After being briefed today on President Obama’s firing last week of Gerald Walpin, Inspector General of the Corporation for National and Community Service, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said the president did not abide by the same law that he co-sponsored – and she wrote – about firing Inspectors General.
“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.”
McCaskill, a key Obama ally, said that the president’s stated reason for the termination, “Loss of confidence’ is not a sufficient reason.”
McCaskill is not just “a key Obama ally.”
She’s a pure, fullbred GROUPIE. This lady is so in the bag for President Obama that even Chris Matthews might be jealous. For her to admit he screwed up-let alone that he broke a law-this is devastating. A Republican Congress might have him impeached for such crimes, and a truly unbiased media would be carrying this story ad nauseum instead of just a token story from Jake “Huevos Grande” Tapper at ABC.
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
Ahhh… But you’re missing something, the law was written to try to catch a Republican president trying to hide payback and graft, not a Dem. 🙂
Sarge
Dems….caught in their own snare
They’re JUST now figuring that out? Where were they last Wednesday when we were all reporting that fact?
Not to worry boyos, they’ll find a scapegoat to take the fall or they’ll simply say “WHATEVER….watcha gonna do about it?”
MSM: “Move along, nothing to see here.”
Yeah… he broke a law.. so what – just another in a long line that is getting longer. What is going to be done… why, nothing, of course!
The White House is now saying that Walpin was “was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions”.
Ageism anyone?
Gerald Walpin
This will end up in the same scrapheap as the Rod Blagovich story. Blagovich goes from a criminal politician to a TV & radio star. Where is Obama’s indignation on that story?
Damn. You cannot use Obama and indignation in the same sentence, people!
Democrat = Hypocrit.
“Do as I say,not as I do” the Democrats Motto
Obama is a ‘god’ sort of. How could you constrain Him from doing God’s work by firing some uppity republican Inspector General? As the poster clearly stated this law is only operational during times of republican occupancy of the White House. However, I don’t see even Obama’s violation of it as an impeachable offense. Its a technical issue and I doubt there is any criminal penalty attached to the President’s non compliance with that law, as that could raise constitutional issues in and of themselves. We should not be sidetracked with whether or not Obama and Michelle dotted the “i”s and crossed the “t”s in attempting to fire the IG. The crux of the story is the reason for the firing and the corrupt cronyism and the attempt to protect an Obama supporter contributor and friend from corruption charges and/or potential obstruction of justice by the Obama Administration.
Those might be the impeachable charges if Obama had an R after his name.
That McCaskill is a key Obama ally just makes me skeptical about her intentions. She might be useful to the Obama administration as a faux stalking pony. McCaskill also acted like she was really concered about Chrsyler dealergate, except that the most important question – what criteria were used and how were they applied? – was allowed to be ignored. Her “concerns” about an issue contribute to the appearance of bipartisan accountability even as the substance is left unexposed.
Just like in the dealergate case, regarding this IG matter McCaskill is stressing the need to address PROCEDURAL issues rather than the need to investigate any underlying CORRUPTION. She complains that Obama “failed to follow procedure” and he’s hoping that he’ll “provide a more substantive rationale” for the firing. Well, Obama now claims that the man is senile, as the 30 day clock ticks (never mind that they tried to intimidate Walpin into resigning at first). Poof, rationale offered = problem fixed! Obama listens to criticisms from his own party, proof yet again of his belief in open, accoutable government.
McCaskill is like a honorable golfer calling penatly shots (or infractions) on her own leadership. Do we believe that?
@Buckeye:
I totally agree with your analysis. Another point, I’ve been in Missouri off and on for over a month northwest of the KC area. McCaskill is taking heat for the obsessive Obama cheerleading, thus, she kills two birds with one stone. She’s smart and just as devious.
My post is in the hopper, P&T.
@Aye Chihuahua:
They could just as well say that about Obama without his teleprompter.
@Missy:
And Biden too.
In fact, Mr. Walpin made that point himself in his Fox interview today:
Heh.
As a side note Missy….I am not sure who keeps signing your permission slip to be away from here but I don’t like it.
Obama fired an IG. Stop. Obama violated the law. Stop. The law Obama violated is the same law he voted for. Stop. There can be no mistake about the fact that Obama did in fact break the law. Stop. The law he broke was a federal law. Stop. The Constitution is clear. Stop.
Article II, Section. 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Stop.
The key words are “other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”. Stop.
End of discussion. Stop.
Message ends.
Wait. Let me get this straight.
Bush fired attorneys that served at ‘his pleasure’ (12 if I recall) and the left went ape over it. (Clinton fired all but 1 if memory serves me). The left decried it and demanded Bush’s resignation, impeachment and everything else under the sun.
Obama clearly breaks the law that HE voted FOR (maybe he was for it before he will be against it *grin*) and not a peep from the
hypocritesdemocraps?Imagine my surprise!
Hawk…I do believe that I have told you many times to stop using facts and history. The Leftinistra do not appreciate it.
@Aye Chihuahua:
Wish whoever signs the permission slips would talk me into going somewhere else, where there is no clean up after guests, no laundering gazillions of sheets and towels, no weeds and the mulch is already spread. Thanks for the nice side note!
Eye witness to the meeting:
“By all accounts, the May 20 meeting was contentious. It was then that Mr. Walpin chastised the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service for failing to exercise enough oversight over AmeriCorps grants. Our witness, a staff member, said the board was hostile and rude. He said the board repeatedly interrupted Mr. Walpin and peppered him with questions on multiple issues. He fully confirmed Mr. Walpin’s account that the board excused Mr. Walpin for 15 minutes and that when Mr. Walpin returned to find his notepapers out of order, the board refused to give him time to get them straight.
Mr. Walpin says he had been working around the clock and was becoming ill at the meeting. Still, any confusion, the witness said, stemmed at least as much from the board’s hectoring behavior as from Mr. Walpin’s own doing. Either way, a charge that “disorientation” is enough to “question” an independent official’s “capacity to serve” should rest on more than one incident. Nobody has claimed that Mr. Walpin has shown any confusion, not the slightest bit, before or since that meeting. ”
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/18/a-witness-to-walpin-gate/?feat=home_editorials
@Mark L Harvey (aka Snooper): @Hawk:
Next thing you know they will call us terrorists for thinking The Constitution means something.
OOOps they already did