Come back when I find anything you made up? Geez, that wasn't difficult.
You made up ==> 'Palin used private email accounts for government business'. Well, you didn't make it up, but you have repeated it. You've been given ample opportunity to prove she did it. As expected, you did not provide any links. Lots of cheap talk but you can't ever seem to prove a damn thing. On Dec 13, 2:23 pm, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > come on back when you can find anything i made up sparky ! > mean while like it or not palin used private emails for government > business . > On Dec 13, 2:05 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Mike, > > > Considering your penchant for making stuff up, I'm not counting on you > > using that information any time soon. > > > As for there being "no question that palin used yahoo and other email > > accounts for government emails".. perhaps you have no question, but > > then again, you'll accept any story as long as it's anti-Palin, so I'm > > not surprised. > > > Fact is, I did Google this and it came up empty. I've searched for > > quotes, I've searched for charges, I've searched for copies of emails > > that would prove this and all I can find are people such as you making > > the accusation but never substantiating it. I guess you guys think if > > you repeat the lie often enough it will make it true. > > > You might want to try employing some common sense. Do you really think > > motherjones would have written "her emails--if the legal reviewers do > > not censor them for political purposes--might still make interesting, > > and perhaps important, reading." if evidence existed? And how can > > legal reviewers censor them if they're already out there? Duh! > > > I don't suppose you're going to actually prove Palin admitted to this > > by providing a link, are you? ...I didn't think so. > > > On Dec 13, 3:16 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > wow! gee thanks for sharing that information with me it might come in > > > handy some day . now let me share something with you there is no > > > question that palin used yahoo and other email accounts for government > > > emails she has admitted doing so during the campaign the only question > > > is what was she trying to hide when she did so . if you really want > > > her exact quote when she admitted her actions you might try googling > > > it . > > > > On Dec 12, 5:14 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Mike, > > > > > You probably know this but I'll tell you anyway; when you are reading > > > > an article such as this, words contained within quotations can be > > > > attributed to an identified source. Words not in quotes belong to the > > > > author. As you can see from this passage there are no quotes. That > > > > means this is the author's opinion and nothing more. I tried to help > > > > you out by pointing out there were no quotes but you chose to ignore > > > > me. See if I try to help you again. At least I know you're not a legal > > > > scholar as you clearly have no idea what constitutes 'evidence'. > > > > > On Dec 12, 3:57 pm, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The problem: Palin had used at least two nonofficial email accounts > > > > > (such as a Yahoo account) to conduct her state business. Given that > > > > > the governor's office did not have access to those accounts, its > > > > > information specialists had concluded that the only way to gather all > > > > > her emails would be to search the state email accounts for about 70 > > > > > people who worked within the executive offices of the governor and > > > > > look for emails to and from Palin's nonofficial email accounts. > > > > > Palin's office estimated it would cost almost a thousand dollars for > > > > > each search of these 70 or so official accounts. > > > > > > On Dec 12, 3:28 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > > Please point out a QUOTE in this article from Palin or her office > > > > > > that > > > > > > confirms she used private email accounts for official state > > > > > > business? > > > > > > I'll help you.. there aren't any. What you seem to be taking as > > > > > > evidence are the personal comments of the author who clearly has a > > > > > > political agenda against Palin. > > > > > > > Three months after her email account was hacked (the only real > > > > > > crime.. > > > > > > a crime the MSM has all but forgotten) you have; No evidence > > > > > > showing > > > > > > her conducting state business on a private email account. No charges > > > > > > against her for using her private account for official state > > > > > > business. > > > > > > There’s nothing illegal to nail her on. You must be deeply > > > > > > disappointed. > > > > > > > In fact, her private email account has been far more scrutinized > > > > > > than > > > > > > any other political figure and they can find nothing. I've got a > > > > > > better chance of telling the truth if I claimed O'Bama was using his > > > > > > private email accounts for government business... after all, I've > > > > > > got > > > > > > no evidence to prove he didn't, as I do for Palin. > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 3:02 pm, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > read the article she admits using private email acounts > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 2:30 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I know that, Mike. My question is where is the evidence that > > > > > > > > Palin did > > > > > > > > this?? Assumption and speculation does not count. > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 1:19 pm, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > it is aginst the law to use private emails for government > > > > > > > > > bussiness ! > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 12:48 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > > > > > > Where is the *evidence* of her using a nonofficial account > > > > > > > > > > for state > > > > > > > > > > business? > > > > > > > > > > > The last sentence from the motherjones piece you copied > > > > > > > > > > here says it > > > > > > > > > > all; > > > > > > > > > > > > "...her emails--if the legal reviewers do not censor them > > > > > > > > > > > for political purposes--might still make interesting, and > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps > > > > > > > > > > > important, reading. " > > > > > > > > > > > "MIGHT still make interesting, and PERHAPS important, > > > > > > > > > > reading". It's > > > > > > > > > > been three months and still there is nothing. MIGHT it not > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > responsible for motherjones - and you, Mike - to stop > > > > > > > > > > spreading this > > > > > > > > > > bullshit until some real evidence exists? > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 11:46 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not about the election it is about a corrupt > > > > > > > > > > > politician who is > > > > > > > > > > > unfit for office any office ! > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 9:48 am, Kamakazee <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sweet Jesus, when will you and Letterman realize the > > > > > > > > > > > > election is over? > > > > > > > > > > > > > And ya realize your CIC Elect is having a bit of > > > > > > > > > > > > difficulty explaining > > > > > > > > > > > > that whole mess in IL right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 7:26 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin used these nonofficial accounts for official > > > > > > > > > > > > > business, in > > > > > > > > > > > > > violation of Alaska state open records > > > > > > > > > > > > > rules,http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/12/11290_palin_emai... > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would You Pay $10,000 for Sarah Palin's Emails? > > > > > > > > > > > > > How > > > > > > > > > > > > > much would you pay for access to the emails Sarah > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin has sent and > > > > > > > > > > > > > received as governor of Alaska? Would you part with > > > > > > > > > > > > > $10,000 for them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's basically what her office is asking. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > During the general election, I filed an open records > > > > > > > > > > > > > act request for > > > > > > > > > > > > > all emails that had gone to and from Palin in her > > > > > > > > > > > > > official capacity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And Alaska citizen watchdog Andrée McLeod, who had > > > > > > > > > > > > > long been > > > > > > > > > > > > > peppering > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office with similar requests, did the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > At a time when > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin was on the hot seat as Senator John McCain's > > > > > > > > > > > > > vice presidential > > > > > > > > > > > > > running mate, her office replied that it would cost > > > > > > > > > > > > > over $65,000 to > > > > > > > > > > > > > round up all of Palin's emails and that Mother Jones > > > > > > > > > > > > > would have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > cover this cost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem: Palin had used at least two nonofficial > > > > > > > > > > > > > email accounts > > > > > > > > > > > > > (such as a Yahoo account) to conduct her state > > > > > > > > > > > > > business. Given that > > > > > > > > > > > > > the governor's office did not have access to those > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts, its > > > > > > > > > > > > > information specialists had concluded that the only > > > > > > > > > > > > > way to gather all > > > > > > > > > > > > > her emails would be to search the state email > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts for about 70 > > > > > > > > > > > > > people who worked within the executive offices of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > governor and > > > > > > > > > > > > > look for emails to and from Palin's nonofficial email > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office estimated it would cost almost a > > > > > > > > > > > > > thousand dollars for > > > > > > > > > > > > > each search of these 70 or so official accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seemed absurd and unfair for Palin's office to > > > > > > > > > > > > > pass the cost of > > > > > > > > > > > > > this search on to those who had requested Palin's > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails. After all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > she should have been using her state email account > > > > > > > > > > > > > for state > > > > > > > > > > > > > business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a letter to her office, I maintained that > > > > > > > > > > > > > requesters should not be > > > > > > > > > > > > > forced to pay for Palin's inappropriate use of > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office eventually agreed, deciding it would > > > > > > > > > > > > > not charge fees > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the extensive search operation that would be > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary to compile > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's emails. In early October, it informed me that > > > > > > > > > > > > > it would begin > > > > > > > > > > > > > reviewing Palin's official emails and gather the > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails related to > > > > > > > > > > > > > state business that were sent to and from her > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > All for no charge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But there was a rub: this whole process could be > > > > > > > > > > > > > expected to take > > > > > > > > > > > > > weeks. That meant that none of her > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
