Via Breitbart: Despite heavy lobbying from G7 leaders, President Donald Trump declined to endorse the Paris Climate Agreement in a joint pledge of support for one of former President Barack Obama’s signature achievements in office.
Trump’s decision upset world leaders like German Chancellor Angela Merkel, desperate to convince the president of the agreement’s merits.
“The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization,” Merkel said, describing discussions with Trump about climate change “very unsatisfying.”
For opponents of the agreement, the decision is a welcome development after the president’s economic adviser, Gary Cohn, told reporters that Trump was “evolving” on the issue. But it still was not a fulfillment of his campaign promise to withdraw the United States from the Paris agreement.
The president announced on Twitter that he would make the decision next week of whether to remain in the agreement.
I will make my final decision on the Paris Accord next week!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 27, 2017
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I say stay in it and play it…..you have no voice if you leave the room
Trump declines to endorse Paris Climate Accord…and flips the entire conversation to Illegal immigrants and muslim terror….and that really wigged them out
A voice only makes a difference if you are talking to rational people about rational things. Discussing climate change with watermelons and kleptocrats is like discussing whether you wan to be boiled or spit roasted with cannibals.
You should also be aware that if the Paris non-Treaty is not duly dejected by the Senate and Formally denounced by the president,the Supreme Court will order the US Government to enforce it and to pay multiple Gigadollars over to the UN to be distributed to needy third world kleptocrats whose countries are suffering from climate.
Mr. Sobchak, I understand your concerns, they have some basis. However, in U. S. jurisprudence, the courts apply conflict of laws principles. The U.S. Constitution’s requirement that this be a Senate-ratified treaty to be enforceable will control. There is NO Paris — anything. It is legally meaningless except in the most ephemeral of ways.
The Paris deal was a frawwd, pulled together in the dying hours of Obamah’s last term. He knew he could not get constitutionally required senate approval so he got it changed to an “agreement” and unilaterally signed on behalf of the US.
The US does not need “a voice in the room ” because if it pulls out of UNFCCC the whole thing will fall apart. That will be the just return for an ‘agreement’ which is based on falsified science and was forced upon the world, including the US, by lies and manipulation.
The main winners at the moment are the Chinese who will do nothing other than was is in their best economic interests while the developed nations swear themselves to economic self-flagellation.
candidate Trump said : “This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop.”
Now he is in a position to ensure that happens : GET ON WITH IT.
As the Paris agreement is basically a mutual economic suicide pact, I would think anyone with an interest in sovereignty and economic stability would certainly reject commitment.
“The U.S. Constitution’s requirement that this be a Senate-ratified treaty to be enforceable will control. There is NO Paris — anything. It is legally meaningless except in the most ephemeral of ways.”
I wish I could agree with you. And you are absolutely correct about what the US Constitution says. Unfortunately there are only 3 justices who care about what the Constitution says (Thomas, Alito, and, we hope, Gorsuch). Kennedy, and the Dirty Little Coward John Roberts, sometimes care, but some times they don’t, and the other four are liberals who only care about what the NYTimes says.
As long as Paris non-Treaty is not duly disapproved and denounced, it could come up at a time when the Court is made up of 9 wise Latinas, and hell will be out for breakfast. You can’t give them any excuses. They will seize power and you will be helpless.
“I say we takeoff and nuke the site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.”
Discussing climate change with watermelons and kleptocrats is like discussing with cannibals whether you want to be boiled or spit roasted.
I wish there was an edit function on this website.
There is an edit function on this website, Walter. Just let your eyes defocus and move on to the following knowledgeable comments.
Paris is legal quicksand. it doesn’t bind you, it drowns you.
+1 Walter
“that shapes today’s globalization”.
What if we dont want this globalization?
Why is the UK trying to pull out of the EU?
What planet is this woman on?
Cheers
Roger
http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com
I did enjoy the discussion between Janice and Walter. Both are correct, because one is arguing the law (Constitution), and the other politics. The 2 are rarely the same.
That sounds like appeasement.
It also sounds like the false dilemma fallacy.
“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” – Winston Churchill
Sounds like a warmist trying to convince sceptics to support a false agreement.
I love it, Latitude; I get a voice in the size of the knife used to cut my throat.
“That sounds like appeasement.”
I liked PM Margaret Thatcher, “I smell the subtle stench of appeasement”.
For some reason that reminds me of:
{repeated from yesterday — as it seems to be needed….}
1) The United States is not “in” the Paris environstalinist deal. That was purely the former president’s hobbyhorse. What he did matters as much as his replacing the flowers on the Whitehouse tables with bowls of — ooo, doesn’t that look SO lovely (cough) — fruit.
**********************
2) Take heart! All is well.
(1)
(Source (copied yesterday): https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy )
(2)
(Source: https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-03-28/trump-about-end-obama-era-emissions-cuts-how-will-co2-emissions-change )
Donald J. Trump is by no stretch of the imagination pro-AGW
(the trollish snide comments of the video’s maker nicely underscore the above. 🙂 )
[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdqc27I7HGA&w=640&h=390]
(youtube)
00:26 A big scam.
1:42 {renewables} not economically viable
(and China is doing the smart thing by using coal)
2:22 This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bu11sh1t has got to stop.”
(Donald J. Trump tweet, 1/2/14)
*********************
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN — LIVES!
#(:))
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
For the U.S. to join in the play in the Paris AGW Futbol Games is to be sent out onto the field with our shoelaces tied together while China, et al., gleefully sprint along, laughing all the way.
Only a:
1) FOOL
or
2) America hater
would bind the U.S. to such a deal.
(and, btw, Trump can’t do that anyway — it still requires Congress to ratify)
Merkill”s comment really says it all
““The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization,” Merkel said, describing discussions with Trump about climate change “very unsatisfying.””
there in lies the problem–today’s globalism (and of course tomorrows is even more important) which is a nice way of saying one world unelected government –EU on steroids — to rule us all.
By staying in you are agreeing with the principle with which you disagree! Say no.
by staying in the room…he changed the conversation to muslim terrorism
Latitude: He can just as effectively shout that from across the street. He has a pretty big megaphone, you know… 🙂
Hey Janice! Happy Memorial Day weekend!
…I think Trump enjoys doing it face to face….across the room with this media, nah
Besides he can run all over them when he’s there….and he just did and proves that
Much more effective to be there and turn it on them…anything they say, he can answer right then, in their face
Latitude! Thank you.
I have no doubt that Trump will NOT indulge his preference for communicating mano a mano at the GREAT expense of crippling the U.S. economy.
What happened in Paris had best stay in Paris…. in their world-famous sewers would be a good place.
“Trump declines to endorse Paris climate agreement and turns the entire conversation to radical muslim terror, illegal immigration, and a bunch of freeloading NATO sponges”…in their face
…but they might not invite him back either!
Good. Cut them off at the knees and leave them to bleed out.
And that’s a problem? It would save the U.S. taxpayers thousands of dollars in transportation and other costs. It would be great for President Trump’s family (dad home is the best). If they don’t want the U.S. there, it’s a win-win.
MAKE — OUR — DAY.
I actually read Art of the Deal….and this is exactly the way he says to do it
Muslim immigration…EU wants it their way not Trump’s way……deal
NATO….EU wants it their way not Trump’s way….deal
Climate Change….EU wants it their way not Trump’s way…deal
When you look at it that way…he’s doing it exactly the way he said to do it in his book
…and he can’t leave the room and do that..he’s using this for his own platform and did it
Like it or not..just walking out is not really an option…we will need to work with them on so many other things
…and Trump hammered them on three of those other things right at that meeting
Without America’s money and military EU is screwed, so yes, walking out is the thing to do. Make them come calling, hat in hand. Just as Art Of The Deal says it should be done. Let them dangle for a year or so. They are the ones in the toilet begging for a bailout.
How many times do we: Europeans screw up, America fixes it at great cost, America props up Europe, Europe entangles America into multiparty B.S. [RINSE AND REPEAT]
Walking out on a ridiculous “deal” with the globalist warmistas is an option, and if he wants the continued support of people like me who voted for him ( and I would have even if CAGW was the only thing he got right).
Walk out, slam the door, and forget to turn off the lights!
>>
Happy Memorial Day weekend!
<<
Same to you Lat!
Jim
Latitude, to “stay to say” you need to agree with CAGW.
Latitude, how does all the things we need to deal with the world relate to the one, small CAGW non-topic?
The art of any deal is being prepared to walk away. As soon as the other side knows you need the deal, they can demand the moon and get it.
“What happened in Paris had best stay in Paris…. in their world-famous sewers would be a good place.”
Hi, Ms. M., what is it with parisian sewers anyhow? i once read the unabridged version of Les Miserables and in it there was a whole chapter about sewers. (fifty pages of nothing but sewers!) Most boring chapter of any book that i ever read. i just don’t get it. What’s up with them sewers?!
The Paris Climate Accord isn’t a room. It’s a cell.
And it’s ATM only allows the US to deposit, not withdraw.
In the absence of US green, let the UN (et al) go through withdrawals.
PS I know other nations are being tapped to provide the UN (et al) its green “fix”, but many of those nations’ leaders still seem to be addicted to “feel good” policies.
Sorry Latitude… no one will have a voice wrt to Paris climate agreement if we withdraw. The whole Paris thing falls apart in short order without the US. You apparently keep thinking it actually has something to do with mitigating climate change… it does NOT. It has everything to do with the new world order.. and without the US on board…well.
Thank you for the sane take on that issue.
Exactly right Alcheson.
The treatment of the Chinese is only the most obvious way that it can be proven it is not about CO2 or climate change.
As if a bunch of idiotic and clueless politicians know the first thing about physical reality.
“It has everything to do with the new world order”
From the goat’s mouth !!!
““The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization,” Merkel said,”
You apparently keep thinking it actually has something to do with mitigating climate change… it does NOT
You must be new….but love the way you projected that! LOL
Acheson
America did not sign the kyoto agreement and that persisted for years. Why would the Paris agreement-whether you agree with it or not- fall apart without Americas participation?
Tonyb
By the US (Trump) declining to join the agreement, it puts several nails into the coffin of the whole global-warming farce and extortion game. This is the only course to take since joining even w/o Senate ratification will be still be seen outside the US as an endorsement by the US. The overwhelming majority of people outside the US known nothing about Senate ratification, and those who do either ignore it for propaganda purposes or do not understand it.
Merkel’s comment in the article-” The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization.”
I think this pretty much says it all. If you don’t favor globalization, get out of the Paris agreement.
it’s the G7…..sign it or not sign it…..we’re in it
…it’s about more things than global warming
Trump is still going to be in the room whether he signs it or not….and he didn’t sign it
…and if he never signs it, he’s still going to be in the room
Personally I love the fact that he went…didn’t sign it…and used it as a platform to call them out on NATO, immigration, muslim terrorism and on and on….he understands the G7 is not just about Paris
Climatereason – The Kyoto Protocol is a treaty, not an accord or agreement. Treaties are binding on the signers (and the US Senate did not and hopefully never will ratify Kyoto.). Paris is not a treaty. Obama purposefully made sure it didn’t take on the language of treaty for the sole purpose of bypassing Congressional advice and consent, and has very little binding language in it. Obama and his team were very careful to make sure Congress wouldn’t have to be involved, by invoking existing treaties and US law as much as possible, and using non-binding language for whatever’s not already binding by way of previously ratified treaty commitments.
As such, all President Trump has to do is say “America has changed its mind” and ignore it. He doesn’t even have to formally withdraw.
Since the Clean Power Plan is pretty-much DOA, and that’s one of the hooks Obama tried to hang Paris on, all that’s left is the previous commitments in the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change (which was foolishly ratified, binding the US to its commitments enumerated in that treaty).
It’s not a treaty, it’s an agreement between heads of state, including former President Obama. In the interest of clarity Pres. Trump should sign an executive order countermanding the previous order, and withdraw from the UNFCCC and stop spending on bad UN programs. When future problems come up, similar to the UN appointing Iran as chair of the Human Rights Clowncil(sic) he can withdraw funds for that.
As far as the Supreme Court goes, be ready to go the distance and control the issues by bringing suit first to prevent others from setting the agenda.
UNEP Inquiry
“Mobilizing the world’s capital is essential for the transition to a sustainable, low-carbon economy.”
“Inquiry: Design of a Sustainable Financial System.”
Scroll down to Advisory Council members which include:
Kathy Bardswick, Canada
Rachel Kyte, SE4All
Adair Turner, also with INET
And others.
http://www.unep.org/inquiry
Another UN organization.
UNEP
The Financial System We Need
From Momentum To Transformation, 2nd Edition, October 2016, 96 pages
Appendix II:
Partners included:
IISD, Canada
Generation Investment Management
Rockefeller Foundation
IMF
SE4All
World Resources Institute/WRI
European Climate Foundation
Paulson Institute
And many others
At:
http://catalogue.unccd.int/778_The_Financial_System_Momentum_to_Transformation.pdf
Networking.
UNEP
Inquiry: Design of a Sustainable Financial System
‘Aligning The Financial System With Sustainable Development’, January 2015, 34 pages
The Inquiry’s Knowledge Network includes:
IISD, Manitoba, Canada
World Bank
PRI
CIGI, Ontario, Canada
Carbon Tracker
UNEP
And others
The Inquiry’s Country Engagements include:
Kathy Bardswick, Canada
Adair Turner, also with INET
And others
http://gstss.org/2015_Norfolk_4th_/Documents/Aligning_the_financial_system.pdf
Networking.
“I say stay in it and play it…..you have no voice if you leave the room
But you leave with your wallet intact
It appears that the mod is off for a well-deserved Memorial Day weekend break, so, once again — minus a bad word (oops) ….
*****************************************
{repeated from yesterday — as it seems to be needed….}
1) The United States is not “in” the Paris environstalinist deal. That was purely the former president’s hobbyhorse. What he did matters as much as his replacing the flowers on the Whitehouse tables with bowls of — ooo, doesn’t that look SO lovely (cough) — fruit.
**********************
2) Take heart! All is well.
(1)
(Source (copied yesterday): https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy )
(2)
(Source: https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-03-28/trump-about-end-obama-era-emissions-cuts-how-will-co2-emissions-change )
Donald J. Trump is by no stretch of the imagination pro-AGW
(the trollish snide comments of the video’s maker nicely underscore the above. 🙂 )
(youtube)
00:26 A big sc@m.
1:42 {renewables} not economically viable
(and China is doing the smart thing by using coal)
2:22 This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bu11shit has got to stop.”
(Donald J. Trump tweet, 1/2/14)
*********************
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN — LIVES!
#(:))
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
For the U.S. to join in the play in the Paris AGW Futbol Games is to be sent out onto the field with our shoelaces tied together while China, et al., gleefully sprint along, laughing all the way.
Only a:
1) FOOL
or
2) America hater
would bind the U.S. to such a deal.
(and, btw, Trump can’t do that anyway — it still requires Congress to ratify)
I agree with everything you’ve said Janice but I still worry that without Trump either coming out and killing the deal outright or letting the Senate kill the deal outright that this ‘Accord” will be used as ammo for the ecolawyers to try to lawfare their way into compliance with it. Wasn’t there a post yesterday or the day before about protests against climate change? We already have seen activist judges throwing the Constitution overboard with the immigration rulings, what makes any sane person think that they wouldn’t CHEERFULLY do the same with Constitution with respect to the Paris Agreement?
Fear not, dear Rhoda. 🙂
The case(s) would ultimately end up in the U.S. Supreme Court where what the law is will soundly defeat all those enviroprofiteer-funded lawsuits.
Donald Trump will not be intimidated and he would no doubt say about that: Believe me. Not going to happen.
https://youtu.be/c-XicsJq5VY
But a few years later in Paris he said it was one of the biggest problems.
https://youtu.be/Dgr2BRccCok
The Climate Action Plan was Obama’s path to meeting his Paris commitments. By canceling the CAP, President The Donald effectively canceled Obama’s unilateral promise to the socialist world.
Janice
Though I agree with much you’ve said I disagree with the action that should be taken. I say treat it as a formal treaty and send it to failure of ratification in the Senate. It takes 2/3 majority to ratify and that ain’t gonna happen. This ambiguous status of an “agreement” such as this by the executive would be dangerous any time but with the left holding so much sway in the courts it is even more so now. I say kill it! Tear off it’s head and bury it in a bag full of garlic. Drive a stake through the heart and leave the rest in eternal sunlight. If we don’t it WILL come back to haunt us. I can’t see a better time for punitive and definitive action on this whole issue of CO2 as a pollutant. And I don’t want any possible justification left for someone to declare CO2 a pollutant ever again because other nations have and that key point is the whole premise of this “agreement”. The POTUS and our legislature and thus both elected branches of our Federal government needs to be on record as having rejected that premise.
And as far as domestic politics goes I want to see the senators of both parties put their markers down as to where they stand on the issue. A vote will force them to do that.
We don’t need a place in the Paris accord room no matter if one thinks it’s an attempted suicide pact for industrialized nations or just Kabuki theater. This news now is coming out of the G7 and we’ll be there no matter what is done about this Paris piece of feces. Just as we will be in the UN if we defund the IPCC or any other initiative that body of mostly authoritarian governments has or creates that is counter to our National interests. Kill or be killed!
Janice, for those items in Paris that are binding (most of it is written not to be binding), it is within Presidential authority to enter into certain agreements provided there is supporting law or precedent. See Circular 175 for the process to determine legal international agreement under the President’s constitutional authority. Because it was not written as a treaty, Congress doesn’t have to ratify – all it takes is a letter of acceptance from the President. I am truly surprised that Obama did not issue an official acceptance before he left office.
jstalewski (7:50am today): Circular 175 is not law. Given ad arguendo that Circular 175 along with Japan Whaling Ass’n v. American Cetacean Soc’y make Obama’s actions voidable, not void, this helps President Trump (and also argues against sending it to the Senate for the needless delay of rejecting the Paris deal).
That is, the Circular 175 argument cuts both ways: it says that, likewise, Trump has the authority to rip it up and throw it into the garbage (where it belongs, imo).
So, your point is relevant and of interest, but, moot.
No no no. They need America and will respect us more for telling the truth about this sham
Climate fraud needs no US validation, should leave the entire UN pseudoscience protocol right now as well.
Dr. Lindzen should get the Metal of Freedom and the entire WH should filled with skeptic science experts denouncing 40+ years of fraud.
We may need to fund climate propaganda deprograming centers across universities. A cult needs to unwind, it isn’t going to be quick or easy.
A clean Paris break is a start but globalists are far from defeated.
Paris is the ultimate Tar-Baby, crafted by Obama to entangle future Presidents.
So long as it exists, it will be the courts and lawyers that decide America’s economic future. If you think the EPA is a monster, imagine what Paris will become.
As has happened in the EU, what started out as a Trade Agreement has grown so that it now regulates every aspect of life. The people are not governed by elected officials, rather by faceless bureaucrats in Brussels, drafting even more cumbersome regulations. While the EU parliament is a powerless joke.
he promised to leave the room
so leave the room.
then leave the building.
“no voice if you leave the room”
On the contrary, there are many instances where you have a much larger voice if you leave. The simple action of leaving can be the biggest shout-out you can do. Also, you are expected to follow the rules inside the room, whereas outside the room you can point out how badly the rules have been rigged to silence dissenters.
When the room is padded on all sides maybe it’s best to be on the outside looking in.
Trump tells confidants U.S. will quit Paris climate deal
President Trump has privately told multiple people, including EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, that he plans to leave the Paris agreement on climate change, according to three sources with direct knowledge.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-trump-tells-confidants-he-plans-to-leave-paris-climate-deal-2424446776.html
Thanks for the link, Latitude. Not mentioned is Trump’s only (I think) substantive public assessment of the Paris Stupidity. In his 100 days speech he described it as, to paraphrase, a crazy one-sided deal where China and India go gangbusters with coal while the USA goes broke letting them do it. I would expect that, not climate, will be his premise of tanking the deal.
Another encouraging angle in that report is that the White House has asked Pruitt, a sceptic’s Godsend, to zip it until a formal announcement is made so that the decision will be seen as a “victory for Trump, not Pruitt”.
If you don’t walk out and kill it, it will grow back. The goal as clearly stated is to consume all the money of the world to solve a theoretical issue. Now, if the Arctic was ice free as Al baby had predicted, something other that babbling and hysteria to go on, that would have been a totally different discussion.
There are few moment in history when 1 person can change the world.
Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan Margaret Thatcher, Gorbachev seized these moments and made the most of them.
This is Donald Trump’s moment.
It would be difficult to argue the case for catastrophic global warming. World temperatures as calculated by NOAA have risen just 0.8 0C since 1880. Since 1998 man has emitted 1/3 of all CO2 emissions yet world temperature, as measured by more accurate satellites, has remained constant. (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/06/a-problem-nearly-one-third-of-co2-emissions-occured-since-1998-and-it-hasnt-warmed).
Temperatures vary by 10 degrees or more from day to night or from city to city with no ill effect. World crop and grain harvests continue to increase from year to year yet we are led to believe that we are facing disaster which can only be avoided by closing our reliable power generators and spending billions building solar and wind generators which cannot be relied on for constant supply.
Europe and much of Australia is already well down this path of destruction. China is the world’s largest emitter of CO2 and has promised not curtail its development of new coal fired power until 2030.
Donald Trump is the only man who can save America and the World and reveal that the climate change emperor has no clothes. Cancel Paris, or give it to the Senate to dispose of.
Seize the moment. Please. For the world.
Great overview, LittleOil. May I submit a small addition before, hopefully, the moderator transmits your comment direct to the White House.
“World temperatures as calculated by NOAA have risen just 0.8 0C since 1880”
on the way out of the Little Ice Age.
1+
Yah, excellent
“A voice in the room” of an asylum? Best thing is to get the hell out of there.
Vision of an “unsatisfied” clutch of Merkel mad types has made my day.
The specific climate goals are thus politically encouraged, rather than legally bound. Only the processes governing the reporting and review of these goals are mandated under international law. This structure is especially notable for the United States—because there are no legal mitigation or finance targets, the agreement is considered an “executive agreement rather than a treaty”. Because the UNFCCC treaty of 1992 received the consent of the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to take effect.
I predict Trump will send it to the Senate for ratification.
I will be very surprised if he doesn’t approve it next week.
agree
Approve the “Paris Accord” ?..What have you been smoking today ?
Wrong. Trump didn’t wish to cause even more uproar (after the NATO and the trade discords) while in Europe. Next week he is back in the USA on the home ground where he feels as the King Donald I and will be looking after his loyal subjects, as for the rest they have to like it or lump it.
Change the news cycle time is what time it is.
Oh the Russians stole the election by….
… well how knows what they did, because everything is so Fake in the News today, but exposing somebody’s emails is just exposing who they really are and then we don’t have to fall for their fake public personna anymore.
Leak everybody’s emails so we know who they really are. I’m fine what that.
——
But back to topic, probably good for Trump to get CNN off the the FakeNews and get them onto the “global warming” storyline again.
No matter what the FakePolls say, people do not want to pay MORE for energy and to pay Carbon Taxes. Ask the politicians who lost elections based on the green fantasy taxes. All of them.
But then, there is no real difference if one signs onto the Paris Accord or not because it has no enforcement mechanisms. Anything happen to any country that did not meet their Kyoto Protocol targets? What Kyoto Protocol targets? Which countries exceed their targets and which did not meet them? Nobody has a clue or cares one iota.
Which countries have put the most money into the new UN Green Climate Fund. Nobody knows because you can’t find out because they hide all the information..
So what. Sign the darn Accord. Nothing needs to change at all and nothing happens if you don’t live up to it.
But change the news cycle back to something less FakeNews-like and that is worth something.
because it has no enforcement mechanisms.
==============
not true. the white-house lawyers certainly don’t believe that, nor did Obama. The cost of going to court is the enforcement mechanism. Environmental pressure groups can force public policy via the courts rather than the choice be left to the public via the ballot. In effect the levers of government move from the elected officials to the appointed judges.
The EPA “sue and settle” games with green NGOs short circuited Congress, and even the Executive, at times. We need to get all that crap off the books.
“I will make my final decision on the Paris Accord next week!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 27, 2017”
That exclamation point on Donald’s tweet makes me think he is going to exit the Paris Agreement. He wouldn’t be excited about making the announcement otherwise, imo.
Either you or Latitude above will be disappointed. Me, I have no expectations, so I will be neither disappointed nor surprised by anything Trump does. I think David Brooks (whom I mostly detest) nailed the guy:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/opinion/trump-classified-data.html
Just remember, that, although you can be too thin, you cannot be too rich or too cynical.
Walter can read my mind……..not accurately
Latitude:
I don’t think David Brooks understands Trump. Trump actually has some personal convictions and has had for years. Trump has been expounding on world problems for decades. He knows what’s going on and he has a definite point of view.
David Brooks thinks Trump is a butterfly. I do not.
>>
. . . six fireflies beeping randomly in a jar.
<<
I played with fireflies as a kid. I don’t remember hearing them beeping.
Jim
You would have heard them if you cared enough about the environment, Jim. Caring mightily gives you powers beyond normal human capabilities.
Ya, that Trump guy is really stupid. It’s not like he is a billionaire and President of the United States, or anything like that.
We, the commentators, are the only smart people. Achievements are so overrated.
Dave Fair, you nailed it, pal. Fake news generators are the smart ones!
Ditto! The endorsement, so far approved only by Obama, needs to be ‘considered’ as a treaty and referred to Congress.
I said not accurately…..
@ur momisugly TA…I looked up some of his past interviews and talks after his nomination. He certainly was animated in many of them while speaking clearly as he followed his thoughts on a given subject. My opinion of him improved a good bit after listening to him in his younger years.
Trump is not stupid.
Of course the MSM and the Left always portray Republicans as being stupid. Remember “Bush’s Brain”, Karl Rove, who the MSM claimed was doing all GW’s thinking for him. The same with Reagan. They called him an “amiable dunce”. They currently claim Bannon is Trump’s brain. The Left is like a broken record playing the same tune over and over again. The Left has gotten to the point where they believe their own lies and propaganda.
TA,
You’re dead on regarding the Bigbrain Progressive meme;
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/02/the_walkerstupid_obamagenius_myth.html
It started in the later 19th century in fact in NY urban newspaper circles. Opposing collectivism = rube status and it refined from there.
Scott Adams said he shouldn’t just come out with a decision made from behind closed doors. I tend to agree with him. He needs to hold a livestream debate between the two sides, then he can say, well such and such refused to show up or they had no answer to some of the points brought up by the other side etc.
First off, Merkel says the agreement “shapes globalization”. Notice that she doesn’t say it fixes any climate problems, real or imagined.
Second, the Paris agreement would cost something like a trillion dollars per year and result in cooling of MAYBE a tenth of a degree maximum. This is clearly the world’s worst and most inefficient refrigeration system.
w.
Well, on the surface of it, it seems ridiculous in the first place to try and micro-manage the for-God’s-sake CLIMATE, by micromanaging one species contribution to it, when that species contribution is only something like 3% or so, and the Greenhouse gas in question only amounts to about 3% of that.
As far as Trump goes, I think he’s leveraging, just like he does.
Merkel’s “shapes today’s globalization” comment should be sufficient motivation for Trump to “blow it out of the water”.
“Sighted sub, sank same.”, Donald Francis Mason
Bingo. ‘Globalization’ is the problem, and it’s what Trump was elected to solve.
Hmm,is this en echo of a previous German’s idea,of globalisation!
+1
There are no surplus GDP funds to force spend, on green scams that do not work, ignoring the surreal issue that almost the entire warming in the last 150 years was caused by solar cycle changes.
Drain the dam swamp.
The IPCC science, economics, and engineering is/was 100% incorrect/fake.
The Paris stupid ‘accord’ is a future legal black hole for the special interest groups.
http://www.justfacts.com/images/nationaldebt/debt_gdp-full.png
Quite so. Nothing to do with any warming.
And, one would guess that “shaping globalization” will not ring any nice bells on Trump. Desperate move.
“The end justifies the means” is only seems a just justification for those whose standards reach no higher than themselves.
Look, all these multi-party agreements devolve into the lowest common denominator. You have supposed climate agreements spinning off into SJW nonsense.
What happens is one party will hold up consensus to get an advantage or a political objective. Multiply that by the square of the number of participants and you get a sense of the mindless crap in climate and trade agreements.
Have any of you actually read any of the UN and IPCC drivel? TPP Trade Agreement?
Bilateral agreements are manageable. Who the hell needs the rest of the world agreeing to a deal between sovereign states?
Willis:
Thanks for that info. I have a question.
Do you or anybody know what Merkel means by the agreement “shapes globalization”?
It seems to me that it could mean anything (unless, of course, somebody knows different).
Richard
Her “shapes globalization” means nothing more than “we all agree to constrain American exceptionalism.”
Left to its own devices, America engenders worldwide constitutional freedoms and economic expansion through capitalism. Obama showed what happens when America is hamstrung by world socialism.
richardscourtney May 27, 2017 at 12:00 pm
“Do you or anybody know what Merkel means by the agreement “shapes globalization”?”
WR: To unify countries you need a common enemy. When there is no common enemy, you need to create one: Catastrophic Antropogenic Global Warming.
And where do you do so? In your common institution: the UN. An IPCC is created and the IPCC creates the problem. And then you get all noses in the same direction. Remember the emotional pictures at reaching the Paris agreement. For example: http://16005-presscdn-0-36.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/paris-agreement.jpg The photo expresses the common thing: ‘Together we will make it’.
It is all orchestrated. And there is no real climate problem. I suppose that is why the Paris Agreement is no real treaty: everyone can leave when he wants.
“The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization,” Merkel said, describing discussions with Trump about climate change “very unsatisfying.”
Could not agree more. This is the money quote above. Globalization. Nothing to do with the environment.
And Merkel is an East German Communist.
Since it is and always about a political order the impact on climate was always a facade. Time for technical skeptics to admit how wrong they always have been in their treatment of climate policy as a serious science proposal. A key reason we were brought to this brink of a social critical thinking collapse.
Willis you say “Second, the Paris agreement would cost something like a trillion dollars per year and result in cooling of MAYBE a tenth of a degree maximum”
——————
The problem is, if as you, and hopefully everyone, desire to enable the 3rd word countries to become 1st world countries then their energy if derived from dirty sources will more than 8 times the pollution – co2 and other, this will make considerably more than 0.1C rise in temperature.
Hopefully if the 1 trillion dollars helps them avoid following this path the we all benefit. What proof have you that it will not have this effect. I understand you accept a doubling of co2 will add 1C to temp. So with all the 3rd world polluting to attain the west standard of living you would be looking at least 3C rise in temp. I would hope you see this as a poor outlook.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cop21-richest-10-per-cent-produce-half-the-world-s-co2-emissions-a6756511.html
That depends on IGPOCC’S hypothesized positive feedback, which is very iffy.
Seriously, Smueller? Pollution? Read up on CO2.
According to you, a doubling of CO2 from 280 ppm to 560 ppm would lead to a 1 degree C global temperature increase above pre-industrial. It follows that a further doubling from 560 ppm to 1,120 ppm would result in another increase of 1 degree C. To get to your 3 degree C number, CO2 would have to rise to 2,240 ppm.
Show me a study.
No way to get 3C rise at 1C per doubling. Are you actually projecting 8X times the present atmospheric CO2?
That’s 3200 ppm! I hope you see your projection as physically impossible. Remember, all the scary climate stories depend on ludicrous amounts of positive feedback.
Smueller- there is no way to predict what will happen with the climate over the next hundred years. The IPCC models do not model “the” climate they model “a” climate cannot be detailed enough to work because the climate is chaotic, it is not deterministic. It doesn’t follow a single path from one time to the next, it can follow any of hundreds of paths and because the models are all inadequate they cannot predict which path the climate will follow. To me it appears that the best that can be done is explain how the glaciations and ice age work. Then we’ll have a bit of an idea when to expect the next global temperature drop of 9deg.C . The glaciations and interglacials seem to an example of an attractor in a chaotic system.
I have more than 1\10 th of a degree variability around my back yard.
Refrigeration is bad for life on earth. More CO2, more warmth will lead to more fecund life.
Merkel grew up and was educated as a chemist in East Germany (Leipzig) under communism, became political post Berlin Wall at age 35. One must wonder how deeply anti-democratic her indoctrination was in her formative years. Does she recognize she’s on a path to Marxist Totalitarianism?
Just because
Merkel
and the EU
are committed to
economic and
national-security
flagellation
doesn’t mean
the US has to
do the same.
“President Barack Obama’s signature achievements” Really? The treaty was never ratified by Congress, so it is null&void, non-binding, meaningless. And DJT has yet to throw this trash out so it can still cause problems.
Please explain to me how remaining in a flawed “non-treaty” is necessary for the U.S. to develop advanced energy technologies and participate in the global economy?
It’s not necessary.
“Six against One”… looks darn one sided, doesn’t it?
But that’s OK to the USA, Chancellor Merkel!
We’ll wait while EU’all go get some more help to ‘even up the odds’!
Retreat? Hell, we just got here!
Trump had them outnumbered!
If France, Germany, and Italy are part of the European Union, which has its own governing body, why are they allowed their own individual reps at the G7? And the UK is still part of the EU, too, although on its way to the exit, so maybe they’re a special case. Why not just one rep for the EU? Canada, Japan, the U.S., and the EU should be called the G4 (but maybe consider the UK to make it G5?).
First bd, walk away. Negotiations start. What concessions on both sides???
I particularly liked the article mentioning that not being a part of it won’t stop things and just makes you late to the party… I say, excellent. Lets say that renewables eventually do get awesome. We can buy the awesome ones cheaply, instead of the crappy ones that cost dearly. Win win. If it’s inevitable, let someone else do the heavy lifting for once.
For contrast the Guardian report of the same story is here.
A quote from that article:
Strangely, they don’t say why that was a reason for the US to be worried.
M Courtney May 27, 2017 at 10:30 am
And i know exactly which computer it is.
michael
Daisy, Daisy, give me you answer true.
I’m half-crazy all for the love of you.
It won’t be a stylish marriage, I can’t afford a carriage;
But you’ll look sweet. Upon the seat of a bicycle built for two!
Darned phone auto-complete syntax :
But you’ll look sweet, upon the seat …
A 0.2C temperature increase is mindless, made up B.S.
Not simulations – computer models. ‘Model’ is a more general term. ‘Simulation’ a kind of model. Climate models are not simulations because 1) they parameterize too many things, 2) ignore most of the factors affecting climate, and 3) model climate at too coarse a grain.
Good!
In fact GREAT! 🙂
As in, “Make America GREAT again!”
Yeah, if it is very unsatisfying to Merkel, then it is probably very satisfiying to Trump’s supporters. We don’t see eye-to-eye with Merkel on very many things.
Yep. She is either a BIG Kool-aide drinker or …. a Kool-aide maker….
Mutti made the most cosmologically stupid move in all of political history. Kiloparsecs beyond any insanity perpetrated by all of the addled despots of yore combined. The English language – rich and expressive as it undoubtedly is – fails miserably as a medium in which to describe quite how lunatic Merkel and her unilateral decision to fulsomely invite the entirety of the Muslim third world into Europe are.
I think Merkel is just generally clueless. She actually thought inviting millions of refugees into Germany and other European nations was a good thing. She seems oblivious to the fact that her actions have gone a long way towards killing the established civilizations of Western Europe. She invites the enemy into the camp and expects good things to happen.
Merkel is not alone. There are many millions on the Left who are just as clueless. It must come with the territory.
“Merkel and her unilateral decision to fulsomely invite the entirety of the Muslim third world into Europe are.”
Trump may finally have Merkel and NATO on the right track. Trump got them to sign off on military action against the Islamic State Terror Army, which was one of Trump’s complaints about NATO, that they were not focusing on terrorism. Now they are.
Had Merkel and NATO focused on the Islamic Terror Army back about 2012, they could have stemmed the flow of refugees being generated by the attacks of the Islamic Terror Army.
What is so pitiful is a well-trained force like NATO could have taken down the Islamic Terror Army is short order if they put their minds to it. Instead, they did nothing, along with Obama, and sat back and watched as the Islamic Terror Army disrupted the whole Middle East and created millions of refugees, who are now flooding into Europe.
And then there is their stupid move to remove Kaddafy from power in Libya without providing for putting Libya back on its feet *after* Kaddafy. Instead, NATO and Hillary killed Kaddafy and then went home and washed their hands of the situation, and the terrorists took over in Libya and now there are thousands of Libyan refugees adding to the onslaught.
Merkel and general Leftwing inaction and stupid actions have brought a large percentage of their problems on themselves.
Brexit was the first official revolt from this path.
She cackles as she stands over the cauldron stirring.
It’s Communist strategy to break down and destroy an existing culture, in this case European culture, in order to fill the void with Marxism/Totalitarianism. Merkel was indoctrinated and ingrained with East German Communism. The flooding of Western Europe with overwhelming numbers of poverty-stricken refugees of a different culture is bound to hasten the breakdown process along with the economic suicide of fighting CAGW.
haha, Trump is doing almost nothing to make America great again. Kinda sad to see so many people who go through live living on slogans, rather than actual accomplishments.
..he appointed Gorsuch
Lets see… Gorsuch, two oil pipelines, opening up federal lands to exploration, attempting to rescind the massive land grabs by Obama, trying to restrict immigration from terrorist locales without a good vetting system in place, Pruitt in at EPA, Sessions in at DOJ, Progressives/Libs heads exploding…. those are just a few of the things I could quickly come up with. Of course if he would actually get some help from Congress he would get a helluva LOT more done. Like Tax reform and healthcare overhaul.
Chris, you seem to have a nasty little mind.
Engarp,
Garland could not have been approved. From where would he have gotten 60 votes?
Clearly you know nothing of our system as it was then.
Do you seriously believe that Thomas was as qualified as Bork?
You can’t possibly be an American. You sound as if you’re not even of this world.
Engarp,
I’m the very opposite of misogynist. I love women.
But that doesn’t change the fact that Sotomayor and Kagan are Lesbians. Which status can’t help but affect their rulings on a wide range of issues.
I don’t know Sotomayor, but I do have a mutual friend with Kagan, so have met her socially now and then. She’s likeable. So much so that Scalia hoped Obama would nominate her, as the best of a bad lot.
But not having a family does affect your world view. Kagan herself is wise enough to realize that the USSC has gotten far too regional. It now consists mainly of people from a narrow class from a narrow region. Even the few justices from outside the Acela Corridor have long lived in it and been affected by its statist provincialism. Even Ginsburg realized that nationalizing abortion and same sex marriage wasn’t good jurisprudence. Unfortunately that recognition didn’t stop her from doing it.
Gorsuch helps restore some national balance to the court, as the only current resident of the West and Protestant on the court.
And you apparently don’t know that it’s possible to keep a vote from coming to the floor when 60 votes are needed.
Engarp,
That’s right. Thanks for admitting I’m right.
Garland couldn’t have been approved, so your lame-brained assertion is shown false, by your own admission.
The GOP changed the rules in the same direction as Reid had already done. Otherwise, there would have been no ninth justice.
At least now the USSC is one small step closer to representing America. If the court looked like America, it would have six Protestants, two Catholics and one Other, ie Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, pagan or infidel. It would have three Southerners and two each of Northeasterners, Midwesterners and Westerners.
In its present configuration, it’s not even close, except for one black and one Latina, which is about right as to ethnicity ratio.
” I guess you have forgotten that the basis of our system of government follows the 1st Amendment, which sort of requires us to keep “church” and “state” separate.”
The requirement is that the State not establish a religion, a State religion, like the British used to have.
There is no law that says the State and Religion have to avoid each other.
The law also says the State cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion.
So, the State cannot establish a State-controlled religion, and the State cannot interfere in the free exercise by private citizens of their religion.
The ACLU wants to turn this law on its head. They want the State to suppress the private exercise of religion in public places in the name of not establishing a State-controlled religion. But allowing a religious group to practice their religion is not the equivalent of the State establishing a State-controlled religion, it is merely allowing the religious group to practice their religion without interference.
Unfortunately, the ACLU wants to interfere in all public displays of religion on the grounds that this is equivalent to the State establishing its own religion. The U.S. Constitution says they are wrong.
Back off, Chimp. That was uncalled for.
If Merkel is unhappy, its a good thing.
Still can’t believe Germans haven’t run her out of office.
The whole business of Climate Change ceased being meaningfully scientific with the publication (and accompanying hype) of Michael Mann’s ‘hockey-stick’ paper. President Trump occupies a high political office and you may be sure that his decision will be overwhelmingly dominated by political considerations. He will have little trouble finding scientific reasons to justify his decision … whatever it is.
Trump seemed much more interested in spanking Merkel and Macron for non-compliance on NATO funding levels. It is still hard to tell what is going on with Paris.
Macron had some nice things to say about Trump after the G7 was over. One thing he said was Trump was very good at listening to the various points of view. Very engaged.
It’s not “climate change”.
It’s Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
A prophecy of futures possible
And failed models past.
Conceived in dreams, born in inference,
And progressing at the twilight fringe.
The age of liberal abandonment has passed.
Deep Plunger(s) has exposed your Water Closet(s).
Hey, Merkel. It wasn’t carbon dioxide that forced the refugee crises.
We want [positive] progress, not peculiar prophecies, and redistributive schemes.
Stay strong, Mr. President.
If Paris was worth its salt, Obummer would not have circumvented the formal process of formal treaty ratification. The whole accord is just another redistribution scheme to lower the standard of living in the USA over time while funneling the resources we are not permitted to use to the other, nearly 200, countries with their hands out picking the USA pockets. They see it as reparations for the past American exceptionalism. I see it as embezzlement in the name of climate.
It’s just another attempt to use the weaponized, SJW-infested court system to sidestep Congress. Democrats may not be able to get elected any more, but they don’t need to when they can just rule from the courts.
Trump refuses to sign on to a joint statement about climate change, and there is no hint of any renegotiating of the Paris Agreement, so what’s not to like?
If Trump was interested he could have got in on the joint statement. The other G7 members would have bent over backwards to get him onboard. They would have let Trump write the darn thing. But Trump declined. Not the actions of a man who is going to join an agreement.
I [think] I told Trump that I would not give a dollar for his campaign unless he reneged on the Paris agreement. [I get his e-mails asking for money but I am not sure if he gets my response to those e-mails?]
I had a word in his ear about those chinese hoax comments. I expect his endorsement “golf courses don’t grow on trees.”
“The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization.”
Yep, nothing to do with the climate!
Which is precisely why he needs to upset these these people a hell of a lot more than they are currently claiming to be upset. They need jolting into a different mindset.
C’mon Donald, return the favor. Publicly blow this stuff off, and help make it an issue in the UK election. If we are going to have perdition forced on us, at least help make it something people thought they had an opportunity to vote for. Recent history suggests the general electorate are not quite as stupid as CNN thinks.
Participating in the Paris deal is not consistent with ‘Making America Great…’ I think he (Trump) recognizes that.
Every day Mr. Trump delays exiting the Paris Agreement he risks a Judge forcing America to stay in Judicial fiat and allowing climate extremists band climate profiteers to dictate energy and environmental policy via the courts.
I agree. He should have struck while the iron was hot.
I don’t care what is being threatened or offered to him behind the scenes. They can’t threaten anything worse than undermining the whole fabric of the Western economic way of life, and they can’t promise anything better than to agree to not do so. This is what the issue is about. All he is doing is allowing them to marshal their forces, which are very considerable.
Well OK, so far so good. For now, I’m going to ignore the possibility that he might not withdraw or disavow, and concentrate instead on the delicious worldwide hue and cry, the wailing, moaning, and teeth-gnashing from the America-hating, humanity-hating Watermelons when he does. It will be epic.
““The Paris deal isn’t just any other deal. It is a key agreement that shapes today’s globalization,” Merkel said,”
How out of touch can Merkel be!!! This is the prime reason to stay out of it. I will replay Pearse’s foreign affairs 101: When a big player joins a multilateral klatch, it becomes a minority voice and things get decided against it (it also gets to pony up the majority of the cost). When a big player joins a bilateral deal, he gets what he wants or he withdraws. Only the little guys are sensible to sign multilateral deals. Look how votes go in the UN. US has a veto but so do China, Russia, UK and France – the big player should not be happy with the odds for its favored policy. Tillerson and Cohn need to read this simple “101”. Like the Brexit fears of almost half the UK, I chided them with their history (Britannia ruled the waves (brave warriors), English is spoken by a couple of billion people (hugely advantageous trade, investment situation), These countries have the same traditions of freedom, rule of law, fair play, etc. And in their spare time, the British invented all the games we play!)
Nice! Great use of the Wiff-Waff argument.
To the subtle reader, the meaning was that we are a “club”. Thanks for informing me that they even invented ping pong, too! Why avoid doing business with the people we really know. I could have added that the UK invented the industrial revolution, economics, banking…. and the English speaking world garnered 90% of the Nobel prizes in science (80% of course in the US). Continental Europe’s biggest contribution was Mаяхйзм, a failed system that they can’t lay to rest. Fortunately, Brexit was done when it was because in another few years the fearful would have been the majority. Trump’s win, too, would not have been possible a few years from now. Now that may be bad or good news to you.
I forget who said this.
“He who promises to rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.”
Gary, the UN IPCC is driven by majority vote only. No Security Council vetoes.
This is how the kleptocrats and socialists push climate agreements to extreme, ludicrous ends.
Amazing how a real leader, stands out amongst todays “World Leaders”.
Trump is the one eyed man in the kingdom of the blind, while these treacherous worms are trying to impose globalism,via the UN and CAGW, Trump points to the death worshippers walking freely amongst their people and reminds them , national defence has a cost.
They respond by attempting to ignore him and continue to blather about CC.
I predict a rather entertaining speech coming up on Climate Change,globalism and responsibility of politicians.