# BREAKING NEWS: Alaska Legislature



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Alaska legislature has voted 12-0 to release the investigator's report if Sarah Palin has abused her powers as governer of Alaska. 

adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : Troopergate hearing (Updated: It's starting)


----------



## Isolde (Oct 10, 2008)

You are a fool, no wait, an assclown.


----------



## Chris (Oct 10, 2008)

Branchflower was a prosecutor in Anchorage for 28 years.

 He is a good man. He will make the correct case.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

This is as it should be , the American people should have all the information to make their decision with.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Isolde said:


> You are a fool, no wait, an assclown.



Please elaborate as to what spurred this recent round of idiocy from you - or are you just trolling again? Does it make you feel better about yourself to insult someone?


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> This is as it should be , the American people should have all the information to make their decision with.



You're funny. The queen of disinformation wants the truth to be spread. Be sure to tell Barry how you feel about total disclosure too, would ya ?


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

This story is going nowhere.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

Money quote:

*"Sarah Palin abused her power as governor"*


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

Why does a sitting United States Governor, allow a personal family grudge to impinge on official state business, and use her power to harass an ex-family member?


----------



## rayboyusmc (Oct 10, 2008)

> You're funny. The queen of disinformation wants the truth to be spread.



No that's AlliBabble.

they just reported that they found that she had abused her power to remove what's his name.  She violated two Alaska statutes.

Good old Saint Sarah.

This is from a bi-partisan committee.

She broke state law.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Why does a sitting United States Governor, allow a personal family grudge to impinge on official state business, and use her power to harass an ex-family member?



And you think Clinton never did anything like this as governor of Arkansas?


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> No that's AlliBabble.
> 
> they just reported that they found that she had abused her power to remove what's his name.  She violated two Alaska statutes.
> 
> ...



Allegedly


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

They dont care.

They will forgive her and then spew hatred for Obama because he once worked with a guy who had a committed  crimes 40 years ago.


----------



## Article 15 (Oct 10, 2008)

I am hearing rumors that the investigation is turning up FAIL for Sarah Palin ...


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> And you think Clinton never did anything like this as governor of Arkansas?




I don't care what you "think". 

Show me a bipartisan, State report from Arkansas, showing Clinton broke state civil law in the 1980s 

IN the meantime, what do you think of a sitting US Governor, and vice presidential candiate, using her gubenatorial office illegally to pursue personal family grudges?  What does that say about her character?  

Thanks.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Allegedly



Nope


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 10, 2008)

Last I checked Alaska has more then 12 members in the Legislature.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Nope



Yup, since 12 legislators do not get to decide for the entire Body. But hey you do not really care about rights and facts unless they involve a liberal right?


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Money quote:
> 
> *"Sarah Palin abused her power as governor"*



It's time to impeach her.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> I don't care what you "think".
> 
> Show me a bipartisan, State report from Arkansas, showing Clinton broke state civil law in the 1980s
> 
> ...



She's a politician.  Lack of character is a prerequisite.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> I don't care what you "think".
> 
> Show me a bipartisan, State report from Arkansas, showing Clinton broke state civil law in the 1980s
> 
> ...



And what about Sarah Palin BILLING the Alaskan taxpayers for her time campaigning as Vice President?


----------



## rayboyusmc (Oct 10, 2008)

Allready, the excuses begin.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> It's time to impeach her.



She broke the law, misled, and violated the public trust. 

That was the unanimous finding of a bipartisan legislative judicial committee. 


That's grounds for impeachment, by any standard.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> It's time to impeach her.



Which cant and wont be even considered until January when the Legislature returns. And then it will take the action of the ENTIRE body, not just 12 political hacks. I suspect the people will have a say to by calling and writing their representatives and voicing THEIR opinion.

This is nothing more than a political stunt just before the Presidential election. Just as was proclaimed early by it's chairman.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Nope



Guilty until proven innocent?


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

She broke no laws.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

She won't be impeached.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

They dont care.

She has an R after her name and that is all that matters.


----------



## rayboyusmc (Oct 10, 2008)

And she has been attacking Obama's character?

Maybe, he will pick Cindy instead.  She can buy the damn office.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> She won't be impeached.



No -she won't. This is al lthe same shit that we have been hearing about Bush for years now---impeach impeach. Someone needs to learn how to get rid of a grudge.


----------



## rayboyusmc (Oct 10, 2008)

> ENTIRE body, not just 12 political hacks.



Really, did you check to see that they are dems and repubs in the fucking hackery group.

More excuses.

Found in violation of the public trust.  Bad Sarah.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> Really, did you check to see that they are dems and repubs in the fucking hackery group.
> 
> More excuses.
> 
> Found in violation of the public trust.  Bad Sarah.



Violation of public trust would include every politician in office now. Big deal.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

they voted 12-0 to release a document. this proves nothing.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

wow just wow


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> She's a politician.  Lack of character is a prerequisite.




Please name one judicial body, court, or legislative committee that has ever found Obama guilty of abusing power, violating any ethics laws or civil service laws. 

If you come up empty, we're going to have to conclude that Barack Obama is more ethical and moral than poor Sarah.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Please name one judicial body, court, or legislative committee that has ever found Obama guilty of abusing power, violating any ethics laws or civil service laws.
> 
> If you come up empty, we're going to have to conclude that Barack Obama is more ethical and moral than poor Sarah.



A. She hasn't been found guilty yet.

B. Being found guilty or not doesn't mean one is more moral or ethical than another.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 10, 2008)

rayboyusmc said:


> Really, did you check to see that they are dems and repubs in the fucking hackery group.
> 
> More excuses.
> 
> Found in violation of the public trust.  Bad Sarah.



Has nothing to do with the fact she took on those republicans and embarressed the shit out of them. Political games is all it is.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Alaska legislature has voted 12-0 to release the investigator's report if Sarah Palin has abused her powers as governer of Alaska.
> 
> adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : Troopergate hearing (Updated: It's starting)






Wonder how much money Brock and ACORN paid them?


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> This is as it should be , the American people should have all the information to make their decision with.






yes, and that includes Brock's association with terrorist like Bill and Bernadett and the ACORN scoundrels.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> You're funny. The queen of disinformation wants the truth to be spread. Be sure to tell Barry how you feel about total disclosure too, would ya ?







rep rep rep..


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> They dont care.
> 
> They will forgive her and then spew hatred for Obama because he once worked with a guy who had a committed  crimes 40 years ago.







judged guilty without benefit of a trial. good little communist that you are.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> A. She hasn't been found guilty yet.
> 
> B. Being found guilty or not doesn't mean one is more moral or ethical than another.



Do you have any bipartisan reports showing that Barack Obama abused his office, and used it to engage in family vendettas? 

No you don't. 

This is the quickest flameout in political history.  I thought at worst, poor Sarah would be another Dan Quayle.   She's dangerously into Spiro Agnew territory now. 

This really calls into question John McCain's judgement, don't you think?  He's supposed to be the "experienced" one.  Why would he choose an inexperienced 18-month Governor with ethics problems?  That's not good judgement. 

Obama picked someone who had vast experience, and is emminently qualified to step into the commmander in chief role on a moments notice. 

Notice any contrast in the judgement, and management style of the two candidates?  Any at all?


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> I don't care what you "think".
> 
> Show me a bipartisan, State report from Arkansas, showing Clinton broke state civil law in the 1980s
> 
> ...






not half as much as brock's hanging out with terrorist bombers.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> A. She hasn't been found guilty yet.
> 
> B. Being found guilty or not doesn't mean one is more moral or ethical than another.



B is an excuse for when A comes true, which it has.

Why do you think the McCain/Palin came out with a report saying she was free the day before?

Oh yeah, if she is innocent then O.J was framed TWICE.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> And what about Sarah Palin BILLING the Alaskan taxpayers for her time campaigning as Vice President?






asswipe. do you think barry is billing us for his Senate pay?


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Please name one judicial body, court, or legislative committee that has ever found Obama guilty of abusing power, violating any ethics laws or civil service laws.
> 
> If you come up empty, we're going to have to conclude that Barack Obama is more ethical and moral than poor Sarah.






no we don't, blind asswipes like you might come to that conclusion. but that figures


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

WillowTree said:


> judged guilty without benefit of a trial. good little communist that you are.



Its the law of Alaska dude.

Its how they do it there.

question them if you dont like it.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> B is an excuse for when A comes true, which it has.
> 
> Why do you think the McCain/Palin came out with a report saying she was free the day before?
> 
> Oh yeah, if she is innocent then O.J was framed TWICE.



B is not an excuse for A. Your posting wasn't on here when I posted this.  I never said she was innocent.  It would be foolish of me to assume a politician was innocent.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Its the law of Alaska dude.
> 
> Its how they do it there.
> 
> question them if you dont like it.



She broke no law---------can't you even read ?


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> She broke no law---------can't you even read ?



Loopholes dillo. She abused power though, that much is proven.

And that's all you need really. Just the fact she abused her power alone.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

Alaska panel finds Palin abused power - Decision '08 - MSNBC.com


A legislative committee investigating Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has found she unlawfully abused her authority in firing the state's public safety commissioner


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Do you have any bipartisan reports showing that Barack Obama abused his office, and used it to engage in family vendettas?
> 
> No you don't.
> 
> ...



You don't know what I have.  
McCain has poor judgement.  I thought picking palin was reckless. I said that the day he picked her.  Still, you can't tell me that simply because Obama hasn't been charged that he is automatically morally superior to Palin.


----------



## Isolde (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Please elaborate as to what spurred this recent round of idiocy from you - or are you just trolling again? Does it make you feel better about yourself to insult someone?



Your news alerts are anything but. I'm sorry and I'll keep my comments to myself.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 10, 2008)

This is just sad at this point.  This investigation was started before Palin was ever chosen by McCain.  Palin stated she would cooperate with the investigation and then after being chosen as VP candidate began to obstruct it as much as possible.  Why not let people testify?  If it is just a partisan attack, why initially say you would cooperate?  Why would a committee of 10 rep. and 4 dem. be partisan against her?  Even if the rep. didn't like her, they would not sabotage the chance of an Alaskan V.P. ?  If it was a hack job, why not go the distance and find her guilty of illegally firing him?  Why not at least recommend a criminal investigation?  

It was a legit investigation.  She broke no laws.  She violated ethics rules.  Just a little folksy abuse of power.  

There is no reason to try to justify this woman's behavior.  She's petty.


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Its the law of Alaska dude.
> 
> Its how they do it there.
> 
> question them if you dont like it.





I thought you said she hasn't done anything illegal? Dood


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> Loopholes dillo. She abused power though, that much is proven.
> 
> And that's all you need really. Just the fact she abused her power alone.







hells bells, you've sat and watched a mountain of corruption pile up against Obamalama, and you worrry about abuse of power?


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

WillowTree said:


> hells bells, you've sat and watched a mountain of corruption pile up against Obamalama, and you worrry about abuse of power?



I've been the one saying hells bells on this board for days now. 

Difference between Obama and Palin is Palin was found GUILTY of ABUSE OF POWER.

Where's the panels finding Obama guilty of something?


----------



## WillowTree (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> I've been the one saying hells bells on this board for days now.
> 
> Difference between Obama and Palin is Palin was found GUILTY of ABUSE OF POWER.
> 
> Where's the panels finding Obama guilty of something?





they've crawled up his ass just as you have. His airplane stinks too.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

She's guilty of ethics violations. 

The firing of the trooper was lawful. 

It was the use of her official office to pursue personal family vendettas that was a misuse, abuse, and violation of the public trust, in accordance with alaskan state ethics law.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

WillowTree said:


> they've crawled up his ass just as you have. His airplane stinks too.



And so does McCain's choice of a VP. Least Obama can clean his airplane. 

By the way Willow, since you believe in Sarah Palin would you like to buy this bridge to nowhere? It's real real cheap.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> I've been the one saying hells bells on this board for days now.
> 
> Difference between Obama and Palin is Palin was found GUILTY of ABUSE OF POWER.
> 
> Where's the panels finding Obama guilty of something?



All politicians have abused their power at one time or another.  The fact they haven't been tried doesn't mean they haven't abused it.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

Its the old con montra whenever they get caught screwing the pooch. They claim everybody does it.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Its the old con montra whenever they get caught screwing the pooch. They claim everybody does it.



I'm not a con. And I maintain that everyone does it.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> All politicians have abused their power at one time or another.  The fact they haven't been tried doesn't mean they haven't abused it.



Really? All? Care to get me a list of all of them and their offenses?

Stop trying to excuse poor lwttle Sawwah's screwup by saying everybody does it.

Here's a joke for you:

What's the difference between what is considered a "Good" Republican and "Bad" Republican?

"Good" Republicans don't get caught.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> Its the old con montra whenever they get caught screwing the pooch. They claim everybody does it.



Some VP vetting process McCain  has, huh? 

You know Palin must have lied to McCain.  She must have told him not to worry about it, that she hadn't misused her official office to pursue personal vendettas. 

I bet McCain's pissed.  I know Karl Rove pushed him into picking Palin, but I still have enough respect for the old man to think he wouldn't have picker her if he knew she was guilty of ethics violations.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> I've been the one saying hells bells on this board for days now.
> 
> Difference between Obama and Palin is Palin was found GUILTY of ABUSE OF POWER.
> 
> Where's the panels finding Obama guilty of something?



Hell--Obama hasn't done ANYTHING ---NOTHING----ZIP---NADA---.

How in the hell can you assess a person who hasnt done anything but campaign. ??   He votes 'Present' .  WHOA baby !!  There's some real stab at making a change.
He can only wish he had the balls Sarah has.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> I'm not a con. And I maintain that everyone does it.



Quick Elvis! Everyone is doing it! And take Sawwah with you!


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Some VP vetting process McCain  has, huh?
> 
> You know Palin must have lied to McCain.  She must have told him not to worry about it, that she hadn't misused her official office to pursue personal vendettas.
> 
> I bet McCain's pissed.  I know Karl Rove pushed him into picking Palin, but I still have enough respect for the old man to think he wouldn't have picker her if he knew she was guilty of ethics violations.



Are there any other republican female governors?


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Isolde said:


> Your news alerts are anything but. I'm sorry and I'll keep my comments to myself.



I broke the news here before any of the major three 24 hour channels did. In fact, if you poll everyone on here, an overwhelming majority of them found out about this from me. I broke the story here on USMessageBoard, therefore.. umm... yeah. Go me!


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

Turn on MSNBC right now. Walt Monnigan is on.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> Hell--Obama hasn't done ANYTHING ---NOTHING----ZIP---NADA---.
> 
> How in the hell can you assess a person who hasnt done anything but campaign. ??   He votes 'Present' .  WHOA baby !!  There's some real stab at making a change.
> He can only wish he had the balls Sarah has.



Sarah doesn't have any balls, otherwise she would of allowed her people to testify. You know, the whole "I'm transparent" thing.

Obama hasn't gotten charged with anything as far as I know. 

Short of finding a dead hooker in the guy's trunk, Republicans are screwed come November 4th.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> I broke the news here before any of the major three 24 hour channels did. In fact, if you poll everyone on here, an overwhelming majority of them found out about this from me. I broke the story here on USMessageBoard, therefore.. umm... yeah. Go me!



 damn you're one desperate dude.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> Quick Elvis! Everyone is doing it! And take Sawwah with you!
> 
> View attachment 6069



weren't you the one whining about the "kill him" business?


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> weren't you the one whining about the "kill him" business?



I was joking, you've never heard the metaphor "So if everyone was going to jump off a bridge, would you do it?"

Hell, I'm constantly insulted here because of my age but I know such things like these.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 10, 2008)

> Has nothing to do with the fact she took on those republicans and embarressed the shit out of them. Political games is all it is.



Show me the evidence where she specifically embarrassed a majority of the members of the investigative committee.  Please provide the link.  Otherwise you're just blowing smoke.


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> I was joking, you've never heard the metaphor "So if everyone was going to jump off a bridge, would you do it?"
> 
> Hell, I'm constantly insulted here because of my age but I know such things like these.



Ok, I'll try to lighten up.


----------



## Yurt (Oct 10, 2008)

sounds like complete bull....not a single FACTUAL piece of evidence to substantiate that she abused her powers...



> The report found that Palin let the family grudge influence her decision-making *even if it was not the sole reason *Monegan was dismissed. "I feel vindicated," Monegan said. "It sounds like they've validated my belief and opinions. And that tells me I'm not totally out in left field."



this makes is factual that she had cause to fire him other than the alleged grudge, that is enough under the law to allow a governor to fire that employee



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



  she broke the law....but we don't recommend sanctions or criminal investigations....IOW, we don't want anyone else to review this....as even the guy fired admitted NO ONE told him to fire that guy....he ONLY FELT that what was wanted

complete farce...and the facts remain that he did indeed stay at his job after her husband allegedly made the initial alleged, wink, wink request:



> Monegan said he understood the Palins wanted Wooten fired. "I had this *kind of ominous feeling *that I may not be long for this job if I didn't somehow respond accordingly," Monegan told the investigator.
> 
> For *months afterward, Todd Palin filed complaints *about Wooten


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> Sarah doesn't have any balls, otherwise she would of allowed her people to testify. You know, the whole "I'm transparent" thing.
> 
> Obama hasn't gotten charged with anything as far as I know.
> 
> Short of finding a dead hooker in the guy's trunk, Republicans are screwed come November 4th.



I think everyone on here can agree that Sarah has no balls.


----------



## Isolde (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> damn you're one desperate dude.



Indeed, what would we do without David?


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

elvis3577 said:


> I think everyone on here can agree that Sarah has no balls.



We've certainly seen stranger things happen in this election.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Oct 10, 2008)

Here's the report:
http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/10/10/16/Branchflowerreport.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf

Findings are on page 8. Can someone tell me why I _shouldn't_ vote for McCain/Palin based on this?


----------



## elvis (Oct 10, 2008)

Robert_Santurri said:


> We've certainly seen stranger things happen in this election.



NO, nothing would trump a "Crying Game" moment.  sorry


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

Yurt said:


> sounds like complete bull....not a single FACTUAL piece of evidence to substantiate that she abused her powers...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





So you choose to ignore and dismiss a bi partisan panel who examined the evidence brougth to them by investiors because .......well , because you choose to?


----------



## Yurt (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> So you choose to ignore and dismiss a bi partisan panel who examined the evidence brougth to them by investiors because .......well , because you choose to?



read my post genius...i disputed the alleged evidence from the news and their own sources...obviously all you have is a conclusory retort that has no substantive support....shocker


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 10, 2008)

Yurt said:


> read my post genius...i disputed the alleged evidence from the news and their own sources...obviously all you have is a conclusory retort that has no substantive support....shocker




not a single FACTUAL piece of evidence to substantiate that she abused her powers


then you ignored the evidence


----------



## Yurt (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> not a single FACTUAL piece of evidence to substantiate that she abused her powers
> 
> 
> then you ignored the evidence



and you still fail to provide ANY...there was not one shred of factual evidence...only some guy felt a certain way...and then he remained on the job for MONTHS all the while todd palin is merely complaining as a regular citizen about this guys behavior...boohoo...the finding also said it was NOT the only reason he was fired...go away before you embarras yourself further

this is a nothing story


----------



## del (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Money quote:
> 
> *"Sarah Palin abused her power as governor"*



"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'd fire a guy that kept a drunk child abuser with a gun and a badge on staff, too.

go figure.

http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/552393.html


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Truthmatters said:


> not a single FACTUAL piece of evidence to substantiate that she abused her powers
> 
> 
> then you ignored the evidence



I knew you would pick up on that---being as practiced at it as you are,


----------



## Isolde (Oct 10, 2008)

del said:


> "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'd fire a guy that kept a drunk child abuser on staff, too.
> 
> go figure.



Not to mention, he was an insubordinate wanker who tried on more than one occasion to go over her head.


----------



## Yurt (Oct 10, 2008)

hey truthsplatters....she "fired" him.....



Palin offered Monegan a different job, as executive director of the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Board. He turned it down.

'Out of the blue,' top cop Monegan gets Palin's axe (7/13/08): Politics | adn.com

yep, that is an abuse of power


----------



## Yurt (Oct 10, 2008)

and where is that evidence truthiness?


----------



## Ravi (Oct 10, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Money quote:
> 
> *"Sarah Palin abused her power as governor"*


Wait a minute...didn't McCain already decide to grant her a full pardon?


----------



## Ravi (Oct 10, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Yup, since 12 legislators do not get to decide for the entire Body. But hey you do not really care about rights and facts unless they involve a liberal right?


Apparently only liberals care about the truth, right? Those sneaky republicans that voted against her are actually liberals in disguise.

What a moron you are. Absolutely and beyond a shadow of a doubt you are a stupid partisan ass.


----------



## Modbert (Oct 10, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Wait a minute...didn't McCain already decide to grant her a full pardon?



Didn't you get the memo?

Sarah Palin is a Maverick on a mission from God, Jesus gave her a full pardon.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Apparently only liberals care about the truth, right? Those sneaky republicans that voted against her are actually liberals in disguise.
> 
> What a moron you are. Absolutely and beyond a shadow of a doubt you are a stupid partisan ass.



You might wanna research the republicans who voted against her. This could backfire on ya !


----------



## Ravi (Oct 10, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> You might wanna research the republicans who voted against her. This could backfire on ya !


Oh, no doubt they are closeted gays.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

I love it. For one evening, and one evening only, the breaking news all over TV is about Palin and an investigation into her violation of ethics laws. Beyyyoooooteeefulll. 

This will be fodder for 2012, no doubt.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Article 15 said:


> I am hearing rumors that the investigation is turning up FAIL for Sarah Palin ...


yeah, read the report

"did Palin abuse her power?"

answer: "yes"

"what should we do about it?"

answer: "change the rules to give governor more powers"


LOL


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> I love it. For one evening, and one evening only, the breaking news all over TV is about Palin and an investigation into her violation of ethics laws. Beyyyoooooteeefulll.
> 
> This will be fodder for 2012, no doubt.


ROFLMAO
NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



read the report
i did


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 10, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Oh, no doubt they are closeted gays.



Moose lovers.


----------



## DavidS (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> ROFLMAO
> NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> ...



You read the full 1000 page report in that amount of time? I can't get through a 100 page book that quickly! DiveCon, you are an AMAZING intellectual - you must read at speeds unknown to mankind! Please, I beg of you... enlighten me to your abilities.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

DavidS said:


> You read the full 1000 page report in that amount of time? I can't get through a 100 page book that quickly! DiveCon, you are an AMAZING intellectual - you must read at speeds unknown to mankind! Please, I beg of you... enlighten me to your abilities.


its not 1000 pages
its 268
and you can skip a lot of the boring testimony pages


----------



## Chris (Oct 10, 2008)

I told you so.


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> its not 1000 pages
> its 268
> and you can skip a lot of the boring testimony pages



That's called skimming, not reading. And based on your posts, I'm assuming you skim a lot.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> That's called skimming, not reading. And based on your posts, I'm assuming you skim a lot.


i read the perttinent parts
try it sometime


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> i read the perttinent parts
> try it sometime



How do you know which parts are pertinent if you skipped it?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Chris said:


> I told you so.


did you read the recomendations?


you didnt tell us anything
you are a complete fucking moron
they recommended that the governors power be increased
thats NOT what you were looking for
there are NO criminal charges, not even a slap on the wrist


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> How do you know which parts are pertinent if you skipped it?


ok, thanks for proving you are as big a fucking moron as chris/kirk


----------



## Chris (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> did you read the recomendations?
> 
> 
> you didnt tell us anything
> ...



Apology accepted.


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> ok, thats for proving you are as big a fucking moron like chris/kirk


That sentence doesn't even make sense. Usually one makes grammatical mistakes like that when one is rattled. Are you rattled DiveCon?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> That sentence doesn't even make sense. Usually one makes grammatical mistakes like that when one is rattled. Are you rattled DiveCon?


go look again


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Chris said:


> Apology accepted.


none was given

are you really more of a moron than i previously thought?


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> That sentence doesn't even make sense. Usually one makes grammatical mistakes like that when one is rattled. Are you rattled DiveCon?



_Last edited by DiveCon; Today at 11:41 PM._


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Posting in a hasty frenzy - a clear indication that DiveCon is rattled.


----------



## Chris (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> none was given
> 
> are you really more of a moron than i previously thought?



I was right, she abused her power.

Now be man enough to admit it.


----------



## Shogun (Oct 10, 2008)




----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Chris said:


> I was right, she abused her power.
> 
> Now be man enough to admit it.


did you see what they recomended?
to give her MORE POWERS
LOL
you FAILED


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> _Last edited by DiveCon; Today at 11:41 PM._
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Posting in a hasty frenzy - a clear indication that DiveCon is rattled.


i made several edits, cause i missed some when i corrected the first time
that doesnt mean i'm rattled at all, it means i type like crap
LOL
and waiting on new lens for my glasses because these progressive lens suck
and they cant replace before monday
so i dont see as clearly as i would like, and that makes reading a little hard right now



damn, too much personal info for the internet


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> did you see what they recomended?
> to give her MORE POWERS
> LOL
> you FAILED



Did you see what they concluded? SHE ABUSED HER POWERS!!!!!!

But based on your posts, I understand. You like being abused.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Did you see what they concluded? SHE ABUSED HER POWERS!!!!!!
> 
> <snipped assholes bullshit>.


uh, aparently because her powers were too limited, since they recomend increasing her powers


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> uh, aparently because her powers were too limited, since they recomend increasing her powers



Riiiiight, they need to take out that rule about abuse for personal or financial gain. Obviously that part gets in the way of an elected official doing their job.


----------



## kane3o1 (Oct 10, 2008)

Todd Palin is a hoe. He's dirty also. Every time they show him on screen, he's always smiling and crap but I knew something was fishy about him; now we know -_-


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 10, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Riiiiight, they need to take out that rule about abuse for personal or financial gain. Obviously that part gets in the way of an elected official doing their job.


you didnt read the report


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 10, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you didnt read the report



I did read the report. Show me where in the recommendations that they recommended expanding her powers. All they said was that the Alaskan law clarify "government agencies" and that EVERYONE be given feedback in police misconduct investigations. Go on, douche, find it.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> I did read the report. Show me where in the recommendations that they recommended expanding her powers. All they said was that the Alaskan law clarify "government agencies" and that EVERYONE be given feedback in police misconduct investigations. Go on, douche, find it.


LOL
you didnt read it all on the recomendation then

unless you dont understand, that also gives the Governor more power
LOL


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> LOL
> you didnt read it all on the recomendation then
> 
> unless you dont understand, that also gives the Governor more power
> LOL



You can always tell when someone is busted after they've been called out on their bullshit. They always write LOL, LOL alot. I've got the report open in a .pdf file, Recommendations p. 78, no such thing about expanding her powers exists. DiveCon has a reading comprehension problem.

"The First Recommendation
The legislature should consider ameding AS 23.30.107(b)(1) to require that a "governmental agency" that seeks to acquire medical or rehabilitation records of an employee first establish a reasonable relationship between the request for the records and the purpose for obtaining the records. Additionally, the term "governmental agency" should be defined in AS 23.30.395.

The Second Recommendation
The legislature should consider amending AS 39.25.080 to permit those who file complaints against peace officers to receive some feedback about the status and outcome of their complaint."


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> You can always tell when someone is busted after they've been called out on their bullshit. They always write LOL, LOL alot. I've got the report open in a .pdf file, Recommendations p. 78, no such thing about expanding her powers exists. DiveCon has a reading comprehension problem.
> 
> "The First Recommendation
> The legislature should consider ameding AS 23.30.107(b)(1) to require that a "governmental agency" that seeks to acquire medical or rehabilitation records of an employee first establish a reasonable relationship between the request for the records and the purpose for obtaining the records. Additionally, the term "governmental agency" should be defined in AS 23.30.395.
> ...


is the governor not a citizen?


thus YOU are a dumbass


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

^^^^^

LINK:
http://download2.legis.state.ak.us/DOWNLOAD.pdf


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> uh, aparently because her powers were too limited, since they recomend increasing her powers


No they didn't.

"The First Recommendation
The legislature should consider ameding AS 23.30.107(b)(1) to require that a "governmental agency" that seeks to acquire medical or rehabilitation records of an employee first establish a reasonable relationship between the request for the records and the purpose for obtaining the records. Additionally, the term "governmental agency" should be defined in AS 23.30.395.

The Second Recommendation
The legislature should consider amending AS 39.25.080 to permit those who file complaints against peace officers to receive some feedback about the status and outcome of their complaint."




			
				DiveCon said:
			
		

> is the governor not a citizen?


 You are so fucking PWNED.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> ^^^^^
> 
> LINK:
> http://download2.legis.state.ak.us/DOWNLOAD.pdf


i already read it dumbass

and what i said is correct
you just dont like the way i said it
and i was playing you for the dumbass you are


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> No they didn't.
> 
> "The First Recommendation
> The legislature should consider ameding AS 23.30.107(b)(1) to require that a "governmental agency" that seeks to acquire medical or rehabilitation records of an employee first establish a reasonable relationship between the request for the records and the purpose for obtaining the records. Additionally, the term "governmental agency" should be defined in AS 23.30.395.
> ...


no, actually, YOU are
ROFLMAO


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> no, actually, YOU are
> ROFLMAO



Show me where??? Where in the recommendations did they recommend to EXPAND THE GOVERNOR'S POWERS AS YOU'VE BEEN STATING IN EVERY THREAD??????? All you have is denial backed up by LOL and ROFLMAO.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Show me where??? Where in the recommendations did they recommend to EXPAND THE GOVERNOR'S POWERS AS YOU'VE BEEN STATING IN EVERY THREAD??????? All you have is denial backed up by LOL and ROFLMAO.


are they NOT increasing the powers of EVERY citizen?
why yes, they are

is not the GOvernor a citizen

why, yes, she is

PWN3D

i said it exactly the way i did because i KNEW some asshole like you would do just what you did


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

Oh and now you gave me a negative rep because you have nothing else!!!!!!!!!!!! 


Seriously, you should give up the internets. You truly suck at it.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Oh and now you gave me a negative rep because you have nothing else!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> Seriously, you should give up the internets. You truly suck at it.


i just PWN3D your ass
LOL

and now you whine publicly about a neg rep


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> i just PWN3D your ass
> LOL
> 
> and now you whine publically about a neg rep


You PWNED nothing. You stated numerous times that you read the report and that they recommended to expand the Governor's powers. After being called out on it, now you're spinning and trying to say that they recommended to expand every citizen's powers. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Even the staunchest conservative can read this thread and your bullshit claims and see that you got bitch slapped.

My friend, you have been thoroughly thread raped.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> You PWNED nothing. You stated numerous times that you read the report and that they recommended to expand the Governor's powers. After being called out on it, now you're spinning and trying to say that they recommended to expand every citizen's powers. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
> 
> Even the staunchest conservative can read this thread and your bullshit claims and see that you got bitch slapped.
> 
> My friend, you have been thoroughly thread raped.


nope, you got PWN3D
just admit it
i set you up and slammed you down
actually, i expected someone else to get nailed with it, but you were the first
i still have a shot on another board
LOL
face it, i set you by claiming it was expanding the powers of the GOvernor, when it was expanding the powers of every citizen to get the results of the investigations into complaints made
the Governor also being a citizen also gives her that power


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

Look, I have to say that's a complete misrepresentation of what the report recommends.  It says citizens who file a complaint should get more feedback.  That's tidying up a flew in the system, it's not giving the governor more power.

Politically this is a disaster for Palin and McCain.

Palin has been found to have abused her public office for personal gain.  That's unethical.   Palin acted unethically.  She has also shown a propensity to using public office to bully individuals.  She is not of sound character to occupy the second highest public office in the US.

That is a political disaster.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Look, I have to say that's a complete misrepresentation of what the report recommends. It says citizens who file a complaint should get more feedback. That's tidying up a flew in the system, it's not giving the governor more power.
> 
> Politically this is a disaster for Palin and McCain.
> 
> ...


it was a trick, i pulled it off
LOL

and as for Palin abusing her power
hmm, no recomendations for any punishment
thats very telling
as in had the reports been more open then there would have been no abuse


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> nope, you got PWN3D
> just admit it
> i set you up and slammed you down
> actually, i expected someone else to get nailed with it, but you were the first
> ...



Riiiight, the "ol' it was a trap all along" defense. Ummm, sure son, like that's ever worked on the internets before. 

Let's rehash (because this is so hilarious). You stated the panel RECOMMENDED TO EXPAND HER POWERS, in more than one thread, mind you. Then got called out on it.

The FACTS: The legislature NEVER recommended to EXPAND THE GOVERNOR'S POWERS.

Face it son, you got ass raped and the only comeback you had was LOL, ROFLMAO, and Neg Rep. You lose!!!!


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Alaska legislature has voted 12-0 to release the investigator's report if Sarah Palin has abused her powers as governer of Alaska.
> 
> adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : Troopergate hearing (Updated: It's starting)



Assclown...


http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/10...r_Report_10-10-08.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf

Tell me again what powers Branchflower has?


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Look, I have to say that's a complete misrepresentation of what the report recommends.  It says citizens who file a complaint should get more feedback.  That's tidying up a flew in the system, it's not giving the governor more power.
> 
> Politically this is a disaster for Palin and McCain.
> 
> ...



Actually, Dive Con was only tricking us. What he meant to do was fool us into thinking that the legislature recommended to expand the governor's powers when in actuality they recommended everyone's powers be expanded by giving them feedback whenever they file a police report.  

Gotta watch out for that tricky DiveCon, he's such an evil genius. 

[/sarcasm]


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Riiiight, the "ol' it was a trap all along" defense. Ummm, sure son, like that's ever worked on the internets before.
> 
> Let's rehash (because this is so hilarious). You stated the panel RECOMMENDED TO EXPAND HER POWERS, in more than one thread, mind you. Then got called out on it.
> 
> ...


LOL

keep denying it
it might make you feel better
i figured it would be chris that would fall in the trap
LOL


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Actually, Dive Con was only tricking us. What he meant to do was fool us into thinking that the legislature recommended to expand the governor's powers when in actuality they recommended everyone's powers be expanded by giving them feedback whenever they file a police report.
> 
> Gotta watch out for that tricky DiveCon, he's such an evil genius.
> 
> [/sarcasm]


i PWN3D you
LOL


----------



## Dirt McGirt (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> i PWN3D you
> LOL



Let's put that to a poll.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves - I must be missing something here:



> Quote:Originally Posted by DavidS
> Alaska legislature has voted 12-0 to release the investigator's report if Sarah Palin has abused her powers as governer of Alaska.
> 
> adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : Troopergate hearing (Updated: It's starting)
> ...



Now, can you tell me what the link between your question and David's post and the report is?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Let's put that to a poll.


no thanks
this board has way more people on your side than mine
LOL
you just dont like it that you fell into the trap i set


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

Dirt McGirt said:


> Let's put that to a poll.



You can't, Mani isn't around.


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> jreeves - I must be missing something here:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, can you tell me what the link between your question and David's post and the report is?



It's time to impeach her.-----David S

What on a flawed legal basis and a man who has no power what-so-ever?Lmao


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> It's time to impeach her.-----David S
> 
> What on a flawed legal basis and a man who has no power what-so-ever?Lmao



Okay, I don't know what the impeachment process is in Alaska or what the process is for - what's that word meaning you want to get the governor back so they can be booted out?

Anyway - the prosecutor was tasked with getting evidence of facts.  He was working like a criminal investigator.  You know the weird thing?  Most criminal investigation work doesn't require legislative powers.  My old detective colleagues would jump up and down at me for that but it's true.  Uniformed cops need more powers than a detective.  When you're a detective you go around and talk to people and get statements and then you work out what sort of evidence you have an if it's admissible in a criminal court.

This bloke was doing much the same thing.  But he didn't have to worry about admissibility of evidence.  But he did have to worry about relevance because anything that isn't relevant is _prima facie_ inadmissible because it's worthless.  He looked for and found relevant evidence.  He then had to come to a set of findings or conclusions which have to be drawn from the evidence.

He did that and he reported on it.  The panel, reading his report, agreed.

The evidence is there.  Palin abused her office as governor.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Okay, I don't know what the impeachment process is in Alaska or what the process is for - what's that word meaning you want to get the governor back so they can be booted out?
> 
> Anyway - the prosecutor was tasked with getting evidence of facts.  He was working like a criminal investigator.  You know the weird thing?  Most criminal investigation work doesn't require legislative powers.  My old detective colleagues would jump up and down at me for that but it's true.  Uniformed cops need more powers than a detective.  When you're a detective you go around and talk to people and get statements and then you work out what sort of evidence you have an if it's admissible in a criminal court.
> 
> ...


yet no charges were recomended, why is that?


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yet no charges were recomended, why is that?



Why would anyone believe anything you say?


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Okay, I don't know what the impeachment process is in Alaska or what the process is for - what's that word meaning you want to get the governor back so they can be booted out?
> 
> Anyway - the prosecutor was tasked with getting evidence of facts.  He was working like a criminal investigator.  You know the weird thing?  Most criminal investigation work doesn't require legislative powers.  My old detective colleagues would jump up and down at me for that but it's true.  Uniformed cops need more powers than a detective.  When you're a detective you go around and talk to people and get statements and then you work out what sort of evidence you have an if it's admissible in a criminal court.
> 
> ...



Note: Monegan served at the pleasure of the Governor. But, increasingly, the "serves at the pleasure of" phrase only applies to Democrats  not Republican leaders.

*Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...," *Monegan joined with his friend and Obama operative Hollis French and  at the apparent urging of French  decided to fight his firing and charge Palin's staff with misconduct. Another apparent friend of French's  Special Prosecutor Steven Branchflower  allowed the state senator to interfere with the witness subpoena list. Of course, this is illegal. But, bear in mind these are Democrats  who appear to be immune from any and all laws they don't like. The facts are that this is a bogus and partisan "investigation" into nothing. But, the Obama adherents are apparently allowed to do and say anything they like. Stalin is alive and well in Alaska.

These are the facts, folks. If nothing else, this one incident proves Governor Palin truly DID fight against the Alaska good ol' boy network and they don't like it. They don't like it one bit! So far, everything the left-wing has thrown at her has been proven false. But, that doesn't stop them from continuing to attempt to manufacture scandals where none exist. The more ethical people are, the harder the unscrupulous and dishonorable entities attempt to destroy them. Alaska Governor and VP candidate Sarah Palin must surely be as principled as anyone who ever lived.
Obama operative fires off another bogus scandal against Palin

Wink, Wink....he has no power but to defame....


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves, your girl is done. 

Stick a fork in her.


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> jreeves, your girl is done.
> 
> Stick a fork in her.



Really based on an Obama backer with no legal authority to make a legal finding?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> jreeves, your girl is done.
> 
> Stick a fork in her.


where's the impeachment?
where is even a recomendation of a charge?


----------



## CrimsonWhite (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> Why would anyone believe anything you say?



He's more believable than you Kirk.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> Really based on an Obama backer with no legal authority to make a legal finding?


whats even funnier is he didnt even recomend a charge


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

CrimsonWhite said:


> He's more believable than you Kirk.


thank you


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

CrimsonWhite said:


> He's more believable than you Kirk.



I was right. She abused her power. She violated the law.

None of you is man enough to admit it.

What a bunch of pussies.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> I was right. She abused her power. She violated the law.
> 
> None of you is man enough to admit it.
> 
> What a bunch of pussies.


what law did she violate?
and if so, where are the charges


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

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.

Panel: Palin abused power in trooper case - CNN.com


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


Obama operative fires off another bogus scandal against Palin
Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...," 

Like I said this is what Monegan said before an Obama surrogate, Hollis French got a hold of him.


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> Obama operative fires off another bogus scandal against Palin
> Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...,"
> 
> Like I said this is what Monegan said before an Obama surrogate, Hollis French got a hold of him.



Not man enough to admit you were wrong.

Coward.


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> Not man enough to admit you were wrong.
> 
> Coward.



You can't admit the whole basis of the investigation is politics?


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> You can't admit the whole basis of the investigation is politics?



You are a liar and a coward.

The legislative committee was made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats. Steve Branchflower, the prosecutor, has 28 years of experience and a stellar reputation.


----------



## jreeves (Oct 11, 2008)

Chris said:


> You are a liar and a coward.
> 
> The legislative committee was made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats. Steve Branchflower, the prosecutor, has 28 years of experience and a stellar reputation.



Obama operative fires off another bogus scandal against Palin

Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...,"

Why did Monegan state this then?


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> yet no charges were recomended, why is that?



No idea.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> Note: Monegan served at the pleasure of the Governor. But, increasingly, the "serves at the pleasure of" phrase only applies to Democrats &#8212; not Republican leaders.
> 
> *Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...," *Monegan joined with his friend and Obama operative Hollis French and &#8212; at the apparent urging of French &#8212; decided to fight his firing and charge Palin's staff with misconduct. Another apparent friend of French's &#8212; Special Prosecutor Steven Branchflower &#8212; allowed the state senator to interfere with the witness subpoena list. Of course, this is illegal. But, bear in mind these are Democrats &#8212; who appear to be immune from any and all laws they don't like. The facts are that this is a bogus and partisan "investigation" into nothing. But, the Obama adherents are apparently allowed to do and say anything they like. Stalin is alive and well in Alaska.
> 
> ...



Why did you quote me and then not address a single point in the quote?


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> Really based on an Obama backer with no legal authority to make a legal finding?



He found Palin breached a statute.  She abused her office.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> You can't admit the whole basis of the investigation is politics?



What politics?  The evidence is there, from an independent investigator. Do you think he and the witnesses are lying?


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

jreeves said:


> Obama operative fires off another bogus scandal against Palin
> 
> Although Monegan had previously stated: "For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff ...,"
> 
> Why did Monegan state this then?



Are you paying attention?

Palin abused her office.  Read the report.  Heck read the online newspapers.

Face facts.


----------



## Stoner (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Face facts.



Here's a fact...Palin didn't violate any laws.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

Stoner said:


> Here's a fact...Palin didn't violate any laws.



And you know this because.....?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> And you know this because.....?


what charges were recomended to be pressed?


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> what charges were recomended to be pressed?



None.

So?


----------



## Stoner (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> And you know this because.....?



You do know this report hasn't even been endorsed, right?



> But the panel of lawmakers voted to release the report, although not without dissension. *There was no immediate vote on whether to endorse its findings.*



Panel Finds Palin Abused Power


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> None.
> 
> So?


not having any charges tells me there was either nothing illegal, or what ever the abuse was was minor
of course, YMMV


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

Stoner said:


> You do know this report hasn't even been endorsed, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Panel Finds Palin Abused Power



So what?  The report has been compiled and presented.  It finds that Palin abused her office.  It also finds a few other things as well of course.  

So, what is the "endorsement" process going to do?  Is it to take note of the findings that state legislation should be changed?  That would be helpful.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> what charges were recomended to be pressed?



Was there authority for Branchflower to recommend so?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Was there authority for Branchflower to recommend so?


he recomended laws be changed
why couldnt he also recomend charges


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> he recomended laws be changed
> why couldnt he also recomend charges



I suppose it could be something to do with the terms of contract.

I read the terms. I didn't see anything about recommending a prosecution.

I would imagine that's the job of the DA.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> I suppose it could be something to do with the terms of contract.
> 
> I read the terms. I didn't see anything about recommending a prosecution.
> 
> I would imagine that's the job of the DA.


link to those terms?


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> link to those terms?



It's in the pdf of the report at page 2.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> It's in the pdf of the report at page 2.


"to recomend any action for the legialature"

sounds pretty broad to me


btw, "any action" would include charges to be pressed

btw#2, he found an "abuse of power" based on the part of the law that said for "personal gain" yet didnt prove any gain


----------



## strollingbones (Oct 11, 2008)

here is the time article:


What the Troopergate Report Really Says - TIME


part of it:

Those answers were expected, given that most of the best pieces of evidence have been part of the public record for months. The result is not a mortal wound to Palin, nor does it put her at much risk of being forced to leave the ticket her presence succeeded in energizing. 

But the Branchflower report still makes for good reading, if only because it convincingly answers a question nobody had even thought to ask: Is the Palin administration shockingly amateurish? Yes, it is. Disturbingly so. 

The 263 pages of the report show a co-ordinated application of pressure on Monegan so transparent and ham-handed that it was almost certain to end in public embarrassment for the governor. The only surprise is that Troopergate is national news, not just a sorry piece of political gristle to be chewed on by Alaska politicos over steaks at Anchorage's Club Paris. 

A harsh verdict? Consider the report's findings. Not only did people at almost every level of the Palin administration engage in repeated inappropriate contact with Walt Monegan and other high-ranking officials at the Department of Public Safety, but Monegan and his peers constantly warned these Palin disciples that the contact was inappropriate and probably unlawful. Still, the emails and calls continued  in at least one instance on recorded state trooper phone lines.


----------



## strollingbones (Oct 11, 2008)

div con time summary...go read it....why are yall up so early....i know dir is in oz....but arent you in the states divcon?  its all new riff raff at 5 am eh?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

strollingbones said:


> div con time summary...go read it....why are yall up so early....i know dir is in oz....but arent you in the states divcon? its all new riff raff at 5 am eh?


up late 

and why should i read Time's summery when i can read the full report(and have)


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> "to recomend any action for the legialature"
> 
> sounds pretty broad to me
> 
> ...



It depends how the term "personal gain" is defined in the relevant statute.

The action for the legislature is also interesting.  I don't know if the legislature can prosecute for a breach of a statute or whether that would be the job of a DA or someone similar.  The recommendations for legislative change obviously fall to the legislature.


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> nope, you got PWN3D
> just admit it
> i set you up and slammed you down
> actually, i expected someone else to get nailed with it, but you were the first
> ...


I'm embarrassed for you.


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Look, I have to say that's a complete misrepresentation of what the report recommends.  It says citizens who file a complaint should get more feedback.  That's tidying up a flew in the system, it's not giving the governor more power.
> 
> Politically this is a disaster for Palin and McCain.
> 
> ...


It won't matter to those that support the McCain/Palin ticket...especially those types on the video links Silence provided yesterday. Hopefully McCain won't expect the rest of the country to swallow this abuse of power and will replace Palin with another VP pick.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I'm embarrassed for you.


you should be embarrassed for yourself


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It won't matter to those that support the McCain/Palin ticket...especially those types on the video links Silence provided yesterday. Hopefully McCain won't expect the rest of the country to swallow this abuse of power and will replace Palin with another VP pick.



If it's acceptable for the governor of a state to use their office for personal (in this case - family) gain then there are problems.

When Spitzer was found to be banging expensive call girls he had to go.  Palin has used her office to conduct a family vendetta against her former brother in law and has been found to have breached state law in so doing.  Spitzer had to go and did go.  What happens to Palin is up to the Alaska legislature.  But she was found to have broken the law.  Yet here we see the most painstaking efforts at denying she did anything wrong.  That's hyper-partisan politics.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> If it's acceptable for the governor of a state to use their office for personal (in this case - family) gain then there are problems.
> 
> When Spitzer was found to be banging expensive call girls he had to go.  Palin has used her office to conduct a family vendetta against her former brother in law and has been found to have breached state law in so doing.  Spitzer had to go and did go.  What happens to Palin is up to the Alaska legislature.  But she was found to have broken the law.  Yet here we see the most painstaking efforts at denying she did anything wrong.  That's hyper-partisan politics.


what was the gain?


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> If it's acceptable for the governor of a state to use their office for personal (in this case - family) gain then there are problems.
> 
> When Spitzer was found to be banging expensive call girls he had to go.  Palin has used her office to conduct a family vendetta against her former brother in law and has been found to have breached state law in so doing.  Spitzer had to go and did go.  What happens to Palin is up to the Alaska legislature.  But she was found to have broken the law.  Yet here we see the most painstaking efforts at denying she did anything wrong.  That's hyper-partisan politics.


Agreed. We shall see if the Republican leadership has enough respect for the country and themselves to force her off the ticket.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 11, 2008)

Ravi said:


> Agreed. We shall see if the Republican leadership has enough respect for the country and themselves to force her off the ticket.



An aussie from Victoria and the board retard agree on something, how drool.


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> An aussie from Victoria and the board retard agree on something, how drool.



It's droll, you moron. Of course since you are no doubt drooling at this moment it's understandable how you made the slip.

Aren't you just loving the GOP these days?


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It's droll, you moron. Of course since you are no doubt drooling at this moment it's understandable how you made the slip.
> 
> Aren't you just loving the GOP these days?


shitting on Americans again i see

hypocrite


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 11, 2008)

Ravi said:


> It's droll, you moron. Of course since you are no doubt drooling at this moment it's understandable how you made the slip.
> 
> Aren't you just loving the GOP these days?



Careful dear we do not want that major methane explosion on a Saturday morning.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> what was the gain?



Unfortunately for her the terms of the statute are so broad they encompass the efforts - by her husband who isn't subject to the statute - to get his ex-brother in law kicked out of the Alaska State Troopers.  You mentioned omission.  Quite right.  Again the broad terms of the statute gather her in.  She apparently needed to act to stop her husband continuing his actions and she didn't.

Now, putting things in perspective.  She won't be charge criminally.  Nor should she I think.  If she weren't campaigning for VP then anyone hearing this story would make the usual jokes about Alaska (probably the same jokes we make here about isolated areas but with snow instead of sand) then this would be a ripple in Alaska politics.  I would go so far as to think that no-one would be thinking about recall let alone impeachment.

But it's all fair game in an campaign process that emphasises character.

I'd like to see that Alaska statute here but there would be no chance of it.


----------



## Gray (Oct 11, 2008)

DavidS said:


> Please elaborate as to what spurred this recent round of idiocy from you - or are you just trolling again? Does it make you feel better about yourself to insult someone?



Please paste and copy the part of the report that states she broke the law.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> Unfortunately for her the terms of the statute are so broad they encompass the efforts - by her husband who isn't subject to the statute - to get his ex-brother in law kicked out of the Alaska State Troopers.  You mentioned omission.  Quite right.  Again the broad terms of the statute gather her in.  She apparently needed to act to stop her husband continuing his actions and she didn't.
> 
> Now, putting things in perspective.  She won't be charge criminally.  Nor should she I think.  If she weren't campaigning for VP then anyone hearing this story would make the usual jokes about Alaska (probably the same jokes we make here about isolated areas but with snow instead of sand) then this would be a ripple in Alaska politics.  I would go so far as to think that no-one would be thinking about recall let alone impeachment.
> 
> ...


you do realize that if the trooper(Wooten) had been fired it would have been detremental to her families finances
specifically her sister and her nephew
since Wooten would then have been out of work, there would have been no income from which to draw child support


kinda kills that meme


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you do realize that if the trooper(Wooten) had been fired it would have been detremental to her families finances
> specifically her sister and her nephew
> since Wooten would then have been out of work, there would have been no income from which to draw child support
> 
> ...


 Is that the official McCain press release, she didn't want her brother-in-law fired?


----------



## Dr Grump (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you do realize that if the trooper(Wooten) had been fired it would have been detremental to her families finances
> specifically her sister and her nephew
> since Wooten would then have been out of work, there would have been no income from which to draw child support
> 
> ...



Strawman.

So, why did she try and have him fired for then? Surely his boss (who is after all the main victim in all this) would have happily fired the trooper if he was incompetent. Why wouldn't he? he didn't, so your vindictive "hockey mom" decided to act like a tosser. Go figure - a religous neocon whackjob acting like a tosser. Unbelievable!


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 11, 2008)

Dr Grump said:


> Strawman.
> 
> So, why did she try and have him fired for then? Surely his boss (who is after all the main victim in all this) would have happily fired the trooper if he was incompetent. Why wouldn't he? he didn't, so your vindictive "hockey mom" decided to act like a tosser. Go figure - a religous neocon whackjob acting like a tosser. Unbelievable!


how the fuck is that a strawman?
wow you are being even more of an idiot that usual

because he made the rest of the troopers look bad
it was bad for the state

and his boss, was fired because he wasnt doing HIS job


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

RetiredGySgt said:


> An aussie from Victoria and the board retard agree on something, how drool.



Rock, I'll take a lot of shit from you before I give you a drubbing but calling me "from Victoria" is going too fucking far!  Get yer baseball bat out, yer gunna need it. 

Missed it earlier - just as well I'm in a good mood though.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

DiveCon said:


> you do realize that if the trooper(Wooten) had been fired it would have been detremental to her families finances
> specifically her sister and her nephew
> since Wooten would then have been out of work, there would have been no income from which to draw child support
> 
> ...



No meme old son, right there in the report.  And who's not to say old Toddy boy is too dumb to realise it anyway? 

Come on Todd and the Mrs would have slung a few bob at them.  Jeez that sound I hear, is it, yes, it is.....scraping, yes definitely scraping.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 11, 2008)

Diuretic said:


> No meme old son, right there in the report.  And who's not to say old Toddy boy is too dumb to realise it anyway?
> 
> Come on Todd and the Mrs would have slung a few bob at them.  Jeez that sound I hear, is it, yes, it is.....scraping, yes definitely scraping.



YA  Sarah is a real tyrant for trying to protect her sister from an abusive asshole. She should have let the authorities handle it. Those TROs always work so well.


----------



## jschuck12001 (Oct 11, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> YA  Sarah is a real tyrant for trying to protect her sister from an abusive asshole. She should have let the authorities handle it. Those TROs always work so well.



Stop making excuses, there is a right way and a wrong way to do something, if the guy was so bad then why couldnt they get rid of him without abusing power.  Your so fricken hard headed, you would like Palin no matter what and you have proved that time and time with your posts.  Just another Angry woman voting for bullshit.


----------



## dilloduck (Oct 11, 2008)

jschuck12001 said:


> Stop making excuses, there is a right way and a wrong way to do something, if the guy was so bad then why couldnt they get rid of him without abusing power.  Your so fricken hard headed, you would like Palin no matter what and you have proved that time and time with your posts.  Just another Angry woman voting for bullshit.



Just like there is a right place and a wrong place to get a blow job ?  And a right place and a wrong place to lie about it ? As soon as you are willing to set some standards that don't flip flop to your advantage , I'm more than willing to play.


----------



## Diuretic (Oct 11, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> YA  Sarah is a real tyrant for trying to protect her sister from an abusive asshole. She should have let the authorities handle it. Those TROs always work so well.



So it's okay for someone to call on the Governor's office to help them out personally?  Alaskans will be happy with that no doubt.  She's going to be a busy girl is your Sarah.


----------



## Truthmatters (Oct 11, 2008)

they think it makes her a Maverick to break the laws she swore on the bible to protect.

Oh the Mavericky goodness.


----------



## Red Dawn (Oct 11, 2008)

dilloduck said:


> YA  Sarah is a real tyrant for trying to protect her sister from an abusive asshole. She should have let the authorities handle it. Those TROs always work so well.




Now I understand why you're a republican. 

Theoretically speaking, if you worked for a credit rating agency, you would have no problem using your employer's power, to screw up the credit of an ex-wife or girlfriend, and you would find nothing ethically wrong with that.


----------



## Gray (Oct 11, 2008)

Red Dawn said:


> Now I understand why you're a republican.
> 
> Theoretically speaking, if you worked for a credit rating agency, you would have no problem using your employer's power, to screw up the credit of an ex-wife or girlfriend, and you would find nothing ethically wrong with that.



Pull some more crap from outer space, Captain Space Cadet.


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 12, 2008)

> Pull some more crap from outer space, Captain Space Cadet.
> Reply With Quote


He said theoretically.  If the poster does not find anything wrong with Palin using her authority as governor to pursue a personal agenda of destroying a trooper's livelihood because she didn't like him, then the principle should apply to the credit agency example given.
You can disagree that it reflects the same values, but please explain how it is different and discuss it reasonably rather than spitting out inane drivel.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 12, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> He said theoretically.  If the poster does not find anything wrong with Palin using her authority as governor to pursue a personal agenda of destroying a trooper's livelihood because she didn't like him, then the principle should apply to the credit agency example given.
> You can disagree that it reflects the same values, but please explain how it is different and discuss it reasonably rather than spitting out inane drivel.


but thats not the case
someone with Wootens record SHOULDNT be in law enforcement


----------



## N4mddissent (Oct 12, 2008)

> someone with Wootens record SHOULDNT be in law enforcement


Can you give me a link to his record.  I've found a few documents, but more would give me a better overall picture.  Primary sources are preferred.


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 12, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Can you give me a link to his record.  I've found a few documents, but more would give me a better overall picture.  Primary sources are preferred.


are you serious?


----------



## Chris (Oct 12, 2008)

N4mddissent said:


> Can you give me a link to his record.  I've found a few documents, but more would give me a better overall picture.  Primary sources are preferred.



Here's a great link to his record...

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/li...721/20080721_111415_PalinLetterofRecomend.pdf


----------



## DiveCon (Oct 12, 2008)

Chris said:


> Here's a great link to his record...
> 
> http://extras.mnginteractive.com/li...721/20080721_111415_PalinLetterofRecomend.pdf


from 8 years ago
and likely before the facts were known
leave it to you to pull up BS like this


----------

