Half-Baked in Alaska: Palin's 11th Hour "Troopergate" Exoneration Was a Lie
It was surely an odd bit of timing on Monday, November 3--just hours before one of the biggest presidential elections in American history--that the Alaska State Personnel Board issued a finding by its chief investigator, Timothy J. Petumenos, that Republican vice-presidential candidate and Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, did not breach state ethics laws when she fired Alaska public safety commissioner Walt Monegan in July of this year.
This last minute finding appeared to exonerate Palin of any legal culpability in the so-called "Troopergate" scandal that dogged her throughout her ill-fated, two-month run on the Republican ticket. Palin boldly claimed it a "vindication," while headlines throughout the world declared that she had been "cleared" of any wrongdoing.
That was hardly the case. Composed entirely of political appointees--and all Republican--the Personnel Board was hell-bent on clearing Palin from the get-go. Its findings were neither final nor impartial. And they leave many questions about her behavior, along with that of her husband and her staff, unanswered.
Perhaps the most significant questions that remain are whether or not Governor Palin and her husband, Todd, committed perjury in their sworn affidavits to the personnel board.
There is significant circumstantial evidence that they did.
Less than a month before the Personnel Board's findings, of course, a Republican investigator of the bipartisan Alaska Legislative Council declared that while Palin broke no laws in firing Monegan, she had, in fact, violated the state's Executive Ethics Act by actively pursuing the firing of her former brother-in-law, Alaska state trooper Mike Wooten.
Palin put the lean on Monegan to fire Wooten. He didn't. So he was fired instead.
As Governor, Palin had the executive right to fire Monegan. On that fact, both the Legislative Council and Personnel Board agree.
What they disagree about is whether Palin, her husband, and her staff had the right to hound Monegan about the firing of Wooten. The Personnel Board said that she did have the right; the Legislative Council's reading of the Alaska Ethics Act says she did not.
And hound they did. More than three dozen times in less than two years.
In the aftermath of Monegan's dismissal, Palin gave at least four different reasons for it--all of which seem spurious, at best, and concocted, at worst. And there is strong evidence contradicting every one of her four explanations.
But even more troubling is the absolutely obsessive pattern of strong-arming Monegan about Wooten that began immediately once Palin took office. Within two months of her December 2006 inauguration, Palin and her husband, Todd, contacted Monegan a half-dozen times about firing Wooten. Then Palin's staff members began the assault. Then more contacts from the Palins. Then more from staff.
The pressure was unrelenting and continued right up until the time that Monegan was fired. The record on that--emails, notes, even taped phone conversations--is quite clear.
Perhaps the most troubling piece of evidence is a February 7, 2007, email from Gov. Palin to Monegan. It's a long, rambling missive that concludes with a return to her obsession with Wooten: "Just my opinion -- I know you know I've experienced a lot of frustration with this issue. I know Todd's even expressed to you a lot of concern about our family's safety after this trooper threatened to kill a family member..."
Both Palin and her husband swore under oath that they did not have conversations with Monegan a month earlier (in January 2007) about the Wooten matter. Yet the February 2007 email proves concretely that Palin was aware that her husband had conveyed concerns to Monegan and, by implication ("I know you know") that she had as well. It also clearly establishes the pattern of her trying to use her influence to get Wooten fired from her earliest days in office.
Palin further contradicted her own testimony by saying that her husband complained to her so frequently about the handling of the Wooten matter that she had to tell him to stop, and then shortly thereafter contended that she knew nothing about his activities to get Wooten fired.
Implausible? Absolutely. Perjury? That remains for a legal body to decide.
But will one?
I contacted Monegan's talented attorney in Anchorage, Jeffrey Feldman, of Feldman, Orlansky & Sanders, to ask him about the state of the case and what were the next legal steps in this matter.
"No one knows the answer to that question," he declared. Since the Personnel Board made a finding of "no probable cause" and denied Monegan's request for a hearing, there "is nothing currently pending before the Personnel Board."
Feldman indicated that Monegan's legal options are also limited. He "could file an action in court either challenging his dismissal, asserting defamation claims, or seeking a due process name-clearing hearing," but as of now that's uncertain.
That leaves the Alaska Legislature. When it goes back into session in January, there are a variety of options it could pursue. Although there's a bipartisan majority caucus in the state Senate, Feldman said, it's uncertain whether Senate President-designate, Republican Gary Stevens (not related to the convicted U.S. Senator), will follow up on any matter dealing with Troopergate.
That, to me, would seem to be a dereliction of the Legislature's duty. The Alaska Legislature has the right--and I believe the obligation--to follow-up on the findings of its own investigation and to censure Governor Palin for what was a clear pattern of abusing her power.
Moreover, the Legislature also has the power to seek contempt charges against Palin and other state officials who willingly ignored the Legislative Council's subpoenas during its investigation of Troopergate. And it also has the power to hold hearings on whether or not Palin and her husband committed perjury. There's troubling evidence that they did.
Come January, someone needs to show Alaska's first family that they are not above the law.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
As Steve Martin used to say on SNL.......
Nothing about Sarah Palin is creditable
So what is Sarah didn't come clean on a few possible executive privilege misdeeds. She's a 'maverick' for crissakes. She reads lotsa newspapers and magazines -- 'all of them and any of them that have been in front of her all these years' from what I understand. Plus, NAFTA-SHMA
Keep it going. This woman wants to be POTUS. So just keep it alive.Let all the lies and corruption be documented.
If Bush gets to walk I guess she may as well too. At least there is consistency with the elite and powerful answering to no one.
Gee, why don't we just spare ourselves the b.s. investigations that always come up shy of holding an elected official accountable for anything.
Everybody knows laws only apply to us peasants.
Great point.
and IMO it seems as though the bigger the crime and the "higher" the official, the more they are allowed to get away with. If they aren't stopped they will only get worse!
Why is it that top executives are always rewarded for bad behavior?
And some publisher is ready to pay this woman 7 million to write a book. This is why the world is in such a mess. Lie , cheat, lie cheat, lie cheat and you will get 7 million dollars. God bless America.
Regrettably Alaskan politics are riddled with corruption. Not my opinion. Check out the number of politicians who have been indicted or are under investigation (including Ted Stevens' son): www.adn.co
Another factor in why Alaska is so dysfunctional is that it has a citizen legislature instead of a professional legislature. I'm no fan of professional pols, but by clinging to the model they have, about the only people who can afford to be legislators are retirement-aged guys. It precludes having younger professionals who need to make a buck, have children and other family obligations that prevent them from "serving".
And of course, the idea that Palin testified to a Personnel Board that owes its jobs to her is flagrant abuse of power and conflict of interest. Palin's dismissive disregard for (and failure to testify in front of) a bipartisan committee of legislators as "partisan" shows the contempt for which she should be charged.
C'mon, Alaska, show the lower 48 that you know how to clean house. Palin and others are besmirching the reputation of all good Alaskans.
I would like to take this opportunity to strongly encourage Todd Palin to direct all his considerable influence as Alaska's First Dude on energizing the Independence Party's secessionist movement. Thank you.
Start pressure on Gary Stevens NOW to look at Palin's unethical behavior. Apart from her use of the First Dude to inappropriately be involved in government business, there remains her use of non-govt. email to do government business. Her claim that she did it innocently is a LIE -- unless of course reading about Scooter Libby and Rove get their hands rapped for the same offense was not on her reading list over the past several years.
There is PLENTY in her behavior to find reprehensible, but if Gary Stevens hasn't got the stomach to go after our self-seeking governor directly, then at least TIGHTEN the ethics law and policies like when per diem expenses are appropriate and for whom. Apparently Palin doesn't understand those policies either. Quick, someone read them to her in case she can't read.
Hmmm, let me get this straigt-
Palin wanted the state's Personal Board to determine this case -
The Personal Board is composed of three members all appointed by the governor, rather than a bipartisan board not appointed by governor
Personal Board finds her not guilty of any wrong doing.
Anybody else smell a rat?
The truth always comes out in the end.
the trouble is that it doesn't seem to matter to a lot of people - the truth, I mean!
It was a lie. And this is a surprise how, exactly?
Carabou Barbie and her cohorts have begun a cannonzation process for the entire litter of Wasilla Hillbilies. These nuts aim to get the other Parties nomination in 2012, by hook or (being Republicans) crook. So, Sweet Lil' Sarah suddenly becomes as pure as the fresh fallen Alaska snow.
If any major percentage of the American people are stupid and inbred enough to get this screwball "I Love Lucy" knockoff anyplace close to missle launch codes EVER, I would say they deserve what they get, except that her actions would also screw up lots of innocent people (who can't vote) along the way.
Is the collective American memory so short that we cannot remember the day WE elected Barack Obama?
That same day, we sent Carabou Barbie away, because even republicans had a sandgrain of sense enough to understand that this batsy lady was SO VERY UNFIT to be President that her own party members would not vote for their own ticket.
Will SOMEBODY out there tell me what, if anything has changed in TWO FRICKING WEEKS that would make anyone with a stray IQ point think that this mess would make a good President ANY TIME in the NNEXT oh, Century or two?
Roci
The Personnel Board had to exonerate her. They knew they had a good chance of getting her back, and they serve at the governor's pleasure.
According to The New York Times (Nov. 4, 2008, Page A22), "In September, Ms. Palin took the unusual step of filing an ethics complaint against herself to the Personnel Board, which she said was the proper forum for dealing with the matter." Perhaps Attorney Jeffrey Feldman could start there. Was this seemingly very strange step in fact a proper one for Gov. Palin to have taken? Was it even legal? An ethics complaint against oneself? (And if it was legal, perhaps the Alaska's Legislature should consider closing that particular loophole.)
Also according to The New York Times (same page), "Ms. Palin said in the summer that she would cooperate with the legislative inquiry but, after she was nominated, she refused to testify." Any grounds for legal action there, Mr. Feldman? Was she within her rights to refuse to testify? What exactly does the law empower Alaska's Legislative Council to do?
Finally, I hope Alaska's Legislature takes action to hold the current and any future governor legally accountable for any and all phone calls made to a state empoloyee by a governor's spouse from the governor's office, using the governor's phone.
so in other words, you are saying Palin filed the complaint against herself, knowing that it would be sent it to the people she appointed? No wonder why I don't like this lady. I didn't care either for the interview with Greta where Palin made it seem like no big deal that all that money was spent on her clothes and the fact that they ended up in Alaska. No follow up questions from Greta. I just don't like it. From a conservative perspective, an Obama Presidency is problematic, according to our values of being a conservative. But what do we have to look forward to? A eauty queen, calculating person who pretends to be conservative when the fact is she really isn't.
She seems like a crook. I can't tell you how many times, reading conservative posts how often the men let it slip that they have the hots for her. It's just disgusting that they are letting themselves be led by their balls when they are supposed to conservative and are supposed to have values. That's why Palin gets away with so much. Maybe we don't need women in politics, being that it seems men are so easy to manipulate when a pretty woman is in charge. All values go right out the window!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
