Independent Investigator in Palin Ethics Case not so independent after all
By AnjaP
@Rollo1 (16679)
Boston, Massachusetts
July 24, 2009 11:27pm CST
I wanted to post a link to this news story, because this explains a lot as far as I am concerned. The independent investigator, Thomas Daniel, who leaked the story about Palin's defense fund as well as having been hired to investigate other complaints against her is closely tied to the Democratic Party and is a partner in a law firm that represented Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/23/palin-investigator-ties-democratic-party/?test=latestnews
Does this guy sound very independent and objective to you?
The article answers another question I see often on here. So many don't understand how Palin could have legal bills if she has state attorneys. But the law in Alaska prohibits state officials from defending the state's chief executive against ethics allegations.
If someone with a reason to want to find ethics violations can't make any of these complaints stick, this woman must be squeaky clean.
3 responses
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
25 Jul 09
Rollo, does this surprise you? I didn notice that you didn't mention the other investigations into Sarah that were conducted, or the final conclusion was made by people Palin APPOINTED. Now in many caese the fact that she appointed these people would be considered bad. But, the fact that Palin did apoint personal friends to postions and in some cases had no background in that field should say even more. I don't think you are going to find an independent person to investigate anything in this country period. Anyone who could be put in that postion to head an investigation would be friends with one party or another. Rmember Ken Star? How independent was he?
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Jul 09
The final conclusion in 17 out of 18 cases so far is "dismissed". I think the point is that if someone with an axe to grind can't manage to make a mountain out of a molehill there just ain't enough dirt. Sarah's obviously still pretty clean, despite the mudslinging.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
25 Jul 09
This may sound scary, but I actually agree with you. Truly independent investigators are rare. Personally I think this is an open and shut case so unless this guy is grossly partisan and dishonest he'll come to the same conclusion as the team of lawyers that Kristan Cole consulted with before creating the fund. There's also the matter that Sarah Palin was in no way involved with this fund and never took a penny from it.
All politicians appoint friends, and often friends with no experience in the given position. Leon Panetta ring any bells?
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
26 Jul 09
Rollo, how many years did it take Ken Starr to find something on Clinton. And this is a man that spent $200 Million US taxpayer dollars to find a dress. Given time you can find something on anyone.
@Quiplet (255)
• United States
26 Jul 09
One TV commentator stated today that Sarah Palin's 100,000 Twitter followers were not enough to get her elected.
I'm a Palin Twitter follower, and there are two other registered voters in my family that love her also but don't Twitter. Multiply that times 100K, add+ those families who don't Twitter, then neutralize (for now) those who have been lied to by the media, add+ #1 best seller coming out along with Sarah Palin unleashed from the GOP and governorship = a Winner.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
26 Jul 09
That's a clear attempt at trivialization. Well, I am a Palin Twitter follower, too. I also follow Obama on Twitter (you know what they say - keep your friends close and your enemies closer). I wonder if he added in all the Facebook friends too.
Actually, Obama couldn't be elected by just his Twitter followers, either. He'd be about 55 million votes short.
Guess you and I are just a little bit ahead of the pack on the Twitter front, but since all the news from Iran following the election came out over Twitter, I am glad I use it.
@happyness3 (394)
• United States
25 Jul 09
Great research Rollo1! I love it when people find stuff like this because it just confirms what I have said all along. Could it be possible, that in the little known State of Alaska, we actually have a decent politician who isn't corrupt, who doesn't lie, and who actually is there for the people? Last year, while we were all paying high electric bills, and outrageous gas prices, Sarah stood up to the big oil companies, and put some of that money back in the pockets of Alaskans! People say, well don't you get a dividend every year up there? Yes we do, but what she gave us was an extra $1800 per person on top of that dividend. And we got a credit on our electric or fuel bill. The day that Sarah was tapped as McCains running mate, I was eating breakfast at a restaurant with a TV playing. Everyone started applauding. I called my best friend, and told her that I wasn't sure if I was excited that we, as Alaskans, had the opportunity to share this wonderful woman with our country, or if I was sad that we might have to let her go. I have always tried to stay out of politics because of the lies and such, but with her, there is just honesty and a willingness to help people.
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Jul 09
Some would have us believe that Alaskans are terribly disappointed with her, so it's nice to hear from an Alaskan on this subject.
I think her lack of glitz and smarmy glibness is a nice change from the polished, telemprompter-aided image, but it seems that the press has decided who the elite are and people will exchange honesty for a spiffy image. Well, I think that less glitz and glamour and more down-home sense would do Washington a lot of good. Thanks for the response.
