Basically it says she was/is about to be indicted by federal investigators for embezzling money through a corrupt deal with a construction company.
EDIT: Seems to be true (other sources are confirming). We should change the title of this thread to "Sarah Palin...F&*ked". If this is true (and it seems like it is) she is toast.
EDIT #2: Looks like it's not true. Lots of people in Alaska were saying this was happening, and the LA Times apparently had a source that confirmed it, but the spokesperson for the FBI in anchorage say definitively that there is no ongoing investigation. Link
If these embezzlement claims are true, I don't know how anyone can defend Sarah Palin. She already illegally used her influence to get her sister's ex-husband fired. She has the demeanor and temperment of a spoiled selfish beauty queen. If you believe the claims of her post interview behavior I don't understand how anyone can still support her.
All points about demeanor and such aside, I expect my politicians and national leaders to be smarter and more well-informed than I am. I should not be able to get a better idea of what's going on in the international community than the vice president, simply by browsing CNN and the BBC. That is not acceptable. Sarah Palin seems to demonstrate a willful ignorance of the world around her, and belittles and demeans her opponents as elitist when they claim she should do otherwise.
On July 04 2009 17:00 evandi wrote: The part where she was asked about what newspapers she read the question itself was insulting and hence her response.
Here is the video.
"Yes, the question was insulting, and hence the response.." <--- rofl
There is no point discusing anything with evandi if he/she comments the video i just pasted with
On July 04 2009 17:00 evandi wrote: The part where she was asked about what newspapers she read the question itself was insulting and hence her response.
Its like you receive different inputs from her videos then us.. Truly epic..
Being asked if you can name at least one newspaper is pretty insulting, and you don't agree. Bask in your hatred, man.
Why did she not name one when asked? It is a fairly simple question. Let us consider some possible scenarios.
One possible answer is that she thought the question was insulting and so chose not to answer it, as you suggest. However, her body language and the way her verbal responses deteriorate and she starts fumbling for words strongly indicates that this is not the case. And surely, someone who thought the question was insulting would look at the questioner with incredulity and indicate as such in her answer.
A second possible answer is that she does not know the name of any newspapers. This stretches credulity and I cannot really take it seriously.
A third possible answer is that in the heat of the moment her mind went blank and she could not really remember any names so she blundered around trying to extricate herself from the situation.
A fourth possible answer is that she could name newspapers but that she was not really familiar with their content and that she was afraid of being caught out by a more detailed follow-up question so she was reluctant to name specific publications.
As I said, I think the first one is highly implausible given her body language and verbal responses. Answers two and three are rather worrying for someone who has designs on the highest offices of the land. Personally I think the fourth answer is the most likely, but it is also something of a negative mark against her. And rather amusing. Or perhaps I too am "basking in hatred" with such a detailed consideration supported by the evidence available.
Well, actually from her response I think it is obvious that she assumed that Couric was implying at first that as an Alaskan she was probably getting her news from weird Alaskan sources or what-not.
But then she implied that she reads everything. And what do you know, I do too. I read everything the internet provides to me. She gave a similar response. She evidently will read anything.
When asked to name something specific, if she did reply with something specific it wouldn't really mean anything since she already said that she just reads everything and doesn't really have a particular choice... so it came across to me as if it were an insult. To play along would be to validate the question (which did not fit after Palin's previous remarks).
Unfortunately neither this:
Well, actually from her response I think it is obvious that she assumed that Couric was implying at first that as an Alaskan she was probably getting her news from weird Alaskan sources or what-not.
nor this:
When asked to name something specific, if she did reply with something specific it wouldn't really mean anything since she already said that she just reads everything and doesn't really have a particular choice... so it came across to me as if it were an insult. To play along would be to validate the question (which did not fit after Palin's previous remarks).
are actually supported by the video.
As I have pointed out, nothing about her body language or her fumbling verbal response give any support whatsoever to the notion that she believed the question was an "insult". On that basis, I do not find your response remotely compelling. I am rather surprised, given my earlier analysis, that you would continue to peddle the "insult" line.
Ok, well, her body language and her fumbling verbal response could very well have been that she was flustered at having her intelligence or normalness(not a word perhaps) challenged by Couric so what you just said was just a biased opinion in my opinion.
I am sorry evandi, but that is a very weak and rather confused response.
You made a claim about the reason for Palin not naming specific publications; I have pointed out that your claim is not supported by the video. You have not properly addressed this. There is nothing "biased" in pointing out that your claim is not supported by the evidence. Your further comment is conjecture. My own suggested explanation is far more plausible given the contents of the video.
Well, it wasn't weak or confused in my opinion. Your own opinion is your own opinion. We can leave it at that.
On July 04 2009 21:16 Ghardo wrote: at least try not to act like the 13 years you're old
the thing about palin is that she insults the little bit of human intellect i possess. if she wasn't in politics and representative of the republican party (imagine her in a talk show) nobody would back her up for the naive and uneducated crap she's talking (or can you see russia from alaska?).
Like I've said there is a part of Russia that can be seen from Alaska. Just google it.
On July 04 2009 20:01 Kolean.Tellan wrote: Trolling Trolling Trolling... Trolling Trolling Trolling...
RAWHIDE!!!!!
Having examined evandi's posting history, I do not believe he is trolling so I do not think that accusation has any merit. Of course, I do think he is wrong.
No, he's definitely trolling. No one in their right mind or with any bit of education can twist and spin reality, facts and word definitions so far, and come to the conclusions that he does. He's actually quite good, since he's single-handedly responsible for 10 pages of responses telling him he's wrong.
Or maybe he's just the most ignorant twat to ever walk this planet. His posts contain so many logical fallacies, that people like him really shouldn't be allowed freedom of speech
Right, I have an opinion that the majority does not share. Thus, since I am not caving in there are a lot of people arguing with me. Are they going to give me the last word when almost everyone here disagrees with me?
"His posts contain so many logical fallacies, that people like him really shouldn't be allowed freedom of speech "
When I respond to posts such as yours with a slight insult I guess I'm breaking the rules because I was sent such a PM. Of course what you said was ridiculous and insulting, however I guess I'll have to leave it to you to dream up what I would tell you if it was not against the rules for me to do so.
Actually, living near a country does imply familiarity with that country. It isn't everything, but it is a little thing to say about ones experiences.
No, that's simply incorrect. You just did exactly what Palin did in the interview.
How does living near a country increase your familiarity with that country, and thus your foreign policy analysis and decision making capability? Does that mean you converse or have any interaction with that proximal nation's leadership? Do you regularly interact with anyone from that country and does that give you any insight into the whole nation's interests and objectives? Living near a country doesn't make you any more familiar, interacting with them does, and if she could have cited some examples of actually interacting with Russians that would have been a totally fine answer. She didn't, and I suspect it's because she doesn't interact with anyone from Russia despite Alaska's close proximity.
How is this so difficult to understand it is a little thing to say about ones experiences. It doesn't imply anything but that she is more familiar with Russia than the average person. It implies that its probably on her mind more than the average person. I don't believe I or she claimed any more than that.
It is something worth stating and doesn't in any way claim expertise.
You are blowing this way out of proportion as is the anti-Palin custom.
But the point of the question was to get some idea about her expertise and knowledge about foreign policy (even a basic understanding). And she gave a completely nonsensical answer and she's rightfully so ridiculed about it, just like any politician running for office should be. Of course it shouldn't be the only or main argument against her, but god damn are you seriously saying that you're satisfied with her answer and don't see anything wrong in it? If yes then you have some insanely low standards for government officials.
I don't think what she said implied that she was an expert on foreign policy. So, ya, I was satisfied with her answer.
Which candidate that ran was actually an expert on foreign policy? None of them. They have advisers. You have insanely misguided views on what kinds of "super-creatures" run things.
They excel at getting votes, nothing more. None of them are experts, they rely on their advisers.
Noone was expecting or looking for expert analysis on foreign policy, but imho you have to do better "Russia is our neighbor" on such important issue. I'm not an expert on governing, but if you're that dense on the issue, then how will you manage to comprehend and evaluate what advisors are advising you. I know government isn't run by super-humans but i'd love that to happen because that's exactly what i expect elected officials to be - far more intelligent and educated than their average voters.
No, I think that's a fine amount of knowledge for someone who is going to be advised by experts.
And I don't think Obama knows anymore than her about Russia.
Wow you really have low standards, maybe only for Republicans, because equating Obamas answers with Palins is beyond my comprehension. Hopefully you're just trolling. Have a good day.
Good day. You're really naive, but good day.
Of course, I've already pointed out blogs you can check for opinions like mine, so that by now individuals who have brains in their heads should focus less on calling me a troll and more on either running away as quickly as possible or discussing the facts.
This is what one of the writers at Hot Air, one of the blogs you mentioned earlier, wrote about her resignation:
I’ve had a chance to watch the video of her announcement and read through dozens of Twitter messages back and forth attempting to rationalize this, and still, it simply can’t be rationalized on the basis of what Palin said today. It’s easily the most bizarre resignation I’ve seen, and just about senseless.
If the spotlight was too much, then she shouldn’t have run for office in the first place. If she’s quitting because people are taking potshots at her, then she’s not the kind of political fighter we thought she was.
Unless there was a serious illness or a serious scandal, the resignation on the grounds Palin gave is simply incomprehensible. She has destroyed her own credibiity in a single day.
.
And there's an update at the bottom with an excerpt taken from The Spectator, with one of The Spectator's writers stating that "I just listened to her speech announcing her decision, and found it singularly unimpressive" and "Statesmen hang tough. Sarah Palin is cutting and running. ‘Nuff said."
Yet you wrote that "I cannot fathom how people are so unaware of conservative blogs such as Hot-Air, Free-Republic (which is the opposite in politics to dailykos but just as rabid and partison) and Michelle Malkin's blog.
I don't agree with them on the war or many social issues, but they and I would and do defend exactly this position about Palin."?
There are a variety of opinions on those sites, but for one thing Palin has always ranked high in polls in the republican party as a possible candidate for 2012. How can they agree with all of the accusations sent by people on this thread?
So some people on this particular issue, (not whether or not she is dumb) thinks that it is odd or bad that she is resigning? What have you just proven? Nothing.
Because to be honest, the retoric and outright lies that you see in that site are very similar to what you are saying.
Well, I never believed he was Muslim, nor did I ever believe that he wasn't born in the US. And no I have never seen that particular site, but there you go, some people believe such things yet are not trolls.
On July 04 2009 19:26 evandi wrote: No, I think that's a fine amount of knowledge for someone who is going to be advised by experts.
And I don't think Obama knows anymore than her about Russia.
Okay, so let me get this right: You believe that Obama doesn't know anymore than Palin about Russia despite Obama majoring in Political Science at Columbia University with the specialization in international relations? I'm sorry, but doesn't international include, but is not limited to, Russia? Or do you believe that Obama learned nothing from Columbia? Or is it that suddenly, all of our universities are suddenly terrible at teaching, and thus they skipped parts such as Russia? Or is it that Russia isn't considered an important nation in international relationships?
Ehhh. Sarah Palin is not the best candidate and I truly hope that republicrats can get someone else to represent them for the next election. She isn't a stupid slutty worthless woman like she gets portrayed, but neither is she presidential material. Nor could she win, unless she radically changes her public image.
The points i was trying to make earlier in this thread were only in response to all the people that were jizzing themselves over how great Obama is.
i think he's right, it's pretty clear to LEAVE office for no reason implies the numerous scandals surrounding sarah palin rather than a potential presidential bid, whoever she runs against is going to torture her with the fact that she QUIT her job when it got too tough, i don't think she can even win a primary with this on her record
lol wut now Palin is threatening legal action against a blogger.
"To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as 'fact' that Governor Palin resigned because she is 'under federal investigation' for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation," Van Flein said in a statement. "This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law."
On July 04 2009 19:26 evandi wrote: No, I think that's a fine amount of knowledge for someone who is going to be advised by experts.
And I don't think Obama knows anymore than her about Russia.
Okay, so let me get this right: You believe that Obama doesn't know anymore than Palin about Russia despite Obama majoring in Political Science at Columbia University with the specialization in international relations? I'm sorry, but doesn't international include, but is not limited to, Russia? Or do you believe that Obama learned nothing from Columbia? Or is it that suddenly, all of our universities are suddenly terrible at teaching, and thus they skipped parts such as Russia? Or is it that Russia isn't considered an important nation in international relationships?
In Soviet Russia, Obama has international relations with you!!! .... wait i didn't do that right.
"To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as 'fact' that Governor Palin resigned because she is 'under federal investigation' for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation," Van Flein said in a statement. "This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law."
People are so out of touch if they think that threatening lawsuits against bloggers will help them with their public relations: the opposite is true. "Palin to sue blogger" just blows the story up.
Why people think they can take something off the internet because they threaten lawsuits I still don't know. Once the internet has it, it's forever.
"To the extent several websites, most notably liberal Alaska blogger Shannyn Moore, are now claiming as 'fact' that Governor Palin resigned because she is 'under federal investigation' for embezzlement or other criminal wrongdoing, we will be exploring legal options this week to address such defamation," Van Flein said in a statement. "This is to provide notice to Ms. Moore, and those who re-publish the defamation, such as Huffington Post, MSNBC, the New York Times and The Washington Post, that the Palins will not allow them to propagate defamatory material without answering to this in a court of law."
Headline should read: Palin to sue blogger, Blogger strikes gold in ad revenue and msnbc appearances.
Being indicted takes two things: A prosecutor willing to press charges, and a judge willing to hear.
You don't need any evidence to be indicted, which is one of the reasons why people are usually indicted when nearing election years. The Republican party had a specific contract stating that the Speaker of the House had to resign if indicted, but when a challenge was about to arrive, they changed to so that the Speaker would have to step down if it was politically motivated (aka some democratic lawyers wanted to use the Republican rules against themselves and force out the speaker of the house). I can't remember when this was exactly, it might have been Newt Gingrich but my memory is fuzzy.
There were some indictments to help push the culture of corruption if I'm not mistaken, but of course they were dismissed of all charges, the main point was to get the headline "Republican indicted on charges of blowing up Africa and eating fetuses," from my reading of "The Thumpin' (title after GWB called the democratic landslide in 2006 "a thumpin'")".
lol wut now Palin is threatening legal action against a blogger.
OMG {CC}StealthBlue just went into the bathroom to clean himself off after molesting a child (not that he just needed to pee)! You'd sue also.
EPT
