President Barack Obama (AP Photo)
Posted on 06/22/2009 2:48:23 PM PDT by BP2
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) is seeking information from AmeriCorps about the Walpin firing. The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee is also seeking information on documents that had allegedly been withheld from Neil Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Assets Relief Program (SIGTARP), the $700-billion financial bailout package launched last fall.
Grassley this week also filed a request for all documents that might demonstrate what role the office of First Lady Michelle Obama played in the firing of Walpin, if any. The First lady’s former chief of staff, Jackie Norris, is expected to join AmeriCorps as the senior adviser next week. (See Previous Story.)
Meanwhile, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is asking the administration to provide more information on the AmeriCorps matter.
Regarding his case, Walpin would like to see a congressional investigation to lay out all the facts.
“I would very much like for the American public to know all the facts, instead of how it has so far not been disclosed in response to Sen. Grassley’s and Congressman Issa’s letters,” Walpin said in an interview. “My view is that – as with Teddy Roosevelt – that sunshine is the best disinfectant. I think it is terrible what happened here to the IG, the institution as a whole."
"My firing has a chilling effect on other IGs," he said. "The best way to handle that--aside from President Obama admitting that he made a mistake--is to have a congressional hearing so that all facts can be put out for the public to see.”
He said that he believed the Democratic majority in Congress would support an investigation.
“I have great hopes that Democrats, like Republicans, believe in the integrity of the system and believe that the IG system must be protected,” he said. “I have hopes. I hope they won’t disappoint me.”
An independent office?
The Treasury Department has asked the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to clarify the special inspector general’s legal status within the executive branch.
In April, Barofsky sent a memo to the Treasury regarding the DOJ inquiry, addressing the issues of attorney-client privilege and whether the special inspector general is subject to supervision by the Treasury Department.
“SIGTARP does not object to your plan to seek guidance from the OLC, however, as discussed below, SIGTARP believes the Emergency Economic Stability Act of 2008 provides SIGTARP is an independent entity within the Treasury, that SIGTARP is not subject to the secretary’s supervision, and that attorney-client privilege is not a bar to access to Treasury’s records or information,” Barofsky wrote. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed any connection regarding the AmeriCorps firing and the TARP matter.
“The president believes that inspectors general fulfill a unique and important role in ensuring that programs operate with efficiency,” Gibbs told reporters during the daily briefing on Friday. “No attorney-client privilege has ever been evoked. No documents sought have been withheld. The DOJ review is not related to a particular investigation. It is sorting out the legal issues relating to the creation of this office.”
He added, “We have outlined the reasons why the inspector general of the Corporation for National and Community Service was not retained.”
Gibbs later responded to a question as to whether someone could infer a trend with the Obama administration and inspectors general.
“If they inferred it, it would be an incorrect inference,” Gibbs told CNSNews.com.
‘Desperation’
Walpin said the White House called him “confused” and “disoriented” for lack of a legitimate reason for the termination.
“I think it’s absolutely desperation on their part,” Walpin said. “The first reason they gave me for my termination was that the president thought I ought to move on. The second reason the president expressed was that he lost confidence in me. That was in a letter to Congress. Of course that’s not a reason, that’s a conclusion.”
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that oversees inspectors general, was the lead sponsor of the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, which Obama co-sponsored as a senator. The law requires that the president give Congress 30-days notice before dismissing an inspector general and provide Congress with an explanation of why such action is necessary. Initially, Obama only told congressional leaders he lost confidence in Walpin.
McCaskill, in a statement last week, said the White House did not offer a sufficient explanation under the law. So that same day, White House Counsel Norman Eisen sent a letter to the Homeland Security Committee providing further reasons.
“Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation,” Eisen wrote. “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.”
In regard to claims he was confused, Walpin said: “Well, I can only say to you that those are code words for a desperation attack on somebody who is--I’m not a young man, I’ll be 78 in September--those are code words to suggest or imply that I’m senile.”
“This is desperation. They never believed I would do anything but resign to avoid the mud that is thrown at somebody who stands up to the most powerful person in this country,” Walpin said. “I did this as a matter of principle. I believed that I could not look myself in the mirror if I gave in.”
No one with the agency or the administration contacted him about being disoriented or his job performance, Walpin said.
“Let’s assume they’re even right--which I say is not correct--they and the corporation have met with me hundreds of times,” Walpin said. “Not one occasion have they ever said anything but that I’m very eloquent. Indeed, on the Tuesday before I was fired, one of the top management people in the corporation begged me to go out to San Francisco and speak to 2,0000 members of their staff and grantees at a conference because they thought my ability to speak was so great.”
Last Wednesday, after the White House released Eisen's letter further explaining the president's firing of Walpin, Sen. McCaskill issued a statement, in which she said that the White House's explanation for the removal of Walpin seemd "well-founded," while suggesting that Congress "undertake any further review that might be necessary."
“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," said Sen. McCaskill.
"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," said Sen. McCaskill. "The reasons given in the most recent White House letter are substantial and the decision to remove Walpin appears well founded.”
The mediaWHORES...will be gunning for him. To the point of destroying him...MARK IT! These freakin people are DEMONIC!!
+++++++++++
We must fight this one tooth and nail - right now, all of us...bring it out in the letters and radio and with your friends...Make Walpin a household name...a badge of shame to zero...
“They can be as in our faces as they want and do it with total impunity.”
++++++++++++
Oh no. Only if we let them. It may seem like that at times. But some shreds of integrity and tradition remain in this nation and we must pick them up, fashion them into a flag, and start to fight NOW.
Hey, neighbor, can I borrow a cup of hope? My cupboard has run dry.
Or, he'll be a passenger on another plane that mysteriously falls out of the skies.
My apologies for not providing fully up to date material. I didn't check the previous link and assumed it at least had an update in notes or something. There is a 30 day before removal provision, signed into law in October 2008. Pub. Law 110-409 - Inspector General Reform Act of 2008
If an Inspector General is removed from office or is transferred to another position or location within an establishment, the President shall communicate in writing the reasons for any such removal or transfer to both Houses of Congress, not later than 30 days before the removal or transfer. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a personnel action otherwise authorized by law, other than transfer or removal.
In my opinion, there isn't any "meat" in the 30 day notice provision. See no prohibition on 30 day suspension, which is not transfer or removal. A typical law, looks good, but is INTENTIONALLY superficial or hollow. Any "meat" in Walpin's removal has to do with the reasons. See Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre, etc.
No meat AND Walpin has no standing to enforce that section. Congress would have to sue the president I believe. (way over my head). He might be able to get a writ of mandamus.
There is no recourse to a court remedy. This is strictly a political issue. Congress appropriates the funds and also legislates the existence of watchdog agents. If Congress finds the president is out of line, it applies political pressure. If he strays too far, they have the power of impeachment. If the president is a crook, he SHOULD be impeached, disgraced, removed, and barred from future office - all of that is within Congress's power.
Why would he want a hearing in front of those Democrat sleazebags? We know what the outcome would be.
Now our erstwhile “news media” will tell us every bad thing they can find in the life of Gerald Walpin.
My sincere hope is that the “news media” liberal hucksters soon go out of business.
Thanks. I suspected he served at the pleasure of the President much like the Attorneys General do.
Mr. Walpin will need to file a few civil suits.
The sooner the better.
Mr Kevin Johnson, useing my tax dollars to have his car washed. The only one fied is the guy who uncovered it.
And Clair McAsshole is A-OK with it.
That was quite a book.
A farce. Congressional hearings will be a repeat of the hearings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as the Rats provide cover for Obama.
An 18 year old all star Girls volleyball team of 6 has more nads than these RINO dirtbags.
Do you have a pic of Clair McAssschole?
Just wondering...
If he doesn’t get his hearing now, he’ll get it in 2010.
Another thought for Talpin would be to file an injunction to halt the business at AmeriCorps because it has no independent oversight, and is pending Congressional action due to the illegal firing of the existing IG.
Very similar, but also somewhat different. The IG is basically "eyes of Congress," to insure that appropriated funds go where they are supposed to. Naturally, they are also "eyes of the executive," as he is charged with upholding fraud laws.
As a basic proposition, it's politically dangerous to terminate either a US Attorney or an IG that is handling cases "close to home." Clinton/Reno took lots of heat for asking for a resignation from Jay Stephens, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. He was investigating allegations against Dan Rostenkowski and other House Democrats.
So, in the same vein, removing Walpin before the investigations of Obama croneys is done is politically hazardous; and Obama is also -personally- short-circuiting a set of findings from the group that renders findings and opinions on the ethics of IG's.
Acting US Attorney Brown has filed a complaint against Walpin, and I think Brown's complaint is a matter of self-preservation (playing Chicago politics for "the boss," cover for the target of an investigation and be promoted, or don't play ball and be fired), rather than a legitimate complaint. I'll look around some, but as far as I know, it is unprecedented for a US Attorney and an IG to go at each other's throats over protecting a target - usually, a US Attorney and an IG are a tag team on the same side, saving government money, rooting out fraud, etc.
If Congress, and Senator Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa are carrying the challenge and demanding good reasons for Walpin's termination. The media will bury the story as it develops, so it will take effort to keep oneself apprised.
Meanwhile, Brown has managed to bury the wrongdoing in the St. HOPE Academy case - with Walpin submitting a special report to Congress on that front, and that front meriting its own Congressional investigation.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) is seeking information from AmeriCorps about the Walpin firing. The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee is also seeking information on documents that had allegedly been withheld from Neil Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Assets Relief Program (SIGTARP), the $700-billion financial bailout package launched last fall.SIGTARP happened on Bush's watch, but considering Obama's pledge and presidental directive toward open government ... WHY is Obama withholding SIGTARP documents from the overseeing IG?
BTW, Neil Barofsky is a Bush IG appointee, too.
You got that right, Joe!!!
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.