President Obama Fires Controversial Inspector General
EmailWith little public notice, President Obama Thursday fired the Inspector General of the Corporation for National and Community Service, Gerald Walpin.
Saying he was “exercising my power as president,” Mr. Obama suspended Walpin with pay, saying his termination would be “effective 30 days from now.”
The president wrote that “it is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as Inspectors General. That is no longer the case with regard to this Inspector general.”
The decision was announced, such as it was, in letters the president wrote to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Vice President Joe Biden in his role as president of the Senate.
White House counsel Greg Craig, responding to a letter of concern about Walpin’s termination from Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, noted that the “Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, a career prosecutor who was appointed to his post during the Bush Administration, has referred Mr. Walpin’s conduct for review by the Integrity Committee of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.”
Craig said that the White House was “aware of the circumstances leading to that referral and of Mr. Walpin’s conduct throughout his tenure and can assure you that that the president’s decision was carefully considered.” He noted that Walpin’s termination “is fully supported by the Chair of the Corporation (a Democrat) and the Vice-Chair (a Republican).”
Exactly what conduct issues necessitated review was unclear; the White House and the office of the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California would not comment.
A source familiar with the president’s thinking told ABC News that “Mr. Walpin’s overall conduct in a variety of circumstances – well beyond the scope of the Assistant U.S. Attorney’s referral — led the president to conclude that Mr. Walpin should be replaced by someone who could effectively provide the kind of independent oversight that the president values.”
Walpin had been criticized for the way he handled an investigation into Kevin Johnson, former point guard of the Phoenix Suns, who was elected Mayor of Sacramento last November and is an ally of the president’s.
Johnson helped found a community group called St. HOPE Academy, and Walpin investigated how $847,673 in grant funds from AmeriCorps, a division of the Corporation for National and Community Service, were used by St. HOPE.
The funds were approved for St. HOPE to manage one-on-one tutoring for elementary and high school students; managing the redevelopment of one building a year in the Oak Park neighborhood; and for work surrounding Guild Theater and Art Gallery events.
The goals were to improve the reading and math for 100 elementary and high school students, to stimulate economic growth in Oak Park, to increase local arts programming and to recruit and train 500 volunteers to complete 10,000 hours of service.
But in the thick of Johnson’s mayoral run last September, Walpin announced that Johnson, St. HOPE Academy, and former St. HOPE executive director Dana Gonzalez, were suspended from participating in federal contracts or grants until the investigation was complete.
Walpin said in a statement at the time that his initial report "cited numerous potential criminal and grant violations, including diversion of federal grant funds, misuse of AmeriCorps members and false claims made against a taxpayer-supported Federal agency."
The Inspector General investigated whether any of the AmeriCorps funds had been diverted and misused, among them: that AmeriCorps members had been used to recruit students for St. HOPE Academy, for non-AmeriCorps clerical and other services, and for political activities in connection with the Sacramento Board of Education election. AmeriCorps members performed services “personally benefiting… Johnson,” such as “driving [him] to personal appointments, washing [his] car, and running personal errands.”
Grant-funded AmeriCorps members were taken “to New York to promote the expansion of St. HOPE operations in Harlem,” Walpin charged.
"When you instead take the AmeriCorps members to New York for a purpose not within the grant, you are misusing the members and diverting the funds from the purposes intended," Walpin told The New York Sun’s Josh Gerstein.
Johnson called the announcement “politically motivated.” His campaign pointed out that in 2005 Walpin introduced Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at an event in Washington, DC, as the governor of a state run by the "modern-day KKK … the Kennedy-Kerry Klan."
Johnson’s campaign issued a statement saying, "we have said all along that there may have been administrative errors, much like the hundreds of other small nonprofits that have been investigated in the past. We are confident that the U.S. Attorney will decide not to proceed when it conducts a nonpolitical review of the allegations."
Johnson’s attorney Bill Portanova told reporters that “volunteer organizations are staffed by people with good hearts and intentions and, as a rule, are not accountants by trade.”
Johnson in November won the mayoral race, defeating the incumbent.
In spring of this year, questions began being asked about whether Mayor Johnson could receive stimulus dollars given his suspension from being able to received federal grants.
Johnson's lawyer, Matthew G. Jacobs, wrote to AmeriCorps asking for Mayor Johnson’s suspension to be lifted. ''The idea that somehow these regulations were supposed to apply to a private individual or bar an entire public entity or the Sacramento region on the basis of the private activities of an individual who just happened to become mayor strains credulity,'' Jacobs wrote.
In April of this year, the new Acting Attorney General, Lawrence Brown, settled the case, requiring St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson. Walpin complained that he had not been consulted on the settlement.
“The agreement reached strikes a proper balance between accountability and finality,” Brown said in a statement. “St. HOPE Academy must pay a significant amount for its improper handling of AmeriCorps funds. The lifting of the suspension against all parties, including Mayor Johnson, removes any cloud whether the City of Sacramento will be prevented from receiving much-needed federal stimulus funds.”
The settlement included St. HOPE formally acknowledging that it did not adequately document a portion of its expenditures of the grant awards. In addition Johnson and Gonzalez were to register to take an online course offered by Management Concepts titled “Cost Principles.”
On May 6, Walpin expressed disagreement with the decision to settle.
“The only circumstance that changed was the sudden media and political pressure to settle the matter monetarily and lift the suspension,” Walpin wrote. “These pressures had the desired effect.”
Walpin charged that AmeriCorps made a “180-degree turnaround” on the circumstances in the case “based on the change of circumstances of Respondent Johnson, who had, after directing St. HOPE’s misuse of the grant funds provided to it and receiving the suspension notice, become Mayor of Sacramento. The suspension was lifted because, as one Corporation official put it, the Corporation could not ‘stand in the way of Sacramento’ — thereby effectively stating that, while Respondent Johnson was not sufficiently responsible to receive further Federal funds in his management position as a grantee, he suddenly became sufficiently responsible when elected Mayor of a city receiving substantially more federal funds…”
Walpin said this was “akin to deciding that, while one should not put a fox in a small chicken coop, it is fine to do so in a large chicken coop!”
Walpin charged that the settlement “(s)ends the signal that acceptance of a grantee or its principal as 'responsible' can be purchased in a monetary settlement, overriding all evidence of wrongdoing previously found to warrant a suspension, without the presentation of any contradicting evidence."
He said arguments that the settlement is in the government's interest "is an attempt to pull the wool over the public's eyes.”
Yesterday, Walpin was told to clear out his desk immediately.
Grassley said Walpin needed to be given 30-days notice, which he said is required by the 2008 Inspector General Reform Act that President Bush signed into law and then-Sen. Obama co-sponsored.
Specifically, Section 3 of the law requires that, “the president shall communicate in writing the reasons for any such removal or transfer to both Houses of Congress, not later than 30 days before the removal or transfer.”
“No such notice was provided to Congress in this instance,” Grassley wrote in a letter to the president.
“Given that you were a cosponsor of this vital legislation I am deeply troubled to learn of the ultimatum given Inspector General Walpin absent Congressional notification,” Grassley wrote.
Grassley wrote that the Integrity Committee of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency had not produced any negative findings against Walpin, and “he has identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds either wasted outright or spent in violation of established guidelines. In other words, it appears he has been doing his job.”
Noting recent “massive increases in federal spending of late,” Grassley said that “it is more critical than ever that we have an Inspector General community that is vigorous, independent, and active in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. I urge you to review the Inspector General Reform Act you cosponsored and to follow the letter of the law should you have cause to remove any Inspector General.”
Craig disagreed, saying that Walpin’s termination – being suspended for 30 days with pay – was “fully consistent with the Inspector General Act.”
– jpt
President Obama Tops Mitt Romney in New Poll 
Romney on a Roll
“Walpin had been criticized for the way he handled an investigation into Kevin Johnson, former point guard of the Phoenix Suns, who was elected Mayor of Sacramento last November and is an ALLY (my emphasis) of the president’s.”
‘Nuff said.
I’m certain their will be a public/press outcry and call for an inquiry of this “political firing”. /s
Posted by: WhereWasThePress? | June 12, 2009, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm
Wow. An inspector general giving the boot for trying to be a good steward of our money.
They were given $847,673 …
Had to pay back …
St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson
That’s half of the money misused! And that’s what they admit to? 72k that Johnson had to pay back PERSONALLY?
Oh can’t expect a non-profit to be accountants? You mean 50 cents of every dollar is misused and you chock that up to an accounting error?
And Mr. Walpin is the one out on the street…
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
Yep, it sure does look like Mr. Walpin was doing the job he was supposed to do…good for him! I’m sure there is still a place for him on this planet that will appreciate someone with integrity…which does not seem to be appreciated by this administration.
Posted by: kathy | June 12, 2009, 2:19 pm 2:19 pm
And as for the president disobeying the law he voted for…well, I’m shocked…
Posted by: kathy | June 12, 2009, 2:20 pm 2:20 pm
I suppose it is in within executive purview, but absent gross negligence or malfeasance, Obama and his team are playing with fire in telling a supposed independent investigator to just clear out his desk and leave.
This is a clear shot across the bow, not only on bureaucratic “holdovers” of other administrations to tow the line, but that “inspectors general” have a price to pay if they make wrong decisions.
No sane person can call this anything but a “chilling effect” on independent audits of our rapidly out of control government expenses.
Posted by: robertb | June 12, 2009, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm
Kevin Johnson got in trouble with an underage girl and this is who Obama is firing IG because of.
That is change we can believe.
The politics in this country are a joke.
Posted by: dan | June 12, 2009, 2:23 pm 2:23 pm
The Obama admin keeps chipping away at their credibility by helping out their political allies at the expense of the taxpayer. The president has the right to hire and fire members of the executive branch at his will, but IG’s are supposed to be non-political, so if one is fired, there better be a pretty good, demonstrable example of misconduct or poor performance. I don’t know if this rises to that level, and anyone who takes the time to learn about this situation will conclude that Walpin obviously caught Johnson with his hand in the cookie jar, otherwise there would not be a settlement requiring him to personally pay back $72k. Where I come from that is a lot of money, not to mention the $400k+ that St. Hope has to repay. The fact that he was still elected as mayor says that the residents there don’t care that much about the waste of their money, but I care about the waste and fraudulent use of MY money, which is what happened with Americorps funds and what is going to be flowing through his hands in stimulus money.
Posted by: Jason | June 12, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm
The president has free reign to fire anyone he wants to.
Posted by: matt | June 12, 2009, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
“The president has free reign to fire anyone he wants to.”
So you don’t care why or how? I thought this was all about ending the “culture of corruption” in Washington? If he fires someone that stinks of a “culture of corruption”, the response is “he can fire anyone he wants to”?
Gives a new emotion to a “chill going down your leg”.
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
dan: Did you read the article? This guy basically called his boss an idiot and a liar publicly, repeatedly, on the record. How do you think that would fly in any private business? Is accountability really that foreign a concept to the Right?
“In April of this year, the new Acting Attorney General, Lawrence Brown, settled the case, requiring St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson.
…
Walpin said this was “akin to deciding that, while one should not put a fox in a small chicken coop, it is fine to do so in a large chicken coop!”
…
(Walpin) said arguments that the settlement is in the government’s interest “is an attempt to pull the wool over the public’s eyes.”
Posted by: jhw539 | June 12, 2009, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
Michelle my Belle… Some decisions about CNCS are being made by First Lady Michelle Obama, according to service advocates.
First Lady Michelle Obama’s chief of staff, Jackie Norris, is being sent to the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) in what is both a White House shake-up and an indication of the first lady’s sway over the corporation that oversees AmeriCorps, Serve and Learn and the Senior Corps.
Posted by: WhereWasThePress? | June 12, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
KR – I think you mean “If he fires someone WHO CAUGHT THOSE that stink of a “culture of corruption”
Posted by: robertb | June 12, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
kathy:”And as for the president disobeying the law he voted for…well, I’m shocked…”
Uh, he’s following the law. That’s why the guy is still on the payroll for 30 days and Congress has been notified. If they want to raise any legitimate reasons other than partisan digs to counter this action, they have 30 days before he leaves government employment.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 12, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
How many church-run groups did Walpin investigate for engaging in politics and preaching support for GW Bush? Walpin was hyper-political in his support of Romney.
Going after non-profit Community groups for minor book-keeping errors because Sr. members support the ‘other’ party is not a good idea if the new President understands and supports Community Organizers.
Posted by: thebob.bob | June 12, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
And the message, loud and clear is…don’t go investigating one of Obama’s buddies.
Posted by: Keith | June 12, 2009, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
“If they want to raise any legitimate reasons other than partisan digs to counter this action, they have 30 days before he leaves government employment”
Uhh, I think civil service and labor rights he has more options than that, let alone the congressional investigation meaningless as it may be coming from the minority party.
This smacks a bit of Archibald Cox’s Saturday Nite Massacre and the amazing Democratic snit over Alberto Gonzalez firing of attorneys. And we’re less than six months in.
Obama’s playing with fire, acting Chicago style and you just kneejerk falling into line, jhw
Posted by: robertb | June 12, 2009, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
“This guy basically called his boss an idiot and a liar publicly, repeatedly, on the record. How do you think that would fly in any private business? Is accountability really that foreign a concept to the Right?”
So he should shut up and color? I told Jake he needs to learn that term because that’s apparently what is expected of all of us, shut up and color. I thought government officials standing up to Bush was a mark of integrity, but against Obama he should be fired and be accountable. Gotcha, no double standard there.
Isn’t this simular to the Justice Department thing with Bush? They went through and fired some attorneys and it was national news of him firing people who disagreed with him? How is this different? (BTW, was against Bush on that issue for some of them.)
Not to mention, that is not why he was fired. The administration has given no reason why he was fired.
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 2:44 pm 2:44 pm
“Going after non-profit Community groups for minor book-keeping errors…”
MINOR bookeeping errors??
Given $847,673
What is admitted to being misused..
$423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson.
Thats MINOR bookeeping issues? Thats half of the money and just what they admit to. How is that minor? Do you have minor bookeeping errors with half of your monthly income?
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Strange… fire a man (Walpin) for doing his job? Do you suppose this is a coincidence:
First Lady Michelle Obama’s chief of staff, Jackie Norris, is being sent to the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) in what is both a White House shake-up and an indication of the first lady’s sway over the corporation that oversees AmeriCorps, Serve and Learn and the Senior Corps
CNCS remains without a CEO after the withdrawal last month of Nike vice president Maria Eitel, even before her nomination went to the Senate. Although the corporation’s CEO must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, Michelle Obama reportedly has taken the lead in selecting the nominee.
Posted by: SjB | June 12, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
hmmm…so the president has “free rein to fire whomever he wants to”…is that prevailing opinion now that Obama is in office? Funny, it certainly didn’t seem to be the case when G.W. let some judges go a while back. I seem to recall the earth shook, teeth gnashed, and weeping and wailing were heard like never before from sea to shining sea! Guess part of “change” included all the rules, huh??
Posted by: LB | June 12, 2009, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
KR:”"This guy basically called his boss an idiot and a liar publicly, repeatedly, on the record. How do you think that would fly in any private business? Is accountability really that foreign a concept to the Right?”
So he should shut up and color?”
Have you ever had a job? You don’t talk to the press about how stupid a decision your boss made. If you’re in a healthy office, you take it up behind closed doors. Seriously, this is not a difficult concept – I learned it flipping burgers in high school and it has held for every job since.
“I thought government officials standing up to Bush was a mark of integrity, but against Obama he should be fired and be accountable. Gotcha, no double standard there.”
Please cite an actual REAL case of government officials “standing up to Bush.” Other than by resigning. All you’ve ‘got’ is a non-existent strawman.
“Isn’t this simular to the Justice Department thing with Bush?”
No, since the Justice Department “thing” was directly and explicitly violating laws written by Congress (hiring careerists based on political party is a no-no – we’re not some tribal third world nation). It also allegedly dealt with using prosecutions for political gain – an appalling corruption of our electoral process if true.
This is firing some guy who was attacking the credibility and mission of his own employer.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 12, 2009, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
Fire and hire. we support you Mr President
Posted by: Edgar Suuna | June 12, 2009, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
“Isn’t this simular to the Justice Department thing with Bush?”
No, since the Justice Department “thing” was directly and explicitly violating laws written by Congress (hiring careerists based on political party is a no-no – we’re not some tribal third world nation)”
I think the incident being refered to is when Bush fired 7 DOJ lawyers for not prosecuting ACORN.
Its tough to keep all the Bush scandals straight.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 12, 2009, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
Sorry Charlie…I mean jhw… an Inspector General is not your garden variety political yes man. Inspectors General have been used by governments for 100s of years to clean out corruption. Here we make it a civil service position. It’s more important even than one of Obama’s 100 or so czars, to have auditing czars be able to investigate what they want and when they are overruled, to call out the big guys for their biases.
That’s the name of this tune, jwh and ryan, and I really am surprised that you just jump on the Obama bandwagon without a thought on something as sleazy as this.
Posted by: robertb | June 12, 2009, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
“Have you ever had a job? You don’t talk to the press about how stupid a decision your boss made. If you’re in a healthy office, you take it up behind closed doors. Seriously, this is not a difficult concept – I learned it flipping burgers in high school and it has held for every job since.”
Whatever, of course I’ve had a job. He came out critical of the settlement that was done without his knowledge, indicating his job was already gone. The attorney General did his job for him, instead of going through him. I’d be ticked off too. And this is obviously political corruption, your saying he should have kept his mouth shut about political corruption under something that was his responsibility? I wouldn’t claim it either.
“Please cite an actual REAL case..”
By stating that, the only REAL case is one of your opinion so im not going to waste my time.
“This is firing some guy who was attacking the credibility and mission of his own employer.”
Even if it’s true, even if everything you say is true, it DOES NOT dismiss the obvious corruption of the actions done by the attorney General in this case.
You can say it’s because he expressed his outrage in public, which could be justified, but that is not what the adminstration has said is the reason for the firing first off. And second, it doesn’t discount the circumstances that reek of corruption, period.
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
jhw, in taking someone to task over his comment on this issue, you wrote, ” Is accountability really that foreign a concept to the Right?” first of all, it is not just ‘the right’ who are troubled by this dismissal. I am disturbed and want a lot more information, and I am not a right winger, despite repeated suggestions by you, ryan_c, and others around these parts that I am.
It seems to me that the AG’s settlement of the case, which included having the charity and the individual both pay large sums of money back to the government, means that Walpin was right to find that the groups and Mr. Johnson had misused government funds. That was what he was charged with investigating.
You say that Walpin repeatedly insulted his boss when he publicly disagreed with the settlement. I have mixed feelings about this part of the story and want to see more information. But I understand Walpin’s frustration. He was charged with rooting out fraud and misuse of funds; he identified such fraud; he reported such fraud and the perpetrators were punished. However, Johnson was an important public figure and powerful friend of the president who won a public office in the interim and now his position in Sacramento might jeopardize the city’s ability to obtain stimulus funds. So something had to be worked out, and Walpin was frustrated by what was worked out. Maybe he was rude in his response to the agreement, but was that a firing offense?
Given the delicacy of the matter, I think the president should have thought not just twice but several times before taking this step (firing Walpin) and should have made sure he did everything about the firing completely transparently and correctly. Grassley points out that the proper notification of Congress was not made in a timely fashion. That’s a shame.
I applaud Mr. Walpin for saving the taxpayers a ton of money. I worry about the chilling effect of this firing on other “independent” inspectors general, as other commentators do.
Posted by: moderate | June 12, 2009, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
robertb:”This smacks a bit of Archibald Cox’s Saturday Nite Massacre and the amazing Democratic snit over Alberto Gonzalez firing of attorneys. ”
? Unlike Cox, this guy was in no way investigating anything having to do with Obama. Unlike Cox, no one is resigning in protest. Unlike Cox, this does not have to do with a prosecutor. And just for trivia value, unlike Cox the firing was not done by Robert Bork (yes, that conservative darling almost-justice-Bork).
As for the snit over the attorney generals, you show a pretty deep ignorance of that case too if you think it is equivalent to this one.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 12, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
“hiring careerists based on political party is a no-no – we’re not some tribal third world nation”
Yeah… I’m sure that doesn’t happen here. We are so above that. Our military Generals and Admirals are supposed to be promoted for their abilities too and not their political affiliation, but that doesn’t happen either. And it doesn’t matter which President it is, it happens.
Posted by: KR | June 12, 2009, 3:14 pm 3:14 pm
“an Inspector General is not your garden variety political yes man. ”
Gerald Walpin was director of Center For Individual Rights which is famous for fighting affirmative actions for arguing against college codes against racist speech and sexual harrassment, and getting some football players rapists off the hook.
He has been on some kind of mission against colleges that do not allow military recruiters on campus penning several opeds.
Not sure you can call the guy non political.
“That’s the name of this tune, jwh and ryan, and I really am surprised that you just jump on the Obama bandwagon without a thought on something as sleazy as this.”
That’s the name of the tune the right wing media wants to play, today.
Yesterday it was fake outrage at David Letterman.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 12, 2009, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm
KR:”"Please cite an actual REAL case..”
By stating that, the only REAL case is one of your opinion so im not going to waste my time. ”
No, there is actual reality. You said:
“I thought government officials standing up to Bush was a mark of integrity, but against Obama he should be fired and be accountable. Gotcha, no double standard there.”
You clearly and explicitly made an accusation of a double standard based on absolutely no actual event. You’re fabricating events that never happened to insult those who hold different opinions and it clouds the debate that should take be based on actual reality. Or can you cite this case where government officials stood up to Bush (other than by respectfully and quietly resigning) and were commended for their integrity rather than promptly fired? When did this happen? Or is your accusation of a double standard a completely baseless attempt to discredit anyone you disagree with?
Posted by: jhw539 | June 12, 2009, 3:20 pm 3:20 pm
Gerald Walpin “getting some football players rapists off the hook”. Such a smear, after Virginia Tech woman lost her criminal case where her rape charge at the grand jury!! stage, she filed some civil charge under the Violence against Woman act and the Center to which Walpin belongs intervened
Sorry Charlie, the Act was ruled overbroad in authority and the case was dismissed. Walpin and the center WON in the eyes of justice!
“Gerald Walpin was director of Center For Individual Rights which is famous for fighting affirmative actions… ..He has been on some kind of mission against colleges …”
So basically you’re admitting Obama is acting in a raw partisan fashion with this firing!!! Hah!!
Posted by: robertb | June 12, 2009, 3:38 pm 3:38 pm
That’s Acting U.S. Attorney, not Attorney General. He wasn’t Walpin’s boss.
Posted by: tanarg | June 12, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
“Such a smear, after Virginia Tech woman lost her criminal case where her rape charge at the grand jury!! stage, she filed some civil charge under the Violence against Woman act and the Center to which Walpin belongs intervened”
No smear at all, she was raped, star football players got off.
“Brzonkala told her roommate about the incident in January 1995 and then pressed charges in the campus judicial system that spring. Morrison was suspended, but the school held a second hearing after he appealed. Eventually, the provost reduced his punishment to probation plus one hour of counseling.”
Though one of the football players was convicted of sexually assaulting someone else…how nice.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 12, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
Ahhhhh, the transparency overfloweth
Posted by: Drilling | June 12, 2009, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
You can not criticize BHO or his friends or you will get fired or they will play the race card. What have we become?
Posted by: Carol in Alabama | June 12, 2009, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
So Walpin tried to throw an election and got fired?
Good. One less mole.
Posted by: JM | June 12, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
ABC sucks up agian to Barry O. What a misleading headline. Obama fires IG for catching an Obama pal stealing money and the IG is controversial? This is Chicago politics at it’s best. The article does not mention that the money will never be paid back because st. Hope is insolvent and Johnson does not have to pay back his portion. Do your job ABC. If Bush did this there would be an investigation.
Posted by: mitch | June 12, 2009, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
soon they will come for dissenters in the dark of night…
Posted by: hillary | June 12, 2009, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
It kind of sounds like the POTUS is picking up on The Donald’s methodology..maybe he has been watching The Apprentice series.
You know, for as sad as some of these happenings are (I won’t say ‘news’).. at least each day I get a chuckle. Thanks Mr. Tapper and ABC for getting me through my day.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 12, 2009, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
Now Barry can put someone honest from ACORN in there to overesee his community organization slush fund.
Posted by: mitch | June 12, 2009, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm
I believe this is a crime – that is to say, it used to be, but who knows what’s illegal anymore. Obama should be arrested for this.
Posted by: AMERICA LOST | June 12, 2009, 4:52 pm 4:52 pm
This poor guy obviously violated the two main rules:
1st) you get along. / 2nd) you go along.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 12, 2009, 4:54 pm 4:54 pm
The U. S. Attorney’s Office found that Walpin LIED to them about the evidence, WITHHELD evidence, did not even conduct an AUDIT before making its accusations, and had made public announcements about criminal charges that DID NOT EXIST.
Walpin made this announcement in the middle of an election. He’s just another Bush mole, and now he’s been neutralized.
Walpin’s lucky he’s not in jail for falsifying evidence. As it is, he’s only looking for a job.
Posted by: JM | June 12, 2009, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm
No matter what the circumstances.. the POTUS is having a bad week.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 12, 2009, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm
the problem is he did his job, got to close to the hands that feeds him. dont want to have anyone on board who might finger someone close to obama. perhaps david letterman should be appointed as he has so much in common with the party in power
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm
Johnson’s attorney Bill Portanova told reporters that “volunteer organizations are staffed by people with good hearts and intentions and, as a rule, are not accountants by trade.”
Gee, it would be nice if this kind of argument worked for micro-firms facing the California building code enforcement regime, not to mention the IRS.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 12, 2009, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
As often is with “personnel issues” we’re not given the real reason for Walpin’s dismissal. Here in Sacramento, many are disappointed that someone who was willing to take on Kevin Johnson is now being fired. Some of us had known about the grant money abuses that took place in 2004 but had no idea who was the correct authority to complain to. Some of us went to the Secretary of State’s office and the FPPC to complain about his use of Americorps volunteers to support certain incumbant candidates for school board who had voted to close Sacramento High and turn it over to Johnson. Others were aware of the religious component that was part of the Volunteers obligation because it was reported in the Sacramento Bee. What got the Inspector General interested was the allegations of sexual abuse involving Johnson and two Americorps volunteers. Reports in the Bee of Johnson’s settlement made to an underage girl in Phoenix gave some credence to the stories.
The settlement that was reached between Johnson and Americorps means he once again escapes real scrutiny. It’s unlikely he’ll ever repay a dime of the money. I don’t want this story to be about Obama. I want it to be about Johnson. That he his given any kind of weight as a political and public figure on the state and national stage is pathetic. Here in Sacramento it is just laughable when we’re not cryin’ about it. Obama needs to pay more attention to the actions of those he calls his allies.
Posted by: Kate Lenox | June 12, 2009, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
Apparently his investigation was getting too close to Obama for comfort and had to go. When a criminal is in charge, anything is possible and justice is just an abstract notion.
Posted by: James | June 12, 2009, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
ryanc…no fake outrage over letterman. its real…look at msnbc…54% of their audiance says he is out of bounds. and thats as liberal of a crowd as you can get.letterman has done more for the gop than rush limbaugh, he has exposed hypocracy of the left to the independents and the moderate left.
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
Apparently the investigation was getting too close to Obama and something needed to be done to stop it. When a criminal is in charge anything is possible and justice is just an abstract notion. Obama can run but he can’t hide.
Posted by: James | June 12, 2009, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
i love it…this article cited the new KKK….the kennedy kerry klan. thats creative.
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
We’ve lost confidence in Obama. Can we fire him? Oops, America has to put up with 3+ more years of him doing his best to destroy America.
Posted by: Mark | June 12, 2009, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
Has anyone posted the letter explaining the reasons for the termination?
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 12, 2009, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm
kate lennox….if what you printed is factually accurate there is obviously more to the story.s eems to me this guy got fired for doing his job,
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
So what’s the problem with Mr. Walpin again??? If I read the passage correctly, he lost his job for doing his job…Not a good sign..
Posted by: Parallax View | June 12, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
so the mayor used americorps like obama used acorn? interesting. obviously a settlement was reached therefor vindicating the inspector general actions. we can keep a speaker of the house who lies about the cia and fire an inspetor general who exposed the mayor of sacramento. hmmm…sounds like chicago to me
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
JM…better re-read the article. New Attorney General is requiring St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson. Walpin complained that he had not been consulted on the settlement. Seems that Walpin was fired for doing his job. Now our gov’t is going to give Mayor Johnson millions of our tax money. I wonder if Mayor Johnson can spend the money wisely or misuse the money again?
Posted by: camp50 | June 12, 2009, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
I guess Mayor Johnson can pay ACORN to get him re-elected in the next race. It is ashame to get fired for doing your job. I find it very funny that Barry O didn’t even remember that he co-sponsor a billed that required him to give Walpin a 30 day notice…..
Posted by: camp50 | June 12, 2009, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm
this new regieme makes the GOP look honest. i had an employee come to me today and ask how the new health care bill will impact him. he also quickly figured out that if the employer is going to be taxed for providing health care that we may have less employees or his salary will be rdeuced to pay for it. so everyone who works will end up paying for it regardless of your tax bracket. he said that s-cks.
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
JM, deep breaths, dear. You’re getting overheated. You wrote: “The U. S. Attorney’s Office found that Walpin LIED to them about the evidence, WITHHELD evidence, did not even conduct an AUDIT before making its accusations, and had made public announcements about criminal charges that DID NOT EXIST.” Funny, they went on to make a settlement with the parties he accused that required the guilty parties to pay substantial amounts of money back. Seems that if it were so crystal clear that he was lying and there was no case, Johnson would never have settled and the government would have dropped the case once Bush was out of office (since you claim the investigator was a “Bush mole”– bizarre claim, btw, since it is no secret that he was appointed by Bush during Bush’s administration). That did not happen.
Then you said,” Walpin made this announcement in the middle of an election. He’s just another Bush mole, and now he’s been neutralized.” For my opinion of your characterization of Walpin, see above. And if someone does something corrupt or illegal, it cannot be mentioned while that person is running for public office? Really? So if I’m ever accused of a crime, I should immediately start running for public office to get the investigators off my back?
Your overwrought conclusion: “Walpin’s lucky he’s not in jail for falsifying evidence. As it is, he’s only looking for a job.” I would imagine that if he had falsified evidence, the Obama administration would have indicted him for it. And he’s not only looking for a job, he’s incurred the wrath of The Chosen One and he’s suffered having his reputation attacked by folks like you on the internet and elsewhere. SEems a high price to pay for doing your job with dogged determination to me.
Posted by: moderate | June 12, 2009, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
This stinks of political firing. After the democrats spending 2 years wanting hearings and investigations into 7 fired AGs I would think this would produce bigger waves. Especially with “no comment” being the reason being given?
Until/unless more information comes out I will withhold some judgment but considering Obama has invested money into the Americorps program this sure looks like a case of wanting a figurehead who finds nothing wrong with one of Obama’s pet projects. Also Johnson is an Obama supporter.
Speaking of AGs Obama has announced he will be replacing some (hasn’t said how many). I wonder if it will be “no comment” there also. Thanks Jake for investigating some of these issues where it seems most other reporters won’t get anywhere near.
We’re losing free press more and more every day and things like the fact democrats get weekly coverage for “protesting” fired AGs some of whom were shown to not be doing their job and most MSM journalists are accepting democrats at their word and refuse to cover things like Pelosi should be of concern to everyone.
Posted by: Cryos | June 12, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm
How dare an IG intercede in a legitimate scheme for wealth redistribution? Off with his head!
Posted by: kriuk | June 12, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
now the rest of the country understands why california is bankrupt.people like johnson are all over this state.its a democrat run state
Posted by: catman | June 12, 2009, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
No mention yet of how our First Lady Michelle Obama figures into all of this?
Posted by: WhereWasThePress? | June 12, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm
So, it sounds to me like the president fired the inspector general for doing his job …. it’s just unfortunate that doing his job interfered with an Obama supporter misusing federal grant money.
Posted by: Miss Me | June 12, 2009, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
As usual, people jump to their own conclusions WITHOUT all the facts. It looks to me the atty gen became quite upset because he was not notified of “the settlement”. At least that is what I am deriving from the article. President Obama has fired ONE AG; guess you all forget President Bush fired EIGHT AGs without valid causes, other than he wanted to replace them with his very own cronies. So, until all the facts are in, it would be wise to stop bashing President Obama. He is NOT the culprit here. It seems those that hate our President are determined to blame him for everything simply because he knew someone! If we were all judged by YOUR standards, we’d all be some kind of criminal merely for having known someone who might have done something wrong or is guilty of same. Think, people!
Posted by: NinaK | June 12, 2009, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm
I love this part: “Given that you (Obama) were a cosponsor of this vital legislation I am deeply troubled to learn of the ultimatum given Inspector General Walpin absent Congressional notification,” Grassley wrote.
ABC – please continue to follow this story. It’s an important one on so many levels.
Posted by: Love it | June 12, 2009, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
I am happy to have Obama, an honorable president, who will remove all these Republicans that were imposed on US. We had enough corruptions and lies from the past Republican government.
Posted by: Andy | June 12, 2009, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm
“I am happy to have Obama, an honorable president, who will remove all these Republicans that were imposed on US.”
Exactly. Every honorable President should have the ability to illegally fire people who uncover corruption about one of the President’s own cronies.
This is the CHANGE WE NEED! Enjoy!
Posted by: Jenn | June 12, 2009, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
This story feels VERY politically motivated — first off, Walpin was appointed by George W. Bush in 2007. That right there makes such a position, for either party, one that is somewhat partisan in nature.
Next, in August 2008 when the matter was sent to the local US Attorney’s office, even THEY had problems with it,
“We also highlighted numerous questions and further investigation they needed to conduct, including the fact that they had not done an audit to establish how much AmeriCorps money was actually misspent,” Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown said in an April 29 letter to the federal counsel of inspectors general.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_national_service_inspector_general
It seems to me at least, there were valid grounds for Walpin’s dismissal, as he seemed more focused on finding something politically embarrassing for his GOP friends, than actually uncovering actual waste and abuse (as if that was the case, he’d done a FULL AUDIT).
Posted by: sammyglick | June 12, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
Obama, the crook…caught red-handed.
Posted by: Robert | June 12, 2009, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
Clearly, Obama has improperly fired Walpin. Impeachable violation of the law?
Posted by: tanarg | June 13, 2009, 12:48 am 12:48 am
jhw539 wrote:
Uh, he’s following the law. That’s why the guy is still on the payroll for 30 days and Congress has been notified. If they want to raise any legitimate reasons other than partisan digs to counter this action, they have 30 days before he leaves government employment.
———
Obama has to tell Congress WHY he fired him. He needn’t bother making up a lie, because it’s obvious he’s just playing Chicago thuggery in D.C., as the smart people in this country knew he would and the dumber than dumb bozos who drank the Kool-Aid were too blasted stupid to figure out on their own.
Posted by: tanarg | June 13, 2009, 12:51 am 12:51 am
The president wrote that “it is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as Inspectors General. That is no longer the case with regard to this Inspector general.”
—————————————-
Riiight! How dare Mr.Walpin question the manipulation of more than $850,000. of taxpayer dollars by one of your big-time supporters!!
Chicago politics at it finest. barf!!
Posted by: Sunnyr | June 13, 2009, 5:28 am 5:28 am
Perhaps Mr. Walpin discovered the documentation that AmeriCorps is actually intended by the Obama administration to become “Green Police”. These will be inner-city youth, recruited and given green shirts, and sent out into surrounding suburbs to track and monitor the amount of electricity used by each house. Those homes having a larger consumption-per-capita ratio will be issued homeless people to whom the homeowners will be required to house and to feed at their own expense while their new energy tax is tripled.
Such is the dream of the left-wing nutjobs.
Posted by: Howard Beale | June 13, 2009, 10:28 am 10:28 am
I hope this is not the end of this story, Jake… because I think BO thinks he is above the law and is intimidating government officials. This is highly illegal and unethnical. This IG should be fully reinstated and given a letter of apology for doing his job… protecting the taxpayer!
Posted by: Ben | June 13, 2009, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
Where’s the outrage? Bil Clinton fired ALL of the attorney’s and nothing was said. Bush fired 18 and Congress tried to impeach him. Nothing but crickets chirping over this one. The media and Congress and the Democratic Party are a bunch of lying hypocrites.
Posted by: Former_Democrat | June 13, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
I am reminded elsewhere that these actions began before last November’s election. So it’s unlikely that the August 2009 loomed large, if at all, in Mr. Brown’s calculations, though he no doubt was aware as to who would likely win the election.
Some have questioned Mr. Walpin’s actions, but he tried to get a resolution well before the election, and apparently was stonewalled by the Attorney’s office. Also, for those who might question Mr. Walpin taking the matter to the press before the election, please remember that career professionals at the DoJ proceeded against Senator Stevens well before the election, surely with the awareness that the matter would not be resolved until after the election.
Posted by: Alfred J. Lemire | June 14, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
uh, jake. quick question: why is this dude a “controversial IG”. wanst sure why you used that adjective. didnt see anything in the story to indicate it. or is anyone who actually asks a question of obama or one of his buddies, then ‘controversial’.
joe the plumber
gerald the IG
who next?……..
Posted by: fred | June 15, 2009, 11:44 am 11:44 am
Gerald Walpin, the inspector general fired for uncovering wrongdoing by a prominent Obama supporter, is a moderate Republican, not the right-wing kook depicted by the White House spin machine.
The White House itself recently cited and quoted Walpin, as a prominent and respected lawyer and former federal prosecutor, in supporting one of its judicial nominations, as was reported in a June 2 post at CNN’s Political Ticker.
Posted by: Harold | June 15, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm
Suspending Walpin with 30 days pay, then firing him is equivalent to firing him without notice but granting him a 30 day severance package. This is not what the law allows.
The Obama admin has committed a criminal act with this abrupt dismissal and Walpin should pursue this in court.
Posted by: Sunshine | June 15, 2009, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm
ABC:”Controversial?” What’s “controversial is how the media can cover up for Obama time in and time out. IF GW had done 1/15th of the things OBAMA has done, there would be 3 inch type headlines condemning him daily. but Obama gets a free pass on everything, from Rezco to the two trillion dollar deficit, to gas prices rising 35 % higher for no reason, to unemployment records, OBAMA gets a pass from ABC, NBC, etc..>WE used to have a press that actually investigated things. Now that they are paid arms of the DNC, they only dig up dirt on Republicans, while ignoring all the lies Obama said about the war, etc. HOW SAD! It should be a free press, but its now a FREE PASS!
Posted by: al brooks | June 16, 2009, 3:06 am 3:06 am
looks like Johnson was caught usign the Ameri-Corps as his personal slush fund and little elf helpers at taxpayer’s expense.
Posted by: Aaron Webb | June 16, 2009, 10:59 am 10:59 am
What’s with the headline? Who decided Mr. Walperin is controversial?
The controversial figures here are Johnson and the president.
And I love the line about how people who work for nonprofits basically don’t know anything about handling money, but they have “good hearts.” Sounds like reason enough to withhold funds to me.
Posted by: sreggie | June 16, 2009, 2:40 pm 2:40 pm
You have to remember…It’s only Fraud if they wish it to be… if your slush fund is run by Ted K. and his new dog Spot…..It’s community non-profit….
Why do you think Gov’t hates the so called “Organized Crime”….There can only be one….
Posted by: Jimmy | June 16, 2009, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
Why is the Inspector General controversial? Because he is looking into a corrupt democrat. He’d still have a job if the crook was Republican. I sure HOPE something will CHANGE soon.
Posted by: SEAL76 | June 16, 2009, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm
I hope Walpin has something good up his sleeve, saving up some good dirt, and ammo to fight this to the end. With that ignoramus Michelle Obama involved, its gotta be highly likely she’s made some big mistakes. The rest of the admin must be tired of scrambling to clean up for all the wreckless and idiotic things Mrs. Obama is doing. Someone in the admin Im sure will have to do something soon to reign her in before she blows it for all of them…
If I were Walpin, I’d file a lawsuit vs. the Obama admin. for this, they’ve clearly violated policy… Lets get this out into the plain view of all Americans who deserve to know about the corrupt activities in the Whitehouse!
Posted by: Chris H. | June 16, 2009, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm
Why should anyone be surprised at this? He is only doing what has been doing since he first entered politics. He honed his craft in the corrupt Chicago machine. What we have in the White House is the most corrupt president in our nation’s history. What else is going on behind the scenes?
Posted by: Jennie | June 17, 2009, 12:41 am 12:41 am
This is like a Grisham novel (or the Clinton Administration). People who rock the boat or expose fraud are simply removed and the state run media just looks the other way. Just like Acorn and the others, Obama gets a free ride again.
Posted by: eric | June 18, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
The article notes:
“In April of this year, the new Acting Attorney General, Lawrence Brown, settled the case, requiring St. HOPE Academy to pay $423,836.50 — $72,836.50 of which would be paid personally by Mayor Johnson. Walpin complained that he had not been consulted on the settlement.”
I have messed up my check book here and there but to the tune of $423,000+????
That was the settlement. Who knows how much Johns “mistakingly” used for things he had no idea he should not use the money.
Sounds like Hussein has given us the change of which he spoke/
Posted by: Pastor Jack Wilson | October 30, 2009, 8:36 am 8:36 am
Controversial my ####. That criminal (obama) and Criminal (johnson) is where the controversy lies. I may be wrong, but I thought the inspector generals job are to uncover wrongdoing. When will congress open their eyes and realize the criminal that is disgracing the office of the President? The comment from the crooked lawyer, saying they weren’t accountans, hell I’m not an accountant either, but guess what? I CAN ADD, learned to add in the 1st grade. This lawyer is obviously from the younger generation, where the public schools graduate students with a pulse.
Posted by: Dave | March 6, 2010, 11:36 pm 11:36 pm