Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully Mars
This is part of what I never understood about the situation. If this trooper did all these things and I'm not saying he didn't. Why didn't Palin et el just come out and say "Damn right I tried to protect my family from this guy. I'd have taken the same action if any other family contacted my office and alerted me that a trooper was engaging in these dangerous behaviors aimed at their family. As Governor I have to take action to protect the families of Alaska. We have to think outside the box sometimes when families are in danger." Why she first choose to partake in the investigation then refused is beyond me. Seems to me she could have put this to sleep fairly easily.
The way she went about it makes her look like just another power hungry politician. But I think she could have added to her (I can't believe I'm using this word) maverick image had she been more up front from the beginning.
|
guyy was answering this question, but people weren't particularly interested in what he wrote.
It's not that abuse of power is owned by Republicans, but that some Republicans' theory of the executive is justification for wielding power as they do. To offer an alternate explanation is to undermine that theory of how the executive should operate. Even if that reason makes sense, offering it substantiates the position that an executive branch is answerable to outside review.
Tully, are you being facetious about the report clearing her?
It only cleared her in respect to whether she can or can not fire the guy. The investigation found that the pressures they applied to him was an abuse of power.