Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Todd Palin, Creepy "First Stalker"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-13-08 03:04 PM
Original message
Todd Palin, Creepy "First Stalker"

by Kagro X

Mon Oct 13, 2008 at 07:35:13 AM PDT

Yes, we already knew that Todd Palin might be so creepily obsessed with Mike Wooten that questioning his mental stability might be fair game. After all, in his frenzied vendetta aimed at destroying the life of the man who dared to cross Sarahcuda, he inexplicably inserted himself into Wooten's worker's compensation claims, trying to deny him payment for an injury sustained on the job, even going so far as to stalk Wooten and photograph him riding a snow machine, hoping that would disprove his injury claims and cost him his compensation.

The Branchflower report (PDF) adds a new detail or two that show just how warped Palin's crusade was. For instance, it turns out that Todd followed Wooten 100 miles off the road in order to secretly photograph him during the snow machine trip that supposedly disproved his worker's comp claims. (It didn't. The trip was actually pre-approved by Wooten's doctor.)

It also included this equally intrusive (and equally baseless) gem: that Wooten "had been seen" dropping his kids off at school in him patrol car at 8:01 a.m. Yes, the report notes the creepiness of the fact that the time is noted that precisely. And yes, it turns out that this activity, too, was pre-approved, this time by Wooten's supervisor. Crazy-ass Todd Palin appears to have spent an awful lot of time trying to frame Wooten up for "violations" that Wooten was actually meticulous about having pre-approved, don't you think?

And how about this one? Todd, Sarah and her dad had been after Wooten's job for some time already by the time election day 2006 rolled around, so this vendetta predated her gubernatorial victory. But check this bit out: Palin was elected on November 7, 2006. On November 8th, Todd called Wasilla Chief of Police John Glass to discuss Wooten. Remember, Wooten was a State Trooper, not a Wasilla municipal officer. Turns out, Palin was calling Glass to tell him what a bad guy Wooten was, and to say that he wanted to make sure Wooten was never hired onto the Wasilla force.

What does that tell you?

November 7th, Sarah Palin is elected governor. November 8th, Todd Palin is already trying to sabotage Trooper Wooten's next possible job. Sarah's been governor-elect for all of one day, and Todd's already licking his lips at the prospect of improperly using state government resources to fire him -- and to block him from working for anyone else, too.

This is one sick puppy, folks.

And what's it all for, anyway? The report has some interesting things to say on that front, too. For one thing, there's this bit of news regarding the Palins' claim that they feared for their safety. When the Palins were interviewed to prepare for setting up their security detail shortly after Sarah's election, they were asked whether they knew of any specific threats to their safety.

Their answer? Nope.

The Palins apparently didn't "fear" Wooten until they found themselves in need of a story for the subordinates they were illegally pressuring to fire him. And indeed, Branchflower concludes:

he evidence presented has been inconsistent with such claims of fear. The testimony from Trooper Wheeler, who was part of her security detail from the start, was that shortly after elected to office, she ordered a substantial reduction in manpower in her personal protection detail in both Anchorage and Juneau, an act that is inconsistent with a desire to avoid harm from Trooper Wooten or others. Moreover, assuming that Trooper Wooten was ever inclined to attack Governor Palin or a family member, logic dictates that getting him fired would accomplish nothing to eliminate the potential for harm to her or her family. On the contrary, it might just precipitate some retaliatory conduct on his part. Causing Wooten to loose his job would not have de-escalated the situation, or provided her or her family with greater security.

Uh... yeah.

And not only that. This stupid, myopic and vindictive crusade actually came back to hurt Sarah's sister's claims in her divorce, too. When it came time to settle the issues of division or property and child support, here's what the judge in the Wootens' divorce case had to say:

On the other hand, Mr. Wooten is now challenged in his income earning ability. He's making in that $60,000 range, but he may be headed south to more like a $50,000 guy, and that's, at least in part, because it appears for the world that Ms. McCann and her family have decided to take off with the guy's livelihood, that the bitterness of whatever who did what to whom has overridden good judgment. Aesop told us not to slay the goose who lays the golden egg. For whatever reason, people are trying to slay the goose here and it tends to diminish his earning capacity.

I think it's tragic that -- you know, if I thought Mr. Wooten was in-like-Flynn with the Alaska State Troopers from now until the cows come home, you might have a different outcome here. But, the Plaintiffs table has created a situation where that is a very fragile outcome. So, I'm not going to assume it.

Holy shit, these people are dumb as all fuck. They just cannot help themselves. They're like spoiled children, and now, they want the entire United States to suffer under their vindictive stupidity.

Can you even imagine the disasters in store for us if these guileless, instant gratification-addicted, tantrum pitchers get installed in Washington, with the national security apparatus at their command?

::
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/13/10352/387/784/627716
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC