Probe finds new clues in AmeriCorps IG scandal By: Byron
York
|
 |
| Gerald Walpin |
After
seven weeks of trying, investigators looking into President Barack
Obama’s abrupt firing of AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin are
still unable to answer the most basic question of the whole affair: Why
did the president do it?
They know the reasons the White House has given: That the 77-year-old
Walpin was addled and not up to the job, that he had too many conflicts
with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service,
which oversees AmeriCorps, that his office had once distributed a
parody newsletter that contained an allegedly sexist remark.
They know all that. But they also know that AmeriCorps is one of
Obama’s favorite federal programs. They know that AmeriCorps gave an
$800,000-plus grant to Kevin Johnson, the mayor of Sacramento, Calif.,
who just happens to be an influential friend and supporter of the
president. They know that Walpin investigated Johnson’s misuse of that
federal money. They know that as a result of Walpin’s probe, Johnson
was suspended from receiving any new federal grants, a fact that caused
controversy in Sacramento when leaders realized it could prevent the
city from receiving millions in federal stimulus money. They know that,
amid the local uproar over the Johnson affair, the acting U.S. attorney
in Sacramento, Lawrence Brown, made a deal to let Johnson off the hook,
and then took the unusual step of denouncing Walpin. They know that
Walpin vigorously objected to Johnson’s getting off easy. And they know
that after Walpin protested, the president fired him.
Common sense suggests that’s a suspicious series of events. During the
time his case was under review, did Johnson, or anyone acting on his
behalf, ever get in touch with the White House? Did the White House get
in touch with him? And did Johnson’s relationship with Obama, plus the
Sacramento political establishment’s desire to get the stimulus cash,
play any role in Brown’s actions?
Those are the key underlying questions in the AmeriCorps affair, but
investigators have been stymied by the White House’s refusal to answer
any inquiries about any communications or other dealings it might have
had on the subject. Brown has also refused to answer questions.
Now, investigators are trying a new route, examining the role of the
Justice Department. Sen. Jeff Sessions, ranking Republican on the
Senate Judiciary Committee, has asked the committee chairman,
Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, for a hearing on the AmeriCorps/Walpin
affair, focusing specifically on the role of Brown and his bosses at
Justice.
According to a senior Republican aide, Sessions’ interest was piqued
by a statement made in a late March television interview by Rep. Doris
Matsui, the Democratic congresswoman who represents Sacramento. Asked
whether Johnson’s problems could prevent the city from receiving
stimulus funds, Matsui said that, at Johnson’s request, she had “been
in conversation with officials at the White House and OMB [Office of
Management and Budget] and others to ensure that we don’t lose any
money at all.”
Within days of Matsui’s statement, a settlement was reached. Johnson
was unsuspended, and in a particularly unusual move, acting U.S.
Attorney Brown issued a press release hailing the arrival of stimulus
funds. “The lifting of the suspension against all parties, including
Mayor Johnson, removes any cloud whether the City of Sacramento will be
prevented form receiving much-needed federal stimulus funds,” Brown
wrote.
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee want to know why a U.S.
attorney was touting his own actions in bringing stimulus money to the
city. That’s not the normal role of prosecutors. “We need to hear
whether the settlement in this case was tainted in any way by political
influence or political factors,” says the senior Republican aide.
So far, Brown has refused to answer any questions. In June, Rep.
Darrell Issa, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, sent a list of 20 questions to Brown
and received no response. A follow-up in July was similarly ignored.
“Your unwillingness to be cooperative with our investigation raises
further questions about your role in this matter,” Issa wrote Brown.
Adding to the suspicions is the fact that the only person who objected
to the Johnson deal, who said it shouldn’t be done, was Gerald Walpin.
And for his efforts, he was fired.
A growing number of lawmakers want to know why.
Byron York, The Examiner’s chief political correspondent, can be
contacted at [email protected].
His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog
posts appears on ExaminerPolitics.com.
