[...] Per an ADN account of the same staggering costs, it’s difficult to assign complaint numbers to a cost, but clearly the Troopergate complaints… three out of the eighteen… were the bulk of the costs. The price tag for Palin’s complaint that she filed against herself to clean the mud off the fan was estimated to be over $100K. [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Bingo, CB. It’s nothing but one man’s opinion, paid a hefty sum by the lawmakers hoping for more. Dang… it’s not even a good legal opinion for Alaskan law. But then, what can you expect from a SC attorney with *far* too many personal and family ties with Walt Monegan, eh?

Why would you expect “backbone” from the Alaskan lawmakers? They’re just politicians and chamber members… but of a state Congress instead of the fed. Should they magically be any less corrupt and self serving than our federal bozos?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

OK, here is my last post on this thing because I am starting to become borderline obsessed. What really angers me about the legislative council’s report is that the MSM gives the impression that the published report represents the opinion of the whole legislative council rather than just one person — Branchwater. The fact that the legislative council agreed to publish the findings apparently does not imply agreement with the findings as stated in the video linked above by none other then Kim Elton (D, Obama supporter, witch hunter). If that is the case, then the other members of the legislative council should clearly and publicly state that. The fact that they don’t seems pretty limp-wristed and cowardly to me. I though Alaskans were supposed to have more backbone than that?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

And, if you believe Missy’s links, it’s closer to $200K….

All for charges that, if all guilty, are $5000 per charge.

I love Congress… federal or state, they are all spoiled children with waaaaay too much money to spend.

The the coup d etah? It all comes back to what the ‘Personnel Board” wants to do after their investigation. OMG…. the brain power of the combined media on Trooper’gate couldn’t fuel a AAA rechargeable battery.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ok, slogging thru the actual report, this quote sums up for me what was really going on:

“Shortly before the annual celebration of Police Memorial Day on May 15, 2008, Commissioner Monegan had dropped off a color photograph at Governor Palin’s Anchorage office with a request that she sign and present it at the ceremony. The photograph was of an Alaska State Trooper who was dressed in a formal uniform, saluting. He was standing in front of the police memorial located in front of the crime lab at AST headquarters in Anchorage, partially obscured by a flagpole. The picture to be signed by the Governor was to be used as a poster to be displayed in various Trooper Detachments around the state.”

“Shortly after he returned to his office from dropping off the photograph, he received a call from Kris Perry, Governor Palin’s Director of her Anchorage office who asked [according to Walt Monegan’s testimony] “Why did you send a poster over here that has a picture of Mike Wooten on it?” Until that moment, Commissioner Monegan never realized it was indeed a photograph of Trooper Wooten. Governor Palin cancelled her appearance and sent Lieutenant Governor Parnell in her place.”

So, someone at the Alaska State Troopers was trying to rub the Governor’s nose in the fact that Wooten was still a trooper and there was not a d*mn thing she could do about it. Probably not Monegan (he seems like a dolt). But this certainly backs up the Palin family’s contention that the troopers were laughing over the fact that Wooten got off with a slap on the wrist for serious infractions.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Rocky_B:

More in the neighborhood of $100,000 actually.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Conclusion?
Senator French’s October Surprise was the equivalent of sneaking up behind Palin and yelling, “Boo”. A Halloween prank that costs Alaska at least $5000

Like or Dislike: 0  0

CB, I’m not sure if you are familiar with the Alaskan players in this off-broadway farce. And I thank you for the video link. Frankly, I avoided the feedback of the legislators, since I only care about the legal implications of this… as in just what was Branchwater using as his “guilty” precedent fodder and interpretation of the Ethics Law, and what was the response.

The rest? And mostly this crew… all lawmakers and their lip service. That and a dime won’t even get you a call on a public phone nowadays.

Kim Elton and Lyda Green – two of the tree interviewed – are all partisan lawmakers (albeit not necessarily DNC… but then when you’re a maverick, you make enemies of both sides…) are most certainly not fans of Palin.

Kim Elton, a Dem, is an official Obama supporter.

Lyda Green, tho a GOP member, doesn’t stand with Palin on more than most issues. She has elected not to run for re’election because most of her constituents agree with Palin, and not her.

The Green/Palin personality/issue difference battles run back almost to Palin’s assumption of office, and have crossed political and personal lines over this time.

This leaves Coghill.. one of the Senators in the lawsuit to halt the legislative council investigation as unConstitutional. In that lawsuit, the Superior court said let the investigation stand, and the Alaskan Supreme Court has not issued a formal opinion yet, but dismissed the lawsuit. That had to do with whether the legislative council was abusing it’s budgetary power, making decisions of the body outside their authority, and abusing Palin’s due process rights via Article I of the Alaskan Constitution.. which deals with due process specifically about legislative councils and their “investigations”.

However any judge is reticent to create a precedent that disallows a legislature to conduct investigations. It is a dicey subject.

As far as I’m concerned, this one is clear cut biased and wrong. But to create a precedent that disallows future investigations? Tough call….

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Here is a video interviewing various members of the Legislative Committee that shows the report is just a conclusion of Branchwater and the committee members do not necessarily agree with it http://community.adn.com/mini_apps/vmix/player.php?ID=2270632

A paraphrase of Kim Elton (D) — This report is not a report the legislative council has issued. If you talk to each of the individual members of the legislative council, some agree with every element, some agree with some, and maybe there are some that don’t agree with any of it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

CB, per the first ADN hotlink in my post:

The report by investigator Steve Branchflower was made public late this afternoon by a bipartisan 12-0 vote of the Legislative Council, which authorized the investigation

The vote was to make it public. I don’t know that they need to agree, confirm or deny an indy counsel investigation. They do not have the authority to sentence or fine… that’s up to the Personnel Board (which they tried to make *that* investigation optional in the media’s eyes), the AG’s office or the administration itself.

The indy counsel investigation is sort of a one way witch hunt. Unlike a trial, the “subject(s)” are not allowed to have their counsel present during testimony, they do not have their counsel counter the investigations findings in front of the legislators. So it’s rather like a “trial” with no representation.

Also, a trial is investigating/judging a crime or charge to find out the events and perps of that crime. An independent counsel is investigation of a person, and trying to find out what crimes or misdeeds they did. Thus the term, witch hunt. Think McCarthy era. Alaskans have a bad taste in their mouth from that era, and built in safe guards against such legislative witch hunts in their Constitution.

Nor is the indy counse equipped to do anything but recommend. And this particular indy counsel is an any attorney member of the Alaskan bar in the status of “active out of state”…. meaning he’s a SC attorney, vaguely practicing in Alaska under some bizarre co-op agreement. This indy counsel did not consider, nor cite precedents in order to justify his interpretation of the Branch Executive Ethics Act.

In other words, it’s just a show… and a bad one at that.

But, ya know, considering what they were striving for, they fell quite short of the evil doing’s they alleged Palin was doing.

Like or Dislike: 0  0