During my career as a Police officer and Police Administrator in Maine, I had several cases where I had to terminate the employment of officers. In every case the fired officer and his loyal associates claimed it was “Personal” and an “abuse of authority”. This is the norm for these cases, which is why the administrator is routinely meticulous about fairness and documentation of the investigation. Union challenges and lawsuits are anticipated. The fact that the union could only get a token reduction in the suspension time means that the AST investigators dotted the “I’s and crossed the T’s”. The Dems and the MSM had better think twice before going too far down this road, because they will very likely highlight the picture of a sister, not a governor, blowing the whistle on an abusive cop who was abusing HIS power.
Thank you! Pretty much says it all, concisely, factually, and a good warning to LSM that they will ignore!... Yep, I read the article similarly, and found the operative phrase to be "the union". Unfortunately for this country, unions have degenerated into 'defenders of the criminal' and most have long overstayed their usefulness to the typical wage earner. When it's a police union, the negatives are magnified a hundredfold! Rogue cops are the norm in Mexico, we shouldn't have to suffer them here.
True, and either way, the story does not have a happy ending for use as a smear
1. A AST had a vile temper and made threats that were documented, after a thorough investigation he was terminated.
2. Pallin, concerned for her sister’s safety took action to protect her sister from her violent husband.
So 1 being the case, it is a cross the “T” and dot “I” situation, if 2 took place, the alternative would be “She should have let her sister be abused” which would make for a absurd story line.
Not that the Media wouldn’t spin it like that, it would be impossible to sell that line of thought to anyone but Olberman viewers and the Koz Boyz...