Troopergate Report: Biased and Unprofessional, But Good Enough For the Media

Ann Althouse wrote: "...but let's resist the impulse to slough off this [Troopergate]  report. It means something."

It means something all right. It means that a couple of former prosecutors, Hollis French and Steve Branchflower forgot their roots.

I haven't finished the public report yet, but so far 27+ years as an appointed and elected prosecutor tells me this:

1. Hollis French, high profile Obama supporter and supervisor of this investigation, should have declared a conflict of interest and recused himself. Similarly, Branchflower's history with Monegan has apparently not been disclosed to the public or to the Legislative Council

2. Steve Branchflower, French's hand picked investigator, appears to have overstepped his charge which was to incude "recommendations," not "findings" in his report. He has acted as investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury in the matter.

3. Despite relentlessly leading the witnesses and encouraging them to speculate about Governor and Mr. Palin's state of mind, Branchflower does not appear to have made his case -- and it is clear that he WAS trying to make a case.

4. The ethics statute under which Branchflower finds the Governor "abused her power" is, of course, not an "abuse of power" provision, but an ethics provision. Branchflower actually found that the Governor acted within her powers when she demoted Monegan.

5. Violation of the ethics provision requires that an executive officer knowingly make an "effort to benefit a personal or financial interest" of him or herself or a family member.

An oversimplified, but accurate, take on this is that both Todd and Sarah Palin spoke continuously about Wooten, the brother-in-law, bringing discredit to the department, about the inadequacy of the disciplinary action taken against him and about the negative impact he would have on DPS recruiting.

Arguably, all of these considerations fall within the Governor's OFFICIAL, NOT PERSONAL, areas of interest. Branchflower simply chose not to see it that way or to even put forward the case for that interpretation.

My experience tells me that Wooten's five-day suspension did not reflect the severity of his transgressions. Moreover, I saw no evidence that Monegan or anyone else at DPS made an effort to assure the Governor that the internal disciplinary procedures were being improved to prevent similar inadequacies.

The portion of the public report that I have read reflects a lack of both objectivity and professionalism.

French and Branchflower did their work for Obama, however marginal that work was, and left the rest to Obama's surrogate media.

1
Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)

Comments

I guess you forget that it

I guess you forget that it was a republican comitee that appointed them and then a republican council that voted to release the report as their result.  But sure its biased...?

I guess you don't understand

I guess you don't understand that at the time the Legislative Council appointed French, Palin had not been nominated for VP and his allegiance to Obama was not relevant. Once she was nominated, he had an obvious conflict of interest and his intemperate remarks to the media aggravated the situation. He is a lawyer, and knows better.

It is not significant that the vote to release the report was unanimous. At least one of the members said there was "no consensus" on the conclusions. Thanks anyway for the Obama talking points. You could use a brush up on the facts, if they matter to you.

Since I posted, Kim Elton, chair of the Alaska Legislative Council, who refused to remove Obama supporter Hollis French as oveerseer of the investigation even after French made politically motivated comments to the media, said this:

"I believe that these findings may help people come to a conclusion on how they should vote [in the presidential election.]" http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html

Elton is also an outspoken supporter of Obama's, who has made the maximum political contribution to his campaign.

What was the purpose of this non-partisan, unbiased investigation again?

"Republican" alone in Alaska

"Republican" alone in Alaska is meaningless.  There are a minority of reformist Republicans and a plurality of machine Republicans who caucus with the Democrats to give them a working majority.

Wow

Take the blinders off guys, she is corrupt period.  This was a partisan board, republican partisan.  If there are "different" flavors of republicans in Alaska then welcome to the rest of the United States.  Nothing mattered before Palin was nominated is like saying nothing happened in Iraq pre-Surge, wake up!

Thank you for your comment

Thank you for your comment, cookworth. For a moment there I actually thought that 27 years in the investigation and prosecution business, having supervised something like fifty conflict of interest and political corruption investigations, and actually reading the report might have some value in assessing the situation here.

Obviously, a strongly held opinion giving rise to conclusory assertions is really all that is necessary for a clear understanding of what really happened. LOL

I felt like one of the last thinkers on Earth, until now.

I posted a similar unofficial rebuttal to this  infamous "Branchflower Report", and  like you, I haven't heard the end of it. I am so happy that you see past the fodder, and intelligently dissected the erroneous portions of this flawed report. The fact that Stephen went so far as to enter the discussion with Glass in regards to Todd's alleged statements about not hiring Wooten for one the vacancies, is more proof that he was slanting the report. Mr Palin, as a citizen, has the RIGHT to express his feelings. At no time in the report does he state via the hearsay statements, "you need to fire Wooten". It is only stated, he expressed what he felt was wrong about the lack of concern for a rogue Trooper. It was the speculative assumptions which wouldn't  be allowed it a courtroom, that alleged his intent.

I give Stephen credit for advising an amendment to the Statutes which forbad the release of information regarding the complaints filed. What I found contradictive, was Branchflower saw the frustration as it related to this, yet didn't conclude that the actions alleged were misconstrued, and nothing more than a continuance of the said frustration. Clearly, throughout the report, you sense this is what Mr Palin was referring to. If you have a time bomb, you do not ignore it. The statements involving the ban against possession of a firearm, show the intent of the Governor. Yet, again, Branchflower ignored it. If you recall the case of Marie Vega being shot to death at her place of employment in South Anchorage, by her estranged boyfriend in the late '80's, you understand the Governor's concern. Mike Wooten verbally expressed a desire to harm her father.

It is asinine that the left defends such Media hazing in cases such as these, but is silent when Sen. Obama operatives create the "Obama Truth Squad" in Missouri at his campaigns request.

My blogged comment can be found on my MySpace page.

YouTube page