275 Comments
User's avatar
Cheryl Andrews's avatar

Thought he was the flag carrier for leaving all things to the States?

Expand full comment
Jacqueline Klein's avatar

Musk makes more money selling carbon credits to companies that build gas guzzlers, than he does on selling the actual cars. So this is in direct conflict with what musk would want. Poor, poor musk, spent $100’s of millions to buy his guy the presidency only to have said guy destroy his wealth. 😂

Expand full comment
Zyxomma's avatar

Ta, Dok. Earth Day is coming. For us, it's every day.

Expand full comment
Ron Spangler's avatar

The playbook is pretty clear at this point:

- Issue an EO that unconstitutionally makes new law, or is otherwise illegal or unconstitutional

- If it applies to the federal government or the private sector, the people in executive positions generally obey anyway, while the people affected sue and get an RO

- If it applies to the states, they sue and get an RO

- The government ignores the RO and does it anyway

- It works its way through the courts to SCOTUS which, on the shadow docket, says "Go ahead, Cheeto" on some technicality

So let's just jump to the last step, because the whole process is boring and repetitive.

Expand full comment
Ron Spangler's avatar

I keep changing the channel to see if anything new is on, but it's all fascist re-runs. Even The Apprentice was better than this. Fuck me.

Expand full comment
Peter MacMonagle's avatar

He is the reason why there is such a thing as birth control

Expand full comment
mfp-6s,7s,9s's avatar

at the risk of turning into the dept of redundancy dept, i'll just say that this (like everything else Kim Don Ugh does) is UNCONSTITUTIONAL AF

Expand full comment
Bupkus231's avatar

Geez - if anything is "ideologically motivated", it's these assholes - if they're even smart enough to have a consistent "ideology".

Expand full comment
mfp-6s,7s,9s's avatar

the ideology of sociopaths is 'chaos and destruction'--

so no, it doesnt take any amount of 'smart'

Expand full comment
marydn's avatar

"...or energy policies that threaten American energy dominance,”..."

American energy dominance?!? WTF does that mean?!? Is this some of the amurrican excepshunalism that the right is always talking about?

Expand full comment
Bagels of Doom's avatar

Have fun, Congrisscritters, telling your constituents (that you have been conditioning for the sanctity of States' laws for decades) that all that has just been decreed null and void.

Expand full comment
Alice B Toklas's avatar

Yeah, “States’ Rights.” Huh.

Expand full comment
Louise James's avatar

I know SCOTUS only gave Trump immunity from prosecution if he committed a crime as president as long as it was done as an official act of the presidency.

But, we all knew and know that Trump will simply declare everything an official act and that he'll extend the immunity to allow him to break constitutional law with immunity. Which is what's he is clearly doing with this latest act.

Expand full comment
Louise James's avatar

So someone showed him the movie, Civil War, and he decided to cosplay as Nick Offernan's president character, and doesn't understand that he was the baddie in the plot.

Expand full comment
Tango Charlie's avatar

I'm not liking these small government Republican policies too much.

Expand full comment
Glennis Waterman's avatar

Seems to me that the Trump administration's policies are also "ideologically motivated" - especially since, with every change, they take the opportunity to slam "wokeness". So is it bad to be motivated by ideology? Or is just the ideology they don't like bad?

Expand full comment
Hank Napkin's avatar

"I'm gonna be called home pretty soon so yeah no air or water stuff cuz I won't need it by the way am a perfect physical specimen living 200+ years on top of these years plus the born at conception months and years carried around in Fred's scrotum for total personhoodwink."

Expand full comment
Priscilla A Clore's avatar

Whoop-ti-do.

No.

Expand full comment