Gerald Walpin is about to become President Obama’s worst nightmare. Walpin was the inspector general for the Americorps program. Walpin was illegally fired by President Obama for doing his job. Let me repeat that. Walpin was illegally fired for doing his job.

This is a classic case of President Obama vs. Sen. Obama.

Here’s something important that you need to know:

In 2008, SENATOR Barack Obama co-sponsored a bill known as the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008. Here’s the synopsis of one of the chief provisions of the bill:

(Sec. 3) Requires the President, the heads of designated federal entities, the Librarian of Congress, the Capitol Police Board, and the Public Printer to communicate to Congress in writing the reasons for removing or transferring an IG no later than 30 days before such removal or transfer.
Provides that the IG of the U.S. Capitol Police may be transferred from office only by the unanimous vote of the Capitol Police Board.

Next, here’s a partial transcript from Mr. Walpin’s interview with Glen Beck:

GB: So, gosh, he hasn’t given you a reason on why you have been terminated. I’ve read the letter. It just doesn’t…he just basically says that he doesn’t have faith in you.
WALPIN: Well, that’s a conclusion, not a reason.

That led to this exchange:

GB: So your job, as I understand it, is to track down money that’s being wasted or is being misused.
WALPIN: That’s right.
GB: My tax dollars, Erin’s tax dollars, everyone’s tax dollars?
WALPIN: That’s exactly right. The AmeriCorp program, the other agencies programs, I believe, are great as long as they’re properly managed and the money isn’t being misused.
GB: Why do you think this is happening?
WALPIN: I can only say that I became a thorn in the side of someone because I was doing my job and I was fired for doing my job. And by the way, the investigation of Johnson was started by the agency itself. AmeriCorp management called us and asked us to investigate some reports they’d heard of wrongdoing.
GB: Were you ever pressured to stop it?
WALPIN: No.
GB: Did anybody…
WALPIN: The only thing that came up was, after Johnson was elected mayor, after the stimulus money came in, there was great media and political pressure to get him off the hook and get his suspension lifted.
GB: This happened to you on Thursday…
WALPIN: Wednesday.
GB: Wednesday night. Do you remember the case when George Bush fired those attorneys, which he had the right to do?
WALPIN: They were serving at the discretion of the President.
GB: You were not serving at the discretion of the President, were you?
WALPIN: Only he can…under the statute, which was designed to protect the independence of the inspectors general, I can only be terminated if he gives 30 days advance notice and gives the reason why I’ve been terminated.
GB: So it’s all open and everyone knows?
WALPIN: That’s correct.
GB: So that you can truly be independent?
WALPIN: Yes.
GB: Because if someone can put pressure on you, you aren’t really independent?
WALPIN: That is correct.

IRONY OF IRONIES: President Obama fired an IG while ignoring a law that SENATOR Obama co-sponsored a year earlier. It’s predictable that President Obama’s liberal apologists will say that this is just like President Bush’s firing of the attorneys. That’s BS. The only thing that Walpin’s case has in common with the US attorneys if that there were terminations involved.

What’s more important is that President Obama ignored the law that he co-sponsored to illegally fire someone in an effort to protect a political supporter of his. That’s the worst type of cronyism we’ve seen since the firing of the White House Travel Office staff.

Sen. Obama tried establishing reformer credentials. President Obama has literally rejected the laws that he helped create to protect a high profile political ally. Men of integrity don’t change their minds on something so important in that short of a period of time.

Simply put, President Obama’s action in this matter suggests that he’s willing to ignore the rules when it suits him. That isn’t inconsistent with his threatening political retribution on Chrysler’s bondholders. Let’s remember that President Obama characterized the bondholders as greedy vultures when, in fact, one of the bondholders was an Indiana pension fund.

President Obama’s actions tell us that he thinks he can do whatever he wants. He hasn’t proven that he’s the least bit interested in the rule of law if it will prevent him from helping his political allies.

That’s what third world despots get away with. It isn’t something that the American president should get away with.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at California Conservative

3 Responses to “President Obama vs. Sen. Obama”

  • Shoebox says:

    “laws for thee but not for me” seems to be the recurring theme of this administration

  • One minor correction my friend. S. 2324 never passed out of the House so the IG Reform Act of 2008 is NOT law…..

    The Law that applies here is the Inspector General Act of 1978 and he may have indeed violated that law.

    LL

Leave a Reply