Open Letter to Senator Elizabeth Warren

Reposted from the CO2 coalition

On August 28, Dr. Caleb Rossiter, Executive Director of the CO2 Coalition, published on open letter to Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) on the issue of censorship. He states:

“In July you wrote to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and, to my shock and dismay, asked him to censor me and the CO2 Coalition of climate scientists and energy economists, of which I am the executive director. At issue is an op-ed on the arcane mathematics of computerized climate models that I co-authored in 2019 with our senior fellow Patrick Michaels, a former president of the American Association of State Climatologists.

“I’ve been struggling to find some common ground that would interest you in looking carefully at my opinions, both on the “climate disinformation” you allege and on the concept of censoring rather than debating opinions with which one disagrees. […]

“The energy with which you pursue your argument that the CO2 Coalition should be banned from Facebook for promoting “climate denialism” is impressive, but you’ve violated our first rule in analysis: understand the other point of view so you can portray it accurately before questioning it.

“You should have contacted the CO2 Coalition to see if you could learn anything from their view of the facts, let alone of the media characterizations and conclusions about its interaction with Facebook. The Coalition website has a specific statement countering the original news claim that Facebook made an exception for the op-ed in question because it contained “opinion.” […]

“And there is absolutely no evidence as of yet for your claim that, “The devastation caused by the climate crisis will also be disproportionately felt by communities of color…” Even if there were, we have learned here in class to do full analysis of not just the costs, but also the benefits of various policy choices. Wouldn’t banning cheap, reliable energy in favor of costly, intermittent “renewables” under a “carbon neutral” Green New Deal itself badly damage communities of all colors? (Remember, there is nothing renewable about the mining and manufacturing infrastructure needed for wind turbines and solar panels and their storage batteries!)

“Similarly, you worry over media reports that combined climate and economic mathematical models can be tuned to project CO2-driven extreme weather that reduces US GDP by ten percent in 2100 – but then you leave out the tremendous, fossil-fueled increase in GDP by then that would more than pay for such damages.

“You argue that Facebook should censor non-alarmist views because, “the climate crisis and environmental degradation are not matters of opinion. They are existential threats that hurt communities and economies throughout the world – including and especially Black communities and other communities of color.” But of course these claims are the essence of matters of opinion! They involve judgments that can go either positive or negative, depending on reasonable choices in analysis of the claims and counterclaims on science, economics, and health, as well as on the costs and the benefits of changing our energy mix.  […]

“As I follow your argument for Facebook censoring my views, (1) the CO2 Coalition knowingly lies (that’s the definition of disinformation); (2) these lies will reduce public support for “action on climate change” (actually, energy action, since the climatic results of reducing CO2 emissions are precisely what the models have tried, and failed so far, to project); and (3) without such action, “communities and economies…will continue to be ravaged by the climate crisis.” (Actually, “continue” is premature, since as noted, there is no climate crisis yet, only a projected one.)

“There is much here, of course, that I think is unproven and that I think you didn’t prove or even try to prove in your letter. But even if it were all true, wouldn’t it be better to tolerate our disagreement, and then defeat my nefarious efforts in debate than to simply silence them? Surely, Facebook users are smart enough to assess evidence and make up their own minds, just like my students were. I still subscribe to the dictum often attributed to Voltaire: I may disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
The full letter can be downloaded at the link below.

Open Letter to Senator Elizabeth WarrenDownload

112 thoughts on “Open Letter to Senator Elizabeth Warren

    • Yes. I was going to say good luck with that.

      Marxists like Warren are taking over the demo☭ratic party and will lie, cheat and steal to increase their power.

      They typically accuse opponents of doing what they in fact are doing. For instance, with a compliant Marxist media, they have hidden wide-spread rioting or tried to portray riots as peaceful protests. Only, when they see that the riots are hurting them in the polls are they acknowledging them and now they are trying to blame the president, even though all of these are occurring in demo☭ratically controlled cities and states.

      In fact, demo☭rats and their supporters are funding paid protesters (rioters) and even bailing them out of jail when arrested. Demo☭ratic prosecutors are even dropping serious charges when possible, allowing riots to persist.

      • The Kenosha Wisconsin shooting of the 3 BLM rioters and thugs by a 17 yr-old carrying an AR-15 is disturbing.
        And not in the way the media would like the story to be portrayed.

        – One part of my rational side says that minor kid should never have been there with a gun. He was breaking the law carrying any gun without direct supervision of a responsible, legal age adult. I get that.
        – The other rational side says, everyone has an absolute right to protect themselves from violent assault. The 17 yr old was then assaulted by 3 individuals, at least 2 of which were armed with handgun. 2 then lost their lives while assaulting the 17 yr old, and the other was seriously wounded in the arm as he held a pistol and fired and missed.
        History is filed with such pivotal turning points by children doing what the adults cower from. The young Jewish tribe boy David faced-off and slew the Philistine giant Goliath while the adults cowered, is but one example.

        That 17 yr old Kenosha shooting story is very much like the Covington High School-Nick Sandman portrayal initially by the media 18 months ago. An intentional distortion by outlets like CNN, NYTimes, MSNBC, and Buzzfeed was done to create a preferred narrative. But they apparently didn’t think their might be more complete video recording to show the whole context of what happened there. That narrative as Nick Sandman the bad boy utterly crumbled and reality reversed 180º when the full videos were seen of that incident and who were the real provocateurs.

        Sometimes it takes a child’s actions to wake-up the adults as to what they should be doing to stop the thugs.

        • The overwhelming evidence proves he knew how to handle the gun safely. It was not a “dangerous” gun in his hands. Hence, no law broken.

          • In Wisconsin, like all states, it is a Misdemeanor for a minor to be in possession of a firearm without an immediate presence and guidance of a responsible adult.

          • One of the charges filed against Rittenhouse according to several news outlets:
            “Rittenhouse also was charged with a misdemeanor count for possession of a dangerous weapon under the age of 18.”

            You can go be Mr Legal Eagle and dig throguh Wisconsin statutes to find the specific reference law #, if you care too. This is pretty standard across all 50 states, i.e. simple possession by a minor of a firearm without immediate supervision of a controlling adult is a generally a misdemeanor. The 1968 Firearms Act out of Congress pretty much dictated what the standards are to the states to follow for consistency across all 50 states: long guns and shotguns: age 18. Pistols age 21.

          • Joel O’Bryan – August 29, 2020 at 3:07 pm

            The Kenosha Wisconsin shooting of the 3 BLM rioters and thugs by a 17 yr-old carrying an AR-15 is disturbing.– One part of my rational side says that minor kid should never have been there with a gun. He was breaking the law carrying any gun without direct supervision of a responsible, legal age adult. I get that.

            Joel, were your above noted “the 3 BLM rioters and thugs” guilty of breaking the law by carrying pistols without direct supervision of a responsible, legal age adult? Was it all right for those 3 rioters to be there with their guns ……… but not alright for the white 17 year old to be there with his gun.

            The 17 yr old was then assaulted by 3 individuals, at least 2 of which were armed with handgun. 2 then lost their lives while assaulting the 17 yr old, and the other was seriously wounded in the arm as he held a pistol and fired and missed.

            Joel O’Bryan, are you certain that the only reason you found the incident disturbing is that the assaulting trio of “3 black BLM rioters and thugs” suffer gun shots for their dastardly actions whereas the “property protecting” white 17 yr old remained unscathed?

            Is the white kid still in jail and the black kids released without posting bond?

          • “The 1968 Firearms Act out of Congress pretty much dictated”

            In blatant violation of the second amendment, so …

          • “Joel O’Bryan, are you certain that the only reason you found the incident disturbing is that the assaulting trio of “3 black BLM rioters and thugs” suffer gun shots for their dastardly actions whereas the “property protecting” white 17 yr old remained unscathed?”

            It looked to me like the three guys who were shot were white, too.

            The kid probably shouldn’t have been there with a rifle. He was obviously inexperienced in such things. But I would have done the same thing he did. Those guys were attacking him and he has a right to defend himself, and if his attackers die, that’s on them, not him. What kind of fool would go after an armed guy’s rifle? Answer: A dangerous fool. A fool that would look like a certain life-threatening danger to the person he is assualting. I would have pulled the trigger, too.

            You try to grab someone’s gun, and you will probably get shot. Don’t try that with me. I can guarantee you what will happen in that circumstance. I would consider anyone doing that to be a threat to my life.

        • A 17 year old is a young adult, not a “kid” .
          I served with several men who were 17.
          ( till they celebrated their birthdays )

          I understand your point , but in the part of the country I grew up in ,
          gun ownership and use was common by persons as young as 10 .

          Maybe we were more mature then than people are now ?

          And we didn’t shoot anyone that was law abiding …
          😉

          • I started using a single barrel 12 gauge shotgun when I was 12 years old.
            By 17, I was fairly experienced.

            My great uncle lied about his age to sign up for WW1 at the age of 15 to fight in the trenches. (he lived to be 90.)
            It is not unusual for teenagers to be competent with firearms.

          • 26 yr olds are kids to me now.
            17 yr old in possession of a fireman without adult supervision is a misdemeanor.

          • My little brother was only 12 when he saved and my sister from rape by two men in the navy–they thought my sister and I 12 and 15 were easy prey–but my brother who had been hiding came out with the shotgun and the men ran away. If trained properly–“boys” know how to handle weapons.

          • JC,
            You are wrong. When I was 17 I was arrested for minor in possession of firearms in Ca. I was rabbit hunting in the desert with a .22 rifle. Went to court and pleaded guilty and released to my parents.

          • I was a Distinguished Expert from the NRA by the age of 11, and had fired well over 100,000 rounds by that time (rifle and pistol teams) without one safety infraction. After 27 years Army, I’d fired millions of rounds and taught many thousand’s of soldiers, how to shoot expert with every weapon the Army had. As a kid, I carried a single action on my side everywhere and in the field, we all carried a rifle or shotgun for hunting and protection. They should have been glad, they didn’t encounter someone like me with an AR! LoL!

        • “Sometimes it takes a child’s actions to wake-up the adults as to what they should be doing to stop the thugs.”

          But that’s what the ‘woke generation’ say about Gritter Thumpbug…so are you saying she’s right ???

          • Children can be right. There is no principle that says children get basic stuff wrong more often than adults.

        • My concern is that vigilante action is playing into the hands of those in the background who are actually organizing and supporting these disruptions (and I do NOT mean the useful idiot politicians and MSM).

          I believe their purpose is a breakdown of respect for the US system of government including law and order. With civil insurrection they have an excuse to install THEIR version of a democratic utopia.

          Law Enforcement and the militia are trained to deal with riots; 17 year old kids who cross state lines and illegally possess an AR15, no matter how well intentioned, are not.

          • Are you following the news?

            The US system is crumbling right now. There is insurrection and nearly civil war.

          • “The US system is crumbling right now.”

            Is this wishful thinking on your part? Maybe you are just a little too credulous.

            Anyway, the United States is not crumbling. The Democrats in control of Portland, and Seattle and New York and Chicago have abdictated their responsibliities and are allowing the criminal element in those cities, along with imported criminals, to run wild.

            Other than that, the U.S. is doing just fine. No riots, burning or looting is going on in my part of the country, and in most of the country.

            The news media ignorantly or deliberately report these riots as being all over the nation but that is simply not true A handful of radical Democrat-run cities are involved and these Democrats don’t want to stop the violence taking place in their jurisdictions.

            Trump will soon put an end to all of it. He says he is going into Portland soon, and I think if he is reelected, and I think he will be, then he will be quelling all the anarchists and rioters, and the billionaires funding them, in pretty short order..

            Don’t buy into the False Reality being promoted by the radical Democrats and the radical Democrat Media. They are distorting reality for political purposes, as they always do.

            The U.S. will do just fine unless Joe Biden is elected. But he won’t be elected.

        • He was legally in possession on the rifle. Wisconsin law only requires a hunting permit >under the age of 16< and nothing prohibits him carrying it.

          He also did not carry it across state lines; it was his friend's… who lives in Wisconsin.

      • The Democrats blame Trump for not doing more on COVID-19, when in fact they fought him every step of the way back in March.

        Now we have state and local Democrats telling Trump that he is not wanted in their cities, while at the same time we have national Democrats proclaiming that every riot is Trump’s fault because he didn’t do enough.

      • Scissor,
        Don’t forget murder! As they have proven throughout the ChiCom-19 Virus scamdemic the DemoKKKrats have shown zero qualms about killing people by the thousands, especially if they are older citizens who have the knowledge and experience to vote against their idiotic policies!
        The riots show this penchant as well when they ignore or condone the Burning, Looting and Murder that is devastating many inner city neighborhoods! The DemoKKKrats seem to be working to increase racial tensions while allowing the homes and businesses of minorities to be destroyed, many forever!

          • errr, is the scam that they are using event of the virus to promote their own political ends at the expense of what is best for the population?

          • Because the entire response and fear and constantly updated “death rate!” and “cases” IS a big fat effing hoax.

            Comorbidities
            Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups.

            https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Comorbidities

            People who were shot in the head were counted as a Covid Death…

    • “rbabcock August 29, 2020 at 2:08 pm
      A wasted letter and time writing it.”

      Agree with Rbabcock

    • Socialists like Warren don’t need to understand anyone else’s position, because in their minds they already know everything.

      The fact that you disagree with these self anointed guardians of all that is sacred is sufficient to prove that you are evil and have no rights.

    • Wasted on her, because she won’t read it.
      Wasted on her ilk, because the disagreement is about control, not about the facts.
      Wasted on the undecided majority, because they will not have much of a chance to see it.
      Wasted on those of us who agree, because we are already on that page.

        • Because such actions are wasted on the leadership of the movement is not evidence that such actions are wasted on others who’s paychecks don’t depend on the scam.

    • Yes, a waste of time. These are the same Democrats that gave China a free CO2 pass to emit as much CO2 as they wish at least until 2030, and also allow developing nations to keep increasing their emissions indefinitely. The use of fossil fuels is only an issue if used domestically as it helps maintain growth, democracy and capitalism and therefore the Democrats need to lie and censor in order to drive their fake alarmist policy which is key to implementing their socialist agenda.

    • The only thing we can do is vote People like Warren out of office and keep her kind far from the the levers of political power.

      Expecting an epiphany, a contrition, and/or Road to Damascus moments in today’s stupid Democrat politicians like Warren, Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, and all their ilk is insanely naive.. You really can’t fix their kind of stupid.

      • “The only thing we can do is vote People like Warren out of office ”

        But that won’t happen in Massachusetts which is extremely politically correct- as much or more than CA.

      • She’s not stupid. She’s power hungry, like the rest of the Democrat tribe.
        They want the power to take stuff from people who earned it, in order to make their own lives more pleasant.

        • ” She’s power hungry, like the rest of the Democrat tribe.”

          Just like the Trump tribe & politicians in general.

          • Trump is not a politician which is evident by his actions and the fact that both parties have tried and failed to remove him.

          • TRUMP! is not a politician. He is a Patriot Businessman.

            Your statement identifies you as a leftist. As TRUMP! and others mentioned during the RNC, TRUMP! has and is keeping his promises. The fact that he is checking items off the list is driving the “Political Ruling Class” crazy because they have, for years on end, run on the same issues election after election. That is why TRUMP! and the Republican TRUMP! party do not need a platform. Items on the last platform are resolved, and TRUMP! is working on the others relentlessly.

            Insider politicians of both parties and their crony MSM friends are viciously attacking TRUMP! in an attempt to maintain the status quo from which all their influence and power comes.

            Finally, I always counter liberals when the say all politicians lie. I agree all leftist politicians lie, however there are at least some conservatives who do not. You can tell who they are by the attacks from the left and their media minions.

    • Trump was roundly criticized for racially insensitive remarks for calling Warren Pocahontas, but the real Pocahontas actually betrayed her tribe and went over to white society, didn’t she?

      That’s what was generally known for several hundred years although I know that historians and politicians are busy re-writing history – eg. even Lincoln’s statues are being attacked by violent ‘protesters’ on the Democrats’ payroll.

    • “When is someone in charge going to put a permanent muzzle on Warren???”

      Ralph, are you saying you want freedom of speech only for one side ???

      So, if you both get your wishes there will be no debate & the tyrants win !!!

  1. People like Fauxahontas et al cannot be engaged in meaningful dialogue, because, although the lights are on, there’s nobody in the house (OK, sometimes there’s a guy hiding in the basement).

      • Well, Biden needs to fall out–waging a presidential campaign from his basement doesn’t impress anyone!

  2. Someone in charge needs to muzzle Warren, forthwith, before she finishes the destruction of the Party’s credibility.

  3. My experience in dealing with The Left is that they’re much too lazy to go to all the trouble to understand your argument when they have so many straw men lying around, ready.

  4. With Sen. Warren we see yet another ignorant politician who doesn’t know diddly squat about how scientific discourse works. Never stop asking questions, never stop debating and challenging a theory or hypothesis until it is proven beyond the shadow of doubt. I know this and I’m not even a scientist. The CAGW theory is a long, long way from being proven.

    It is frightening and pathetic to see a U.S. senator engaging in what is essentially censorship. The last place she belongs is in a position of power or influence in the U.S. Congress. If Congress is full of people who think like her, then freedom and thought and speech is in serious trouble in this country.

    How far away are we from the formation of a squad of climate thought police?

  5. The Democratic party no longer exists as it has been co opted by the Progressives which are a Marxist Trojan horse. Everything they’ve touched recently has become crap and turned around and bit them on the ass. Russiangate? Ukrainegate? Postalgate? GNDgate? Racismgate? Riotgate? And on and on. Their attempts to shove AGW down the throats of Americans isn’t working as planned thanks to Trump. He may not be polished (understatement) but he puts America first and knows a con when he sees it.

  6. Today’s leftists are so smug and self righteous that they would never lower themselves to debate you, they will just try to shout you down, silence you, cancel you, and destroy your life…and still pretend like they have the moral high ground.

    • WR2
      “smug and self righteous” goes to the heart of the defining characteristics of the typical progressive. They think that they know what is best for society and individuals, and feel that they have the moral high ground to do whatever is necessary to implement their ideas. It is actually like a form of insanity because sane people will question their sanity, whereas the insane are convinced they are sane and it is everyone else that has a problem.

    • Democrats aren’t ‘left’ by world standards and climate change is not a left/right issue… real left wingers don’t believe in it as they rely on support from heavy industry trade unions.

      This website cannot be considered to be debating climate change while it characterises climate change as being of the left and muddies the argument with vituperative US domestic politics.

      The (2nd lowest) arctic sea ice for example knows nothing of US politics: it does what it does in response to physical natural forces.

      • It pains me to say this…but griff is correct…

        “CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT A LEFT / RIGHT ISSUE”

        But the politics surrounding it is; & is a useful way of controlling populations… while our glorious leaders grab more power & line their pockets.

        Nature doesn’t give a f**k what we do , or think, or what arrogant dickhead thinks they are in control. Nature will do what it does when it wants, whither we are here or not as it did for ~4billion years before we crawled out of the slime & will do for ~4billion years after we’ve gone.

      • “Politics is the set of activities that are associated with making decisions in groups, or other forms of power relations between individuals, such as the distribution of resources or status.”

        in a..

        “Democracy is a form of government in which the people have the authority to choose their governing legislation. Some cornerstones of these issues are freedom of assembly and speech, inclusiveness and equality, membership, consent, voting, right to life and minority rights.”

        ….. seems reasonable to me, but here are some alternatives that might interest you…

        Dictatorships
        One party states
        Oligarchy
        Anarchy
        Monarchism

        You never debate climate change here, you make ridiculous statements of childish idiocy then run away until the next time you have another vacuous remark pop up in the void that is your head.

      • Climate Science becomes leftist when it panders to emission control being the only solution. It is by far the worst solution ever conceived to the alleged problem and history shows will not work. Climate Scientists do not specialize in Economics, Physics, Ecology or any of the fields that should be put to task to work out what might be the best way to tackle the alleged problem. In fact the only field that climate scientists seem to have covered in great proliferation is social sciences.

        Democrats have become connected to that same leftard movement by the Green New Deal which connects emission control to the stated outcome.

        The long and short is Emission Control is codespeak for wealth redistribution it will not in any way reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere because by design it only targets only developed countries who have wealth it aims to redistribute.

      • Democrats aren’t openly Marxist, therefore they aren’t really leftists. According to the Marxists.

        Let’s see, this site allows griff and other alarmists to come here and try to make their case.
        But according to griff, that isn’t a debate. In griff’s world, it’s only a debate when his side is allowed to make claims and nobody is allowed to disagree.

  7. Liberal mentality says everybody is supposed to be equal. The only way for everyone to be equal is for everyone to think alike. Science is therefore determined by popular vote.

    Too bad that some of us are intelligent enough and have studied the matter enough to be able to think for ourselves. This is unacceptable behavior, to be suppressed at all cost.

      • They will push for that when they find a candidate that is also of the correct gender and color. The concept of meritocracy is foreign to progressives.

  8. Liberal mentality says that everybody is supposed to be equal. This requires that everybody think alike, and science is to be determined by popular vote.

    Being intelligent enough and knowing enough to think for yourself is unacceptable and such behavior is to be suppressed.

  9. Hmm. Methinks it may be time to make a novel Constitutional argument here. Can Sen. Warren’s demand, in her capacity as a United States Senator, rise to the level of the state action necessary to allege and sustain a violation of CO2 Coalition’s First Amendment rights? After all, Zuckerberg, who is already under pressure from both sides of the aisle on the question of Facebook’s gate-keeping policies, is going to feel that he ought to comply with Sen. Warren’s demands, lest his company be subject to more severe antitrust and other regulations. Just a thought to throw out there.

  10. With the left, facts and reason make no impression. They don’t value truth. They value emotions. To a lefty feeling it, makes it true. If you manage to corner them in an argument and point our how wrong they are, they feel bad and then you are a bully. It’s a tough thing because if you sink to their level and use emotions then they are happy to point out our hypocrisy

  11. First Amendment offense, not to mention to her oath of office.

    Engage a suitable body like CEI to sue FBook and the instigator. At a minimum, it would bring this issue of wide public interest to a head by putting those clowns under the spot light.

  12. I love how the Big Conservatives, libertarians (“libertarés”) and liberal cretins and the Stack Exchange “experts” (on https://law.stackexchange.com/ (*)) scream “it is NOT censorship and not 1st amendement related unless the STATE censors you”.

    Morons!

    (*) but actually almost all contributors on all the sites are arrogant and pathetic, notably space.stackexchange.com and physics.stackexchange.com and stackoverflow.com

    • “…not 1st amendement related unless the STATE censors you”.

      Actually, the 1st Amendment only applies to Congress. “Congress shall make no law….”

      • damp
        However, the courts have expanded that to “No baker shall refuse to bake a cake, regardless of their religious views.”

      • Tell that to the federal judiciary. They don’t believe it applies exclusively to Congress!

        Maybe the judges are simply making up of stuff… but I don’t believe it doesn’t apply to an EO or to an agency reg.

    • The US government has given the social networks a privilege to allow postings of libel without being accountable for the damage done, on the grounds that they are providing a public service. Pretty sure a supreme court would agree that keeping the privilege while censoring non-slanderous opinion, or even slanderous opinions but in a partisan way, is an attempt by the government to circumvent the 1st Amendment.

      • Again, “Congress,” and “law.” Those two elements are necessary to take refuge in the 1st Amendment.

        • So President Trump can block anyone in Twitter?
          And also exclude Jim Acoster from the WH?
          Also that “journalist” (officially “Playboy magazine’s chief White House correspondent”) Brian Karem can have his access suspended (for only 30 days)?

  13. The senate oath of office is:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. link

    She has violated the oath. The Constitution is what it is, not some kind of buffet from which she can pick and choose. She should be impeached.

    • Impeachment applies only to judges and executive branch officials as something the House of Representatives can do with a simple majority vote. The Impeachment of such a judge or executive branch officer then goes to the Senate where a 2/3 affirmative vote is needed for removal.

      But for Congress-critters like Pocahantas, each chamber can expel one of its own members with a 2/3’s concurrence vote. The constitution doesn’t even allow a recall vote by state voters to remove sitting congressperson.

      • It’s up in the air.

        On January 14, 1799, Vice President Thomas Jefferson formally announced the dismissal of the case and brought the trial to an end. It remains unclear on what grounds the Senate based its conclusion as to lack of jurisdiction. Was it because a senator is not a civil officer and cannot be impeached? Or was it that Blount could not be impeached and tried because he had already been expelled? The Senate’s dismissal remains too ambiguous to decisively answer either question; nonetheless, the Senate’s action in the Blount case has been interpreted as precedent for determining that a senator cannot be impeached. senate.gov

        Anyway, as you point out, congress critters like Blount can be expelled, so it may be moot as to whether they can be impeached.

  14. Dr. Rossiter. Asking a politician – any politician – to read 5½ pages of dense text is asking something that’s beyond the ability of most of them. Good try, but I’m afraid it’s a wasted effort. It will probably end up in the bin, after she has skimmed the first paragraph.

    Never underestimate the intellectual shallowness of your opponents in the climate wars.

    • A two hundred word summary with no more than seven points and then the five and a half pages as an addendum may have helped or perhaps better still five clever cartoons addressing the main points followed by the text.

      I agree with Russell Cook that this letter was not a waste of time – even if Senator Warren does not read it. One of her staff may as well as other curious people who will benefit from the explanations and hopefully one of these may take up the cause of effectively exposing alarmism’s flaws publicly.

  15. I am frankly astounded by the number of commenters here criticizing Dr Rossiter for a ‘wasted’ effort, and by those suggesting a “permanent muzzle” on Senator Warren. Makes me wonder if those commenters are shills sent in by enviro-activist groups with the goal of discouraging people like Dr Rossiter and others from fighting back. Two wrongs don’t make a right; there should be zero calls for the censorship/shutdown of Senator Warren, but instead several of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals should be turned against her via targeting and isolating her ludicrous statements and ridiculing them so that more people are made aware of them who will then spread the depth of her faults that much further. Plus, the far-left is absolutely counting on our side to roll over, ignore, and acquiesce to their efforts. High praise should be given to Dr Rossiter and any others who risk harm in some form or another to themselves when they stand up against the One Percenter politicians and news media people who have far more power than they are entitled to. Who knows what influential person will see Dr Rossiter’s efforts and might then relay them to Tucker Carlson, Rush Limbaugh or perhaps President Trump himself, all of whom could mop the floor on a national stage with Senator Warren’s idiocy in this situation.

    We can win the CAGW disinformation / far-left dictatorial takeover war one battle at a time by widely, prominently, and forcefully exposing those mobsters for what they are ……….. but we will lose when too many can’t be bothered to support such fights or surrender in the blink of an eye to such oppression.

  16. errr, is the scam that they are using event of the virus to promote their own political ends at the expense of what is best for the population?

  17. I have the impression, that mostly green and left activists and politicians are asking for censorship.
    As a voter, I would be appalled.

  18. I commend the letter and those who wrote it and stand by it.

    Censorship is not something to be taken lightly or lying down.

    And I also agree and disagree with griff on 1 point: muddies the argument with vituperative US domestic politics. US domestic politics does seem to be at the forefront of a lot of comments on this site. However I disagree that only US domestic politics is vituperative (good word by the way), because the bitterness over this 1 topic is not only in the US.

    Climate change is a political issue. I think we can all agree on that. But at the heart of this issue is a US Senator overstepping and putting pressure on a business to censor. A business that runs a platform and is not a publisher. It could have been any topic, hotdogs are really sausages, real sausage is not a hotdog…it doesn’t matter. What matters is a US Senator who swore an oath to protect the US Constitution has just called out to a platform (not a publisher) to violate the first Amendment. Whatever she deems as justification does not negate what she actually did.

    Shame on Sen Warren.

  19. That a US Senator violates her oath of office by conspiring to deny people the right to freely speak about non-criminal ideas and opinions is outrageous.
    I despise her and anyone who would dare support her.
    Tyrants always claim the moral high ground when they steal other people’s freedom.
    Senator Warren is not only a traitor to her oath of office and the American people. She is an ignorant illiterate proven liar who is not worthy of the office she holds.

    • That is undoubtedly all true Hunter, but you must remember Elizabeth Warren is a 1024th part native American. As a consequence of her historic rights to the North American land mass, through her birth line she feels she has special dispensation to talk gibberish nonsense, apparently..
      If I was a 100% native American, I would be outraged, that someone as blatantly insincere as she is, claims to represent or speak for me.

  20. This best describes the disHonorable Senator from Massachusetts
    “Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis” – “Unencumbered by the thought process.”
    Tom Magliozzi, Car Talk

Comments are closed.