Category: Misappropriation of Funds

Marco Rubio’s Bypass of Congress for $4 Billion in Arms to Israel Highlights Trump’s Unchecked Military Power

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has recently bypassed Congress, invoking emergency authorities to send $4 billion in arms, including 2,000-pound bombs, to Israel amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This alarming maneuver marks the second instance within a month where the Trump administration has sidestepped the necessary legislative approval for military aid. Rubio’s justification for this emergency measure was not specified, raising serious concerns regarding transparency and accountability in government.

Federal officials informed congressional committees about the arms deal, which includes the transfer of munitions that are currently under review. Notably, one significant shipment valued at approximately $2 billion had yet to be submitted to Congress for its consideration. The evident haste in moving forward with such substantial military support without proper scrutiny reflects an unsettling trend within the Republican administration, prioritizing swift action over responsible governance.

The Pentagon’s recent announcement outlined the potential delivery of over 35,000 bombs to Israel, a nation that has faced criticism for deploying these munitions in densely populated areas like Gaza. U.S. military experts have warned that such bombs are entirely unsuitable for urban combat scenarios, exacerbating concerns about collateral damage and civilian casualties in one of the most overpopulated regions on Earth.

This pattern of executive overreach under the Trump administration exemplifies a troubling disregard for checks and balances, effectively undermining legislative authority. The bypassing of Congress not only raises ethical questions about decision-making processes but also threatens to escalate an already volatile situation in the Middle East, with little regard for the humanitarian implications.

As the Trump administration continues to operate with alarming impunity, the bypassing of congressional oversight in arms sales underscores the potential for unchecked military aggression and increased hostility. This behavior reveals a commitment to militaristic policies that favor profit over the preservation of human life and international stability.

(h/t: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/02/us/politics/rubio-arms-israel.html)

DHS Unveils $200 Million Anti-Immigrant Ad Campaign, Fueling Trump’s Fear-Based Agenda

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under the leadership of Kristi Noem, has allocated an astonishing $200 million for an aggressive ad campaign. These ads are explicitly designed to promote anti-immigrant sentiments and express gratitude to President Donald Trump for his initiative to tighten immigration controls. Noem recently revealed that this entire campaign was Trump’s brainchild, as he directed her to star in the ads worldwide, urging her to discourage illegal immigration.

During her speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Noem recounted Trump’s insistence on her participation, stating that he required her to publicly thank him for “closing the border.” In a blatant display of taxpayer-funded propaganda aimed at issuing threats to migrants, the ads convey a message of fear, urging undocumented individuals to either leave the country voluntarily or face deportation, all while praising Trump.

The ad blitz serves dual purposes: to propagate the Trump administration’s hardline stance against immigrants and to bolster Trump’s reputation among his base. It features Noem delivering a stern warning to undocumented immigrants, claiming that those who do not leave the U.S. face dire consequences. The campaign, funded by taxpayer dollars, highlights an unsettling approach to governance where public resources are leveraged to support a singular narrative of fear and exclusion.

This initiative coincides with broader troubling changes within the DHS under Noem, including the sidelining of personnel who are supposed to oversee elections—a move reflecting potential vulnerabilities in protecting democratic integrity. Additionally, resources are being diverted to enforcement against immigrants rather than tackling significant financial crimes, suggesting a dangerous shift in priorities under Trump’s influence.

In orchestrating this advertisement campaign, the Trump administration continues to manipulate public opinion, portraying immigrants as threats while simultaneously glorifying Trump’s administration’s policies. What emerges is a clear indication of a government apparatus that is more invested in fostering divisive propaganda than addressing the complex realities of immigration and governance, highlighting an alarming trend towards authoritarianism under the guise of patriotism.

(h/t: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-kristi-noem-200-million-dhs-ad-campaign-thanks-president-1235276324/)

Trump Blasts Indictment to the Faith & Freedom Coalition

Skip to main content Manage SubscriptionLogin! subscribe Politics TV Interviews Entertainment Sports Podcasts Opinion UK Mediaite+ Mediaite Manage SubscriptionLogin! subscribe Politics TV Interviews Entertainment Sports Podcasts Opinion UK Mediaite+ Deadspin Walks Back Article Accusing Chiefs Fan of Wearing Blackface: ‘We Regret Any Suggestion That We Were Attacking the Fan’ ‘Don’t Fall For It’: Don Jr Insinuates Alleged Attempt To Burn MLK’s Home Is False Flag Op ‘I Am A Really Bad Person’: Michigan School Shooter Addresses Court Before Sentencing GOP Rep Claims Staffer’s Threat to Out Daughter’s OnlyFans Page Led to On-Camera Altercation White House Dumps Council on American-Islamic Relations from Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia Materials ‘I’m Being Indicted For You!’ Trump Goes Full Martyr in Speech at Faith Conference, Rages at the ‘Scoundrels and Thugs’ Who Charged Him Ken MeyerJun 25th, 2023, 9:12 am Twitter share button Former President Donald Trump went all in with his claims of political persecution in a new speech blasting his indictment for mishandling government secrets. Trump spoke before the Faith & Freedom Coalition on Saturday and complained about the “hoaxes,” “witch hunts,” and the supposed weaponization of the Justice Department against him. The ex-president was indicted earlier this month on 37 federal criminal counts for alleged conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and Espionage Act violations connected with his mishandling of classified documents. “Every time the radical left Democrats, Marxists, communists and fascists indict me, I consider it a great badge of courage,” Trump declared to an applauding audience. “I’m being indicted for you! And I believe the ‘you’ is more than 200 million people that love our country. This is a continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all times.” Trump went on with more of his false claims about the “rigged” 2020 election before scoffing at the “disgraceful” prosecutors charging him under the Espionage Act. After once again claiming ownership of the documents that belong to the United States government, Trump tried to draw a false equivalence between his documents case and how others have handled sensitive material. I had every right to have these documents, personal belongings in boxes. Joe Biden didn’t. Even Mike Pence didn’t have that right. They weren’t covered by the Presidential Records Act. I was because I was president, but they weren’t. But these scoundrels and thugs, they only come after me. they didn’t go after the many, many other presidents that kept their documents. Watch above via Newsmax. Have a tip we should know? [email protected] Filed Under: Donald TrumpTrump Indicted Previous PostNext Post Previous PostNext Post Load Comments Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. Tips Have a tip or story idea? Email us. Or to keep it anonymous, click here. Most Popular ‘We Heard Him With Our Own Ears!’ CNN’s Dana Bash Stunned By Trump Rival’s Claim Cops Incited Jan. 6 Rioters ‘I Have No Evidence But—’ NBC’s Chuck Todd Floats Trump Collusion With Debate Attack Dog Ramaswamy ‘I Was Shaking Listening to Him’: Van Jones Says Vivek Ramaswamy’s Debate Remarks ‘One Step Away From Nazi Propaganda’ ‘Pathetic and Disgusting’: McGovern Slams Marjorie Taylor Greene, Says ‘It’s Really Rich to Get a Lecture on Civility’ From Her Hot Mic Catches Megyn Kelly’s Post-Debate Panel Mocking Ron DeSantis’s Expression: ‘Looked Like You Shot His Dog’ You may also like: CNN’s Jake Tapper Slams Fox News Over Trump Insurrection: ‘Huge Part Of Why January 6 Happened’ Tommy ChristopherDec 8th, 2023, 7:55 am ‘You’re Trailing DeSantis, Trump, and Nikki Haley’: Skeptical Laura Ingraham Presses Ramaswamy on His Chances Michael LucianoDec 7th, 2023, 8:48 pm Fox News Guest Pushes Bonkers Theory Democrats Might Invent ‘A New Covid’ to Keep Biden Off Debate Stage Caleb HoweDec 7th, 2023, 3:06 pm ‘No One Is Above The Law’: CNN Legal Expert Trashes Trump’s Immunity Appeal Just Minutes After It’s Filed Phillip NietoDec 7th, 2023, 2:42 pm ‘Trump Was Brought to Heel!’ CNN Analyst Fact-Checks Trump Courthouse Rants, Says Gag Order Worked Tommy ChristopherDec 7th, 2023, 2:28 pm JD Vance Demands DOJ Go After Washington Post Writer Who Called For ‘Resistance’ Against Trump ‘Dictatorship’ Jennifer Bowers BahneyDec 7th, 2023, 1:50 pm © 2023 Mediaite, LLC About Us Advertise Privacy Accessibility User Agreement Ethics & Diversity Policy Contact

The language being used her exactly mirrors the authoritarians of the past, where Dear Leader is the vessel of the perceived victimhood of the Party.

[https://www.mediaite.com/trump/im-being-indicted-for-you-trump-goes-full-martyr-in-speech-at-faith-conference-rages-at-the-scoundrels-and-thugs-who-charged-him/]

Trump Administration Paid Firm Nearly $14 Million For Just 2 New Recruits

The Trump administration paid an astonishing $13.6 million to an outside contractor this year to increase border protection staffing, but that effort has resulted in only two new job offers, according to a scathing report by a federal watchdog that called for “immediate” action to rectify “serious performance issues.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection granted Accenture Federal Services — a subsidiary of the global Accenture consulting company headquartered in the tax haven of Dublin — a $297 million contract last year to boost staffing by thousands in the wake of President Donald Trump’s crackdown on the border and immigration.

The company is “nowhere near satisfying its 7,500-person hiring goal over the next 5 years,” declared the report, which was released last week by the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security. “Further, CBP has used significant staffing and resources to help Accenture do the job for which it was contracted. As such, we are concerned that CBP may have paid Accenture for services and tools not provided.”

CBP “risks wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on a hastily approved contract that is not meeting its proposed performance expectations,” the report concluded.

The firm has already been paid $13.6 million. But when the inspector general audited the company’s actions, it discovered that as of Oct. 1 — more than 10 months into the contract — Accenture had successfully processed only two accepted job offers. In addition, it did so largely using CBP resources instead of its own, the report said.

CBP officials argued with the inspector general’s conclusion, insisting that not only did Accenture recruit two staffers, but has set up a hiring process and helped move “thousands” of applicants into the pipeline for consideration. The Office of the Inspector General responded that no records tracking these applicants exist, and therefore “we question the veracity” of CBP’s argument.

The OIG noted that it requested evidence during its review of CBP oversight of Accenture. But CBP “did not provide any supporting documentation of its oversight and indicated it was still developing performance metrics.”

Despite disputing the report’s particulars, CBP agreed to all four recommendations from the inspector general to address the situation. One of the recommendations involves determining whether Accenture should reimburse the Department of Homeland Security for services not delivered.

[Huffington Post]

Trump’s 2020 Campaign Has Reportedly Funneled Over $1 Million Into His Own Businesses

Federal election filings analyzed by Forbes say that Trump’s 2020 campaign has raked in millions of dollar from donors while Trump himself has converted at least $1.1 million of those donor funds into his own money by charging “the campaign for hotels, food, rent and legal consulting.”

Trump Tower Commercial LLC is a New York State-based entity owned by the 45th president. As of the latest campaign finance filing, the entity had charged Trump’s re-election campaign at least $665,000 in rent. An additional $225,000 in rent payments have been made to this entity through a similar arrangement with the Republican National Committee (RNC).

The extent of the space currently being rented by the 2020 campaign and the RNC is currently unknown but reporter Dan Alexander‘s reporting suggests one of two things: an extreme amount of real estate is currently being occupied–or the Trump Tower business is heavily inflating real estate prices.

Per Forbes:

Leading up to the 2016 election, the president’s campaign paid an average of $2,700 in monthly Trump Tower rent for every person listed in campaign filings as receiving a “payroll” payment. The 2020 operation, by contrast, is shelling out an average of $6,300 in monthly rent for every such person.

And that’s not all.

There’s also the matter of a separate Trump-owned and New York State-based entity known as Trump Plaza LLC. This entity currently controls a retail space, a parking garage, and two medium-sized apartment buildings.

According to federal filings, the Trump 2020 campaign has paid Trump Plaza LLC at least $42,000 in rent since November 2017–but, according to Forbes, there doesn’t appear to be any campaign activity occurring on any such property owned by the entity.

For one, the retail space simply has nothing campaign-related going on whatsoever. Same goes for the parking garage–which appears to be sub-leased to a non-Trump company at present. As for the apartment buildings? It doesn’t look like there’s any campaign-related activity happening there either.

Again, Alexander’s report:

Forbes staked out the buildings, arriving at 7:15 a.m. one November morning and staying for the next 14 hours, with the exception of an 18-minute break around 3 p.m. By our count, seven people went in and out of the twin, four-story brownstones over the course of the day. One refused to talk, and six said they had not seen any sign of the campaign in the buildings. Nor had a man behind the front desk at Trump Plaza. “I’ve been here since the beginning,” he said. “If there was any kind of office rented out for campaigning or whatever, I would know about it.”

The report goes on to speculate that it’s “unlikely” Trump’s 2020 campaign would simply hand cash over to the president for “nothing in return,” and cites an unnamed Trump 2016 staffer who said that Trump Plaza apartments would occasionally serve as crash pads for Trump campaign staff. If that’s the case, of course, it would be a lot cheaper to occasionally rent hotel rooms, but, Alexander notes, “that would not guarantee a steady stream of rent for the president.”

Breaking down that revenue stream is also illustrative.

Since Trump Plaza LLC began charging Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign “rent” in November 2017,  such payments have averaged out to some $4,200 per month. Those amounts appear to be quite a bit above market value.

According to Forbes‘ recent perusal of real estate website StreetEasy, recent rents in the same brownstone apartments have gone for $3,700 and $3,850–substantially lower prices (especially in the fiercely competitive Manhattan real estate market) than what Trump’s campaign has been paying the president’s own business for alleged campaign use of those circumspect properties.

And even if it doesn’t seem like much of up-charge? According to Federal Election Commission rules, campaigns are supposed to pay “fair market value” for all goods and services they use–especially when they use and pay their own businesses.

[Law and Crime, Inquisitr]

EPA paid $1,560 for 12 fountain pens, emails show

A close aide to Scott Pruitt last year ordered a set of 12 fountain pens that cost the Environmental Protection Agency $1,560, according to agency documents.

Each $130 silver pen bore the agency’s seal and Administrator Pruitt’s signature, according to the documents, which were obtained by the Sierra Club through a Freedom of Information Act request.
“Yes, please order,” an aide wrote.

The order from the Washington shop Tiny Jewel Box also included a set of journals that cost $1,670.

EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said the pens were similar to purchases made by Pruitt’s predecessors “for the purpose of serving as gifts to the Administrator’s foreign counterparts and dignitaries upon his meeting with them.”

Purchasing records show the EPA under the Obama administration made a $2,952 purchase from the same shop in 2009 for “non-monetary awards for Administrator.”

The purchase stands out not only for the cost but also because it was approved by a close aide who Pruitt described in congressional testimony last month as “longtime friend.”

Pruitt has sought to distance from the agency’s controversial spending, including a $43,000 phone booth in his office. He has recently blamed some purchases on “decisions made by career staff,” as he told the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, this week.

Pruitt’s actions are currently under scrutiny by investigators at the EPA inspector general, the Government Accountability Office and Congress. At least 12 investigations have been opened.

Other emails released by the agency and obtained by the Sierra Club show the same aide working on Pruitt’s apartment search during work hours. In her first year on the job at EPA, she received two raises that boosted her pay by 72%.

The pen purchase was first reported by The Washington Post.

[CNN]

Scott Pruitt and a crew of EPA aides spent four days in Morocco promoting natural gas

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt returned Wednesday from a trip to Morocco, where he talked with officials about their interest in importing natural gas as well as other areas of “continued cooperation” between the two countries.

The EPA disclosed the trip late Tuesday, issuing a media release that included photos and a statement from Pruitt saying that the visit “allowed us to directly convey our priorities and best practices with Moroccan leaders.”

“We are committed to working closely with countries like Morocco to enhance environmental stewardship around the world,” Pruitt said.

The purpose of the trip sparked questions from environmental groups, Democratic lawmakers and some industry experts, who noted that EPA plays no formal role in overseeing natural gas exports. Such activities are overseen primarily by the Energy Department and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Pruitt took along seven aides and an undisclosed number of staff from his protective detail. The group included four political aides, including Samantha Dravis, associate administrator of the Office of Policy, and senior advisers Sarah Greenwalt and Lincoln Ferguson, as well as one career official, Jane Nishida, principal deputy assistant administrator of the Office of International and Tribal Affairs. Pruitt’s head of security determines how many advance staffers travel on any given trip, EPA officials said, and in this instance it was two.

At the request of Senate Democrats, the EPA inspector general is looking into Pruitt’s use of military and private flights, as well as his frequent visits to his home state of Oklahoma during his first few months on the job.

“It seems strange that Administrator Pruitt would prioritize a trip to Morocco to discuss natural gas exports while there is no shortage of more pressing issues here in the U.S. that actually fall within the jurisdiction of the agency he leads,” said Sen. Thomas R. Carper (Del.), the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “I presume Mr. Pruitt is aware his agency’s inspector general is conducting an investigation into his questionable travel, which makes his decision to take this trip an odd choice at best.”

Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in a statement that Pruitt “acts like he is a globe-trotting salesman for the fossil fuel industry who can make taxpayers foot the bill.”

Pruitt traveled in business class for three flights, according to an individual who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an internal agency matter, and in economy class for two flights. Asked about the travel arrangements, EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox replied in an email, “Due to concerns from our security team, Administrator Pruitt was granted a waiver by EPA’s Chief Financial Officer to fly business-class.”

Wilcox said he could not provide the trip’s total cost because the travelers’ arrangements were booked through their respective departments.

Pruitt met with three top Moroccan officials, according to the agency statement, including the minister of energy, mines and sustainable development; the minister of justice and liberties; and the secretary of state to the minister of foreign affairs. Wilcox said Pruitt “discussed our bilateral free trade agreement, solid waste response, disaster relief and communications with top Moroccan officials.”

His visit came shortly after the EPA held a workshop in Rabat about solid waste management, public participation and crisis communication.

Morocco, the only African country with which the United States has a free-trade agreement, is a signatory to the 2015 Paris climate agreement and has collaborated in the past with U.S. officials on its push to expand domestic solar energy production. During the trip, Moroccan officials took Pruitt on a tour of the IRESEN Green Energy Park, which the EPA said showed the administrator “firsthand the work being done to promote environmental innovation, including solar energy across Morocco.”

[Washington Post]

Trump Official Blames Obama for His $1 Million Office Redesign

Since the Trump administration moved in last year, there’s been an unspoken competition among Cabinet officials to spend as much taxpayer money as possible in the most questionable of ways. A favorite among the group, of course, has been refusing to come within 20 feet of coach, insisting instead on flying business or first class or, hell, just renting a private plane or borrowing a jet from the government. Also popular? Dropping tens of thousands—and in some cases hundreds of thousands—on office redesigns as though they’re Fortune 100 C.E.O.s and not government bureaucrats.

Over at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Ben Carson, whose department had its funding slashed in the latest White House budget, dropped $31,000 on a dining set for “safety” reasons. At the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, the front-runner for Most Blatantly Corrupt Trump Official, invoiced taxpayers for a “brown maple wood stand-up desk with brass locks,” a second “oversize desk with decorative woodworking that some E.P.A. employees compared to the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office” (cost of refurbishment: $2,075), and a nearly $43,000 soundproof phone booth, which, it turns out, was illegal for him to purchase without notifying Congress first. And to round out the club, on Tuesday afternoon we learned that U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, one of the people responsible for dragging us into a trade war with China, spent nearly $1 million to redecorate two of his offices.

According to the New York Post, Lighthizer spent $3,500 of taxpayer money on an antique desk, $859 on a hugely important 30-inch “Executive Office of the President” plaque, and $830 to “transport and install two paintings on loan from the Smithsonian.” In addition, he paid Executive Furniture of Washington, D.C., which specializes in high-end furniture and wood-finished desks, a whopping $475,000. For his staff, he splurged on 60 sit-stand desks ($18,500), a modular wall system ($290,000), and 90 Herman Miller Aeron office chairs ($54,000). But if you thought Lighthizer would take responsibility for the expenditures, think again:

When asked about the spending spree, Lighthizer’s office pointed the finger at the Obama administration.

“The furniture purchases are the culmination of a longtime, planned project that began under the Obama administration to replace two-decade-old furniture,” Lighthizer’s office said in a statement.

(An official from Lighthizer’s office further explained to The Hive: “Ambassador Lighthizer did not direct these expenditures, which were planned and executed consistent with career staff’s spending authority. All furnishings were acquired through Executive Office of the President contracting procedures. In my opinion as a senior career official responsible for developing and implementing this project, these funds were critical for continuing to execute effectively USTR’s mission.”)

Obama-era, unsurprisingly reps were having none of this explanation, telling the Post that they didn’t approve any major remodeling plans and that it was “laughable” Team Trump would try to pin this on them, considering the new administration had no problem pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership on day four of Trump’s presidency. “We told 11 other countries that we were going to do a trade deal with them, and the Trump administration found the power to unwind that,” an Obama trade official told the Post. “So furniture purchases cannot be as binding.”

As for whether Lighthizer will suffer any consequences for the pricey interior design choices, the odds are about as likely as Trump blurbing a second print run of James Comey’s book. Though the president is indeed on a firing spree, ethical transgressions like Lighthizer’s seem only to improve one’s standing with the boss. If Pruitt can hang on after his office decor spending spree, shady housing arrangement, and insistence on outfitting his official business car like it’s the Batmobile, then Lighthizer should be just fine.

[Vanity Fair]

Scott Pruitt Bypassed the White House to Give Big Raises to Favorite Aides

In early March, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt approached the White House with a request: He wanted substantial pay raises for two of his closest aides.

The aides, Sarah Greenwalt and Millan Hupp, were part of the small group of staffers who had traveled with Pruitt to Washington from Oklahoma, where he had served as attorney general. Greenwalt, a 30-year-old who had worked as Pruitt’s general counsel in Oklahoma, was now his senior counsel at the EPA. Hupp, 26, was working on his political team before she moved to D.C. to become the agency’s scheduling director.

Pruitt asked that Greenwalt’s salary be raised from $107,435 to $164,200; Hupp’s, from $86,460 to $114,590. Because both women were political appointees, he needed the White House to sign-off on their new pay.

According to a source with direct knowledge of the meeting, held in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, staffers from the Presidential Personnel Office dismissed Pruitt’s application. The White House, the source said, declined to approve the raises.

So Pruitt found another way.

A provision of the Safe Drinking Water Act allows the EPA administrator to hire up to 30 people into the agency, without White House or congressional approval. The provision, meant to help expedite the hiring of experts and allow for more flexible staffing, became law in 1996. In past administrations, it has been used to hire specialists into custom-made roles in especially stressed offices, according to Bob Perciasepe, a former acting EPA administrator.

After the White House rejected their request, Pruitt’s team studied the particulars of the Safe Drinking Water provision, according to the source with direct knowledge of these events. By reappointing Greenwalt and Hupp under this authority, they learned, Pruitt could exercise total control over their contracts and grant the raises on his own.

Pruitt ordered it done. Though Hupp and Greenwalt’s duties did not change, the agency began processing them for raises of $28,130 and $56,765, respectively, compared with their 2017 salaries. Less than two weeks after Pruitt had approached the White House, according to time-stamped Human Resources documents shared with The Atlantic, the paperwork was finished.

Word of the raises quickly began to circulate through the agency. The episode infuriated some staffers; to some political aides, it was evidence of Pruitt’s disregard for the White House’s warnings to cabinet officials that they avoid even the appearance of impropriety. It also underscored the administrator’s tendency to play favorites among his staff, according to two sources with direct knowledge of agency dynamics. Hupp, in particular, is making more than her Obama-era predecessor, a five-year veteran of the agency who did not break six figures until the final year of the administration, according to public records. (While Greenwalt has no obvious peer in the Obama administration, the EPA’s general counsel had an annual salary of $155,500 in 2016.)

Said one EPA official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the press: “This whole thing has completely gutted any morale I had left to put up with this place.”

“The Safe Drinking Water Act provides the EPA with broad authority to appoint scientific, engineering, professional, legal, and administrative positions within EPA without regard to the civil service laws. This is clear authority that has been relied on by previous administrations,” EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said in a statement. “The Administrator was not aware that these personnel actions had not been submitted to the Presidential Personnel Office. So, the Administrator has directed that they be submitted to the Presidential Personnel Office for review.”

The White House did not return requests for comment.

[The Atlantic]

Trump’s EPA chief Scott Pruitt caught living in prime DC condo owned by top energy lobbyist’s wife

President Donald Trump’s environmental chief has been living in a townhouse co-owned by the wife of a top energy lobbyist.

EPA administrator Scott Pruitt occupies the home a short distance from the U.S. Capitol, but neither the agency or lobbyist J. Steven Hart would say how much the Trump administration official has been paying to live in the prime location, reported ABC News.

The cost of the rental agreement will be a key question in determining whether the property is an improper gift, according to ethics experts.

Hart confirmed to ABC News that Pruitt lived in the condo, which is owned through a limited liability company that links to address owned by the lobbyist and his wife Vicki Hart — who is a lobbyist specializing in health care.

The Harts were described in 2010 by the newspaper Roll Call as a “lobbyist power couple.”

Steven Hart, chairman and CEO of Williams and Jensen, previously served in the Reagan Justice Department and is a top Republican fundraiser, and his firm reported more than $16 million in federal lobbying income last year.

“Among his many clients are the NRA and Cheniere Energy Inc., which reported paying Hart’s firm $80,000 a year,” ABC News reported.

[Raw Story]

1 2