Dominique Strauss-Kahn head of the International Monetary Fund is gone.
Given the circumstances and what I've heard from various sources, the attack he is being jailed for appears to have been real and Strauss-Kahn was not set up.
On the other hand, he was left to hang in the breeze. Now surely a person who'd commit a crime like this has been at it for a long, long time. My guess is all the other times until now it was smoothed over with a quick bag of cash to the victim.
Not so this time so in that sense, he was "removed."
Does it matter and if so how?
It all depends on the orientation of the next head of the IMF. Even though the head is a puppet (as all heads of organizations like this are), they do have some ability to set directions.
Strauss-Kahn was anti-US dollar and pro "compassionate" (a relative term here to be sure!) bailouts for smaller economies.
The IMF has not always been led by people with this orientation and may not be under its next head.
None of this changes the fact of the coming financial system collapse, but it will change how resources are allocated as the ship is going down. Bullish for the US dollar. Not so for countries like Ireland and Portugal who are foolish enough to play along and take the "aid."
The correct response to banker malfeasance is to let the people who invested in and loaned money to the banks eat their losses. It should be a learning experience for them, not the ruination of the host country.