Sounds bad but I'm not sure I bye it just yet because so far Trump has been super transparent with all of his executive actions and meetings. Everything has been out in the open, in front of cameras. This might be just trying to organize the vision until they can sort out the issues with/within EPA. My opinion isn't blind either because if you compare Trumps first 2 days to the to previous administration hidden deals being executed (you'll know what's in it when it passes), Trump and his transparency has been a breadth of fresh are. Obama promised transparency and instead delivered a giant, steaming, invisible turd.
no employer let's their employees publicly disparage them the EPA is supposed to serve the elected leadership of the country, but it is staffed with career bureaucrats who hate the elected leadership
I'm guessing it's because some elements of the EPA might go rogue while they're gutting it. Media blackouts is fairly standard in the private sector when new management comes in, it's just the r****ded conspiracy theorists who scream "OMG we're being taken over by Nazis!!!" that are causing all the noise.
This is a picture of earthquake activity in this portion of the US in 2016. Take a look at Oklahoma, where fracking is common. Scott Pruitt was the Oklahoma AG who eliminated regulation of the oil industry in Oklahoma. Scott Pruitt is the nominee for EPA.
Are you suggesting that Scott Pruitt lifted regulation in OKL knowingly that he'd increase earthquake activity?
The EPA has been out of control for years, look up land grabs under wetland rules and massive river pollution caused by the EPA when cleaning up a mine. Meanwhile EPA regs offshored our pollution and jobs to China. If Trump wants to build industry, taming the EPA is the first logical step. Extra freedom for landowners and general citizenry is just a side benefit.
This was hilarious. Apparently someone with access to the Badlands Ntl Park twitter didn't follow the media blackout orders. They got away with it for a little while at least. I love seeing stuff like this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-in-defiance-of-trump/?utm_term=.bcb0e1eb0cc8 I'd like to see more defiance in situations like this.
Much ado about nothing. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/us/politics/keystone-dakota-pipeline-trump.html?_r=1
This probably makes a dude in Bum****, Nowhere sleep better at night. Isn't that Great? ...at least it's absurdly ironic.
Interesting...is this what happened when Obama DID THE EXACT SAME THING? No. Meaning, you are...completely and totally wrong? FWIW...the press vilifying him didn't work in the election, and won't work afterwards. He's already demonstrated that he will just bypass them. The more it continues, the worse the press will look. They will just continue marginalizing themselves. They went Godwin just on his inauguration speech, which is ridiculous, but also leaves them so far out there there isn't much more they could do. If the press doesn't reel it in to some degree, they will find that most people will simply stop paying attention. You can only cry Wolf so often, and they pretty much used that up day one.
Totally fair and objective comments...who let you in here? I agree, Trump has been very transparent. Every admin for some time has promised this, none have delivered. I think Trump will (perhaps he will get burned and change later, we'll see). But Trump isn't a politician, so I think he doesn't care. He'll put it out there, and deal with the fallout as it happens. As for this particular action, Obama did the exact same thing. It isn't just a Trump thing. And I do think it is for the reasons you mentioned. They don't want a lot of unfliltered, unfounded comments coming out of the department, from people who don't really know what is going on. Frankly, I'm surprised that this isn't standard government practice...many companies have policies similar to this, and for the same reasons. No sense creating a lot of noise they will then need to deal with.
Interesting. You'd be equally in favor of it, I'm sure, if say someone in the DNC sent WikiLeaks more damaging documents? If not...why not? I suspect the defiance you support is highly biased.
Don't think that is a fair comparison since the mentioned leak is science. If it comes down to arguing whether science has to be leaked to the public then we are in a really bad place.
i've been searching in google but i just cant find your proof that Obama did the same. Can you site your legitimate source? (not calling you a liar i just did not find a hit at all when i searched for did obama ever order a media blackout)
