Monday, 11 May 2009

Sarah Palin innocent?

As stated in a previous post, I visited The Personnel Board's webpage and had a look at the minutes of their meetings. On October 31, 2008, the following went on record:

Board Member Tamagni asked Assistant AG Dave Jones if the Board had the authority to assess fees for frivolous complaints. Mr. Jones stated he would research the question and report back to the Board.

Assistant Attorney General Dave Jones looked into it and determined “the answer is no, the Personnel Board may not award fees against a person for filing a frivolous or meritless ethics complaint. A statutory change would be necessary.”

I found an interesting comment on the ADN political blog about the above:

"Well here's the thing, if she filed a complaint against herself, citing abuse of power, then in fact, isn't she admitting guilt? If the Personnel Board didn't dismiss it as meritless, then aren't they acknowledging that there was a legitimate complaint? Though due to their conflict of interest, their "findings" were irrelevant (hired and able to be fired by Palin)!

But I'm wondering, since Palin admitted guilt, how could the PB find her innocent of her own charges against herself. That's like a bank robber admitting he did the crime and the judge saying, no you didn't. If she filed a complaint against herself, why was there even an investigation? Why didn't the PB simply penalize her and be done? Why the big charade? It would have saved Palin and the state a lot of money!"

This comment prompted me to search for details of the ethics complaint Sarah Palin filed against herself.

From an article on ADN, dated September 3, 2008, when Troopergate became a problem for Sarah Palin's vice presidential campaign and her camp wanted the Branchflower investigation halted:

The governor asked that it go to the three-person Personnel Board as a complaint. While ethics complaints are usually confidential, Palin wants the matter open.

The lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, also asked the state Legislature to drop its own investigation into the Monegan matter. He says the Personnel Board has jurisdiction over ethics.

"Governor Palin believes it will find no conceivable violation of the Ethics Act," her complaint says. She wants the investigation "to put these matters to rest."

Tom Daniel, an Anchorage labor and employment lawyer hired by the board in the Renkes case, took a quick look at Palin's complaint Tuesday.

"It appears that the Governor has filed an ethics complaint against herself. ... This is very unusual because ethics complaints typically are filed against others," Daniel wrote in an e-mail responding to a Daily News query.

Among key claims in Palin's complaint:

Special Agent Bob Cockrell of the governor's security detail told Todd Palin to let Monegan know about Wooten's threats against Chuck Heath, who is Palin's father and was Wooten's father-in-law.

Monegan never told the governor or Todd Palin that Wooten had been disciplined over complaints brought by the family that included tasering his stepson, illegally shooting a moose and telling others that Heath would "eat a f***ing lead bullet" if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce. Wooten ultimately was suspended for five days by troopers but the family says they only learned that when the conflict spilled into public after Monegan's firing. In her complaint, Palin calls the suspension "a slap on the wrist."

Recently, Wooten's supervisor intervened when he wouldn't return the children after a visit, the complaint says. Wooten warned his ex-wife he was going to get her and Palin, the complaint says. "There is evidence suggesting that Wooten was following the governor," it says.

Does the above read as a complaint by the governor against herself or as a complaint against Wooten?

The relevant thing is: if Sarah Palin was innocent, why did she mention Wooten and his trasgressions at all? The whole point of the Branchflower investigation was to look into her abuse of power, NOT Wooten's conduct. By referring to Wooten in her complaint against herself, she was trying to justify her actions, no?

Reading the key claims in Sarah Palin's complaint, it seems very clear that the governor tried to prove that she, her husband and her staff had the right to attempt to have Wooten fired because he was so bad, as stated above. The simple fact that Wooten is mentioned proves that Sarah Palin abused her power as governor and encouraged or allowed her husband and her staff to approach Walt Monegan to have Wooten fired.

Sarah Palin started a legal defense fund to make her supporters part with their money to pay Van Flein's astronomical fees relating to this farce.

As for "While ethics complaints are usually confidential, Palin wants the matter open.", I must point out that the Personnel Board report was never published.

I rest my case.

All Troopergate posts


sjk from the belly of the plane said...

Exhibit 1: State of AK website, property of the State of AK.

Exhibit 2: Gov. Palins page links to Todd Palins page with State of AK Seal.

Exhibit 3: Todd Palins Page links directly to Iron Dog race page in which he competes for compensation, as well as Iron Dog race sponsors featuring Todd Palin.

Exhibit 4: Todd and Sarah Palin report income from Iron Dog race.

Exhibit 5: MISUSE OF OFFICIAL POSlTION (AS 39.52.120)
Public employees may not use their positions for personal gain or to
give an unwarranted benefit or treatment to any person. For example,
public employees may not:
 use their official positions to secure employment or contracts;
 accept compensation from anyone other than the State for
performing official duties;
 use State time, equipment, property or facilities for their own
personal or financial benefit or for partisan political purposes;

Exhibit 6: Use of the State web site to promote an event “for the personal or financial benefit” of the Palin family ” violates (AS 39.52.120)

Case Closed.

Anonymous said...

Another thing Regina......are these points you show the "reasons" she filed the complaint?

If so, does she give AK statute # to substantiate her "claims" for filing?

The other complaints I've read point to the statute/s being violated to back up the complaint.

Did the gov do that? maybe I am misunderstanding the grounds she's using.

Anonymous said...

Also Regina......Celtic Diva said there is audio that can be ordered, from what I understand the minutes may leave out a lot.

I'm not sure how one gets the audio or if it's kept forever or what.

the problem child said...

Funny, the GINO "complaint" looks an awful lot like a complaint against Wooten, not herself. Oh, yes. And the Personnel Board's findings closely followed that logic, at least as they were reported.

crystalwolf aka califgrl said...

I think she filed on case they couldn't close down Branchflower (which they didn't)and she knew the PB wouldn't dare find her guilty.
And I don't believe a thing what GINO says or Grandpa Chuckie says as their liars all of them! Wooten might no be a angel but, he got on GINO's sh!t list, and I think Levi did or his Mom also. (why they started investigating her after GINO on the campaign trial) Levi, lost his jobs b/c GINO's loose lips, not a accident either. I think if anyone has complaints against her they should go directly to CREW and the FBI.
Your wasting your time with filing with SOA.
Can't wait until the truth come out, then we can have a WORLDWIDE PARTY!!!!

Kyra said...

is it legal for Sarah Palin to include those kinds of comments about a state employee in her complaint against herself? I realize that much of it is public record at that point, but if 1) she is supposedly filing a complaint against herself, then 2) isn't including confidential personnel information illegal? My memory of personnel work back when is that even if things were "open record" if it was in the file, it could not be released by a state employee without going through process. ???

regina said...


Normal process doesn't seem to apply in Alaska. My point is that by including the Wooten stuff she admitted the abuse of power. Why else would she refer to Wooten at all, other than to justify her actions?


crystalwolf aka caligrl said...

Here's a list of all complaints:

Kyra said...

I agree, normal process doesn't seem to apply. I am just continuously stunned that this woman can flout the law, ignore ethics, hire her friends and cronies to cover for her, lie to our face, tell a different lie on the same subject the next day, and again, and no one except us bloggers calls her on it and although her stock in the GOP appears to be falling somewhat, she's still enough of a leader that down here in California I stay on top of it because I still see her as a potential threat.

Just truly, truly amazing. Thanks for all your work!