The Wooten “Family Feud”
Governor Palin told aides to “Stay away, there’s nothing we can do.”

2008-09-12
By

To many, Sarah Palin’s sister’s divorce is a private family matter, best left there. To others, it is a potential window into Sarah Palin’s character and a launching pad for a broader discussion on family policy. Reports of allegations, maybe false, maybe not, set-up a traditional he-said, she-said allowing anyone to take a side. Another more politically loaded question has been raised. Did Sarah Palin abuse her position as Governor to get involved in the dispute?

Newsweek added fuel to the fire this week with an article claiming court records reveal that “A judge repeatedly told Palin and family not to badmouth her sister’s ex.” According to Newsweek, ‘An Anchorage judge three years ago warned Sarah Palin and members of her family to stop “disparaging” the reputation of Alaska State Trooper Michael Wooten, who at the time was undergoing a bitter separation and divorce from Palin’s sister Molly.’

The juicy Newsweek soap opera can leave one with the image of a judge shaking his finger directly at Sarah Palin and other family members, “repeatedly” admonishing them for bad behavior. But the quotes given are general comments regarding “disparagement” of parents by family members. The context – in sharp contrast to unflattering images of an uncivilized “family feud” – was preservation of the Wooten couple’s joint custody arrangement; another testament to the family’s ability to work through difficult situations, achieving strong and positive results.

In the world of he-said, she-said side-taking in family issues, something positive must be seen in both Michael and Molly Wooten. They must have done something right, as parents. And while we’re at it, let’s applaud the judge for preserving parental relationships instead of legally destroying them.

The judge’s comments were not set off by Sarah Palin’s or family members’ involvement in the divorce and custody proceedings, nor were there necessarily any false allegations involved. The judge reacted to testimony from an Alaska State Troopers’ union representative who said family members had lodged complaints in the past (and before Sarah Palin first held public office) about Trooper Wooten’s behavior. The representative took the position that the complaints were not job related.

In relation to early coverage of the abuse of power allegation, Internet discussion boards immediately became clogged with questions about the circumstances under which Trooper Wooten was fired. He wasn’t, and newer reports began revealing a more indirect and complex set of speculations built on the dismissal of a commissioner who had the power to fire Wooten. Were Governor Palin’s aides pressuring the commissioner to fire Wooten?

MensNewsDaily.com has obtained audio demonstrating that aides had the objective of keeping the Governor out of the dispute and that Sarah Palin and husband Todd instructed them to “Stay away, there’s nothing we can do.”

Meanwhile, there is evidence that the people interested in keeping Troopergate alive are Sarah Palin’s political enemies, from those who made initial allegations to those carrying out the investigation in Alaska. (Republican response.) Election campaigns have been known to include some dirty tricks. But Troopergate is being conducted using public funds. In the end, this is where the appearance of, if not illegal, then patently unethical conduct may come to rest.

  • Squiggy

    No, of course I don’t believe them – I know them to be manipulative liars. But apparently the wishy-washy “uncommitted” aren’t so sure. The accusation of (insert scandal du jour) may not make them vote for the other guy, but them staying home is almost as good for him.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    Those desperate last minute accusations: Do you believe them when they do that? Palin Phenomenon Accelerates Downfall of Old Media

  • Squiggy

    Roger F. Gay said,

    I think if there was a silver bullet against Sarah Palin, the Democrats would have fired it off already.

    I hope so. They sure managed to keep a couple of them hidden until the week before the election last time. As close as the 2000 election was, it almost worked.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    T Finnan;

    I like your logic. The “Code of Judicial Conduct” you refer to consists of ideas conforming to fairness and honesty. In order to get the story right, we need to practice that logical fairness and honesty.

    Family courts do not operate in that fashion however. Since 1990, they generally operate as kangaroo courts. I don’t see evidence that this judge did anything wrong however. He made a statement which made sense in the context of a joint custody arrangement (well, anytime really). He’d heard testimony without hearing from all the parties involved and did not make a special ruling based on that testimony. He just made a general statement that made sense and that was the end of it. He by default I guess one could say, ruled against changing the joint custody arrangement based on the testimony of the union representative. He just said that sort of thing that the union represenatative talked about ain’t a good thing and then they all went on with their lives. No ruling even about whether there was anything to what the union representative said.

    Newsweek isn’t writing by any Judicial Rules of Conduct. They spun the information out of control to create the latest soap opera episode. That’s kangaroo journalism.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    Jim;

    I think if there was a silver bullet against Sarah Palin, the Democrats would have fired it off already. Get the facts wrong and the whole message will slide into the abyss when the background story changes. Besides that – we’ve had people imagining that the fathers’ rights movement is the male mirror of feminism. It can’t get drawn into unethical and devious behavior or it will be.

    There’s a question here. It raises issues. But I wouldn’t want to see everyone running for every cliff of personal intreague and soap opera that’s set up and dropping over – while the whole important political issue of federal manipulation of marriage and family policy is forgotten.

  • T Finnan

    Repeat of comment #1, Was Sarah Palin ever in court to hear this warning? How did the records become available? Did the judge send Sarah Palin a copy of his warning? How does this fit in with the Code of Judicial Conduct?

  • http://www.gndzerosrv.com Jim Untershine

    Roger

    When the media starts using ‘Trooper Gate’ to destroy Palin’s political career, it would be nice to have a little blow back on our buddy Joe Biden.

    Was Palin exercising a rendition of the ‘Biden Doctrine’ (VAWA) in immediately attacking anyone who gets in the way of attacking anyone who was perceived to be a threat to the First Family of Alaska? Is the ‘Bush Doctrine’ any different?

    BTW: Sorry about the husband/father typo in the earlier post (I noticed it as soon as I submitted it), I hope you didn’t think I was making things up.

  • Squiggy

    perspicacious said,

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion here *even me* and even when I boldly disagree with your views.

    If he wants you to stay, you can stay. You don’t have a right to post here. You libs need to learn what a “right” is.

    perspicacious said,

    Have you actually reviewed the official Wooten divorce file?

    Have you actually looked at the interview I mentioned? The one where Wooten himself disagrees with what you’re saying? Obviously not. But I bet that won’t stop you. You’ve got a mission, and Obama stars in your eyes.

    P.S. Notice that you haven’t been banned because of your point of view. Conservatives don’t do that. The websites that YOU agree with immediately ban anyone suspected of being a conservative. And I’ll bet that gets tiring really fast. Go check out Obama’s you-tube ad about McCain not using e-mail ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ2I0t_Twk ). Almost 240000 views and somehow there’s only five comments. All positive. Makes you wonder how many negative responses they’ve had to delete. Bet they’ve got carpal tunnel.

  • perspicacious

    Roger said: It’s a fact that Newsweek is not a credible source. It doesn’t matter how you feel about it – it’s a fact.
    _________________________

    Because you say so? I never claimed I *felt* they were credible BTW. That is your strawman.

    Have you actually reviewed the official Wooten divorce file?

  • perspicacious

    Roger said: Obviously you have a bone to pick
    _________________________________

    So now I’m the messenger being attacked. I “have a bone to pick” simply because I disagree with you about Palin? At the same time you apparently are alleging you have no dog in the race–that your are unbiased. The comment above in itself shows your bias for Palin.

    You wrote an opinion piece. Everyone is entitled to an opinion here *even me* and even when I boldly disagree with your views. Yet, rather than argue the points I bring up, you go for the ad hom. I’ll look at that as you waving the white flag. Obviously if you could counter my comments with facts, you’d do so rather than complaining that you don’t have time to research, etc.

    I held this web site to a higher standard than that of usenet posts. Was I mistaken?

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    perspicacious;

    It’s a fact that Newsweek is not a credible source. It doesn’t matter how you feel about it – it’s a fact.

  • perspicacious

    PS Squiggy and Roger – it is the sign of an amateur debater that when they cannot attack the message, they attack the messenger. The issue here isn’t your *feelings* about CNN, Newsweek, the Wall Street Journal, etc. If you have an issue with the content of what they say, demonstrate why it is incorrect.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    perspicacious:

    Obviously you have a bone to pick. I can see that just as easily as I can see the bias in the Newsweek article. My article is short, so I don’t spend too many words explaining – point-by-point – the faults in the Newsweek article. The Newsweek article makes claims, which it states as fact to set the mood, which are not supported by the facts they have, as represented by the information they give about the hearing content. It’s crappy biased journalism – and this certainly isn’t the first time for Newsweek.

    The rest of my post responding to Jim Untershine – well, if it doesn’t interest you then just leave it to me and Jim.

  • perspicacious

    Jim Untershine wrote: Maybe the trooper will take the blame for everything just to keep Joe Biden out of the White House. Might be a good opportunity to show how VAWA may have precipitated this whole debacle.
    _______________________________________

    The trooper is doing exactly what my husband was told by his attorney to do during a custody battle with my husband’s ex. That is, to be a “good boy” and admit to the judge you did wrong and accept responsibility for it. Whether the comments are true or not doesn’t matter to a judge any more than they matter to a population that is largely uninformed and inexperienced in the ways of family court issues.

    So, I think Wooten’s taking responsibility and being “nice” about his ex in the press is being done on his part for the good of his own custody issues and more importantly for his children.

    However, I won’t rule out that McCain, in his current zeal to protect “Sarah” (along with McCain’s handlers) aren’t also putting pressure on Wooten to do this.

  • perspicacious

    Roger said: But not by making things up, which is what some people seem to want to do…
    ______________________________________

    Exactly what has been made up? Like Squiggy, you seem to dislike the source, in your case Newsweek, but you haven’t come up with anything that shows much less proves Newsweek didn’t look at the court records and report exactly what they found there. Until you do I maintain your bias for “Sarah” is working overtime here.

    The rest of your post in reply to Jim Untershine has nothing to do with the topic of *your* article above, that is it has nothing directly to do with the allegations against Palin or the investigation she’s under. IMO it is just another red herring on your part to take the focus off of what Palin apparently did do in one particular divorce and custody case and the legal repercussions she’s facing because of that now.

  • perspicacious

    Squiggy said: As for the Wall Street Journal, what exactly makes them “conservative” to you? The fact that they’re a totally boring read?
    ______________________

    Sounds like more personal bias on your part. What “exactly” makes the WSJ boring to read? Because you think so?

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    Jim:

    Might be a good opportunity for a Father’s rights advocate to get the juicy back-story to this chilly Family Law tragedy.

    But not by making things up, which is what some people seem to want to do – or jumping in to make a big thing out of every rumor, piece of gossip and partisan spin that comes along. Nobody I know has any inside track on this. I think Ned Holstein started out with good intent and the right attitude, but it looks like he got bogged down – ’cause all we get is accounts from other sources – which include, rumor, gossip, attitude, and partisan spin. Anybody following the “investigation” in Alaska is going to get mired in it.

    I’d be personally bothered by anyone who uses the people involved in this unethically, and I really think people need to stop and think about that joint custody arrangement. As many fr advocates as there are out there pushing joint custody – I’m surprised that I’m the first person to put some focus on it.

    I’d suggest that anyone who thinks the situation is a good one to launch a more general point about family policy should think very carefully about how they’re going to do it; and be classier than ever instead of sinking to the level of Newsweek and Daily Kos, for example. And if I see someone hammering away at it because they support Barack Obama or Bob Barr or Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton or Al Gore or Ralph Nadar or whatever, I won’t feel the least bit guilty about dropping the hammer myself.

    Around here, these sorts of issues are taken very seriously.

  • Squiggy

    perspicacious, I watched an interview with Wooten. HE doesn’t seem to think it was such a big deal. He said that not only is he on good terms with “his children’s mother”, but that he considers her a friend.

    These things always seem terrible when being “investigated” (especially if you already want them to be proof of evil intent).

    As for the Wall Street Journal, what exactly makes them “conservative” to you? The fact that they’re a totally boring read?

  • http://www.gndzerosrv.com Jim Untershine

    Palin told the Secret Service that the trooper (victim of Family Law) threatened her husband’s life. Might be a good opportunity for a Father’s rights advocate to get the juicy back-story to this chilly Family Law tragedy.

    Maybe the trooper will take the blame for everything just to keep Joe Biden out of the White House. Might be a good opportunity to show how VAWA may have precipitated this whole debacle.

  • perspicacious

    How about the Wall Street Journal, Squiggy? That’s one of the conservatives’ favorite papers. I should know, I am a true conservative.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122109403841221751.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

    Ethics Adviser Warned Palin About Trooper Issue
    Letter Described Situation as ‘Grave,’ Called for Apology
    By JIM CARLTON
    September 11, 2008; Page A8

    Quote:

    An informal adviser who has counseled Gov. Sarah Palin on ethics issues urged her in July to apologize for her handling of the dismissal of the state’s public safety commissioner and warned that the matter could snowball into a bigger scandal.

    Unquote

    Quote:

    In the letter, written before Sen. John McCain picked the Alaska governor as his running mate, former U.S. Attorney Wevley Shea warned Gov. Palin that “the situation is now grave”

    Unquote

    Quote:

    Mr. Shea was acting on his own in writing the letter, with no official capacity. In late 2006, Gov. Palin asked him to co-write an ethics report for Gov. Palin with then-House Democratic leader Ethan Berkowitz that recommended new financial-disclosure rules for elected and appointed officials in the statehouse. That report served as a key document for the ethics bill she later signed into law.

    Unquote

    Quote:

    After his initial letter in July, Mr. Shea followed up with another letter, dated Aug. 4, in which he told Gov. Palin that she probably COULDN’T [emphasis mine, Roger] legally shun a legislative investigation into the firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.

    Unquote

    So much for your “questions” about the authority of the legislature in this matter, Roger. Research is your friend. On the topic of government power, you raised above, Roger, wouldn’t all of us like to have the legal power Palin seems to enjoy in getting rid of people she personally dislikes. Look up the name John Bitney.

    Quote:

    Gov. Palin has taken the opposite tack, hiring a private attorney to advise in a matter that has become known as “Troopergate.” Seven Palin administration employees have refused to meet with the independent investigator. The McCain-Palin campaign has argued that the state legislature has no right to look into the matter. Palin spokesmen say the state personnel board is the appropriate investigative body, setting up a showdown between the state’s legislative and executive branches.

    Unquote

    Quote:

    Mr. Shea, in his Aug. 4 letter, warned Gov. Palin against taking her current approach. “My feeling is this is not a personnel matter.

    Unquote

    Squiggy if you’re not going to believe the WSJ, a bastion of conservative reporting, who are you going to believe? Then again, a True Believer doesn’t need no stinkin’ proof. LOL.

    BTW, Squiggy countless news source including the Wall Street Journal yesterday reported that The Shadow Governor and 12 of Palin’s appointed lackey’s have been subpoened to give depositions (basically testify) before Steven Branchflower. Do you feel better now that you know it wasn’t “only” CNN? LOL.

  • Squiggy

    If that’s the best CNN can do, this is a nothing charge. Just another mudball slung at the wall.

    It remains to be seen if this will backfire like all the rest have done.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay

    perspicacious

    I read that subpoenas were being issued but don’t really find the technical parts of the play by play very interesting. I suppose that sort of thing is more interesting to someone seeing it for the first time. I was amazed that a legislature has such power and still wonder sometimes about separation of powers between the branches. Where can I get some of those special powers? And if you had your choice, would you choose the power to subpoena, or the ability to fly?

  • perspicacious

    The article is disappointing. It will take a lot of slanted writing to make a silk purse out of this sow’s ear and no, I’m not calling Palin a sow so don’t even go there. Have you heard The Shadow Governor got subpoened today along with 12 of her staffers?

  • perspicacious

    The judge didn’t tell Palin and extended family to DO anything. He gave them a warning. Actually several warnings. Judges are allowed to do that without bringing a person into the action. For example, you could have been chewing gum in his courtroom and he could have warned you that it was in your interest to spit it out. He would not be abusing his power to warn you any more than he was out of line to warn Palin, et al.

  • T Finnan

    The court has no jurisdiction to tell Sarah Palin or any other party not named in the pending action to do anything without first bringing them into the action. The judge may have told Sarah Palin’s sister to do something, but that is not binding on Sarah Palin. Everyone has the right to notice to confront adverse rulings.

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/author/rogerfgay/ Roger F. Gay


Buy the book now on Amazon.com. Or listen to Ronnie tell a story at escaping-from-reality.com.

Archives