The Case Against Sabotaging Biden’s Paris Agreement Plans

Eiffel tower, Paris. France

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

A few days ago WUWT published an article urging President Trump to kill the Paris Agreement by submitting it to the Senate. I disagree with this view. Quite apart from the risk the thing might actually be ratified, if enough RINOs cross the floor, an act of restraint which occurred in the final days of the Obama administration provides a reason to reconsider.

‘The Planet Could Become Ungovernable’: Climate Scientist James Hansen on Obama’s Environmental Record, Scientific Reticence, and His Climate Lawsuit Against the Federal Government

By David Wallace-Wells
JULY 12, 2017

James Hansen is the former head of climate research for NASA, the author of the legendary early “zero model” for climate change, and is now the lead scientific figure in a lawsuit being brought against the federal government alleging complicity on climate change, which Hansen and his fellow litigants argue is a violation of the equal protection clause — since the costs of change will fall unequally on future generations.*

Sounds like a political winner.
Yeah. So why can’t we get it done? I wrote a letter to Obama after he was elected in 2008, and tried to explain this.

What happened?
I couldn’t get John Holdren to deliver the letter — he was chosen to be the science adviser. He said he couldn’t do anything until he was confirmed. And finally, near the end of the Obama administration, I tried to get Obama to settle our lawsuit. Which would have made sense. Actually the judge in Oregon was puzzled as to why Obama was fighting us. Because Obama, when he talked about the planet, he sounded like us.

Then, as soon as Trump was elected, I said, this is now really a time the Obama administration should settle the case.

It would have been a sneaky way to lock in some climate policies …
So I sent an email to John Podesta, and surprisingly got a response almost immediately, asking me to use a different email address — I’d used the one that was hacked.

Wow.
And he did try to help. Eventually, though, Obama rejected the idea, because his lawyers preferred his plan, his Clean Power Plan, which is being challenged in various courts.

Read more: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/scientist-jim-hansen-the-planet-could-become-ungovernable.html

Just as Obama showed restraint in the final days of his administration, and rejected James Hansen’s plan to bind Trump’s hands on climate policy, so I believe it would be wrong to prevent Biden from fulfilling his manifesto promise to restore the Paris agreement, if Biden is sworn in as the next President.

I detest the Paris Agreement. I cheered when Trump announced he was cancelling the agreement, I cheered when the USA officially left the Paris Agreement. I would have cheered if Trump had submitted the Paris Agreement to the Senate a few years ago, as a way of killing it off once and for all.

But submitting the Paris agreement to the Senate at this late stage would be seen by many as an act of political sabotage.

Two can play that game. A tit-for-tat escalation of Presidents sabotaging their successors could worsen the USA’s political tensions.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
205 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Don
December 15, 2020 10:30 am

Political sabotage? Like stealing an election? That kind of sabotage? You really are a delusional fool if you think political sabotage hasn’t already been happening the last four years.

The Dems will amnesty all the illegal aliens currently in the USA, ending the possibility of ever getting a non-socialist into the White House, or into Congress. Start teaching your children Mandarin, so that they can communicate with their masters after 2030 or so.

Timo, Not That One
Reply to  Don
December 15, 2020 11:55 am

They don’t need to amnesty anybody. They simply will not change the electoral system. There will always be the same system from here on in. Just like a dictatorship.
The Democratic Republic of Amerika.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:55 pm

Eric, you would think that. A perfect counter example would be all of the former Californians who left that state because of high taxes and dysfunctional government turn around and vote for politicians who promise to raise taxes and have government take over everything.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2020 3:42 pm

You can add the Germans, who are straining under high taxes and energy bills. Where energy production, industry and jobs are rapidly declining. On top, a system where you can’t find any official media that isn’t delivering anything else but state propaganda.
Unfortunately, in the fall they will all vote for the same parties as usual, although they’re being constantly lied to, by their own government. … No, we can’t…

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2020 8:29 pm

Even if adopted though (but likely insufficient support) it would steal the wind from Biden’s sails as he enters office, he could no longer claim to be the President that brought the Country back to Paris

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:47 pm

The Democrats don’t even need illegal aliens coming in to maintain their power now. All they have to do is cheat like they have been doing since Trump came on the scene, and if they control the Executive Branch, then the cheating will never be acknowledged or stopped. Who needs illegal aliens voting when the Democrat election official can just keep feeding the same winning ballots through the vote counting machine over and over and over.

The Democrat criminals that trampled the constitution and used the Executive Branch to target their political enemies, look like they are going to be put back in charge. They will correct their 2016 mistakes and there may never be another conservative elected president.

If Trump can’t make his case for voter fraud, then there are several very important things he should concentrate on. He should take measures to united his 75 million supporters, and he should take measures to reform the election system in the United States. No vote counted without a voter ID.

Trump is going to have to get down in the grass roots. State by State on some issues. He’ll probably be visiting Georgia. I think he has a bone to pick with a few local Republican politicians.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 15, 2020 8:18 pm

“If Trump can’t make his case for voter fraud, then there are several very important things he should concentrate on. He should take measures to united his 75 million supporters, and he should take measures to reform the election system in the United States. No vote counted without a voter ID.”

Anything Trump does on his own can be undone by Kamala Harris.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
December 16, 2020 10:15 am

“Anything Trump does on his own can be undone by Kamala Harris.”

That’s true. Anything the Founding Fathers did can be undone by the Democrats if they have control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency.

So let’s hope the Republicans hold control of the U.S. Senate, and hope that the Republicans take control of the House in 2022, which will block most of the socialist Democrat insanity, and then elect Trump in 2024 to do what he did in 2016, undo all the socialist BS the Democrats have stuck us with.

That’s why Trump needs to organize his 75 million member base and coordinate their political actions. No need to create a new political party. Trump already owns the Republican Base and we don’t need the Republican Elites, they can go become Democrats.

Trump needs to organize his Base with the goal of eliminating socialism from the United States through political means. The Left is at war with the American constitution and it’s time for Republicans to fight back in an organized way. Trump is a good organizer.

markl
December 15, 2020 10:39 am

The “Paris Agreement” has already morphed into “The Great Reset” as the Left continues to lose traction with their wealth redistribution narrative and AGW has lost its’ luster with the Marxist crowd because it hasn’t captured enough useful idiots among the masses. If the Progressives succeed in taking the two Georgia senate seats they will control everything in the USA …. including funding for the Paris Agreement. Then it will be all over but the shouting for a democratic and free America for at least the next two years.

lawrence brown
December 15, 2020 10:43 am

“Two can play that game. A tit-for-tat escalation of Presidents sabotaging their successors could worsen the USA’s political tensions.”

1. This is not a game.
2. The left stole the 2020 election, they ignore election law, moral laws, and have no rules.
3. If we have the votes in the senate, kill it. If it’s the right thing to do and we have the votes, kill it.
4. Whatever is constitutional, do it. Use every legal weapon to stop the left. They don’t care about tit for tat, they care only about power, about jamming left wing ideology down our throats.
5. Fight the left with every legal, constitutional means available. Fight them to the bitter end and never surrender, never ever give up.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:24 pm

Eric,
Where is the evidence that Biden received help? All US government departments including the
Justice Department and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency have all publicly
stated that the was no evidence of widespread fraud. No lawsuit alleging fraud has been successful.

Biden won the election fairly and by over 7 million votes which is almost exactly in line with what every poll has been predicting since February.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:17 pm

Hundreds of affidavits of individuals observing misconduct in both voting and in how the votes were handled.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 4:52 pm

Mistreatment of observers is not evidence of fraud. Similarly pulling suitcases out from where they were stored is not evidence of fraud. The best case you can make is that irregularities in vote counting made it easier for fraud to happen. But there it is a huge leap to go from that to actual evidence of fraud and no one from the Trump’s legal team has managed to persuade any judge or the FBI that fraud happened.

If the video from Georgia was evidence of fraud why has no federal agency charged or even arrested anyone over it? Election fraud is a federal crime and if it happened you would expect to see charges being laid by now.

Philo
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 18, 2020 5:27 am

Preventing the observers from doing their job is voter fraud. If the suitcases “under the table” had ANY fraudluent ballots in them there is voter fraud. Unfortunately apparently the dishonest pollsters and their backers prevailed.

Doing anything but the very best efforts to conduct the election honestly is voter fraud. Since the lower courts are already packed with Dems they are useless in settling partisan issues. The Founders assumed that politicians would follow the constitution. That worked until Andrew Jackson got elected.

Up until the 1970’s an “honest” ethic prevailed between the parties even while the liberal Fascists were packing the lower courts, the schools, the Federal government, and State governments.

There can be no “ethical” government if one party succeeds in capturing the government apparatus, the courts, the schools, and Federal, state, and local elected offices.

Either the electorate realizes that government has gone off the rails or we will suffer decades of decadent, dishonest rule. Unfortunately some multi-billionaires have decided to use the power of their money for their own ends, not as the Rockefellers and other 19th century power brokers tried to use their wealth to better the country.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 7:51 pm

As long as you can’t prove that the highly irregular behavior and gross violation of all regulations is fraud, then as far as the socialists are concerned, it isn’t fraud
Of course fraud can’t be proven without examining the ballots that came out of those suitcases. However thanks to the fast work of the comrades in crime, those ballots were quickly mixed in with the rest of the ballots and are no longer identifiable.

Like most progressives, Isaak’s standards are based on what ever gets him the most free stuff.

bigoilbob
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 10:23 am

“I caught a cheat, because I could lean in close and see she was doing sleight of hand tricks with the votes – short bundling her preferred candidate.”

Great eyes, and citizenship. Which state/city/voting location? Which election? This is one of the biggest instances of proven voter fraud to come to light, so do you have a link to the arrest(s), trial(s)? What did Kobach do, after you told him?

I watch for these, and am kicking myself for missing it…

Derg
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 3:46 pm

You are a moron.

Mr.
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 4:14 pm

Izaak, “evidence” has been presented in spades

It’s the refusal by officials who should know better to fully investigate accusations of observed malfeasance that is getting up people’s noses.

Polls are saying that upwards of 40% of voters who voted Democrat believe there has been widespread electoral fraud.

Ignoring or dismissing the public’s take on situations is a recipe for dire political repercussions.
Remember that “basket of deplorables”?

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Mr.
December 15, 2020 5:49 pm

And all of the “evidence” that has been presented has been dismissed by judges across the country as not credible. And as William Barr said:
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election,”.
While CISA said:
“The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history. … All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary. This is an added benefit for security and resilience. This process allows for the identification and correction of any mistakes or errors. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

Again Trump’s legal team has failed to produce any evidence of fraud that could convince a single judge to change a single vote. The FBI who were instructed into looking into the election have failed to find anything. Wild assertions on dubious webpages do not could as evidence.

Mr.
Reply to  Mr.
December 15, 2020 6:05 pm

Izaak, my position is that at this stage, whether the electoral malfeasance was / is enough to swing overall election results is not the point.

The point is the obligation to independently chase down ALL affidavits, observations, reports that assert electoral malfeasance and clear them up.

Mostly what has happened so far is that the officials who were responsible for overseeing the electoral processes have told judges – “no, yer honor, everything was tickety-boo as far as we know. Nothing to see here”

I think there is one judge who wants a thorough independent investigation reported back to him, but he declared he was not about to rule out the declared results.

This is what should be happening in all cases, imo.

Mr.
Reply to  Mr.
December 15, 2020 7:18 pm

Izaak, here is an independent forensic audit report ordered by a Judge in Michigan into gross irregularities in the calibration, operating & results reportage of the Dominion voting machines in just one County –
https://www.depernolaw.com/uploads/2/7/0/2/27029178/antrim_michigan_forensics_report_%5b121320%5d_v2_%5bredacted%5d.pdf

It’s 23 pages, but a digest of the report is available here –
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16862/dominion-voting-systems

This is the kind of independent assessment of evidence that I reckon should be done for all the reported irregularities.

MarkW
Reply to  Mr.
December 15, 2020 7:53 pm

One of the justices from the WI supreme court declared that Trump’s suit was an example of racism.
Who, besides Izaak, believes that this justice is capable of honestly ruling on the merits of the case?

Observer
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 7:05 pm

There’s a LOT of evidence. None of it has been examined in a court of law because the cases have all (so far) been dismissed on the grounds that the plaintiffs had no standing, or other such technicalities.

And then there’s this:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/systemic-purposeful-fraud-clark-county-nevada-dominion-machines-also-kicked-70-ballots-settings/

A C Osborn
Reply to  Observer
December 16, 2020 1:48 am

1,000,000+
If you don’t look you will never find evidence of anything.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 8:26 pm

“Where is the evidence that Biden received help?”

Biden received the most help from the MSM and Social Media.

The MSM that were allowed to interview him prior to the election absolutely failed in their journalistic responsibilities: meaning they didn’t ask a single tough question, didn’t call him out on ANYTHING (“you aint black if you don’t vote for me”, etc), refused to cover any story detrimental to Democrats in general, and Biden specifically.

If you can’t see that, then you are indeed blind.

John Endicott
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
December 16, 2020 6:07 am

the phrase “There are none so blind as those who refuse to see” could have been written with Izaak I mind given how it describes him to a t.

Vincent Causey
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 11:35 pm

Are these the same departments who claimed Trump was a Russian agent for 4 years? Are they the ones who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was all Russian disinformation?

2hotel9
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 16, 2020 5:35 am

No, they have all, uniformly, refused to accept and look at any evidence or any of the sworn affidavits. Stolen election.

beng135
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 16, 2020 8:03 am

Izaak sez:
Eric,
Where is the evidence that Biden received help? All US government departments including the Justice Department and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency have all publicly stated that the was no evidence of widespread fraud. No lawsuit alleging fraud has been successful.

Oh good Lord. You can’t reason with the truly indoctrinated, they’ll swear an apple is an orange.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:58 pm

We have one side who has shown time and again that they will do anything, break any rule, in order to win.
The only option left is what do we do? Continuing to ignore the malfeasance on the part of the Democrats only gets us more malfeasance on the part of the Democrats.
We have three options
1) Fight back anyway we can.
2) Just surrender to the growing tyranny.
3) Secede

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:18 pm

You cannot defeat evil by inviting it to tea either.
If you don’t fight back, you lose.

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:29 pm

No one here suggested Republicans should cheat in elections, so why are you implyng they made that suggestion?

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 7:54 pm

Failing to fight back is indistinguishable from surrender.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 8:30 pm

“Failing to fight back is indistinguishable from surrender.”

And “White silence is violence.”

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 6:26 am

Eric you can’t defeat evil by letting evil get away with being evil. At what point do you fight back against evil instead of letting evil win all the time?

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 6:28 am

Jeff, you non sequitur is as moronic in equal measure to how far it misses the point (which is extremely far).

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 8:49 am

John, do you believe in the saying “you’re either with us or against us”? That’s what Mark said, and that’s what my quote says.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 1:37 pm

Sorry, Jeff, but if you believe that’s what your post says, you have a serious misunderstanding (to be nice about it) of what the phrases you posted mean. They are not equivalents to anyone with a brain that can read them or that know anything about them.

bigoilbob
Reply to  MarkW
December 17, 2020 11:27 am

“3) Secede”

KYSO, but might want to ponder, first The seceding states would be, for the most part, red, takers. Since both social security and medicare bennies were first given right after program adoptions, there was NO pile of $ built up for them. Hence, no obligations from non seceders to continue to make the transfer payments. But I’m sure all of your rebel officials will be all over that for you, right? Right?

TonyG
Reply to  bigoilbob
December 17, 2020 12:29 pm

Seems to me the blue states should be “all over that”, then. No more obligations to the “takers”, right?

TonyG
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:38 am

“But what do you have left if both sides show no restraint in breaking things?”
In war, if one side exercises restraint while the other side does not, you have a clear victor. And it’s not the restrained one.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  lawrence brown
December 15, 2020 3:45 pm

If the Senate remains republican, they should block the budget until new electoral legislation is passed.

Doonman
December 15, 2020 10:48 am

I’m all in favor of letting Joe Biden reduce the US GDP by $3 trillion by 2040 by rejoining the Paris Accord. Its a great idea and its the first thing Joe will do. It’s all part of building back better. Of course, if it saves one polar bear’s life it will be worth it.

James Stagg
Reply to  Doonman
December 15, 2020 8:21 pm

Doonman, you win FIRST PRIZE for the best comment of this string!

Dale S
December 15, 2020 10:50 am

It’s probably not even possible for Trump to sabotage Biden as badly as the Obama/Biden administration sabotaged him on the way out the door. If Obama chose one way of usurping legislative power to unilaterally implement policy (Clean Power Plan) instead of another way of usurping legislative power (sue-and-settle) in his waning months, I don’t see how that represents any sort of precedent Trump should follow.

The fact is that the Paris Agreement is meant to be a treaty, and treaties are *supposed* to go to the Senate constitutionally.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dale S
December 15, 2020 4:02 pm

“It’s probably not even possible for Trump to sabotage Biden as badly as the Obama/Biden administration sabotaged him on the way out the door.”

The Republicans could play the same underhanded game as the Democrats, but they won’t. Republicans still believe in the United States. Democrats only believe in gaining political power at the expense of the United States if that is required.

Democrats are ruthless. Republicans are not. It’s a weakness in Republicans. It’s a virtue, but it’s still a weakness, because unscrupulous people like the Democrat Elites take advantage of it. Repulbican always seem to be surprised when Democrats are discovered breaking the rules. It’s like Republicans live in a Dreamworld where Democrat Elites are regular folks rather than the political predators they are.

Republicans being credulous is now a danger to national security and the Rule of Law. They failed to take into account the Democrats’ capacity for thievery and lawbreaking. They depended too much on hope that the elections would go smoothly and took no extra precautions. They gave the Democrats too much of an opportunity to cheat.

James Stagg
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 15, 2020 8:26 pm

Thank you, Tom. Wish I could upvote your comment!

Juan Slayton
December 15, 2020 10:50 am

Depends on the January 5 election in Georgia. If the Democrat party ends up in total control of all 3 branches of government, you might regret having just brought a knife to a gunfight.

Bryan A
Reply to  Juan Slayton
December 15, 2020 12:33 pm

Even if the Georgia re-election in January give the dems 2 additional seats, Republicans already have 50. The best the dems could do s a 50/50 split

Stephen Philbrick
Reply to  Bryan A
December 15, 2020 1:23 pm

You do know how this works, right? The Veep can cast a tie-breaking vote so 50-50 mean Den control.

Bryan A
Reply to  Stephen Philbrick
December 15, 2020 8:33 pm

True, but last I heard 50/50 was far less than 2/3s and it would take 2/3 to ratify a treaty and 2/3 to overturn the 2/3 rule

Juan Slayton
Reply to  Bryan A
December 15, 2020 2:10 pm

50/50 plus Vice President Harris.
Enough to: Change Senate debate rules to give total control to a bare majority; approve statehood for DC and Puerto Rico; increase the size of the Supreme Court; pack the court with political activists; borrow more money to give to the UN Green Fund; cripple American energy companies; re-imagine the meaning of the first and second amendments….for starters.

Kemaris
Reply to  Bryan A
December 15, 2020 2:11 pm

The only way that becomes a winner is if the Republicans have the testicular fortitude to reject Kamala Harris’ nominations to the vice presidency after she invokes the 25th Amendment to become president. The vice presidential nominee must be confirmed by a simple majority of both houses of Congress, leaving open the possibility of a perpetual 50-50 deadlock in the Senate, with no vice president to break ties. Unfortunately, that makes Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, or Joe Manchin the most important person in the Senate depending on the specific issue.

John Endicott
Reply to  Kemaris
December 16, 2020 6:53 am

Ah, I think Kemaris’s post is what czechlist was responding to. In that case, czechlist is missing a vital part of Kemaris’s point. If Harris becomes President, the VP slot is vacant, there literally is no VP tie-breaking vote because at that point there is no VP. The role of VP would then remain vacant until the Senate confirms her replacement, meaning the Republicans can deadlock anything the far left tries to get through as long as they can keep their RINOs in line and reject all of President Harris’s VP nominations.

czechlist
Reply to  Bryan A
December 15, 2020 2:20 pm

And VP Harris will be President of the Senate and would cast the deciding vote.
Wanna guess how she would vote ?
Like the Amy Coney Barrett nomination, given any circumstances the dims wouldn’t have hesitated to do the same. The dims are immoral and unethical and demonstrate it daily with the support of the propaganda arm – the media

John Endicott
Reply to  czechlist
December 16, 2020 6:46 am

And VP Harris will be President of the Senate and would cast the deciding vote.
Wanna guess how she would vote ?

Depends on what is being voted on. According 12th Amendment, when the senate is voting on who to be vice-president (due to no one getting the needed number of Electoral votes), the requirement is a “majority of the whole number” of Senators – which excludes the VP from voting.

However, as it seems we are talking about the line of succession here, that doesn’t really apply as Congress doesn’t get a vote on succession via the 25th, as the 25th states unequivocally that the vice president is the direct successor of the president, and becomes president if the incumbent dies, resigns or is removed from office

2hotel9
December 15, 2020 10:51 am

Eric? Political sabotage? Where have you been the last 4 years? Democrats have done nothing but commit acts of political sabotage repeatedly, Nannee Pelosi and Chuckles Schumer are doing so RIGHT NOW. Why is it only the political left is allowed to do this things and Americans have to simply surrender when we are in charge of Congress?

Juan Slayton
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:33 pm

Being nasty doesn’t win hearts and minds….

Totally agree. Unfortunately a great many voters vote on the basis of likeability, not policy. Which is why candidates should pay more attention to the first part of Teddy Roosevelt’s advice: Talk softly Would that our president could have seen this wisdom.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 5:57 pm

on what basis do you think Trump won? He was behind in every national opinion poll since February by about 10 points. In the battleground states he was behind by about 4 or 5 points. Which meant that even if the polls were as wrong as they were in 2016 he would still lose. The bookies had Biden as the clear favourite as well and furthermore the media has been blaming him (fairly or unfairly if you like) for the US’s appalling response to COVID which had killed over 250 000 people by election day. And if that wasn’t enough no president has ever won re-election with a net unfavourability rating as high as his.

The real surprise of election night was how close Trump came to getting a second term. He performed a lot better than anyone including himself expected.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 7:55 pm

Trump was behind in every national opinion poll in 2016, and by larger margins.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 7:57 pm

Given the number of people who have lost their jobs when it became known that they were Trump supporters, what makes you think everyone who is a Trump supporter is going to admit that to a stranger that calls them at home?

Simon
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 12:58 am

MarkW December 15, 2020 at 7:55 pm
“Trump was behind in every national opinion poll in 2016, and by larger margins.”
Not true. On election night in 2016 he had tightened things up when it was announced the FBI was investigating Clinton’s emails. Now, “make it up Mark,” if you think I am wrong then provide evidence. Biden was without question ahead of where Clinton was in 2016, end of story.

MarkW December 15, 2020 at 7:57 pm
“Given the number of people who have lost their jobs when it became known that they were Trump supporters, what makes you think everyone who is a Trump supporter is going to admit that to a stranger that calls them at home? ”
Again, evidence please? Was that one person, five, or five million?

A C Osborn
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 1:59 am

Mr Walton by 10:30pm on November 3rd the President was over 100,000 votes ahead in the swings states.
By magic the next morning he was losing every single one, including in stations that were officially “closed” ie no more counting over night.
If you do not think there was fraud then you don’t WANT to see it.
There is tons of evidence that no court has had the guts to allow the public to see.
I quote a Judge responing to Sidney Powell, ” even if your conspiracy theories are true I still have to dismiss”, Justice means nothing to the upholders of justice.

2hotel9
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 5:28 am

When every judge refuses to even look at the evidence and sworn affidavits the stealing of elections is easy. The Supreme Court did not rule on anything, they simply refused to look at any of the evidence. Period. No ruling, simple refusal to do their Constitutionally mandated job.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:16 pm

For awhile is good enough if you can permanently change the rules for voting. Plus import millions of new supporters.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:05 am

Surrendering/capitulating/appeasing won’t reach them. It never has all the numerous previous times that Republicans have surrendered/capitulated/appeased , it won’t this time either.

GeologyJim
December 15, 2020 11:00 am

I cannot agree with you on this, EW

“A tit-for-tat escalation of Presidents sabotaging their successors could worsen the USA’s political tensions.”

That line sounds just like the RINO chorus, “Yeah, it’s clear the Democrats pulled off a spectacular election theft in broad daylight and dared us and the Supreme Court to call them out on it. But to fight this fraud would only cause the American public to doubt the (ahem) “integrity of our elections” in the future”

If you cannot fight for what is true and right with everything at your legal disposal, then what’s the point of even pretending to be the “Opposition”?

MarkW
Reply to  GeologyJim
December 15, 2020 11:33 am

The main reason why Republicans keep losing is that they want to make nice with people who’s only goal is to kill them.

Republicans seem to be convinced that if they are just nice enough, just given enough concessions, that the Democrats and the media will finally start to like them.

To his dying day, McCain couldn’t figure out why the media that had loved him whenever he stabbed fellow Republicans in the back, turned on him when he ran for president against a real Democrat.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2020 4:16 pm

“The main reason why Republicans keep losing is that they want to make nice with people who’s only goal is to kill them.”

Exactly !

And I think the main reason they want to make nice is because if they don’t make nice with the Democrats, then the fury of the Leftwing Media drops on their heads. Republicans don’t want any part of that. It’s understandable, after seeing what the Leftwing Media is doing to Trump, but their fear has the effect of giving the Left the upper hand because the Right shuts its mouth in order not to be criticized.

Climate Change is a good example. If a reporter asks a Republican about their position on Climate Change, the Repubicans run for the hills. They don’t want to be pinned down on the subject because they know what the Leftwing Media will be calling them if they don’t agree with the alarmists.

One of the few exceptions is U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who is more than happy to spar with the press or anyone else about Human-caused Climate Change. He doesn’t believe in it, and is not afraid to say so. The Media trash him for his stance but he doesn’t care what they say.

TonyG
Reply to  MarkW
December 15, 2020 5:10 pm

Despite what is now decades of that behavior, they STILL haven’t learned.

But what’s worse is that the “rank and file” average Republican voter continues to vote these spineless jellyfish back into office, somehow thinking ‘well they’ll do better this time”

Tom Abbott
Reply to  TonyG
December 16, 2020 10:24 am

Well, maybe after the experience of this election, Republican voters will look more closely at who they have representing them and who has failed to represent them.

Dale S
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:14 pm

Sending a treaty to the senate, as the constitution prescribes, is NOT darkness and NOT fascism.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:21 pm

Eric, you have been a great contributor to WUWT. On this point, you are clearly out in left field. You should stop digging a deeper hole for yourself. If the Colonists ins 1775 thought the way you are proposing the United States would be the southern part of Canada.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 6:10 am

Eric, one sides been doing that for decades while the other side just bends over and takes it time and again (with the rare exceptions). At what point should republicans/conservatives stop bending over and taking it?

Pat Frank
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 5:19 pm

Churchill defeated Fascist Germany by leading the British to kill more Germans than the Germans killed British.

Dark/light only comes with post-hoc analysis. The action itself is all dark.

The war against progressives will take dark doings to win. With the victory will come light. Not before. So it ever has been.

If the Dems succeed in packing the Supreme Court and bringing in DC and Puerto Rico as states, open the borders and legislate the non-citizen vote with fabrication as needed, ruin the First Amendment with laws against “hate speech,” and destroy the 2nd Amendment by regulating gun ownership into non-existence, there will be no legal or peaceful remedy. All those roads will be closed. At that point only a real shooting war may recover the Constitutional US Republic.

Should that come to pass, one can only hope the threat of the US Navy at sea will deter China from pitching in with a few nucs.

MarkW
Reply to  Pat Frank
December 15, 2020 8:02 pm

Part of the BREATH act that has been circulating in Washington recently is a demand that everyone inside the US be allowed to vote. Citizen or not, here legally or not.
They also want to abolish prison and automatically restore the right to vote to all felons.

If they have their way, they will have millions of new voters and a complete electoral lock for a generation or more.

Interested Observer
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 6:54 pm

I’m sorry Eric but, as much as I admire Winston Churchill, your synopsis of World War 2 is highly inaccurate.

The Communists defeated the Fascists with a lot of help from the US and a little bit of help from the UK and the Commonwealth. History shows that the Communists were no better, and possibly worse, than the Fascists. Dark was defeated by Darker in WW2.

After 1940, all Britain had to do to “win” the 2nd World War was not surrender, as Winston Churchill knew all too well. He was the perfect leader for the time because, he would “never surrender”.

As for the modern Republicans, the reason they don’t want to fight the Democrats over the obvious cheating in the Presidential election is that they are all swamp creatures who don’t want the swamp drained. Getting rid of Trump means it’s business as usual; the swamp stays full. Even if they don’t have any control over it, they’ll still get rich from it.

Anyone who thinks Republicanany politicians are in office for any other reason than getting rich is a fool.

MarkW
Reply to  Interested Observer
December 15, 2020 8:04 pm

There were a lot of Republicans who hated Trump more than even the Democrats did.
He wasn’t a member of the club the way they were. He was an outsider who wasn’t afraid to over turn as many apple carts as was needed to get things done.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Interested Observer
December 16, 2020 2:04 am

Wrong, President Trump is not in office to make money.

John Endicott
Reply to  A C Osborn
December 16, 2020 7:02 am

Trump, prior to running for president, also wasn’t a politician and is only classes as one because he ran for (and won) the presidency. He’s pretty much the proverbial exception to all the rules.

TonyG
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:43 am

There is a very big difference between adopting a philosophy and adopting a strategy.

mkelly
Reply to  GeologyJim
December 16, 2020 5:01 am

This is Kennedy – Nixon again. Democrats cheat and ask Republicans to be the bigger person and not fight back for good of country.

Democrats violated constitution in several states. No entity but legislative body can change election laws but that didn’t stop judges, AG’s, etc from making changes. Yes cheating happened with the aide of lazy republicans.

Mr.
December 15, 2020 11:06 am

Eric, here’s the best strategy advice on all the agw bs I’ve seen so far –

I saw a comment on one of the Aussie news sites from someone advising Prime Minister Scott Morrison to “just say yes” to all the activists & msm demands for emissions targets out to 2050.

The rationale then went on to explain that like all the other adherents to the Paris agreement, you don’t actually do anything, or kick in any $$$s. You and they will all be well into retirement by 2050, and since today’s “current affairs” coverage lasts about 2 weeks, nowhere will any mention be made of what you did or didn’t do back in 2020 in regards to ghg emissions reductions targets.

The climate capers are essentially just an exercise in appeasement and virtue signaling anyway, and whatever nonsensical efforts are currently being made to “fight climate change” will inevitably be realized as abject stupidity, or just exactly what it really is – carpetbagging.

Gerry, England
Reply to  Mr.
December 15, 2020 12:17 pm

The trouble with that is it allows the econutters the chance to go to court and challenge decisions on the grounds that it won’t meet the emissions target. The dumb UK government has seen plans for a 3rd runway at Heathrow Airport rejected as failing to meet the Paris Agreement. It has of course been rendered moot by the covid disaster.

Mr.
Reply to  Gerry, England
December 15, 2020 1:17 pm

Gerry, we all assume that governments go ahead and do the things they promised to do, or were directed to do by judiciary jurisdictions.
However, we all know that politicians & bureaucrats everywhere can make anything a “work in progress” for years, even decades if that suits them
As the old saying goes – “there’s more than one way to skin a cat”

(Look at how the Justin Trudeau liberal govt in Canada bought the Alberta to BC oil pipeline from the developers, promising to complete it, but in reality to stifle efforts to ever have the thing take oil to the BC refineries and shipping routes to Asia)

Mr.
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 4:27 pm

Boris has proven that he is not a conviction politician.
He’ll chase votes on any issue that doesn’t upset the status quo.
He reminds me of Grouch Marx –
“these are my principles, but if you don’t like them, I have others . . . “

Walter Sobchak
December 15, 2020 11:24 am

The original strategy was a waste of time. The US is now out of the Paris Agreement. If Trump submitted it to the Senate and they voted it down, the US would still not be part of the Paris Agreement.

In January, Biden will be sworn in. He will rejoin the the Paris Agreement. He can and will do that even if the Paris Agreement is submitted to the Senate tomorrow and voted down 95 to 5. The President is not estopped by a treaty rejection. He can resign and resubmit as many times as he likes. He can do it three times a week, if that is what he wants to do.

Biden won’t submit the Paris Agreement to the Senate because he can’t win a treaty vote of 2/3rds of the Senate.

But it will be an executive agreement and Biden will send billions of Dollars to Red China and to African Kleptocrats to pay for his climate guilt.

Biden will continue to use his powers to shut down the American Economy, and to achieve the real goal of the Democrat party, which is to humiliate, impoverish, and demoralize the lower classes.

After all if the serfs won’t tug their forelocks and bow to their masters, they must taste the lash.

Kemaris
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
December 15, 2020 2:14 pm

Actually, no. A Treaty, once rejected, is rejected. An identical treaty could be prepared and signed again, not just by the president for the Uzs, but by every signatory. How long is the rest of the world going to waste time trying to get the US Senate to approve a treaty without changing anything of substance?

bonbon
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 4:10 am

Aha, change Paris to Berlin to Madrid (Lisbon and Maastricht are all used up).
A real lesson in European geography.

Gads! China could use Shanghai (Hong Kong is off limits), Kyoto is all used up.

How about simply telling the truth and calling it the London Treaty. After all Lord Malloch-Brown’s color revolution worked, what?

SMC
December 15, 2020 11:25 am

“A tit-for-tat escalation of Presidents sabotaging their successors could worsen the USA’s political tensions.”

You mean political tensions in the USA could actually get worse? Dumb question, it can always get worse. And, unfortunately, it will get worse.

John in Oz
Reply to  SMC
December 15, 2020 1:09 pm

The people allowing the Democrats may find themselves saying “It’s worse than we thought” once Biden and Co implement their plans.

Ironic

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:20 pm

They already are.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 8:07 pm

If the US is turned into another socialist paradise, a lot of good people are going to get hurt as well.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 8:08 pm

As to finding our way back to a republic of fair elections, in my opinion, that boat has already sailed.

bonbon
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 4:12 am

And guess which single state supported the CSA in 1861?

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:11 am

Won’t happen as long as one side is allow to continue to be unfair without consequence because the other side keeps caving in and “being nice for the greater good”. How many times does one have to appease before learning the lesson that appeasement doesn’t work?

Paul Johnson
December 15, 2020 11:26 am

The premise of the Hanson lawsuit seems to be that failure to act on Climate Change disproportionately burdens future citizens and is thus unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.
If that were to be the precedent, every program that disproportionately burdens future generations would be unconstitutional. This would include all underfunded pension programs like Social Security as well as medical programs funded by payroll taxes like Medicare.

Reply to  Paul Johnson
December 15, 2020 1:59 pm

By the same logic, unnecessarily spending on green initiatives that will have no detectable effect on the climate, but a massive negative impact on the economy also disproportionately burdens future generations since the only way to pay for it now is to borrow from the future.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Paul Johnson
December 15, 2020 4:25 pm

“The premise of the Hanson lawsuit seems to be that failure to act on Climate Change disproportionately burdens future citizens and is thus unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause.”

First, a burden has to be shown to exist, before it can be a burden on future citizens. As of today, it has never been shown that Human-caused Climate Change exists. Not even once.

Speculation about Human-caused Climate Change is not evidence that it exists.

A judge should throw such lawsuits out of court for lack of evidence.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 16, 2020 7:18 am

A judge should throw such lawsuits out of court for lack of evidence.

Unfortunately there are too many activist judges on the bench that won’t. Hansen would just need to shop around for the right one, then the friendly administration agrees to settle, so the suit never goes forward to judges that might actually do what should have been done. It’s call sue and settle.

December 15, 2020 11:26 am

translation: The Trump admin and the GOP senate shouldn’t do what it needs to do – cuz the Obama admin didn’t attempt a similar but opposite action – not out of gentility – but cuz Obama had his own plan – and he was facing a GOP senate (not mentioned in the above article)

why? – to avoid being tainted as “sneaky”? – even tho the greenies in quoted interview obviously sanctioned their attempt to be sneaky

there’s nothing more pathetic than a rightwing victim – who surrenders out of fear what the leftwing will think he’s – ungentlemanly

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:14 pm

that didn’t answer my objection – in that taking a legitimate action shouldn’t be taken – cuz it offends your sense of etiquette – and your model of decorum? – Obama – who had his own plan and a GOP senate to confront

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 7:29 pm

and we’re worried about what comes next – after Biden is given the freedom to have his way – when he could have been prevented from it

we’re not worried about what you’re worried about – the etiquette that even the guy you are using as a model didn’t use – Obama wasn’t adhering to etiquette – he was pushing his agenda – and couldn’t use the trick that strikes fear into you – cuz he couldn’t have gotten past the senate

the reason you need to talk abstractly is cuz you have to – you can’t prove anything you say – the decorum you want to preserve – that you think will be destroyed – is in your imagination – and the idea that the decorum is alive in well in the DEMs even now – is in your imagination – and the destruction you think will occur – is in your imagination – fortunately – you can’t get it to take root in our imaginations

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:21 am

Eric things have aready been broken, the democrats have spent the last 4 years breaking them. Nevil Worral, appeasing them only rewards them.

Frederick Michael
December 15, 2020 11:40 am

Senate ratification of a treaty requires a 2/3 supermajority.

CD in Wisconsin
December 15, 2020 11:46 am

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

Quote:
“Lysenkoism is used colloquially to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives…

The word is derived from a set of political and social campaigns in science and agriculture by the director of the Soviet Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Trofim Denisovich Lysenko and his followers, which began in the late 1920s and formally ended in 1964…”
**************

Today’s climate alarmist Lysenkoism still stands and has survived since 1988 despite the fact that the U.S. is not exactly an oppressive police state as the old Soviet Union was back in the day. That fact that a climate alarmist form of Lysenkoism has happened and can be made to work to some degree here in the U.S. demonstrates that a supposedly free press and a democratic government that governs in the framework of respect for human rights does not guarantee anything in terms of honest, sound science (or honesty in any other area for that matter).

Back in Stalin’s day in the USSR, you could probably kiss your sweet butt good-bye if you dared to question Stalin and his policies and beliefs. As stated in the quote above, Lysenkoism in the USSR lasted for over three decades, and it likely survived because no one dared question it. With climate Lysenkoism’s characteristic similarities to its Soviet original today, the failure of any viable challenge to the CAGW narrative in government, the mass media, scientific organizations and academia leaves one getting the sense that the spirit of Stalin is still very much alive and well in too many ways, especially as the U.N.

The willingness of the environmental movement, politicians, academics, media pundits, corporate leaders and others to embrace climate and renewable energy Lysenkoism sets us on a course with the Biden administration to lay the groundwork for serious economic decline if little is understood about climate change and energy production outside of those with the knowledge to challenge the solar and wind energy and the CAGW orthodoxies. Whether Trump will live to see the day that he regrets not challenging these orthodoxies remains to be seen.

If there is pressure (and perhaps intense pressure) in science and academia not to challenge climate and renewables Lysenkoism, money and political agendas likely have a lot to do with it. So the parallels to the old USSR remain. Until somebody — anybody — comes along with the power, authority and intestinal fortitude to do what too few are currently willing to do, I will just keep my fingers crossed that the worst does not come to pass with Biden and company.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
December 15, 2020 1:00 pm

Back in Stalin’s day in the USSR, you could probably kiss your sweet butt good-bye if you dared to question Stalin and his policies and beliefs.

My grandfather did, and it cost him 16 years in Lubyanka. He documented the holodomor and published it in a book. It’s one of only two surviving records.

He never stopped hating Stalin.

WR2
December 15, 2020 11:49 am

Yeah, like if we play nice suddenly the eco fascist globalist leftists will. You’re delusional. They are in a war against us, it’s time the rest of us recognize that and act accordingly.

It’s hilarious that Hansens pathetic lawsuit references the equal protection clause. Leftists seek to treat everyone differently based on their liberal victimhood score (As far as I can see, here’s how their scoring works: +3 for black, +1 for other minority, +2 for female (only +1 if white female), +1 for gay, +2 for transgender, +1 for any religion not christianity, +1 for not US citizen at birth. Whoever has the highest victimhood status wins special rights. Test it out while watching commercials. The higher victimhood score character will always be portrayed as smarter, more responsible, etc.

In any case, equal protection is for “any person within its jurisdiction”. I’m pretty sure imaginary future people are not within their jurisdiction. And how are the laws applied unequally? Unequal outcomes are not the same as being applied equally. Should a wealthy person file a civil rights lawsuit because he doesn’t pay equal federal income tax than a poor person? Also, isn’t the equal protection clause about state laws (“No state shall…”)? What specific state laws does he think are being applied unequally?

What an abhorrent waste of resources these sham lawsuits are.

MarkW
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 3:26 pm

There is a war, the problem is, only one side is fighting. The other side still thinks that they can achieve “peace in our time”.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:26 am

And yet you are telling them not to, and instead should appease the Dems to achieve “peace in out time”. Appeasement has an abysmal track record.

Bruce Cobb
December 15, 2020 12:02 pm

Anyway, the Traitor-in-Chief is too busy acting like a deranged, unglued, tantrum-throwing, anti-democratic, Constitution-hating, would-be tyrant to be bothered with anything like that.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 15, 2020 4:30 pm

You need to stop watching CNN, Bruce. You sound like one of their guests.

To be a traitor one has to break the law. Which law has Trump broken?

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 15, 2020 4:57 pm

How about paying off a prostitute to keep quiet during the 2016 election? Trump was an un-indicted co-conspirator and that charge is likely to come back once he is no longer president.

Simon
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 1:10 am

Eric, the laptop is a nothing. If there was anything in that laptop story it would have come out before the election. It’s a big fraud. Do you not think it weird that a guy who is soooo rich from milking foreign governments (Hunter Biden) would bother to repair an old laptop. And he just happened to take it in to some republican hero computer geek. And why did Tucker Carlson suddenly decide he wasn’t going to kick a man who is down? Clue, it’s because there is nothing in that laptop fraud. Again, if I am wrong I will be back to apologies. Which reminds me. Still waiting for your apologies Tom and Markw re the election. I was right, which means you were both ….?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 11:51 am

“it’s because there is nothing in that laptop fraud. Again, if I am wrong I will be back to apologies. Which reminds me. Still waiting for your apologies Tom and Markw re the election. I was right, which means you were both ….?”

I think you will probaby end up apologizing for the laptop. There is a lot of stuff there. The FBI has had the laptop since Jan. 2019.

As for me and MarkW apologizing, I don’t recall ever saying I would apologize. What I recall is you said you would apologize if Trump won, and I said, we would look forward to that apology.

Besides, there is no reason to apologize for taking the postion that Trump might be able to prove enough fraud in the election to change the outcome. Even if one is wrong, it’s not a reason to offer an apology. And the jury is still out on that question, don’t you know.

Simon
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 17, 2020 2:02 am

I was seeing whether you would man up if you were wrong. I guess I have my answer. Seems Trump supporters do not want to admit under any circumstances(unlike democrats) that they are wrong. Let’s not forget that Clinton called Trump the next day to concede defeat.

MarkW
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 15, 2020 8:12 pm

Compare that to the efforts to silence everyone regarding the now admitted charges against Hunter BIden. He’s even been indicted on failing to pay taxes on $400K of the money he “earned” in Eastern Europe.

Simon
Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2020 1:13 am

If H Biden failed to pay taxes then he should be held accountable and if need be go to prison. Now let’s see, who else is up on tax fraud? Oh that’s right, DJ Trump. Love to see his arse in stripes too. And so it should be if he is guilty.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkW
December 16, 2020 11:58 am

Trump is probably the most honest man in presidential history.

That won’t stop leftwing politicians from indicting him on anything they can dream up, but so far, despite the best efforts of the low-life Democrats, Trump is pure as the driven snow.

If the Democrats want to harrass Trump after he leaves Office, I can see how something like that might rile up his 74+ million supporters.

Simon
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 17, 2020 10:46 am

Tom
Whether his supporters get riled or not is their business. Do you not agree that is\f he is guilty he should be held accountable by the law?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Izaak Walton
December 16, 2020 11:03 am

Here in the United States, the concept is a person is innocent until found guilty.

So Trump has not broken the law and paying off a pole dancer, if that’s what he did, is not a treasonous act.

A good example of a treasonous act is when Joe Biden and the other criminals in the Obama administration conspired to lie to the FISA court in order to create a scandal out of thin air, with the help of Hillary Clinton, to destroy Trump and disenfranchise his 74 million+ supporters.

Trump cannot factually be called a traitor. On the other hand, Biden does qualify as being a Traitor to the United States. He used the power of the Federal Government to attack his political opponents. I don’t have any doubt he will do the very same thing in the future, if he is in a position to do so.

I guess this won’t be the first time the American people elected a Traitor as president. They elected Bill Clinton, and I consider him a traitor to his country, too. Of course, the American people didn’t know Clinton was a traitor until after he was elected. In Biden’s case, the American people did know he was a traitor. And they probably did not give him enough votes to become president, if all the illegitimate votes were subtracted. But we’ll never know because the Democrats have rigged the voting system.

Simon
Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 16, 2020 11:31 am

Tom
Trump is being investigated for violating state law with regard to taxes, including inflating the value of his properties for insurance and deflating for tax. That’s a crime.
He is also on a rape charge and may have to supply a DNA sample. that is serious stuff.

There were in fact two woman he was having affairs with and paid hush money to.

Anyway you will dismiss this stuff as a media beat up and fake news. But for interests sake, here is a list of the crimes he faces and a little background. In my humble opinion he has some serious problems here…..

https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/300186038/excop-held-repairman-at-gunpoint-over-voter-fraud-claiming-he-had-thousands-of-fake-us-ballots

2hotel9
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 16, 2020 5:38 am

Yes, that is exactly what Biden/Harris are doing. Good catch, burcee.

u.k.(us)
December 15, 2020 12:21 pm

I think you might have really stepped in it now Eric.
Politics is a nasty business.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:30 am

Enjoy your freedoms while you have them. If the cancel culture left, whom Biden/Harris are in bed with, have their way, you won’t have long to enjoy them, but hey at least you advised against “breaking” the things that the Dems have already broken many times over the last 4 years, right?.

Peta of Newark
December 15, 2020 12:23 pm

To try sabotage it is Childish and Petty

*Surely* we know Mr Trump is a million miles above that. C’mon

Leave the petty behaviour to the Alarmists and Warmists.

Won’t happen quickly but it *will*be their undoing.
Good Things Come To Those That Wait … blah cliche blah blah cliche

Hey, maybe there *is* A Cunning Plan afoot ;-))
Keep it under your hat tho i.e. Follow Don’s example/lead

David Blenkinsop
December 15, 2020 12:25 pm

Saying that it is too late to sabotage the Paris Accord in the US Senate may be beside the point if having the Senate vote it down just wouldn’t work in any case? The thing is already not an actual treaty, but is a ‘talking point’ basis for new taxes and restrictions anyway. Maybe people just have to keep fighting the climate wars until the big Paris guilt trip becomes obviously moribund and/or ineffectual.

TonyG
December 15, 2020 12:32 pm

could worsen the USA’s political tensions.

Not sure how much more worser it could get…

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 10:08 am

Eric – prove it – the burden of proof for the destruction of society or whatever level of destruction you are envisioning – has always been on you – telling us you have a hunch is not proof – and not scientific – and (imo) not gentlemanly – and that could lead to all sorts of dire consequences

Reply to  jeyon
December 16, 2020 10:36 am

I had a sarcasm tag at the end of my post – the website evidently treated it as erroneous HTML – and ignored it

Komerade Cube
December 15, 2020 12:34 pm

@ Eric, you’re letting your optimism get the best of you…

>>>A tit-for-tat escalation of Presidents sabotaging their successors could worsen the USA’s political tensions.<<<

The days of political tensions are over for the next few hundred years, and perhaps forever. The republic is done, killed off with a shower of Chinese manufactured votes, campaign contributions, and trolling (hi Griff!)

– how much longer will you keep pissing in the ocean with WUWT? Perhaps you could sell it to Griff’s master and finally get that funding that the morons have been accusing you of receiving.

As for me, I’ve decide to hang up my hat and drop off the grid. It’s all yours, Griff. If I ever come back to WUWT I look forward to seeing your pseudonym as the byline for every post.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 10:32 am

Then the republic is already doomed – with all those unspoken principles that have been despoiled over the last 2 centuries – most recently by the Dems – who’s ruinous activities you are unwilling to hinder – out of fear that that action will – with certainty (!) – bring down the moral structure that holds up society – – as I’ve said before – prove it

Gregory Woods
December 15, 2020 12:45 pm

Mises predicted the fall of the USSR due to ignorance of how free market pricing works (more or less): IE, Reality. So will it be with the Global Warming Scam: IE, Reality. The question is then – how long will it take?

Beta Blocker
December 15, 2020 12:50 pm

Signing back on the the Paris Agreement is merely a public relations gimmick to appease the climate activists.

As I’ve said many times before , a US president already has all the legal authority he or she needs to quickly reduce America’s GHG emissions on a fast track schedule — if that president is willing to accept the political risks.

We will find out soon enough if Joe Biden will walk the talk of his professed climate activism and will begin to apply the full authority of the Executive Branch in quickly reducing our consumption of fossil fuels.

ScarletMacaw
Reply to  Beta Blocker
December 15, 2020 2:27 pm

It’s not just cutting CO2. The Paris agreement also includes climate reparations to “developing nations.” Biden could use it as an excuse to funnel US taxpayer dollars to 3rd world dictators, and maybe even the ChiComs since they are considered “developing” under the Paris treaty. At the very least he would send billions to the UN climate bureaucracy like Obama did.

Andy Espersen
Reply to  Beta Blocker
December 15, 2020 3:15 pm

I think you are right : signing back on the Paris Agreement is just a “public relations gimmick”. When you stop and think, the Paris agreement was never binding – and hardly any countries have passed binding legislation. Those countries will soon, very soon, discover their mistake the hard way.

Why worry? It will waste us some billions of dollars to start with – but the fact of the matter is that eventually it will all fizzle out – because it will prove a financial, economic impossibility in the end.

fretslider
December 15, 2020 12:54 pm

Just before Obama left office he gave away a lot of money to ‘the cause’.

Given that in 2016 the US voted for Trump and against Paris, what would you call that?

December 15, 2020 1:04 pm

Eric you fail at the basic understanding the Separation of Powers built into the US Constitution. The Senate was given the power to approve or disapprove of Foregin treaties the Executive may make because they become “law.” And the Constitutional framers made it a high bar, 2/3 of the Senate to ensure broad support of the agreement.

Obama tried to side-step that with both the Paris Climate Agreement, regardless of the ‘voluntary’ INDCs (emissions) targets, the agreement obligated the US Treasury to send billions of dollars to the UN’s climate Aid Fund. Obama did that without Congress’s approval. That was a clear unconstitutional move that Dementia Joe wants to restart.

I think it is clear you fundamentally do not understand the US Constitution and why it has been so successful at stop Executive over-reach and how it places lots of checks on an abusive President.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
December 16, 2020 4:52 am

Joel,
Trump does not have a treaty to submit. There is no treaty on the table. Even if the Senate did not approve of the past agreement if submitted, there is nothing to stop Biden and the Dems from joining a different agreement that would essentially be the same. The focus has to be on fighting back against any climate agreement that is entered into without Senate approval. And you know they will try to do that.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 16, 2020 7:14 am

Tom, “a different agreement” means getting the other countries back to the table and signing on to another agreement. Even if that “other agreement” is identical to the current one, that is a process that take up lots of time. Time that can be spent by the good guys to do just as you suggest: fighting back against any climate agreement that is entered into without Senate approval. Assuming the good guys can find a spine and some balls, something Eric’s appeasement suggest requires them not to do.

leitmotif
December 15, 2020 1:07 pm

Short memory, Eric?

“Barack Obama transfers $500m to Green Climate Fund in attempt to protect Paris deal.

New instalment leaves $2bn owing, with Donald Trump expected to cease any further payments.”

“Barack Obama has heeded calls to help secure the future of the historic Paris agreement by transferring a second $500m instalment to the Green Climate Fund, just three days before he leaves office.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/18/barack-obama-transfers-500m-to-green-climate-fund-in-attempt-to-protect-paris-deal

leitmotif
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:36 pm

Yeah, what’s $500m to the American taxpayer, Eric?

From the Guardian article.

“The Obama administration is refusing to let president-elect Trump’s posse of oil barons and climate deniers dictate how the world responds to the climate crisis,” said Tamar Lawrence-Samuel, of Corporate Accountability International, which led the campaign.

“This victory is the climate justice movement’s opening salvo to the Trump presidency. And we’re not going away.”

2hotel9
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 5:31 am

There is no different “view”, it directly sabotaged Trump and America. THAT WAS ITS INTENTION AS STATED BY BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA. Wake the f***k up. Stop defending America’s enemies.

2hotel9
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 5:29 am

It sabotaged America, Trump is an American so it did indeed sabotage Trump.

bsl
December 15, 2020 1:20 pm

Eric

Read Crisis and Leviathan, by Robert Higgs.

Stephen Philbrick
December 15, 2020 1:30 pm

I’m still in favor of submitting it.

I don’t see it as sneaky or underhanded, it’s a way to get the Senate to go on record.

I understand that Biden won’t submit it, and will try executive order, but an order conflicting with a rejected treaty might be more easily challenged.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 2:29 pm

It is Lisbon Treaty, and has never been submitted to a popular vote. The EU is very careful after France and Netherlands rejected the constitution.

Wiliam Haas
December 15, 2020 1:30 pm

But the reality is that, based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the conclusion that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. It is all a matter of science. There is no climate emergency. But even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue because they are part of the current climate. We do not even know what the optimum climate actually is let alone how to achieve it. Sacrificing the economy in the name of fighting climate change is not such a good idea.

But even if CO2 did he effect on the Earth’s climate like some say that it does, the reduction in CO2 emissions that would be achieved via the Paris Agreement would not have a significant effect on the Earth’s climate so why bother. And now the UN wants to make the Covid 19 lockdown both global and permanent for all time in the name of fighting climate change. I guess that in the future we can all wear uniforms, live in dormitories or barracks, and just do what we are told in the name of Big Brother.

Kemaris
December 15, 2020 2:15 pm

Sabotaging a successor? You mean like framing them as an agent of a foreign power?

TonyG
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 15, 2020 5:19 pm

My argument is breaking one of the few remaining platforms of unspoken cooperation will not make things better.

Eric, our perspectives obviously differ, but from what I see, NOTHING will “make things better” other than the complete surrender of one political philosophy. And even then I’m not so sure.

John Endicott
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 7:38 am

So you choose not to use the existing legal tools available to fight against something guaranteed to hurt lots of people (energy poverty hurts the world’s poor the most)? That’s sure a funny way of looking for a way out which doesn’t lead to lots of people being hurt.

2hotel9
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 5:33 am

Won’t make anything better by simply going along with the scam.

Carl Friis-Hansen
December 15, 2020 2:39 pm

Apropos “political sabotage”, Patric more had an interview on Instagram, but it was soon removed.

Patric Moore on Global Warming CO2 and Energy December 15th 2020
Dr. Patric Moore just fires the facts in a short interview.
This interview was shortly after removed from Instagram.
Is it really that bad if the conned population hear the truth?

michael hart
December 15, 2020 3:46 pm

“But submitting the Paris agreement to the Senate at this late stage would be seen by many as an act of political sabotage.”

Hardly. It would be merely taking the legitimate political process to it’s formal conclusion instead of leaving it in limbo to be toyed with by successive political ne’re-do-wells.

I’m surprised to hear this from you, Eric. In a political climate where the opposition has shown a willingness to play very very dirty, you appear to be advocating against taking an approach which is well within the rules and well within the currently ‘accepted’ rules.

The only real hope we have for a Biden Presidency is that he is simply too “old-school” and set in his ways to do some of the crazier things that are being put forward by his associates. People who are probably already plotting his downfall.

michael hart
Reply to  michael hart
December 15, 2020 4:05 pm

Further, one of the problems of UK membership of the EU was that UK politicians would go away and “negotiate” (i.e cave-in to) agreements that were then presented as a fait-accompli to the nation.

This was a convenient way of passing legislation that would never have been agreed to domestically, but now we had to do it “because of Europe”.

Whether true or not in individual cases, the US would do well to avoid the precedent of having further laws enforced domestically because a feckless US President had already agreed it with some even worse foreign cronies.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 16, 2020 12:40 pm

your argument – if you must be reminded – is that Trump/Senate action will have dire consequences – but you’re unwilling to prove that there would be dire consequences – it’s just a hunch on your part – yes – you have a right to your opinion – but don’t be surprised if people ask for more than a tingly feeling – like evidence? – or even a little logic for what you think will happen

instead – you based your case on Obama’s supposed self-discipline – ie not taking a similar step – but you neglected to point out that he COULDN’T have – due to a GOP senate – so your model for good behavior is a bull in a china shop who didn’t try to bust the china too high for its reach

Tom in Florida
Reply to  michael hart
December 16, 2020 4:57 am

“The only real hope we have for a Biden Presidency is that he is simply too “old-school” and set in his ways to do some of the crazier things that are being put forward by his associates. ”

That would assume Biden has any say in anything. Most of us do not believe that, his handlers and the Democrat leadership are calling all the shots. Just look at some of “his” potential appointees. Biden is simply a front man who will come out and say anything he is told to. This is going to be 4 years of “Weekend at Biden’s”, if he lasts that long.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 16, 2020 6:23 am

Indeed. the betting pool will soon be open for how soon after inauguration that the 25th is invoked. After all Nancy said she wasn’t setting up the 25th commission to get *Trump* out of office.

Jon R
December 15, 2020 3:54 pm

RINOS at this point are blood thirsty savages of whom you can have absolute certainty to do anything to hurt Trump. FIX news is now a worse place for facts than CNN for a case in point.

bonbon
Reply to  Jon R
December 16, 2020 4:22 am

Who fixed the fox, I wonder….

catahoula
December 15, 2020 8:25 pm

Thanks for the post, unpopular as it seems to be.

I’ll disagree, in the respect that: if Democrats are going to treat the Paris Accord like a binding treaty, it should go through the Senate wringer and become one. Poisoning the well doesn’t really enter into it, since it should have been done when the O did his magic executive move.

There’s a difference between doing the legally aboveboard (this one) and doing the procedurely possible (the ACA). They’ll scream, but they always do.

bonbon
December 16, 2020 4:17 am

Some here are making mountains out of molehills.

President Trump should pardon both Snowden and Assange – then watch the green swamp creatures flap!

Barr has been disbarred – he is so swampy he cannot see the others.. (as someone said on Fox).

Tom Abbott
Reply to  bonbon
December 16, 2020 12:09 pm

“Barr has been disbarred – he is so swampy he cannot see the others.. (as someone said on Fox).”

Attorney General Barr did not get disbarred. He resigned from the job.

Barr is one of the few people I would trust in Washington DC. I hate to see him go. I hope he appoints a special counsel to investigate the Bidens before he leaves Office, thus making it much more difficult for Traitor Joe to fire the special counsel and stop the investigation.

Barr’s statement about finding no fraud in the elections, was miscontrued by the leftwig media and then misunderstood by lots of people, which was the purpose of the miscostruing in the first place. Propaganda and lying works for the Left.

willem post
December 16, 2020 6:44 am

Here is the case FOR ending PARIS.

WORLD AND US PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CAPITAL COST
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-consumption
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, CAPEX

The analysis in this article includes two scenarios: 1) 50% RE by 2050, and 2) 100% RE by 2050.
The CAPEX values exclude a great many items related to transforming the world economy to a low-carbon mode. See next section.

50% RE by 2050

World CAPEX for RE were $2,652.2 billion for 2010-2019, 10 years
World CAPEX for RE were $282.2 billion in 2019.
World CAPEX for RE would be $24,781 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 5.76%/y

US CAPEX for RE were $494.5 billion for 2010 – 2019, 10 years.
US CAPEX for RE were $59 billion in 2019.
US CAPEX for RE would be $7,233 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 8.81%/y

100% RE by 2050

World CAPEX for RE were $2,652.2 billion for 2010-2019, 10 years
World CAPEX for RE were $282.2 billion in 2019.
World CAPEX for RE would be $60,987 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 10.08%/y

US CAPEX for RE were $494.5 billion for 2010 – 2019, 10 years.
US CAPEX for RE were $59 billion in 2019.
US CAPEX for RE would be $16,988 billion for 2019 – 2050, 32 years; compound growth 13.42%/y

THE BIGGER CAPEX PICTURE FOR THE WORLD AND THE US

World More-Inclusive CAPEX

The above CAPEX numbers relate to having 50% RE, or 100% RE, in the primary energy mix by 2050, which represents a very narrow area of “fighting climate change”. See Appendix for definitions of source, primary and upstream energy.

This report, prepared by two financial services organizations, estimates the world more-inclusive CAPEX at $100 trillion to $150 trillion, over the next 30 years, about $3 trillion to $5 trillion per year
https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/research-and-markets/funding-the-fight-against-global-warming/

US More-Inclusive CAPEX

The ratio of World CAPEX for RE / US CAPEX for RE = 16,988/60,987 = 0.279

A more-inclusive US CAPEX could be $27.9 trillion to $41.8 trillion

The US CAPEX could be less, because, at present, the world is adding a quad of RE at about $58.95 billion, compare to the US at about $102.78 billion.

It is unclear what accounts for the large difference.
Part of it may be due to differences of accounting methods among countries.

This would echo the CO2 situation.
Presently, there exists no standard way to verify the CO2 emissions and RE build-out claims of various countries!
The opportunities for cheating/fudging/obfuscation are endless.

NOTE: The CAPEX numbers exclude costs for replacements of shorter-life systems, such as EVs, heat-pumps, batteries, wind-turbines, etc., during these 30 years. For comparison:

Hydro plants have long lives, about 100 years.
Nuclear plants about 60 years
Coal and gas-turbine plants about 40 years
Wind turbine systems about 20 years
Solar systems about 25 years

2hotel9
December 17, 2020 1:28 pm

Really, bob? California, Oregon and Washington are the only states that have openly discussed secession from the Union. They are Republican states? Really?

bigoilbob
December 17, 2020 2:37 pm

Seems to me the blue states should be “all over that”, then. No more obligations to the “takers”, right?”

No, we would probably still have an ambassador to the new confederacy. And we would have to guard against illegal immigration for the good health care and better jobs. Also, we would have to minimize cross border damage from the additional confederate superfund sites resulting from their minimal environmental safeguards.

FMI, which blue state has objected to it? The reason it hasn’t happened is that red state legislators know what a self inflicted Gong Show they would be hosting. Better just to get subterranean posters to whine ineffectually about it.

bigoilbob
December 17, 2020 2:57 pm

Really, bob? California, Oregon and Washington are the only states that have openly discussed secession from the Union. They are Republican states? Really?”

Review the posts. The reference to secession in the comments was definitely NOT from a progressive. And please link to any significant such “open discussion”. But even thre had been any such action, it would only back up my facts about who would benefit from the current state giver/taker stati…

%d bloggers like this: