Todd Palin, Sarah Palin's husband, in sex affair scandal with massage therapist Shailey Tripp: Enquirer
The National Enquirer is reporting that Sarah Palin's husband, Todd, is embroiled in a sex scandal involving an extramarital affair with a massage therapist who has been "busted for prostitution."
The Enquirer claims it has unearthed official documents showing 36-year-old Shailey Tripp was arrested for maintaining a house of prostitution in March and that cops have confiscated physical evidence that could tie Todd to the alleged affair.
The tabloid did not disclose when the alleged rendezvous took place or what evidence was seized by police.
The Palins, who have previously been dogged by cheating allegations in 2008 and 2009 and have vehemently denied each and every accusation, though they have not commented on the Enquirer story.
Shailey Tripp, is shown on the left, according to the tabloid. (National Enquirer)
In the same Jan. 31 issue in which the National Enquirer reports the Palin scoop, it also reports that Jennifer Aniston has a drinking problem and President Obama is stick-thin because he has stomach parasites.
Still, the tabloid broke the story of the biggest political scandal since Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, when it reported ex-VP and presidential candidate John Edwards' affair with a campaign videographer.
The Palin story, writes the tabloid, began after several media outlets received an anonymous e-mail from thepalinmorals@hotmail.com claiming Tripp had an affair with Todd, which eventually led to Tripp's arrest in March 2010.
"According to the tenants in the building of her offices, they saw Todd come and go often and heard noises that sounded like someone was having sex," the e-mail read.
A woman by the name Shailey Tripp is listed as a massage therapist in Wasilla, Alaska. Calls to the listed phone number were not returned.
The Enquirer claims its investigation revealed that Tripp, 36, was arrested on March 4 in Anchorage and charged with having a house of prostitution.
Tripp pleaded no contest on June 13, 2010, according to the tabloid, and has a sentencing date set for June 15, 2011.
Dick Cheney's NBC Interview: Addresses Obama, Palin 'Target Map,' Arizona Shootings, And More
In his first interview since undergoing major heart surgery last July, former Vice President Dick Cheney addresses a wide range of topics, including the Arizona shooting and the resulting political fallout, his latest views on Barack Obama's presidency, his offer to George W. Bush to step down as vice president, and his upcoming health decisions.
Read the full release from NBC News along with key quotes below. * * * *
NBC NEWS EXCLUSIVE -- FORMER VICE PRESIDENT DICK CHENEY SITS DOWN WITH JAMIE GANGEL IN HIS FIRST INTERVIEW SINCE HIS HEART SURGERY LAST JULY
The Interview Will Air On "Today" Tuesday, January 18 and an Excerpt Will Air Tonight On "NBC Nightly News With Brian Williams"
NEW YORK - January 17, 2011 -- In his first interview since his heart surgery last July, former Vice President Dick Cheney sits down exclusively with "Today" National Correspondent Jamie Gangel. The interview will air on "Today" tomorrow, Tuesday, January 18, and an excerpt will air tonight on "NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams."
In the wide-ranging interview from his home on the eastern shore of Maryland, Cheney opens up to Gangel on multiple topics. On his health, Cheney says he hasn't made a decision yet on a heart transplant. On President Obama, Cheney says he still thinks he is a one-term president, but he is pleased to see him adopting some of the Bush/Cheney policies on the war on terror. On the tragedy in Tucson, Cheney says we should be careful about drawing a connection to political rhetoric. He also reveals he offered to step aside as vice president multiple times. Cheney also discusses his upcoming book, which is set to come out in September.
Excerpts from the interview below; mandatory credit to NBC News with airdates.
Jim Bell is the executive producer of "Today" (Mon.-Fri., 7 a.m.-11 a.m. ET)
***
CHENEY ON HIS HEALTH:
JAMIE GANGEL:
Let's start in the obvious place. For those who have not seen you recently, you look a little different. You lost some weight. This past summer your doctors told you that after five heart attacks you had to make a decision. And you had major surgery. And you had a heart pump put in. Can you tell me a little bit about what they did?
DICK CHENEY:
Sure. Well, there's a system called the LVAD, Left Ventricular Assist Device. And it in effect takes blood from the ventricle chamber of your heart and moves it into your aorta. And it significantly increases the amount of blood flow you've got going, which is vital when you get to end stage heart failure.
It significantly improves the function in the kidneys and your liver because they get an adequate supply of blood. And I'd reached the point after 30 years and five heart attacks where I really needed to do something. And so that's what we did. It's a pump that runs at about 9,000 RPMs. It's battery powered from the outside. But it's a wondrous device. It's really a miracle of modern technology. And now I'm here today because we have that kind of technology. And because the doctors were able to adapt it to my situation.
...
...
JAMIE GANGEL:
More and more people are using these instead of heart transplants, but usually they use them for a year or two. Are you thinking about a heart transplant?
DICK CHENEY:
I haven't made a decision yet. The technology was originally developed to provide a transition. To take somebody who's reached the point where they needed a transplant but a transplant wouldn't immediately be available, so they put this in as a temporary measure.
What's happened over time is the technology's gotten better and better and we've gotten more and more experience with people living with this technology. So I'll have to make a decision at some point whether or not I want to go for a transplant. But we haven't addressed that yet.
***
CHENEY ON PRESIDENT OBAMA:
JAMIE GANGEL:
You said that you thought that President Obama was going to be a one term President. Do you still?
DICK CHENEY:
I do.
JAMIE GANGEL:
Because?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, because I think he embarked upon a course of action when he became President that did not have as much support as he thought it did. That once he got into the business, for example, of the healthcare reform. I think he's enacted a program that a great many people are very worried about. And that there's a lot of support out there for the effort to repeal that healthcare package.
I think his overall approach to expanding the size of government, expanding the deficit, and giving more and more authority and power to the government over the private sector is a lack of-- sort of a feel for the role of the private sector in-- in creating jobs, in creating wealth and getting our economy back on track. Those are all weaknesses, as I look at Barack Obama. And I think he'll be a one term President.
JAMIE GANGEL:
He's recently rebounded in the polls a little bit. Do you think he's gotten more in tune with some of these things?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, I think perhaps he learned a lesson or two in the off term elections, the off year elections. The Democrats suffered major defeats. The Republican victory in the House was one of the most momentous changes, if you go back and look at our history, that we've ever had in terms of the number of seats captured.
He obviously has been through the fires of becoming President and having to make decisions and live with the consequences. And it's different than being a candidate. When he was candidate he was all for closing Gitmo. He was very critical of what we'd done on the counterterrorism area to protect America from further attack and so forth.
I think he's learned that he's not going to be able to close Guantanamo. That it's-- if you didn't have it you'd have to create one like that. You've got to have some place to put terrorists who are combatants who are bound and determined to try to kill Americans.
I think he's-- in terms of a lot of the terrorism policies-- the early talk, for example, about prosecuting people in the CIA who've been carrying out our policies-- all of that's fallen by the wayside. I think he's learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate. So I think he's learned from experience. And part of that experience was the Democrats having a terrible showing last election.
JAMIE GANGEL:
You said you believe President Obama has made America less safe. That he's actually raised the risk of attack. Do you still feel that way?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, when I made that comment, I was concerned that the counterterrorism policies that we'd put in place after 9/11 that had kept the nation safe for over seven years were being sort of rapidly discarded. Or he was going to attempt to discard them. Things like the enhanced interrogation techniques or the terror surveillance program.
They'd been vital from our perspective in terms of learning basic fundamental intelligence about al Qaeda, about how they operated, who they were, where we could find them. And we were able to put in place a successful policy that did prevent any further major attacks against the United States over all those years. And he campaigned against all of that.
As I say, I think he's found it necessary to be more sympathetic to the kinds of things we did. They've gotten active, for example, with the drone program, using Predator and the Reaper to launch strikes against identified terrorist targets in the various places in the world.
That's all well and good. That's a plus that he's learned in that regard. But I still worry that until you've been there -- clearly a day I'll never forget-- 9/11-- I mean most Americans will always remember where they were on that day. But to sit in the Presidential bunker under the White House as al Qaeda launches hijacked aircraft and hits New York, hits Washington and kills 3,000 Americans, that's something I'll never forget.
And-- it requires you to-- certainly stimulated in me and I think the President I worked for an absolute commitment that that's never going to happen again on our watch. And that we'll do whatever we have to do in order to prevent it. And I hope President Obama is to that point now where he has that same basic attitude. But we might never find out until there's actually another attack.
***
CHENEY ON THE TRAGEDY IN TUCSON AND POLITICAL RHETORIC:
JAMIE GANGEL:
We don't know what motivated this young man, but immediately there was an uproar about contentious political rhetoric being responsible. Whether it's Sarah Palin using words like, "Don't retreat, reload," or President Obama in 2008 said, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun," are those kinds of metaphors dangerous? Do you think the political rhetoric has gotten out of control?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, I think we have to be a little bit careful here-- about a rush to judgment. Trying to explain the event when we don't really know everything we need to know in order to be able to make sort of a final judgment. There's a lot more I'd like to know about the man who was the perpetrator of this awful crime.
And I think we need to be a little careful about assuming that somehow the rest of society or the political class bears the responsibility for what happened here when it was the act of a deranged, crazed individual that committed a crime.
I think our politics can get pretty rough at times. Having been vice president for eight years, maybe I'm more (CHUCKLES) sensitive to it than others, but the fact of the matter is, a good, tough political fights is one of the great strengths of our democracy. And so I think we have to be cautious I guess about jumping to conclusions here about the extent to which the sort of the political environment contributed to or caused this event. I think the event was caused by a deranged individual. And-- that's where we ought to look in terms of trying to assess guilt.
In the meantime certainly there's nothing wrong with, and I wouldn't be critical about people who are saying, "Look, we need to be careful about our rhetoric. We need to treat one another with respect during the course of our political debates," and so forth. I think that's always good, sound advice.
But I don't think we should anticipate that we can somehow take a system that was designed for political combat, if you will, between the parties, between ideas, between principles and set that aside. I wouldn't want to do that. That's the heart and soul of our political system. And that's basically a good thing.
JAMIE GANGEL:
Do you think we should watch our language? Do you think we should avoid things like targets on websites?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, perhaps. But again, as I say, I'm reluctant to judge our politicians based upon the act of what appears to be a lone, crazed gunman. Who perpetrated the crime.
***
CHENEY ON OFFERING TO STEP ASIDE AS VICE PRESIDENT:
JAMIE GANGEL:
Let me talk to you about President Bush's book. In his memoir he said about you, "Ten years later I've never regretted my decision to run with Dick Cheney," but he also writes that you offered and he considered dropping you from the ticket. And he says, quote, "He'd become a lightning rod for criticism. He was seen as dark and heartless, the Darth Vader of the administration." First of all, why did you offer to step aside? And I gather it was not the only time you offered?
DICK CHENEY:
Well, I actually went in about three different times because I didn't think he took me seriously the first time. That it was all in that period right before the '04 campaign. And the reason I did it was I thought he needed to have the ability to do whatever was necessary-- to make sure he won.
I always remembered what happened in '92 when his father ran. And there was a lot of speculation at the time that if he had gotten a new Vice President-- not to say anything negative about Dan Quayle. He's a friend of mine. But if he'd reached out and gotten a new Vice President he might have won reelection.
And I didn't wanna stand in the way if in fact that kind of decision would enhance the President's prospects of winning reelection in 2004 when he was up against John Kerry. And I thought he ought to have the freedom to change anybody he wanted, including me.
Sarah Palin will appear on Sean Hannity's program on Fox News Monday, the New York Times reported Thursday night.
This interview will be Palin's first extended interview since the shooting rampage in Tucson that killed six people and wounded 12, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords was holding an event outside a grocery store to meet with her constituents.
Palin has been taking heat from both sides of the political spectrum since the shooting. In the days following the shooting before details of alleged gunman Jared Loughner's plans emerged, Palin was blamed by some on the left for using incendiary speech, including violent words and imagery.
When it became clearer that the alleged gunman, Jared Loughner, did not seem to be a follower of Palin's, critics on the right cried foul at all those who blamed the former Alaska governor for the rampage.
On Wednesday, Palin released a video in which she said Saturday's shooting in Arizona had nothing to do with political rhetoric, and media figures who invoked a map featuring gun sights on congressional districts are guilty of "blood libel."
Liberal and conservatives have criticized Palin for the video, which equates criticism of Palin's rhetoric with the historical persecution of Jews by accusing them of taking the blood of Christian children.
Sarah Palin Accuses Media Of 'Blood Libel' But Apparently Doesn't Understand The Terrible, Anti-Semitic History Behind That Term
In typical fashion Sarah Palin took to her Facebook page today to finally address the Arizona shootings this weekend, to which she has been endlessly linked by various elements of the media and political spectrum.
In equally typical fashion, Palin offered little introspection into her role in the political dialogue of the past year and laid the blame directly at the feet of the media, whom she accused of "blood libel." A terrible term she apparently is not clear on the meaning of. But more on that in a second.
Two interesting things about the timing and nature of this post. It is clear that Palin spent the last few days testing the waters and leaving the heavy lifting of the defending her to the folks at Fox News, most notably Glenn Beck. Part way through her Facebook post she says "Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle."
Emphasis mine, because this is a reference to an old DNC map that Roger Ailes said in an interview the other day his team had dug up and which has been appearing on Fox News with great frequency ever since.
Palin may have also taken heart from a CBS poll released yesterday that found 6 out of 10 Americans don't see a link between political rhetoric and the shootings.
What is also clear from this post is that Palin, assuming she does want to run for President, has no interest in appealing to voters beyond her base. The terrible events of the weekend offered the former Governor a chance to step forward, display some leadership qualities, and speak to the country as a whole about rhetoric, or politics, or her vision, or her idea of America, or whatever. Basically anything she deemed fit to showcase her ability to transcend a national tragedy...an ability the nation generally requires its presidents to possess. Nay, demands.
Instead Palin has retreated, again, behind the safe walls of her Facebook page and only emerged to appeal to the fraction of voters who vehemently agree with her that she is a victim of an overzealous media (which she frequently is, but people running for President hopefully possess the ability to rise above the chatter). Short version: This is not the reaction one hopes for from a presidential candidate.
Back to "blood libel." Says Palin in her post:
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.
Again, emphasis mine. Blood libel is a strong term with historically violent connotations and one wonders if Sarah Palin is familiar with its actual definition and history. From Wikipedia:
Blood libel refers to a false accusation or claim that religious minorities, almost always Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays. Historically, these claims have–alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration–been a major theme in European persecution of Jews.
Ben Smith points out that Glenn Reynolds used the term in a WSJ op-ed earlier this week so presumably she picked it up from there. Nevertheless, one WSJ column does not cancel out centuries of meaning for a term that has terrible, terrible meaning and repercussions -- Jews have been persecuted for centuries using this false claim. The especial irony here being that Palin deploys this term while attempting to criticize the media for inciting violence and calling for responsible rhetoric.
And then there is the extra terrible irony that Rep. Giffords is Jewish.
Perhaps we can look forward to a Facebook note and Vimeo video explaining her choice of phrase.
Sarah Palin Accuses Media of "Blood Libel" after Tucson Shooting
Saturday's shooting in Arizona had nothing to do with political rhetoric, and media figures who invoked a map featuring gun sights on congressional districts are guilty of "blood libel," Sarah Palin said in a video statement Wednesday.
Special Section: Tragedy in Tucson
The former vice presidential candidate has remained mostly silent since the attack that killed six people and critically wounded Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords at a meet-and-greet event in a Tucson supermarket.
But Palin stressed Wednesday that the violence was the work of "a single evil man" and that crimes "begin and end" with the people that commit them. Palin dismissed the recent criticism focusing on whether incendiary political rhetoric - including her organization's swing district map featuring crosshair - might have contributed to a climate that promotes violence against political figures.
"I listened at first puzzled, then with concerned, and now with sadness to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event," Palin said."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 that they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."
As the New York Times' Michael Shear explained Wednesday, "By using the term 'blood libel' to describe the criticism about political rhetoric after the shootings, Ms. Palin was inventing a new definition for an emotionally laden phrase. Blood libel is typically used to describe the false accusation that Jews murder Christian children to use their blood in religious rituals, in particular the baking of matzos for passover. The term has been used for centuries as the pretext for anti-Semitism and violent pogroms against Jews."
Palin is part of a chorus of voices on the political right casting itself as the victim of smears and an attempt to infringe free speech following the Tucson attack.
Right wing blogger and law professor Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds argued in a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday that "there's a climate of hate out there, all right, but it doesn't derive from the innocuous use of political cliches. And former Gov. Palin and the tea party movement are more the targets than the source."
A Different White House Emerges After Tucson Tragedy John Dickerson: Can Obama Find the Right Words? Giffords Breathing on Her Own, Doctors Say Poll: 45% Say Politics Motivated Jared Loughner
Palin herself referred in the video to a House bill, proposed after the shooting by Democratic Rep. Robert Brady of Pennsylvania, that would "criminalize speech."
Palin said that attacks on free speech and the democratic political system remind us how much we cherish and need to protect them.
"It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9/11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security," she said. "We will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults."
It's unclear whether the timing of Palin's message has any special significance politically, but it came the same President Obama travels to Tucson to meet with victims' families and local leaders - and ahead of a planned national address from the University of Arizona Wednesday evening.
Sarah Palin still has not removed the controversial target list map from her Facebook page -- the one that was posted back in March and features crosshairs all over a map ... and the name of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, among others. Palin has been getting flack for the map in the wake of the Giffords shooting over the weekend. A Palin staffer defended the graphic, saying, "We never ever, ever intended it to be gun sights ... It was simply crosshairs like you'd see on maps."
No evidence that Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck influenced gunman Jared Loughner
(WIREUPDATE) — Despite the rhetoric found on Twitter and liberal websites there is absolutely no shred of evidence that Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck ever once influenced the gunman behind the mass shooting in Tuscon, Arizona. By all accounts Jared Loughner was an insane individual whose online ramblings do not reflect either the former Governor or the television host.
In the hours after the tragic shootings we have learned very little about the gunman. According to former friends he was considered ‘a loner’ who used recreational drugs and listened to music such as Jimi Hendrix and The Doors. He was able to legally obtain the gun that he would go on to use in the shooting of 19 individuals.
Liberal commentators such as Keith Olberman and DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas were quick to give blame to Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck for Loughner’s actions despite hearing any evidence that would suggest Loughner was influenced by them.
Jared Loughner’s obsession with Arizona Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords wasn’t a recent occurrence. Long before Sarah Palin posted a Facebook image declaring Giffords as one of her political targets during the 2010 mid-term elections, Loughner told a high school friend that he spoke with the Congresswoman. He asked Giffords a question and determined she was “stupid and unintelligent.”
This meeting occurred a year before Sarah Palin was a household name, in 2007, and three years before the infamous ‘targets’ image was posted on Facebook.
Loughner left numerous disturbing messages on his Myspace page. On December 13, 2010 he wrote, “I don’t feel good: I’m ready to kill a police officer! I can say it.”
The very next day he followed up his threat with an equally disturbing omen of today’s news, “WOW! I’m glad i didn’t kill myself. I’ll see you on National T.v.! This is foreshadow …. why doesn’t anyone talk to me?..”
During those two days talk show host Glenn Beck was gearing up for his multiple broadcasts in Wilmington, Ohio to celebrate “America’s First Christmas.”
Topics over those two days included Glenn’s thoughts on the Narnia movie, the collapse of the Metrodome due to snowfall, The Bush Tax-cuts, CNN attempt to discredit Glenn over his comments on Islamic terrorism, Jim Wallis bashing rich Americans, meeting Mark Wahlberg at a restaurant, and George Soros’ influence on the progressive movement.
At no point during these broadcasts did Glenn suggest for his listeners to arm themselves and shoot police officers. Actually, Glenn has a long history of telling his listeners to give thanks to the men and women in uniform and not hate.
Loughner’s own disdain of the police might have stemmed from an incident when he was cited for possession of drug paraphernalia, also in 2007. While the charges were ultimately withdrawn, it seemed to have severe effect on his college studies as he would soon drop out of school.
The exact motives of Loughner’s heinous actions are unclear at this time – what is clear Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck probably had nothing to do with it. Loughner formed his own opinions and acted on them. He is responsible for his own actions and deserves the highest punishment afforded by law.
