June 10, 2011
By Jason Easley and Sarah Jones
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 and not 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?
Any person who wrote to criticize the Governor has their email and phone number out for the Palin cult to attack. Sarah Palin once again used a seeming “attack” on her (aka, a request for transparency) as an opportunity to turn the guns of her internet vigilantes on her detractors. This is an outrageous compromising of those citizen’s privacy and safety.
Yes, they are private citizens, not public officials.
Palin doesn’t seem engaged at all in legislative process, but spends most of her emails forwarding mean and fawning emails about herself to her minions (the purpose of which Frank Bailey exposed in his book to take down detractors) or emails praising her as God’s chosen.
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
Sarah Palin and company have had two and half years to pour over and edit these emails, yet they chose to release personal information about the people who emailed her to the public.
The answer is that this is Palin’s way of creating a new enemies list, and putting cross hairs on her critics. We have not gone though all 24,000+ pages of emails yet, but from the initial review of thousands of pages, it is clear that there is an agenda of retribution present. Palin is providing her hapless followers with the information needed to track down and harass those who dare criticize their “Dear Leader.”