[Crazieman]

Yeah it is. They write the law. They execute the law. They adjudicate the law.

And you don’t vote for any of it. Sucks to be you.

[headstamp 2]

Had a liberal the other day complaining about breathing all the terrible CO2 pollution from all the cars.

I had a fleeting moment of thought about trying to explain that CO2 isn’t a “pollutant” but when looking into those empty eyes of hers, I thought better of it.

I was witnessing the face of total indoctrination and stupidity.

[Blood of Tyrants]

One of the most unconstitutional things Congress has ever done was to create agencies and give them the power to make rules withe the weight of law.

[blueunicorn6]

Kneel! Kneel before your government employee masters! Bring them offerings of bribes lest they strike you down!

[SolidRedState]

In the 70’s they began making mfr’s put catalytic converters on cars.

These converters transform car exhaust hydrocarbons into water vapor (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2)

Now they tell us CO2 is bad.

They can’t have it both ways.

[SamuraiScot]

The EPA Is Not Above the Law

No, the EPA is outside the law. It has no right to exist. It is therefore against the law, and has been since its inception in 1970.

The EPA is a criminal "protection racket" that should simply be disbanded immediately, and all the moneys taxed to maintain it over the decades refunded to the individual taxpayers who paid the bill (or their estates). That refund should not come from the Treasury, which belongs to the People. It should be drawn from the private holdings of the government officials (or their estates) who approved its operations over the years, in proportion to their responsibility for those decisions or operations.

I'm not prejudiced in any way, and would insist on collecting from everyone responsible, regardless of position, in proportion to his actions in support of this criminal organization: Presidents, legislators, Supreme Court justices, agency administrators, and 501c-3 foundations. (Where 501c-3s are concerned, as private citizens, individual Board members and donors would be exempt from penalty.) All who officially supported or abetted the EPA took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and all violated it. An outfit like the CATO Institute or the Club for Growth would do an excellent job apportioning responsibility appropriately. When explaining it to liberals, we could informally term this a "redistribution of wealth." But in reality it is just returning people's property—inflation-adjusted and with interest, of course.

Since all operations of the EPA have constituted a taking under cover of law and a deprivation of Americans' Constitutional rights (with literally world-changing consequences), any immunities ordinarily granted to office-holders doing their jobs are void. It will be very merciful of us if we do not pursue criminal prosecution as well.

[Jim Noble]

On behalf of a construction contractor, a trucking firm, and their respective trade associations in California, my colleague, Ted Hadzi-Antich, will argue that the EPA’s failure to submit the vehicle emissions standards to the Science Advisory Board for comment requires the standards to be vacated.

The Clean Air Act is unconstitutionally vague and should be repealed. And the process of "peer review" of proposed regulations cannot work when the reviewers are all clones of Jonathan Gruber.

[Carry_Okie]

The only serious issue is what the courts should do about EPA’s violation of law. EPA’s statutory violation cannot be dismissed as a harmless error. Congress enacted the requirement for Science Advisory Board review because it believed it would make a difference in the standards and regulations EPA issued, and that has proven true time and time again. EPA’s violation relating to these rules is especially consequential, as the two affidavits of the former chairman of the Science Advisory Board explain: these are precisely the type of rules that Congress intended the Board to evaluate, and EPA’s failure to obtain the required peer review is inexcusable.

PATRICK HENRY, Virginia Ratifying Convention: This, sir, is my great objection to the Constitution, that there is no true responsibility — and that the preservation of our liberty depends on the single chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish themselves.

[sphinx]

What is this “law” of which you speak? We have a sovereign. He has a phone and a pen and a teleprompter. He commands, and we obey. What has “law” to do with it?

[lowbridge]

“The EPA Is Not Above the Law”

Sorry. The EPA didnt get that memo.

[dfwgator]

[vpintheak]

I agree in principal, but our cowardly courts and legislative branch have usurped their authority and handed the EPA and other unconstitutional authorities that ability to write crap essentially into law without due process.

[vpintheak]

I like the smarmy guy in the background too. Like everyone doesn’t like clean air and only they do...

[Impy]

They are the law, apparently. So is the also unelected FDA. Needless to say the founders did not envision this.

But hey lets whine about the 17 amendment, that’s the real problem amirie?