W.H.: Fired IG 'confused, disoriented'

[Pirate Smile]

Source: Politico

President Barack Obama removed a government agency’s internal watchdog last week and plans to fire him in part because he was “confused” and “disoriented” at a meeting last month, the White House said in a letter to Congress Tuesday night.

The letter came after several senators, including key Obama supporter Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), expressed concern that Obama skirted the requirements of federal law in the terse explanation he gave Congress about his reasons for removing the inspector general of the Corporation for Community and National Service, Gerald Walpin.

“Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation,” Obama ethics counsel Norm Eisen wrote in a letter to senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Me.), with a copy directed to McCaskill. “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.”

“We further learned that Mr. Walpin had been absent from the Corporation’s headquarters, insisting upon working from his home in New York over the objections of the Corporation’s Board; that he had exhibited a lack of candor in providing material information to decision makers; and that he had engaged in other troubling and inappropriate conduct,” Eisen wrote.

Eisen’s letter also noted that a complaint was pending against Walpin, brought by the acting U.S. Attorney in Sacramento, who accused Walpin of failing to disclose evidence in an investigation.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23831.html

[dysfunctional press]

1. so does that mean that he's a drinker...?

or that he's becoming senile...? :shrug:

[Demobrat]

2. Could be either one.

Or he could be addicted to prescription drugs.

[shraby]

3. Or drugs of the non-prescription kind.

[dysfunctional press]

5. going just by his picture, that seems...doubtful.

[DCKit]

14. Have you read the paragraphs of warnings on any of the prescription drugs lately?

They're only expected to work "as advertised" on 85% of the population and Dog help you if you mix 'em up a bit.

[MidwestTransplant]

8. Sounds like something other than senile. They would have been a little more sensitive

in the wording I would imagine.

[struggle4progress]

15. No. It means that he's a rightwing Federalist Society shill, who launched a complaint

against Kevin Johnson just as the SF mayoral primary season kicked off last year. Walpin pushed hard and loudly for criminal charges during the main campaign season -- but Bush-appointed US Attorney McGregor Scott decided criminal charges would be inappropriate, although Scott did later reach a civil settlement in which Johnson and his group returned some money without admitting wrong-doing. Walpin's complaint was apparently an attempt to create a campaign issue of the form SF won't be able to get Federal money because of the complaint against Johnson. Voters didn't buy that argument last November, and it was finally completely resolved in Johnson's favor in April

I'd bet what happened at the meeting was that Walpin was asked asked some hard questions about what he'd actually been up to and replied "Um ... um ... um ... um ..."

[sofa king]

20. They're simply muscling out the most obvious stay-behinds.

I'm not sure if I agree with the Obama Administration's cautious approach. Then again, the Bush Administration and its legacy is being treated as if it is dangerous and murderous--which it is. I'd like to see them rounded up and put on trial, but that guarantees danger and murder.

There is another, administrative approach, which is to simply identify and toss those government employees who are manifestly unqualified. Those people also happen to be largely Bush Administration appointees and favorable hires. That approach simply has to be taken whether or not the other one is.

This guy could be one or the other, a criminal or a fund-raising idiot savant, or he could be both, and a drunk. If he's got a lick of conscience he'd be drowning it in booze.

[No Elephants]

28. Who cares what motivated him? He tried to interfere with an election. Nuff said.

The fokker should be in jail, IMO.

[sofa king]

31. I concur.

If those people aren't exposed and punished, they'll be back to steal another one. They will capitalize upon their criminal success and gain illicit power, broadening their opportunities and increasing the chances of their early return. If they figure out how to better manipulate and control the Internet, we're through.

I'm frankly surprised we survived the Bush Administration, and I have no doubt at all that another one would doom the United States as we knew it. That's why I favor a stepped up level of investigation and prosecution, including dumping off Bush and his entire criminal team at the Hague for war crimes trials.

It's obvious, however, that it ain't gonna happen, and we will instead have to continue to combat our now institutionalized corrupt voting system and bought media with overwhelming turnout.

[CAG]

4. If only this had happened a year or two ago, the poor guy would have been promoted

the then pretender in chief

[4lbs]

6. Interesting.

Reading this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8475539


I wonder what those that were harshly critical of the President in that thread have to say now. Or will it just be the sound of crickets from them?

[No Elephants]

26. Two different issues, both related to the Walpin dismissal. The first is, was

Obama justified in firing him? The answer, IMO, is yes, for the reasons stated in this thread and also in a prior thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3919731#3923604 That however, can be a subjective conclusion.

A totally separate issue--did Obama first notify Congress, as required by law? That is a yes or no answer, objectively determined. That is the issue raised in the thread that you linked. And the answer seems to be no. (McCaskill is not only the author of the bill, but was one of Obama's earliest supporters. I take her at her word.)

Since the two issues are separate, supporting Obama on this thread, but critizing him on the thread that you linked is not an inconsistency.

[avaistheone1]

7. Larry Summers was asleep at a Cabinet meeting. Can we fire him too?

Larry sleeping off a bender?

[Liberal_in_LA]

17. How embarrassing!

:blush:

[rpannier]

18. Personally, I'm happier when he is sleeping

He does less damage

[Trocadero]

9. Walpin was whining like a stuck pig on Glenn Beck's program - saying that

Obama fired him because he was investigating a friend of Obama's, and both Walpin and Beck screeched that Obama was corrupt.

Looks like Obama was trying to let the elderly Walpin save face - then Walpin had to make that dickish appearance on Beck last night.

[Pirate Smile]

10. What an idiot. Obama's reason is easily verified by talking to anyone on the board.

“Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation,”

This is one of those things that pop up where anyone with any sense (or memory) knows Obama is going to have a reason for doing it even if it isn't apparent immediately. They were trying to do it without embarrassing the RW asshole. No such luck. What an idiot.

[trthnd4jstc]

11. Corporation for Community and National Service

Corporation for Community and National Service:

http://www.nationalservice.gov/

Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_for_National_and_Community_Service

[DUlover2909]

12. He was on PCP, heroin, and horse tranquilizers.

Oh well. Bye-bye. You're gone. Just try to sue and you'll find yourself in 72 hour detention. That's how to use the Bush policies against these fuckwits.

[OKNancy]

13. Just a guess, but I bet he is a drinker

He wants to stay home so he can drink without people seeing him. That on top of the "confused and disoriented" statement it sends off an all too familiar signal.

[groundloop]

16. I also vote for the drinking scenario

Too bad he didn't take the opportunity to save face that was afforded him.

I had a former boss who behaved in a similar manner, he'd start drinking every morning before coming to work. He was given a similar opportunity to go out quietly, thank goodnes he took it (he was a great friend, just didn't do a very good job being drunk all the time).

[underpants]

19. I would guess that too

[Cha]

21. This is interesting in addition because

there was a thread yesterday in GDP on McCaskill's objection to the way President Obama didn't explain enough when Walpin was fired.

<snip>>>

“The White House has failed to follow the proper procedure in notifying Congress as to the removal of the Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service,” McCaskill said. “The legislation which was passed last year requires that the president give a reason for the removal.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8475539

[notesdev]

22. Firing an IG is no joke

You people may not be familiar with just how serious this is in Washington DC. This is huge impact - IGs are supposed to be effectively untouchable, and their role is more to report to Congress than to report to the executive branch.

These reports of Walpin being confused, etc. had better be true and documented twelve ways from Sunday with every person involved willing to testify in front of Congress - or we have a major Constitutional crisis on our hands.

An Inspector General is a major means by which the Congress holds the executive accountable to faithfully execute the laws that Congress makes. These are Senior Executive Service personnel, they need to be confirmed by Congress just like an appointee to the Cabinet.

Given the astonishing performance logged by a different Inspector General (that would be this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXlxBeAvsB8 ), and the fact that she is still at her job, Obama got some 'splainin to do.

IF this turns out to be political, that is going to send shockwaves through DC, and not in a good way - if civil service members can be fired based on their political opinions and affiliations, the federal government will be impossible to operate. If this turns out to be Obama protecting his friend from an investigation, then we start talking about Nixon-level malfeasance.

Here on DU most every poster automatically will affiliate with the Democrat in any given dispute. In the bureaucracies of DC, the bond of civil service vastly outweighs the bonds of politics. Civil service people are used to the political masters changing, while they keep on keepin' on. If that is threatened they will bind together and oppose the political clans, and usually the civil service wins out on longevity.

Either way, you can pretty much kiss health care and cap & trade goodbye at this point. A political culture like this will have every knife drawn, every back to a wall, and no one at all will be willing to compromise on anything.

I can't believe I am saying this but things like this make me seriously wonder whether Obama is up to the job of being President. This is not the kind of thing a President should be spending his political capital on, and will be extremely damaging to his ability to control the executive branch. I've been in DC less than half the time he has, spent less time working for the federal government, and even I can see that this is wow-inducing stupidty to start a fight over a marginal IG.

[Psephos]

23. The only non-knee jerk post on the thread

and I know you will be targeted by the tomato-throwers for it.

The irony, of course, is that your point of view far better serves Democratic Party interests in the real world.

Astonishing Grayson link, btw. Thanks.

[struggle4progress]

24. Here's a very useful TPM piece: Obama Removes AmeriCorps IG Who Clashed With Ally

... as the Bee would later note in an editorial, "Walpin decided to act before any legal body determined whether irregularities in the administration of grants from 2004-2007 reflected inadvertent errors and ignorance of regulations or actual fraud" ... The Bee would later find that, since its inception in 1994, the NCSC had suspended only two other organizations and three other people, and that the irregularities at St. HOPE were similar to those found at other nonprofits that were not suspended ... Walpin had introduced Mitt Romney at a meeting of the conservative Federalist Society -- on whose board Walpin sits -- by saying that Romney served as governor of a state, Massachusetts, run by the "modern-day KKK ... the Kennedy-Kerry Klan" ... US attorney McGregor Scott, a Bush appointee, announced that the investigation into the misuse of funds did not warrant criminal charges ... Then, even once the relevant authorities had determined that no crime had been committed and agreed on an appropriate remedy, Walpin worked to undermine that agreement by appealing to Congress ...

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/obama_removes_americorps_ig_who_clashed_with_ally.php?ref=fpblg

[No Elephants]

25. Baloney. This guy abused his position to try to interfere in an election. Please see this

DU thread, especially Reply # 15. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3919731#3923604

And, based on your prior posts, I certainlly CAN believe you are saying that Obama is not up to being President.

[WriteDown]

27. This seems to contradict this new accusation...

Was he fired for handling the case wrong or was he dioriented in a meeting. And where is the evidence backing this disorientating claim. The fact that the organization under investigation has already returned 400,000.00 seems fishy in itself.

[notesdev]

29. I wouldn't dig too deep into that position

Suddenly the 'not of sound mind' approach has been abandoned (as Walpin went on TV and demonstrated that he is coherent and can talk intelligently about the situation) and now we're into the improper-interfering-with-an-election strategy. Yet Johnson gave back $400k - not something that would happen if the accusations against him were unfounded.

And now we find that the Walpin case is not isolated - there are at least two other IGs coming forward with similar stories:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-tc-nw-inspectors-0617-0618jun18,0,5718990.story

And the Washington Times now claims to have a firsthand witness who contradicts the administration story entirely. I take that source with a grain of salt, but until more details are known, it can't be dismissed out of hand.

These IGs are agents of Congress. If Obama is going to fire them without rock-solid cause he's going to run right up against a separation of powers and a very angry legislature. It's no coincidence that Sen. McCaskill was the one to raise the issue, as a former auditor she surely knows just how deep the impact of IG removals are; and as a Senator she has strong interest in defending the prerogatives of Congress.

There are also two more factors that will come into play; a possible age-discrimination civil rights violation, and the violation of a law concerning the firing of IGs that was co-sponsored by none other than Senator Barack Obama himself.

Corruption is not cool, no matter who does it. And it just so happens that IGs exist for that very reason.

[lovuian]

30. Obama talks a good game

but his actions speaks volumes

We are watching