Trump's EPA Is a Climate Crime Scene

Here's the evidence

Aug 06, 2025

Small town politics are notorious for their backroom handshake deals and exclusive, good ol’ boys networks, and now, we get an unabashed look at their outcomes at the federal level. Late last week, when the ridiculously flawed EPA report was released, critics were quick to point out its unusual panel of authors and the oh-so-obviously convenient timing of its release.

Authors were five scientists with long track records of having fringe or outlandish views that ignore well-accepted knowledge, and embrace fringe views and debunked theories of climate change. They are perhaps some of the only professionals in the industry who would be willing to back this administration’s assertions that coal and oil production and consumption should increase. They are a few outliers who will agree that measures to curb environmental destruction are ill-informed, and who, despite their backwards thinking, can still technically call themselves climate scientists.

The absurd report came out almost in tandem with the Trump administration’s announcement that they are making moves to overturn the “endangerment finding”, a 2009 congressional decision that obligates the EPA to enforce regulations on pollutants that endanger human health. To be clear, the EPA is the only agency tasked with this effort, so ending this rule would essentially end all US climate regulations.

Of course, when asked why they want to rescind the endangerment finding, the Trump admin points to their new EPA report full of assertions that climate change action is overblown. They claim they are necessarily responding to new scientific information.

As I read this news, and listen to the bullshit propaganda surrounding it, I can’t help but be taken back to a park conversation around a conference room table in a small city. I was called in as an expert in park planning and social equity. The matter at hand was a request from a local entrepreneur who wanted to donate part of his business property to the city to be developed as a high-end public pocket park, which the city would pay for. The property owner’s business would directly neighbor the proposed park.

The Parks Department had a very limited budget and an existing public park plan that was prioritizing neighborhood park maintenance and improvement, all based on public input. The pocket park had not been a part of that, and it was essentially planned by the single property owner. To me, it looked like a massively expensive personal amenity that he didn’t want to pay for.

A city official laid out the plans and first asked if it was feasibly possible. Technically, yes, it would be possible.

Next he asked department leaders if it fit with their plans. Nope, no one except Economic Development really wanted this (they saw it as a tourist draw and an incentive for this business person to keep up operations in the district).

Then it was my turn. Was this an equitable park…or could it be? No way. It was designed in a way that was meant to be exclusive, it would benefit a select population of people (one wealthy business owner in particular), and it took much needed resources away from other public parks that directly served residents and the Parks Department.

The city official kind of blushed and addressed the group. Okay then, how do we justify putting a park here? The group reluctantly complied. Shrugging, laughing sheepishly, quietly suggesting a rerouting of walkability plans or connections to cultural resources. And it was done.

“It’s going to be a really nice park,” the official said with his red faced smile. And, depending on your definition of nice, I bet it is.

But to me, this park plan has always been representative of everyday corruption. It is a reminder that moral principles, best practices, and the greater good, just don’t land with some people. No facts and evidence can change their mind when they have their loyalties established and agenda set.

The only way I could imagine that park not being developed is if that city official and the system that enables him, would instantly lose power. I’d dream of people showing up to public offices and demanding answers about the park and where its funding was coming up. I hoped endlessly for raucous City Council meetings, with the public putting their elected officials on the spot. Letting everyone know about their mismanagement and biased, tax-payer funded favors.

And that was for one park.

I can’t tell you how amplified that feeling is now with Trump’s environmental policy. I wish all the people feeling the stab of unjust budget and policy cuts could be there to see exactly who was wielding the knife. To see exactly how little they care for their constituents as they slash. I have to believe that in such a confrontation, we could wrestle away the weapon.

Luckily, with this move by Trump and his bootlickers, we have a pretty clear picture of what the corruption in the closed door meetings looks like. It's a pretty simple connect-the-dots.

Energy industry advocates fund Republican campaigns.

Republicans replace people in EPA and other climate-related federal positions with energy industry advocates.

Energy industry advocates destroy infrastructure and evidence, and create new guidelines that suit their interests.

Republicans use new guidelines to rip down policies that protect citizens from the energy industry.

This is how they justify the unjustifiable. This is how they cover their snake tracks just enough to deny their movements to those not wanting to see them. But I think just maybe, this is just indiscrete enough for them to get a wake up call.

All those protests and people showing up that I prayed for with that small town park project, I see them happening here, on the national scale. I see advocates getting louder and citizens becoming savvy. We don’t have all the insider information, but what we do see is maddening enough to move us.

Just Sunday before last, Lee Zeldin, the head of the EPA, faced protesters at an event in Hampton where he was put on point for betraying his agency. Later in the week, EPA scientists protested in Chicago, backed by their local federal employee union chapter, and climate activists. U.S. Democratic Congressional Representatives are also vowing not to take this laying down.

People are paying attention.

Not to mention, Trump’s power is weakening. The Epstein scandal, which no one is forgetting, is plaguing him. His approval ratings are dropping. In response to his chaotic, tariff-ridden policy, the economy shows signs of a significant downturn. To top it off, some of his most attention-grabbing political stand-ins and social media influencers are questioning him and his GOP loyalists.

He will lose the power to act without consequence. And we will gain the power to hold him accountable. We’ll make sure of it.

With love and hope for the future,

Stephanie

Support from readers like you empower my work. If you want to help me fight for truth, land, and local voices—against Trump and others—please become a paid subscriber today:

What shift in power are you seeing where you live? Where do you see opportunity to hold leadership accountable?

Parks People

Discussion about this post