The Politicized Firing of a US Inspector Gen.

[n david]

Remember a little over a year ago President Bush used his right to remove some US Attorneys from their position ... and the Democrats went nuts, demanding hearings, etc. For months the news was centered on Bush and Gonzalez firing these people for political purposes. There was even talk of impeachment.

To be honest, I'm still a little skeptical over the Bush Attorney flap. It appears, from some angles, to be politically motivated ... but apparently legal.

Well, BHO has done the same thing, this time with a US Inspector General - and this time there's a law that requires specific reasons as to the firing, so as to safeguard against politicized firings ...

And BHO was a co-sponsor of this legislation!

In short, the US IG's job is to find any misuse, abuse, etc of gov't funds.

Well it appears this US IG found just that ... only the perp is a BHO donor and supporter and this US IG has been fired. What's incredible is the US IG did his job - he found misuse of funds and this perp and BHO donor ended up having to repay over $400,000 to the gov't as a result of this IG's investigation.

I'm waiting for the Democrats to demand an investigation ... I bet I'll be waiting a long time ... so since the Democrats will never call for one, let's hear the Republicans demand one - and make sure the public knows BHO is violating his own sponsored legislation with the politicized firing of this US IG.

Source

[EVAunit01]

I hadn't heard about the IG being fired. It's just politics as usual. So much for all that change we were promised.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by n david

Remember a little over a year ago President Bush used his right to remove some US Attorneys from their position ... and the Democrats went nuts, demanding hearings, etc. For months the news was centered on Bush and Gonzalez firing these people for political purposes. There was even talk of impeachment.

To be honest, I'm still a little skeptical over the Bush Attorney flap. It appears, from some angles, to be politically motivated ... but apparently legal.

Well, BHO has done the same thing, this time with a US Inspector General - and this time there's a law that requires specific reasons as to the firing, so as to safeguard against politicized firings ...

And BHO was a co-sponsor of this legislation!

In short, the US IG's job is to find any misuse, abuse, etc of gov't funds.

Well it appears this US IG found just that ... only the perp is a BHO donor and supporter and this US IG has been fired. What's incredible is the US IG did his job - he found misuse of funds and this perp and BHO donor ended up having to repay over $400,000 to the gov't as a result of this IG's investigation.

I'm waiting for the Democrats to demand an investigation ... I bet I'll be waiting a long time ... so since the Democrats will never call for one, let's hear the Republicans demand one - and make sure the public knows BHO is violating his own sponsored legislation with the politicized firing of this US IG.

Source

I sat through a large portion of those hearings, what a joke. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse was one of the worst of the bunch, can't wait to hear him squawk this time. Hmmm nothing Mr. Whitehouse? You have nothing to say this time?

[n david]

*******Update********

So after repeated requests from both Republicans and Democrats, BHO relented and had his lawyer send off a letter giving reasons why this IG was fired.

I love the response from the IG ...

In the letter, White House Special Counsel Norman Eisen wrote that Walpin was "confused" and "disoriented" at a recent board meeting, was "unduly disruptive," and exhibited a "lack of candor" in providing information to decision makers.

"That's a total lie," Walpin said of the latter charge. And he said the accusation that he was dazed and confused at one meeting out of many was astonishing as rationale for his ouster.

"It appears to suggest that I was removed because I was disabled -- based on one occasion out of hundreds," he said.

"I would never say President Obama doesn't have the capacity to continue to serve because of his (statement) that there are 56 states," Walpin said, adding that the same holds for Vice President Biden and his "many express confusions that have been highlighted by the media."

Priceless. If this IG was fired for being disoriented and confused ONE TIME, then BHO and the VP need to submit their resignations or be impeached as well.

How lame ... and they said it's not politically motivated. More Chicago-styled politics from BHO.

I don't think this will, or should be, the end of this. Requests have been made for any and all correspondence, including memos and emails from the WH regarding the firing.

[n david]

Any BHO supporters have anything to say about their boy?

JD?

[SOUNWORTHY]

Originally Posted by n david

Any BHO supporters have anything to say about their boy?

JD?

BHO supporters hasn't a leg to stand on so they're gonna keep their cotton pickin mouths shut!!

[n david]

***bump***

[Jermyn Davidson]

I honestly don't know enough about this to comment.

I heard something on FOX about this-- the fired IG was on there.


Seriously though, I could not watch him for more than 2 minutes.

He really seemed to be whining and it sounded like he did not have any proof to back up that he has something to whine about.



What gave the Democrats a leg to stand on is the sheer number of the political firings and the obvious implications of it.


The right wing hacks were quick to defend their firings with, "these guys serve at the will of the President anyway-- they can be fired with or without cause."



But the Democrats were responding that it isn't good to fire them based solely on politics.


Anyway, that's how I remember it all and I could care less that 1 IG was fired and he's crying about it without any substantial proof to back up his claim of unfairness.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I honestly don't know enough about this to comment.

I heard something on FOX about this-- the fired IG was on there.

Seriously though, I could not watch him for more than 2 minutes.

He really seemed to be whining and it sounded like he did not have any proof to back up that he has something to whine about.

What gave the Democrats a leg to stand on is the sheer number of the political firings and the obvious implications of it.

The right wing hacks were quick to defend their firings with, "these guys serve at the will of the President anyway-- they can be fired with or without cause."

But the Democrats were responding that it isn't good to fire them based solely on politics.

Anyway, that's how I remember it all and I could care less that 1 IG was fired and he's crying about it without any substantial proof to back up his claim of unfairness.

I figured such a response... Bush firing bad; BHO firing ok.

I disagreed with the Bush firings, however true it was that they could be fired with or without reason. I believe in my post history you can find I argued for the investigation of these firings.

However, if you took a little more than just 2 minutes to read the information on this fired IG, it's just as political a firing as the Bush ones.

Add to it the legislation co-sponsored by BHO that makes it illegal to fire an IG based on political reasons -- and this becomes a little more than a dust up.

As for any proof ... I would say the proof lies in the IG's investigation of BHO's pal (and political donor) who was forced to repay the gov't thousands of dollars he illegally received.

I'm puzzled at why the number of firings matter? One political firing is just as wrong as a dozen.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

I figured such a response... Bush firing bad; BHO firing ok.

I disagreed with the Bush firings, however true it was that they could be fired with or without reason. I believe in my post history you can find I argued for the investigation of these firings.

However, if you took a little more than just 2 minutes to read the information on this fired IG, it's just as political a firing as the Bush ones.

Add to it the legislation co-sponsored by BHO that makes it illegal to fire an IG based on political reasons -- and this becomes a little more than a dust up.

As for any proof ... I would say the proof lies in the IG's investigation of BHO's pal (and political donor) who was forced to repay the gov't thousands of dollars he illegally received.

I'm puzzled at why the number of firings matter? One political firing is just as wrong as a dozen.

It is very difficult to prove anything with 1. With 1, it is simply one man's word against another.

With 12, there's very little left to doubt.

Plus the firing of 12 would affect many more people.


In the end, it's not the same-- even if both were political firings.