A legislative committee investigating Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has found she unlawfully abused her authority in firing the state's public safety commissioner.The investigative report concludes that a family grudge wasn't the sole reason for firing Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan but says it likely was a contributing factor.
« Obama Supports Paulson's Bank Semi-Nationalization | Main | ACORN Breaking Through: The Video » The Palin Probe Drops...10 Oct 2008 08:32 pm
From the AP:
Comments (51)
Wow, Alaska is totally in the tank for Obama.... 
Hahahaha! Another super day for the GOP ticket!
But when you are a "maverick," you don't have to follow the law. Duh.
Huh. Late Friday release? I thought these people weren't in the tank for McCain-Palin.
HAHA would be great if they impeach her now. Not that it would change any right-winger votes. Since Obama's gonna win this election anyway, might as well well spike them when they are down, a little payback for the 2000 election.
The committee also cited Rich Lowry for repeated episodes of "self-abuse."
When was it that Sen. McCain decided to, loudly and on-camera, become honorable again? Let me think...
Somehow I'm not seeing a Palin press conference here. Or--hey--didn't the report have anything to say about Ayers?
Does it get any more clear-cut than, "she unlawfully abused her authority in firing the state's public safety commissioner?" Hopefully, this is the final nail in McCain's campaign's coffin.
My take: John "Original Maverick" "Campaign Stunt" McCain will use this opportunity as a last gasp at reversing his fortunes — Palin bows out, Mitt "I'm a Businessman" Romney steps in.
Look over there! It's Ayers! It's Ayers! Pay no attention to the truth behind the curtain. AYEEEEEEERRRRSSSS!!! In all seriousness, how's McCain's judgment and vetting looking right now? Most people figured this out within a couple of days of Palin being picked. There was a ton of evidence available in the public domain. The only surprising element of this report is that Republicans in Alaska actually showed some spine in making this vote unanimous.
I'm at a loss to figure out how that would benefit McCain, R. Justin--but I think you might just be right! Wow. Then again, that "erratic" label stung; he's probably not going to want to open himself up for more of that, I'd bet.
Ayers doesn't benefit. "Celebrity" doesn't benefit. Going to "Warsh-ing-tun" to clean up the bailout mess without actually cleaning it up doesn't benefit. ... In my eyes this is the quintessential McCainesque move, an attempt to pull another great stunt and maybe (though I agree it's unlikely) sway some cash-strapped voters to elect a fiscal-minded executive.
As much as I'm sure McCain would love to drop Palin right about now and grab up Romney, there's no way he can do it. Everyone McCain voter left likes her better. If he throws Palin under the bus, that angry mob she's been feeding will turn on him.
It can't be otherwise than as you say. He *is* a gambler, and there's also not much left that he hasn't tried. I just wonder--ballots have been printed, right? And people have even voted, right? So there is the double-hurdle of the RNC and whoever is in charge of deciding if votes for Palin can go without question to VP-X or not.
But when you are a "maverick," you don't have to follow the law. The report explicitly states that she broke no laws.
That's not the case... it says she broke no laws in firing the commissioner. She did, however, break the law in pushing for the trooper to be fired. There's a reason the stories are leading with "unlawfully abused her power."
Maybe she should have fired the travel office instead...any Dems here want to answer that?
This report will have little real effect on this election, but it does Democrats a favor by wounding Palin's credibility and reputation in a highly visible way which will make it hard for her to run again for national office.
I don't think this is a major story. And I say this as an Obama supporter who is unafraid to criticize Marc when the time asks for it, hehe. I think this does 2 things, neither of which are too incredibly major, but do matter somewhat... 1. Steals the newsday... all the networks, cable, newspapers, blogs, etc. will be discussing this in some fashion... The more of this and less of Ayers and Acorn, the worse for McCain. 2. Runs counter to Palin's claim that she's a maverick and that we can't trust Obama (apparanetly, we can't trust her).
I think a whole bunch of Republicans are going to start selling off their Bill Kristol stock.
No lampwick - if Palin's reputation is further damaged to the point where she can never run for national office again, it would do the United States and the world a favor.
If Sarah Palin had just come out on day one and said "yes, I pressed for him to be fired because he threatened to kill my father and he tasered his step son" this would be a non-event. As it is, people who aren't going to vote for her probably decided that after the interviews. Most of those that are still planning on voting for McCain/Palin would probably still be amenable to the above rationale. If the media (and a certain other Atlantic Blogger) hadn't thrown so much cra* at her as soon as she hit the national stage, this might cause people to look deeper at her past, but I think everyone who is going to do that already did.
The investigator found Palin to have "abused her authority" and the "public trust," but that she did not fired her Public Safety Commissioner illegally. However he noted that 10 high level Palin appointees refused to honor subpoenas until it was too late to be interviewed and the governor reneged on her promise to cooperate and be interviewed as well. He castigated the inept, appointed Attorney General who assisted in the stonewalling. Therefore he terms his investigation incomplete.
So, I hope all the Republicans who were so upset about the perceived Clintons' abuse of power will be equally as upset about this named unlawful abuse of power. But this independent isn't holding my breath. I think I finally have realized there little honor among Republicans.
I'm going to leave this election aside for a moment, because, honestly, things are going too fast and furious for this thing to make much of a dent in McCain-Palin. They will either win, or lose, based upon other factors... Instead, I will speak to the future. I seriously doubt this impacts the Governor in any meaningful way. Oh, it will be something she will face to the end of time, no doubt there. But consider these things that, when the heat of this election cycle cools down, I think will dominate more than they do today. The firing of the Commissioner was legal and within her power. Most people will get that. The attempt to get the in-law trooper fired can be viewed as "abuse of power", if one so decides. However, let's look at the statute that was cited as the justification for the verdict of "abuse of office"--that the attempt to get the trooper fired was an attempt to achieve "personal or financial" gain. Personal, or financial, gain. Hmmm... Clearly, there was no financial gain here. That then leaves "personal". Now, here, I admit there was probably indeed a personal and family motivation going on. But...but....to maintain that the motivation was *only* personal is to then say that it is beyond the pale for a reasonable person--any citizen of the state, really--to question why an officer who has threatened to kill another citizen is still on the force. Seems to me that if that is unethical, then there are a lot of unethical people in this country. I must thus reject this as unethical. Also....to maintain that the motivation *is* and only *can be* personal is to also maintain it is beyond the pale to invoke concerns about armed individuals with tempers when discussing domestic situations--a decision that will surely be greeted warmly by the tens of thousands of Americans who cannot currently possess arms due to various domestic violence laws. Seems to me that the left, which would usually automatically come down against a police officer involved in a domestic situation who has a history of both threatening violence and has acted inappropriately towards children, has once again sold its birthright for a pot of political porridge. Basically, the reason why this won't be fatal to the Governor is that the trooper *did* threaten a citizen (spare me the retorts, it's documented in the police investigation. Just because one does not get fired for it does not mean it's good to go...it just means your union is powerful...); that such threats to citizens are not what we consider proper behavior for police; that across America in the past few years there have probably been dozens, if not hundreds, of similiar efforts to have cops removed because various parts of the citizenry no longer considered them safe to hold the power of life and death decisions; that even if one decides not to remove such police, it does not automatically mean the attempt was wrong or unethical or purely personal in motivation; and that if the law then says that to seek such redress of grievances is wrong, then the law is an ass. And that will be the big takeaway. That the law is an ass that says police can do no wrong, even when they do.... Finally, I'm somewhat flummoxed why the glee has come from the left on this issue, for it was always my understanding that Democrats fancied themselves as fighting for the little guys against unchecked police officials....but then, truth in advertising laws never apply here, do they?
Horace - Your justification just rolls off the tongue. And btw: Palin is to Monegan as unchecked official is to little guy.
Simple version. Sarah Palin abused her power as governor, and said she wants expanded powers as vice president. Sarah Palin lied when she claimed there was any reason to be afraid. There was none. Sarah Palin abused her power and lied. Those are violations of law. What she was not was charged with criminal conduct. But she came rather durn tootin close t'that moose.
It is mind boggling to me that the extreme right, the Christianists, are so blind to their own hypocrisy. We all are guilty of employing a double standard from time to time. Most are subtle, some are glaring. The latter ones generally grab our attention and cause us to reflect a bit. I still remember hearing all over that we were to show "some respect" to Mr. 25%, er, the 43rd President of the United States of America. That he was Our President, and that we needed to stand behind him. One of those hypocrites is now spouting off at the mouth in front of audiences in swing and not-so-swing states all acros the country about how we should not trust one of the two men who retains a 50% (or 90% depending on your measure) chance to become the next of these "Presidents". Yet I am curious to know whether something about him (Obama) will suddenly change on Nov. 5 to make him a more deified person, someone who as "Our President" warrants respect, adoration, blind obedience...or whether those standards were not as sincerely attached to the presidency as many right-wing nut jobs claimed? Given today's inevitable findings by the Alaskan committee, one cannot cease to be dumbfounded by the level and of hypocrisy, and extent of its infection in this country. Who is Sarah Palin? Hypocrisy does not well lend itself to transparency.
Wasn't she also caught on tape lying about this issue? That seems like it would be an important element of this story. Nonetheless, lying, ignoring subpoenas, abusing power, destroying documents...sounds like she'd be a great VP to me. Wonder what we'll find in her man-sized safe. Honestly though, there are so many reasons not to vote for Palin, this one doesn't even make the top 40.
You people are all missing the point of this story. The main takeaway on this story is WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! WILLIAM AYERS! Got it?
So does this qualify as an 'October Surprise'?
Does this woman have any integrity? Just think about this: a VP candidate of United States has been found guilty of abusing power!! Now, if McCain has any honor and integrity left he should remove her from ticket and put a clean and independent person on the ticket. That is the only way an independent like me will consider voting for him. I betcha this woman is going to be considered the most polarizing woman politician of this century when all is said and done. Yes, more polarizing than Hillary. Hillary has regained some good will but Palin is full of worst qualities. The base may love her but she is considered close to a disgrace by others. I have asked atleast three dozen people what they think of her as their very first reaction to her. Only one person said 'maverick', the rest of the people used negative terms like 'inexperienced', 'crazy', 'racist' to describe her. Now tell me how can one spin this as partisan finding. - All democratic and republican legislators voted for this probe. - The probe was conducted by an independent authority. Branchflower is reputed for his integrity and factualness. - The report was released by approval of 12 member committee which consists of equal number of democrats and republicans.
You think Cheney is bad, wait till this woman is totally exposed. She is a combination of Cheney, Nixon, Bush, Quayle, McCarthy. Palin = Cheney + Nixon + Bush + Quayle + McCarthy
The report indicate that she drops her state secuirity so the notion that she was threatened
She cannot wink her way out of this one.She had the gall to say it is about Obama untruthfulness.
Most of these comments, as is the blog itself, are just ignorant or dishonest. Gov. Palin's political enemies came up with this finding, true, but they practically said what they were going to do before the investigation. Kind of takes the believability out of their "findings", doesn't it? At least for honest people. She had every right to fire whom she fired, because she doesn't even have to give a reason - they serve at her pleasure, just like members of the President's cabinet. If you serve in an administration, you do what your "boss" wants, or you leave. As for the trooper, whether some law was broken or not, the things they said about him were shown to be true - and it's certainly understandable that they would not want some trooper continuing to serve when he's guilty of such things. The fact that he was a member of their family at one time, only means they had knowledge of it. And really, all of you who criticize, look me in the eye and tell me you wouldn't have done the same exact thing if you had the authority to do so - or even thought you had the authority, and I will call you a liar.
Steve Benen noted on his blog that this is the first time in the history of America that BOTH candidates on a major party ticket were found to have violated ethics standards BEFORE assuming the office of POTUS or VP. That's pretty mavericky!
So. She broke no laws, it will be spun as if she was utterly vindicated. But, the main take away from this report, released unanimously by a bi-partisan legislative body, was that she explicitly violated the public TRUST of which she was entrusted. I understand hers, hubby's, and her staff's behavior in this matter to be in breech of the code if ethics act that govern her office. Maybe it won't mean much beyond a news cycle or two. Those that support her will still be behind her and those that are not have another reason to not get behind her. In the end, this is unsettling for a candidate actively running for the 2nd highest office in the land. Mac and Pal have greater obstacles to overcome in order to claim a victory. IMO this report and it's findings are yet another...
Who wants Todd Palin, former secessionist, in the Vice-Presidential office suite "advising" his wife on a daily basis? Lets see those hands!
Try reading the report before commenting, okay, people? Sarah Palin did, in fact, break the law. No surprise.
Palin wrongly used her status as an elected official to get rid of a former relative who does sound like a jerk. But, for those who defend her, what else might she do with her power? She might move on to bigger and better things, perhaps things that you wouldn't like. It's just not cool to abuse your power. And Todd Palin's involvement is really mindblowing. Can you imagine him anywhere near the office of the VPOTUS? No way. Now how.
Game. Set. Match. I think McCain threw in the towel when he called Obama a 'decent man' - hatred and bigotry was all he had left
Contrary to what Angelica writes above: Palin did break laws: not in firing the guy, but in violating the Ethics LAW that states you can't abuse your office for personal gain (family retribution falls into the personal gain category). You are not allowed to push for the firing of someone. You're not allowed to let your un-elected husband badger state employees to fire someone. It is against the Ethics Law.
I demand a retraction from Camille Paglia.
Credible questions are now being raised as to whether the Palin home in Wasilla was built FOR FREE by the same contractors (and Palin campaign contributors) who built the Wasilla Sports Complex at the same time. Sarah Palin is going to be revealed as a thoroughly corrupt Repiglican. I'm loving it.
This news is anti-climatic after all we have seen from Team McCain and Sarah Palin in particular. Opinions on her got pretty fixed after the Couric interview fiasco and her wink-a-thon of a debate. If you were still Team McCain after everything that's happened this week, you're probably still Team McCain. Team Obama is really none too surprised by the news and just trying to balance the urge to gloat about a victory that seems almost inevitable, against a defensive pessimism born of seeing GWB elected twice.
Anybody have the LEGAL definition of this phrase or these words, preferably from the Alaska Statutes, but at least from some other legal authority recognized in Alaska? “...effort to benefit a personal or financial interest...” I’ve had one Palin critic tell me her “personal benefit” was vengeance. Until these terms are legally defined, the "abuse of power" charge is open to question:
What's really disturbing and could have a bigger impact is her pathological response to it. In a phone call to Alaskan reporters, she insisted three times in a matter of 5 minutes that she was "cleared of any legal wrongdoing", which is patently false. http://community.adn.com/adn/node/132625 To Horatius above: There was a prior investigation of Wooten that resulted in his temporary suspension for the very same issues they continued raising to Monegan. His point was simple--Wooten had already been disciplined for those grievances, and he could not act unless and until there was evidence of new wrongdoing. They had none but continued to obsessively pursue the matter anyway. In addition, they were unscrupulously bad-mouthing Wooten to his children--to a point where the judge had to warn them he would remove custody from Sarah's sister if they did not stop. They seemed determined to get revenge in any way they could, not genuinely afraid of him.
Trailerhunter, This is the definition under Chapter 39 of the Alaska Statutes (She was found to have violated 39.52.110): (18) "personal interest" means an interest held or involvement by a public officer, or the officer's immediate family member or parent, including membership, in any organization, whether fraternal, nonprofit, for profit, charitable, or political, from which, or as a result of which, a person or organization receives a benefit;
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I can picture Obama with an outstretched hand mimicking colbert:
Election please!
Posted by Mark | October 10, 2008 8:36 PM