It was January of 2011 that the National Enquirer ran a story identifying Todd Palin as a pimp.
For over five years I have tried to obtain independent corroborating evidence of the report. It wasn’t until the Colombia scandal broke that I learned of the connection between Todd Palin, David Chaney (the agent assigned to guard Sarah during the ’08 campaign, and one of the supervisors involved in the Colombia scandal) and Shailey Tripp.
I have posted several reports on the voluminous documents produced as a result of a Court Order entered in the FOIA suit pending in Federal Court in Dallas. Here are the posts:
- Part I: Relevant Background
- Part II: The Secret Service an Agency in Crisis: One Employee’s Account
- Part III: Notice to the Congressional Oversight Committee
- Part IV: Telling Lies is Part of the Culture of the Secret Service
- Part V: The Deception of David Chaney and the Secret Service
- Part VI: Critical Documents Still Missing in the FOIA Suit
- Part VII: Two Pages that Highlight the Culture of Corruption
The original approach of DHS to the FOIA requests was to simply ignore the requests. When that didn’t work, and I threatened a suit, AT Smith of the Secret Service offered to produce a statement of David Chaney (which should have already been produced in response to my FOIA requests) in exchange for an agreement to withdraw all pending FOIA requests. Assuming that the Secret Service and DHS has been truthful when they asserted that documents could not be produced due to “ongoing enforcement proceedings,” I agreed. When the statement of Chaney was produced, at least 50% of the statement was redacted, but he denied any knowledge of Shailey Tripp. It was hard to understand why there would be relevant “ongoing enforcement proceedings” if Chaney didn’t know Tripp, but I waited the 6 months to refile my FOIA requests. When I did I asked for documents to reveal the “ongoing enforcement proceedings.” Nothing has been produced to indicate that there was EVER an “enforcement proceeding” that pertained to Todd Palin or David Chaney.
When the documents requested were still not produced, and after repeated appeals to the DHS and various politicians, I filed suit in Federal Court to enforce my rights to receive the requested documents. After the suit was filed, the coercive behavior of the government continued. The attorney for the Department of Justice asserted a claim against ME, asserting that I should have to pay the attorney fees of the government. I filed new FOIA requests with the DOJ and DHS asking for any statutory or case law to justify the assertion against a citizen of a claim for attorney fees by the government in a FOIA case. I also requested a copy of ANY case where attorney fees had ever been awarded to the government and against a Plaintiff in a FOIA case. Both the DHS and the DOJ have not produced a single document in response. The clear indication is that such a claim was asserted to attempt to intimidate me.
When lies, delay tactics, and coercion didn’t work, the Court ordered production of the documents. Days before the deadline set by the Court, the Office of Inspector General asked for an extension of time, for YEARS to produce documents that were required by law to be produced in 20 days. The Court ordered compliance with the original order.
Now, being out of options, the next attempt to hide the truth was the production of such a large volume of documents which would be overwhelming to review, hoping that perhaps I wouldn’t spend the time to read every page. Even though I had attorneys hired to handle the case, the attorney fees associated with reviewing thousands of pages of documents would likely triple the cost of the lawsuit. The Secret Service produced four binders of documents, which were each approximately 4 inches thick. Additionally, OIG produced roughly 10 inches of documents, representing thousands of pages. The OIG is still producing documents. My first challenge was to review the Secret Service documents. After many long nights of reviewing those documents, I began to tackle the massive number of documents produced by the OIG. My assumption was that the OIG documents would essentially be a duplication of the Secret Service documents. I was wrong. The documents that should have been part of the records of the Secret Service, were only produced by the OIG. Even though there were thousands of pages, I was determined to review each and every page.
Yesterday, I finally made it to the last pages of the thousands produced by OIG. Roughly twenty pages before the last document produced was a document identified as “Report of Investigation”. (OIG-2014-0000007A) It was described as an “Independent Review of Cartagena, Colombia Incident”. The “Reporting Agent was identified as David Nieland and was dated 9-26-12. (Note: David Nieland is the agent that was himself arrested in 2014 in a prostitution sting and then resigned.) All of the thousand of pages produced redacted the names of the agents involved in the Colombia scandal, protecting the privacy interest of those agents who were forced to resign. Thus David Chaney’s name is usually not apparent in any document that relates to his involvement. It is clear however that David Chaney was one of two “senior supervisors” ousted from the Secret Service as a result of his involvement in the Colombia prostitution scandal. He was also the agent that was assigned to guard Sarah Palin during the ’08 campaign. You remember, he was the one who posted pictures of himself on Facebook, “checking her out , if you know what i mean”.
In the report of David Neiland, dated 9-26-12, Mr. Neiland reported on the interview of “Employee #2”. While the name of the employee is redacted, it is apparent to me that it is David Chaney. Relevant portions of the statement include:
“Later in the day on April 11, 2012 ________met with ____ near the swimming pool at the Caribe hotel in Cartagena, Colombia. ________ stated __________ told him that he wanted to go to a strip club and take prostitutes back to the hotel while in Cartagena since prostitution was legal in Colombia.”
“On June 6, 2012, __________ stated that his attorney ________ received a telephone call …”
“…was asked whether he would be willing to submit to a polygraph examination to which he responded in the negative…”
“_________ stated that this interview focused on a story which appeared on an internet blog written in which he was referenced in alleged sexual encounters between ____________ and ______________”
“________ also admitted to the OIG that he had solicited prostitutes on two previous occasions, once in __________ in 2008 or 2009 and the other time in ___________ in 2009.”
I believe this is the statement of Chaney because:
- Chaney and Stokes were the supervisors involved in the Colombia scandal, so I would anticipate they would be the first two agents to be interviewed. That would explain why he was the “Employoee #2” interviewed in Mr. Neiland’s report.
- Chaney had an attorney involved to represent him in the scandal, and this document confirms that the person giving the statement had an attorney.
- Chaney did not agree to take a polygraph examination, and the person giving this interview refused a polygraph.
- I am unaware of any “internet blog” that reported on a story of one of the agents in Colombia who used prostitutes in America, except my report regarding Chaney, Todd Palin, and Shailey Tripp.
- The fact that this agent admitted to solicitation of a prostitute in 2008 is consistent with the time frame Shailey Tripp reported with regard to her encounter with Mr. Chaney.
- The statement provided to me of Mr. Chaney by AT Smith was dated June 6, 2012, the same day referenced in this interview, and which the agent interviewed indicated focused on a story which appeared on an internet blog.
The most amazing part of this report is not that it is consistent with Shailey Tripp’s account, that it confirms a history of using prostitutes that pre-dated the Colombia scandal, that Chaney was not required to take a polygraph test, that it was never disclosed to me in the statement of Chaney provided by AT Smith that Chaney admitted to use of prostitutes before April of 2012, or that it confirms the fact that the Director of the Secret Service, Mark Sullivan, lied to Congress in his testimony. The amazing thing to me is that this report was generated almost four years ago, is specifically relevant to the FOIA request that I repeatedly submitted, and was easily identifiable as responsive to my request. It took over one year of litigation, a Court Order, and over $100,000 in attorney’s fees to obtain a report that was available 3 1/2 years ago. Thus it appears that the culture of corruption extends far beyond the Secret Service.