"Well, I’m very very pleased to be cleared of any legal wrongdoing," Palin said, "any hint of any kind of unethical activity there. Very pleased to be cleared of any of that."Tapper fact-checks:
That's just not the case.Some much needed details from the report:
One can make the argument, as Palin and her allies have tried to do, that this investigation -- launched by a bipartisan Republican-controlled legislative body -- was somehow a partisan Democratic witch hunt, but one cannot honestly make the argument that the report concluded that Palin was "cleared of any legal wrongdoing" or "any hint of unethical activity."
The evidence supports the conclusion that Governor Palin, at the least, engaged in 'official action' by her inaction if not her active participation or assistance to her husband in attempting to get Trooper Wooten fired [and there is evidence of her active participation.] She knowingly, as that term is defined in the above cited statutes, permitted Todd Palin to use the Governor’s office and the resources of the Governor’s office, including access to state employees, to continue to contact subordinate state employees in an effort to find some way to get Trooper Wooten fired. Her conduct violated AS 39.52.110(a) of the Ethics Act...[emphasis added]And yet she's still saying that there was "no hint of any kind of unethical activity" there.
Liar.
Why must there be constant character-bashing of this woman? I see that people have such a disdain for her, and yet she is doing what many consider to be a hell of a job in this campaign, myself included. Palin-bashing just seems so unpatriotic, somehow.
ReplyDeleteObama, however, is so unpatriotic already that bashing him would be redundant to the superlative. And so, I refrain.
Calling out a candidate for Vice President for lying is not "bashing."
ReplyDeleteI suppose if a candidate doesn't want to be stuck with that kind of label, then that candidate should probably do a better job making sure the comments she makes reflect the truth.
The panel that produced the report stated that Palin had violated ethics laws. That panel consisted of 8 Republicans and 4 Democrats and they voted unanimously.
If Sarah Palin can't handle having her comments challenged by what's a matter of public record then she truly is unprepared for national politics.
Now, if lkjrb16 insists on defending blatant lying as patriotic, I suppose that's his prerogative.
However, I think most voters would agree that there is nothing wrong with pointing out that Palin's comments that she had some how been exonerated by the report are simply not true.
It's a pretty sad statement that you employ the "patriotism" card to defend what is clearly a gross misrepresentation of the truth by Sarah Palin.
John K: Still defending a trooper who tasers 9 year old kids eh?
ReplyDeleteyou just refuse to see, huh john??
ReplyDeleteBranchflower report on Tasergate: Just one guy's opinion that contradicts itself and ignores the relevant facts and law
ReplyDeleteThe Branchflower Report is a series of guess and insupportable conclusions drawn by exactly one guy, and it hasn't been approved or adopted or endorsed by so much as a single sub-committee of the Alaska Legislature, much less any kind of commission, court, jury, or other proper adjudicatory body. It contains no new bombshells in terms of factual revelations. Rather, it's just Steve Branchflower's opinion — after being hired and directed by one of Gov. Palin's most vocal opponents and one of Alaska's staunchest Obama supporters — that he thinks Gov. Palin had, at worst, mixed motives for an action that even Branchflower admits she unquestionably had both (a) the complete right to perform and (b) other very good reasons to perform.
John K: Oh I see clearly alright. If that trooper had done that to Michelle or some other left wing kook's kid you would also demand he be fired and then demand his dept supervisor be fired for not complying with your demands. Two sets of rules operating here.
ReplyDeletewhat part of doing things legally and ethically don't you understand???
ReplyDeleteUmm, Does it matter to anyone that the Trooper Wooten was brought up for a disciplinary hearing, and given a suspension, BEFORE Monegan was appointed to his office?
ReplyDeleteHe had no grounds to fire Trooper Wooten.
And, yes, it is true that the Governor was within her rights to fire Monegan.
BUT, she when she used her members of her family to harass Director Monegan to pressure him to fire Wooten, she violated the state's ethics code.
Oh, and, of course, using a private e-mail account to carry out State business, to avoid record-keeping requirements, in carrying out the harassment of Walt Monegan, was also an ethical breach.
I think that using her office to carry out a personal vendetta casts serious doubt on her fitness to be Vice President of the United States, one-72yr.-old-heartbeat-from-the-presidency.
johnk? heir?