Ignore A Subpoena & Goto Jail!

Another thing we can blame GW Bush for.........The spoiled little rich kid (who evidently never heard the word "No" from his parents!) has spread a culture of outright lawlessness in this country by telling his employees to pay no attention to subpoenas. While not a Bush employee, Palin's husband is the latest criminal to do this. I say arrest their damned butts, haul them into court & add "Obstruction of Justice" charges to their list!
If you or I disregarded a subpoena, guess what would happen? (II guess the rich & famous are above the law after all)

I wish the general public was given a simple formula that would make it clear, at which income level, occupation or position in life....that your are above the law?
(perhaps a simple line added to your 1040 that would say: "Congratulations!!...You are now above the law")

Did you listen to the audio of this witchhunt? It is a joke, don't embarrass yourself with thisanymore.

coaledsweat wrote:Did you listen to the audio of this witchhunt? It is a joke, don't embarrass yourself with thisanymore.

Just answer one simple question: Yes or No.......Is it not an ongoing, bi-partisan investigation of Gov. Palin's possible abuse of power? (no way for anyone to prejudge her guilt/innocence until the investigation is complete, but her blocking it looks bad........Just like Bush does )

there is a reason we put a elected offical in charge of a state.
You may not like every decision they make.
but you can vote them out of office.
Unlike the judges in MA.
BBD

Blackdiamonddoug wrote:You may not like every decision they make.
but you can vote them out of office.

Not sure if I follow you here Doug but don't we have the right to expect anyone, regardless of the wealth or power to at least obey the law?

The clown was fired for insubordination, repeatedly trying to go around and over Palin's financial directives to feed his pet projects. I will find you the audio, tell me this clown French isn't wasting taxpayer money.

Here you go. Enjoy.

http://blog1.thejtandbearshow.com/2008/ ... -list.aspx

Trolling?

coaledsweat wrote:The clown was fired for insubordination, repeatedly trying to go around and over Palin's financial directives to feed his pet projects. I will find you the audio, tell me this clown French isn't wasting taxpayer money.

No way for you or I to decide her guilt/innocence at this point coaledsweat. I'll trust th bi-partisan, official investigation & suggest you should do the same.
Regardless of that & back to the topic, what legal right does her husband have to ignore a lawfully executed subpoena?
Could you do that without getting arrested?....Of course not! Why are these people above the law?....Makes me sick!


PS...I notice you will not answer a single question that I ask you......Maybe I need to subpoena you!! (but then again, you obviously can't answer my questions because you are trying to defend the indefensible.

Has he actually failed to appear at a specified time yet? As far as I know all that's been said is that it is his intention to not comply with the subpeona. That does not mean he actually has yet. In fact it isn't clear from the reporting and commentary that I've seen so far that the subpeona has even been delivered to Mr. Palin yet. People often say such things and use lawyers to fight behind the scenes in order to narrow the focus of any questioning, to negotiate alternative testimony arrangements, and to otherwise gain a tactical advantage (particularly when on the receiving end of a partisan hack effort, which this has become thanks to Hollis French).

And apparently, in the event he does fail to appear, in order for him to be arrested the full state senate would have to be brought into session in order to vote on if he is in contempt of the state legislature, currently that isn't set to happen until January. Since you're all about waiting for the investigation to complete before finding guilt or innocence, shouldn't we wait until the vote is held before we get in a tizzy about his supposedly breaking a law?

And your characterization of this as a bipartisan investigation is laughable at this point. It may well have started off as a reasonably fair and bipartisan effort, but the second she was named as VP nominee the tenor of those heading up the investigation changed and the stakes for the impact of the investigation, even if she is ultimately found to have committed no wrong, raised significantly. The investigation itself, as it always does in these high stakes situations, becomes the political bludgeon. Any semblance of truth in the effort becomes secondary to those heading it up with a partisan axe to grind. Among some of the changes are the Democrat lead on the investigation making public claims of an upcoming "October surprise" and public acknowledgment of being a partisan in active effort and favor of the Obama ticket.

And if I may venture into the pre-judgement game, given the evidence that has come out publicly so far, it is looking more and more like the investigation is something of a sham.

pvolcko wrote:Has he actually failed to appear at a specified time yet? As far as I know all that's been said is that it is his intention to not comply with the subpeona.

Fair point Paul, but he has announced his intention to disregard the subpoena so are we in agreement that he has no legal grounds to simply thumb his nose at the legal system by failing to appear?
If he fails to appear & if you agree that he must appear, doesn't he deserve to be arrested? (you would be)

pvolcko wrote:And your characterization of this as a bipartisan investigation is laughable at this point.

That is obviously your opinion, & one not shared by everyone, including a majority of the Republican members of the investigation. Regardless of the politics here, doesn't the truth need to come out as to whether or not Gov. Palin overstepped her authority? Should investigations be simply quashed for the political benefit of one of the sides?

The merits of this case are not for us to decide & there is not enough public info available for anyone to make a decision....YET.

pvolcko wrote:And your characterization of this as a bipartisan investigation is laughable at this point.

The waste of the taxpayers money on this isn't very funny.

He didn't show.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26794836

"Witnesses who refuse to testify can be found in contempt under Alaska law. But the full Legislature must be in session, which won't happen until January. That means witnesses can stonewall without penalty beyond the Nov. 4 election, lawmakers said.

One of them, Sen. Gene Therriault, opposed the subpoenas. He said Friday the investigation was intended to uncover whether the governor was justified in firing Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, and he believes she was."

The Alaska AG on this. He thinks it's a partisan witch hunt, so do I.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti ... 215/NEWS15

I thought it was funny that on the AOL poll's McCain is always ahead but on the husband having to go they agreed slightly, but on if the investigation should continue go on during an election it was a yes 68%.

Yeah, let's waste more time and money on this.

http://townhall.com/blog/g/bcd9ee89-b16 ... dab47baf2e

Devil505 wrote:Fair point Paul, but he has announced his intention to disregard the subpoena so are we in agreement that he has no legal grounds to simply thumb his nose at the legal system by failing to appear? If he fails to appear & if you agree that he must appear, doesn't he deserve to be arrested? (you would be)

I don't know the law on this, but I suspect there is legal recourse available to get out of a subpoena. Both spousal privilege (depending on the questions that would have been asked) and potentially executive privilege come into play here. Also consider that perhaps the state legislature doesn't have legal authority to compel appearance without first holding a full senate vote. The subpoena in this case was issued by a 3-2 vote of a 5 person panel. It may well not hold the full weight of a subpoena issued by the full senate. You seem to be jumping to the worst of conclusions here.

That said, I believe he will appear if and when the time comes that he is legally compelled to do so. It is also proper for him to do so. It does no one any good to be held in contempt, be fined, or even be sent to jail for a couple months.

And that said, I don't think it will come to compelling him to testify. I think this may be some political gamesmanship of their own. This appears to be a very simple investigation, only a handful of people involved. They may well be playing things so as to create a political villain out of the process so that they can go in and clear their name at the time of their choosing, to play the opposition against itself. They may also be forcing the investigator into a position of having to issue findings well in advance of Nov 4. If they do this playing hard to get for another week or two, let it gain some broad media attention, and then go in, testify, and demand that for the sake of fairness issue their report ASAP, instead of waiting until the friday before election day... it could be a smart strategy to defuse the october surprise that Hollis French said he'd be delivering.

That is obviously your opinion, & one not shared by everyone, including a majority of the Republican members of the investigation. Regardless of the politics here, doesn't the truth need to come out as to whether or not Gov. Palin overstepped her authority? Should investigations be simply quashed for the political benefit of one of the sides?

I'd love to see a source on that. From what I've read the vote to get this set of subpeona's issued was 3-2. 2 Dems and 1 Rep yea, 2 Rep nay. I'm sure the republicans want it to be over and done with and want the truth to come out, but the partisan nature of Hollis French's statements and his action of striking a key witness from the subpeona list (leader of a meeting where Palin may have been involved and where this firing was discussed) creates an air of unfairness and partisan hackery.

I want the truth to come out, but given the increased profile and the partisan turn it has taken, I think it makes sense to find a non-partisan individual or group to run things. And barring that, expect for French and others to be kept in line while it goes on. I'm not saying scrap the whole thing. It is started, I'm for finishing it. But it needs to be fair and not used as a platform for unfair political character assassination.

The merits of this case are not for us to decide & there is not enough public info available for anyone to make a decision....YET.

Says the man who openly advocates for Bush, Cheney, Rove, and the rest to be put in chains and hauled off to prison.

There is quite a bit of information available publicly as to the professional reasons Wooten could have been fired (two exampled, unreasonable pushback on budgetary directives and meetings behind Palin's back). There's also the list of things the police officer did and the fact he wasn't fired when any right minded supervisor should have fired him. There's also Wooten's testimony that he was never told to fire the police officer, only that a number of contacts on the subject of the officer were made (given his record it is unsurprising and entirely reasonable in the abstract). And most recently we have Palin's personal email account being hacked and the contents made open to the world to see, and nothing even remotely incriminating being found on any subject.

You may not be interested in making a judgement of your own at this point, that's fine. I think there is enough known to be reasonably certain Sarah Palin did nothing wrong (or to be a little less charitable, she had ample reason to fire him regardless of the personal aspect that may have been at play) and that perhaps Todd Palin overstepped his bounds a little bit (something that I do not believe will be at all an issue if McCain/Palin are elected).


edit: Sorry, I got the names confused. Wooten is the state trooper, Monegan is the chief that was fired.