Shock! Investigator looking into Sarah Palin has ties to John Kerry, Al Franken, the DNC and more! AP reports it as “independent investigator”

An AP story that made all liberals cream in their pants mention the following about the so called violation of ethics laws (The highlighted experts are from (Sweetness & Light):

An independent investigator has found evidence that Gov. Sarah Palin may have violated ethics laws by trading on her position as she sought money for lawyer fees, in the latest legal distraction for the former vice presidential candidate as she prepares to leave office this week.

The report obtained by The Associated Press says Palin is securing unwarranted benefits and receiving improper gifts through the Alaska Fund Trust, set up by supporters.

An investigator for the state Personnel Board says in his July 14 report that there is probable cause to believe Palin used or attempted to use her official position for personal gain because she authorized the creation of the trust as her legal defense fund.

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 board. That allows her to resolve the issue without a formal ethics reprimand.

Palin posted an entry on Twitter in which she said the “matter is still pending,” a statement echoed by her lawyer.

Thomas Daniel is the so called “independant investigator”. What the AP doesn’t tell you in their story is that Daniel is a big time donor to Democrats John Kerry, Al Franken, and is also a partner of the law firm of Perkins Coie. A little check over at Wikipedia of Perkins Coie reveals the following:

The firm was founded in 1912 and has represented Boeing Company since the founding of the aerospace giant in 1916. Other prominent clients include Microsoft, Amazon.com, Starbucks, Costco, Craigslist, Google, Facebook, Intel, Washington Mutual, AT&T, Safeco, and Nintendo. It has thirteen offices in the United States and two in China.

Perkins Coie also serves as counsel of record for the Democratic Party and its candidates; its political law group is headed by top campaign lawyer Bob Bauer. Perkins Coie represented John Kerry’s presidential campaign and recently represented the Presidential campaign of Barack Obama. The firm represented Christine Gregoire in the prolonged litigation surrounding her 2004 Washington State gubernatorial election, and a team of Perkins lawyers headed by Marc Elias is currently representing Al Franken in his legal battle over the 2008 Senatorial election in Minnesota. The firm also represents the Democratic Leadership Council, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

In 2006, Perkins Coie made headlines when, led by partner Harry Schneider, it represented Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the alleged driver and bodyguard of Osama Bin Laden. The case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Bush Administration’s Military Commissions were held unconstitutional.

Surely seems independant to me, how about you?

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)

July 22, 2009 · Filed Under Corruption, Democrats, Sarah Palin


Comments

  • Karenc

    I am a liberal, but one who never has used profanity – which I see too much of on both the far left and far right. To me, it always seemed to negatively correlated to good arguments.

    The link you cite are pretty weak. The fact that other lawyers from this large law firm represented the Obama, Kerry and Franken campaigns does not mean that they have links to all the lawyers in this law firm. In addition, the fact that that lawyer contributed to Democrats indicates he is a Democrat – not that he has any real connection to them. (I admit to contributing to both Kerry and Obama, as did millions of other people.)

    I think the broader question is whether it is fair that high profile politicians on either the right or left, who need to defend themselves from law suits generated at least partially for partisan reasons can be financially devastated. The main example on the left is Bill Clinton, who faced many suits that were found to be unfounded. The same appears to be the case in the already handled Palin ones. (Neither were completely innocent – Palin was found by the Republican controlled legislature of misusing her government position to push to get her ex-brother-in-law fried and, though Clinton was not convicted by the US Senate, reading the Senate statements of Democrats, they argue that it did not reach “high crimes and misdemeanors”, not that he did nothing wrong.) The idea that some have suggested is that the government should pay if the charges are dismissed. It is troubling that any public official could be financially destroyed defending themselves from bogus charges.

    As to the specific charges, they do not seem inflammatory. Unless I am completely missing the point, they are speaking of not complying with the letter of the law in terms of reporting contributions. If there is no misuse of money for purposes not approved of and if there is no quid por quo, it would seem this is the kind of thing that happens all the time resulting in fines.

    I am not impressed with Palin, but if this story is just what was reported, it really does not seem to be a big deal.

  • greg

    Hopefully, this bit of news will start the unraveling of the entire 0bama/Axelrod smear machine which has been operating in AK since last September. The Personnel Board should throughly investigage the leaking of the confidential report, subpoena Daniel (the lawyer who wrote the report), Kim Chatman (the person who filed the complaint), Rachel D’Oro (AP reporter who received a copy of the confidential report, probably from Chatman), and put the squeeze on them. One or the other would break, and spill the guts on the whole operation.

  • amsron

    Did you edit the Wikipedia page to make your charges seem more real?

    It’s easy to edit a Wikipedia page. I’d recommend to anyone reading this that they review the page to see if it’s been locked against editing and/or still has the verbiage quoted here. If I’m wrong, I’ll apologize, but I don’t think I am.