Also, feel free to go here to see his appearance on Colbert's "Better Know a District" segment (It starts at about 1:45 into the segment).
9/5/08
9/4/08
Yes, of course the scandal deepens
Aides to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin improperly obtained her former brother-in-law's state police personnel files and cited information from those records to raise complaints about the officer, the head of Alaska's state police union said Thursday. |CNN|
Addendum: The defense is both credible and damning:
In response, the McCain-Palin campaign told NBC News that the files were not protected, and that Wooten himself had signed a waiver allowing a divorce lawyer to gain access to his personnel records. They added that Todd Palin, the governor's husband, was the source of information for Bailey, and that the information came from Wooten's divorce proceedings.
In other words, the McCain campaign is saying that Todd Palin gathered damaging information on Mike Wooten by looking through his divorce proceedings, then passed it on to an aide to the governor, who later used it to try to have Wooten fired. |TPM Muckraker|
...don't know about you, but I'd like to hear Bailey testify under oath about this. Too bad he's refusing.
Let's assume that Bailey really did get the information from Todd Palin, and that he found the information by looking through divorce proceedings.
There are, to begin with, a lot of questions that need to be asked about Todd Palin's access to the information. What is the status of the divorce proceedings that Todd Palin looked through? In other words, was Palin sharing something that was part of the public record, or was he sharing something private? And, was his source the legal record or the personnel file itself? If his source of information is the actual personnel file, then it is doubtful that any release Wooten signed would have authorized Palin to make this sort of use of it.
More importantly, what condition was the information in when Bailey received it, and what did Bailey know about its provenance? If Bailey knew that it was likely from Wooten's personnel file, and I don't see how he couldn't have realized that, then it would have been improper -- and pointless -- to use that information to try to get Wooten fired.
...apparently I didn't hit publish when I updated this post four hours ago. At any rate, the McCain campaign appears to be in possession of the waiver Wooten signed, and they are declaring that because Wooten signed the waiver "the information is in the public domain."
Speaking as someone with familiarity with the rules that typically surround personnel files for state employees, that's doesn't strike me as a credible statement. I'd really like to read a copy of the specific waiver, but suffice it to say that waivers almost universally have a clause which says something like, 'the recipient shall retain all information in confidence' and another clause which allows the information to be shared on a very limited basis with those directly involved in the relevant proceedings. The idea that anyone would sign a waiver which put personal information in the public domain just doesn't pass the smell test.
Now, it is possible that the information is in the public domain if it is included in the divorce proceedings and the divorce proceedings are not under seal. States differ in their practices regarding divorce proceedings, so its possible that the relevant records are open in Alaska.
...I can't find an answer one way or another in Alaskan law. What circumstantial evidence I have from the law would suggest that divorce records are *not* sealed (because there are various provisions which allow confidential information (e.g., social security numbers) to be excluded from the public record. That said, I looked at one of those sites that handles record requests for a fee, and the information contained there indicates that in Alaska "Divorce records are sealed for 50 years."
...Luckily, there are plenty of scandals, so we have lots of opportunities to learn about how they do things up North:
Todd Palin's former business partner files an emergency motion to have his divorce papers sealed. Oh God.|Source|
Three cheers for the Big Ten Network
All last year Comcast ran ads telling me how evil the Big Ten Network was. Then, Comcast caved, and now I've got the Big Ten twenty four seven. Tonight it's Drew Brees and Purdue taking on the Kansas State Wildcats of Michael Bishop in 1998's Alamo Bowl.
...the convention? Maybe later. They're watching at the OG.
...the convention? Maybe later. They're watching at the OG.
via veegle,
In other news, I would like some of what Gartner Group analyst Steve Prentice is smoking.
The computer mouse turned 40 years old in 2008. Gartner Group analyst Steve Prentice says the mouse will be obsolete in three to five years. - The Week Magazine, 8/15/08
In other news, I would like some of what Gartner Group analyst Steve Prentice is smoking.
Discuss
I’m sure Todd Palin could have bought a ton of arugula with the money he spent on his snowmobile instead. He just chose not to, which is fine. But that’s what these culture wars are all about — relatively prosperous cultural conservatives fighting with relatively prosperous cultural liberals about “postmaterial” political issues and using lifestyle cues as proxies for those battles — they’re not about poor people mobilizing themselves on behalf of the GOP. |Yglesias|
9/3/08
More troopergate?!
Those emails from Governor Palin that Monegan was saving? They've leaked.
...in other troopergate news, Frank Bailey, the high ranking Palin staffer who was caught on tape pressuring DPS in the Wooten affair, is now refusing to testify before the independent investigation.
...in other troopergate news, Frank Bailey, the high ranking Palin staffer who was caught on tape pressuring DPS in the Wooten affair, is now refusing to testify before the independent investigation.
You Better Get Right with God
We may shudder in horror and make fun of her for being nuts, but the hard-core base of the GOP is eating this stuff up. Be afraid, be very afraid.
What a load of crap
Ross Douthat has been, up until now, one of the few conservatives that could be counted on to put intellectual honesty squarely in front of partisan advantage. But he has also been a Palin backer since before her nomination, and has written that, "I'm probably rooting harder for Sarah Palin to succeed than I have for any politician in recent memory."
I had high hopes that Douthat might take on the job of defending Palin on the merits, but he's chosen another course. In a series of posts over the last two days, Douthat has joined the McCain team in pretending that all negative reactions to Palin are part of some sort of hysterical overreaction, rather than being based in any sort of principled worry about her candidacy.
The reason Palin hasn't been accepted as a "moderate" and a "centrist" isn't, as Douthat has it, because "The chattering classes are already inclined to treat the Republican Party as a gathering of gun-toting yahoos with too many damn kids." It's because Sarah Palin is not a moderate or a centrist. Palin has a governing style that is reminiscent of the worst of the Bush Administration's executive overreach, she holds religious and social views that are far outside of the mainstream, and she has displayed an easy ability to lie for partisan advantage.
And yet, Douthat feels free to sit back and complain about "colleagues I used to respect and publications I normally admire" rather than to defend Palin on the merits. Douthat is probably right that muddying the water is the best hope at this point, but I expected better of him.
I had high hopes that Douthat might take on the job of defending Palin on the merits, but he's chosen another course. In a series of posts over the last two days, Douthat has joined the McCain team in pretending that all negative reactions to Palin are part of some sort of hysterical overreaction, rather than being based in any sort of principled worry about her candidacy.
The reason Palin hasn't been accepted as a "moderate" and a "centrist" isn't, as Douthat has it, because "The chattering classes are already inclined to treat the Republican Party as a gathering of gun-toting yahoos with too many damn kids." It's because Sarah Palin is not a moderate or a centrist. Palin has a governing style that is reminiscent of the worst of the Bush Administration's executive overreach, she holds religious and social views that are far outside of the mainstream, and she has displayed an easy ability to lie for partisan advantage.
And yet, Douthat feels free to sit back and complain about "colleagues I used to respect and publications I normally admire" rather than to defend Palin on the merits. Douthat is probably right that muddying the water is the best hope at this point, but I expected better of him.
Every jot and tittle
In yesterday's episode, Thomas Van Flein attempted to change the venue of the Troopergate investigation to the Palin controlled Personnel Board. That move failed, in part because the Personnel Board only has jurisdiction when a complaint has been filed, and no complaint had been filed.
Today, Governor Palin attempted to secure jurisdiction for the Personnel Board by filing a complaint against herself.
Addendum: Van Flein sent a letter to the independent investigation letting them know about the complaint and introducing this humdinger of an argument. Strikes me as a little crazy, but maybe one of the lawyers in the audience can provide an informed opinion:
Maybe it's worth noting that Van Flein is making two entirely separate, and possibly incompatible, arguments here.
He argues, first, that the legislative power of the state legislature does not include the power to investigate the executive branch. This strikes me as Bushian take on the separation of powers. Van Flein raises the stakes a few paragraphs later when he further asserts that "the general legislative power to issue subpoenas is clearly prohibited relative to the Legislative Council."
Van Flein's second argument is that having created a mechanism for investigation of the executive branch, namely the personnel board process, the Legislature may not now investigate using a different process. This argument could be compelling only if one first rejected the major premise of Van Flein's first argument. That is, if you grant, contra Van Flein, that the legislature has investigatory power, then you might further argue that the legislature has ceded that power to the personnel board process. Even then, you would be on thin ice as nothing in the Executive Branch Ethics Act (pdf!!) speaks to the possibility of concurrent investigations of suspicious acts except for Sec. 39.52.910(b) which says, in part, "nothing in this chapter precludes a prosecution under an applicable criminal statute nor prevents enforcement of any other state law that imposes a stricter standard of ethical conduct on public officers."
Today, Governor Palin attempted to secure jurisdiction for the Personnel Board by filing a complaint against herself.
Addendum: Van Flein sent a letter to the independent investigation letting them know about the complaint and introducing this humdinger of an argument. Strikes me as a little crazy, but maybe one of the lawyers in the audience can provide an informed opinion:
While the Legislative Council does have some limited investigatory power, those powers seem to be limited to investigations related to proposed or current laws. We are not aware of any such proposed legislation. In fact, we are suggesting that the Legislature may lack jurisdiction to investigate a co-equal branch of the government. While Governor Palin does not have anything to hide, you certainly can appreciate why she would insist that the investigation be conducted fairly, consistent with Alaska Statutes, and free from even the suggestion of political influence. Senator French suggests that this position is somehow "at odds with our state's constitution." We are not aware of which provision of the constitution he refers to but would be happy to reconsider our position if you point us to it. In fact, Mr. French may have overlooked this part of the State Constitution:The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed
Art. I, Sec.7. The Governor is a "person" and is entiteld to "fair and just treatment" as part of this investigation. Following state law, including the personnel board process, would comply with the Constitution. |Source (pdf!!)|
Maybe it's worth noting that Van Flein is making two entirely separate, and possibly incompatible, arguments here.
He argues, first, that the legislative power of the state legislature does not include the power to investigate the executive branch. This strikes me as Bushian take on the separation of powers. Van Flein raises the stakes a few paragraphs later when he further asserts that "the general legislative power to issue subpoenas is clearly prohibited relative to the Legislative Council."
Van Flein's second argument is that having created a mechanism for investigation of the executive branch, namely the personnel board process, the Legislature may not now investigate using a different process. This argument could be compelling only if one first rejected the major premise of Van Flein's first argument. That is, if you grant, contra Van Flein, that the legislature has investigatory power, then you might further argue that the legislature has ceded that power to the personnel board process. Even then, you would be on thin ice as nothing in the Executive Branch Ethics Act (pdf!!) speaks to the possibility of concurrent investigations of suspicious acts except for Sec. 39.52.910(b) which says, in part, "nothing in this chapter precludes a prosecution under an applicable criminal statute nor prevents enforcement of any other state law that imposes a stricter standard of ethical conduct on public officers."
9/2/08
RNC drinking game
Obviously, a shot every time we hear about McCain's time as a P.O.W., but what are the other rules?
Unrelatedly, here's a new GOP talking point: "I could take you through the vetting process, but I'm not going to"
...hijacking the post to say, this is some fucked up shit right here.
...Rick Santorum says Sarah Palin "is going to be learning with a fire-hose attached to her mouth."
...now that we've got race, gender, and booze on the table, what do you think of the talking point, "A lot of voters are going to think that Republicans got the order of the ticket right."
...Ross Douthat, Palin's self-proclaimed biggest fan, owes us more than this.
...the convention is boring, but Palin keeps on giving.
Update by Jason: From the video about Reagan: "He said he hated taxation, inflation, and the Soviets." I just took two shots.
Update by Jason, 2: The phrase "Country First" always strikes me as dirty, but only because of Shakespeare's country matters.
Unrelatedly, here's a new GOP talking point: "I could take you through the vetting process, but I'm not going to"
...hijacking the post to say, this is some fucked up shit right here.
...Rick Santorum says Sarah Palin "is going to be learning with a fire-hose attached to her mouth."
...now that we've got race, gender, and booze on the table, what do you think of the talking point, "A lot of voters are going to think that Republicans got the order of the ticket right."
...Ross Douthat, Palin's self-proclaimed biggest fan, owes us more than this.
...the convention is boring, but Palin keeps on giving.
Update by Jason: From the video about Reagan: "He said he hated taxation, inflation, and the Soviets." I just took two shots.
Update by Jason, 2: The phrase "Country First" always strikes me as dirty, but only because of Shakespeare's country matters.
A pattern of behavior
Thomas Van Flein, Governor Palin's new lawyer, today:
According to media reports, he clears $185 an hour working on the case, and is budgeted for about 500 hours. Nice work if you can get it.
Amusingly, Van Flein went on to request that the independent investigation provide his office with, "a copy of all witness statements you have...all documentary evidence you have, any witness list you have, and a copy of the complaint or other charging document upon which you are basing your investigation." Presumably, Van Flein will tomorrow explain that the materials are intended to be sent on to the Personnel Board.
Senator Hollis French, administrating the investigation and writing on Judiciary Committee stationary, said no:
This is the second time in the last few weeks that Palin has attempted to move the investigation into a venue she controls. Previously, Governor Palin directed Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg to launch an investigation of the charges. This was widely seen as an attempt to tamper with the work of the already authorized but not yet hired independent investigator. From the August 13th Alaska Daily News:
That whitewash blew up in Palin's face, but the failure of the gambit hardly excuses it. And here it is again.
Let's suppose for a minute that Governor Palin didn't do anything wrong up until and including her firing of Monegan. It would still remain true that in the last month she has repeatedly lied about her actions in the Wooten affar and has repeatedly tried to preempt the Legislature's investigation. She's stonewalling, pure and simple. I don't know what her middle name is, but I'm starting to suspect that it must start with a 'W'.
On a side note, and just to show that the ridiculousness never stops, if I'm reading the news right, it's because of the attempted whitewash that the State of Alaska is now having to shell out $95,000 for a private lawyer. In the normal course of things, the AG would provide counsel, but because the AG's investigation uncovered evidence in the scandal, the AG may be required to give a deposition and so he had to recuse himself from the case.
We fully welcome a fair inquiry into these allegations, and believe that the Personnel Board is statutorily mandated to oversee these proceedings. We trust you have no objection to following state law in that regard and will work with us in adhering to state law and submitting these issues to the body properly vested with primary jurisdiction. |source (pdf!!)|
According to media reports, he clears $185 an hour working on the case, and is budgeted for about 500 hours. Nice work if you can get it.
Amusingly, Van Flein went on to request that the independent investigation provide his office with, "a copy of all witness statements you have...all documentary evidence you have, any witness list you have, and a copy of the complaint or other charging document upon which you are basing your investigation." Presumably, Van Flein will tomorrow explain that the materials are intended to be sent on to the Personnel Board.
Senator Hollis French, administrating the investigation and writing on Judiciary Committee stationary, said no:
Your letter goes on to request that Mr. Branchflower work with you "in adhering to state law and submitting these issues to the body properly vested with primary jurisdiction" I confess that I may be misunderstanding your point. The Legislature, of course, has its own separate powers of investigation. I hope you are not suggesting that the Legislature does not have the authority to investigate potential violations of law by members of the Executive Branch. Governor Palin has repeatedly stated that she has nothing to hide and that she and her administration will cooperate fully with this investigation. Is your client aware that you seem to be challenging the Legislature's jurisdiction? Such a position is at odds with our state's constitution, and with your client's public statements.|source (pdf!!)|
This is the second time in the last few weeks that Palin has attempted to move the investigation into a venue she controls. Previously, Governor Palin directed Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg to launch an investigation of the charges. This was widely seen as an attempt to tamper with the work of the already authorized but not yet hired independent investigator. From the August 13th Alaska Daily News:
But critics of the governor -- although not French himself -- have raised the specter of "witness tampering." Some legislators said it doesn't look good for the attorney general to get involved.
"I think it is harmful to the credibility of the administration, harmful to the process and harmful to all the parties involved," said Fairbanks Republican Rep. Jay Ramras, chair of the House Judiciary Committee. "It's just the worst possible thing to be doing."
That whitewash blew up in Palin's face, but the failure of the gambit hardly excuses it. And here it is again.
Let's suppose for a minute that Governor Palin didn't do anything wrong up until and including her firing of Monegan. It would still remain true that in the last month she has repeatedly lied about her actions in the Wooten affar and has repeatedly tried to preempt the Legislature's investigation. She's stonewalling, pure and simple. I don't know what her middle name is, but I'm starting to suspect that it must start with a 'W'.
On a side note, and just to show that the ridiculousness never stops, if I'm reading the news right, it's because of the attempted whitewash that the State of Alaska is now having to shell out $95,000 for a private lawyer. In the normal course of things, the AG would provide counsel, but because the AG's investigation uncovered evidence in the scandal, the AG may be required to give a deposition and so he had to recuse himself from the case.
Too much fun with Palin
In the comments, Wobs writes:
I understand the desire to go there.
But every time we get to this point in a big election, there is a tension between what will make the best short term political attack, and what makes the best long term argument. I think this falls into the latter category because I just don't think that many people are going to rethink their stance on sex-ed in the next 60 days because of Palin's story.
In terms of winning the election, Palin's story is, I think, a deceptively helpful battle for the Republicans. The economy and the war are going to lose McCain the election, if we can keep the focus on that. If the election becomes about social issues... well, we'll probably still win, but I think it will be a lot closer.
I want to make hay over her daughters pregnancy. Palin is a proponent of abstinence only sex ed as the panacea for teenage pregnancy. May I introduce to you exhibit A in evidence of its bankruptcy.
I understand the desire to go there.
But every time we get to this point in a big election, there is a tension between what will make the best short term political attack, and what makes the best long term argument. I think this falls into the latter category because I just don't think that many people are going to rethink their stance on sex-ed in the next 60 days because of Palin's story.
In terms of winning the election, Palin's story is, I think, a deceptively helpful battle for the Republicans. The economy and the war are going to lose McCain the election, if we can keep the focus on that. If the election becomes about social issues... well, we'll probably still win, but I think it will be a lot closer.
Palin now trying to block investigation
The state has hired a private lawyer to represent Gov. Sarah Palin's office in the Legislature's investigation into the firing of former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The lawyer already has challenged whether lawmakers even have authority to oversee the inquiry. |ADN|(via TPM)
9/1/08
More fun with Palin!
Here is Palin's response to a candidate questionnaire for the Alaska 2006 gubernatorial race:
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
"Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance."
Sigh.
Here's the wikipedia entry for the Pledge of Allegiance.
Labor day
I thought at first that the guy on the lower right was the same person who had battered my head with his stomach, but now I can see that the angle is wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
