It's no big news that General Stanley McChrystal is expected to either resign or be fired today in wake of his bombshell in Rolling Stone.
But what does censuring his top commander do for President Obama's credibility?
Remember, this is the president who, in a welcome speech to senior officials shortly after the inauguration, said:
"Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I or a former president wants to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General and the White House counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law. Information will not be withheld just because I say so; it will be withheld because a separate authority believes my request is well-grounded in the Constitution. Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency."
What McChrystal and his team said was at times downright disrespectful (calling the Vice President "Bite Me" rings a bell), but if we're ground in the Constitution, it was all within their rights to say under the umbrella of free speech.
Also allowed -- McChrystal's decision to resign because he simply cannot work with the president if he disagrees with the path the administration is taking in the Middle East.
After all, that's well in keeping with that senior staff speech:
"It's not about advantaging yourself. It's not about advancing your friends or your corporate clients. It's not about advancing an ideological agenda or the special interests of any organization. Public service is, simply and absolutely, about advancing the interests of Americans."
By now Obama has made clear he has the final say on McChrystal's fate.
Which means a possible firing, and yet another blow to those promises of transparency and doing right by the American people rather than the administration.
If McChrystal leaves, do you think it should be up to him or the president?
Image via isafmedia/Flickr