IAP Political Forum

Okay long before Palin was nominated as VP, when the state of Alaska opened an investigation into Palin's firing of her public service commissioner, she said she had no problem testifying.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/palin-allies-sue-to-halt-trooper-probe/

The investigative panel is composed of 6 republicans and 4 democrats.
After being nominated she now refuses to cooperate with the investigation because it's "Tainted by Democrat political partisanship"....with 6 republicans and 4 democrats.

Now she calls it "McCarthyistic" (doesn't help her metaphor that Joseph McCarthy was a Republican) and has mobilized her state legislators to try and halt the investigation. Already her party, one of the two parties claiming to be the ones who will bring 'change' is already scrambling in the background to support her iin her decision to give the American Justice system the finger....just as they have for 8 years now.

So obviously, and with 2.5 months to go, we can see that already a vote for republican is a vote for 4 more years of the same, "Screw you" to the law.





Reasons? Anyone? I don't expect any serious or honest answers from the Repuiblicans here (they would be refreshing though), but the self-serving rationalizations are entertaining.

Ahk

Don't know much about this yet other than a few things here and there but my guess (and it's only a guess) would be that her new people (McCain advisers) don't want this to hinder any chances of the McCain/Palin ticket getting elected so they want to drag it out until after election day.  She seemed to have no problem doing it before but it would cast a negative light right now even if she is innocent and the media would be all over it. 

Let's assume for arguments sake you are right. That's acceptable to you?

She is no friend to many Republicans in Alaska since her advocacy for vetting corruption ensnared a few....so just because there are Republicans on the panel does not mean anything....that being said....if anyone believes anything can be done from an investigative standpoint that will not include partisanship....especially with the degree of fulminate hatred of her from the left....then I'd like to sell you a bridge.

Just as investigative matters were held off on Bill Clinton with regards to Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey until he left the Presidency....this investigation can be held off until the second week of November....that will certainly take any partisan air out of the sails.

If someone is really bent on this firing....and think that as far as all allegations/truths/half truths with regards to all politicians....then I believe they should assume that everything that is alledged is true....and if that is a show-stopper for them, then do not vote for her and McCain....if however...in the grand scheme of things...and believeing all politicians lie, and weighed against others told regarding infanticide....and think this is relatively minor....then it won't really matter then.

Hmm. I don't like it much but I have to admit that's pretty valid.



Ahk

This is a politically driven witch hunt and it's in Palin's best interest not to testify.

Here's the bottom line, Palin was the boss and she had the authority to fire any body for any reason.

Since when is it a crime for a boss to fire his employees?

When it violates their rights.

However.....I do believe you when you said it is politically driven.....as most things are this close to election time.

1) Palin's not merely delaying justice, she's trying to avoid it altogether.

2) Please refresh our memories of how clinton was allowed to delay matters until after he left the presidency. My recollection, which is apparently faulty, is that Clinton and his defense team challenged Jones's right to bring a civil lawsuit against a sitting president for an incident that occurred prior to the defendant's becoming president. The Clinton defense team took the position that the trial should be delayed until the president was no longer in office, because the job of the president is unique and does not allow him to take time away from it to deal with a private civil lawsuit.
The Supreme Court, on May 27, 1997, allowed Jones' lawsuit to proceed. On November 13, 1998, with more than two years left of his presidency, Clinton settled with Jones.

--My faulty memory was aided by the obviously faulty Wikipedia. So please, Patton, correct us.

In answer to the question, "why won't Palin testify," it's blindingly obvious.

She can't testify and tell the truth without incriminating herself. Ordering someone fired without due cause is illegal in most states. I don't know for sure about the law in Alaska, but I imagine it's the same there as elsewhere. At a minimum, it's deeply embarrassing and reveals key flaws in her character--remember, she's already lied about the details, and had to "restate" her position when taped testimony obvously contradicted her version.  

She just wants it all to go away, just like George W Bush is hoping all his malfeasance in his administration will just be forgotten once he's gone.

Your research is better than my memory.

I still think nothing fair or impartial is possible between now and the election simply based on everything that has been attempted thus far to destroy the Governer.

I think the only way a thorough, impartial investigation lacking a partisan hack job would be after the election....but hey....no one listens to me anyway.....

So the voters should be happy choosing between politicians, one of whom may be a criminal but we don't get to know until after the election? That's your preferred alternative? I wonder if you'd feel differently if, say, the VP under legal suspicion was Hillary Clinton? But I guess we'll just never know...

I guess you didn't read what I said earlier:

If someone is really bent on this firing....and think that as far as all allegations/truths/half truths with regards to all politicians....then I believe they should assume that everything that is alledged is true....and if that is a show-stopper for them, then do not vote for her and McCain....if however...in the grand scheme of things...and believeing all politicians lie, and weighed against others told regarding infanticide....and think this is relatively minor....then it won't really matter then.

Was that not clear?

What's clear is that if you've enjoyed the lawlessness of the Bush administration and applauded their contempt for justice as they employ every legal trick in the book to run the clock out on the many investigations into their crimes, you'll love McCain/Palin.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_09/014751.php

I thought she was under investigation for this before she was selected as VP?

I could be wrong... but this was one of the first things that came out after McCain picked her.

I swear, she's so Bush-like, its scary:

“E-mails from the Palin administration are being withheld from the public and the governor is citing executive privilege," reported Alaska TV station KTUU last month. "With subject lines like ‘Fagan,’ ‘Andrew Halcro’ and even ‘Alaska Ear,’ it makes some wonder how those topics could possibly be policy related; especially since those same e-mails were copied to the governor's husband...Officials say the private e-mails within the Palin administration won't be released.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/how-transparent.html

If he was copied that would make them not emails within the administration.  Any judge should see that.  It is patently dishonest to claim so when they have already broken the boundaries of the admin.

The whole sordid tale started on July 13th, when the Anchorage Daily News -- which has been all over Trooper-Gate since the start -- reported that Walt Monegan, the state's respected public safety commissioner, had been fired without a clear explanation.

Read the rest of "Troopergate, Everything You Need to Know", here:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/troopergate_everything_you_need_to_know.php

Right... but her state legislature hired a special investigator back in late July (LINK (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/100/story/45779.html)) - well before she was selected as VP. I mean, you could argue that it's being more heavily pursued for partisan reasons... but the initial investigation started back in July.

That's all I'm saying.

US citizens don't have a right to be employed and they certainly don't have a right to not be fired.

Maybe she's hiding something.Even her aides refused to give statements when they given subpoenas.

Do US citizens have a right to know if their elected representatives are following the law or not?

The McCain campaign says "Hell NO!"
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/troopergate_for_now_gop_missio.php

They must be very proud.

You guys are pissing up a tree. But hey, don't let us stop you.

The investigation into "Troopergate  " was initiated end of July last.  Clearly it was not motivated by political partisanship trying to derail Sarah Palin as a potential Vice President.

If an ordinary citizen was being investigated for the illegal/unlawful sacking of an employee , do you think that  "ordinary citizen"  would be allowed to "refuse to co-operate with the investigation". My guess is that he/she would be "refusing to co-operate" from a  jail cell

Where exactly does it say in the Constitution that a State Governor or a "candidate" to public office is exempted from co-operating with an investigation.

 The interesting part of McCains moosejaw running mate is that she seems to be under a McCain gag order. Now she isn't talking to any media at all . The McCain camp has figured out that she is great for photo opps. but every time she opens her lieing moosejaw mouth they drop in the polls.
  http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/no_questions_please_were.html

Yes, two verbal klutzes who can't speak without cliff'ss note to replace another verbal klutz who can't speak without cliff's notes. I know the Republican litmus test on abortion, but I think there is one on stupid too.

God, this is hilarious. As an indication of what a joke Sarah Palin has become, this is the actual headline in the Seattle Times, a centrist newspaper that endorsed bush in 2000 and has a jones for eliminating the estate tax (while the report is from the AP, papers write their own headlines):

Palin pre-empts state report, clears self in probe
By MATT APUZZO
Associated Press Writer
ANCHORAGE, Alaska —
Trying to head off a potentially embarrassing state ethics report on GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, campaign officials released their own report Thursday that clears her of any wrongdoing.

 Ethics anyone??
Palin abused power in trooper case
 ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her power as Alaska's governor and violated state ethics law by trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report concluded Friday.


Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is under investigation for the firing of her public safety commissioner.

 "Gov. Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda," the report states.

Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan's refusal to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal, but Palin had the authority as governor to fire him, the report by former Anchorage prosecutor Stephen Branchflower states.
 However, it states that her efforts to get Wooten fired broke a state ethics law that bars public officials from pursuing personal interest through official action.

Monegan has said he was fired in July after refusing pressure to sack Wooten, who had gone through an acrimonious divorce and custody battle with Palin's sister.

 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html

The Alaska Legislative Council report said, quote: "For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 2952.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."

Palin today: "If you read the report, you'll see that there's nothing unlawful or unethical about replacing a cabinet member. You've got to read the report, sir."

Hmmm. Maybe she needs to read the report.

Here's the official Palin response to the Alaska Legislative Council's report:

"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."

Hmmm. Alaskan officials of both parties voted to appoint the special counsel to investigate the scandal; Alaskan officials of both parties agreed publicly that the investigation was warranted; Alaskan officials of both parties approved of subpoenas as part of the probe; and Alaskan officials of both parties resisted efforts to shut down the investigation. The Council consisted of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats. They voted unanimously to release the report.

Does Palin have an ounce of respect for democracy, for the political process? Should we feel comfortable with Palin's understanding of and respect for the rule of law?

Meanwhile, here's a part of the report not getting much attention:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2008/10/troopergate_finale.html

The McCain/Palin ticket. Quite remarkable...