Will Trump send the Paris Agreement to the US Senate?

source
 https://twitter.com/dwallacewells/status/1331590427980521478

The Wall Street Journal has called for Donald Trump to finally send the Paris Accord to the US Senate.

Joe Biden has promised to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord on day one, but President Trump could stop it from having any binding legal power.

President Obama signed on to the international agreement by executive action in 2015, which meant Mr. Trump could withdraw from it the same way, as he did in 2017. As per the terms of the accord, that withdrawal became effective on Nov. 4, 2020. Mr. Obama’s pledge to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions at least 26% by 2025 wasn’t legally binding. Only Senate consent to its ratification could have made it so—and the upper chamber would have rejected the treaty handily if Mr. Obama had submitted it.

Yet if Mr. Biden brought the U.S. back into the accord, it’s possible it will take on the weight of law. Although there is nothing about the agreement’s terms or the manner in which the U.S. entered it that make it legally binding on the U.S., some green group may find a friendly federal court to produce that result.

Example: Mr. Trump rescinded Mr. Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals immigration program, yet it remains in place. Although DACA was both created and reversed by executive action, the Supreme Court blocked its rescission in June on grounds that the Trump administration’s decision was “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedures Act. The court’s rationale was procedural; the justices didn’t deny that the president can reverse a predecessor’s executive action. But creative lawyers and judges can find ways of blocking a new president from changing policies, with Congress never having a say.

To prevent the Paris Climate Accord from taking on such undue power, Mr. Trump should submit it to the Senate, and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should schedule a quick vote. It would certainly be rejected—ratification requires a two-thirds vote—and it is unlikely any court could subsequently resurrect a legislatively tossed treaty. Without the help of judges, Mr. Biden would need a winning ratification vote to make the accord binding, which he likely couldn’t get no matter how well Democrats do in Georgia’s January runoffs and the 2022 midterm elections.

From The GWPF

Date: 11/30/20

Benny Peiser, GWPF

This is the key question that will determine the future of US and international climate diplomacy for years.

The next few months will show whether the incoming Biden administration will get its way and rejoin the Paris climate accord as promised, or whether the outgoing Trump administration will try to prevent this from happening.

Trump’s rejection of the Paris agreement was based on his view that it was extremely unfair to the US, allowing rising Asian superpowers, in particular China, to use cheap fossil fuels to make Chinese manufacturing much more competitive and to increase its energy investments around the world, while the US was forced to curtail using its abundant cheap energy resources, while having to pay much of the $100 billion annual green transfer fund to the developing world which is part of the Paris agreement.

Now, of course, Joe Biden has promised to reverse the reversal, pledging that his incoming administration will re-join the Paris agreement, most likely on 20 January 2021, the same day he takes office.

This widely predicted development has caused an angry response by President Trump. During the recent G20 meeting of world leaders Trump repeated his key reasons for pulling out of the UN climate agreement.

Yet, Trump has only himself to blame for a situation whereby a simple letter by President Biden to the UN can undo what he decided by the stroke of a pen. By failing to submit the Paris agreement to the US Senate for ratification or likely rejection, he has enabled the new US administration to rejoin the climate accord in the same way he withdrew, simply by sending a letter to the UN.

And looking at this Bloomberg article from 2013 it was known the Paris Agreement was for show.

“The only way that a 2015 agreement can achieve a 2-degree goal is to shut down the whole global economy,” Yvo de Boer, former UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) executive secretary said in 2013.

Bloomberg.com Kyoto Veterans Say Global Warming Goal Slipping Away

The only three living diplomats who have led the United Nations global warming talks said there’s little chance the next climate treaty will prevent the world from overheating.

Kyoto Veterans Say Global Warming Goal Slipping Away

0 0 votes
Article Rating
162 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
max
November 30, 2020 10:06 am

Can you imagine? The suspense is killing me, I hope it will last…

Greg
Reply to  max
November 30, 2020 12:05 pm

This is a brilliant suggestion and so in line with Obummer’s final shot on the way out of the door, where he threw a cheque of 500 million into the Green Slush Fund, that they could never complain about it.

Trump still has plenty of time but he needs to get moving.

Scissor
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 1:03 pm

Do it. Just do it.

Bryan A
Reply to  Scissor
November 30, 2020 3:02 pm

Exactly…
Either it passes ahead of Biden and Biden can’t claim it…
Or
It is thrown out and Biden can neither submit it nor EO it into existence.
Either way, Trump pulls the wind out of Biden’s sails

Petit_Barde
November 30, 2020 10:29 am

“The only way that a 2015 agreement can achieve a 2-degree goal is to shut down the whole global economy,” Yvo de Boer, former UNFCCC executive secretary said in 2013.

wiki:
De Boer was born in Vienna on 12 June 1954. He holds a technical degree in social work.

How is it possible that such jerks can find themselves at the helm of global organizations?
Did this clown stopped his own activity ?

max
Reply to  Petit_Barde
November 30, 2020 11:16 am

Because it’s not about science, it’s about politics? Just a guess.

Editor
Reply to  max
November 30, 2020 11:59 am

No reason to guess, max. The UN founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to support political agendas, which go by the name of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement . And funding-hungry climate researchers gave them exactly what they wanted after a few rounds.

Regards,
Bob

Latitude
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 30, 2020 5:47 pm

UN formed the IPCC in 1988….and China immediately increased it’s CO2 emissions 5 times more

…and yet it’s always “we” have to do something

“our” CO2 emissions are exactly the same as it was in 1988….”we” did not increase CO2 emissions at all….”we” did not contribute to the increase in CO2 either

all of the increase in CO2 has come from China and the developing world

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Latitude
November 30, 2020 6:01 pm

I still wonder why everyone is still giving credence to the myth that increased CO2 has anything whatsoever to do with warming … hence “climate change”. People who understand the whole thing is a fraud are still using their language. If they get to determine the words we use … they call ALL the shots. STOP acknowledging their control. CO2 was almost completely saturated at ~100ppmv. Nobody can FIX “climate change”, nor should any sane person want to.

Loydo
Reply to  Latitude
December 1, 2020 3:07 am

Along comes Rory, super convinced, super confident and super wrong. Sadly just the inevitable disinformed consequence of all the crackpot conspiracy theories and anything but CO2 nuttery proudly on display here at crank central; WUWT. I don’t blame you Rory – you’re just ignorantly regurgitating something that confirms your bias. Here is that well-known marxist alarmist Roy Spencer with his take on the”saturated CO2″ disinformation bs.
https://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/04/skeptical-arguments-that-dont-hold-water/

willem post
Reply to  Latitude
December 1, 2020 6:32 am

The CO2 graph of the article is an absolute gem.
It should be displayed all over the world to EXPOSE the Climate Hoax, and the FUTILITY of efforts.

Here is an excerpt of an article.

WORLD AND US ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CAPITAL COST
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-consumption

World energy consumption is projected to increase to 736 quads in 2040 from 575 quads in 2015, an increase of 28%, according to the latest from the US Energy Information Administration. EIA.
See URL and click on PPT to access data.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/

Most of this growth is expected to come from countries that are not in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, and especially from countries where demand is driven by strong economic growth, particularly in Asia.

Non-OECD Asia, which includes China and India, accounted for more than 60% of the world’s total increase in energy consumption from 2015 through 2040.

PARIS AGREEMENTS

China, India, and other developing Asian countries, and Africa, and Middle and South America need to use low-cost energy, such as coal, to be competitive.

They would not have signed up for “Paris”, if they had not been allowed to be more or less exempt from the Paris agreements

Obama agreed to commit the US to the Paris agreements, i.e., be subject to its financial and other obligations for decades.
However, he never submitted the commitment to the US Senate for ratification, as required by the US Constitution.
Trump rescinded the commitment. It became effective 3 years later, one day after the US presidential elections on November 3, 2020.

If the US had not left “Paris”, a UN Council likely would have determined a level of RE spending, say $500 billion/y, for distributing to various poorer countries by UN bureaucrats.
The Council would have assessed OECD members, likely in proportion to their GDPs.
The US and Europe would have been assessed at 100 to 150 billion dollars/y each.
The non-OECD countries likely would continue to be more or less exempt from paying for the Paris agreements.

World spending on renewable energy, RE, systems was $282.2 billion in 2019.
This article shows the spending would need to increase to about $375 billion in 2022, and grow at a compounded rate of almost 6%/y thereafter, to achieve an RE goal of 50% RE in 2050. See table 3
Achieving 100% RE by 2050, as a slogan, sounds attractive. It likely would be not feasible for a multitude of reasons.
.

joe - the non constitionalist
Reply to  Petit_Barde
November 30, 2020 11:20 am

senate requires 2/3s vote to ratify a treaty.

So a few republicans can peel off without any problem

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  joe - the non constitionalist
December 1, 2020 8:00 am

I don’t know why everyone overlooks that point. The Constitution was written specifically to keep bad treaties from passing due to a few people. Biden can “join” but the US is not legaly bound until the Senate ratifies the treaty.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Petit_Barde
November 30, 2020 10:28 pm

“He holds a technical degree in social work.”

Well if he held a technical degree in a STEM subject he would more than likely be working in a STEM field.

People who work in STEM usually have too many ethics to successfully succeed in political organisations, even assuming they wanted to get involved in the first place.

The only time you tend to see STEM types involved in political activities is when they get completely pissed off at what they are seeing and decide to career change to sort out the rubbish. Unfortunately the establishment recognises them as outsiders and tends to close ranks against them.

hiskorr
Reply to  Petit_Barde
December 1, 2020 7:27 am

“…shut down the whole global economy.” Pretty much what we have now in response to a slightly more vigorous seasonal flu. Maybe Biden will get the G20 to extend the lockdowns -can’t be too safe!

icisil
November 30, 2020 10:37 am

Not a smart move. Senate majority is too narrow (if it holds) and some repubs are traitors.

icisil
Reply to  icisil
November 30, 2020 10:42 am

Oh I forgot, 2/3 majority required.

John Endicott
Reply to  icisil
December 1, 2020 7:22 am

Indeed. Even if the RINOs defect, the 2/3rd threshold will not be reached. Seems a pretty smart move. Hopefully someone will bring the idea up to Trump and he acts on it, Otherwise Biden will sign on to it and not submit it (same as Obama did in the first place).

Reply to  icisil
November 30, 2020 10:48 am

You obviously didn’t read the article or know that it take 67 US Senators (2/3 majority) to ratify (approve) a treaty. If it fails to reach that threshold, it’s considered legally rejected by the US senate and then cannot be enforced or followed by the Executive Branch.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 30, 2020 11:04 am

And there is no way the Senate will ever reach that threshold at this point in time. So Biden will not submit it either.

Spetzer86
Reply to  Tom in Florida
November 30, 2020 12:28 pm

but, if it’s already been submitted and rejected, he couldn’t ignore the vote. The Ds would probably figure out some formal way of keeping it in committee and stopping the vote before recess, but it would be nice if the Rs would ever read the damned playbook and figure out how to pull some of these things out of the fire.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Spetzer86
November 30, 2020 3:11 pm

The Dems would like nothing more than for Trump and the Senate Republicans to take the blame for the U.S. not ratifying the treaty. Biden will never submit it because it will be tabbed as a defeat for him. He will just let it languish in limbo which is alright by me.

John Endicott
Reply to  Spetzer86
December 1, 2020 7:14 am

Tom, Biden would just do what Obama did – sign it with out ever submitting it by claiming it’s not really a treaty. The only way to tie his hands on this would be to have Trump get the Senate to take up the resolution (and fail to get 67 votes for ratification) before Biden can ever pick up his “pen and phone”. IE a pre-emptive strike

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 1, 2020 7:18 am

So Biden will not submit it either.

Obama never submitted it either. That’s the problem, Biden (like Obama before him) will happily sign on to it without ever submitting it for senate ratification by claiming it’s “not really a treaty (wink, wink)”. The only way it will get before the Senate is if Trump pre-emptively sends it to the Senate.

MarkG
November 30, 2020 10:37 am

If Joe Biden cheats his way into the White House, Americans will have far more important things to worry about than the Paris Agreement.

Simon
Reply to  MarkG
November 30, 2020 11:07 am

MarG
If you really think Biden cheated then you need to give Trump the evidence coz he’s got none. Can I suggest you watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzBJJ1sxtEA

It is the republican Trump appointed to make sure the elections were done fairly with no cheating. You know, Krebs who Trump fired because he said stuff Trump didn’t like.

ATheoK
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 12:02 pm

Amazing!
Simple is as wrong in other topics as he is about climate, where simple runs 99% erroneous.

5 More Ways Biden Magically Won the Presidency, maybe.

Vote anomalies that are impossible.

The biggest problem for simple is that in spite of msm’s and democrat’s farcical claims, there is not a “President Elect” until the Electoral College meets and elects one.

With several of the State’s claims already heading to SCOTUS, it is very unlikely that Biden won anything.

Keep in mind, that these challenges are not murder or rape charges, but election fraud charges.

Where trials surrounding murder and rape require “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt”; Election Fraud only requires a preponderance of proof.

Also Election fraud is about substituting, increasing, preventing a voter’s legal right to a ballot.
All that is required is that each state prove their ballots are legal.
Not that Conservatives must prove which ballots are illegal

Democrats must show legal ballots matching the votes plus prove that every law was obeyed when counting those votes…
Democrats are already in deep illegality when multiple sites have been proven to conduct vote counting illegally and where many thousands of votes are fraudulent or nonexistent.

Conservatives have already lined up whistleblowing Dominion employees who will testify to the fraudulent activities.

And Dominion themselves installed last minute “updates” to the software on tens of thousands of ballot counters.
An action that by states’ laws requires recertification before the machines can be used.

In other words, more than enough votes and odd vote increases (pure data editing) have been identified that if SCOTUS agrees, President Trump will win those states, easily.

Simon
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 1:16 pm

ATheoK
Haha your denial only makes the outcome that much sweeter. The scotus will not look at new evidence, only whether the lower courts have acted properly. Given Trump and his team of clown lawyers have come up completely empty handed, it is beyond certain the scotus will do nothing. I say it again…. nothing. And when they do, lets’s see if you are man enough to admit you were wrong.
“And Dominion themselves installed last minute “updates” to the software on tens of thousands of ballot counters.” BS…. evidence please that even that they did this , and even if they did (which is what you do with computers) prove it changed anything?

“Conservatives have already lined up whistleblowing Dominion employees who will testify to the fraudulent activities.” More BS.

And Biden has to prove nothing. He won, it is on loser Trump to prove mass fraud. Given his background you would think he could spot it if it was there. It ain’t… he loses. Bye bye Don the Con.

This was the most secure election in US history. If yu think otherwise prove it. Haha and to think you called me “simple.” Oh the irony.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:19 pm

‘The most secure election in US history.’

And you call us deniers.

Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:52 pm

JS
“And you call us deniers.”
That’s what the republican in charge said. It’s what tRump threw his toys over. Not my words.

jim hogg
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 2:08 pm

These are simply assertions ATheoK. You haven’t presented a single scrap of evidence in support of any of them. Who are the witnesses to these alleged crimes? Why have none of them presented their evidence to respectable media outlets? If Trump had access to any evidence for any of the several states where the vote tallies were reasonably close don’t you think he would have ensured that it was published for the world to see?? I don’t believe in jumping to conclusions on anything but so far all I’ve heard are endless allegations and not a whiff of the kind of stuff that could be used in a court of law. There are plenty of Trump supporting officials, authorities, investigators and journalists out there and yet nothing of substance has found its way into the public domain.

Mr.
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 3:17 pm

Hi Jim,
just for clarification, could you give us just 3 names of “respectable media outlets”?
Thanks.

ATheoK
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 3:53 pm

Not assertions. All facts.
It isn’t my fault if you rely upon complicit msm and democrats for your news. hint; the BBC and CNN are not reliable news sources.

Try Sidney Powell’s or Lin Wood’s or General Flynn’s or Giuliani news feeds into twitter and Parler.
• Plenty of detailed vote data.
• Plenty of witnesses, as in hundreds,
• Plenty of video, including of Dominion demonstrating changing data, and of vote tally for President Trump dropping while Biden’s vote tally rises by the same numbers.
• Plenty of physical evidence, fake ballots and etc.
• Whistleblowers and insiders as sworn witnesses,
• CIA Server farm seized in Germany, explains why Haspel was refused participation,
• Dominion using percentages instead of actual votes,
• Dominion purposely programming vote change algorithms while failing to provide and security accounting, i.e. Dominion’s software fails basic software security,
• Dominion taught election officers how to change vote data,
• Dominion employed conflict of interest democrats to scan ballots,
• Hundreds of thousands of ballots that were purposely denied refused proper chain of legal custody by democrats,
• Dominion is owned by ‘Blum Capital Partners, L.P.’
• Dianne Feinstein’s husband, ‘Richard C. Blum’ is on the board of Blum Capital Partners,
• Nancy Pelosi’s husband is also a large investor in Dominion
etc. etc. etc.

It is a very long list! All it requires is paying attention and avoiding the falsehood news sources which makes up most of msm.

Or, if you want the data, the NYT’s and a few other sources still have the vote database and timelines available for download.

Simple still doesn’t understand, SCOTUS or panything.
SCOTUS is very interested in Constitutional issues!
Voter Fraud in a President election is definitely a Constitutional issue.
Nor, with tight Constitutional deadlines will SCOTUS send the cases back to Districts or states.

Most of the original court filings have not been handled properly. e.g., A judge dismisses because ‘he’ declares witnesses as “not credible”?

Nevertheless, mishandled court cases are already accepted or on their way to SCOTUS.
Where SCOTUS will consider the Constitutional issues and the available evidence.

Joel Snider
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 3:59 pm

The entire country was a witness to this fraud – everyone knows what was done – it’s just that progressives don’t care.

And I guess you’ve missed the near-total censorship on-line.

ex-KalifoniaKook
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 4:21 pm

jim hogg – evidence and witnesses have been presented to legal authorities. Presenting evidence to “respectable media outlets” has no legal standing in the US, and could easily be considered a waste of time.

What country do you come from?

Simon
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 4:56 pm

ATheoK
Try Sidney Powell’s or Lin Wood’s or General Flynn’s or Giuliani news feeds into twitter and Parler.”
Now you have got to be kidding here. Surely you are joking. Rudi can’t even dye his hair without it running.
For the record I have watched Powell and she is as crooked as a stick. You believe anything that comes out of her mouth you are as crazy as she is. All that stuff about China and Venezuela is just plain bonkers.
And Flynn is an admitted felon why would you believe him. He lied to the FBI then admitted it.

ATheoK
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 5:21 pm

Just as simple doesn’t understand what Acquitted means, he also does not understand Pardoned.

Besides, General Flynn’s admission of guilt came because Weissmann’s stooges threatened with prosecuting Flynn’s kids.
A prosecution just as illegal as their extorting a guilty admission.

Under Sidney Powell, General Flynn rejected the guilty plea, totally!

After the prosecutorial malfeasance was revealed, the DOJ agreed with Sidney Powell AND DROPPED ALL CHARGES!!!

Keep in mind that simple is up to his old tricks. Unable to rebut facts he does his worst to slime the people involved.

Just another example of simple’s pre-puberty whine trying to deflect attention from reality and facts.

Simon
Reply to  jim hogg
November 30, 2020 7:20 pm

“Besides, General Flynn’s admission of guilt came because Weissmann’s stooges threatened with prosecuting Flynn’s kids.”
More BS. Reference please. Flynn was pardoned by a crook in Trump. think about it. Trump let a guy off who was directly linked to potential crimes by him. In other words I’ll get you out if you keep quiet. I don’t think anyone in US history has done that?

“Under Sidney Powell, General Flynn rejected the guilty plea, totally!”
Changed his story you mean. Got the nod from Trump I’ll look after you. You do realise that both Flynn and Powell think QAnon is something to support, right?

“After the prosecutorial malfeasance was revealed, the DOJ agreed with Sidney Powell AND DROPPED ALL CHARGES!!!”
Yep under Trump s direction. More corruption. Hell the guy admitted lying. What more do you need?

“Keep in mind that simple is up to his old tricks. Unable to rebut facts he does his worst to slime the people involved.”
Nope just refuted all of your nonsense. Keep it coming though this is fun. Been waiting four years to give it back.

” Just another example of simple’s pre-puberty whine trying to deflect attention from reality and facts.”
I’m not the one supporting the whiner in chief who is refusing to concede. Even Hillary had the integrity to concede the day after she lost. Man-boy Trump hasn’t got the balls it seems.

Simon
Reply to  ATheoK
December 1, 2020 4:18 pm

ATheoK
I see William Barr has just come out and put the brakes on Trump…..
“Disputing President Donald Trump’s persistent, baseless claims, Attorney General William Barr declared Tuesday the U.S. Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that could change the outcome of the 2020 election.”
So ATheoK Is Barr in on the fraud too?

Greg
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 12:17 pm

Wow 60 min, who could argue with that?

“No recount or audit has changed the outcome in any state ….” , right there has been NO AUDIT ANYWHERE. That is the problem. If you don’t look you will not find.

“the most secure in American history” . Hahaha ! That’s a cracker. With voting machines connected live on the internet and servers situated in Germany?

However, I bet when Jill Stein started legal challenges to voting machines in 2016, you chipped in to here $9 million fund raiser.

ATheoK
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 4:09 pm

““the most secure in American history” . Hahaha ! That’s a cracker. With voting machines connected live on the internet and servers situated in Germany?”

And documented evidence that China, Iran and others were into the system during vote tabulation.
They likely got that bit of information from the server farm they seized since Dominion purposely does not track who accesses.

Derg
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 12:35 pm

Ha..I am still laughing at you Simon for coming on here writing how Trump didn’t do anything to stop Covid.

Us: Simon he instituted a travel ban.
Simon: he did?
Us: Good lord pay attention
Simon: Well he still didn’t do anything

Simon
Reply to  Derg
November 30, 2020 1:21 pm

Derg
You really are a one trick pony aren’t you. When you have no come back go “way” back to some comment months ago. Even then you misquote and twist. So back to the present. Trump is toast… he has no answer to his losing except to say “they cheated.” Pathetic. Time to get his fraudulent arse out of the white house.

Derg
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 2:07 pm

One trick pony 😉

You are very funny when you come on here…clown show comes to mind.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:07 pm

Hey, slimy Simon – you are in no position to talk down to anyone. Certainly, not in regards to ‘fraudulent.’ You have repeated your same Mike Simon/Obama talking points every single time you’ve posted.

And by the way – ‘they cheated’ is legit.

The progressive fraud is unending – from the Russian collusion scam, to the impeachment, to the election. You know it. You simply have no shame. And every day you outdo yourself with your phony sanctimonious slime.

And by the way – were ALL you progressives ‘pathetic’ when you lied about Russia? How about the way you spun every single word Trump uttered into a hate slur?

Pathetic? You’re disgusting.

Biden’s the fraud. This Tanya Harding ‘victory’ is utterly detestable. Trump’s been the only guy acting in the benefit of this country in decades.

Loydo
Reply to  Simon
December 1, 2020 3:13 am

Donald Trump Leaves The White House

DonM
Reply to  Derg
November 30, 2020 1:31 pm

Simon: na na na nah nah nah nah nahh nahh nahh nhhhhhhh

… fingers in ears

(which shows his singular talent, ’cause his thumb is still in it’s standard location)

Simon
Reply to  DonM
November 30, 2020 2:28 pm

DonM
If you have anything, tell me where I’m wrong? Or are you part of the Guiliani hair dye brigade who spouts conspiracy stuff…. till he gets in front of a judge.

Joel Snider
Reply to  DonM
November 30, 2020 4:12 pm

Hey Simon, since you didn’t have the balls to replay, here’s waht ATheoK posted:

Not assertions. All facts.
It isn’t my fault if you rely upon complicit msm and democrats for your news. hint; the BBC and CNN are not reliable news sources.

Try Sidney Powell’s or Lin Wood’s or General Flynn’s or Giuliani news feeds into twitter and Parler.
• Plenty of detailed vote data.
• Plenty of witnesses, as in hundreds,
• Plenty of video, including of Dominion demonstrating changing data, and of vote tally for President Trump dropping while Biden’s vote tally rises by the same numbers.
• Plenty of physical evidence, fake ballots and etc.
• Whistleblowers and insiders as sworn witnesses,
• CIA Server farm seized in Germany, explains why Haspel was refused participation,
• Dominion using percentages instead of actual votes,
• Dominion purposely programming vote change algorithms while failing to provide and security accounting, i.e. Dominion’s software fails basic software security,
• Dominion taught election officers how to change vote data,
• Dominion employed conflict of interest democrats to scan ballots,
• Hundreds of thousands of ballots that were purposely denied refused proper chain of legal custody by democrats,
• Dominion is owned by ‘Blum Capital Partners, L.P.’
• Dianne Feinstein’s husband, ‘Richard C. Blum’ is on the board of Blum Capital Partners,
• Nancy Pelosi’s husband is also a large investor in Dominion
etc. etc. etc.

It is a very long list! All it requires is paying attention and avoiding the falsehood news sources which makes up most of msm.

Or, if you want the data, the NYT’s and a few other sources still have the vote database and timelines available for download.

Simple still doesn’t understand, SCOTUS or panything.
SCOTUS is very interested in Constitutional issues!
Voter Fraud in a President election is definitely a Constitutional issue.
Nor, with tight Constitutional deadlines will SCOTUS send the cases back to Districts or states.

Most of the original court filings have not been handled properly. e.g., A judge dismisses because ‘he’ declares witnesses as “not credible”?

Nevertheless, mishandled court cases are already accepted or on their way to SCOTUS.
Where SCOTUS will consider the Constitutional issues and the available evidence.

Joel Snider
Reply to  DonM
November 30, 2020 4:24 pm

‘Or are you part of the Guiliani hair dye brigade who spouts conspiracy stuff’

Isn’t that cute coming from the Simon-stain on Goebbels mattress?

rah
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 1:34 pm

Have you ever heard of the term “Low information voter” Simon? Just look in a mirror and you’ll have the definition. In fact I suspect that term of “Low information” is a universal one in your case.

Rune
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 2:09 pm

Simon, is it your view that there was no cheating in this election whatsoever?

Or is it your view that there was perhaps a little cheating, but not enough to tip the scales?

Jim
Reply to  Rune
November 30, 2020 2:14 pm

An amazing amount of fraud and cheating took place at many levels!

Simon
Reply to  Jim
November 30, 2020 2:35 pm

Jim
“An amazing amount of fraud and cheating took place at many levels!”
Proof please? You need to stop and move on. Losing in court, losing the election, losing credibility. Losing, losing, losing. Do you Trump disciples not get tired of losing?

Simon
Reply to  Rune
November 30, 2020 2:33 pm

Rune
“Simon, is it your view that there was no cheating in this election whatsoever?”
Nope, there is and will always be morons who try to cheat. Was there more than any other time? Who knows and certainly not Trump. Was there a conspiracy against Trump that flipped votes on mass? No chance in hell. At least there is no evidence at all of that. Sure there are crack pots saying the weirdest stuff at this time, but nothing worth listening to. We are now weeks past the election and still nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:09 pm

Hey Simon, since you didn’t have the balls to replay, here’s waht ATheoK posted:

Not assertions. All facts.
It isn’t my fault if you rely upon complicit msm and democrats for your news. hint; the BBC and CNN are not reliable news sources.

Try Sidney Powell’s or Lin Wood’s or General Flynn’s or Giuliani news feeds into twitter and Parler.
• Plenty of detailed vote data.
• Plenty of witnesses, as in hundreds,
• Plenty of video, including of Dominion demonstrating changing data, and of vote tally for President Trump dropping while Biden’s vote tally rises by the same numbers.
• Plenty of physical evidence, fake ballots and etc.
• Whistleblowers and insiders as sworn witnesses,
• CIA Server farm seized in Germany, explains why Haspel was refused participation,
• Dominion using percentages instead of actual votes,
• Dominion purposely programming vote change algorithms while failing to provide and security accounting, i.e. Dominion’s software fails basic software security,
• Dominion taught election officers how to change vote data,
• Dominion employed conflict of interest democrats to scan ballots,
• Hundreds of thousands of ballots that were purposely denied refused proper chain of legal custody by democrats,
• Dominion is owned by ‘Blum Capital Partners, L.P.’
• Dianne Feinstein’s husband, ‘Richard C. Blum’ is on the board of Blum Capital Partners,
• Nancy Pelosi’s husband is also a large investor in Dominion
etc. etc. etc.

It is a very long list! All it requires is paying attention and avoiding the falsehood news sources which makes up most of msm.

Or, if you want the data, the NYT’s and a few other sources still have the vote database and timelines available for download.

Simple still doesn’t understand, SCOTUS or panything.
SCOTUS is very interested in Constitutional issues!
Voter Fraud in a President election is definitely a Constitutional issue.
Nor, with tight Constitutional deadlines will SCOTUS send the cases back to Districts or states.

Most of the original court filings have not been handled properly. e.g., A judge dismisses because ‘he’ declares witnesses as “not credible”?

Nevertheless, mishandled court cases are already accepted or on their way to SCOTUS.
Where SCOTUS will consider the Constitutional issues and the available evidence.

rah
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:54 pm

Joel it is worth mentioning that Dominion suddenly closed it field offices and got the hell out of dodge.

An executive of Dominion, Eric Cummer is quoted as saying: “Trump is not going to win. I made f***king sure of that!”

And Simon, The justices of the SCOTUS have oversight of the various circuit courts. By a happy coincidence here is the list of those over the contested states:
Circuit Courts have been Reassigned

Effective November 20, 2020, ordered pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42

MI – Brett M. Kavanaugh
WI – Amy Coney Barrett
PA – Samuel A. Alito
GA – Clarence Thomas

Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 5:03 pm

Joel Snide
The one trick pony copy and paste man. See my reply to ATheoK above when he did the same C and P. It’s BS mate. Wake up. don the Con is gone.

ATheoK
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 5:24 pm

Now simple believes I should retype Sidney Powell’s 104 page legal filing, her 70 page legal filing, along with Lin Wood’s and Giuliana legal filings…

All while simple repeats very tired trollop tales and misconceptions as if they have merit…

Pure adolescent whine by simple.

Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 7:38 pm

ATheoK
Now simple believes I should retype Sidney Powell’s 104 page legal filing, her 70 page legal filing, along with Lin Wood’s and Giuliana legal filings…

All while simple repeats very tired trollop tales and misconceptions as if they have merit…

Pure adolescent whine by simple.

Nope not interested in her make up stories. If they are so compelling why don’t they put them in front of a court? Answer, because they are make believe. And let’s not forget even the fraudster Trump dumped her from his team. It takes a lot to embarrass him but she got there.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
December 1, 2020 12:21 am

“Was there a conspiracy against Trump that flipped votes on mass? No chance in hell. At least there is no evidence at all of that.”

As I keep telling you; you’re utterly ignorant of court procedures, documents, language and protocol. You insist on making statements like the above, yet you keep ignoring the pages and pages of prima facie testimonial evidence, any one of which is sufficient to bring a motion to trial. There were literally thousands of conspiracies at all levels and of different types … hundreds of which were witnessed, documented and sworn to under oath. The fact hat this evidence is prima facie, validates hundreds of others with less compelling evidence.

S. Geiger
Reply to  MarkG
November 30, 2020 11:20 am

LOL and wow! Just checked in to see ‘what’s up’. Is this what this web site has turned into? “Joe Biden Cheats…” Ubeleivable and sad….I hope this isn’t reflective of the mindset of Mr. Watts.

Greg
Reply to  S. Geiger
November 30, 2020 12:12 pm

So you think the site owner is responsible for every comment you may no agree with?

Is it “Ubeleivable and sad” [sic] that someone can disagree with your worldview. Oh sorry, I wasn’t thinking you must be a Dem.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  S. Geiger
November 30, 2020 3:14 pm

The mindset of our host is to not censor anyone or any comment that is civil no matter what side of an issue is put forth.

TonyG
Reply to  Tom in Florida
November 30, 2020 4:53 pm

That’s unacceptable anymore. Better to censor, block, and warn like Twitter does to protect the easily offended.

John Endicott
Reply to  S. Geiger
December 1, 2020 3:25 am

Go back to twitbook, S. Geiger, if you can’t handle other people freely commenting and saying things you disagree with. There’s no censorship of civil discourse here, no matter how much differing ideas offends you.

michael hart
Reply to  MarkG
November 30, 2020 11:24 am

I disagree, Mark G. A US President lasts, at most, eight years. Many do not expect Biden to last even four years, and many bad things are reversible, especially since there are mid terms to punish particularly bad administrations.

However, dreadful laws can last for centuries. I think the proposal to submit it to the Senate is a good one. My main concern is that Trump was never as committed as his rhetoric sometimes sounded. There were things he could have done on day one, but didn’t. He wasted a lot of time.

ATheoK
Reply to  michael hart
November 30, 2020 12:19 pm

Pelosi had a team investigating removing a sitting President via the 25th Amendment.
When asked, Pelosi stated that this team was not about removing President Trump.

Removing a frail senile Biden would be far easier than attempting to remove President Trump.
There are many reasons to choose deep state involved Kamala Harris as Biden’s VP that have nothing to do with voter perception, Congressional or Electoral support for Biden.

Giving hints that the deep state democrats and RINOs plan to remove Biden soon after inauguration and install Harris.
Must be a huge disappointment to Jill Biden as she is very unlikely to be a “Nancy Reagan” to her Joe.

Simon
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 2:08 pm

ATheoK
“Removing a frail senile Biden would be far easier than attempting to remove President Trump.”
How so. As far as I know Biden has never extorted a foreign power with threat of removing aid to get dirt on his political opponent? Please tell how Biden is more at risk than that?

Mike Dubrasich
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:10 pm

Simple Simaon, are you blind and deaf? Joe Dementia extorted the Ukraine government by threatening to withhold a $billion in aid unless they fired the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, for whom his corrupt and inept son Hunter was “working”, and Joe Corruption bragged about it openly in front of the media, and everybody knows it.

Joe Sleaze is the Godfather of corruption. He is filthy dirty and a traitor to this country. You support a known and admitted traitor who cheated his way into office. Megatons of evidence of voter fraud abound. Your blindness does not afflict tens of millions of Americans who want our democracy back. Your sneers are wasted here.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:11 pm

Gee, Simon, I guess you really missed what was going on in Ukraine.

Actually, you didn’t – you’re just trying to spin the criminality from Biden.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:14 pm

By the way, the Ukraine was instrumental in the attempted coupe against Trump. He was well within his rights.

Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:24 pm

Simon, apparently your news sources never made you aware of Hunter Biden’s laptop, the testimony of Hunter’s partners in the “pay for access” schemes, and who the “Big Guy” is who is mentioned in the communications as getting a cut of the payoffs.

Any of us would never get close to a Security Clearance with that background.
The possibility of his being compromised by those governments is all too real.

And how about Joe bragging on TV about withholding billions in aid if the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating the energy company Hunter was a director of was not fired? (Of course Hunter was named a director with a salary way above that of a normal corporate director despite knowing nothing about the energy industry, the Ukraine or the language of that country.

ATheoK
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 4:28 pm

Simple;
Biden has bragged on video about extorting the Ukraine!
And that doesn’t count Biden’s Quid Pro Quo for the same country!

President Trump may have been impeached on that subject, but it was not proved in any detail!

Which is why the Senate had an impeachment trial where the President was not accused of any “High Crimes” or any “Misdemeanors”. Both are Constitutional Requirements for impeachment.

A trial that will live in infamy forever, along with schiff, nadler, pelosi, schumer and the 2020 Congress.
Again, Congressional liars Nadler, Pelosi, Schiff, Schumer and a number of others were proven utterly sinfully wrong.

President Trump was acquitted of all charges including the libellous claims the President demanded Quid Pro Quo.
Surely, even simple understands what acquittal means…

Rory Forbes
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 4:38 pm

The democrat gang of criminals, you listed, didn’t even make a show of providing one piece of valid evidence or a cause of action. They voted for impeachment on the basis of their own criteria (not the “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” required for impeachment under the constitution). It should come as no surprise to ANYONE AND EVERYONE that the Democrats had already planned their election fraud even before their Covid windfall. Otherwise Trump’s election would have been as huge as Regan’s. The entire map wold have turned red without the scam.

Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 5:07 pm

“Mike Dubrasich November 30, 2020 at 4:10 pm
Simple Simaon, are you blind and deaf? Joe Dementia extorted the Ukraine government by threatening to withhold a $billion in aid unless they fired the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma”
Yawn. That was authorised by Obama. Shokin was a crook and the whole of Europe wanted him gone. Biden was the guy authorised to remove him. Very different to Trumps traitorous bollocks. Read the truth here:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/viktor-shokin-ukraine-prosecutor-trump-biden-hunter-joe-investigation-impeachment-a9147001.html

Simon
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 5:09 pm

Joel Snide
“By the way, the Ukraine was instrumental in the attempted coupe against Trump. He was well within his rights.”
More BS, reference please.

Kemaris
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 5:12 pm

That question is easy. All Harris has to do is claim that Biden is unable to carry out the duties of the presidency, and get a majority of cabinet department heads, or any other such body as Congress may establish, to agree. If Biden disagrees with that majority determination, then it goes to both houses of Congress to either approve or reject the removal. This is all covered by the 25h amendment to the US Constitution.

My money in the pool is on Biden being removed under the 25th amendment as the first order of business on January 21st, 2021. That way he gets to officially be president (#46), a position he has desired for it’s own sake for 5 decades, and the far, far left gets the kind of president it actually wants as soon as possible.

michael hart
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 2:13 pm

Yeah, I read about that too, though I didn’t see the details (currently the other side of the Atlantic).

It’s a sad day when I think that Biden, a politician of nearly five decades standing in US political corruption, may not actually be that bad because he is unlikely to want to change what he is familiar with. ‘Better the devil you know’ is an aphorism that stands the test of time.

Spetzer86
Reply to  michael hart
November 30, 2020 12:30 pm

and KH is worse. If JB holds out for 2 years, there’s some talk that KH could then run for two terms since she would’ve been covering for JB those last two of his term.

John Endicott
Reply to  Spetzer86
December 1, 2020 6:32 am

KH couldn’t even get 1% of her parties primary vote, her being elected to even 1 term in office is a pipe dream. Her only term in office will be whatever is left of Biden’s when she 25ths him.

czechlist
November 30, 2020 10:38 am

Law, legislative action became moot under the 8 years of the 0. Harris/ Biden would merely create an Executive Order requiring Executive Department employees ignore any direction other than from the Chief Executive. 0 set precedents for it with DACA being the prime exhibit. There are too many Clinton/0 judges still in the Judicial system to guaranty any dissent would be recognized. The US is no longer a nation of laws but if intimidation.

DKR
November 30, 2020 10:51 am

Let the DIms have their way. They got hammered in the down ballot. People need to suffer a little more before they wake up. Biden will bring the pain with his swamp creature cabinet. The sheeple will finally get it or am I just too optimistic?

Reply to  DKR
November 30, 2020 11:17 am

The Democrat-Socialists plan to destroy US domestic oil production is to first suppress domestic energy demand via a Spring 2021 COVID nation-wide Lockdown via a Presidential Order/Declaration of a Health Emergency. Democrats are willing to destroy the US economy and ruin people’s lives in order to gain total control over the US energy market and oil and gas production.

Destroying domestic supply will be politically much easier in an oversupplied market. People won’t see what is happening right away until it is too late.

The loss of demand will send oil prices plummeting again as they did last May. That oversupply will then allow Biden and his miscreants to destroy US Domestic production via regulatory actions. Then in the coming years, as the economy recovers, the demand will go up, the domestic production will not be there, and we’ll be back to Mid-East oil dependence and high gas prices.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  DKR
November 30, 2020 11:22 am

With blanket approval for 11 million more Dem voters about to be added to the rolls and stimulus largely targeting the favored groups included the more irresponsible state governments, it really does not not matter what you think or project optimistically. They can buy success with your money much like a stolen credit card in the hands of those ordering limo rides and other goodies.

Burl Henry
November 30, 2020 11:00 am

Rather than hold global warming to to no more than 2 deg. C. since pre-industrial times (1850?), implementation of the Paris Climate Accord will actually cause them to quickly RISE by 1.5-2.0 deg. C. from PRESENT temperatures.

Governments around the world are striving for net-zero CO2 emissions by banning the burning of fossil fuels, because of their production of CO2. However, the burning of fossil fuels produces both CO2 and SO2 aerosol emissions.

We know from Pinatubo and other eruptions that their injection of SO2 into the stratosphere causes temporary cooling, because of the highly reflective nature of SO2 aerosols. These aerosols eventually settle out of the atmosphere, and temperatures recover to pre-eruption levels, or usually, a bit higher, because of the removal of their SO2 pollution from the atmosphere.

So, the abandonment of the burning of fossil fuels and the the loss of their SO2 aerosol emissions HAS to cause temperatures to rise from present-day temperatures.

Global anthropogenic SO2 aerosol emissions currently (2019) total ~72 Megatons. If those emissions are driven to near zero, Earth’s temperatures will soar to those of the Medieval Warming Period, where all but the extreme polar ice melted (farming in Greenland, etc.).

For the sake of humankind, the Paris Climate Accord needs to be abandoned, not ratified!

Loydo
Reply to  Burl Henry
December 1, 2020 3:19 am

Sulphates wash out in a few weeks. CO2 lasts centuries.

Reply to  Loydo
December 1, 2020 2:00 pm

Loydo:

Sulfates wash out in a few weeks.

Not true for volcanic eruptions. Their sulfurous injections into the stratosphere typically last for 2 years or more.

And really not true for industrial emissions, since those that wash out are constantly being replaced, so that they are always present.

And so what, if CO2 lasts for hundreds of years. It has NO climatic effect

http://www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/se/

Burl Henry
Reply to  Loydo
December 1, 2020 2:11 pm

Loydo:

Sulfates wash out in a few weeks”

Not true for volcanic eruptions, Sulfates injected into the stratosphere last for 2 years or more before settling out.

Although industrial ,emissions can wash out in a few weeks. they are constantly being replaced, so that their “lifetimes” are as long as the emitting sources exist.

And so what ,if CO2 lasts for centuries. It has NO climatic effect. Which I can prove.

Loydo
Reply to  Burl Henry
December 1, 2020 8:53 pm

Nah, nah, but so what…lol

James
November 30, 2020 11:03 am

It will likely destroy all economies around the world, starting with ours. We have an excellent example in California, and WA State which has enormous issues with wind and solar power, creating inconsistent energy for demands and major rolling blackouts. It will cost us $Trillions. Even the recommendations in WA State was wind and solar does not help in proving economically viable energy to their state and is inconsistent with power demands. Both modes of power require more energy (or reduction of CO2) to build and sustain, then they produce in it’s lifetime. Think China, India and other major polluting countries will comply? Lol

michael hart
Reply to  James
November 30, 2020 12:30 pm

No, China, India etc will not comply. That is why they will not tank the world economy completely, just the US economy until policies get changed.
Not good for US citizens but China, India etc will benefit. Many people think that is the real reasoning behind it at the UN level. They aim to make us all a bit more equal by making sure the better off get poorer, even though they have done nothing to deserve such treatment. Of course, the size of the overall cake will likely get smaller, but redistribution of wealth, not wealth creation, is their benchmark. Western Communists didn’t disappear at the fall of the Berlin Wall, they joined the green lobby, who were already half way down that street already.

November 30, 2020 11:08 am

Trump can submit it to the Senate. That is the President’s prerogative.
But also the Senate, led by the majority and thus the Majority Leader has the prerogative to not do anything or put it up for a vote. Politics comes into play here.

Mitch McConnell will be the Senate Majority at least for most of the month of January as well in the New Congress that is sworn in on January 3rd. He could wait until after the January Georgia run-offs elections to schedule a vote (or not) on the Paris Treaty approval or rejection for consent to ratification. Approval requires 2/3 affirmation to pass. That language is important.
Read the historical overview of the process here:
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm

That US Senate website overview also gives a list of treaties rejected by the US Senate. The first being in 1825.

McConnell doesn’t have to do anything. There are 37 treaties submitted to the US Senate since 1947 that are still waiting on a Senate vote that will never come. Here is the List:

US State Department List of Treaties “Pending in the US Senate” for ratification.
https://www.state.gov/treaties-pending-in-the-senate/

If Trump were submit it before he leaves office and Senate Majority Leader McConnell holds a Senate vote on it (in December or January) and rejects it (it certainly would NOT overcome the 2/3 threshold), it is clear the Paris Treaty could not be “re-entered” by Dementia Joe.

What is unclear is if Trump submits it for consent and then the US Senate does nothing on it. It would give some more legal weight in the Courts that Dementia Joe could not “re-enter” a pending treaty, but that has not been fully tested.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
November 30, 2020 1:33 pm

“Trump can submit it to the Senate.”
He can submit a treaty that he has signed for ratification. Has he signed it?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 1, 2020 12:14 am

quoting the above senate.gov website:

“The Senate does not ratify treaties—the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the United States and the foreign power(s).”

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 1, 2020 12:23 am

i.e. the resolution to approve would not pass the Senate, thus it would be formally rejected. There would be no signature and no viable legal avenue forward for Biden to pursue the Paris Deal on his own by Executive Order or to send US money to the UN Climate Aid Fund as the Paris Deal calls for. If he tried, he’d get blocked by the Courts as Steve Milloy wrote in the WSJ Op-Ed quoted here in part.

Although procedurally it really is that simple. The politics of it are Byzantine.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 1, 2020 11:22 am

“the resolution to approve would not pass the Senate”
So does Trump submit a “resolution to approve”? Sounds like he might gag on that.

John Endicott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 1, 2020 6:53 am

He can submit a treaty that he has signed for ratification.

Incorrect. He can do it before signing. President George Washington visited the Senate Chamber in August 1789 to seek advice and consent on negotiating a treaty with Indian tribes (IE before any treaty was signed). On June 10, 1919, Woodrow Wilson asked for a quick consent to the Treaty of Versailles. Consent was not given and thus the US never signed the Treaty of Versailles or joined the associated League of Nations (despite the role Wilson played in championing the formation of the League). August 1921, the United States instead signed a separate peace treaty with Germany, formally ending hostilities.

Basically, Trump could use Biden’s promise to sign on to Paris as the reason for requesting the Senate exercise it’s ratification powers before any signing takes place.

Reply to  John Endicott
December 1, 2020 11:25 am

“the US never signed the Treaty of Versailles”
The US did sign the treaty, on June 28 1919. Wilson then submitted it to the Senate for ratification, unsuccessfully.

John Endicott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 2, 2020 2:19 am

Nick, you are wrong.

1) June 28th is After June 10, So before your claimed signing it was brought to the senate for ratification, showing your initial assertion about having to sign it first to be utterly wrong.

2) The treaty was never signed on to by the US Government because the Senate refused to ratify it. Hence the need to sign a separate treaty with Germany to declare an official end to hostilities in Aug 1921 (and hence why we never joined the league of nations, which was a part of the treaty – despite Wilson’s desire to do so). Whether to not Wilson put his signature on it is legally irrelevant as he did not have the backing of the US government to do so (see senate’s refusal to ratify starting from *before* Wilson arrived in Paris for the June 28th meeting), as a result the US itself did not sign on to the treaty, period. Anything Wilson did on June 28th was purely for show, as it had no power in the US (as he already knew at the time), because he’d already gone to the Senate two weeks earlier and failed to get ratification. Wilson could have “signed” a hundred treaties that day, and none of them would have been worth the ink he used, because he had no power to sign the US up to something that the Senate already rejected. Citizen Wilson may have signed (as that’s the only entity he had power to sign for, as he’d already been refused by the Senate), the US did not.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 2, 2020 11:12 am

“So before your claimed signing it was brought to the senate for ratification”

No. Before June 28, when the Allies agreed to and signed the Versailles treaty, there was no agreed treaty that could have been brought to the Senate.

In fact, the Senate vote on ratification was on November 18, 1919.

John Endicott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 4, 2020 5:57 am

Wrong again nick. While the allies didn’t sign until the 28th, drafts of the treaty were already in existence before then. There was “Agitation in the United States Senate ” (per the paper of record, the New York Times) as far back as June 7th because while copies of the treaty reportedly had reached wall street, they were being withheld from the Senate due to “Wilson’s determination not to give the Senate an opportunity to see the treaty draft until it is completed officially”.

John Endicott
Reply to  Nick Stokes
December 4, 2020 6:02 am

Bottom line, despite your history denial, both Washington and Wilson went to congress before treaties were signed, seeking to get senate ratification first. Wilson failed (which is likely why most presidents don’t go that route – the as the saying goes “it’s easier to ask forgiveness than to ask permission” ) as the Senate refused to ratify when first asked to do so (and eventually voted to not ratify at all).

Bruce Cobb
November 30, 2020 11:17 am

Unfortunately, TraitorTrump™ is too busy attempting to steal the election to do anything that would actually be good for the country, like sending the PA to the Senate, in order to have it rejected. He doesn’t actually give a flying fig about our country, making him a lying, moronic, fraudulent TRAITOR.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 30, 2020 4:11 pm

My observation of this and previous threads is that those of us who fear a Biden regime are concerned about his expressed policy plans and direction. There are posts on this site that support that OPINION of Democrat policies.

In contrast, Trump haters invoke fact free ad hominems.

In their rage, some don’t even bother to make sense.

For the sake of argument let’s say DJT doesn’t “give a fig about this country”. How does that suggest he is a “fraudulent TRAITOR”?

(BTW I could name a dozen current politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle who act as though they “don’t give a fig about this country” but instead act in a manner to preserve their own power and status.

Simon
Reply to  George Daddis
November 30, 2020 10:48 pm

George Daddis
“There are posts on this site that support that OPINION of Democrat policies.”
And there are those that just say stuff like Biden is senile.
“In contrast, Trump haters invoke fact free ad hominems.”
Huh. How dare you? I provide both thank you very much. I mean it is a fact that the “liar in chief”(adhom) said climate change was invented by the Chinese to make US manufacturing non competitive (fact).

Doonman
Reply to  Simon
December 1, 2020 10:17 am

When a 78 year old man who mumbles incoherently and can’t remember what state he is in or what office he is running for, the first thing I think of is mental clarity.

Now Joe Biden has fallen and broken his leg while playing with his dog. Broken bones are the harbinger of death for elderly people, there is no other notable sudden accidental injury that leads to their eventual demise.

Simon
Reply to  Doonman
December 1, 2020 11:06 am

“Now Joe Biden has fallen and broken his leg while playing with his dog. Broken bones are the harbinger of death for elderly people, there is no other notable sudden accidental injury that leads to their eventual demise.”
Well you woke up a ray of sunshine…..

William Astley
November 30, 2020 11:22 am

Will Trump approve the Paris (Beijing) Climate Change Plan? Zero ‘probability’, in this Universe. P.S. There is only one Universe.

What happened in the last year? Any questions? I heard that we will are going to find out Jan. 2021.

The Climate Change/Climate Emergency/Carbon Taxes/Green Energy…. ….The big worldwide campaign that is so enthusiastically forced down our throats each and every year.

Was created to incapacitate the US and the Western countries. That complex corrupt/scam is going to disappear as an issue because we are going to all wake up when we get a pile of new info. Jan 2021.

Why is climate change/environmental lawyers/NGOs or speech about those topics not allowed in China? Not allowed in China, in that in China people disappear and go to jail if they ‘talk’ or try to change any Chinese project.

https://themarshallreport.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/trump-orders-useucom-to-seize-scytl-servers-in-germany/

President Trump’s Forces used a military unit attached to USEUCOM (United States European Command) to get a CIA computer facility to hand over evidence in Frankfurt Germany. By using this method, with U.S. law enforcement present to take custody of the evidence, that evidence is now under the control of the Department of Justice through US Attorneys. Because of the way it was obtained, it can all be used in court or other judicial proceedings.

Both the head of the CIA, Gina Haspel, and the head of the FBI, Christopher Wray were not informed of the operation taking place in advance. Both of them had been aggressively working to undermine and sabotage the Trump Administration.

Greg
Reply to  William Astley
November 30, 2020 12:30 pm

Thanks, I’d heard a rumour of this but had seen nothing in the press, even on RT.

Trump is playing a smart game against some big foes. This is pretty amazing stuff. Lucky there are some patriots still in play here.

Greg
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 1:03 pm

Apparently this was a raid on CIA, not Dominion or Scytl servers. Hammer and Scorecard being used on US targets??

ATheoK
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 5:27 pm

Greg:
This just showed up in The Gateway Pundit’s feed:
Arizona Voter Fraud Witness Army Col. Phil Waldron Confirms Experts Saw Dominion Communicating with Frankfurt on Election Day (VIDEO)

Not that they will ever tell us the exact reasons Dominion was communicating with Germany.

ATheoK
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 4:56 pm

Look in Sidney Powell’s news feeds.

Somebody has been studying servers and routers for details that are not provided by Dominion software.

From Superspreader’s comments, many of which sum up what is in Sidney Powell’s court filings, and twitter

“10) Then, CIA removed from briefings.
11) FBI removed from briefings.
12) CIA server farm raided in Europe.
13) Krebs fired.
13) Chris Miller consolidating all special forces under him.
14) General Flynn works directly with Sidney Powell and he is no ordinary general.
15) General Flynn commanded every WET team in this nation.
16) U.S. Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.) works with her too.
17) Even though retired, U.S. Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.) was #3 in the Air Force

From <a href=>Superspreader’s

This is the Kraken:
— ‘THE KRAKEN’ is a reference to the 305th Military Intelligence Battalion, based out of U.S. Army Fort Huachuca, Arizona, U.S. Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.) revealed today.

• CIA server farm secured in Frankfurt Germany; Information transmitted to Spain then to Frankfurt; It was a CIA facility; (This would explain Haspel being removed from briefings.)
• US soldiers killed (Initial Report and Needs further confirmation)
• China, Russia, Iran identified as being involved
• This is treason. McInerney thinks we will eventually have Nuremburg level of trials. He is recommending that President Trump NOT leave office despite whatever occurs on December 14th.

• The 14 recent Trump firings tend to support these notes:
• CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency) Bryan Ware fired
• DHS Cybersecurity head Christopher Krebs fired.
• Secretary of Defense Mark Esper fired.
• Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller consolidating all special forces under him.
• Gen. Scott Berrier installed as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency on October 2 2020
• General Flynn pardoned and given back security clearance
• Madeleine Albright, Henry Kissinger, Jane Harman and Eric Cantor removed by the Defense Policy Board
• Seven other un-named people fired by the Defense Policy Board

Unless brought up in trial, I doubt we will ever hear the details of the Army’s raid on a CIA server farm.

Simon
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 10:52 pm

ATheoK
OK let’s not beat around the bush. After reading all that creative writing I have a question for you. Do you think QAnon is a thing to be taken seriously?

John Endicott
Reply to  Simon
December 1, 2020 6:59 am

Certainly more seriously than you, but then that’s not setting the bar very high now is it 😉

Instead of mindlessly repeating the “but what about QAnon” talking points meant to distract, why don’t you address the meat of ATheok’s posts?

Simon
Reply to  Simon
December 1, 2020 11:12 am

John Endicott
“Instead of mindlessly repeating the “but what about QAnon” talking points meant to distract, why don’t you address the meat of ATheok’s posts?”
But… but… there is no meat. There’s not even any bone. Hell I’d take gristle at this stage. If it gets any traction outside of the looney right (to be clear not everyone on the right is crazy) I will be amazed. The great news is we wont have to wait long. Either this lot (Powell Guiliani) have some solid facts to present to a court, or they are going to left to be mocked for all time. I for one can’t wait to see how this ends up.

John Endicott
Reply to  Simon
December 2, 2020 2:22 am

Then it should be simplicity itself for you to address his points and show that. Yet you don’t. you distract, deflect, and ad hom. endlessly. that’s very telling.

Jim
Reply to  Simon
December 2, 2020 11:49 am

“QAnon will die out.” – Machiventa Melchizedek, Planetary Manager (message from him, 2 months ago.) It already has significantly.

Jim
Reply to  ATheoK
December 1, 2020 6:31 am

What about BG (Ret) Tony Tata taking over as policy head of the pentagon?

Greg
Reply to  William Astley
November 30, 2020 12:55 pm

That seizure seems to date from 13th Nov, still no word of what they found ?

I heard about the servers being in Germany from the Pennsylvania Senate hearings but no mention of this raid.

ResourceGuy
November 30, 2020 11:23 am

Now plot the unified budget for climate change spending alongside in indexed and absolute numbers.

Mike McMillan
November 30, 2020 11:30 am

Just Do It

Rud Istvan
November 30, 2020 11:38 am

WSJ is not very knowledgeable about Constitutional law. It has been settled since Thomas Jefferson was George Washington’s secretary of state that a treaty, per Article 2§2.2, is an agreement between nations that is “immutable save by mutual consent”. The Paris Accord is not a treaty. Obama insured the the language was not binding so he could join WITHOUT Senate consent.

Greg
Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 30, 2020 12:36 pm

You seem most learned in US law sir. Probably much more than WSJ correspondents.

Could Trump still make the play you suggested over 4 years ago and simply pull the rug on the whole UNFCCCP project with 12mo notice in writing?

ATheoK
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 4:36 pm

Rud is the guy to listen to regarding Federal Law.
Maybe not the equal of Powell or Wood, but I do prefer Rud’s explanations to some of Giuliani’s.

A few of Rud’s opinions may be slanted, but that is his personal prerogative. They are worth reading!

Rud may not be the equal of WSJ’s best, but he certainly far outclasses the run of the mill author pretending or paraphrasing legal matters.
WSJ’s best are busy studying financial legalities while the Murdoch Brothers prefer writers who know what the boss wants.

Bill Parsons
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 11:27 pm

Author of “How to Stop the Paris Climate Accord” in Nov. 29 WSJ editorial page was Steve Miloy.

His bio: “Mr. Milloy publishes JunkScience.com, served on the Trump Environmental Protection Agency transition team and is the author of “Scare Pollution: Why and How to Fix the EPA.”

Rud istvan
Reply to  Greg
November 30, 2020 9:13 pm

Yes. Via also FCC treaty abrogation at 12 months, IIRC §22.6. But he chose not to use that route . Read the FCC treaty law I provided you gratis three years ago.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Greg
December 1, 2020 2:18 pm

Greg, he could have then but the question is now moot.

ScarletMacaw
Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 30, 2020 3:58 pm

The fact that immediate withdrawal was not allowed means that at least that clause was immutable save by mutual consent. That makes it a treaty.

Calling it “not a treaty” is just a lie perpetrated by Obama.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  ScarletMacaw
November 30, 2020 9:21 pm

legally, nope.Just wrong.

John Endicott
Reply to  Rud Istvan
December 1, 2020 7:03 am

Indeed, you are. Claim a treaty is something other than a treaty in order to work around the senate does not make it not a treaty. period. ScarletMacaw is absolutely correct in saying: Calling it “not a treaty” is just a lie perpetrated by Obama. A Lie, that you’ve clearly bought in to.

ATheoK
November 30, 2020 12:11 pm

“The Wall Street Journal has called for Donald Trump to finally send the Paris Accord to the US Senate.”

After several decades of subscribing to the WSJ, I dropped my subscription five years ago, because articles with substantial leftist viewpoints, lack of objectivity and easily debunked claims were becoming too frequent.

There was a time when the WSJ’s news articles were more timely and neutrally written. When any facts included were accurate and indisputable.
Then WSJ started their leftist march. Conservative authors and editors were reassigned or left their employ.

What did become obvious is that Globalist Rupert Murdoch who had purchased the WSJ and he had mostly turned the WSJ over to his children. Children who set the WSJ on a business path that could very much be like FOX news.

Unless the article is strictly financial, I haven’t trusted a WSJ article in years; especially any of their articles dealing with politics, climate, Gaia, Unions, European Union, China and globalism.

rah
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 1:36 pm

Agreed. Wasn’t always that way, but it certainly has been for some time now.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  rah
November 30, 2020 9:29 pm

Rah, I have been reading WSJ every day since first year HBS in sept 1973.
Have learned much since, including its many now evident biases. Now immune.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  ATheoK
November 30, 2020 3:05 pm

The reason for their position is so as not to hand Biden a quick defeat. He will no doubt be pressured by the far left to rejoin and submit it to the Senate where everyone knows it will not concur. They would rather blame Trump for the U.S. not being part of the pact.

Andy
November 30, 2020 12:19 pm

You could add GFC and Covid lock down to the graph

TonyG
November 30, 2020 12:26 pm

Based on that chart, it appears that global climate agreements are responsible for the increase in CO2…

Greg
Reply to  TonyG
November 30, 2020 1:06 pm

That’s due the exponential increase in the amount of delegates flying to climate conferences.

Ian Coleman
November 30, 2020 1:44 pm

The lurking gremlin in this article s that the Supreme Court has anti-democratic powers. Five people can enact policy and in fact legislation. The Supreme Court is not a diverse body. All of its members (including Clarence Thomas) are graduates of Ivy League universities. A clear majority are Roman Catholics. This small band of socially similar people, appointed for life, can do a lot of heavy stuff.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Ian Coleman
November 30, 2020 3:00 pm

Your misconception is that the SCOTUS should be democratic. The fact that the liberal Justices have used their position to enact policy that would not make it past Congress is the fault of those Justices not the system.

Ian Coleman
Reply to  Tom in Florida
November 30, 2020 4:06 pm

You make a fair point, Tom, but the system empowers the Justices so it is arguable that the system is at fault. You’d have to be simple in the head not to realize that the Supreme Court is a political body. It is certainly not, except in theory, a review board vetting laws on the basis of their constitutional validity. Everyone understands the implications of replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Amy Coney Barrett.

Some people think that the number of justices on the Court will be expanded from nine to twelve to obviate the current conservative majority. We’ll see.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Ian Coleman
December 1, 2020 5:19 am

And you make a fair point that the appointment of Justices is a political process, especially so in recent years. The political divide in this Country is so large I fear it can never be mended. Gone are the days when both sides could work together towards a common goal. Absolute power is now the goal and the rationale that the ends justify the means is now accepted.
My last sentence not withstanding, the expansion of the SC would be a tricky move. First, the Democrats would have to change the law which would require voting on the record. For those Senators up for reelection in 2 years, they may not want to take that chance for the good of their own career. Second, because it will risk the unintended consequence of galvanizing the opposition to greater heights and prove Trump was right about Biden.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Ian Coleman
November 30, 2020 3:07 pm

No, that is fundamentally incorrect. The Supreme Court has been abused over the past century by Progressives to subvert the Constitution and make fiat law. (Particularly in the interpretation of the interstate commerce clause, used to justify most every unconstitutional activity that the federal government wants to take on. Also of course the famous implied rights to privacy).

The current majority are conservatives (more or less) who understand their role to interpret the original intent of the laws and Constitution and apply it. Therefore, they cannot and will not invent rights that are not enumerated in the Constitution.

This will likely be better understood when my side is sorely disappointed that the Supreme Court will only interpret the law as written, rather than act as lawgivers. I don’t see how it is at all likely that they will do anything to assist Trump in overturning the election results due to fraud, or that they will do anything to invalidate Obamacare as the Dems fear. They will only be an asset to conservatives in ruling against Democrat overreach that is surely coming. However, if the Senate is stolen, the Supreme Court will be packed with leftwing judges. And if Georgia was stolen in the Presidential election, why would we imagine that it won’t be stolen in the Senate run-off?

Frankly I am very, very pessimistic about the future at this point. May I be wrong!

Ian Coleman
Reply to  Rich Davis
December 1, 2020 3:56 am

Hello, Rich Davis. If I understand your point correctly, you are arguing that conservative justices apply constitutional originalism to their opinions, making them morally sound, but liberals make up new rules that are antithetical to the intent of the original writers, making them morally questionable.

Well I dunno. Both conservatives and liberals are motivated by political bias. Original intent has no moral weight than I can see, and in fact is invoked as a post hoc justification for prior bias. Which is still based on ideology.

Originalism itself as a philosophy has been fatally wounded by the processes for amendment of the Constitution. All the amendments are explicitly political, as the come through Congress.

Decisions by the Court still split along ideological lines. Nine very accomplished and scholarly people, ostensibly applying the same constitutional template, often cannot agree. My own view (which I’ll concede must appear naïve) is that none of the Justices ever acts on bad faith. Except, or course, in the vote-counting decisions that resulted in the re-election of George W. Bush. And okay, maybe Roe vs. Wade was a little hinky. And anything Antonin Scalia wrote was kind of dirty.

November 30, 2020 2:05 pm

The Covid-19 Shutdown had no effect on the growth of CO2 in the air. However it devastated the economy of the World. The Paris agreement similarly has no effect on the rise of CO2 in the air but will devastate the Western World’s economy. The Paris agreement is feel-good propaganda and social wallpaper only.

glen ferrier
November 30, 2020 2:16 pm

Hello All: A small request. Over at Robert’s “Ice Age Now” blog there is a story about the CIA and Dominion servers. It is a way-over-the-top story. How does one verify or refute this story?

Thanks,

Speed

Scissor
Reply to  glen ferrier
November 30, 2020 2:27 pm

You could always ask someone.

https://www.cia.gov/cgi-bin/forlang_form.cgi

Rory Forbes
November 30, 2020 2:58 pm

Considering it’s nearly certain that neither CO2 nor water vapour are causing any temperature rise, due to almost total spectral saturation, it’s rather moot what the Paris Accord is supposed to accomplish. It’s well known that the IPCC’s entire goal is the redistribution of wealth, as the primary purpose of globalization.

November 30, 2020 3:30 pm

“To prevent the Paris Climate Accord from taking on such undue power, Mr. Trump should submit it to the Senate, and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should schedule a quick vote…”

This is the best idea I have seen on WUWT in a while – someone tell Trump to do it !!!

– JPP

Rory Forbes
November 30, 2020 4:28 pm

I find it strange that ANYONE would not immediately go the the default truth about Biden (and Kamala too) that lying and cheating is in his nature. He has been caught lying and cheating (plagiarism) so often and so egregiously it’s impossible to believe this election was NOT fraudulent., worked out long before 2020. The covid issue was merely a fortunate windfall for the amoral Democrats. The problem is, the Democrats went overboard with their fraud. Only a completely credulous simpleton could fail to recognize the fraud. Biden didn’t out perform both Obama and Billary, with 80 million votes. It several counties he received more votes than people on the voter’s lists.

Simon
Reply to  Rory Forbes
November 30, 2020 10:59 pm

Rory Forbes
Biden got the votes. Not because he is something amazing, he got them because Trump is detested by so many. Yes I know some love him. But more hate him. And I don’t know why anyone is surprised Biden won. He was well ahead in the polls. The surprise was that Trump did so well.
PS you made another small spelling mistake… just saying. See if you can spot it.
“It several counties he received more votes than people on the voter’s lists.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 11:30 pm

Biden was many hundreds of votes behind in ALL the key locations. Trump received 10 million (probably more than 20 million) more votes than he did in 2016. Trump is loved because he loves his country. Biden is already a three time loser, a proven cheat and plagiarist as well as being almost as bad a liar as Harris. She couldn’t even get a nomination and had to withdraw for lack of support. Biden is just a universal joke, and a loser … an ideal candidate for the Democrats. He’s an empty suit like Obama was … and even more easily manipulated.

Biden was NEVER “ahead in the polls”. There was no surprise that Trump did well. That’s why the media falsified the polls and the Dems needed to run their fraud. Trump was likely millions of votes ahead. You’re the one who accused Sidney Powell of the spelling errors. It’s fun to see how easily you’re trolled by typos … what a schlemiel, what a maroon.

Simon
November 30, 2020 4:59 pm

ATheoK
“It is a very long list! ”
It a long list alright of complete BS. If any of that was true it would be presented in court. Face it you have been conned. And thankfully as a result the Don Con is gone.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 9:03 pm

You poor schmucks are so credulous because you specialize in willful ignorance. As I told you earlier; learn something about court procedure and the genesis of court action. You also need to proof read your atrocious syntax and spelling … especially since you criticized Sidney Powell for hers. The hing is, you simply have no idea what evidence means and how it’s used in a law suit. Your ignorance is glaring.

Simon
Reply to  Rory Forbes
November 30, 2020 10:55 pm

Rory Forbes
So Rory let’s get this straight you are criticising people for their “syntax and spelling” then post “The hing is.” Mate that’s too funny.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Simon
November 30, 2020 11:14 pm

I was specifically drawing attention to the several errors in your own posts BECAUSE you claimed (ad hominem) that Powell’s material were filled with spelling and syntax errors. It was fun dropping the”t’ in thing, knowing (like a typical brain dead Dem) you would mention that rather than your own egregious writing … and miss the points about your utter ignorance of legal procedures while parroting the media lies.

That’s why Biden and Kamala lost the election by a landslide. They so over-did the fraud; a blind fool can see it.

Simon
Reply to  Rory Forbes
December 1, 2020 1:00 am

Rory Forbes
BECAUSE you claimed (ad hominem) that Powell’s material were filled with spelling and syntax errors.
Ummm, nope didn’t mention that. Who else have you been trolling?

Josie
December 1, 2020 1:34 am

“some green group may find a friendly federal court to produce that result.”

That’s exactly what happened in the Netherlands. Our Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) no less. They just rubberstamped it not being troubled by any knowledge or experience of course. Judges do not have any affinity with numbers.

cedarhill
December 1, 2020 5:28 am

Yes, but…the Lawfare folks have ways. Suppose a change is made and “ratified” by the those that signed, including the US. Then Biden simply does the “signing” charage, the PA is revived along with the prospect of submitting it to the Senate sometime. Along the way, the Activist Left sues the Gov to abide by what was signed to mitigate CO2 damage, the Biden Admin settles (see accompanying article of how this works) and the Geenie Lawfare folks march on toward the next theft of an election…

Coach Springer
December 1, 2020 7:08 am

Are they saying that courts will interfere with Biden’s executive order if a Republican lame duck Senate rejects the agreement? Not likely and temporary if they did. Sure, Biden’s prospective EO on day one would be every bit as “capricious” as Trump’s rescission EO, but John Roberts’ bevy of statist courts will conveniently defer this time because they wouldn’t want to appear “political.”

Such a move would also motivate Biden – or whoever ascends to the crown after him – to go ahead and do what he was going to go ahead and do anyway. But the press would spin it as motivation, Facebook would ban contrary opinion as dangerous and partly false, and schools would teach it that way. Regardless of unsettled science, if Biden/Harris take office, global warmists have won the decisive political battle – if they haven’t already. As it is, every time I drive to Chicago, I find a new wind farm.

Linda Goodman
December 2, 2020 10:50 pm

Charles seems unaware that Biden’s ‘extensive and inclusive voter fraud’ failed. It was brazen and sloppy and they got caught. The media is in denial and decided to conjure a faux reality. But facts trump fraud and fantasy.

President Trump’s speech today on the unprecedented and ‘overwhelming election fraud’ – the networks apparently won’t air it and blow their illusion so it’s posted on Facebook: 12/2/2020
https://www.facebook.com/153080620724/posts/10165908467175725/

MICHIGAN ELECTION FRAUD HEARING: 12/1/2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYybSI6xvAc
ARIZONA ELECTION FRAUD HEARING: 11/30/2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXyOtzADUCU
PENNSYLVANIA ELECTION FRAUD HEARING: 11/25/2020

Linda Goodman
Reply to  Linda Goodman
December 2, 2020 10:52 pm
%d bloggers like this: