The Anchorage Daily News Gets It Right

Yesterday’s Anchorage Daily News called “bullshit” on Governor Palin’s efforts to spin away the conclusions of the Legislature’s bipartisan report on the whole Troopergate issue:

Palin vindicated?
Governor offers Orwellian spin

Sarah Palin’s reaction to the Legislature’s Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation. She claims the report “vindicates” her. She said that the investigation found “no unlawful or unethical activity on my part.”

Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian.

Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: “I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.”

In plain English, she did something “unlawful.” She broke the state ethics law.

Perhaps Gov. Palin has been too busy to actually read the Troopergate report. Perhaps she is relying on briefings from McCain campaign spinmeisters.

That’s the charitable interpretation.

Because if she had actually read it, she couldn’t claim “vindication” with a straight face.

Palin asserted that the report found “there was no abuse of authority at all in trying to get Officer Wooten fired.”

In fact, the report concluded that “impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired.”

Palin’s response is the kind of political “big lie” that George Orwell warned against. War is peace. Black is white. Up is down.

Gov. Palin and her camp trumpeted the report’s second finding: that she was within her legal authority to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. But the report also said it’s likely one of the reasons she fired him was his failure to get rid of her ex-brother-in-law trooper.

That’s not “vindication,” and surely Gov. Palin knows it.

Gov. Palin does have a defense. She could have said:

“I’m gratified that the report confirmed what I said all along, that I had the authority to terminate Walt Monegan as public safety commissioner.

“I absolutely disagree that I violated state ethics law. In repeatedly complaining about trooper Mike Wooten, Todd and I were not pursuing a personal vendetta. We were trying to protect the integrity of the Alaska State Troopers from having an arrogant, almost-out-of-control law-breaker in their ranks. Because the action we were seeking was in the public interest, not purely our personal interest, there is no ethics law violation.”

Gov. Palin and her husband felt so passionately about Wooten because the case was so personal to them. Their passion blinded them to any other considerations.

They had no sense that the power of the governor’s office carries a special responsibility not to use it to settle family scores. They had no sense that legal restrictions might prevent the troopers from firing Wooten. They had no sense that persistent queries from the governor’s office might be perceived as pressure to bend state personnel laws.

Gov. Palin and her husband were obsessed with Wooten the way Capt. Ahab was obsessed with the Great White Whale. No Wooten, no peace.

Has Gov. Palin committed an impeachable offense? Hardly.

Is what she did indictable? No.

But it wasn’t appropriate, especially for someone elected as an ethical reformer. And her Orwellian claims of “vindication” make this blemish on her record look even worse.

You asked us to hold you accountable, Gov. Palin. Did you mean it?

The editorial makes an excellent point of particular interest to us media mavens: there are plenty of defensible spins Team Palin could have put on this very predictable development (did anyone really think that they were going to get off without any criticism?); why did they resort to one that is so, so bad and only reinforces the growing perception of a political figure who is rigid, overscripted and hard-edged?

- Austin

14 Responses

  1. I love it – Palin takes down a rogue cop and unresponsive bureaucrat and we’re supposed to see her as the villain?

    More troopergate I say! More!

  2. Fernando -

    Not a villian per se but as someone willing to break the law for her own personal agenda. If she’ll do it when the stakes are this low, what could she justify in the name of national security?

    But, since you’ve raised the competence issue as well, she been unable to “take down a rogue cop” as you put it; how’s she gonna take out Bin Laden?

    - Austin

  3. Come on, Austin. Nicolle Wallace? Tucker Bounds? They both have a long-standing record of guiding their clients the wrong way. Hello, Bush administration? I can’t believe you’d be surprised by this.

  4. “Undo pressure”? I don’t think that meets the test of illegality.

    How’s Palin going to take out Bin Laden? Like any military strategy, she’ll have to circumvent Democratic opposition.

    This Troopergate thing is the most laughable political (let alone legal) issue yet.

    Do you guys realize what your alleging – that a rogue child-torturer cop and his incompetent boss were picked on? We all know where the Dems’ sympathies lie. I like Palin even more now.

  5. Call me a fool, but what I don’t understand is if Trooper Wooten actually tasered his step-kid (which he apparently denies) how come he hasn’t been prosecuted for it? If this is such an open and shut case of “torture”, how come the guy isn’t in jail? Do Alaskan laws differ so much from the laws in the rest of this country that the child’s mother can’t at least get a restraining order?

    Or is there a possibility that this is one of those “he said/she said” areas in a nasty divorce–and we’ve all seen what those can do to friends and family. Still, using a taser on a child is a pretty serious charge, and you’d think there’d be sufficient evidence/witnesses for prosecution.

    I have to admit, that the parts of the report I’ve read, where the Chief dude called the State Police and tried to report Wooten for abusing the public trust by using his squad car to drop this kid off at church (it turns out Wooten had already obtained permission in advance to do this) sound a whole lot like persecution to me.

  6. @ Fernando, re: “‘Undo pressure’? I don’t think that meets the test of illegality.”

    Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: “I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.”

    At the risk of sounding like Yogi Berra, I’m pretty sure violating a statute is illegal.

  7. But an auditor’s finding isn’t a determination of guilt. We have another mechanism called “court” that does that.

    Here’s the statute:

    http://www.legis.state.ak.us/cgi-bin/folioisa.dll/stattx07/query=*/doc/%7Bt16068%7D

    I still like the totally unsympathetic political posture the Dems are taking: Protect our bad cop and useless bureaucrat .

  8. Personally, I like the Republican”s assumption that all cops are crooks and child torturers–remember that little thing you called a “determination of guilt” that requires a “court”? Why are you so willing to overlook that in some cases but not in others? Just trying to protect your friends in high places, while tossing the little guys (who put their lives on the line to save your sorry ass every day) to the wolves? You’d probably even go so far as to vote against effective body armor for police, wouldn’t you?

    Republicans=cop killers

    (or at least that’s how your “argument” would seem to go….personally, I think the whole thing, and the logic and tactics that go with it, stink.)

  9. Fair point, Fernando. The courts haven’t ruled. Yet. I suspect brother-in-law is probably plannig a civil suit.

  10. YOU ALL MUST COMMENT ON THIS!

    http://www.drudgereport.com/flashotp.htm

  11. Fernando, don’t you suppose that the the Ayer’s attacks were in McCain’s talking points the day before and day of the coverage of Ayers connection to Obama? I think that’s just the way it works in politics and journalism these days. When candidates issue talking points and candidates and their surrogates repeat said talking points like trained monkeys, their viewpoints do tend to show up in news coverage, regardless of the party using the talking points. That’s hardly evidence of Obama hypnotizing reporters with his secret magical, mystical talking points that only Democrats know how to use.

  12. As Drudge aptly points out:

    “The memo oddly mirrors much of the main press analysis and theme of the current campaign.”

    I don’t rely on the press much to do their own thinking. At this stage in the game, independent analysis could mess it up for their boy.

  13. nice job changing the subject fernando! the drudge report no less.

    you realize the Republican House caucus sent out commercials opposing the bail-out before the vote? it is called planning.

    It is also important to remember that trooopergate was initiated by a republican legislature and started well before Bible Spice was selected as VP.

Leave a Reply