The bi-partisan committee unanimously authorized the independent investigaton.
Hollis French is their "implementer." They can rein him in, or assign his duties elsewhere whenever they want. I am an "implementer" for a governing agency. The Board sets policy, some of which I implement. The Board can ask me to design the program differently if they want and, at their whim, they could pull the program from my control, or cancel large portions of it. Fortunaely, the Board doesn't act so capriciously, but they can and they would if they felt it needed to be done. ---------------- This is about as bi-partisan of an investigation of a politicians ethics I've ever seen. They have gone out of their way to make it so. On Sep 15, 8:56 pm, "d.b.baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The so-called "independent" investigator is getting his marching > orders from a Dem senator who supports Barack Obama (i.e., Sen. Hollis > French). > > On Sep 15, 11:46 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > d.b > > > How would you define an "independent" investgator? According to you a > > Democrat would be biased and partisan, logic dictates a Republican > > would be also. So, who do you suggest? How about investigatoes from > > the National Inquirer? Either way it turns out they get headlines and > > that's all they care about. > > > On Sep 15, 10:21 pm, "d.b.baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > [Q] - I have run across some very explosive audio from an Alaska Joint > > > Judicial Committee Hearing. What you will hear is the committee > > > discussing who's really running the investigation. One of the > > > committee members tells the "independent" investigator Branchflower > > > that he has the right to put someone on the subpoena list who was > > > omitted for some reason. However, investigator Branchflower refuses to > > > do so, saying that he must consult with Mr. French, the Alaskan > > > Democratic Senator leading the "troopergate" investigation. This > > > confuses the committee member, who wonders why he has to consult with > > > Hollis French at all. Does that mean Hollis French, a partisan > > > Democrat and Obama supporter, is putting the list together for > > > political purposes? If that is so, then it seems this is much more > > > than just a deep conflict of interest. > > > > Here is the audio: > > > > Why does Mr. French have any say in putting the subpoena list > > > together? How independent is an investigation being run by a partisan > > > Alaskan Democrat Senator, Hollis French? Aren't the political > > > motivations of Mr. French too strong to run a fair investigation? Is > > > he using it to promote his career and the agenda of the extreme Left, > > > which is to destroy Sarah Palin at all costs? As you can hear in the > > > audio, it is extremely fishy to say the least. This is looking more > > > and more like a partisan witchhunt. > > > -http://blog1.thejtandbearshow.com/2008/09/14/explosive-audio-in-palin...- > > > Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
