Palin testifies in ethics dispute

Saturday 25th October, 10:11 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 21 Total Comments Show All

Everton2 at 06:55 PM JST - 25th October

I just can't see what all the fuss is about. I just don't think she is that cute.
goodDonkey at 08:44 PM JST - 25th October

“I am so pleased to finally have gotten the chance to tell what really happened and get the truth out,” Palin said in a statement released by her attorney

She had the chance before. I watched her duck out of an interview shortly after she was nominated when asked about the details. I saw it on the news; she just walked away from the questions. She could have called a press conference at any time to explain herself and then take questions to clarify anything that the press did not understand. So to say she "...finally have gotten the chance to tell what really happened..." is dishonest.

There is a reason special prosecutors are appointed in instances similar to this - it is called conflict of interest. No one in their right mind would call an investigation "independent" if the investigator has the person under investigation as a boss. I guess they define things differently in Alaska. Why is it that any judge or prosecutor would recuse himself in a such a conflict of interest?

Petumenos assured him he was working quickly but made no promise the case would be closed before Election Day.

An "independent" investigator would offer no assurances because it is none of the attorney's, for the one being investigated, business. The proper answer would not have been that he was working quickly but rather thoroughly to get to the truth.

Then the conservatives will condemn those who scoff at the results. By the way the committee that found her in violation of ethics rules was made up of 10 Republicans and four Democrats. And that my friends is what the Republicans were calling a smear job.
Sarge at 09:40 PM JST - 25th October

"largely toothless legislative report"

Can we please stop wasting everyone's time with this?
Nah, it helps the Democrats with their efforts to get the community agonizer into the White House...
SuperLib at 09:40 PM JST - 25th October

Sometimes she kind of reminds me of George Bush.
SezWho2 at 09:53 PM JST - 25th October

sailwind,

How does California enter into this discussion?

I'm pointing out that after this became a Republican campaign issue, Palin asked the Alaska Personnel Board (consisting of three members appointed by Republican governors, including one appointed by herself) to rule on this case instead of the Alaska Legislature.

The Personnel Board is independent of the governor's office. So is the Alaska Legislature. It is ridiculous to accuse a bipartisan legislative committee of being partisan while suggesting that three people appointed by Republicans are not. We might as well suggest that it makes absolutely no difference who the president is when the next Supreme Court nomination comes due. The name on the door may say independent, but it is no more independent of the governor than the legislature is.

You find great meaning in that she called for herself to be investigated. I find more meaning in that she only called for it after it became an issue and that she called for it to be done by a board appointed by members of her party rather than by a bipartisan legislative committee drawn from legislators selected by the people of Alaska.
SezWho2 at 09:57 PM JST - 25th October

Incidentally, I'd much rather talk about the real issues in the campaign. But I hate to see the concerted effort to tar Obama (or Biden) and whitewash Palin (or McCain).
goodDonkey at 12:48 AM JST - 26th October

"largely toothless legislative report"

sarge said:

Can we please stop wasting everyone's time with this?

No we cannot stop. Toothless does not have anything to to do with accuracy of the report it has to do with repercussions. It is "toothless" because they cannot take any action against Palin.

Do we really need to explain every idiom to you sarge? This particular idiom often includes a tiger; they could have said the report was a "toothless tiger." It would have had the same meaning.

sarge try to keep this in mind the committee releasing the report had 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats on it.
sailwind at 01:04 AM JST - 26th October

Cool

If the committee releasing the report had 10 Democrats and 4 Republicans and they came to the same finding only then it would be fair.
goodDonkey at 04:43 AM JST - 26th October

sailwind

The "report" I was speaking of is the report that found Palin in violation of ethics laws. That is the committee that had 10 Democrats and 4 Republicans.
SezWho2 at 08:36 AM JST - 26th October

goodDonkey,

Don't you mean 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats?

To me the key point is that the Alaska legislature has a Republican majority in both houses, that the legislative committee investigating this affair is bi-partisan and that it even had what seems to me a rather large and disproportionate Republican representation.

Palin's claim that it would be partisan seems to me correct. However, unless she has made a lot of political enemies in her own party, it would seem to be partisan in her favor, if anything. Additionally, she cannot--legally at least--hire or fire members of the legislature.

On the other hand she can fire the Republican-appointed members of the Personnel Board. It's true that she needs cause. But she found cause for Monegan even when she didn't need it.
JoeBigs at 11:59 AM JST - 26th October
Ethics ethics you say, this darn word has used often by the Republicans to mean what they want it to mean and not what it means.

Palin is just an average politician who got caught trying to create her own dictatorship. You can spin this anyway you Right Wingers but the facts are the facts.
1. She tried to fire an employee of the Police department because she did not like him. Wooten was his name and he was her ex-brother in law.
2. She first tried to get an employee of hers to do the dirty work. But that employee was ethical and did not wish to do that. Public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan was his name.
3. Then the unfaithful employee was then fired because he would not do her bidding. Public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan was fired because she did not trust him.
She is corrupt and there is no getting around it. She wants die hards around her that will fall on their swords to save her.

She thinks she can run a government like she ran a business and that is wrong.

For those Republicans that do not understand this, the United States of America is a Democracy. Government is suppose to be transparent and with her Government of Alaska, it was not transparent. She was and is corrupt....
coulrophobic at 12:07 PM JST - 26th October

These Palin articles are a joke. She's the best thing to happen to happen to JT since the Iraq War.

Obama's campaign is illegally taking in millions from foreign donors.

The fake Greek temple columns for Obama's DNC speech cost 5 million dollars.

But yeah, we need to look at Sarah's wardrobe and the story of some bureaucrat loser who quit his job and is blaming the governor.
goodDonkey at 08:41 PM JST - 26th October

SezWho2

Thank you. Yes that is what I meant. Also you spelled out the issue very well. Most often I am trying to present a logical argument. I am so consumed with covering all the bases that I don't bother to give good explanations on the details. Other times I over focus on the details. As far as I am concerned one could read your post and know the issue completely.
SezWho2 at 08:07 AM JST - 27th October

coulrophobic,

The issue is not the amount of money. The issue is about whose money it is, what it is being spent on, whether there is any personal benefit and whether it is consistent with the candidate.

In the case of the "fake Greek temple", the money was raised to promote the candidate, was used to promote the candidate, does not conceivably result in any personal benefit to the candidate (unless he's going to wear the temple every time he goes out to dinner) and associates the candidate with the roots of democracy.

In the case of the "Niemann-Marcus threads", the money was raised to promote the candidate, was used to promote the candidate, results in a personal benefit to the candidate if she keeps the clothing, and associates the small-town every-day hockey mom with a life-style that is out of reach with most Americans.

By the way, if you think Obama's campaign is illegally taking money from foreign donors you should do something about that.
Nessie at 08:31 PM JST - 27th October

Pro, or con?