Discussion in 'Congress' started by JimH52, Sep 19, 2008.
CTCentral - News from the Associated Press
Not court dumb shit. The Legislature is not a Court. And the LAW specifies that the FULL Legislature must compel people to testify, not some political committee bent on an "October" surprise.
But then as usual any lie will do for you leftoids.
AS 24.25.030. Disobeying Subpoena or Refusing to Testify.
If a witness neglects or refuses to obey a subpoena, or neglects or refuses to testify or to produce upon reasonable notice any material and proper books, papers, or documents in the possession or under the control of the witness, the senate or house of representatives may by resolution entered on its journal commit the witness for contempt. If contempt is committed before a committee, the committee shall report the contempt to the senate or house of representatives, as the case may be, for such action as may be considered necessary.
Thats pretty much the penalty, it's up the legislature to decide what they think is proper. Sorry, no arrests, so basically the only thing he can do is go to the full session and say "hey they didn't show now what"
I thought I might add too that the only person that can arrest them is the Sgt. At Arms at the direction of the president of the senate or the speaker of the house after the house or senate has passed a resolution directing them to do so.
AS 24.25.040. Arrest For Disobedience to Subpoena.
A witness who neglects or refuses to attend in obedience to subpoena may be arrested by the sergeant-at-arms and brought before the senate or house of representatives, as the case may be. The only warrant or authority necessary authorizing arrest is a copy of a resolution of the senate or house of representatives signed by the president of the senate or speaker of the house of representatives, as the case may be, and countersigned by the secretary of the senate or the clerk of the house of representatives, as the case may be.
So again, don't hold out to much hope on the October Surprise
this thread dies fast
Just curious here. What is it you think this partisan panel is even looking for? And what on earth does Palin's husband have to do with it anyway? This is about the governor -not her spouse. And even in Alaska you can't force a spouse to testify against his spouse -even assuming he had anything to testify against her about.
Under the Alaska constitution, the commissioner of Public Safety serves at the pleasure of the governor. Any idea what that means when a particular job serves at the pleasure of the executive (whether governor or President)? If the governor is pleased -you keep your job. If the governor isn't pleased -you don't. Even if this panel decided to find that Palin fired this guy for no other reason than he refused to fire the state trooper in question -she had the right to do that. Think there is some kind of job security for positions that are filled by people the governor appoints? She gets to replace any department head with the person of her choice for no other reason than she wants someone else in that position. Interestingly, she didn't request the new commissioner fire this trooper, did she? When the trooper received a 5 day suspension, she dropped it. So it obviously wasn't to remove this guy so she could get someone else to do it.
Whether this legislative panel personally approves of her reasons for removing him or not, the guy isn't getting the job back and the panel has no authority to force a governor to keep on a department head that governor believes is sabotaging her office, trying to divert funds to projects after she had already vetoed funds for those projects and whose own emails show outright insubordination to executive orders. He's not getting the job back no matter what.
Even if this was the ONLY reason she fired the guy (which it wasn't) -SO WHAT? Seriously, you think a state trooper who was found guilty by an internal investigation of tazing his 13 yr. old stepson (felony child abuse), found guilty of drinking and driving a highway patrol while on duty after being caught redhanded by other troopers and then also found guilty of threatening to kill his father-in-law should actually still BE a trooper? Policing figures are those who should be held to the highest standards -not the lowest. That the kind of state trooper you want running around in your state? She didn't go looking for a flimsy reason to request his firing -the trooper CREATED plenty of legitimate ones himself. But she also had plenty of legitimate reasons for removing the commissioner that had nothing to do with this.
This is one of the most pointless witch hunts I've seen. In the end, they will have to admit that she always had the authority to remove this man for no reason at all, that it sure looks like she had plenty of legitimate reasons even beyond the trooper thing -and that requesting a felony child abuser caught drinking and driving while on patrol be fired isn't an abuse of power after all -since not too many Alaskans are likely to agree that is the kind of state trooper they want running around their state either.
Actually her husbandf has been the "shadow governor" all the while!
In the aftermath of the Walt Monegan firing, one question keeps surfacing over and over again; why does the governor's husband, Todd Palin appear to hold so much power?
After all, Nancy Murkowski or Susan Knowles were never accused of pressuring a commissioner or inappropriately sitting in on meetings that should have been private.
The stories started last year when Representative Ralph Samuels told me about going into a meeting, he thought would be private, with Governor Sarah Palin. Much to his surprise, Todd Palin was there and proceeded to sit through the entire meeting.
Other lawmakers have shared similar stories and were shocked at how inappropriate Todd's presence was at meetings with the governor. Yesterday on the Dan Fagan Show, Representative Jay Ramras mentioned that Todd was working lawmakers offices during the ACES debate.
But more importantly, Todd's fingerprints on trying to impact personnel decisions appear to go beyond the current scandal revolving around State Trooper Mike Wooten.
Consider the story of one of Governor Palin's former trusted advisors, John Bitney.
Bitney grew up with the governor, often telling the story of being in the same band class. He served as her Issues Coordinator during her successful gubernatorial campaign in 2006, spokesman for her transition team after the election and on December 1, 2006 he was named her Legislative Liaison.
Bitney was respected as a hard worker by people who knew him and worked with him. In six months, Bitney guided the governor's policies through the legislature, including her hallmark legislation; AGIA.
But John Bitney made the fatal employment mistake; he got on the bad side of Todd Palin.
In June of 2007, it became known that Bitney was dating the soon to be ex-wife of Todd Palin's good friend. Palin reportedly began demanding that Bitney be fired.
After a short time, Bitney realized that he couldn't remain in the governor's office due to the constant pressure and he worked out a deal with Chief of Staff Mike Tibbles to take a transfer to another department.
On July 3, Bitney was in the process of driving his vehicle back to Juneau when he couldn't get his state issued Blackberry to work. When he arrived in Tok he called his office and was told that his Blackberry had been turned off and that his name had been removed from the state employee directory.
His call was then transferred into Tibbles who told him the proposal they talked about was a no deal and the governor ordered him fired immediately. John Bitney was never given a reason why he was fired and never given a chance to make a graceful exit.
However reading the press statements from the Palin administration, you'd think otherwise.
According to the APRN on July 9, 2007, Governor Palin's spokeswomen Sharon Leighow said Bitney left for "personal reasons" and the departure was "amicable."
The Associated Press reported on July 10, 2007, "A spokeswoman for the governor says Bitney and Palin mutually agreed he would leave his post for personal reasons."
Bitney didn't leave his post, he was unfairly and unceremoniously fired and even after serving as a loyal employee was never given an answer as to why he was dismissed by the governor.
According to Bitney, "Todd's words have so much weight".
The most alarming indication of Todd Palin's reach into state government came just yesterday.
Last month, a group of Alaskans filed a freedom of information act for emails sent from the computers of both Frank Bailey and Ivey Frye. Along with several boxes of documents, they received a cover letter along with 78 pages detailing the emails that were not released due to "Deliberative Process and Executive Privilege". (Privilege log attached)
Page 1 of the list showed seven emails from both Governor Sarah Palin and Lt. Governor Sean Parnell within a three hour time frame on Feburary 1, 2008 that were described as "Email re Andrew Halcro".
The serious concern about these emails is that they were prohibited from being released to the public due to executive privilege, even though Todd Palin was copied on these same emails.
Todd Palin is not a member of the executive branch, nor is he even a government employee. Todd Palin is a member of the general public.
So why in the world is Todd Palin getting copied on emails that his wife's administration is classifying as confidential?
Furthermore there is something incredibly suspicious about these emails.
The first email was sent on Feburary 1 at 7:41am from Lt. Governor Sean Parnell to Governor Sarah Palin. Obviously something was burning Parnell to make him fire off an email to the governor so early in the morning about Andrew Halcro. This in turn set off a flurry of email activity that spanned the next three hours and encompassed five different people including Todd Palin.
Judging from the blogs I posted on January 31, the night before, this very well could be about the 2004 TransCanada proposal that Parnell help negotiate when he was an attorney in the oil & gas division that has been kept sealed ever since. TransCanada has insisted to this day that it remain confidential.
These emails should be released to the public...after all Todd Palin has no standing to claim executive privilege. By including him in the email loop, the Palin administration has arguably breached any claim of executive privilege.
After all, government can't pick and choose what private citizens get to see confidential material, that is exactly why freedom of information laws exist.
The attached print out clearly shows that something drove this administration into overdrive, hence the seven emails in under three hours. Since the executive privilege has been breached by sending them to Todd Palin, this administration should release those emails so all Alaskans can see them.
This is yet another example of why we need to get to the facts about how power is being used in the governor's office.
(To see the complete email Privilege Log detailing the flow of emails click attachment)
Press Archives of John Bitney's firing:
Shadow Governor? | AndrewHalcro.com
Nobody should cooperate with a committee so obviously biased and out to get them.
This issue is not going to be solved by the "Obama Hollis French October Surprise Committe" . I posted the law. All he can do by law is notify the legislature and they must VOTE on the matter as to how to proceed. Not the committee. As for Todd Palin being the shadow governer, here is a guy that works one week on one week off on the north slope for years, fishes commercially, and races snow machines year after year. So what your saying is he has what a laptop with him up there on the North slope to run the state with? Thats a real stretch, thats like saying the janitor that works down the street from the white house is really the guy who is running US Space Command because his wife is a manager there.
The committee was made up of 8 Republicans and 4 Democrats, and they voted unanimously to investigate the charges. The prosecutor, Steve Branchflower, was an Anchorage prosecutor for 28 years and is highly respected.
What is ironic is that most of the people who were subpoenaed have already given depositions when Palin was cooperating with the investigation. The prosecutor has plenty of evidence and should be able to bring charges by October 10th.
Separate names with a comma.