Meet our new Secretary of State

[Dill]

(12-17-2016, 11:11 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: My first question regarding Tillerson is what experience does he have in diplomacy?

Well he does have some, sort of. Running an international oil company is not like managing hotels.

ExxonMobile has its own intelligence service. They deal with heads of state in many countries. And they have
frequently thwarted US policy goals in places like Chad and Iraq. So Tillerson has a kind of foreign policy
experience for sure.

It's just hat he has always been a creature of one corporation. Can he recognize other than business interests?
Can he put US interests ahead of Exxon's?  I am not so sure. He knows Putin, does business in Russia, but
is accustomed to working "with" autocrats, not against them.  I'm sure he knows far more than Trump, but may
have Trump's limited corporate conception of ethics.

[JustWinBaby]

(12-17-2016, 01:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who determines this lack of qualification?

I'm guessing writers at HuffPo who never had a real job and majored in English.

But seriously this guy might have been good for Sec Energy, but not sure why doing a few deals with foreign countries would qualify you for Sec State.

Although, again, a lot of this angst is based off the false premise these figure heads actually do something - Hillary's claim to fame as Sec State was how many miles she flew. Because it sure as hell wasn't the "Russian reset" button.

[Bengalzona]

(12-17-2016, 07:34 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You just called yourself dumb. I don't think it is fair you get to insult your intelligence, but the rules around this joint preclude me from insulting your intelligence. 

I'm gonna need a ruling from one of the mods. 

You can't insult other people.

However, indirectly insulting someone else's intelligence by posting something so inane and/or off-topic that it makes other people scratch their heads and wonder what type of glue you are sniffing is common around here. I do it several times a day. 


Hope that helps. 

[Bengalzona]

Personally, I'm giving the whole admin 100 days on-the-job before I start judging. That is my idea of fairness. Trump has reasons for picking this guy. I'm not quite sure what those reasons are at this point. He's the one who has to sell this to Congress. And I think Congress is going to scrutinize the Secretary of State position much more thoroughly than any other position.

[GMDino]

(12-17-2016, 05:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Where have I said I know more than anyone? I am not the one that deem folks unqualified to serve in Cabinet positions; however, there is definitely no shortage of these experts. 

(12-17-2016, 01:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Previous picks you say? Does that mean this guy should use his personal email for official business?

The current pick has plenty experience with international affairs.

I think I have a better idea of who thinks they can determine qualifications and they most likely don't have a clue about the workings of international affairs.

Yep, conformation hearing are a good thing as long as they don't occur on Social Media by a bunch of folks that have no clue. 

(12-17-2016, 05:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There's a good chance this made sense in your head. 

[GMDino]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/12/18/exxon-probes-may-figure-tillerson-senate-hearings-top-diplomat-job/95380806/

Quote:Donald Trump isn't the only person headed to the U.S. government's executive branch saddled by legal issues.

As the president-elect tapped ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson as the chief U.S. diplomat, a judge issued a ruling that could help decide the outcome of state investigations into the energy giant's statements on climate change and the firm's accounting disclosures.

Those are just two of several issues federal lawmakers could explore during Senate confirmation hearings expected early next year for Tillerson's appointment as secretary of State. The hearings are likely to focus on Tillerson's business negotiations and other dealings with Russia President Vladimir Putin, along with questions about ExxonMobil's federal contracts.

The legal battle with New York, Massachusetts and other states hinges on whether ExxonMobil (XOM) properly disclosed the potential impact of climate change on the company's finances and gave investors accurate values for the firm's assets during a two-year oil price slump.

On Dec. 12, Texas U.S. District Court Judge Ed Kinkeade ordered the top legal officials of New York and Massachusetts to file written arguments by Jan. 4 addressing ExxonMobil's contention that the New York and Massachusetts probes are politically motivated and should be terminated. The ruling came in a lawsuit the energy giant filed in June as part of an effort to block the investigations.

The lawsuit characterized the investigations as "a coordinated effort to silence and intimidate one side of the public policy debate on how to address climate change."
[/url]

ExxonMobil has been part of that debate for decades, participating in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since its inception and supporting a carbon tax as a preferred system to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, the company says in its lawsuit.

As potential evidence of bias by the state officials, the legal action quoted Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey as saying her investigation would show "a troubling disconnect between what Exxon knew" and what the company "chose to share with investors and the American public."

The lawsuit cited alleged close coordination between "sympathetic" state attorneys general and climate change activists seeking records from ExxonMobil that could fuel possible investor lawsuits.

Denying the company's allegations, the state officials said their investigations are aimed at protecting ExxonMobil investors and U.S. consumers from potential fraud.

"When an energy company makes disclosures about the impact of climate change and related government policies on that company’s core business, New York law requires it do so accurately — and not present an external picture materially at odds with what the company or its executives have concluded internally," New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's office said in a court filing last week.

Attempting to gauge the accuracy of the company's disclosures, Schneiderman in November 2015 subpoenaed ExxonMobil financial records, statements and other climate-change-related material dating to 1977. He filed a New York state court lawsuit seeking to compel related disclosures by Pricewaterhouse Coopers, an accounting firm for ExxxonMobil.

The company said it had disclosed information about the business risk of climate change for many years in Securities and Exchange Commission filings and other shareholder reports.
[url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/09/16/exxonmobil-accounting-disclosures-examined/90476826/]

This year, Schneiderman's investigation broadened to examine why ExxonMobil, unlike other U.S. energy giants, had not written down the value of oil and gas assets during the industry-wide price plunge. Many companies "write down" the value of assets on their financial statements when they may no longer be able to produce as much income. Theoretically, Exxon's decision could have led investors to believe the company was more valuable than it really was.

ExxonMobil said its financial results met the accounting and reporting standards of the SEC and the Financial Accounting Standards Board. The response underscored statements Tillerson made in 2015 to trade publication Energy Intelligence.

"We don't do write downs," Tillerson said in the interview. "A lot of other people are very quick to want to write things down because it kind of improves things going forward. As part of our disciplined approach going forward, everyone around here understands, once you make that investment, you live with that the rest of your career. If you have invested in a high-cost environment and things go south, you better have anticipated your ability to work on the things you can work on to sustain the profitability of that investment."

[Dill]

(12-18-2016, 08:26 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Personally, I'm giving the whole admin 100 days on-the-job before I start judging. That is my idea of fairness. Trump has reasons for picking this guy. I'm not quite sure what those reasons are at this point. He's the one who has to sell this to Congress. And I think Congress is going to scrutinize the Secretary of State position much more thoroughly than any other position.

I admire your patience, B-zona. 

We are rather like fans judging draft picks. We have no power. Sometimes we are right and sometimes wrong.

This "draft" will be pretty interesting, though, since the GM has never played football before.

[Dill]

(12-17-2016, 05:42 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Is this that same Rex Tillerson from that same Exxon Mobil that has a potentially $500 billion dollar deal with Russia that was put on ice with those sanctions put on Russia after they invaded Crimea?

Put on ice for now. . .

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/exxon-mobile-russia-sanctions-rex-tillerson-232770

ExxonMobil successfully lobbied against a bill that would have made it harder for the next president to lift sanctions against Russia, clearing the way for the oil giant to restart a program worth billions of dollars if Donald Trump eases those restrictions as president.

The company’s effort could be helped by outgoing CEO Rex Tillerson, who, if confirmed as secretary of state, would be a key adviser on the decision.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(12-18-2016, 06:02 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I'm guessing writers at HuffPo who never had a real job and majored in English.

But seriously this guy might have been good for Sec Energy, but not sure why doing a few deals with foreign countries would qualify you for Sec State.

Although, again, a lot of this angst is based off the false premise these figure heads actually do something - Hillary's claim to fame as Sec State was how many miles she flew.  Because it sure as hell wasn't the "Russian reset" button.

Figureheads?  Like a CEO?

[GMDino]

(12-19-2016, 03:57 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Figureheads?  Like a CEO?

One that has all his underlings do the work and then takes all the credit when it goes right and denies any knowledge when it goes wrong?

[BmorePat87]

Huntsman would have been a great choice.