Over the weekend, The Wall Street Journal had no trouble with that fact, noting that “Gov. Palin faced a weekend of critical news coverage following an Alaska legislative report concluding that she violated state ethics laws…” And this morning, ABC’s Jake Tapper turned in a report on Good Morning America, that, in under three minutes, debunked three of Palin’s “repeated false assertion[s]” about the contents of the report. Tapper said, straight up, that the report concluded she had “abused her power and violated state ethics laws.”
(Even Palin should agree. In 2004, Palin and a Democratic lawmaker issued a joint statement calling for a formal investigation of the sitting governor and his attorney general under the Ethics Act, which they repeatedly referred to as state law.)
Still, some outlets continue to say that the report found no violation of the law. This afternoon, MSNBC ran this chyron under a conversation with Palin spokesperson Meg Stapleton: “Alaskan legislators find that Palin broke ethics rules but not the law.” And The Anchorage Daily News is treating the question of whether or not the report said she broke the law as a partisan he-said/she-said.
This isn’t clarity. It isn’t even correct. It’s an excess of evenhandedness. Palin can dispute the accuracy of Branchflower’s reading of state law, or even question—as she has—if it was appropriate for the legislature to investigate the matter. But no matter what you heard—or didn’t hear—since the release of the report, its conclusion is clear: she broke the law.
- 1
- 2
Surprise, surprise!
The former prosecutor who worked with the guy Palin fired finds that Palin violated some ethics law by trying to get her abusive ex-brother-in-law fired and nobody really gives a crap, except for the moonbats!
Posted by padikiller on Mon 13 Oct 2008 at 06:22 PM
Even though the board ruled that Mrs. Palin "abused her powers..." any appointee can be removed for any reason. Further, whether or not the police officer in question was an in-law of the Palin's isn't very relevant. This officer, according to reports, was physically abusive toward his wife and son. So those criticizing Mr. & Mrs. Palin, are therefore defending a wife beating, child abusing police officer. I think good sense prevailed here.
Posted by jpmzo on Mon 13 Oct 2008 at 06:35 PM
Hmm ... lets see here. Alaska legislator and BHO supporter, Hollis French hires Steve Branchflower to conduct an investigation on both his and his presidential nominee's opponent. Thwarted from having it released on October 30th for the October surprise of the campaign, he manages to have it released and even though several hundred pages remain confidential and absolutely no one except for Branchflower has endorsed the report, Clint Hendler of the CJR somehow spins it into the fucking Church commission.
Its like you guys don’t even pay lip service to objectivity anymore.
Posted by Carl Stevens on Mon 13 Oct 2008 at 07:54 PM
"Palin Broke the Law, Says Investigation"
"Galieo Is A Heretic, Says Inquisition"
"Girls Are Witches, Say Puritans"
"World Is Flat, Says Bible"
Posted by padikiller on Tue 14 Oct 2008 at 07:16 AM
In my state, an ethics violation is punished by the state ethics commission. Let's see if she is punished. It's really just another indication of how mini-Bush she is!
Posted by Bill Cadogan on Tue 14 Oct 2008 at 08:18 AM
The travelling press circus following Palin around the country is no better. She was asked "tough" questions such as "What do you think of the report?" and "Do you feel vindicated."
Not one of dozen or so reporters covering her campaign asked a specific, pointed question along the lines of, "Governor, the report said you abused your office, used your office for a personal vendetta and broke the state's Ethics Law. How can you say that you are "relieved that the report cleared you of wrong-doing?"
I wish I could get paid for not doing my job.
Posted by Charley James on Tue 14 Oct 2008 at 09:52 AM
A Democratic opponent of Palin hires a former prosecutor who worked on the police department with the guy Palin fired to investigate Palin and then fast-tracks in order to craft the "investigation" into a political hit job... And all the CJR-types can wonder is why nobody gives a crap about this non-story.
Why isn't the MSM skewering the guy behind the witch hunt?
HUH?
Posted by padikiller on Tue 14 Oct 2008 at 10:37 AM
Clint, I’ve had a change of heart on this one. I fully support a formal investigation into Palin's violation of the Alaska state ethic code. That is, of course, right after Obama’s clear cut ethical violations are investigated.
Illinois state legislators are prohibited from taking honoraria for speaking under the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act.
According to Barack Obama’s 2000 and 2002 tax returns he received $16,500 as a “Foundation director/Educational speaker” in 2000 and on his 2002 Schedule C, Barack reported $34,491 for “LEGAL SERVCES / SPEAKING FEES.”
The Illinois Governmental Ethics Act (5 ILCS 420/ Sec. 2-110. Honoraria ) states that No member of the General Assembly shall accept any honorarium where “honorarium is defined as means a payment of money to a member of the General Assembly for an appearance or speech
So right you are Clint, lets throw the book at Palin .. right after someone even dares mention this.
Posted by Carl Stevens on Sat 18 Oct 2008 at 11:17 AM
A more revealing headline would read, "Gov. Palin has a spine, shocking other politicians." If your sister was abused by a state cop would you be Michael Dukakis or Sarah Palin? She fired her public safety director. The cop is still a cop. Where's the benefit for an ethics violation?
Posted by Roy Bercaw Cambridge MA USA on Sun 19 Oct 2008 at 09:40 PM