Troopergate Conclusion: Palin Abused Her Office

posted by John Nichols on 10/10/2008 @ 10:07pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (105)

Subscribe Now

Far from being the good-government "reformer" that Republicans have attempted to present her as, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has governed in an abusive manner that violated the public trust and the statutes of the state.

So concluded special investigator Steve Branchflower, a veteran Anchorage prosecutor who was hired by Alaska's Republican-controlled legislature to investigate Palin's firing in July of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The firing caused a firestorm in Alaska because Monegan, a former Anchorage police chief was a highly-regarded lawman and because the public service commissioner and other state officials suggested that he had been removed because he refused to dismiss Mike Wooten, a state trooper was the governor's former brother-in-law.

Alaska's Republican-dominated Legislative Council, which authorized the investigation of Palin's wrongdoing, voted unanimously to release the 263-page report in which Branchflower writes:

"I find that Governor Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52 110(a)of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52 110(a) provides:

The legislature affirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Branchflower said the evidence he gathered in the course of a two-a-half-month inquiry led to the conclusion that "Governor Palin and Todd Palin and her family have, over an extended period of time, endeavored to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired from his job as an Alaskan State Trooper."

Branchflower does not dispute that, as governor, Palin had the authority to fire Monegan. Alaska's Constitution, written in the 1950s at a time Alaskans were seeking statehood status, created an extremely strong governorship, with what the investigator describes as "broad" authority to appoint and dismiss state department heads.

But, even if Palin used powers vested in her as governor, she did so in a manner that put her in conflict with the ethics act. How so? Branchflower determined that Monegan's refusal to do the governor's personal bidding -- and fire Wooten -- was "likely a contributing factor" in her decision to remove him from his position.

"The evidence supports 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 in attempting to get Trooper Wooten fired [and there is evidence of her active participation]," concludes Branchflower.

Specifically, the investigator writes, "The governor knowingly... permitted [husband] Todd Palin to use the Governor's office and the resources of the Governor's office ... in an effort to find some way to get Trooper Wooten fired."

Governor Palin, who once welcomed the "Troopergate" inquiry and demanded that the legislature "hold me accountable," refused to cooperate with Branchflower after she accepted the Republican vice presidential nomination. Branchflower's report details the many roadblocks placed in the way of his investigation by Palin and her appointees, especially Alaska Attorney General

McCain campaign operatives and associates of former White House political czar Karl Rove made a number of moves to shut down the inquiry. But Republican legislators in Alaska refused to do so.

The Legislative Council's unanimous vote to release the report, which came after seven hours of deliberation, was the latest evidence of the determination of the state's legislators, Democrats and Republicans, to check and balance an abusive executive who now seeks to move from the state to federal level of government.

Here is the report Branchflower produced and the Legislative Council on Friday released.

Comments (105)

Oh, come on, that's not nearly as bad as meeting Bill Ayers a couple of times...or so they will argue.

Posted by Be Good at 10/10/2008 @ 10:21pm
Sure .. after all it was just a family spat. Nothing here, move along - right?

Geez....same old bed of corruption party

Posted by leftofcenter at 10/10/2008 @ 10:22pm
Those damn republicans.

Posted by bleedingheart at 10/10/2008 @ 10:24pm
In 1953, the late Oscar Shaftel, Queens College Professor of English literature and Oriental studies refused to tell Senator Joseph McCarthy and the Senate Internal Security Committee whether or not he was or had ever been a communist and refused to name his friends and colleagues. For those refusals--as was the custom at the time--Queens College, where he had taught since its founding in 1937, fired him. But Professor did tell the senators: "I cannot imagine a capable administrator telling Sean O'Casey he could not teach drama, or Picasso that he couldn't teach art."

In 1982, 14 years after the last of the laws used to fire him was ruled unconstitutional, Dr. Shaftel was finally given a city pension. At a news conference, he was asked whether he felt he had regained his honor. He looked out into the lights and said quietly, "I never lost my honor."

You Betcha! Professor Shaftel never lost his honor. But the same cannot be said of John McCain. He has driven himself into the gutter since first abandoning the "Straight Talk Express" four years ago, when, within a few days after stating "you don't question a man's service," he cowardly sat on his hands silently while his nemesis, George W., swift-boated by proxy John Kerry--a good, decent and arguably, honorable man.

While today's events have turned a few heads, including mine, Senator McCain still has a long way towards recapturing his honor. I wish him well–just not in the upcoming election.

Posted by bobforer at 10/10/2008 @ 11:12pm
Now we'll have to see how much lying republicans do in order to excuse Palin's lying.So much for being a reformer.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/10/2008 @ 11:12pm
If you puruse prosecution of a liberal, left-wing, Marxist law like the "Alaska Executive Branch ETHICS Act"....

the terrorists will win!!!!!!!!

(No...I REALLY do expect something like that from GUPDOG!....LOL)

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/10/2008 @ 11:21pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/10/2008 @ 11:21pm

I am waiting, patiently and with bated breath, to hear how the right wing is going to spin this. I do believe these ethics violations which have broken several laws (though whether those laws are civil or criminal is unclear) do at the very least open up the possibility of an impeachment inquiry. The one person who should really be frightened by all this is Todd. From what I understand, he did even more than his wife did, and may end up being even more accountable than her at the end of the day. Nevertheless, I await the inevitable right-wing spin.

Posted by yutsano at 10/10/2008 @ 11:47pm
The upside for Levii is if future monster in law is out he won't have to get married. Probably have to pay child support though. See always a bright side.

Posted by bascaville at 10/11/2008 @ 12:37am
Yet another nail in the GOP coffin.

Anyone still undecided by this point must be brain dead.

Posted by sloper at 10/11/2008 @ 12:39am
Game, set, match.

Posted by Balrog at 10/11/2008 @ 12:41am
This report leaves little to the imagination. Palin clearly "abused" her power as governor of Alaska.

So where do we go from here?

The headlines in the NYT as well as the Washington Post, can not be denied to be true by Palin or her supporters. she stated, "hold me accountable".

I think now we simply hold her accountable.

This should serve as an embarrassment to the McCain camp as well as the republican party in general. But they won't get it and spin in such away that will not mention there Henchmen that were stationed in Alaska trying to suppress this information.

But most importantly, we should serve notice to McCain/Palin, their camp and the entire republican party that another 4 years of having a vice president who abuses his or her power is not on our agenda! Period.

So this is the judgment of a man who would be president? After meeting Palin once or maybe 1.5 tims, did he think as Bush, "I looked her in the eyes and saw her soul."

Poor judgment on the behalf of a candidate for highest office in the land and the secretive, manipulative, abuse of power by the VP candidate.

Doesn't this give you a warm and fuzzy feeling?

Or at least a feeling of deja vu.

Posted by Hoot at 10/11/2008 @ 12:43am
The official right-wing response will be as follows:

But...but...but...but...CLINTON...and AYERS...and Rev. Wright...and Obama's BLACK, don't you see that?...and TERRORISTS UNDER YOUR BED...and LIBERALS...

And all the while, they'll be doing that thing that the righties do so well, at least metaphorically, if not physically - they'll be wetting their pants!

Posted by jmusolino at 10/11/2008 @ 12:53am
Posted by jmusolino at 10/11/2008 @ 12:53am | ignore this person | warn this person

and don't forget Ted Kennedy and Chappaquiddick and even that happened in July of 1969!!

Republican's love to bring this up each time Kennedy would speak up.

Well I'm sure his eventual death will have them dancing in the streets.

Posted by Hoot at 10/11/2008 @ 01:37am
I think the Alaska Republicans were very brave, and that they are truly conservative of a sense of reality. "Take that you spin doctors!" It's great.

Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/11/2008 @ 02:00am
What do we usually hear from those accused of "ethics" violations?

" I have let down my family, my friends, my constituents, etc." "Sometimes in the heat of battle you make mistakes, etc." "I'm only human. Everyone deserves a second chance." "I mis-spoke."

And of course, from her apologists- "For god's sake, give the woman a break & let her getawn with her life. Who will put moose meat on the table, rid the wilderness of savage wolfish predators & rouse patriotic Americans to strike out at leftist pinkos if this woman is stripped, uh, uh...oh yes.. of all human dignity?"

Posted by Sorelish at 10/11/2008 @ 02:15am
I'm finding it increasingly difficult NOT to believe that the Republicans actually WANT to lose the Presidency this time. Consider these: 1) The least-loved candidate with a tanked campaign emerges as the nominee; 2) The party picks a VP nominee who is frighteningly unqualified by any real world standard (surely we can agree by now that neither candidate had much say in running mate selection).

Given the steaming bed of poop we're waking up to, what surprises me is that the Dems still want to win.

It's clear to me that the next President will be a one-termer. The economy is tanked and things are going to get worse over the next 2-4 years. No centrist policy shifts will change that. Obama is emerging as a hard-core centrist and I'm getting more concerned about his timid stances.

My predictions: 1) Obama wins in '08; Dems take both houses 2) Reps crank-up their demonizing machine full-tilt to undermine Presidential credibility and to keep market confidence low 3) After 2 yrs of ineffective centrist reform, Reps retake Congress in '10 4) Reps take the White House in '12 and the deregulation party resumes.

I'm supporting Obama because I oppose McCain. If we had instant-runoff voting, I'd vote Nader for sure.

Posted by timtw at 10/11/2008 @ 03:06am
I believe that upon closer examination of Sarah and Todd Palin investigators will find evidence of "Kinky Sex." Wasilla must be rife with it.

As the Methamphetamine capital of Alaska. And given the overall "conservative" supressed christian fundamentalism that is present in the area, there must be some juicy stories there.

Sex scandals are always more effective at bringing down Repubs than obscure legal maneuvers. The electorate is always facinated by who is doing who.

Posted by chaoszen at 10/11/2008 @ 06:58am
But how could she be wrong? She's so pretty! Hail to the MILF!

Posted by mcnova at 10/11/2008 @ 08:52am
Roseanne Cash: 2. Reproductive Issues I also believe that a teenager's pregnancy is a "private family matter." In fact, I believe that every woman's pregnancy is a "private, family matter." (I bet the GOP never thought of making that leap!)

ROFLMFAO

Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/11/2008 @ 09:11am
Sorry for the misspelling. Rosanne.

Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/11/2008 @ 09:12am
"I think the American people can tell the difference between the results of a politically motivated investigation and a legitimate finding of fact," campaign spokesman Taylor Griffin said.

Truer words were ne'er spoken.

Posted by skeletonman at 10/11/2008 @ 09:32am
The only thing she did wrong was "nothing". Her "inaction" to stop her husband was an abuse of power.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am

I've heard that even trolls can learn. In your case. I'm not so sure.

Posted by skeletonman at 10/11/2008 @ 09:38am
Darin-Was that really the best you could come up with?Well,I guess you had little to work with.It is,now,a known fact that she abused her power in trying to get the trooper fired and then lied about it and if you need to excuse that by doing the but but Clinton nonsense then that's fine.You may lie to yourself and point the finger at someone,like Clinton,who isn't running for anything if you need to,but don't expect others to be that pathetic.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 09:42am
Darin, she abused her power to benefit herself, trying to fire a trooper who crossed her in some way. If her husband did it, of which I am very doubtful save for the implication that the governor is behind him (let's remember, he himself had no power), then she is still responsible, as well as being a tool. That is not "nothing".

The right is gonna call people who find this wrong on "their bullshit hypocrisy"? Sure they will, but so what? Creationists call me on my bullshit hypocrisy all the time when I say I believe in god and evolution.

The real humor in your statement--and this is saying a lot for you--is that you seem to imply the right has some righteous thing going on here, and once people admit Clinton abused his power then all will be well and the right will cease making attacks. Shit, Clinton should be in the Hague for war crimes, and were the Nuremberg principles applied, he would be hanged (along with every other president since World War II).

There, good, now my hands are clean. Love me, please.

So worthwhile a sacrifice for knowing that yellow-bellied coward McCain, who can't even look Obama in the eye because he is such a wuss, is going down in flames.

Posted by onthehelm at 10/11/2008 @ 09:42am
The report concludes that the action was a violation of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

Alaska's Executive Branch Ethics Act, which was established to "discourage executive branch employees from acting upon personal interest in the performance of their public responsibilities and to avoid conflicts of interest in the performance of duty," the report says.

--Aww, Darin is being cute again!

She violated an ethics Act, she abused her authority...

but in con world, abuse of authority is use of authority.

so, normally the right-wing-nuts would fall all over themselves to defend the police against the machinations of a gubment official...but NOT if that gubment official is a shiny bauble and agrees with them about God and Guns! No, in this case the respected, honored policeman/hero is a villain.

Look at this response: "partisan led inquiry run by Obama supporters and the Palins were completely justified in their concern regarding Trooper Wooten given his violent and rogue behavior."

So, now we are to believe that the REPUBLICANS from Alaska are liberal Obama supporters? !! You people are on crack!

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:03am
All week the cons have been making a mountain out of a pebble with their Ayers Bullsht. This is a guy that did some things they disagree with almost 40 years ago. The cons have been railing for YEARS about Clintons abuses of power, and still do TODAY.

but, when we have a REPUBLICAN panel say that their candidate abused her power,... nope... nothing wrong here. she said she would cooperate, but she did anything BUT cooperate,... nothing wrong with flip/flopping on that when your WHOLE campaign is based on God, ending corruption and being a part of the Straight Talk Express.

It would be akin to running with the Family Values Party with an unmarried pregnant teen daughter and then declaring that family is off limits, while attacking other peoples lack of morals in their families.

Or maybe stumping for a Global War on Terror while defending the guys that outed a covert CIA operative whose job it was to save them from Iranian terrorism.

Or maybe calling for tax cuts while cheering on 2 overseas wars.

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:14am
Darin, could you write a little bit about these "terrorists"?:

Arnold R. Weber

Gov. Jim Edgar

Ray Romero

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:17am
[ A much, much worse example would be if you illegally acquired FBI files on your political enemies. That would be an example of gross abuse of power.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am ]

By KEVIN ZEESE

The Baltimore-based chapter of the national Iraq Pledge of Resistance is an anti-war organization working for peace by challenging people in power, educating the public and getting citizens to take action. In the interview below, Maria Allwine of the Pledge, describes how the National Security Agency (NSA) is spying on them. These allegations, which have not been reported in the media despite attempts to get coverage, are based on documents received by the pledge in litigation with the government.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

zeese01112006.html

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:21am
[ A much, much worse example would be if you illegally acquired FBI files on your political enemies. That would be an example of gross abuse of power.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am ]

Undercover Maryland State Police officers repeatedly spied on peace activists and anti-death penalty groups in recent years and entered the names of some in a law-enforcement database of people thought to be terrorists or drug traffickers, newly released documents show.

The files, made public yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland, depict a pattern of infiltration of the activists' organizations in 2005 and 2006. The activists contend that the authorities were trying to determine whether they posed a security threat to the United States. But none of the 43 pages of summaries and computer logs - some with agents' names and whole paragraphs blacked out - mention criminal or even potentially criminal acts, the legal standard for initiating such surveillance.

...Nothing in the documents indicates criminal activity or intent on the part of the protesters, ACLU officials said.

Nonetheless, the state police's Homeland Security and Intelligence Division sent covert agents to infiltrate the Baltimore Pledge of Resistance, a peace group; the Baltimore Coalition Against the Death Penalty; and the Committee to Save Vernon Evans, a death row inmate.

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:25am
'Say it isn't so','Dog gone it', (wink)...of course we all recognize these little blurbs from Ms Palin!...all I can say is Mission Accomplished...'You betcha'

Posted by cg101 at 10/11/2008 @ 10:27am
[ A much, much worse example would be if you illegally acquired FBI files on your political enemies. That would be an example of gross abuse of power. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am ]

For at least a year before the 2004 Republican National Convention, teams of undercover New York City police officers traveled to cities across the country, Canada and Europe to conduct covert observations of people who planned to protest at the convention, according to police records and interviews.

...But potential troublemakers were hardly the only ones to end up in the files. In hundreds of reports stamped "N.Y.P.D. Secret," the Intelligence Division chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law, the records show.

These included members of street theater companies, church groups and antiwar organizations, as well as environmentalists and people opposed to the death penalty, globalization and other government policies. Three New York City elected officials were cited in the reports.---NYT

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:28am
[ A much, much worse example would be if you illegally acquired FBI files on your political enemies. That would be an example of gross abuse of power. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am ]

by Brian Ross, Vic Walter, and Anna Schecter

Despite pledges by President George W. Bush and American intelligence officials to the contrary, hundreds of US citizens overseas have been eavesdropped on as they called friends and family back home, according to two former military intercept operators who worked at the giant National Security Agency (NSA) center in Fort Gordon, Georgia.

"These were just really everyday, average, ordinary Americans who happened to be in the Middle East, in our area of intercept and happened to be making these phone calls on satellite phones," said Adrienne Kinne, a 31-year old US Army Reserves Arab linguist assigned to a special military program at the NSA's Back Hall at Fort Gordon from November 2001 to 2003.

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:30am
[ A much, much worse example would be if you illegally acquired FBI files on your political enemies. That would be an example of gross abuse of power. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am ]

U.S. Military Spied on Hundreds of Antiwar Demos by Aaron Glantz

SAN FRANCISCO - At least 186 antiwar protests in the United States have been monitored by the Pentagon's domestic surveillance program, according to documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which also found that the Defense Department collected more than 2,800 reports involving Americans in a single anti-terrorism database.

The internal Defense Department documents show it is monitoring the activities of a wide swath of peace groups, including Veterans for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, Code Pink, the American Friends Service Committee, the War Resisters League, and the umbrella group United for Peace and Justice, which is spearheading what organizers hope will be a massive march on Washington this Saturday.

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:32am
Palin said in the VP debate that she believes there is "much flexibility there in the Office of the Vice-President" and she will be "tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda".

We've now seen how Palin taps into the power and flexibility of an office to usher in her own personal, petty, vindictive agenda, and how she is so very unsuited to hold any position of power at all.

Posted by Balrog at 10/11/2008 @ 10:32am
Darin, would you be open to inquiries into abuse of power by authorities that acquired files on their political enemies?

Would you

Could you

eat them with a fox?

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:35am
Posted by Balrog at 10/11/2008 @ 10:32am

we certainly would not to give her access to such Constitutionally protected areas as say... the travel office!

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 10:37am
Is it just me, or is Palin's abuse of power pretty damn close to the same thing that led to the downfall of disgraced Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick? So is the vast difference in public reaction a race thing, or what?

Posted by Amaquash at 10/11/2008 @ 11:51am
Kwame was worse. But, he still has die hard defenders like Darin too.

Posted by crabwalk at 10/11/2008 @ 12:24pm
Posted by Amaquash at 10/11/2008 @ 11:51am

Good point.

Posted by k330k at 10/11/2008 @ 12:28pm
Obviously, you folks didn't see the NO GLOATING sign on the door when you came in.

Posted by Tunnelrat at 10/11/2008 @ 12:49pm
The only thing she did to "abuse" her power was "nothing". That is, Todd used the connections he had because his wife was governor and her "inaction" to stop him constitutes an abuse of power.---------Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am

Poor Sarah, I guess she was constrained by her Biblical injunction to "be submissive to your husbands", huh???

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/11/2008 @ 1:00pm
HOW CAN PALIN CLAIM TO BE A REFORMER WHEN SHE ENGAGES IN THE SAME SORT OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS AND ABUSE OF POWER AS DICK CHENEY?

Posted by Metteyya at 10/11/2008 @ 1:34pm
Darin

Note that the Governor's office seemed to have quite a bit to do with the "First Dude's" efforts. The first appointment with Moneghan and Mr. Palin was likely set up by the Governor's staff and took place in the governor's Anchorage office. There had also been a further conversations requested by the Governor's Chief of Staff, the Commissioner of her Department of Administration and her Attorney General. You don't think she had anything to do with the action of her staff and department heads on this matter?

As Moneghan said "I would find it kind of incredulous that individually, you'd have a chief of staff and two commissioners just acting on their own and just asking about an employee"

Amen!

Further, it wasn't just them. Moneghan testified to having received a call from Governor Palin where Trooper Wooten was the sole topic.

There were also phone conversations from Frank Bailey, described as Palin's "go-to guy" where it mentions that she, not just Todd, couldn't believe that Wooten had not been fired.

Posted by brunowe at 10/11/2008 @ 1:44pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am | warn this

Read all 263 pages, Bubby. It looks like Caribou Barbie and Joe Six-pack suffer from an almost criminal lack of class if nothing else. Of course I am thinking that the only plus to having this guy jobless and unable to pay child support would be if they hoped it would eventually land him in jail.

Nicefolks, very nice folks.

Posted by Pogge at 10/11/2008 @ 2:22pm
pogge-One thing that I can't figure out is why they were pushing the trooper if they really were scared of him.Who is insane enough to want to turn him into a disgruntled person with no job and no future where he could then snap?

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 2:26pm
I know, what you mean, nobody. I am a domestic abuse volunteer and it sure isn't something we recommend.

Posted by Pogge at 10/11/2008 @ 2:29pm
pogge-I told my wife last night that doing that would be no different than willfully pushing an abusive husbands buttons.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 2:32pm
Which only proves great minds (and husbands!) think alike!

Posted by Pogge at 10/11/2008 @ 2:37pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/11/2008 @ 3:17pm

As long as she helps to try to stop Obama...

you'll look the other way, won't you?

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/11/2008 @ 3:45pm
lvliberty-I see that you responded with your paranoid idiocy about hating conservative Christians and Marxists and I see that you are,still,ignoring the fact that it was proven that Palin lied about the trooper having nothing to do with it and just went with the one part that agreed with your view and then you'll have another tantrum when someone points out your dishonesty and hypocrisy..

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 4:06pm
"The firing of Monegan did not provide nor could it, any personal or financial benefit. Nor has anyone provided one as evidence."

Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/11/2008 @ 3:17pm

Huh?

Extracting revenge isn't a personal benefit? (albeit a kind of twisted one)

Posted by Malcontent at 10/11/2008 @ 4:08pm
Lvliberty has become so paranoid that he is now claiming that republicans investigating Palin is a Marxist political ploy.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 4:08pm
your comments above are all very interesting and well thought out, but you are missing the main point that you would not like a person with Michael Wooten's resume on your police force.

Posted by kykooky at 10/11/2008 @ 4:13pm
kykooky-No one knows the full story about Wooten,but what is known is that no one in the family complained about those things that they knew he was doing until he dumped Palin's sister.Before that he hung out with the Palin family. Other state employees did similar things, were not fired from their jobs and Palin did not go after them..

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 4:21pm
"The firing of Monegan did not provide nor could it, any personal or financial benefit. Nor has anyone provided one as evidence."

The personal benefit was satisfaction of a grudge against Wooten that stemmed from a messy divorce.

Posted by brunowe at 10/11/2008 @ 5:00pm
The right is gonna call people who find this wrong on "their bullshit hypocrisy"? Sure they will, but so what? Creationists call me on my bullshit hypocrisy all the time when I say I believe in god and evolution. Posted by onthehelm at 10/11/2008 @ 09:42am

Ah, just mess with their heads and tell them that Adam and Eve were actually apes!

Posted by graywolf765 at 10/11/2008 @ 5:00pm
Ummm!!

Posted by eniobob at 10/11/2008 @ 5:02pm
Lying Nation Neocons, here's a trick you might employ on the reality based posters here. Pick some ratio, like every eleventh scandal, and take a less predictable tact on the issue. Your lies are relentlessly predictable, simplistic and boring.

Posted by winyahn at 10/11/2008 @ 5:23pm
Two on the right tried,pathetically,to excuse Palin,but ran away when confronted.That,of course,means that they know she did wrong and can't really defend it.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 5:55pm
The firing of Monegan did not provide nor could it, any personal or financial benefit. Nor has anyone provided one as evidence.

Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/11/2008 @ 3:17pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Golly, I can't believe that anyone - even Luvvy - has the temerity to spout drivel like this.

The "personal" gain is getting Wooten fired, nimrod; that would have been the desired outcome of the vendetta carried out by Caribou Barbie and her husband, Joe Sixpack.

But because Monegan had some integrity (not to mention some nay-nays), Sarah and the First Dude didn't derive the gain sought; failing to achieve the desired outcome does not diminish the fact that these two nitwits abused the power of the Governor's office.

Ask yourself these questions:

Would my reaction be any different if the power abuser was named "Clinton ?"

Who would Jesus pressure for improper action ?

Posted by skeletonman at 10/11/2008 @ 6:16pm
Sorry, that should be "Todd Sixpack."

Posted by skeletonman at 10/11/2008 @ 6:20pm
LVL is obviously not the legal scholar that he thinks, though I saw that "justification" come out of Grandpa's campaign today. The statute clearly says personal benefit as well as financial. The fact that the statute does not specifically define what a personal benefit is therefore leaves it to a judge's discretion, and you would be hard-pressed to find a judge who wouldn't agree that the termination of Wooten for personal vendetta construes a personal benefit. Sarah is in trouble. And not the bubble-headed Katie Couric caused type of trouble. She and Todd are now very vulnerable to a lawsuit from both Monhegan and Wooten. I still haven't seen whether the violation of the statute constitutes a criminal offense or what the legal remedies are for that yet (Darin wasn't kind enough to post that part of the statute, I wonder why?), but impeachments have been successfully charged on less.

Posted by yutsano at 10/11/2008 @ 7:15pm
those alaska republicans are obviously terrorists in disguise.

Posted by jasonrhodes at 10/11/2008 @ 7:32pm
McCain wants Obama to apologize for the fact that Palin is a hate monger who stirs up hate at her rallies.Not sure why Obama is to blame for Palin's words and actions,but McCain blames Obama and not himself or Palin.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 8:07pm
LVLIB will sell out his "Christian principles and morality" (yes, in "quotes" for a reason)...

for political partisan expediencey EVERY time.

If a homosexual Republican made the difference in a Republican majority Senate or a Democratic majority Senate....he'd look the other way and say it wasn't important.

If John McCain was outed as privately encouraging his daughter to get an abortion when she was a teenager....LVLIB would say "All the MILLIONS of aborted babies that Obama will of course cause far outweigh McCain's 'one mistake'"

If Sarah Palin robbed a liquor store....LL would say "She was trying to take money from a store that sold the Devil's drink to folks and corrupted their souls....I'd say she was actually doing God's work when she grabbed that ill-gotten till money!"

McCain/Palin could say Jesus was not the Son of God....and if it risked Obama winning....LVLIB would say "They're entitled to their opinion...so what?"

He's a hypocritical windbag and mouthpiece for hyper-conservative politics, first and last....preacher is just his day job.

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/11/2008 @ 8:32pm
preacher is just his day job.

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/11/2008 @ 8:32pm

I thought he was an insurance salesman now...

Posted by yutsano at 10/11/2008 @ 8:37pm
I'd say shame on Palin but she has no shame. I think she'd blow Ronald Reagan, if he were alive, on live television if it would give her more power.

Posted by Tree_Fitz at 10/11/2008 @ 9:16pm
darin-You forgot to post any facts like I did and,as you know,I'm not the left,but,very much in the middle.Palin and the first lady were involved and I don't care about the first lady since he isn't running for anything.Nice try to pawn it all off on him,though.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 9:21pm
That maybe a fact... She did not abuse her power ... She abused her power...

That is the fact.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 9:05pm

Whatever you say.

Posted by Malcontent at 10/11/2008 @ 9:24pm
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 9:05pm

Is that the "She's no axe murderer, moron. (she used a machette)." defense?

Posted by Malcontent at 10/11/2008 @ 9:25pm
lvliberty-You are an amazingly dishonest person and I have had it with you,but will continue to hound you,anyway since it's fun to watch you run from it..You know full well that using your power to get revenge is an ethics violation and you know she lied about it,but will excuse it just like you excuse anything your side does..Neither you nor Palin are Christians so get over your persecution complex.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 9:26pm
lvliberty-You have no problems supporting a liar which you say is worse than being gay.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/11/2008 @ 9:30pm
Posted by Malcontent at 10/11/2008 @ 9:25pm

Actually, I went back and looked at Darin's postings very carefully, and he wants to talk out of two sides of his mouth. He says she didn't abuse her power then says by her inaction she DID abuse her power, but it's okay cause Clinton was MUCH worse. So basically he's trying to rescue Bible Spice (I saw that name for her on the Swampland blog and it STILL makes me giggle) by throwing up a false equivalency.

Posted by yutsano at 10/11/2008 @ 10:16pm
those alaska republicans are obviously terrorists in disguise.

Posted by jasonrhodes at 10/11/2008 @ 7:32pm

Yeah, well I heard that they hate America, too.

Posted by skeletonman at 10/11/2008 @ 10:19pm
I have been gone for a while. But it is nice to know that "LOVE LIBERTY' (sic)is still slithering around here with his loony fundamentalist fascist ravings. His supreme arrogance makes him think we care about his opinion. I hope he is around on Nov.5 when a Democrat is elected President. It will drive him batshit crazy.

Posted by philbq at 10/11/2008 @ 10:26pm
Remember Palin does not have to answer questions. She and Karl Rove don't respond to subpoenas unless they want to. Rules are made for the "little people".

Posted by Barbara2423 at 10/11/2008 @ 10:28pm
I think Alaska should impeach her. That should shake things up!

Posted by psahome at 10/11/2008 @ 11:24pm
The central charge dealt with whether Palin abused her power by firing Monegan. The answer is "No, she did not."

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am | ignore this person | warn this person

.

I admitted she abused her power.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 9:18pm | ignore this person | warn this person

.

Wow, Darin, you're spouting it so fast and furious...

...you can't even keep your OWN bull crap straight!!!

It only took you just slightly less than 12 hours to completely contradict yourself.

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 01:22am
As I sit here and watch all this go down I wonder what has happened to this country. I was speaking to my mother the other day and she said oh this is nothing new. She reminded me of how Kennedy was demonized for being a Catholic. How the history of the republican party is steeped in bigotry and hate. So is the democratic party, remember the southern democrats walking out of the 1948 Democratic National Convention after Hubert Humphrey gave his speech on segregation.

Now we have come to another apex, Sarah Palin. I have watched this past week and wondered how is it that we have come to this.

Now we come to her husband Todd. This man until 2000 was a member of Alaskan Independence Party, a secessionist political party.

My question is what is his function in the state of Alaska's government? Why is he making decisions about matters of state?

Palin is clearly a power hungry overly ambitious political animal who seems to stop at nothing to get what she wants.

All of this reminds me a little of the film the Manchurian Candidate.

Posted by jeffe at 10/12/2008 @ 02:12am
The life issue is extremely important to me. Far more important than a party.

Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/11/2008 @ 9:04pm

ROFLMAO! Death is important to you, Larry, specifically the deaths of those 1.2 million Iraqis, deaths for which you stand in complete support and agreement. You are possibly the most pro-death, anti-life poster on these boards. Oh, while you're at it, keep whining about you're oppressed, OK, Larry? You know, because we don't follow your orders.

Posted by jmusolino at 10/12/2008 @ 02:36am
Posted by yutsano at 10/11/2008 @ 10:16pm

bible Spice... exccelllent

fits in well with mcCains wife, Scary Spice II. You all know her...she is the non-elitist with a bunch of homes and $300,000 outfits.

---

Sarah Palin, the woman that is supposed to help fight Bush corruption, the woman that will bring it to DC, the True Believer in God's word...

Is a Liar, she violated ethics rules and refused to cooperate. This is the example the cons want in the VP slot?

Posted by crabwalk at 10/12/2008 @ 07:01am
Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 01:22am

Darin's few shreds of honesty often fight it out to a draw with his engrained ideology.

and he ends up contradicting himself.

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/12/2008 @ 07:29am
Something that annoys me about the report is "no further action recommended". If you are simply an employee you are powerless to effect your destiny and no matter the quality of your work you are subject to being treated like trash at the whims of the "so called" powerful. I listened carefully to the interviews with the man, Monegan, that was fired and this guy has been totally destroyed by this. His whole career has been trashed. Branchflower seems to want to cover his bureaucratic ass. Palin sounds like she thinks that the United State Constitution is identical to the Alaskan Constitution. She thinks she is Dick Cheney or worst Lynn Cheney, who is meaner than the Dick. What kind of message are we sending to younger Americans? We have really created a very dangerous DNA for our country.

Posted by lachatte at 10/12/2008 @ 08:04am
"Pitiful answer. There was no benefit to her office or personal gain."

Pitiful response. Settling a personal grudge against an ex-brother-in-law isn't a personal interest?

Note that the Alaska statute says nothing about gain, ..."any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Posted by brunowe at 10/12/2008 @ 10:37am
Darin, you're awesome. I have never seen anyone so awkwardly take a fact, embrace it's opposite, and then try to say he embraced the fact. You should be running the McCain campaign.

Posted by onthehelm at 10/12/2008 @ 10:40am
Posted by brunowe at 10/12/2008 @ 10:37am

Apparently wanting to ruin your ex-brother-in-law is "governmental policy"...not a personal interest.

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/12/2008 @ 11:54am
This whole 'troopergate' thing may just be the very tiniest tip of a much larger iceberg.

Like, it turns out she was taking money from the state of Alaska (per diems) to live in HER OWN HOUSE. As obnoxious as that seems, the big trouble is that she forgot to report that as income as is required by law.

It also turns out that she has been using her state office, and taxpayer money, to promote her chruch and religion. Over and over.

More of Palin's 'abuse of power' keeps leaking out every day.

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 12:47pm
I can't wait to hear Darin and Loony Larry try to spin those things into 'there's no personal interest' in her actions.

Should be entertaining.

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 12:48pm
Here's a new title some of you may be intersted in.

http://i35.tinypic.com/118k1gx.jpg

Posted by bobforer at 10/12/2008 @ 2:28pm
Posted by Maskdelta at 10/12/2008 @ 07:29am | ignore this person | warn this person

.

Many of our fiends on the right who post here...

...are undergoing a complete meltdown. Larry sounds absolutely whacked out, psycho, full-on crazy. Rio and Sjerk keep up their cut-n-paste from Rush and hate-wing sites but never actually bother to read any of it to see if it makes a lick of sense - and then, in a classic case of 'projection' complain that everyone on the left speaks so mean of them.

And Darin is doing the McCain...take the last shred of honesty, objectivity, and sense of honor remaining (however illusory) and piss all over it while doing thier best Gollum-Smeegle imitation trying to have it both ways.

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 3:34pm
darin-but but but Clinton.LOL I did call for Clinton to be put out of office and I voted for Dole and I think Palin should be impeached for lying and abuse of power.I have stated my views about Clinton and Dole on here numerous times.

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/12/2008 @ 4:54pm
"Palin: Probe Cleared Me Of Any Wrongdoing While Troopergate Report Said She Broke State Ethics Law, Alaska Gov. Says She's Exonerated"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/12/politics/main4516113.shtml

When I first read this, I thought 'how can she make such a statement?'

The report stated clearly that in the judgment of the investigator, Palin had violated state law and the ethical standard specified therein.'

I was caught in the throes of cognitive dissonance until I remembered that Palin believes that dinosaurs and humans co-existed.

I felt better then.

Posted by skeletonman at 10/12/2008 @ 5:56pm
darin-but but but Clinton.LOL

Posted by i'm nobody at 10/12/2008 @ 4:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person

.

See, told you it would be entertaining.

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 7:01pm
I merely called most of you hypocrites. Clinton did things ten times worse, and you all diminished and absolved him yet hold Palin to a higher standard. That is hypocrisy.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/12/2008 @ 4:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

.

The central charge dealt with whether Palin abused her power by firing Monegan. The answer is "No, she did not."

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 09:24am | ignore this person | warn this person

.

I admitted she abused her power.

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/11/2008 @ 9:18pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Posted by Lillian at 10/12/2008 @ 7:03pm
Clinton lost his law license for committing perjury and for obstructing justice.

*** and he should have. And the impeachment process was initiated and he was ultimately acquitted.

Clinton illegally obtained FBI files on his political opponents for the purpose of winning elections.

*** is that an actual fact or just a canard because you're looking for old dirt?

Clinton pardoned the unrepentent FALN terrorists to help Hillary's Senate election.

*** pardons are the only absolute power the President has. Many many leaders have had unsavory pardons in the past, watch Georgie Boy pull off a few on his way out the door too.

Clinton fired the travle office staff. This was not an abuse of power. However, when a political stink arose after the firings, one of the people was framed for embezzelment to make the firings seem justified. The case went to trial and the jury returned a not guilty verdict in about 15 miuntes.

*** umm, so? As I recall Hillary was involved in all that mess too.

If any of you can show me a post where you called for Clinton's impeachment over these offenses, I'll appologize to you for calling you a hypocrite.

*** okay, to be fair I've never posted about any of Clinton's affairs (it's up to you to decide if that's a pun or not), and I've never been a big fan of either Bill or Hillary. You just seem to want to play Cranky Old "But they do it too!!!" Republican. Clinton's dealings are, ultimately, IRRELEVANT.

Posted by yutsano at 10/12/2008 @ 7:07pm
Clinton did things ten times worse, and you all diminished and absolved him yet hold Palin to a higher standard. That is hypocrisy.-----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/12/2008 @ 4:39pm

Darin, then it's ALSO hypocrisy for you to still support Palin, given how you feel about the Clintons!

or are there "degrees of corruption" you'll accept from SOME candidates for high office and "other degrees of corruption" you'll accept for SOME OTHER candidates for office?

You are still planning on voting for McCain/Palin, right?

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/12/2008 @ 11:15pm
palin said today that she was "cleared of any wrongdoing......and any hint of unethical" behavior.

the report said precisely the opposite.

night is day; left is right; up is down.

Posted by darladoon at 10/12/2008 @ 11:39pm
Repubs could care less, Palin is a piker compared to the abuses Bush and Cheney have piled up over the last 8 years.

Posted by takemyveepplease at 10/13/2008 @ 12:25am
The firing of Moneghan did not provide nor could it, any personal or financial benefit. Nor has anyone provided one as evidence.

lvliberty

Come on now. It is clearly a personal benefit if you want a state employee terminated for personal reasons. Moneghan is a man of honor and a Republican who wouldn't go along. Have you heard the guy? Sounded to me like a straight-arrow public servant, who was the victim of petty revenge. Gov Palin's claims to the contrary do not stand the smell test, particularly since she denied her people leaned on Moneghan until her aide Bailey was caught on tape. Why lie if it was simply a poor performance termination as she now claims. If there was no betrayal of the public trust why did 10 Republicans sign off on the report? Are they all Obama supporters? McCain didn't vet her before he chose her, more bad judgment.

Ethics are a field of philosophy that extends beyond the commercial. Money does not have to change hands in order for there to be an ethical violation. Technically a Governor of Alaska may have the authority to fire the Director of Public Safety at will, but personal vendettas carried on by an unelected spouse and staff who are State employees are a no-no. That was the breach of the public trust in this case. Your lame defense is limited to executive privilege, when the stain is on her character.

By the way, do you know who Todd's contractor "buddies" who helped build their house might be? Maybe the same guys who helped Ted Stevens? Enquiring minds wanna know and Todd ain't talkin'. I thought maybe the campaign might have given you some advance talking points for when the story breaks--or maybe Darrin has them.

Posted by ohsotired at 10/13/2008 @ 12:54am
Sarah Palin in Pictures:

[recommend that you view in sequence]

1) http://i34.tinypic.com/sv18gx.jpg

2) http://i33.tinypic.com/34e9rhs.jpg

3) http://i34.tinypic.com/29f8cbc.jpg

4) http://i35.tinypic.com/10y4f49.jpg

5) http://i33.tinypic.com/2r2vsxd.jpg

6) http://i37.tinypic.com/2cmxjy8.jpg

Posted by bobforer at 10/13/2008 @ 04:31am
As far as voting... I don't know. Honestly, if I thought it would make a difference I probably would, but I don't, so it's easier to say I might not.----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/13/2008 @ 08:35am

Now, Darin, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're being ignorant...and not dishonest.

You can see the polling as well as I can and you know that your home-state of North Carolina is now a "toss-up". If McCain loses it, he loses the election (given it would likely mean he lost Virginia as well).

Now, obviously as a Charlotte resident, your vote is very important given down-state (the Raleigh-Durham "Research Triangle") leans Democratic while the western half of your state is more Republican.

So...are you REALLY thinking about not voting? Or are you still trying to ride the fence (leaning Right of course) and not be committed to Palin here, in case the whole thing blows up and you are trying to retain some kind of credibility by dis-associating yourself from her?

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/13/2008 @ 09:14am
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/13/2008 @ 09:19am

So you're saying "If my vote mattered"...

you meant you think it won't matter because McCain IS going to lose North Carolina?

Posted by Maskdelta at 10/13/2008 @ 10:42am
"The report didn't fault her for her actions, but for inaction. "

That isn't accurate. Since a few of her top aides also intervened in this case, it seems unlikely that she just sat on her hands.

Posted by brunowe at 10/13/2008 @ 12:45pm
Damn, I wish I could get her to sit on MY hands :)

Note, If you deduce by the above comment that I'm not taking all this too seriously:

YOUR RIGHT!

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 10/13/2008 @ 12:52pm
Kucinish

Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/13/2008

are you drunk?

Posted by frosty zoom at 10/13/2008 @ 9:18pm