Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Racism? Be sure to read the links.
1 posted on 06/14/2009 6:51:54 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: STARWISE; maggief; Liz; SE Mom; Miss Didi

PING!!


2 posted on 06/14/2009 6:53:57 AM PDT by penelopesire ("The only CHANGE you will get with the Democrats is the CHANGE left in your pocket")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: holdonnow; HonestConservative; rodguy911

ping


3 posted on 06/14/2009 7:03:51 AM PDT by AliVeritas ( Pray, Pray, Pray)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe

$850K buys a lot of car washes!


4 posted on 06/14/2009 7:07:23 AM PDT by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe
Walpin's run in with the acting US Attorney in Sacramento is critical to any understanding of what's going on.

Mr. Brown, the acting prosecutor, said Walpin hadn't come up with a prosecutable offense on the part of the major Obama donor.

Now, what's a prosecutable offense? When it comes to the DOJ that means the US government isn't going to go to court for something (other than a violent crime within federal jurisdiction) that doesn't reach a certain dollar value. Years ago I had a problem with them when they wanted to kick a multi million dollar claim against AARP back to 10 cents on the dollar ~ that would take it under the then standard of $250,000 and no court time would be needed.

I believe the standard is higher these days. So what Mr. Brown did was real quick wrap up the $800,000 (app) claim against the major donor by accepting a deal. The donor would pay $400,000 now and $400,000 later (over time).

By leaving only $400,000 outstanding Mr. Brown effectively took the amount at dispute below the level of current DOJ standards whatever they are.

Mr. Walpin undoubtedly thought this was not kosher and continued to protest ~ in public.

Brown then filed an ethics complaint against Walpin. A committee charged with the responsibility for doing such things met (bunch of Eric Holder's buddies by now), said Mr. Walpin was elementally evil and trashed him.

Obama took the opportunity to fire another Republican buried in his regime.

No doubt Obama's "truth squad" thugs are busy looking for such people ~ they even come into FR and try to engage us in debates with their talking points so that they can trip up any current federal employees.

At the same time I don't think Obama went looking for Walpin on behalf of his buddy ~ although his wife undoubtedly wanted him to do that ~ but he seems to have not had to do that.

Mr. Brown and Mr. Walpin are apparently both Republicans. However, Mr. Brown is the President of an association of Prosecutors (et al) in the Eastern District of Northern California, that is, Sacramento, and has a political life, albeit not in partisan affairs. Still, I'd bet in that position he gets news on all the cases involving the rich and famous in that district long before others, and he knew this was about a major Obama donor.

Mr. Walpin probably believes Mr. Brown to be a major league a$$ki$$er (which is where all the evidence points as well).

It's the circular firing squad we should be worried about. Walpin and Brown should have been working together to drag Obamista donors into court.

I fault Mr. Brown in this dispute.

5 posted on 06/14/2009 7:10:50 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe
Mr. Dunham needs to reread "The Rules of Digging a Hole for Yourself"...especially Rule #1...STOP DIGGING!
But, then again, the claim is that he's articulate, not literate.
6 posted on 06/14/2009 7:14:40 AM PDT by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe
This should be a very interesting story and hard for the MSM to ignore, since it has lots of juicy pieces:

(1) A former NBA star is involved.

(2) The President appears to have tried to bully Walpin into a quick resignation.

(3) The accused Inspector General was investigating a big Obama supporter.

(4) The acting US Attorney is accusing the Inspector General of misconduct.

(5) The accused charitable agency has agreed to pay back $400,000 to the government and made no effort to deny wrongdoing.

(6) No one involved has a clean exit strategy, so there will be a lot of the “he said / she said” dialog that talking heads love to play.

But since this involves Obama, there will be nearly zero coverage.

10 posted on 06/14/2009 7:24:33 AM PDT by Senator_Blutarski (No good deed goes unpunished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe
Walpin, pointing out that he is not a political appointee and does not serve at the President's pleasure, declined to do so. So Obama fired him. By statute, Obama is required to give Congress 30 days' written notice of his intention to fire an inspector general and set forth his reasons for doing so. Obama failed to comply with that aspect of the statute, merely saying that Walpin no longer has the President's "fullest confidence." That would be sufficient reason to replace a political appointee, but not to fire an inspector general.

Law? Obama is above the law. Didn't you here that he won the election?

He's a legend in his own mind.

15 posted on 06/14/2009 11:37:41 AM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe

I wish, that I could say, that I am shocked.

However, this is just part of the change.


16 posted on 06/14/2009 1:34:20 PM PDT by razorback-bert (We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe

Does what is known of this episode (apparent violation of law, for questionable purposes) amount to “an impeachable offense”?


17 posted on 06/14/2009 3:11:57 PM PDT by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yoe

Damn! It’s time to fire that incompetent in the WH.


19 posted on 06/15/2009 12:33:39 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson