Sarah Palin's Secret Emails

[The Wicker Man]

Sarah Palin's Secret Emails

The Palin administration won't release hundreds of emails from her office, claiming they cover confidential policy matters. Then why do the subject lines refer to a political foe, a journalist, and non-policy topics?

In June, Andrée McLeod, a self-described independent government watchdog in Alaska, sent an opens record act request to the office of Governor Sarah Palin. She requested copies of all the emails that had been sent and received by Ivy Frye and Frank Bailey, two top aides to Palin, from February through April of this year. McLeod, a 53-year-old registered Republican who has held various jobs in state government, suspected that Frye and Bailey had engaged in political activity during official business hours in that period by participating in a Palin-backed effort to oust the state chairman of the Alaska Republican party, Randy Ruedrich. (Bailey has been in the national news of late for refusing to cooperate with investigators probing whether Palin fired Alaska's public safety commission because he did not dismiss a state trooper who had gone through an ugly divorce with Palin's sister.)

In response to her request, McLeod received four large boxes of emails. This batch of documents did not contain any proof that Frye and Bailey had worked on government time to boot out Ruedrich. But there was other information she found troubling. Several of the emails suggested to her that Palin's office had used its influence to reward a Fairbanks surveyor who was a Palin fundraiser with a state job. In early August, McLeod filed a complaint with the state attorney general against Palin, Bailey, and other Palin aides, claiming they had violated ethics and hiring laws. Palin, now the Republican vice-presidential candidate, told the Alaska Daily News that "there were no favors done for anybody."

But more intriguing than any email correspondence contained in the four boxes was what was not released: about 1100 emails. Palin's office provided McLeod with a 78-page list (PDF) cataloging the emails it was withholding. Many of them had been written by Palin or sent to her. Palin's office claimed most of the undisclosed emails were exempt from release because they were covered by the "executive" or "deliberative process" privileges that protect communications between Palin and her aides about policy matters. But the subject lines of some of the withheld emails suggest they were not related to policy matters. Several refer to one of Palin's political foes, others to a well-known Alaskan journalist. Moreover, some of the withhold emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin, the governor's husband. Todd Palin—a.k.a. the First Dude—holds no official state position (though he has been a close and influential adviser for Governor Palin). The fact that Palin and her aides shared these emails with a citizen outside the government undercuts the claim that they must be protected under executive privilege. McLeod asks, "What is Sarah Palin hiding?"

The list of still-secret emails includes a series of messages that circulated on February 1, 2008, among Palin, Bailey, Frye, and Todd Palin "re Andrew Halcro." A former Republican, Halcro ran as an independent against Palin for governor in 2006, collecting only 9 percent of the vote. Since then he has been a blogger who often criticizes Palin. There is no telling what the emails said about Halcro. But in a July blog posting, Halcro asked, "why in the world is Todd Palin getting copied on emails [about me] that his wife's administration is classifying as confidential....These emails should be released to the public....after all Todd Palin has no standing to claim executive privilege. By including him in the email loop, the Palin administration has arguably breached any claim of executive privilege." And McLeod wonders, "What do emails about Andrew Halcro have to do with policy deliberations?"

The list of confidential emails includes a number of communications related to the Public Safety Employees Association, a union for the state's police officers and state troopers, and the headings refer to PSEA ads and a "PR campaign." Many of these PSEA-related emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin—and were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. (Recently, John Cyr, the PSEA executive director, told The Washington Post that Sarah Palin held a grudge against the state troopers and held down their salaries and other funding because her ex-brother-in-law-the-trooper had not been fired.) A separate email sent from Frye to Bailey and Todd Palin and headed "I may be in trouble here guys" was withheld because it involves a personnel matter. In April, a series of emails with the subject line "from Sheila Toomey" zipped between Sarah Palin, Bailey, Frye, other Palin aides, and Todd Palin. Toomey writes the "Alaska Ear" political gossip column for the Anchorage Daily News. These emails were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. And a string of emails titled "Racism on the Radio" that went back and forth between Governor Palin and her aides was blocked from release on the same grounds.

McLeod says she intends to file an appeal of the decision to withhold the emails on the 78-page list.

Palin has denounced McLeod's efforts. After McLeod filed the ethics complaint, Palin told the Anchorage Daily News, "This is the same Andrée McLeod that follows us around at public events and camps herself out in our waiting area and hounds us for a job, asking us if there's a way she can...not have to go through the system to get a job with this administration." Palin also called McLeod "the falafel lady," because McLeod once sold falafel. On his website, Halcro has posted excerpts of emails Palin sent McLeod between 2002 and 2005, in which she praised McLeod. In one of these messages, Palin wrote, "You're all about accountability." In another, Palin said, "Thanks for working to instill the public trust." Palin also wrote her, "I'm proud to know you." And in one email, Palin hailed McLeod: "Holy Moly you are powerful regarding getting the word out to the press about questionable activity."

"I've known Sarah for years, " says McLeod, who moved to Alaska from New York in 1978. "When the finger is pointed at somebody else, she's all for accountability. When it's pointing at her, it's different. Sarah Palin was elected on the basis of providing open and honest government. She has failed miserably."

The McCain-Palin campaign did not respond to phone and email requests for a comment.

[szh]

I am curious ... what is the purpose of asking for Sarah Palin to reveal all her e-mails here?

Has anyone asked Biden for all his e-mails too? Any report on what he might say to that?

Z

[The Wicker Man]

If she's got nothing to hide, then why hide them at all?

[szh]

If she's got nothing to hide, then why hide them at all?

Would you allow yours to be made public and pored over by people?

The fact that she (or anybody) might have e-mail that they don't want in the public means nothing. Calling this an act of "secrecy" really stretches rational limits.

Z

[The Wicker Man]

Would you allow yours to be made public and pored over by people?

Yes, but my primary means of comm isnt by email anyway.

anyway, I'm not the person running for VP.

[ishkabibble]

Has anyone asked Biden for all his e-mails too? Any report on what he might say to that?

Put in a FOIA request and find out.

[ishkabibble]

Would you allow yours to be made public and pored over by people?

The fact that she (or anybody) might have e-mail that they don't want in the public means nothing. Calling this an act of "secrecy" really stretches rational limits.

Well, at the federal level, the US has FOIA.

I would hope all states have something similar.

I don't see any stretches. Are you an advocate of government secrecy? Or open government?

[AZhitman]

Are you an advocate of government secrecy? Or open government?

Are you an advocate of personal privacy?

The "if she's got nothing to hide" argument is lame. The left doesn't like it when the right uses it as an excuse to invade privacy.

Oh, but she's a government employee...

Yes, correct. And there's no expectation of privacy FOR EMAILS ON TAXPAYER-FUNDED SYSTEMS. I know, because I'm the "snooper" at least weekly.

So, file the request under the FOIA and STFU. Because the expectation for ANYONE would be to oppose turning over their electronic communications and you all know it.

[szh]

Are you an advocate of government secrecy? Or open government?

Never thought about it per se ...

Z

[ishkabibble]

Are you an advocate of personal privacy?

Yep, but this is not personal.

The "if she's got nothing to hide" argument is lame. The left doesn't like it when the right uses it as an excuse to invade privacy.

Again, entirely different situation.

Because the expectation for ANYONE would be to oppose turning over their electronic communications and you all know it.

Yep, and the law trumps the "wants" of the employee. Upset about your work email being snooped into? Too bad; you shouldn't have been emailing "unprofessional" things.

Yes, correct. And there's no expectation of privacy FOR EMAILS ON TAXPAYER-FUNDED SYSTEMS. So, file the request under the FOIA

Thanks for arguing against my point, yet proving it.

[telcoman]

I am curious ... what is the purpose of asking for Sarah Palin to reveal all her e-mails here?

Has anyone asked Biden for all his e-mails too? Any report on what he might say to that?

Z

All the other candidates have been fully vetted during this long campaign.

What is Sarah Palin hiding?

Why is she unable to speak except from a speech prepared by others for her?

I want to know and so do millions of others. That is one reason why the blogs have become so popular. Any false information gets quickly disproved such as the baby issue and we move on.If she would make herself available to the press she could provide us with facts that can be checked and verified.

[wingFeather]

The Palin administration won't release hundreds of emails from her office, claiming they cover confidential policy matters.

I don't think it's in the best interest of our country for her email to be public access.

All the other candidates have been fully vetted during this long campaign.

Incorrect.

[rn79870]

Would you allow yours to be made public and pored over by people?

The fact that she (or anybody) might have e-mail that they don't want in the public means nothing. Calling this an act of "secrecy" really stretches rational limits.

Z

Yes Z, that's the law. The boss (in this case the people of Alaska) own those emails. Palin has no reasonable expectation of privacy when using her official email account) The courts have already ruled an employee has no right to privacy in the company email system.

So, yes, if she refuses to release them, she attaches a very strong suspicion of wrongdoing to them. Given the extensive amount of controversy attaching to her candidacy, she would be wise to release them, that is, unless they are what they are purported to be, in which case, she should refuse to release them.

Edited***I searched for a reference to Alaska and did not find one. However, it is permissible for a state to grant that right of privacy to it's citizens, but that's not what is being claimed here. The general rule RE: company email is this...The short answer is, the company owns the computer and the company owns the network — if you want something to be private, don't do it at work.

[marlin29311]

I want to know and so do millions of others. That is one reason why the blogs have become so popular. Any false information gets quickly disproved such as the baby issue and we move on.If she would make herself available to the press she could provide us with facts that can be checked and verified.

I think blogs are becomming the downfall of many things in the US - people will believe anything that's posted in a blog as long as someone says that they are an "expert" or something of the sort. Look a couple years back when a kid went onto a stock blog, hyped up a stock he owned and sold it for a whole lotta $$$. (Sure, the FTC caught him, but it still happened...) The search for credible evidence has been perverted by people with personal agendas against one side or the other.

Assuming that Palin has something to hide is another misnomer - innocent until proven guilty ring a bell? It's not fair to accuse someone of something without the evidence to support - your gut instinct doesn't hold up. Agreed, something might be contained within, but honestly, where the hell do people find these things anyway? And shouldn't resources be devoted to other, more meaningful pursuit such as alternative energy sources, funding our malnurished social security system instead of trying to find everything possible to bash our elected representatives? (yes, people do need monitoring, but until Palin was a VP candidate, did anyone give a hoot?)

In the end, will it make a difference if they are discovered? Probably not. Bill Clinton had sex with an intern. He's still revered by the public. Everyone knows that the left hates the right and vice versa - what difference will an email confirming that do?

[rn79870]

In the end, will it make a difference if they are discovered? Probably not. Bill Clinton had sex with an intern. He's still revered by the public. Everyone knows that the left hates the right and vice versa - what difference will an email confirming that do?

Let's say those emails contained evidence on whether she had abused her power as Governor of Alaska that was relevant to the ethics investigation she is undergoing at this time. I would think she would voluntarily release them to the public to show that the charges were false and put an end to the rumors. America is a pretty forgiving nation when it comes to politicians screwing up, however, if they appear to be covering it up, or if they appear to be lying, our citizens neither forget or forgive.

The major blogs, (and I frequent about 6) go way out of their way to verify and document the source of their information. They clearly point out what is rumor and what is documented. They survive by being first, and being accurate. More often than not, you'll see a news story a day or more on a blog before it hits the networks. Blogs are a good thing.

[The Wicker Man]

Yes, correct. And there's no expectation of privacy FOR EMAILS ON TAXPAYER-FUNDED SYSTEMS. I know, because I'm the "snooper" at least weekly.

So the matter is moot. She should comply with requests about revealing her email.

[AZhitman]

I concur, while maintaining my position that the left has once again displayed extreme hypocrisy.

In return, let's see all of BO's and JB's emails.

Johnny Mac gets a pass, he doesn't use email, LOL.

[ishkabibble]

Where is "the left" in this, and their supposed "extreme hypocrisy"?

[The Wicker Man]

Where is "the left" in this, and their supposed "extreme hypocrisy"?

Everything and everyone that doesn't help the right has a left wing bias.

[szh]

Everything and everyone that doesn't help the right has a left wing bias.

And, vice versa, of course!

Z

[wingFeather]

Where is "the left" in this, and their supposed "extreme hypocrisy"?

Unless you've been living under a rock, or are trying to (unsuccessfully) discredit AZ's post, then you have heard the Democrats WHINING relentlessly about the Patriot Act & such.

Funny how Democrats want their own communications private, but Republicans MUST share ever-s-thangz!

There. I have spelled it out for you. Hopefully now you understand what AZ meant by extreme hypocrisy.

[ishkabibble]

You have done nothing to show me where "the left" is involved in this. PATRIOT has absolutely nothing to do with FOIA, and personal communications have nothing to do with the public sector's communications.

But, like the monkeys on the typewriters who may eventually bang out Shakespeare, you're welcome to try again.

[96Qowner]

But, like the monkeys on the typewriters who may eventually bang out Shakespeare, you're welcome to try again.

"monkeys" you say. Isn't this interesting.

Two things happen when you can't resist the urge to talk like that. You communicate the impression that you enjoy speaking to your opponent in a manner that suggests you despise him, and secondly, it prompts responses, like mine, that have nothing to do with the topic.

We all are guilty of it from time to time, including some of the best campaign strategists in the country. Let's all think for a couple seconds before we hit the post button.

[wingFeather]

You have done nothing to show me where "the left" is involved in this.

Dear kind sir,

Please Google the complaints against the Patriot Act from the left. If you come up short handed, stop someone with an Obama bumper sticker & ask them their opinion.

Thank you,wingFeather

[AZhitman]

If you come up short handed, stop someone with an Obama bumper sticker & ask them their opinion.

Now THAT was funny.

(...sorry - back on topic...)

[szh]

Guys, need to keep it on the high road ....

I am going to delete a few posts here.

Z

[ishkabibble]

Ok, I'll ask once again:

Where is "the left's extreme hypocrisy" in a Republican's FOIA request for Palin's emails?

I'll answer it for Greg and winger since neither is going to respond because they are flat out wrong: There isn't any.

Now, for the bonus round, let's play "find the right's baseless partisan hackery in this thread" , "who posted without even reading the article?"

[AZhitman]

I'll concede that point ish, especially since we're discussing the specific requester -

I was going more along the lines of (follow me here, since I've already conceded) the left's typical opposition to requests for "privileged" or private info / correspondence / etc...

This just struck me as hypocritical in that the target (Palin) allegedly opposes giving up her emails and the requester (who I ASSUMED was operating from the left) brings the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" argument (typically heard fro the right).

Ironic twist, you must admit.

[Jimefam]

I believe in personal privacy and wouldn't dream of asking any candidate for their personal emails. However, In most companies and certainly public office a person has no expectation of privacy(as hitman has already acknowledged) specially if those emails might pertain to a legal investigation being conducted. I wouldn't consider myself a member of the left but I do enjoy my freedom and dont appreciate when they are limited but this is not the issue here and some peoples attempt to make it appear as such shows fear to me. Appearances are important whether you like it or not and refusing to give documentation you clearly have no right to withhold surely gives off the impression something inappropriate occured. It would have been a powerful statement for her to voluntarily turn in those emails and say "unlike most politicians I have nothing to hide" instead she is fighting the request. Obviously there is something they consider politically damaging enough to allow her to appear improper.

[Jimefam]

By the way no administration has used the "priviliged" argument more than the bush administration. Just look at the scooter libby situation. It is much more a political survival tool to stonewall than a characteristic of any one party.