Posted on 06/18/2009 11:54:03 AM PDT by MaestroLC
A top White House lawyer called the firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin an act of "political courage," according to House Republican aides who were in a meeting with the lawyer Wednesday.
Norman Eisen, who is the White House Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform, met with staffers for Rep. Darrell Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Wednesday. Eisen, along with another White House staffer who accompanied him, "wanted to talk broadly about inspectors general," says a GOP aide familiar with what went on at the meeting. "When we pressed them on specific questions and documents, they said they weren't prepared to give us information on that."
In one exchange, according to the GOP aide, the White House lawyers explained that inspector general Walpin was not working well with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, and the administration believed that IGs should work well with the leadership of their agencies. Eisen said he knew that removing Walpin might be seen as an action that would raise questions. "But [Eisen] said that what they did in trying to fix the situation was an act of political courage -- and 'political courage' is the phrase they used," says the aide.
Republicans, along with a few Democrats, have been concerned about the White House's methods in removing Walpin. The law requires the president to give Congress 30 days' notice, plus the cause for the firing of an inspector general. In Walpin's case, the White House called Walpin out of the blue, gave him one hour either to resign or be fired, and only later notified Congress, and then without giving any cause for its action. Only later, after a lone Democrat, Sen. Claire McCaskill, said the White House "failed to follow the proper procedure" and
On the other hand, firing the IG without notice OR cause is against the law. BO's own law. Whether or not it is constitutional is immaterial, because BO certainly believed it was constitutional, or he wouldn't have sponsored it....Righhhhht! 'Nuf said.
Norman Eisen wouldn’t understand ethics or accountability if they smacked him up side the head. Look for many more jutifications for theft, murder, graft and corruption from this guy as the Obama Regime continues to unravel and reveal its true nature.
The list, ping
>>In one exchange, according to the GOP aide, the White House lawyers explained that inspector general Walpin was not working well with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, and the administration believed that IGs should work well with the leadership of their agencies.<<
From yesterday’s Washington Times:
“By the staff member/witness’s account, later independently confirmed by Mr. Walpin, the IG had been working around the clock before the meeting, overseeing reports and reactions thereto concerning a case in Sacramento embarrassing to a close Obama ally and a case in New York highly embarrassing to board itself of the Corporation for National and Community Service. By both independent accounts, Mr. Walpin opened the meeting by chastising the board for particularly weak oversight of the grants, involving the Teaching Fellows program of the City University of New York. By both accounts, the board met Mr. Walpin’s report with considerable hostility and repeated interruptions, during which the questions ranged without much logical order over several different topics.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2009/jun/17/ig-witness-blows-white-house-excuse/
Well it’s tough to have a good relationship with a board when your job requires that you tell them they are failing in their roles as board members. I guess they want an IG that gives them happy talk and looks the other way. Unfortunately that’s not what IGs are for. Political courage is when your IG is telling your political friends that they are wrong and you stand up for the IG.
Washington DC = Chicago South
Yes, they are desensitizing us through the media so they can do whatever they want, when they want. No media questions, keep changing the words and meanings, the sheep stay in line.
Speaking of age (sort of) this ruling today....
High court rules against exec in West Des Moines age case
The U.S. Supreme Court has made it harder to prove discrimination on the basis of age, ruling against an employee in his mid-50s who says he was demoted because of his age.
In a 5-4 decision today written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court said a worker has to prove that age was the key factor in an employment decision, even if there is some evidence that age played a role. In some other discrimination lawsuits, the burden of proof shifts to the employer once a worker shows there is some reason to believe a decision was made for improper reasons.
Cheering foreseen by Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and Iran.
Cheering foreseen by Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and Iran.
Oops, sorry for double post.
So the branding continues.
By next week they will have found someone to say that he has frowned at a black person at some point in his life, and then he will be branded a racist.
They didn't like his exposure of their corruption...
Dubya said HE didn't fire the US Attorneys. We still don't know who made the firing decision. So, the question "Was it illegal for Dubya to fire those attorneys?" misses one of the points of controversy altogether.
With regard to the Walpin removal, Greg Craig, WH Counsel, is arguing that it's legal to remove them as long as he pays them 30 days. My issue isn't the 30 days, that's a diversion from probing the point that the real reason for removal of independent oversight is to bury corruption by cronies.
What's funny is the reaction by Senator McCaskill. She was all pissed off, now she thinks the reasons given are good.
I'm not a fan of Grassley, but he's doing excellent work on this issue; and on reflection, he seems to be very consistent in providing forthright advocacy for whistleblowers.
>> They didn’t like his exposure of their corruption...
Yeah, the nerve of that guy... actually doing his job.
“...the White House lawyers explained that inspector general Walpin was not working well with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, and the administration believed that IGs should work well with the leadership of their agencies.”
Wow, is that a wrong premise!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.