Dr. Chacko On Indefinite Administrative Leave

UPDATE II: Please also check out my new book, The Definitive Dossier on PTSD in Whistleblowers, for only $3.99, in which I dedicate chapter four entirely to the exploits of Dr. Anna Chacko. 

A source tells me that sometime yesterday afternoon the head of the Pittsburgh VA, Terri Wolf, held a meeting with the radiology department. At that meeting, Ms. Wolfe announced that effectively immediately Dr. Anna Chacko would be on indefinite administrative leave.

If you have been following my work, you need no more information but for those unfamiliar, here's a quick recap. Dr. Anna Chacko is the head of radiology at the Pittsburgh VA. She has been there since October of 2008. Almost immediately, staff in the radiology department began to complain about her behavior. They described her as tyrannical, a serial liar, she refused to do clinical work, and she created an environment of terror and split the department. In March of this year, an "investigative board" was formed. In April of this year, the board recommended that Dr. Chacko be removed. Dr. Chacko then challenged the results. She reached out to Congressman Brad Miller of North Carolina and on May 15th of this year, Congressman Miller sent a letter to General Eric Shinseki, the head of the VA. Weeks later, word came from General Shinseki's office to the Pittsburgh VA to keep Dr. Chacko in her post. She came back to work on August 1st, following a management class she attended.

I then tracked Dr. Chacko all throughout the country and found that her behavior at the Pittsburgh VA was part of a pattern of tyrannical behavior. In fact, I have begun to describe Dr. Chacko as a Psychopath. She worked for fourteen months in Butte, Mt. at St. James Hospital and was involved in four lawsuits and turned a radiology department seven figures in the black into one in the red. She was forcibly removed from Lahey Clinic, where she spent about six years, by security and screamed, "kiss my big Indian ass" on her way out. Many questions remain about all sorts of previous employers including a twenty year military career.

I began writing about Dr. Chacko nearly four weeks ago and so it's unclear what, if any, influence my series has had on this decision. It may or may not be a coincidence that the announcement came less than a day after this piece was posted. At the least, it affirms what I have written. A source also tells me that Dr. Chacko has made veiled threats to sue me. That's to be expected. Dr. Chacko sues in a serial manner. She left Lahey Clinic and a lawsuit settled her departure. One former colleague told me they had a lawyer on retainer during most of their tenure with Dr. Chacko. As I mentioned, Dr. Chacko is involved in no less than four lawsuits in Butte. (not all name her specifically, though two do, but all have her as a principle in evidence) In fact, most, if not all, of her previous employers have settled with Dr. Chacko and that settlement often includes an agreement for both sides to remain quiet. I would point out that any lawsuit against me would give me license to subpoena nearly everything related to all her prior employment endeavors.

It's also important to note that when Dr. Chacko left in April of this year, the language used by management to describe her departure is nearly identical to that used now. Since an "indefinite administrative leave" is so nebulous, Dr. Chacko could never come back to the Pittsburgh VA or she might be back to work on Monday. It's also important to note that her line and voice mail at the VA still work. Because the VA is guarded with "personnel matters", it will be difficult to get any information. The radiology staff was told little besides that effectively immediately Dr. Chacko was on indefinite administrative leave. So, it's not yet clear if this was a local decision, a regional one, or if this decision came from General Shinseki's office directly. I can confirm, however, that formal complaints were made about Dr. Chacko since her return on August 1st and those complaints reached all the way to Michael Moreland, the regional director of the VA that includes this Pittsburgh VA.

That said this story is far from over. If her administrative leave is buried, she will pop up elsewhere and you can bet that she will behave the same way. The entire process has been corrupted. The Pittsburgh VA tried to remove her and they were trumped by the head of the VA. It's unusual, to say the least, for the head of the VA to make a hiring/firing decision for one individual doctor at one individual hospital. Now, the decision has been reversed again. In fact, Dr. Chacko should have never been hired at the Pittsburgh VA to begin with. Her work history, had it been properly examined, should have clearly shown a doctor that had no business at the Pittsburgh VA. So, either someone didn't do their due diligence, or the process didn't allow for proper due diligence. In fact, Dr. Chacko's entire career raises serious questions about numerous legal, whistleblowing, and medical procedures. None of those will be answered if Dr. Chacko's removal is quietly buried and she is simply allowed to surface elsewhere.

UPDATE: The latest information confirmed to me so far is that the administrative board has convened their investigation. I have no information on the results of their investigation. This is, however, the second such board that has investigated Dr. Chacko at the Pittsburgh VA. I have been assured by a source with a great deal of knowledge of the situation that the chances that Dr. Chacko would be allowed back to the Pittsburgh VA are extremely minimal.

\

After All the Hyperanalysis...

Today's Chicago Sun Times has the first ten pages and half the sports pages dedicated to analyis and hyperanalysis of Chicago's loss of the Olympic bid. One Sun Times article called the Olympic snub an after effect of "anti American bias." That's interesting because I thought that all ended when Obama was elected. With every analysis, there was a different perspective. Rick Telander thought it was a rejection of Daley's arrogance. Of course, the murder of Derrion Albert could have played a role as well.

The reality is that no one knows but the IOC and they aren't speaking. It's just one of many problems in the process of being chosen and then ultimately putting on the games that I have seen in following Chicago's bid. Frankly, that the IOC is totally non transparent in their voting process is the least of my problems. Sure it probably means they are corrupt and it's likely that bribery is often involved and we learned it was in Salt Lake. Of course, that should just mean that less cities decide to participate. That doesn't seem to ever be a problem. For instance, Chicago started planning for the Olympics in the spring of 2006. So, if we were awarded the games, that would mean more than ten years of planning for a two week party. Does anyone else see a problem with that? It's hard to know what the price tag for the last two and half years was but it's somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million. We're told that was all private money but that's also hard to track. The city's current budget shortfall is $750 million. Does anyone else see a problem with a city spending a $100 million just to see if they can get the games?

Conservatives are now taking their potshots at the President. After all, he went to Copenhagen and Chicago was rejected anyway. Yet, what most Conservatives don't say is that the national leaders of all four cities went. In fact, Tony Blair went to pitch London in their eventual and successful quest to host the 2012 Summer Olympics. It's now a demand, unwritten of course, that the IOC see the national leader of the city's country in order to get the games. Some are saying that the prestige of the presidency was weakened by Chicago not getting the games. Here's what those that are saying this aren't saying. Had Obama not gone, Chicago wouldn't have gotten the games. (as it turns out it didn't matter) You can bet those same people would have blamed him for not getting the games. So, Chicago worked for two and a half years on the bid and then it was held hostage to a fifteen minute presidential appearance. Isn't that twisted? Isn't the process a bit twisted when the thoughts of Euro liberals now determine the prestige of the presidency?

The folks of Rio seem to be excited and I wish them well. I hope that in three or four years they will be just as excited. For instance, the host city contract that they signed means that the IOC gives them a fixed amount of money and Rio covers the rest. They plan on spending $14 billion by the end but projections seven years into the future are nearly impossible to make. So, Rio maybe stuck spending more than $20 billion to have a two week party. That's some party. The host city contract also means that all decisions must be approved by the IOC. So, for the next seven years, Rio is no longer run by Rio but by the IOC. In other words, every single Rio decision will now be approved by the IOC. So, the city of Rio, for the next seven years, will be run by the International Olympic Committee.

Here in Chicago there were a few marginal debates in trying to balance a plethora of new Olympics sites with the current natural habitat and with the citizens that had to be displaced to build them. That's a hard balance. That's of course because Chicago is a city and not a never ending sports complex. Cities aren't meant to be never ending sports complexes and yet that's what the IOC demands that any host city does. Beyond that, they have a contract that demands enforcement of their demands. It's not that easy to build a sports complex for every single sporting event known to man and also make sure that many of the citizens of your city aren't displaced, natural habitat isn't destroyed, and life isn't disrupted for years at a time. Yet, that's exactly what happens to any host city. Here in Chicago, several of the harbors were going to be closed for several summers in order to build the kayaking venues. That's one of hundreds of several issues for Chicagos' planning. So boaters couldn't enjoy the lake for several summers for a two week party. Again, that must be some party.

There is really something wrong when your city is turned upside down and every decision for nearly a decade is made with only one purpose, making the Olympics great. Yet, that's the Olympics process. Our mayor did little else in the last two and a half years and all he has to show for it is a trip to Copenhagen. The citizens of Rio are dancing in the streets now but once the full force of the preparedness of the Olympics takes hold we'll see how they feel.

Council Winners

Winning Council Submissions
First place with 1 2/3 points! – Rhymes With Right - A Note On The “Tenther” Smear
Second place with 1 points – (T*) – Soccer Dad - Leaving the nest
Second place with 1 points – (T*) – Joshuapundit - Welcome To The Babi Yar Hotel
Second place with 1 points – (T*) – The Colossus of Rhodey - More on Obama’s ridiculous foreign policy
Second place with 1 points – (T*) – Mere Rhetoric - Obama Knew About Secret Iran Facility During Transition, Experts Pushed Engagement Anyway With Pro-Iran Pretexts
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Right Truth - Why America Could Be Doomed
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Bookworm Room - Obama Keeps Hitler Analogy in the Public Eye
Fourth place with 1/3 points – The Provocateur - Yet Another Defining Moment
Winning Non-Council Submissions
First place with 1 1/3 points! – Jennifer Rubin/Commentary - Netanyahu’s Speech for the Ages
Second place with 1 1/3 points – RedState - Common Sense Outlawed in Indiana
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Breitbart TV - Sources: Sarkozy Thinks Obama is ‘Incredibly Naive and Grossly Egotistical’
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – The Anchoress - A Study in Contrasts
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – WSJ/Bret Stephens - The Neocons Make a Comeback
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – StreetWise - It’s Not a Real Estate Crisis, It’s a Debt Crisis
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – The Times Online (UK) - The Anglo-world of settlers, not dominators
Third place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Larry Greenfield / American Thinker - Liberal Jews and the Legacy of Neoconservatism
Fourth place with 1/3 points – (T*) – Kausfiles @Slate - Did ACORN chicanery elect Al Franken?
Fourth place with 1/3 points – (T*) – Simply Jews - Ich bin kein Berliner?
Fourth place with 1/3 points – (T*) – Fore-Left - Speaking of Vast Conspriacies..

Video, Quote, and Word of the Day

flagitious

scandolous

All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible.

Thomas E. Lawrence

Rio To Host 2016

The news just came in. The city appears to be partying and we all wish them well in hosting the games.

Obama's IOC Speech

I am torn by this speech. On the one hand, this was a fairly marginal speech made by the President. He did a much better job of selling the vision of the Olympic games. He certainly did a good job of telling the IOC how Chicago could benefit from the games. Yet, he was rather flat in selling the city itself. He listed off a series of individual neighborhoods like Ukranian Village and Hyde Park and he gave a short history of the city, including the great Chicago Fire that nearly burnt it down. Still, most of what he said could have been said by any representative of any city. Given that the president is from Chicago, I was expecting a much more personal appeal. He did talk about how Chicago became his own home after moving around most of his life, but I was disappointed by his salesmanship of the city itself.

That said, I am against the game coming here. So, a flat sales job helps the cause. President Obama said

No one expects the Games to solve our collective challenges. But we do believe that in a world where we have too often witnessed the darker aspects of our humanity, peaceful competition between nations represents what is best about our humanity.

That's an ironic and curious statement considering that the beating death of Derrion Albert has been broadcast around the world. Many in Chicago would ask how the Olympic games will do anything to solve that sort of violence in the city. The speech, for obvious reasons, didn't address that death nor any of the negatives of bringing the games to the city.

All in all, I am underwhelmed. If this puts Chicago over the top, then the IOC was simply hypnotized by his celebrity because no one can say this speech swayed them to Chicago.

UPDATE:

Chicago and Tokyo were both just eliminated.

Mr. President: Here's My Nickel's Worth of Free Advice

Over the last few days, the media is reporting on growing speculation that the president is considering or even ready to propose a value added tax. In this way, President Obama would share some ideological similarities with Mike Huckabee. Mike Huckabee is also in favor of a value added tax, though he calls it a consumption tax or the fair tax. There is however a huge difference between Mike Huckabe and President Obama. Mike Huckabee proposes that all we have is a value added or consumption tax. Meanwhile, President Obama wants a value added tax on top of all the other taxes.

The idea first gained media attention most recently when it was suggested by John Podesta of the Center for American Progress. that the value added tax was more plausible than ever earlier in the week. Podesta, according to D.C. insiders, is believed to have significant influence over the current White House and was the Chief of Staff to Bill Clinton. His think tank CAP then held a conference in which all the powerful liberal economic thinkers all got on board in support of the idea of the value added tax.

Supporters of the VAT say it is a great revenue generator and they also say it encourages savings. It maybe a great revenue generator but that's because it takes a lot of money out of the hands of the citizens. Taxes affect behavior. So a tax on consumption would reduce consumption which would increase savings. That said, we're in a recession and we need more consumer spending. Now, we're going to have a tax on spending. Does that sound smart now?

Politically, however, the idea is even worse. The president must understand that if he breaks his pledge not to tax anyone earning under $250,000 a year, his presidency is over. That's not a broken promise he recovers from. There is no equivocation or explanation that will help him if there is a broad based tax on those earning less than $250,000. Now, opponents like me were dubious that the president could engage in the sort of spending he has and keep that pledge. This is exactly such a tax.

The president has added a cigarette tax. He's added several credits for low income folks. He wants to add a penalty for not getting health insurance. He wants to cut some credits for charitable giving. He also wants to complicate the tax code regarding corporate taxes. If the VAT were all part of a tax overhaul that simplified the tax code, that would be something most would applaud, however it's clear that the president has no use for simplifying the tax code. Everything he's done has complicated the tax code. Now, he's thinking about adding a VAT on top of it. If the president were to officially support such an idea, that would be it. It would be the George HW Bush equivalent of a promise broken. So, my advice is to stop listening to the far left on this. This tax is a bad policy idea and a much worse political idea.