With all of Washington, D.C.'s political intrigue -- the commercialization of the White House, the administration's mysterious connections to Russia, and President Trump's ability to be both landlord and tenant on a government property -- why is U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz so curious about the planning and forethought that goes into a Twitter tweet?
No, the Utah Republican is not sifting through the president's Twitter feed. Rather, his attention was caught by a seemingly innocuous tweet from Bryce Canyon National Park in Utah, where the staff was thrilled on December 29 to welcome the country's two new national monuments, Gold Butte in Nevada and Bears Ears in Utah.
Was that tweet simply a spur-of-the-moment shout-out, as many tweets are, or did the park staff have advance notice of the designations by President Obama? And if they did, wonders Congressman Chaffetz, how much advance notice?
We're not talking state secrets here. But hey, none of the other national parks in Utah tweeted the news on December 29, although the Traveler did the day before, when the announcements were made. And while the writing was clearly on the wall regarding the new monuments, we didn't get advance word.
The issue with Rep. Chaffetz is that this tweet could be evidence that the Obama White House lied to Utah Gov. Gary Herbert when it wrote him to say that as of December 15 "no decision had been made about Bears Ears."
Could it be that the White House really was planning as of December 15 to designate those two monuments, as it did on December 28, and that Bryce Canyon officials were in the loop?
"When was a Bears Ears map slot created in the Bryce Canyon National Park's front desk national parks and monuments map area?" Rep. Chaffetz wrote to acting Bryce Canyon Superintendent Sue Fritzke on January 19 (attached below).
"Who made the decision to create a Bears Ears map slot in the Bryce Canyon National Park's front desk national parks and monuments map area," he added in a follow-up question.
Finally, the congressman wondered, "(W)hen did you become aware of the Bears Ears National Monument designation and from whom?"
Bryce Canyon's celebratory tweet, Rep. Chaffetz explained in his letter, "created the appearance that officials at Bryce Canyon coordinated with the White House prior to this most recent designation."
Beyond being curious about the map slot for the new monuments, the committee chairman asked the superintendent to "identify any employees of Bryce Canyon National Park consulted regarding the Bears Ears National Monument Designation. For each employee, identify the communications, that is, when did those conversations occur and with whom?"
Why is Rep. Chaffetz, who has issues of national security to investigate, so concerned about Bryce Canyon's tweeting habits? True, the designation of Bears Ears National Monument went against plans that the congressman and his fellow Utah Republican, Rob Bishop, had for the landscape involved.
But polling shows Utahns were in favor (47+ percent for and 32 percent against) the Bears Ears designation, and a strong majority (60 percent) have no interest in seeing monuments decommissioned. And Rep. Chaffetz made a quick reversal last month when legislation he drafted to transfer 3 million acres of federal lands to the states was soundly criticized by hunters and anglers.
At day's end, we'd like to think taxpayer dollars could be better spent than on investigating a harmless 24-word tweet.
Comments
Well, beach, when you find the time, I'd sincerely be interested. While we support the NPS mission, we strive to be middle-of-the-road with our coverage and definitely don't try to spin anything.
If we're complaining about "Extremist spin", then Rep. Chaffetz' conduct is a perfect example. He is using his congressional oversight committee to further an extremist anti-environmental agenda. As Kurt has pointed out, his committee limits itself to investigations which further his political views.
THIS CARTOON IS A HOOT! It captures the whole situation in one look and a big laugh.
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4973188-155/bagley-cartoon-sometimes-bear-...
Extremism? That is laughable. It is not extreme to want to protect our borders and our economic health and return to the country's foundation as laid out in the Constitution.
As to fascism, the Cambridge Dictionary says "a political system based on a very powerful leader, statecontrol of social and economic life, and extreme pride in country and race, with no expression of political disagreement allowed" . The only part of the definition I see happening now is "pride in country" which is hardly a bad thing. I also note that neither this definition or the one from my 1970 Webster's dictionary attribute fascism to the "right".
The definition from your "old college dictionary" is actually the 1983 American Heritage definition cited by Sourcewatch (what a coincidence) American Heritage has since replaced that defintion with: a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Again, no mention of left or right. Fascism can come from either extreme and is coming from neither at the moment.
Agreed, Lee. Good cartoon, and knowing the usual appetitie of bears, even more chuckles.
Kurt - thank you. That was a perfect example of how to deal with the extremist one-true-way slanderers. "A political system based on a very powerful leader, statecontrol of social and economic life, and extreme pride in country and race, with no expression of political disagreement allowed" Wow - in his own mind Trump is a "very powerful leader", but otherwisee this is what is being attempted exactly. Witness his aide Miller stating that the President's decisions should not be questioned. Witness their attempt to redeine the media as 'fake', even if it is merely quoting him back accurately.
The only people who can't see that this fascist ocean is wet are those also standing in the water.
Rick, if anything it is the left that wants state control of social and economic life and it is the left that actually shuts down dissent. The fact that Trump is pointing out the fake news doesn't mean he is trying to shut down news outlets. He is just pointing out their obvious biases. And while an aide may say his decisions shouldn't be questioned (attribution and context needed), noone is preventing anyone from doing just that. Your fascism charges are just more of your baseless accusations.
EC, in my nearly four-decades long career as a journalist, I have never witnessed anyone at such a high level as the president of the United States actively trying to discredit media that doesn't parrot what he says. Trump is not pointing out biases, but actively trying to discredit mainstream media while catering to those who don't question the words that come out of his mouth.
There's nothing wrong with questioning bias, but when the president dubs anything he doesn't agree with (say, the size of his inaugural audience, his staff's communications with Russia, that he wasn't at odds with the intelligence community) as "fake" news, it's not only disturbing, but the trickle down is incredible divisive.
Are there questionable "news" outlets? Absolutely, and they should be discredited based on the merits. But for the president to dub stories he disagrees with as fake news is greatly disturbing. The more he does it, the more it pervades the views of people who simply shout "fake news" over issues they disagree with.
There is a clear and necessary role for a free, independent media in the country. The president certainly seems to disagree. As evidence, have you seen his "Mainstreet Media Accountability Survey"?
https://gop.com/mainstream-media-accountability-survey/
And in my years, I have never seen the media falsely attack at such a high level. When they make up the stories he is fully justified to try to discredit them. What he is not doing is trying to shut them down, you know, like how the climate change community tries to shut down critics. Now that is fascism.