Jump to content

We need to talk about Scott Pruitt


Pods

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

what the actual fuck? does this guy do any real work?

In terms of work that is pro-industry, pro-pollution, anti-science, anti-regulation, and anti-environment, he's done a lot. It will take years to recover even if he is fired tomorrow and replaced by someone competent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Hypothetically, what would it actually take for this weird grifter to get canned?

Him criticizing Trump.  Other than that, there is absolutely nothing he can do that will get him canned.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Longhornmaniac8 said:

He's just a vile, disgusting person. Fuck Scott Pruitt. He's arguably the worst part about this entire administration. Just a swamp rat to the nth degree.

I see your Pruitt and raise you a Devos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2018 at 8:06 AM, Ragnarok said:

Yeah, the nerve of that guy Pruitt.  Did you see his latest outrage?  Insisting that studies that EPA uses publish their data and methodologies.  I mean, people are just going to try to find something wrong with it. Outrageous. That's not how we do things at the EPA.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

I think we know where all the missing immigrant kids are. Tied down to used mattresses in Scott Pruitt's network of sex dungeons. That's why he needs all that extra security. 

In this admin that's a sadly real possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woohorn said:

Everyone says Pruitt only being kept around to move into AG slot because he has already been confirmed. Wouldn't he still have to be confirmed as AG though?

He's already been confirmed by the Senate, so he can slide over positions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, woohorn said:

Everyone says Pruitt only being kept around to move into AG slot because he has already been confirmed. Wouldn't he still have to be confirmed as AG though?

A cabinet reshuffle or shuffle is when a head of government rotates or changes the composition of ministers in their cabinet. They are more common in parliamentary systems, and less so in democracies where cabinet heads must be confirmed by a separate legislative body, and occur at pleasure in autocratic systems without suitable checks-and-balances.

Cabinet reshuffles are far less common in systems where members of the Cabinet are not drawn from the legislative branch. In such systems there is a far larger pool of viable candidates to choose a cabinet from. Members of such cabinets are usually chosen on account of their qualifications to run a specific portfolio, so moving these cabinet members to different portfolios at a later time usually makes little sense. For instance, in the United States, it would be very unusual for a president to reassign multiple cabinet secretaries to new positions, especially since a United States Cabinet member moved to a new position within the cabinet needs to be confirmed in the new role by the United States Senate—this alone is seen as a powerful deterrent against U.S. presidents initiating major cabinet reshuffles. On an individual basis, however, U.S. Cabinet members will occasionally change departments—for example, Norman Mineta served as Secretary of Commerce under Bill Clinton before becoming Secretary of Transportation for Clinton's successor, George W. Bush.

Cabinet reshuffles occur at the pleasure of monarchs or dictators in autocratic systems, which lack the checks-and-balances of systems with greater citizen or legislative control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federal Vacancies Act says that when a cabinet member resigns or dies, the position can then be held by the first assistant or another cabinet member (who was confirmed with advice and consent of the senate) as the acting secretary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pods said:

He's already been confirmed by the Senate, so he can slide over positions. 

Pruitt would have to be reconfirmed.    Or at least every previous person who switched cabinet roles had to be reconfirmed.  I assume they didn’t do that for fun.

However it’s not feasible for trump to fire Pruitt for cause from the epa only to nominate him later as AG.  This is why trump is keeping him around.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, woohorn said:

So pods says no new confirmation and rpm says new confirmation required. God I love message boards.

He can be shifted into the AG position for some period of time without Senate reconfirmation. I don't know how long that is offhand, but there's lots of articles out there on it. He'll eventually have to be reconfirmed, but he can throw a lot of shit in the gears in the meantime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pruitt is a great corruption distraction... he’s among the poorest of the cabinet members.  While the media is focused on Pruitt, the real billionaires like Devos and Wilbur Ross are probably landing some sweet international deals & pump and dumping stocks on inside information. 

 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

While the media is focused on Pruitt, the real billionaires like Devos and Wilbur Ross are probably landing some sweet international deals & pump and dumping stocks on inside information. 

Seriously, just think about the money that could be made by pumping Trump full of stories of unfair trade practices in the steel industry.  Buy American companies and short European ones right before his "executive time" on the toilet the next morning when he fires off an irrational tweet about impending steel tariffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-tapped-aide-donors-to-help-wife-land-job-at-conservative-group/2018/06/13/f54c87fa-6db1-11e8-afd5-778aca903bbe_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9cd6fc82d569

Pruitt had EPA aides speak to donors about finding his wife a job.  Crazy how the best defense of Pruitt is that perhaps he didn't technically break the law.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What will Scott Pruitt do after public service?

Doesn't he have to actually serve the public first, before he can do something after?  I'm not seeing too much of that out of him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Years after Trump is out of office, Paul Ryan is going to attempt some sort of image rehabilitation tour where he will try to pretend that he had no choice but to follow Trump's agenda.  His ever growing list of bullshit quotes like these need to be archived for those moments.

Ryan frustrates me so much because he is so obviously smarter than this, yet chooses to play these dumbass games.  It's infuriating.  

Edited by Chuckie Finster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Ryan frustrates me so much because he is so obviously smarter than this, yet chooses to play these dumbass games.  It's infuriating.  

I’m not sold on Paul Ryan being that smart.

He’s no Louie Gohmert but he’s nowhere near Ted Cruz smart.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Jive Turkey said:

This is kinda old, but sheds more  light on the depths of his corruption. 

 

He was just investigating the flatulence emitted by those in attendance and he personally needed to oversee the operation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jive Turkey said:

This is kinda old, but sheds more  light on the depths of his corruption. 

 

guarantee that he reimbursed the owner based on the face value of the ticket, like $100, when the going rate was $1500.  Or whatever.    And when he says he reimbursed the ticket owner, my guess is that he paid cash and the friend/lobbyist will back up that claim 100%.

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pruitt spent nearly $3K on 'tactical' pants and polos

 
New disclosures show Pruitt spent nearly $3K on 'tactical' pants and polos: report
 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt spent nearly $3,000 on "tactical pants" and "tactical polos," according to new disclosures cited Wednesday by The Intercept. 

Records obtained by the outlet through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that Pruitt spent $2,749.62 on the clothing items as part of his security expenditures. 

The disclosures showed that Pruitt spent $288,610 on various security items, bringing the total amount of public money Pruitt has spent on security items to $4.6 million. 


The amount marks a $1.1 million increase from the administrator's security costs from last month, according to the outlet. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-disclosures-show-pruitt-spent-nearly-dollar3k-on-tactical-pants-and-polos-report/ar-AAyVOwH?ocid=spartandhp 

ygTRw5J.jpg
Edited by Mapache
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...