Third Inspector General Controversy Emerges

This whole thing makes me sick. We must have accountability in government. If Obama can not follow the laws that he helped right, our society is doomed. We got some of this with Bush and it must STOP! We are nation of laws. WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS. The law is clear about this matter. Gerald Walpin is a great man who has served our nation with dignity and integrity and we must not allow him to be treated in this manner. The is either a really ugly money and power grab by the administration or the worst case of age discrimination I’ve ever seen. Either way Obama and his administration have broken the law and must be held accountable for their actions.

What do you expect from the party who shoves classified documents down its shorts with no repercussions at all?

Norm Eisen, told staffers for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, called firing Walpin an act of “political courage,”
I really don’t want to chime in anymore on most of these issues, but people should be aware, and politicians especially, that the source of courage (see Federalist Papers, Montesque, et al) is anger.

Wouldn’t it be just peachy if any wise man could be eliminated for being (hush, hush) senile, or any bright leader as being (hush, hush) alarmist, or any concerned civil rights observer as being (hush hush) pro-gay, or any concern of mis-directed funds being (hush, hush) troublesome. Reasons should be written, that’s the whole protection of a lawful order.

‘Walpin said “they are exaggerating,” and blamed the appearance that he seemed confused on the fact that his “notes had somehow become disorganized. And I was not feeling well.”‘
OK, so from his own admittance he did indeed appear dazed and confused – I suppose everyone who claimed that was a lie to slander a completely innocent, sharp as a whip guy at all times will apologize now the FACTS are coming out.

Maria:”This sounds more like one of Gibbs’s press conferences.”
Gibbs does not actually make policy and is not expected to have a firm grasp of all the relevant facts. Heck, Bush hired a talking head off of FoxNews to do Gibb’s job for a while.

Let’s see, we had Congressional hearings on Bush’s firings of US attorneys, which was perfectly legal, but Obama breaks his own law in regard to the firing of these IGs, and it’s OK with the Dems? This story should be headlined in every major newspaper and TV national news show in this nation. Thanks, Jake.

” Heck, Bush hired a talking head off of FoxNews to do Gibb’s job for a while. ”
Tony Snow was a heckuva lot more than a “talking head off of FoxNews”. And he was heads above Gibbs. More professional, more courteous, more intelligent.

Quick poll here – Who laughs hysterically and who grimaces with pain every time you hear the word transparency come out of Obama’s mouth?
I’m at the hysterically laughing point.

Today’s LA Times:
“Timing of Treasury Department challenge, AIG probe raises concerns – The challenge to TARP watchdog Neil Barofsky’s authority came as he began an investigation of the department’s role in approving bonuses to executives of insurance giant AIG, sources say.”
It doesn’t say anything about the Freddie & Fannie bonuses… I keep wondering why those bonuses never seem to get much attention.

Concerned in OH:” Every morning there’s some new Obama lie, failure, or broken promise. ”
The right isn’t strong on reading comprehension I take it:
“This Inspector General controversy is quite different from the other two, however, in its apparent lack of connection to President Obama or his administration. The White House does not appoint the inspector general of the ITC. Rather, that power is held by Aranoff, a former Democratic Senate staffer who was appointed to the position by President Bush. And unlike in the other two cases, there is no evidence that the White House or Obama administration had any issue with Gwynn or the work she was doing.”
Keep this in mind when they crank up the mud machine for 2010.

MarkLeavenworth:”You and yours apparently still don’t understand what a good reason is. A good reason for a termination is an act, a fact, a breach, or a crime…with records, with evidence to support the claim.”
Did you read the full letter? It did indeed list acts and facts of where Mr Walpin was not fulfilling his job. And records and evidence that are being collected and reported now only support the reasons given for his dismissal.
Even the comment about “dazed and confused” (which would get me fired – it’s my job to provide concise and accurate information on the projects I am working on) has now been substantiated by Mr Walpin himself, who gave an excuse as to why he was confused as opposed to denying it happened. That is a fact where he failed at his assigned job.

Listen all you Obama haters. This Wolpin case stemmed from the fact that he was not doing his job properly for some time and a republican was the one who called for his resignation accompanied by a democrat. He attended a hearing without providing all the facts and left out portions of the account which were necessary to come to a logical conclusion. Read the inditement….it is all there. He held back facts pertinent to the case in hand and was selective in what information he would share. Of course, it is one more thing to try to attribute to Obama. You all must learn to read all of the facts not the ones you think will demean our president.

jhw539- It did indeed list acts and facts of where Mr Walpin was not fulfilling his job… (which would get me fired -
——————–
What acts and facts, in the letter the president wrote to congress, are you referring to?
You seem to believe that the standard the president should have for firing an IG is the same standard your employer should have for firing you?

More evidence this needs investigating (Source – Washington Times):
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.

jhw539- Or maybe you think it’s OK for a president to name an IG without specifying a good reason, and then for his staff and associates to launch a hunt?

There are two parallels I think of with the way this appears to be shaping up. The one is the social tactics ill-tempered teenage girls use when they don’t get their way. The other is the tendancy of the British bureaucrats to always try to paint their critics as mentally unstable in one way, or another.

Jake, I am stumped by this paragraph:
“This Inspector General controversy is quite different from the other two, however, in its apparent lack of connection to President Obama or his administration. ”
Uh… the ITC is part of the executive branch of the government, so there is a tie to Obama. Which begs the question on which files were confiscated and why… Don’cha thank???

My apologies Jake on garbling the ITC independence. Please accept my apologies.
The mission of the Commission is to (1) administer U.S. trade remedy laws within its mandate in a fair and objective manner; (2) provide the President, USTR, and Congress with independent analysis, information, and support on matters of tariffs, international trade, and U.S. competitiveness; and (3) maintain the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS).

Obama and his fellow Democrats (that would die from lack of Oxygen if Obama stopped to quick) are a bunch of idiots. They are destroying America as they strive to have their (yes people replace staff with knowledge and digitny. I hope Wolpin makes them give him a public apology at the very least. America can not survive 4 years of Obama.

Mr.Walpin was confused because he paused. Obama does that every-time he speaks without a Teleprompter.

Mr. Walpin says he had been working around the clock and was becoming ill at the meeting
Posted by: Ordinary Sadie
when your being hammered with the truth, yeah you can get sick

“You all must learn to read all of the facts not the ones you think will demean our president.”
Posted by: talmag
So why do you think Walpin is the one out there telling his story to the media (which disputes the reasons given in the letter) and the White House is remaining mum?
Also, why do you think Obama felt compelled to violate the proper firing procedure for an inspector general? He was required to notify Congress of the reasons for the firing in writing prior to firing Walpin. Since Obama co-sponsored the bill that made that requirement law, you’d think he would have fired Walpin correctly.
If Obama has fired Walpin in the correct, legal manner, I might agree that he had good cause, but by-passing the law doesn’t reflect well on Obama’s motives. No hate here – those are just the facts.

I thought I’d never see a more corrupt, infantile and vengeful administration than Bush II but BO has managed to beat the odds and actually make the Bush-Cheney regime look good. Wonder what’s next after the firings, the ABC propaganda machine, the endless television appearances a la all the famous megalomaniacal supreme leaders–I don’t think the United States can take much more after 8 years of Bush–we need a real leader and as MLK said in the 60′s, “it’s not the color of one’s skin it’s the content of the character.” Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Emanuel, Geithner, Axelrod, Michelle and Barry Obama.

“The right isn’t strong on reading comprehension I take it:
”
jlw,
READ the LAW. It’s right out there in the public domain, and its about as clear as anything ever written in congress!
there is even this from LAST YEAR!
Washington, DC – Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) released a statement today with the news of the nomination of Neil Barofsky, a Federal prosecutor in
New York, to the post of Special Inspector General (IG) of the Troubled Assets Relief Program. Baucus fought to include the Special IG requirement in the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to protect taxpayer interests and guard against waste, fraud and abuse in the Treasury’s new financial rescue program. The Senate Finance Committee will hold a hearing on November 17, 2008, to question Mr. Barofsky about the position.
“I included the provision for an independent oversight authority because every American is depending on us to track, defend, and recoup the dollars spent during this rescue process. Hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money has already been sent
out the door for this financial rescue. This effort urgently needs the stronger oversight and increased accountability that the special Inspector General can provide. I will do everything in my power to thoroughly and quickly vet Mr. Barofsky, and to see a confirmed IG on the job without delay,” said Baucus. “I’ve said before that I don’t like bailouts, and my support for the financial rescue program was conditioned on this strong protection that the special IG can provide for taxpayers.”
The Special Inspector General will be independent from the Treasury Department, with funding and full authority to audit and investigate. Baucus insisted that the office have
adequate resources to meet its goal of identifying and bringing to an end any fraud or abuse of taxpayer funds used by the program. The Inspector General will be required to make his or her first report to Congress within 60 days of confirmation.
what part of “The Special Inspector General will be independent from the Treasury Department” is so difficult for you lefties to grasp?
There is nothing in the TARP LAW which defines the position & its duties or the IG Act of 1978 that would lead one to the conclusions that Treasury made.
This position was created for the SOLE PURPOSE of making sure what happened…would not happen! The only thing was everyone “assumed” it was going to be those who recieved TARP funds who be blocking the process, NOT The Obama administration’s Treasury Dept!