The firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin by the Obama for outing a close supporter is not being fairly reported by the Obama Networks. The Obama/Ahmadinejad/Chavez administration has stated Walpin is somewhat "confused" and can no longer do his job effectively, and he needed to be removed. They gave him one hour to resign or he would be fired. Obama as a Senator signed off on legislation requiring the office of the president to give the congress thirty days notice of any firings of any inspector generals. The rule apparently does not apply to the One. The evolving story, which changes day to day, is being spoon fed to obedient media outlets meant to disgrace an honest level headed public servant to protect a lap dog belonging to Obama. Walpin is not going quietly into the night. The Washington Examiner, one of the few media outlets which still adheres to journalistic ethics has the story.
Fired AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin strongly denies the White House's claim that he was "confused, disoriented [and] unable to answer questions" at a May 20, 2009 board meeting of the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that oversees AmeriCorps. In a letter to several members of Congress Tuesday night, Norman Eisen, who is the White House Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform, wrote that at the May 20 meeting, "Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the board to question his capacity to serve." Eisen wrote that Walpin lost the confidence of the Corporation Board, which led to the decision to fire him.
"I started out by chastising the board and telling them their duty was not just to accept what management says, but to make their independent analysis of those reports," Walpin continues. He says board members were "clearly angry at my temerity in telling them they should not be acting in the manner of many for-profit boards, which have been recently criticized." Walpin says there was "no confusion whatsoever about our two reports, and our clear findings, which were a major part of the meeting."
So where did the White House allegation of confusion come from? Walpin says that he was not feeling well that day, and that he was repeatedly interrupted as he gave a prepared presentation. "Then at one point, they broke in and said I had to leave the room while they handled something else," he recalls. "I left my papers there. When I came back, they were in disorder. I attempted to reorganize them and be certain that I was not repeating what I had already discussed. But I was quickly denied time to review my notes and told that I had to leave because the board was too busy."
The White House suggestion that Walpin, who is 77 years old, is somehow mentally not up to his job and cannot perform his duties has caused great skepticism among Republicans on Capitol Hill. GOP investigators have talked to Walpin and found him entirely sharp and focused. "He has been collected and coherent," says one investigator. "What the White House described is not the experience that we have had in dealing with him." (That is also my own experience, having talked with Walpin for a total of about two hours since the weekend.) In addition, Walpin has also performed well in recent high-profile media appearances.
There has been such a strong reaction by Senate Republicans demanding answers, Obama and his merry men are running around in circles looking for a new cover story to cover their lying butts. The Washington Examiner continues its reporting:
Norman Eisen, the White House Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform, met with investigators on the staff of Republican Sen. Charles Grassley at Grassley's offices this morning. The investigators wanted to learn more about the circumstances surrounding the abrupt firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin. According to Grassley, Eisen revealed very, very little, refusing to answer many questions of fact put to him. And now Grassley has written a letter to the White House counsel asking for answers.
The questions relate to a letter Eisen sent to some senators Tuesday night attributing Walpin's dismissal, in significant part, to Walpin's behavior at a May 20, 2009 board meeting of the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that oversees AmeriCorps. Eisen wrote that at the meeting, "Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the board to question his capacity to serve." After the meeting, Eisen wrote, Walpin lost the confidence of the Corporation Board. The White House conducted a review of the matter, and Walpin was fired. (For a detailed account of Walpin's reaction to the White House charges, see here.)
At today's meeting, Sen. Grassley's staffers wanted to know more about the White House review. "Unfortunately," Grassley writes in a letter just sent to White House counsel Gregory Craig, "Mr. Eisen refused to answer several direct questions posed to him about the representations made in his letter." Grassley says that since Eisen refused to answer the questions in person, Grassley would submit a dozen of them in writing. Here they are:
1) Did the [Corporation for National and Community Service] Board communicate its concerns about Mr. Walpin to the White House in writing?
2) Specifically, which CNCS Board members came forward with concerns about Mr. Walpin's ability to serve as the Inspector General?
3) Was the communication about the Board's concerns on or about May 20, 2009 the first instance of any communications with White House personnel regarding the possibility of removing Mr. Walpin?
4) Which witnesses were interviewed in the course of Mr. Eisen's review?
5) How many witnesses were interviewed?
6) Were any employees of the Office of Inspector General, who may have had more frequent contact with Mr. Walpin than the Board members, interviewed?
7) Was Mr. Walpin asked directly during Mr. Eisen's review about the events of May 20, 2009?
8) Was Mr. Walpin asked for his response to the allegations submitted to the Integrity Committee by Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown?
9) What efforts were made during Mr. Eisen's review to obtain both sides of the story or to afford the Office of Inspector General an opportunity to be heard?
10) In addition to the claim that Mr. Walpin was "confused" and "disoriented," the letter also says he exhibited "other behavior" that led to questions about his capacity. What other behavior was Mr. Eisen referencing?
11) If the initial and primary concern had to do with Mr. Walpin's capacity to serve for potential health reasons, why was he only given one hour to decide whether to resign or be fired?
12) If Mr. Walpin's telecommuting arrangements since the beginning of this year were a major concern, then why was Mr. Walpin not simply asked to stop telecommuting?
A new America under an Obamaocracy. Cross him and your reputation will be impugned. Protect the tax cheats, the ACORN thugs, lying Speakers and the perpetrators of the election fraud, but bring down and marginalize those honest citizens for pointing out the incongruity. It's shameful. Mr. Obama, you are an embarrassment and a fear monger. Show us your birth certificate sir, if not, are we to assume you're a fraud, too? It's time to make a stand America, silence is no longer an option if we want to save our dignity and our constitutional right to speak freely.