there is question that she did it the only question is what was in the emails .
On Dec 15, 11:23 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, > > Have you wondered how McLeod knows this if they have not yet been seen > via her open records request? > > As best as I can tell the judge is responding to the verbiage of the > charge, and not from personal knowledge that in fact personal email > accounts were used for government business. In other words, McLeod is > charging this and the judge is ordering emails that fit this criteria > must be preserved. But the judge is not saying they actually exist. In > fact, I believe the second paragraph proves this to be the case. The > judge won't order Palin to stop doing something that he doesn't know > is actually being done, so is requesting additional arguments to prove > the charge. > > Apparently the only emails obtained so far that might have proven > anything were blacked out for privacy reasons. I would imagine the > judge will be given the opportunity to review these emails. > > Comments such as "It was not widely known that the governor and her > staff were using..." are editorial comments and not proven truth. > > But I appreciate the quote and will reserve judgment on Palin's > culpability pending a decision from the judge. So I won't say she > didn't, but I don't think it's proven she did. Sorry Mike, that's the > best I can do at this time. I'm sure you can understand my desire to > wait for the court case to be concluded and a guilty decision rendered > before I accept she did this, right? > > On Dec 15, 10:14 am, Florida Cracker 532 <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Private Palin Emails Must Be Preserved, Judge > > Ruleshttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/15/private-palin-emails-must_n_... > > ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A state judge reaffirmed Wednesday that government- > > related e-mails Gov. Sarah Palin and her staff sent from private > > accounts must be preserved and ordered further arguments over whether > > to halt the use of such accounts for state business. > > > Anchorage Superior Court Judge Craig Stowers refused to immediately > > order Palin and her staff to quit using private e-mail accounts for > > state work and instead told attorneys in the case to present written > > arguments on the propriety of the practice and on which e-mails were > > public records. > > > Stowers made the decision in a lawsuit brought by Anchorage resident > > Andree McLeod against Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. > > > McLeod contends that public records could be lost if the e-mails are > > not archived in the state system. > > > Palin has occasionally used private e-mail accounts to conduct state > > business, and her Yahoo accounts were hacked last month. The hacking > > showed that the use of private e-mail accounts could make state > > business vulnerable to being exposed. > > > It was not widely known that the governor and her staff were using > > private e-mail accounts until McLeod filed the first of several open > > records requests earlier this year that yielded some of the e-mail > > traffic. Alaska officials blacked out much of it, citing privacy > > reasons. > > > McLeod is suing to preserve the records so they will be available for > > her open records request to review the e-mails. > > > Her attorney, Don Mitchell, said Wednesday that public access to the > > messages is obstructed because they cannot be obtained through > > channels set up under public records law. > > > Story continues below > > ******************************************************************************************** > > On Dec 15, 9:37 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Prove it. Don't tell me to Google it, as I already have. You're making > > > the accusation, you prove it. Until you do, it's just another one of > > > your lies. > > > > On Dec 15, 9:23 am, Florida Cracker 532 <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > palin did indeed admit to useing private emails for government > > > > bussiness . she admited it during the campain and after ! > > > > > On Dec 15, 9:16 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > My but you are dense. I will try again. Palin did not admit to using > > > > > her private email accounts for government business. I can find no > > > > > evidence to suggest she did and despite many requests for you to prove > > > > > otherwise, apparently you can't either. > > > > > > Get back to me when you find something or when official charges are > > > > > filed against Palin. I won't be holding my breath. > > > > > > On Dec 15, 3:09 am, Florida Cracker 532 <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > frank if you can prove Palin did not use private email accounts for > > > > > > government business after she admitted that had done so please go > > > > > > ahead and do it . > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 6:23 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Mark, > > > > > > > > It's still entertaining. Time and again Mike makes a claim, to > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > it is easily proven wrong, and rather than address the facts he > > > > > > > repeats his same line. > > > > > > > > It's be proven by his very own reference that an unborn fetus is > > > > > > > alive. Not only can he not mount an argument against the > > > > > > > definition > > > > > > > but he chids you for questioning a later definition, which is > > > > > > > clearly > > > > > > > philosophical. > > > > > > > > Here it's been proven that Palin has not admitted to using a > > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > email account for government business and again, he can't defend > > > > > > > it, > > > > > > > so he repeats the same old line. All I've asked for is a quote or > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > link to something that proves the evidence exists and Mike can't > > > > > > > do > > > > > > > it. Milke twists things so badly that he could actually argue that > > > > > > > frogs can fly because they eat flies. > > > > > > > > What I'd really like to see is someone, such as Hollywood, whom I > > > > > > > believe Mike does respect, to jump in here and add his two cents. > > > > > > > At > > > > > > > least Hollywood takes the time to defend his positions. > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 2:03 pm, mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > frank, arguing is murky is a tee total waste of your time. his > > > > > > > > little > > > > > > > > mind functions in a reality unknown to sane people. save your > > > > > > > > breath. > > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 1:05 pm, Florida Cracker 532 > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > sorry frank as much as you would like it not to be true palin > > > > > > > > > admitted > > > > > > > > > using private emails for government business ! > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 10:52 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > None. Let's look at what was said; > > > > > > > > > > > "A spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign has > > > > > > > > > > acknowledged the > > > > > > > > > > use of private accounts." > > > > > > > > > > > She uses personal email accounts. Everyone does. Does it > > > > > > > > > > say she > > > > > > > > > > acknowledged using them for government business? No.. it's > > > > > > > > > > YOU who > > > > > > > > > > wants to infer this from the statement. > > > > > > > > > > > "As a champion of government accountability > > > > > > > > > > and transparency, Governor Palin was exercising an > > > > > > > > > > abundance of > > > > > > > > > > caution to ensure that all state and personal business > > > > > > > > > > matters were > > > > > > > > > > being kept separate," > > > > > > > > > > > Here she is explicitly stating the importance of separating > > > > > > > > > > matters of > > > > > > > > > > personal business from state. Coming immediately following > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > acknowledgement that she uses personal email accounts, this > > > > > > > > > > HAS to > > > > > > > > > > mean she uses personal email accounts for matters of > > > > > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > > > > business, and her official email accounts for matters > > > > > > > > > > pertaining to > > > > > > > > > > the state. I'm pretty certain she wouldn't admit to using a > > > > > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > > > > account for government business and immediately follow that > > > > > > > > > > up by > > > > > > > > > > stating how she's used an abundance of caution to ensure > > > > > > > > > > she didn't do > > > > > > > > > > this. Come on Mike, use your head. > > > > > > > > > > > She admitted using personal email accounts as does most > > > > > > > > > > everyone else > > > > > > > > > > these days. She does not admit using personal email > > > > > > > > > > accounts for > > > > > > > > > > government business? Stop telling me to Google this.. I > > > > > > > > > > have, > > > > > > > > > > extensively, and I find NO EVIDENCE of this. All I'm seeing > > > > > > > > > > is more > > > > > > > > > > evidence of you being incapable of simple reading > > > > > > > > > > comprehension. > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 8:49 am, Florida Cracker 532 > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > what part of she admitted it don't you understand ? > > > > > > > > > > > an if you are still having trouble excepting it look on > > > > > > > > > > > google . > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 8:39 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tell me where I'm wrong. Tell me where in the article > > > > > > > > > > > > above it shows > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence that Palin used her personal email accounts > > > > > > > > > > > > for government > > > > > > > > > > > > business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I'm wrong, why have no charges been filed? If I'm > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong why was it > > > > > > > > > > > > written at motherjones; "her emails--if the legal > > > > > > > > > > > > reviewers do not > > > > > > > > > > > > censor them for political purposes--might still make > > > > > > > > > > > > interesting, and > > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps important, reading.". If in fact there was > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence they would > > > > > > > > > > > > not have written their attack in terms of "might still" > > > > > > > > > > > > or "and > > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps important"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is you who will not see. You WANT Palin to be guilty > > > > > > > > > > > > so you see > > > > > > > > > > > > guilt where none currently exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 14, 3:33 am, Florida Cracker 532 > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > well i guess your answer proves " there are non so > > > > > > > > > > > > > blind as those who > > > > > > > > > > > > > will not see ? " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 13, 4:02 pm, > > ... > > 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
