The mudslinging battles in the two investigations of Sarah Palin just got even muddier… Per the Portland Examiner today, five GOP lawmakers have decided to take legal action in the attempt to halt Sen. Hollis French’s legislative witch hunt.
The Personnel Board investigation will go on as planned.
JUNEAU, Alaska (Map, News) – Five Republican state lawmakers filed suit Tuesday to end the bipartisan investigation into Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s firing of the public safety commissioner even though the vice presidential candidate once said she welcomed the probe into allegations of abuse of power.
The lawsuit called the investigation “unlawful, biased, partial and partisan.” None of the lawmakers who filed the suit in Anchorage Superior Court serves on the bipartisan Legislative Council that unanimously approved the investigation.
Continue reading Steve Quinn’s AP article here
Another HT to Jeffrey Setaro and Amanda Carpenter at Townhall
Per an ADN (Anchorage Daily News) article today, Kevin Clarkson, Anchorage attorney for the five GOP lawmakers, sent an email to ADN, giving notice on his filed brief. [Clarkson was interviewed on Mark Levin’s talk radio show this afternoon]
But first, I might say I disagree with Ms. Carpenter that there are two filed complaints. I believe there is only one. Reading the link to the brief, it appears the plaintiffs are the five GOP Senators – Robert Bettisworth, James Dodson, Seth Church, David Eichler, Thomas Temple and Alan Simmons – and filed *as* citizens of Alaska, being nailed for expenditures that are illegally appropriated. (None of which, I will add, are members of the Joint Legislative Council)
Now I can’t be sure as I have not seen any additional filed briefs. But who has the standing to file the lawsuit on behalf of the citizens of Alaska – and if any could, it would be their elected officials. And if I’m wrong, I’ll be the first to issue a public “mea culpa”…. LOL
But my first inclination is that the brief is covering the lawmakers, and the lawmakers as citizens…. not two separate complaints asking for declaratory and injunctive relief.
Reasons cited for this action are not a surprise to me… unconstitutional via Alaska’s Constitution under procedure for possible impeachment (under Article II of the Constitutions), jurisdiction and due process.
Again, read the brief link provided above. But there’s a highlight that make me roar…
First, Clarkson alleges Steve Branchflower was not licensed to practice law in Alaska until August 5th. He apparently has some dual residency specifics as both SC and AK. Branchflower, of course, was appointed by Hollis and his merry band, the Legislative Council officially on the 31st of July, and in the news August 1st. ooops….
Back to some other more mundane, but pertinent issues now.
I mentioned in the most recent Trooper’gate post that this particular Alaskan legislative investigation was blazing some new procedural trails. The lawmakers appointed Branchflower (prematurely to his legal practice possibly), and are guiding his investigation by voting on witnesses. Other traditional legislative investigations – per federal law – are only pertinent if they are in connection with legislative development, and the lawmakers are not involved in the process.
Evidently, reading Clarkson’s brief, Alaska is no different.
Secondly, as also mentioned in some previous Trooper’gate posts, this investigation will cost the Alaskan taxpayers $100K. Well, guess what… the Legislative Council has no budget appropriations power to allocate these funds for the investigation. These funds must be appropriated thru the standard procedural legislative process before the full body.
… another oops
Clarkson’s brief goes on to state that the priority jurisdiction belongs to the Personnel Board, per Alaskan law. And if you’re a regular reader of this Trooper’gate series, you’re way ahead of the western MSM on these facts. Clarkson states in his brief:
The parallel investigation of the underlying facts by a partisan legislator serves no purpose other than to highlight the inquiry as a poorly disguised political attack.
Amen to that…
Something else I’ve mentioned several times is that this legislative process may violate Palin’s (and others they plan to investigate) Due Process, per the Alaskan Constitution. And Alaska, on the heels of the McCarthy witch hunts, was very specific in naming legislative investigations in their Declaration of Rights – Due Process in Article I.
Per Clarkson’s brief:
Legislatures are properly and inherently biased and therefore not well suited to serve as neutral adjuticative bodies. Delineating the Constitutional rights of Alaska’s citizens in the shadow of the McCarthy era, the State founders were acutely aware of the dangers of allowing partisan legislators to sit in judgment of their fellow citizens or political adversaries. To insure against that possibility, the Constitution itself guarantees that “the right of all citizens to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed”. [Alaska Const Article I, Sect. 7]
The same basic concern over the abuse of legislative power inspired the Alaskan Legislature to act again, 50 years hence, to create the Alaskan Personnel Board as the neutral adjuticative body to resolve government ethics disputes, including disputes involving the Governor, in a fair and unbiased fashion. The Personnel Board, not the thinly-veiled “independent” adjuticated inquiry spearheaded by Senator French is the proper forum to conduct a neutral review.
Can I get another *Amen* here! I’ve been shouting this since the onset of this nonsense. Now if those of us that are informed can catch the media up on reality….
For the “declaratory relief”:
The plaintiffs want the courts to rule that the Branchflower investigation is beyond the statutory power of the Legislative Council, and thereby unConstitutional.
For “Due Process” declaratory relief violations, Clarkson points out that Sen French has not only retained control over the investigative process, but is not conducting the process in an unbiased fashion based on his press statements. This, of course, violates Palins due process rights as it is not being handled with “fair and just treatment”, as the Constitution states.
For the injunctive relief”:
Stop Branchflower from spending State money that was appropriated outside the means of the standard procedure, there therefore not within the Legislative Council’s statutory authority. In other words… “freeze”! Funds already spent are outside of any lawful remedy. (Could Branchflower be eating his legal fees already???) The are asking for a temporary restraining order against Branchflower incurring any further costs.
And oh, BTW, the plantiffs are asking for Branchflower to pay for the legal costs incurred for this lawsuit… kewl.
…. okay, added afterthought here. I don’t want to blame Branchflower for Hollis French’s vendetta and lack of legal authority. He’s just a guy accepting a job… even if he is a Monegan buddy. So I’ll be more benevolent, and recant the above as an instinctive evil “heh heh”… and hope that Branchflower sues the begeezus out of French to recoup his legal fees.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Wow! I’m a huge Palin supporter, but even this move surprises me. It must be pretty bad from the perspective of the Governor and her legal team about how this thing’s being handled for them to sue over it! Wow! I hope Palin is once and for all cleared! She’s stated in at least 3 appearances over the course of months that Monagen was fired over budget issues. I believe her.
Thanks for the link MH… I think it’s safe to say the legislative investigation won’t finish up before the election now. I’m much more interested in/concerned about the Personal Boards investigations at this point. Outside of the media interest Monegan’s firing isn’t particularly interesting… He was an executive appointee who served at the pleasure of the Governor and who, in theory at least, could be replaced at will. As you said the real issue is Bailey and Wooten’s medical records.
What amazes me is how (IMHO) the “goal posts” are being moved back.
The attacks and accusations seems to have evolved and shifted, but it appears that the case is developing cracks within the accusing ranks. It appears that some (both supporters of the investigation and third parties) are developing a backbone.
Just my two cents.
Just to add to the confusion Amanda Carpenter @ Townhall.com is reporting that a group of Alaskan residents has filed suit against Stephen Branchflower… The suit alleges the investigation is unconstitutional and asks a judge to stop it.
http://townhall.com/Columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/09/16/troopergate_investigator_sued
Here’s the filing:
http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/09/16/11/Branchflower_Complaint__Summons-Filed.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf
i have to wonder if the morons who want this investigation know what a laughing stock they are about to become. palin is following the letter of the law, so is the personnel board. these senators or whatever are making a mockery of the process, using their forum for personal gain and political advantage. after the election and all of the bs is wrapped up i say that palin should sue the ever lovin shit out of them.
Yes the Democrats are children all over the country. These are the same people that take the ball away because they did not get their way.
This will probably look bad on Branchflower adn the rest of the Obamatans in Alaskan after this is done. It is a political witch hunt that has no basis and is unconstitutional under Alaska’s constitution and has been biased from the beginning.
Just goes to prove you how desperate de Dems are. When will they realize that there is no meat on the bone? No matter how hard they try, Sarah will always come out clean, because this woman has integrity, nothing like Obama.
QUESTIONS TO POST ON LIBERAL BLOGS, MEDIA BLOGS AND MODERATE BLOGS
See what their responses are eh? 🙂
Does Gov. Palin have the right of counsel and the right of due process?
Will Branchflower (the official investigator) be able to conduct his inquiries without legislative tampering or influence? Is he (independent investigator) in charge of this investigating or is it State Senator French (politician)?
Why is Alaska State Rep. David Guttenberg (D), once a supporter of investigating Palin, now angry at Branchflower and French?
According to the state constitution, who has legal precedent to conduct this investigation? Is it the legislature or is the State Employee Review Board?
Whose subpoenas must be obeyed (or be thrown into jail for contempt of court)? Is is the legislature or is it the State Employee review board? In other words, which ones are binding in the eyes of the law?
Of the witnesses who have been deposed by the State Employee Review Board, what have they said while under oath? What were the comments of Michael Monagle, the, the keeper of Trooper Wooten’s file?
What is an “at-will” employee (Governor appointee)?
What is the significance on Wooten’s “Release of personnel file 2/8/08” form?
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/pdf/pr_08122_doc1.pdf
What is the significance of this McCann vs. Wooten form?
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/pdf/pr_08122_doc_2.pdf
Why did State Senator French make comments to the WSJ before any evidence was gathered or subpoenas deposed?
Why was the investigation going at a snail’s pace until Palin was selected as McCain’s VP? Now, there seems to be a rush to get a ruling before the election.
Would the investigators of Gov. Palin be interested in “troopergate” if a ruling was delivered after the November election?
If Gov. Palin wins the November election (and resigns her post) would the investigators still pursue the case?
Would the accusers of Gov. Palin still pursue the case if the Personnel Board cleared her?
What are some of the violations that Trooper Wooten was punished for? What was his punishment? Is he still working as a AK State Trooper? Did he issue a death threat to Palin’s father? Did he ever have a restraining order placed upon him by his ex-wife?
Why hasn’t Gov. Palin been subpoened? Surely, she is the central figure in this case?
Was Commissioner Monegan a “team player”? Has he ever done anything to circumvent or insubordinate his superiors? What was his professional relationship with the Gov.?
Has Monegan said anything to the press that has contradicted his sworn testimoney?
Has the Obama camp ever contacted Wooten or his union?
How much did CNN offer Wooten for his story?
Has Wooten ever filed a work-comp form? Is that related to medical disclosure?
Who is Mr. Barnhill and his recent comment to the press…
________________________
Barnhill acknowledged that if any administration officials improperly disclosed information from Wooten’s personnel file, that could violate the law. But, he said, he knows of no evidence any did so.
________________________
Why does the media mainly focuses on the legislative investigation yet mostly ignores the Personnel Board process?
Did anyone ask Monegan to fire Trooper Wooten?
Sounds like you pretty much got it, Timothy. However it’s the Personnel Board, not the Employee Review Board.
The Personnel Board is composed of three members, appointed by the Governor, and part of the Dept of Administration. Duties are approval/disapproval amendments to personnel rules; consider extensions of the partially exempt and classified service; hear appeals under A.S. 39.25.170; and hear complaints under the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.
These particular members are all originally appointed by Palin’s predecessor, Frank Murkowski. One came up for renewal, and Palin re’appointed her at the beginning of this year.
So if you find there is anyone on a liberal/progressive blog who has a clue… hang, even knows there are two investigations…. let us know? We could all use a pleasant surprise! LOL
Mata, why don’t you see weather NoQuarter [ http://noquarterusa.net/blog/ ]
or one of the other PUMA blogs will post your article on their sites? There’s a heck of a lot more traffic there than here.