LOS ANGELES (LALATE) – Sarah Palin emails released today (read online below) could refocus attention on Walt Monegan and Mike Wooten (“Troopergate”) along with email exchanges with Todd Palin. Sarah Palin emails released today prompted a news media circus in Juneau, Alaska. Passed out were boxes of printed copies of Palins’ emails. One reporter called it “hundred of pounds” of paper with the emails released in hardcover format, not digital. Multiple news agencies requested the twenty-four thousand pages of emails.

But while news reporters this weekend quickly scan the printed versions of the emails into digital format and post them online for readers, insiders are wondering how much of Troopergate will be revealed. New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, and other news outlets were present this morning to take delivery of the messages that spanned from January 2007 through to September 2008. (Update: some of the emails are being posted online HERE as of 11 am PST.)

But will the emails reveal more about Troopergate? An October 2008 report found that Sarah Palin fired Walter Monegan because he wouldn’t fire Trooper Michael Wooton divorcing Palin’s sister. The 2008 report found that then “Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get trooper Michael Wooten fired.”

Palin was accused of trying to get fired Michael Wooton. The report found that Palin urged Commissioner Walter or Walt Monegan to fire him. But when Walt didn’t, she fired him. The report found that Palin sacked Monegna for that among other reasons. Wooton is the ex husband of Sarah Palin’s sister.

“The evidence supported the conclusion that governor Palin, at the least, engaged in ‘official action’ by her inaction, if not her active participation or assistance to her husband, to get trooper Wooten fired” found the report issued at the time. “Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get trooper Michael Wooten fired.”

The report found that Monegan wasn’t fired just because of his refusal to fire trooper Wooten, but that it was at least one of the factors.

• Comments (0)

LOS ANGELES (LALATE) – Sarah Palin’s remarks about the Paul Revere Midnight Run hit news last week; but this weekend Palin defended her remarks as they made their ride across Fox News. Despite Sarah Palin’s reinvention of Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride, the former Vice Presidential Candidate is certain she didn’t misspeak. Palin told news today “I know my American history.” Moreover, she says that news coverage of her comments is just another example “gotcha-type of question” from the liberal media. But, ironically, this time the questions come from Fox News.

Palin’s originally remarks said that Revere wanted to warn the British. “Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have,” she remarked. “He did warn the British.”

Even Fox News wasn’t happy with Palin’s reinvention of history. Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace asked her today “You realize that you messed up about Paul Revere, don’t you?” Palin refused to admit her mistake. “I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere…. He did warn the British.”

“He who warned the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms by ringing those bells, and makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.” Despite Palin’s version of history, there were lanterns, no bells.

Reaction on Twitter today has featured the #AccordingToPali hashtag in response to her comments. On April 18, 1775, Paul Revere rode to warn American patriot leaders Samuel Adams and John Hancock to warn of marching British shoulders.

Today, Palin defended her version of history. Palin tells news “In a shout-out, gotcha type of question that was asked of me, I answered candidly. And I know my American history.”

• 
  
  Comments (0)

LOS ANGELES (LALATE) – Tracy Morgan’s Sarah Palin remark has prompted a TNT apology to the politician. Tracy Morgan’s comments about Sarah Palin aired live during TNT’s Thursday night broadcast of “Inside the NBA”. The remark was not censored before airing.

Tracy Morgan had joined on court TNT hosts Charles Barkley, Kenny Smith and Ernie Johnson. Morgan is best known for his appearance on NBC’s “30 Rock” opposite Tina Fey who has garnered an Emmy for her Sarah Palin parodies.

Smith and Barkley during the broadcast chose to turn the TNT program into less about basketball, and more like an episode of Donny Deutsch’s Love Calling.  Smith asked Morgan who is hotter “Tina Fey or Sarah Palin?” Barkley followed up with the question “Sarah Palin’s good looking, isn’t she?”

Morgan then responded with “Let me tell you something about Sarah Palin—she’s good m— material.”

Jeff Pomeroy in a news statement quickly apologized for Morgan’s remarks “It’s unfortunate Mr. Morgan showed a lack of judgment on our air with his inappropriate comments. We apologize for any embarrassment or offense it may have caused.” Pomeroy and TNT in their statement did not mention anything wrong with the  Smith and Barkley questions.

• Comments (0)

LOS ANGELES (LALATE) – Sarah Palin joined Sean Hannity (FOX) tonight to defend “blood libel” and “target maps”. Palin’s Hannity interview gave her a televised opportunity to respond to criticism about her crosshairs imagery, target maps, and blood libel remarks. The interview was best summed up with Palin’s remark: “I’m not going to sit down. I’m not going to shut up.”

First, Hannity asked Palin to explain her definition of “blood libel”. The term derived from Jews allegedly using Christian bloods in ancient rituals. Palin told Hannity that “Blood libel obviously means being falsely accused of having blood on your hands and in this case. That’s exactly what was going on.” The ADL had said of “blood libel” that “we wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain in Jewish history.”

Sarah Palin Crosshairs Screenshots
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 1
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 2
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 3

Second, as to crosshairs imagery, Palin said targets didn’t originate with her. Palin’s Hannity broadcast showed a Democratic map using the same imagery, as previously reported on LALATE. Democrats used a target map far before Palin did. “Behind the enemy lines” read the text underneath the Democrats’ map featuring bullseyes. “President Bush won nine states by single-digit margins. Those states should be ripe targets for Democrats”.

Third, as to other criticisms, Palin said that a “lie” must be put out before it can live. “If a lie does live”, Palin explained, one’s reputation could be harmed.

• Comments (2)

LOS ANGELES (LALATE) – Sarah Palin’s blood libel remarks were in response to one controversy. Now the Palin’s blood libel comments are sparking another. Whether it’s “misunderestimate” (George Bush), “wee-wee’d up” (Barack Obama) or “refudiate” (Palin), the word selections by our politicians, and their new “definitions” to our existing words, have long been the subject of debates by political pundits. But this time, Palin’s words were criticized by the Anti Defamation League.

Palin once told news that “‘Refudiate,’ ‘misunderestimate,’ ‘wee-wee’d up.’ English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!” Today the ADL is not celebrating Palin’s use of “blood libel”. “We wish that Palin had not invoked the phrase “blood-libel” in reference to the actions of journalists and pundits in placing blame for the shooting in Tucson on others. While the term “blood-libel” has become part of the English parlance to refer to someone being falsely accused, we wish that Palin had used another phrase, instead of one so fraught with pain in Jewish history.”

LL Cool J fans were not happy Palin’s use of words to describe the rapper / actor in March 2010. To promote an upcoming special, Palin said LL Cool J had a “fledgling career”. By May 2010, she was tweeting “refudiate”. “Misunderestimate” was a favorite non-word of George Bush, “wee-wee’d up” was an Obama expression. Robert Gibbs said of we-wee’d up “I think ‘wee-wee’d up’ is when people get nervous for no particular reason”.

But then, in November 2010 Palin tweeted remarks in conjunction with imagery of a target list, a crosshairs map.

On November 4, Sarah Palin tweeted the outcome of her “bullseye” drive. “Remember months ago ‘bullseye’ icon used 2 target the 20 Obamacare-lovin’ incumbent seats? We won 18 out of 20 (90% success rate…).”  Last week,  FOX NEWS reported  some Democrats were especially concerned about Palin’s choice of words in fall 2010. “Don’t retreat, instead, reload!”.

Now, Palin has posted a video comment, addressing the controversy about the crosshairs and target map.  “If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

While Palin is battling criticism about her own language, it has become commonplace for both parties to find fault for another party’s message, while not admitting their own errors.

Sarah Palin Crosshairs Screenshots
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 1
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 2
Sarah Palin Crosshairs 3

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun” was the remark by Obama during the 2008 campaign. Democrats used a target map far before Palin did. “Behind the enemy lines” read the text underneath the Democrats’ map featuring bullseyes. “President Bush won nine states by single-digit margins. Those states should be ripe targets for Democrats”.

• 
  
  Comments (0)