Home | About | Donate

At Senate Hearing, State Nominee Tillerson 'Still Lying About Climate Change'


At Senate Hearing, State Nominee Tillerson 'Still Lying About Climate Change'

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

At his senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, U.S. secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson on Wednesday dodged questions about ExxonMobil's long history of denying climate science, lending credence to claims his tenure would be a disaster for the planet.


It is perfectly NORMAL for Republicans to be opposed to spend any money on anything that does NOT quickly PROFIT too big to fail corporations. You should know better than to expect anything else.


While feigning that he is no longer employed by his sole, life-long employer, ExxonMobil, Tillerson will make sure that his former employer benefits quite well from his position as Sec. of State just as Cheney made sure Halliburton benefited from his position as VP. Via Tillerson, Trump will be able to fulfill his main goal with regards to US-Russia relations which is allowing Exxon to have access to Russian oil and gas via its $500 billion dollar deal that Tillerson negotiated with Putin a few years back.


What? The Dems suddenly grew a pair? No way!


Rather trade with Russia than war or constant threat of war.
Doing an oil deal with Russia is probably less harmful than Hillary's fracking.
Obama lied about that fracking poisoning drinking water and the air within a couple of miles.

And Obama continues to lie about the harmful effects of fracking.


Kaine could have pressed much harder on this.


Another loser nominated. Apparently there is no way to stop the onslaught of Fascism.
I would like to see more light shed on VPE Pence. He lost his re-election bid in Indiana and has a dismal record there. Should be fired. It however is looking more and more like he is gonna inherit the throne.
Organize, resist and dream...it's the best we can do. Short of a messy revolution.

"And as someone who continues to disparage climate models, he is unfit to lead the U.S. and world on climate action."
I do get a kick out of this comment. Why would anyone assume that the US of A leads or should ( or could fro that matter ) lead the world in climate action?


Given how the Trump administration has lauded Putin, put putin salivers into power who wish to do what putin did to russia, refused to acknowledge at all the game russia has played with our election process (#1 footnote), and Rex who has been cosy with the russians over oil deals, we are going to be playing patty cake with the russians. And how much is that authoritarian streak of Trump and Putin going to be hitting us?
1st footnote, I don't need a reminder of what we do in other people's elections. But two wrongs don't make a right and those of us against such things can complain about Russia, just as well as the US.


I hope not. I believe you are being facetious but I've got to tell you that is one of the most offensive terms -----which is apparently bipartisan and used by both males and females.

As if we need more "manly testicles/testosterone" -----that will do the trick!! Kick some ass too!!

These were the sickening bumper stickers that I saw throughout the midwest:

"Trump: finally someone with balls"
Can we please stop using this statement?

How about wisdom, courage with some compassion thrown in?


Tillerson just flat out stated that fossil fuel industry does not get subsidies and he will do whatever it takes to support our business interests.


The more money in your bank account the bigger the lie you can tell.


I'd rather stop the import of Putin's authoritarian tendencies than trade with them freely and disregard the harm.
And as far as doing an oil deal with russia over fracking, both are extremely harmful. Which is why so many opposed Hillary and her love of fracking. The problem is . now we have a president and cabinet that will do far more harm to the environment and addition to climate change than Hillary every would have done.
As far as Obama, he has done far more than hillary would do with stopping fracking on public land. Unfortunately, Bush sought to destroy the EPA with all his appointees, many who still remain. Thus the EPA is still in the throes of republicans.
Plus when Obama tried to overturn the fracking rules implemented by cheney, he was stopped by a federal judge. The ruling of 2005 set by cheney thwarted what Obama wanted to do. It essentially outlawed being able to disclose what poisons are in the fracking process. And it stymied all efforts by Obama to change anything.
Hillary would never have done what Obama did to stop fracking, given her stance that fracking was good. But given what the russians want to do, which is far more harmful, I have take Hillary over trump.


Do you really want the democrats to be like the republicans? Most of them already are. They work for the rich, it is only the few who don't that speak out against the dangers. The republicans certainly have the balls to be telling us that tax cuts for the rich are great, that we should be hating all the people they do, that science is bad, liberals are bad because they support all those 'others', and that they are the only 'real americans' and that the majority of people who voted against them are not real americans and don't matter.
All that takes balls to say.


They (the Republicans) certainly want us to believe that's how they are endowed. I suspect when you pull back the fly (so to speak), you'll find that the size of Trump's hands says it all. (Apologies to Caroline...).


The republicans have been denying that the carbon industry has been getting subsidies for decades. And cries when we give subsidies to alternative energy. Expecting them to tell the truth would be like accepting the sun rises in the west.
When one looks at the possible profits that come because of denying climate change and subsidies, you can understand why they fight so hard to defend the carbon industries. The estimates for oil alone in what is out there is 40 trillion dollars. Considering confirmed amounts of coal is 200 yrs of use w/o any looking for any other suspected coal reserves and natural gas reserves, the amount of profit is staggering for them if we ignore the harm using them will cause. That kind of money makes killing 90% of the people on the planet a good thing. As long as you are one of the survivors.


My only quibble here is that I'm not sure just 10% of the planet's population would spend enough on fossil fuels to deliver that 40 trillion dollars -- on the other hand, if they are composed of "the" 10%, then maybe it's plausible.


Just Republicans?


If Tillerson gets the job he will be lectured about climate change everywhere he goes, except perhaps in Russia. Clinton, Kerry, and then Tillerson. What a drop off Tillerson would be. How low can the US go?


People still thinking Clinton would be the greater evil over Trump need to talk to some non-sheeple women, please. You know, the ones who own many small businesses and really grow your local economy, often times. And, I voted for Stein and supported Bernie. His Cabinet picks make you look rather myopic, btw. As in, delusional.