Troopergate Scandal: Judge Warned Pallin

Newsweek is reporting that a judge warned Sarah Pallin and her family not to disparage her sister’s soon-to-be-ex-husband in the divorce and child custoday case. 

Court records obtained by NEWSWEEK show that during the course of divorce hearings three years ago, Judge John Suddock heard testimony from an official of the Alaska State Troopers’ union about how Sarah Palin—then a private citizen—and members of her family, including her father and daughter, lodged up to a dozen complaints against Wooten with the state police. The union official told the judge that he had never before been asked to appear as a divorce-case witness, that the union believed family complaints against Wooten were “not job-related,” and that Wooten was being “harassed” by Palin and other family members.

The “Troopergate” special investigator, former prosecutor Steve Branchflower, was hired by a unanimous vote of state legislative leaders. His mission: to investigate whether Palin fired Walter Monegan—her State Public Safety Commissioner (and the official in charge of the State Police)—when he refused to dismiss or open a new disciplinary investigation of Wooten after receiving complaints about him from Gov. Palin and her husband Todd. Initially, Palin indicated she would cooperate with the investigation. But more recently, a lawyer hired by the state to represent her in the case asked the Alaska Attorney General to request that a state personnel board conduct its own special-counsel inquiry and demanded that the state legislature back off.

At the heart of the continuing “Troopergate” flap is evidence that despite Judge Suddock’s warnings back in 2005 and 2006, Palin and her husband continued to make disparaging allegations against Wooten, even after she went to the statehouse.

I have to admit; she’s the perfect running mate for John McCain.  Mean and vindictive.  Freshen your lipstick, Ms. Barracuda?

  7 comments for “Troopergate Scandal: Judge Warned Pallin

  1. September 10, 2008 at 5:57 pm

    Dan, I imagine you omitted that Trooper Wooten tasered his 11-year old step son as a “test,” simply because you are unaware of that salient fact.

    Or that Monegan had previously been forced to step down as Anchorage police chief by his Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich — who is now the Democratic nominee against Sen. Ted Stevens.

    Glad to know Wooten’s union is fighting to keep this sterling example of law enforcement professionalism on the job.

  2. Dan Chmielewski
    September 10, 2008 at 6:03 pm

    Matt — I provided a link to the Newsweek story for all to see; as far as omissions go, I left those details out like you left out the details of John McCain, Dick Cheney, Tom Tancredo, and Fred Thompson all using the phrase “lipstick on a pig..is still a pig” to your Obama outrage post yesterday. Touche’

  3. September 10, 2008 at 6:11 pm

    I’m sure that’s it.

    As I’ve already posted, the Obama gaffe was not that he used a hackneyed colloquialism that a million other people have used. It’s the context. But I don’t want to get too…nuanced.

  4. Dan Chmielewski
    September 10, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    The context is accurate; lipstick on a pig is not change. And a fish in an paper marked change will stink after 8 years. The McCain/Palin ticket offers NO new ideas and means another 4 years of the failed policies of George W. Bush. Its not a gaffe.

    McCain had a gaffe today on FCS; you might want to read up on that. Pallin had a gaffe yesterday on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. What Obama said wasn’t a gaffe.

  5. Ms. Moose
    September 10, 2008 at 8:38 pm

    What is the difference between George Bush and Sarah Palin?

    Lipstick.

  6. OCGator
    September 10, 2008 at 11:28 pm

    Dan if that’s the best you can do you should hang it up.

  7. Jim
    October 8, 2008 at 12:49 pm

    This is slightly off topic – but please do view keatingeconomics.com for an accurate historical aacount of how McCain helped his corproate donors cover up a crime.

Comments are closed.