Troopergate probe: Palin abused power but had the right to fire Monegan
posted at 9:55 pm on October 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Look at it this way: If the race was close right now, this would be a killer. As it is, it’s just one more shovel blow to the back of the skull.
Feel better?
Finding Number One
For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah 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 reaffirms 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.
Finding Number Two
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.
Team Maverick’s statement:
Today’s report shows that the Governor acted within her proper and lawful authority in the reassignment of Walt Monegan. The report also illustrates what we’ve known all along: this was a 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. Lacking evidence to support the original Monegan allegation, the Legislative Council seriously overreached, making a tortured argument to find fault without basis in law or fact. The Governor is looking forward to cooperating with the Personnel Board and continuing her conversation with the American people regarding the important issues facing the country.
Here’s the PDF of the report. Don’t be daunted by the size; the crux of it’s only six pages long, spanning pp. 65-71. In a nutshell, she had legitimate and illegitimate reasons to fire him. The former means the termination itself was lawful, the latter means her compliance with the ethics statute wasn’t.
Political fallout? The base won’t care and left hates her already, so we’ll probably see a few more independents peel away and that’s it. This does give The One a handy reply, though, the next time she questions his character on the stump, and needless to say McCain’s rhetoric about cleaning up government will be highly nuanced indeed from now on. Should make for an entertaining topic during the next GOP primaries, too. For once, Hewitt’s immortal, much-mocked line from last winter is right on target. You know who really benefits from this? Mitt Romney.
Exit quotation: “Legislators, journalists and others were greeted at the elevator outside the meeting room by a group of McCain-Palin campaign volunteers who were dressed as clowns and who said, ‘Welcome to the kangaroo court.’”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Not only a Friday, but the Friday before a three day weekend.
French and Branchflower wanted the words “abuse of power” in the report somewhere. They HAD to have it in there somewhere, even if the evidence was so little.
They could have said “Gov. Palin showed abuse of electrical power outlets”, and the MSM would redact it to “Gov. Palin showed.. abuse of…power…”
Enoxo on October 11, 2008 at 1:18 AM
Our brave Sarah is not flinching from attacking Obama though. She is revving it up. Go Sarah!
To all the conservatives, don’t be chicken-hearted and fight the good fight. There’s plenty of time to turn this thing around.
promachus on October 11, 2008 at 1:19 AM
That report was released on a Friday for headline impact on a weekend. People will see the headline at the top of their newspapers on Saturday morning. They will read it and then say, “That’s it! She’s finished!” They will NEVER dig into the details, as we have done.
We here know it’s all a farce, but the MSM have too much power of persuasion over people who don’t see beyond what’s on their very minds during the day. Most people don’t care about it: they just believe what the newspeople tells them to believe. And that’s where the damage is done.
That’s why the AP headline is so deeply irresponsible, IMO, even after they changed it an hour or two later. They know local papers will pick the first headline. If it bleeds, it leads. They’re sharks. They have given themselves the power to destroy her, because she has told them she’s not there to please them in the first place.
newton on October 11, 2008 at 1:20 AM
Sure. You have anything better to offer that I can take a swing at?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:20 AM
tell… Dang!
newton on October 11, 2008 at 1:21 AM
I told you, tennman. He’s a jackass. He’s not worth your time! He’s just another troll pig.
newton on October 11, 2008 at 1:22 AM
“Fake but accurate,” ain’t it?
newton on October 11, 2008 at 1:23 AM
So Sarah Palin is saying via her attorney that there is no violation of the Ethics Act because that has to do with financial gain.
They are stretching the term of personal gain here to ridiculous lengths.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:27 AM
So if a public official has good reason to fire a subordinate, but may also personally benefit from the firing, does that mean they can’t act? A subordinate in that position would be able to get away with murder.
Kenrod on October 11, 2008 at 1:27 AM
No ‘likely’ about it. The report states unequivocally that Palin violated the Alaska Ethics Act, and lays out the impermissible actions. You can hold on to ‘likely’ if you want, but is not representative of the report’s clear conclusions. Read page 66 again. It might make some sense if you take of your Palinmania blinders.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:30 AM
newton:
To be honest, I don’t know how many people will even care. They are concerned with the stock market and the bailout and the stuff going on like that right now. It is almost as if the campaign has been sidelined by the economy.
I am sure the media will try to go after her, but there is something so unsympathetic about a rogue cop and a politically motivated witch hunt, that it might not hurt her at all. With some people it might even help her.
I am not sure about Independents. A lot of them are independents because they have a low opinion of partisan politics. If they think this is a smear, it could blunt the effect somewhat.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:31 AM
trailboss:
What you are overlooking is that the report is the product of one man. It is not endorsed or approved by anyone outside this little lynch mob, and that includes the legislature and it offers no new factual evidence. It is opinion and it seems there is debate about that opinion and debate what constitutes a violation of the Ethics Act. You act as if it were a Supreme Court decision.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:33 AM
Ok, Terrye, forgive me but I’ve got to ask, based on our conversation today, who’s ’stretching’ in your opinion?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:33 AM
I find it telling that Drudge has not posted a headline.
Connie on October 11, 2008 at 1:35 AM
The problem with the McCain/Palin campaign is not Sarah but McCain.
Birdseye on October 11, 2008 at 1:36 AM
No, I don’t feel anywhere near that strongly about it. But it makes sense to me, and as I said earlier, I am inclined to believe it. I’m not calling it undeniable truth. Maybe I have made you think that with unclear writing, but I don’t.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:36 AM
Oh please. McCain is the most qualified, substantive candidate from the two presidential candidates.
terryannonline on October 11, 2008 at 1:38 AM
…and if you would take your lips off of OBobbles ass, you would realize how dangerous he is, and how far you are reaching with this report.
Consider changing a couple things from one of your recent droppings:
Picture a report (yeah, I’m sure the media will get right on this) on the connection between OBobble and Ayers.
How telling that your panties get wet over a partisan hack report on a governor firing someone she had every right to fire, or inquiring about a thug trooper concerning a complaint made against said thug. A thug who still has a gun and badge. If Alaska is like other states and state troopers are a part of the governors protective detail, perhaps there were other concerns she had about what else those in charge of the troopers might be ignoring.
How telling you care more about this than OBobbles working relationship with a domestic bomber, and other thugs worse than the trooper.
91Veteran on October 11, 2008 at 1:40 AM
You are inclined to believe. My goodness, man. You’ve been treating it like the Gospel truth for the entire thread.
terryannonline on October 11, 2008 at 1:40 AM
Yes, he is. And the hardest to like, and to understand, sometimes. He says one thing on the economy in the morning and changes around 180 in the afternoon. The biggest issue of this election is shaping up to be his weakest area.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:42 AM
Even for Obama – defending a guy who wouuldn’t fire someone for tasering a child is a real argument that you don’t want to go into
So now we have the oldest political party in the United States now defending drunked abusers who taser children
*sigh*
just when we hit bottom we are scratching for more
EricPWJohnson on October 11, 2008 at 1:42 AM
They have a strong point, however. How can you be deemed to have unquestionable authority, and legal right to do something, and then be accused of unethical behavior when doing it?
They also make another point: Branchflower concedes that only the Personnel Board can make a judgement call on whether or not Gov. Palin was unethical–which is what Palin has been saying the entire time. She’s cooperating with that investigation.
And yet, that doesn’t stop Branchflower for proclaiming his opinion, which has no legal recourse, under the obfuscation of an investigation for political headlines.
Enoxo on October 11, 2008 at 1:43 AM
My bad, terry(s). I’m not an absolutist, but when I have to defend myself to various posters at the same time, I am sure I sometimes sound that way.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:44 AM
trailboss:
What are you talking about? I used Enoxo’s link in the last thread which went directly to Palin’s attorney’s statement. The statement said that the charge of an ethics violation was not valid because an ethics violation referring to personal gain had always been about money. That is what the lawyer said.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:45 AM
Yes, McCain is weak on the economy. However, what substantive thing has Obama said about the economy? Nothing. At least McCain knows something about foreign policy. I fear that Obama doesn’t know a thing about the economy or foreign issues.
terryannonline on October 11, 2008 at 1:46 AM
I never brought up obambamatic, you did. I’m looking at this only in terms of Palin, not in comparison to anybody. It’s only ‘telling’ in that you are reading ‘intent’ in my posts rather than ‘content.’ I invite you to keep trying, though.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:48 AM
Enoxo:
Yes, it is one of those when did you stop beating your wife kind of things.
Ridiculous.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:50 AM
I’ve tried looking for content in each of your comments, but found it lacking in all of them.
In one comment you are absolute, then in another, you use weasel-words, then in another you blame other posters for the comments you make.
Typical.
91Veteran on October 11, 2008 at 1:54 AM
trailboss:
No, you are not only looking at this in terms of Palin. You are looking at this with an axe to grind. I am not a Palinmaniac or whatever you called people. I was not even sure about nominating her. But this whole thing just seems contrived to me.
It is a reach and for what purpose? There is nothing unethical about worrying about an abusive cop who apparently had license to do pretty much anything he wanted.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:54 AM
Don’t mean nothing
Guardian on October 11, 2008 at 1:55 AM
I think I understand better, now. The Ethics Act refers to ‘personal or financial interest,’ not solely money. A personal interest could mean any self-interest,like getting back at the guy who divorced your sister, not just financial gain. I think Palin’s lawyer is dissembling a little. All good lawyers do. But he’s not laying out all the facts, just those that support the client.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 1:56 AM
trailboss:
Is he dissembling? If it can mean anything, then why isn’t there a history of that. According to the statement it has always been about money. If you are going to use gain, to mean anything you want it to, then there is no end to possible violations.
BTW, Sarah Palin’s sister was one of several women who ended up putting restraining orders on this man. And the reason he threatened to put a bullet in his father-in-law’s head was because the old guy was going to pay for a lawyer so that his daughter could divorce lover boy.
So I am not sure you got that whole who wanted to get rid of who thing right.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:01 AM
Are you telling me you don’t have an axe to grind? Everyone does, unless they just don’t care anymore. My axe here is that Palin apparently , and I’m just going off the report, apparently abused her powers in office, and it apparently was not just to get an abusive cop off the street. The report indicates that the Palin’s actions were not consistent with acting out of fear, or concern for others safety, but were consistent with a personal vendetta.
It may not be true, but it is the best ‘evidence’ I have to go on, not being a Palin kool-aider. If true, using state power to pursue a personal vendetta is one of the worst kinds of abuse. Now put her in the presidency, with that background, and see how comfortable you are. I’m sure you will discount what I have to say, but you should at least consider the implications for yourself.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:05 AM
I don’t think people will care all that much about the report. There has been so much drama with Palin since her becoming the VP nominee that I think most nonpartisan will just strung it off.
johnt on October 11, 2008 at 2:06 AM
I’m not calling anybody an angel, here. The only one I care about is Palin, ’cause she’s the only one running on a presidential ticket.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:08 AM
trailboss:
Well I think we have an apparently politically motivated hit job. Even a killer is called the alleged murderer. You have taken a report with a contradictory finding that negates its own basic assertion and then you say it apparently shows Palin abused her power. You say this in spite of the fact that there is no new bombshell, no new evidence, no new anything. It is just one guy’s opinion.
I think it is flimsy and I have my doubts as to the motive of the people who put it out there. And I don’t think based on this kind of pap that Palin abused her power.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:12 AM
Let’s see.
Trooper threatens to murder a man. Trooper tases kid. Trooper flashes his badge inappropriately, to intimidate business owners. Trooper drives drunk. Trooper pulls so much crap on and off duty that I’d need to go back and look at the formal complaints against him again to remember them all.
But it’s Sarah Palin who is guilty of “the worst kind of abuse”.
Got it.
capitalist piglet on October 11, 2008 at 2:14 AM
trailboss:
You said she fired the poor lad because he divorced her sister. I said her sister was the one wanting a divorce. So if that is true, it turns your claim of revenge against the wrong trooper into crap.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:14 AM
Not even a hint of an argument from me on that one. I read somewhere that people are blaming the current administration for the economy, and Obambastic and the dems are the beneficiaries. Pocketbook politics is strange stuff, but very powerful.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:16 AM
I remember being part of the Vietnam anti-war movement in that I went to a few concerts and blasted John Lennon out of my dorm window. I was a moron. I wasn’t really anti-war. I was “let’s go to the concert and have a good time.”
Thank God I grew up.
Connie on October 11, 2008 at 2:16 AM
And yes Palin is on the ticket, but then again America managed to overlook Whitewater and Rose Law and things like that which represented real ethical questions. I think I can overlook Sarah Palin trying to deal with a bad family situation.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:17 AM
trailboss:
Well Bush is a Republican so apparently the entire global meltdown is the fault of the Republicans. And besides Jimmy Carter said so and why would he lie? It is not as if he might have an ulterior motive.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:19 AM
Well, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. But the report is the only thing going for the moment, and it does not contradict itself, it lays out a decent indictment.
I understand it was a messy divorce, and it turned the Palins hard against Wooten. And Palin didn’t fire Wooten, she fired Monegan, because he wouldn’t fire Wooten (former bro in law).
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:22 AM
Oh, clearly. We’re all reading your tone of detached bemusement loud and clear, genius.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:25 AM
Don’t bring that poor old peanut farmer into this. He was attacked by a vicious swimming rabbit, and saw a UFO, and had sexual thoughts once. And had a brother named Billy. Poor, poor Jimmah.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:26 AM
Did you bother to read the whole post, or just cherry-pickin’ there, Genie Ous?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:27 AM
Yup, we care about her too. With that thought in mind, I’m wondering why Monegan (a) sent up that photo of Wooten to be autographed by Palin, and (b) allowed Wooten to suit up disguised as Safety Bear in a situation in which Palin might well have encountered him while he was so disguised. Either Monegan was dumb as a doornail and allowed himself to be manipulated multiple times by Palin’s enemies, or he decided to become one himself. Either way, if I were her, he was out the door — replaced by someone with a bit more political savvy [as for that, I mean not someone who would fire Wooten, but who would assure that he stayed clear of the Palins, who obviously were uncomfortable with him].
As for the Palins, after Wooten’s death threat, they had every right to be wary of him.
unclesmrgol on October 11, 2008 at 2:29 AM
Rabid cultist radical liberal enablers have obviously needed a rage fix to soothe their insecurity by defending their worship totem.
The increased attacks on Palin prove that liberals are still susceptible to the same old bias as always.
The party of KKK hate can’t seem to grow up enough to see or accept the fact that their candidate is a closet Karl Marx lover even though he’s connected to multiple socialist mentors and in the face he of his party creating the crisis that’s forcing the nationalization of our economic system.
Is Obama the messiah or is he part of why we don’t get to retire for a long, long time?
Speakup on October 11, 2008 at 2:29 AM
At the top of page 71:
Here is an open and shut case for firing for insubordination. So apparently the reasoning of the “independent” consul was that since Sarah Palin possibly had other reasons for wanting Monegan fired she wasn’t allowed to fire him for a perfectly legitimate reason. This is some of the stupidest reasoning I have ever heard.
Buford on October 11, 2008 at 2:29 AM
It’s not like you’ve left a trail, Smartest Guy Ever. Don’t worry, you got all us dummies fooled.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:33 AM
You know, Mr. Treacher, if you’d bother to be even slightly respectful, as in not starting off a conversation accusing me of something, you would probably find I would treat you with due respect also. All I’m asking. Can we tone it down a little. My apologies for attacking back.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:36 AM
The conversation is ongoing. But if you want to blame me, it’s not like you’ve got a rep to ruin.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:38 AM
Please, read the whole post.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:39 AM
Please, kiss the whole thing.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:42 AM
I’m asking for a truce, and apologized for attacking you. Is this all I can get for that?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:45 AM
Yes. Try begging harder.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:46 AM
Nevermind.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:49 AM
No, you’re a dick.
spmat on October 11, 2008 at 2:50 AM
In politics, perception is reality, unfortunately. Palin did not really do anything wrong, yet the Liberal press will spin it in a way to suggest that she did.
If we want to win in 2012 (or even in 2010), let’s work harder toward bringing down the Liberal media establishment. Luckily, the major newspapers are already tanking. But let’s work to expedite the process…somehow.
MedSchoolCatholic on October 11, 2008 at 2:50 AM
We’ve noticed.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:52 AM
Thanks for that. Any attention I can get is at least +1.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 2:53 AM
Check your calendar. It’s October 2008.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:53 AM
The troll who admits he’s a troll to try to salvage some kind of victory out of getting caught out as a troll is still a troll.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 2:55 AM
Bovine Fecal Matter………
What is going on that is effecting every tax paying, home owning, 401K investing American today…….
…….. THIS, and how it started:
Talk all you want about Sarah Palin, WE are voting for HER, not John McCain~
Seven Percent Solution on October 11, 2008 at 2:57 AM
oh, yes, certainly MY worst fear, getting caught out as a troll. Owww, oooh, oh my aching self-image. Oh! that hurts so little, quit it some more Mr. Treacher. I so respect the ‘troll patrol’ on HA, they make me just fearful. I fear anyone who’s day is made by ‘catching trolls.’
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 3:00 AM
You don’t have to fear it. You don’t even have to accept it. I hope you don’t, actually.
Whereas I’m amused by anyone who’s so much smarter than everybody else but doesn’t know how to spell “whose.”
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:13 AM
If Obama was caught with a dead girl AND a live boy a certain writer for Hot Air would claim that it benefits “the One.”
Capitalist Infidel on October 11, 2008 at 3:14 AM
Damn cowboy keyboard. Always messin up my spellin, and grammr, an’ all that.
I must say, you are easily amused.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 3:17 AM
And the jackass behind it.
It’s not my fault you can’t do any better.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:20 AM
Are you always this spiteful, or am I a special case?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 3:22 AM
Are you gonna be okay, sweetie?
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:31 AM
Someone in this campaign has an executive record which can be and has been scrutinized. Only one.
Executive experience.
silverfox on October 11, 2008 at 3:36 AM
Are you ever going to be civil, Bluto?
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 3:36 AM
What was the ethical charge agains Palin?
According to the report, it was mainly, if not solely, due to the fact that she didn’t control her husband.
An ironic charge, wouldn’t you say?
Anyway, she supposedly violated a catch-all ethics code (almost like a moral turpitudes clause).
And, more importantly, the commission was NOT SURE if she truly violated any ethics code at all.
They stated it was “likely” that she did.
Wow! What a charge! What a joke!
TexasDude on October 11, 2008 at 3:37 AM
If you’ve got a good reason, I’m listening.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:39 AM
I tried once, and you told me to beg. Apparently you can’t climb down once you’ve mounted your high horse, and I just can’t make myself care that much.
Te amat Iesus – ceteri te putant irrumatorem.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 3:50 AM
You didn’t try anything. If you want us to take you seriously, be honest.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:52 AM
Sic est vestri matris.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 3:54 AM
Licentia meus matris ex is
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 4:11 AM
Nite. Remember –
morans fac pausam ut sedes birotarum olfacias.
trailboss on October 11, 2008 at 4:18 AM
Up yours, troll.
Jim Treacher on October 11, 2008 at 4:36 AM
So according to the report, Palin “may have’ fired unethically, but had many valid reasons for firing him.
WFT???
So, with all the valid reasons to fire the guy had she not done so then what? Derlect in Duty? WTF???
Damn, I hate the media and Democrats.
jp on October 11, 2008 at 5:46 AM
B.O. may indeed be celebrating the fact that it seems that with this report that it may all be over for McCain.
But meanwhile in Chicago, Tony Rezko is preparing to sing to the Feds about the activities of certain political figures in Illinois, and one of those figures happens to be none other than B.O.
Grant it, it may take some time for the story to unfold and by that time, the election may be over, with the Left proclaiming victory and all.
But once the full story is told by Mr Rezko about the REAL B.O., and the things he did and was involved with, it could mean that possibly, quite possibly, I and the rest of the country may have the rare opportunity of seeing two DEMOCRATIC Presidents impeached by Congress in our lifetimes.
Anyone else consider that possibility?
pilamaye on October 11, 2008 at 6:26 AM
So?
At least she try to blow up the Pentagon.
madmonkphotog on October 11, 2008 at 6:47 AM
She broke no laws and the rest of this case is nothing but a cheap political farce.
rplat on October 11, 2008 at 6:53 AM
Political farce is an understatement.
She had the lawful right to fire for any reason under the sun, as admitted by this investigation.
TexasDude on October 11, 2008 at 7:07 AM
And the sweet irony is that they are placing into power the very person that will most likely destroy them.
jmarcure on October 11, 2008 at 7:11 AM
I consider it fantasy and the reason is that the media wants so desperately to get BO that they will spike any story that looks negatively on him. The reason I think this is because they are spiking negative ones now. It’s the media that is to blame for BO being in this race and no one else. If they had given him 10% of the negative coverage they gave the other candidates BO would have been out long ago. Heck, if they had given him 1% of the negative coverage they give President Bush BO would be going though impeachment rather then getting to be the next President. It’s the MSM that is getting BO in and I really hope they live to regret it.
jmarcure on October 11, 2008 at 7:35 AM
Sorry if this has been pointed out, I haven’t read the whole thread. This report is not logical. The Trooper in question is still on the job and it doesn’t appear that the current Public Safety Commissioner has felt compelled to fire him either. Everyone is getting the drawers in a bunch over what is obviously a non-issue. It boggles the mind.
Cindy Munford on October 11, 2008 at 7:55 AM
At Sarah’s next rally: “Todd, stand up please. Meet my husband, an unrepentant protector and defender of our families and of the good people of Alaska.”
gracie on October 11, 2008 at 7:56 AM
“Sorry if this has been pointed out, I haven’t read the whole thread. This report is not logical. The Trooper in question is still on the job and it doesn’t appear that the current Public Safety Commissioner has felt compelled to fire him either. Everyone is getting the drawers in a bunch over what is obviously a non-issue. It boggles the mind.”
I concur, Cindy. But trooper Wooten, the crap cop is being protected by the police union and good guys like Todd Palin know it and do believe he’s dangerous. The Legislators’ report was much more about Todd who is not a state employee than it was about the Governor who acted well within her power to fire the Superintendant Monegan. By the way she did offer Monegan head of the Liquor Commission where he would, however, have no budgetary responsibilities. He turned it down.
gracie on October 11, 2008 at 8:10 AM
Having worked in state government, I have to say these legislators who allowed the Obama campaign to con them into this report are morons. If they hated Palin as governor why would they want her and McCain to lose? So she can return to her job as governor and make their lives miserable? And she will…her approval ratings in the state are high and she’ll get the pubic support.
Think she won’t veto or refuse to approve anything they suggest? She can probably even see to it they aren’t re-elected if she wants.
This whole rush to judgment was another example of the Obama campaign using some idiots, and in a heartbeat will throw them under the bus.
Deanna on October 11, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Lots of time for this and none for anyone to ask Obama why, on the US dime, he is supporting and campaigning for Raila Odinga?
Why isn’t that a topic here?
drjohn on October 11, 2008 at 8:24 AM
As a lawyer, I can see that the “report” is a dishonest hatchet job. The bottom line is that Govenor Palin acted lawfully in the firing and the rest is strained nonsense.
This is what the Left does when you stand up and speak courageously. It will engage in character assassination. You should see Obama as a socialist fascist Chicago machine politician. He must be defeated. America’s future is at stake.
Phil Byler on October 11, 2008 at 8:26 AM
You must watch this:
http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2008/10/video-absolutley-damning-footage-of-obama-stumping-for-socialist-islamist-odinga/
Somebondy’s got a LOT of explaining to do.
drjohn on October 11, 2008 at 8:28 AM
Right on, Deanna. This is the rock and roll of politics and Sarah will spin it her way. If she returns to Alaska as Governor, she will break the back of the police union protecting their bad apples.
gracie on October 11, 2008 at 8:30 AM
Well, when you are in a decision making roll, you make mistakes.
Don’t blame Obama…he hasn’t done anything…
right2bright on October 11, 2008 at 8:36 AM
You go Phil. I agree 100% and I agree with who said “Fight the GOOD fight”. I wish I had a bumper sticker with that on it.
I also want to say here in Maryland, blue state that it suckingly is, I see nothing but MCcain Palin signs in my neighborhood. How Obama is winning this smear I have no idea. I don’t see the evidence.
I’m gonna shaddap now because like any agressive battle don’t just beat your enemy, beat them back beyond beat and thats what we need to do; kick ass and keep kicking just in case.
johnnyU on October 11, 2008 at 8:43 AM
And Phil Byler, that’s why we support Mrs. Palin…she will speak again. Remember at the RNC on 9/3/08 she said “… we are expected to govern with integrity, good will, clear convictions, and…a servant’s heart.” That’s what she will do.
gracie on October 11, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »