The ethics investigation into Sarah Palin’s handling of the issue surrounding her ex-brother-in-law’s career is a trumped up charge with no legs that came about after the brother-in-law allegedly issued this threat to Palin’s sister: “Put a leash on your sister and family or I’m going to bring them down.”
Despite the attempt to “bring her down,” Alaskans know the truth. Palin’s approval rating stood at 80% as of last month.
The charge is this: People in Palin’s inner circle, including her husband, talked with Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan about serious charges against Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, Trooper Mike Wooten. Wooten and Palin’s sister, Molly McCann, were in the midst of a divorce. Wooten remained on the force, Monegan was later fired, and he “wonders if Wooten’s situation was part of it.”
“Never put pressure on Walt Monegan to fire — hire or fire — anybody,” Palin responded.
Talking? Wonders? Once the accusations against Wooten are widely known, the rest of the country will probably be wondering how Wooten was allowed to carry a badge and gun. In fact, for a time in 2005, he wasn’t.
The charges against Mike Wooten, allegations revealed when “all 482 pages and hours of recorded interviews” in the investigative file into the case was voluntarily released, are stunning.
“The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,” Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days.
[...]
Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both:
- Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
- He illegally shot a moose.
- He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
- He told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.
Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force, according to Grimes’ letter to Wooten.
Those incidents included: a reprimand in January 2004 for negligent damage to a state vehicle; a January 2005 instruction after being accused of speeding, unsafe lane changes, following too closely and not using turn signals in his state vehicle; a June 2005 instruction regarding personal cell phone calls; an October 2005 suspension from work after getting a speeding ticket; and a November 2005 memo “to clarify duty hours, tardiness and personal business during duty time.”
[...]
The troopers’ investigation into Wooten began after Chuck Heath — Wooten’s father-in-law and Palin and McCann’s dad — alerted troopers about a domestic violence protective order McCann had obtained against Wooten on April 11, 2005. McCann filed for divorce the same day, according to the court docket.
The trooper had not physically assaulted his wife but intimidated her and threatened to shoot him, Heath told troopers, according to a memo about the complaint.
The same day, a concerned neighbor of the couple called troopers with more accusations, including alcohol abuse, based on what Heath and McCann had relayed to him. Wooten seemed “disconnected” lately, the neighbor said. He told troopers that Heath and McCann were afraid to call troopers themselves.
“Extreme verbal abuse & violent threats & physical intimidation,” McCann wrote in her April 11, 2005, petition to the court. He had driven drunk multiple times, threatened her father, told her to “put a leash on your sister and family or I’m going to bring them down,” her petition says. A judge issued a 20-day protective order to keep Wooten away.
In written orders to Wooten sent the next day, trooper Capt. Matt Leveque echoed the court’s directive. Leveque, now a major, also told Wooten to give up his department-issued guns, badge, credentials and vehicle during his off-duty time, while the order was in effect.
Anchorage Daily News has detailed coverage, including a timeline
Like That? You'll Probably Like These.
- Palin Won’t Participate in Tasergate Probe
- Meet The Sarah Palin Troopergate Investigators
- Report: Son Of Democrat Rep Was Palin Email Hacker
- Another Palin Smear Down: Mother-In-Law A McCain/Palin Vote
- National Enquirer Palin Slam Debunked Before Release
Tagged
Mike Wooten, Sarah Palin8 Responses to “Don’t Buy It: Palin “Brother-In-Law” Investigation Trumped-Up”
Comments posted are the opinions of the individual poster and do not reflect the views of Bucks Right. Comments are only moderated to prevent spam. No legitimate opinions are altered for content, although we reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason. VALID e-mail address required.
1Jonathan Jerald on Aug 31, 2008 at 8:28 pm:
You neglected to mention that Alaska’s legislature voted 12-0 to investigate whether Palin exerted improper influence in the matter or to direct readers to the interview in which Monegan revealed extensive contact with Palin and her husband, who gave him a file on Wooten. Monegan also turned over copies of e-mails Palin sent him regarding Wooten, and although the contents of those e-mails have not yet been made public you can bet those documents and the legislature’s investigation will give the story sufficient ‘legs’ for months to come . . .
[Reply]
Steven Reply:
August 31st, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Go ahead and defend the old boy’s network that kept this guy carrying a gun and in a position of authority:
* Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
* He illegally shot a moose.
* He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
* He told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.
I hope you lefties do keep pushing the issue of Palin fighting to get Mr. “Eat a F’ing Lead Bullet” fired. She fought corruption from oil companies right down to her own family.
I can only hope that you guys continue your sexist attacks against this woman for trying to get a serial abuser and apparent psychopath off the police force straight through November.
[Reply]
D J Reply:
September 1st, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Palin had an 80 precent approval rating. 87 percent of Alaskins polled believed she is lying about being involved in the firing of he State Trooper boss for not firing the brother in law. Which poll was taken first ?
[Reply]
Anonymous Reply:
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:15 am
First you should trust very little said by either side in divorces.. Is this trooper ok ?.. probably not.. but everyone that brings up the taser incident seems to imply that this trooper was shooting this little kid.. What really happened apparently was that the trooper was showing the kid his new toy, and the boy asked to be jolted with it “repeatedly” and even got his cousin to watch to show off.. now, that the trooper went along with this is troubling, but the incident isn’t as sinister as it sounds, the probes were taped to the boy, not shot into him… now the mother was upstairs the whole time and knew about it.. of course this all comes out in the divorce.. which all goes back to the first sentence of this post… so stupidity abounds in the whole family.
[Reply]
Lisa Reply:
September 16th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Jonathan Jerald:
You incidentally forgot to mention that a majority of Alaska’s legislature is Democratic and those who aren’t, were apparently also feeling threatened by Gov. Palin’s well-known record of eliminating corruption in the government of Alaska.
DJ:
“80 [percent] approval rating” vs. “87 percent of Alaskins polled”
The percentage of approval rating in the State of Alaska pertains to all of the citizens of Alaska, who answered the survey, whereas a POLL is actually taken by a sample of citizens (hypothetical example: 100 people polled on who would vote for McCain / Palin or Obama / Biden). Most likely, there will always be a certain percentage of those citizens, who are “undecided”.
So, say if there is a tie between those would vote for McCain and Obama of 45 to 45, this would mean that 10% are undecided. This is why polls are not always a credible source of information. They can be skewed and manipulated, according to the manner of the questions that are asked and the area (whether predominately liberal or conservative) where the poll was taken. Some are more accurate than others, but all of these opinions do not speak for the majority of Americans.
[Reply]
2stu van tine on Sep 4, 2008 at 9:32 am:
As Governor, Palin was the CINC of the state troopers. If she had information that he was a frequent drunk driver, and threatened to shoot people, she had a duty to do something about it. If she hand’nt, and Wooten ran over somebody in his cruiser while driving drunk, she’d be accused of keeeping him on the job so the alimony/child support checks would keep coming to her sister.
The libs will take anything they can find about anybody, however innocuous, and label it a “scandal.” The lefties in the press will happily play along. Huffington, a KGB spy, will do anything to destroy America. (OK, I made the spy part up, but she obviously hates America and works to destroy it.)
[Reply]
Lisa Reply:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:14 am
stu van tine:
I agree! She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. It’s pretty bad, when Obama sends an entourage consisting of 30 lawyers, private investigators and reporters off to Alaska to dig up “dirt” on Gov. Sarah Palin. That is pathetic, especially since the liberal media manipulated almost every interview to their advantage — not to mention, Obama’s.
That interview with Charles Gibson on ABC? All of the portions of the interview that would have realistically presented her as intelligent, able and confident enough to do the job of VP (if not, President), were EDITED OUT, so she would not appear that way to the viewing audience! Editing is always something that will be required in any television interview or article of writing, but normally, it does not affect the overall story.
In regard to “troopergate”, Mike Wooten was quoted as saying that he wants no bad blood between himself and the Heath / Palin families, yet claims that the charges of drinking on the job and the threat against her father as bogus. Not so. Both of these charges against him (including tasering two children, game violations and abusing Sarah’s sister, Molly) are substantiated. He must be feeling either 1) remorseful or
2) harrassed, because he also stated that he wishes Sarah and her family the best in her endeavors. Things that make you go “hmmm…”!
[Reply]
3Stephen on Sep 30, 2008 at 10:21 am:
Anyone who wouldn’t address a police officer threatening any member of your family has something wrong with them. It would be a little late to do something after her father is dead. All the rest of us should support the Palin family in their efforts to get this person out of a position of authority.
[Reply]