GOP told cops to hold off on arrest until after election

cyclohexane

Platinum Member
Feb 12, 2005
2,837
19
81
"The trooper's affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin's candidacy factored into the investigation"
I think that is enough to link the GOP with this.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: cyclohexane
"The trooper's affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin's candidacy factored into the investigation"
I think that is enough to link the GOP with this.
I think that's enough to indicate the investigators considered the difficulties they could have monitoring someone who was under Secret Service protection, and delayed their arrests to avoid crossing paths with the Feds. GOP election cycle shenanigans? Not so obvious.
 

Julius Shark

Banned
Dec 28, 2008
76
0
0
Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy?

Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy?
Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.
Bad news, Julius; they've already been investigated. If you know of any Kennedys selling OC, however, please let us know.

edit: tag
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Originally posted by: cyclohexane
"The trooper's affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin's candidacy factored into the investigation"
I think that is enough to link the GOP with this.

Only if you don't bother reading the rest of the paragraph:

The trooper's affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin's candidacy factored into the investigation, with state officials delaying execution of a search warrant until this month, when Johnston was "no longer under the protection or surveillance of the Secret Service."
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Julius Shark

Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy?

Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.

Oh... LOOKY! We have another sorry ass right wing apologist sore loser spewing FUD, trying to distract attention from the utter wholesale catastrophy his criminal jackasses have laid on the nation and the entire world for the last eight years. :thumbsdown: :|
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,702
54,694
136
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy?

Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.

Is this going to be your thing now? We already have enough people around here that post this same shit, but they're better at it. Why don't you concentrate on either writing better posts, or at least more original trolls. Either way works for me, we just are all full up on right wing retards right now and can't really fit another.
 

Julius Shark

Banned
Dec 28, 2008
76
0
0
Listen, I enjoy a little repartee. It looks like I?m about to get plenty of it on this site!

Could somebody tell me what a ?troll? is?
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
Listen, I enjoy a little repartee. It looks like I?m about to get plenty of it on this site!

Could somebody tell me what a ?troll? is?
Just look at the post above the one where you asked this question and you will know.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: cyclohexane
"The trooper's affidavit indicates that Sarah Palin's candidacy factored into the investigation"
I think that is enough to link the GOP with this.

Really? Did you read the rest of that sentence which explained why her candidacy was a factor? :confused: Nothing in the article says anyone in the GOP was even aware that she was being investigated. Your topic title is an outright lie. :thumbsdown: Learn to read.
 

Julius Shark

Banned
Dec 28, 2008
76
0
0
Oh... LOOKY! We have another sorry ass right wing apologist sore loser spewing FUD, trying to distract attention from the utter wholesale catastrophy his criminal jackasses have laid on the nation and the entire world for the last eight years.

Would this qualify as a "troll" post?
 

LumbergTech

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2005
3,622
1
0
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
Oh... LOOKY! We have another sorry ass right wing apologist sore loser spewing FUD, trying to distract attention from the utter wholesale catastrophy his criminal jackasses have laid on the nation and the entire world for the last eight years.

Would this qualify as a "troll" post?

im starting to think that you are a troll as well..11 posts..targeting specific people already..

these people don't seem to get the point, yes there is a lot of corruption all over the place..this thread is about a specific corruption (alleged)

focus on the goddamn topic...start your own topic if you want to discuss other issues
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Julius Shark

Oh... LOOKY! We have another sorry ass right wing apologist sore loser spewing FUD, trying to distract attention from the utter wholesale catastrophy his criminal jackasses have laid on the nation and the entire world for the last eight years.

Would this qualify as a "troll" post?

Welcome to AnandTech Forums. Judging from all of your eleven posts, I won't be suprised if you are a returning, previously banned troll.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: LumbergTech
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
Oh... LOOKY! We have another sorry ass right wing apologist sore loser spewing FUD, trying to distract attention from the utter wholesale catastrophy his criminal jackasses have laid on the nation and the entire world for the last eight years.

Would this qualify as a "troll" post?

im starting to think that you are a troll as well..11 posts..targeting specific people already..

these people don't seem to get the point, yes there is a lot of corruption all over the place..this thread is about a specific corruption (alleged)

focus on the goddamn topic...start your own topic if you want to discuss other issues

Yeah, kind of blew his cover with the "what is a troll" line. :roll: You can always spot a real noob from a manufactured one. EBT's be gone already.
 

Julius Shark

Banned
Dec 28, 2008
76
0
0
?Welcome to AnandTech Forums.?

Well thank you. I guess I should have put on my Nomex suit before joining.

I note that this relative has been arrested but not convicted. Does that mean that we should overlook this and not discredit Palin at this time?

Or, is this an indictment of Palin as a whole and worthy of casting her from public life?

If the later is the operative standard, will that standard apply to Democrats that fall into a similar category?



PS Are there any Conservatives on this board?
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
?Welcome to AnandTech Forums.?
Well thank you. I guess I should have put on my Nomex suit before joining.
Would a Nomex suit protect you from the flash-back from your promiscuous flaming of "Liberals" and Democrats?

I note that this relative has been arrested but not convicted. Does that mean that we should overlook this and not discredit Palin at this time?
Or, is this an indictment of Palin as a whole and worthy of casting her from public life?
If the later is the operative standard, will that standard apply to Democrats that fall into a similar category?
Guilt by association has long been a favorite of the anti-Obama crowd. Why would we expect it to change now?

PS Are there any Conservatives on this board?
There are conservatives, and also quite a few of your fellow "Ditto-Heads".
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I don't like Sarah Palin, I don't like many of the actions of The GOP, but I have to feel that the OP and his link have failed to make the case for GOP skulduggery.

According to the link of cyclohexane.

1. The Alaska State police investigation started with a routine drug recovery, the people holding the drugs then fingered Sherry Johnston. (nothing political there )

2. Routine police surveillance then followed, again standard police procedure. Build the case stronger and find who the customers are. Nothing political there.

3. Then the zinger, Sherry Johnston, because her son was slated to marry Bristol Palin, received secret service protection. That secret service protection ceased not long after November 4 because John McCain and Sarah Palin forgot to win the election. Now if I were an Alaska State cop, I would get real queasily about getting into any pissing contests with the secret service, so I have to somewhat conclude
that there is nothing political there, maybe something rational, but political no.

4. There was simply no great hurry to arrest Sherry Johnston, and extra time built a stronger case, although I can not find the exact day secret service protection was no longer provided to Sherry Johnston, I still have to conclude her arrest was not political and was driven by rational police procedure.

Only in Hollywood or TV cop show do arrests and criminal charges proceed at the speed of light, its usually slower than most people like.
 

Julius Shark

Banned
Dec 28, 2008
76
0
0
?Would a Nomex suit protect you from the flash-back from your promiscuous flaming of "Liberals" and Democrats?? - CallMeJoe

I think I am starting to understand the rules here. Your strong opinions are welcome as long as they align against Conservatives (in an aggressive way) and are sympathetic to the party of choice on this board, Liberal/Democrats. In addition, side tracking off topic is accepted in order to flame Conservatives, but not to discredit or question Liberal/Democrats.

?Guilt by association has long been a favorite of the anti-Obama crowd. Why would we expect it to change now?? ? CallMeJoe

Shall I take that as a, yes?

?There are conservatives, and also quite a few of your fellow "Ditto-Heads".? ? CallMeJoe

Thank you. I hope that we are welcome here. I like to joust with people of strong opinion and who are not afraid of a highly disciplined and knowledgeable Conservative. I am not a peach faced undergrad still searching and impressionable. I have been exposed to the ?coin of the realm?, Liberalism promoted by academe, and I reject it.

Someone has already thrown out words like ?banned?. I?ve only been here for a few hours. This person has some sort of special title under his name like ?Supercalfragilistic Expealidocious? or some such drivel. I believe that I may want to reread the rules of the board before challenging this character.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Julius Shark

I believe that I may want to reread the rules of the board before challenging this character.

I believe you may want to reread the history of the last eight years of devastation your Traitor In Chief and his gang or traitors, murderers, torturers, war criminals and Wall Street robber barons have foisted on our nation, and while your at it, you may want to review some past discussions on this forum.

We long ago outgrew the tired song and dance of those who try to divert attention away from specific problems within one party by pointing to petty past bullshit of those from another, regardless of party affiliation. For example, this thread is about the possibility that Sarah Palin MAY (repeat MAY) have tried to use her position to delay the investigation in to her daughter's presumed future-mother-in law, and your first reply was:

Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy?

Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.

If that's the best you've got to offer, go home and practice. If you're going to express strong views, be sure you can back them up with replies that are on the subject and supported by facts and credible links. You will be called on it if you can't.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: Julius Shark
I think I am starting to understand the rules here. Your strong opinions are welcome as long as they align against Conservatives (in an aggressive way) and are sympathetic to the party of choice on this board, Liberal/Democrats. In addition, side tracking off topic is accepted in order to flame Conservatives, but not to discredit or question Liberal/Democrats.
From 4 of your first 8 posts:

Obama voters should realize that the purpose of this is to insult and poke fun at our enemy (liberals and democrats) at many levels. The ?Magic Negro? provides most every element necessary for Conservatives to ?hide in plain sight? our disdain for ALL things Obama.
Here is a clue, Liberals. The cover given you by the media is weakening. They can?t help themselves. Prepare to spend the next four years looking as weak as the candidate you put in office.
Liberals and Democrats have always done well in Hollywood because they both have something in common. Both work in a world of make believe.
By the way, Obama will be swearing on a King James Bible. That must really cause some hemmoroids to act up.
Are we going to investigate the relatives of Liberal Princess Caroline Kennedy? Let?s start with Uncle Ted at Chappaquidick and then move to cousin William Kennedy Smith and his rape victim.

You appear to have arrived with a strong agenda. Don't act surprised when you're called on it. Feel free to keep expressing your opinions, just try to avoid the example of some of your compatriots here who discredit themselves by their unrelenting (and frequently illogical) attacks on "Liberals".