It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Horza
Regardless of if this report is accurate
Palin and McCain's supporters had hoped the inquiry's finding would be delayed until after the presidential election to spare her any embarrassment and to put aside an enduring distraction as she campaigns as McCain's running mate in an uphill contest against Democrat Barack Obama.
But the panel of lawmakers voted to release the report, although not without dissension. There was no immediate vote on whether to endorse its findings.
The inquiry looked into her dismissal of Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, who said he lost his job because he resisted pressure to fire a state trooper involved in a bitter divorce with the governor's sister. Palin says Monegan was fired as part of a legitimate budget dispute.
The report found that Palin let the family grudge influence her decision-making, even if it was not the sole reason Monegan was dismissed.
Bill McAllister, Palin's Alaska communications director, released a statement saying the report "vindicated the governor by finding that she acted within her constitutional authority to remove 'at-will' employees." But he questioned the report's abuse of power finding.
Palin violated the state Ethics Act, Branchflower found.
In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.
Originally posted by mabus325
reply to post by bknapple32
This is what frustrates me with liberals. There is no legal definition of "Abuse of Power" in the Alaskan constitution. This was a political hit job once it was discovered that McCain was interested in Palin.
In fact, Monegan did not contest his firing before the Alaskan Human Rights Committee which he had right to do.
Originally posted by anachryon
AS 39.52.110. Scope of Code.
(a) The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust. In addition, the legislature finds that, so long as it does not interfere with the full and faithful discharge of an officer's public duties and responsibilities, this chapter does not prevent an officer from following other independent pursuits.
Originally posted by chiefbluefeather
Lieberman will replace Palin this week
I don't think that the McCain campaign can possibly win with Palin on the ticket, and they are beginning to realize it. I suspect the wheels are already in motion to replace her with the man who John McCain really wanted to run with. Someone who helps him solidify his bull# "crossing the aisle" meme. If I could get ten to one odds on it, I'd lay good money that Joe Lieberman will be named McCain's new VP within the next week.
You read it here first.
Originally posted by ImaNutter
I don't get it. The Republicans are rough and tough enough to run a slanderous campaign, but when a bi-partisan committee finds her to have committed an ethics violation, it's malarkey?
Let's get something clear first... THAT BEGAN ITS INVESTIGATION BEFORE SHE WAS PICKED FOR VP, I REPEAT, BEGAN..THE..INVESTIGATION...B-E-F-O-R-E...
They performed their investigation, Palin and the McCain campaign MADE IT CLEAR they did not want to cooperate (why wouldn't they with nothing to hide?), and she is found to have breached her contract with regards to ethics?
Let's get another thing straight, I am not voting, I refuse to vote (not under this faux democracy ran by big $$$$ and lobbyists, it doesn't matter who wins the same lobbyists will still pay, buy off, do coke, and have sex with the same politicians who are supposed to be representing you).
So, do NOT label me righty lefty inbetweeny anti-American, or any other term you can think to "discredit" my opinions.
It just makes me want to vomit, when something is actually DONE to check up on a claim made against a politician, the results go in line with NORMAL ACTIVITY WE ALL BELIEVE POLITICIANS ENGAGE IN, then it is ignored because of personal bias?
GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!
Edit: (The buy off, do coke, have sex with reference comes from the oil lobbyists/politician fiasco that was hardly in the news a couple of weeks ago..)
[edit on 11-10-2008 by ImaNutter]