Slashdot Mirror


Energy Department Refuses To Give Trump Team Names of People Who Worked On Climate Change (businessinsider.com)

The Department of Energy said Tuesday it will reject the request by President-elect Donald Trump's transition team to name staffers who worked on climate change programs. Energy spokesman Eben Burnhan-Snyder said the agency received "significant feedback" from workers regarding a questionnaire from the transition team that leaked last week. From a Reuters story, syndicated on BusinessInsider: The response from the Energy Department could signal a rocky transition for the president-elect's energy team and potential friction between the new leadership and the staffers who remain in place. The memo sent to the Energy Department on Tuesday and reviewed by Reuters last week contains 74 questions including a request for a list of all department employees and contractors who attended the annual global climate talks hosted by the United Nations within the last five years. "Our career workforce, including our contractors and employees at our labs, comprise the backbone of (the Energy Department) and the important work our department does to benefit the American people," Eben Burnham-Snyder, Energy Department spokesman said. "We are going to respect the professional and scientific integrity and independence of our employees at our labs and across our department," he added. "We will be forthcoming with all publicly available information with the transition team. We will not be providing any individual names to the transition team."

23 of 858 comments (clear)

  1. This is how you drain the swamp by SuperKendall · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is what draining the swamp looks like. It's finding out who the cultists are and removing the hopelessly devout from roles where they influence anything, especially who gets government money simply because they are in the same cult.

    If you call it a witch-hunt you are not far wrong, except in this case there really are plenty of wishes to find and dispose of.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:This is how you drain the swamp by clonehappy · · Score: -1, Troll

      It's blue. What color is it in your drug-induced lefty coma where Trump is somehow the bad guy?

    2. Re:This is how you drain the swamp by SuperKendall · · Score: -1, Troll

      And CO2 won't stop magically absorbing solar radiation and heating the lower atmosphere

      There is so little CO2 in real life it does not have that effect, at all.

      Methane does. Water vapor (clouds) do. But you, and the rest of your cult have been focusing on the wrong thing all along. That's what really makes me angry about your arrogant cultist bastards, you have let real pollution thrive while you hunt down and eliminate plant food... It's people like you that are truly fucking the earth over.

      You also have yet to prove why 2C (current prediction) of potential warming does anything except bring unprecedented prosperity to humanity.

      We don't need thousands of researchers researching something

      Like I said, witchcraft, not science. No need to look into frogs blood curing warts and infidelity. We all know it works so why research? The kettle is settled.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:This is how you drain the swamp by Highdude702 · · Score: 0, Troll

      I've been reading these comments and every time you say something intelligent and correct they can only call you an asshole or racist. Yet these are the same people that want to ban hate speech. Obviously the definition of hate speech is "anything that does have a leftist agenda"

  2. Re:Good for them! by 110010001000 · · Score: -1, Troll

    They are supposed to be protecting the people they serve, not "their team". Why should they be ashamed of attending conference talks?

  3. Is the EPA violating the establishment clause? by CajunArson · · Score: -1, Troll

    Given the cult-like atmosphere at the EPA and the frankly abusive behavior towards the citizens it supposedly exists to protect I think some reduction in useless bloat is warranted.

    Oh, and since the science is settled abuot climate change, the EPA obviously doesn't need anybody to research it... right?

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  4. "scientists" by SuperKendall · · Score: -1, Troll

    I call it a witch hunt against scientists

    Since when was her any science involved around climate change?

    It became a political circus about ten years ago, science hasn't really entered into it since then - real scientists accept challenges to belief, real scientists publish data and results for others to replicate results. They do not change the data to fit theories they have...

    There are no scientists to protect, sad to say.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:"scientists" by clonehappy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Look, man. IT'S SETTLED. Remember?

      Don't make them start enforcing the fact that it's settled at the end of an M-16.

  5. Re:The Obama Administration by clonehappy · · Score: -1, Troll

    Your ass, how bad does it still hurt that you lost? Seriously, tell me how bad it hurts. Let the hate flow!

  6. Re:Good for them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Standard low-IQ response from a leftist.

    If they "rebel", he will just shut down the entire department. If they do a job worth doing (energy does not), then he will reform it with new people.

    You can ignore reality, but you can not ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. Snowflakes like you will learn this soon. Trump will teach you.

  7. Good! by clonehappy · · Score: -1, Troll

    Fire them all, then.

  8. And next year... by jcr · · Score: 0, Troll

    Trump might actually submit a budget to the congress (as Obama has never done), and in this budget the funding for the DoE would be cut 75%. It's an executive agency, after all.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  9. Re: Good for them! by clonehappy · · Score: 1, Troll

    After folks finish digging up the dirt on this Russian hacking fiasco

    Still clinging to that one, are we? Is that all you all have left?

  10. Re:Good for them! by srmalloy · · Score: -1, Troll

    They show integrity by hiding who did what while in a government position? This information shouldn't be secret to begin with.

    Particularly since Obama has been quite vocal about how he didn't want to have anyone connected with him who wasn't solidly aligned with the Anthropogenic Climate Change dogma; Trump can generically assume that the entire upper management of an agency that received any funding connected to climate change supported the AGC policies.

  11. Global warming is NOT a hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Global warming is NOT a hoax, it is a SCAM, to tax people and pocket the money and do absolutely nothing (which coincidentally is all that can be done) to prevent global warming.

    Thus enter the global warming scammer protection program!

  12. Re:Good for them! by meta-monkey · · Score: -1, Troll

    That is what these agencies are supposed to do - they're not supposed to be partisan tools for the current ruing party; they're supposed to be an impartial apparatus that does a job mandated by Congress to the best of their abilities.

    But they're currently partisan tools for the Obama administration. So you agree with replacing them?

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  13. Re: Good for them! by ldsknack · · Score: 0, Troll

    we can only hope he reduces the size of government, starting with those that fabricate data to direct policy for our country.

  14. Re: Good for them! by Phydeaux · · Score: -1, Troll

    Oh, you mean like not getting the gun control measures he wants and then crying about it in the Rose Garden? Upbraiding the American people because they're too stupid to see his genius? Oh, sorry, just thing out loud about our current "Narcissist in Chief". As to DJT, he'll use whatever idea gets the job done, be it his or someone else's. He is very good at being the "Persuader in Chief" though.

  15. Re:Good for them! by meta-monkey · · Score: -1, Troll

    But no purges ever happened.

    Obama spent 8 years purging the military of fighting officers to replace them with social justice political pansies. Good for the goose...

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  16. Re:Good for them! by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: -1, Troll

    You really are a fucking moron aren't you. You know the fucking answer. You just wanted to try and make a pissy point. Fuck off.

    For the mentally challenged...

    The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States Government concerned with the United States' policies regarding energy and safety in handling nuclear material. Its responsibilities include the nation's nuclear weapons program, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy conservation, energy-related research, radioactive waste disposal, and domestic energy production. It also directs research in genomics; the Human Genome Project originated in a DOE initiative. DOE sponsors more research in the physical sciences than any other U.S. federal agency, the majority of which is conducted through its system of National Laboratories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  17. turnip is an asshole by AndyKron · · Score: 0, Troll

    Donald Turnip is a fucking asshole, and so is everybody that voted for the asshole.

  18. Re:Good for them! by ScentCone · · Score: 0, Troll

    Trump is the one burning our government to the ground

    Really? How has he done this? What parts of the government are now burned to the ground? Be specific.

    But from day one, these fuckers have declared war.

    Really? Actual war? War on who? Be specific instead of waving your hands around, hyperventilating, and being deliberately vague in hopes nobody will call you on it.

    One look at the proposed cabinet shows that 100% - these people were not selected for expertise, they were selected because they have deep-seated antipathy and aggression towards the very government agencies they're supposed to oversee.

    Be specific, with examples. For example, how does the designated Secretary of Defense exhibit "deep seated antipathy" towards the military? Specifically. How does the designated Secretary of State exhibit "deep seated antipathy" towards the State Department? Specifically. Since you're making sweeping statements about the entire cabinet, you must have lots of examples of the history of "aggression" you have in mind, and explanations about why each new designee's ideas about their prospective department is based on antipathy and wanting to "burn it to the ground." So, yes, specific examples, please - at least one for each new cabinet members, since you're talking about all of them.

    There is no "working with" someone who has publicly declared themselves your enemy.

    Which designated cabinet secretary has publicly declared their prospective department to be their enemy? For each one, provide the name and public declaration in which they said the department was their enemy.

    I'd thank you in advance for the work you'll have to do, but because you obviously have all of this information at your fingertips so you could come to such specific conclusions about the entire cabinet, I'm sure you'll have it all ready to copy and paste. Let me guess, it will all be links to HuffPo and NYT opinion pieces, right? Yeah.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  19. Re:Good for them! by roman_mir · · Score: -1, Troll

    I advocate for destruction of every government department, my natural desire is to destroy every one of them and to fire all those real people doing their real bidding.