Today, CREW learned that the Alaska Governor’s Office has requested its third extension of time to respond to CREW’s request for documents related to the firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan.  The attorney general -- the same attorney general who has helped Governor Palin protect her email from public scrutiny -- is empowered to rule on the Governor’s request for an extension.  No suspense on how that one will come out.  The Governor’s latest reason for needing more time reads a little bit like “The dog ate my homework.” 

Citing “circumstances beyond my control,” Governor Palin’s administrative director explained that the need for “more prolonged review” and one sick lawyer means they simply cannot complete their processing until October 31, 2008.  Will any of us be surprised when they submit a fourth request for more time and ask for a date after the election?  Nor is there any mystery on the final outcome of the Governor’s “prolonged review”; we expect to receive little of substance based on a stated need to protect as deliberative discussions involving Governor Palin and “first dude” Todd Palin. 

At least CREW has not been presented with a multi-million dollar bill for processing . . . not yet.

CREW's FEC complaint against Sarah Palin and the RNC is garnering coverage in the media.

UPDATE: We also made Perez Hilton.

From McClatchy:

A watchdog group filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission Wednesday alleging that the Republican Party broke federal campaign laws by buying Sarah Palin and her family about $150,000 in clothes for campaign appearances.

The complaint names as defendants Palin, the RNC, Larson and other operatives associated with the RNC.

The Federal Election Campaign Act specifically prohibits expenditures for such purposes, the liberal-leaning Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said in its complaint.

The group cited language in the law stating that no donated funds may be converted to personal use if the expense "would exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign," including a clothing purchase unless it is of "de minimis value."

Today, CREW filed a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint against vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, the Republican National Committee (RNC) and several other political operatives associated with the RNC, for improperly spending $150,000 on clothing for Palin and her family, in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA).  The complaint and exhibits can be found here.

According to news reports, the clothing and accessories purchases for Palin and her family included  a whopping $49,425 spent at Saks Fifth Avenue, and a $75,062 spending spree at Neiman Marcus. 

These shopping excursions violate campaign finance law. 

FECA specifically prohibits a candidate for federal office from converting campaign funds to personal use. 

FEC regulations make clear that the prohibition applies to clothing purchases, such as those made for the Palin family.The RNC implicitly admitted that the clothing was purchased with campaign funds by stating that it will be donated to charity after the campaign.  The RNC also relies on this prospective contribution to explain why the personal use prohibition is not applicable as FEC regulations provide that donations by candidates to charitable organizations are not for personal use.  It does not appear, however, that this exception would apply to the clothing worn by Palin’s family, even it does apply to her own.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW, said:

It is ridiculous that RNC would spend $150,000 to outfit a vice presidential nominee and her family at any time, but it is more outrageous given the dire financial straights of so many Americans and the state of our economy.  As if that isn’t bad enough,  the expenditures violate campaign finance law.  The FEC should investigate immediately. 

If the RNC had an extra $150,000 to throw around, there were better alternatives than pricey designer clothes.  For example, $150,000 could fund three Alaska teachers’ yearly salaries; library books for the Juneau, Alaska School district for nearly two years; health care premiums for 31 working Americans or 12 families; flu vaccinations for just over 6000 people, or pay the heating bills for 131 low-income households this winter.

There has been an enormous amount of coverage and commentary concerning the $150,000 spent by the Republican National Committee (RNC) on clothes for Sarah Palin.   CREW looks at this solely through the prism of whether or not this action was legal.  As Melanie Sloan told the New York Daily News, we want the FEC to determine if this spending on personal items violated the law:

Even if it was legal for the Republican National Committee to drop $150,000 at Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, Macy's and Bloomingdale's, it went against the spirit of the campaign finance law John McCain championed in the Senate, legal experts said.

"The McCain-Feingold law of 2002 specifically banned the use of campaign funds to purchase clothing," said lawyer Brett Kappel. Larry Noble, another Washington lawyer, agreed: "McCain-Feingold was the first statute that prohibited the use of campaign money for clothing."

The Republican National Committee, however, insists a loophole allowed it to spend the money to try to turn the already attractive hockey mom into a cosmopolitan runway model.

Unrepentant McCain campaign insiders insisted that it was smart, too.

"She's a middle-class woman from Alaska who dressed that way," an unapologetic top McCain adviser said. "Somebody needed to spruce her up for national television."

Melanie Sloan of the legal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said it would file a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission as early as today to seek a ruling on the legality.

"The reality is it won't be decided before the election, so it may be more of a political issue than a legal issue," Noble added.

Late Friday, Alaska's legislature released its report on Governor Sarah Palin's actions surrounding the dismissal of the commissioner of public safety.  The report found Palin "violated the state's executive branch ethics act":

A legislative investigation has concluded that Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power in pushing for the firing of an Alaska state trooper who was once married to her sister, or by failing to prevent her husband Todd from doing so.

The report by investigator Steve Branchflower was made public late this afternoon by a bipartisan 12-0 vote of the Legislative Council, which authorized the investigation.

Branchflower's report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state's executive branch ethics act, which says that "each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Here are the reports key findings:

Finding Number One

For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.

Finding Number Two

I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

Finding Number Three

Harbor Adjustment Service of Anchorage, and its owner Ms. Murleen Wilkes, handled Trooper Michael Wooten's workers' compensation claim property and in the normal course of business like any other claim processed by Harbor Adjustment Service and Ms. Wilkes. Further, Trooper Wooten received all the workers' compensation benefits to which he was entitled.

Finding Number Four
The Attorney General's office has failed to substantially comply with my August 6, 2008 written request to Governor Sarah Palin for infomration about the case in the form of emails.

Todd Palin plays an active role in his wife's administration.  He's been subpoenaed to testify in the scandal surrounding the firing of the state's commissioner of public safety.  Yesterday, Mr. Palin declined to testify:

Gov. Sarah Palin's husband has refused to testify in the investigation of his wife's alleged abuse of power, and a key lawmaker said today that uncooperative witnesses are effectively sidetracking the probe until after Election Day.

var tmpURL = window.location.href; function im_story() { var action; msg = 'aim:goim?'; msg += 'message='; msg += tmpURL; document.Form.action = msg; document.Form.submit(); } function newsvine_story() { window.open('http://www.newsvine.com/_wine/save?popoff=1&u="' + tmpURL + '"','newsvine','toolbar=no,width=590,height=600,resizable=yes,scrollbars=yes') }

anchorage_dai626:http://www.adn.com/palin/story/530493.htmTodd Palin, who participates in state business in person or by e-mail, was among 13 people subpoenaed by the Alaska Legislature. McCain-Palin presidential campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan announced today that Todd Palin would not appear, because he no longer believes the Legislature's investigation is legitimate.

 

 

 

 

Sarah Palin initially welcomed the investigation of accusations that she dismissed the state's public safety commissioner because he refused to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper. "Hold me accountable," she said.

For someone who claims to be a reformer and promises to change the ways of Washington, Sarah Palin has sure started off on the wrong foot.  Palin's email practices as governor of Alaska are strikingly similar to the email practices of the White House.

Alaska law, like federal law, requires all state agencies -- which includes the Governor’s Office -- to preserve public records that adequately document how they function do the business of the state.  AS 40.21.060.  Alaska law also requires each state agency to establish a records management program with controls over the creation, maintenance and use of records used in the conduct of current business, again mirroring the federal law.  And, like its federal counterpart, Alaska law defines “records” as including emails, which must be preserved as if they were paper records.

For Sarah Palin and her office this means that even if they are free to use outside email accounts to conduct state business -- which is far from clear -- they must still preserve those emails as public records documenting their functions, policies, decisions, etc.  But we know from emails that have leaked to the public that Sarah and her office are using outside email accounts precisely to avoid record preservation obligations.  Sound familiar?  It wasn’t that long ago we learned that top White House officials, including Karl Rove, were similarly using outside email accounts -- in their case accounts tied to the RNC -- to conduct government business but avoid leaving a paper trail.

CREW's Melanie Sloan wrote this post, which appeared on Huffington Post last night:

In light of today's pronouncement by vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin that she will not cooperate with a "tainted" investigation into her firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, former prosecutor and executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Melanie Sloan, released the following statement:

Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, claims the mantle of a reformer while subverting an investigation into her own conduct authorized unanimously by a bipartisan committee of Alaska state legislators. While bragging about her efforts to clean up Alaska politics and end corruption, behind the scenes Governor Palin is using every possible tactic to stymie the inquiry into her own corrupt conduct, including demonizing and refusing to meet with investigators. If, as she asserts, she has done nothing wrong, Governor Palin should have nothing to fear from respected former Assistant District Attorney Steven Branchflower’s probe and she, her husband and those subpoenaed should welcome the chance to explain why she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.

You may remember that earlier this month, CREW released both a timeline of the investigation, as well as a detailed breakdown of Gov. Palin’s supposed public cooperation versus her efforts to undermine the investigation.

A state legislative committee upped the ante in the investigation of the scandal swirling around the Governor's office:

The state Senate Judiciary Committee voted 3-2 today to subpoena 13 people -- including the husband of Gov. Sarah Palin -- in an investigation of whether Palin abused her power in trying to get her former brother-in-law fired.