Member of Parliament Says No Good Will Come From Sharing Video of Attempted...
Roseanne Barr Not Impressed With Rolling Stone's Wrap-Up Smear Against Spencer Pratt
Inclusionmaxxing So Hard You Invent the Muslim Lesbian Power Couple
Daily Beast: 'CBS News Veteran' Shreds ‘Brazen MAGA Slant’ of 60 Minutes
'THIS IS A WAR': Here Are More Reactions to the Karmelo Anthony Murder...
‘Our Tea Party Is Here’: The Left is Standing By Their Nazi-Tattooed, Adultery-Plagued...
MeToo Who? AOC: Abuse Allegations Against Democrat Are 'Hard to Stomach'... But We'll...
Irish Politicians Respond to Immigrant Stabbing Incident, You Wont Believe What They're Co...
LIVE ELECTION RESULTS: Primary Night in Maine, Nevada, North Dakota, and South Carolina
Tom Steyer: Billionaire Democrat Proves You Really Can Buy Everything Except Votes
Trump Watches Basketball Like a Normal Human, Jonah Goldberg Has a Full-On Nervous...
‘FAFO, Donald’: Gavin Newsom Signs Law Imprisoning Politicians Who Spread Election Lies
Karmelo Anthony Supporter Rages, Wants to Know What to Tell Her Five Boys
Report: Bari Weiss Poised to Oversee Editorial Operations at CNN
Another Former Capitol Staffer Confirms a Past Romantic Relationship With James Talarico

Fake news from the future: EPA soon to stop (its usual bang-up job of) protecting the environment

Oh, come on.

Anyone who follows media types on Twitter knows that conservatives and liberals alike are strongly suggesting reporters keep their powder dry and save the real outrage for when it’s deserved — after all, it’s been settled among our intellectual betters that a Trump presidency will lead to certain armageddon, either through nuclear war or climate change … maybe both, in the form of nuclear winter.

Advertisement

Overplaying their hand at every opportunity is one of the reasons voters turned their backs on the media when they went to vote, and it doesn’t look like the media has learned its lesson.

Take, for example, a piece in Wednesday’s Washington Post on Donald Trump’s pick to head the EPA, filed under the headline, “Trump to name Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma attorney general suing EPA on climate change, to head the EPA.”

Fair enough … although Jim Roberts, who has enjoyed high-powered gigs at the New York Times, Mashable, and Reuters, preferred this alternate headline:

There’s already been a full day’s worth of drama over the “existential threat to the planet” Pruitt’s appointment would be, but if the EPA truly is going to stop protecting the environment, is that such a bad thing, considering the bang-up job the agency has done recently? Look how quickly the EPA responded to this huge toxic spill … that was the fault of the EPA.

Advertisement

Oops. Give it time and $28 million and nature will clean it up. And the person responsible for the spill? The one accused of violating the Clean Water Act and giving false statements? No biggie.

Oh, and remember what a great job EPA head Gina McCarthy did with the Flint water crisis? Outstanding.

So, the EPA is finally going to stop “protecting” the environment? Good. We can think of a few federal agencies that could stop “helping” for the next four year.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement