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
“We are proud to defend our corrupt practices and we have the political courage to fire the whistleblowers”
about as much political courage as littleman’s attack on Gov.Palin’s family
They admit it! He was fired for political reasons and not job performance.
Then why didn’t the MSM get their thongs in a twist over Bush firing 8 AG’s but nothing over Clinton firing all of them when he took office?
>> A top White House lawyer called the firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin an act of “political courage,”
Corruption is Courage.
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
On another note, it seems they have changed their story from “Walpin is suffering from dementia!” to “Walpin does not play well with others!”.
Should have said “Political Suicide”.
Sort of like swatting flies.
Maybe they're already getting cocky enough that, if we fight this IG firing, we can reign them in a bit.
The left always overreaches and this might be the fight to knock them back on their heels for awhile.
Probe one...of another forty before 2012. I can’t see how you avoid not appointing an investigator and having to face some senate committee to explain how “political courage” really works.
It does take some courage to break the Law, especially if you once endorsed the same law you broke as Senator.
Couragous Crook ?
Barky’s digging his own grave!
It appears that the breaking of laws is of no concern to the Obama administration. A massive double standard. Be they Constitutional laws, or not. Also, fascism and oppression also seem to be “in vogue” as well. Are we looking at another version of Venezuela here?? Seems that way.
Thugocracy in action.
Exactly.
With all of the maggots occupying the White House, a few flies are no surprise.
posted by Gator113
So, “Working Well” with the leadership means nodding your head and agreeing with them?
An IG should have a reasonably adversarial relationship with the leadership. He should make sure they are following the law and not wasting taxpayer money.
;>)
Maybe refusing to go along with Obama's grand scheme for the nation is a mark of political courage too.
Thugocracy in action.
I woke up one day and found I lived in a banana republic with an arse monkey in the white house.
Lying = Courage! ... Damn, Clinton wasn’t even that arrogant to try that spin.
I’m thinking of a word beginning with C, but it ain’t courage — like corruption, or perhaps Chicago...
How come I keep seeing Baghdad Bob every time this administration defends breaking the law?
You say pota-to and I say potah-to...
Which it it: incoherent, or not a team player?
They have abandoned the "dazed and confused" defense - obviously not a winner based on Walpin's numerous sharp appearances in the last two days - and have reverted to "Walpin's a Republican hack with an ax to grind".
This was their initial story.
Be prepared for "Walpin's a racist bastard" defense next;.
This has legs. Even the NY Slimes has finally reported it, well the "dazed and confused" version.
Guess the Slimes will now have to report that we are no longer at war with EastAsia.
Popcorn, anyone?
That's not a good comparison, because Carter, Reagan, and Bush I likewise replaced all US Attorneys in the first year of the first term. That "move" is not controversial.
Replacement other than attrition at the start of a second term, as the GWB administration did in 2005, is controversial. We still don't know how far down the chain of command the power to fire a US Attorney goes. President Bush said he was NOT involved in the firing decision, and we don't know who exactly made the firing decision.
That said, the Walpin firing merits plenty of attention. It is unusual, and the reasons given, so far, don't hold water.
I mean, who'd act on the recommendation of an Alzheimer's sufferer?
Political Courage. Yes, the same political courage Nixon showed when he fired Cox.
Chicago mafia runs the oval office now.
political courage, eh?
You have to admit, it is ballsy,
to expose your fascism so blatantly.
Thug’0’crat ALERT!!!
But then why did the MSM get all over Bush for firing just 8 in his second term and no mention of Clinton?
Supersizing the Big Lie for modern times.
I would say cowardness is a better fit.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Barky is either:
OR
Either way, we will know shortly depending on how this situation is resolved.
I assume Norman Eisen is a CROOK!
So, they admit it was politically motivated. Impeachment!
I would guess that he is one of those people that live in "gray" territory (where right and wrong are difficult if not impossible to delineate). He probably sleeps well because he believes he is only protecting the President from those who are out to get him.
evidently, the fbi
there was a thread posted last night that linked to a cbs13 (sacramento) story - the fbi is investigating johnson
When are the Democrats in congress going to figure out that they are as irrelevant as Republicans to Obama ?
Just what one should expect from the Chicago thugocracy. The Mafia had the “courage” to wipe out underlings, too, knowing the police would not touch them. BO’s gang knows that the msm is not interested in publicizing his political “hits”, either.
Probably ACLU member also!
Yep!
The Bush administration brought up "but Clinton fired 93" as a distraction. It worked great! But at the start of their first terms, Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II all replaced [almost] all sitting US Attorneys. It's not controversial, so it doesn't make news when it happens. Well, Reno made news by asking Mary Jo White to resign, but other than isolated examples like that, the first year/first term, put in who you want is the way things have been done for 30+ years. Obama will do it too - no big deal.
The deal in 2005 is a second term. Some US Attorneys were asked to resign - that was not precedented for a start of second term, although the president obviously has the power to remove them. Beside the fact that resignations were asked at the start of a second presidential term is one "newsworthy" point. The other one, as I mentioned once already but will repeat, is that the president didn't fire them. Some unnamed and so far unknown person decided certain US Attorneys had to go. That ought to be troubling, because it prevents accountability; and may be pushing firing decisions too far down the chain of command. There was another event rolled in there, whereby somebody in the WH managed to get the statutes changed, so replacement US Attorneys could be put by the Attorney General, with no nomination from the president and no confirmation by the Senate. That provision was short-lived.
Their excuses get lamer and lamer!
In the world of the 0Bamaide drinkers; up is down, black is white, night is day, and the truth is whatever the great leaders says it is.
Gunner
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.