50 Comments

1. The Texas Pundit:

As James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal might say: Metaphor Alert!!!

Roger, it is clear that the left in general and the Obamabots in particular are out to crucify Sarah Palin. And, like any port in a storm, any accusation-no matter how stupid-is their meat and potato’s.
At least that’s the way I see it on this side of the Pecos River

Tex

Oct 11, 2008 - 6:25 am 2. peterike:

Indeed the report may contain nothing, but it will do its damage just the same. Doing a quick check, I see that MSN, Yahoo and Googlenews have as major headlines something on the order of “Palin abused authority.” God knows what the TV news is saying — I never watch those people.

So the factoid is now out there, and a huge segment of the public will walk around with the notion in their head — “Palin abused authority.” They’ve been primed for weeks with endless talk of “troopergate” and now the “truth” comes out!

The MSM is so vile and unfair it’s beyond comprehension now. But the job’s been done, and the McCain ticket probably just dropped another point or two.

Oct 11, 2008 - 7:02 am 3. mary:

The investigation in Alaska was approved by a bipartisan legislature a month before Sarah Palin became the VP nominee. The report points to the fact that Palin did not have appropriate boundaries between her personal life and her responsibilities as governor. She gives the impression of vindictive and secretive —- Otherwise, why do state business on personal e mail accounts? If there was nothing to hide, why couldn’t she allow her husband and state officials to respond to the subpoenas requested?

Oct 11, 2008 - 7:17 am 4. Countrylawyer:

OK. Let’s see. The spouse of an elected chief executive, holding no authority other than sharing a bed with the chief executive, pushes for a political appointee to be removed from the office that appointee currently holds. Which then happens. For reasons which may or may not implicate how that appointee has discharged his duties, but which also, because of the peculiar facts of the case, intersect with the spouse’s personal-level thoughts on whether the appointee should continue in the job. I thought we were assured that Travelgate was not such a big deal after all, and had zero to tell us about the fitness for high office of Wm. Jeff’n Clinton. Or perhaps the White House travel office had tasered Chelsea one afternoon, just for giggles, and purely out of concern for the First Privacy, we weren’t told about it.

Oct 11, 2008 - 7:18 am 5. John Kranz:

Here we have classic Spitzerism — without the attractive young sex workers. The indictment is the verdict. There is no plan to offer due process, the chance to confront one’s accuser, to present contrary evidence. There’s a push to ensure habeas corpus rights for enemy combatants, but nobody wants to extend it to Dick Grasso, Hank Greenberg, or Sarah Palin.

Oct 11, 2008 - 7:53 am 6. mdgiles:

Uh, Mary. The report essentially says nothing and is based on a statute so nebulous that an official who reported that a wanted serial killer had moved in next door, would be liable under the “personal interest” section.

And since governor Palin had to take on the corrupt “old boys” network of her own party to get elected, I’m sure that there are more then a few Alaskan Republicans who would be glad to sign on to a bipartisan hatchet job. Oh course, that only demonstrates their stupidity; as the quickest way to restart the gravy train, would be for the Palins to move out of Alaska to DC. And any citizen – with at least the intelligence of a bag of hammers – should want any officer making threats of violence against innocent bystanders, using a taser on minors and/or drinking on the job, off the force.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:00 am 7. John Q:

“The Branchflower Report is a series of guess and insupportable conclusions drawn by exactly one guy”

Sorry but if that’s the case, Governor Palin has to take some of the blame for that. She refused to participate in the review and blocked her staff from doing the same. Her husband participated but only in written responses to questions. If this were a Democratic Governor, this kind of behavior would not be condoned.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:10 am 8. Frank Davis:

Mary – get a clue. The report acknowledges she can fire the police commissioner at will. That should be the end of the story. What state business did she conduct on personal email? The illegally leaked emails show no state business. Democrats always try to make a mountain out of nothing. I guess you are one of those. My investigation concludes you are delusional. It’s just as valid as Branchflower’s conclusion.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:13 am 9. Charlie (Colorado):

She gives the impression of vindictive and secretive —- Otherwise, why do state business on personal e mail accounts?

I dunno, Mary — considering that no one seems to have any evidence that Palin actually did state business using personal email accounts, and that this particular rumor has been passed around now for months, reappearing over and over, I’m not sure that “secretive and vindictive” might not be projection.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:21 am 10. John Hansen:

I looked at the key finding -
I find that, although Walt Monegan’s refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin’s firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

Coupled witht the public statement of Monegan

“For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten. Not the governor. Not Todd. Not any of the other staff,” Monegan said Friday from Portland. “What they said directly was more along the lines of ‘This isn’t a person that we would want to be representing our state troopers.’”

This does not even rise to the level of “He said, She said”. Its more like judgment by “He thought, She thought”

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:23 am 11. yehudit:

Mary and Country Lawyer have obviously not read the facts of the case.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:25 am 12. bobc:

She violated the law

but we know that doesnt bother GOP activists ever since Watergate

DId nixon violate a law that affected our safety? no but he had to resign anyway

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:35 am 13. Angela:

Hypocrites. I believed the Republicans party and pundits concern about the Clintons’ abuse of power. This independents eyes have been opened; hypocrites the lot of you.

I have read the report, I have followed the time line, I refuse to be inoculated further against truth by your lies.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:38 am 14. The Wide Awake Cafe » October Surprises:

[...] As the late Peggy Lee sang, Is that all there is? [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:45 am 15. Alaska Resident:

Speaking of Alaskan politics…have you seen Time magazine’s article on Sarah Palin? Just came out. Half truths, multiple inaccuracies.

I think this new book can set the record straight. Sarah takes on Big Oil: The compelling story of Governor Sarah Palin’s battle with Alaska’s Big 3 oil companies, as told by the state’s top oil and gas editors. (www.sarahtakesonbigoil.com)

Written by the other side, so to speak, since the writers are not Republicans. They also talk to a whole lot of people in the industry — Alaska’s oil and gas industry — angry with Gov. Palin.

But surprisingly, Palin has done a solid job. She really wrote her own story by having the intelligence, insight and backbone to be the best one of the toughest CEOs Alaska has ever had.

Here’s an excerpt from the book that shows what typical interviews turned out:

Dan Seamount, one of two commissioners who served with Sarah Palin in 2003 and early 2004 on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, had the following to say about Palin.

“She’s pro-development, not pro-industry. She’ll tell you, ‘My boss is the people of Alaska.’
“She’s smart, a quick study. Her adversaries’ biggest mistake is underestimating her intelligence, her understanding of issues. And she uses their arrogance against them.”

And this:
“Your leadership and that of your administration has been outstanding and your integrity and transparent style are a breath of fresh air in what has proven to be a rather shady and smoke-filled past in regard to energy issues in Alaska.” —David Sokol, chairman and CEO of MidAmerican Holdings Co. (a Warren Buffet company), to Gov. Sarah Palin, related to her work on a pipeline to carry North Slope gas to market.

Oct 11, 2008 - 8:50 am 16. Laurence Wagman:

This report which I skimmed through last night was a cure for my insomnia. As for as any wrong foing there is none. Monegan serves at the pleasure of the gov, thus, the gov can fire Monegan for whatever reasons she sees fit. End of story, and investigation from that point is only to embarrass Palin.

So here are the facts: Wooten, is a State Union employee who posesses a state provided fire arm. Prior to Gov. Palin entering office we know 1.) Wooten was drinking or was drunk inside a taxpayer provided vehicle 2) Wooten used what I presume is a state issued Taser gun on his 10 year old step son. Upon taking office we know Wooten had threatened physical harm to the executive of a state as well as her family.

This begs the following questions…

1). What does it take for an officer of the law to be fired in the state of Alaska…apparently quite a bit.

2). Why did it take Monegan so long to do something? …by the way I believe Wooten is still on the payroll.

With Monegan I believe a pattern developed of inaction. Palin had enough and replaced him. Lastly we know from the report that it was Todd not Sarah Palin who advanced much, to which I say so what the guy wants to protect his family…If a husband can’t protect his family then what good is he.

While the MSMedia will try and portray this as abuse of poer. The McCain camp can help its cause by going on offense. It should defend Todd Palin as someone just trying to protect his family from physical harm. I say beat that point home and its political Juzitsu. If I were advising Obama’s campaign I would stay clear of this one. My predict this story dies by Monday.

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:03 am 17. bobc:

but even I will admit Clinton abused his power Re; monica

Palin thought she could do same

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:08 am 18. Brian Macker:

“She violated the law”

Actually, no she didn’t.

“using a taser on minors”

Letting a kid who wanted to get tasered prove he wasn’t a momma’s boy to his friends.

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:09 am 19. The Palin Troopergate Probe | PAWaterCooler.com:

[...] Kimball: “Is that all they’ve got?” It’s like Oakland according to Gertrude Stein, i.e., there’s no there there, Hollis, no [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:11 am 20. John:

Come on. We all know how the lefties treat facts and news: they don’t have to be true, you just have to *want* them to be true.

There is always some form of mental gymnastics that can be performed which allows someone to declare that something is ‘true’ even if it is not.

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:14 am 21. John:

Here I’ll show you: everyone that is attacking Sarah Palin over this issue is in favor of tasering defenseless children, otherwise they would not object to her efforts to have the trooper in question removed from duty.

See how much fun this is? And so easy!

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:17 am 22. PaulB:

“Actually, no she didn’t.”

Actually, yes she did. The report even told you precisely which law she violated.

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:27 am 23. mad:

but… how can you blame the obamabots when the investigation has been ongoing since at least mid-summer? are you saying that obama is really THAT freakin’ smart, that months before palin’s surprise nomination as candidate for vice-presidency, he engineered an investigation of palin on ethics-related charges in a gop-run state? wow… now i’m really going to vote for obama!

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:31 am 24. bobc:

that Palin DID violate ethics law is the findings of the report.

Mccain knows all about Ethics committee reports

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:43 am 25. Angela:

I just read that this is the first time in history that a party ticket has both candidates who have violated ethics laws.

Oct 11, 2008 - 10:06 am 26. Tversky:

The real scandal here is that the Alaska State Troopers could conclude that a trooper tasered his 10 year old stepson, drank in his patrol car, violated the law (hunting violation) and has an escalating pattern of poor judgement and bad conduct but then slap him on the wrist with a 10 day suspension. Don’t believe me? Read it for yourself:
http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/07/21/16/Wooten_suspend_letter.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf

If Palin did as this bipartisan report alleges (by the way, the panel voted to RELEASE the report, they didn’t vote on it’s conclusions), then her husband’s actions didn’t just benefit Palin personally but they also benefitted the PUBLIC AT LARGE. Is Branchflower actually making the case that Palin was obliged to stop her husband from speaking up about a bad cop and likely liability case merely because it would benefit her personally as well as the public? That’s idiotic to say the least. Moreover, if Hollis French, sleazebag Obama partisan extraordinaire doesn’t think a cop that tasers kids and drinks in his patrol car isn’t a rogue cop then pray tell, what exactly does that cop have to do to earn the title “rogue cop” from French? Murder someone? This is a smear job. Palin shouldn’t be trashed for this, she should be CELEBRATED.

I’m shocked that you Obama supporters are actually supporting the idea of keeping a dirty cop that abuses children and drinks in his patrol car on the job. I thought you had better morals than that. At least that’s what you keep CLAIMING.

Oct 11, 2008 - 10:42 am 27. JMHawkins:

There are a lot of brave, hard-working cops in this country, and there are a handfull of tin-horn bullies without enough judgment to run a lemonaide stand. Every private citizen that runs into a Trooper Wooten in their life and isn’t in a position to do anything about his abuse of his badge hopes that jerk will someday tick off the wrong person, someone who is in a position to do something about it.

Seems that happened in this case, but the whole things makes me nervous about the state of our law enforcement agencies (as well as every other regulatory government body). Wooten clearly shouldn’t have a badge, but even when he threatens a family member of the Governor of the state he works for, he can’t be fired and it makes more trouble for the 80% approval-rating Governor than is does for the tin-horn cop. Amazing.

And in addition, in the middle of all this, Monegan reportedly made a little threat of his own to Governer Palin, telling her “someone” had told him she’d been seen driving with her son Trig no in a prober child safety seat. Palin didn’t back down and good for her.

So, in my mind, this report confirms even more strongly that we need a Sarah Palin in charge. Someone has to dismantle the corrupt networks of public employee unions, regulators, lobbyists, and pols, not to meniton rent-seeking businesses, that are undermining our entire society. Whoever does that will come under vicious attack with the aparatus using every brickbat (like this commission and it’s phony-baloney notions of ethics) to stop it.

Palin is willing to stand up to that. We need her more than ever.

Oct 11, 2008 - 10:49 am 28. Fausta’s Blog » Blog Archive » Also at the AFP: John Fund on ACORN:

[...] The rest of the lamestream media (John’s words)? Fretting that Sarah Palin fired a political appointee. [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 10:54 am 29. Kimball: The Tasergate Report–Is that all they’ve got? (1) | Jack’s Newswatch:

[...] [Source] Note:  Not exactly what CTV is blathering on about but I do what I can.  [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:02 am 30. Tversky:

Great post JMHawkins. Wooten is the one that’s engaging in abuse of power. (French is just a partisan hack trying to score a few points with our dear leader Obama. I don’t expect much from him. Moreover, Moneghan is just another worthless bureaucrat, refusing to rock the boat against the police union. Sadly typical of many government workers.)

But Wooten is a law enforcement officer. Dirty cops, pedaphilic priests and biased members of the press are among the sleaziest people out there. They abuse the public trust and reduce the public’s faith in government, church and the 4th estate.

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:15 am 31. Tazergate Investigagtor Concludes that Palin Might Have Abused Her Power, Except She Used Them Legally and Properly | The Sundries Shack:

[...] Roger Kimball cautions us: Surgeon General’s Warning: do not drive or attempt to operate machinery while contemplating the just-published 260-odd-page report orchestrated by Hollis French, Alaska legislator and supporter of Barack Obama. [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:30 am 32. Democratic witch hunt of Palin finds pretty much nothing | BlogWonks Free WordPress Blog Hosting:

[...] Kimball is as genuinely underwhelmed by the Troopergate report as I am. Surgeon General’s Warning: do not drive or attempt to operate machinery while [...]

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:31 am 33. Tversky:

I’m sorry Angela, but you are a grade A moron. I try not to attack the Obama supporters personally but your total refusal to look at the facts of the case show a stunning degree of arrogant stupidity. The report states Governor Palin behaved unethically by failing to stop her husband from talking to one of her employees about a bad cop. A man that the Alaska State Troopers concluded had tasered a 10 year old child and drank in his patrol car. I would hope that you would be honest enough to admit that a trooper that did something like that should be removed from the force. Given that fact, how then could Governor Palin’s behavior be considered unethical? Imagine if Todd Palin had never spoken up about Wooten and one day while Wooten was drinking in his patrol car he killed someone and the state faced a huge liability suit? I bet you would be screaming she was behaving unethically then too! You can’t have it both ways.

As for McCain? Please bring up Keating Five. PLEASE!!! Lead Democratic prosecutor Robert Bennett (he also defended Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones case) concluded McCain was totally innocent and only named because the Democrats were afraid the S&L scandal would fall completely on their shoulders (as the other four senators were Democrats – including Obama supporter John Glenn) Moreover, McCain has pretty much spent the rest of his career trying to make up for the shame he went through by championing SERIOUS, BIPARTISANSHIP legislation like McCain-Feingold. In contrast, for all his bluster and ego, Obama has NEVER championed any serious bipartisan legislation. He’s never taken a stand. He’s never shown bravery or a committment to doing what’s best for his country even over the interests of his party. He’s an opportunist and a fraud. So yes, please keep bringing up Keating 5 and Tasergate. Because the truth actually REINFORCES McCain and Palin’s well earned reform credentials. Also, by doing so you reveal the pettiness, silliness and ignorance of many Obama supporters. Not to mention the fact that you are apparently completely incapable of doing independent research and instead mindlessly rely on the “gospel” of DailyKos, HuffingtonPost, TalkingPointsMemo and the other lefty sites. Please, for your own sake – don’t be a sheep. Go out and find the facts for yourself.

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:32 am 34. peter jackson:

It’s a report by one guy hired by a functionary of the Obama Campaign. The only astonishing thing about it is how lame and empty it is.

Meanwhile Obama gets a million dollar earmark for his wife’s employer who then turns around and gives 20% of it to Michelle Obama in the form of a 200% raise. I guess you Democrats are just fine with that, right? What amounts to a US Senator appropriating government funds into his checking account? Has anyone looked in Obama’s freezer?

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:35 am 35. Jim:

As Dyer says, it’s an “episode of political theater that would make Josef Stalin blush.”

Ahem. Why must both sides make analogies that allude to people like Stalin and Hitler. I understand that the master trope of the blogosphere is hyperbole, but honestly, can you sya with any sort of straight face this report would strike Stalin as theatrical. Or, to take a common leftist approach, that George Bush is Hitler.

If we do not stop shouting (and hyperbole is the printed equivalent of Fox news/MSNBC shouting) we are not going to make any progress in approaching any of the real troubles in our country.

Now, as ever, we need a Middle Way.

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:46 am 36. elHombre:

As an old prosecutor, I know crap when I see it and this report is crap.

I’ve done a preliminary alalysis at:

“Troopergate Report: Biased and Unprofessional, But Good Enough For the Media”
http://thenextright.com/elhombreprimero/troopergate-report-biased-and-unprofessional-but-good-enough-for-the-media

Oct 11, 2008 - 11:50 am 37. Richard:

Hollis French is a moron. The media are Lemmings. This is “Seinfeld” story.

Oct 11, 2008 - 12:02 pm 38. elHombre:

Correction: “I’ve done a preliminary [analysis] at …”

Tversky is correct, Angela is a moron, or perhaps just a typical Obot troll (a plethora of which seem to infest this site).

The final report on Keating Five stated:

McCain’s “actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence…. Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate.”

Of course Obama’s folks lie about this along with everything else.

As for Obama and Troopergate: Hollis French is the main, but not the only, Obama connection to “Troopergate.” As a high profile Obama supporter in Alaska, French should have recused himself from overseeing the Legislative Council investigation for what is obviously a conflict of interest dating from Palin’s nomination for VP. French hand picked the investgator, Steve Branchflower, who should also have recused himself after Palin was nominated for VP.

Ironically, if French’s conduct in Troopergate were judged by the same ethics statute Branchflower used against Palin, it would be an obvious violation.

Oct 11, 2008 - 12:10 pm 39. TMLutas:

I have read the section IV reasons behind Finding I that Sarah Palin behaved unethically (pages 48-68). I will never get that 20 minutes of my life back.

The detailed legal reasoning comes down to Sarah Palin, via inaction, did not restrain a private citizen, her husband, from seeking a redress of grievances, specifically the firing of a trooper he considered completely unsuitable for government service due to actions he believed to be true.

A private citizen’s right to seek a redress of grievances is guaranteed by the US Constitution’s 1st amendment. Palin is being formally dinged for not infringing on the 1st amendment using her power as Governor of Alaska. That’s outrageous. Alaska should seek to get its money back from its contractor.

Oct 11, 2008 - 12:25 pm 40. Ben Murphy:

If Branchflower set out to write a partisan report that would make Sarah and Todd Palin look terrible, then he failed. If he was actually trying to do what he was paid to do – produce an objective account of the events surrounding Monegan’s dismissal, he did a great job.

Trooper Wooten did some bad stuff. He was investigated, found guilty, given a minor punishment. This was before either Palin or Monegan was in a position of authority.

Sarah Palin comes to power. She and Todd think, in their common-sense way, that Wooten should be fired. But Monegan has to point out the reality: he’s been punished once, and cannot be fired now for what he did then. Regulations that preserve due process and employees’ rights sometimes limit executives from putting common-sense into practice, and a bureaucrat like Monegan has to break the bad news. But Sarah allows Todd to keep hassling Monegan, fishing for some new charge to throw at Wooten. That is unethical: although the law might sometimes be an ass, public servants must respect it, and the Governor and her First Gentleman must as well. The result, in this case, is that when Monegan is fired, he has a legitimate complaint about the pressure he was placed under.

Incidentally, Branchflower’s report acknowledges that the confidentiality laws perhaps offer too much protection to troopers who are under investigation, and suggests they be altered.

This sounds like an ethics offense, but a minor one, a story of a new Governor and her husband who, at first, don’t quite realize the limitations of executive power.

Oct 11, 2008 - 12:43 pm 41. bobc:

Palin talked REPEATEDLY to government employees.

That was the overreaching the GOP majority led commission said was Abuse of power.

Oct 11, 2008 - 1:24 pm 42. gadfly:

the report is out and it speaks for itself.

Obama lead in the polls will go up,

if I am wrong I will send you money

Oct 11, 2008 - 1:35 pm 43. davenoon:

To argue, as several folks have here and elsewhere, that Hollis French “orchestrated” this report and that it somehow represents an extension of the Obama campaign’s wishes, is beyond moronic. Hollis French is a member of the Legislative Council, which contains ten Republicans and four Democrats. He’s not even the chair of the council. The council agreed, unanimously, to hire a former Alaskan with an absolutely pristine record of non-partisanship in public service. Whatever you think of French’s ill-advised public statements, Branchflower did his job.

The council’s charge was not simply to investigate the firing, but (more importantly) to measure the degree to which Palin may have violated the ethics standards that her own administration amended in 2007 to correct the massive ethical lapses displayed by the previous governor. The state constitution clearly permits the governor to fire commission heads for no cause; no one has ever disputed that. This constitutional provision does not, however, permit the governor to abuse her office by using her husband — an unelected adjunct to the executive branch — as well as her subordinates to settle a private score.

Sarah Palin and her husband did not like the results of the investigation that led to Wooten’s suspension. They believed it was their prerogative to revise the results of that investigation or to urge other public officials to revisit a closed investigation. They were wrong, and the report clearly explains why.

Oct 11, 2008 - 1:55 pm 44. elHombre:

Ben: “If [Branchflower] was actually trying to do what he was paid to do – produce an objective account of the events surrounding Monegan’s dismissal, he did a great job.”

bobc: Palin talked REPEATEDLY to government employees. That was the overreaching the GOP majority led commission said was Abuse of power.

No offense, but you are mistaken. From my analysis, cited earlier:

5. Violation of the ethics provision requires that an executive officer knowingly make an “effort to benefit a personal or financial interest” of him or herself or a family member.

An oversimplified, but accurate, take on this is that both Todd and Sarah Palin spoke continuously about Wooten, the brother-in-law, bringing discredit to the department, about the inadequacy of the disciplinary action taken against him and about the negative impact he would have on DPS recruiting.

Arguably, all of these considerations fall within the Governor’s OFFICIAL, NOT PERSONAL, areas of interest. Branchflower simply chose not to see it that way or to even put forward the case for that interpretation.

Oct 11, 2008 - 2:25 pm 45. jonaby:

Why does everyone here seem to be ignoring the point of the report?

It is simply this: It is an abuse of power to use Governmental powers to try to punish enemies of your family. No matter how bad the State Trooper was, the fact is, as a former brother-in-law, it is a conflict of interest to try and get an ex-relative fired (or hired).

There were TWO questions, not one. First, did Palin have the authority to fire the Commissioner. Answer: Yes.

Second – which everyone keeps ignoring here – did Palin abuse her authority in trying to pressure the state troopers to fire a trooper that was a personal enemy of her family.

Answer: YES. The questions are completely separate.

If Palin had used her power to HIRE a brother-in-law it would be just as bad. That’s the point, yet the postings here are full of willful blindness.

Oct 11, 2008 - 2:33 pm 46. me:

the republican-controlled legislature approved of the probe unanimously. while a lone dem may have worked against her, several members of her own party thought she was guilty enough to be in favor of this.

Oct 11, 2008 - 4:43 pm 47. John D:

Hmm. I work for a LE agency on the west coast. If one of our officers, or any adult, had used a taser on a 10 year old, whether or not the kid wanted it, they would be looking at felony child abuse, endangering the welfare of a minor and assault II, at the very least. I’m sure a halfway competent ADA could have come up with more.

The child would be removed from the home and the drones from Child Welfare would have set up an office in his living room never to leave.

We have had several officers terminated for various things. The most common is lying to a superior. That brings instant and irrevocable termination.

In a case like this he would have had his hearing and been gone and none of the other officers would have shed a tear for him. That’s without even getting into the driving a patrol car under the influence and the domestic violence complaints.

I guess things are different in Alaska

Oct 11, 2008 - 9:14 pm 48. What Sarah knew « Blithe Spirit, the Blog:

[...] New Criterion editor Roger Kimball goes further: [...]

Oct 12, 2008 - 1:19 am 49. alex:

Trooper Wooten illegally shot a moose in 2003. Governor Palin’s father butchered the moose and both Wooten’s and Palin’s family ate it. Wooten tasered his stepson in 2004. In 2005, all of this came to light as part of a messy divorce between Palin’s sister and Wooten. Wooten admitted to both as part of an inquiry that was brought on by the Palin family, but denied drinking in his patrol car. None of the incidents were brought to the attention of the ASP prior to the beginning of the divorce. Palin, in effect, kept all of this to herself until her sister decided to divorce this clown. This says a lot about her respect for public safety as much as about the severity of the incidents.

In 2007, Palin became governor, shortly after, a number of her aides and her husband began an off-the-record campaign to get Wooten fired, with a total of 36 contacts were made that were determined to have placed Monegan under the impression that he should fire Wooten.

While Palin can hire or fire at will, Monegan can’t. His hands were effectively tied, and he told Palin that she should stop putting pressure on him to this end. She fired him, then hired Kopp to replace him. 10 days later, Kopp stepped down when a prior sexual harassment claim against him came to light. He received $10,000 severance pay for the two weeks he was on the job.

Prior to her selection as the VP pick, she requested and anointed the investigation into the situation. Then she was selected and refused to participate in the investigation, then requested her AG to say that her employees would not be honoring the subpoenae.

The report came out, ahead of the date that was scheduled prior to her selection, so as not to place undue influence on the election.

All of this paints a pretty strange picture, and apparently, the bar of qualification to be Republican vice-president is pretty low. Scary stuff.

Oct 12, 2008 - 11:55 am 50. Ben Murphy:

Branchflower offers a clear defense of his application of the statute to this case on p.66:

“Such impermissible and repeated contacts create conflicts of interest for subordinate employees who must choose to either please a superior or run the risk of facing that superior’s displeasure and the possible consequences of such displeasure. This was one of the very reasons the Ethics Act was promulgated by the legislature”

It was not Monegan who punished Wooten’s tasering of a boy with a four day suspension – that didn’t happen on his watch. It is clear from the report that Monegan was pressured to compensate for this ’slap on the wrist’ by finding some other reason to fire Wooten.

I’ve had friends put in this position. The boss says “We would be better off without this person, let’s find a reason to fire them.” Public employees should not be pressured to follow the personal agenda of the executive when making personnel decisions, however well-intentioned that personal agenda may be.

Oct 12, 2008 - 12:22 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: