Troopergate: The Dem Smear Job of Palin Falls Apart

This week facts came to light about the so-called "bipartisan" ethics investigation of Sarah Palin. Palin fired the Alaska State Safety Commissioner, Walter Monegan, whose job included presiding over the Alaskan state troopers. Democrats have charged that she fired him in a personal vendetta, i.e. because he failed to fire Palin's former brother-in-law after he divorced Palin's sister.

A state investigation previously disclosed that the brother in law, trooper Mike Wooten, was caught driving drunk in his police car, that he tasered Palin's eleven year old nephew, and that he threatened to kill Palin's father. Those are pretty good reasons to fire Wooten, and Palin would certainly be within her rights to fire the Safety Commissioner for keeping Wooten on. However, that's not what happened. Wooten still has his job, even under a new Safety Commissioner.

The Weekly Standard reports that Palin released records showing that the Safety Commissioner was fired for insubordination, for going over Palin's head to seek the state legislature's approval of a project without submitting it to Palin first; for issuing public statements of his disagreement with Palin on budget issues, and for refusing to carry out other of Palin's directives. The State Safety Commissioner serves at the discretion of the Governor and may be fired by the Governor for any reason. This guy was begging to be fired and finally got his wish.

Ed Morrissey usefully outlines Monegan's record of insubordination:

* 12/9/07: Monegan holds a press conference with Hollis French to push his own
budget plan.*

1/29/08: Palin’s staffers have to rework their procedures to keep
Monegan from bypassing normal channels for budget requests.*

February 2008: Monegan publicly releases a letter he wrote to Palin supporting a project she vetoed.*

June 26, 2008: Monegan bypassed the governor’s office entirely and
contacted Alaska’s Congressional delegation to gain funding for a project.

Not surprisingly, the head of the committee investigating Palin, state senator Hollis French, is an ardent pro-Obama Democrat. It isn't difficult to see that the so-called investigation is a fraud, designed to engender public distrust of Palin and paint her with an undeserved aura of wrong-doing. Naturally, the main stream media assists in the smear by reporting on Palin's "vendetta" and point out, often, that Palin is the "target of an ethics investigation."

This smear technique is nothing new to the Democrats. U.S. Congressional Democrats tried the very same thing on President Bush for firing several federal prosecutors. Bush didn't like their performance so he replaced them. The Dems in Congress attempted to stage an "ethics investigation" of Bush, claiming that the firings were improper, hoping to taint him, and other Republicans by association, with the stench of unethical behavior. Such "investigations" are deliberately dragged on as long as possible to generate maximum negative publicity for their intended targets.

The Dems attempted to subpoena Bush and other Bush Administration officials, to be grilled in their Kangaroo Court. Bush and the other officials refused to obey the subpoenas or to cooperate with the staged stunt. Like the Alaskan Safety Commissioner, federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the chief executive. Bush has the legal right to fire any prosecutor at any time and for any reason, and it is none of the business of Congressional Democrats. Palin's option of firing Monegan is in the same category of legal, permissible actions by the chief executive.

McCain Campaign Rebuts Accusations Re: Sarah Palin

Bryon York at National Review Online discussed the McCain Campaign's response to a variety of accusations regarding Sarah Palin.

1.  Sarah Palin wasn't properly "vetted."  The implication is that Palin's negatives are so great that McCain wouldn't have chosen her had he known about certain events in Palin's life and career.  York writes:

The story, my campaign source told me, is “materially false.” Gov. Palin, the strategist said, was subjected to a “complete vet.” “That included her filling out a 70-question questionnaire that was highly intrusive and personal. She was then interviewed for more than three hours by A.B. Culvahouse. There were multiple follow-up interviews.” (I asked precisely how many follow-ups there were, but my source stuck with “multiple.”) “There was a thorough interview process,” the strategist continued. “There was a public records search and political vet. There was a private life and financial vet. Everything that has come out was known by the campaign through the vetting process.”

“Every aspect of her political record is known to us. These people [McCain’s opponents] are desperate.”

2.  The "Troopergate" Issue:  Did Sarah Palin fire the commissioner of public safety because he wouldn't fire Palin's brother-in-law from the Alaska Troopers?

“Of course this issue came up in the vetting, and this is what we discovered,” the source said. “The man who was fired has said on the record that he was never pressured by the governor or the governor’s husband on the issue of firing Trooper Wooten. The governor had a vision for how she wanted that department to be run.  The commissioner had a different vision.”

“The reason that members of the Palin family were having discussions with the head of the state police about this state trooper, who was her ex-brother-in-law, was because he had made threats against the family. He threatened to kill the governor's daughter, her father, and her sister. He tasered her 11-year-old stepson.  And that is why the Palin family was concerned about this trooper.”

Read it all here.