Legislative Panel Finds Palin Abused Authority!

[AGBF]

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Palin-Troopergate.html?hp=&pagewanted=print



...and here's some background.

October 10, 2008
Palins Repeatedly Pressed Case Against Trooper
By SERGE F. KOVALESKI

ANCHORAGE — "The 2007 state fair was days away when Alaska’s public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, took another call about one of his troopers, Michael Wooten. This time, the director of Gov. Sarah Palin’s Anchorage office was on the line.

As Mr. Monegan recalls it, the aide said the governor had heard that Trooper Wooten was assigned to work the kickoff to the fair in late August. If so, Mr. Monegan should do something about it, because Ms. Palin was also planning to attend and did not want him nearby.

Somewhat bewildered, Mr. Monegan soon determined that Trooper Wooten had indeed volunteered for duty at the fairgrounds — in full costume as 'Safety Bear,' the troopers’ child-friendly mascot.

Two years earlier, the trooper and the governor’s sister had been embroiled in a nasty divorce and child-custody battle that had hardened the Palin family against him. To Mr. Monegan and several top aides, the state fair episode was yet another example of a fixation that the governor and her husband, Todd, had with Trooper Wooten and the most granular details of his life.

'I thought to myself, "Man, do they have a heavy-duty network and focus on this guy," ' Mr. Monegan said. 'You’d call that an obsession.'

On July 11, Ms. Palin fired Mr. Monegan, setting off a politically charged scandal that has become vastly more so since Ms. Palin became the Republican vice-presidential nominee.

By now, the outlines of the matter have been widely reported. Mr. Monegan believes he was ousted because he would not bow to pressure to dismiss Trooper Wooten. The Alaska Legislature is investigating the firing and whether the governor abused the powers of her office to pursue a personal vendetta. Its report is due Friday.

..."




Deborah

 

[mimzy]

eek! now what though? are there going to be legal ramifications for her? or is it more of just a ''told you so'' thing?

 

[starsapphire]

The nearly 300-page report does not recommend sanctions or a criminal investigation.

 

[luckystar112]

This is confusing. More.

Branchflower''s report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state''s executive branch ethics act, which says 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."
......

In the second finding, Branchflower says Monegan''s refusal to fire Wooten was not the sole reason for his dismissal but that it was a "contributing factor." Still, he said, Palin''s firing of Monegan was "a proper and lawful exercise" of the governor''s authority.
I''m confused, which is it? Proper and lawful, or an unethical violation? Or both???

....

The third finding says a workers compensation claim filed by Wooten was handled appropriately.

.....

Number four concludes that the attorney general''s office failed to comply with Branchflower''s Aug. 6 request for information about the case in e-mails.

 

[Anna0499]

Perhaps the confusion lies in "ethics rules" vs. actual laws. I don't know if it applies to politicians, but I know lawyers have rules of ethics which they can violate but not necessarily be sanctioned/punished for...they are usually just scolded and sent back to their practice in shame to probably get fired. Someone has to bring charges against the (alleged or not) violator in court and the court will determine the punishment, if any is warranted, but that usually comes in the form of a legal malpractice claim. The ethics violation is proof of legal malpractice but does not itself constitute a punishable crime because it is a self-imposed code of the profession. There is also, of course, the respective state boards that may revoke or suspend licenses, etc., but there is no license at issue here. Not sure if this is the case with the ethics act here - anyone know about these things applied in the political arena?

 

[decodelighted]

Don''t worry guys ... Palin cleared HERSELF already. So everything''s all settled. Heh.

 

[VRBeauty]

Ethics laws vary by state. In California, most anyone in a position like the Public Safety Commissioner would serve at the pleasure of the Governor -- the understanding is that if the gov asks for your resignation, you comply. That said, it would be inappropriate for the Governor to fire someone (or ask for their resignation) because that individual was asked to do something that they determined was not appropriate and possibly illegal (like fire a subordinate civil servant because the gov doesn't like the subordinate).... in that case, the gov would probably come up with another "reason" for the dismissal. Usually the appointed official goes along either out of duty or because that's the way its done in that realm, and they want to keep their options for the future open.

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 10/10/2008 9:41:28 PM
Author: decodelighted
Don''t worry guys ... Palin cleared HERSELF already. So everything''s all settled. Heh.

 

[goobear78]

Date: 10/10/2008 9:41:28 PM
Author: decodelighted
Don't worry guys ... Palin cleared HERSELF already. So everything's all settled. Heh.

Well, thank goodness that's settled. LOL.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/10/2008 9:41:28 PM
Author: decodelighted
Don''t worry guys ... Palin cleared HERSELF already. So everything''s all settled. Heh.

Pre-Empts? Is that like the Bush Doctrine??!!???


































lol

 

[mimzy]

Date: 10/10/2008 9:29:54 PM
Author: luckystar112
This is confusing. More.


Branchflower''s report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state''s executive branch ethics act, which says 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.''

......


In the second finding, Branchflower says Monegan''s refusal to fire Wooten was not the sole reason for his dismissal but that it was a ''contributing factor.'' Still, he said, Palin''s firing of Monegan was ''a proper and lawful exercise'' of the governor''s authority.

I''m confused, which is it? Proper and lawful, or an unethical violation? Or both???



Number four concludes that the attorney general''s office failed to comply with Branchflower''s Aug. 6 request for information about the case in e-mails.

it is sort of confusing - it seems that the "proper and lawful" part is referring to the actual process of the firing (which she did appropriately, and i think was hard to do because he was part of a union maybe?) and that it was within her role as governor to fire him (duh). they also said that there were ''other contributing factors'', which were deemed legitimate

 

[miraclesrule]

I think it''s sad when people don''t know the difference between illegal and unethical.

I have a clear example. It''s legal to cheat on your spouse with random partners in an unsafe manner and come home to their spouse, yet it isn''t illegal.

It is a shame that deplorable acts are considered legal even if they are unspeakably unethical. At least to some degree, laws evolve that make some very unethical behavior a crime...or at least a tort.

I suppose these types of questionable activities will be always remain a matter of opinion. Because it is so difficult to get people to change their personal opinions, especially on positions of personal politics, it hardly matters what the facts are because the mind has a way of justifying any strong personal opinion.

 

[ksinger]

Pre-Empts? Is that like the Bush Doctrine??!!???


What''s the Bush Doctrine..........................? (wink)

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 10/10/2008 11:09:10 PM
Author: ksinger
Pre-Empts? Is that like the Bush Doctrine??!!???



What''s the Bush Doctrine..........................? (wink)

lol, my freaking brain hurts, requires too much thinking...i need to go blink.

 

[trillionaire]

Date: 10/10/2008 9:29:54 PM
Author: luckystar112
This is confusing. More.


Branchflower's report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state's executive branch ethics act, which says 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.'

......


In the second finding, Branchflower says Monegan's refusal to fire Wooten was not the sole reason for his dismissal but that it was a 'contributing factor.' Still, he said, Palin's firing of Monegan was 'a proper and lawful exercise' of the governor's authority.

I'm confused, which is it? Proper and lawful, or an unethical violation? Or both???


....


The third finding says a workers compensation claim filed by Wooten was handled appropriately.


.....


Number four concludes that the attorney general's office failed to comply with Branchflower's Aug. 6 request for information about the case in e-mails.

My impression, having read a few of the reports, is that she abused her power by allowing her husband excessive and unlawful access to the staff and her office, and for allowing him to pressure her subordinates. Some are complaining that that wasn't the point of the investigation, though certainly it seems within it's purview, IMO. It appears that there was total consensus of the bipartisan committee to release the report, (12-0) but not total consensus on the findings. Some are saying that in order to be in violation of the particular ethics law in question, it has to be for financial gain, which it was not. So that is a technical detail that we may hear more about.

So, in conclusion, she violated the law by letting her husband do her dirty work.

 

[luckystar112]

Here is the full report, for anyone that wants to tackle it.

 

[trillionaire]

"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.

The Branchflower report states Todd Palin used his wife''s office and its resources to press for Wooten''s removal, and the governor "failed to act" to stop it. But because Todd Palin is not a state employee, the report makes no finding regarding his conduct.

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

 

[luckystar112]

This is interesting stuff. I'm actually reading the pdf of the report.

It appears, so far (I'm only on page 49) that over the course of a year, from the first complaint against wooten, no one would tell the family anything. Wooten stole a moose, tased an 11 year old, drove drunk, threatened to kill the family, etc. When the investigation was over Wooten was disciplined but appealed and was able to keep his job.

Then the Palin family got annoying.
They started calling Monegan frequently and were told repeatedly that the case was closed. So Todd Palin started calling and complaining about every little thing. He saw Wooten on a snowmobile when he was supposed to be injured and had filed workers comp; he saw wooten drop off his kids at school in his police car (that happened twice)....

Then time went on and Monegan dropped off a photo of a state trooper for Sarah Palin (who was not there) to sign (which would be distributed to several departments) and apparently Monegan "didn't realize" that the photo was of Wooten. Palin was pissed. She apparently thought he had done it on purpose, and she didn't think it was very appropriate since this was a man that had threatened to kill her family.

It was at this point that she started trying to find a replacement for Monegan, Mr. Kopp (that's not a pun) who testified that there were multiple issues that were causing Palin to want to part ways with him, not just the Monegan's refusal to fire Wooten.

That's where I'm at so far!!

 

[trillionaire]

Date: 10/11/2008 3:18:13 AM
Author: luckystar112
This is interesting stuff. I''m actually reading the pdf of the report.


It appears, so far (I''m only on page 49) that over the course of a year, from the first complaint against wooten, no one would tell the family anything. Wooten stole a moose, tased an 11 year old, drove drunk, threatened to kill the family, etc. When the investigation was over Wooten was disciplined but appealed and was able to keep his job.


Then the Palin family got annoying.

They started calling Monegan frequently and were told repeatedly that the case was closed. So Todd Palin started calling and complaining about every little thing. He saw Wooten on a snowmobile when he was supposed to be injured and had filed workers comp; he saw wooten drop off his kids at school in his police car (that happened twice)....


Then time went on and Monegan dropped off a photo of a state trooper for Sarah Palin (who was not there) to sign (which would be distributed to several departments) and apparently Monegan ''didn''t realize'' that the photo was of Wooten. Palin was pissed. She apparently thought he had done it on purpose, and she didn''t think it was very appropriate since this was a man that had threatened to kill her family.


It was at this point that she started trying to find a replacement for Monegan, Mr. Kopp (that''s not a pun) who testified that there were multiple issues that were causing Palin to want to part ways with him, not just the Monegan''s refusal to fire Wooten.


That''s where I''m at so far!!

you are a "trooper," reading all of that! LOL!