POTUS vs NPS and Science Agencies Twitter War

[quade 4]

The other day it was made clear by the current Administration the National Park Service and other government agencies were absolutely not to post anything on twitter without approval and in compliance with his wishes.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/21/politics/trump-national-park-service-tweets/index.html

That was chilling to say the least.

Today there has been an epic twitter battle going on where some National Parks and other agencies are ignoring him and posting science facts. Notably, climate science.

This is going to be interesting and very telling in how the Administration handles it.

For instance:
https://twitter.com/GoldenGateNPS/status/823624278230695936
https://twitter.com/NASAClimate/status/824027184142565376

I know of at least one case where at least one NPS tweet today was removed.
https://twitter.com/garywhitta/status/824022649760161792

Vanity Fair story:
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/01/national-park-service-defies-trump-gag-order-tweets-climate-change-facts

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Well, like the Princess said:

"The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your grasp."

The whole administration is looking more and more foolish.

They are focusing on minutiae. And wasting a lot of time, energy and credibility on them. Not that they had a whole lot of credibility to begin with.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[billvon 3,114]

>They are focusing on minutiae. And wasting a lot of time, energy and credibility on
>them. Not that they had a whole lot of credibility to begin with.

On the plus side, that limits their ability to do damage. If Trump spends all his time tweeting about how popular he is and how lousy Madonna and SNL are, he has less time to provoke North Korea into a war.

[grimmie 186]

You know some old time, ready to retire NPS guys are just trolling the crap out of Trump with these.

[Phil1111 1,176]

Yep be it the NPS or CIA, if somebody thinks orders will turn real government business, national interests and the scientific basis of facts. Into political trumpisms. They will find leaks, subterfuge and inaction.

Also called patriotism.

Trump’s Anti-Science Campaign, by New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trumps-anti-science-campaign

Trump and the anti-science movement is just starting:
http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/24/14372940/trump-gag-order-epa-environmental-protection-agency-health-agriculture

[rushmc 23]

You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

billvon

>They are focusing on minutiae. And wasting a lot of time, energy and credibility on
>them. Not that they had a whole lot of credibility to begin with.

On the plus side, that limits their ability to do damage. If Trump spends all his time tweeting about how popular he is and how lousy Madonna and SNL are, he has less time to provoke North Korea into a war.

Well there are two problems with that:
1 - He's so busy focusing on stupid stuff that he's totally unprepared when (not if) something big happens.
2 - He's so focused on stupid stuff that someone like Kim Fatty 3rd will provoke him into a confrontation.

grimmie

You know some old time, ready to retire NPS guys are just trolling the crap out of Trump with these.

Maybe, but there's also "Civil Service" and all of it's rules.

Trump can't simply fire someone. He also can't simply issue a proclamation and change policy.

I'm going to guess that there are specific policies/rules for NPS use of social media written out somewhere. Rules that state all posts must be factual or something similar (and a lot more). Also going to guess that all of these "renegade" posts follow all of those rules.
And, again, Trump can't issue an edict to change those policies. There's a procedure that has to be followed.

So if Trump gets all annoyed and hops on AF1 and goes out to the Badlands to fire that particular ranger, the ranger could look at him and laugh.
Or simply gather up his stuff, walk out the door, go to a lawyer and file a "wrongful termination" suit. Which he would almost certainly win.
This sort of disobedience would be 'career killing' for someone who wishes to move up the ladder in government service, but it would be almost impossible to get fired over it (again, presuming the behavior follows existing written policy).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[quade 4]

rushmc

You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Please show me where Obama silenced the National Park Service over trivial matters such as retweeting a photographic comparison of something.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,114]

>You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened
>the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Because it wasn't. He didn't order anyone to stay silent; he said that US politicians who deny climate change pose a serious threat to US national security, which is true. Just as doctors who deny that vaccines work pose a threat to public health, and just as cops who think that all blacks are immoral criminals pose a threat to public safety.

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

Hi Joe,

Quote

Or simply gather up his stuff, walk out the door, go to a lawyer and file a "wrongful termination" suit. Which he would almost certainly win.

Back in '81 when Pres. Reagan issued a hiring freeze, almost everyone of the people effected eventually got a job with the federal gov't. Some had to go to court to get their job. Oh, and they got back pay also.

About the only ones who did not eventually get their jobs were the ones who took work elsewhere.

One needs to think broad & wide before making any type of declaration; there are effects.

Jerry Baumchen

[GeorgiaDon 379]

Quote

One needs to think broad & wide before making any type of declaration; there are effects.

Unfortunately shallow, narrow, and short term is what we are going to get. Elections have consequences. I hope "the people" will not be so gullible next time.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened
>the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Because it wasn't. He didn't order anyone to stay silent; he said that US politicians who deny climate change pose a serious threat to US national security, which is true. Just as doctors who deny that vaccines work pose a threat to public health, and just as cops who think that all blacks are immoral criminals pose a threat to public safety.

I posted the article years back that disproves what you say here.
He threatened NASA employees.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

GeorgiaDon

Quote

One needs to think broad & wide before making any type of declaration; there are effects.

Unfortunately shallow, narrow, and short term is what we are going to get. Elections have consequences. I hope "the people" will not be so gullible next time.

Don

You post this as his approval numbers rise.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***>You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened
>the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Because it wasn't. He didn't order anyone to stay silent; he said that US politicians who deny climate change pose a serious threat to US national security, which is true. Just as doctors who deny that vaccines work pose a threat to public health, and just as cops who think that all blacks are immoral criminals pose a threat to public safety.

I posted the article years back that disproves what you say here.
He threatened NASA employees.

Considering your record on dz.com with regards to posting articles that state the exact opposite of what you think they do. And your record of providing "proof" from pretty questionable sources, all that can be said:

So low energy. Sad! FAKE NEWS.

[billvon 3,114]

>You post this as his approval numbers rise.
===============

Gallup poll: Trump sets new low inaugural approval rating

BY JOEL CONNELLY, SEATTLEPI.COM
Updated 4:40 pm, Tuesday, January 24, 2017

President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday tweeted that approval rating polls are rigged against him, as a series of polls show him with historically low approval as he enters office. In the latest survey, only 40% of respondents in a Washington Post/ABC News poll approve of the way Trump has handled the post-election transition, making him the least popular incoming president of the last seven chief executives.

The contentious first few days of Donald Trump's presidency have not produced the approval numbers normal for a president's so-called honeymoon period, according to a new national Gallup Poll.

"President Donald Trump is the first elected president in Gallup's polling history to receive an initial job approval rating below the majority level," Gallup reported.

"He starts his term in office with 45 percent of Americans approving the way he is handling his new job, 45 percent disapproving, and 10 percent yet to form an opinion."

By contrast, President Obama had a 68 percent approval rating for his first days in office. George W. Bush was at 57 percent and Bill Clinton at 58 percent. But just 25 percent disapproved of Bush's early performance, and only 20 percent gave Clinton a thumbs down.

"Trump now holds the record for the lowest initial job approval rating as well as the highest initial disapproval rating in Gallup surveys dating back to Dwight Eisenhower."
============

[billvon 3,114]

>He threatened NASA employees.

Prove it.

[rushmc 23]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/25/americans-rate-trumps-inauguration-speech-positively-favorability-jumps-seven/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,275]

I would have been surprised if there was not an increase in support after that speech. There is a definite audience for the "America first/Fortress America message. However, that moment has already been eclipsed by the steady stream of mis-steps and bad feelings pouring out of the White House.

Breitbart's reporting on Trump's ratings is meaningless. As I'm sure you know. It is the same as Trump reporting on himself.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[quade 4]

You might want to check the poll being referenced rather than the Breitbart spin of it.

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/170103_crosstabs_POLITICO_v3_KD-1.pdf

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,114]

>http://www.breitbart.com/...ability-jumps-seven/

Breitbart? Ha!

Thanks for the morning chuckle.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

From Twitter via FB:

"The thing the dystopian novels could never predict was the sudden rebellion of the National Parks social media managers."

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[aphid 0]

JerryBaumchen

Back in '81 when Pres. Reagan issued a hiring freeze, almost everyone of the people effected eventually got a job with the federal gov't. Some had to go to court to get their job. Oh, and they got back pay also.

About the only ones who did not eventually get their jobs were the ones who took work elsewhere.

Jerry,

My memory of the 1981 mass firing by Reagan of 11,000 ATC employees and their exclusion from future federal employment differs.

Regards,

John

[JerryBaumchen 1,466]

Hi John,

Quote

My memory . . .

Two completely different things.

1. Pres. Reagan signed the hiring freeze immediately upon entering the Oval Office right after his inauguration.

2. The ATC employees went on strike later. Striking as a fed employee is/was illegal ( ask me how I know ); so Pres. Reagan did a wholesale firing of them.

Then they went thru a hiring process to replace the fired people; I think that is how John Mitchell got on with ATC, a replacement employee.

Larry Bagley of USPA was a ATC controller who went on strike. Their union convinced them that they were so big & necessary that the gov't would yield. Pres. Reagan simply said that since you failed to show up for work => you are gone. He also ordered that none of them could get their jobs back.



Jerry Baumchen

[yoink 321]

rushmc

You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Saying that you think stating something is dangerous is one thing. Effectively enforcing a gag order to prevent the dissemination of something that you don't like are two completely different things.

What happened to freedom of speech? Apparently it's one of the first things on your President's list to go.

Heil Trump!

[rushmc 23]

yoink

***You didn't post anything like this, saying it was chilling, when Obama threatened the climate Skeptics and told them to stay quiet.

Saying that you think stating something is dangerous is one thing. Effectively enforcing a gag order to prevent the dissemination of something that you don't like are two completely different things.

What happened to freedom of speech? Apparently it's one of the first things on your President's list to go.

Heil Trump!

Ah

I agree with freedom of speech.

I am just pointing out selective outrage

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln