Palin Contradicts Palin on Troopergate Explanation

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


palin-motorcycle-250x200.jpg

As part of an effort to beat back the investigation into whether Governor Sarah Palin fired Alaska’s public safety directory Walt Monegan because he refused to dismiss a state trooper involved in an ugly divorce with her sister, Palin’s attorney filed papers on Monday claiming that Palin fired Monegan because of his “outright insubordination” regarding policy and budgetary matters. The problem with this explanation: it directly contradicts Palin’s own story.

In mid-August, Palin spoke with New Yorker writer Philip Gourevitch, who was in Alaska–prior to Palin being named John McCain’s running-mate–to do a piece on “the peculiar political landscape” of the state. During his time there, the controversy regarding Monegan’s dismissal was in the news in Alaska. And Gourevitch asked Palin about it:

[Palin] said that one of her goals had been to combat alcohol abuse in rural Alaska, and she blamed Commissioner Monegan for failing to address the problem. That, she said, was a big reason that she’d let him go–only, by her account, she didn’t fire him, exactly. Rather, she asked him to drop everything else and single-mindedly take on the state’s drinking problem, as the director of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board. “It was a job that was open, commensurate in salary pretty much–ten thousand dollars less”–but, she added, Monegan hadn’t wanted the job, so he left state service; he quit.

In Palin’s telling–before any of this was of national interest–Monegan’s departure from the post had nothing to do with Troopergate and, in fact, he hadn’t even been fired. She had asked him to switch jobs; he had left state employment on his own accord.

Yet on Monday, the Palin side offered a much different tale. In a 19-page brief, Palin’s lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, contended that Monegan, while public safety commissioner, engaged in “an escalating pattern of insubordination on budget and other key policy issues.” Van Flein claimed Monegan had gone behind Palin’s back to work with state Senator Hollis French, a Democrat who is now leading the Troopergate investigation, on the budget for his department. And Van Flein maintained that Monegan’s “firing”–note the use of that word–came after Monegan planned a trip to Washington, DC, to seek funds for a project to combat sexual assault, an initiative that had not yet been approved by Palin.

Responding to Van Flein’s brief, Monegan said he has provided records to the Troopergate investigator, Steve Branchflower, about his tenure as commissioner, and he has continued to claim he was ousted by Palin because he refused to fire Palin’s ex-brother-in-law.

It is hard to square Palin’s mid-August explanation with the recent brief. Talking to Gourevitch, she suggested Monegan had not really been fired; the brief says he had. She said she wanted Monegan to take on a top-priority in another job; the brief says he was an insubordinate employee who could not be trusted. Would you give such a fellow another important job?

This is not the first Palin contradiction in this episode. She initially vowed to cooperate with the investigation. But after state legislators last week voted to issue 13 subpoenas in the case–including one for Palin’s husband, Todd–the McCain-Palin campaign on Monday said the investigation was “tainted” and Palin was “unlikely to cooperate with it.” (The subpoenas covered many top Palin aides, as well as the head of a company that handles worker’s compensation claims for the state. Branchflower told the legislators he had preliminary evidence that a Palin aide had pushed to cut off benefits to Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, Mike Wooten.)

Palin supporters are now dismissing the inquiry as a politicized probe. (Her lawyer has asked that the inquiry be conducted by a personnel board that is controlled by the governor.) And a family matter that became a state matter is now a national matter, with spinners and lawyers trying to influence the outcome, and the McCain-Palin campaign looking to kill the legislative investigation. In the days after Palin became the Republican Party’s nominee for vice president, it was unclear how Troopergate might affect the GOP ticket. Did the McCain-Palin campaign really have much to worry about? Given Palin’s conflicting explanations of Monegan’s dismissal, there’s now more reason to believe she does have cause for concern.

Photo from flickr user Ligadier Truffaut used under a Creative Commons license.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate