Who Told the TrooperGate Witnesses to Ignore the Subpoenas?

/in /by

Here’s an interesting question. Who told the Palin-friendly TrooperGate witnesses not to show up? It’s relevant, you see, because two Democrats are thinking of asking the police to investigate whether there was any witness tampering in the case. It seems they’re not focusing on the more incendiary possibility that Murlene Wilkes’ financial incentive persuaded her to lie to Stephen Branchflower about being pressured to deny a Wooten workers comp claim. Rather, these lawmakers are considering whether the mere act of instructing witnesses to ignore a subpoena constitutes witness tampering.

Separately, two Alaska Democrats said they are considering asking state police to investigate why subpoenaed witnesses, including Palin’s husband, did not testify before the legislative committee last week. The lawmakers, Rep. Les Gara and Sen. Bill Wielechowski, said state law bars witness tampering, but that they did not have enough information to file a formal complaint in the case.

In other words, the people who told Todd Palin and about seven state employees to blow off a valid subpoena may be on the dock for witness tampering.

I don’t know whether that argument withstands legal scrutiny (bmaz?). But the McCain team is taking no chances. They say they didn’t tell witnesses not to show.

Griffin said the campaign has not advised any witnesses on how to respond to subpoenas.

Which makes me wonder whether this is one of the reasons why Palin’s lawyer, Tom Van Flein, is lying about having terminated his contract with the state.

Last week, Governor Palin’s lawyer Tom Van Flein was quoted in the Anchorage Daily News as saying that his "firm last Friday terminated its state contract, worth up to $95,000, to represent the governor’s office."

Not true. The contract wasn’t canceled.

Van Flein has a written contract with the State of Alaska. Like all such contracts with the State, it has provisions governing termination. Termination requires notice to the State, typically in writing.

According to my sources, Van Flein did not provide notice of termination to the state, either in writing or orally.

See, back when I was trying to count all the conflicts of interest among Palin’s legal teams in Alaska, I speculated that maybe Van Flein had terminated his contract because it made it possible for him to represent both Sarah and Todd Palin, getting around the fact that 1) the state shouldn’t pay legal fees for a non-state employee, and 2) the state shouldn’t pay a lawyer to represent two parties whose interests may not coincide, and 3) the state should not pay a lawyer if the Attorney General decides to un-recuse and stick his nose in the case.

But Van Flein hasn’t, apparently, terminated his contract with the state. Which means the state is still paying for badly conflicted legal representation even though one of the reasons they’re paying for it (because the AG had supposedly recused) is no longer operative.

More importantly, Van Flein, at a time when he was employed by the state and consulting with McCain’s fancy terrorism prosecutor, almost certainly advised Todd Palin he could simply blow off a valid subpoena.

Doing so on the state’s dime, it seems, raises the stakes on that advice.

image_print
  2. ThingsComeUndone says:

    Here’s an interesting question. Who told the Palin-friendly TrooperGate witnesses not to show up? It’s relevant, you see, because two Democrats are thinking of asking the police to investigate whether there was any witness tampering in the case.

    Who else has the clout to tell Sarah anything but McCain’s GOP election lawyers?

  4. slide says:

    To instruct a witness to willfully disobey a lawful subpoena constitutes obstruction of justice. For an attorney to instruct a witness to willfully disobey a lawful subpoena will find the attorney before the state bar and probably will get him/her seriously sanctioned if not disbarred. I am sure we will hear much more about this in the future.

    • Ann in AZ says:

      For an attorney to instruct a witness to willfully disobey a lawful subpoena will find the attorney before the state bar and probably will get him/her seriously sanctioned if not disbarred. I am sure we will hear much more about this in the future.

      If all things were equal and justice were for all, that may be true. But if it were, why wouldn’t “Goldbars” Luskin be disbarred?

      Also, isn’t witness tampering also obstruction of justice? And ignoring subpoenas from the Congress of the US did not upset the Congress enough to issue arrest warrants, why would anyone expect ignoring subpoenas from the Alaska legislature to fare any better?

    • Ahgoo says:

      It’s not just van Flein, it’s the Alaska AG Colberg. Complaints can be filed at the Alaska State Bar website.

  5. GregB says:

    Leave Sarah Pain alone! It’s the right of Republicans to ignore whatever laws they deem ignorable.

    -G

    Boy, Chimpy’s got an audience full of crickets…..

  6. perris says:

    Here’s an interesting question. Who told the Palin-friendly TrooperGate witnesses not to show up?

    not the answer you are looking for but the answer never the less

    it was meyers who told them, no matter who told them afterwards, meyers told them first

  7. ThingsComeUndone says:

    More importantly, Van Flein, at a time when he was employed by the state and consulting with McCain’s fancy terrorism prosecutor, almost certainly advised Todd Palin he could simply blow off a valid subpoena.

    We need to jail these people until they talk the odds that they all decided to blow off subpoenas independently is very unlikely.

  9. i4u2bi says:

    I’m thinking McLiar should go ahead and replace Miss Piggy with Pat Robertson so there would be less of a ‘distraction’.

  10. emptywheel says:

    @8

    But remember, that’s the investigation that Palin tried to get out of last week–I’m not sure exactly what happened, but apparently the 3 people in charge didn’t buy her submission that she had done her own study and found she had done nothing wrong. So I actually think that one might bite her in the ass, too.

    And in any case, the cover-up really is snowballing in its own right.

  12. masaccio says:

    The Commissioner of the State Police is Joseph A. Masters. He was appointed by Sarah Palin on September 12, 2008, according to this press release.

    Masters, 44, of Anchorage, has 24 years of public safety experience. He has more than 20 years of service with the Department of Public Safety in various roles including supervising trooper recruitment and training. Masters served as deputy director of the Alaska State Troopers from June 2003 through May 2005. Prior to his service with the Troopers, Masters was a commander in Fish & Wildlife Protection.

  13. Leen says:

    They must have brought in the experts who know how to ignore supboenas and get away with it. Rove, Meiers, Bolton.

    Is this what you lawyer folks call a ”precedent”? Wonder if any of the peasnats out here will use the Palin/Rove/Meiers/Bolton precedent if we are ever sent a subpoena?

    • klynn says:

      EW, thanks for the post. Let’s hope the Alaskan Women Against Palin group puts some more public pressure on the Alaskan legislature in regards to this whole cover-up.

      Leen,

      When we lived in DC, I was a key witness to a DUI accident which did over $10 thousand in property damage. I was pregnant. I received a subpoena and showed up in court. Due to a lack of a translator, the case was given a continuance. I was notified to show up 5 different times. I showed up each time, taking unpaid leave from my job and each time no court translator for the defense team. I asked the judge if there was any way for me to give a deposition due to health reasons? I was told, “No!” The sixth notice came. The day I was due in court, I went into labor. I called to courthouse in between contractions and I was told if I did not show, I would be charged with contempt. Of course, I could not show. I was at the hospital. I was in transition, pushing a baby out when the case came before the judge. The case was dismissed because I was not there and I was charged with contempt.

      I was notified, while giving birth, and a high risk delivery nonetheless. It took a friend, who was editor of Law Review, calling the judge and scolding him for punishing a citizen who tried to meet her civic duty several times, even had phone records of my call to the court house while in labor and two of my showings to the court house happened while I was suppose to be on bed rest which is why the request for giving a deposition was made.

      The whole thing was ridiculous and I resented how I was made to feel like the criminal, instead of the actual criminal. It was quite intrusive on the joy of making it through a high risk delivery and holding our first born in our arms…

      Peasants get their arses hulled off to court…

  15. cbl2 says:

    I has a confusion – one of those 7 is Ivy Frye – she also retained Van Flein

    asked the Anchorage Daily News Who is paying Frye’s bill ?

    and what of the other 6 who refused to testify – who are their attorneys and who is paying them ?

  17. Prairie Sunshine says:

    Bush hectoring the United Nations that they can be a force for good in the 21st St with “transparency, *something* and seriousness of purpose….”

    Transparency.

    Yeah, I did spit up a little in my mouth. Fortunately there’s still ol’ Emeril reruns on the FoodTV network….

  18. Adie says:

    Hi Marcy and Pups!

    Now lookee here, folks. Today’s me birthday, and we’re gonna celebrate by power-washing the front walk. I gots no way to dodge this subpoena. I’m just a poor hapless senior person.

    I want BLOOD in the water, and I want it NOW!

    We’ll do cleanup. Okay?!

    Just… just… we gotta be able to see it to know where to spew the cleaner.

    ON, You Huskies! Mush!

  19. radiofreewill says:

    The Occam’s Razor answer would be – The same person/people who told Miers, Bolten and Rove that they didn’t have to Obey the Rule of Law, either.

    If Subpoenas don’t work, isn’t that a de-facto indication that the Rule of Law isn’t working, either?

    What’s going on here? Why aren’t Court Dates and Arrest Warrants being issued to the Fugitives from the Law?

    If this looks like an Obvious Case of Witness Tampering to any Law and Order Citizen, then consider the nature of the Tampering, itself – to moot the Rule of Law.

    It’s enough to make you wonder if this Group Action By Palin Witnesses in an Abuse of Power Investigation, is a Case of Election Tampering by the Bush Administration?

    Who gets to Ignore Subpoenas?

    …in an Abuse of Power Investigation?

    • Adie says:

      Thank you sweetie!!! I made it to and into codgerhood, against all odds!

      Without my honey, our 2 sweet spawn, and youse guys, it just wouldn’t be worth the fight.

      What a MESS junior and shooter have made out of Berzerkistan!?!

      My dear, clueless, comfy$$ brother called yestidie. He now “gets it”, kinda; at least he’ll vote Obama and is a-feared of mcsame, somewhat stunned/amused(?) by palindrone. Still, he innocently queries, “Say. What ever happened to cheney?”

      Yes, I added rover to my answer also, gave FDL some kudos, and explained a bit more about why I blog. I didn’t bother asking about his investments and houses and cars…. I luv my brother, but…

  21. EdwardTeller says:

    emptywheel,

    Colberg stated before he left for his Kansas exile, that the Alaska Department of Law was directing state employees not to honor the subpoenas. But Todd Palin, even though he is claiming to be part of the executive branch, isn’t a state employee. I doubt the AG could have legally instructed Todd, even if the department of law had somehow determined that the subpoenas were “unlawful.”

    All this happened after Ed O’Callaghan and his team popped into Juneau and Anchorage. Big protests against the Department of Law planned for this weekend, and smaller ones throughout the week in Anchorage, outside the department of law Anchorage offices.

    Meanwhile, the de facto AG of Alaska, O’Callaghan, is keeping the entire Heath family (Palin’s parents and siblings) under 24/7 guard, yet are shopping them around at events.

  23. Beerfart Liberal says:

    i think Todd’s lawyer wrote a two or three page letter explaining why the subpoena was bogus and why he had advised his client to ignore it. Don’t know that ignoring a subpoena is correct or whether lawyer should have sought to quash it. But whatever, as long as the lawyer is up frint saying it was his advice, i don’t think this line probably will get far.

  27. scribe says:

    Ok, EW, a not-so-short answer to your question follows.

    1. Witness tampering. What constitutes witness tampering under state law, varies from state to state. It would depend on both the statutory law that state (in this case, Alaska) has, and on the decisions of courts applying and interpreting that legal text.

    Under the general understanding of what constitutes witness tampering, telling, encouraging, or threatening a witness so that witness declines to respond to a validly issued subpoena would constitute witness tampering. It might also constitute obstruction of justice, again depending upon the exact text of the statute and the cases interpreting it.

    You’ll note I use the term “validly issued subpoena” – if the witness can legitimately argue (or even colorably argue, a lower standard) that the subpoena was not validly issued, then not obeying it would not be a crime, and telling someone they did not have to obey it similarly would not be a crime. The better, safer practice would be to move to quash it, rather than ignore it, but given the political realities the McSame campaign clearly thought moving to quash might confer some legitimacy upon it, which they did not want to do. Thus, too, all the back-and-forth about how the legislative inquiry was “illegitimate” and “partisan”, the latter being a word Republicans use when they are getting their behinds kicked….

    2. Obstruction of justice. Similarly, destruction of physical evidence or records sought by a validly issued subpoena would almost certainly constitute obstruction of justice. I noted last week – here or over at TalkLeft, I forget which – that when the Palin Yahoo account was erased post the hacking incident, that erasure likely constituted obstruction of justice. Nixon burns the tapes – obstruction of justice….

    3. Accessory-after-the-fact and contempt. Additionally, also depending upon the language of the relevant statute and the cases interpreting it, if the underlying events relative to which the subpoena was issued was a crime, then refusing to respond to the subpoena or telling, encouraging or threatening someone to not respond to it, the ultimate objective or effect of which was to thwart, delay or impede the investigation of the underlying crime, could make the person so refusing or telling, encouraging or threatening another into an accessory after the fact. The person refusing to testify – the subpoenaed witness – would also be liable for contempt. We all know enough about contempt, so I won’t rehearse that further.

    To “sanitize” the accessory-after-the-fact idea, say there’s a subpoena served upon the accountant seeking records of Al Capone’s bribery/graft records for a criminal investigation into his alleged tax evasion. (”The Untouchables” was on last night….). These records would tend to substantiate or vitiate a tax evasion case, right? If the accountant, rather than turning over the records instead used them as fuel for his woodstove, thereby covering up whatever was done, that person would be an accessory-after-the-fact to Capone’s tax evasion.

    The problem in bringing such a case for accessory-after-the-fact liability is that as a general rule (a) it requires proof of intent to hinder the investigation and (b) it requires proof that the destroyed records/information actually existed in the first place and (c) it requires proof of the underlying crime’s existence and the link of the records to that crime. Not an easy case to win, by any stretch of the imagination.

    4. The overarching problem. Getting truthful, accurate anwers would almost certainly require getting the witnesses – the refusers and the investigators – before a grand jury. Assuming Alaska has grand juries – on which I am agnostic. Palin’s in control of the Attorney General and, I would suspect, that means she’s in control of the criminal prosecution process.

    If Palin wins the VP election, no one is going to go near pushing a state-court criminal investigation, including trips to the grand jury, because of – at a minimum – Alaska Pride.

    If Palin loses the VP election, no one is going to go near pushing a state-court criminal investigation, including trips to the grand jury, because (a) she’ll be in a full-up retributive mood and (b) she’ll likely have her AG going after the nasty bloggers who brought her down.

    The only way I see this leading to anything in the way of a prosecution is if (a) Palin loses the election and (b) the incoming Obama administration can see their way clear to spending some resources on hunting a witch-hunting corrupt political environment. Although I would suggest that, were I in a victorious Obama’s shoes I would spend no small amount of effort on actual prosecutions of Republicans who’d gone over the line – starting with the NY prosecutor who airdropped in to thwart the legitimate state investigation – in the interest of cleaning up the political system, I cannot say that Obama will see things the way I do.

    • emptywheel says:

      I’ve got a hunch that BRanchflower has enough with teh workers comp stuff that it will cause problems enough for the election. THat is, I think he has enough witnesses already to make a case–just not that case.

      • scribe says:

        I agree with you on that – he got the early stuff before the McSame folks hit town and Palin decided to stop cooperating.

        I think he’ll be able to write a report that will have point headings like this:

        I. Proven allegations of abuse of power:
        A. Workers’ comp.
        B. (Maybe) violations of employment statutes (he has the tapes).
        C. Other proven stuff (remember, they had the TIPS phone line open for weeks on this investigation prior to her being picked as VP).
        D. Recommendations for further investigation.
        II. Obstruction of justice, witness tampering and interference with the investigation.
        A. Obstruction of justice. (destruction or withholding records)
        B. Witness tampering. (Exhibit A – the McSame campaign)
        C. Interference with the investigation.
        1. The McSame campaign.
        2. Palin’s family and relatives.
        3. The Governor’s office and Executive Branch interfering with the Legislature and separation of powers.
        D. Recommendations for prosecution.

    • timbo says:

      With regard to your commentary that no one is going to pursue this after the election…no matter what the outcome of said election…

      Horse-pucky! If the rule of law is functioning, you can’t just avoid being investigated because you are a governor, VP, or whatever. The question is…is the rule of law still operative in Washington or Alaska? The fact that many of us doubt that it is is a paramount reason for the judicial and investigative policing arms, and especially the legislative arms of state and federal government to follow up on corruption and abuse of power cases. If they don’t, there isn’t really much point to having elections…except to switch which gang of criminal fleecers is directing the nation.

  29. Twain says:

    Good morning, Adie. Happy Birthday with balloons, and kites and lots of ice cream. How about we have a big party for you on November 5? The Whole country can celebrate. Have a wonderful day.

    • Adie says:

      Now THAT’s one GRAND IDEA! DEAL! I’ll bring the popcorn and, ahem, “spirits”, saving a-plenty for Jan. 20… ;->

  30. kspena says:

    OT-cheney going to hill to twist repug arms today to support bush bailout plan. Apparently 80 are opposed to any bailout….via MSNBC..

  32. Adie says:

    Hey ET!!!

    Hope you’re doing o.k. Stay safe fella.

    I’ll ask yet again: u ever get back to visit Oberlin?

    I spect you’d get a hero’s welcome.

  34. NorskeFlamethrower says:

    1,774 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

    Citizen emptywheel and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

    This old Lutefisk eater has been yellin’ at the top his old, ,weak lungs for weeks now that the real Palin story that illuminates what’s goin’ on inside the rulin’ oligarchy and tells us where our national politics is goin’ is the relationship of Palin to the Alaska Independence Party and the oil boys. Exxon Mobil created the Alaska Independence Party and then drove the state and the establishment Republican Party broke. They ran Palin for mayor of Wissalia and when decreased tax revenues from oil taxes shook the state finances, they ran Palin as a “reform” candidate against the “corrupt” Tony Knowles usin’ the base vote of the Independence Party along with dissafeected Republicans and a few Democrats. They succeeded in hijackin’ the Republican Party in Alaska much like they hijacked the national Republican Party in 1964.

    What is happenin’ now is that the old Republican establishment (read bankin’ and mortgage finance money) is bein’ hung out ta dry by the neo-fascist oil cowboys from the Goldwater junta. This split in the rulin oligarchy is bein’played out live with the McCain campaign and the corporate media…why do ya think McCrazy is gettin such bad press.

    Go back and watch Rachel Maddow’s show from last night…the Republican leader of the Alaska State Senate was calmly and forcefully drivin’ the stake right through Palin’s candidacy…they’re jest waitin for her ta come back ta the state after the election, her nasty little ass is gunna be out in the snow (if there’s any left).

    But the real story here is not obstruction of justice or payoffs or playin around with Worker Comp claims…the real story here is the split in the rulin’ class between the oil faction of the oligarchy and the traditional conservative bankin’ money…I’m bettin’ on the bankers. This also looks a lot like the crunch that the old money in Germany faced in 1932 when they thou8ght they could control Hitler so they backed ‘im and he ended up eatin their children. Their American cousins won’t make that mistake this time.

    KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, FEAR WON’T BEAT FASCISM!!

  36. lllphd says:

    ew, don’t i recall somewhere that van flein, when he recused himself, refused to say who was paying him? so, is he still getting paid? in addition to the state?

    my suspicion there is that someone in the mccain campaign with a lick o’ sense (or maybe the one lick they share amongst themselves) realized that the atty’s bills would be subject to disclosure, and if the mccain campaign was paying, they’d be implicated in the obstruction issues.

    wonder what they’re offering this guy to make him go along, risking his license and career?

    also, if i read that quote from griffin is that he did not advise any WITNESSES; that does not preclude him from advising some central player who then relays the info to the witnesses, in an oblique and vague ’someoneridmeofthismeddlesomeman’ sorta way.

    i smell rove stank.

  37. eCAHNomics says:

    Paulson: I share your frustration on executive compensation.

    For hiim it’s locking the barn door after he got out.

  40. Leen says:

    Paulson ”it pains me” to see this bailout fall into the laps of the American taxpayer. Yeah right.

    Paulson is the fox guarding the hen house. The american taxpayers are about to be eaten or maybe just plucked.

  42. Adie says:

    Oops. Gotta go for now gang.

    Thanks for the good wishes.

    Anyone wanna come scrub a porch? It’d really be rather therapeutic, if himself would just let me chalk in cheney’s ugly puss before we turn on the powerwasher, heh.

  44. radiofreewill says:

    This is an investigation Authorized by the Legislature – Law-makers exercising Oversight – of the State of Alaska – and, frankly, a likely determinant in whether Impeachment Proceedings should begin against Sarah Palin for Abuse of Power.

    To say that the State Personnel Board is the proper venue for the Legislature’s concern over the Alleged Improper Removal of the State Trooper’s Chief Law Enforcement Officer, is a Ridiculous Contention. Palin stands Strongly Suspected of Going Around the Law, by Abusing her Power, for Revenge in a Vicious Personal Vendetta.

    If ever there was a Case for the Legislature to Assert its Responsibility to Protect the Rule of Law – this is it.

    If the Palin’s get away with Defying the Law – it will Weaken the Fabric of Our Society and Green Light every Extremist in the Country to do the same.

    Stand Up, Alaska!

    ET – I hope there are Many Thousands of – Peaceful – Protesters at the “Department of Law” this weekend.

  45. Leen says:

    sold his 500 million dollar in Goldman sachs Stock.

    Now this ”bailout” is an ”investment”. How quickly these inside hit men can turn shit into fools gold

  46. jayt says:

    “Who Told the TrooperGate Witnesses to Ignore the Subpoenas?”

    smacks of Cheney/Addington.

    They may not give a damn about John McCain, but they sure as hell don’t want a Dem administration showing up in January and cranking up the investigation machine…

  47. cbl2 says:

    o/t

    Republican Study Group to announce bailout plan of their own at noon today – per Politico

    The RSC’s plan is set to include a two-year suspension of the capitol gains tax, provisions to transform mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into private entities and efforts to stabilize the dollar.

    • Badwater says:

      Suspending the capitol gains tax means less money coming in to the Government. I guess that means that they intend to stabalize the dollar by forcing its value to zero. If it can’t go lower, that my friends is stablility you can believe in.

      • R.H. Green says:

        Regarding the suspension of the cap gains, they’re still working that trickle-down theory. What they can’t seem to grasp is that trickle-down is part of the larger “free market” idea in which government intervention (by regulation or bailouts) is wrong. Time to choose where their loyalty is.

    • klynn says:

      Wow, more privatization, tax cuts for the rich, no regulatory control…How “more of the same” of them…

      That’s the ticket…

    • scribe says:

      With all these plans floating around, perhaps it would be best to (a) let the Treasury Secretary and Fed Chairman continue their work in stabilizing the markets and (b) work on working through the details of the various plans.

      It’s not like the markets’ long term trends are anything other than down. Better to ride the slide than to push all the chips in and still wind up falling to the same level when all is said and done. Because if the latter happens, the way one gets there is by falling off a cliff.

      That said, probably the best thing to do then would be to put off any bailout plans until after the elections, so they can be considered free of the partisan rancor that will attend them. And so the Congress can know who will be implementing them and draft them accordingly.

  48. Leen says:

    Paulson, Wall Street, and the Bush administration seem to have our Reps balls nailed to the barn floor and have given them a choice…. let us use the Treasury keys or the barn will burn to the ground. You choose

  49. freewayblogger says:

    thanks for the input firepups… guess we’ll have to see how this plays out (I have almost no idea what the hell’s going on, but I spent most of yesterday repeating the words “Seven. Hundred. Billion. Dollars.”)

    After Abu Ghraib broke I put up a bunch of signs that said simply “Fiasco”. might be time to bring them back.

  50. Leen says:

    Equal justice under tha law (choke)

    How can the powers that be wonder why there is such a deep disrespect for our so called justice system amongst the peasants?

    Rove is still running around manipulating and underminig our elections instread of being hauled off to prison for his many crimes.

  54. Leen says:

    On Sunday’s This Week George Will was agreeing with Donna Brazille on the bailout. Donna asked ”what’s the rush”?

  55. JimWhite says:

    I’m not a wag, but. A dollar bill is six inches long. A quick run to the calculator and a couple of conversion factors gave me:

    66 million miles if 700 billion dollar bills are laid out end to end

  58. emptywheel says:

    @88

    I agree–I think everyone is getting distracted with the Monegan firing and not seeing how much time Branchflower has spent with other witnesses of other abuses of power.

    For example, the Bitney firing will be in there–he has at least two, maybe more, witnesses who will say Todd had Bitney fired for a personal reason, and the guy who hired him will say that even after he hired him the Gov tried to get him fired again.

    There’s the whole workers comp thing–which may well be really damaging.

    I’m also curious what Branchflower will do about the use of personnel files. When the witnesses said they’d testify, he said he wouldn’t pursue them for illegally accessing Wooten’s personnel file. But the AG voided that agreement, and Branchflower has abundant evidence that the Gov’s office was sneaking in Wooten’s personnel file for totally inappropriate reasons.

    There’s going to be a lot in that report, I’m pretty sure. Just not the stuff that directly pertains to Monegan, but that may not matter.

  61. Adie says:

    News of the Day: Our praying mantids mated yestidie and I took pictures.

    Book calls them voracious predators. Apparently cheney hadn’t re-invented his self by the publishing date.

  63. Adie says:

    i tend to pick up accents easily. just happens. nowadays, i find myself sounding like palin. UGH! will try to control. hard. i want her to go away and stay there.

    everyone i meet seems to want to discuss the mystery of WHY she was chosen.

    all i can come up with is, TOTAL IGNORANCE! she’s the world’s best reason for rejecting mcsame. No.. wait.. She’s the 2nd. The 1st is that idiot who insists on hugging everyone. eeeeewwwwwww.

    they’re like twin lightening rods. they appear. ZAP! their audience immediately pivots and turns to Obama/Biden.

    what’s not to like? the gag reflex before you pivot.

  64. Adie says:

    Thank you dawgies, for helping me live to my 67th version of childhood!

    now, to powerwash the sidewalk with my sweetie.

    Please mind the kennel while i go play. Thanks a bunch!

  65. Pyre says:

    7 0 0     B i L L i o N     i N     U n M a R K e D     B i L L s

    i N     A     p L a i N     p A p e R     B a g

    O R     T h e     E c o N O m y     G e T s     i T

  71. osage says:

    What I can’t wait to see is how quickly Sarah Palin’s legal advisors drop her like a hot potato when Obama wins the presidency. I have the feeling that Sarah Palin will be a one-term Governor and a Republican pariah.