Headlines the Palin email breach as a "dirty trick", implying it was a Democratic ploy. Interestingly, the article it points to has this paragraph:

"The disclosure Wednesday raises new questions about the propriety of the Palin administration's use of nongovernment e-mail accounts to conduct state business. The practice was revealed months ago—prior to Palin's selection as a vice presidential candidate—after political critics obtained internal e-mails documenting the practice by some aides. "

One things republikans hate..is an audit trail!

You have to give her credit for at least knowing how to use email....

I love how quickly this went from being an illegal breach of her email to about how she used her email for her work. That was good. I was watching the news last night when it started. Nothing like spinning what was obviously an illegal act into something that hadn't even been shown yet - that somehow she had been hiding emails in her personal account.

Man, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. What I am amazed with is how fast the left came up with that talking point to deflect the attention. Not that it is working, but you guys keep being good parrots and move them along :)

The audit trail that will be interesting is when the Secret Service (and others) subpoena the records from the website that the shots were posted on.

But still, try to paint lipstick on that pig why don't you :)

In case you republikans forgot....If laws were broken..they should be investigated by the authorities...due process should be afforded all persons involved.

No, you seem to want to have it both ways. My point was, the law was broken by the trooper, and yet it appears it was NOT investigated fully. Someone made a deal for him - now this supervisor has been painted as the victim, and I will make a bet that when all the facts come out, the only victim here is Palin and her family.

You only care about the laws Vince when it suits your purposes. I assume when you get busted for possession you will go on about how the laws suck, and "it ain't mine man, it ain't mine!!"

I just find it funny to see you going on about laws :)

Keep trying.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, you seem to want to have it both ways. My
> point was, the law was broken by the trooper, and
> yet it appears it was NOT investigated fully.
> Someone made a deal for him - now this supervisor
> has been painted as the victim, and I will make a
> bet that when all the facts come out, the only
> victim here is Palin and her family.
>
> You only care about the laws Vince when it suits
> your purposes. I assume when you get busted for
> possession you will go on about how the laws suck,
> and "it ain't mine man, it ain't mine!!"
>
> I just find it funny to see you going on about
> laws :)
>
> Keep trying.


So now you're an expert on the investigation of the trooper! Stop trying to read my mind...understand my motivations about anything! You wont find me making any statements on here other then saying due process under the law needs to be followed. Sorry you didnt like the way due process worked in the case of the trooper...I guess the governor didnt either...and took the law into her own hands! Abuse of power...and all I want is for her to have due process under the law!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2008 04:11PM by Vince(1).

Do you even know what the process was?

I am basing my judgment on what the trooper admitted to. You should ask some of your police friends and see what they think their chief would do if they tasered (even in test mode) a kid.

Again..again...again..I am not the troopers supervisor and neither are you! So tell me...why do you think he wasnt fired...despite pressure from the governor's office? Huh..Mr Judge and jury? Huh Mr. Supervisor? Remember...it wasnt his not firing the trooper that got the supervisor fired (according to Palin)..so it wasnt his decision on that issue!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2008 05:52PM by Vince(1).

Which probably explains why the supervisor was fired. Circular logic there Vince.

The only thing any of us "knows" at the moment is what the trooper said. The supervisor has speculated that he might have been fired because of his not acting on the trooper in a way the governor wanted. MIGHT. No proof, nada, zilch. A couple of recordings from folks in the Governors office asking about it, a couple of emails from folks commenting and asking about it (the trooper still working for the office).

Sad side note to you. The Governor can fire the supervisor for cause, which I believe was documented in this case - so we will have to wait and see on that won't we? My bet... just my thinking... they will eventually say that the supervisor was fired with just cause, and while they find that it could possibly be attributed to other factors, there is not enough evidence to conclude anything other than the reasons cited in the HR documentation filed by the Governors office. But, they will draw out the suspense as much as they can, have leaks suggesting that they might have evidence of other wrong-doing, etc... all to come down to nothing in the end.

But hey, keep those conspiracy theories coming.

As a note, they would probably have had a case if the Governor had ordered the trooper fired directly - since she has no direct supervisory capacity for him, that would have been an abuse.

You worry about this at night don't you Vince? Nightmares? Sleeplessness?

Sorry :)

Nope..sorry buddy...no circualr logic here. Just saying it dont amke it so!

All the unknowns you highlight are the very reasons for the investigation. The investigation that Palin is trying to stonewall. The last person who wants the truth out is Palin!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2008 07:12PM by Vince(1).