Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
LOLRiiiight, 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!!!!
i PWN3D youActually, 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
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)
Assclown...
http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/10/...ffiliate.7.pdf
Tell me again what powers Branchflower has?
no thanksLet's put that to a poll.
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
yet no charges were recomended, why is that?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.
yet no charges were recomended, why is that?
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.
jreeves, your girl is done.
Stick a fork in her.
where's the impeachment?jreeves, your girl is done.
Stick a fork in her.
Why would anyone believe anything you say?
whats even funnier is he didnt even recomend a chargeReally based on an Obama backer with no legal authority to make a legal finding?
thank youHe's more believable than you Kirk.
He's more believable than you Kirk.
what law did she violate?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.
