No mention of the troopergate story.

In addition, when McCain surrogates were asked about Palin's experience, they all used the opportunity to blast Obama's experience.

Republicans are guilty until proven innocent.

I'm certainly not free of looking at this kind of thing from a Republican with immediate suspicion.

But the lies and distortions of the Clintons' record and statements and behavior by other Democrats over the course of this campaign have certainly opened my eyes to the extent and depth of the "truthiness" that really has always prevailed at TPM and etc. that I never particularly questioned when it was directed at a enemy we all had in common.

Maybe it's because I'm reflexively giving the benefit of the doubt to a funny, feisty woman politician with an unusual political trajectory, but it seems to me that she's far enough outside the typical Republican mold to give even WKJM reason to hesitate for just a second about that automatic assumption of guilt by party label.

Yeah -- an "intellectual giant" who couldn't get the simplest established facts straight on the very story he was encouraging outrage over.

I mean, Marshall uses the word "allegedly", when it is established fact?

Seriously.  They'll throw one abusive, step-son tasering, I'll kill your father! ex-brother-in-law and the McCain camp will respond with a major fundraiser, buy a house with good friend of nearly 20 years and then call it a "boneheaded" decision, now convicted felon being sentenced a week or two before the Election.

When she became governor, she appointed the Anchorage Chief of Police, to be in charge of public safety (including the State Troopes) and then pressured him to fire Wooten. The appointee looked into the matter and decided that the allegations had been dealt with, and refused.  So she fired him, and has since denied that anyone had pressured him on Wooten.  That unraveled upon a light investigation --- facts are stubborn things --- and she says simply it was done without her knowledge.

I don't know why she fired him.  She doesn't say. Just like she fired the police chief and the Library Director (now THERE's a political position) of Wasilla when she was Mayor.  Because she could.  

Can you imagine what she will do to her enemies as VP and she starts talking to the IRS?  We're going back to the good old days when the White House had enemies lists.

In this case, whatever charges were brought against wooten were resolved, and the problem was that the Palins were not satisfied with that, and after the entire matter was completed in accordance with State police procedure, they kept going and kept going and used the Governor's Office to do it. Had they not used the Governor's office, there would have been no problem.

And the complaints in the current round appeared not in the original cycle but some time later when a custody litigation over the couple's children began. Is there a new state police proceeding? Of course not. It is probably governed by union rules which require due process, rather than political intervention. He still IS an Alaska state trooper, after all this nonsense.

And it seems to me Dems can make an issue of that without defending Wooten. For one thing, even if getting Wooten fired was a good cause, getting involved so directly in a single case makes Palin look petty and small. For another, as was pointed out upthread, lots of people are already sensitive to and concerned about issues surrounding the abuse of executive power. If this adds to the perception that the GOP, even the new, 'maverick' GOP, is the part of authoritarianism, I don't think it does them much good.

even if we accept (based on what i've read, her ex brother-in-law is a pri*ck) that all the allegations against trooper wooten are true, that she was related to him, and had a personal interest in the outcome of the investigation, should have been sufficient reason for her to keep her nose out of it, period.

no ordinary citizen is in the same position as she, it just smacks of poor judgment on her part. do we really want someone who exhibits that low a level of judgment in the possible position of being in control of nuclear weapons?

The problem is she LIED about it. She said that she and her staff (and her hubby) didn't try to intimidate Monegan, but they clearly did. The tape recording proves that.

Funny that you mention the cop "illegally hunting the moose" but neglect to point out that the guy was using his father-in-law's license, and said moose was then consumed by the FIL and the wife--the ones who then made the accusation years after the fact.

That aside, if it has not been mentioned above, look again how a progressive frames a domestic violence incidence in terms that are, quite frankly, a cover for domestic abusers: "Palin's family" (so that the image of men can be invoked with the sister), "a feud" (Hatfields vs. McCoys, or Wootens vs. Heaths),   "bitter custody and divorce battle" (no domestic violence to see here, just a bitter woman who made 9 false accusations [and nevermind the 5 proven accusations!]).

The whole thing is just another example of rule by the person instead of rule by law, something that would have horrified people all across the political spectrum not so long ago. The fact that the conservative movement has so successfully promoted their twisted version of small government to the point where people are having to struggle to find the proper scandal angle on this is the most disturbing thing about this whole story.