Sarah Palin Uses EMAIL DUMP To RELEASE Critics Personal Information

Segami

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:27 PM
Original message

Sarah Palin Uses EMAIL DUMP To RELEASE Critics Personal Information

:smoke: :smoke:

" As the media swarms over Sarah Palin�s emails has anyone thought to ask why the personal information of those who wrote emails critical of Palin was not redacted?

Some very ugly things are going to come out of these emails andnot against Sarah Palin. Frankly I�m very disturbed by her legal team�s choices in what I�m reading. Sarah Palin and her legal team spent two and half years combing these emails for pages they wanted to withhold and for redactions to protect the privacy of some people. But you want to know whose information they left in?

-I feel sorry for those media members who traipsed to Alaska thinking that they were going to get unfettered information. What we are seeing in these emails is an attempt by Palin and the people who were appointed by her and working for her in Alaska to create a narrative of revenge and the victimization of Sarah Palin.

The people who emailed Palin have all had their names, email addresses, addresses, and in some cases phone numbers made public in this email dump. This is a problem for those who sent her criticism like the email below:

cont'

http://www.politicususa.com/en/sarah-palin-critics-info

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

aquart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:31 PM
Response to Original message

1. Wow. You are so right.

Ain't she just the sweetest thing?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

spanone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:33 PM
Response to Original message

2. of course, that's why it's taken them three years to release them

redaction and 'privacy'

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Segami

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. Some of these email senders might take great exception that THEIR personal info was NOT redacted

as was Sarah Palin's and some of the chosen.

"......one of the reasons cited for withholding over 2,300 of Palin�s emails is �Article 1, Section 22 of Alaska�s constitution: �The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed.�� It is apparent that this law is only being applied to the former governor and the chosen people whose names and personal information were redacted in the emails. Apparently in Alaska, public officials have the right to privacy but citizens do not. Since some of these email senders are no doubt from outside of Alaska, one wonders if they have a lawsuit on their hands......"

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

justiceischeap

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. Makes me wish I'd sent a scathing email.

I'd love to be in a class action lawsuit against Palin.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Angry Dragon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 05:47 PM
Response to Original message

3. Lawsuits

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LiberalAndProud

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 06:04 PM
Response to Original message

6. I am afraid for these people.

All it takes is one Jared Laughner and one gun.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Segami

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. Absolutely! It has an eerie ' coded ' enemy's list feel to it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Pisces

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 06:06 PM
Response to Original message

7. She is a sick, twisted individual. Why weren't these things redacted?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Blue_In_AK

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Jun-10-11 06:27 PM
Response to Original message

9. And these e-mails are more interesting for what was redacted

as opposed to what was produced. There are many, many e-mails discussing obviously relevant state issues that have been held back for what seem to be pretty baseless reasons.

Sean Parnell is covering his butt as well as Sarah's.

What I would like to see out of this is a lawsuit against the state. Sarah came to office promising transparency, but this disclosure is anything but transparent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProgressiveProfessor

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Jun-11-11 12:05 AM
Response to Original message

10. For background, who was in charge of reviewing the emails?

What were the ground rules for redaction?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 06:41 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.