Sarah never said Fire Wooten...and other true things

Discussion in 'Congress' started by N4mddissent, Oct 12, 2008.

  1. N4mddissent
    Offline

    N4mddissent Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    878
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +140
    If you read the transcripts in the Palin document, you will see that it really does not matter whether either Palin directly said the exact words "You must fire Wooten". It's not that difficult to interpret the message the Palins were sending. What this report shows is the Palins think they are entitled to special treatment and have no respect for the rules. It is sick, pathetic, and frankly childish the way they behaved. And if you're going to quote Monegan, provide the entire quote:
    In the same interview he stated:
    It's clear he was saying that they pressured him to fire Wooten without using the specific words: Fire Wooten! And it is clear if you read the testimonies in the investigative report as well. Let's have a little folksy chat about this mess.

    A McCain campaign press release from August 30 stated

    So apparently Palin thought it was reasonable for the investigation to be completed in October.

    On August 30 Palin stated,
    But just 2 days after making the statements above (in an investigation that had started before she was ever selected as running mate) she requested that the committee and Mr. Branchflower drop their investigation


    They made the claim that the Personnel Board had authority. However it would not be difficult to see the conflicts inherent in allowing the investigation into whether Ms. Palin improperly used her authority to fire someone, to be conducted by a board which she had the authority to fire. Later it was ruled by the court that the committee did have authority to investigate the matter.

    During her Gibson interview, Palin stated,:
    But of course, her attorneys did not request the personnel board to investigate until Sept. 1st, and prior to that- like the Aug 30th statements- she was not saying that it was the jurisdiction of the personnel board, she was saying she would "cooperate with the legislative probe".

    Furthermore she made statements about the trooper like
    But how much should we believe this? The threat of "killing her dad: and "bringing down her family" was not found to have any merit. The memorandum of findings from the investigation of the trooper could not verify that he made these comments. Sarah Palin did not hear these comments directly, and when Todd asked the trooper about them, Wooten denied it then. The only person who heard those comments was Molly, Sarah's sister. Molly- who also suddenly claimed physical abuse for the first time when a custody battle began and could not remember whether she had been injured or specific instances of pain when questioned and thus her abuse charges were found to be without merit. The Molly who tried to get a larger split in the divorce, apparently claiming that she might hurt her back or get carpal tunnel syndrome if she worked more. Third party witnesses who had seen them argue through a window stated it did not seem to get out of hand. Molly did get a restraining order on Wooten. If you file a complaint, you get an automatic restraining order until a hearing can be held to determine if the need for one is legitimate. When the hearing was held, the restraining order was dismissed. Of course, from the McCain camp all you heard was that this was a guy who had a restraining order against him. (Or DVPO, but I'm using the colloquial term for convenience).

    I thought this was interesting. Sarah Palin claimed that she and her son Track listened to a phone conversation between her sister and Wooten for Molly's safety. But when investigators asked Track, he stated they were only listening to hear if Wooten acknowledged having an affair. One of them was less than honest it seems. I put my money on the kid being honest.

    Finally, as the investigative report stated (p.67), it is inconsistent that Palin would begin significantly reducing her security detail if she feared this violent and dangerous man who had threatened her family.

    They hired a private investigator to dig up dirt on this guy and though everything was properly investigated and reprimands made, it did not produce the result they wanted. They could not tolerate this and committed to getting what they wanted regardless of what was appropriate. Todd Palin even complained about Wooten dropping his kids off at school in his patrol car. I know that is against regulations, except of course, he had gotten permission from his supervisor. Can we call Todd Palin an asshole at this point?

    Is that a good ol' hockey mom, Joe Sixpack thing to do? This is family that 1) doesn't respect truth very much and 2) acts like spoiled brats when they can't get their way. At least that's my interpretation.

    But what's not my interpretation is that Sarah Palin, occasionally directly, more often through surrogates- especially her husband, violated the public trust by using her elected office to pursue a personal conflict. When the commissioner she selected showed too much integrity to violate the rules and regulations for her personal vendetta, she fired him and replaced him with a guy who was forced to resign 2 weeks later for a sexual harassment complaint that occurred before she hired him (so I guess she and McCain share similar views on the vetting process- it's unnecessary). She has lied repeatedly to you and me about cooperating with the investigation and about her conduct. I know some people have claimed that this committee, despite being heavily Republican, is biased. The usual claim is that the Republicans on the committee don't like Sarah Palin because she embarrassed them while she was "shaking things up" in Alaska. But I have yet to see any specific evidence related to this. If someone could provide me with information about how she embarrassed specific members of the committee, I would be more inclined to consider such arguments. And surely that's not asking too much, assuming those who claim such are not just reciting claims out of McCain's campaign but have checked the information out themselves.

    I do not think Sarah Palin will be impeached. It is true, that legally she had the authority to fire the Commissioner. She has been cleared of any legal wrongdoing. However, it is serious to be found guilty of ethics charges. Especially when you wanted the focus of your campaign to be judgment and character. Abuse of power is an extremely serious charge in my opinion. If she was willing to abuse her power as governor of Alaska, what good reason do we have to believe that she would not abuse power in any higher office? We still have an ongoing investigation in Washington over abuse of power in the firing of the attorney generals. If we don't stand up to politicians who abuse the power of their office, they will continue to feel entitled to that power and it can only end badly when leaders begin to feel they are above the law and/or entitled to have their will given authority over others rights.

    Conclusion- Sarah Palin is a poor leader.
     
  2. del
    Offline

    del BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    45,052
    Thanks Received:
    9,830
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +9,885

    and you've got waaaay too much time on your hands.
    :lol:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Modbert
    Offline

    Modbert Daydream Believer Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Messages:
    33,178
    Thanks Received:
    2,957
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,962
    :lol:
     
  4. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    She is a poor leader.

    She abused her power as mayor, she abused her power as governor, and she will abuse her power if she is elected VP.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2008
  5. PubliusInfinitum
    Offline

    PubliusInfinitum BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,805
    Thanks Received:
    725
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +726
    Well yes that is a conclusion... but it's a conclusion that lacks a valid basis.

    What you're saying in effect is that the Cheif Executive Officer of an organization should not have the authority to determine the standards of that office and what IS and is NOT representative behavior which reflects the measure of that standard...

    Which is illustrative of the dimwitted feelings of an imbecile.

    Governor Palin did not abuse her power... She failed to adequately exercise her power. She shoudl have demanded that a sub-par employee be fired... than when he was NOT FIRED... brought the replacement for the person that failed to fire the sub-par employee into the office when she fired him... and pick up the phone and called THE NEXT REPLACEMENT an told them to stay by the phone, that she would be hearing from HER or THE NEW GUY as soon as he finishes some work she needs taken care of right away...

    The Trooper in question is a reprobate... and has no business being anywhere NEAR a position of authority and public trust.

    If Sarah Palin is gulty of anything, she is guilty of soft peddling a problem that needed to be hard pressed, because she was afraid of 'how it might look'...
     
  6. PubliusInfinitum
    Offline

    PubliusInfinitum BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,805
    Thanks Received:
    725
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +726
    False... and I challenge you to advance for this board SPECIFIC EVIDENCE WHEREIN YOU CAN SHOW SUCH ABISES OF POWER BY Gov Palin.
     
  7. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    I posted the video which has the evidence.

    But you don't really want evidence, you just want to follow the three rules of lying....deny, deny, deny.
     
  8. PubliusInfinitum
    Offline

    PubliusInfinitum BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,805
    Thanks Received:
    725
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +726
    And if I had asked you for some propaganda in the form of a URL, than you'd have a fine point... sadly (for you) I challenged you to post SPECIFIC EVIDENCE WHEREIN YOU CAN SHOW GOVERNOR PALIN ABUSING THE POWER OF HER OFFICE... Now to be honest you're failing to provide ANY specific evidence wherein you can show that Gov' Palin abused the power of her office and you're doing it in TWO threads simultaneously... Its not looking good for yet ANOTHER leftwing blather... I suppose we can chalk this one up with "BUSH LIED"... LOL... Or that time tested Jewel... The SMOKING GUN... "The Downing Street Memo" Where an anti-war Socialists is on 'the official record' concluding that Bush cooked the books and in so doing: BUSH LIED~
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2008
  9. N4mddissent
    Offline

    N4mddissent Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    878
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +140
    Rules and regulations were already in place that were established to handle complaints about the behavior of State Troopers. Prior to Sarah Palin hiring her Commissioner, her family had filed several complaints against Trooper Wooten. Those complaints had been duly investigated, reviewed, and then a reprimand was issued. All according to the established framework. When the Palins requested the new commission to review whether all of the information was considered, he did so. And the conclusion was that it had been duly investigated and resolved. If Sarah Palin, even as the Chief Executive, did not like the outcome, then she is more than welcome to attempt through various orders and/legislative actions change the system so in future cases the result may be different. But she, nor anyone who holds public office, should be considered above the law. You see, the thing about America is, even though she may be governor of the largest state, and he is just a lowly trooper, her will does not trump his rights. If the investigation of the Trooper was flawed, she can attempt to bring that to light. Both Wooten and Palin were investigated. In each case, some of the allegations were proven, others dismissed. It seems odd that you would look at these two U.S. citizens and with one, Wooten, you damn him for not only the things that were proven, but those that were dismissed. While the other, Palin, you forgive her not only for those things dismissed, but also the parts that were proven. How do you justify your characterization of Wooten? He was investigated on charges of abuse. Charges filed by Palin's family. And though the investigation did not find the abusive behavior, you still hold him guilty.
     
  10. PubliusInfinitum
    Offline

    PubliusInfinitum BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    6,805
    Thanks Received:
    725
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +726
    The Cheif Executive Officer is charged with executing the Laws of the State... Where she knows that a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS NOT FIT FOR PUBLIC TRUST: IT IS HER SACRED DUTY TO SEE THAT SUCH AN OFFICER IS REMOVED FROM OFFICE!~

    She should still BE IN ALASKA FIRING PEOPLE WHO FAIL TO FIRE THAT SCUMBAG!

    This is not a person that she did not know... SHE KNEW THE GUY PERSONALLY... SHE KNEW HE WAS A REPROBATE AND SHE KNEW IT FIRST HAND.

    The Governor is guilty of NOT GETTING THE JOB DONE (THE JOB OF FIRING THAT SCUMBAG) because she thought that it might look bad. She should have advanced an Executive Order requiring him to be stripped of his official duties and escorted off the job site; and his record of malfeaseance published in the paper of Alaskan Record.
     

Share This Page