In 2006, President Bush fired eight U.S. Attorneys. It was within the rights of the executive branch to fire those attorneys, who serve at the pleasure of the President. Bush did not have to give a reason or provide cause to fire them. Following those firings, there have been 2 1/2 years of accusations, scandal, and investigations of the Bush administration. The investigations continue to this day.
Then the great CHANGE occurred, and Barack Obama became President Of The United States. Things would be different now. No longer would people be hired or fired for political reasons.
And then Obama fired Gerald Walpin, the Inspector General Of The Corporation For National And Community Sevice (he was the watchdog over Americorps and other national service organizations). It was Mr. Walpin's job to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and that's what he did. Among other mishandlings of taxpayer funds he ferreted out, in 2008 Walpin discovered that St. Hope Academy had misused a large share of over $800,000 it had received in taxpayer funds. The CEO of St. Hope Academy was Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, a former NBA star and big-time Obama supporter. Johnson and St. Hope were barred from receving further federal funds. So far so good. Things were working as they should. You defraud the taxpayers, you pay the price. Walpin was doing his job.
Then, on April 9, 2009, the Acting U.S. Attorney for California's Eastern District, Lawrence G. Brown, cut Kevin Johnson a deal. Here are some of the details:
Acting United States Attorney Lawrence G. Brown announced today that St. HOPE Academy has agreed to pay $423,836.50 to settle allegations that St. HOPE did not appropriately spend AmeriCorps grant awards and education awards in accordance with the terms of grant requirements and did not adequately document its expenditures of grant awards. The amount of the civil settlement represents one-half of the $847,673 in AmeriCorps grant funds received by St. HOPE Academy…The lifting of the suspension against all parties, including Mayor Johnson, removes any cloud whether the City of Sacramento will be prevented from receiving much-needed federal stimulus funds,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Brown…St. HOPE will make an initial payment of $73,836.50 by electronic transfer within five business days from today…Kevin Johnson will pay $72,836.50 of the initial payment by St. HOPE, with possible repayment to Johnson by St. HOPE when it is financially able to do so…St. HOPE has entered into a stipulated judgment for $350,000.00, plus five percent annual interest, payable at $35,000 annually for 10 years.
Let's put this into perspective. Kevin Johnson and St. Hope Academy bilked the taxpayers out of over $400,000. Their penalty ? Pay it back, and they get 10 years to do it. That's it. No further punishment, and their right to receive more taxpayer money is restored. Do any readers out there think they'd get a similar deal for defrauding over $400,000 ? No, me neither. It's good to have friends in high places, and Kevin Johnson certainly has them. And if you noticed, Kevin Johnson ends up paying NOTHING out of his pocket. He gets reimbursed for the money he pays back, even though the original misspent Americorps funds included personal services performed for Kevin Johnson. Even worse, St. Hope Academy is a NON-PROFIT organization, so their future funding, the money they will use to PAY BACK the money they defrauded the taxpayers out of, will come from FUTURE TAXPAYER MONEY endowed upon them by Barack Obama (who, btw, increased Americorps funding by $5 billion, because, you know, the American economic situation is SO GOOD right now. That's Obama's idea of fiscal responsibility).
When Gerald Walpin found out about the sweet deal that Kevin Johnson and St. Hope Academy received for their criminal behavior, he objected in a May 13, 2009 letter to Congress that the settlment reeked of impropriety. Walpin urged Congress to act.
It appears Walpin ruffled the wrong feathers, the feathers of power, because Walpin was fired. He received a phone call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Reform, notifying him that he had one hour to resign or be canned. Walpin, who had not only finished a report on misuse of funds by St. Hope, but who had also just finished a report of misuse of funds by the City University Of New York, Americorps biggest program, told Eisen he thought the timing of his firing was "very interesting." Eisien replied that is was a "pure coincidence." Sure.
Here's the problem. Gerald Walpin didn't serve at the pleasure of the President, as did those U.S. Attorneys who were fired by George W. Bush. According to the 2008 Inspectors General Reform Act (that Senator Obama CO-SPONSORED), the President must give Congress 30 days notice and a sufficient cause to fire an Inspector General. Obama had done neither, and was in violation for firing Walpin. Obama's intial explanation was that he lost confidence in Walpin, which, as Walpin himself noted "is a conclusion, not a cause."
Some members of Congress, including Democrat Claire McCaskill, objected. So did members of the conservative media. That prompted a second explanation from President Obama of why Walpin was fired, so Obama would be within the law. Eisen wrote a letter to Congress as follows:
“Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation ,” Obama ethics counsel Norm Eisen wrote in a letter to senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Me.), with a copy directed to McCaskill. “The Board’s action was precipitated by a May 20, 2009 Board meeting at which Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the Board to question his capacity to serve.”
They are practically saying the 77-year old Walpin is senile. But if you read Walpin's letter to Congress in May, or his other reports on St. Hope or CUNY, he hardly seems senile. He seems quite clear and precise. He also didn't sound at all senile during a Fox News roundtable discussion on the issue.
And even if Walpin had some kind of medical problem during that May 20th meeting that affected his mental abilities, how EMPATHETIC is it for Obama to fire him over it ? Not at all. It's cold-hearted as hell. How about they recommend that Walpin go see a doctor instead ? Of course, they didn't do that, because they didn't fire Walpin for cause, they just made up a cause. They fired him for political reasons, because Walpin the watchdog was blowing the whistle in places the Obama administration didn't want it to be blown – on Obama's cronies, on Obama's pet projects. That's sure how it looks to me.
Walpin is fighting back. He refused to resign and has described Obama's alleged "cause" for firing him as "outrageous," "smears," and "total lies." Good for him.
How long do you think the investigation into the Walpin firing will be ? 2 1/2 years and counting, like the Bush attorney investigation, or ZIP ? I'm going with zip, because, you know, Obama is a Democrat, and we don't really want to waste our time investigating Democrats these days. That's "non-productive," just like it was when Congress decided there shouldn't be any investigation into Nancy Pelosi's accusation that the CIA lies to Congress all the time. Who cares if the CIA is lying ? Much ado about nothing. It's only our national security at stake. But Bush firing those attorneys, which he had every legal right to do, well, that's BIG. Somehow.
{ 35 comments… read them below or add one }
King, this Democrat party with the left media is the most corrupt, lying, promise breaking administration in the history of our country. Obama does nothing but lies and breaks promises to his constituents and pushes forth with the agenda of his backers. He is killing the middle class and blaming it on Bush, this is BS and he will be found out as will the rest of the scammers. No one will confront BO because of the racial accusations that would befall them. I watched Dodd and Frank tonight in an interview tonight on CSPAN. They are about as smart as Biden. Both half-wits. When this administration and congress is finished Bush – Cheny will look like the best leaders in the history of the US.
Obama is worse than Nixon when it comes to "politics."
You'd think the president would have more important issues to think about than $800,000 in gov't waste, but getting all the oars in the water over at Americorps is pretty important to his Hitleresque plans for an Obama-youth force "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military.
It's in the pipeline:
"The first step was the passage of HR 1388, "The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act," originally titled the GIVE (Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education) Act before the Senate renamed it as a tribute to the "Lion of Liberalism." It triples AmeriCorps from 75,000 to 250,000. The second step is HR 1444, not yet passed, which would establish a Congressional Commission on Civic Service. The commission would "address and analyze" the effects on the nation and on those who serve "if all individuals in the United States … were required to perform a certain amount of national service" and "whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all young people could be developed."
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_12373299
Obama learned his lessons well in Chicago. Daley must be so proud.
Rather than going all knee-jerk, Fox-conspiracy ballistic, King should examine all the evidence before passing out the tin foil hats….
"Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation. The Board's action was precipitated by a May 20, 2009 Board meeting at which Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the Board to question his capacity to serve. Upon our review, we also determined that the Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, a career prosecutor who was appointed to his post during the Bush Administration, had filed a complaint about Mr. Walpin's conduct with the oversight body for the Inspectors General, including for failing to disclose exculpatory evidence. We further learned that Mr. Walpin had been absent from the Corporation's headquarters, insisting upon working form his home in New York over the objections of the Corporation's Board; that he had exhibited a lack of candor in providing material information to decision makers; and he had engaged in other troubling and inappropriate conduct. Mr. Walpin had become unduly disruptive to agency operations, impairing his effectiveness and, for the reasons stated above, losing the confidence of the Board and the agency. It was for these reasons that Mr. Walpin was removed."
http://mediamatters.org/research/200906170037
I realize that conservatives are not used to straight-forward dealings from a president….but it's kind of embarassing to scape the conspiracy dumpster and come up empty.
Laughably, King seeks equivalency with this non-issue over a 77 year old trouble maker…..and the obstruction of justice case of Rove and Miers removing U.S. Attorneys to gain political advantage for the GOP.
And larry….I never expected you would be against national service. Who knew? It's okay for military servicemen to invade and occupy a country posing no threat to us…..costing a trillion or so and producing absolutely nothing…..but it's some Third Reich conspiracy for a trifling amount to be spent on young Americans actually, you know, helping the nation here at home?
I'm glad to see you think the defense budget is trifling, Reverend.
And weren't you the one who told me there's no way Obama would push for "mandatory" volunteer service? I wonder if they'll give the kids those evil-looking knives like the Nazis did?
I noticed Rev that your MediaMatters didn't attempt to deal with the fact that
Walpin was fired by Obama outside the law that Obama had pushed so hard for to keep Bush from firing Inspectors General. I wonder why they didn't even mention the fact that he violated that law that he had sponsored and in fact pushed for. Of course, we both know why they didn't mention that fact so we don't need to discuss it.
King, I am proud of you for taking those Obamas on for trying so hard to rid us of that nasty, senile, old man. I have seen him talking on Fox more than once and especially liked to hear him say that although all he could get from facing up to Obama would be more smear tactics he was going to do it anyway.
I certainly hated to see that KJ was at the center of this crap but his Academy is surely part of the AmeriCorps scandal and I hope that the courts get him a bit more than what that "Bush appointee" gave him as punishment for wasting grant money.
We must see that Rev Red is only wanting this to be political and refuses to admit that money misspent should be repaid to the government. That would take in lots of people of the non-profit group that get all their money from AmericaCorps, like Obama's own creation, Public Allies, need to be investigated by somebody other than people controlled by Obama and his people.
I noticed that you're back, roy, from an 8 year long hiatus of slumber on this fiscal responsibility stuff. Hope you're sufficiently rested to protect the country from frivolous spending.
also from mediamatters……..On June 17, following the White House's release of the letter detailing the rationale behind its decision to remove Walpin, McCaskill released a second statement that read:
McCaskill expressed disappointment that the White House initially failed to follow proper procedure by not giving the reasons for Walpin's removal; however, the additional information provided late Tuesday in a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee put the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law. The law was authored by McCaskill and requires the president to give Congress 30 days advance notice of an IG's dismissal, along with reasons for the termination.
"Last night, in response to my request for adequate information on the firing of Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service Gerald Walpin, the White House submitted a letter to Senators Lieberman and Collins that now puts the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law. The next step for Congress is to use the 30 days provided by the notice to seek further information and undertake any further review that might be necessary. The reasons given in the most recent White House letter are substantial and the decision to remove Walpin appears well founded."
You know, NASCAR has never released what substance was found in Jeremy Mayfield's blood test that got him suspended for life. They cited privacy. We now know that Walprin's ship has pretty much slipped from it's moorings. It might be medical. Should Obama have kept it quite?
That 77 yo driving that 5000 lb Caddilac thru the school zone becomes confused and disoriented…..should we have empathy for him?
Damn,
Kevin Johbnson has always been one of the few professional athletes I have greatly admired. It started by him refusing to go to NY for the draft because he wanted to share the moment with his grandparents that raised him. Once in the league he donated not just large sums of money to his community but as much of his time as he could spare. He was so dedicated to helping the poor youth that were headed for a life of misery. Please Kevin tell me it aint so.
Anybody who has observed Walpin on numerous television appearances or read his numerous reports knows that the "he's senile" cause cited by Obama is bogus. That's obvious. It is supported additionally by the fact that Walpin's employers had him give a big oral presentation two days AFTER that May 20th meeting at which he was allegedly disoriented. They wouldn't have done that if Walpin was mentally deficient.
As for Walpin working from home, that is the deal he worked out with the government's approval. That alleged cause is also bogus. If the board had changed their minds about that, all they had to do was tell Walpin to come into the office more. That is no justification to fire him.
The CNCS board asked for a REVIEW of Walpin, and then Walpin was summarily fired (one hour to resign or be fired) without having a chance to face his critics or answer any of the allegations against him. The Reverend thinks this is just. I do not.
That stuff about Walpin "failing to disclose exculpatory evidence" is downright hilarious. St. Hope and Kevin Johnson had already been found to be guilty.
The complaint from the U.S. Attorney from California is also ridiculous. He's the VERY GUY who gave Kevin Johnson and St. Hope the sweetheart settlement that let them get off scott free for defrauding the taxpayers (and let them get MORE taxpayer dollars), the very guy Walpin was complaining about himself. If anyone's conduct should be reviewed, it should be that U.S. Attorney's.
As always, the Rev erects his gigantic double standard – if a GOPer does it, he's guilty as hell. If a Dem does it, no problem, nothing to see here.
It's also informative to hear that the Rev approves of the New Hitler Youth program that Obama intends to pursue – forced national service. That pretty much says it all. I guess, to paraphrase Kris Kristofferson, freedom soon will be just another word for nothing left to lose.
Da King first sez….."They are practically saying the 77-year old Walpin is senile."
he then sez……"that the "he's senile" cause cited by Obama is bogus."
where has anyone said "he's senile" as a cause for his dismissal?
I would agree it might be medical. But should (or could) we drag this guys medical records into full public view?
When a 77-year old is fired for being "confused" and "disoriented," the meaning is pretty clear.
Of course I wouldn't be for putting his medical records in public, but if there is any truth to Walpin being mentally unfocused at that one meeting, the proper response isn't to fire him, it's to have him examined by a doctor. It goes without saying that a person shouldn't be fired for getting sick. The reasons for Walpin's firing seem like nothing but cheap political subterfuge to me. That Walpin was outing Obama's cronies, and Obama and company didn't like it seems a lot more plausible.
when you put quotation marks around he's senile I thought you had an actual quote from somebody.
I would tend to agree with you……there is only one way to answer your charges……open up Walpin's medical records.
King, it's the same as Bush firing the Lawyers. It happened because it could. No investigation required, it was done at their whim because they were allowed to do it and Obama wanted his own guy in there. Confusion is just the excuse they will use. If they are going to use confusion as the excuse, why not get rid of Biden also, or Ted Kennedy or Dodd.
Da King sez…….."That stuff about Walpin "failing to disclose exculpatory evidence" is downright hilarious. St. Hope and Kevin Johnson had already been found to be guilty."
with holding evidence is wrong….period. No ands, if or buts
Da King…..I'm with averagejoe here……….why are you whining about Obama firing this guy when Bush/Cheney/Boehner did the exact same thing
Problem here is….King's take is entirely misguided….
"The second board member said that the board had unanimously directed its chair, Alan Solomont, to inform the White House of the board's serious concerns about Walpin's performance, and that Solomont had done so.
"No action would have been taken if the board had not, on a bipartisan basis, directed the chairman" to talk to the White House, said the second board member. The move was "entirely unanimous — no division at all."
As for what had caused the board's concerns in the first place, the second board member again echoed the first, saying that the board had had worries about Walpin since before the May 20 meeting, but called his performance at the meeting, "the capper."
At that meeting, said the second board member, Walpin made "ad hominem attacks on individuals that we thought were completely uncalled for." The second board member declined to elaborate on the nature of those attacks.
The second board member also referred to an investigation of the IG's office conducted by staff for CNCS's Equal Employment Opportunity unit, after a complaint. The second board member said that, according to the staffers conducting the probe, Walpin's response to the investigation had been "intimidating." The second board member claimed to be unaware of the nature of the original complaint."
Read first hand accounts here….http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/americorps_board_member_we_initiated_ig_firing.php?
Why didn't Obama give the 30 days notice? Why have they come out with two different stories after having no story initially?
Must be a conspiracy, huh?
What it is….is grasping for straws to bash with.
As far as this wingnut tantrum goes…..there really isn't anything to look at….move along.
Conservatives, though they can't see it, are humiliating themselves more and more each day with their trivialities and silliness. And don't forget the hypocrisy….Sen. Ensign won't.
I guess you can't answer the questions, then. This one's a classic, though:
"humiliating themselves more and more each day with their trivialities and silliness. And don't forget the hypocrisy….Sen. Ensign won't."
In three short words at the end and you've painted yourself everything you're complaining about–trivial, silly and hypocritical. You've got a gift, Reverend.
McCaskill released a second statement that read:
"Last night, in response to my request for adequate information on the firing of Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service Gerald Walpin, the White House submitted a letter to Senators Lieberman and Collins that now puts the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law. The next step for Congress is to use the 30 days provided by the notice to seek further information and undertake any further review that might be necessary. The reasons given in the most recent White House letter are substantial and the decision to remove Walpin appears well founded."
larry, I'm not sure that you or King understand the firing process. Let's take an example……your truck driver comes in drunk. You fire him for coming to work drunk. Do you let him take the truck out to make his deliveries? No, you take him off the job.
Walpin has been fired and taken off the job. Congress has 30 days to review his firing. He doesn't get to stay on the job for that 30 days. You don't have to give congress thirty days notice BEFORE you fire them and get them off the job…..that makes absolutly no sense.
Go read this…
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/06/19/walpin/
My God, King you have surely brought Rev Red out of his hiding place. First he comes along with the crap from mediamatters then tpmuckraker and finally salon. I guess that Kos may be a bit further left than those three but a small bit. When someone does that kind of linking I have to back off a bit. I wonder if his next one will be the blog, Huffington Post. Blog after blog and we are supposed to accept their crap as fact.
Finally Walter comes stomping in saying that the Congressional law that Obama was one of the most influential members pushing it to law doesn't say that he can't fire an inspector general without giving Congress 30 days notice. That is just exactly what that law says has to be done and we find that the firing took place on June 11 but the Congress wasn't informed of same until June 17. The law was violated and by Democrats at that.
These fools that talk about Bush and the lawyer people really haven't realized yet that that one was legal even if it was political and this one is purely political and illegal as it can be.
The number of stories that they have come up with since the 17th is very amazing to me but then that is how they do things. Tell a story and if is isn't accepted then tell another one until you finally get there.
Walter these words from the mediamatters thing that Rev Red slapped on us tell me that they think the man is senile. *** The Board's action was precipitated by a May 20, 2009 Board meeting at which Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the Board to question his capacity to serve.***
Walt, I am 6 months away from being 77 and I think you may have trouble proving me senile but then I am not in a position to get one of Obama's buddies in trouble for misuse of public funds. It is very true that I don't like those non-profit organizations Obama has pushed and founded at least one of but then I just don't like having AmericaCorps deciding who wrote the best grant request.
roybot sez…….."Walt, I am 6 months away from being 77 and I think you may have trouble proving me senile…….."
I NEVER said Walpin was senile. Obama NEVER said Walpin was senile. King quoted someone that said Walpin was senile but never sourced that quote. RR NEVER said Walpin was senile. I suggested it was medical. There are some drugs that I take that makes me lightheaded. I can see how it happens.
Are you telling me that if Walpin was e-mailing naked pictures of himself to young girls from a government computer Obama has to notify congress at least 30 days before firing him? That doesn't make sense…….well……there was Mark Foley and the cover-up by Boehner and Hastert
I'm saying Obama can fire Walpin and then notify congress
this is what Sen McCatskill said……"Last night, in response to my request for adequate information on the firing of Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service Gerald Walpin, the White House submitted a letter to Senators Lieberman and Collins that now puts the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law. The next step for Congress is to use the 30 days provided by the notice to seek further information and undertake any further review that might be necessary."
The law Obama is required to follow when firing an Inspector General says the following:
"Requires the President, the heads of designated federal entities, the Librarian of Congress, the Capitol Police Board, and the Public Printer to communicate to Congress in writing the reasons for removing or transferring an IG no later than 30 days before such removal or transfer."
Yes, it takes 30 days to fire an IG for cause.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2324/show
That's why it's different than Bush firing those U.S. Attorneys. Bush didn't need cause. Those attorneys served at his pleasure. He could replace them whenever he wished.
Roy,
How can you possibly question Media Matters, Tpm, or Salon ? It's not like they have an agenda, lol.
I also love how they keep talking about the "unanimous" board recommendation. It's two people.
again King…….this is what Sen McCatskill said……"Last night, in response to my request for adequate information on the firing of Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service Gerald Walpin, the White House submitted a letter to Senators Lieberman and Collins that now puts the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law. The next step for Congress is to use the 30 days provided by the notice to seek further information and undertake any further review that might be necessary."
the White House submitted a letter to Senators Lieberman and Collins that now puts the White House in full compliance with the notice requirement in the law.
you saying McCatskill is wrong?
Sure Walter. McCaskill's either got amnesia and is wrong or is simply covering for the corrupt administration like the rest of you lemmings.
this from ABC news……….
President Obama Fires Controversial Inspector General
June 12, 2009 1:49 PM
With little public notice, President Obama Thursday fired the Inspector General of the Corporation for National and Community Service, Gerald Walpin.
Saying he was “exercising my power as president,” Mr. Obama suspended Walpin with pay, saying his termination would be “effective 30 days from now.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-fires-controversial-inspector-general-.html
larry, King………happy now?
walter,
Don't try to argue with me about things I never said. You couldn't be more dishonest.
In my original post, I said Obama complied with the law with his second explanation of Walpin's firing.
I was merely pointing out that you were wrong when you said Obama didn't have to give Walpin 30 days and cause in order to fire him. You were wrong.
actually King if honesty were important to you the title of this thread should have been…." President Obama suspends IG Walpin with pay, says Walpin's termination would be “effective 30 days from now.”
Of course a title like that wouldn't have looked bad for the President. Really, isn't it the republicans (like yourself) whole intent is to make the President look bad?
The title accurately portrayed the President's action.
And I'm not a Republican.
"President Obama SUSPENDS IG Walpin with pay"……does that mean he's fired or does " Walpin's termination would be “effective 30 days from now.” means he's fired?
If Walpin collects the 30 days pay and does end up being terminated……does he have to pay back the 30 days pay? Just asking.
King sez….."And I'm not a Republican." Now there's a whopper.
if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…..it's a duck