Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump signs Exec Orders moving Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines forward

Trump signs Exec Orders moving Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines forward

Elections have consequences

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsVvHcKm-w0

President Trump has signed executive orders moving the approval process for the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines forward.

This does not ensure approval and construction, but it restarts the processes stopped under the Obama administration under heavy pressure from environmental and left-wing activist groups.

Stopping these pipelines was the most cherished of liberal causes, intertwined with climate change and identity politics causes. The Dakota pipeline protests became the white liberal “Burning Man,” with virtue signaling reaching new heights. Anti-Israel protesters also tried to hijack the protests.

CNBC reports:

Trump signed executive orders that will make it easier for TransCanada to construct the Keystone XL pipeline and for Energy Transfer Partners to build the final uncompleted portion of the Dakota Access pipeline.

The Keystone XL would bring oil from Alberta, Canada, to Nebraska, where it would connect to an existing pipeline to bring the crude to Illinois. Former President Barack Obama refused to approve the cross-border project, saying the environmental review was not adequate in light of its route through the Sandhills ecosystem in Nebraska….

Obama also backed a delay to completion of the Dakota Access pipeline, which would bring oil from North Dakota to Illinois….

In December, the Army Corp of Engineers said it would deny Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners the easement it needs to complete the final stretch of the $3.7 billion Dakota Access pipeline. Jo-Ellen Darcy, United States assistant secretary of the Army for civil works, said the best path forward was to explore alternative routes for the pipeline, something Energy Transfer Partners says it will not do.

Tribe members and protesters have been camped out for months in Cannon Ball, North Dakota, in opposition to the Dakota Access pipeline.

Liberal heads already are exploding.

[Featured Image via YouTube]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

NO, it cannot be true. trump is not a conservative, could not possibly promote an anti liberal agenda. /s

    Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | January 24, 2017 at 12:39 pm

    Wilson was another Progressive who liberals did not and would not today find much in the way of common ground.

    Nixon was another, and look how the central government metastasized under his Progressive reign.

    Don’t be stupid.

      “Don’t be stupid.”

      Lectures from the ignorant are tiring.

      Wilson, Nixon, neither have a thing to do with Trump. Just more blather from the lonely home of nevertrump.

      As I have said repeatedly, Trump will end up being the most effective conservative since Ike. I could care less that he is not “pure” enough for you.

      Pure conservatives do not exist. The “conservatives” we’ve had in office previously failed at promoting any semblance of conservatism.

      We’ll see what happens. I stand by my prediction. You simply stand in opposition in the hopes you can say “I told you so”, as you always tell us.

      You are more wrong each day that goes by.

        Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | January 24, 2017 at 1:08 pm

        Conservatives are NOT BIG GOVERNMENT authoritarians. The opposite is true.

        You keep chanting this “pure” bullshit. It’s a total lie that anyone promotes that. But you find it a useful lie. So you and others keep aping it.

        Reagan and Coolidge were conservatives. W was MORE conservative than your Great God Cheeto. As history will show.

        Watch and learn, cultist.

          Lie, lie, lie.

          Do you have anything else in your small vocabulary?

          Romney, McCain, the most recent pair of R nominee’s before Trump. You voted for both, neither remotely conservative, both close to progs themselves. Go ahead, I can put up a mile long list of their prog positions, and you supported both.

          Now, you find only a “pure” conservative acceptable. Pathetic.

          You will be shown as wrong over and over.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 1:42 pm

          Poor, stupid, Butt-hurt Barri…

          Romney was certainly NOT a ‘pure’ conservative. Yet, yes, I did vote for him. Giving the lie to your stupid assertion that I or others here insist in ‘purity’. I voted for him because he was by FAR the better choice.

          And he was to the RIGHT of Your Great God Cheeto, as Mr. Establishment himself stated.

          I don’t insist that Der Donald be ‘pure’, you moronic cultist. I merely point out that he’s no part “conservative” and is quite the opposite.

          Your demand for purity is a recent contrivance, that is a certainty.

          You really want to make the case that Romney, the father of Romneycare, mother to Obama care, Romney that desired to have a 35% tariff on China is to the right of Trump? Go ahead, I’ll play.

          In your broad definition of collectivist every R nominee since Reagan is one, and truth be told, Reagan as well.

          No “lie” in your comment, hotkey broken? You did find the cute “butt-hurt barri” hotkey at least.

          “I merely point out that he’s no part “conservative” and is quite the opposite.”

          And you keep being exposed as either ignorant, stupid, or a foolish prevaricator. I have no idea which. Nor care. You are always wrong.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:07 pm

          “Your demand for purity is a recent contrivance, that is a certainty.”

          That is certainly another iteration of your same lie.

          It’s all you’ve got. You’ll just keep chanting it like the slavish follower you’ve shown yourself to be.

          Question: did YOU vote for Romney over Obama? If not, YOU were the “purest”, were you not?

          You certainly have a poor memory since I have explained it to you multiple times.

          After voting for every crap candidate the R’s ran, I did not vote for Romney, leaving the selection blank. If the R’s were going to nominate Romney, the RomneyCare father to run against Obama, the one person who could not run against Obamacare, it meant several things. One, they had no interest in defeating Obama, they had no interest in repealing Obamacare, and they had no, zero, nada conservative principles. At that point I understood clearly the problem: The GOPe would first have to be defeated, then we could defeat the progs. I could not foresee Trump, only that someone like him might arise. Cruz? Perhaps, I though so at one time. But I knew he could not defeat Shrillary early on. Trump could. Trump did. As I predicted way earlier than your poor memory can recall.

          So, no, it had nothing to do with “pure”.

          Now, quit deflecting and make your case for Romney being Mr. Conservative.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:32 pm

          Poor, stupid cultist. You can’t even read, much less reason…

          And I knew you wouldn’t, couldn’t back up your assertion that Romney is a conservative to the right of Trump. You resort only to your typical ad hominem. It’s all you have.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:43 pm

          Your crap-packed skull has been impervious to EVERY previous explication, including on immigration, you moron. You confuse your broke-dick opinions for fact, even in the face of quotations.

          You are a waste of time, generally. I just use you as a foil occasionally.

          Milwaukee in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 3:41 pm

          Thanks a lot Rags. I was going to take a nap, but now I will approve your message. Yes, Nixon supervised a huge growth in the Federal Government, and gave us Affirmative Action and Title IX. I pause to spit.

          The process is important. A large government totalitarian doing our bidding is still a large government totalitarian. My hope is that President Donald Trump will somehow become less totalitarian.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 5:48 pm

          Nothing wrong there.

          We live in hope…

          Your explication is always just BS.

          “But there is more. In the Univision interview, Romney also said that permanent immigration reform was “badly needed” and urged Republicans in Congress to pass legislation that will make “more transparent” the process by which illegal immigrants can obtain residency.

          “Maybe even then,” Romney said, “Republicans will swallow hard and say, ‘OK, even despite the fact that we now have a stick in our eye launched by the President, we’re going to go ahead and try and see if we can’t make some improvements to the immigration system.’ I hope we’re able to do that.”

          Conservative radio hosts, who constantly demonstrate how poorly they understand the immigration issue, went ballistic.
          They tore into Romney, accusing him of capitulating to the left’s demands for “amnesty.”

          http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/05/opinion/navarrette-romney-immigration-common-sense/

          “Romney will keep Obama’s immigration policy”

          http://www.cbsnews.com/news/romney-will-keep-obamas-immigration-policy/

          Among others.

      Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 1:20 pm

      Nevertheless, you will surely agree that on this occasion he dun gud.

      guyjones in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 6:27 pm

      Rags’ perpetual infantilism and snarky belligerence is getting so damn tiresome. He’s incapable of making a point without constantly slinging insults at people who have the temerity to disagree with him.

      These are the hallmarks of an embittered, bullying and insecure persona.

        Ragspierre in reply to guyjones. | January 24, 2017 at 6:48 pm

        You have me confused with Der Donald.

        His minions find those traits you incorrectly ascribe to me to we wunderbar, dreamy, powerful, and a mark of greatness.

    Barry, when you argue with an idiot, you then have two idiots arguing.

    Don’t waste your time.

I especially like the “dignity and respect” tweet. I mean that’s what liberals are all about.

Paul Begala, a Democrat with a high leftist rating, put it like this way back in the 1990s, “Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool.”

The One, another super leftist and the worst president ever, put it like this, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.”

Now, Trump has that same pen.

    Ragspierre in reply to fscarn. | January 24, 2017 at 12:55 pm

    So now “your team” has the pen.

    Is that really how we hope the country will move into the future?

    Me, I’ll take the Constitution, and devolved, limited central government.

    But that’s a conservative viewpoint.

      Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 1:23 pm

      Rags, do you have any objection to the specific orders which we are discussing right now? Or for that matter to any order he’s signed so far? I agree completely with your general point, but why are you making it here? On this occasion he dun gud.

        Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | January 24, 2017 at 1:32 pm

        It isn’t a matter of “dun gud” or not. It’s HOW it gets done.

        There’s a totally justifiable pent-up demand for the OPPOSITE of the Obamic Decline, and that is, in part, dangerous.

        You can read all kinds of comments here expressing the idea that “whatever works” is the way to go, and is justified.

        But “whatever works” is often only a temporary swing of the pendulum, and the complete opposite of what we should be doing. Which is taking all the energy OUT of that pendulum, and putting it back where it belongs.

          clintack in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:14 pm

          So… do you object to how this specific thing got done?

          President Obama halted the pipeline with an executive order. President Trump overturned that executive order with one of his own.

          Is there anything remotely objectionable in that way of getting things done?

          Shit. He just objects to Trump. Period.

          It has a name. Trump Derangement Syndrome.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:29 pm

          “President Trump has signed executive orders moving the approval process for the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines forward.

          This does not ensure approval and construction, but it restarts the processes stopped under the Obama administration under heavy pressure from environmental and left-wing activist groups.”

          Short answer is “no”. To the extent this has ANY real effect, I think allowing these projects to move forward is swell. I’ve posted many times in favor of pipelines generally as being simple, safe solutions for moving “stuff” all over the nation. It’s just rational.

          This all started with the trollish https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/01/trump-signs-exec-orders-moving-keystone-and-dakota-access-pipelines-forward/#comment-729045

          Pushing BIG GOVERNMENT across the mid-field line is not “conservative”. It’s just BIG GOVERNMENT.

          Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 2:59 pm

          I agree that how it gets done can be even more important than that it does get done. But on this occasion do you have any objection, either to what he did or how he did it? It seems to me that these two orders were entirely good, both in form and substance. So why not give him credit where it’s due?

          Criticising everything he does can only detract from your credibility when he really does something bad; it’ll be “oh, there go those nevertrumpers again, they never like anything he does”. Me, I gave 0bama credit on the rare occasion when he did good or was right on some issue, and I will do the same for Trump. So far Trump seems to have done a lot more right than wrong; I doubt that will last, but I’ll wait for him to mess up before denouncing him.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 24, 2017 at 3:19 pm

          Read the above, Milhouse.

          There are lots of acts that are unobjectionable…indeed, swell…that are not attributable to ‘conservative’ impulses.

          I can’t say it more clearly.

      And you’ve been totally ineffective. What’s that definition of insanity again?

      Rags, you’re fast losing interest as even a chew toy.

      DaveGinOly in reply to Ragspierre. | January 25, 2017 at 12:03 am

      Progressives made much of the fact that W signed more executive orders than Obama, completely disregarding the content of those orders. It should be no surprise to anyone than a chief executive issues executive orders, so our concern shouldn’t be the simple act, but the what those orders direct. If Obama stood in the way of commerce, jobs, and industry (by which I mean good works that have positive impacts on the people and society) and Der Donald uses that same pen to undo what was done, then this should be a happy time. When you have a specific argument with an executive order, let us know. Until then it does no good to just “rag” about orders without regard to their content. Makes you sound like a progressive – who all seem dead-set on opposing Trump no matter the value and potential positive impact of his decisions and actions.

With this move, Trump has now literally done everything that I had personally and specifically hoped that he would do with his presidency.

So everything else from here on out is just gravy. Or lagniappe, as they say in N.O.

This is really fun to watch. Øbama did lots of stuff on the sly by executive order, and the media simply turned a blind eye since they were 100% in synch with his progressive agenda.

Now Trump is undoing all of this stuff VERY VISIBLY, and the media simply doesn’t know what to do.

Øbama legacy?? (#1) Millions of new gun-owners and (#2) A clear path to use the hell out of executive orders for Trump and all subsequent presidents. Live by the pen; die by the pen. Heh.

Efficient and transparent. Refreshing.

Everything is potentially dual-use; but, for now, positive progress.

Still not tired of all the winning.

Keep it coming!

Too bad Chelsea Obama didn’t scrawl his signature of those orders with pencil – Trump could have just erased it and saved a lot of paper – which could have been better used as Obama toilet paper:

https://www.amazon.com/Jumbo-Roll-Obama-Toilet-Paper-Twice-Rolls/dp/B00HFTOGKE

Best. Election. Ever.

Of course nothing will actually happen. All we’ll get out of this is another round of lawsuits. But we can’t blame that on Trump.

    clintack in reply to tom swift. | January 24, 2017 at 2:16 pm

    Wait and see. My impression at the time was that President Obama halted the process by executive order because the court challenges were mostly exhausted. I’ll be surprised if they haven’t started work within the next two years.

One of the tweets: “Ruth Hopkins @RuthHHopkins
Trump catering to big oil projects he invested in and will directly benefit from implementing #NoDAPL #NOKXL
11:33 AM – 24 Jan 2017”

Does anyone know what she’s talking about?

    Barry in reply to clintack. | January 24, 2017 at 2:29 pm

    Yea, like all progs she is making shit up.

    The twitter probably thinks that Trump has stock in the oil companies. I guess she didn’t hear that he sold all stock positions during the summer and will invest in cash, treasuries and allowed mutual funds. That was mentioned in the press conference when the attorneys went through the status of the Trump holdings.

    Of course, if he opts to invest in the mutual funds, then he could benefit if the overall increase in the stock market.

It’s interesting that the Professor refers to the signing as moving the process forward while all of the tweets that I have seen assume that he has approved the pipeline itself.

I’ll read the actual document when it is posted on the site –
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions

There is still a delay in posting. I hope they speed the posting to same day especially since the document is written and just needs to be signed. Of course, Trump could change the wording since he appears to be reading before he signs.

All this winning is sure making me tired. I wonder what Trump has in store for Wednesday?

    I know, right? I’m getting cramps in my facial muscles from smiling so much. My Trump skepticism is fading rapidly…this is just so.much.fun.

    I think he is spreading out these orders and memos so that they get more attention from the press and lefties. And, it cheers up the people who voted for him because they can see that he is doing what he said he will do.

    I heard that one of the EO/EM that he signed instructed the EPA not to issue any grants, regs. etc and that the EPA employees are not to talk to reporters or post to social media. That makes sense since I read somewhere today that the people impacted with the CO mine spill will be able to refile their claims and the EPA will be told to honor them. So, if the EPA budget has to cover those costs, it should be from the current EPA budget and not new authorizations.

    And, if someone from the EPA leaks information to a reporter when instructed not to disclose info, then that could be grounds for dismissal. Sounds like Pruitt will have a fun time at the EPA.

    SCOTUS nominee? That would be nice. Then he can tackle DACA. That will raise some hackles.

Let’s try this…

I like Joe Lieberman. I think he’s a mensch. There are a lot of things Lieberman could do that I’d support, in and of themselves.

Joe Lieberman is NOT a conservative. Not any part a conservative, although he at least holds some common values with conservatives.

If he did some rational thing, that would be swell. He would not be a conservative. He’d still be a Progressive.

The environmental opposition to the pipelines is all about money. Nothing else. While the individual environmental loon may have a heartfelt conviction that they are saving the planet, environmental activism is a big business, just like the racial discrimination industry. The chances of an “environmental disaster” are zilch. The Exxon Valdez spill, the Deepwater Horizon spill and many others which occur every single year cause no lasting damage. Crude oil used to bubble up right out of the ground in Texas and other places and it did not destroy the planet. The planet is very hard to damage. Then there is the safety record of pipelines. Remember how the State of Alaska was going to be destroyed by the Trans- Alaska pipeline? Oil spills were supposed to make the pristine wilds of Alaska look like a truck-stop parking lot in Mississippi. Didn’t happen. The pipeline was suppose to be the death of the caribou, elk and moose, in Alaska. The caribou population doubled in the interim.

These two pipelines. when built, will transport oil much more efficiently and safely than it is now. It will cut transport costs and should reduce the cost of petroleum while giving the US greater access to oil supplies in the northern parts of North America. And, if they are successful, Donald Trump will be a hero. This fact stimulates a number of peolpe to rail against the pipelines.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to Mac45. | January 24, 2017 at 7:27 pm

    And… people who spent lots of money accumulating tank-cars for their railroads might feel a bit of discomfort. When is the last time a pipeline ran off the tracks and put a string of tank cars in a river?

Henry Hawkins | January 24, 2017 at 7:29 pm

The low hanging fruit gets picked first. Don’t get too excited.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Henry Hawkins. | January 25, 2017 at 12:05 am

    True, but Obama left so much low-hanging fruit in the form of executive orders there’s a bumper crop to be picked. The point is that Trump didn’t waste any time to start the harvest.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend