I must admit, after watching the video, I am flabbergasted!

Here we have two prominent EPA attorneys who obviously are sincerely convinced that CO2 is responsible for climate fluctuations (a position I disagree with), and yet are also vehemently opposed to Cap & Trade ( a position I agree with).

It would appear that, as I have hoped, the political winds are becoming confused. Instead of a stiff breeze, we are getting a tornado.

As to the requirements being demanded by the EPA, that is actually Standard Operating Procedure for any governmental body. No government employee is allowed to use their position to make political messages, nor to use their position in order to further personal goals. Of course, such restrictions are subjectively enforced, to assist in allowing employees who agree with management to air some views with a lot of leeway while tightly restricting others who disagree with management. It's simply the nature of the beast.

Obviously, since these two attorneys are being tightly restricted, their views are not held by the management at the EPA.

(Incidentally, every governmental employment contract in the USA also contains a section on patent/copyright restrictions. Any employee must ask for permission from their supervisors to apply for a patent or register a copyright, even if such is based entirely on personal time. Failure to do so can result in such patent/copyright being legally confiscated by the governmental body.)

The restrictions themselves are poorly worded. They can be read as all restrictions being required, instead of offering options to comply. This makes no sense when one considers they are calling for removal and editing of the video. Possibly this will be a loophole to make it possible for the attorneys to continue spreading their message. They are, after all, attorneys.

Thank you for the great find!

TheRedneck