The NY Times Editorial Board asserts that Scott Pruitt is unfit to serve.
THE BLIZZARD of ethical questions surrounding Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has become a Category 5 storm. Already facing big questions about his wasteful spending and relationships with lobbyists, Mr. Pruitt intensified his problems by dishonestly blaming his staff for one major ethical failure. Then the New York Times revealed that staffers who tried to rein in Mr. Pruitt’s unnecessary spending were punished. More than ever, it is clear that Mr. Pruitt is unfit to serve.
The Editors provide a summary of Pruitt’s misdeeds. Earlier posts here and here over the last few days in this blog have those details. The Editors close with a scary possibility that answers the question I posed in my headline.
In any normal administration, Mr. Pruitt would be gone. Instead, even as revelations about Mr. Pruitt piled up this week, Mr. Trump was reportedly still entertaining the idea of installing Mr. Pruitt as attorney general, a position for which his primary qualification may be willingness to squelch the Russia investigation. An ideologue who has arrogantly abused his position, Mr. Pruitt does not deserve a promotion. He deserves to be fired.