ABC Reignites ‘Troopergate’: Officer Portrayed as Victim, Palin as Guilty
-By Warner Todd Huston
ABC Still Attacking Gov. Palin
On its Blotter from Brian Ross Blog, ABC News is trying to re-ignite the “Troopergate” issue by portraying Alaska state trooper Mike Wooten as a victim of “threatening phone calls.” And, in reporting this new aspect of the story, ABC waits until the last sentence of the story to mention that Governor Palin was deemed innocent of charges of ethics violations in trying to be rid of Trooper Wooten even as 90% of the story pounds home what the supposed charges against the Governor were. Further, ABC misrepresents the charges against Wooten as a simple “she said” argument by Palin and fails to mention that he was actually found guilty of many of them.
In fact, this whole report subtlety makes Governor Palin look like the bad actor in this situation and garners sympathy from the reader for Trooper Wooten. In the first paragraph, the piece talks of Palin’s “harsh allegations” and states that he has been “taken off patrols recently for his own safety” because of “threatening phone calls.” The report mentions that both Wooten and his union are whining that he cannot get over time pay since he’s stuck on a desk job “for his own safety.” Looks like ABC thinks Trooper Wooten is a victim here.
The next paragraph goes on to recount how “Palin, her husband and top aides worked to get the trooper, Mike Wooten, booted from the ranks of the Alaska State Troopers” and says that “two separate investigations” eventually became the “‘Troopergate’ scandal.” The ABC piece then goes on to report all of the “harsh allegations” that Governor Palin charged against Trooper Wooten. But, the way these several paragraphs are presented the charges are only discussed in a “she said” style.
Of course, the ABC piece did find room to mention that Wooten denies the charges and also gives Wooten’s pals room to argue for his innocence.
Wooten has denied the claims or said his actions were misrepresented. His supporters have said Wooten was unfairly targeted by Palin and her family, because of his prolonged custody battle with Palin’s sister, Molly.
So, all we get is Palin’s claims of his guilt, the Trooper’s claims of his innocence, and a lot to discussion of how an ethics panel found Palin herself guilty of violating ethics. We also get the sob story about how Wooten has been threatened over the phone and how this has caused the police to fix him to a desk job where his union whines that he now cannot get over time pay.
Not one of the charges that the article says “she said,” though, were compared to the actual findings of Wooten’s guilt. The piece did not, for instance, report the fact that the Alaska State Police actually found Trooper Wooten guilty of several of the charges directed against him by the Governor. The piece leaves his actual guilt unreported.
Here is the last deceptive paragraph of the story, the only paragraph that has any exculpatory words for Governor Palin at all.
The first Troopergate investigation, by the Alaska legislature, found that Palin had broken state ethics laws in her quest to punish Wooten. The second probe, by the state’s gubernatorially-appointed Personnel Board, found she did not. Palin did not respond to inquiries from KIMO.
Notice that this report does not mention that the first panel that found Palin guilty of ethics violations was run by a partisan Democrat group out to damage the Governor. But also notice how they phrase the probes. The partisan Democrat panel is only called an investigation “by the Alaska legislature,” whereas the second one is termed a probe carried out by “the state’s gubernatorially-appointed Personnel Board.” This is ABC’s way of saying the first board was free of partisanship yet the second was made up of a board that Palin appointed!
This entire piece is yet one more slanted, hit piece against Governor Palin.
| More from Warner Todd Huston
Stumble It!
November 10th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Todd, you are off your meds again. Quit playing party lackey to make yourself feel good.
FACT: Palin’s very public claim that Wooten physically threatened her father was 100% mierda de toro. If Wooten had done so, Wooten would have been immediately arrested, fired, and he would still be in jail. Folks who actually threaten the families of governors find themselves locked up faster than an Obama one-liner.
I won’t bother debunking the rest of Palin’s baloney, because it holds no more water than the stripper’s allegations in the Duke Rape Case.
The first two Committee findings, both of which were conducted by Republican majority committees, found that she had way overstepped her boundaries.
Those findings did not titrate the fact that her persistent activities were specifically intended to manipulate the outcome of a court proceeding, both by doing dirty things behind closed doors, and waging a war of terror from the Governor’s office. The last time I checked, tampering with or harassing witnesses in a court proceeding is a felony. If you bother reading the court transcripts in the custody proceeding, the judge hauled off Palin and the wife’s attorney, in very strong language, a number of times for their orchestrated attempt to run the case by remote control.
Those committees did not sit in a capacity to make a finding of criminality. The last committee report was done by Palin’s people, and was an internal whitewashing of the whole affair.
November 11th, 2008 at 2:20 am
David,
I really don’t get it. You and one or two others are obviously out to get Sarah Palin. I don’t know why. There was a he-said, she-said kind of thing and the “charges” against Palin were just accusations – supported by what even Monegan characterises as “circumstantial evidence.”
The Republican accuser was a guy who lost the election to her – whose reputation she ground into the ground with accusations of corruption. The political committee that found fault was lead by and stacked with Obama Democrats. The few Republicans involved were part of the old boy network that had been partially ousted.
What is it that’s driving you to misrepresent the situation in order to attack Sarah Palin?
November 11th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Roger, I read the entire commission report carefully, and have seen the comments entered in the divorce court by the judge.
Palin did things far worse than what the average relative does to manipulate court cases. That she happened to become the darling “savior” of the Republican party only emphasizes the vast importance of her behaving like a real social conservative, not another barnyard feminist neocon.
I find it quite interesting that so many folks so deeply aware of the horrid things feminists do want to give her a free pass. At minumum, she should have been arrested for tampering with witnesses (which the three reports did not consider).
If Palin had not behaved like a rabid radical feminist, I would have supported her. I simply cannot support anyone who plays dirty pool to screw men to the wall.
There is much teaching to do in the Republican Party. Huston is just one classic Reagan conservative who knows nothing about social issues or what they mean.
We better get our ducks in a row and sing a consistent tune about what we expect from the Republican party. If we do not do this now, we will get what we deserve later, and the Party will fall flat on its face again and again until it gets it right.
November 12th, 2008 at 6:54 am
I’m not giving Palin a free pass. There just isn’t any evidence to convict her. I’m still in principle a guy who believes people should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Accusations are not proof – not even evidence (I’ve even known judges who treat accusations as evidence and that’s wrong).
I’m being entirely selfish. (Well, maybe not entirely.) The presumption of innocence is something I want for myself, so I’m leading by example. Accusations by Palin’s political rivals and disgruntled employees aren’t evidence. Newsweek’s spin on the judge’s comments generally re: feuding relatives isn’t evidence either.
The only reason I can think of for using the commission report as “evidence” is to take their side politically and engage in a political attack against Palin. The commission has no credibility and use of their material contaminates any argument that might be produced from it.
BTW: If I were in Sarah Palin’s shoes, I’d fire Walt Monegan. He’s causing too much of a distraction and has stated publically that he intends to continue to cause trouble. For the same reason, Bush should have fired James Hansen from NASA years ago (Gore’s political advisor re: the climate hoax).