Obama fires Inspector General, violating his own law.

[QuantumPion]

From the examiner:

While Obama was a Senator, he co-sponsored a bill creating the office of the inspector general, with a provision requiring 30-day period before being able to fire an IG. The purpose of which was to ensure that the IG could not be dismissed by the people they were inspecting. It was a good idea, and helps the integrity and neutrality of the IG.

Inspector General Gerald Walpin was investigating apparent corruption of Americore. It turned out Obama supporters and campaign contributors were embezzling taxpayer money.

Obama, contrary to his own senate bill, gave Walpin 1 hour to resign or be fired, a political move to protect his corrupt supporters. Walpin did not give in however, so Obama did fire him. The reasoning Obama gave was because Walpin was supposedly senile and incompetent.

What is it with Obama and hiring every tax cheat in sight, and getting rid of anyone who would hold him or his supporters accountable?


-------------------------------
Repost Lock

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[dphantom]

From the left we hear......crickets...

 

[jpeyton]

Repost

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: dphantom
From the left we hear......crickets...

I do agree this looks very suspicious but I'll note this fired IG's word taken as gospel while those who made and agree with the decision are deemed liars. Usually there's 2 sides to a story and the truth lies in the middle.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: dphantom
From the left we hear......crickets...

Actually I've heard crickets from the right too. I wonder why the Reps aren't all over this...maybe there's nothing to it? I never heard anything about it and that's probably why you aren't being flooded with responses....because people are actually reading.

 

[Craig234]

Seems to me we lack the facts to say much conclusive (not that the right will hesitate, as mentioned above, to accept his word as gospel as long as it's against Obama).

Any time we have a situation like this where a watchdog is terminated, especially when there's a political motive involved, scrutiny is a good idea.

It's quite possible that the reason for this was anything from their just not liking his style in how he told them what to do, to their not wanting him to expose unpleasant problems.

But it's also possible that it was legitimate, from the facts we have. It has a bad smell to it, but that's not conclusive.

There's nothing silencing him that I'm aware of if he has a strong case to make against AmeriCorps, by releasing the info for the press to investigate.

 

[Patranus]

Well I started this thread last week and was slammed.
Then when I posted what you just posted my detractors stopped slamming me and shut up.

I suspect that you won't be able to have a debate on this issue because it is so clear cut against Obama that people are just going to be "dismissive", "derisive" and "arrogant".