Palin Exonerated in Troopergate

The Alaska Legislature's investigation of "Troopergate" came to a 12-0 consensus on the nature of Governor Palin's actions. Now comes the tricky part--how does one characterize the consensus? The conclusions are as follows: ...a workers compensation claim filed by Wooten was handled appropriately. ...Palin's firing of Monegan was "a proper and lawful exercise" of the governor's authority. Of course, those aren't the headlines, although they are the only concrete conclusions produced by the investigative committee. What lead is this. "Governor Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda ... to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired," Branchflower's report says. "Compliance with the code of ethics is not optional. It is an individual responsibility imposed by law, and any effort to benefit a personal interest through official action is a violation of that trust. ... The term ‘benefit' is very broadly defined, and includes anything that is to the person's advantage or personal self-interest." We can gather two things from this statement. Sarah Palin had no personal involvement in the dispute, and two--you have to stretch pretty far to make the firing a Trooper Wooten a matter of personal benefit, in fact so far that no one who isn't a complete a-hole can make this kind of allegation with a straight face. Unlike say Governor Eliot Spitzer of NY, who tried to frame the NY legislature's Speaker (normal Democrat stuff...), Palin could derive no political benefit from the firing of Wooten. Clearly there was no finanical benefit either. How about a personal benefit? I know lots of people going through divorces and I don't know any of them that want their spouses to lose their jobs, in fact--and you should know this--they want their spouse in healthy financial condition so they can support an children of the marriage or minimize the financial impact of the divorce on the other spouse. Its pretty lcear that firing Wooten would go against the financial interest of the Wooten family, and thus presumable agains the interest of the extended Palin family. So whose interests does firing poacher-Taser boy serve? Well, judging from his superior's report, it serves the public interest. If I had a cop like this working on the local force, I would camp out on the Mayor's doorstep with a hundred of my closest friends to be sure the guy (or gal) was removed from service. The report is so transparently a matter of hard ball politics that every participant should be driven from office, and preferably the state. They'd be more comfortable in New York or New Jersey anyways. Final note: No penalty to the governor. I think that says it all.

• » Read Full Story