Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

Post by dashundchen » Wed, Jan 25, 2017, 5:11 AM UTC

barney54 wrote: post #15

cyberferret wrote: post #6

I am looking for reasonable explanations for this, but keep coming up blank. I grew up in a country where this sort of censorship and fact hiding was the norm, and hated it. I now live in a country that is much freer, but for the first time since 1938, no longer has an active US ambassador, with no replacement in sight, since President Trump fired all US ambassadors to foreign countries on the afternoon of his inaugu…

Here's an explanation--the new management of the agencies want to review the social media policies.

Post by jjaredsimpson » Wed, Jan 25, 2017, 5:12 AM UTC

wooter wrote: post #150

icanhackit wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Saying you don't understand because you don't agree You can't make an assessment about whether you agree if you don't understand - the latter must must happen before the former can come to pass. It would either be the case that you don't understand because the explanation is complex or it contains logical fallacies...the latter applies to your statement above. > is like saying you don't understand why a homosexaul…

> But if we're going talk about the old classics like racism, homophobia, and sexism -- the conservative side knows the art better than any. Lincoln, a Republican, abolished slavery. And Roosevelt, a Democrat, interned Japanese Americans.

Post by facetube » Wed, Jan 25, 2017, 5:13 AM UTC

monksy wrote: post #57

iandanforth wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPS is in charge of the National Mall. They are heavily invested in the truth of statements about their work. Just as it was appropriate for intelligence officials to state they believed Russia hacked DNC servers, it is appropriate for the agency in charge to correct, lets be generous, misstatements about how many people attended an event they helped coordinate.

It is incredibly appropriate for the security services to state suspicion/evidence of foreign maleficence. (If it's true.. if it's a political suggestion.. they should be punished for propaganda) Although, Wikileaks has been nothing but consistent in stating it wasn't rush that gave them the leaks. It is fine for NPS to report occurrences. However, it was not fine for them to make a comparison of inaugurations. The o…

Post by Gigablah » Wed, Jan 25, 2017, 5:20 AM UTC

TD-Linux wrote: post #94

whyileft wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The National Park Service hosted the event. Seems like it would make sense to post public information about the crowd size when there was a lot of public debate and misinformation about it. I understand your frustration thinking they would always look out for the president's best interest, but this was a pretty clear fact they were posting, not some kind of political opinion. 2. December 3, 2008. That's when that…

>In some countries what you just did would be considered a crime. I, for one, am happy that I live in a country where I don't have to worry about being prosecuted for making HN comments.

Post by learc83 » Wed, Jan 25, 2017, 5:22 AM UTC

masonic wrote: post #164

sandworm101 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Where a new admin hasnt lined up a new ambassador, normal practice is to have the old one continue until the replacement is worked out. This admin, for whatever reasons, is months behind the normal schedual. A list of names should have already have been circulated on the hill so that they could be vetted and agreed upon asap. To leave such a post unfilled breaks diplomatic protocols and can be taken as a slight.

This admin, for whatever reasons, is months behind the normal schedual. This admin must really suck to be "months behind" after 5 days. Please describe your process for properly vetting, nominating, debating, and confirming all (or most) ambassadorships in 4+ days, since you see that as "normal practice". Extra credit: name any three administrations that have done so. I would hope that the Secretary of State would ha…