via TPM: The independent investigator of the Trooper-gate probe has released his report on Gov. Palin's actions in the firing of the police chief over a personal matter:
Finding Number One
For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. The Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act provides:
“The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and that any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust.”
Yup, not lookin' so good, bless yer heart.
bob-neer says
What next? Can she be indicted?
<
p>NYT reports:
<
p>
gary says
It appears the finding was that the Governor failed to curtail her husband’s actions. Sounds a lot like Wife of Bill’s Travelgate, or … oh, what the heck, you turn a phrase better than I can:
<
p>Emphasis mine.
<
p>
<
p>
<
p>
charley-on-the-mta says
Funny way to put it, gary, considering that Todd Palin can’t fire the man himself, can he now?
<
p>And since we’re sniffing red herrings, maybe you can tell me exactly what became of Whitewater. Ah yes, an investigation into sex with the wrong woman. This report on the firing of the police chief deals with … the firing of the police chief.
<
p>This is relevant how? What were we talking about again?
gary says
<
p>Funny way to put it, gary, considering that
Todd Palinthe wife of President Bill Clinton can’t fire themanwomanhimselfherself, canheshe now?<
p>You don’t get the relevant!? Please, at least try to keep up; I’m not going to feed you more cue cards.
lightiris says
Definition: The more trapped an individual is in a losing argument, the more likely s/he is to invoke the presidency of Bill Clinton. See also: Godwin’s Law and red herring fallacy.
gary says
The less creativity a person has, the more likely they are to copy Godwin’s Law and assign a new name.
lightiris says
but I’m certainly not the first to mention this phenomenon. You should read/get out more.
charley-on-the-mta says
And you’re going to have to continue to “feed me cue cards” when you veer so wildly off-topic. Do accept my apologies in advance.
gary says
Faking stupidity to avoid contrasting travelgate from troopergate is a novel approach to debate. But I accept your apology nonetheless.
huh says
gary’s typings reminded me of this excellent LATimes article on Fox’s recent anti-Obama faux documentary.
<
p>
<
p>Just when you think the standard for discourse can’t get any lower…
gary says
Yet another nondefense. Charley–in his own words–obviously saw that there was no “there, there” on the issue of the wife of a President’s travelgate, yet he’s concerned when the spouse of a govenor is accused of exercising executive power.
<
p>In defense, Charley pleads stupid, Lightiris quotes cliches, and you bloviate on my ‘typings’ in general.
<
p>You final sentence truly is appropriate: “Just when you think the standard for discourse can’t get any lower…”
johnk says
but I wanted to reiterate. Nice vetting….
laurel says
didn’t you mean “nice betting”? ah, the difference one key makes. đŸ˜‰
johnk says
he likes to gamble.
kbusch says
Excellent setup and execution
johnt001 says
…but it won’t. The right wing will dismiss this as an invention of the left wing media, and they’ll continue on their two-minute hate drill.
laurel says
will forgive Bible Spice for anything. But the middle of the road sort of voter will certainly hear alarm bells ringing in the back of their minds. This one will survive the holiday weekend.
peabody says
Keating Five?
<
p> Maverick?
<
p> Reformer?
<
p> Judgement?
<
p> John McCain!?!
<
p> YES WE CAN!
<
p> GO OBAMA-BIDEN!
<
p>