Ex-Obama official mocks Sen. Paul for getting 'beat up' by neighbor

Looks like a Democrat :-)

Former Obama national security spokesman Tommy Vietor was forced to apologize after mocking Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul for being assaulted by his neighbor.  (Fox News)

A former Obama administration national security spokesman apologized Wednesday after mocking U.S. Sen. Rand Paul for being assaulted by a neighbor in an attack that left Paul seriously injured.
Tommy Vietor lashed out at the Kentucky Republican after the senator shared a letter from the FBI confirming that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the love couple removed from Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation over bias against President Donald Trump, still have top security clearances.
"You are a shameless hack and an idiot. Stop attacking public servants. Start doing a better job not getting beat up by your neighbor," Vietor wrote to Paul in a since-deleted tweet.

Tommy Vietor, former Obama national security spokesman, attacked Sen. Rand Paul for getting 'beat up' by his neighbor.  (Twitter)

The former official, who now co-hosts the “Pod Save America” podcast with other former Obama administration staffers, was referring to the incident last year when the senator’s neighbor entered his property and tackled him from behind, forcing him to the ground. Paul had problems breathing as the incident left him with six broken ribs.
Backlash shortly followed Vietor’s distasteful remark, with many criticizing him for blaming the senator for being assaulted.
“Really bad look for @TVietor08, and almost inexplicably so -- how is it Rand Paul's fault that his crazed neighbor brutally assaulted and injured him?” one Twitter user wrote.
“Is it cool for a former Obama national security spokesman to taunt a senator about getting attacked, or nah? The internet is forever,” seconded James Hasson, a contributor to the Federalist.
In the wake of the criticism, Vietor deleted the comment and issued an apology to the senator, reading: “I shouldn't have made fun of you getting assaulted by your neighbor. It was classless and I apologize.”
But the second part of the half-hearted apology that called Paul “pathetic” and “hackish” made people question whether Vietor actually meant to apologize, prompting another round of backlash.
“Once you use the word ‘but’ it confirms this is not an apology,” wrote a Twitter user, slamming Vietor.
“A sincere apology does not include any rationalization for the incident requiring said apology,” wrote another.

Mike Pompeo, Trump's pick for secretary of state, to tell senators years of soft US policy toward Russia 'now over'

Mike Pompeo, whom President Trump chose for his next secretary of state, is expected to tell the Senate during his confirmation hearing Thursday that years of soft policy toward Russian aggression are “now over.”
According to his prepared remarks obtained Wednesday by Fox News from a senior Trump administration official, Pompeo will chastise Russia for acting “aggressively” and emphasize that the national security strategy of the Trump administration considers Russia “a danger to our country.”
He also will say that diplomatic efforts with Moscow, while challenging, “must continue.”
Pompeo, currently the CIA director, will vow to promote democracy and human rights while stressing America’s “duty to lead,” according to the remarks, despite Trump’s vows to put “America first.”
“If we do not lead the calls for democracy, prosperity and human rights around the world, who will?” Pompeo plans to say. “No other nation is equipped with the same blend of power and principle.”
Pompeo’s remarks Thursday before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be the first chance for lawmakers and the public to hear directly from the former Kansas congressman about his approach to diplomacy and the role of the State Department, should he be confirmed to replace Rex Tillerson.
Pompeo’s views on global issues are well known — he was questioned extensively by senators for his confirmation to run the CIA — but Democratic senators have raised questions about his fitness to be the top American diplomat, given some of his past comments.
“When journalists, most of whom have never met me, label me — or any of you — as ‘hawks,’ ‘war hardliners,’ or worse, I shake my head,” the former Army officer is expected to say. “There are few who dread war more than those of us who have served in uniform.”
The remarks continue, “War is always the last resort.”
GEN. ZINNI, ADM. STAVRIDIS: WHAT POMPEO MUST DO FIRST IF CONFIRMED
Pompeo’s chief goal Thursday is said to be convincing senators that he intends to strengthen the State Department.
Pompeo wants to ensure the State Department is a relevant player in national security policy, a source close to him told Fox News. The source, who wasn’t authorized to comment by name and requested anonymity, said Pompeo promises a relevant State Department that will find “its swagger once again.”
Pompeo is expected to say that as he met with State Department workers recently, they all said they wanted to be “empowered in their roles” and clear about Trump’s mission.
“They also shared how demoralizing it is to have so many vacancies and frankly, not to feel relevant. I’ll do my part to end the vacancies, but I’ll need your help.”
Since being nominated last month, Pompeo has spent much of his time at the State Department immersing himself in briefing books and undergoing mock hearings and prep meetings on key issues like Iran, Syria and North Korea, as well as the inner workings of the State Department, a person close to Pompeo said.
He’s also spoken to all eight living former secretaries — including Hillary Clinton, whom he famously criticized over the deadly 2012 attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.
Pompeo’s questioning by senators comes amid spiraling tensions with Russia over Syria and China over trade; concerns about the planned summit between Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un; and uncertainty over the administration’s international agenda.
He’ll tell the Senate that he’s read CIA histories of past talks with North Korea and is confident that Trump won’t repeat past mistakes, according to the remarks.
“President Trump isn’t one to play games at the negotiating table, and I won’t be either,” he plans to say.
The Republican also is expected to pledge to make it “an immediate personal priority” to work with U.S. allies to try to “fix” the Iran nuclear deal.
Pompeo plans to say: “The stakes are high for everyone, but especially Tehran. If confirmed in time, I look forward to engaging key Allies on this crucial and time-sensitive topic at the G7 Ministerial Meeting on April 22, and the NATO Ministerial Meeting later that week.”
Trump has vowed to withdraw from the accord if agreement with European allies to revamp the deal can’t be reached by May 12.
Trump announced Pompeo’s nomination to become the 70th secretary of state in the same March 13 tweet in which he dumped Tillerson. “He will do a fantastic job,” Trump said at the time, confirming months of speculation that the largely sidelined Tillerson was out of a job and would be replaced by Pompeo, who is known to have the president’s ear and respect and shares his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal.
Pompeo, who was confirmed for the CIA job by a 66-32 vote, developed a reputation for being more outwardly political than many past directors of the traditionally apolitical agency. He developed a visibly close relationship with the president, traveling to the White House on most days to deliver the highly classified President’s Daily Brief in person rather than leaving the task to other intelligence officials. Often Trump would have the CIA director stay in the West Wing after the briefing to accompany him to other meetings.

Liberal Teacher Cartoons

Oklahoma Republicans refuse to bow to teachers' demands

As the Oklahoma teachers’ strike enters its second week, Republican lawmakers said Tuesday that they have no plans to further concede to the groups’ demands of eliminating a capital gains tax break as a way to increase school funding.
Meanwhile, the teachers' walkout has been costing taxpayers about $15,000 per day, Oklahoma City's FOX 25 reported.
Last month, Oklahoma’s Republican-led Legislature approved $450 million in new taxes, a move intended to raise about $6,100 for teachers’ salaries, textbooks, and classroom equipment, the Oklahoman reported. The Legislature also approved $2.9 billion for public schools – an increase of nearly 20 percent over last year’s spending.

Alicia Priest, president of the Oklahoma Education Association, speaks to a crowd of teachers and supporters following the arrival of a group that walked 110 miles from Tulsa to the state Capitol as protests continue over school funding, in Oklahoma City, Tuesday, April 10, 2018.  (Associated Press)

Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican, signed both bills.
But teachers say their salary increases were not enough after a decade without raises.
The capital gains deduction has become a target for teachers in because it reportedly benefits few Oklahomans and would generate about $120 million annually. An analyst hired by a state commission looking into Oklahoma's variety of tax incentives for businesses and industries recommended last year that the deduction be eliminated.

Demonstrators in Oklahoma on the final leg of a 110-mile trip from Tulsa to the state Capitol as protests continue over school funding, in Oklahoma City, Tuesday, April 10, 2018.  (Associated Press)

"The incentive overall cannot, with the data available, be credibly shown to have significant economic impact or a positive return on investment for the state," the analyst wrote.
Nevertheless, state Rep. John Pfeiffer, a House majority floor leader and top Republican lawmaker, said Tuesday that the Legislature has no plans to eliminate a capital gains tax break, nor are lawmakers likely to consider any other revenue bills this session.
"As far as this year, we've accomplished a whole lot, and I just don't know how much more we can get done this session," Pfeiffer said.

Leaders of Oklahoma's largest teacher's union have demanded a repeal of a capital gains tax exemption and for the governor to veto a repeal of a proposed lodging tax as they push for more education funding in massive demonstrations at the state Capitol, Tuesday, April 10, 2018, in Oklahoma City.  (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki)

Fallin also defied striking teachers Tuesday, signing a bill to repeal a tax on hotel stays that teachers had called on her to veto. Fallin encouraged lawmakers to turn their attention to other issues.
As teachers descended on the Oklahoma state Capitol again Tuesday, the crowds were notably smaller. The House and Senate this week returned to more routine work, holding committee meetings and considering bills unrelated to revenue or education.
The crowds at the Capitol are costing the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) about $15,000 a day, FOX 25 reported.
“The $15,000 goes into basically repairing the grounds, the janitorial service, and having to pull additional staff from other parts of the Capitol complex and bring them in to aid the normal staff we have here,” a spokeswoman for OMES said.
According to FOX 25, the Oklahoma Education Association is footing most of the bill.
The OEA has called for the walkout to continue until the Legislature comes up with more money for schools. Several districts have announced plans to close Wednesday for an eighth consecutive day. Classes remain canceled in Oklahoma's biggest school districts.

Arizona court says Dreamers no longer eligible for in-state tuition

Darian Cruz, right, wipes away tears as she and Jasmin Lopez, left, listen to a friend talk about the Arizona Supreme Court ruling against young immigrants granted deferred deportation status under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, during a demonstration at the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix, April 9, 2018.  (Associated Press)

College students in Arizona who participate in the Obama-era DACA program are no longer eligible for cheaper “in-state” tuition, the state’s Supreme Court ruled this week.
The ruling affects so-called Dreamers who attend Arizona’s three state universities and its largest community college.
The unanimous ruling Monday will affect at least 2,000 students who participate in DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), which began in 2012 and which President Donald Trump has been looking to scrap or change since taking office in 2017.
The court said it would issue a written opinion explaining its reasoning by May 14.
The high court heard arguments last week in connection with the case.
The Arizona Supreme Court said it was making its decision known quickly to give the district and its students, as well as the state, as much time as possible for planning.
The case was filed under former Attorney General Tom Horne and continued by current Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who issued a statement saying his duty was to uphold the law.
"While people can disagree what the law should be, I hope we all can agree that the attorney general must enforce the law as it is, not as we want it to be," the statement said.

"While people can disagree what the law should be, I hope we all can agree that the attorney general must enforce the law as it is, not as we want it to be."

Matt Hasson, spokesman for the Maricopa County Community Colleges District, said the district was disappointing.
"This ruling is troubling for the 2,000 DACA students currently enrolled in Maricopa Community Colleges," he said in a statement. "During the past five years, more than 600 DACA students earned an associate's degree or a certificate from one of our colleges and are making valuable contributions to the health of our economy."
The chair of the state Board of Regents also lamented the decision, which came in a case pursued by the attorney general after the community college district began allowing DACA students to pay in-state tuition several years ago.

Carlos Yanez, front right, gets a hug from a friend after Yanez spoke during a news conference to protest the Arizona Supreme Court ruling against young immigrants granted deferred deportation status under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, during a demonstration at the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix, April 9, 2018.  (Associated Press)

A lower court in 2015 rejected the attorney general's contention that lower tuition violated a voter-approved 2006 law known as Proposition 300 that prohibits public benefits for anyone living in Arizona without legal immigration status.
The university system used that ruling to offer lower tuition and continued the practice when the Court of Appeals ruled last year that federal and state law don't allow lower tuition for DACA students.
A current community college student taking a full-time course load would see tuition go from about $2,580 a year to about $8,900 a year. The state's three universities have a policy of charging residents without citizenship 150 percent of in-state tuition, moving tuition from about $10,000 a year to $15,000 per year.
Many young people covered by the DACA program, who are known as Dreamers, had said their school plans would be derailed if they lost access to lower in-state fees.
"Not only does this put education out of reach for most students, many will simply drop out from this disappointing decision," said Edder Diaz Martinez, a DACA recipient himself and a founding member of Undocumented Students for Education Equity, a group representing immigrant students at Arizona State University.

Lindsey Graham, Cory Booker to introduce bipartisan bill that would protect Robert Mueller's job: report

Just hours after President Trump reacted angrily Monday to news that federal agents had raided the office and home of his personal attorney, a bipartisan group of four senators is planning to announce legislation Wednesday to protect special counsel Robert Mueller’s job.
Democratic Sens. Cory Booker and Chris Coons will be joined in the longshot effort by Republican Sens. Thom Tillis and Lindsey Graham, the AP reported, citing two anonymous sources familiar with the legislation.
The group will reportedly announce legislation that would give any special counsel a 10-day window in which he or she could seek expedited judicial review of a firing. The bill faces long odds in the House.
Graham, who said last year that there would be "holy hell to pay" if Trump ever fired Mueller, has repeatedly sparred with Trump since he announced his candidacy for the presidency.
Trump has called the FBI's raid "disgraceful" and lambasted Mueller's investigation as "an attack on our country." He openly flirted with firing Mueller earlier this week.
DERSHOWITZ: MUELLER 'LAUNDERING INFORMATION' TO NEW YORK PROSECUTORS
"Why don't I just fire Mueller?" asked Trump, repeating a reporter's question to him Monday night. "Well, I think it's a disgrace what's going on. We'll see what happens, but I think it's really a sad situation when you look at what happened.
"And many people have said, 'You should fire him.'" Trump added. "... So we'll see what happens ... this is a pure and simple witch hunt."
Many legal experts believe Trump cannot directly fire Mueller. On that theory, any dismissal, for cause, would have to be carried out by Rosenstein, who appointed the counsel in May 2017 and has repeatedly expressed support for him.
In addition to investigating potential ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, Mueller is also examining whether the president’s actions constitute obstruction of justice.

“It would be suicide for the president to want to talk about firing Mueller."

As the investigation has worn on, Trump has repeatedly called it a “witch hunt.”
After introducing similar bills in August, when Trump first began criticizing the Mueller probe, both Tillis and Graham had been quiet for months on whether the legislation was still needed as Democrats continued to push for a bill.
HANNITY: 'ROGUE' MUELLER HAS 'DECLARED WAR AGAINST TRUMP' WITH RAID ON ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Both Republicans said they didn’t think Trump would really move to fire Mueller, but they fast-tracked the new bill after Trump's harsh words for Mueller on Monday.
Under the legislation, the expedited review would determine whether the special counsel was fired for good cause. The bill would also ensure that any staff, documents and other investigation materials were preserved as the matter was pending.
But many Republicans in the Senate still expressed confidence Tuesday that Trump would not fire the special counsel.
“I don’t think he’s going to be removed,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “I think he’ll be allowed to finish his job.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said Tuesday on Fox Business News: “It would be suicide for the president to want to talk about firing Mueller. The less the president said on this whole thing, the better off he would be, the stronger his presidency would be.”

Zuckerberg says he's unaware of Facebook pushback for liberal groups after conservative targeting

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg responds to questions from Texas Senator Ted Cruz about whether Facebook is a neutral public forum or a biased tool for political advocacy and whether or not the CEO requires new employees to share political views.
Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg told lawmakers Tuesday that he was "not specifically aware" of any instance where the social network had removed content posted by liberal groups amid concerns that the platform is biased against conservatives.
Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told Zuckerberg that "a great many Americans" are "deeply concerned that Facebook and other tech companies are engaged in a pervasive pattern of bias and political censorship." Cruz then ticked off a list of conservative content that he claimed had been "suppressed" by Facebook, "including stories about [2012 GOP presidential candidate] Mitt Romney [and] stories about the Lois Lerner IRS scandal."
"In addition to that, Facebook has initially shut down the Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day page ... has blocked over two dozen Catholic pages, and most recently blocked Trump supporters Diamond and Silk’s page – with 1.2 million Facebook followers -- after determining their content and brand were 'unsafe to the community.'
DIAMOND AND SILK ACCUSE FACEBOOK OF DISCRIMINATION, CENSORSHIP OVER 'UNSAFE' LABEL
"To a great many Americans, that appears to be a pervasive pattern of political bias. Do you agree with that assessment?" Cruz asked.
In response, Zuckerberg noted that Cruz had raised "a fair concern" and noted that the company is based in Silicon Valley, which he described as "an extremely left-leaning place."
Cruz then asked if Zuckerberg knew whether Facebook had removed content from Planned Parenthood, MoveOn.org, or "any Democratic candidate for office." To each question, Zuckerberg responded that he was not aware of any such content.
Zuckerberg also denied that he knew the political affiliations of his employees or made personnel decisions based on politics.
"I am very committed to making sure that Facebook is a platform for all ideas," Zuckerberg told Cruz. "We're proud of the discourse and the different ideas that people can share on the service and that is something that as long as I’m running the company, I’m going to be committed to making sure is the case.
Zuckerberg testified before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees amid an ongoing controversy over the gathering of user data by Cambridge Analytica, a firm affiliated with Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Walmart Made in China Cartoons

What the "blank"?

One year in, Trump's Gorsuch nomination may be his longest lasting legacy

Judge Neil Gorsuch shakes hands with Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy after being sworn in as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, accompanied by Louise Gorsuch (C) and U.S. President Donald J. Trump in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, U.S., April 10, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria - RTX34YQB

April 10 marks one year since Justice Neil Gorsuch was officially sworn in as the 101^st associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.  It’s been a year of fulfilled promises.  We now know that President Trump kept perhaps his most important campaign promise by nominating a successor to Justice Scalia who would carry on his legacy.  And for Justice Gorsuch himself, it has been a year of fulfilling the promise of his confirmation hearings: that he would be a judge committed to fairness and independence, deciding cases on the basis of the law and the Constitution rather than politics or personal feelings.
One of the most striking features of Gorsuch’s first year on the Court is his demonstrated commitment to the constitutional principles he articulated during his confirmation hearings.  In his opinions as well as oral arguments, Justice Gorsuch has repeatedly invoked familiar themes.
For example, the theme of commitment to the laws as passed by our elected representatives permeated Gorsuch’s confirmation hearings.  He recalled difficult decisions as a circuit judge requiring him to apply laws with which he disagreed.  When senators criticized some of his legal conclusions, he explained that it is for Congress to change a law, not the courts.  In Gorsuch’s view, a judge’s job is to “try to understand what the words on the page mean.  Not import words that come from us.  But apply what you, the people's representatives, the lawmakers have done.”
Already Justice Gorsuch has carried out that commitment.  In his first day of oral arguments, the junior justice redirected discussion of a law so complex and poorly drafted that Justice Alito wondered aloud whether it had been written by someone “who takes pleasure out of pulling the wings off flies.”  Instead of succumbing to the temptation to “fix” the law by effectively rewriting it, Gorsuch challenged both parties to follow the plain text of the statute.  In his dissenting opinion in the case, he explained that—rather than having the courts “tweak” statutes to make them work more efficiently—“the business of enacting statutory fixes [is] one that belongs to Congress and not this Court.”

At oral argument in a redistricting case, Gorsuch suggested jokingly that the lawyers hadn’t yet addressed “the arcane matter, the Constitution,” and cited several constitutional amendments that shed light on discussion.

Justice Gorsuch has similarly returned the Court to fundamental constitutional questions when the analysis proposed to the Court lacked constitutional moorings.  This was illustrated clearly in two cases argued last October.  At oral argument in a redistricting case, Gorsuch suggested jokingly that the lawyers hadn’t yet addressed “the arcane matter, the Constitution,” and cited several constitutional amendments that shed light on discussion.  In a second case examining whether an immigration law was unconstitutionally vague, he challenged both sides to ground their own arguments in the Constitution itself rather than judge-invented doctrines or tests.
Perhaps the most repeated constitutional theme at Gorsuch’s confirmation hearing was his concern about a line of cases requiring courts to give administrative agencies significant deference in lawsuits.  Twice already, Gorsuch has objected to the Court deciding not to hear cases that would challenge the outsized role of administrative agencies and reconsider the practice of giving agencies an extra thumb on the scale.
As the country watched a year ago to learn more about the man who was nominated to be the next justice, they saw an articulate, thoughtful, and principled judge explain his approach to judging and to the law.  A year later, it has become clear that Neil Gorsuch is as excellent a justice as we had hoped he would be. 

Lost amid all the 'noise' over Scott Pruitt is the very real damage Obama's EPA did to rural communities

The far left will stop at nothing in their efforts to derail the presidency of Donald Trump. Still bitter about the outcome of 2016, the left claims much of their outrage toward the president is driven by his unpredictable personality, but ideological opposition to his administration’s reform-minded agenda is the real root of their anger.
Nowhere is this more evident than the furor surrounding Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Trump’s opponents have seized on a number of recent unflattering news stories involving Pruitt and his agency. While admittedly not the best public relations for Pruitt, his “real sin is that he is one of Mr. Trump’s most aggressive reformers,” as the Wall Street Journal editorialized last week. President Trump expressed a similar sentiment over the weekend when he tweeted praise for his EPA chief’s “bold actions” and “record clean Air & Water while saving USA Billions of Dollars.”
Since taking office last year, Pruitt has boldly carried out the president’s campaign promises. In October, he moved to repeal Obama’s Clean Power Plan regulations, ending the War On Coal and providing a shot in the arm for coal country that had been decimated.
Pruitt and Trump issued an executive order doing away with the Obama-era Waters Of The United States (WOTUS) that sought to impose new regulations on every miniscule body of water in this country.  And Pruitt encouraged Trump to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, an accord which the UN itself admitted last year was largely symbolic, but whose damage to American businesses would have been real.
Environmental protection remains a priority: under Pruitt’s leadership, $100 million dollars have been awarded to Flint, Michigan, to upgrade the drinking water and to clean up sites contaminated with hazardous substances and pollutants – known as “Superfunds” – has been prioritized.
Pruitt’s “scandals” are exaggerated for political expediency: never mind that the Obama EPA spent just as much, if not more, than Pruitt’s team, according to a recent Fox News report.  Or that Lisa Jackson, Obama’s EPA chief, was caught using the email alias “Richard Windsor” to communicate with people outside the government. Or that one Obama-era EPA employee was caught downloading and watching pornography on the job. These issues prompted no outrage from Hill offices, and one questions if Congressional inquiry could possibly be politically motivated, or if left-wing outrage is a one-way street.

These millions of Americans who lost their jobs, their towns, and their livelihood voted to undo the EPA’s destruction, and Scott Pruitt is doing just that.

The left also knows that opposing Trump and Pruitt will curry favor with Tom Steyer, the San Francisco billionaire taking a bigger and bigger role in the public policy debate. Already having pledged $30 million dollars of his vast fortune to help elect identically ideological environmentalists, Steyer has now embarked on a publicity stunt to impeach the president, spending millions on television and digital ads.
Lost amid all the noise is the extreme damage the previous EPA did to rural communities. My work takes me to small, energy-rich towns around the country.  These are the places where America gets its power, where multiple generations of energy workers live and worship and raise their families.  Places where the champions of the eco-left would not deign to visit.  These towns survived dot.com bubbles and housing crashes because the majority had steady, good paying jobs in coal mines or oil fields.
These proud towns went from prosperity to poverty during eight years of EPA regulatory action as unemployment became rampant, and with it, myriad hardships: shuttered stores on main street, depleted education funds, increased opioid use.  Families broke apart as moms and dads moved from their beloved hometowns looking for work.  The very fabric of their communities – neighbors, schools, churches, little league, diners, town squares – destroyed in less than a decade.
The ideologues of the previous EPA believed they were punishing “the fat cats” as Obama liked to call rich people who didn’t vote for him, or “millionaires and billionaires” in Bernie Sanders lexicon, or “big oil” according to the eco-left. But who they really punished were the forgotten men and women in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, New Mexico, Alaska, and Louisiana, among others.  These millions of Americans who lost their jobs, their towns, and their livelihood voted to undo the EPA’s destruction, and Scott Pruitt is doing just that.  His punishment will be severe: the eco-left, in conjunction with their elected patrons in Congress and media allies, will persecute him relentlessly.   
Our message to Administrator Pruitt: American energy workers who are going back to work thank you. The American economy thanks you. And please remember these wise words: if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.