It’s starting to look that way:
In a detailed conversation Wednesday morning, Walpin said the White House is “grasping at nonexistent straws” to justify his termination as watchdog for one of the Obama White House’s favorite federal programs.
Walpin described an atmosphere in which his investigations into fraudulent and inefficient use of federal dollars were often the cause of conflict with the board and top management of the Corporation. “The fact that the board doesn’t like what I was doing in order to perform my duties as an IG is not a reason for removing me,” Walpin said. “In fact, the more diligent an IG is in reporting criticisms of the board and the running of the corporation, the more the board doesn’t want the IG there. But that’s exactly why the IG position was created.”
In this case, the board and top management were unhappy with Walpin’s aggressive investigation of the misuse of federal AmeriCorps funds by Sacramento, California mayor — and prominent Obama supporter — Kevin Johnson. The board was also unhappy with Walpin’s probe into the waste of AmeriCorps money at the City University of New York.
If it were a Republican president (and especially George Bush) who had fired an IG with no apparent cause because he was getting too close to a buddy, the New York Times would be pounding its spoon on its high dudgeon on a daily basis. But this is just hope. And change.
[Update a couple minutes later]
More from Moe Lane:
As Ed Morrissey noted, believing that this was the White House’s primary motive requires that you believe that the administration’s instinctive, immediate reaction to seeing an employee come down with a debilitating disease is to fire them. Yes. That is precisely the thing that one does when one wishes to maintain a reputation for empathy and tolerance. I can’t say that I have as much difficulty as Michelle Malkin reconciling the allegation of Walpin’s mental diminished capacity with his public appearances (see the video above), mostly because neither I nor Ms. Malkin can take it at all seriously…
First you fire him, then you try to smear him. It’s right out of the old Clinton playbook. I wonder if Rahm is calling the shots here? I guess that he should be thankful that, unlike Travelgate, they didn’t get the FBI to trump up some charges and try him.
Yet.
[Update mid afternoon]
He’s not taking it lying down:
“I am now the target of the most powerful man in this country, with an army of aides whose major responsibility today seems to be to attack me and get rid of me,” Walpin said.
Facing bipartisan criticism for the firing, Obama sought to allay congressional concerns with a letter to Senate leaders Tuesday evening explaining his decision. In the letter, White House Special Counsel Norman Eisen wrote that Walpin was “confused” and “disoriented” at a May 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 not only false, but poor 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.” Obama mistakenly said once on the campaign trail that he had traveled to 57 states.
I hope he sues.
[Thursday morning update]
Gee, this is starting to sorta look like a pattern:
…no fewer than three IG’s have recently been fired, all while investigating so-called sensitive issues.
A Chicago politician covering up corruption? Who could have imagined such a thing?
[Bumped]