Drip, drip, drip

Here's what I don't ge. Why is she stalling the investigation? Stalling guarantees this will be a story until the very day of the election.

Why is she doing this? My understanding is that even if the investigation were to make a worst case finding against Palin, it still wouldn't be that bad.

As I understand it (and I may be wrong), as Governor, she has the right to fire anyone for any reason. There wouldn't seem to be any criminal liability even if the investigation were to find she fired her safety commissioner for no other reason than personal payback. Sure, the safety commissioner could sue her, but so what.

I think the drip, drip, drip hurts her more than any eventual finding. Of course, the timing of finding is REALLY bad for her. It's not due to arrive November 1st, so that's not good for her at all.

Were I advising her, my goal would be to end this as quickly as possible. I wouldn't stall, I'd try for an early ruling. I might suggest she try to come to a cooperative agreement with the investigator. One where she and all her employees would quickly appear for depositions, in return for assurances that the final report would be released as soon as possible. At least a few weeks before the election.

She's on the record as saying she "invited the investigation" and would "cooperate fully". By stalling she just makes herself look like a crooked politician in the mold of so many Bushies. drip, drip, drip.

Another potential way of ending this quickly would be a full mea culpa. She could admit that, yes, she fired the safety commissioner for not firing that terrible, awful, terrible, did I say terrible? state trooper x brother in law. They've already demonized the guy so much that it seems this actually might be their plan.

The drip, drip, drip just proves she's a politics-as-usual crooked, politico.

Geez, whatever happened to Obstruction of Justice?

"nothing to hide"?....what a reformer! After this election she will be governor of nowhere.

@ Jonze

But even if she's found to be guilty of everything she's being investigated for, I don't think she'll have broken any laws.

So what's the point of her stalling? If she hadn't said she "invited the investigation" and would "cooperate fully", she might be able to stall without looking like an outright liar. But she did say those things.

Just another idiotic decision by the McSames.

Hmmmm... she wants the investigation turned over to her appointees.

Why am I thinking Gonzales? Mukasey?

I hope Alaska's Senate has the diligence to do what our US Senate (or House) will not.

PEACE

Subpoena her under penalty of contempt for failure to comply. Do they have the power?

I came across this that in actuality, Sarah Palin DIDNT sell that plane on EBAY. How many untrue stories is she spewing out?

Was Monica Goodling part of McCain's vetting team? Her standards certainly were applied.

Ain't an ethics issue . . . This is a felony investigation.

I can't tell you all how pissed off I am that Alaska State Troopers did not cuff and frog-march her off the stage after her acceptance speech last night . . . That would have been GOOD political theatre . . . Way better than McInsane's enterence at the end.

Ain't an ethics issue . . . This is a felony investigation.

Posted by Richard L. Adlof

Felony? Where are you getting this? We can dream, but that's not the reality.

The investigation appears to be very similar to those done by the US Congress. They'll dig up evidence and make findings. Those findings can then be sent to the Attorney General for possible prosecution.

http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/478090.html

If they do send it to the AG, they'll probably runs into exactly the same problem we have with the Bush administration, an Attorney General that will refuse to file any charges.

The unimaginable power of the presidency nags at my attention. Personally, I am frightened by the possibility of Ms. Palin inheriting high office. Very frightened.

Look at what she did to Director of Public Safety, Walt Monegan!

A hearing had been held concerning charges made by Ms. Palin’s family against her sister’s ex-husband, State Trooper Mike Wooten. He had been given a suspension.

Subsequently, when she became governor, Ms. Palin lived up to her self-description as a bulldog. She wouldn’t let go.

From kttu TV Alaska news service, August 13, 2008 by Jason Moore:

“Palin said her administration made more than 20 calls to the Department of Public Safety regarding Wooten, the governor's former brother-in-law.

Palin previously had denied her administration pressured Monegan but at least one of those calls was caught on tape.”

As a result: From the AP: “Monegan has said he felt pressured by Palin family members and her administration to fire Trooper Mike Wooten.”

Imagine Walt Monegan’s position. His job or his principles.

And it wasn’t just member’s of her administration putting on the pressure, the governors’ husband, Todd, also “talked” to him.

After seeing Ms. Palin and her husband, two people with the drive of competitive athletes, I ask myself who wouldn’t buckle under such pressure. 20 calls concerning one trooper!

I don’t doubt that he felt pressure. Yet, Monegan stood firm, both, for the rights of the individual, and the integrity of his department, telling the Palin team that he would not be a part of a “head hunting” expedition. Due process means due process.

A good man’s service was lost to the community when, without giving cause, Governor Palin fired Mr. Monegan. His replacement had to be replaced quickly, disqualified for previous inappropriate behavior.

And what about Ms. Mary Ellen Ellen Emmons. She, like Mr. Monegan, stood firm.

“Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.

Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin’s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. “They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,” Ms. Kilkenny said.

The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to “resist all efforts at censorship,” Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support.” www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin

I fear the power of the presidency in the hands of Ms. Palin.

An abuse of power that involves firing a Director of Public Safety for defending due process, or firing a librarian for resisting censorship is a strong indicator that she lives in a world where she knows what is right, and good governance means eliminating those who don’t see the light.

I don’t believe that it serve the country well to place the power of the presidency so near the reach of Ms. Palin.

You are almost correct. When an appointee serves at the pleasure of the governor, she can fire him for any legal reason. In other words, she can fire him because she doesn’t like the color of his shoelaces, but not because she doesn’t like the color of his skin. And, she can fire him for not doing her bidding, as long as her bidding itself was not illegal. In this case, her bidding was that the appointee fire her ex-brother-in-law based on two-year-old charges for which he had already been investigated and punished by the proper authorities. There are additional tawdry details, as you might imagine, but that is the crux.

It seems so straightforward to me, but damn if we can get the concept through to her loyal Palemmings (aka the Branch Palinians).

it's not obstruction of justice to use every legal means available to you, by definition. Seems like her lawyer is just doing his job.

And I can guarentee this won't come to a head before the election. If there is some kind of decision, there are interlocutory appeals, motions injunctions, lots of perfectly legal delay tactics.

Another thing I am sure of is that she got the lawyer for the express purpose of stalling the investigation until after the election.

Even if she should ultimately succeed on the merits, I'll bet that the dirt we get to hear in the process would not be appealing to swing voters.