Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
"The plaintiffs and Alaskans will suffer irreparable harm if the investigation at issue continues and if the resulting investigative report issues as planned on Oct. 10, 2008," they wrote in their appeal.
This sounds a lot like the BS the Pubs proposed during the 2000 Florida battle. irreparable harm!? STHU
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Rachel Weiner | October 14, 2008 08:38 AM
The Anchorage Daily News reports:
The state Personnel Board investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of Walt Monegan has broadened to include other ethics complaints against the governor and examination of actions by other state employees, according to the independent counsel handling the case.
The investigator, Tim Petumenos, did not say who else is under scrutiny. But in two recent letters describing his inquiry, he cited the consolidation of complaints and the involvement of other officials as a reason for not going along with Palin's request to make the examination of her activities more public.
Newsweek reported on Saturday that the Personnel Board probe, which both the McCain campaign and critics expected would be more favorable to Palin, hasn't turned out that way:
McCain campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton dismissed the report as the product of "a partisan-led inquiry run by Obama supporters." But there could be more land mines ahead. Some weeks ago, the McCain team devised a plan to have Palin file an ethics complaint against herself with the State Personnel Board, arguing that it alone was capable of conducting a fair, nonpartisan inquiry into whether she fired Monegan because he refused to fire Wooten, who had been involved in a messy custody battle with her sister. Some Democrats ridiculed the move, noting that the personnel board answered to Palin. But the board ended up hiring an aggressive Anchorage trial lawyer, Timothy Petumenos, as an independent counsel. McCain aides were chagrined to discover that Petumenos was a Democrat who had contributed to Palin's 2006 opponent for governor, Tony Knowles. Palin is now scheduled to be questioned next week, and the counsel's report could be released soon after. "We took a gamble when we went to the personnel board," said a McCain aide who asked not to be identified discussing strategy. While the McCain camp still insists Palin "has nothing to hide," it acknowledges a critical finding by Petumenos would be even harder to dismiss.
On Tuesday, the Anchorage Daily News also printed a blistering editorial on Palin, calling her response to the State Legislature's Troopergate report "Orwellian."
Sarah Palin's reaction to the Legislature's Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation.
She claims the report "vindicates" her. She said that the investigation found "no unlawful or unethical activity on my part."
Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian.
Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."
In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law.
Perhaps Gov. Palin has been too busy to actually read the Troopergate report. Perhaps she is relying on briefings from McCain campaign spinmeisters.
That's the charitable interpretation.
__________________
Here's to the Army and Navy and the battles they have won; here's to America's colors, the colors that never run. May the wings of liberty never lose a feather. ....
Apparently, this is the story that will not die......
Alaska Rep. Calls for Probe Into 'Troopergate' Witness Tampering
By Jason Leopold
The Public Record
Monday, October 20, 2008
In a new front for Gov. Sarah Palin’s “Troopergate” troubles, a top Alaska Democratic lawmaker has called on the state’s attorney general to appoint an independent investigator to probe whether operatives in Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign broke Alaska’s criminal witness-tampering laws.
In a letter to Attorney General Talis Colberg, state Rep. Les Gara alleges that McCain’s campaign staffers influenced witnesses close to Palin to get them to withhold cooperation from a legislative inquiry into whether Palin abused her authority in pursuing a vendetta against her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper.
“I am concerned that the state’s criminal witness-tampering laws have been broken by certain staff for Sen. McCain’s presidential campaign,” Gara wrote to Colberg on Monday.
Gara said the McCain staff arrived in Alaska after Palin was picked as McCain’s running mate on Aug. 29 and spent the next month and a half trying “to stall or stop” the investigation by getting several senior Palin aides and her husband Todd to balk at giving depositions.
Gara noted that Palin’s aides had agreed in July to be deposed about allegations that Palin improperly fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan after he refused to fire her ex-brother-in-law, Trooper Mike Wooten. However, after Palin’s selection as the GOP vice presidential nominee, the aides reneged.
Colberg, a close Palin ally, responded to Gara late Monday and advised the Democratic lawmaker to bring his concerns before the state personnel board, and ask the panel to further expand its probe of Palin.
“While you do not accuse anyone in the Department of Law of criminal conduct, you are particularly critical of McCain Campaign staff attorney Ed O’Callaghan,” Colberg wrote. “You suggest that my department may have a conflict of interest in investigating or supervising the investigation of the matter directly. Since the scope of the pending investigation before the State of Alaska Personnel Board has greatly expanded, investigator Timothy Petumenos...may be willing to add the federal witness tampering criminal allegations to his inquiry.
"Expanding the scope of the personnel board investigation would accomplish your goal of assuring that the allegations are taken seriously, and it would eliminate the potential for any perceived investigative conflict between the Department of Law and another entity."
Colberg earlier spearheaded a failed effort by the Palin administration to get the state courts to quash the subpoenas.
Despite the resistance from Palin’s aides and from Colberg, the legislative inquiry on “Troopergate” was completed on Oct. 10 with a finding that Palin had abused her authority and violated the state ethics law that bars officials from using their positions to further personal aims.
Gara began his push to have the witness-tampering issue addressed last month with a letter to Colonel Audie Holloway, director of the Alaska State Troopers.
"Something has caused, or in the words of the statute, may have ‘induced’ these witnesses to change their position," Gara wrote. "It seems a witness would not risk possible jail time that comes with the violations of a subpoena without advice of others."
Holloway responded in writing to Gara on Oct. 2, agreeing that the witness-tampering concerns were a “serious issue” but declining to pursue an investigation because of the unusual situation surrounding the possible crime.
“Although the Alaska State Troopers are mandated to enforce criminal and regulatory laws throughout the state, investigations into reported violations are always subject to certain practical limitations even in normal situations. The current situation is anything but normal,” Holloway wrote.
Holloway noted that the underlying dispute involved his state troopers -- and that Attorney General Colberg had been party to the Palin administration’s efforts to contest subpoenas served on Palin’s aides.
Given these concerns, Holloway concluded, “The short answer is that I cannot dedicate resources at this time.”
But he suggested that Gara might seek a directive from the legislature and the executive branch for the state troopers to hire an “unbiased investigator for this type of sensitive investigation.”
Earlier Investigation
The “Troopergate” investigation has centered on whether the governor, her husband and several of her senior aides pressured Public Safety Commissioner Monegan to fire Trooper Wooten, who was in an ugly divorce and child custody dispute with Gov. Palin's sister.
Besides faulting the Palins and the governor's associates for applying this pressure, the Oct. 10 investigative report by special counsel Steve Branchflower criticized Attorney General Colberg for not turning over e-mails to assist the probe, further suggesting that Gara's letter will receive a cool reception from Colberg.
In his letter to Colberg, Gara cited a pattern of behavior by the Palin administration “suggesting our criminal laws may have been broken.”
“Until Aug. 29 [when Palin was tapped by McCain as his running mate] no witness ever refused to comply with a request by the Independent Investigator [Branchflower] for an interview,” Gara wrote.
“Starting Aug. 29 witnesses who had never objected to the investigation suddenly refused to voluntarily show up for interviews with Mr. Branchflower. After refusing to show up voluntarily, these witnesses then refused to show up for subpoena’s issued by the Legislature.
“It is hard to believe that witnesses who had never previously objected to appearing for testimony would risk, without outside advice or pressure, the potential jail time that comes with a refusal to comply with a subpoena.
“Between Aug. 29 and the release of the Independent Investigator’s report on Oct. 10, approximately 10 witnesses failed to show up before the Senate Judiciary Committee for their subpoenas. After failing to show up for subpoenas, these witnesses did later provide written statements.
“Their later decision to submit to written questions, after failing to show up for their subpoenas, doesn’t cure this violation, or any criminal conduct by any person who attempted to induce those witnesses from showing for their subpoenas.”
Gara said, “It appears there has been contact with witnesses, previously willing to cooperate in this investigation, and that persons may have ‘attempted’ to ‘induce’ them not to comply.”
McCain-Palin campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton was highly critical of Gara's witness tampering claims.
"This is yet another political stunt from Representative Les Gara, a Democratic Alaska state legislator who has been working with the Obama campaign since last year," Stapleton said. "State. Rep. Gara's previous hijinks include sending a letter to the Alaska State Troopers making a similar baseless accusation, and engaging in a sidewalk ambush in front of television cameras and reporters."
With news camaeras rolling, Gara confronted Stapleton on the day the Branchflower report was released and asked her pointedly if she intended to apologize to the state officials she disparaged during several press conferences during the course of the "Troopergate" probe.
The heated exchange did not result in an apology from Stapleton who told Gara that the "Troopergate" investigation was politicized by Democrats.
In another development, an attorney hired by Alaska’s personnel board to investigate whether Gov. Palin violated state ethics laws in the “Troopergate” case is expected to depose the governor and her husband this week at an undisclosed location in another state.
Timothy Petumenos, the attorney hired by the personnel board, will spend about six hours interviewing Palin and her husband, Todd, according to Thomas Van Flein, an attorney representing the Palins. It’s unknown whether Petunmenos will release a report prior to the Nov. 4 election.
Petumenos's investigation is said to include at least two other ethics complaints filed against Palin, one of which is believed to be a complaint filed by the Public Safety Employees Union alleging Palin and her aides illegally accessed her ex- brother-in-law's personnel files and improperly and illegally tried to get him fired from his job as a state trooper.
Citizen watchdog Andree McLeod filed the only other publicly known ethics complaint against Palin. McLeod alleges the governor secured a state job for one of her fundraisers.
On Sept. 2, just a day before accepting the GOP nomination, Palin took the unusual step of filing an ethics complaint against herself, a move that was designed to head off the legislative inquiry.
Palin and her campaign advisers appeared to be betting that the personnel board would clear her of wrongdoing in the firing of Commissioner Monegan. The board’s three members are appointed by the governor, although two are holdovers from her Republican predecessor, former Gov. Frank Murkowski.
__________________
Here's to the Army and Navy and the battles they have won; here's to America's colors, the colors that never run. May the wings of liberty never lose a feather. ....
Palin cleared by second investigation, but note how narrowly they phrased the question, ie. whether she violated the ethics laws in making "the decision" to fire Monegan. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...s_palin_d.html
He did not delve into the "abuse of power" violation leading up to that decision that was found by the legislature.
Half-Baked in Alaska: Palin's 11th Hour "Troopergate" Exoneration Was a Lie
by Geoffrey Dunn
It was surely an odd bit of timing on Monday, November 3--just hours before one of the biggest presidential elections in American history--that the Alaska State Personnel Board issued a finding by its chief investigator, Timothy J. Petumenos, that Republican vice-presidential candidate and Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, did not breach state ethics laws when she fired Alaska public safety commissioner Walt Monegan in July of this year.
This last minute finding appeared to exonerate Palin of any legal culpability in the so-called "Troopergate" scandal that dogged her throughout her ill-fated, two-month run on the Republican ticket. Palin boldly claimed it a "vindication," while headlines throughout the world declared that she had been "cleared" of any wrongdoing.
That was hardly the case. Composed entirely of political appointees--and all Republican--the Personnel Board was hell-bent on clearing Palin from the get-go. Its findings were neither final nor impartial. And they leave many questions about her behavior, along with that of her husband's and her staff's, unanswered.
Perhaps the most significant questions that remain are whether or not Governor Palin and her husband, Todd, committed perjury in their sworn affidavits to the personnel board.
There is significant circumstantial evidence that they did.
Less than a month before the Personnel Board's findings, of course, a Republican investigator of the bipartisan Alaska Legislative Council declared that while Palin broke no laws in firing Monegan, she had, in fact, violated the state's Executive Ethics Act by actively pursuing the firing of her former brother-in-law, Alaska state trooper Mike Wooten.
Palin put the lean on Monegan to fire Wooten. He didn't. So he was fired instead.
As Governor, Palin had the executive right to fire Monegan. On that fact, both the Legislative Council and Personnel Board agree.
What they disagree about is whether Palin, her husband, and her staff had the right to hound Monegan about the firing of Wooten. The Personnel Board said that she did have the right; the Legislative Council's reading of the Alaska Ethics Act says she did not.
And hound they did. More than three dozen times in less than two years.
In the aftermath of Monegan's dismissal, Palin gave at least four different reasons for it--all of which seem spurious, at best, and concocted, at worst. And there is strong evidence contradicting every one of her four explanations.
But even more troubling is the absolutely obsessive pattern of strong-arming Monegan about Wooten that began immediately once Palin took office. Within two months of her December 2006 inauguration, Palin and her husband, Todd, contacted Monegan a half-dozen times about firing Wooten. Then Palin's staff members began the assault. Then more contacts from the Palins. Then more from staff.
The pressure was unrelenting and continued right up until the time that Monegan was fired. The record on that--emails, notes, even taped phone conversations--is quite clear.
Perhaps the most troubling piece of evidence is a February 7, 2007, email from Gov. Palin to Monegan. It's a long, rambling missive that concludes with a return to her obsession with Wooten: "Just my opinion -- I know you know I've experienced a lot of frustration with this issue. I know Todd's even expressed to you a lot of concern about our family's safety after this trooper threatened to kill a family member..."
Both Palin and her husband swore under oath that they did not have conversations with Monegan a month earlier (in January 2007) about the Wooten matter. Yet the February 2007 email proves concretely that Palin was aware that her husband had conveyed concerns to Monegan and, by implication ("I know you know") that she had as well. It also clearly establishes the pattern of her trying to use her influence to get Wooten fired from her earliest days in office.
Palin further contradicted her own testimony by saying that her husband complained to her so frequently about the handling of the Wooten matter that she had to tell him to stop, and then shortly thereafter contended that she knew nothing about his activities to get Wooten fired.
Implausible? Absolutely. Perjury? That remains for a legal body to decide.
But will one?
I contacted Monegan's talented attorney in Anchorage, Jeffrey Feldman, of Feldman, Orlansky & Sanders, to ask him about the state of the case and what were the next legal steps in this matter.
"No one knows the answer to that question," he declared. Since the Personnel Board made a finding of "no probable cause" and denied Monegan's request for a hearing, there "is nothing currently pending before the Personnel Board."
Feldman indicated that Monegan's legal options are also limited. He "could file an action in court either challenging his dismissal, asserting defamation claims, or seeking a due process name-clearing hearing," but as of now that's uncertain.
That leaves the Alaska Legislature. When it goes back into session in January, there are a variety of options it could pursue. Although there's a bipartisan majority caucus in the state Senate, Feldman said, it's uncertain whether Senate President-designate, Republican Gary Stevens (not related to the convicted U.S. Senator), will follow up on any matter dealing with Troopergate.
That, to me, would seem to be a dereliction of the Legislature's duty. The Alaska Legislature has the right--and I believe the obligation--to follow-up on the findings of its own investigation and to censure Governor Palin for what was a clear pattern of abusing her power.
Moreover, the Legislature also has the power to seek contempt charges against Palin and other state officials who willingly ignored the Legislative Council's subpoenas during its investigation of Troopergate. And it also has the power to hold hearings on whether or not Palin and her husband committed perjury. There's troubling evidence that they did.
Come January, someone needs to show Alaska's first family that they are not above the law.
__________________
Here's to the Army and Navy and the battles they have won; here's to America's colors, the colors that never run. May the wings of liberty never lose a feather. ....
Cosmic Defender Champion!
Linear Mode
