White House now a Stenographer for Exxon. Is that All Bad?

March 7, 2017

White House cribs an Exxon press release verbatim.

Given the evidence-free nature of most White House statements and initiatives, could it be that cribbing from Exxon at least means someone gave consideration to making a coherent, grammatically correct statement. Might not be all bad.
Above, former Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson, at recent confirmation hearings, discussed the merits of a carbon tax, and the reality of human caused climate change.

And, does that mean Trump and Exxon are on the same page in favor of a carbon tax?

I’m not optimistic, but always looking for the bright side.

Washington Post:

The White House and ExxonMobil were in sync Monday. Some might even call it a mind meld.

In a news release, ExxonMobil highlighted the oil giant’s plan to spend $20 billion over 10 years, build 11 chemical and natural-gas projects and create 45,000 jobs. Within the same hour, the White House put out its own statement claiming credit for the expansion and adding, “The spirit of optimism sweeping the country is already boosting job growth, and it is only the beginning.”

One full paragraph appeared nearly identically word for word in each release. Another sentence appeared almost verbatim elsewhere.

ExxonMobil spokesman Alan T. Jeffers said that the company had supplied the information to the White House.

The White House release quoted President Trump saying that ExxonMobil’s investment plan “is exactly the kind of investment, economic development and job creation that will help put Americans back to work.”

But Exxon’s investment plan was launched in 2013 — four years ago. And while the White House was hailing the investment program by ExxonMobil and talked about Trump’s “promise to bring back jobs to America,” General Motors on Monday announced the layoff of 1,100 workers in Michigan.

“ExxonMobil is strategically investing in new refining and chemical-manufacturing projects in the U.S. Gulf Coast region to expand its manufacturing and export capacity,” said the company’s news release, posted at 3:10 p.m. “The company’s Growing the Gulf expansion program, consists of 11 major chemical, refining, lubricant and liquefied natural gas projects at proposed new and existing facilities along the Texas and Louisiana coasts. Investments began in 2013 and are expected to continue through at least 2022.”

“Exxon Mobil is strategically investing in new refining and chemical-manufacturing projects in the United States Gulf Coast region to expand its manufacturing and export capacity,” said the White House’s news release, in which Trump is quoted as praising ExxonMobil for creating jobs. “The company’s Growing the Gulf program consists of 11 major chemical, refining, lubricant and liquefied natural gas projects at proposed new and existing facilities along the Texas and Louisiana coasts. Investments began in 2013 and are expected to continue through at least 2022.”

The White House release was received by email at 3:44 p.m. and is posted on the White House website. Apart from some apparent copy-editing changes, the only difference is that the White House version describes the “Growing the Gulf program” rather than the “Growing the Gulf expansion program.”

Just in case you haven’t seen the latest “This is Not Cool” video – it picks up on Mr Tillerson’s statement that “..our ability to predict the effect (of climate change) is very limited.”

The record shows, he’s wrong.

 

Advertisements

5 Responses to “White House now a Stenographer for Exxon. Is that All Bad?”

  1. Sir Charles Says:

    Maybe they realise that the majority of US citizens don’t want pollution.

    => Americans are confused on climate, but support cutting carbon pollution

  2. Sir Charles Says:

    A high-stakes legal battle between ExxonMobil and the New York attorney general’s office is roiling around documents held by the company’s auditors.

    => Exxon’s Auditor Could Hold Key Piece of Climate Fraud Investigation


    • “… Schneiderman could unearth anything from a smoking-gun email to revealing discussions related to Exxon’s posture on climate change. …”

      Regarding the latter, what Schneiderman could reveal about Exxon’s ‘posture’ would be like revealing the posture of ClimateCrocks. Exxon wondered about global warming (the correct term here) at first, they clearly had doubts about what climate modeling was supposedly showing, as seen in ICN’s own collection of Exxon docs, and then they took a politically correct position on the issue rather than grow a spine to detail what was inconclusive about subsequent IPCC reports.

      The former item is what you guys beg for. Considering how you characters have yet to produce a single “smoking-gun email” or full context document scan, undercover video/audio transcript, money-transfer receipt, etc, out of your beloved books, websites, videos from the AGW leaders you worship which nails a skeptic climate scientist to the wall about what, where, when & how to lie about global warming in exchange for megadollars ……….. I wouldn’t be holding your breath for any such revelation of that kind from Schneiderman or anybody else. I’d suggest the bigger thing to fear here is the appearance of Schneiderman’s efforts seemingly being an outgrowth of that 2012 La Jolla workshop that Naomi Oreskes put on … the one where she implied some ‘smoking gun’ evidence was in old Western Fuels material she claimed to have.

      If I may politely suggest it, there is a reason why your pal commenter “dumboldguy” so vehemently implores y’all not to read my material at my GelbspanFiles blog. As ever, the elemental question is: don’t the rest of you feel insulted when folks tell you what NOT to read, as though they have so little confidence in your ability to make informed decisions that they think you’ll flip in a heartbeat into being an AGW skeptic? You do have confidence in yourselves to be able to read ‘enemy material’ and then prove what the lies and disinformation is, don’t you?

  3. Sir Charles Says:

    And this could crack you up: In 2012, Mr. Trump secured almost $1 million in energy-efficiency incentives and low-interest loans from the state of New York to fit a Trump-branded residential tower in Westchester County with eco-friendly fixtures, according to state records obtained by the New York Times.

    => Trump Got Nearly $1 Million in Energy-Efficiency Subsidies in 2012

  4. mboli Says:

    Love this video! The belief “the climate models got it all wrong” is such a fixture among the deniers.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: