100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Palin Stonewalling "Troopergate" Investigation | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
She won't talk to the press, and now Sarah Palin is refusing to cooperate (thought she promised she would...) with the investigation into whether she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan because he refused to terminate a state trooper who divorced Palin’s sister.
She's certainly a Republican, a test tube spawn from GOP stonewallers D!ck Cheney and Karl Rove, but is she already above the law? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can she legally refuse to cooperate with an investigation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so??????????????????
who fired the trooper then? if Monegan didn't? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wasn't aware that the investigation was about who fired the trooper, but whether or not Mrs. Palin choose to overextend her position of power, to seek revenge for her sister.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was just a visible Woody fart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And people think this is shocking news? Politions do it all the time and never get caught (most of the time).
And WTF is up with people adding "gate" to everything thats a "scandal". It annoys the hell out of me for some reason O_O |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I posted on another thread about this issue not long ago. Within the last week or so I think.
What's really amazing is the the GOP has tried to stop this investigation in a number of ways already and no one seems to notice. Of course Palin can refuse to cooperate with investigators. The fifth amendment gives her and all of us the right to avoid self incrimination. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. I just hope the investigators do not back down and the facts of this case are uncovered. Alot to hope for I am sure but oh well...hope springs eternal! haha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McCain's campaign is imploding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Winx
on
Wed 09/17/08 04:42 PM
|
|
Not coooperating with an investigation makes one look guilty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McCain's campaign is imploding. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And heads are rolling! Fiorina's rolled today... Good one, Woodster!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree not cooperating may on the surface makes one appear guilty I understand (get ready to be floored here regular readers) Palin's reluctance to cooperate with investigators.
I muck around with legal issues now and then and have seen many cases where the innocent find themselves convicted based on statements given to investigators voluntarily. I had a prof once, a respected attorney, tell a class, "If stopped by the police, if arrested, say nothing...in other words you idiots, exercise your right to remain silent! It will serve you well." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And heads are rolling! Fiorina's rolled today... Good one, Woodster! yup.  
another neocon imposter whacked off by Mc Cain, the "also ran" candidate ,without blinking. cool, huh? I can't wait for him to start firing everybody when he is in the White House. practice makes perfect. sweet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't wait for him to start firing everybody when he is in the White House. That'll be sad, man. An old, senile man firing imaginary lackeys while in the White House... on a tour. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't wait for him to start firing everybody when he is in the White House. That'll be sad, man. An old, senile man firing imaginary lackeys while in the White House... on a tour. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hahah
Well, his campaign staff...his appointees, if he has the chance to make them, will be a real laugh fest. For Wouldee and others I'd suggest reviewing your old high school government texts. Once you do you may have a greater understanding for the powers of the presidency. You see, once not so long ago, presidents could hire and fire at will. From the janitor to the secretary of random big_department_001. What happened? Political pay offs and corruption. Joe Idiot's worthless brother-in-law needs a job...let's make him a political appointee! Umm that's happening now isn't it? Sure it is but.. imagine..a time when things were worse than they are now? Fired for just disagreeing despite doing your job well...umm never mind...haha Mechanisms to limit the power and influence of any one party are now built into the system. Are they imperfect? Obviously... Political pay-offs or firings should not be tolerated. We all must fight to strengthen and enforce balance and fairness. Mob rule is a scary thing.No matter if our party of choice is or is not in power. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Wed 09/17/08 08:30 PM
|
|
the people i am talking about getting fired are the same ones that Bush is systematicaaly firing over the years.LOL
the entrenched liberal politicos in the bureaucracy at the federal level, not his own staff, my short sided soundbyting detractors.
and the whacking at the knees of federal money returned to the states which aso hampers the social democrat agenda of employing the party faithful in cushy government jobs. nepotism? Mc Cain is going to sontinue the arduous task of deconstructing the social democrat infrastructure in the bureaucracies, ad infinitum while faith based initiatives continue to aid the federal government by providing more and more of the humanitarian aid with the logistical support of the federal government. Which, by the way, makes redundant so manyy government jobs. But that has been quietly held from you liberals by your talking heads which only deseminate their talking points through thwe marginal liberal media. You will never know the truth behind your handlers' angst from them. they are too deceitful to tell you they have lost their grip on the levers of government. These are the best of days. yup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gosh, please review the people, Bush's own appointee's who have come and gone over the years....
"entrenched liberal politicos in the bureaucracy at the federal level" So, you are saying Bush appointed entrenched liberal politicos? Then he fired them? Does anyone with more energy than I have tonight want to post a list of those who have come and gone from this administration? Funny stuff! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wiley
on
Thu 09/18/08 08:36 AM
|
|
Ok. A couple of things.
Obviously none of you are aware of Alaska's constitution and that this "investigation" was launched by the Alaska legislation who is not authorized to investigate such matters anyway. AS 39.52.310. Complaints.
(a) The attorney general may initiate a complaint, or elect to treat as a complaint, any matter disclosed under AS 39.52.210 , 39.52.220, 39.52.250, or 39.52.260. The attorney general may not, during a campaign period, initiate a complaint concerning the conduct of the governor or lieutenant governor who is a candidate for election to state office. (b) A person may file a complaint with the attorney general regarding the conduct of a current or former public officer. A complaint must be in writing, be signed under oath, and contain a clear statement of the details of the alleged violation. (c) If a complaint alleges a violation of AS 39.52.110 - 39.52.190 by the governor, lieutenant governor, or the attorney general, the matter shall be referred to the personnel board. The personnel board shall return a complaint concerning the conduct of the governor or lieutenant governor who is a candidate for election to state office as provided in (j) of this section if the complaint is initiated during a campaign period. The personnel board shall retain independent counsel who shall act in the place of the attorney general under (d) - (i) of this section, AS 39.52.320 - 39.52.350, and 39.52.360(c) and (d). Notwithstanding AS 36.30.015 (d), the personnel board may contract for or hire independent counsel under this subsection without notifying or securing the approval of the Department of Law. (d) The attorney general shall review each complaint filed, to determine whether it is properly completed and contains allegations which, if true, would constitute conduct in violation of this chapter. The attorney general may require the complainant to provide additional information before accepting the complaint. If the attorney general determines that the allegations in the complaint do not warrant an investigation, the attorney general shall dismiss the complaint with notice to the complainant and the subject of the complaint. (e) The attorney general may refer a complaint to the subject's designated supervisor for resolution under AS 39.52.210 or 39.52.220. (f) If the attorney general accepts a complaint for investigation, the attorney general shall serve a copy of the complaint upon the subject of the complaint, for a response. The attorney general may require the subject to provide, within 20 days after service, full and fair disclosure in writing of all facts and circumstances pertaining to the alleged violation. Misrepresentation of a material fact in a response to the attorney general is a violation of this chapter. Failure to answer within the prescribed time, or within any additional time period that may be granted in writing by the attorney general, may be considered an admission of the allegations in the complaint. (g) If a complaint is accepted under (f) of this section, the attorney general shall investigate to determine whether a violation of this chapter has occurred. At any stage of an investigation or review, the attorney general may issue a subpoena under AS 39.52.380 . (h) A violation of this chapter may be investigated within two years after discovery of the alleged violation. (i) The unwillingness of a complainant to assist in an investigation, the withdrawal of a complaint, or restitution by the subject of the complaint may, but need not in and of itself, justify termination of an investigation or proceeding. (j) The personnel board shall return a complaint concerning the conduct of the governor or lieutenant governor who is a candidate for state office received during a campaign period to the complainant unless the governor or lieutenant governor, as appropriate, permits the personnel board to assume jurisdiction under this subsection. If the personnel board receives a complaint concerning the conduct of the governor or lieutenant governor who is a candidate during the campaign period, the personnel board shall immediately notify the subject of the complaint of the receipt of the complaint, of the suspension of the personnel board's jurisdiction during the campaign period, and of the candidate's right to waive the suspension of jurisdiction under this subsection. The candidate may, within 11 days after the personnel board mails or otherwise sends notice of the complaint to the candidate, notify the personnel board that the candidate chooses to have the personnel board proceed with the complaint under this section. If the candidate does not act within that time or if the candidate notifies the personnel board that the candidate is not waiving the suspension of jurisdiction, the personnel board shall return the complaint to the complainant with notice of the suspension of jurisdiction under this subsection and of the right of the complainant to file the complaint after the end of the campaign period. (k) A campaign period under this section begins on the later of 45 days before a primary election in which the governor or lieutenant governor is a candidate for state office or the day on which the individual files as a candidate for state office and ends at the close of election day for the general or special election in which the individual is a candidate or on the day that the candidate withdraws from the election, if earlier. For a candidate who loses in the primary election, the campaign period ends on the day that results of the primary election showing that another individual won the election are certified. The complaint alleges to fall under AS 39.52.120 (Misuse of Official Position) and the only ones legally able to pursue the matter at hand are the personnel board (to avoid a conflict of interest.) and Hollis French, the partisan hack who is leading the charge against Palin has already decided the outcome of the case without an investigation. http://community.adn.com/adn/node/131386
And now this Posted by Alaska_Politics Posted: September 16, 2008 - 8:13 am From an e-mail sent overnight by Anchorage attorney Kevin Clarkson: Five Alaska Legislators, Rep. Wes Keller, Rep. Mike Kelly, Rep. Bob Lynn, Sen. Fred Dyson, and Sen. Tom Wagoner, will file suit in state superior court in Anchorage tomorrow morning (9/16/08) at 9:00 am (Superior courthouse 4th Avenue) against Sen. French, Sen. Kim Elton, Stephen Branchflower and the Alaska Legislative Council in order to halt the investigation of Governor Sarah Palin and others because the investigators have lost the appearance of impartiality required under the Alaska Constitution. The Legislators will ask for declaratory and injunctive relief in the investigation, stating that it is an attempt to use the Alaska Legislative Council to further partisan politics. The Legislators cite in their lawsuit that the investigation into the firing of former Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Public safety Walt Monegan, led by Sens. Hollis French and Kim Elton, with Stephen Branchflower and the Alaska Legislative Council, is being driven by partisan politics in an attempt to unlawfully smear Gov. Palin and others. “The Partisan actions of Sen. French, Sen. Elton and the Legislative Council have tainted the investigation beyond the appearance of impartiality required under the Alaska Constitution,” said Kevin Clarkson, Esq., of the firm Brena, Bell & Clarkson, P.C., and counsel in the suit. The investigation, which began after Monegan’s dismissal in July 2008, is being led by outspoken supporters of Barack Obama and members of the Democratic Party. Sen. Elton, the Chair of the Legislative Council donated $2,000 to the Obama campaign but has failed to disclose this to the Legislative Council and he continues to preside over the Council with respect to the investigation, refusing to convene meetings of the Council at the request of a majority of the Council’s membership. Sen. French the investigation “project manager” failed to disclose to the Legislative Council the comments he made on a radio program criticizing the Governor’s conduct regarding the termination of Monegan as “criminal” prior to being appointed as the investigation “project manager” and even prior to a vote to investigate at all. Sen. French also failed to disclose to the Legislative Council that he had a personal bone to pick with the Governor over the Monegan firing because Monegan was a friend and because he had worked closely with Monegan during the 2008 legislative session regarding attempts to include in the state budget items that Governor Palin had vetoed. Since the Alaska Legislature wrote the ethics laws, they should know better. Obviously out to score political points though. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And I'm no Palin fan, but "Troopergate" has about as much merit as the "Obama birth certificate is a forgery" thing.
|
|
|
|
|
