Posted on 07/07/2009 10:26:01 AM PDT by jessduntno
Inquiry continues into Walpin firing
Senator Chuck Grassley says President Obama has yet to provide Congress with a satisfactory explanation for why he fired Gerald Walpin from his position as Inspector General at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
Some critics of the Walpin firing believe the inspector general was fired simply because he investigated Obama ally and Democratic Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson for using AmeriCorps grant money illegally. However, in a letter to the Senate committee that oversees AmeriCorps, the White House claims Walpin was fired because he was "confused and disoriented," engaged in "inappropriate conduct," and had become "unduly disruptive to agency operations."
Senator Grassley (R-Iowa) is skeptical of the explanation and has written a letter to the White House, seeking more information on the firing. Although he has yet to get a response, the senator notes congressional oversight demands the White House cooperate.
"This administration, during the campaign and since, has been very adamant that they're going to promote more accountability and transparency in government," he notes. "And lack of this information is not transparency, and consequently I don't know whether government's accountable. And part of my job is to hold the executive branch accountable."
Grassley finds it especially disturbing that President Obama did not abide by a law he co-sponsored with Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri) and Grassley in the Senate that requires a 30-day notice to Congress before an inspector general can be fired.
(Excerpt) Read more at onenewsnow.com ...
How would this distinguish him from any other member of the administration? Why did they not make him the "Common Sense" Czar?
How many Czars are there, now? 32?
mmmm, where is the media storm over the ILLEGAL firing of the IG by Obama.....Oh yeah, Obama is just the siting President. We should be more concerned about a soon to be ex-governor. We a loud of crap. Where in the world is the media????
I despise AmeriCorps to the core. A noodgey neighbor who recently complained to my unincorporated township about the state of my lawn, caused a letter from “AmeriCorps” to descend upon me. After telling several lies, it threatened to get the county and the police involved on the very day I was reading the letter. A phone call to the bureaucrat resulted in a gush of very apologetic bureaucratese.
Firmly attached to O’s behind by the lips
If this guy is just a Czar, then Obama had no legal authority putting him up — taking him back down shouldn’t be a problem.
But if he’s somebody that has to be confirmed by the Senate, then yes, Grassley should get very angry at this. I would say go for the jugular, Grassley, and try to get Obama impeached. Might as well start now.
Calling police for lawn maintenance, LOL! Tazin’ in the grass...
The President breaks his own law again.
Nixon must be rolling over in his grave.
Bad lawn?
We had a media firestorm over the legel firing of nine U.S. Attorneys, who were not doing their jobs, but this illegal firing of an IG, for doing his job, goes completely under the radar.
“the White House claims Walpin was fired because he was “confused and disoriented,” engaged in “inappropriate conduct,” and had become “unduly disruptive to agency operations.” “
“confused and disoriented,” = Forgot he was a democrat, therefore he cannot possibly be using the money illegaly.
“inappropriate conduct,”= He was investigating a friend of the current Capo di tutti capi.
“unduly disruptive to agency operations.”= Could possibly have caused severe problems for the bilking of Americans by this corrupt POS called OBAMA
Any chance this will be the first offense cited in the House Impeachment trial in January, 2011?
Let me rephrase: any chance this will NOT be the first article of impeachment in 2011?
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.