Oh - and the media - new rules for reporters having access to the West Wing:

MikeB4: In Government here non authorised staff are not permitted to speak to press or make public statements. The US doing what most governments do.

Honestly, I think statements like this are deceptive. Trump is not  like Key, or May, or Merkel. He is not like Clinton, or Reagan, or even Bush. He is someone who doesn't respect precedent, or process, or tradition. I think he will use whatever means are available to him to achieve whatever he wants. Saying others also do this does not justify it because the others who do it have different purposes in mind. I think Trump is a dangerous psychopath. I hope I am wrong.

Rikkitic:

MikeB4: In Government here non authorised staff are not permitted to speak to press or make public statements. The US doing what most governments do.

Honestly, I think statements like this are deceptive. Trump is not  like Key, or May, or Merkel. He is not like Clinton, or Reagan, or even Bush. He is someone who doesn't respect precedent, or process, or tradition. I think he will use whatever means are available to him to achieve whatever he wants. Saying others also do this does not justify it because the others who do it have different purposes in mind. I think Trump is a dangerous psychopath. I hope I am wrong.

 

MikeB4:

Rikkitic:

 

MikeB4: In Government here non authorised staff are not permitted to speak to press or make public statements. The US doing what most governments do.

 

 

 

Honestly, I think statements like this are deceptive. Trump is not  like Key, or May, or Merkel. He is not like Clinton, or Reagan, or even Bush. He is someone who doesn't respect precedent, or process, or tradition. I think he will use whatever means are available to him to achieve whatever he wants. Saying others also do this does not justify it because the others who do it have different purposes in mind. I think Trump is a dangerous psychopath. I hope I am wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

Not all things he does is bad or unusual something's are normal practice for both Government and private organisations.

Perhaps you missed that the part where the departments tasked to disseminate information outside the organisation - ie "that's actually their job" - have been gagged.

A department like the EPA is actually there to provide information.  Metservice wouldn't be able to issue a weather forecast, Geonet an earthquake report etc - if what you said is "normal practice" was true.

Fred99:

MikeB4:

Rikkitic:

MikeB4: In Government here non authorised staff are not permitted to speak to press or make public statements. The US doing what most governments do.

 

Honestly, I think statements like this are deceptive. Trump is not  like Key, or May, or Merkel. He is not like Clinton, or Reagan, or even Bush. He is someone who doesn't respect precedent, or process, or tradition. I think he will use whatever means are available to him to achieve whatever he wants. Saying others also do this does not justify it because the others who do it have different purposes in mind. I think Trump is a dangerous psychopath. I hope I am wrong.

 

 

Not all things he does is bad or unusual something's are normal practice for both Government and private organisations.

 

Perhaps you missed that the part where the departments tasked to disseminate information outside the organisation - ie "that's actually their job" - have been gagged.

A department like the EPA is actually there to provide information.  Metservice wouldn't be able to issue a weather forecast, Geonet an earthquake report etc - if what you said is "normal practice" was true.

 

MikeB4:

I didn't miss anything. I am saying that controls on information is normal to ensure consistency and accuracy.

Right...

So a blanket ban on Communications Directors issuing any communications is normal. 

Anyway, here's the agenda:

Donald Trump is getting ready to hammer the EPA

Note that this coincides with Trump's statement at press conference that he'd "going to reduce regulation of business at least 75%".

Oh yeah - we'd all love less regulation, and clean air, and water. He's promising that too.  Next he'll be claiming to walk on water.

Fred99:

 

 

 

Perhaps you missed that the part where the departments tasked to disseminate information outside the organisation - ie "that's actually their job" - have been gagged.

 

A department like the EPA is actually there to provide information.  Metservice wouldn't be able to issue a weather forecast, Geonet an earthquake report etc - if what you said is "normal practice" was true.

 

 

 

There is potential for this to be bad, but I think you are (again) jumping the gun. I wouldn't consider a temporary closing of the stream of data while the new administration determines what and how it wants to communicate, to be an automatically bad thing. 

I have acquired businesses in the past and controlled the narrative coming from the old staff because I want the message going to the new customers to be consistent with the ones we give our existing customers. 

networkn:

 

Fred99:

 

 

 

Perhaps you missed that the part where the departments tasked to disseminate information outside the organisation - ie "that's actually their job" - have been gagged.

 

A department like the EPA is actually there to provide information.  Metservice wouldn't be able to issue a weather forecast, Geonet an earthquake report etc - if what you said is "normal practice" was true.

 

 

 

 

There is potential for this to be bad, but I think you are (again) jumping the gun. I wouldn't consider a temporary closing of the stream of data while the new administration determines what and how it wants to communicate, to be an automatically bad thing. 

 

I have acquired businesses in the past and controlled the narrative coming from the old staff because I want the message going to the new customers to be consistent with the ones we give our existing customers. 

 

 

 

You're jumping the gun - click the link I posted above and read it - before assuming "it's going to be fine" - because it isn't.

Here's his response to questions from Sanders by probably the new head of the EPA at his confirmation hearings the other day:

 

 

Sanders: My office has received a great deal of comments from people in the state of Vermont, which takes environmental protection very seriously, as well as from all over the country. And the fear is that the nomination of Mr. Pruitt is a nomination designed to protect the fossil fuel industry and not the environment. I would like to ask Mr. Pruitt a question. As I understand it, earlier in this hearing, you said that Mr. Trump was wrong in suggesting, in stating over and over again, that climate change was a quote unquote “hoax.” Is that in fact the case?

 

Pruitt: That is correct Senator.

 

Sanders: Okay. Let me ask you this. As you may know, some 97 percent of scientists who have written articles for peer reviewed journals have concluded that climate change is real, it is caused by human activity, and it is already causing devastating problems in our country and around the world. Do you believe that climate change is caused by the emission, by carbon emissions? By human activity?

 

Pruitt: Senator, as I indicated, you weren’t here during my opening statement, but as I indicated in my opening statement, the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that in some manner.

 

Sanders: In some manner?

 

Pruitt: Yes, sir.

 

Sanders: 97 percent of the scientists who wrote articles in peer reviewed journals believe that human activity is the fundamental reason we are seeing climate change. You disagree with that?

 

Pruitt: I believe the ability to measure, with precision, the degree of human activity’s impact on the climate is subject to more debate on whether the climate is changing or whether human activity contributes to it.

 

Sanders: While you are not certain, the vast majority of scientists are telling us that if we do not get our act together and transform our energy system away from fossil fuel, there is a real question as to the quality of the planet that we are going to be leaving our children and our grandchildren. So you are applying for a job as administrator for the EPA, to protect our environment, overwhelming majority of scientists say we have got to act boldly, and you’re telling me that there needs to be more debate on this issue and that we should not be acting boldly?

 

Pruitt: No, Senator, as I’ve indicated, the climate is changing, and human activity impacts that…

 

Sanders: But you haven’t told me why you think the climate is changing.

 

Pruitt: Well Senator, the job of the administrator is to carry out the statutes as passed by this body…

 

Sanders: Why is the climate changing?

 

Pruitt: Senator, in response to the CO2 issue, the EPA administration is constrained by statutes…

 

Sanders: I’m asking you a personal opinion.

 

Pruitt: My personal opinion is immaterial to the job of the…

 

Sanders: Really? You are going to be the head of the agency to protect the environment, and your personal feelings about whether climate change is caused by human activity and carbon emissions is immaterial?

 

Pruitt: Senator, I’ve acknowledged to you that human activity impacts…

 

Sanders: Impacts. The scientific community doesn’t tell us it impacts, they say it is the cause of climate change. We have to transform our energy system. Do you believe we have to transform our energy system in order to protect the planet for future generations?

 

Pruitt: I believe the EPA has a very important role at regulating the emission of CO2.

 

Sanders: You didn’t answer my question. Do you believe we have to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to do what the scientific community is telling us in order to make sure that this planet is healthy for our children and grandchildren?

 

Pruitt: Senator, I believe that the administrator has a very important role to perform in regulating CO2.

 

Sanders: Can you tell me, as I think all of us know, Oklahoma has been subjected to a record breaking number of earthquakes. Scientists in Oklahoma, scientists say that Oklahoma is almost certain to have more earthquakes with heightened risk of a large quake, probable to endure for a decade, and that the cause of this is fracking. Can you point me, picking up on Senator Harris’s discussion with you, can you point me to any opinion that you wrote, any enforcement actions that you took against the companies that were injecting waste fracking water?

 

Pruitt: Senator, let me say I’m very concerned about the connection between activity in Oklahoma…

 

Sanders: And therefore you must have taken action. I guess, can you tell me who you fined for doing this?    

 

Pruitt: The corporation commission in Oklahoma is vested with the jurisdiction and they have actually acted on that…

 

Sanders: And you have made public statements expressing your deep concern about this?  

 

Pruitt: We have worked with…

 

Sanders: You have made public statements? You’re in a state which is seeing a record breaking number of earthquakes, you’re the attorney general. Obviously you have stood up and said you will do everything you can to stop future earthquakes as a result of fracking?

 

Pruitt: Senator, I’ve acknowledged that I’m concern…

 

Sanders: You’ve acknowledged you’re concerned. Your state is having a record number of, well if that’s the kind of administrator for the EPA, your state’s having a record breaking number of earthquakes, you have not acknowledged your concern. If that’s the kind of EPA administrator you will be, you’re not going to get my vote.

 

Fred99:

 

 

 

You're jumping the gun - click the link I posted above and read it - before assuming "it's going to be fine" - because it isn't.

 

I am not "assuming it will all be fine" I am simply suggesting not everything you are posting has only 1 outcome or 1 possible reason, but even as I type this I know it's futile.  

Assuming all this is true, what shall we do? Other than post a blow by blow on everything he does for the next 4 years, do you have a plan to stop him ? He has made clear his plans on pretty much most things, and won the Election anyways. He has the house and senate, he has carte blanche. 

If you keep on like this, you will give yourself an ulcer or something worse maybe. I am not being sarcastic or unkind when I say that.

For what it is worth, I think it is vital to maintain an accurate, independent account of what is said and done to the extent possible. No-one can know for certain what the future will bring, but we definitely need some kind of credible record of what has transpired if there is to be any hope at all for the future.

networkn:

 

Fred99:

 

 

 

You're jumping the gun - click the link I posted above and read it - before assuming "it's going to be fine" - because it isn't.

 

 

I am not "assuming it will all be fine" I am simply suggesting not everything you are posting has only 1 outcome or 1 possible reason, but even as I type this I know it's futile.  

 

Assuming all this is true, what shall we do? 

 

Assuming what is "true"?  Appointing a serial climate change denier to head the EPA?

Most of what he's doing may be in the USA thus (mostly) directly affecting the USA - but also have global consequences.

Public opinion in NZ matters - as to how we deal with consequences of Trumpism.

One example would be that if the USA does indeed pull out of global agreements on climate change, then it's not reasonable to "sit back and hope it'll be okay". What to do - hard to say.  Perhaps you've got an opinion on that.

Look what he did to the National Parks Service twitter account the other day when they retweeted pictures of the "crowd" at the inauguration!

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/21/us/national-park-service-trump-tweet.html

This is just the beginning of an "alt-facts" world... A world where the EPA will soon tell you something like the Dakota Pipeline is good for the environment.

networkn:

 

 

 

If you keep on like this, you will give yourself an ulcer or something worse maybe. I am not being sarcastic or unkind when I say that.

 

If you keep on making personal comments / giving advice like that, you'll really annoy me. So back off on that please.

I'm enjoying what I'm doing.  End of discussion on that matter - I hope.

networkn:

 

 

 

Assuming all this is true, what shall we do? Other than post a blow by blow on everything he does for the next 4 years, do you have a plan to stop him ? He has made clear his plans on pretty much most things, and won the Election anyways. He has the house and senate, he has carte blanche. 

 

If you keep on like this, you will give yourself an ulcer or something worse maybe. I am not being sarcastic or unkind when I say that.

 

Seriously, can you and others who insist on posting these "personal advice" to Fred99 please consider desisting? These are really just thinly disguised posts that are complaining about people posting about the thread topic in a thread that you don't have to read if the posts somehow bore you. He's already indicated that he knows how to look after himself and has  asked another who's been disseminating similar "advice" to worry about himself, and there are others who would like to partake in these discussions. Nothing you've said is remotely insightful or unknown to anyone who hasn't been under a rock for months.