Really? So which 'vested interests supersedes the other? Her vested interests AS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE STATE that has first hand knowledge that one of her Law Enforcement officers is unfit for service or her vested interest as a citizen who knows first hand that a State Law enforcement officer is abusing his power to abuse and intimidate his family?
There's no conflict of interests here... and ANY attempt to defend this scumbag is a waste of air.
Fankly, this is unforgivable; as YOU PPL DEFENDING A CROOKED MALE COP ABUSING HIS POSITION TO INTIMIDATE HIS EX-WIFE AND HER PARENTS, is how the Lifetime channel got started... the channel I lovingly refer to as "The Man-Hater Channel.
This guy is the epitome of worthless, a punk using his badge, the PUBLIC SHIELD, to abuse those around him... and you ppl are defending his ass.
The Governor had first hand knowledge that this scumbag was crooked and it was her duty to see him removed from office and in that order stated her reasoning and rejected all demands by the judiciary to reinstate him.
What's fascinating to me is that the ADVOCATES OF CHANGE are in here DEMANDING THE SAME OLD SAME OLD!
ROFLMNAO... I so love sweet Irony... even when it's so thoroughly predictable.
So now a governor has to know everything about every state employee and their status within the working mechanisms of their public service?
Who here is defending Wooten? I am not.
You on the hand, think it is OK with a public servant to interfere in the internal disciplinary decisions of the state when said public servant has a vested interest in the outcome. Now that truly is disgusting...