Balanced legal review ? |
Had the NCUA General Counsel and Board acted legally? OIG's task was to explore that legal decision. Here's how OIG conducted that independent legal research (it's on page 5 of the Issa letter):
"On November 16, 2012, the NCUA Office of the General Counsel [OGC were the folks OIG was supposed to be investigating!] sent the OIG Counsel an email entitled "Legal Opinion on Applicability of E. O. 13433." In that email, the OGC stated that "[w]e recently requested the attached opinion, I am forwarding it to you as it might be of interest in connection with your investigation."
The legal opinion [called the "Cooper opinion"] was dated November 15, 2012 and OIG states... "Consequently, in the spirit of full disclosure and attribution, we note that OIG Counsel's legal analysis ... derive in part from the Cooper opinion. On January 2, 2013, representatives from my office met with your office [Issa's staff] to discuss the Cooper opinion and the circumstances surrounding the OIG Counsel's receipt of it."
"The circumstances surrounding..." Yep, even the OIG realized that having the suspect conduct your legal research for you smells of dead fish. But this seems to be in line with NCUA's standards.....
To measure fairly, the true value and veracity of The "OMG...OIG" Letter to Congressman Issa, no one has ever said it better than H. L. Mencken:
"It reminds me of a string of wet sponges; it reminds me of tattered washing on the line; it reminds me of stale bean soup, of college yells, of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights."
4 comments:
OMG....OIG Letter to Issa reminds me of the fact that some people do not have to hunt BULL to shot it!
How can you question their decisions if they make up their own rules?
And especially when they can make them up after the fact.
Anyone checked ncua's budgeted expense for rubber stamps?
Post a Comment