...no question about it, Sarah Palin is currently--a CRIMINAL.

From CNN:

Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her power as Alaska's governor and violated state ethics law by trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report concluded Friday.

Wait, you didn't get that. Let me repost the quote from CNN again:

Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her power as Alaska's governor and violated state ethics law by trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report concluded Friday.

Oh, wait, still don't get it. Let me repeat it in other words: FUCK YOU REPUBLICAN SCUM.

Being a Democrat, I understood fully the entire first part of your comment.

Being an outraged liberal, I was more than thrilled to see your final statement.

I am outraged, too, because I know exactly how Republicans would react if this was someone they opposed. I was being purposefully flip in order to rile up those that are going to rush to Palin's defense. They will claim the findings were bias (even though it was a bipartisan council that unanimous adopted the report) and/or that the investigation was politically motivated (even though the investigation began before John McCain tapped Palin as VP).

However, for the record, there are many Republicans that will also be outraged for the same reasons that I am. My comments were truly just directed to a subset of the far-right Republicans that have hijacked their party and will defend criminal behavior by their own. I was just frisky with glee.

Last I heard there were going to be no charges filed.

Would you have a Link for the Trial Transcript?

There was an investigation, not a trial. The findings of the investigation is that she criminally abused her power and violated states ethic laws. The findings were unanimously approved by a bipartisan legislative council.

Branchflower concluded that "Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

That finding makes her a criminal. You know as well as I do that just because charges aren't filed or charges are dropped, doesn't mean the person is exonerated of the criminal wrong doing.

The Palin's are now claiming that the investigation over stepped its bounds. However, as the Anchorage Daily News reported in early August: On Monday, the council, a bipartisan panel of state senators and representatives, voted 12-0 to spend up to $100,000 "to investigate the circumstances and events surrounding the termination of former Public Safety Commissioner Monegan, and potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch.

Emphasis, added, of course.

Spin it all you want.

<link>

The 263-page report released in Anchorage also found that while Palin was well within her right to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan, his dismissal came in part because he refused to remove her sister's ex-husband from the Alaska State Troopers.

Speaking of spin.

What she did was unethical, it was not ilegal. Yes, it's a lame technicality, but don't over emphasize it when the ethics angle is the true charge against her, and bad enough in it's own right.

The report also fails to mention any actions to be taken against Palin what so ever. If the charges are so damning, if they do indeed rise to unlawful behavior, where is the recomendations for punishment? Not even a footnote?

It's bad enough that she did what she did, but there was no personal gain and thus there was no criminal action. She certainly deserves to be censured over it though.

She broke state ethics law, that is illegal not just unethical.

It is not up to Branchflower to decide the punishment, that is the job of the Alaska legislature.

Finally, there was never a question of whether, as Governor, she has the right to fire individuals. The question was did she abuse her power and break the law when she fired someone. To that, the answer is yes.

Here is the official finding of the report:

For the reasons explained in Section IV of this report, I find that Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

As for personal gain, the entire affair was based on a personal vendetta.

Spin, spin, spin, until you are dizzy.

No, she did not violate laws, she abused her position as governor, which they are claiming is itself a violation of the law. I read the statute in question, and I read the report, and IMO it does not rise to the level of "personal gain" that is required for criminal intent.

The key word here is "gain." She did not gain anything. Emotional gain doesn't count for criminal intent, sorry.

Ken Star issued a report on Bill Clinton I didn't agree with, either. In both cases the reports are flawed. Has nothing to do with spin or politics.

Tell me this--when you violate the law, what is that called? The report finds she violated the law. It explicitly stated she engaged in "prohibited" unethical behavior.

As for gain, there was a very messy custody battle going on at the time. The firing of Wooten would have ensured that he did not win custody of Palin's nephew.

Since you read the report, you know that "benifit" means anything that is to a person's advantage or self interest (pg. 49) and "personal interest" means an interest held or involvement by a public officer or the officer's immediate family member (pg. 50).

Additionally, the Ethics Act contains a section on "Improper motivation," which is defined as a motivation not related to the best interests of the state (pg. 50-51).

Finally, the report clearly states that the Attorney Generals office did not cooperate with the investigation and has withheld evidence, namely emails. Branchflower was originally told that there were 1.3 million emails preserved across 23 accounts. As of the report, he had received only 270 emails (pg. 75).

Silly, foolish zealot.

The report is the result of an inquiry by a legislative body, which has no power to determine whether a crime has been committed.

It's not even the equivalent of an indictment, let alone a conviction.

Your ignorant rage is amusing as hell.

The conclusion of the legislative investigation is that she violated the law. Allow me to repeat, the conclusion of the legislation investigation is that she violated the law.

Here's the report. It is now up to the legislature what their action will be.

Yes, silly zealots, indeed--like those that defend criminal behavior from one of their own.

Pointing out that the report has roughly the same legal significance as your local Boy Scout troop taking a vote that you have been molesting roadkilled male poodles isn't the same thing as defending the behavior, poor blind partisan fool.

It is an accusation, and nothing more.

"It is now up to the legislature what their action will be."

Your wishful thinking doesn't make it so:

"Under Alaska law, it is up to the state's Personnel Board, not the Legislature, to decide whether Palin violated the ethics laws. If so, it must refer the matter to the Senate president for disciplinary action."

Rant away, tiny pointless person.

Palin/McCain tried to defer the entire investigation to the state Personnel Board and the Alaska Supreme Court agreed with the legislature.

It is true that the three-member, all Palin appointed Personell Board will have the final say in the matter, though.

The report, however, unanimously endorsed by Republicans and Democrats alike, has found that Palin committed an impeachable defense.

Yes, let me repeat, partisan zealots indeed.