Members of the Cult of Climastrology were enthusiastic over the government sponsored witch hunts aimed by elected Democratic officials at Skeptic groups and individuals, and have long promoted the removal of 1st Amendment rights from those involved in WrongThink. However, when the table is turned, they aren’t particularly happy
(Daily Caller) Two environmental groups backing investigations into ExxonMobil and conservative think tanks by some states attorneys general are furious they’ve been threatened with a subpoena by federal lawmakers.
Greenpeace and 350.org activists were so mad with House Republicans they sent a letter back demanding lawmakers disclose their ties to Exxon, other oil companies and conservtive think tanks. Activists also argued, rather ironically, such requests violate their First Amendment rights.
“As we have explained in detail in our prior letters to the Committee, the Committee’s requests violate basic First Amendment protections, fall outside the proper jurisdiction of the Committee, and are impermissibly vague, overbroad, and burdensome,†Greenpeace and 350.org wrote to Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House science committee.
Interesting. These same groups were big cheerleaders when the subpoenas were flying the other way. Free speech for me but not thee seems to be their ideal. This leads to
(Daily Caller) A top House Republican issued subpoenas Wednesday to the attorneys general and environmental groups conservatives argue are depriving companies and other organization of free speech rights.
Texas Rep. Lamar Smith issued subpoenas to Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, and eight environmental groups focusing on nonprofit groups for supposedly hiding information related to global warming.
“The attorneys general have appointed themselves to decide what is valid and what is invalid regarding climate change. The attorneys general are pursuing a political agenda at the expense of scientists’ right to free speech,†Smith, who chairs the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, said in a press statement Wednesday.
“Unfortunately, the attorneys general have refused to give the committee the information to which it is entitled. What are they hiding? And why?â€
From the press release
Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber (R-Texas): “Since when did it become a crime to express or hold an opinion? The difference of opinions is what makes our country so strong and unique. It’s this freedom without censorship or restraint that helped build our country. However, this posse of attorneys general believe that those whose opinion, or scientific research, conflicts with the alleged consensus view on climate change should be the subject of investigation and prosecution by government officials – talk about a chilling effect on free speech.â€
From Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.)
“If the debate on climate change is settled, the environmental activists and state attorneys general should have no problem convincing the American public with their own evidence and arguments. Why go to such great lengths to squash differing opinions and anyone who questions their conclusions? These individuals, scientists, and organizations have the right to conduct research, form their own opinions, and voice those opinions.â€
and
Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio): “Instead of upholding the constitution, protecting citizens, and putting real criminal behind bars, these attorneys general are using taxpayer dollars to manufacture charges to send a political message. This demonstrates a clear deviation from the legal duties of an attorney general and the possible abuse of discretionary judgement. It is not the job of the attorneys general to decide what science should be conducted, and their actions indicate their intent is to silence certain voices.â€
It’s a fight started by those who wish to use the Government to shut down 1st Amendment Rights, something which is specifically forbidden in the Constitution (remember, the original Bill of Rights was more about telling the Government what it cannot do), and now must be joined by those who wish to protect those 1st Amendment protections. And the first group is not real happy when their own tactics are turned back on them.
