Troopergate: Less than critics wanted, but still trouble
posted at 8:49 am on October 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I’ve read through the Troopergate report and some of the commentary arising from it, and the McCain/Palin ticket appears to have a mixed bag. The report acknowledges the obvious: Governor Sarah Palin has the right to fire political appointees for whatever reason she desires. The termination of Walt Monegan was completely within her purview and her authority. However, we hold politicians to higher standards, or at least we should, and the report’s conclusion that she abused her power in light of her husband’s actions in attempting to get Trooper Mike Wooten fired will stick in voters’ minds in the final days of the election.
Jazz Shaw, no Palin fan, notes the ethics issue for the prosecution:
The report says Palin failed to reign in her husband’s inappropriate efforts to use the governor’s office to contact trooper employees in his attempts to have Wooten fired.
“Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda … to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired,” Branchflower’s report says.
“Compliance with the code of ethics is not optional. It is an individual responsibility imposed by law, and any effort to benefit a personal interest through official action is a violation of that trust. … The term ‘benefit’ is very broadly defined, and includes anything that is to the person’s advantage or personal self-interest.”
The result of this is that the report will be turned over to the President of the State Senate for possible disciplinary action. McCain’s supporters are already in full swing, furiously trying to spin the report into something palatable, but it’s hard to see this as anything but another black eye for the Arizona Senator’s campaign. The responses will say that Palin didn’t technically break any laws. (Well, I suppose that’s technically true on some levels, assuming you don’t think of ethics laws as… errr, you know.. “laws.’) They are also decrying the investigation as a partisan witch hunt. (The panel convened to investigate this was comprised of eight Republicans and four Democrats.)
The investigation started at the request of another Republican — Sarah Palin. The allegations of a “partisan witch hunt” began when the legislative master of the investigation, Democratic state Senator Hollis French, started promising an “October Surprise” and embarrassment for John McCain before one witness had even been deposed. French further clouded the investigation by interfering with subpoenas, blocking one for a witness to a meeting in which all other attendees had been subpoenaed … and that witness had run the meeting, and was also Palin’s chief of staff. There is plenty of evidence that French wanted a partisan outcome and not justice.
But still, if Todd Palin was bullying people to fire a non-political appointee for personal reasons, using the implied authority of his wife, and Sarah Palin knew about it and didn’t stop it, that would be a breach of ethics. Most people would agree that a police officer who drank alcohol in his patrol car, tasered his 10-year-old stepson, and threatened to murder his estranged wife’s father should not be working in law enforcement. All of those allegations were confirmed by Alaska in an investigation. However, the job of trooper is not a political appointment, and if Todd Palin acted in a manner reported by this investigation, it would be improper and subject to some sort of censure from the Legislature.
That’s a big if, though, and the matter is far from closed. Beldar, speaking for the defense, notes that the report reflects the opinion of one man hired by French, and has not yet been accepted by the Legislature:
Even the Anchorage Daily News is misrepresenting the meaning of this report: I just received an email update from it in which it claims that “Today Alaska legislators found Palin did abuse her power in the ‘Troopergate’ controversy.” That’s absolutely false — the Alaska Legislature is not in session, and all that happened today was that the 12-member Legislative Council that received the Branchflower Report voted unanimously to release its first volume (the 263-page .pdf file linked above) to the public. Several more volumes and hundreds more pages prepared by Branchflower still remain confidential — suggesting that Branchflower’s selective quotations in the report may well have been “cherry-picked” or taken out of context — but the governor’s office has itself posted quite a few more documents pertaining to the investigation on the internet, confirming Gov. Palin’s repeated statements that she has nothing to hide in this entire matter.
Beldar, an attorney himself, also has some criticism for the investigator:
Instead, Branchfire has piled a guess (that the Palins wanted Wooten fired, rather than, for example, counseled, disciplined, or reassigned) on top of an inference (that when the Palins expressed concern to Monegan about Wooten, they were really threatening to fire Monegan if he didn’t fire Wooten) on top of an innuendo (that Gov. Palin “fired” Monegan at least in part because of his failure to fire Wooten) — from which Branchflower then leaps to a legal conclusion: “abuse of authority.” Branchflower reads the Ethics Act to prohibit any governmental action or decision made for justifiable reasons benefiting the State if that action or decision might also make a public official happy for any other reason. That would mean, of course, that governors must never act or decide in a way that makes them personally happy as a citizen, or as a wife or mother or daughter, and that they could only take actions or make decisions which left them feeling neutral or upset. This an incredibly shoddy tower of supposition, and a ridiculous misreading of the law.
Branchflower puts under a microscope every direct and indirect contact that can possibly be claimed to to come, directly or indirectly, from Gov. Palin or her husband, Todd. In none of them did either Sarah or Todd Palin demand or request that Wooten be fired. Some of them date back to before Gov. Palin was even a candidate for governor. All of them are equally well explained by legitimate concerns that Wooten was a potential threat to the Palin family (having already made death threats against Gov. Palin’s father) and/or an embarrassment to the Alaska Department of Public Safety and the entire state law enforcement community. That the Palins also had strong — and entirely understandable! — negative feelings about Trooper Wooten does not make any of these communications remotely improper, much less illegal.
Nevertheless, Branchflower leaps to the personal conclusion (page 67 of the .pdf file) that “such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palins’ real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family related reasons.” Well, here’s another memo to Mr. Branchflower: When the family is question is the family of the Governor of Alaska, and when her security detail is charged with protecting her from threats, and in the process of that, the security detail actively seeks out information as to who may have previously made death threats against the family, that’s no longer solely a “personal family related reason.” And when someone like Trooper Wooten threatens to bring ridicule and shame to the entire state of Alaska, that’s no longer solely a “personal family related reason” either.
Branchflower, I’m told, is an attorney and a former prosecutor. If he thinks this kind of nonsense could support a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, or even a finding of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, then he may be the worst lawyer I’ve ever encountered — and I’ve met a lot of awful ones in almost three decades before the bar.
That brings us to the main point of this exercise. It will produce no certainty whatsoever, thanks to the Legislative Council’s inaction in the face of Hollis French’s efforts to turn this investigation into a present for Barack Obama. The LC should have bounced both French and Branchflower after the “October Surprise” comment and replaced them with people of less partisan temperament. Instead, we have a report that both clears the Governor and indicts her spouse in a contradictory, confusing judgment that appears to have been looking for some self-justification for all of the time and money spent on it.
Palin runs almost zero risk of any sort of rebuke on the basis of this report in Alaska, but the election may be a different matter. The phrase “abuse of power” resonates with voters, even when it’s applied to the candidate’s spouse. Had the report come out two months ago, when no one paid any attention, it would probably be a nothingburger. Now, with three weeks left in the campaign, it’s going to dent the reform message of John McCain, which was the main reason he asked Palin to be his running mate. It won’t convince current supporters to reject McCain, but it will make it a little more difficult to convince undecideds.
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: « 1 2 [3]
Just finished reading the whole dang report…
Its all about TODD Palin, not the Govenor, and in one place says she is at fault because she did not use HER power to stop Todd.
Uh, Todd is a private citizen. He is not in Office. How is SHE held accountable for HIS actions…
Or, should Hillary be disbard for Bill’s lieing under oath?
It that the LEGAL standard of an Ethic’s complaint?
Thats the jump that needs to be brought up, and by the Dudeness himself…
He should come out in a speech and say, Yeah, I tried to get this guy fired because he was a slimeball… but last time I checked I AM NOT THE GOVENOR! AND I AM NOT THE ONE UNDER INVESTIGATION!!!
Romeo13 on October 11, 2008 at 1:02 PM
This is just my 2 cents, but in the “grand scheme of things,” this is extremely minor (or at least it should be).
For over 20 years, the likes of ACORN and social engineers of the left along with sympathetic, selfish but dim-witted politicians have guided this country down a path lined with good intentions towards total economic disaster. Other sympathizers have further enabled this to happen by indoctrinating rather than educating.
It is hard to compare using one’s political connections to get an obvious bad person–the trooper–fired vs. a potential worldwide economic meltdown that could have and probably should have been avoided.
P.S. Avoided? A most definite YES! Why, you ask? Think of the old Biblical adage.
With education more indoctrination rather than education, the groundwork is laid for groups like ACORN to work the system to literally create the sub-prime mortgage market. What they should have “agitated” for was improved E D U C A T I O N, and not indoctrination. In other words, they would have taught people “how to fish” so that they could then “eat for a lifetime.”
But, of course, we know that groups like ACORN are not the least bit interested in free, educated and independent people. No, instead, they are only interested in needy followers.
Wildcatter1980 on October 11, 2008 at 1:04 PM
It’s rather ironic that Biden is on the campaign trail, aiming to bolster his creds by bragging about his legislation to protect women from abuse.
Surely, Sarah Palin is politically plucky enough to cite her concern for the citizens of Alaska in raising questions about an unethical and dangerous state police officer with a history of abuse and in finding that subversive politics was protecting that officer from a dismissal.
onlineanalyst on October 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM
I will not be watching TV today, and since it is a weekend a lot of other people will not either.
Will it hurt McCain/Palin? I don’t know. I do not know that it will change any minds.
Has anyone here heard of Hillbuzz? Someone mentioned that something might be coming about Illinois politics/ACORN/Rezko/Obama, whatever. I found this site and there is some really interesting stuff there, here is a sample:
There IS a RICO investigation of ACORN and the Obama campaign underway - this has now been established by the mainstream media. Right now it’s rumored here in Chicago that Patrick Fitzgerald is heading it (confirmation on that has not come yet). There is a lot of activity in Chicago right now, with a lot of IRS agents looking into the finances coming in and out of this city, and across state lines (this was established on Monday when the GOP issued emergency press releases that much of Obama’s campaign contributions could very well be illegal foreign contributions - what appears to be deliberately poor record keeping designed to hide the true identities and monetary sources of online donors is at issue here). We see in 15 states now that ACORN is being busted for attempted voter fraud, and for fraudulent, illegal voter registratons in the hundreds of thousands, if not a million. The article below states, and we have confirmed this with people who know for sure, that the people who gathered evidence of Obama’s fraud and voter intimidation techniques during the primaries against Hillary Clinton are sharing everything they have with the Republican Party and the federal government.
What’s happening here is something we have never seen before: centrist Clinton Democrats and Republicans are working together to expose the DNC and Obama campaign’s illegal activities and orchestrated, coordinated fraud. Both parties are working with federal agents to investigate ACORN, which has been funded with upwards of $800,000 in questionable donations from the Obama campaign (in what appears to be the expressed and explicit direction to engineer voter fraud in the general election). The tactics being employed now in the 15 states currently under investigation are the VERY SAME TACTICS we saw on the ground in Iowa, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Indiana, and other states working for Hillary Clinton in the primaries.
And all of this ties back to Chicago.
Where the Obama campaign and DNC are now based.
Where people we know tip us off to little things to pay attention to that, when pieced together with all the other little pieces that are revealing themselves, leads to a single conclusion: there will be indictments for all of this.
We don’t know when they will come — but they will come. There is just too much here to ignore.
There is a lot more.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Everyone basically saw this for what it was…Those of us who support the McCain ticket still do and won’t be swayed but the partisan hit job, undecided probably understasd this was a political hit job run by three Obama supporters…the Obama suporters ill try to make the most of this but they will only be effective preaching to their choir…who deep down also know this was a political hit job (but they will be proud of that)
Yesteday I had lunch with my friend who is a big Obama supporter. she came out slugging…calling Palin every name in the book…I didn’t get mad, I just asked her to specify how it was she had become all the things she was saying Palin was …my friend could only bring up Troopergate…I asked her to explain Ayers and got Obama was 8…then Wright…no longer part of the church…Rezko Obama not only one who benefitted…Odinga…campaigning for his cousin…ACORN…don’t understand the way blacks have been treated…all I can say is that by the time we were done with this discussion I could tell she had lost some of her venom..she knew she’d had to explain away just to much! I was too tired to ask her why she is willingly suspending disbelief…
CCRWM on October 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM
I think you can safely forgo the complex reports and ethics wrangling for one simple concept. Todd Palin tried to get rid of a dangerous slimeball any way he could. To which, I say, awesome.
That’s going to resonate better than vague rumblings on “abuse of power.”
TheUnrepentantGeek on October 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM
This would have had more merit if it had come out some time ago, but this close to the election a lot of people will wonder.
BTW, what if some ugly stuff comes out about Obama between now and Nov 4, will people believe it or just assume it is politics?
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM
That, and even after the Head Cop was supposedly FIRED for this… Wooten is still on the force…
Wouldn’t ya think that the next hand picked Palin appointee would have got rid of Wooten if that was the real issue?
Romeo13 on October 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM
the person or people who GAVE THE CONCLUSION ARE ALL OBAMA SUPPORTERS.
Who is guilty of what. todd palin freely says he tried to get his wifes ex brother-in-law fired as a law inforcement officer. and stated that sarah told him to back off.
so what is sarah guilty of? nothing!!
I think that most men in u.s. whould have done the same.
TomLawler on October 11, 2008 at 1:37 PM
It’s been pointed out that the use of the word “likely” is ridiculous, to put it mildly. It implies Branchflower is a mind reader. And even he admits Plain was within her legal rights to fire Monegan.
But wasn’t Monegan offered another position which he turned down and then was let go? So is that really being fired? In any business if you’re offered another position and turn it down, it isn’t considered being fired because you had an option to keep working.
Deanna on October 11, 2008 at 1:55 PM
This is a simple issue that has absolutely no credibility other than being a partisan witch hunt and smear campaign. The details don’t even matter and it can all be boiled down to a few simple points.
1. Most states, including Alaska, are “at-will” employment states. The meaning is simple- a person can quit for any reason or no reason at all and an employer can fire someone for any reason or no reason at all. Worst case scenario is a situation were someone is fired in violation of the Civil Rights Act, ADA or similar law or if (because it’s a government job) they were terminated under Whistleblower protections. Even then, the person is usually still fired but may be entitled to compensation via a civil lawsuit. None of these things applies to in this case.
2. Cabinet members serve at the discretion of the Governor. Palin is not required by any stretch of the imagination to give any reason for terminating a Cabinet member. The fact that she did give several valid reasons that had nothing to do with the trooper and were verified by the terminated idiot on several occasions (including TV interviews)and that she offered him a alternative position (which he declined) demonstrates that Palin was more than fair and went above and beyond any statutory or implied responsibility. She could have canned him because it was Tuesday and she woke up on the wrong side of the bed and he’d have absolutely no cause for any legitimate complaint.
3. Every citizen has the right (and arguably the duty)to complain about a corrupt public servant. See the Constitution and countless other laws for clarification on Free Speech and the role of citizens and government. That is what Todd did. Period. At best, you could argue that to avoid the ethical allegations (for which no evidence has yet been presented)he should have simply called from a cell phone or similar personally registered and paid for device. So, at best, Todd Palin should pay for any telephone charges related to his calls… UNLESS you allow that the role of “First Dude” carries an official or implied role within the state government. For example- Todd was expected, albeit unofficially, to host tea for the former gubernatorial spouses at the Governor’s Mansion. While this is not a official role, it is an established traditional one that has been accepted as a responsibility for a spouse, so it establishes that he has semi-official duties. He can also be assigned, like anyone else, to official duties at the discretion of the Governor and “deputized”, so-to-speak, with official authority as a representative of the Governor. For example- say Todd was delegated to call on behalf of the Governors office to pursue an official complain against an officer that had nothing to do with his family but was the same situation with an unaffiliated 3rd party. There would never have been an issue, since it is no more than a citizen complaint that was mandated for follow up by the Governor through her official representative. Official spouses represent their elected spouse at all levels of government to everything from civic function to international deals (see any First Lady in history). There is nothing remotely wrong with this. Had this been a 3rd party, Todd and Sarah would likely be commended by all involved for taking an official interest in and pursuing a citizen complaint against a trooper.
Damiano on October 11, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Not any way he could. Wooten is still alive, even after Todd Palin encountered him on a snowmobile 100 miles out in the wilderness. Todd shot Wooten’s picture, not Wooten. Branchflower’s allegations of malfeasance (no court of law on this one, which the lefties conveniently ignore) doesn’t go that far.
Romeo13 makes a point with which I disagree:
If Todd Palin used state resources to press his case, and those state resources were provided by Sarah Palin to Todd for that use, abuse occurred by Sarah Palin. One would have expected something in the Branchflower report detailing such an improper use of state resources, but none was provided (at least in the parts of the Branchflower report we are permitted to examine). We don’t have the crusade occurring using Sarah Palin’s official e-mail account or her official phone, Todd Palin is rebuffed time and again by the officials involved — they understand his non-official citizen status, and remind him of it over and over.
Sarah’s concern seems to be not having Wooten be in her proximity — a valid concern. Monegan (the center of the controversy, since he was fired) does two things so “in your face” that they make me wonder whether he had his head screwed on right — he sends to the Governor a large photo of Trooper Wooten with a request that it be autographed by her, and then allows Trooper Wooten to disguise himself in a full body bear costume (”Safety Bear”) for the opening ceremonies of the Alaska State Fair, which Palin was to attend.
While door number one is spooky enough, I would say that door number two was so scary as to almost mandate firing, without even mentioning all the other doors which led Branchflower’s report to conclude that no laws were broken, even while making the contrasting finding that Palin violated ethics laws.
unclesmrgol on October 11, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Deanna:
Palin tried to transfer Monegan, he took that as being fired.
No wonder we have such crappy people in government, it is impossible to fire anyone.
In the private sector you can be fired for looking cross eyed at your boss, but in government…why it is almost impossible.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:11 PM
100% correct. Monegan is not even eligible for unemployment for 2 reasons:
He was not unemployed through no fault of his own, evidenced by:
1. He turned down suitable alternative employment that was within his ability to perform and would not have resulted in any recognized hardship
2. He was terminated for insubordination; evidence of which was thoroughly documented and acknowledged as factual by both parties (even if the particulars are disputed)
The entire issue here is very simple- Liberals think that they are entitled to jobs, regardless of how they perform in that job, their qualifications or any other consideration.
Take the same in a different context- if this was a fry cook at McDonalds who was canned because he refused to account for his against policy usage of oil and potatoes, we’d never have this conversation.
Note to liberals- do the job that you are qualified to do, are hired to, as well as you can do it and according to established policies and you will never have a problem and can go to work in a reasonably pleasant environment that is reasonably free from drama. They only workplace drama that exists… ever… is when people start thinking that they are entitled to something other than a job and a check.
Damiano on October 11, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Thanks, that’s what I thought. So the term “fired” in the report isn’t accurate. And I don’t think the public will buy the government is different concept. This guy wasn’t elected, he was appointed.
And as someone said, that explains why they released it on a Friday of a long weekend. If they really thought this would fly they would’ve waited until Monday.
Deanna on October 11, 2008 at 2:23 PM
To say that Todd Palin does not have an “official” position would require that be consistent. Contrarily, Todd has legally and ethically represented Palin on official trips, at the Gubernatorial spouses tea, in campaigns (for her and others) and countless other capacities.
Official spouses hold a complex dual role where they are required to perform traditional duties, official duties, can hold delegated authority (like anyone else) and hold a well documented, accepted and acknowledged influence on the official spouse while maintaining status as a general citizen.
Put simply, you have whatever authority your spouse say you have. Period. If anyone is going to argue technicality in this area, you then need to cite nearly every first lady in history (on a State and Federal level) for all the trips they have taken, calls they have made, speeches they have given and work they have done. Hillary Clinton should never have had a White House office or staff. Michelle Obama should not be a surrogate for her husband or even introduce him at events, much less hold a prime time speaking slot at the DNC.
Damiano on October 11, 2008 at 2:30 PM
Interesting point, but just because you are the Gov’s spouse does NOT mean you give up the Constitutional Right to “Petition for Redress”…. which is EXACTLY what he was doing.
He saw somthing that he thought was wrong, and used his Freedom of Speech, to petition the proper authorites to Redress somthing he saw as wrong.
Romeo13 on October 11, 2008 at 2:48 PM
And to finish that though…. if Gov Palin had ordered him, as a Private citizen, to shut up about it, SHE would have been violating his Civil Rights…
Romeo13 on October 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Damiano:
That might be true to some extent, but the original complaint was filed by Palin’s father after Wooten threatened to kill him. So the whole thing started before Palin was Governor at which time Todd Palin was not the first Dude.
Terrye on October 11, 2008 at 2:57 PM
This is a classic case of “guilty until proven innocent.” What could the Palins have possibly done differently that this “investigator” wouldn’t object to?
At any rate, Branchflower’s wife worked for Monegan just a few years ago and publicly praised Monegan.
Therefore, based on Branchflower’s own “reasoning,” I hereby declare that Branchflower abused his authority to satisfy his grudge against Palin for demoting his wife’s friend.
Someone get in touch with Halcro and French. The investigation will start Monday morning.
Mr. Wednesday Night on October 11, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Why can’t a private citizen, Todd Palin, ask/demand as a taxpayer, that a Corrupt State Trooper be fired?
jp on October 11, 2008 at 5:18 PM
This dog ain’t barking
The story does not enthrall the public because it is too intimate and too trivial. Like the Clinton escapades the general public does not want this level of activity to be a subject of national interest.
In mixed company I have seen the few times anyone brought up the subject, some lady always mentions the taser and buck stops there
It doesn’t even have a long life span as gossip
If they push against Palin too hard on this one it will cause a rebound sympathy for her. She will be “Bill Clinton’d” which is a plus
entagor on October 12, 2008 at 3:17 AM
what is sarah guilty of???? gov palin
TomLawler on October 12, 2008 at 11:06 AM
wong key. even though sarah told todd to restrict his contacts with the gov’s office todd still worked to get a lousy cop fired. so what!!
the hacks in alaska want us to believe that sarah did something wrong. the review board in alaska is in truth polically motivated. all of the first 3 are in fact obama supporters.
TomLawler on October 12, 2008 at 11:23 AM
The theory that Monegan was fired because of his treatment of Wooten is ANACHRONISTIC.
If that was why Palin fired him, she would have done it much earlier. The timing fits his acts of insubordination.
Pythagoras on October 12, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 [3]