Wednesday, January 11, 2017

POP QUIZ: Spot and Identify the Rex Tillerson BS in His Senate Testimony

THEN: Vlad I Addressed Sanctions — Not Lobby for or Against

NOW: We at Exxon Lobbied on Sanctions — Not for or Against
(We Didn't Even Like Sanctions)

Introduction: George Orwell, author of “1984” introduced us to the words doublethink and newspeak, but the one word he DIDN'T use, which actually combines the two is: “Doublespeak.”

Doublespeak is saying one thing and meaning another, usually its opposite like he wrote saying that when BIG BROTHER (government) and the Party say PEACE they mean WAR; when they say LOVE they mean HATE; and when they say FREEDOM they mean SLAVERY.

Well that is the same kind of doublespeak we got in the below exchange between Sen. Corker and Rex Tillerson during Tillerson’s Senate confirmation hearing regarding his nomination for Secretary of State.

See if you can spot the slick bullshit lingo in this exchange from Tillerson during that hearing (January 11, 2017).

The full article comes from here and has this headline under the picture of Tillerson testifying:

Trump Nominee Says Exxon Didn’t Lobby Against Russia Sanctions, Despite Evidence It Did

Initially during the hearing, Tillerson was emphatic when describing Exxon’s lobbying, saying point blank:  “I never lobbied against the sanctions. To my knowledge, Exxon Mobil has not lobbied against the sanctions.”
Sen. Corker (R-TN), seemingly confused, interjected, saying: “I think you called me at the time.” 
Then Corker called for an early break before noon. When questioning reopened, Corker’s first question back to Tillerson was to ask him to clarify his earlier statement about the sanctions line of questioning. Corker asked the question this way:Has Exxon simply lobbied on sanctions rather than “against” them?
Tillerson quickly responded:Senator that is correct.”
Then Tillerson just as quickly added to that:I never lobbied against the sanctions. That characterization that Exxon Mobil lobbied against the sanctions is just inaccurate.”
Tillerson’s former employer (ExxonMobile) echoed that latest explanation, saying:As our former chairman said, we provided information about impact of sanctions, but did not lobby against sanctions. The lobby disclosure reports you cited do not contradict his testimony.” (This was provided by Alan Jeffers, a spokesperson for Exxon who spoke to that and to BuzzFeed News).
Background: In 2014, as President Obama began sanctioning Russia for the annexation of Crimea, there were at least three proposed pieces of legislation that, among other things, upped military aid to Ukraine and issue sanctions specifically against Russian energy firms.
Exxon lobbied on all three of those proposals, Congressional filings show even though the filings don’t indicate the details of Exxon’s lobbying effort, Tillerson himself made the company’s views clear at the time in 2014, saying clearly:We do not support sanctions, generally (Tillerson told shareholders) We don’t find them to be effective unless they are very well-implemented comprehensively — and that’s a very hard thing to do.”
Do you see my point in all this? Keep in mind, this is not just a case of clarifying previous words – this is a blatant effort to redesign the original words with clear intent to deceive and cover up possible real motives of Tillerson and about his stated views and purpose if confirmed to get the sanctions lifted for both Russian and ExxonMobil benefit and a huge, huge profit.
Doublespeak – dare I say (but not too loudly)? BTW: I hope you easily spotted the disconnect (the deceptive wording)… clever, but not for me, and I’m sure (and hopefully) not for you.

My final simple Q: How can someone lobby ON something without being FOR or AGAINST that something?
Thanks for coming by… Oh, yeah Tillerson should not get the SOS job, but with this majority of GOPers in charge, well… he will, sadly.

No comments: