OWNED? You Betcha!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Sarah Palin unlawfully abused her power as governor by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, the chief investigator of an Alaska legislative panel concluded Friday. The politically charged inquiry imperiled her reputation as a reformer on John McCain's Republican ticket.

Investigator Stephen Branchflower, in a report by a bipartisan panel that investigated the matter, found Palin in violation of a state ethics law that prohibits public officials from using their office for personal gain.

The inquiry looked into her dismissal of Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, who said he lost his job because he resisted pressure to fire a state trooper involved in a bitter divorce with the governor's sister. Palin says Monegan was fired as part of a legitimate budget dispute.

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."

Branchflower said Palin violated a statute of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

Palin and McCain's supporters had hoped the inquiry's finding would be delayed until after the presidential election to spare her any embarrassment and to put aside an enduring distraction as she campaigns as McCain's running mate in an uphill contest against Democrat Barack Obama.

The investigation revealed that Palin's husband, Todd, has extraordinary access to the governor's office and her closest advisers. He used that access to try to get trooper Mike Wooten fired, the report found.

Branchflower faulted Sarah Palin for taking no action to stop that. He also noted there is evidence the governor herself participated in the effort.

But, found nothing illegal. I can understand someone wanting to help a family member who is subject to a out of control policeman. It's better then the massive corruption of sayClinton with the various travelgate, white water gate etc. Give me Palin any day.

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But, found nothing illegal. I can understand
> someone wanting to help a family member who is
> subject to a out of control policeman. It's better
> then the massive corruption of sayClinton with the
> various travelgate, white water gate etc. Give me
> Palin any day.


She unethically abused her office but because there was nothing "illegal" that was okay? Why don't Republicans hold their own candidates to the standards they expect from Democrats?

No one's perfect. What about the comparison to the Clintons. Remember Vince Foster? I think there were several dead bodies. This is the kind of mistake I can accept.

Rod Wrote:
>>Remember Vince Foster? I think there were several dead bodies.
Attachments:

Ohhhh..there you go again Rod! Looking back into ancient history...Bill Clinton isn running for office and Hillary isn't on the ticket! We are talking about Sarah...holier then thou Sarah..who goes around calling herself a maverick! You betcha...a real maverick she isn't...just another corrupt republikan politician

Well some women are just kind of firey. She said the trouper threatened too kill her dad. That might be a understandable to want him fired even for a republican.

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No one's perfect. What about the comparison to the
> Clintons. Remember Vince Foster? I think there
> were several dead bodies. This is the kind of
> mistake I can accept.


Vince Foster killed himself. Ron Brown died in an accidental plane crash. Whitewater was dismissed as a non-issue. The only supposed "crime" Bill Clinton committed was lying under oath in a trumped up witch-hunt about his personal sex life (FYI - He was never convicted).

But my point is this. Please hold your own candidates to the same standards you hold the Democrats. Otherwise, you sound like a hypocrite.

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well some women are just kind of firey. She said
> the trouper threatened too kill her dad.

Was that before or after her dad helped him kill that moose out of season?

FYI - Palin was so afraid of her ex-brother-in-law that she never turned his "death threats" over to the police. She's the mayor of Wasilla and she never said to the Police Chief, "Hey. My brother-in-law threatened to kill my dad. Can you look into that?" It's because it never happened. Palin fabricated the charge after her ex-brother-in-law threatened to "bring her down" over her interference in his divorce.

If he didn't say it she would not have been fired up about it. Accusing her of lying I guess is easy to do but think about it.

Here is the thing. The GOP know that the are going to lose the White House. They are trying andything and everything to hurt the Dems. This voter fraud that FOX NEWS is bullsh**ing about is another case of them trying to come up with excuses as to why they will lose. Just think, wasn't it 8 years age GOP and GOP apologists were saying that same thing about Al Gore? Let's just calrify, Al Gore had much steadier ground to stand on.

The country is tired of GOP way of life. I admit I voted for Bush in 2004 simply because Kerry was just as big a dip as Bush. But Barrack and his vision is the best way this country has to getting back on track.

Lots of fascinating info here about the trooper investigation:
http://www.adn.com/politics/story/476430.html

Including this:

Quote

"F'ING BULLET"

The other incident happened in February 2005. Both McCann and Palin gave troopers detailed accounts of what happened. Wooten was headed home in a rage, McCann said.

She called Palin and put the phone on speaker so Palin could listen when Wooten got there and get help if things got bad. Palin had her teenage son Track listen in, too.

As McCann remembered it, Wooten said if their father got a lawyer for her "he would eat a f'ing lead bullet. I will shoot him."

Palin was interviewed by troopers too.

"Mike in the conversation never did get to the bottom of what, what the foundational issue he was dealing with, he just kept screaming, "I'm gonna F'n kill your dad if he gets an attorney to help you," Palin told troopers, according to the transcript.

Track told troopers he heard the comment, too.

Palin drove over and watched through the window. She and McCann both said Wooten was all wound up. A neighbor who stood watch as well later told troopers that Wooten looked angry but that McCann wasn't cowering or anything.

Wooten told troopers he never said anything like that about his father-in-law.

The investigation concluded he did. It wasn't a crime, because he didn't threaten Heath directly. But it did violate trooper policy, the investigation found.

Oh, well if she couldn't be convicted on a technicality then her actions should be applauded.

She wasn't on trial. Some folks wanted to figure out if she abused her power concerning Moneghan. Interesting point there, all this crap with Wooten happened BEFORE she even ran for office as Governor. They then find that she did not abuse her power in firing Moneghan, and that it was perfectly legal.

The article was pretty good in going into all the issues with Wooten and also debunked what someone else said in a thread a while back that he tasered him in test mode. Not true, it said he taped the leads to him and just did it for a second or two. The only "test" part about it was that it was taped to him, much like they do when demonstrating the device.

Read into it whatever you want lopter, sorry your dreams were not fulfilled in the findings.

Her actions were in line with probably what almost any person would do in that circumstance.

Angelus, there are more than enough other threads dealing with voter fraud issues.

From intrade.com........

Barack Obama to win 2008 US Presidential Election - Last Price: 77.8

John McCain to win 2008 US Presidential Election - Last Price: 22.4

Strong Sell on McCain. Eat it. Chew it. Swallow it. Get it down.

Ah, the lopter spam party. Or maybe voter. Folks that like to spam their message across every thread.

Pretty pathetic. Why not buy a billboard and put up your victory declarations? I mean really, it will get to the more than, what, 10 people that read these boards?

That speaks volumes for the in-depth moose crap that you post here every single day. You haven't moved to Oklahomo yet?

I try to limit my comments to the thread. If you want to post intrade latest quotes, why not do it in your own thread so we only have to read it once if we care?

Posting it here just makes it look like you are scared he is going to lose.

The truth...Palin abused her power as governor..she allowed her husband undue access to officials to pursue the Wooten case. Palin is a pile of misjudgement.

Sniff. Oh that hurts Vince.

Wow, the big October Surprise reduced to "allowed her husband to" and "the firing was legal".

Seriously. Lol.

seriously...she abused her power...and her family members abused their access...the voters will decide how serious they take the findings..not you!

and who expected a bomb shell from this? all the talk on here was about her refusing to cooperate with the investigation. all you did was spin..spin..spin how due process was some how a bad idea! it was you who made this a bigger deal then it was...all anyone else said is we should know the facts before election day..now we do! spin that a-hole!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2008 10:45PM by Vince(1).

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Folks that like to spam their message across every
> thread.

I know you're a big believer in facts, evidence, and many, many links, but I found this statement kind of funny because you essentially spam the same Hannitized message in most election-focused threads.

What is today's message? More ACORN voter registration improprieties? Something about Bill Ayers? Further defense of McCain's substance-free VP candiate?

Oh I know: Reverend Wright. That must be the gameplan for these final three weeks.

erik:

Usually I just respond to these threads. You can probably count on one hand the number of threads I started. Usually when I did, I linked to an article (typically from MSM - not Fox, and certainly not from a slanted site) and quoted the pertinent section. I also make a point to include information that may shed some light on the issue, and not always in my favor. But again, go back and you will see I am usually responding to something someone posts without saying where they got it, or they got from some blog spam across the internet. The Obama campaign seems very good at manipulating the Internet - it is amazing how every message or article they put out has instant links to 10000+ sites in an hour or so. These folks are working overtime.

You don't believe me? Check it out yourself.

Also, folks seem to like to troll for responses. I respond to what voter or someone posts about Palin smoking marijuana by first stating so what, then comes a response saying well it was illegal and how that is just BAD, then when I respond to that by pointing out Obama, suddenly I am the one making a big deal about it? Please, what a load of craplogic that is lol.

You all are funny. It seems the goal here is to have your own little troll club. Ok, have fun, troll away.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> seriously...she abused her power...and her family
> members abused their access...the voters will
> decide how serious they take the findings..not
> you!
>
> and who expected a bomb shell from this? all the
> talk on here was about her refusing to cooperate
> with the investigation. all you did was
> spin..spin..spin how due process was some how a
> bad idea! it was you who made this a bigger deal
> then it was...all anyone else said is we should
> know the facts before election day..now we do!
> spin that a-hole!

In the thread you started Vince:
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/121376.html

Quote

Troopergate Cover Up
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: September 16, 2008 06:54AM

The arrogance of republikans for the due process is incredible. This is what we can expect if Palin wins the presidency...if you dont agree with her on energy policy and what families with special needs policy.....you are out. Didnt we suffer enough under a president who never listened to anyone but himself?

The presidential campaign of Sen. John McCain is trying to put to rest the ethical controversy that's come to be known as "Troopergate," releasing e-mails supporting Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's contention that she dismissed her public safety commissioner over budget disagreements, not because he wouldn't fire her ex-brother-in-law.

And, the campaign says, Palin is unlikely to speak with an investigator hired by the state legislature to look into the matter.

Sure, you started on about due process, then there are these responses:

Quote

Re: Troopergate Cover Up
Posted by: WashingToneLocian ()
Date: September 16, 2008 09:09AM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The arrogance of republikans for the due process
> is incredible.


I really hope the Alaskan Legislature moved up the report release to October 10th so that they have time to put in Articles of Impeachment before the election. While the voters of Alaska may love Palin (because she hasn't been in office long enough for them to know what she is really all about), it sounds to me like nobody in the State House, Republican or Dem, can stand the woman.

Then:

Quote

Re: Troopergate Cover Up
Posted by: TheMeeper ()
Date: September 16, 2008 12:06PM

Her refusal to cooperate with the investigation is a distraction to the campaign, which means whatever she is hiding would be an even bigger distraction.

All of this before I ever even posted once in the thread. So when I finally respond, my first statement is:

Quote

Re: Troopergate Cover Up
Posted by: Registered Voter ()
Date: September 16, 2008 01:24PM

You guys can't see the forest for the trees. Who cares.

The only people this makes any difference to is the people that already support Obama. If you think that anyone is going to be upset with her even if she DID fire the guy for not getting rid of the trooper it won't make a difference. The trooper ADMITTED to doing it. I would think anyone with half a brain can figure out that if you are a police officer and use your taser on a kid you are kind of stupid. If you are a police officer and make threats to put a bullet in your ex-father in-laws head, you are criminally stupid.

Now, what exactly did I do to bring this topic up in the first place, or to start talking about cover up, and how if she did anything it had to be worse since she was not going to testify, or ANYTHING at all about due process?

Right - I did nothing other than respond. You and your friends Meep and WTL though started salivating over how you would see her brought down, or even impeached. Oooh. Maybe you talked about due process, but the rabid troll horde here was all in a frenzy over it.

Yeah, and then "yawn" it was exactly as I said it would be. Nothing.

My main gripe with this on both sides of the camp is dishonesty. Politicians, as representatives of the people and the public trust, should be held to a higher standard for honesty, not for lifestyle choices. I would sooner vote for an openly-gay black woman that admitted to smoking a lot of weed in her college days than a straight white guy who tells me he's the epitome of virtue and decency.

Nobody's voting for the best leader anymore; only the best politician.

You do not get to decide if it is nothing or not...the voters do!

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You do not get to decide if it is nothing or
> not...the voters do!

Actually, the electoral college does, and they aren't legally bound to vote in accordance with the public's wishes.

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well some women are just kind of firey. She said
> the trouper threatened too kill her dad. That
> might be a understandable to want him fired even
> for a republican.


Sure, give him another reason to do it.