About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox & Friends baselessly suggested Walpin, Carlin, and Weiderhold all "Watchdogs Silenced by Administration"

July 01, 2009 7:30 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Fox & Friends baselessly linked three purported "whistleblowers" as on-screen text claimed they were "silenced" by the Obama administration.

18 Comments

On the July 1 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-hosts Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson and Brian Kilmeade baselessly linked three purported "whistleblowers": recently dismissed Corporation for National and Community Service inspector general Gerald Walpin, Environmental Protection Agency research analyst Alan Carlin, and Amtrak inspector general Fred Weiderhold, whose retirement was announced by Amtrak on June 18. While talking about Weiderhold's resignation, Fox & Friends also aired on-screen text that read: "America's Endangered Species. Watchdogs Silenced by Administration." However, the hosts of Fox & Friends cited no evidence that the Obama administration had anything to do with the resignation of Weiderhold, who serves at the discretion of Amtrak's chairman of the board, Thomas Carper, a Democrat who was first appointed by President Bush to the Amtrak board on November 15, 2007.*

Moreover, Carlin and Walpin have nothing to do with Weiderhold. Carlin is not a "whistleblower"; the report he co-authored that Fox News is claiming was improperly excluded from an EPA report on greenhouse gas emissions has been criticized by climate scientists. As for Walpin, the White House provided a list of reasons for his termination, which included a complaint filed by the acting U.S. attorney over his conduct.

Weiderhold's retirement came after a report he commissioned yielded conclusions critical of Amtrak management. On February 11, Weiderhold retained an independent law firm to, according to the law firm, "review and analyze several Amtrak policies and practices relating to oversight of OIG [Office of Inspector General] audits, investigations, and operations." The firm's report concluded that the OIG's work was "being substantially impaired" by Amtrak officials:

Amtrak OIG's independence and effectiveness are being substantially impaired by a number of policies and practices at the corporation relating to Law Department oversight of OIG investigations, OIG personnel matters, and OIG funding.

[...]

These policies and practices constitute significant impairments to the Amtrak OIG's effectiveness and its actual and perceived independence under the standards of the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 3 ("IG Act") as well as published guidance of the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") and the Government Accountability Office ("GAO").

The law firm, Willkie Farr & Gallagher, submitted its report to Weiderhold on June 18. Amtrak released a statement on June 18 announcing that Weiderhold had resigned after 35 years of service.

As The Wall Street Journal reported, "citing concerns about oversight at the publicly funded [Amtrak] corporation at a time when it is set to spend more than $1 billion in federal stimulus funds," the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee "launched an investigation" into Weiderhold's resignation on June 29. In their letter to Amtrak Chairman Thomas Carper, Reps. Edolphus Towns (D-NY) and Darrell Issa (R-CA), the chairman and ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, cited the independent report Weiderhold had commissioned and stated:

According to press reports, the Inspector General retired abruptly on June 18, 2009, after he presented this report to Amtrak officials. We understand that Amtrak has appointed a former Amtrak human resources executive, with no experience in the Inspector General community, to serve as acting Inspector General.

These reports cause us grave concern about the circumstances surrounding the Inspector General's departure. We are further concerned that the board and management of Amtrak have compromised the effectiveness of the Inspector General by interfering with the independence and authority that Congress has explicitly granted to the Inspector General by statute.

The letter did not in any way suggest that the White House played a role in Weiderhold's retirement. According to the Goverment Accountability Office, "[t]he Amtrak IG is appointed, and may be removed, by the head of Amtrak." Carper currently serves as the chairman of the board of Amtrak. Bush appointed Carper, a Democrat from Illinois, to Amtrak's Board of Directors in November 2007, and the Senate approved Carper's nomination in March 2008.* The Amtrak board of directors, comprised of Bush administration appointees, "unanimously agreed to name" Carper as chairman of the board on January 30, 2009. Prior to joining the Amtrak board, Carper served as mayor of Macomb, Illinois.

According to the Wall Street Journal report, Amtrak has denied any " 'relationship between the timing of Mr. Weiderhold's retirement' and the report critical of Amtrak management."

As Media Matters has noted, the EPA has reportedly said Carlin "is not a scientist," and Gavin Schmidt, a climate modeler at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, has pointed to "a number of basic flaws" in Carlin's report, including "the complete lack of appreciation of the importance of natural variability on short time scales, the common but erroneous belief that any attribution of past climate change to solar or other forcing means that CO2 has no radiative effect, and a hopeless lack of familiarity of the basic science of detection and attribution." Additionally, in an interview with TPMMuckraker published July 1, Carlin acknowledged of his report, "I didn't have time to fix all the problems -- and they still aren't fixed." Carlin reportedly claimed that he produced his report over the span of "a few days," whereas he "normally write[s] research papers and reports, which take six months to a year." Carlin also stated that he similarly provided global warming reports to the EPA when President Bush was in office but that "[t]o the best of my knowledge, the Bush administration never followed up on my ideas."

Walpin's suspension from his position as inspector general was announced on June 11. The Obama administration provided a list of reasons for Walpin's June 11 termination, including but not limited to the board of the corporation's concerns over Walpin's behavior and conduct, as well as a complaint filed by acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of California Lawrence G. Brown regarding Walpin's actions during his investigation into the misuse of AmeriCorps grants given to a nonprofit organization in Sacramento, California. In his April 29 letter, Brown alleged that Walpin and his staff "did not include" or "disclose" relevant information regarding the case to Brown's office; that Walpin repeatedly discussed the case in the press after being advised "under no circumstance was he to communicate with the media about a matter under investigation"; and that Walpin's "actions were hindering our investigation and handling of this matter."

Media Matters has previously noted that on-screen text aired during the June 17 edition of Fox & Friends asserted as fact that Walpin was "fired for protecting taxpayers."

From the July 1 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

DOOCY: Yesterday, we were telling you a little bit about a guy from the EPA who had written a report that was critical of the global warming consensus in the federal government.

KILMEADE: Yeah. He said it wasn't happening.

DOOCY: He said that the temperature's been going down. His report was then discounted and not included in the EPA's final thing. And then remember about a month and a half ago that fellow by the name of Gerald Walpin? He was the inspector general of AmeriCorps, and he was calling into question some of Barack Obama's pals, in particular, the now-mayor of Sacramento and how they had -- he had mis-- and his organization -- had misspent hundreds of thousands of dollars. Well, now we're learning that another whistleblower, a fellow who -- by the name of Fred Weiderhold who's the inspector general at Amtrak, suddenly got abruptly retired after he made some critical comments.

CARLSON: It's all in the words, isn't it? It's all in how this happens. He wasn't fired. He wasn't let go. He was retired. But why? Well, some people are questioning this this morning because apparently he was looking into money and the way in which it was being spent at Amtrak. Remember, Amtrak is pretty much government-funded, and I believe it received a lot of the stimulus money.

KILMEADE: 1.3 million.

CARLSON: All right, so questions would be, of course, for taxpayers, how was that money being used? And if you're the inspector general, remember, these are people who have no political ties, apparently. They are there to be the watchdog of what's going on and how these organizations are spending your money. Now, this guy looking into Amtrak, told to retire.

KILMEADE: Yeah. Senator [Chuck] Grassley [R-IA] said look out for this. A lot of people are scared when they come up with this 80-page report that said how bad Amtrak is run, even though I have a great time when I'm on there --

DOOCY: Sure.

KILMEADE: -- and the food's semi-good, and I often tip the guy at the end. At least it's edible -- a bit of a surprise.

DOOCY: The conductor?

KILMEADE: Yeah, the conductor. I usually tip my conductor.

DOOCY: He is the guy at the end.

KILMEADE: Yeah, he's got a little --

CARLSON: He's talking about the waiter who's bringing his drinks.

KILMEADE: Right, no, he's usually -- the conductor usually brings my drinks. It's good. Anybody with a vest.

DOOCY: Right.

KILMEADE: But here's the deal. This guy's fired. He has no idea why. The other guy that visited us last week, Gerald Walpin: fired. They questioned his sanity; they said he's too old. Now this guy, Alan Carlin, his job -- he's fired by saying there might not be any global warming.

CARLSON: No, he was not fired. His report was not admitted into the final analysis --

KILMEADE: OK.

CARLSON: -- but he still has his job.

KILMEADE: And he's gotta not feel too strongly about it, judging by the track record. [Rep.] Darrell Issa [R-CA] on the House side and Senator Grassley are all saying we want explanations for these actions. And who knows, maybe if Senator Jim DeMint [R-SC] does come in and talk about his book, we could ask him when he sits on the couch.

DOOCY: He's going to be here in just a minute, but ultimately -- and I think Grassley, the senator from Iowa said these interventions have systematically violated the letter and spirit of the Inspector General Act. Remember, the inspector generals are out there looking out for us. And yet, if they gotta worry about whether or not they are going to be abruptly retired because they are critical of the system, and in the particular case regarding the Amtrak guy, he also blew the whistle on the fact that they apparently have retained a number of outside law firms, and they are shielded from the inspector general's reach. So, in other words, they bring in these outside law firms, and they -- the government watchdog can't keep an eye on them because they're from outside. Interestingly enough, Michelle Malkin sums it up this way. She's got a great column about this today. She said "watchdog out, lapdog in."

KILMEADE: Lapdog in, yep. Absolutely.

CARLSON: Who would want to be an inspector general now? That's the big question. And fear of retaliation. Let's talk about some new polls that are out.

*Correction: This item originally stated that the Amtrak inspector general serves at the discretion of the Amtrak president and CEO, a position currently held by Joseph H. Boardman, a former Bush administration official. In fact, the Amtrak inspector general serves at the discretion of the chairman of Amtrak's board of directors, a position currently held by Carper. Media Matters for America regrets the error.
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mk3872 (July 01, 2009 7:41 pm ET)
      3 1
      What idiots. These guys have been reduced to reporting on any and all crazy hair-brained ideas & consipiracy theories created by Michelle Malkin! She's been pushing these for weeks ...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (July 01, 2009 7:47 pm ET)
        3  
        Good old Michelle Malkin. Always ahead of the curve on right wing lunacy.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by TheDayV (July 01, 2009 8:23 pm ET)
        1  
        It's not reporting, it's straight gossip and speculation.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by phredicles (July 01, 2009 8:56 pm ET)
      3  
      I think this is also at least in part an attempt to ape language used during the Bush years in an attempt to confuse any accounting of that administration's abuses: "See? Obama's silencing whistle-blowers, too - everybody does it, and 'your' president is at least as bad as 'ours'." It's BS, but we have to be watchful lest it gain any traction.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (July 01, 2009 9:15 pm ET)
        5 1
        I'd say Walpin and the Amtrak guy are being mentioned right now to "establish a pattern" in the minds of the Fox & Friends target audience (aka the stupidest 5% of Americans).

        The big fish is Carlin. Once the monkeys are hypnotized, Fox and other media outlets can focus on the Climate Change denial propaganda, citing the pattern of censorship by the Obama Administration to support their stories.

        And I don't have to predict it will work, there's already a poster on another thread completely bamboozled into thinking that Carlin did legitimate work that has been silenced.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by historygeek001 (July 02, 2009 12:27 pm ET)
          2  
          I think you nailed it. I think I read the same thread you're referring to; despite the fact that Carlin's background is in economics, not climatology, and despite the fact that he made several basic scientific errors, they're clinging to the idea that he is RIGHT, as if what he said made sense. It's ridiculous.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (July 02, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
             
          Yeah, some of these wingnuts and ditto-heads will believe anything...

          All Fox has to do is trot some right-wing loon, give him a microphone, and these lemmings will be spreading the lies.

          You can lead some of these conservatives around like a dog with a bone.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by LIBERTY OR DEATH (July 02, 2009 12:15 am ET)
        1
      Walpin was fired for political reasons it happens all the time in boath partys.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by OnceYouGoBarack (July 02, 2009 5:05 pm ET)
           
        boath partys[sic]
        Did you mean 'Baath Parties' as Saddam Hussein? If so, then you post almost makes sense.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (July 03, 2009 10:35 am ET)
             
          Probably not, with the Baath party firings, it was permanent, in that Saddam and his sons did the firing (following a load and aim).
          Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (July 02, 2009 8:27 am ET)
      1  
      And, ironically, Fox is still on the air. If ALL watchdog groups were silenced, why do they still have their FCC license?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by SMTDL (July 02, 2009 1:05 pm ET)
         
      Same old Fox News ..get stories from right wing talk radio..present connecting innuendo and a few facts..leave out other details..and VOILA a new "Scandal/Epose!!Next step bring in commentators(Rove,Morris) to baselessly agree.. but no one will be on to clarify or rebut and its Fair and Balanced...we report you decide!!!its SOOOOOO Easy!!!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Joe in Chicago (July 02, 2009 1:17 pm ET)
        1
      I spent several years working for AMTRAK in Washington and Philadelphia. I know Weiderhold. I watched the story develop on Fox this morning. I'll tell you this: it rings true. I think the alarm is primarily based on two issues. One the retirement after a report critical of the agency was issued. Two, Weiderholds replacement has no experience in audit and investigation. You have to remember when something does not look quite right, critical press will react, irrespective of facts or knowledge
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (July 02, 2009 4:53 pm ET)
        1  
        But,

        Even if the report is true and Weiderhold was wrongly terminated, the White House is not involved:

        "...the Amtrak IG is appointed, and may be removed, by the head of Amtrak."

        Just more crapola from the Fake News Channel.


        Report Abuse
    • Author by terry ott (July 03, 2009 2:25 am ET)
        2
      The Walpin case is intriguing. I know less about the others. I've reviewed everything I've been able to find regarding Walpin, and all the surrounding events. Included are the various legal documents, news stories, blog commentaries, Walpin's complete report and various notes and memoranda (33 of them)_posted by WaPo. And the letter of support signed by 170-some prominent people from both parties and many positions.

      What makes this intriguing is the characters involved, as well as the impression that something is very wrong about what came down.

      I suppose it is therapeutic for some to just say, "nothing to it; more BS from the right wingers". I doubt that anyone reading this will have done the same amount of digging that I've done. . I doubt that anyone reading this will have done the same amount of digging that

      There IS something wrong here; of that I am convinced. We have allegations of emails being deleted, we have the long and distinguished (I contend) career of Walpin, a guy that at 77 doesn't need the gig. The more you look it, trust me or look for yourself, the fishier the thing looks.

      Anhd
      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 04, 2009 7:10 am ET)
        1  
        It IS rightwing BS whether the firing stinks or not. Put out a report critical of the bosses and bad things happen. I dont think that is a good thing but what is the evidence the White House had anything to do with the HEAD OF AMTRAK forcing the guy to retire?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by johnrod10 (July 04, 2009 11:07 am ET)
        2
      Regardless of the reasons given by the administration, the LAW requires a 30 day notice and Congressional approval to fire an IG. Odly enough, the Inspectors General Reform Act of 2008 was co-signed by none other than Barack Obama himself. He broke the very law that he had his name on. Im ready for Obama defenders, but please dont use the "Bush was worse" argument. It's tired, lame, and overused. And pointing out Bush's faults does not give Obama an exuse to break the law. I've beaten you to the Bush deflection argument so save it, please...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (July 04, 2009 3:51 pm ET)
        2  
        How about if we point out that Obama did NOT fire the guy the head of Amtrak did. Will that penetrate that laserlike focus you have on repeating the rightwing mantra no matter how silly it is? Did you READ the article.

        MMFA there was no evidence the white house had anything to do with the firing.

        JRod. Obama broke his own law by firing the guy

        MMFA. He didnt fire the guy the head of Amtrak did

        Jrod he should have waited 30 days

        MMFA, ah they forced him to retire. Do they have to wait 30 days for that and Obama didnt do it the head of Amtrak did it

        JRod. Obama broke a law with his name on it by firing the guy


        LOOK this is so simple even YOU have a shot at understanding it. White House NOT head of Amtrak. Head of Amtrak forced guy to retire NOT WHITE HOUSE.

        So either cough up your evidence the white house did this or stop wasting our time
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.