Comments on: AmeriCorps Controversy Brewing?

By: DaGoat

DaGoat — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:29:13 +0000

If only you were kidding, pacatrue.

By: pacatrue

pacatrue — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:24:46 +0000

We only know two things for sure. As tidbits suggests above, if this becomes an issue at all, the partisans on the right will discover that this is one of the most egregious examples of abuse of power in 100 years and the partisans on the left will discover that Walpin is perhaps the most incompetent and politically compromised Inspector General ever to work for the federal government. The conclusions are clear; now we just have to go select the evidence.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:20:32 +0000

Casualobserver--

From the Associated Press report:

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

So, the reporting seems pretty clear to me that the US Attorney's office informed the media before the 2008 election that they wouldn't be prosecuting anyone. Since Bush-appointee Scott was in office until sometime in 2009, he was in charge when they decided not to prosecute.

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:12:40 +0000

Fine, yours was a “question”…….but now we're still left with an unsupported “assumption”……..while Halpin files his report in August 2008, there is no evidence yet that it was responded to in that very same month. It could have sat for awhile and Brown (the non-appointee) could have been the one to first deal with it.

The reporting above is not clear enough to say.

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:52:27 +0000

Casualobserver--

First, I didn't make an accusation, I asked a question--I even included a question mark at the end of my sentence to show that I was asking a question.

Second, the guy who was the US Attorney in August of 2008 was a Bush-appointee named McGregor W. Scott.

Third, that means McGregor W. Scott is the Bush appointee who declined to prosecute, because the charges were overstated.

By: casualobserver

casualobserver — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:18:52 +0000

incorrect accusation, George...........

Walpin's response has led congressional investigators to want to know more about Brown, the acting U.S. attorney. I referred to him earlier as a "Bush holdover." That's not entirely accurate. Brown is now the acting U.S. attorney, and he was in the office during the Bush years, but he is a career official, not a Bush appointee.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/

By: GreenDreams

GreenDreams — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:17:04 +0000

“prosecutors determined there was no fraud”
“Alan Solomont, a Democrat and the board chairman of the government-run corporation, and Stephen Goldsmith, a Republican and the board's vice chair, said they strongly endorsed Obama's decision. “

By: GeorgeSorwell

GeorgeSorwell — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:59:21 +0000

From the Associated Press report linked above:

In August 2008, Walpin referred the matter to the local U.S. attorney's office, which said the watchdog's conclusions seemed overstated and did not accurately reflect all the information gathered in the investigation.

"We also highlighted numerous questions and further investigation they needed to conduct, including the fact that they had not done an audit to establish how much AmeriCorps money was actually misspent," Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown said in an April 29 letter to the federal counsel of inspectors general.

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.

Probably the US Attorney who declined to prosecute just before the election was also a Bush appointee?

By: tidbits

tidbits — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:47:33 +0000

M – Thanks for pointing that out. I'd admit that my statement about the WH being proactive in sending the letter was wrong, but it hurts soooo bad when I do that.

By: Americans Must Keep Asking Questions about Obama – Saul Alinsky – Raum Emanuel – Governor Palin – NPR – Rush Limbaugh – Sean Hannity – Michael Savage – Glenn Beck – Larry Sinclair – Americorps &#

Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:14:33 +0000

[...] political contributions to, questions about setting aside the rights of secured creditors to do it, questions about Obama apparently firing the Inspector General of Americorps in retaliation, questions about the [...]

By: mikkel

mikkel — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:03:24 +0000

Actually according to the links the letter to Congress is required under a law passed in response to the Bush AG firings.

By: tidbits

tidbits — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:59:05 +0000

Reports so far are sketchy as to what actually happened, But expect to see much more of this story in coming days (weeks? months?). Be sure of one thing. It will be used in a partisan way in Washington on both sides. I believe I read that the political connection comes out of Chicago, so it could get very messy for the WH. Probably why they are moving proactively with letters to key congressional leaders.

Today would be a good day for the spin-meisters on both sides to renegotiate their contracts.

By: jwest

jwest — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:17:04 +0000

Timely, balanced………even has links to right and left sources.

Outstanding!

(are we on the right website?)