Alaska AG: State employees won't honor subpoenas

[Crabtownboy]

By STEVE QUINN
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 17, 2008; 2:03 AM

JUNEAU, Alaska -- Alaska's investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power, a potentially damaging distraction for John McCain's presidential campaign, ran into intensified resistance Tuesday when the attorney general said state employees would refuse to honor subpoenas in the case.

In a letter to state Sen. Hollis French, the Democrat overseeing the investigation, Republican Attorney General Talis Colberg asked that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also said the employees would refuse to appear unless either the full state Senate or the entire Legislature votes to compel their testimony.

Colberg, who was appointed by Palin, said the employees are caught between their respect for the Legislature and their loyalty to the governor, who initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry but has increasingly opposed it since McCain chose her as his running mate.

"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.

Last week, French's Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed 13 people. They include 10 employees of Palin's administration and three who are not: her husband, Todd Palin; John Bitney, Palin's former legislative liaison who now is chief of staff for Republican House Speaker John Harris; and Murlene Wilkes, a state contractor.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PALIN_TROOPERGATE?SITE=MIDTN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

 

[Revmitchell]

Good for them. Democrats think that if they start an investigation about nothing and issue subpoena's that somehow validates their false charges. This is a Democratic political witch hunt and is shameful the governor can fire anyone for any reason.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Good for them. Democrats think that if they start an investigation about nothing and issue subpoena's that somehow validates their false charges. This is a Democratic political witch hunt and is shameful the governor can fire anyone for any reason.

I thought you are a law and order man. Where is your respect for the law? Now these people are really in a bind, decide whether to be in contempt of the law, or fired for being disloyal to Palin by honoring the court order.

 

[Revmitchell]

I thought you are a law and order man. Where is your respect for the law? Now these people are really in a bind, decide whether to be in contempt of the law, or fired for being disloyal to Palin by honoring the court order.

Just because some dumbocrat starts an investigation and issues subpoenas doesn't make them legal or legitimate.

 

[carpro]

Looks a lot like a fishing expedition.

The AG is going to make them get a license to fish, so to speak.

Monegan says no one from the administration ever told him directly to fire Wooten, he says their repeated contacts made it clear they wanted Wooten gone.

End of story.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Just because some dumbocrat starts an investigation and issues subpoenas doesn't make them legal or legitimate.

Subpoens are legal documents, thus to defy them is to be in contempt of the court. Individuals do not issue subpoenas,

Subpoena: the usual writ for the summoning of witnesses or the submission of evidence, as records or documents, before a court or other deliberative body.

Online Etymology Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
subpoena (n.)

1422, sub pena, from M.L. sub poena "under penalty," the first words of the writ commanding the presence of someone under penalty of failure, from L. sub "under" + poena, ablative of poena "penalty." The verb is attested from 1640.


1. a writ issued by court authority to compel the attendance of a witness at a judicial proceeding; disobedience may be punishable as a contempt of court

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subpoena

A subpoena is not issued by the investigator, it is issued by the court, thus it is always legal. I am surprised you have such little respect for the law.

 

[Revmitchell]

Subpoens are legal documents, thus to defy them is to be in contempt of the court. Individuals do not issue subpoenas,


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subpoena

A subpoena is not issued by the investigator, it is issued by the court, thus it is always legal. I am surprised you have such little respect for the law.

You give a general definition. Not impressive. You are intentionally misrepresenting my position. You need to correct yourself so as not to bear false witness.


"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.

 

[Crabtownboy]

"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.

Of course the governor would say this, the investigation is about her. But she has no legal grounds to stand on in this case. She is simply sending a message, "You'd better show your loyality by standing with me and being in contempt of court or you will be fired. Remember what happened to others who were not loyal."

It is the governor who has placed them in this untenable position. Another example of her having a temperment unfit for being VP.

 

[Revmitchell]

Of course the governor would say this, the investigation is about her. But she has no legal grounds to stand on in this case. She is simply sending a message, "You'd better show your loyality by standing with me and being in contempt of court or you will be fired. Remember what happened to others who were not loyal."

It is the governor who has placed them in this untenable position. Another example of her having a temperment unfit for being VP.

Now address your misrepresentation of my position. You need to correct this.

 

[Revmitchell]

And of course a Democrat is going to issue false subpoenas they are desperate.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And of course a Democrat is going to issue false subpoenas they are desperate.

The words 'false subpoena' is an oxymoron. It is impossible. The Democrat did not issue the subpoenas. He requested them and the court approved them, making them legal documents. Palin has placed state employees in an impossible position. This shows she has no respect for the law ... as was already indicated by other actions she has taken in the past. This is beginning to sound very much like the defense Nixon tried to use. It didn't work then and will not work now.

I am still surprised that you have so little respect for the law.

 

[Revmitchell]

The words 'false subpoena' is an oxymoron. It is impossible. The Democrat did not issue the subpoenas. He requested them and the court approved them, making them legal documents. Palin has placed state employees in an impossible position. This shows she has no respect for the law ... as was already indicated by other actions she has taken in the past. This is beginning to sound very much like the defense Nixon tried to use. It didn't work then and will not work now.

I am still surprised that you have so little respect for the law.

You continue to lie about me which shows your own personal desperation during this election cycle. Have you ever heard of false arrest, illegal search, do you support the patriot act or do you see it as unconstitutional?

The judge can be wrong and just as partisan in this election cycle as anyone else. The 9th circuit court of appeals is a good example of that. The most overturned court in history.

 

[Crabtownboy]

You continue to lie about me which shows your own personal desperation during this election cycle. Have you ever heard of false arrest, illegal search, do you support the patriot act or do you see it as unconstitutional?

Who is lieing. You are the one who says they should defy the law. The supoena is a legal court order to appear and testify. A supoena cannot be illegal. The reasons for its being issued can be qustioned, but the document itself is legal and an order. For you to argue otherwise either shows a complege lack of respect for the law or ignorance of law and supoenas.

You are displaying a typical fundamentalist and so called conservative attitude. Obey the law when it fits my idea of the world. If it does not fit what I preach it is wrong and should not be obeyed. This is a very unethical position to take.

Desperate? Not at all. McCain is out out to destroy America. Obama is not out to destroy America. We will survive either. I am not sure we can survive Palin, who is more of a G. Bush than G. Bush is. If McCain is elected I pray that he survive his term in office. We should pray for the welfare of any person elected.

The judge can be wrong and just as partisan in this election cycle as anyone else. The 9th circuit court of appeals is a good example of that. The most overturned court in history.

Regardless of whether the judge is right or wrong, whether he/she issued the supoenas for the right or wrong reasons is beside the point. The subpoena is a legal document and to refuse to honor it is to be in contempt ... and shows a lack of respect for the law.

 

[Revmitchell]

Who is lieing. You are the one who says they should defy the law. The supoena is a legal court order to appear and testify. A supoena cannot be illegal. The reasons for its being issued can be qustioned, but the document itself is legal and an order. For you to argue otherwise either shows a complege lack of respect for the law or ignorance of law and supoenas.

You are displaying a typical fundamentalist and so called conservative attitude. Obey the law when it fits my idea of the world. If it does not fit what I preach it is wrong and should not be obeyed. This is a very unethical position to take.

Desperate? Not at all. McCain is out out to destroy America. Obama is not out to destroy America. We will survive either. I am not sure we can survive Palin, who is more of a G. Bush than G. Bush is. If McCain is elected I pray that he survive his term in office. We should pray for the welfare of any person elected.



Regardless of whether the judge is right or wrong, whether he/she issued the supoenas for the right or wrong reasons is beside the point. The subpoena is a legal document and to refuse to honor it is to be in contempt ... and shows a lack of respect for the law.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Thanks for proving my point.

An another cow flew by.

 

[guitarpreacher]

Subpoens are legal documents, thus to defy them is to be in contempt of the court. Individuals do not issue subpoenas,


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subpoena

A subpoena is not issued by the investigator, it is issued by the court, thus it is always legal. I am surprised you have such little respect for the law.

You're wrong about these subpoenas. They are not issued by a court, they are issued by a legislative committee. And in this case, and in the case of the U.S. Congress, the one conducting an investigation does issue their own subpoenas.

In this case, the reasons for the commissioner's firing are very well documented. I don't know what the law is in Alaska. For the U.S. Congress, they can charge you with contempt of congress for ignoring a subpoena. Don't know if Alaska has that law or not. Apparently the Alaska AG doesn't seem too worried about contempt charges.

But there is no court involved here, just more of the same typical democrat politics - throw everything you can find against the wall and see if anything sticks.

 

[Crabtownboy]

You're wrong about these subpoenas. They are not issued by a court, they are issued by a legislative committee. And in this case, and in the case of the U.S. Congress, the one conducting an investigation does issue their own subpoenas.

In this case, the reasons for the commissioner's firing are very well documented. I don't know what the law is in Alaska. For the U.S. Congress, they can charge you with contempt of congress for ignoring a subpoena. Don't know if Alaska has that law or not. Apparently the Alaska AG doesn't seem too worried about contempt charges.

But there is no court involved here, just more of the same typical democrat politics - throw everything you can find against the wall and see if anything sticks.

Gpreacher, Thank you for your addition to this thread. I appreciate your correction. It should be interesting to watch as this whole think unfolds.

Howeve it is not just Democrats who voted for the investigation.

In July, the four Democrats and eight Republicans on Alaska's Legislative Council voted unanimously to investigate the circumstances of Monegan's dismissal. Although Monegan was an at-will employee who could be fired for almost any reason, lawmakers wanted to see whether Palin tried to use her office to settle a personal score with Wooten.

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap_stories/a/p/1131/09-16-2008/20080916035010_16.html

As you see that 8 Republicans voted for the investigation and only four Democrats. So to say that it is a Democratic smear tactic is not quite right. The investigative council is made up of 10 Republicians and 4 Democrats ... so I do not see how you can day it is ... as in your words.

just more of the same typical democrat politics - throw everything you can find against the wall and see if anything

If there is nothing there why is she fighting it so? Why is the McCain campaign trying to kill it? Seems to be a lot of smoke here and you know the old saying, "Where there is smoke there ................................"

 

[Revmitchell]

Gpreacher, Thank you for your addition to this thread. I appreciate your correction. It should be interesting to watch as this whole think unfolds.

Howeve it is not just Democrats who voted for the investigation.

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap_stories/a/p/1131/09-16-2008/20080916035010_16.html

As you see that 8 Republicans voted for the investigation and only four Democrats. So to say that it is a Democratic smear tactic is not quite right. The investigative council is made up of 10 Republicians and 4 Democrats ... so I do not see how you can day it is ... as in your words.

If there is nothing there why is she fighting it so? Why is the McCain campaign trying to kill it? Seems to be a lot of smoke here and you know the old saying, "Where there is smoke there ................................"

There is no smoke. Investigations can be a distraction even when baseless. And false subpoenas should always be ignored.

In July, the four Democrats and eight Republicans on Alaska's Legislative Council voted unanimously to investigate the circumstances of Monegan's dismissal. Although Monegan was an at-will employee who could be fired for almost any reason, lawmakers wanted to see whether Palin tried to use her office to settle a personal score with Wooten.

This information alone makes any subpoena baseless.

Though the governor initially said she'd cooperate, after she became McCain's running mate in late July, her lawyer sought to have the three-member state Personnel Board take over, alleging that public statements made by the Democratic chair of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Hollis French, indicated the probe was politically motivated.

French had said the results of the investigation could constitute an "October surprise" for the McCain campaign. He later apologized. The campaign also insists that French, Branchflower and Monegan are friends, even though the men say they only know each other professionally and have never socialized.

Clearly the motivation by the Dems is without doubt.

 

[Crabtownboy]

There is no smoke. Investigations can be a distraction even when baseless. And false subpoenas should always be ignored. [/quoate]

And another cow flew by.

This information alone makes any subpoena baseless.

And another cow flew by.

Clearly the motivation by the Dems is without doubt.

Hmmm, them Dems are tough ... convinced twice their number of Republicians to vote to investigate Palin.

Rev, you are really a closet liberal on quite a number of issues. Liberal in the sense you like to damn others about.

 

[Revmitchell]

Hmmm, them Dems are tough ... convinced twice their number of Republicians to vote to investigate Palin.

Rev, you are really a closet liberal on quite a number of issues. Liberal in the sense you like to damn others about.

And he continues to make my point. This election cycle is making libs desperate.