« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Fired IG: Obama-ites Are Out To "Attack Me And Get Rid Of Me"
Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general who was recently fired by the White House, has shot back at his former bosses over the dismissal -- but he hasn't done much to undo the impression that he's far from an independent, non-partisan figure.
Last night, the White House sent a letter to Congress explaining why it fired Walpin. Ethics counsel Norm Eisen wrote Walpin, 78, was "confused" and "disoriented" at a recent board meeting, that he had been absent from the office, and that he had shown a "lack of candor" in providing information to decision-makers. That seemed to refer to a formal complaint issued by a local US Attorney regarding Walpin's work on a probe of the Obama ally, Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson. The complaint charged Walpin with, among other things, withholding from the US Attorney's office pertinent information he had obtained.
Now, in an interview with FOXNews.com. Walpin called the "lack of candor" charge "a total lie," and repeated his contention that he was fired for daring to go hard after Johnson, an Obama supporter.
As for the explanation that Walpin was confused at a meeting, he responded, improbably, by referencing a verbal slip-up that Barack Obama made during the campaign, which conservatives tried unsuccessfully to make hay out of at the time.
Said Walpin: "I would never say President Obama doesn't have the capacity to continue to serve because of his (statement) that there are 56 states." And he added that same is true for Vice President Joe Biden and his "many express confusions that have been highlighted by the media."
And he amped up the level of rhetoric, declaring: "I am now the target of the most powerful man in this country, with an army of aides whose major responsibility today seems to be to attack me and get rid of me."
Not exactly a picture of the kind of dignified, apolitical watchdog that you'd want for an IG.
As for the absentee charge, Walpin said that CNCS had agreed to allow him to work from home. He said he had planned to resign before Obama took office because his wife objected to his weekly commuting from New York to Washington. But he reconsidered after coming to an agreement with the board allowing him to come to the capital twice or more a eek, and work from home the rest of the time. He said he had "never had a single objection" to the arrangement until the White House's letter.
We certainly haven't heard the last of this.

















Naw...couldn't be the Omama-ites...Mr.Walpin getting rid of some one who doesn't follow party lines is a Bush-ite tactic..you must be one of these....crooked, a complete Republican partisan hack or imcompetent..probably all three
June 17, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. Walpin's charges that the government is out to attack him and get rid of him sound serious. These charges scream out for the necessity of a Congressional hearing and I expect that we should start to hear this call for hearings from Walpin and his supporters themselves in order to get to the bottom of this matter.
I took the liberty of contacting Senator Grassley myself to demand that he hold hearings on this. It seems only fair that we get to see Walpin testify in front of Congress so that he is not forced to rely on right wing media alone to try to save his job.
Support Walpin's quest to save his job! Won't you join me today in making your voice heard to demand Congressional hearings on Walpin?
http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm
June 17, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would I possibly want this political hack to stay as IG?
June 17, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't say that anyone should want this political hack to stay as IG.
I just said that we should support Walpin's purported quest to save his job which he is waging in the right wing media by instead demanding that Congress hold public hearings on him.
I can't imagine why Walpin, like other Bush Administration officials that have run into trouble, would not jump at the chance for a full public airing of why he was fired and his actions in office. I assume also that he would welcome being able to defend himself under oath from the disturbing allegations that appear to be emerging against him, including concealing evidence, misprision of office, misuse of his police powers, politicization, as well as displays of mental confusion.
Calling for public hearings just seems like the right thing to do to set the record straight in the Walpin matter. After all, it may turn out that his entire tenure was not, in fact, filled with misconduct and political dirty tricks and that the referral to the IG ethics board was a mistake. So let's hear it from Walpin under oath.
Call your representatives in Congress today and demand a full hearing on the charges against Walpin so that Walpin can defend himself under oath!
June 17, 2009 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not the staying. It's the testifying. What could be better than letting this fellow rave for a while in front of a Congressional committee?
June 17, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a good idea. Let the guy cook his own goose.
He looks like he could be related to Max Baucus
June 17, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't it true that presidential appointees, while requiring the approval of the Senate for their appointment, serve at the pleasure of the President, not at the pleasure of the Senate?
And, doesn't the President have the authority to fire any presidential appointee he pleases at any time?
This all sounds like a total non-issue being made into a political football by the Republicans.
June 18, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink