With all the hoopla about EPA Director Scott Pruitt spending tens of thousands of dollars on trips around the world, have you ever wondered just how much the previous EPA director spent under Obama?
If you don’t know off the top of your head, that’s understandable. The media didn’t give a rat’s behind about this issue until Trump got elected.
Well our good friends over at Hotair did some digging and, as you’ll see, Pruitt’s travel expenses aren’t any different than those of his predecessor, Gina McCarthy.
First, here’s Scott Pruitt’s summary expenses for two trips he took in 2017:
- Italy’s G7 Summit: $84,000
- Morocco: $40,000
In the article, Jazz Shaw tells us that the Washington Post…
…made the “Italy trip” sound like some sort of sightseeing tour. In reality, Pruitt and his staff were attending the G7 summit, but did visit the Vatican, which the Washington Post found absolutely scandalous.
Jazz then proceeds to give us McCarthy’s expenses for 2016:
- Ghana: $68,382
- Peru: $45,139
- Tokyo: $74,737
And 2015:
- Paris: $41,320
- Dubai: $90,367
- Tokyo: $67,702
- Italy: $56,192
And 2014:
- Vancouver: $62,246
- Vietnam: $68,267
As you can plainly see, Pruitt’s expenses are no different than those of McCarthy. Yet Democrats and the media are going nuts as if this is the first time it’s ever happened.
In fact the EPA director before Gina McCarthy, Lisa Jackson, actually spent $155,763 on a trip to China in 2013. How in the heck does that go unnoticed?
As Jazz points out, you can be the judge of whether this kind of spending on travel expenses is exorbitant or not. But the double standard which the media uses against Republicans is more than crystal clear, as the EPA spokesperson Jahan Wilcox points out:
The double-standard couldn’t be more clear: under Barack Obama’s EPA the media chose not to report on expenditures to protect the EPA Administrator for international travel or the costs of their trips, but under the Trump Administration the costs to protect our government officials is somehow scandalous.
It’s not just with this, it’s with many things. The media went into hibernation when their favorite president got elected. Actually, I shouldn’t make them sound so docile. They actually covered for Obama on many, many things. And now they continually expose just how biased they truly are.