Fascinating claim that the scientists were removed for being "Partisan" in distributing information that disagreed with their opening speaker, but of course the opening speaker was somehow completely non-partisan in disagreeing with the banned scientists.

I don't really see how you can possibly have it both ways.

"Apolitical is when I agree with you. Political is when I disagree with you. And this is not a political space, stop bringing politics into everything or you're out!"

Landry and the erstwhile NOCVB want to continue to guzzle corporate cash.

Not saying that's what happened here, but the reasoning makes sense in general.

Partisans strongly dislike non-partisan positions, because they are even more dangerous to them than the partisan counterpart.