http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/NEW-White-House-refuses-to-answer-Senates-questions-on-AmeriCorps-IG-firing-48285832.html

White House refuses to answer Senate questions on AmeriCorps IG firing
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
06/17/09 6:10 PM EDT

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 Wednesday 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 Wednesday's meeting, Sen. Grassley's staffers wanted to know more about the White House review.  "Unfortunately," Grassley writes in a letter sent late Wednesday afternoon 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?

Grassley asks the White House for a response in writing by Wednesday, June 24.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/16/obama-accuses-fired-inspector-general-americorps-confused-disoriented/

WASHINGTON –– Responding to criticism from a Senate Democratic ally, President Obama explained why he fired the Inspector General of the AmeriCorps without the 30-day notification required by law, calling Gerald Walpin so "confused" and "disoriented" that there was reason to question "his capacity to serve."

In a letter to the bipartisan leaders of the Senate Committee that oversees AmeriCorps, Obama listed these alleged defects in Walpin's leadership as an Inspector General.

   * Removed after unanimous request from the AmeriCorps board of directors
   * At May, 20, 2009, board meeting Walpin "was confused, disoriented and unable to answer questions and exhibited behavior that led the board to question his capacity to serve."
   * The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California complained about Walpin's conduct to the IG oversight board and alleged he withheld exculpatory evidence.
   * Walpin had "been absent from the Corporation's headquarters, insisting upon working from his home in New York over the objection" of the board.
   * He "exhibited a lack of candor in providing material information to decision makers."
   * He "engaged in other troubling and inappropriate conduct."
   * He "had become unduly disruptive to agency operations, impairing his effectiveness."

The letter, authored by Norman Eisen, Special Counsel to the President for ethics, concluded: "It was for these reasons that Mr. Walpin was removed."

Hours before, Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri Democrat, criticized Obama for failing to specify why he fired Walpin.

"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 in a statement. "The legislation which was passed last year requires that the president give a reason for the removal. 'Loss of confidence' is not a sufficient reason. I'm hopeful the White House will provide a more substantive rationale, in writing, as quickly as possible."

Obama voted for the legislation requiring specific notification to Congress of the reasons to dismiss an inspector general. Any move to fire an inspector general requires 30-days notice. Obama voted for the law to strengthen the independence of inspectors general.

Walpin led a 2008 investigation into allegations of misused taxpayer funds distributed by AmeriCorps to the St. HOPE Academy of Sacramento, founded in 1989 by Obama supporter and former NBA player Kevin Johnson. Walpin said Johnson, now mayor of Sacramento, misused roughly $850,000 in AmeriCorps funds. His referral to the U.S. Attorney's Office did not result in the filing of criminal charges. But St. HOPE officials agreed, via a settlement, to repay half of its AmeriCorps grants.

On Tuesday, Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican, sought all White House information Walpin's firing. That followed a request from Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, that AmeriCorps provide "any and all records, e-mail, memoranda, documents, communications, or other information" related to Walpin's firing. Issa and Grassley are minority members of congressional oversight panels.

Republicans also have asked what role, if any, First Lady Michelle Obama played in Walpin's firing. The White House denies she had any voice in Walpin's future with the agency.

Republicans began to question Michelle Obama's role after press reports indicated she was taking a strong interest in AmeriCorps activities and when her former chief of staff, Jackie Norris, became a "senior adviser" to the Corporation for National and Community Service, also known as AmeriCorps.

Quoted:
From Byron York at the Washington Examiner: Gerald Walpin Speaks: The Inside Story Of The AmeriCorps Firing

What's behind Obama's sudden attempt to fire the AmeriCorps inspector general?

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
06/11/09 8:14 PM EDT

Some strange and potentially suspicious events tonight concerning the Obama White House and the AmeriCorps program. I've been told that on Wednesday night the AmeriCorps inspector general, Gerald Walpin, received a call from the White House counsel's office telling him that he had one hour to either resign or be fired.  The White House did not cite a reason.  "The answer that was given was that it's just time to move on," one Senate source told me tonight.  "The president would like to have someone else in that position."

Inspectors General are part of every federal department. They are given the responsibility of independently investigating allegations of waste, fraud, and corruption in the government, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House. Last year Congress passed the Inspectors General Reform Act, which added new protections for IGs, including a measure requiring the president to give Congress 30 days prior notice before dismissing an IG.  The president must also give Congress an explanation of why the action is needed.  Then-Sen. Barack Obama was one of the co-sponsors of the Act.

Now, there is the hurried attempt to dismiss Walpin, without the required notice or cause.  After last night's call, Walpin got in touch with Congress, and it appears the White House has backed off, at least for now.  This afternoon, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, who is something of a guardian angel for inspectors general, fired off a letter to the White House about the affair.

"I was troubled to learn that last night your staff reportedly issued an ultimatum to the AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin that he had one hour to resign or be terminated," Grassley wrote.  "As you know, Inspectors General were created by Congress as a means to combat waste, fraud, and abuse and to be independent watchdogs ensuring that federal agencies were held accountable for their actions.  Inspectors General were designed to have a dual role reporting to both the President and Congress so that they would be free from undue political pressure.  This independence is the hallmark of all Inspectors General and is essential so they may operate independently, without political pressure or interference from agencies attempting to keep their failings from public scrutiny."

Grassley said he was "deeply troubled" by the Walpin matter and closed by asking the president "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."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Whats-behind-Obamas-sudden-firing-of-the-AmeriCorps-inspector-general-47877797.html

UPDATE 1: I've been trying to discover the real reason for Obama's move, and it's still not clear.  I'm told that it could be a combination of the normal tensions that surround any inspector general's office, or the president's desire to get his own people in IG positions, or a dispute over a particular investigation. "Bottom line," one source wrote, "getting rid of a tough, Republican-appointed IG who has been aggressively going after waste and fraud gives Obama a chance to replace that IG with a more compliant team player."

I'm also told that a number of inspectors general around the government have been expressing concerns to Congress recently about threats to their independence.

UPDATE 2:  More information now, from the Associated Press. link The White House is going ahead with firing Walpin.  The firing apparently stems from Walpin's investigation of a non-profit group, St. HOPE Academy, run by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California (and a big Obama supporter).  "[Walpin] found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car," the AP reports.  In April, the U.S. attorney declined to file any criminal charges in the matter and criticized Walpin's investigation.  But at the same time Johnson and St. HOPE agreed to repay about half of the $850,000 it had received from AmeriCorps.

Bottom line: The AmeriCorps IG accuses prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money.  Prominent Obama supporter has to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money.  Obama fires AmeriCorps IG.

UPDATE, 4:55 PM Friday:

On Wednesday night, after the White House counsel's office called AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin on his cell phone to tell him he had one hour to resign or be fired, Walpin sent an extensive e-mail account of the call to the man who had phoned him, Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform.  In the e-mail, Walpin explained that he would not make a decision in such a short period of time.  He also noted that Eisen had said any appearance of a connection between Walpin's firing and recent conflicts over Walpin's handing of high-profile investigations was "coincidence."  Here is the whole e-mail, sent from Walpin to Eisen at 7:32 p.m. on June 10:

My email responds to your telephone call to me while I was in a car driving on a highway, at about 5:20 p.m.  I have now reached a destination and therefore can write you this email.

In your telephone call, you informed me that the President wishes me to resign my post as IG of CNCS [Corporation for National and Community Service, which includes AmeriCorps].  You told me that I could take no more than an hour to make a decision.

As you know, Congress intended the Inspector General of CNCS to have the utmost independence of judgment in his deliberations respecting the propriety of the agency's conduct and the actions of its officers.  That is why the relevant statute provides that the President may remove the IG only if he supplies the Congress with a statement of his reasons––which is quite a different matter than executive branch officials who serve at his pleasure and can therefore be removed for any reason and without notification to Congress.

I take this statutorily-mandated independence of my office very seriously, and, under the present circumstances, I simply cannot make a decision to respect or decline what you have said were the President's wishes within an hour or indeed any such short time.  As you are aware, I have just issued two reports highly critical of the actions of CNCS, which is presently under the direction of the President's appointee and, I am advised, someone with a meaningful relationship with the President.

Chairman Solomont and I have had significant disagreements about the findings and conclusions contained in these reports.  It would do a disservice to the independent scheme that Congress has mandated––and could potentially raise questions about my own integrity––if I were to render what would seem to many a very hasty response to your request.

I heard your statement that this request that you communicated on behalf of the President and the timing of our reports and disagreement with the CNCS Board and management are "coincidence," as you put it on the phone, but I would suggest there is a high likelihood that others may see it otherwise.

I suspect that, when presented with the circumstances I have just discussed, the President will see the propriety of providing me additional time to reflect on his request.  If however he believes that my departure is a matter of urgency, then he will have to take the appropriate steps toward ordering my removal, without my agreement.

Gerald Walpin

Inspectors General are part of every federal department. They are given the responsibility of independently investigating allegations of waste, fraud, and corruption in the government, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.

Quoted:
"Civilian National Security Force"

You think the halfrican can hand out M4s, body armor, and helmets while the Inspector General is watching?

Quoted:
Very interesting...



And very pertinent if this is true.

Quoted:
Until just now, I had never heard of Americorps. The wiki article is interesting.

Quoted:
WTF? Nixon didn't even have balls that big...I swear I'm gonna shit myself when Obama releases an "enemies of the white house" list







Speed

Quoted:


It will have to be snuck out, they won't release it, people will just start...... well you know how it ends.

The Kennedy Serve America Act will:

Ask many more Americans to give a year to solve specific challenges (participation in the program will not be mandatory as has been rumored in some circles):

Building on the success of AmeriCorps, the legislation will create new “corps” focused on areas of national need. It will ask 175,000 more Americans to give a year of service through these corps as part of a new national commitment to solve these challenges, expanding the number of national service participants to 250,000 by the fiscal year 2017.

Increase opportunities to serve by people of all ages:

   * The legislation will improve opportunities for young people in low income, high-need communities to engage in service to improve their own communities.
   * It will dramatically expand service opportunities over the next eight years to 250,000.
   * It increases the Segal AmeriCorps Education Award level, and pegs it to the maximum level of the Pell Grant.
more  here

Quoted:
Until just now, I had never heard of Americorps. The wiki article is interesting.

Quoted:
WTF? Nixon didn't even have balls that big...I swear I'm gonna shit myself when Obama releases an "enemies of the white house" list







Speed

Quoted:
obama wants to get his man in place as he gets the Sturmabteilung built up.

Quoted:

They're probably trying to stop the guy from sneaking out with something damning. Hopefully, he's already done so.

Quoted:



he'll have a heart attack by months end

Quoted:
Czar, the new Executive Branch power brokers.

Quoted:


car accident, veered into a tree, no skid marks, no autopsy needed.

Quoted:
The corruption in this administration will has already eclipsed anything this country has seen before.

Quoted:



(we just may not know all the details yet)

Quoted:

Bottom line: The AmeriCorps IG accuses prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money.  Prominent Obama supporter has to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money.  Obama fires AmeriCorps IG.

Quoted:
http://www.donkeydish.com/images/gallery/kevin-johnson_174x228.jpg

Kevin Johnson

He is Sacramento's first African American mayor.

School: University of California at Berkeley,

St. HOPE is a nonprofit community development corporation whose mission is to revitalize communities through public education, civic leadership, economic development and the arts.

In 2003, St. HOPE formed St. HOPE Public Schools, a pre-K-12 independent charter school system that provides education to nearly 2,000 students in seven small schools

During the summer of 1995, a 16 year old girl alleged that Johnson had fondled her. Johnson apologized to the girl when confronted by her with that accusation during a phone conversation recorded by Phoenix police though he also stated that "what you're saying happened, I'm not entirely agreeing happened.

On April 16, 2008, rival mayoral candidate Leonard Padilla distributed a 2007 report of similar allegations made against Johnson at St. HOPE Sacramento High School. The allegations were investigated by local police, but no charges were filed, and the alleged victim recanted her story

On April 29, 2008, a group of female civic leaders including former Sacramento Mayor Ann Rudin, Sacramento Municipal Utility District board member Genevieve Shiroma, and former State Senator Deborah Ortiz demanded the release of the police report on the matter.[26] The teacher to whom the student initially brought the complaint subsequently resigned over the incident, claiming, "St. HOPE sought to intimidate the student through an illegal interrogation and even had the audacity to ask me to change my story

There, you go, staunch support of Obama.

Quoted:


A pedophile to boot? Awesome.

Quoted:
Very interesting...



And very pertinent if this is true.