Happy Anniversary, Most Cynical EPA Memo Ever

Reposted from Government Accountability & Oversight

Timely milestone for one of the most cynical documents obtained during the Obama administration

With the signs increasing that the Biden EPA plans to use National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) to impose its climate agenda without the political peril of congressional votes, GAO wishes an infamous Obama-Biden memo a Happy, Very Timely Anniversary.

This particular memo, titled “Strategic Communications Conversation” to which PR advisor Allyn Brooks-LaSure attached a “Non-Paper” (that also was non-provided), was dated on this date in the early months of the Obama-Biden EPA, and broken on January 26, 2015. It turned up in the “Richard Windsor” trove of records obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute from then-Administrator Lisa Jackson’s false-identity email account, an account used promiscuously by current Biden officials Gina McCarthy and Joe Goffman.

It’s quite something to read this memo, written at precisely this point in the Obama-Biden administration, and with new sue-and-settle examples, erm, “reconsidering” Bush regulations piling up (more on that later).

This is particularly important given signs detailed to the DC Circuit here, laid out here, and very nicely summarized in today’s Wall Street Journal here, that EPA is preparing to issue a secondary ozone “NAAQS”, in a brilliantly craven move to even further obscure what it is up to on CO2. (Recall, even Obama’s EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson rejected a climate NAAQS as not “advisable”. One prominent green attorney said “hell will freeze over” before that came to pass. Well, Texas just froze over, at least, and with the help of this very agenda.)

What this memo shows is EPA’s recognizing it had to move its global warming campaign away from the failed model of discredited Big Green pressure groups and their “mascots” the polar bears and polar ice caps, that “climate” has proved “consistently — an unpersuasive argument to make.” In it we see the birth of the breathtakingly disingenuous “shift from making this about the polar caps [to] about our neighbor with respiratory illness…”.

Doubling down on the cynicism, it continued:

Children:…By revitalizing our own Children’s Health Office, leading the global charge on this issue, and highlighting the children’s health dimension to all of our major initiatives – we will also make this issue real for many Americans who otherwise would oppose many of our regulatory actions.

Here we see the conviction, manifested, that if they yell “clean air” and “children” enough about something they, the media and the green groups will ultimately get their way.

Which perfectly segues into today’s blockbuster Wall Street Journal editorial, “Biden’s ‘Backdoor’ Climate Plan,” about how “Democratic AGs, green groups and a top Biden environmental regulator are colluding on a plan to impose the Green New Deal on states through a back regulatory door” — “to hasten a replacement ozone rule that regulates CO2” — “because they know they can’t pass it through the front in Congress.”

4.7 22 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 18, 2021 2:14 pm

The dirty tricks gang is back with the motto to go over the top more than their last gang efforts. The real cost of a biased press is in looking the other way and getting rewarded with jobs in that process. All they lack is any truth on their side.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 18, 2021 3:45 pm

When I was a kid, no journalist would consider taking a job in any administration. Maintaining the appearance of objectivity was still important.

Modern journalists don’t feel the need to maintain any appearances.
The chance to be part of the power structure is just too enticing.
Those journalists who haven’t been asked to be part of the power structure are all campaigning for the next slot to open up

Abolition Man
Reply to  MarkW
March 18, 2021 3:58 pm

When we were kids there still were some good journalists; the species is now almost completely extinct due to the invasion of the feral species of propagandists or urinalists! The Yellow Stream Media think being part of the power structure is a worthy goal; they would never expose criminal behavior unless the perpetrator said or did something unPC!

Reply to  Abolition Man
March 18, 2021 6:18 pm

For the last 4 years CNN’s Don Lemon has been mercilous in his attacks on Trump and anyone who supported Trump.

On the other hand, when it comes to the much more serious, and actually documented charges against Cuomo, Lemon is still defending Cuomo. Urging his viewers to never forget the humanity of Cuomo and declaring how everyone needs to remember the good things Cuomo has done for the party.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  MarkW
March 18, 2021 7:28 pm

I can stomach a lot, but Lemon is unwatchable.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  MarkW
March 19, 2021 5:20 am

I was wondering why the media don’t mention Cuomo’s wife and her thoughts on this- then I read that he’s divorced and his most recent “domestic partner” left him a few years ago- so the poor guy is getting horny and found how easy it is to hit on hot young women in his office. Cuomo enjoyed attacking Trump- now he’s finding out what it’s like. I like his dad, Mario, what with me also being Italian American- but I never liked Andrew. When talking in public he drones on and on in a preachy manner I can’t stand.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 19, 2021 9:16 am

I’ve read several reports that Cuomo’s ex and his children were actually afraid of him.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  MarkW
March 19, 2021 10:36 am

Well, I’m Italian too- and also have a bad temper- but it’s just yelling, not physically violent- not sure about Andy Cuomo, apparently he does threaten people. His dad was a lot more mellow. I recall his dad once telling the following story: “We know that during the Great Depression- many stock brokers jumped out of windows when they lost their fortune- one landed on my immigrant father’s push cart loaded with veggies”. A nice tall tale of rising out of poverty- funny if not true.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 19, 2021 12:34 pm

I don’t get these guys. There they are good-looking, rich, powerful men who could probably win the woman they wanted if they gave it half a try, but instead they go around molesting their subordinates. I guess they aren’t looking for love.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 20, 2021 7:28 am

As a fellow Italian-American, I could never stand blowhard Mario & his tax & spend policies that severely hurt the same middle class his doublespeak was proclaiming to help.

Reply to  Abolition Man
March 19, 2021 9:17 am

I remember hearing in the 70’s that a lot of kids were getting in to journalism “to make a difference” – i.e. to be activists, vs. simply reporting. The entire field has been perverted as a result.

Reply to  MarkW
March 18, 2021 8:36 pm

Obviously, journalists think they’re <i>already</i> part of the power structure.

Reply to  jorgekafkazar
March 19, 2021 12:10 am

What on earth would make anyone think urinalists (thank you Aboman!) has not always been part of the power structure? Crikey Moses, how else would the governing classes tell the working classes what to think thinking is?
Protocol 12v8:
“Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralize the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind …. If we give permits for ten journals, we shall ourselves found thirty, and so on in the same proportion. This, however, must in no wise be suspected by the public. For which reason all journals published by us will be of the most opposite, in appearance, tendencies and opinions, thereby creating confidence in us and bringing over to us quite unsuspicious opponents, who will thus fall into our trap and be rendered harmless.”

March 18, 2021 2:16 pm

The movie Ghostbusters was ahead of its time with its EPA character.

March 18, 2021 2:18 pm

Are these people really any different than the North Korean (crime syndicate) and Russian (killers) that they label.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 18, 2021 3:47 pm

They haven’t started jailing or k1lling opponents yet. Though they are rapidly laying the ground work for that step.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  MarkW
March 18, 2021 4:18 pm

I think they already started with the jailing.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
March 18, 2021 9:28 pm

Our government has an aversion to truth the way a vampire has to garlic. If you have to use falsification to get a policy enacted, that ought to be a “canary in a coal mine” to indicate you are heading toward failure if not disaster. The real world simply does not work the way Progressives construe it… and yet they somehow think that they will avoid the real world being the final arbiter in te end. (sigh)

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
March 18, 2021 2:34 pm

Why present a straight-up proposition supported by verifiable observations when propaganda is your go-to device?

Dave O.
March 18, 2021 2:51 pm

Alarmists have long referred to carbon dioxide as just CARBON, as in carbon offsets, carbon sequestration etc in order to link co2 with that dirty, filthy (black smoke) carbon. This makes it easier to sell “pollution” controls on co2 emitters to their normally ill informed voters.

Reply to  Dave O.
March 18, 2021 3:00 pm

Yes, their goal is carbon reduction. The cynical human would be concerned about a conflict of interest between carbon sequestration and their planned population schemes. Welcome to the Twilight Fringe.

Reply to  n.n
March 18, 2021 4:51 pm

This fits nicely with Gates’ plans to control the population to save the planet. They may have a literal definition of zero carbon footprint for carbon-based life forms. I have to learn to walk on my hands.

March 18, 2021 2:58 pm

The Green Blight recedes to it niche, maybe. Bird, bats, all manner of flora, and fauna, once displaced, are singing in gay renewal.

March 18, 2021 3:27 pm

A reminder about the repoliticization of EPA under Biden.

IMO Mass v EPA was wrongly decided by SCOTUS. Maybe they can fix it.

’Carbon pollution’ evokes the Clean Air Act, itself with a faulty circular definition of pollutants that allowed Obama’s admin to ‘sue and settle’ that CO2 was a CAA pollutant.

The permanent end solution is to amend the faulty CAA definitions. But that won’t happen until deplorables take back the House, Senate, and WH. At the rate of disasters Biden is now causing, that might be possible in 2025–if the election process gets fixed at the state level in enough swing states. Is happening in Georgia. Will happen in Arizona after Maricopa audit. Might happen in PA. And a new favorable court ruling in Mi that SOS issued illegal signiture verification instructions offers some hope there. Already have the Wisc Supremes ruling that the Dane and Milwaukee county ‘shut in no ID’ instructions violated the state constitution—about 150k illegite ballots in 2020 based on the ‘valid’ 2018 equivalent.

Jon R
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 18, 2021 7:32 pm

The no standing ruling pretty much finished SCOTUS as a “grand body”. Just another 7 hacks from the establishment.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 19, 2021 12:07 am

A lot is riding on these lawsuits. If they fail, the US will effectively be a one-party state under the Democrats.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Graemethecat
March 19, 2021 5:26 am

Massachusetts is currently a one party state- the vast majority of all politicans are Democrats. Governor Baker is a Republican- but in name only. The state’s house of reps has 128 Democrats and 38 Republicans. But those Republicans are also in name only. I’ve never heard one expressing any skepticism of man caused climate change- NEVER. They like those jobs too much- the more they cooperate with the party line- the more they get paid.

March 18, 2021 3:31 pm

The EPA has no authorization to regulate CO2. It is not listed as one of the “criteria pollutants” they are mandated to regulate by the Clean Air Act or any of its subsequent updates. They can’t regulate something without specific authorization from Congress. It’s time to use Leftists’ favorite weapon against them: lawfare. Sue the blinkety-blank out of the EPA if they try to regulate CO2 or methane directly or indirectly. Then file civil suits against the specific people in the EPA and the Executive Branch who are illegally overstepping their authority.

Reply to  stinkerp
March 18, 2021 4:32 pm

You won’t get a court to touch it.

Reply to  Derg
March 18, 2021 5:01 pm

Courts regularly decide that some decisions are best left to our elected representatives. What stinkerp is suggesting is the exact opposite of the kind of case which the courts won’t touch.

Reply to  stinkerp
March 18, 2021 5:32 pm

SK, a gentle correction. Based on my comment just above. The CAA defined an air pollutant as that which pollutes, then gave a 7 part regulatory test on whether ‘pollution’ regulation was permissible.
MA sued EPA because the Bush admin had said CO2 did not meet the 7 part test. Case went to SCOTUS, which ruled EPA could so decide. So Obama’s new EPA admin promptly did so just by juicing the ‘cost of carbon’.
We are stuck with a provably bad decision, since the CAA congressional record plainly meant that mostly naturally occurring stuff like CO2 was not targeted. No different than water vapor. The CAA was supposed to be after stuff like ozone, PM10 particulates, NOx, sulfates… Congress goofed the definition.

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 18, 2021 8:16 pm

Water s a greenhouse gas. Simple as that. They should GHG-tax the hell out of it. $40 a gallon – after all, we want to save the planet.

What will be funny is that as the value of US$ drops to zero, water really will be $40 a gallon.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 18, 2021 8:31 pm

But no worries, with 6 “conservative” justices, surely they will correct this. Look at all the great conservative wins lately… oh wait.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rich Davis
March 19, 2021 12:47 pm

The Courts are allowing politics to interfere with their duty of hearing cases.

States sue other States and the U.S. Supreme Court says it doesn’t have jurisdiction. If not them, then who does have jurisdiction? The World Court?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 19, 2021 12:52 pm

The Red States are actively starting to sue the Biden administration and I imagine they are going to sue them over their regulation of CO2, also.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 19, 2021 2:39 am

Notwithstanding EPA v. Massachusetts, the SCOTUS also has delivered Michigan v. EPA 576 US 743 (2015).
There the Supreme Court analysed whether the EPA must consider costs when deciding to regulate rather than later in the process of issuing the regulation.
Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia held that the EPA must consider costs and that it interpreted the Clean Air Act unreasonably when it determined that it did not need to consider costs when it issued a “finding” that it was “ necessary and appropriate” to regulate.
This decision was a setback to the Obama climate change agenda and is a severe ongoing impediment for the EPA.
Consider the “cost”of a broad directive being a NAAQS and its considerable impact on people and businesses.
Put simply, they may be illegal under this SCOTUS ruling without a cost assessment accompanying the directive.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 19, 2021 5:28 am

“The CAA defined an air pollutant as that which pollutes”

No wonder every time I read some climate emergency bullshit- they always say, “carbon pollution”- keep saying it and drill it into everyone’s head.

March 18, 2021 4:03 pm

Repositioning CO2 and Carbon in the deceitful equation will be a challenge for the ideology and its proponents. It looks like the “king” is trying to put his clothes back on.

March 18, 2021 4:07 pm

Which state leads in Ozone pollution? California of course with the top 6 most polluted metro areas. And 7 in the top 10. https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/the-10-us-cities-with-the-most-ozone-pollution

March 18, 2021 4:38 pm

Run it through the special ops team at FBI if you have too, but get it done. The advocacy donor groups said to.

March 18, 2021 4:48 pm

Wasn’t 2009 the year they tried to launch the fake swine flu epidemic.

Reply to  richard
March 18, 2021 5:17 pm

Just a personal observation about the 2009/2010 swine flu.
It was NOT a fake. I lost my senior FDA guy to it in July 2009. He was other wise healthy, and left behind a wife and two teenagers.
The mortality data coming out of Argentina (their winter, our summer) were horrific.
Fortunately, the flu vaccine industry turned on a dime and dedicated all their resources to that flu variant vaccine. So by peak NH flu season 6 months later, we had ample vaccine for it.

Was COVID-19 politicly overplayed? Yes. Was it still very serious? Also yes. Even with over death attribution by half (the with/from issue), still over 1/4 million excess deaths in US alone in the past 12 months. Not to mention the many ‘recovered’ long haulers.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 18, 2021 7:35 pm

I would downplay nothing
But covid is taking off the old and the weak, like every predator, at higher than normal rates.
The result will be that next year the death rates among these groups will be well below normal as so many extra were taken this year

It is inevitable

The death rate over two years will be average most likely.

Just my opinion

Reply to  Pat from kerbob
March 18, 2021 8:35 pm

There could be a slight increase in deaths from flu because all of the covid precautions is leaving us humans devoid of herd immunity from flu viruses as well as other communicable diseases.

Reply to  noaaprogrammer
March 19, 2021 12:39 am

Ah, some common sense!

Reply to  Pat from kerbob
March 18, 2021 9:42 pm

It is hard for me to imagine how people survived during the pre-antibiotic days when diseases like Polio, Tuberculosis, Scarlett Fever, Diphtheria, Malaria, Typhoid, virulent influenza, Small Pox, etc. …were freely circulating.

It is amazing they were able to send their children to school or had an economy (much less the strongest in the world). An no one wore a mask in public.

What would people of that generation have said about a 1.9 trillion dollar Diphtheria Stimulus Bill? My guess is they would have gladly traded in all of those diseases for one as mild as COVID19.

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Reply to  Anon
March 19, 2021 9:20 am

There was a time when losing half your children before the age of 5 was considered normal.

Reply to  MarkW
March 19, 2021 10:12 am

I don’t know if it’s true, but I recall reading that people used to not name children until they were 8 years old to avoid becoming attached.

Even if not true, it underscores what you’re saying. Most people today really have no understanding of how harsh life can be.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
March 19, 2021 12:36 am

“Even with over death attribution by half…”
Uhm, the CDC admitted to overreporting of what, 96 to four? That is 24 times overreporting, not half. Even then, they cannot prove it was covidiocy, not having isolated the virus in vivo. Also, many people have published official stats showing no excess deaths as advertised.
As for swine flu, well, did you remember to keep a tissue sample, for independent verification, or are we just to believe the popular explanation of the time, as handed down from his physician’s mighty throne?
Instead of telling me about your buddy’s wife and kids, tell me about his diet, MSG, aspartame, nitrous salts, Roundup, GMO… Hell, I’d be content just with stats on his soda intake, with dates, compared to “recipe changes” at the factory.
I have yet to be convinced the ‘flu is not dietary corruption. My proof? I fix (and prevent) my own flu by dietary means, as do my family, my animals and every friend that believes me long enough to also try. It’s not about superfoods and supplements, it is about avoiding toxins.
You are a learned man, maybe you can tell us how exactly covid1984 ingests and destroys the common old flu virus that ain’t killed nobody for over a year now?
Internal consistency of argument is a worthwhile pursuit, sir, as you surely know. Why the double-think? You regularly teach us interesting things, is your job dependent upon the occasional intellectual red herring?

March 18, 2021 9:11 pm

It is too bad they had to destroy science (and STEM) as well as our scientific institutions in this failed trial-and-error ploy. And I mean that literally. My guess is that there are a few readers here on WUWT from the generation that remembers the significance of getting something published in Nature and Science and the consequences to an author’s career if an article had to be retracted (or edited after publication).

So, I am happy to see this move from a scientific debate “toward” a political debate, as this was always the correct venue. It is still sad that they need to exploit the medical community and use fear and emotions and not the merits to appeal to voters, but some type of correction was long overdue.

I also don’t see how medical statistics will be more persuasive than starving polar bears, flooded cities and melting ice caps, so I surmise that this shift (if true) will do little to move the needle toward some type of NWO / global governance situation.

Regardless, it will be nice to see Michael Mann types told that their discipline has lost its chic and is now passé and that they will now have to struggle for grant money, based on actual science, like the rest of us.

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Tom in Toronto
March 18, 2021 10:22 pm

How exactly is your ‘neighbor’s respiratory illness’ in any way related to climate change? If anything, a shrinking cold-and-flu season would prevent or reduce the severity of such illnesses.
There is no effect on anyone or any thing (aside from maybe greening some frozen tundra and preventing some cold-weather related disease and deaths) when temperature rises by a few degrees.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tom in Toronto
Reply to  Tom in Toronto
March 19, 2021 1:54 am

Pollution from fossil fuelled transport and power stations….

Tom in Toronto
Reply to  griff
March 19, 2021 9:12 am

That is well-known and understood. Pollution (particulates, NOx, SOx, etc) is bad. CO2 (the ’cause of climate change’) is not pollution; no matter how much you and other alarmists would like to conflate the plant food with actual pollutants.

The world’s CO2 psychosis is taking away needed attention from the real environmental problems.

Reply to  griff
March 19, 2021 9:22 am

Pollution from fossil fueled transport and power stations was taken care of back in the 1970’s.

March 18, 2021 10:33 pm

I note that the memo obtained by Horner doesn’t give a percentage of people worried by climate change. I wonder why that is?

Reply to  lee
March 19, 2021 12:41 am

I’m wearing out my Plus button over here!

Reply to  paranoid goy
March 19, 2021 9:22 am

For just $5, I can send you an industrial grade Plus button.

March 19, 2021 1:22 am

Climate change is not a pollution issue and it is not a USA issue. It’s a CO2 issue. CO2 is not a pollutant.

Also, it is a global issue that can’t be understood or managed as a national issue. There has to be a global climate action plan with a global carbon budget and the only role for the USA would be to participate and comply.


March 19, 2021 5:03 am

Effing rat-bastards.

If this is attempted, would love to see a yellow jackets response to it. We cannot let this leftist-globalist attack on us succeed.

Joseph Zorzin
March 19, 2021 5:15 am

From that Woke St. Journal article, “The Supreme Court in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007) ruled that the law’s general definition of “pollutant” covered greenhouse gases.”

Yuh, I live in that fanatic state of Massachusetts- the new Mecca of climate emergency religion. This state is loaded with climate emergency priests and prophets. And the home of the very powerful Conservation Law Foundation whose motto is: “For 50 years, CLF has taken on powerful opponents who would pollute our air and water and squander our resources. Our deep local knowledge, legal acumen, and policy expertise make CLF a prime mover in building our clean energy future, countering climate change, and safeguarding our communities. We never give up and go home because we are home.”

MA now has a net free by 2050 law on the books. No gas engine cars to be sold here after 2035. All nuclear and coal and oil power plants shut. They’re also trying to shut all natural gas and the only pumped storage project facilities. The enviro fanatics (comparable to ISIS) want to lock up all the forests so that their only function will be to sequester carbon. This tiny state will begin sacrificing hundreds of thousands of acres of forests to install solar “farms”. It’s going to install the first utility scale wind “farm” out at sea at tremendous cost.

Massachusetts- the home of the new religion. If you read any newspaper or magazine- or watch any TV show in the state- you’ll never know that there are any skeptics of the new religion. I didn’t know either until a friend told me about this site and others. Then I discovered Tony Heller’s site. I’m a skeptic of skeptics too- but the skeptics of man caused climate change make far more sense to me because I’m always very skeptical of religions!

Yet, this state is doing very poorly distributing Covid vaccines – far worse than many “red” states.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights