Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Troopergate Report Assigned By Palin Is In

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 7:02 AM on November 4, 2008.


Competing troopergate reports.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Election 2008 in your
mailbox!

 

Three weeks ago, an independent investigation launched by the Alaskan legislature into Sarah Palin's abuse-of-power scandal wrapped up with a fairly devastating report -- Palin violated the public trust, violated state ethics laws, and lied about it. (Soon after, Palin, driven either out of ignorance or illiteracy, said the report had cleared her of "any hint of any kind of unethical activity," which is the opposite of reality.)



Palin and the McCain campaign decided it didn't like the independent investigation, and preferred a different probe, run by Alaska's personnel board, which is made up of members who answer to Palin.



And wouldn't you know it, on the night before the election, the board sided with Palin in a hastily released report.


A report released on Monday by a state board found that Gov. Sarah Palin did not apply improper pressure to try to dismiss a state trooper who was her former brother-in-law and did not violate state ethics laws in the firing of her public safety commissioner.


The report by the Alaska Personnel Board contradicts the conclusions last month of a separate inquiry into the matter overseen by a bipartisan legislative panel. The earlier inquiry found that Ms. Palin had breached a state ethics act by pressing to have the trooper, Mike Wooten, fired.





It appears that, as far as Palin's Alaska Personnel Board is concerned, this was a he-said, she-said situation. Walt Monegan described discussions he had with members of the Palin administration about the governor's ex-brother in law, while Palin and her aides said those conversations hadn't taken place. As far as the board's investigator was concerned, he believed the aides.


Monegan said last night, "The conversations absolutely did take place. I've been a police officer for some 35 years. Aren't I supposed to tell the truth? And in this case I did, under oath to both investigators. It's not only me. There were senior members of the Department of Public Safety who got the calls, felt the pressure and knew exactly what was going on. I will always feel that there were conversations and e-mails that were intended to inappropriately use an official government position to settle a family matter."



At this point, Palin and her allies will, at a minimum, claim vindication. For others, there will probably be a temptation to conclude, "One investigation cleared Palin, one didn't, so let's just forget the whole thing."



But the bottom line remains the same: the only bipartisan, independent investigation that wasn't operated by people who answer to the governor found that she violated state ethics and violated the public trust. An 11th-hour favor to the governor doesn't change that.

Digg!

Tagged as: palin, troopergate


Franken-Coleman Update: Norm Returns To Senate As Non-Senator
Al Franken, has been declared the winner of the Minnesota contest but has yet to be sworn in as court battles continue.
Post by Ryan Grim. January 21, 2009.
A Bar Stool View of This Moment in American History
Some reactions to Obama's inauguration speech (which, yes, I watched in a bar).
Post by Joshua Holland. January 20, 2009.
Franken-Coleman Recount: How Far Will It Go?
Will Norm be able to take this all the way to the conservative-controlled US Supreme Court?
Post by Phoenix Woman. January 10, 2009.
Advertisement
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?