"Year of Action" – Obama's 'Success' – Regulate More

Editor’s Note – Recently we saw yet another email from the fund raising arm of the DNC touting the Presidents ‘year of action’ and that they need yet more money to help him have another success in 2015.

Looking at his previous six years of action, the country really cannot afford any more ‘action’ by this President, especially with his “uni-pen,” the “pen of unilateral action.”

Give Barack Obama credit for keeping his promise. “This is going to be a year of action,” the president pledged last January. And indeed, with a series of unilateral executive actions in the last few months of the year, he made it so.

Obama’s original promise was entirely understandable. He entered 2013 fresh from a solid re-election victory, determined to score legislative wins on gun control, immigration, spending, and other knotty issues. It all ended in disappointment. As 2014 dawned, Obama promised — to Republicans, threatened — to take a new path. (Read more here.)

In just 2014 alone, as their advertisement proclaims, Obama apparently did achieve great ends, if you ‘drink Kool-Aid’:Dec2014ObamaAdEmail.4

  1. He announced historic action on climate change;
  2. He raised the minimum wage on federal contractors;
  3. He established new rules to ensure equal pay for women;
  4. …and lastly, he took ‘executive action’ on immigration reform.

What they left out of the list of unilateral, unconstitutional acts was a disastrous streak of foreign policy failures and other dubious events like (H/T to the National Journal):

  1. Islamic State: “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant;”
  2. “The “Taliban Five” – Obama staged a celebratory event in the Rose Garden in May with the parents of freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl,” only to see an unexpected negative reaction from all corners, including Democrats;
  3. NSA – “Remember that big speech Obama gave in January about reforming the National Security Agency’s surveillance practices” – only to reauthorize the very same;
  4. “Every warm weekend seemingly saw Obama hitting the links, even as the world, at times, felt like it was wobbling a bit between Iraq, Ukraine, the protests in Ferguson, Mo., the spread of Ebola, and other crises.” Worst of all was giving a speech when an American journalist was beheaded in in Syira and then five minutes later he was on the links.
  5. The border – “…the president being photographed playing pool and drinking beer in Colorado just as waves and waves of refugee children from Central America were spilling across the southwestern border:”
  6. CIA Report – Senate Democrats released a report earlier this month concluding that the Central Intelligence Agency had engaged in repeated episodes of torture and had misrepresented its effectiveness, the president pointedly refused to endorse it, or address it publicly in any way. Only Diane Feinstein looks worse here.
  7. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act continued to be ‘none-of-the-above’ and a political anchor, reaching new depths of unpopularity, and now you have bigger fines to look forward to in 2015;
  8. Ukraine and Crimea – need we say more about Putin’s laughter at Obama’s expense?
  9. Ebola – could that have been handled any worse when it came to quelling fear and panic – that’s leadership. By the way, where was that Czar, Ron Klain?
  10. Israel and Gaza – John Kerry’s epic ‘fail‘ reached stratospheric proportions;
  11. Supreme Court – Just how many cases will Obama lose concerning his unilateral actions and the fraud that was ObamaCare and its principal architect, Jonathan Gruber, the man they called  ‘Mr. Mandate’ who “sees stupid people;”
  12. The Economy – that ever so slogging ‘success‘ that no one in the real-world seems to feel as good about as Obama unless you are into the NYSE and its rarefied air;
  13. Iran – What can we say about Iran, other than being played for a complete fool? But maybe a new embassy in Tehran will soothe the savage beasts and the Mullahs blind ambitions;
  14. Cuba – Ditto on Iran, and then there is that whole Sony/North Korea thing still unsettled;
  15. Scandals – too numerous to list, and each is still unresolved, from the IRS to Benghazi – maybe 2015 ‘action’ will clear the air?

Of course this list just hits some of the “high” points of the past year but look what else he did this year – 75,000 pages of new regulations, feeling good about making that donation now?

How much “action” from Obama can this country withstand for two more years?

Obama Imposed 75,000 Pages of New Regulations in 2014

Written by Alex Newman – The New American

Just in the last few weeks, the Obama administration has proposed or imposed over 1,200 new regulations on the American people that will add even more to the already crushing $2 trillion per year cost burden of the federal regulatory machine. According to data compiled from the federal government’s Regulations.gov website by the Daily Caller, most of the new regulatory schemes involve energy and the environment — 139 during a mere two-week period in December, to be precise. In all, the Obama administration foisted more than 75,000 pages of regulations on the United States in 2014, costing over $200 billion, on the low end, if new proposed rules are taken into account.

Just one of those “rules” by the out-of-control Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the so-called “coal ash” regulation, is expected to cost as much as $20 billion, estimates suggest. Another oncoming rule, which experts and analysts say is likely to be the most expensive federal regulation in all of U.S. history, could wreak havoc across the nation and crush the economy to the point that economic growth halts completely, experts said. Even Christmas lights, though, are now in the administration’s regulatory crosshairs, along with virtually everything else.

YearofAction2014While the insatiable Obama White House “pen and phone” machine has been spewing costly and draconian regulatory edicts at a fast and furious pace since taking power six years ago, it seems that the Holiday season has featured an even larger than usual number of wild decrees. Late last month, for example, as Americans were occupied with Thanksgiving, the Obama administration emitted what has been widely decried as the most costly single regulation in American history.

The so-called “ozone rule,” which estimates suggest could cost as much as $270 billion per year and put millions of American jobs at risk under the guise of further regulating emissions of the natural gas, was formally put forward the day before Thanksgiving. Lawmakers decried the timing of the massive regulation, suggesting the scheme was released during the holidays so “stupid voters” — as ObamaCare’s architect infamously described the American people — would be distracted with other matters.

Experts also pointed out that the EPA’s own 2007 studies showed no adverse health effects from exposure to even high levels of ozone. Even people suffering from asthma experienced no adverse effects from high levels of ozone, the EPA itself found. More than a few experts have disputed the notion that ozone causes any harm at all — but that has not stopped the EPA from imposing the regulation under the guise of “protecting health.”

“Bringing ozone pollution standards in line with the latest science will clean up our air, improve access to crucial air quality information, and protect those most at-risk,” claimed scandal-plagued EPA boss Gina McCarthy in a statement celebrating the latest proposed decree. “It empowers the American people with updated air quality information to protect our loved ones — because whether we work or play outdoors — we deserve to know the air we breathe is safe.”

Air concentration of ozone gas, which largely occurs naturally, has been plummeting across the United States in recent decades even without the EPA’s “most expensive” regulation in history. According to the American Action Forum, which analyzes the impact of regulations, the ozone standards are so extreme that 100 state and national parks could be in danger of violating them — despite the fact that they have virtually no traffic or manufacturing bases. Ironically, the EPA claims an array of other recent EPA regulations could “help” states satisfy the new federal ozone decrees.BreakThroughYear2014

American industries, meanwhile, warned that the consequences of the “ozone” regulation on the fragile U.S. economy could be devastating. “This new ozone regulation threatens to be the most expensive ever imposed on industry in America and could jeopardize recent progress in manufacturing by placing massive new costs on manufacturers and closing off counties and states to new business by blocking projects at the permitting stage,” explained Jay Timmons, president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

In an analysis posted on the NAM website, the association included a map showing that, depending on how extreme the final ozone standard was, virtually all of the United States could be out of compliance with the EPA mandates. “With nearly all of the country in nonattainment, U.S. manufacturing growth would come to a standstill; our domestic energy boom could go bust; and existing plants would be required to install additional expensive equipment,” the organization said, citing EPA data.

According to a study released by NAM earlier this year, federal regulations imposed on the United States were costing the American people more than $2 trillion every year by 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And the cost is growing quickly. In 2014 alone thus far, the Obama administration has imposed regulations that will cost the American people over $200 billion in addition to the pre-existing $2 trillion burden, according to low-end estimates by the American Action Forum. That does not include the cost of numerous “executive” decrees and assumes, contrary to findings presented in the NAM-commissioned study, that the cost of the “ozone” rule will be relatively small.

HR-Jan29-Action-Figure_600Another major regulation imposed by the Obama administration in recent weeks surrounds the so-called “coal ash” rule regulating waste produced by electricity generation. The new scheme, finalized shortly before Christmas, could cost over $20 billion. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), presumably the next chairman of the Senate Environment Committee, blasted the plot as “a continuation of the president’s war on fossil fuels.” Among other concerns, he said the new regulations would “make states and utility companies vulnerable to new regulatory costs and expensive litigation.”

Other costly regulations in the pipeline include the Obama EPA’s radical bid to severely curtail emissions of CO2. The natural gas, which makes up a fraction of one percent of all the “greenhouse” gases present naturally in the atmosphere, is exhaled by humans and is described by scientists as the “gas of life.” Still, the White House and the United Nations continue their outlandish campaign to demonize the essential molecule as “pollution,” even threating to shackle humanity to a draconian global CO2 regime under the guise of stopping “global warming.”

Next year, meanwhile, the Obama administration is plotting to unleash yet another deluge of federal regulations targeting everything from fracking to power plants. State governments, lawmakers, and citizens have been fighting back, but so far, the White House shows no signs of backing off or even slowing down the pace when it comes to devastating decrees to pummel the economy and the American taxpayer. More “climate” decrees are coming, too, with the White House even threatening to impose a UN carbon regime on America without obtaining Senate ratification.

Separately, as The New American reported this month, the Obama administration’s increasingly dangerous and anti-constitutional usurpations of power have been accelerating. Despite White House attempts to dupe the American people by claiming it has imposed fewer “executive orders” than previous presidents, the administration was recently exposed by USA Today concealing most of its unilateral decrees by calling them “presidential memoranda” instead of orders. Obama has issued more than any president in history, doing everything from purporting to change federal law to even attacking the American people’s God-given rights using illegitimate executive edicts.

With the sprawling regulatory leviathan growing perpetually more costly and oppressive, critics say the American people’s elected representatives and the courts must both take action. “Congress should examine how executive agencies are exceeding key authorities granted to them and both narrow the substantive grants that are most subject to abuse and improve administrative procedures on multi-billion dollar regulations,” wrote attorneys Todd Gaziano and Mark Miller with the pro-liberty Pacific Legal Foundation in a recent Forbes column about the need to regulate what constitutes a regulation. “Until then, the courts must police these two areas, particularly in the rulemaking context.”

While Republican lawmakers have become adept at loudly complaining about the administration’s non-stop executive power grabs and regulations on the campaign trail, so far, they have done virtually nothing to stop it. In fact, despite all of the promises to rein in the Obama administration’s “imperial” presidency if elected to Congress, victorious Republicans, who already dominated the House of Representatives, recently passed a massive spending bill fully funding virtually every decree the White House has spewed since coming to power through next September.

In other words, GOP lawmakers, sent to Washington by outraged voters in November to stop Obama, gave up their most powerful tool to restrain the administration for almost a full year — before the new members could be seated, and for no good reason. The solution to the growing regulatory lawlessness, though, remains simple: Congress can and should defund the decrees and the unconstitutional agencies behind them before Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America is complete.


 

Related articles:


Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at: anewman@thenewamerican.com

EPA – Garnish Wages? Judge, Jury, Executioner!

Editor’s Note – The EPA is perhaps one the most powerful agencies in the US government when it comes to direct control over the individual. It is perhaps second only to the IRS in this regard and with the recent revelations of weaponization of our federal agencies, the EPA is just as famous for playing judge, jury, and executioner.

It is also famous for its wild over reach and capricious judgments. If they determine that you are to be fined, they claim they can even garnish your wages by using a 1996 law to collect funds they say are owed for unpaid fines largely leaving you no recourse or redress of your grievances. The Washington Times tells us the following:stop-the-EPA

The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly floated a rule claiming authority to bypass the courts and unilaterally garnish paychecks of those accused of violating its rules, a power currently used by agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service.

The EPA has been flexing its regulatory muscle under President Obama, collecting more fines each year and hitting individuals with costly penalties for violating environmental rules, including recently slapping a $75,000 fine on Wyoming homeowner Andy Johnson for building a pond on his rural property.

However, that excerpt does not tell the whole story with the Johnson’s dilemma. Here is background on this EPA decision that shows the sheer power of the EPA:

When Andy and Katie Johnson built a pond on their property in 2011 to provide water for their cattle, they never dreamed it would result in threats of $75,000 a day in fines from the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Johnsons believed they had done everything necessary to get permission for the pond, where the tiny Six Mile Creek runs through their property south of Fort Bridger, Wyo. The Wyoming State Engineer’s Office provided the permit and even stated in an April 4, 2013 letter to the Johnsons: “All of the legal requirements of the State Engineer’s Office, that were your responsibility, have been satisfied for the Johnson Stock Reservoir.”

The EPA saw it differently — and sent the Johnsons a Jan. 30 notice informing them they had violated the Clean Water Act, which could carry thousands of dollars in fines.

The Johnson Family from Wyoming
The Johnson Family from Wyoming

To be fair to this story, it must be mentioned that Congress did pass the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA). From the Treasury web site we see the explanation of the law aimed at collecting non-tax debts owed to the Federal Government. Here are some excerpts:

This law centralized the government wide collection of delinquent debt and gave Treasury significant new responsibilities in this area. The Financial Management Service (FMS) is responsible for Treasury’s implementation of the debt collection provisions of the DCIA…

The types of debts referred to FMS include unpaid loans, overpayments or duplicate payments made to federal salary or benefit payment recipients, misused grant funds, and fines, penalties or fees assessed by federal agencies. FMS sends demand letters to debtors on Treasury letterhead, and enters into repayment arrangements with debtors. FMS’ cross-servicing program administers a contract with PCAs who provide delinquent debt collection services and FMS refers debts to these PCAs.

However, in a sheer case of abject hypocrisy, why is the EPA hitting this nail with such a large sledge hammer that began in 2011 while we learned in early 2012 that many White House staffers owed huge back taxes? In fact, PolitiFact verified that this was true but also mentions that each year, many federal workers are in arrears.

The EPA uses such threats to get quicker payment because they know you are more likely to pay than go through any expensive litigation while the fines pile up and you have the burden of proving your innocence. “It is a powerful incentive for people to agree to expensive settlements rather than fight EPA charges.”

We then ask why the IRS does not pursue true tax offenders with the same zeal that the EPA exhibits to garnish the wages of simple ranchers for massive fines it unilaterally decided upon? The Johnsons thought they had done all that needed to done, only to be trumped by a federal agency, all while federal employees routinely do not try to do the right thing.

The EPA announced the plan last week in a notice in the Federal Register, saying federal law allows it “to garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order.”McCarthy_Gina2

the rule would give the EPA sweeping authority to dictate how and whether Americans could dispute fines and penalties, even as the amount of EPA fines collected from individuals, businesses and local governments steadily increase.

The EPA said it deemed the action as not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore not subject to review.

It is yet another example of selective enforcement, Executive Branch over reach, agency weaponization, and the total disregard for the rule-of-law and fairness. Apparently the EPA is above the law in their eyes because their goals are so righteous in saving our planet, regardless of scientific fact.

However, the push back is becoming very vocal and some Senators are objecting vigorously this newest Obama Administration power grab:

GOP senators slam EPA on wage garnishment

By Timothy Cama – The Hill

Three Republican senators attacked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Thursday for a proposal that they said would allow the agency to garnish individuals’ wages.

In a letter to EPA head Gina McCarthy, the senators, led by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), called the proposal an unwarranted overreach into citizens’ lives.

The EPA would be able to garnish wages without a court order, and unilaterally decide whether people could argue against the garnishments, they said.

The pond in question on the Johnson Ranch
The pond in question on the Johnson Ranch

“While we recognize the government’s legitimate interest in efficiently and effectively pursuing delinquent debt, EPA’s new wage garnishment procedures provide an agency prone to regulatory abuses with even more power over Americans,” Vitter wrote, along with Wyoming Sens. Mike Enzi and John Barrasso.

“Individuals who face threats of ruinous fines from the agency may now have to think twice before challenging EPA over its regulatory jurisdiction.”

 

Under the rule proposed last week, the EPA would be allowed to garnish up to 15 percent of the “disposable pay” of anybody with non-tax debt to the agency, such as fines for violating regulations.

Thanks to the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, the agency does not need to obtain court permission before garnishing.

The EPA defended the rule, saying it complies with the 1996 law.

“EPA is complying with existing laws by adopting hearing procedures that ensure debtors receive a hearing in order to provide due process,” spokeswoman Alisha Johnson said.

“Administrative wage garnishment would apply only after EPA attempts to collect delinquent debts and after [the Treasury Department attempts to collect delinquent debts through other means.”

The garnishment process requires that the agency give advanced notice before any action and give an opportunity for the debtor to review it, contest it or negotiate a repayment agreement, Johnson said.

The EPA issued its proposal as a “direct final rule.” If no one objects to the proposal, it will become final, but if the agency receives negative comments, it will respond to them and finalize the rule in a standard rulemaking process.

IRS – Entrenchment of the Left in Gov, the Rule-of-Law Sacrificed

By Scott W. Winchell, SUA Editor

With the revelations of the lost Lois Lerner emails in the growing IRS Scandal, and the obvious political ideology she infused into her work, it is important to reflect on the general make-up of the body that are largely the employees in federal government in ideological terms. It is not just Lois Lerner.

It’s also people like her former agency’s newest boss, John Koskinen; yes he who donated over $85,000 to liberal candidates over many years now, including Obama twice, at least.

You could see it in IRS Commissioner John Koskinen’s arrogance as well as he testified. Allen West summed it up well in his recent article entitled “Koskinen illustrates primary job qualification for Obama administration: arrogance”:Koskinen Arrogance

The real issue is not the IRS scandal in and of itself, or actually any isolated scandal – because there are too many to count at this point. The issue is the abject arrogance of officialdom exhibited by the Obama administration as aided by the complicit liberal progressive media — and the über-partisan ignorance of the progressive socialist acolytes.

Computer crashes?  Meet the others at the IRS whose computers crashed. Beyond Lois Lerner, and as we reported yesterday, Nikole Flax, there was Michelle Eldridge, IRS national media relations chief, Agent Kimberly Kitchens, Agent Nancy Heagney, Agent Julie Chen, and Supervisory Agent, Tyler Chumny. (Read here from the Daily Caller on these characters.) More supporters of Obama, especially Kitchens as far as we know.

The newest revelation is that the EPA also lost emails; crucial to current litigation.

Why did the EPA release this news now? Because a day earlier, the National Archivist testified that the IRS has broken the law by not reporting lost documents as required. The EPA lost critical emails in a contentious case in Alaska over mining.

“They did not follow the law,” said David Ferriero, the U.S. Archivist who stopped short of saying the tax-collecting agency “broke” the law, saying “I am not a lawyer” in testimony last week. (Read more here at Politico)

Move over, IRS — now the EPA is having its own problems with missing emails. The environmental agency is having trouble locating emails belonging to a former agency employee and pulling information from his crashed hard drive, House members revealed Wednesday while questioning Administrator Gina McCarthy at a hearing on complaints of mismanagement.

“What is it with bureaucrats and public employees … the hard drives crash?” asked Rep. Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.). (Read more here.)

Here is an excerpt from The Hill on the EPA revelation:

“We have tried to serve a subpoena on your former employee and we have asked for the failed hard drive from this Alaskan individual who now is in New Zealand, and seems to never be returning,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the committee’s chairman, said Wednesday.

Emails provided by the committee show that EPA told congressional investigators about the hard drive crash months ago. But McCarthy said she only told the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) about the problem Tuesday.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy

The NARA enforces the Federal Records Act, which governs federal agencies’ responsibilities to maintain records.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) said EPA probably violated the Federal Records Act by not backing up North’s emails.

“It looks like the Federal Records Act has been violated by the EPA,” Meadows said. Did he preserve his emails? That is required by the Federal Records Act.”

“We may have some emails that we cannot produce that we should have kept,” McCarthy admitted.

These are just a few points that demonstrate that the leftists in government are unconcerned with the laws until exposed.

They are hired during Democratically controlled administrations largely, or appointed to head agencies that are growing in liberal dominance in those agencies. Then, if not appointed, once employed, they move up in the system, become decision makers, then determine who gets hired in the future. All to crteate a permanent liberal bias in our federal government.

It has always been the feeling of many that the make-up of federal employees was left-leaning, but in recent years, it is becoming evident that they are now in full control. We reported on a couple of examples in the recent past, especially concerning the hiring of Lawyers. The DHS recently hired a bevy of uber-leftists, and the DoJ is festooned with them.

Lois Lerner and Senator Grassley of Iowa
Lois Lerner and Senator Grassley of Iowa

Let us not forget also, when former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson created a fake name to use on a personal email account, a practice prohibited by law, to be used for official EPA business.

Richard Windsor never existed at the EPA, but the agency awarded the fictional staffer’s email account certificates proving he had mastered all of the agency’s technology training — including declaring him a “scholar of ethical behavior,” according to documents disclosed late last week.

Windsor.Richard@epa.gov was the controversial email alias used by former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, who resigned earlier this year amid questions about whether epa-using-instant-messages-avoid-s/?page=all”>her agency was complying with open-records laws.

SPECIAL COVERAGE: Energy and Environment The new records — the latest in a series that EPA critics have pried loose under open-records requests — suggests Ms. Jackson used the alias even more widely than known, including taking required agency computer training under the fake identity.

Then another revelation emerges. A revelation of epic proportion where Lois Lerner’s ideology is exposed completely.

An email is released, where Lerner, in a knee-jerk reaction, desires to investigate a Senator for the right, Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Why, because an inadvertent, and mistakenly sent email invites Grassley to an event he never even attended because his wife was invited as well and the group offered to offset her expenses if they attended.

Investigators in Congress discovered new emails from Lois Lerner Wednesday revealing the former IRS Exempt Organizations director’s attempt to audit GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley in 2012 over an email mixup.

We hope that Congressmen like SC-R Trey Gowdy prevail for us, here at the IRS, and in the upcoming Benghazi Select Committee Hearings
We hope that Congressmen like SC-R Trey Gowdy prevail for us, here at the IRS, and in the upcoming Benghazi Select Committee Hearings

According to the Associated Press, Lerner mistakenly received an email invitation to an event in December of that year meant for Grassley, who presumably received Lerner’s.

The invitation from the organizer reportedly included an offer to pay for the attendance of Grassley’s wife, should the two be interested in coming. Upon reading Grassley’s invitation mistakenly sent to Lerner, the IRS official accused of unjustifiably targeting conservative tea party organizations’ tax exempt status forwarded the email to another IRS employee, and inquired about a possible audit of the Iowa senator.

Lerner speculated it could be inappropriate for the organizer to pay for Grassley’s wife to attend. The second IRS official dismissed Lerner’s suggestion, and said an audit would be a premature action.

Of all the people at the IRS at the time, why was Lois Lerner chosen to head the Tax Exempt & Government Entities Division of the IRS? Because there was a liberal bias already present. Remember, Lois Lerner worked for the Federal Elections Commission prior and displayed a clear pentient for attacking Republicans and ignoring Democrat Party shenanigans.

Before Lois Lerner was embroiled in the IRS scandal, she was involved in a questionable pattern of law enforcement at the Federal Election Commission that mirrors the discrimination recently exposed at the nation’s tax-collection agency.

One of Lerner’s former colleagues tells National Review Online that her political ideology was evident during her tenure at the FEC, where, he says, she routinely subjected groups seeking to expand the influence of money in politics — including, in her view, conservatives and Republicans — to the sort of heightened scrutiny we now know they came under at the IRS.

General counsel’s reports composed during Lerner’s tenure at the FEC confirm Engle’s recollections of a woman predisposed to back Republicans against the wall while giving Democrats a pass. Though Noble, then the FEC’s general counsel, is listed as the author of the reports, sources familiar with the commission say that given Lerner’s position, she would have played an integral role shaping their conclusions.(Read the rest at National Review)

It is clear to us at SUA that this is what comes from cult-of-personality trumping sane, logical, and sustaining politicians, people that are ‘Americans First’ politicians. The ideological entrenchment is here to stay unless America collectively overcomes this tide. This is what we get when we toss rule-of-law to the curb and elect personalities, those who thrive on the cult-of-personality.

Heck, there is now a $1 Million bounty for her emails. We may never find them, unless more investigation is done. Our bet lies with civil litigation underway now from those aggrieved through the discovery process. People like Catherine Engelbrecht and many others deserve “redress of the grievances.”

The House Ways and Means Committee under Chairman Dave Camp has referred Lois Lerner to the DoJ for criminal investigation, but we see little hope that Eric Holder will do anything there. It is time for a Independent Counsel or Special Prosecutor.

EPA's Lisa Jackson Resigns – No More 'Richard Windsor' Emails

Editor’s Note – Yet another Obama Administration Official who routinely subverted the rule-of-law governing official business has resigned, EPA’s Lisa Jackson. She should have been fired, but will she actually go?

The news of the day regarding State Department officials resigning over Benghazi-Gate is that the so-called resigning officials are actually still employed, and will remain so. But here, Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator extraordinaire must remain out of our government. She should be joined by many others, but then again, we are lucky this one is out.

The question now is, will the flood of new regulations remain? Why didn’t the Obama Administration inform Congress as the law mandates on these regulations? Once again, the Obama Administration subverts the law and does what it wants. Is there no real accountability anymore?

Read more hereabout the depth to which she went to subvert and hide their actions.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson resigns over email fraud and subverting the law.

EPA Administrator Jackson announces resignation

By KEVIN FREKING Associated Press – Federal News Radio

WASHINGTON (AP) – EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, the Obama administration’s chief environmental watchdog, is stepping down after a nearly four years marked by high-profile brawls over global warming pollution, the Keystone XL oil pipeline, new controls on coal-fired plants and several other hot-button issues that affect the nation’s economy and people’s health.

Jackson constantly found herself caught between administration pledges to solve thorny environmental problems and steady resistance from Republicans and industrial groups who complained that the agency’s rules destroyed jobs and made it harder for American companies to compete internationally.

The GOP chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, said last year that Jackson would need her own parking spot at the Capitol because he planned to bring her in so frequently for questioning. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney called for her firing, a stance that had little downside during the GOP primary.

Jackson, 50, the agency’s first black administrator and a chemical engineer, did not point to any particular reason for her departure. Historically, Cabinet members looking to move on will leave at the beginning of a president’s second term.

“I will leave the EPA confident the ship is sailing in the right direction, and ready in my own life for new challenges, time with my family and new opportunities to make a difference,” she said in a statement. Jackson will leave sometime after President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address, typically in late January.

In a separate statement, Obama said Jackson has been “an important part of my team.” He thanked her for serving and praised her “unwavering commitment” to the public’s health.

“Under her leadership, the EPA has taken sensible and important steps to protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, including implementing the first national standard for harmful mercury pollution, taking important action to combat climate change under the Clean Air Act and playing a key role in establishing historic fuel economy standards that will save the average American family thousands of dollars at the pump, while also slashing carbon pollution,” he said.

Environmental activist groups and other supporters lauded Jackson for the changes she was able to make, but industry representatives said some may have come at an economic cost. Groups also noted that she leaves a large, unfinished agenda.

“There has been no fiercer champion of our health and our environment than Lisa Jackson, and every American is better off today than when she took office nearly four years ago,” said Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council. But she noted that Jackson’s successor will inherit an unfinished agenda, including the need to issue new health protections against carbon pollution from existing power plants.

Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., chairman of the Senate’s subcommittee on clean air, called Jackson’s tenure a “breath of fresh air” and credited her for setting historic fuel economy standards for cars and trucks, and for finalizing clean air standards.

But Scott Segal, director of the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, said Jackson presided over some of the most expensive environmental rules in EPA history.

“Agency rules have been used as blunt attempts to marginalize coal and other solid fossil fuels and to make motor fuels more costly at the expense of industrial jobs, energy security, and economic recovery,” Segal said. “The record of the agency over the same period in overestimating benefits to major rules has not assisted the public in determining whether these rules have been worth it.”

Other environmental groups, however, praised Jackson’s clean air efforts.

“Notwithstanding the difficult economic and political challenges EPA faced, her agency was directly responsible for saving the lives of tens of thousands of Americans and improving the health of millions throughout the country,” said S. William Becker of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. “She will be sorely missed.”

Larry Schweiger, head of the National Wildlife Federation, cited her climate change work and efforts to reduce carbon pollution.

Environmental groups had high expectations for the Obama administration after eight years of President George W. Bush, a Texas oilman who rebuffed agency scientists and refused act on climate change. Jackson came into office promising a more active EPA.

But she soon learned that changes would not occur as quickly as she had hoped. Jackson watched as a Democratic-led effort to reduce global warming emissions passed the House in 2009 but was then abandoned by the Senate as economic concerns became the priority. The concept behind the bill, referred to as cap-and-trade, would have established a system where power companies bought and sold pollution rights.

“That’s a revolutionary message for our country,” Jackson said at a Paris conference shortly after accepting the job.

Jackson experienced another big setback last year when the administration scrubbed a clean-air regulation aimed at reducing health-threatening smog. Republican lawmakers had been hammering the president over the proposed rule, accusing him of making it harder for companies to create jobs.

She also vowed to better control toxic coal ash after a massive spill in Tennessee, but that regulation has yet to be finalized more than four years after the spill.

Jackson had some victories, too. During her tenure, the administration finalized a new rule doubling fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks. The requirements will be phased in over 13 years and eventually require all new vehicles to average 54.5 mpg, up from 28.6 mpg at the end of last year.

She shepherded another rule that forces power plants to control mercury and other toxic pollutants for the first time. Previously, the nation’s coal- and oil-fired power plants had been allowed to run without addressing their full environmental and public health costs.

Jackson also helped persuade the administration to table the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought carbon-heavy tar sands oil from Canada to refineries in Texas.

House Republicans dedicated much of their time this past election year trying to rein in the EPA. They passed a bill seeking to thwart regulation of the coal industry and quash the stricter fuel efficiency standards. In the end, though, the bill made no headway in the Senate. It served mostly as election-year fodder that appeared to have little impact on the presidential race.

___

Associated Press writers Lolita C. Baldor and Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.

Armendariz EPA Crucify Video Pulled – Too Late

Editor’s Note – The big news yesterday about the EPA addressed the ideology of those who were appointed to very powerful positions by Obama. The EPA has unprecedented power, and this issue was personified by Al Armendariz, who heads the EPA’s Dallas office. The story and the video were all over the news, yet You Tube pulled the video and scrubbed the site. TOO LATE! It’s everywhere now!

YouTube pulls Armendariz ‘crucify them’ video

By Caroline May – Daily Caller

The YouTube channel where Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe’s office originally discovered the video of EPA official Al Armendariz speak about his “crucify them” enforcement philosophy has scrubbed the original video and lodged a complaint against Inhofe to YouTube.

The source and now YouTube complainant, David McFatridge of “Citizen Media for We The People,” is an environmentalist and, according to Inhofe’s office, has eliminated all content related to Armendariz’s speech from his YouTube channel.

The original video now turns of an error notice that reads: “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by David McFatridge.”

McFatridge’s complaint comes despite the fact that his page reads, “Consider ALL video Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)”.

Inhofe spokesman Matt Dempsey told TheDC they are working to connect with a YouTube representative.

Dempsey also explained that Inhofe’s office covered their bases with their use of the video.

“In short, the video we cut and posted to our YouTube channel came from a YouTube channel, “Citizen Media for We The People,” that said reuse is allowed and we attributed the site in the description of the video,” he explained in an email to reporters. “Further in our original website post for our media advisory, we also included a link to the original source.”

EPA official blasted over ‘crucify’ oil and gas comments

By Todd Sperry, CNN Senior Producer

Washington (CNN) — The White House and the Environmental Protection Agency are distancing themselves from controversial remarks that surfaced this week by a regional administrator attacking the oil and gas industry.

Al Armendariz

In a video made in 2010, Al Armendariz, who heads the EPA’s Dallas office, suggested his approach to dealing with noncompliant oil and gas companies is “like when the Romans conquered the villages in the Mediterranean, they’d go into little villages in Turkish towns and they’d find the first five guys they saw and crucify them.”

Sen. James Inhofe, who posted the video online Wednesday, blasted the EPA administrator’s comments on the Senate floor during a 30-minute speech attacking the Obama administration’s energy policy. “His comments give us a rare glimpse into the Obama administration’s true agenda,” the Oklahoma Republican said.

The White House and the EPA were quick to clarify they didn’t agree with Armendariz’s remarks. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters Thursday, “The official’s comments are inaccurate as a representation or characterization of the way the EPA has operated under President Obama.”

The EPA released a statement on its website, saying, “It is deeply unfortunate that in a 2010 video an EPA official inaccurately suggested we are seeking to ‘make examples’ out of certain companies in the oil and gas industry.”

Armendariz, appointed by President Obama in 2009, apologized for the remarks, “It was an offensive and inaccurate way to portray our efforts to address potential violations of our nation’s environmental laws.”

But Inhofe rejected the apology. “Administrator Armendariz apologized yesterday for his ‘poor choice of words’ when he admitted that EPA’s ‘general philosophy’ is to ‘crucify’ and ‘make examples’ of oil and gas companies, but he did not apologize for EPA’s actions towards its apparent crucifixion victims.”

Inhofe added, “Take the word ‘crucify’ out of Administrator Armendariz’s statement and nothing has changed: You still have a rogue agency following through on President Obama’s ‘general philosophy’ to increase the price of gas and electricity.”

The EPA did not respond to multiple attempts from CNN to answer questions regarding Armendariz’s future with the agency, whether he’ll face disciplinary action or if EPA Chief Lisa Jackson has spoken with him directly.