Back when he was a federal prosecutor, his own department denounced him in the New York Times for “mishandling” the Roy Cohn case:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/23/745976/-NYT:-Walpin-an-embarrassment-to-DOJ-for-mishandling-Roy-Cohn-case

Note that he had a reputation for playing fast and loose with the facts even then.

I suppose that’s one way to interpret what I wrote. Not the correct way, though.

To interpret the firing as political payback, one must assume that Mr. Obama (or his staff) had no fear at all of being called on it, no matter how soon the firing came following Mr. Walpin’s investigation of an Obama ally.

Which are you assuming, Frank? Stupidity or arrogance?

Talk about an egocentric interpretation: “That can’t be what happened, because that’s not the way I would have done it”

Amazing!

If it were me, Quaker, I wouldn’t have been messing around with an IG at all … So I guess Walpin was never fired .

Let’s put the last nail in this discussion, shall we?

The timing of the firing was wrong for stopping the investigation of Kevin Johnson–the investigation was complete and a repayment settlement had already been struck.

The timing of the firing was wrong for political retaliation–too soon! A firing immediately after the conclusion of the investigation begs for attention. Every “Chicago thug” knows that revenge is best when served cold.

So the firing was either too early or too late to fit wingnut theories.

No specific allegation, no evidence–just an implication based on the proximity of the firing to one investigation.

No goalpost moving. I’m asking a question. Are you suggesting political retaliation is Mr. Obama’s motive for firing Mr. Walpin? Yes? No?

Not too difficult, is it?

Progressives have done a few things right but have done many things wrong. Conservatives have done a few things wrong and helped preserve a great many things progressives would destroy if given the chance. The pendulum swings back and forth as it always has. The voters who show up in red counties and states for the most part hold to a more traditional set of values then the blue voter. On somethings our red americans lag thier city cousins in accepting. In other things progressive values erode what has made this country great.

The pendulumm swings back and forth but it ratchets more left than right. Sad but that is the way it is. Hubris and overreach are common human failings that are bipartisan in nature and help push the pendulum.

Leftists being on the whole younger than thier conservative counterparts are much more given to crudity and profanity than those on the right. They are much shriller and less tolerant as a whole. More liberals turn conservative as they get older and wiser than conservatives turn liberal with the wisdom age brings.

The old saw attributed to Winston Churchill ( there is some doubt but he generally gets the credit) goes something like

“A boy at tweny that is not a liberal has no heart, a man at forty who is not conservative has no brain.”

In closing Obama has been Dear Leader on the right side of the political spectrum since his cult following started to overwhelm the “smartest woman in the world”.

We didn’t notice your use of it towards Bush because we were focused on the Chimpy Bushhitler thing. I suppose we owe the left an apology for use of your trademarked term, but you won’t get it. But OMG use the monkey meme on that skinny jug eared fella in the Whitehouse now and you sure get a lot of knashing of the teeth.

Just to make sure we’re clear: The investigation of Kevin Johnson was complete. By alleging political motivation, you’re suggesting that Mr. Obama fired Mr. Walpin not to stop the investigation, but in retaliation for the investigation.

Do I have that right?

Does the shame go away when you evade questions by ignoring them altogether?

It’s an inoperable defect.

Right wing “Amused Observer” uses logical fallacies and manipulative deceit the way some people breath.

He’s in the running for the most deceitful poster here. Considering the competition some of the right wingers here give him for that position, that’s quite an accomplishment.

I’ve reluctantly and genuinely concluded that the only way a really intelligent right winger can operate is through outright deceit and manipulation.

It leaves my conservative streak deeply appalled.

Your poor comprehension skills are on display again. I evade by neither. I simply stick to my point. Noticing that you (yes, you) have no evidence to support your fantastic claims in no way obligates me to express an opinion on separate questions.

J.

You wrote:

Would it be correct to assume by your taffy remarks that you find it unlikely that there was an effort by the Obama administration to silence an outspoken critic of an Obama favorite?

Now your construction leaves my several ways to parry on the premise of your question.

Your tinkertoy comment earlier implies, to me at least, that you put more faith in the senility theory as opposed to the Obama is muffling crony critisism idea.

1) I can deny intending any implication
2) I can call false choice
3) I can plead non sequitor because my previous comment addressed neither of the possibilities you raise.

You could use a more direct formulation: “Do you think Mr. Walpin was fired in retaliation for his investigation of Kevin Johnson?” That would be a much more difficult question to parry. However, I would probably still reply with, “How should I know?” and return to my original point: those who keep insisting that the proximity of the Johnson investigation to Mr. Walpin’s firing is evidence of nefarious action by the Obama administration are ignoring all parts of the story that don’t fit their conclusion.

What I believe about the Mr. Walpin’s firing isn’t relevant to that assertion.

Internet tradition fail.

Mr. Bush was “Dear Leader.” Mr. Obama is “The Messiah,” or “The One.”