Bongulator
Well-Known Member
You'll see this story over the next few days. I'll summarize.
A Republican dude, an Alaskan member of a public watchdog group, who suspected that Palin was conducting partisan business on taxpayer time asked her office for her emails. She gave them four boxes of emails, and withheld 1100 pieces of email, citing 'executive privilege'. She did, however, provide a list of the headers of those withheld emails, and they seemed to be mostly talking about how to defeat political oppenents, how to get that trooper fired, and so on. Probably some embarrassing stuff, or even incriminating if laws were broken. (It is against the law for her to use her office to conduct partisan business.)
In Alaska, the governor can cite executive privelege for policy-related emails before a policy decision has been made. However, the titles of these emails indicate that these have nothing to do with policy decisions or deliberations. In addition, many of those emails she carbon-copied to her husband...who is not an employee of the state. He is just a private citizen.
So now, what happens? The first step is, she has been asked to review the decision to withhold those emails. She will likely say something like, 'Upon review, my initial decision not to let the public have access to these emails was correct, and stands.'
After that, it will have to go to the courts. Of course, she has complete authority to release the emails on her own, at any time. As someone running on a platform as a 'reformer' and a proponent of government transparency, obviously she *should* release all those emails. I wouldn't hold my breath.
The 'executive privilege' claim will likely not stand once a judge reviews. For one thing, she's already given one member of the public, a private citizen, access to the email -- her husband. Is he a better private citizen than others? Of course not. In addition, the judge will get to read them, to make sure that they are policy-related, all 1100 of them. Then the judge will make the call.
Very Dick Cheney-ish of her, to hide emails from the public, when the public pays her wages. And, isn't she supposed to be looking out for the public interest? Isn't that, like, her job? How is it in the public's interest to be refused access to the correspondence of their elected officials?
How she's going to play this, how *McCain* is going to try to spin this, I have no idea. But I can virtually guarantee it's going to be very interesting, especially once those emails are made public. It'll be even better if she's forced to release them, against her will, rather than voluntarily, which as a 'true reformer' is what she should do.
I'm sure Todd Palin's a rockin' dude and all, but if he gets to see the emails, we all should.
A Republican dude, an Alaskan member of a public watchdog group, who suspected that Palin was conducting partisan business on taxpayer time asked her office for her emails. She gave them four boxes of emails, and withheld 1100 pieces of email, citing 'executive privilege'. She did, however, provide a list of the headers of those withheld emails, and they seemed to be mostly talking about how to defeat political oppenents, how to get that trooper fired, and so on. Probably some embarrassing stuff, or even incriminating if laws were broken. (It is against the law for her to use her office to conduct partisan business.)
In Alaska, the governor can cite executive privelege for policy-related emails before a policy decision has been made. However, the titles of these emails indicate that these have nothing to do with policy decisions or deliberations. In addition, many of those emails she carbon-copied to her husband...who is not an employee of the state. He is just a private citizen.
So now, what happens? The first step is, she has been asked to review the decision to withhold those emails. She will likely say something like, 'Upon review, my initial decision not to let the public have access to these emails was correct, and stands.'
After that, it will have to go to the courts. Of course, she has complete authority to release the emails on her own, at any time. As someone running on a platform as a 'reformer' and a proponent of government transparency, obviously she *should* release all those emails. I wouldn't hold my breath.
The 'executive privilege' claim will likely not stand once a judge reviews. For one thing, she's already given one member of the public, a private citizen, access to the email -- her husband. Is he a better private citizen than others? Of course not. In addition, the judge will get to read them, to make sure that they are policy-related, all 1100 of them. Then the judge will make the call.
Very Dick Cheney-ish of her, to hide emails from the public, when the public pays her wages. And, isn't she supposed to be looking out for the public interest? Isn't that, like, her job? How is it in the public's interest to be refused access to the correspondence of their elected officials?
How she's going to play this, how *McCain* is going to try to spin this, I have no idea. But I can virtually guarantee it's going to be very interesting, especially once those emails are made public. It'll be even better if she's forced to release them, against her will, rather than voluntarily, which as a 'true reformer' is what she should do.
I'm sure Todd Palin's a rockin' dude and all, but if he gets to see the emails, we all should.
