Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can anyone answer this? If she has nothing to hide,,,why not just cooperate? No matter who is in charge, if your innocent, then what exactly is the problem?
She looks more and more like a little Bush every day.
"In two letters released Wednesday, Thomas Van Flein called the investigation "unlawful and unconstitutional" and said the man hired to run it, former prosecutor Stephen Branchflower, has a conflict of interest because he's a friend of the fired commissioner. Citing "your seemingly biased conduct of the investigation in recent weeks," he urged Branchflower to stop interviewing witnesses _ the second time this month that he's asked Branchflower to stand down."
Washington Times - Palin's attorney: Investigator 'biased' (broken link)
However, she should cooperate to just show she's cooperating, so it doesn't look bad.
Like any other person in this country, she would cooperate if she had nothing to hide... IF she is innocent, then it is not a big deal. You would think she would like to prove her innocent part in this event to us,,,you know the voters. But she won't... I smell fish!
Doesn't it stand to reason that because the state capital is not that populated and that all of the people know each other? Wouldn't that be the case for anyone who decided to move forward, that they would be "friends"?
She's seeming more and more like Cheney everyday.
I'd like to see any of us decide not to participate in some inquiry into our job. We'd be on our butts faster than a snap.
Doesn't it stand to reason that because the state capital is not that populated and that all of the people know each other? Wouldn't that be the case for anyone who decided to move forward, that they would be "friends"?
She's seeming more and more like Cheney everyday.
I'd like to see any of us decide not to participate in some inquiry into our job. We'd be on our butts faster than a snap.
I agree. I just keep asking myself, why is it tainted now when it wasn't tainted in July?
The AG's office is essentially firing a shot across the bow of the Obama shills who are trying to hijack the Alaska state government for political purposes. The "smoking gun" is the statement that the AG's office will challenge subpoenas in court as well as the statement that the "investigation" is violating the rights of employees.
In other words, "We're going to challenge your BS subpoenas in court and give legal protection to people who don't want to cooperate in your witch-hunt." While it isn't spelled out explicitly, one can also see the potential of the AG's office pursuing charges against the people pushing this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.