Lauren Boebert is laughed at on the House floor as she’s fact-checked by EPA head
The head of EPA expressed concerns about the impact of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling limiting federal agencies’ authority
When are people going to understand it’s not about being right. She is teeing up soundbites for right wing media to clip and talk about “how brave she is for tackling the corrupt EPA.”
We are just enjoying stupidity being laughed at publicly instead of having to hide it for 'decorum'. The reason she is being stupid is not relevant.
So lmk when you plan to stand against Biden, he literally has crossed all his morals so clearly has none left, and/or how do you plan to defend him?
By the end of the back-and-forth, Regan stared at Boebert shaking his head with his mouth a gap.
“It’s just shocking you spent so much time with our regional staff and regional administration and region aid and have such productive conversations about how we’re doing things for your district and your state and then you take this microphone and you pretend that we should not exist,” Regan said.
Oh it’s all a big show for the idiots? Of course. She’s so dumb she can’t even make up an imaginary question.
That's not the kind of head she good with
Hey, good thing our Supreme Court just ruled that people like her (and ultimately, them) will be the ones deciding ALL OF OUR REGULATIONS.
And stupid fucks like Boebert are actually desirable in that situation. Moreso than the more clever folks that will just get corporate lobbiests to literally write the regulations themselves for an $18k "donation" to their "campaign," and a promise of a job after they're voted out in two years or whatever.
If Congress does not codify Chevron deference before Trump (or any other conservative) takes office, then kiss "the administrative state" goodbye. And if you think you're ok with that, or have some clever retort about "bureaucracy bad," then you're gonna find out real quick...
$18k “donation”
This is the part I hate the most about this. It's one thing that we have this "squint a little and you'll see it" kind of graft and corruption. It's another entirely that the going rate for sending us all down the river is appallingly low. Especially since the kind of money a corporation can make for a favorable legal change could be a thousand times that, or more.
The reason corporations buy politicians is because they're cheap.
Don't be so pessimistic! It really adds up if you do it enough!
Plus, the cushy job after leaving office is the real prize. Why don't you just go ask John Boehner? Motherfucker spent a several decade career demonizing cannabis, blocking its decriminalization and putting hundreds of thousands of people in prison for it. He was the third second(? do you count the president?) person in line of presidential succession for at least a decade (think about that). Now he works at a pro-cannabis legalization lobby group (at least as of the last time I looked. Not going to google that piece of shit right now).
Republicans have no morals or ethics. They have no values to stand by.
The fact that they concede that they can't stop themselves from raping and murdering folks without some kind of threat of cosmic torture is a pretty big self-report.
"Elected idiot doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground" could be a permanent headline these days.
Did she change something? Is it the hair? She seems way more plastic and somewhat more doglike than usual.
What a dumb
___C U Next Tuesday
You know what makes me feel like a shitty person? Grinning when a piece of shit like Boebert gets embarrassed like this, but then realizing she probably has a serious mental deficiency. Still, she deserves all of this and more.
Probably? Her mama dropped her in the revolving door on the way out the hospital when she was born and then waited for a marching band to go through that mother fucker before scooping her up. There are people with mental deficiencies that arent full of hate and destruction. Don't ever feel shitty when truth and reason finally gets a small victory.
She's not embarrassed by this, you've gotta have more than 2 brain cells to rub together to feel embarrassed.
Who wrote that article? The amount of typos and misspellings is insane.
I’m not a fan or sympathiser for Boebert but nothing in the way the article is written seems to imply impartial journalism. We are so fucked.
Independent is a terrible outlet. I don't know why it gets linked so much on social media. Maybe because they have the most click bait titles or something.
The world would probably look a lot different if we'd stop riling each other up all the time. Media outlets like that feed on the hate and only promote it.
I like to think "rouge bureaucrats" is another name for conservative bureaucrats.
Ooof the dreaded fact check
She heard "head" and got excited.
Well yeah anyone can be politicians these days
I wonder if she’s taking Russian lessons yet
She’s learned all she’ll need
Hawk Tuah?
She just kept thinking about that BBC lmao
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Michael Regan, the Environmental Protection Agency administrator, gave Boebert a befuddled look when she asked him if the federal agency would continue enabling “rouge bureaucrats to enact unconstitutional regulations” even after the court’s decision that ended the 40-year run of the so-called Chevron standard.
Boebert fired back the same question and dug her heels in the sand, asking him which regulations the EPA would “repeal” to adhere to the court’s ruling.
However, the ruling does not prevent agencies from continuing to issue regulations – something Boebert’s question seemed to imply.
Regan testified to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee on Wednesday about the Supreme Court’s recent decision, saying he was “disappointed” and concerned about its impact.
He told committee members that the decision could hurt the EPA’s ability to interpret language and implement regulations about climate-related investments – something the Joe Biden administration has prioritized over the last four years.
Shortly after Boebert and Regan’s exchange, New York Representative Daniel Goldman pointedly spelled out the Supreme Court’s hearing for “clarify” purposes.
The original article contains 452 words, the summary contains 171 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!