Two things come immediately to mind. First the report includes as evidence of her violation of Alaska ethics law actions she took before she was governor. Secondly the report never does state just how she benefited or her family benefited from her actions or how her actions were actually detrimental to Wooten. Calling up and requesting status reports and saying why you think someone is unfit to serve is sure as hell not the same as trying to illegally or unethically influence a course of action. No one said that they made a finding because they feared retribution by Palin or because they had been promised compensation for doing so. So where the hell is this so called violation?
Also what the heck does a divorce judge’s snarky remark about Palin’s sister’s earning capacity and Wooten’s possible job loss have to do with anything at all. That should be stricken from the record as irrelevant. I mean is Branchflower claiming this is proof that Palin was using her office to get Wooten fired?
The whole thing is major BS and I hope Palin strongly rebukes the findings.
There is relevance in some cases, in pointing out inconsistencies.
Secondly the report never does state just how she benefited or her family benefited from her actions or how her actions were actually detrimental to Wooten.
The law just requires an "effort," not any actual benefit resulting.
Note also that he DID acknowledge the frustration of not being able to find out the status of the investigation, and recommended legislation that would have helped Gov. Palin's family.