Boy the McCain-Palin campaign REALLY doesn’t want anyone to know the results of the Branchflower report. This report, due out next Friday contains the results of the ethics probe known as “Troopergate.” An emergency appeal was filed with the Alaska Supreme Court, after Judge Michalski ruled Thursday that the investigation should move forward,
They’re asking the state’s high court to decide by the close of business today whether it will hear their appeal.
The action comes the day after Anchorage Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski threw out their lawsuit attempting to halt the Legislature’s investigation of what’s known as Troopergate. The suit was filed on behalf of a group of Republican state legislators who oppose the investigation.
Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute and Anchorage attorney Kevin Clarkson, representing the group of anti-investigation legislators, want the state Supreme Court to decide their appeal by Thursday.
That’s because Steve Branchflower, the investigator hired by the Legislative Council, is set to finish his report by next Friday. Branchflower is looking into Palin’s dismissal of her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, and whether she improperly pressured him to fire a state trooper divorced from her sister.
“The plaintiffs and Alaskans will suffer irreparable harm if the investigation at issue continues and if the resulting investigative report issues as planned on Oct. 10, 2008,” the lawyers for the anti-investigation state legislators said in their emergency appeal.
The lawyers argued that allowing the investigation to proceed would threaten the right under the Alaska Constitution to a “fair and just” investigation by the Legislature. They also argued the Legislative Council overstepped its authority in investigating.
The state legislators whose names appear on the appeal are Wes Keller, Mike Kelly, Fred Dyson, Tom Wagoner, Carl Gatto and Bob Lynn.
Judge Michalski, in dismissing their lawsuit Thursday, ruled the conduct of the Legislature’s investigation did not violate the right to fairness.
He found much of the argument against the investigation is not for the courts to decide but is rather “business to be left to the legislative branch.”
The judge Thursday also threw out the argument of Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg, a Palin appointee attempting to quash subpoenas ordering state officials to testify in the investigation.
The attorney general’s office has not joined the appeal to the state Supreme Court. Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Colberg would not be saying what his next move would be until he has a chance to discuss it with the subpoenaed state officials.
And who are these lawyers warning us of the “irreparable harm” that the state of Alaska will suffer?
Liberty Legal Institute is a far right-wing legal firm based in Texas.
The institute has taken on a variety of cases in defense of conservative Christian positions. Anchorage attorney Kevin G. Clarkson said he and the Texas group were donating their work on the suit. “We just want to take the politics out of it and bring fairness back into it.”
Clarkson said he and Liberty Legal Institute were donating their work on the suit. “There is no nonpartisan reason to complete this investigation until after the election,” he said. “We just want to take the politics out of it and bring fairness back into it.”
(eye roll)
This is all moving quickly. We’ll find out soon if the court has made a decision today.
UPDATE:
Yes. The Supreme Court of the State of Alaska will hear the emergency appeal.
In a written order issued about 4:30 p.m. today, the Supreme Court said it would hear oral arguments on the appeal at 3 p.m. Wednesday, and agreed to rule by the end of the next Thursday.
The urgency on timing is because Steve Branchflower, the investigator hired by the Legislative Council, is set to release his report next Friday.
OK, break out that big red Sharpie you save for circling important dates in Alaska politics on your calendar. Wednesday at 3:00. The game continues…
Mudflats 
OH MY GOSH! I hope to high heaven that a group from TEXAS does not get to BULLDOZE Alaskan politics!!!
Oh, do keep us posted! I initially didn’t think there would be much in the report, but the harder they fight it, the more I cannot wait!
“Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute and Anchorage attorney Kevin Clarkson, representing the group of anti-investigation legislators, want the state Supreme Court to decide their appeal by Thursday…The institute has taken on a variety of cases in defense of conservative Christian positions.”
How does a Texas organization have standing in the AK court??? and how is this investigation by the legislature affect a conservative Christian Position? How in the heck is it related??
Wow! You know I still can’t understand why the main street media ignores this issue when clearly Palin has something to hide. I guess they figure she’s pretty good at digging her own grave.
Is this Liberty Legal Institute connected to Liberty University Law School that has filled the White House with very young lawyers who were involved with the Attorney General scandal? Betcha it is — I’ll have to check this out.
Thanks for this thread, AKM
Who do these guys think they are? They demand to know TODAY if the Alaska Supreme Court will hear their appeal. Sounds rather weird and presumptious to me (I’m a lawyer). So the court is supposed to jump to attention to tell them by the end of the day if they will even entertain their bogus motion? I think not! They must have something else up cooked up already if this doesn’t work.
Eh – but who knows. I don’t know the makeup of the Court or their political leanings.
Here is Liberty Legal Institute’s Website: http://www.libertylegal.org/default.aspx Pretty big on religious freedom caees.
Just as I finished my homework and sent emails to all of the legislative council here comes this news. There’s dirt in that report, no doubt about it or they wouldn’t be going to these measures. My email to Wilkes was bounced back, all the rest went through. This is starting to sound pretty familiar—2000 Gore Vs. Bush.
Here is a great political cartoon from the Detroit Free Press.. re: Bailout..
http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081001/BLOG2401/81001015/1214/BLOG24
Doesn’t anyone else take issue with the fact that someone from out of state is coming in and telling us how to run things, but when people from out of state contacted whats his face, he sent rude emails back to them saying have a nice day in New Jersey, or move to Alaska and then you can have a say.
I love when people contradict themselves. It’s great! 🙂
Yes, let’s hope the Alaska Supreme Court kicks this to the curb.
I’m a lawyer (albeit from another jurisdiction). I’ve read both the briefs before the superior court, though not the Superior Court’s decision (thanks for the summary earlier). It sounds as though the Court tracked the reasoning of the defendants’ brief pretty darn closely. A leave to appeal is typically judged on the basis of whether there is ANY merit to the appeal. If there is some merit, the Court will grant leave, and set a date to hear the application. I would not be at all surprised if the Supreme Court issues a ruling declining to hear the appeal on the basis that it has no reasonable chance of success (or whatever the applicable legal test in Alaska is). The appeal is just that futile.
Guess this Liberty group is pretty thoroughly Texas guys — here is who the founder is and he apparently has a career going sticking himself in other people and states’ business:
Kelly J Shackelford, Esq. serves as Chief Counsel of the Liberty Legal Institute (1997-present). LLI was founded by Mr. Shackelford as an organization that fights for religious liberties and protects first amendment rights in the courts in Texas and nationwide. As an expert in constitutional law, Mr. Shackelford has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and Texas Supreme Court in addition to serving as co-counsel in numerous other U.S. Supreme Court cases. http://www.libertylegal.org/About_AboutChiefCounsel.aspx
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/groups/liberty-legal-institute
If this is a religious rights group, why is it interfering in a governmental case?
I thought we had some Constitutional laws forbidding that…
The sweet smell of Texas Bullshit is in the air !!
“The plaintiffs and Alaskans will suffer irreparable harm if the investigation at issue continues and if the resulting investigative report issues as planned on Oct. 10, 2008,” the lawyers for the anti-investigation state legislators said in their emergency appeal.
______________________________________________________________________________________
What about the irreparable damage to the rest of us, and the world, if this report is hidden?
Good Heavens!
Mayb Palin made friends with these guys when she was in Texas – in labor!
The laughable part is how they say they want to “remove politics” from this. If I was an Alaskan, I’d be furious. Hey – I’m from Illinois and I’m furious about it!
I will make a prediction:
The Alaska Supreme court will refuse to hear the appeal, and thus let Michalski’s decision stand on both the lawsuit and attempt to quash.
You heard it here first.
What does the VP do? She hasn’t a clue. The Constitution is NOT flexible, Sarah!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27012278/
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
(I know that doesn’t add anything to the convo, but that’s just how exasperated I am.)
While we are waiting for the Supreme Court — did anyone see (or post earlier) this pretty funny Sarah Palin Debate Flow Chart on Daily Kos? http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/3/43222/8057/718/618653
Sorry – I don’t have time to read through all the posts from today — I am tyring to catch up on a major project that has totally been set aside because of my Mudflats/Election obsession. Just came up for a little air. Going back in soon.
“irreparable harm” if the report’s released next Friday? Not if Palin’s cleared of wrong-doing. They’d be chomping at the bit to get it out even sooner if she came out squeaky clean.
Isn’t Liberty Legal an off-shoot of Dobson’s Focus on the Family? Or was that another of the legal groups trying to stop the investigation?
Packy (16:25:28) : Packy–
I sure hope you are right!
“There is no nonpartisan reason to complete this investigation until after the election…”
Wrong on all counts. The nonpartisan reasons are called justice and fairness for Walt Monegan and truth for all Alaskans. Heck for all voters.
Thanks for staying on top of this for us, AKM.
IF THIS DIDN’T STINK SOOOOOO BAD THEY WOULDN’T BE TRYING SO DAMN HARD TO COVER IT UP.
THE MORE THEY TRY – THE MORE IT STINKS !
http://www.state.ak.us/courts/
“We just want to take the politics out of it and bring fairness back into it.”
My aching ….
Oh Alaska and our Dear Alaskans…you all deserve so much better! I did my homework today and sent my e-mails again also. I just keep thinking the truth will prevail – WHATEVER it is!
Let me add agreement with previous posters about this as well:
Whatever is in that report must be pretty “doggone” awful for Sarah Palin, or they wouldn’t be hanging from chandeliers trying to stop it.
The Supreme Court appeal was so very predictable. They are absolutely desperate to keep the Troopergate report from coming out that they are willing do literally anything! What in hell did she do?! There has to be a secret that is worth a war to keep it hidden. It has to be more than we know so far.
oh no – the court granted the motion to expedite!
Oral arguments set fot next Wednesday at 3pm!
Click to access ak0017.pdf
Order Granting Expedited Consideration
Click to access ak0017.pdf
The court accepted it. UNREAL
Jeez – the Court granted the motion to expedite. Oral aruments next Wednesday at 3pm.
Click to access ak0017.pdf
OMG, this is too funny…..
“Ms. Palin explained that she stumbled in the Couric interviews not because she didn’t know the answers, but that she was annoyed with the interview because she thought the questions did not focus enough on the qualities needed in a vice president. She promised to try to be patient in the future.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/now-palin-has-the-answers/
lord…if anybody believes that then they should start digging their own grave
Also.
“Entered at the direction of an individual justice.”
Who did they get to?
Michalski
“The attorney general’s office has not joined the appeal to the state Supreme Court. Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Colberg would not be saying what his next move would be until he has a chance to discuss it with the subpoenaed state officials.”
This is all so bizarre.
The sad thing is French has to have a brief ready by 9:30 AM on Monday.
Wow! The whole country should be watching this. I know y’all are proud, independent folks up there. And I’m counting on y’all’s Supreme Court being made of the same. Nobody likes having anything shoved down their throats. And I’m betting that they’d rather lick barbwire (a south Georgia expression) than having Texas lawyers tell them how they need to act. I’m betting that’s why they granted the motion to expedite. And expedite they will. Hope those Texas lawyers are looking forward to getting their teeth handed to them on a plate. JMO.
Keith Olberman is my HERO!!!!!
The good news is that they can include anything that wasn’t already filed to the Superior Court, so the only grounds will be if the Superior Court had a mis-finding of fact or a variance from state precedent or constitutional ruling.
can should read cannot im previous post
Well, I will be sending positive energy to Hollis French all weekend as he prepares. I cannot believe this. And how can the State Attorney General be MIA for all of this? It makes NO SENSE. I feel for Alaskans, and I feel for all Americans. This affects us all.
Alaskans, take the ultimate revenge. Turn Alaska into a blue state, it might be the difference in the election, see – http://www.moriches-bay.com/map.gif. It would be hilarous if McCain lost the election because he pissed off Alaskans with his heavy handed tactics.
Packy (16:25:28) :
I will make a prediction:
The Alaska Supreme court will refuse to hear the appeal, and thus let Michalski’s decision stand on both the lawsuit and attempt to quash.
————————
I think they’re dying to hear it, just so they can prove that jurisprudence means something in Alaska. This is their chance to go global on the rule of law. JMO
It’s my understanding that James Dobson has a heavy hand in all this
This is my last post to mudflats until after the election.
Rest assured, I’ll still be reading. I’ve make the very tough decision to rejoin the AK media. Call it an offer I couldn’t refuse.
I’m so grateful to AKM for the information that is being made available here.
I only hope that I will be even 1/2 as concise,informed, and compelling in my work. Thanks to everyone across the state and Outside who gets the word out. I’ll check back in after my contract expires.
Wow! Good luck to you. Go get ’em! AKM
I was listening to KUDO and a local lawyer called up and explained that the right of appeal was automatic, and the petition wasn’t for leave to appeal, but for a decision right away.
They are going to hear it and then deny it. The appeal can only include documents from the original case. They will have 30 minutes to convince the judge that that the courts have the power to dictate when a legislative committee can release its own report. If they had a constitutional leg to stand on then the lower court would have granted them the order.
This is unbelievable! Just unbelievable.
The wench has this, her tax returns, and that family of hers and she wants to help run–or maybe run–our country.
But, Of course, she can’t do much that Bush didn’t already do, right?
ZERO consolation! 😦
correction: a hearing right away
I am depressed. I am going to watch the Obama sign for awhile.
The good news is that the Huff Post has already picked up the story…it will get to the NY times by tomorrow afternoon/evening……also
in time for the Sunday morning funnies?…also?
Eventually we will read about it the Economist. Which Sara aparently reads diligently….also
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/now-palin-has-the-answers/?apage=2#comments
Good luck Kitten!
Uh oh. Why would they expedite the case if they aren’t going to change the status quo. Doesn’t feel good.
KittenStCyr (17:02:03) :
This is my last post to mudflats until after the election.
________________________________________________________________________________
Oh, nooooooooooooo! Just at least check in with us, huh?
I understand, though, I’ll miss about ten days this month. I have tried to get out of going to this wedding…tried everything, really, but I have to go. I’m the mother of the bride. LOL 🙂
Cassie!! 😀
“Irreparable harm” my ass:
How can the exposure of a matter regarding the conduct of a high elected government official, a matter that is, furthermore, of broad public interest constitute an “irreparable harm” except in relation to that official’s desire to avoid professional and political embarrassment? Such a concern is not a matter entitled to judicial attention. The only “irreparable harm” would be if the court interferes with the lawful functioning of a separate, duly constituted branch of government. Hence the trial judge rejected the suit in major part because the complaint presents a political question that is beyond the scope of the court’s proper function of judging legal rights and wrongs under established legal mechanisms and within its constitutionally assigned area of operation. Another way of stating this point is that the courts exhibit their respect of an independent and co-equal branch of government, which may properly organize its own procedures within its field of constitutional competence and, more importantly, facilitate the functioning of republican democracy, whose chief feature is the elected representative assembly by which the sovereign, the people, execute their collective will. I can see no plausible argument for the Supreme Court of Alaska to get involved other than to affirm the order of dismissal pursuant to its duty to dispose of all civil appeals under Alaska court organization.
Up-beat news…Gads I love this man
The flowers are beautiful!
“Senator Barack Obama “suspended” his campaign and returned home to Chicago on Friday night for personal reasons: to celebrate the 16th anniversary of his marriage to Michelle.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/the-obamas-celebrate-their-wedding-anniversary/
@Lara (17:06:49) :
Uh oh. Why would they expedite the case if they aren’t going to change the status quo. Doesn’t feel good.
——————————-
Take heart from what Engine Nighthawk Palin said above.
Lara (17:06:49) :
“Uh oh. Why would they expedite the case if they aren’t going to change the status quo. Doesn’t feel good.”
The Supreme Court might expedite not as a signal of what they are thinking, but simply because the case presents a matter of paramount public importance and time is of the essence so that the Legislature receives timely information on how to proceed.
Crust Scramble – SouthGA (16:59:39) :
I think they’re dying to hear it, just so they can prove that jurisprudence means something in Alaska. This is their chance to go global on the rule of law. JMO
@Crust –
Are you predicting which way the judge will rule or just that he’s thrilled to hear it?
Say it ain’t so, Joe!
Pitbullshit!
I can’t believe this is happening! Wow, there is obviously something damning or they believe it to be to go through all this trouble. So much for accountability.
Sorry to change topics, but I need some help.. Is anybody from VA?
I want to go the the Virginia office tomorrow to volunteer, but I’m not sure where it is. I’m looking for the Northern Virgina office.
Do over.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/now-palin-has-the-answers/?apage=2#comments
If she reads the Economist, I’m voting Republican in this election. I can tell you right now, that dog won’t hunt (another S. Ga. expression).
I wonder if Branchflower could have his report done early…like Wednesday morning!
Engine Nighthawk Palin (17:03:45) :
They are going to hear it and then deny it. The appeal can only include documents from the original case. They will have 30 minutes to convince the judge that that the courts have the power to dictate when a legislative committee can release its own report. If they had a constitutional leg to stand on then the lower court would have granted them the order.
____
Engine,
I am counting on you here!
I don’t know if it’s been reported here already or not but the Alaska Supreme Court has agreed to hear it. It will be heard next Weds. with a ruling by Thursday per the ADN.
Charles, it is even worse than that. Remember that these are six legislators who have NOTHING to do with the investigation and are not on the Legislative Council. Palin is not a party to the action, so the “irreparable harm” they are alleging is – and I shit you not – “damage to their reputations and that of the state of Alaska.”
Yes, to be clear, they are claiming they – these six legislators who have NOTHING to do with the investigation – will suffer irreparable harm in the form of damage to their reputations and that of the State of Alaska.
If they have an appeal of right (which may be the case – I am not licensed in Alaska), then I just have to hope that the Alaska Supreme Court will soundly reject it. The ONLY thing that gives me pause, having read their appeal, is a procedural question about when the Superior Court judge denied their motion. If I read their appeal correctly, they said that they didn’t have a chance to oppose the “defendants'” (Legislative Council) motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ (six legislators) complaint.
I am going to go check that out.
Charles!
STOP MAKING SENSE!
You really can’t make this stuff up. I agree, there must be something otherwise they wouldn’t be trying to hide it.
The MSM is nowhere on this, days late, except Andrew Sullivan. I will tell everyone I know, link here if you are out there. The word needs to get out.
AKM, I wondered if you had any info about the ‘global warming committee’ that Palin made reference to during the debate. Does it exist? Did it do anything? It seems the Darfur divestment story was completely untrue. Also we now know there were no trade missions to Russia, in fact, an overture by a Russian representative seems to have been ignored. Just curious about the so-called global warming commission.
Thanks Charles and Engine Nighthawk. I can’t see the legal basis for overturning the court’s decision. But all I can think of is – 1) everyone predicted the Supreme Court wouldn’t take Bush v. Gore, and then predicted 2) they wouldn’t tell Florida how to count votes. The decision was a pretzel. And yet…..
I hope you guys are right. Guess there’s not much I can do but wait.
LINDA (17:16:41) :
I wonder if Branchflower could have his report done early…like Wednesday morning!
___
Linda,
I like the way you think! I have no clue if he would be outside the law, now that the court has agreed to hear the case, but some of you attorneys here might weigh in with an opinion on this…PLEASE?
Obviously the Court is fast tracking it and ruining the appellants’ lawyer’s weekend utterly. 😉 I can’t imagine it happening to nicer fellows! Anyway, the Court has signaled that it will not allow itself to be used as a tool for delay. If these appealing fools think it’s such an “emergency,” then the Court will happily treat it as one and hand their heads to them that much efficiently.
I don’t see how Branchflower could be find to be a “lawbreaker” by getting his work done early unless he was breaking the rules of his bosses, the Legislature and they wanted to terminate his contract or wrongfully discharge him or something. I would expect, however, that Branchflower would not consider any attempt to frustrate the Court’s ability to make a decision first and will stick to the previous schedule.
“Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute”
This sounds about as truthful as George Bush’s “Clean Air Act”.
Nothing but twisting words to give something an air of respectability. If many more of these sub-humans slither to the surface, I will end up with a permanent sneer of contempt on my face. In this case, why don’t they make like a tumbleweed and roll on back to Texas.
Divatalk (17:14:31) :
not in VA but the obama site will allow you to click on your stste and find a locale!
Have fun!
I mean Obama….and state!
Happy fingers!
The Alaska Supreme Court is the highest level of state court in Alaska. It hears appeals from lower state courts and also administers the state’s judicial system.
The supreme court is comprised of the chief justice and four associate justices. The five justices, by majority vote, select one of their members to be the chief justice.
http://www.state.ak.us/courts/ctinfo.htm
These people are judges – nothing matters but the law. Emotions don’t matter, opinions don’t matter, the only thing that matters is the law. And it pisses them off when lawyers think they can jerk the law of the land around.
I think they’ll uphold Judge Michalski”s decision. I think they expedited it because they know how important it is ‘nip this in the bud’ immediately. If they don’t, Alaska law will be stepped on and $hit on for a long, long time. JMO.
Charles (17:09:52) :
“Irreparable harm” my ass:
How can the exposure of a matter regarding the conduct of a high elected government official, a matter that is, furthermore, of broad public interest constitute an “irreparable harm” except in relation to that official’s desire to avoid professional and political embarrassment? Such a concern is not a matter entitled to judicial attention.
___
Charles,
I really like what you have to say, and if I am understanding you correctly, you’re thinking the rule of law will win out here, correct?
LINDA (17:16:41) :
I wonder if Branchflower could have his report done early…like Wednesday morning!
__________________________________________________________________________________
Oooooohhhhh…..wringing hands together….you are diabolical, and I LOVE it!
Wow. You guys are sure great to read and AKM et al, are right on top of some thoroughly weird goings on.
This is the political equivalent of a barroom brawl. And I am surprised that the “states rights” groupies from Texas are investing so much free time in another state.
The Legislative Council can issue subpoenas. If the disaffected lesgislators don’t like what some of their own have done, then they can call a special session of the Legislature and throw some chairs. I can’t see any role for the judiciary here.
I noticed Colberg hasn’t decided what to do because he has to talk to “his clients.” How hard can they be to find in Anchorage? Maybe they are with Dick Cheney? My guess is he is feeling alot of heat (I can see the end of my political future from everyone’s house) and is paralyzed with indecision.
No end to Republican dirty tricks this year. If you receive a smear E-mail, fight back!
Please forward any smear E-mail to:
watchdog@barackobama.com
Divatalk wrote above: “I want to go the the Virginia office tomorrow to volunteer, but I’m not sure where it is. I’m looking for the Northern Virgina office.”
Divatalk, I don’t live in VA, but I got an e-mail from the dcforobama group earlier today about registering voters in VA. You might find the address on this page:
http://www.dcforobama.com/vavoterreg
Cassie Jeep Pike Palin (Wish I were Trout) (17:26:21) :
LINDA (17:16:41)
_______________________
Yeah! Game. Set. Match.
Karion (17:18:44) :
“Charles, it is even worse than that.”
Put that way, I think it’s Rule 11 (or whatever rule covers frivolous litigation in AK) time for the appellants. The position is completely untenable. I hope they are ordered to pay all fees and costs (their attorneys’ should be held personally liable, too).
Charles (17:24:29) :
I don’t see how Branchflower could be find to be a “lawbreaker” by getting his work done early unless he was breaking the rules of his bosses, the Legislature and they wanted to terminate his contract or wrongfully discharge him or something. I would expect, however, that Branchflower would not consider any attempt to frustrate the Court’s ability to make a decision first and will stick to the previous schedule.
___
Charles,
Thanks for your speedy reply – can I keep you on retainer?
Miss the editing, there should be a ‘to before the nip’.
Two Questions:
Does this mean that witnesses who found the subpoenas “elective” will continue to refuse to appear until the appeal is heard, thus effectively preventing them from being questioned prior to the report deadline on 10/10?
Any AK supreme court watchers have any insight into likely leanings of court?
Thanks
AnneinWA (17:25:55) :
Yes, I believe that’s how it will come out, unless the Supreme Court of Alaska has, unbeknown to us, permitted itself to be bought. No reason they should do that, as they have a pretty sweet deal going just doing the regular judging thing. So do they have life terms there, or what?
Cassie Jeep Pike Palin (Wish I were Trout) (17:24:37
Thanks I’ll check that.
AnneinWA (17:29:10) :
Thank you for your kind comment. Yes, I am a lawyer. Therefore, I know there is almost never such a thing as a slam-dunk legally. But this appeal sounds really frivolous, so hopefully it’s an easy call, as it apparently was in the trial court.
Texas Liberty Legal
reminds me of the old school bumper sticker circa Trans-Alaska Pipeline:
Alaskan Dream= A Texan going south with an Okie under each arm!
UpTooLate (17:31:15) :
Two Questions:
Does this mean that witnesses who found the subpoenas “elective” will continue to refuse to appear until the appeal is heard, thus effectively preventing them from being questioned prior to the report deadline on 10/10?
—————————–
If the Supreme Court upholds Judge Michalski”s decision. deputies could be authorized to start picking up and jailing people immediately – so, Todd, you might not want to get off the plane.
Don’t forget to contribute 16 dollars to the Obama campaign in order to celebrate his and Michelles 16th wedding anniversary!
Thanks Charles.
After the last 8 years, it simply sometimes seems that all rules have been suspended, and laws only apply to some! I know…I sound paranoid, ya’ think?
Charles –
Still doing some research, but here’s the thing that positively kills me. The primary ‘grounds’ for the Plaintiffs’ (again – six legislators that have NOTHING to do with the investigation and aren’t on the Legislative Council) is this clause of the Alaskan constitution (Art. I, section 7)
§ 7. Due Process
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed.
Again, remember that Palin is not a party to the lawsuit – just those six legislators who have nothing to do with the investigation whatsoever. If you can explain to me how their right to fair and just treatment in the legislative investigation has been infringed, you are a better attorney than me. And again, the irreparable harm they claim they will suffer if the report is released as scheduled is damage to their reputations and that of the state of Alaska.
On a positive note, pursuit of an emergency appeal just might mean the McCain team doesn’t have the legislative votes to prevent the release of the report before the election.
Speaking as a non-elite, mavericky, normal, family-values outsider who likes to discuss kitchen-table issues, I betcha every Joe Six-Pack in Alaska wants to read the report before the election, doggonit!! (wink-wink, smile-smile).
Oh, you betcha! AKM
The all time classic expediting of cases was Nixon’s effort to block the release of the Watergate related tape. It was a similar issue of executive privilege, etc., etc. The court granted a leap frogging over the appeals as a way of resolving an issue of pressing national importance.
It’s important to note that the hearing will be completed on Wednesday in plenty of time to insure a timely release of the report. It also insures that no one can claim that the plaintiffs were denied their day in court. I suspect the plaintiffs may have been hoping for a later date and a court order to block the release of the report pending that hearing.
HOLY EXPLITIVE!!! MOTHER OF ALL POTTY TALK!!!! I mean…what the HELL!!!!! Didn’t this Texas based firm READ that the Palins were willing to risk the health/welfare of their unborn child so that it would NOT be born in their big star state????? Oh, bless the heart of those freaking corporate lobbying lawyer motherf….:::waving fists in the air, screaming blood boiling mean, mean words::::
[…] but interestingly, according to ADN, Palin’s attorney general hasn’t (yet) joined it. Mudflats is on it […]
Thanks to the Mudflats Legal Department for “talking me down.”
🙂
karion (17:18:44)
So Karion, have you determined whether there is a colorable due process violation in the trial court procedure? I hope not, or that there was only harmless error because the whole thing is bogus anyway. The only thing I have done is to read the news accounts and the order expediting. I am a little on my high horse here and have not read the briefs. Maybe I’ll drink some and then read the stuff.
Sorry if it’s been asked ( I had to go pee!)
How can these Texan LLI guys even be allowed to present a case to the Alaska Supreme Court? Have they gotten admitted to the bar?
I’m a pretty nice person, with a fairly logical (accountant’s mind), but I can’t expect to present a case to a State Supreme Court ANYWHERE?
Will they just hand their brief to a local attorney for presentation?
What if those 1000 some emails which Troopergate defense lawyers refused to release (some copied to First Dude) reference Palin 2006/2007 personal tax questions amongst various government officials?
That would surely be a good reason to cover them up given the issues raised on the two years of Palin tax filings just released.
Sarah Palin is on public record about paying taxes not a reflection of patriotism. Might there be (illegal) tax evasion points and questions in those Governor emails?
Here’s the real reason they’re trying so hard to keep this investigation from seeing the light of day; they know that even without Sarah or Todd Palin’s testimony, it’s going to be bad for them and they don’t want that info out BEFORE the election. My prediction; should she be forced to return to Alaska a loser on November 5, we’re going to witness one of the fastest falls from grace in recent political history with Palin either resigning or being forced from office within a year. She was okay in Alaska awaiting the day she was able to replace Ted Stevens in the Senate, thus getting the opportunity to become known in the lower 48. But, along comes John McCain a few years ahead of schedule dangling an irresistible carrot in fornt of her and she was too ambitious to say no. Unfortunately for her, Palin had no clue of political life on this level and how quickly the negative things in her past and present records would be revealed. Most people are honest with themselves and if forced to admit it without any repercussions, I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that Sarah Palin would say that deep down inside, she’s in over head on most policy matters and without extensive “training”, unable to answer even the simplest questions posed by Katie Couric (who amongst us can’t name at least ONE newspaper or magazine that we read on a regular basis).
Please don’t take this the wrong way but what works in Alaska doesn’t work down here. She’s in over her head, she knows it, McCain knows it and so does most of the voting public. And, it’s only going to get worse for her if she has to return to Alaska as Governor and that’s why she’s working so hard behind the scenes to try to kill Steve Branchflower’s investigation and subsequent report being made public.
After all, if she doesn’t have anything to hide, why does it appear that she does?
AZ MOM (17:42:27) :
Hey, hey, hey – Let’s all say a few nice words about attorneys, please. We have prudent, Mudflatter lawyers here, helping us understand these issues and the role of the court! Thanks again! 🙂
akmuckraker (17:44:47) :
Thanks to the Mudflats Legal Department for “talking me down.”
AKM
I am with you! This blog has drawn some truly AMAZING people!
karion (17:41:28) :
“Charles –
Still doing some research . . .”
Sounds like you are going for a dismissal for lack of standing. These legislators seem to have no creditable stake in the outcome of the case, I agree, unless standing doctrine is so extraordinarily loose in Alaska that parties may pursue a purely abstract interest. That does not sound like anything a normal, well-adjusted judge would be interested in. For others out there, the Supreme Court can likely affirm the trial judge on any ground, even one that the trial judge did not mention or even contemplate. They could have a field day here.
Cassie Jeep @ 17:47
All courts routinely permit licensed out-of-state attorneys to appear if they are working on a case with a locally licensed attorney.
Deep Throat 2 (17:47:33) :
“Sarah Palin is on public record about paying taxes not a reflection of patriotism. Might there be (illegal) tax evasion points and questions in those Governor emails?”
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Deep–I’m not a fan, believe me when I say that. But in all honesty, I don’t think the payroll people for the state of AK even knew they were supposed to report the per diem payments….just a dirty little “continuation of procedure” that’s been going on for years.
SWWNBN and Todd just handed to H & R Block what they were given by the state—-a W-2___and H & R reported what was on it. I don’t think this is the issue.
Rather, I think it’s the Worker’s Comp thing—that goes way beyond family loyalty and into extreme illegality.
karion (17:41:28) :
Charles –
Still doing some research, but here’s the thing that positively kills me. The primary ‘grounds’ for the Plaintiffs’ (again – six legislators that have NOTHING to do with the investigation and aren’t on the Legislative Council) is this clause of the Alaskan constitution (Art. I, section 7)
§ 7. Due Process
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The right of all persons to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations shall not be infringed.
Again, remember that Palin is not a party to the lawsuit – just those six legislators who have nothing to do with the investigation whatsoever. If you can explain to me how their right to fair and just treatment in the legislative investigation has been infringed, you are a better attorney than me. And again, the irreparable harm they claim they will suffer if the report is released as scheduled is damage to their reputations and that of the state of Alaska.
__________________________
I’m not an attorney, but to me this speaks of the frivolous part of their suit. They have nothing to do with the investigation, yet they are attempting to thwart the lawful activities of the Alaska legislature. Not to speak ill of attorneys, but ridiculous suits can be filed from here to doomsday, just to slow down or halt the process. If I’ve got the money, I can find an attorney to sue, right, wrong or indifferent, be damned.
Brian aka Snooker Hinge Palin (17:56:46) :
Thanks for that explanation. Seems a little presumptive, though, for all these “big wigs” to come to town to make their point!
I’ve said it before….when this particular circus leaves town, the people of Alaska will be cleaning up the mess for years….damage to friends’ reputations, family alliances, political dealings, etc. A really sad time will be had by all.
UpTooLate (17:31:15) :
Two Questions:
1. Does this mean that witnesses who found the subpoenas “elective” will continue to refuse to appear until the appeal is heard, thus effectively preventing them from being questioned prior to the report deadline on 10/10?
2. Any AK supreme court watchers have any insight into likely leanings of court?
****
1. I’m thinking it actually works against htem. Suppose the Supreme Court denied the immediate hearing. The issue would be over for practical purposes, and Branchflower would then have about a week to interview them (if htey cooeprated), and then file a report. He might not want to forego deposing them because of appearance problems, even if he pretty much knows what they will say (I don’t know if that is true) If he doesn’t know what htey will say, he may REALLY want to depose them. And it may take several hours. Heck, I suspect Todd will take several hours all by himself. I could see this delaying the final report. probably not until Nov, but maybe, and delay is delay and who knows what hte next move might be. Given the expediting of the appeal, there is now a reluctance for witnesses to come forward, and after the appeal is heard Branchflower just doesn’t have time to interview and will go forward with what he has.
2. I’m curious about that too. I don’t see how they can rule in favor of the appellants given the legal basis on which is it based (irreparable harm to people who aren’t involved, and the state – which could only be true if the facts are unfavorable, but that’s not a valid legal argument), but then there’s Bush v. Gore. Any thought that the courts were above abject politics was erased.
As a Texan now living in Alaska I love that “Uncle Todd” and Sarah took all precautions to have their baby in Alaska and not in Texas. As he said, “You can’t have a fish picker from Texas.” But, I guess attorneys from Texas are just fine for “Uncle Todd.”
I’m also not an attorney, but I can easily see why the Supremes (or one of them) agreed to the expedited process. With all the “political-this-political-that” fingerpointing going on, they don’t want to have even the appearance of bias.
I don’t think the order to expedite reveals anything about the probable decision.
And since it took the Superior Court judge (who does know AK law) about ten minutes to throw the case out, I’m guessing the only reason it may take the Supreme Court longer is that each of the 5 justices will want to take time to individually tell the Texas Mafia to get the hell out of their courtroom.
Reading the article in ADN about the emergency motion, I scrolled down to the comments, which I always find *interesting* (read: flame fest). Someone named “ndolan622” claims, “The Obama campaign needs to get out of Alaska. They are only supported by Lib (sic) legislators, corrupt republicans and out of work bloggers.”
AKM, this person isn’t refering to you, I hope! Can’t be, because you are definitely NOT out of work, and probably won’t be for some time to come. Also, (oops, BINGO for overused SP verbiage) since when is the Obama campaign messing with Alaska?
Ha! If I were out of work, my life would be a lot easier! 🙂
And the Obama campaign is not doing anything. As a matter of fact, they removed a good chunk of their paid staff when SP got the VP nod. They transferred them to other battleground states. What they mean by the “Obama campaign” is anyone who doesn’t think Sarah is the greatest thing since moose stew. Now the McCain campaign….that’s another story. They’re all over state government like flies. AKM
As has been pointed out, they have recourse and have had recourse by asking for a special session of the legislature. The court has great constitutional grounds to affirm the lower court’s decision beyond the lack of standing argument itself.
Let’s all take a deep breath. The investigation has been affirmed as legit by the superior court. The court has no standing in deciding when a legislative committee delivers a report.
Why don’t you just encourage Branchflower to release his report early. Simple really.
How much better is it going to be if he keeps it until Friday.
Luckily, they aren’t trying to get an injunction specifically to stop Branchflower from releasing the report.
Charles –
What is weird is that the Superior Court didn’t really even get into the standing issue. It said, several times, “assuming the Plaintiffs have standing.” There was no judicial analysis of this issue, and I need to go reread the “defendants'” (Legislative Council) opposition to see if they raised it. I really hope they did.
As for the Superior Court’s actual order, here is the gist: first, it concluded that the legislature certainly has investigatory powers, which was contrary to the incredible argument made by the Plaintiffs (the six legislators NOT INVOLVED IN THE INVESTIGATION). The court further concluded that judicial review of legislative actions is confined to the issue of whether the legislature complied with the constitution.
Now here’s where it gets a little tricky. The Plaintiffs (those six pesky UNINVOLVED legislators) advanced several arguments. Here they are, and here is what the court said:
1. It was improper for the legislature to appoint French to manage the investigation. The Court said this was not an issue for the judiciary, because the Alaska constitution doesn’t speak to this issue. Remember, the judiciary’s role is confined to the issue of whether the legislature complied with the constitution. Because the constitution doesn’t say anything about appointing someone to manage an investigation, it was not an issue for the court to decide.
2. It was improper to appoint the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate. The Court said it wasn’t an issue for the court, for the same reasons set forth above.
3. It was improper for the Senate Judiciary Committee to meet when the legislature wasn’t in session (an interim meeting). The Court noted that the Alaska constitution specifically gives the Senate the right to create interim committees and that the conduct of those committees is in the purview of the legislature. If the committee is acting beyond the legislative rules, that is a matter for the legislature.
4. It was improper for the Senate Judiciary Committee to authorize subpoenas. The Court found that the constitution specifically gave the legislature subpoena authority.
5. It was improper for the Senate Judiciary Committee to issue subpoenas to third parties (not in the legislature). The Court said that if the Senate Judiciary Committee overstepped its authority, that is a matter for the full legislature, not the courts.
6. The investigation was improper because it violated the due process clause (guaranteeing fair and just treatment). The Court said, “assuming there is standing,” the concept of full and fair treatment is different in the legislature, which is political, as compared to that concept before the judiciary, where there is no politics (HA). Deference should be given to the legislature, which is inherently political.
Whew. Still on the clock tonight, I guess.
Well my goodness, seems like the McCain Team has an emergency.
The problem is the cover up. They have tried to pull a Richard Nixon, and in the end it will bite them.
Eventually the truth will out. In the meantime they are just making it easier to vote for Obama and Joe.
I know this is slightly off-topic, but I need a translation here:
1. Palin couldn’t even carry the debate in her home state? What happened to those sky-high approval ratings?
2. I hear the Anchorage Daily News needs a headline writer (see below):
Who is won the VP debate?
Posted by Anchorage Daily News
Posted: October 2, 2008 – 5:25 pm
Gov. Sarah Palin (R)
42% (677 votes)
Sen. Joe Biden (D)
52% (837 votes)
It was a tie
6% (104 votes)
Total votes: 1618
“Is our proofreaders learning?” AKM
This is like a soap opera saga, OMG! Wish I could Tivo it and skip to next Friday!
(I don’t like my name!)
Karion,
As I said, I’m not an attorney, but to me, this is the linchpin
4. It was improper for the Senate Judiciary Committee to authorize subpoenas. The Court found that the constitution specifically gave the legislature subpoena authority.
I think this is their downfall. If the Court found that the constitution specifically gave the legislature subpoena authority, there’s no way around this. Comply or be arrested.
I have argued cases before the AK Supreme Court, won some and lost some. The judges are nothing if not fair, thoughtful and thorough. Note that the petition for rehearing was granted on authority of ONE judge, NOT the entire court; a single judge has authority to do this in emergency petitions. Granting the petition for an emergency expedited appeal gives no indication whatsoever how that judge, or any of the judges, are leaning on the case. Also, some people have asked if denial of the petition for a TRO would mean that Branchflower’s subpoenas are enforceable. No, it would not. The more common judicial subpoena is enforceable by the court, who can hold a person who defies the subpoena in contempt of court. Here, it is a legislative subpoena, which can only be enforced if the legislature, when it is back in session in January, decides to hold the no-show witnesses in “contempt of the legislature”. So, that would really be a political, not a legal, determination. Good luck with that one.
Karion, George, Crust et al:
I agree with you that standing may well be a key issue. Perhaps the Supreme Court of Alaska wants to weight in on this one?
Wondering if Dobson is connected to this law firm since he was instrumental in Palins pick for VP.
Secretive Right-Wing Group Vetted Palin
Secretive Right-Wing Group Vetted Palin
“Last week, while the media focused almost obsessively on the DNC’s spectacle in Denver, the country’s most influential conservatives met quietly at a hotel in downtown Minneapolis to get to know Sarah Palin. The assembled were members of the Council for National Policy, an ultra-secretive cabal that networks wealthy right-wing donors together with top conservative operatives to plan long-term movement strategy.”
Council for National Policy
This would make sense…..cause a skunk always smells it’s own stink.
I.M.O.,, someone going to this much effort is hiding something they don’t want you to find out about. No one goes to these greatest lenghts without a reason,, and no one spends this kind of money on lawyers without a solid reason.
I’ve passed this blog onto about 30 plus others,, like me, now they are addicted. Your blog is the BEST out there, keep it coming!
😀
Well, thanks, kimosabe, that sucks. Here I’ve been thinking from a legal standpoint on subpoenas, not a legislative standpoint. Disregard everything I’ve written. $hit.
karion (18:15:19) :
Yeah, I saw that aside about standing too. Maybe things were so frenzied that the defendants forgot to brief it or maybe the trial judge just had an embarrassment of riches. I am not an appellate law expert, but would you not agree that since the defendants are the respondents, they could push any ground for affirming that the Supreme Court might reach as a matter of law? It seems the appellants are arguing they have standing, so I don’t see how that issue is off the table at the Supreme Court. There likely isn’t any more factual development to do on standing, as far as I can see, so the Supreme Court could just pull the trigger on it. The trial judge sure did make quick work of their arguments, didn’t he? Just hammered them with the political question/separation of powers doctrines over and over again. It is a compelling point, especially under the circumstances. But what about this motion practice objection, that the plaintiffs did not get to submit responsive paperwork? I get the sense their were dueling motions, but I can’t tell if the plaintiffs did or did not get to file responsive paperwork (or did their own motion pretty much present whatever they had by way of defense against the CR 12(b)(6) motion). If their case is pure B.S., then I don’t see that they get to go back to the trial court for the pure hell of it as waste more of the Court’s and parties precious time.
Wow!! I agree with previous posters that the ASC is trying to be transparent. Let the interlopers have their day in court and let’s move on.
Remember Pain’s comments during the debate about the Constitutional
powers of the VP (she was corrected by Biden)? Here is an interview with
her from Fox News this AM which is even worse:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/03/palin-bleeding-authority/
I also just heard on the Rachel Maddow show a professor of Constitutional
Law from George Washington U. discussing Palin’s inappropriate interpretation
of the Constitution, as well as questioning her, Todd’s and staff’s refusal
to acknowledge the subpoenas. So the news is getting out to the MSM.
Is Branchflower bound to a Oct.10 release of the report or can he take more time if needed?
Here she goes again
PALIN: OBAMA COMMENTS DISQUALIFY HIM FOR COMMANDER IN CHIEF
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/03/cameron-interviews-post-debate-palin/
Damn. is there anybody out there who can tell her to just shut up and make it stick?
@Susan, WA (18:34:22)
Really listening to what she says is frightening. I think that she knows exactly what she is a about and does want McCain to “leave” oops “lead” so that she can buckle down with “America” and take care of that “Agenda”……Also
Pistol Tanker Palin (18:23:24) :
This is like a soap opera saga, OMG! Wish I could Tivo it and skip to next Friday!
(I don’t like my name!)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Didn’t like the “Pike” thing either–so I lobbied until someone offered to have me adopted as a Trout—–Just add your request to your name! LOL 🙂
ChuckFree (17:49:17) it’s going to be bad for them and they don’t want that info out BEFORE the election.
_______________________________________
Ya know, that is the thing: the rightists in Texas protecting the transgressions of the pick of the litter (no offense to any animal lovers), SP. And if there is a Dobson connection, whew! That is a story.
On the other hand, our favorite Maverick (mine was Brett) has HIS gumbas in Alaska trying to protect the integrity of his veddy own campaign.
You cannot make this stuff up!
Kimosabe, wow, someone who has argued before them! So they are not made? THat seems to be a fear threading through the posts. It is good to know.
Taupe Armageddon Palin — why do I think this name is prophetic? Taupe=bland gray with a tinge of brown
armageddon = the last battle between good and evil before the Day of Judgement (November 4)
Really, I couldn’t have made this one up! The Palin name generator strikes again!
Is there any legal reason why the previous suggestion that the report be issued before the 3pm Thursday hearing couldn’t be done?
kimosabe (18:24:29) :
______________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for that information!
Crust wrote:”Is there anybody out there who can tell her to just shut up and make it stick?”
Crust, I share your utter disgust with her. However, I think it is to Obama/Biden’s advantage, and to the advantage of all Alaskans seeking justice and truth in governance (and Governors!) to let her talk, and talk, and talk, and talk. The tide has turned, and just like her little gem earlier today on Fox (“Come on. Do we hafta get outta Michigan? I fired off an e-mail”), every time she “communicates,” we learn how out of the loop and crazy she is. I would be willing to bet that she has NO IDEA what is going on in Alaska right now. How can she? She doesn’t even know what’s going on in the McCain-Palin campaign?
Once again…we hear her, but what is she saying????? NOTHING that makes any sense……And I guess “so” is almost as prevelent as “also”
There has got to be something damaging in it. Something really unspinnable. It seems as though they are freaking out more than they are constructively blocking and obfuscating the results.
Makes me wonder…well, more like fantasize about horrendous legal outcomes for the Governor, lol.
Karion:
What is especially so odd about this is it arrives at the Supreme Court after the trial judge denied the TRO. What do the appellants want the Supreme Court to do? Order the trial court to issue the TRO on grounds that the plaintiffs advanced in their own motion and that were found wanting? Fat chance the Supreme Court is going to find an abuse of discretion on that score, even if the case gets to live to another day for who knows what conceivable reason. After 10/10, the whole thing will be moot. So correcting any CR 12(b)(6) procedural error is not likely to make a difference because the report will already be out by the time it gets back down and more litigation takes place, whatever that might entail (anyway, because it’s motion on the pleadings, can’t the Supreme Court just handle the decision on the merits of the motion itself?). I don’t see how the plaintiffs can get there in time, since the effect of reversing the dismissal is just more litigation of the merits of the case after a TRO has already been denied. That sound’s like the definition of mootness to me. All of the foregoing would be wrong, however, if the Supreme Court sees any kind of a case on the merits, such that a TRO should be issued just to let the plaintiffs get their day in court to so they can keep making spurious arguments. Sounds like a tangle about abstractions to me: I hope the trial court has a halfway decent record.
Karion, Charles et al
“The investigation was improper because it violated the due process clause (guaranteeing fair and just treatment). The Court said,
“assuming there is standing,”
the concept of full and fair treatment is different in the legislature, which is political, as compared to that concept before the judiciary, where there is no politics (HA). Deference should be given to the legislature, which is inherently political.”
Hmmm the Court is NOT saying that the appellants have standing (in fact it somewhat infers they may not).
Rather they are saying- assume all facts favorable to the appellants, they STILL lose.
Charles..thanks for your input and level head…..way down here in Florida I want to tear my hair out in frustration and can only imagine how Alaskans feel
and Lulu…you are right and my other half keeps telling me the same thing…let her talk, talk, talk as she’s digging her own grave………..hope so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What’s TRO?
Charles –
Okay, I just reread both the motion for the TRO (filed by the Plaintiffs- the pesky six legislators) and the opposition by the Defendants (the Legislative Council).
Procedurally, I am a little confused. I saw the complaint filed by the AG (seeking to quash the subpoenas), but I haven’t seen the complaint filed by the Texas attorneys on behalf of the Six Pesky Legislators. They aren’t available on the adn.com site, as far as I can tell, but I am assuming there is a complaint. The Six Pesky Legislators filed a motion for a TRO and the Legislative Council responded. There does not appear to be a reply by the Six Pesky Legislators – but, at least in my jurisdiction (and under most local rules), you are not entitled to a reply as a matter of right. Most local rules are permissive on replies, not mandatory.
More confusing is that the appeal to the Supreme Court says that the complaint of the Six Pesky Legislators was dismissed pursuant to 12(b)(6) (“Motion to Dismiss”) that they had not answered. I haven’t found the motion to dismiss filed by the Legislative Council and I strongly suspect one wasn’t made. The Order of the Superior Court does not reference any motion to dismiss: it referenced the motion for the TRO and accompanying motion for preliminary injunction. I am guessing the Court dismissed the complaint on its own (sua sponte), which makes it downright galling that the Texas attorneys for the Six Pesky Legislators would make such a blatant misrepresentation to the Supreme Court.
Incidentally, the Legislative Council did brief and argue the standing issue, and quite well. In fact – and this should give everyone some temporary relief – the work product of the Legislative Council, which was performed by an Anchorage attorney, is substantially better in quality. Moreover, the law is, in my opinion, very much on the Legislative Council’s side. To the point that, if I were counsel for the Legislative Council, I would most definitely be asking for sanctions against the Six Pesky Legislators. I read the brief as objectively as I could and I cannot believe how weak and baseless the claims of the Six Pesky Legislators are.
Well, ya just knew they would file. Afterall, whenever they say they won’t do something, they turn around hoping to catch ya alls asleep… but they’ve done that so often that when Palin’s lawyer said he would probably testify, I just knew they would file with the next level up.
They are getting so darn predictable. At least in that one sense they are not a disappointment. We know what they are going to do despite their words to the contrary. P R E D I C T A B L E.
Wow… this is getting more curiouser everyday!
They sure are trying hard to keep this quiet. It must be really damning.
I think I mixed up the Legislative Council with the legislators themselves. Is the Council the attorneys for the French committee? Is it still more a political brawl?
Didn’t read all the comments, so may be a repeat of what others have said. Branchflower should release the report EARLY!
Who is the woman who rides The Beast in Revelation 17?
TRO = Temporary Restraining Order
TRO: Temporary Restraining Order (isn’t that correct Karion?)
Okay, just found the motion to dismiss. I was wrong – the Legislative Council did file one. I am going to read it now, but had a thought. Let’s assume the trial court improperly dismissed the complaint (on the basis of the motion and opposition to the TRO – that is temporary restraining order for you non-law folks). I think the worst the Alaska Supreme Court could do is reinstate the complaint and give the Six Pesky Legislators the right to oppose it – and direct the trial court to reconsider upon proper briefing.
But that has zero effect on the motion for the TRO, which was filed to stop the Legislative Council from issuing their report next Friday. I am pretty confident that the TRO was properly denied, so, when all is said and done, the Six Pesky Legislators may get their complaint reinstated, but they won’t be able to block the release.
Okay, going to read the motion to dismiss now.
Thanks! I think I knew that but my brains are scrambled tonight – overload I think
karion (18:58:33) :
Thanks for your update. Maybe the motion to dismiss was oral only? I am not familiar trial judges making their own motions to dismiss people’s cases, but maybe if a case is extraordinarily frivolous/CR 11 worthy? One really has to wonder if observing all the niceties of procedure would make a wit of difference in this case, though. If there’s no case, there’s no case, and the plaintiffs can hardly complain they aren’t getting due process, what with the granting of an expedited appeal. I am sure the trial judge knew it was going upstairs anyway, so he just gave it a good push out the door of his courtroom! The Supreme Court will call the shots on this one and they can do as they damn well see fit and how they damn well see fit as long as it’s constitutional. Again, these bozos are probably getting more due process than they are entitled to, and they undoubtedly will get more due process when the motion for sanctions gets filed. Welcome to the Big Leagues.
“Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment
of the great harlot who sits on many waters, . . . .”
Revelation 17:1
You lawyers/legal experts are wonderful – thanks for helping us sort through all of this. We heart you!
off-topic but right on the mark
“She’s all punctuation.”
Bob Herbert, NY Times
Suchanut (Wesson Scalper Palin) (19:13:26) :
Thanks to you and Karion. I hope our prognostications bear out. Unlike the silly plaintiffs’ counsel, I don’t have to work all weekend trying to make an argument out of sh**. So I am going home now. Enjoy!
Sometimes it is really hard to hold my tongue! LOL!
Thanks Charles! Come back soon!
just got in here tonight…and now my head is SPINNING!! Just when one thinks the punks can sink no lower, they go and DO it! What the hell is in that report that makes it so important?
Sarah is about as transparent as MUD! (no inference to mudflats intended)
btw…is any of this showing up anywhere in MSM????
Seems to me that if those 6 legislators wanted to have a say in the direction of the Troopergate matter that they would have found a way to put themselves on that legislative committee. Seems to me that they now are trying to do an end around on a legislative process (committee assignments) by filing suit in court. Therein is a route for dismissal based on lack of standing and lack of jurisdiction for the court. Courts cannot decide who can or who cannot be assigned to legislative committees.
Ironic how those 6 complain about politics being inserted into the process but their actions clearly indicate that they are putting the negative politics into the entire process. Remind me again how partisan it is for numerous R’s and 4 D’s to vote to start this process and a nearly equal number to send out the subpoena’s to appear? btw, I highly doubt arrest warrants will be issued to those who did not appear based on advice of their counsel and/or the state’s AG. It’s not a criminal investigation near as I can tell.
@antiAnti (19:16:01)
I think that we are underestimating her and that is dangerous….she may not have…not care about knowledge, but she is a crafty one and a true believer of something. (Not McCain or the republican ticket) Something tied more to her fundamental beliefs. Please don’t underestimate her. Hitler looks pretty darn from our perspective as well….also
Okay, just read the Legislative Council’s motion to dismiss. It is nearly identical to the Legislative Council’s opposition to the Six Pesky Legislators’ motion for the TRO – all of the same legal arguments and principles. Again, it needs to be said – the quality of writing and legal analysis of the lone attorney representing the Legislative Council is in an entirely different league from that of the Six Pesky Legislators (I think there are five attorneys who signed that one). Also, the law is very much on the side of the Legislative Council.
I don’t know the local rules up there and whether a trial judge can dismiss a complaint on its own accord, and without argument (written or oral). I am guessing yes, but perhaps not. If not, the Supreme Court may well send it back to the trial court – but again, only the issue of dismissing the complaint. Not the TRO.
I was stunned that the Supreme Court took this, but now I think I understand. I do think they are going to uphold the trial court’s denial of the TRO and, for the purposes of releasing the report, that is all that matters. Moreover, I am pretty confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the trial court’s determination of the subpoenas, namely, that the Legislative Council had clear statutory authority to issue them. I think the very worst case scenario is that they will remand the issue of dismissing the complaint to the trial court and order it to reconsider after the Six Pesky Legislators have filed an opposition. By that time, the report will be released.
The one maddening thing is that only the legislature can enforce the subpoenas, even if the Supreme Court says they were validly issued. As I understand the rules in Alaska, the legislature cannot do anything to those who disobey them until they are in session, which is January, 2009. Unlike most judicial subpoenas, neither the police nor court officers can enforce legislative subpoenas. That means that all of those who defy them will not face consequences until next year. Granted, there will be consequences, but I don’t think we are going to hear their sworn testimony any time soon.
Deb (19:26:07)
Huff Post has been on it. The NY times not be far behind. We will have to wait and see if it makes it to the Sunday morning funnies
Branchflower could finish the report early, but he cannot release without the proper vote, right? Am I misunderstanding the process up in AK? So he still needs to wait for a final ruling on the court cases, right?
I missed the “stupid” in the pretty darn stupid in the post above
I dunno…my brain is leaking…
Off Topic, NY Times editorial:
Apologies if this has already been posted on another thread. I have not seen it here myself all day:
“In the end, the debate did not change the essential truth of Ms. Palin’s candidacy: Mr. McCain made a wildly irresponsible choice that shattered the image he created for himself as the honest, seasoned, experienced man of principle and judgment. It was either an act of incredible cynicism or appallingly bad judgment.”
Lulu – I love it! thanks for sharing!
Deep Throat 2 (19:13:15) :
“Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment
of the great harlot who sits on many waters, . . . .”
Revelation 17:1
Is there a good site somewhere on SP’s view of Revelation/Apocalypse?
Has it been noted that her “Putin rears his head” sounds like part of the Revelation scenario with beast rearing its many heads. These folks also sometimes identify Russia as a northern power supposedly also part of end times scenario.
Still not sure I’ve heard from anyone whether the Alaska Supreme Court Justices are likely to forgo any political temptations and just rule on the basis of the law. Wish Charles, Karion and the rest of the Mudflat lawyers were hearing this case! 🙂
I did hear someone say that the Palins are the only family whose kids’ names sound like a law firm. I’m glad the case is not being handled by the Law Firm of Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper and Trig!
I donated the $16 anniversary present!
re: cal al (19:29:29)
Your post says “Please don’t underestimate her. ”
The article I quoted ends with
“the most colossal of errors to put Ms. Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency.”
Bob Herbert, NY Times
—IMO that’s not underestimating. But I leave it to your judgement.
Can’t Walt Monegan file a civil suit of his own against Palin? She has defamed his character and cost him is livelihood. Is that possible?
Who is the woman who rides The Beast in Revelation 17?
____________
That ain’t no woman, that’s Dud’s wife !!
letterman is about to do a top 10 list for messages left on palin’s answering machine
Isn’t there a conflict of interest, here, having a judge who was appointed by Sarah herself?
“Justice Daniel E. Winfree came to the court in January of 2008 after appointment by Governor Sarah Palin. Justice Winfree was born in what then was the Territory of Alaska, and is a third-generation Fairbanksan. Between 1975 and 1978, he was a truck driver and warehouseman in pipeline camps and Prudhoe Bay working on the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and related projects on the North Slope. Justice Winfree earned a B.S. in Finance from the University of Oregon in 1977 and then earned M.B.A. and J.D. degrees from the University of California, Berkeley, in 1981. He was admitted to the Alaska Bar in 1982 and spent 25 years in private practice in Anchorage, Valdez, and Fairbanks before joining the court, working with large and small firms and as a sole practitioner. Justice Winfree served on the Alaska Bar Association Board of Governors for nine years, including service as President in 1994-95 and related service as President of the Western States Bar Conference in 1997-98, and also served a term on the Ethics Committee and several terms on the Fee Arbitration Committee. The Alaska Bar Association presented him with its Distinguished Service Award in 2007. After his final term on the Board of Governors, he joined the Board of Trustees of the Alaska Bar Foundation and currently serves as its President. Justice Winfree is married to another Fairbanks-born third-generation Alaskan, Cathleen Ringstad Winfree, and they have two children.”
Alaska Supreme Court
antiAnti (19:39:11)
I totally agree with you..I wasn’t criticizing…just commenting to myself and to whoever…..also.
(I am finding that little word very handy)
Herbert wrote a good piece, but I think that we all have the tendancy to think that she is just stupid and/or uninformed
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
If any of you are unsatisfied with your given Palin baby name, try omitting (or inserting) your middle name. I had to do that because it gave my wife the same Palin baby name as Sarah Palin’s own Palin baby name. I couldn’t have that!
Peggno in SoCal aka Seagull Junker Palin (19:36:43)
A couple of things and some clarifications.
1. The Alaska Supreme Court is REQUIRED to accept appeals from previous decisions made by any superior court regarding civil issues, and including cases that originated in administrative agencies. They weren’t required to hear it expedited, but, as I said earlier, I think they want to accomplish a definitive resolution.
2. Freakishly (and from the same link, the Governor appoints them, and it appears to be a lifetime appointment. According to that link:
Apart from retirement, judges in Alaska can be removed in one of two ways. First, they may be suspended, removed from office, or censured by the Supreme Court upon the recommendation of the commission on judicial conduct. Secondly, they may be impeached by two thirds of the Alaska Senate and subsequently convicted by two thirds of the House of Representatives
3. Only one of the five justices – Justice Winfree was appointed by Sarah Palin. I suspect that if they have a full hearing, he will recuse himself. I am really hoping he wasn’t the one who signed the order accepting the appeal.
I am no expert on Political Linguistics or the Apocalyptic Interpretations of Revelations as approved by the Wasilla Assembly of God. But I do think Palin’s use of language belies her belief that she is supposed to carry out some “special purpose” related to extreme literal interpretations of the New Testament. Many commenting on here and on other sources have pointed out her strange affinity for terms like “mission” (remember what she said to Charlie Gibson?), and last night, “embassy in Jerusalem.” She said in 1996 that she expects to see Jesus return in her lifetime. She is willing to let the planet be destroyed–perhaps another way to bring about the end times…Normally, I would not be this worried about such things from the mouth of politicians but Palin is one crazy chick.
Thanks Spoon Archer Palin ,
I feel so much better now that I am Drill Swollen Palin.
it is either sick or sexy
Off topic—this one is waaaay over my head!
NC just sent me an email—looks like Obama/ Biden are taking over here, too! I knew that….registered a s*$t-load of voters myself!
Gobama! But what are we putting him into? Our work has just begun, folks. We’ll need to work with him on this stuff.
Some fun for yu’all!
@Dreams in TX (19:40:47) :
Can’t Walt Monegan file a civil suit of his own against Palin? She has defamed his character and cost him is livelihood. Is that possible?
Won’t be much left after they hand the keys to their house to Trooper Wooten. 😉
Damn. I was wrong. i thought they wouldn’t hear it.
Well I sure hope they throw this friggin suit out.
What kind of a Supreme Court do you have (to quote SP) “way up there”?
Anyone have any idea of the likelihood of a negative ruling?
@Cassie Jeep Pike Palin (Wish I were Trout) (19:53:08)
Thanks for the news from NC. It is true. Obama will be stearing a sinking ship.
We will have to do our best ot make it ashore.
@karion –One small thing that will be different if the SC rules that the subpoenas remain unquashed (you can tell I’m not a lawyer, right?) is that the AK govt employees who Colberg refers to as his “clients” — and is that right? — will know, without doubt, that the subpoenas are valid, if currently unenforceable. Presumably, even Colberg would have to admit that. If the Supreme Court says they’re valid, that’s as far as it can go.
So, he will then have to decide how to advise his “clients”. I have read some things that suggest that, up to now, he has informed them that they need not comply — right now — and that they have decided not to. I’ve read other things that suggest that he may have *instructed* them not to comply, which would indicate a little confusion on his part as to whether he is the AK AG or the Governor’s AG. I certainly don’t know.
Anyhow, it will be interesting to see what he does. If he instructs AK employees to not comply with a valid subpoena (just yet), it may spin off yet another batch of abuse of power inquiries.
These guys obviously slept through Watergate 101 — or, for that matter, Monica 101 — the cover-up is always a bigger deal than the crime.
Cheers
Thanks, Karion. Hope you’re right that Winfree will recuse himself.
I’m checking out guys…need to get some sleep.
Keep fighting the good fight…there are ample places to do that.
Thanks to attorneys, thanks to idealists, thanks to intelligent people…
see you mudpuppies in the a.m.
I have a really stupid question but please put my mind at ease.
This is deja-vu to me to the 2000 election. Is there any chance if the State Supreme Court votes down the appeal, they can take it to the US Supreme Court? Can they? Would they?
Why isn’t the MSM on this? This is huge.
Geez, I mean how bad is this report?
I have a great big feeling that even IF Palin is found to have committed some violation, the Republicans and right-wing media will spin it to make HER the victim somehow. Just watch. Her supporters will NEVER believe she is wrong.
Any illegal doings along DOJ lines by KKKarl Rove? Like the rest of the politicization of the Dept. of Justice in the United States by this administration?
The more I read about “our gal Sal”, the more I think McCain should watch his rounded back. She is one ambitious and ruthless little babe, not a scruple in her pretty little head (actually, I think her head is really rather large). Nothing is worse than someone who is not overly bright who thinks she is 100% right and is on a “God-given mission”. This gal is nothing but trouble – look how she’s already deflected attention away from McCain. Who, in fact, is the one who is really running here? She will step on whomever gets in her way, mind my words.
Oh, (OFF-TOPIC sorta, so sorry but I can’t stop) and one other “religious nutty” thing Palin said last night about Sen. Biden’s wife being a teacher. “Her reward is in heaven, right?”
Why put in a religious signifier to that? Was it to show how “divine” her own lineage is, with parents and brother who teach?
(Okay, now I’ll stop–was trying to help out with the Book of Revelations speculation about Palin as demonstrated in her language in this thread)
I found this while out blogging and I liked it
“Typical tactic of idiots, liars, and demons – deny, distract, deflect.
It is straight out of Satan’s Playbook”
The wife comment “reward in heaven” was to throw him off, since he lost his first wife in an accident 36 years ago. It was the tackiest thing I have seen said in the entire campaign except for one of McCains which I will not bring up here.
@Engine Nighthawk Palin
Wow. I hadn’t gone there. That was low!…..and chilly also.
Do these folks have any compassion?
ENGINE WROTE: “The wife comment ‘reward in heaven’ was to throw him off, since he lost his first wife in an accident 36 years ago. It was the tackiest thing I have seen said in the entire campaign except for one of McCains which I will not bring up here.”
Engine, that is interesting that you say that, as so many commentators on TV seemed to think she didn’t know Biden’s sad history with his first wife and kids and the accident…Hence her TOTALLY CALLOUS & UNCHRISTIAN RESPONSE after he choked up. He talks about this horrible tragedy, and she launches into: “Change? We’re a team of mavericks.” Or some such nonsense…
She has literally kicked poor old McShame to the side like a moose turd. In her view she will be VP for a short time, then President and God help anyone or anything that stands in her way. Her training for President will be all the changes she makes to the duties of the VP.
I hope with all of my heart that this report gets out and exposes her. That way she can to return to Alaska, be impeached (preventing her from ever running for any elected office again) and return to fishing with her husband.
We would be rid of her for good and all Alaskans would have a butt for their jokes.
avahome said (18:25:22) :
Wondering if Dobson is connected to this law firm since he was instrumental in Palins pick for VP. (my guess is yes, I mean “HECK YEAH”)
drew hanson said (16:23:05) :
The sweet smell of Texas Bullshit is in the air !!
The godbotherering hypocritical Christian Right roll into Alaska when Obama/Biden are up in the polls – how predictible is that?
As David Letterman said, “Something smells funny here” – and speaking of shit, I’d love to see bullshit artist Sarah Palinocchio rendered by an artist as a steaming pile of shit and Fox, CNN, Coulter, etc., as flies. I’m not much of an artist, nor am I a lawyer, just a girl (wink, wink, “can I call you Joe”) hahaha.
On a much more serious note, I have counselled women who have been raped, by their relatives, strangers, it really doesn’t f’n matter who, just that no woman should have an unwanted baby, and the U.S. V.P. candidate disagrees. So I became interested in the election and Mudflats. Here I am.
I can’t believe that Alaskan are going to stand by and let the Bush-Cheney-McCain-Palin Republican Party highjack the Government of Alaska. They have taken over the PR group in state government and the AGs office. We can all talk about whether she is qualified to be VP or Pres. , but I’m most upset about js her allowing this occupation of the Alaska legal system to further her career. The future of Alaska is more important than anyone’s career. One of folks, back home things that she claims to live by, is stand up and take responsibility for what you’ve done, and it looks like we are going to find out what she did.
Hello,
I’ve enjoyed reading your website and blogs the past few weeks from Nebraska; I want to relay my sincere thanks and sympathy/empathy.
When I heard SP (for legal purposes I deny that means stinkin’ pig) discuss how she is glad the founding fathers allowed for an expansion of a VP’s legislative authority I was angry. Now I’m angry and a’feared (should be one of SP’s “folkisms”). McBush and his “folks” (Cheney…ah, ya ‘member…the one that ther’ shot that guy?) have a’certin taught that ther’ gal a thin’ or two ’bout legislative law! Sorry, now I’m ranting; forgive?
Even if your supreme court judge decides, on appeal, to uphold the lower court rulings he/she cannot enforce it the same way as if those subpeonas had been issued in a criminal case. McBush knew that when he tapped SP and Cheney set the precedent, so there is only a slim chance there will be sworn testimony/proceedings before 11/04.
You are among the few that seem to be willing to share, and work hard to bring the truth out. I pray you will find the strength to keep up your efforts and help the rest of us learn what you already know! Please don’t be offended by my “nonsense”…I really am glad I stumbled onto this site and admire your “grit”. Best of luck tomorrow with the Obama/Biden rally…I’ll be checking back to see the excitement; you guys rock!
God bless, keep it up and a big “by-golly wink to ya’ll”,
pj
PS I hope someone tells all those poor 3rd graders that proper use of the English language shouldn’t be learned from last night’s debate. Sorry “Big Bro, but yer li’l sista’ don’ know sheet ’bout talkin’ proper, gosh darnit!!”
strangelet (Speck Backfire Palin) (19:58:54)
I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what the hell AG Talis Coberg is doing. In my jurisdiction, the AG represents the state – its agencies, boards, commissions, etc. – and protects consumers (Consumer Protection Act claims, antitrust, environmental crimes, etc.).
However, in Alaska (again, kind of weirdly), the AG is the legal advisor for the governor and other state officers (among other tasks). He does not represent the agencies, commissions, etc. See also The attorney general serves as the legal advisor for the governor and other state officers, prosecutes all violations of state criminal law, and enforces the consumer protection and unfair trade practices laws. So he does, in fact, serve as legal counsel for the Governor. I don’t know how many of the subpoenaed are officers within the meaning of Alaska state law. At least, not yet 😀
ocliberal (19:59:32)
Is there any chance if the State Supreme Court votes down the appeal, they can take it to the US Supreme Court? Can they? Would they?
I don’t find this to be a stupid question at all. In fact, and I hate to sound like an alarmist, but something is really bothering me: Why the deadline today? Why did they have to know by the close of business today whether the Court would hear the expedited appeal? Better put, what the hell was their next move if the Supreme Court had declined to hear an expedited appeal?
They couldn’t have had it heard before the U.S. Supreme Court before next Friday, right? I highly doubt it and I have my own gripes with the politicized nature of the U.S. Supreme Court. Moreover, the mainstream media is kind of ignoring this circus. An emergency attempt to get it before the U.S. Supreme Court would most certainly garner a lot of media attention and draw national attention to this.
But I am still uneasy. Why the deadline today? What was their plan B?
hey, Harley 🙂
Was it you who was going to make the Sarah Chicken Dance video? I need a bit of light relief.
Gotta watch Rachel Maddow tonight! She’s talking to a GW law prof about the “expanding the authority of the vp” business (“talk me down…”), and he brings up how astounding it is that SWWNBN is refusing to comply with a subpoena in troopergate–he says he knows of no other case where a pres/vp candidate (or the 1st dud) has refused to comply with a constitutionally issued subpoena while running for office. He calls it downright frightening…
.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27016452#27015911
Crust Scramble – SouthGA (18:42:30) :
VP IDOL
The post debate fox interview just makes things worse… Incomprehensible ramble. I found quite fitting a blogger calling her appearances “VP IDOL”….
“But in those Katie Couric interviews I did feel that there were a lot of things that she was missing in terms of an opportunity to ask what a V.P. candidate stands for. What the values are represented in our ticket. I wanted to talk about Barack Obama increasing taxes, which would lead to killing jobs. I wanted to talk about his proposal to increase government spending by another trillion dollars.”
She had plenty of opportunity to tell what she stands for, instead, she and McPOW focus on lying about Obama. “Also.”
Karion wrote: “But I am still uneasy. Why the deadline today? What was their plan B?”
Karion, I am not an attorney, but one thing I have learned about the McCain/Palin campaign: they are inept. They don’t have a Plan B. They flail about. They are especially desperate now. Normal folks do try to think logically. These people just seem to throw mud to see what IF ANYTHING could possible gum up the works. (My 2 cents on observing their management style for a month now….no one communicates with anyone else. The VP candidate didn’t even know they were pulling out of Michigan, for example)
Totally off subject…
Just got an email from Pickens Plan regarding T. Boone’s meeting with Palin. In fairness he has met with Mc, Obama and they are working on a Biden date. The part that freaked me out was this:
“Her husband Todd sat in on the meeting. You know that he’s a steelworker in the oil fields during the Alaskan summers, so he understands a good bit of this, too. He was interested in the concept of filling your vehicle in your garage overnight using the same gas line that goes to your kitchen range and hot water heater.”
http://www.pickensplan.com/news/2008/10/03/boone-blog-governor-sarah-palin-2/?tr=y&auid=4087434
What the heck is “Todd” doing in that meeting??? Is he going to be sitting in on cabinet meetings too if, God forbid, she gets closer to Washington, DC as anything other than a tourist? This is unreal, truly!
mvngfwd wrote: “What the heck is “Todd” doing in that meeting??? Is he going to be sitting in on cabinet meetings too if, God forbid, she gets closer to Washington, DC as anything other than a tourist? This is unreal, truly!”
I am convinced that it is MACBETH in reverse: Todd is Lady Macbeth.
I find it interesting that the AG didn’t wish to take this further at this point. He may be wanting to cut his losses, which would be a good sign. He’s dug in a hole and he may be fearing the hole could only get deeper after today’s ruling. This investigation has been the most troubling issue of the campaign. I was so shocked when McCain chose someone under investigation. I know you Alaskans are having to endured alot because of your Governor and I thank you for courage to fight for what is right and just for not only yourself but for us in the lower 48.
karion (20:26:19) : It doesn’t look like Colberg himself has a really good idea about what he should be doing. I read somewhere that when the AK constitutional convention happened, there was a fellow who tried pretty hard to get the AG changed to an elective position (like, what, 44 other states). His core argument was along the lines of “What happens if the AG has to investigate the Governor?”
His compatriots were not persuaded, and he lost. As best as I can tell — and this is NOT thorough research — they thought it was a better idea to keep the AG position “non-political”. /* excuse me …. stops laughing */ This is one of those “Princess Bride” moments —
“We want it to be non-elective to keep it non-political”
“I do not think that word means what you think it means”.
Troopergate is the biggest waste of time, money, and attention ever. It is a joke that seems too unreal to those who actually deal with real issues everyday. People who live in NY, NJ, IL, OH, TX, LA, and a whole lot of other places deal with real corruption influences multiple times every day and do not get what the big deal is with you people in Alaska on this so called Troopergate. A guy gave up his job because he felt pressured and blamed it on a request to do his job from the Governor???? This is a problem? Another guy who was (note the past tense) related by marriage to the Governor drinks beer in his squad car, is married four times, tasers a kid, threatens to kill people, yet he still has his job????
Most people recognize that domestic violence is a serious issue. Most people recognize that drinking on the job, especially when you are supposed to be representing the law, is a really big problem. Most people know that serial marriage indicates a problem with the person who is the one who keeps marrying only to destroy the trust and relationship. Most people recognize that threatening to kill someone is a much more serious problem than insubordination. Most people recognize insubordination is a serious issue. Most people realize that the issue between the man accused of insubordination was NOT related to the man who is the domestic threat, serial abuser, child abuser, and drunk on the job.
Well, it may keep you entertained but it looks like a big pile of nothing.
I’ll be happy to share this with anyone who wonders about how big a deal people will try to make of clear cut issues of real abuse. If you really wanted to deal with the problem you would discipline the officer for drinking on the job, tasering a child, making domestic threats, and threatening to kill someone. If you really wanted to deal with the man who claims that he lost his job because he didn’t fire someone, you would look at his record and evaluate it. If you think he has a claim, he keeps his job. If you think he is wrong, the job he gave up is just that, the job he gave up.
Learn to deal with your problems.
I apologize if I sort of hijacked part of this discussion. I’ve read mudflats since just before Labor Day, but have not been a prolific commenter. I just became infuriated with this Troopergate bullshit a while ago and cannot believe this is going on.
This should be something in the national discourse – a VP nominee who is under an investigation called for by a bi-partisan (but Republican controlled) legislative council, who initially said she welcomed it and had nothing to hide, now is pulling every last unethical maneuver to delay or thwart the investigation, hoping that she won’t have to come home and face the music.
I know things are different in Alaska. I, too, am in the Pacific Northwest. And I know there are a lot of folks there who remember the check she got in their hands, and how affable and personable she comes across – how she is a true Alaskan. I just have to believe that this is pissing off the locals, too. Alaska’s government is now in the hands of the McCain campaign. And it will be until the election. That has to be the last thing Alaskans want.
Libby wrote: “Well, it may keep you entertained but it looks like a big pile of nothing.”
Libby, clearly, you do not know any of the facts of Troopergate. You mistate all of them. This is a Worker’s Comp, privacy issue, abuse of power issue. Now that you’re on this blog, why not read all of the previous entries explaining the case? You are woefully out of touch with what “Troopergate” even is.
Hey, maybe you didn’t think Watergate was a big deal either.
I don’t know if anyone has brought this up yet, but I see there are a few legal minds here. I actually read the Appellants brief, (if that’s the correct terminology), and the “irrepairable harm” they mention is that done if the Legislative action is non-constitutional. I.e., not personally to them, but by “trampling” on the constitution it hurts us all. I think this is fair comment, although I don’t think the investigation is anything but constitutional.
Comments from Charles et-al?
Libby, get your facts straight before you make a comment.
This is about abuse of power and NO-ONE not even winky Palin is above the law. Nixon found that out.
hungry too much verbiage troll = Libby
Libby,
I may be out of place as I’m not Alaskan, I’m from Nebraska; but your stance on this issue intrigues me. Why is canidate for Vice President Palin’s ethical standards an Alaskan issue… not worth their bringing it before the rest of us?
She may, soon, be my VP; you are wrong if you think that Alaskan’s insights do not matter to me. What if she had been your Govenor?
Now keep quiet and listen to these people…they know of which they speak.
pj
I so rarely respond to trolls, so forgive me this retort to Libby.
If I understand the first part of your argument correctly, it is that other states have worse corruption and therefore, this issue is irrelevant. I can’t follow that logic – seems about as handy as telling the officer who pulls me over for speeding that other cars are going faster. The issue is whether she used her executive office to settle a family score. That’s freaking relevant to her fitness to serve the country.
Second, and shit, I hate to defend the guy, but so much has been made about him “tasering his son” and drinking. Inform yourself a bit and read <a href=”http://www.adn.com/politics/story/476430.html”this article about Wooten by Lisa Demer, a journalist I really respect. Read the whole thing. Then read it again and think about it.
None of the allegations made against him (few of which were sustained) were made AT THE TIME. Not even the alleged “death threat” against Palin’s dad. None of them. They were all made after Palin’s sister filed for divorce, and, indeed, while they were fighting over custody well into the divorce.
Incidentally, when a person files for a TRO on account of domestic violence, they are (rightfully) granted automatically, but the nature of a TRO is temporary and done without a hearing or any hearing of evidence. You have to go into court a few weeks later and offer proof that the order is justified and should be made permanent. Her TRO was not made permanent – it was dismissed a few weeks later.
Look, I don’t have a positive impression of him, but I have empathy for the fact that his former sister-in-law (who actually wrote a letter of recommendation for him during his happier times with her sister) used her position of authority to screw with his career and livelihood. And also? He WAS disciplined. He was suspended for the few sustained allegations and that is in his file.
Sure, it isn’t Watergate, but that entirely misses the point. Hell, even the issue of whether Palin abused her authority is now a backseat issue. Her evading the accountability she said she welcomed is the issue, and the ridiculous hijacking of the state of Alaska by the McCain camp, is the bigger issue. If it isn’t that big of a deal, why the hell is she doing everything and anything she can to hide the ball?
Ok fellas, this is too much for me. As they say this is way over my pay grade. It is 1:15AM on the east coast and I am hittin the hay. Will be in VA tomorrow canvassing and whatever else I can do to make sure we won’t have to be concerned about McCain/Palin in the W.H. at least.
Hope everything goes great at the rally tomorrow. Will be checking in with you guys.
Good night! 🙂
Oh hell. This is the article on Wooten and the allegations that were rejected and sustained..
I wonder what would happen if the report was released, oh, say, Thursday morning.
;=}
I think our friend Libby has left the building.
yeah.. do not feed the trolls.. it just makes them get bolder and more tedious…. shoo Libby… you were wanting a differnt blog… one where facts and freedom are not important,
buh bye
In the motion to dismiss by the defence it was pointed out that a decision at close on Thursday would be moot as the investigation would be complete at that time. I haven’t read everything yet but I have to wonder if they’re seeking to end the investigation rather than suppress the report. If that was the case then the report could still be published on Friday, if they haven’t actually sought, or do not receive an injunction preventing its publication. I’m sure that’s wishful thinking on my part, but it sure would be fun. 🙂
and just off topic a moment… if Wooten were such a bad bad man (and I am not defending him at all) wouldn’t there likely be other complaints and complaining parties?? and wouldn’t the McCain camp have leaked them all over the place?
karion and Charles,
Thanks so much for sharing your legal expertise and interpretations with us. You have been “on the clock” for a long time!
~Anne
So, what is the big deal with whatever the report may have to make public? What happened to palin saying she wanted to cooperate, have transparency and accountability. I guess the “clean up congress” doesn’t start with sweeping her own side of the street.
The mccain/palin campaign managers are masters of diversion! While the entire country is either swooning or ready to vomit over palin the issues are pretty much not being discussed.
I am very proud of Obama for ignoring the silliness as much as is possible. Bringing palin into the picture has only helped mccain in taking the focus off his old ass and his alliances with Bush and his non-answers to the immense problems this country faces. His solutions are completely linear and without any depth. Hers are based in an uneducated la la land of tribulation and mystical forebodings that the devil’s gonna get us.
I am also encouraged by the press finally starting to be appalled at the mccain/palin ticket for their antics and I say again – it is not a good idea to piss off the press.
I think this whole investigation should be on the front page of every newspaper in the country. Front page – not just buried in the corner of the business or travel section.
Thank you again for being there for the rest of the 48 – without you we would have no clue about what it is going on there.
White Agate and Lara wrote:
The MSM is nowhere on this, days late, except Andrew Sullivan. I will tell everyone I know, link here if you are out there. The word needs to get out.
I hope you guys are right. Guess there’s not much I can do but wait.
—————————
I think that whist we await all the excitement that next we holds~starting with Tuesday’s debate….it is incumbent upon those of us who have the time to become citizen-journalists and begin a campaign to inform the MSM and newspapers in our respective areas of these latest rulings in AK; asking why they deem that this “cover-up” is not newsworthy. It would be great to stoke the embers in time for next week’s news cycles. Let’s present the hard facts and force them to do their jobs! At very least, we can initiate “The Truth about Troopergate” emails to hopefully reach well beyond our individual spheres of influence.
Just a thought ~ to productively utilize all the anxious energy…and do all that we can to leave no stone unturned in this final month which leads us to REAL change. We each have a stake in this election.
YES WE WILL!
wow – so much to take in — think you’ve overloaded my brain
Off-topic, but the good people are fighting back hard against Obama hate DVD
Newspapers get complaints for DVD ad on Muslims
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h1Rd6z2Qk3Fe45zgkt9gKSEiE46gD93JF6Q80
If you’d like to protest to the Texas “501c3” and their foray into a legitimate state investigation, send them your thoughts:
https://www.libertylegal.org/contact.aspx
I wonder if one of our legal friends on this blog can determine if this effort is in conflict with their IRS legal mission statement.
Libby,
Sorry you repugs are so pissed to find that your VP pick is a dingbat, and the good ship S.S. McPalin is going nowhere but under.
Certainly there is corruption in all those places you mentioned, in one form or another, but that doesn’t mean the American people should have lower standards for their leaders. I know a crooked mayor in Detroit who’s going to prison, NOT the gubernatorial campaign. The people of Detroit demanded MORE from their municipal leader than a common criminal.
Metro Detroit doesn’t accept corruption in elected officials, why would you try to tell Alaskans that they should let it go?
Knock off the “Learn to deal with your problems” crap. It’s being dealt with the same way in Alaska as it’s dealt with in Michigan, LA, NJ and everywhere else.
In the courts.
Quit whining because Alaskans expect the same from their gov’t officials as the folks in the lower ’48, and take the same kind of actions to stop it when it occurs.
Off Topic ~~
“””The dumbing down of the GOP
Why aren’t more conservatives disgusted that their party nominated a person devoid of qualifications for the vice presidency (again)? “””
“”” Why should we give her a pass on the most important issues of the day? Supposedly sharing the fears and concerns of the average families who face the burdens of mortgages, healthcare and economic insecurity, Palin simply refused to discuss changes in bankruptcy law and proved that she didn’t know the provisions of McCain’s healthcare plan. “””
Read More @ http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/10/04/dumb/
Libby, I don’t know what country you live in, but MOST PEOPLE are presumed innocent until proven guilty. And MOST PEOPLE do not like their elected officials lying to them and using their elected office for personal vendettas. You accept corruption as the norm and that is telling of how low our elected officials have dragged us.
What happens when the Arctic Has Exxon’s name on it? I cannot help but wonder.
Here’s the new Huffington Post up-to-date reporting on the case:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/gop-lawmakers-file-appeal_n_131815.html#
Notice how Biden brought up Exxon 4 times.
I think Joe Biden did that so intelligent people will wld know that SP is a TOOL FOR BIG OIL.
@strangelet 20:41:57
If there is one good thing that comes out of this it will be that Alaskans wake up to the fact that our AG needs to be elected. If there are two good things that come out of it scarah & her hubby will get their asses handed to them on a platter served up with a side of jail.
SWWNBN sorta reminds me of Vizzini, you know “Did I make it clear that your JOB is at stake?”
Lula,
Palin has stated on record (with Couric) that she is against Plan B. So of course they don’t have one!
(OK, so that was bad…)
I bought a yard sign yesterday, after learning a local store sells Obama/Biden gear. YEA! Now we have two Obama signs on the cul-de-sac while there is only one McCain/Palin. Whew!
[…] Uh… seems like the one who’s worried about suffering irreparable harm is Sarah Palin. Remember when this seemed like an insignificant investigation (from the lower 48, anyway) with a convoluted storyline that would never gain enough traction to become an issue during the campaign? Well, now that the McCain heavyweights have thrown so much at derailing the investigation, it sure looks like Palin must have done something very wrong, and left an evidence trail to boot. The original issue may not have gained national attention, but the frenetic coverup certainly has. But wait. It gets better. Lead on, AKM: […]
Others have said it before, but I too must say that there must be information in this report that could end Sarah’s career and possibly even put her or her husband behind bars. Why else go so far to try to squash it.
A few years ago, a builder in our Republican township was trying to renovate an old house into a B&B. In order to not have to install an elevator, the kept the number of guest rooms under the limit so he would not be classified as running a hotel, which would require an elevator.
The local zoning officer’s demand for such was turned down by a local court. The zoning officer then found a group of disabled Veterans from Buffalo, NY, a 10-hour drive from where we are, and got them to file a complaint against the builder to force him to install the elevator. The complaint was thrown out of court and now there is a beautiful old B&B across the river.
There are no lengths to which the repubs will go to get their own way.
The smell of desperation is in the air.
So the McCain campaign is acting like a 5 year old that was told no. After that you go around and keep asking in the hopes someone says yes. How soon until someone from the Palin/McCain camp throws a hissy fit in front of the media?
What these people have done to the State of Alaska is appalling and I sincerely hope it is all remembered.
Palin’s lawyer explaination of September 30, 2008 for all those nasty tax questions:
Click to access palin_opinion_letter.pdf
Susie in Jersey said:
Others have said it before, but I too must say that there must be information in this report that could end Sarah’s career and possibly even put her or her husband behind bars. Why else go so far to try to squash it.
———————
I “also” believe that is very true. But if all this happens, Dubya will just pardon her before January 20 anyway. Just like Ford pardoned Nixon.
Also, off topic, but it at least gives hope that there is “justice” in the Justice System:
Jury finds O.J. Simpson guilty on all charges
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Thirteen years to the day after being acquitted of killing his wife and her friend in Los Angeles, O.J. Simpson was found guilty of robbing two sports-memorabilia dealers at gunpoint in a Las Vegas hotel room.
The 61-year-old former football star was convicted of all 12 counts late Friday after jurors deliberated for more than 13 hours. He released a heavy sigh as the charges were read and was immediately taken into custody.
Simpson, who went from American sports idol to celebrity-in-exile after his murder acquittal, could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Full AP story here: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OJ_SIMPSON?SITE=SCFLO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
I don’t understand why the main stream media is not all over this story. With the probable cause explained this actually should be a criminal investigation as it appears there was obvious extortion issues when the Governer used her authority with the threat of loosing a 1.2 million dollar contract to get the workers compensation claim denied. Has any one contacted Federal authorities with this matter, as it appears the Alaska AG has a true conflict in prosecuting this matter, which by the way investigating and prosecuting a possible criminal violation should be the AG’s job.
Back on topic, it is nice to see Obama/Biden just cruising along, keeping their focus where it should be. Very professional, and may I say, Presidential. Nothing to cover up; nothing to lie about; and gaining points in the polls everyday.
Meanwhile, the McCain campaign just stoops lower and lower at every turn, covering up this, and covering up that, never addressing any issues, and airing more and more negative ads, that all get shot down by Chris and Keith and Rachel.
Barack Obama hits John McCain with humor to avoid turning off voters
———————————————-
WASHINGTON – Forget turning John McCain into a political punching bag. Barack Obama wants to turn his Republican rival into a punch line.
Obama is known for his soaring oratory, but lately he has been going for the laugh track – cracking frequent jokes.
He has taken to mocking McCain for stocking his campaign with ex-lobbyists while also promising to end their their influence in Washington.
“If you think those lobbyists are working day and night to elect my opponent just to put themselves out of business, well, I’ve got a bridge to sell you in Alaska,” Obama riffs.
“It’s the Leno-Letterman effect,” said University of Virginia politics sage Larry Sabato. “The public is so conditioned to think about politics as the theater of the absurd, they like it when political information is delivered sounding like a comedy routine.”
Obama still mixes in his message of hope and change, with dashes of passion, but along the way he regularly reels off lines that elicits chuckles.
Analysts say Obama wants to annoy and belittle his cantankerous opponent in the eyes of voters – without drawing a backlash. “A way of really getting under McCain’s skin, and prompting the kind of intemperate reaction that might cost him voters, is to make fun of him,” said Hunter College Prof. Ken Sherrill.
Talking Friday to a crowd in Abington, Pa., Obama didn’t simply accuse McCain of being a recent, convenient convert to tighter Wall Street regulation. He got people to laugh about it.
“Suddenly a crisis comes and the polls change, and suddenly [McCain’s] out there talking like Jesse Jackson. Come on,” Obama scoffed as the crowd howled.
One reason for the smiling jabs is people like McCain. Calling him a hypocrite, liar or worse could anger folks.
“The tough stuff, the nasty stuff, that’s what people are offended by hearing,” said Sabato.
Experts point to Hillary Clinton as a prime example. She might have bested Obama in the primary, they say, if she cast herself more like Mae West than the Iron Lady. When she accused Obama of stealing lines, she denounced him furiously: “If your candidacy is going to be about words, they should be your own.”
Obama took the alternate approach when McCain cast himself as the change candidate after the GOP convention.
“I notice John McCain has been trying to say ‘I’m for change, too,'” Obama said recently. “He’s been grabbin’ our signs, using our slogans.”
“He even said the other day, I think, ‘turn the page.’ C’mon John. I’ve been sayin’ that for – how long have I been saying that?” Obama quipped.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/10/03/2008-10-03_barack_obama_hits_john_mccain_with_humor.html
Good morning, all. I was happy to see this link on Yahoo news pages, the AP article by Matt Voltz, “Alaska Supreme Court takes up Troopergate case” …first thing this morning.
Maybe if I split the link, this will post… http://news.yahoo.com
/s/ap/20081004/ap_on_el_ge/palin_troopergate;_ylt=
Alyh.ZD_opIQoHrXu3sTs.GWwvIE
Also posted on Bedtime thread.
I just emailed CNN and my local TV stations asking them to give air time to this situation. We’ll see if they will even listen. I also find it extremely odd that this isn’t showing up outside the blogs!
If you were a Supreme Court judge, how would you take this comment from the plantiffs lawyer?
From ADN:
Clarkson, representing the legislators who sued to stop the investigation, said he thinks they have a good shot at winning the appeal.
“I certainly think we’re right on the law,” he said. “But the unpredictable part is what judges do.”
Thanks for the update, Mudflats…will be waiting for more news !
-b
Sounds to me like Clarkson et al are just padding their fees. McCain should drop the appeal.
Wouldn’t it have been best for the Alaska Supreme Court to have declined to hear the appeal? Right now it sounds like these guys have an arguable case, as per the Supreme Court. And once the appeal has been in front of the Alaska Supreme Court, can’t these guys take it to the US Supreme Court, where they have powerful allies?
Check this out. The “Palin Truth Files” on McCain’s website. http://www.johnmccain.com/palintruthfiles/ Everyone should write them at this address palintruthsquad@johnmccain.com and tell them what they think of McCain/Palin’s attempts to block justice.
karion (20:26:19) :
“An emergency attempt to get it before the U.S. Supreme Court would most certainly garner a lot of media attention and draw national attention to this.
“But I am still uneasy. Why the deadline today? What was their plan B?”
I don’t see a federal issue in this one. It’s a pure internal state affair, if the U.S. Supreme Court knows what’s good for it.
I am stymied on the grounds of the appeal (let alone the actual suit). Are they claiming that the original Judge made an error or misapplied the law in some way?
@PJ. I don’t know the grounds for appeal, but I do know that they feel that they know the law and that judges are unpredictable. That should go down well. 🙂
AlaskaGuy (09:26:08) :
If you were a Supreme Court judge, how would you take this comment from the plantiffs lawyer?
From ADN:
Clarkson, representing the legislators who sued to stop the investigation, said he thinks they have a good shot at winning the appeal.
“I certainly think we’re right on the law,” he said. “But the unpredictable part is what judges do.”
Clarkson is right about one thing. You can never predict what a court will do. Usually they do something neither side expected. I bet they do in this case too.
However, it is a violation of the code of ethics for a lawyer to state a personal opinion to the media about a pending matter (tho lawyers do this all the time, makes me crazy).
As for Judge Michalski, you will not find a more intelligent, thoughtful or fair judge anywhere. I would not say that about many other judges.
Some people have suggested that the SC judge appointed by Gov Palin should recuse himself in this case. Not so. After all, Warren Burger did not recuse himself in the Watergate matter, even tho appointed by Nixon. In Alaska, the judges are recommended by the state Bar Association, and essentially rubber-stamped by the gov. He owes no political debt to Gov. Palin.
AlaskaGuy (20:55:56) says:
“I don’t know if anyone has brought this up yet, but I see there are a few legal minds here. I actually read the Appellants brief, (if that’s the correct terminology), and the “irrepairable harm” they mention is that done if the Legislative action is non-constitutional. I.e., not personally to them, but by “trampling” on the constitution it hurts us all. I think this is fair comment, although I don’t think the investigation is anything but constitutional.”
This issue raises profound questions about the proper role and functioning of the courts within the larger political system, so Troopergate is in no way a triviality (Libby!). You should understand that judges are typically innately “conservative.” I don’t mean politically (although judges are a product of their society, of course, and probably trend to being establishment types), but in the sense that they like to stay out of fights, especially ones with political tinges if they can. The idea is that the judges are the referees and should try to fade into the wallpaper in the political arena except when they really need to decide a dispute. In a republican democracy, matters of public interest should be resolved by the people’s elected representatives, if at all possible, which helps vindicate the form of government we have, instead of having appointed or otherwise less accountable judges (who formerly represented the king, after all) jump in to all things political. Anyone who has familiarity with authoritarian regimes should appreciate this restraint. Incidentally, this attitude also helps judges duck charges of politicization and helps maintain their reputation of impartiality that they need for their workaday business, nearly none of which involves political brouhahas. Nobody likes to stand up in crossfire!
“Standing” is an independent doctrine that holds that a person can’t bring cases an behalf of other unrelated persons or seek to vindicate an abstract principle that has no especial impact on them. A typical test asks whether, if the court were to hear a case, the result could conceivably have a tangible effect on the particular plaintiff, i.e., does the plaintiff have a real stake in the outcome beyond an abstract principle. If not, then the courts should not weigh-in. Standing doctrine is not particularly restrictive, particularly at the state level, but if a plaintiff cannot show even a minimal personal stake in the outcome of a case, then the case should be dismissed for lack of standing. This is sometimes related to the political question doctrine in that a corollary of standing doctrine provides that a harm to all (i.e., all citizens, all taxpayers, all citizens of the world, etc.) is not a harm to the one plaintiff before the court and the remedy is to be found in the political, not judicial arena. Both concepts are at work in this case.
As far as “irreparable harm” goes, obviously there is no such thing to these plaintiffs if they don’t even have standing. They should lose on the political question/separation of powers issue the trial judge ruled on. Also, as a common sense matter, even if Palin were the plaintiff (instead of letting others do her dirty work for her), the precious feelings that the plaintiffs’ claim to hold about this investigation simply should not be seen as giving rise to an “irreparable harm” that is worthy of judicial protection. The B.S./political atmosphere of this suit is thick enough to cut with a knife.
Assuming the court has the integrity and the smarts, they are just going to find a way to explain why it is dumping this case. My bet is that they will do so handily.
I would also cite that there would be no “irreperable harm” if the report clears Palin. However, no one will know unless the report is released!
@kimosabe. Fair comment on judges predicatability. After all, if they were predctable then there would rarely be appeals or overturned rulings, assuming all judges saw all matters the same way. It just struck me as amussing in the way it was worded. It seemed to me to say, “we know the law and the judges don’t”. I’ll grant you that I’m biased in the outcome I want to see though. 🙂
@Charles. Thanks for your reply. I did read it all, but I’d like to comment on the last paragraph. It seems to me that an appeal infront of a Supreme Court would have more than 30 minutes for each side to state their case. As this is what is going to happen on Wednesday, with a ruling on Thursday, could you “predict” how the judge might rule? Do you think they pretty much know how they’re going to rule and are simply going through the motions?
As a layman I simply find this stuff fascinating, and as I’m sure is obvious, have little grasp on the actual legal aspects. 🙂
““An emergency attempt to get it before the U.S. Supreme Court would most certainly garner a lot of media attention and draw national attention to this.
“But I am still uneasy. Why the deadline today? What was their plan B?”
I don’t see a federal issue in this one. It’s a pure internal state affair, if the U.S. Supreme Court knows what’s good for it.”
Charles,
I think this is just going to the State of AK Supreme court, not the US Supreme court.
akbearable (11:51:34) :
Correct. My point was that the state supreme courts reign supreme on questions of state law and one cannot appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on state law questions. For there to be an appeal from a state supreme court to the U.S. Supreme Court, there must be a federal issue, such as an issue bearing on the U.S. Constitution or a federal statute. I don’t see anything like that here. So the Alaska Supreme Court should be the end of the line for this case.
Yes, any a**hole and his brother can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a case for any cockamamie reason, but that court isn’t going to exercise its discretion to accept the case unless there’s good reason to do so. After all, they already reject scads of cases that DO involve federal questions. Why the U.S. Supreme Court would entertain this case is beyond me.
The Alaska Supreme Court, on the other hand, has to hear it. There is no intermediate appeals court for civil cases in Alaska (their Court of Appeals deals with criminal matters), so if a civil party gets no joy in the trial court, they can appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court and that court has to hear it whether it wants to or not. That is unlike most other states, where you only get an automatic appeal to the intermediate appeals court. It’s probably a function of low population and not all that much civil litigation. Maybe after this case, Alaskans will want to make civil appeals to the Supreme Court discretionary only 😉
Charles, so does this mean that the Alaska Supreme Court HAD to agree to hear the appeal or did they have the right to reject it? In other words, the appeal was automatic.
AlaskaGuy (11:51:16) :
“It seems to me that an appeal infront of a Supreme Court would have more than 30 minutes for each side to state their case. As this is what is going to happen on Wednesday, with a ruling on Thursday, could you “predict” how the judge might rule? Do you think they pretty much know how they’re going to rule and are simply going through the motions?”
As the case is being submitted largely on briefs and there is no witness testimony in a court of appellate jurisdiction, the 30 minutes for each side is really just a final argument and a chance for some back and forth Q&A with the judges. One hour appellate hearings are completely typical and it should be enough time for this case. By the time the judges walk in, they will have already read the briefs and will just be focusing on listening to some argument and clearing up any remaining questions about the parties’ positions and the law.
Nobody can absolutely predict any judge. They tend to be pretty independent creatures (and these are life appointments in AK, to boot). They don’t even have to agree with each other; majority vote wins, although I suspect there will be a unanimous or close to unanimous decision here. One can only offer educated guesses about possible outcomes based on experience and reading.
My thought is that this plaintiffs’ lawyer is grasping at straws if he is citing his own opinion of how good his arguments supposedly are coupled with the “unpredictability” of judges. It betrays a lack of confidence, to me, and that he is just fighting the fight for the sake of fighting. He better watch himself in advancing frivolous arguments because the Supreme Court would not be pleased to read and hear such.
Does the court already know what it’s going to do? Well, four of the judges have not even seen briefing yet, most likely (they are enjoying their weekend). My point was that, once they do come in Monday and pick up and start reading the briefs, I expect they are going to come to some rather pronounced views on this case in very short order and that plaintiffs’ attorney is going to have an uphill fight on his hands at oral argument.
PJ (12:26:52) :
“Charles, so does this mean that the Alaska Supreme Court HAD to agree to hear the appeal or did they have the right to reject it? In other words, the appeal was automatic.”
They had to take it. What they did not have to do was hear it on an expedited basis. That was where the court exercised jurisdiction via one judge whose beeper went off on this one, I guess. The court has expedited because of the high profile of the case.
I meant “exercised discretion on this one.”
Thanks again Charles.
Thank you, Charles. I suspected that was the case. There are some loonies at the message board at the Anchorage Daily News who think that because the Court agreed to hear the appeal, it must also mean that the Court believes the appeal has merit.
I am confused on how the defendants think that the Branchflower investigation has no legal authority to investigate. If the Committee approved it, it has to be. If there was any question that it wasn’t, why didn’t Palin bring that up from the onset—why only after she was nominated?
Isn’t the argument the Legislators are proposing pretty much what Bush vs. Gore was all about?
[…] Mudflats blog […]
Palin is now directly involved in these smear tactics of the McCain camp’s attemps to spread lies about Obama!
Since these lies have been investigated and reported as lies by many media organizations, Can Palin be held directly responsible if some nut took that crud serious and caused Obama harm? God forbid!
I would think Obama could now take this to court if he chose to.
What about using this as proof of Palin’s character flaws!
[…] There They Go Again! Emergency Motion Filed With Supreme Court to Stop Troopergate Investigation. U… Boy the McCain-Palin campaign REALLY doesn’t want anyone to know the results of the Branchflower report. This […] […]
This is such an absurd ploy by the McPalin camp. They obviously have something to hide, and they’re trying to buy time ’til the election is over.
I suspect there will be a day when many of is may witness McLame going off on Palin!
She talks as though she is going to be in charge and McLame will have to now to her.
I never knew he has had a habit of going off on women like that, I thought it was. Just anyone!
I think they should both be held accountable for their slander of others! Talk about ruining the life of others!
I have not heard of McCain making such statements and I do not think he can make statements which he knows not to be true.
I wonder who put Palin up to that and why she would put her political career at risk by doing so.
In case anyone missed it, Palin accused Obama of being a close associate of a known terrorist or so called known terrorist! 40 years ago he was involved in something, now he is a professor at a university in Chicago, He is reported to live in the same neighborhood as Obama, which proves nothing!
[…] https://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/10/03/there-they-go-again-emergency-motion-filed-with-supreme-cou… Facts @ 1:37 am [filed under America, America Votes 08, Dick Cheney, McCAin Houses, McCain, Mccain Adultery, Policy, Politics, Sara Meets with UN, Sara Palin’s speech, Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin in Alaska, Sarah Palin’s Acceptance speech […]
Wesson Scalper Palin aka Canuck for Choice (20:22:46) :
Welcome to the mudflats. A lot of Canadians are here, and probably more are lurking!
Alaskans, i’m in VA.. We didn’t know much about your state until we were blessed with her royal highness, Sarah..
It’s been such a fun ride, but the question arises asking is she the BEST you guys can come up with, doggonit.. Dang, nuthin better? Really?
She is sure a fun one.
The latest and best news we can hope for:
The Supremes don’t stop the big reveal, or they do it Monday or Tuesday to beat the Supremes, wouldn’t that seem logical? (And how many GOP elections are going to be helped by Supreme Courts?)
Someone in Alaska filed a lawsuit demanding to see all Queen Sarah’s secret mail that was broken in a story in the wash post..!
And of course, the Sarah Palin Affair, being advertised by the National Enquirer..
With all this fun, a dead McOld rally, and a big obama rally, maybe you guys will vote Dem.. How much would that hurt poor Queen Sarah’s feelings? But since she’s a PITBULL, she should fight?? Nah.. don’t think that’s the right term for her.
So, tell me, how is she worth $2.1 million and is Lake Lucille really dead? Did she really take $25,000 in gifts?
And John Mccain loves her so? Only cause she gives him a woody..
We love Alaska. my wife wants to visit.. maybe next year when it’s be de-palinized, we’ll come see ya all.!
[…] threads, and I found the conversation riveting. Here’s the post which was updated today: “There they go again; Emergency motion filed with [Alaska] Supreme Court to stop Troopergate i… Also, these two photos are kind of fun. They were both taken today at rallies in Anchorage. The […]
I just wanted to say keep it up i appeciate all the blogs the links so intelligently written. Off topic I don´t know American law so can anyone tell me if Mccain dies before the election what happens? I live in Germany just stumbled over your site.
Ps thanks for all the Lawlords out there I can understand lot more now
He, Heee, he… Someone up on top said isn’t their anyone who can tell Sarah to shut the F… up? WELLLL…..we can!!! Lets all of us and put it on every blog everywhere to swamp McCain campaign with emails, phone calls, etc – zillions of messages – to stop the Obama lies!!!! Could it, as Arlo Gunthrie sang about long ago, become a movement?? The tell Sarah to shut the f**** up movement? What does everyone think? Could we distract and drive them crazy doing this??? There are an awful lot of us?
Mudflats, I liked you in gather.com, your rally article, that’s okay?
I have faith that justice will prevail! What a travesty! Palin has no business being anywhere near the White House and no business whatsoever throwing stones at glass houses. Well wishes from Santa Cruz, CA, and may the Force be with you!