SarahPAC blames illegal political donations on software error

By GottaLaff

Paddy linked to this earlier, but I couldn't resist a post.

Death Panel Barbie, short version: The dog ate my homework:

Former Gov. Sarah Palin's political action committee gave excessive contributions to two well-known Republicans and also is facing demands from the federal government for more detailed financial information on a number of fronts.

The deficiencies are highlighted in a five-page letter sent Aug. 19 by a Federal Elections Commission staffer to SarahPAC treasurer Tim Crawford. The FEC wants answers by Sept. 24.

"Failure to adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or enforcement action," FEC campaign finance analyst Allen Norfleet wrote.

Oh, come on, don't get all mad at her and stuff. It was just a computer program glitch. Don't look back, only look forward.

"I think you can say it was sloppiness on my part and my attorney's part," Crawford said, referring to the contributions. "We fouled up there. But it's been fixed." He said SarahPAC's lawyer is Mark Braden of Washington, D.C.

Wowzers, it's a good thing somebody as important as the F.E.C. caught that sloppiness or it might never have been fixed, right?

Or was it "fixed" from the start?

Crawford said SarahPAC uses election software, similar to TurboTax for income taxes, that walks aides through required disclosures. When they filed the mid-year report to the FEC, no violations were noted, so they thought they had done it correctly.

Typical Rushpublic response: Blame everyone and everything but yourselves.

Dianne Feinstein suggests CIA concealment broke law

By GottaLaff

I've been digging for the video on Dianne Feinstein's appearance on today's Fox News Sunday, but can't seem to find it. If someone does, please link me. Meantime:

Regarding the 8-year-old counterterrorism program, the Bush administration's failure to notify Congress "is a big problem, because the law is very clear," said Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Congress should investigate the secrecy because "it could be illegal," Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said.

According to Feinstein, CIA director Leon Panetta told Congress late last month that "he had just learned about the program, described it to us, indicated that he had canceled it and ... did tell us that he was told that the vice president had ordered that the program not be briefed to the Congress."

"We were kept in the dark. That's something that should never, ever happen again," said Feinstein.

Feinstein said that she understands the need for strong countermeasures following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

However, "I think you weaken your case when you go outside of the law," she added.

The Rushpublics are spinning this as an attack on the CIA. Of course they are. Because, see, that's the only reason anyone is discussing subjects like Dick Cheney's orders to conceal information, and the CIA's alleged lies. It has nothing to do with breaking the law, it's all about unfair attacks on our Central Intelligence Agency.

And since we're on the subject, if you want to know how BushCo ignored anybody who disagreed with them on the use of torture "enhanced interrogation techniques", and the CIA's involvement, check out Jane Mayer's book The Dark Side. Then see how all that affected the lives of innocent prisoners like Fayiz al-Kandari.

After you do that, let me know if this is all about the poor, beleaguered CIA and how unAmerican the Democrats are for trying to actually do something about unprecedented government powers and what's left of our legal system.

CIA destroyed 92 interrogation tapes

Somebody needs to be prosecuted for this malfeasance. I'm looking at you George...

WASHINGTON- New documents show the CIA destroyed nearly 100 tapes of terror interrogations, far more than has previously been acknowledged.

The revelation Monday comes as a criminal prosecutor is wrapping up his investigation in the matter.

The acknowledgment of dozens of destroyed tapes came in a letter filed by government lawyers in New York, where the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit seeking more details of terror interrogation programs.

"The CIA can now identify the number of videotapes that were destroyed," said the letter by Acting U.S. Attorney Lev Dassin. "Ninety two videotapes were destroyed."

The tapes became a contentious issue in the trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, after prosecutors initially claimed no such recordings existed, then acknowledged two videotapes and one audiotape had been made.

Federal judge finds Bush administration engaged in illegal record-keeping practices

By GottaLaff

BushCo is always on the wrong side of the law. Busted again:

A federal judge on Friday rejected the Bush administration's latest attempt to keep secret the identities of White House visitors and declared that it engaged in illegal record-keeping practices.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth concluded that the practices in dispute took place before October 2004 when the Secret Service transferred large numbers of entry and exit logs to the White House and then deleted internal Secret Service copies of them.

The practices ended, the judge said, after various private organizations went to court in an effort to gain access to the logs.

Lamberth's ruling brushed aside the government's argument that revealing Secret Service logs would impede the president's ability to perform his constitutional duties.

The court said that the likelihood of harm is not great enough to justify curtailing the public disclosure goals of the Freedom of Information Act.

A watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, asked for the records to determine whether nine conservative religious leaders visited the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence in October 2006.

Lamberth's decision means the government will have to find other legal grounds if it wants to block release of the Secret Service logs.

They'll run the clock out on this case as they have in all the others. But at least we won one.

Rachel Maddow- Warrantless Wiretapping Whistleblower Thomas Tamm Interview

The man is an absolute hero. Background here and here and here.

Californians Against Hate file suit against Mormon church re: Prop 8

By GottaLaff

Ruh-roh! The spread the hate movement hit a snaggy-waggy. They apparently forgot to report "various non monetary contributions", and managed to commit a legal no-no, according to Californians Against Hate. And they targeted non-members, which requires transparency. You all remember transparency, don't you?

The LDS church only reported $2,078 in these contributions. By contrast, Dobson's Focus on the Family reported nearly $84,000, and the National Organization for Marriage reported over $210,000 in non-monetary donations. Yet the LDS -- who led the Yesapalooza on 8, only reported about $2,000? Oooops:

Fred Karger, Founder of Californians Against Hate, today filed a Sworn Complaint with the Enforcement Division of the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). In the complaint he accused The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) of not reporting numerous non monetary contributions to ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal I.D. # 1302592.

Karger contends that The Mormon Church organized phone banks from Utah and Idaho, sent direct mail to voters, transported people to California over several weekends, used the LDS NewsRoom to send out News Releases to promote their activities, walked precincts, ran a speakers bureau, distributed thousands of lawn signs and other campaign material, organized a “surge to election day,” had Church leaders travel to California, set up very elaborate web sites, produced at least 9 commercials and 4 other video broadcasts and conducted at least 2 satellite simulcasts over 5 Western states. All of these actions were geared toward nonmembers.

In addition to the formal FPPC complaint, a letter was also sent today to FPPC Chairman Ross Johnson, California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff expanding on the complaint. [Go here to read the letter]

In the letter, a copy of which is below, Karger stated that 2 other organizations that were also involved in the Yes on Prop 8 campaign, reported substantial non monetary contributions to ProtectMarriage.com. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) of Princeton, New Jersey reported $210,634,75 and James Dobson’s Focus on the Family of Colorado Springs, Colorado reported $83,790.00. No non monetary contributions could be found from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In addition to spreading hate, it looks like they were spreading the non monetary wealth a little too. What would Joe the Plumber say? Excerpts from the letter:

All of these unreported contributions by the Mormon Church were on top of its massive fund-raising effort; the largest ever undertaken on a social issue ballot initiative. [...]

Under California Election Law organizations such as the Mormon Church are not required to report activities if they strictly constitute “member communication.” We will explain why we feel that the activities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints went far beyond “member communication,” and were instead specifically targeted at California’s 17 million voters. By not reporting any of these non monetary contributions, the Mormon Church violated the Political Reform Act.

This stuff doesn't sound very do unto othery to me.

IWRC* Palin may have violated law re: mining initiative

By GottaLaff

IWRC* Palin has so many scandals brewing, it's hard to believe she's not already vice president:

Palin's intervention in dispute may have violated law against state advocacy on ballot measures.

Alaska law forbids state officials from using state resources to advocate on ballot initiatives. [...]

Asked about the initiative at a news conference, she invoked "personal privilege" to give an opinion. "Let me take my governor's hat off for just a minute here and tell you, personally, Prop. 4 -- I vote no on that," she said. "I have all the confidence in the world that [the Department of Environmental Conservation] and our [Department of Natural Resources] have great, very stringent regulations and policies already in place. We're going to make sure that mines operate only safely, soundly." [...]

For Palin to intervene as she did, with a brief, seemingly off-the-cuff statement just days before the election, also showed a lack of serious engagement on complex and important issues, initiative supporters say. Palin, they say, was simply going on the word of officials in her administration that the existing regulations sufficed, without taking into account their possible biases: Her natural resources commissioner hails from the mining industry, and mining companies directly subsidize some regulators' salaries.

"She has this great faith that nothing will go wrong, which gave her a false sense of security, so she went off a little half-cocked" and spoke out, said Tim Bristol, Alaska program director for Trout Unlimited. [...]

Palin's comments rocked the contest. Within a day, the pro-mining coalition fighting the referendum had placed full-page ads with a picture of the governor and the word "NO." The initiative went down to defeat, with 57 percent of voters rejecting it.

Three days later, Palin was named Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, throwing Alaska into a media frenzy. But the fallout has lingered from an episode that may stand as one of the most consequential in Palin's 21-month tenure. The state ethics panel is examining whether her comments violated the law against state advocacy on ballot measures; it had already ruled that a state Web site was improperly slanted toward mining interests.

TrooperGate, now this. Add in a dash of Couric and a pinch of Charlie Gibson and we have a pot of extra chunky Palin scandal stew. Serve that up with a smelly hunk of Gramm-pa McCain bad-judgment Limburger and voila! A toxic meal that would make even those of us with the strongest stomachs nauseous.

*"In What Respect, Charlie?"

SalmonGate

By GottaLaff

How many more revelations will there be?

At the very least, there was something fishy about Alaska Governor (and Vice Presidential hopeful) Sarah Palin’s decision to speak out publicly against the state’s Clean Water Initiative late last month. There may also be something blatantly illegal about her advocacy for defeating the ballot initiative, which ultimately failed to pass when 57 percent of Alaskans voted against it.

A bit of background. The Clean Water Initiative (aka Ballot Measure 4) was put in place to restrict the amount of arsenic and other toxic pollutants that new, large-scale mines could dump into the state’s waterways. Its stated goal was to protect human health and safeguard salmon that use the rivers and streams to spawn. More specifically, it was aimed at a massive gold and copper operation called Pebble Mine located directly upstream of Bristol Bay, site of one of the world’s largest and most sustainable wild salmon fisheries, which produced 31 million pounds of king, sockeye, and chum salmon in 2007.

The law in Alaska forbids a governor from officially lobbying for or against a ballot initiative such as Ballot Measure 4. To get around the law, Palin exercised what she called “personal privilege” when she said to reporters, “Let me take my governor’s hat off for just a minute here and tell you, personally, Prop 4—I vote no on that.”

I will leave it to legal minds in Alaska whether doffing a metaphorical hat and claiming personal privilege exempt a person from obeying the law of the land, but one thing the possible veep’s stance clearly shows is an alarming lack of judgment.

This article is from, of all places, Gourmet Magazine.

Do the calculations yourself. On one hand, you have an industry (mining) that employs 5,500 people in your state and generates $200 million in tax revenues. It is based on a finite resource that will run out one day. On the other hand, you have an industry (salmon fishing in Bristol Bay alone) that employs 12,000 people and contributes $250 million to the economy. This industry is based on a sustainably managed renewable resource that will be around long after the last ton of ore is dug out of Pebble Mine. Which would you favor? [...]

Pebble Mine still has to clear some regulatory hurdles before it goes into full operation, probably sometime around 2011. If that happens, the greatest threat to Bristol Bay’s salmon fishery will have come from bad decisions made by homegrown politicians.

What a reformer. Always thinking of others.