Image 01 Image 03

Trump transition team seeks DOE climate change advocates’ names

Trump transition team seeks DOE climate change advocates’ names

DOE staffers are whining about a “witch hunt”

Few signals could have been clearer that President-Elect Donald Trump is intending to undo the Obama administration’s business-crushing energy policies than the nomination of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency…after he spent a good portion of his career battling it.

Another signal is now coming from his Department of Energy transition team, which is seeking the identities of climate change alarmists who permeate that agency.

Donald Trump’s transition team has issued a list of 74 questions for the Energy Department, asking agency officials to identify which employees and contractors have worked on forging an international climate pact as well as domestic efforts to cut the nation’s carbon output.

The questionnaire requests a list of those individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years and “which programs within DOE are essential to meeting the goals of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.”

Trump and his team have vowed to dismantle specific aspects of Obama’s climate policies, and Trump has questioned the reality of climate change. The questionnaire, which one Energy Department official described as unusually “intrusive” and a matter for departmental lawyers, has raised concern that the Trump transition team is trying to figure out how to target the people, including civil servants, who have helped implement policies under Obama.

Now, you would think that those who have labored under the delusion that humans impact global climate patterns in ways that can be corrected with  taxation and regulation would be proud to be named. After all, Obama and his team were purportedly implementing policies to stop the seas from rising and help the planet to heal.

Yet, strangely, they are referring to Team Trump’s list of questions as a “witch hunt”.

…Coupled with calls by congressional Republicans to relax civil-service protections so that it’s easier to fire federal employees, the transition team’s demand that the Energy Department name names has some current and former workers fearing the worst.

“Sounds like a freaking witch hunt,” one former DOE staffer wrote in an email.

“It is a remarkably aggressive and antagonistic tone to take with an agency that you’re about to try to manage,” a current agency employee said. Another DOE staffer expressed the view that “some [of the questions] are harassment, some are naive, some are legitimate.”

“Why is that important for informing the transition team?” the person said of the list of people who worked on climate issues.

Allow me to answer that last question: Because the transition team needs to identify those who help the Trump administration with its Department of Energy policies, which will be focused on allowing Americans to access, develop, and utilize all forms of energy.

As he is with NASA, Trump is returning the department back to its original mission: To ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.

Team Trump will have much work ahead trying to undo the efforts of Obama. A 2007 Supreme Court climate change ruling, Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency (i.e., “Endangerment Finding”), not only permitted the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1992 but made it feel compelled to do so.

Proper personnel selection will be key in resetting government policy, especially in regards to the Endangerment Finding.

…There’s going to have to be a massive effort to pick apart failing climate models and questionably-adjusted data. They’re going to have to find people willing to expose the current regime’s blatant abuse of logic in generating inflated “costs” of global warming, while largely ignoring the co-benefits of fossil fuel power, like doubled life expectancy and undreamt-of wealth.

On one side will be a massive and entrenched establishment, defending models that we now know were (and this is truly shocking) often adjusted to give a predetermined result. On the other will be a dogged and far smaller clan, tearing apart the code of these models, much like the ENIGMA busters of Bletchley Park. This will get ugly.

In nominating Pruitt, the administration is signaling that it is clearly up to such a fight — and not just over climate change.

And by promoting those within the Department of Energy who want Americans to utilize all their energy options, Trump will have more warriors for that particular battle.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Trump is only following the spirit of my two fave Barry quotes, which are “I won” and “Elections have consequences.” Suck it up Lib/Dem EPA tools and minions… a new Sheriff’s in town ^_~

JustShootMeNow | December 10, 2016 at 4:38 pm

Ah, a little preemptive house cleaning. Get rid of those who have already hinted at sabotage.

    C. Lashown in reply to JustShootMeNow. | December 10, 2016 at 9:16 pm

    George Bush, Obama’s predecessor, should have implemented this level of common sense. That would have short-circuited many of his managerial issues. Running a giant nation with embedded people who are against your agenda is a recipe for failure.

send them all to work at the post office. they need more duds.

“The questionnaire requests a list of those individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years and “which programs within DOE are essential to meeting the goals of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan.””

I don’t know what’s the problem; sounds like the kind of questions the IRS was asking Tea Party groups seeking tax-exemptions….

Unknown3rdParty | December 10, 2016 at 5:07 pm

I agree, it DOES look like a witch hunt. However, since I can find nothing in the Constitution that suggests that the government should somehow manage, administer, control or in any way determine energy policies, shut’er down. No Department of Energy, no witch hunt. Same thing with the EPA … right after their administrative polices are eliminated. And then there’s a whole host of other cabinets, bureaus, czars, etc. that need to be deleted.

    read this article which list the questions –

    There are tough questions asked but not if the new person coming in is really doing their job. The questions are very appropriate organizational questions – who does what and why, what needs to be done, etc.

    A lot of the questions start “can you provide…” which could be considered to be threatening to one’s job. If yes, then produce the information. If no, well why not?

    I hope the same type of questions are being asked of every department.

    “Now, you would think that those who have labored under the delusion that humans impact global climate patterns in ways that can be corrected with taxation and regulation would be proud to be named.”

    This is as good of an example of the un-elected, unaccountable regulatory state as they come. This 4th branch of government simply must be tamed if liberty is to prevail, and that means for many, many of these agencies, outright elimination.

    What’s wrong with a witch hunt in the US government when only witches need to worry?

    And they are worried.

“It is a remarkably aggressive and antagonistic tone to take with an agency that you’re about to try to manage”

No, it’s just a fundamental transformation. Leftover Obamites who are now past their “sell by” dates should be familiar with that concept, right?

Sorry, I know it’s repetitive, but still … this is the




“a matter for departmental lawyers,” SERIOUSLY?

I should think that such information would be a matter of public record and even those bits that aren’t are entirely within the purview of the President of the United States of America. For that matter, more than a few of those folks “serve at the pleasure”.

Whoever commented that this is a matter for departmental lawyers should be first on the list for dismissal.

The greatest advances in technology came when the US had an active space program. Maybe if we get these departments to focus on their true purposes, we can do it again

Here is an article which paints a different picture…

The article lists the 74 questions and the author suggests what is being asked. But, with many of the questions, I view them as asking about the organization chart, who reports to who, what’s been done, what is scheduled to be done, what’s the status of your assets and liabilities, etc. Typical questions when you move into a new job of running a department.

But, many questions also ask about whether there is a statutory link or not. I think that is what is getting people upset. If there is no statutory reason for the committee, position, function, then the next questions are why does it exist, is it effective, and can we cut it?

They even asked the department if there was a 10% annual cut in funds, what areas would they recommend to cut?

The same author wrote this –

It seems that it is going to be “Government meet Business” and the business folks are going to win.

Whenever I moved to a new company (as an accountant or administrator), I would always look at each department and function and ask “”why do you do this task? If I got the answer of “that’s the way it’s always been done”, I knew that changes were needed. Sometimes, it was just explaining the why to my staff. Other times. it was a major overhaul of procedures.

I would love to see the questions being asked of the other departments. And, I’m sure there are many business people who will see these types of reviews and go “YES – finally”!

The DoE doesn’t do science. If you are suffientely of that ilk you won’t believe me. But if you are of that ilk there is no evidence I can bring.

Army aviators drinking alcohol on Navy ships. Shiver me timbers!!

Army aviotors didn’t spend decades in the brig.

But they would have if they leaked secrets.

The guy reveals his age. Witchhunts were yesterday and constrained to a minor population. Today, we have babyhunts, which are global and progressive.

Staffers who believe that carbon dioxide is pollution are invited to stop breathing.

I am of sufficient age that everyone knew that Navy jeep carriers delivered Army Thunderbolts to Saipan,

“Mariana Islands Campaign and the Great Turkey Shoot
13 Jun 1944 – 10 Aug 1944

…14 Jul 1944 In the Mariana Islands, US Seventh Air Force P-47 Thunderbolt fighters based on Saipan again struck Tinian Island. At Guam, US battleships joined in on the pre-invasion bombardment while transport USS Dickerson delivered US Navy underwater demolition specialists to survey landing beaches on the island.”

Where did they come from? Where did those Army fighters come from? I am totally blanking mystified.

It’s like, out of nowhere. Like the Doolittle raid.

Conservative Beaner | December 10, 2016 at 6:52 pm

Hand them a brush and they can clean toilets for the rest of their miserable careers.

I don’t know what Conservative Beaner @ December 10, 2016 at 6:52 even means

Can someone make this simple for me?

DOE staffers are whining about a “witch hunt”

Tell me, what do you do with witches?

Burn them!

And what do you burn, apart from witches?

More witches!!

““Sounds like a freaking witch hunt,” one former DOE staffer wrote in an email.”

Yes, yes it is. We need to eliminate the witches in the DOE.

I’m fine with a witch hunt. Climate Alarmists have been pulling witch hunts for at least a decade now. Time they learned how it feels.

Witch hunts are only bad if there aren’t any witches.

Realistically, it does kind of fit the definition of a Witch Hunt. The big difference between Salem and this case, however, is that they really ARE witches.

Burn Them!

Sorry, I posted that comment before realizing several other commenters had already beat me to it. I didn’t intend to be redundant.

Wonderful! They have been terrorizing citizens for years. Now it’s their turn!! 🙂

The rats are scattering!

If you haven’t followed Liz’s links to the Whats Up with That article, you should. The so call witch hunt is only a very small part of the information being gathered. It does read like a businessman evaluating a failing company he/she is preparing to take over and turn around.