A search of Sacramento’s local fish-wrap (the Sacramento Bee) reveals your obvious ruse. The earliest article found by a search of their archives is Sept. 27, 2008, a full month after Walpin turned over the results of his investigation to the US Attorneys office in Sacramento. In addition, if you read all the Bee’s 14 articles, you will find that all released information came from the US Attorneys office, not from Walpin’s. Search results here;

http://tinyurl.com/n6gt6m

By Sept 2008, Johnson was only running against another Democrat, incumbent Mayor Heather Fargo. Oh my gosh, that’s like undermining Hillary to elect Obama for Pete’s sake!

By the way, that search was conducted by using just “Walpin” and “Johnson”, no other qualifiers were used.

Sorry Manzal but don’t bring a knife to a gunfight, your argument isn’t holding water, no matter how many AP “spins” you try to quote.

As an aside, if this investigation was purely “political” in nature, why is St. Hope paying back roughly half ($450k) of the money they procured from Americorp, being a victim of a political witch-hunt as you so gloriously proclaim?

I doubt you even know what the principles behind Conservatism even mean if you honestly believe that Rush, Sean and FNC have “tarnished” its meaning. Just out of curiosity, what do you think the political philosophy “Conservatism” means, manzal?

And concerning your statement, It sickens me to think that people are so devoid of moral character that they have to resort to racial slurs and hate mongering to try to make their argument., you must really get sick over Obama’s racial comments about “typical white person”, his hatred of the Pennsylvanians who “cling to their Bibles and their guns”, and the people Obama loves and cherishes like Reverend Wright.

Bronzeprofessor,

I like your reply the best. It seems to be based more on logic than emotion, although I dint think you really understood the point I was trying to make. I consider myself a moderate Democrat. I would call myself a conservative Democrat if I didn’t feel the word conservative has been tarnished forever by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the whole of Fox News. So I also believe that public funds should not be misused. I only wish that the news media had to abide by the same set of rules that you do at your University and include opposing viewpoints or just report the facts of a story without bias. That also goes for Liberal media. Every day I see and hear stories by the Conservative media that prey on peoples fears, misrepresent the facts, or just conveniently leave important facts out altogether. I also see the comments from people like “Liberals demise” and “u no hoo” above, saying things like “uppity negro hell bent on Marxism” and “Halfrican-American”. It sickens me to think that people are so devoid of moral character that they have to resort to racial slurs and hate mongering to try to make their argument. I made no representation about “Walprin’s Identity overriding the legitimacy of his position that violations had taken place”. They are two separate issues. Walprin as an IG did what he was supposed to do. Walprin as a Republican may get fired for misusing his position as an IG for political reasons, and it would be within Obama’s right to do so as long as he does it according to the rule of the law that he voted for. As far as your association between Obama and Gonzales, I think it would be better to liken Gonzales and Walprin. It seems to me that they both misused their positions whereas Obama is just doing his job. Correct me if I’m wrong , but if President Bush appointed Walprin, doesn’t that mean that a President can fire one.

proreason

Did I say anything bad about Inspector Generals as a whole or that corruption was too rampant to control? If you had quoted the very next line in my post you would see that my opinion on wasteful spending is:

“That is what we should be trying to fix.”

Gila Monster
Facts here; The fact is right here just re-read the article we are posting about.

“Walpin’s office made repeated public comments just before the Sacramento mayoral election, prompting the U.S. attorney’s office to inform the media that it did not intend to file any criminal charges.”

And in your own prior post:

AP
Fired Inspector General: I Acted ‘With Highest Integrity’

“As a result of Walpin’s investigation, Johnson and the nonprofit St. HOPE Academy that he headed were ordered to repay about half of nearly $847,000 in federal grants they had received from AmeriCorps. Johnson is a political supporter of Obama.”

Its not too big of a leap to conclude that since “Walpin made repeated comments right before the Election” and that since “Johnson is a political supporter of Obama.” that Walprin did in fact try to make Johnson lose the election because he is a supporter of Obama. In my opinion Walprin did his job as an Inspector General and that business concluded with Johnson and ST. Hope being ordered to repay the money. Since Walpin took it upon himself to politicize it afterward I think he deserves to be fired and that this is just another non-story being used as political propaganda to smear the Democrats and President Obama.

“But the I G is supposed to be an independent counsel free of political motives.That is not the case here. Walpin used his position to try to sway the Sacramento Mayoral election Election (I’m sure at the behest of the GOP) instead of just doing his job which is to investigate abuse and wasteful spending, report it, and seek remedy.”

Quite the statement there Manzal, and you base this on what corroborating evidence? Funny but the facts certainly don’t fit your narrative.

Kevin Johnson announced his candidacy for Mayor in March 2008. Sacramento uses the primary non-partisan method to elect their Mayor which was held June 4, 2008. None of the 8 candidates received a plurality (over 50%) therefore a run-off was held in November between the top two vote getter’s, Johnson and incumbent Mayor Heather Fargo who also happens to be Democratic leaning (remember the non-partisan thing) based on her support for amnesty for illegals and gun control. Johnson won the run-off. Facts here;

http://tinyurl.com/kklevs

The majority of Johnson’s election troubles were caused by fellow primary candidate Leonard Padilla who brought up Johnson’s previous sexual assault allegations in April 2008, facts here.

http://tinyurl.com/ll9cx7

Walpin started the Americorp investigation of Johnson’s St. Hope Academy in Jan 2008 and turned over all his findings to the US Attorneys office in Sacramento in August 2008. The only fact released to the press at that time was the occurrence of the investigation, not results or conclusions reached by the investigation. Timeline here from, of all places, the HuffPo.

http://tinyurl.com/lp6a9r

Now tell me again, why on earth would a prominent NY attorney really care who was elected Mayor of a rather smallish CA city that truly has no bearing on the national political stage?

The only “political” thing going on here is the firing of Walpin by Obama himself, boorish political payback for Walpin’s temerity in investigating his buddies at St. Hope, ACORN and La Raza, nothing more, nothing less.

Well let’s see, since the Inspector Generals are supposed to look out for the taxpayers, and since, as you say, corruption is just too rampant to control, there is just no need for them at all, is there?

Firing 3 in the past 2 weeks is certainly justified now that we understand that.

But hey, let’s save money and fire them all.

That should take care of the problem of them sticking their noses in areas where they shouldn’t be sticking them.

Now, why didn’t that approach come up during a Republican administration?

What a puzzler.

Hi, thanks for contributing an alternative viewpoint. I only speak for myself — I do not always tout the conservative party line; for instance, I did not vote for George W. Bush in 2000 or 2004, because I was suspicious of his spending habits from the time of his compassionate conservatism campaign in 2000. In 2003, I protested against the Iraq War, then by 2006, I changed my mind and decided to support it.

The issue of Walpin’s firing is actually quite serious. Remember that Alberto Gonzales was almost surely going to be subject to criminal action, if he had not left the office of the Attorney General, because he fired attorneys for supposedly political reasons. Firing an Inspector General when you are the President of the United States is arguably worse. The one thing it isn’t, is less serious than the things that sank Gonzales’ career.

I for one do not take Mayor Johnson’s actions lightly, nor the actions of other groups who were being investigated by Walpin. I am a professor at a California State University, and did you know that I cannot even use the photocopier or my office extension to copy anything relating to my activities in the Republican Party? Did you know that I am bound by a strict policy, which dictates that I cannot promote Republican ideas in the classroom unless I provide a forum for the opposing viewpoint? When I put together a syllabus, if I include any conservatively leaning articles for supplementary reading, I have to include articles that are explicitly liberal. I do mock trials and refrain from expressing my opinion until after the student jury has voted.

Your argument consists of assuming that Walpin’s identity overrides the legitimacy of his position that violations had taken place. But if you simply assess the problems Walpin was investigating, objectively and according to the principles of public funds and partisan uses, you will probably come to a different conclusion.

I take very seriously the idea that someone in public office cannot use public funds or privileges for partisan purposes. If you get lax about that idea, it is a quick slide into widespread abuse, graft, corruption, and propaganda, similar to what has been documented in dictatorships in other parts of the world. Maybe this sounds overblown, but we cannot remain a democracy if a party can assume power and then use the public treasury to disseminate propaganda, then fire anyone who exposes the problem. If you let Democrats–or Republicans–go down such a road, you make it feasible for a one-party rule that go on indefinitely. Study the case of Mexico in the 20th century.

WWJD

Now it would be nice if Fox News started saying it.

Fired Inspector General: I Acted ‘With Highest Integrity’

AP
Friday, June 12, 2009
An inspector general fired by President Obama says he acted “with the highest integrity” in investigating AmeriCorps and other government-funded national service programs.

Gerald Walpin’s job was to review grants awarded by AmeriCorps and its parent agency, the Corporation for National and Community Service. He told The Associated Press he has no doubt he acted properly in investigating Sacramento mayor and former NBA star Kevin Johnson.

Obama told Congress on Thursday he had lost confidence in Walpin.

As a result of Walpin’s investigation, Johnson and the nonprofit St. HOPE Academy that he headed were ordered to repay about half of nearly $847,000 in federal grants they had received from AmeriCorps. Johnson is a political supporter of Obama.

http://tinyurl.com/mswf98

It certainly appears that Walpin was doing his job. Otherwise, why would St. HOPE return over $400k in federal funds if they were innocent of the misuse charges leveled by Walpin’s office?

This firing was purely political. As Canary posted on the “Selected News” thread, Walpin’s office was also investigating La Raza, ACORN, CUNY and others for various funding transgressions which, naturally, raised the hackles of the Messiah and his minions. Can you see it any other way?

Sadly, this story will eventually be buried by the MSM, much the same as Piglosi’s lies about the CIA, until it disappears in the fog of memory.

I’m just aksing.