Trump White House/Cabinet appointments

[alien42]

Kinda funny watching you turds say 60 minutes is lies and fake information...

i said nothing about 60 Minutes, i did however say you were a liar and i proved it.

you stated "isn't subject to insider trading laws (politicians aren't) escaped your minuscule intellect."

that isn't a 60 Minutes quote, it is YOUR quote and you are absolutely wrong. you weren't speaking in past tense and you followed your false information with a childish personal insult (not to me).

"turds" is another classy touch, but it doesn't negate the fact that you were unaware of the STOCK Act, which i informed you of.

 

[Victorian Gray]

http://watchdog.org/235785/epa-lawsuit-pond-fines/

A rancher is taking the Environmental Protection Agency to federal court, asking a judge to stop the agency from fining him more than $16 million because he ildilt a small pond on his property.

Andy Johnson of Fort Bridger, Wyoming says he made sure to get the proper permits from his state government before building the pond. After all, this is America in the 21st century, and nothing done on your own property — certainly when it involves the use of water — is beyond government concern.

http://www.businessinsider.com/justices-epa-sackett-wetlands-2012-1

WASHINGTON (AP) — Several conservative members of the Supreme Court criticized the Environmental Protection Agency on Monday for heavy-handed enforcement of rules affecting homeowners after the government told an Idaho couple they can't challenge an order declaring their future home site a "protected wetlands."

Not sure what your point is for this post.

Your 1st story is from well over a year ago. It was settled last May and he won.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ines-beats-epa-in-battle-over-stock-pond.html

The 2nd story (also rather old), it appears that the couple won in the courts.

btw, while it doesn't have any connection that I can see to the original story, Mr. Sakett is apparently not a very nice guy.

Sackett, 48, was arrested by a North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation agent after responding to an ad posted on Backpage.com, a website commonly used by pimps. Sackett exchanged several text messages with an undercover officer and agreed to pay $150 for 30 minutes with what he believed was a 12-year-old girl.

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/loc...cle_1dc86084-56ec-50f9-95fd-a909551b1795.html

 

[pcgeek11]

Oops! Looks like you don't have all the facts once again. That's what happen when you get your info from within the bubble.

https://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/muddying-the-clean-water-act/

Andy Johnson of Fort Bridger, Wyoming says he made sure to get the proper permits from his state government before building the pond.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Andy Johnson of Fort Bridger, Wyoming says he made sure to get the proper permits from his state government before building the pond.

He was right
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ines-beats-epa-in-battle-over-stock-pond.html
"
A Wyoming man threatened with $16 million in fines over the building of a stock pond reached a settlement with the Environment Protection Agency, allowing him to keep the pond without a federal permit or hefty fine.

Andy Johnson, of Fort Bridger, Wyoming obtained a state permit before building the stock pond in 2012 on his sprawling nine-acre farm for a small herd of livestock.

Not long after contruction, the EPA threatened Johnson with civil and criminal penalties – including the threat of a $37,500-a-day fine -- claiming he needed the agency's permission before building the 40-by-300 foot pond, which is filled by a natural stream. "
It was very threatening," Johnson, a professional welder and married father of four, said of the EPA's compliance order against him.

"I was shocked and devastated and I didn’t know what to do," Johnson told FoxNews.com Tuesday. "I’m sitting there thinking, 'I’m the only provider for my whole family. How can I fight this?'"

On Monday, lawyers representing Johnson announced that the federal government agreed to resolve the case and a federal court has approved.

Under the settlement, Johnson's pond will remain and he won't pay any fines or concede any federal jurisdiction to regulate the pond. And the government won't pursue any further enforcement actions based on the pond's construction"

AND Annenberg fact-check was wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[pcgeek11]

Not sure what your point is for this post.

Your 1st story is from well over a year ago. It was settled last May and he won.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ines-beats-epa-in-battle-over-stock-pond.html

The 2nd story (also rather old), it appears that the couple won in the courts.

btw, while it doesn't have any connection that I can see to the original story, Mr. Sakett is apparently not a very nice guy.

Sackett, 48, was arrested by a North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation agent after responding to an ad posted on Backpage.com, a website commonly used by pimps. Sackett exchanged several text messages with an undercover officer and agreed to pay $150 for 30 minutes with what he believed was a 12-year-old girl.

http://bismarcktribune.com/news/loc...cle_1dc86084-56ec-50f9-95fd-a909551b1795.html

The point is the EPA is out of control and over stepping their grounds and it is only getting worse. They should not have to battle in court over a small cattle pond and a lot to build your house.... or be threatened with millions of dollars in fines. That is the kind of things the mafia does.

It doesn't matter that Mr. Sakett is a nice guy or not. That is beside the point.

 

[pcgeek11]

Oops! Looks like you don't have all the facts once again. That's what happen when you get your info from within the bubble.

https://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/muddying-the-clean-water-act/

I love the way you quote an Op-Ed.

EPA also hasn't fined him at all.

I never said that they Actually Fined him. They threatened him with huge fine.

Both cases I quoted were settled, but they should never have been an issue to begin with. EPA strong arm tactics are wrong.

 

[compuwiz1]

I love the way you quote an Op-Ed.



I never said that they Actually Fined him. They threatened him with huge fine.

Both cases I quoted were settled, but they should never have been an issue to begin with. EPA strong arm tactics are wrong.

Help is on the way. Trump will make the EPA great again, or kill it.

 

[ivwshane]

I love the way you quote an Op-Ed.



I never said that they Actually Fined him. They threatened him with huge fine.

Both cases I quoted were settled, but they should never have been an issue to begin with. EPA strong arm tactics are wrong.

I don't think you know what an op-ed is

You also appear to be moving the goal posts. You made a claim, it was false. The normal process for a dispute between a citizen and the government took place and was resolved, strong arm tactics not found.

 

[pcgeek11]

I don't think you know what an op-ed is

You also appear to be moving the goal posts. You made a claim, it was false. The normal process for a dispute between a citizen and the government took place and was resolved, strong arm tactics not found.

I moved nothing. I said the EPA was out of control and it is. I gave two examples and you attempted to dismiss them with an Op-Ed.

An op-ed (originally short for "opposite the editorial page" though sometimes interpreted as "opinion editorial") is a written prose piece typically published by a newspaper or magazine which expresses the opinion of a named author usually not affiliated with the publication's editorial board. Op-eds are different from both editorials (opinion pieces submitted by editorial board members) and letters to the editor (opinion pieces submitted by readers).

It doesn't matter how many times you claim it was false, it doesn't make it so. They were threatening them with huge fines for BS charges. Strong arm techniques as they didn't think they would be challenged. These people had to fight the charges at their own expense and suffered because of it. They did win their cases, but it was totally uncalled for. So yes, once again you are full of BS. As usual.

 

[agent00f]

re-write history? Trump had multiple large bankruptcies. He also launched and sunk a variety of businesses which I listed a partial list of. if you want to point out he is going to run the country like a lean mean business, his business history is part of the conversation. sorry to break it to you.

you are the one who is delusional and attempting to re-write history.

and nobody knows what Trump is worth and what his liabilities are because he is not transparent, like every other presidential nominee for decades, by releasing his tax returns. his net worth is up for debate. sorry, but a 'source' from Trump is just that, bullshit, since he does nothing else but lie. he's rich but nobody knows by how much. there are far more qualified very wealthy businessmen in this country who haven't had the number and magnitude of Trump failures.

You must be easily duped

He's not so much easily duped as willing to say anything for white power.

 

[ivwshane]

I moved nothing. I said the EPA was out of control and it is. I gave two examples and you attempted to dismiss them with an Op-Ed.

An op-ed (originally short for "opposite the editorial page" though sometimes interpreted as "opinion editorial") is a written prose piece typically published by a newspaper or magazine which expresses the opinion of a named author usually not affiliated with the publication's editorial board. Op-eds are different from both editorials (opinion pieces submitted by editorial board members) and letters to the editor (opinion pieces submitted by readers).

It doesn't matter how many times you claim it was false, it doesn't make it so. They were threatening them with huge fines for BS charges. Strong arm techniques as they didn't think they would be challenged. These people had to fight the charges at their own expense and suffered because of it. They did win their cases, but it was totally uncalled for. So yes, once again you are full of BS. As usual.

So again, your dumb ass doesn't know what an op ed is. The article by fact check was indeed not an op-ed.

https://www.factcheck.org/scicheck/


Strike 1

From the article you apparently are too stupid to comprehend:

This description sounds as though Johnson simply dug a hole and added water. In fact, the Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA found that in order to create the pond, he constructed a dam on Six Mile Creek, a waterway deemed by the EPA to be a tributary of the Blacks Fork River, which in turn is a tributary of the Green River, which is a “navigable, interstate water of the United States.”

Building the dam constituted a “discharge of pollutants” into “waters of the United States,” according to the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, and thus required a permit that Johnson did not have, or seek. As with the Lucas case, EPA officials say that Johnson received multiple warnings before any enforcement actions were taken.

The EPA rules regarding discharging pollutants into waterways are based on a substantial body of evidence showing that water quality and flow in tributaries and wetlands can affect the water found downstream. In an extensive review of that evidence regarding connectivity of waterways, the EPA notes:

Multiple warnings certainly doesn't sound like the EPA is strong arming anyone (maybe this is another case of right wing speak translating poorly into English). It also want just the EPA but the army corps of engineers who took issue with his pond.

Strike 2

The EPA also settled with Johnson when he agreed to plant willow trees and limit live stock access to the pond. That's hardly a government doing all it can to inflict financial pain on a citizen.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/9/wyo-rancher-facing-20m-epa-fines-claims-victory/

Strike 3

 

[pcgeek11]

Granted I just saw the referal to Op-Ed in your original post and should have read the link instead. I stand corrected about that single point.

I do stand by my opinion that the EPA does in fact use jack boot tactics to abuse citizens doing things own their own land.

as the court said:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Several conservative members of the Supreme Court criticized the Environmental Protection Agency on Monday for heavy-handed enforcement of rules affecting homeowners after the government told an Idaho couple they can't challenge an order declaring their future home site a "protected wetlands."

 

[ivwshane]

Granted I just saw the referal to Op-Ed in your original post and should have read the link instead. I stand corrected about that single point.

I do stand by my opinion that the EPA does in fact use jack boot tactics to abuse citizens doing things own their own land.

as the court said:

If I were to quote you the liberal justices saying something negative about conservative policies, how much credence would you give it? So yea...

 

[pcgeek11]

If I were to quote you the liberal justices saying something negative about conservative policies, how much credence would you give it? So yea...

You are not worth my time.

 

[K1052]

http://watchdog.org/235785/epa-lawsuit-pond-fines/

*snip*

http://www.businessinsider.com/justices-epa-sackett-wetlands-2012-1

*snip*

Ok, I guess one out of three ain't bad.

Any agency with a large purview that the EPA has is going to end up in court when regulating. Sometimes the courts will decide that they are right and sometimes they'll decide they are wrong. When people running for office talk about "job killing EPA regulations" they're not talking about stock ponds in rural Wyoming. They're talking about heavy metas, particulates, ozone, NO2, etc which have large demonstrable effects on public health and finances in the US and clearly fall entirely within their lawful authority to regulate.

 

[Jhhnn]

Ok, I guess one out of three ain't bad.

Any agency with a large purview that the EPA has is going to end up in court when regulating. Sometimes the courts will decide that they are right and sometimes they'll decide they are wrong. When people running for office talk about "job killing EPA regulations" they're not talking about stock ponds in rural Wyoming. They're talking about heavy metas, particulates, ozone, NO2, etc which have large demonstrable effects on public health and finances in the US and clearly fall entirely within their lawful authority to regulate.

Conservatives are easily suckered by industry mouthpieces who try to make it about something it's not. It's about the Cuyahoga river, Love Canal, Times Beach, the valley of the drums in Kentucky & all the other obscure sites & ways that industry has privatized profit & socialized liabilities. Some of the worst offenders are defense contractors, like the Rocky Mtn Arsenal & Rocky Flats near Denver.