You are the wreck of order, breach of laws
You are to nothing constant but to ill
Your loves are set on nothing but your will
You are the least of goods, the worst of evils


I would stop the 1-6 hearing, inquire of the lib/dem presenters of their hearsay evidence: “Why aren’t you presenting testimony from the person(s) with direct knowledge?” In a court of law, you would never be allowed to call someone who is testifying on what someone else said, from yet another party, which is hearsay. Moreover, you have an obligation as an attorney to do at least a little bit of effort to attempt to corroborate the allegations that you are making.

I’m not finding this witness to be credible(1) or the credibility of that evidence, it suggests a motive on the part of the presenters of the evidence to further their narrative, which is not an accurate one, and they’re putting their thumb on the scale of justice to try to achieve a result that they want. It is not a result that has anything to do with the truth(2). They’re creating the liberal’s childish psychological safe space for democrats going into an election they’re gonna get annihilated on, where they get to be the heroes claiming, fallaciously, that they are doing a lot standing up for our democracy.

AGAIN, the problem with hutchinson’s testimony and that it is 3rd of 4th party hearsay. WHY AREN’T WE HEARING DIRECTLY FROM THE Secret Service agents WHO WERE ACTUALLY THERE!!! There’s not some Secret Service exemption to being subpoenaed. That doesn’t exist. These people, these libs, these democrat frauds in Congress are ridiculous.

This is just again their false narrative creation for libs who can’t look at the reality of gas prices, crime, the border, inflation, et cetera. It feels like the Hail-Mary pass in football. If Trump’s so bad, why do libs/dems have to always lie about him? Who in America doesn’t think that pre-pandemic America under Trump wasn’t way better?

1.hutchinson's wholly disemboweled assertion that Trump attempted to commandeer his armored SUV after completing his unfortunate remarks that fateful morning and force Secret Service agents to take him to the Capitol building. According to Hutchinson: The armored presidential fleet vehicles make clear that hutchinson’s testimony is a LIE. There are barriers between the back and front compartments of the AV/SUV that would make that contortionist act very difficult for an agile young person — much less Trump. Indeed, within hours, NBC chief White House correspondent Peter Alexander declared: “A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.”

2.Among the many problems with pelosi’s effort to collect enough evidence to charge Trump with some version of “insurrection” is the fact that Trump had authorized deployment of the National Guard ahead of the events that day. According to then-Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller: “DJT authorized the use of the military to support local and federal law enforcement on 6 Jan. He directed that I provide whatever support was requested. So, technically, he authorized unlimited military support.” Miller’s top aide, then-Pentagon Chief of Staff Kash Patel, affirmed: “There’s zero chance the DoD doesn’t have a record of that. DoD spoke to Capitol Police (who report to pelosi) before Jan. 6 multiple times, and they repeatedly rejected any National Guard assistance, as did D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.” In other words, if you planned to rob the Bank of America branch on Manhattan’s Union Square, would you call 911 before this heist and urge the NYPD to scramble 100 squad cars to the scene of the crime?

Please log in to like, share and comment!

Numerous scammers have claimed to generate green energy credits but do not actually undertake or complete the projects that are supposed to offset the carbon dioxide emissions and generate the credits. They have bilked taxpayers and investors out of billions of dollars. Misleading advertising and outright fraud are all too common among companies and politicians promoting green energy schemes. 2 of the biggest scams are biofuels and biomass burning for electric power.

Trees are carbon sinks, removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere for photosynthesis and storing it in their limbs, roots, and trunks. When trees are cut down, they cease to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, and as it decomposes, releases stored CO2 back into the air. Even if new trees are planted, they remove carbon dioxide only slowly over time.

The green industry promises to plant new trees, maintain the forests, and ensure the trees grow to maturity. As detailed in a BBC story, the claim of tree planting is itself fraudulent, whether allegedly for biofuel replacement or as a direct carbon dioxide removal/carbon credit scheme. Sometimes money is collected and credits are given but no trees planted. In other cases, the trees are planted in unsuitable locations or are the wrong species for the site, and the trees die. The dead trees then add carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere as they decompose. In the Philippines and India, grand tree planting programs were funded by the sale of carbon dioxide credits, only to have those in charge of the program abandon the "forests" once the saplings were in the ground. In the Philippine case, an audit found 88% of the trees failed.

Criminal and civil enforcement of these agreements is almost entirely absent, because no agency with authority exists or no common method for determining the amount of carbon dioxide "removed" is determined in advance for most of these schemes, especially with international programs. As a result, the green industry get away with greenwashing on a massive scale, making self-congratulatory claims of being carbon-neutral or moving that way, while emitting the same or even more emissions than they had before grandly taking up the "climate fight." Often it’s simply hard to account for or track the success of the claims. In other cases, assertions of going green consist of nothing more than a series of claims made in a PR campaign. Rarely are these statements investigated and confirmed. In the rare cases where greenwashing is exposed, the common practice is for the companies to issue a mea culpa. They say, in effect, "Okay, you caught us cheating, but we’re serious this time, and we’ll really start to get green now." Little or no penalty results from these scams—maybe a donation/payoff to a radical green group. Often no concerted, consistent investigation of the follow-through on their new green commitment is undertaken.

As for biofuels, tThe U.S. EPA writes: [B]ecause many biofuel feedstocks require land, water, and other resources, research suggests that biofuel production may give rise to several undesirable effects. Potential drawbacks include changes to land use patterns that may increase GHG emissions, pressure on water resources, air and water pollution, and increased food costs. Depending on the feedstock and production process and time horizon of the analysis, biofuels can emit even more GHGs than some fossil fuels on an energy-equivalent basis. Biofuels also tend to require subsidies and other market interventions to compete economically with fossil fuels, which creates deadweight losses in the economy.

In addition, because the dominant biofuel—ethanol—contains less energy than an equivalent amount of regular gasoline, vehicles’ fuel mileage declines as ethanol is added to the mix. As a result, more fuel is used than would have been consumed without the biofuel.

While the expansion of green energy is not reducing overall carbon dioxide emissions or preventing climate change (as if that were possible), it is wreaking havoc in electric power systems in the United States and abroad. In the United States as a whole dozens of stories have been published in recent months warning of widespread electric power shortages already occurring or looming, as the supply of reliable electric power wanes because dozens of fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydroelectric power plants are being prematurely closed and replaced with wind, solar, and sometimes a small percentage of battery backup.

Wind and solar power are particularly unsuited to supply modern, interconnected power systems because they work only when the weather conditions are just right.
cont'd...

Please log in to like, share and comment!

Essentially the climate change issue is a charismatic smooth-talking sales campaign selling the world the notion of catastrophic man-caused global warming via an endless string of deceptive narratives. Even the name of the issue, "climate change," is deceptive. algore's movie An Inconvenient Truth, taught around the world from the grade school level through college, used the "global warming" phrase a minimum of 25 times while never mentioning climate change once. Why change the name? When "man-caused global warming'' paused instead of continually rising as more atmospheric CO2 irrefutably rises, the public starts asking questions. No problem(1). They switched(2) to "Climate Change" and blamed it for the previous year's 7 million acres of U.S. wildfires, while hoping nobody recalls the nearly 22 million acres burned in 1937.

When objective, unbiased observers examine the issue, they find no end to disingenuous imagery and misleading narratives. Case in point: media don't use clear, midday photos of coal-fired power plants, they instead show views taken at sunset or sunrise where the always-backlit harmless steam emissions resemble sinister pollution clouds. News reports imply the colorless carbon dioxide in the steam is a pollutant, despite the fact that commercial greenhouse growers pump CO2 into their buildings to help their plants and flowers grow bigger and faster. Beyond that, news outlets simplify the name of that odorless, colorless trace gas as "carbon pollution," evoking mental images of smokey black soot.

If the public is not being presented with accurate depictions of just those few items, how many others are misrepresented? Liberal news outlets such as the PBS NewsHour have never once had a skeptic scientist on the program over the last 25 years to dispute what was said during 97 appearances of scientists associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, NASA, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The public is largely unaware of how climate experts question the notion of global warming: temperature data-gathering methodology/ocean acidity/polar bear populations/glacial retreat/the "scientific consensus"/sea levels/weather intensity, on and on. Accusations of corruption by oil companies have played a major part in keeping the issue alive for 30 years now. Its specific claim is that “leaked industry memos” proves the fossil-fuel industry paid skeptic scientists to "reposition global warming as theory rather than fact." Those “leaked memos” were first floated as evidence by environmentalists in June 1991, and the "reposition" strategy goal was most famously spelled out on the full screen in algore's movie, in a deceptively inaccurate comparison to a leaked tobacco industry document. This same supposedly sinister set of leaked memos is the cornerstone evidence for disinformation campaign accusations in most of the "Exxon Knew"-style global warming damages lawsuits (e.g. City of Hoboken, NJ v Exxon), and this same memo set was once again cited in a November 2021 UK Guardian article about oil industry disinformation campaigns, where the article went so far as to additionally post scratchy copies of newspaper ads that supposedly accompanied the "disinformation campaign.”

But it turns out that those ads were never used in the genuine campaign, which was a short-lived public relations effort to tell the public the FACTS what algore and the IPCC wasn't telling them. Worse, the leaked memo set, with the "reposition global warming" strategy targeting a gullible audience of "older, less educated males" and "young, low income women," was only a foolish idea that was rejected by the industry group it was sent to. The whole leaked memo allegation is worthless as evidence, but it is still the main evidence the global-warming alarmists have ever had to convince the public to ignore skeptic scientists and other experts.

As complex as the science is after 30 years, the elemental fatal fault in the global warming issue is how the whole issue still boils down to just a one bogus sentence talking point, echoed over and over by the eco-extremists: "Exxon and the rest of the fossil fuel industry knew the science was settled, but paid shill 'experts' to reposition global warming from fact back to uncertain theory, and that's why everyone can ignore those skeptics and move forward to stop the climate crisis.
cont'd...

Please log in to like, share and comment!

The Climate Prophet Tiny Tim warned us about the collapse of the polar ice caps. But nobody listened

Please log in to like, share and comment!

Data from hundreds of temperature reconstructions show the Northern Hemisphere was significantly warmer for much of the past 10,000 years (Holocene) than it is today. The study published in Climate of the Past examined the sediment records from 66 glaciers and icecaps (GIC) from all over the Arctic, covering the past 12,000 years. Based on these records, they conclude the Arctic was warmer 6,000 years ago than it is today. This research suggests many glaciers and icecaps present today disappeared entirely during the summers 6,000 years ago, as they were warmer than at present. The study reports: "The full Arctic compilation suggests that the majority (50% or more) of studied GICs were smaller than present or absent by ∼10 ka. We find the highest percentage (>90%) of Arctic GICs smaller than present or absent in the middle Holocene at ∼ 7-6 ka, probably reflecting more spatially ubiquitous and consistent summer warmth during this period than in the early Holocene…In the first half of the Holocene, most of the Arctic’s small GICs became significantly reduced or melted away completely in response to summer temperatures that, on average, were only moderately warmer than today."

Please log in to like, share and comment!