The 2008 Presidential Campaign: What Happened and Why?

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:03 pm

Was wondering when the palin-haters would bring this up. It's all lies as far as I'm concerned, from bitter people who ran a terrible campaign. There is no evidence the stories are true. There is no evidence of wrongdoing with her per diem. She was officially cleared of everything in "troopergate." And she is NOT a tax-dodger.

Hal, did Sarah Palin do absolutely nothing wrong? Is there no valid basis for any criticism of her (this is factual!) taking per diem, payment for her children's travel, and not paying taxes? I took Federal Income Taxation in law school. I've read several pieces from tax attorneys online that say that not reporting at least the travel and likely the per diem is quite likely incorrect. It may be that it was an honest mistake.

"officially cleared of everything"? Sure, she was within her rights to fire MOneghan. But the Legislative investigation (10 Republicans, 4 Democrats) found that she violated a non-optional ethics law in Alaska.

And you'll note that I discussed this all as "if true." Frankly, I don't doubt the possibility that people afraid for their jobs and livelihood and worried they'll never get hired again for another campaign would be highly motivated to try to deflect blame from themselves.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:07 pm

Ellienor - I think it came out the day before the Election, that Palin was cleared by her own hand picked board which "officially" looked into it. There were two very different investigations by two very different bodies.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:12 pm

yes, one was filled with her enemies, and one was independant.

And no, Ell, those are not valid criticisms. The per diem and tax issues are particularly invalid, as not even the rabid liberal press could make anything of them. All they eventually had was "troopergate" which turned out to be nothing as well.

You don't like her positions, more power to you, but the baseless trashing is not right.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:21 pm

Hal - the first one, which found she had violated Ethics Law, was made up of mostly Republicans including the Republican from her own town of Wasilla.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:22 pm

Did she pay taxes on the per diem, then, Hal?

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:25 pm

sauronsfinger wrote:Hal - the first one, which found she had violated Ethics Law, was made up of mostly Republicans including the Republican from her own town of Wasilla.

How many times do we have to go over how the republicans in Alaska don't like her because she has worked against their corruption? The whole thing was done by alaskan republicans. Not everyone has blind devotion to their party, SF.

Prim, I don't know, and I don't know the tax laws. I do know if she had done something wrong, it would have been a big story.

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:25 pm

Well, I personally criticize her for pressuring Moneghan and allowing her husband to pressure Moneghan and many other government people to fire her brother in law, regardless of official conclusions.

There is the rule of law to be followed, and I think she showed poor judgement in trying to circumvent the due process.

I'm not baselessly trashing her, Hal. It's appropriate to criticize her actions and her positions on the issues.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:27 pm

what evidence do you have she ever pressured anyone?

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:34 pm

Todd's testimony.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:36 pm

Hal - over the past two months, you have consistently attributed sinister motivations to anyone who criticizes Palin. People here hate her and are trying to hurt and destroy her. Democrats are trying to destroy her politically because she represents the opposite of their beliefs. Republicans in Alaska are trying to smear her because they are crooks and thieves. The media is trying to destroy her because she is a Born again Christian who won't get an abortion.

When does it stop?

Did it ever occur to you that when people oppose or criticize Sarah Palin that they are doing so from a very clear position of disagreeing with her record?

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:40 pm

Ellienor wrote:Todd's testimony.

Please explain.

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:49 pm

Hal, you're right. The official position is that all of this pressure was done behind her back by her husband, and her staff, and she knew absolutely nothing.

http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/492964.html

Sarah Palin denies knowledge that her staff was making phone calls on her behalf. Apparently she denies knowlege that her husband was also making numerous and repeated phone calls. Either she's not being truthful, or she's not in charge of her office.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:01 pm

So your evidence is that there's no evidence, which means she must be lying...

You know another theory? She did her job, and got rid of a scumbag trooper, and then got rid of the guy that was backing scumbags over doing the right thing... and her political enemies decided that was an "abuse of power," and invented how it must have been... only to have no evidence of any such thing.

Sucks when doing the right thing is used against you... but it's a bit better when it's ineffective.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:03 pm

I think this entire Sarah Palin issue was decided rather strongly just two days ago.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:05 pm

If so, SF, it sure would be nice to see people stop trying to smear her.

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:05 pm

actually, Hal, Trooper Wooten is still Trooper Wooten, was never fired.

There was an administrative procedure over the allegations, and he was disciplined.

Are you advocating vigilante justice, outside the rule of law? That's one of the founding principles of America, Hal. Divided government, rule of law, etc.

I'd like to know that a pissed off ex-relative in a position of power in the government can't just come get me. That they're restrained by that American thing--restraint on power, and rule of law.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:09 pm

No, I'm advocating the government not beign corrupt, and not having corrupt people in it. I want the government to continually police itself and get rid of people that don't opperate with the people's best interests in mind.

The trooper will be fired soon enough, or he'll be perfect the rest of his career, either way is fine.

Post by **Ellienor** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:10 pm

No, I'm advocating the government not beign corrupt, and not having corrupt people in it.

Funny enough, I absolutely agree with you.

get rid of people that don't opperate with the people's best interests in mind.

And who should be the judge of that? In a rule of law country, a judge having a personal relationship with the person being judged, as well as a jury, steps aside so the evidence can be viewed objectively.

Post by **halplm** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:10 pm

Ellienor wrote:
I'd like to know that a pissed off ex-relative in a position of power in the government can't just come get me. That they're restrained by that American thing--restraint on power, and rule of law.

As long as we're dealign with facts, lets be clear that the discipline of said trooper was handed down with reference to many OTHER incidents, none of which was the death threats on relatives of Palin.

Post by **sauronsfinger** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 8:11 pm

But Hal, everytime somebody here or in the media brings up issues about Palin, her own record, her own actions and evidence of her own corruption, you find a reason to dismiss it, not believe it, justify it or simply ignore it.