Trig. Since then, Bristol has become a gossip magazine darling, retroactive virgin and a drama queen in a federal court.
Willow has the lowest profile, perhaps because of her age and for being the middle child. One memorable incident was her depiction as the victim of statutory rape in the Letterman fiasco. More recently, Willow was seen in the "locust" episode when the Palins and entourage descended on a gifting suite of a pre-Oscar event and had a jolly good time.
Piper lost her place as the favourite child to Trig and was relegated to the role of babysitter and provider of some cute moments. She's quite at ease with the crowds and gives autographs quite happily. Again, Piper missed a lot of classes during the campaign and book tour. The trend seemed set to continue until Alan Grayson made a remark about his own kid being in school.
Trig was the centerpiece of the Going Rogue book tour. The little guy worked very hard to please the crowds, on one occasion appearing late at night in a diaper and sweatshirt, facing the elements, the noise and the chaos with admirable aplomb. Trig was last seen in public in December 2009 while on a short vacation in Hawaii. The only other event involving Trig since then was a "vicious attack" directed at him on an episode of Family Guy. According to some, Trig is now living with aunt Heather in Anchorage...
So, the mother who was prepared to bend a few rules in order to be around her children, from Barrow to Marshall to Ketchikan, has to be content with covering the whole of the United States (and parts of Canada) with fewer opportunities to be around her large and loving family.
Is the pile of dollars Sarah Palin made so far a reasonable substitute for a family? Are the lives of the Palin children any better than they were before July 2009, when their mother quit as governor of Alaska to make some serious money?
How they must dream of those days when mom made a modest $125,000 a year but they could regularly see her in the flesh instead of a TV screen...
There is a marked difference between bloggers and the MSM when it comes to Sarah Palin. Progressive bloggers write what they do in order to get to the truth and sometimes take donations to cover their expenses. The MSM, with honourable exceptions, want to make big money.
Bloggers are not ruled by corporate interests. Some have evolved (I use the term "evolve" loosely) into cults and others are committed to exposing the other side of Sarah Palin. An admirable group of Alaskan bloggers have provided objective insight into their governor's actions when Sarah Palin was tapped by John McCain to join his ticket. Their efforts gave other people, far and wide, the impetus to start their own blogs. Palingates wouldn't exist without the inspiration from AKM, Shannyn, Gryphen, Celtic Diva and Phil Munger, among others.
We're all still working hard to unravel Sarah Palin's misdeeds and deceptions. Different styles, different appoaches, but we're all on the same side. Read the blogs. We back up our findings with hard evidence. The opinions are balanced and based on fact. We want to be credible and to that end we dig deep to provide proof to back up our claims.
The MSM, rightly called lamestream media by Sarah Palin, have another agenda. They don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Sarah Palin is money. She makes headlines and sells newspapers, generates hits on the internet. The MSM stirs the pot and creates controversy in order to keep her topical and bankable.
Fine. They make their money and we continue to search for the truth.
The good old days of Woodward and Bernstein are long gone. We have the internet, we have instant access to information. No Deep Throat necessary anymore. Now we see the cult of celebrity and an unbridled desire for ratings, hits and money. The MSM chose to pursue profits, the almighty dollar.
We bloggers chose to remain truthful and will continue to do so. From Alaska, from Europe, from Australia or Timbuktu, we're united in not compromising, not selling out.
The MSM can choose to ignore us or try discredit us. That doesn't change the facts, does it?
I prefer our way of doing things. When my head hits the pillow, I'm still poor but I get a good night's sleep. .
"Palin haters want to believe she perjured herself in the hacked e-mail trial. (My reporting confirms that the questioning was narrowly focused and she didn't.)"
So are we "Palin haters"? It's true that the aim of our blog is to expose the many lies and deceptions of Sarah Palin. Do we hate her? I don't! She has never done anything bad to me personally. However, I do NOT wish her to be in any position of power, because we here at Palingates believe she is a dangerously unhinged and mentally unstable warmonger.
The label "hater" is usually used to describe us by our special friends from Conservatives4Palin or by similar pro-Palin blogs. It makes a very "unbalanced" impression to have this label used by a MSM journalist who is a guest on Keith Olbermann's show.
So David Weigel was "ready to debunk a liberal myth" on Olbermann? OK...!
Earlier today, I had a short email exchange with David Weigel.
He contacted me "out of the blue", and what he said was:
"Subject: Question about your perjury story
Call me stupid, but I don't understand it, especially the e-mail question. You guys think there is a real argument that she perjured herself with her description of the yahoo account?"
Screenshot:
So I answered David and said:
"Our argument here is relatively simple.
According to Jamie Satterfield from knoxnews, who specifically confirmed this for me, Palin said in her testimony, in the words of Jamie:
"What she said was the people at the governor's mansion sometimes sent her emails relative to issues regarding the mansion and her children. She denied specifically diverting gubernatorial issues to the account."
We proved in our post that this statement by Palin is simply wrong. She did use this account for her gubernatorial business many times. We also proved that she used her other TWO yahoo accounts extensively for her gubernatorial business. Our points are 100% factual. There are no assumptions, no conjecture etc."
I received no reply to this message.
In order to have the full background of what happened, let me also show you the correspondence I had with journalist Jamie Satterfield from www.knoxnews.com regarding this topic - a journalist who actually was in the courtroom during the testimony of Sarah Palin - unlike David Weigel, who got his report "second-hand"!
I wrote to her on Saturday:
"Dear Ms Satterfield,
my name is Patrick, I write for the blog "palingates" (http://palingates.blogspot.com).
We published an article today about the fact that Sarah Palin possibly committed perjury when she testified in Knoxville:
I have a question to you regarding this matter. In your article you wrote:
+++
She denied using the account to conduct gubernatorial business.
"We know there was an Attorney General's opinion one week prior and a lot of other opinions in the state that, of course, it was proper for me to have a private account," she said.
+++
Do you remember what the exact words were that Palin used?
Because from the records of the yahoo account, it's pretty clear that she extensively used it for her gubernatorial business. We have explained this in our article in detail.
Thanks a lot,
Patrick"
At first, I received the following reply from Jamie Satterfield:
"What's in quote marks are her exact words."
This didn't fully answer my question, therefore I sent Jamie a follow-up question:
"Was the sentence
"She denied using the account to conduct gubernatorial business."
just an "interpretation" of the quote that follows in your article, or did she say it like that?
Thanks!"
Jamie answered me:
"No what she said was the people at the governor's mansion sometimes sent her emails relative to issues regarding the mansion and her children. She denied specifically diverting gubernatorial issues to the account."
A few minutes later, she sent me an additional message and said:
"And to make it clear how journalists actually work, if it's not in quote marks then it is a paraphrase of what was said. Finally, you can create an account on pacer, where a transcript of her testimony will be made publics in the coming months."
From this correspondence, one thing is abundantly clear: Jamie Satterfield tried to report the remarks of Sarah Palin with high accuracy. It's obvious that she applied high journalistic standards to her own reporting.
David Weigel was not in the courtroom - but Jamie Satterfield was. Yet, David apparently did not take very seriously what Sarah Palin actually said in her testimony in Knoxville. I cannot see how he "debunked" the accusation that Sarah might have committed perjury.
I do hope that Keith Olbermann himself or others will follow-up this story - and will invite guests who were actually in the courtroom, like Jamie Satterfield from www.knoxnews.com and who don't appear on a TV show with a political agenda, but want to report the real facts.
+++
UPDATE:
After Countdown aired, David Weigel exchanged this friendly tweet with C4P-outlet "Palin TV" (run by Sheya, contributor at C4P):
I do wonder if David Weigel calls C4P "Obama haters".
My guess is: Probably not.
+++
UPDATE 2:
In a post called "I, Sarah Palin defender" David Weigel reacted on his blog at the Washington Post to the criticism he felt was directed against him in this post at Palingates and stated:
"Today, PalinGates published a lengthy attack on me, including a screenshot of a friendly email I sent them before I went on the show, after my own reporting had convinced me that their first post was mostly baseless. Here's their take.
David Weigel was not in the courtroom - but Jamie Satterfield was. Yet, David apparently did not take very seriously what Sarah Palin actually said in her testimony in Knoxville. I cannot see how he "debunked" the accusation that Sarah might have committed perjury.
And here's what I actually said.
We need to see the transcript, but it doesn't sound like she actually trapped herself in anything here. The defense attorney, Wade Davies, was prohibited from taking this much further than the questions about what -- the e-mails that were sent, that were asked about previously. She stuck to saying that it was political e-mails, e-mails about the governor`s mansion. The e-mails that you were talking about didn't really come up. So the people I talked to inside the courtroom say maybe she could have fudged the words a little bit less, but this doesn`t seem to be a problem for her.
I think it's pretty clear which of us was looking for the facts and which of us is trafficking in innuendo. There is just no case for accusing Palin of perjury."
+++
His remarks prompted me to explain my position. I therefore tried to post the following comment on his blog at the Washington Post, but for unknown reasons, it didn't get through.
This is my comment:
David,
Thank you for reporting our story about Sarah Palin’s possible perjury in Knoxville.
It seems that you don’t understand why we disagree with the premise of your report and felt uneasy with the way you introduced us to your readers. There are several reasons. One of them is that you struck the “wrong tone” right from the start when you simply labelled us “Palin haters”. That’s not what we are. We don’t hate Sarah Palin, but we do NOT wish her to be in any position of power, because we believe she is a dangerously unhinged and mentally unstable warmonger.
Then you claimed to have “debunked” something, although in my view, you didn’t. One of the key arguments of our story was the fact that Sarah Palin, according to the journalist Jamie Satterfield, who listened to Sarah’s testimony in the courtroom, “denied specifically diverting gubernatorial issues to the (yahoo) account”. I contacted Jamie Satterfield in order to find out specifically what was said. One can read the complete correspondence with Jamie Satterfield in our follow-up post:
So do you believe that Jamie Satterfield reported the testimony incorrectly? Because that’s what would have been necessary in order to “debunk” our claim. But you didn’t say that, but instead offered a very vague explanation of what you were told by others, including “Palin-aides”, what Palin is reported to have said in her testimony. In doing so, you carefully avoided the essence of our claim which is that the emails of Palin’s administration, which were published by MSNBC.COM, show that she conducted gubernatorial business on her yahoo-account on a regular basis. As a sidenote, we also explained and documented that Sarah Palin extensively used her other TWO yahoo accounts for her gubernatorial affairs.
As it stands, we believe Palin lied in her testimony about using the yahoo account for her gubernatorial business, as we explained in detail, citing several examples of her emails in our first post:
If this lie technically is “perjury” in a legal sense, is another question, and can only be answered by a judge – and that’s why we framed this as a question in our first post on this issue.
We also believe that Palin was untruthful regarding the two other points we mentioned in our original post.
In what you call a “lengthy attack” on you, I simply quoted your “one-line” email to me, to which I responded with a detailed reply. If your email was as “friendly” as you now claim, why didn’t you send me a response? Why did you instead just twitter that you were about to “debunk a liberal myth on Olbermann”?
Apart from that, I mainly posted three twitter messages from you, and asked the question: Would you label C4P, with whom you exchange twitter messages frequently, simply as “Obama haters”? This question was absolutely justified - and you didn't answer it.
Palingates is not just about Sarah Palin’s faked pregnancy, as the Palinbot-commenters want your readers to believe. In fact, Palingates focuses on a wide variety of scandals in which Sarah Palin is involved. Troopergate, Dairygate, Todd Palin as Alaska’s “Shadow Governor”, and many more, you name it. That being said, I know that Sarah Palin’s faked pregnancy is a true fact:
However, I am sure that we can all agree that a final assessment will only be made after the transcript of Palin's testimony in Knoxville has been published.
"One of the least-commented-on Palin facts of the week was her news conference outside the Knoxville, Tenn., courthouse where the man who hacked her e-mail was being tried. That's right: a news conference. The kind of thing she had not done since losing the 2008 election, the kind of thing she has skipped at every political speech in 2010. And you barely heard about it, because Palin survived it unscathed."
Just for the record - THIS is what David Weigel calls a "news conference":
Hello Palingaters! I'm back into the thick of the action after a couple of weeks catching up with my sister after six years! Just as Palingates is a truly international community, my own family is scattered over four continents and whilst keeping in touch is easy thanks to the internet, there's nothing like the warmth of face-to-face contact...
Patrick and Kathleen, plus our generous contributors, kept the ball rolling with their usual verve and commitment. Thank you all.
I kept an eye on the blogosphere during my break and one pleasant surprise (among many) was finding Palingates leading the Blogger Choice Awards 2010 in the best political blog category. The comments on the site are very heartening and the prospect of being rewarded with such a prize makes us more motivated than ever in our quest for the truth about Sarah Palin.
Registering and voting is a very easy process. Please show your support and encourage your friends and families to pay a visit to Palingates to see what we do and then cast their votes on the Blogger Choice Awards site. Sending e-mails and posting links on Facebook and MySpace are great ways to spread the word.
(Please click on the badge to vote)
Should Palingates win this award, it would be thanks to this amazing community and we would all share the prize equally.
As well as contributing information, links and excellent commentary, you have been very generous with your donations and that has helped offset the mounting expenses relating to very long distance phone calls, for example. Oh well, that goes hand in hand with having a very active international blogging community...
All donations, however small, help a lot, so keep them coming and we'll keep thanking you!
Keeping up with Sarah Palin is no easy task. The lady is like a chameleon, changing her lies almost daily, but we'll continue to catalogue her ever growing repertoire of falsehoods and to dig deep into her dodgy dealings.
Together we can make a difference!
+++
Andrew Sullivan has an excellent post focusing on the "Will she, won't she?" question of whether or not Sarah Palin will run for president in 2012.
"Palin's prospects in the Republican Party are a good deal dimmer than her star wattage suggests. She's tallied middling performances in early straw polls and shows no inclination to embark on the grassroots work required of a presidential candidate. More to the point, this article makes clear that, were there any doubt, her preoccupying concern is "building her brand"--less in a political sense than a financial one. Palin may yet make a bid for the White House. But all evidence suggests that when the time comes to choose between earning money and running for president, Palin will choose money."
This is the conventional view in Washington. I think it's completely wrong, dangerously complacent, and out of touch with profound shifts in media, fundraising and politics. The political parties are weaker than they once were. The elites cannot control grass-roots Internet-driven phenomena. Look at Obama. He seems a natural president now, but Washington dismissed his chances - as they are now dismissing Palin's - right up to the Iowa caucuses. And because Palin is such a terrifying - truly terrifying - prospect for the US and the world, I think such complacency, rooted in cynicism about Palin's mercenary nature, is far too reckless.
Look: what we have seen this past year is the collapse of the RNC as it once was and the emergence of a highly lucrative media-ideological-industrial complex. This complex has no interest in traditional journalistic vetting, skepticism, scrutiny of those in power, or asking the tough questions. It has no interest in governing a country. It has an interest in promoting personalities and ideologies and false images of a past America that both flatter and engage its audience. For most in this business, this is about money. Roger Ailes, who runs a news business, has been frank about what his fundamental criterion is for broadcasting: ratings not truth. Obviously all media has an eye on the bottom line - but in most news organizations, there is also an ethical editorial concern to get things right. I see no such inclination in Fox News or the hugely popular talkshow demagogues (Limbaugh, Levin, Beck et al.), which now effectively control the GOP. And when huge media organizations have no interest in any facts that cannot be deployed for a specific message, they are a political party in themselves.
Add Palin to the mix and you have a whole new machine in American politics - one with the capacity, as much as Obama's, to upend the established order. Beltway types roll their eyes. But she's not Obama, they say. She doesn't know anything, polarizes too many people, has lied constantly and still may have dozens of skeletons in her unvetted closets.
You just couldn't make it up! Conservatives4Palin, who I like to call "peezoo" with all the affection I can muster, imitate their idol Sarah Palin and go into "whining-mode"! The reason? Well, this time their reason is:
"From its exalted position of 209,107 in the Alexa Traffic Rank (87,247 in the USA) and despite a 20% fall in its share of global internet users in the past month alone, the European pariah blog Palingates is urging its readers to vote for it as The Best Blog Of All Time, The Best Political Blog, The Best Blog About Stuff, and The Best Blogging Host.
Having taken a moment to consider that blog’s services to the blogsphere since its inception a little over a year ago (for example, its extensive promotion of hate-filled conspiracies about the origins of two of the Palin children), I trust that you will arrive at an appropriate conclusion as to the actual value of the award if Palingates’ readers do manage to vote it, however misguidedly, The Best Political Blog and The Best Blog Of All Time."
Screenshot:
HAHA! It's obvious that we touched a weak point there. The peelanders are dismayed.
But what about our stats? Is there a reason for concern, as Rich Crowther tries to imply?
I am sure Rich Crowther would highly appreciate to know what's going on in the stats department at Palingates.
I prepared two graphs for you to illustrate the current situation:
First, our views from the founding of Palingates onwards until today on a montly basis. Four days still missing in April, so this month is not complete yet:
With currently about 6,500 unique visitors and 13,000 pageloads on average per day, we will reach very healthy figures for April again.
But was there a big drop from February 2010 onwards?
Well, the second graph answers this question. Here we see the stats from February 2009 onwards on a daily basis:
In February 2010, we had the "Andrea Friedman effect" - when Palingates had "the scoop" on February 19, 2010 and received links from a large number of major blogs - Huffington Post, Gawker, Andrew Sullivan etc. - even from the popular right-wing blog "Hot Air"! ;-)
This day immortalized itself also in our stats, with 80.000 pageloads on one day alone and a huge number of pageloads also during the following days. That's the reason why in February 2010 our stats went through the roof.
Apart from that, the second graph shows that our daily views are remarkably stable.
And who knows, maybe one day we will have another scoop, maybe even bigger...?
Don't forget by the way to vote for Conservatives4Palin" in the "Worst Blog of All Times" category! Because that's exactly what they are: The worst blog of all times!
P.S.:
Our personal favorite for "Best Photography Blog" at the Blogger Choice Awards is Bill Hess - Wasilla, Alaska by 300"! Please give him your love!
