Scott Pruitt Needs to Invent Better Lies

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

On Tuesday, the Atlantic reported that Scott Pruitt went behind the president’s back to give two of his favorite aides huge pay increases. On Wednesday, Pruitt went on Fox News to say that he had just heard about this and had immediately rescinded the raises. Today, the Wasington Post confirmed that Pruitt was lying:

On Thursday evening, two EPA officials confirmed that Pruitt endorsed the idea last month of giving substantial raises to senior counsel Sarah Greenwalt and scheduling and advance director Millan Hupp — although he did not carry out the pay raise himself….[Pruitt] instructed staff to award substantial pay boosts to both women, who had worked in different roles for him in Oklahoma.

The Wall Street Journal ran a laughable editorial today insisting that all of Pruitt’s offenses were the merest peccadilloes, total nothingburgers cast into the spotlight by a conspiracy among the press, the “administrative state,” and environmentalists who hate Pruitt. For some reason, though, they failed to mention either Pruitt’s end run around the White House or his firing of officials who questioned his spending habits. When they get around to it, I’m sure they’ll decide those are just nothingburgers too.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend