Senate Approves Impeachment Theater Rules

By William Teach January 22, 2020 – 9:05 am

The Democrats were up to their typical tricks, because they really do not have any sort of actual evidence

Chief Justice Roberts admonishes both sides at Senate impeachment trial, after marathon session erupts into shouting match

A marathon, 12-hour first day in the Senate impeachment trial against President Trump erupted into a shouting match well after midnight Wednesday morning, as Trump’s legal team unloaded on Democratic impeachment manager Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y. — in an exchange that prompted a bleary-eyed Chief Justice John Roberts to sternly admonish both sides for misconduct in the chamber.

Nadler began the historic spat by speaking in support of the eighth amendment of the day, which was proposed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., just as the clock struck midnight. The proposal would have amended the trial rules offered by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to immediately subpoena former National Security Advisor John Bolton.

McConnell’s rules, which were eventually adopted in a 53-47 party-line vote at 1:40 a.m. ET Wednesday and largely mirror those from the Bill Clinton impeachment trial in 1999, permit new witnesses and documents to be considered only later on in the proceedings, after opening arguments are made.

But Nadler, who was overheard apparently planning to impeach Trump back in 2018, said it would be a “treacherous vote” and a “cover-up” for Republicans to reject the Bolton subpoena amendment, claiming that “only guilty people try to hide evidence.” Bolton has reportedly described Trump’s conduct as akin to a “drug deal,” and he has indicated he would be willing to testify and provide relevant information.

I do believe that Excitable Jerry forgets how our system of Justice works. As for Bolton? There are reports that some Senate Democrats are privately mulling a Bolton for Hunter Biden testimony. No thanks. Let Joe and Hunter testify, or at least Joe, regarding his dealings with Ukraine. Anyhow, as Marc Theissen points out, if Democrats think Bolton will bring down Trump, good luck with that

Consider the irony: Senate Democrats are hoping that former national security adviser John Bolton — yes, John Bolton — will provide them with the bombshell testimony that brings down President Trump. In other words, they have pinned their hopes on a man they have vilified for years, and whose national security career they sought to destroy. Good luck with that.

It’s a long piece, worth the read, but, here’s something that really stands out

No doubt that is all true. Bolton is a foreign policy professional. But none of this means that Bolton believes Trump committed an impeachable offense. He may very well believe Trump’s decision to withhold lethal aide to Ukraine, and to raise Hunter Biden with Ukraine’s president, was wrong. (If so, he’d be correct). But not every bad decision a president makes is impeachable. I’ll bet Bolton considers President Barack Obama’s decision to release five senior Taliban leaders from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for U.S. Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl — an act that the Government Accountability Office found was illegal — worse than a “drug deal.” Yet no Democrats called for Obama’s impeachment over it.

You know there was no way the IRS was targeting Conservative groups without Obama’s say so. And Operation Fast and Furious. And so much more. Where were Dems on those? Republicans did not call for his impeachment, either.

Regardless of whether and how Bolton testifies, Trump is going to be acquitted. The fact that Democrats are counting on Bolton to be the hero who rescues the doomed efforts by Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to end Trump’s presidency shows how weak their case really is.

So, no need for witnesses, right, Chuck?

Read: Senate Approves Impeachment Theater Rules »

Posted in Democrats, GOP | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

UN Climahysterics Declare That “Climate Refugees” Can’t Be Returned Home

By William Teach January 21, 2020 – 4:10 pm

And the have the power to enforce this how, exactly?

Climate refugees can’t be returned home, says landmark UN human rights ruling

It is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found.

The judgment – which is the first of its kind – represents a legal “tipping point” and a moment that “opens the doorway” to future protection claims for people whose lives and wellbeing have been threatened due to global heating, experts say.

Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.

While the judgment is not formally binding on countries, it points to legal obligations that countries have under international law.

“What’s really important here, and why it’s quite a landmark case, is that the committee recognised that without robust action on climate at some point in the future it could well be that governments will, under international human rights law, be prohibited from sending people to places where their life is at risk or where they would face inhuman or degrading treatment,” said Prof Jane McAdam, director of the Kaldor centre for international refugee law at the University of New South Wales.

Well, good luck with this.

Read: UN Climahysterics Declare That “Climate Refugees” Can’t Be Returned Home »

Posted in Global Warming, UN | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 21, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is an area turning into desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on Harry and Princess Pushy threatening suits towards the Canadian paparazzi.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

2020 May Possibly Maybe Be The Last Chance To Stop Climate Doom

By William Teach January 21, 2020 – 8:33 am

Climate Change News’ Kevin Rudd, who is a former Australian Prime Minister (2007-10, 2013) and Foreign Minister (2010-12), or whomever wrote the headline, puts in a qualifier so the Cult of Climastrology can scaremonger about 2021 being the last chance, just like it was in 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, all the way back to around 1998

2020 may be ‘last opportunity’ to limit warming to 1.5°C

While it’s unfair to describe the Madrid climate change conference in December as a complete failure, there is no sugar-coating the reality that it achieved much, much less than what the people and planet need to avoid catastrophic climate change this century.

It’s especially painful to acknowledge that my country, Australia, shares a lot of the blame for the outcome.

The current government’s insistence on using so-called “Kyoto credits” (carried over from my own period in office when we did take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions) towards the implementation of their lacklustre Paris target, only sowed division and disharmony at the talks. (snip)

But now is not the time to simply reflect on what’s been done. We must quickly regroup in the knowledge that this coming year will be the most important year for climate action for a long time.

You see, a decade ago, in the wake of the Copenhagen talks in 2009, the usual suspects were eager to seize on the failure to agree substantial top-down emissions cuts.

The usual suspects, like Australia and the United States, who aren’t hot to implement Progressivism (nice Fascism). Who do not want a high taxation Authoritarian government system dominating their citizens.

Nevertheless, the scale of the task is still of biblical proportions. While more than 100 countries have now pledged to enhance their Paris targets by the end of this year and develop longer-term plans to reach net-zero emissions by mid-century, this still doesn’t include enough of the world’s biggest emitters.

As UN Secretary-General António Guterres has rightly identified, persuading these big emitters is a top priority for 2020. His decision to convene an event to take stock of the summit of world leaders he hosted last September will help.

Biblical! Remember, not a cult.

Above all, this means acting to keep global temperature increases below the 1.5°C guardrail that Maldivian president Mohamed Nasheed and I first proposed at Copenhagen. And, as the science tells us, this year might be the last opportunity to do that.

Good thing there won’t be 20,000 or so climate conference attendees heading to Glasglow in fossil fueled vehicles and private jets next December, right? And then they will tell us 2021 is our last chance.

Read: 2020 May Possibly Maybe Be The Last Chance To Stop Climate Doom »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

St. Greta Seems Upset That Most People Aren’t Actually Listening To

By William Teach January 21, 2020 – 8:13 am

Seriously, everyone should be listening to a child who’s blowing off her education in favor of telling Everyone Else how they should live their lives, right? And telling Government how to dictate citizen’s lives, right?

Greta Thunberg Tells World to ‘Start Listening’ to Her Warnings of Climate Catastrophe

Swedish climate worrier Greta Thunberg expressed disappointment Tuesday the world is neither listening or reacting to her repeated warnings of impending climate catastrophe, saying “basically nothing” has changed since she dropped out of school and began full-time climate protesting.

“Pretty much nothing has been done,” Thunberg said at a World Economic Forum (WEF) panel convened in Davos, Switzerland. “Global emissions of CO2 has not been reduced and that is what we are trying to achieve.”

The 17-year-old made her comments after she was asked what had changed since she launched her student climate strike movement in August 2018, France24 reports. (snip)

Thunberg lamented the awareness driven by young people like herself had not translated into action and “basically nothing” had been done about reducing emissions and tackling the warming planet.

Thunberg said people must “start listening to the science” and “start treating this crisis as the crisis it is.”

“Without treating this as a real crisis we cannot solve it and we cannot solve it from a holistic view,” she said.

“This is just the very beginning.”

So, if we’re supposed to listen to the science, then why are we listening to her? She has no degree in climate science. Nor in any science. Nor in anything. She hasn’t even graduated from lower school.

Heck, even if the slight warming since 1850 was caused at least 51% by the actions of Mankind, the policies of St. Greta and her far left authoritarian buddies would not be the answer.

Read: St. Greta Seems Upset That Most People Aren’t Actually Listening To »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Trump Won’t Tell Russia To Not Interfere In 2020 Elections Or Something

By William Teach January 21, 2020 – 7:59 am

The Editorial Board doesn’t read their own paper, or apparently, any others. But, they have a Narrative

Trump won’t warn Russia off interfering in 2020, so Congress has to

DID RUSSIAN military spies hack the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the U.S. impeachment trial? Well, why wouldn’t they?

It’s alarming that this has been the reaction to a report from a cybersecurity company indicating that Russia’s military intelligence service, known as the GRU, conducted an email “phishing” attack against Burisma Holdings — and sparking speculation that the Kremlin might use its findings to further foment discord among voters in the United States. Another firm was unable to validate the claim that the GRU was behind the breach, and even if it was, the incident could just be another example of Russia’s routine sabotage of its beleaguered neighbor. But there’s ample reason to believe Vladimir Putin’s agents did this, because their fingerprints are all over it, because they’ve done it before — and because the United States hasn’t given them sufficient reason not to do it again.

The WPEB does understand that America’s intelligence agencies do the same thing, right? We just generally do not broadcast it. It is telling that the WPEB is Very Concerned that Russia might expose the dirty dealing with Burisma and the 2 Bidens, Joe and Hunter. The important one is Joe, who looks to be cruising towards the Democrat nomination.

This last point is perhaps the most appalling. Political campaigns can harden their defenses, and platforms can moderate more aggressively against manipulation, but complete invulnerability is impossible. Russia wins as long as voters believe their democracy is in danger of manipulation, even when Moscow isn’t actively manipulating, by engendering distrust in everything from Facebook posts to vote tallies. It’s precisely this doubt that leads people automatically to assume the Burisma breach was an attempt by the GRU to gather dirt on former vice president Joe Biden to later scatter it on U.S. soil.

Let me ask: which Party and their pet media has been pushing that narrative since even before the November 2016 election day?

Complete invulnerability is impossible, but what is possible is deterrence. If Russia knows for certain that it will pay a high price for meddling, it will be less likely to meddle. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) last week continued his crusade to pass the bipartisan Deter Act, which would impose almost automatic cross-sectoral sanctions against Russia if it tries its tricks again. ….

And that’s where it needs to be. Congress does Legislation.

It’s outrageous that Russia mounted a full-scale offensive on American democracy in 2016; it’s outrageous that Russia, by all assessments, plans to mount another next time around; it’s outrageous that President Trump won’t speak out against this; and, as Mr. Van Hollen said on the Senate floor, “It would be equally outrageous for us — knowing that is Russia’s intent in 2020 — to sit here and not do anything.”

Russia caused Hillary to pass out on 9/11, blow off visiting states she needed to win, call half the country “deplorables”, and just be a terrible candidate otherwise? As far as speaking out, here’s the Washington Post

Trump meets Russia’s top diplomat amid scrap over election interference

President Trump met with Russia’s top diplomat in the Oval Office on Tuesday, creating a dramatic contrast as House Democrats unveiled articles of impeachment against him for his actions in Ukraine, an ally fending off a Russian-backed insurrection.

After the meeting, Trump said he warned Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov not to interfere in U.S. elections and urged a resolution to the Moscow’s conflict with Ukraine, the White House said.

Of course, the WP attempted to listen more to Lvrov, who said he only discussed it with Pompeo separately, because the WP wants to listen to Russians more than Trump. No matter what Trump does they’ll criticize him.

Double of course, what exactly did President Barack Obama do to warn Russia off in 2016? Heck, 2015, when it started? Let’s go back to the original Editorial Board article: “Russia wins as long as voters believe their democracy is in danger of manipulation, even when Moscow isn’t actively manipulating, by engendering distrust in everything…” As long as Democrats and their pet media perpetuate “our Democracy (we’re not a democracy) is doomed!!!!!” Russia wins.

Read: Washington Post: Trump Won’t Tell Russia To Not Interfere In 2020 Elections Or Something »

Posted in Democrats, Wonky Media | 36 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cultists Increasingly Mention St. Greta On OkCupid

By William Teach January 20, 2020 – 3:56 pm

These are some sick people

Anyhow, apparently Warmists aren’t so much for diversity and such when it is their own life

The climate is changing dating
“Could there be anything less sexy than buying into fossil fuel propaganda?”

Funny part is, most of these same climate cultists refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels

Katharine Wilkinson has been on a lot of first dates. But she’s only ever walked out on one.

It was 2013 at a bar in mid-town Atlanta, Georgia, and Wilkinson had just published a book about evangelical Christians and the climate crisis. Her date was a guy from the dating app OKCupid. She doesn’t remember his name. Let’s just call him Todd.

A few minutes into their first drink, Todd asked what Wilkinson did for a living, and Wilkinson proudly mentioned her recent accomplishment. But Todd didn’t seem very impressed. In fact, he seemed dismayed.

“He said, ‘whoa whoa whoa, I can tell we’re going to disagree there,’” said Wilkinson. “And I said, ‘On what? Religion? Politics? Climate change?’

“And he said, ‘Definitely on climate change.’”

At this point, Wilkinson said, it was like every neuron in her brain came to a halt. “It took me a minute to gather myself,” she said. But once she did, she knew she couldn’t be there anymore.

So, the person they use is one invested in the climate scam? That needs people to buy her book? Huh.

But Wilkinson is not the only person who considers climate denial a deal-breaker when it comes to dating.

In fact, on OKCupid, so many people share Wilkinson’s aversion to climate deniers that the company now allows its users to pick and choose who they date based on whether the person is concerned about climate change.

Same people are part of the surveys where they refuse to pay more than $10 a month to “solve” Hotcoldwetdry, we can be sure.

“You definitely came to the right place because our users are really engaged and passionate about the leading issues of our time, including climate change,” OKCupid’s global communications manager Michael Kaye said in an email. “There was actually an 800 percent increase in mentions of Greta Thunberg on profiles around the world on OkCupid in 2019.”

That’s creepy, considering she is under 18.

Lots more crazy in the article, have at it.

Read: Climate Cultists Increasingly Mention St. Greta On OkCupid »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 20, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is an Evil fossil fueled vehicle causing terrible carbon pollution clouds, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is NoTricksZone, with a post on Germany’s speech police announcing their defamatory word of the year: “climate hysteria”.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Hot Take: GOP Negotiating Witnesses Is Now “Part Of The Cover Up”

By William Teach January 20, 2020 – 11:24 am

The GOP Senate may be pulling that kill switch sooner than later

Oh, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), one of the House impeachment managers in President Trump’s Senate trial, said Sunday that Republicans looking to block or negotiate on witnesses are “part of the cover-up.”

Nadler’s comments came in response to a question on whether Democrats would consider calling former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden to testify in exchange for calling witnesses put forward by Democrats.

Nadler dismissed the idea of negotiating on witnesses as part of the trial.

“In any trial, all relevant witnesses must be heard,” Nadler said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

We actually don’t need Hunter: we need Joe, who should explain why he demanded a Ukranian prosecutor investigating the company his son was on the board of be fired or a billion in aid would be denied.

“Any Republican senator who says there should be no witnesses or even that witnesses should be negotiated is part of the cover-up,” Nadler said.

Read: Hot Take: GOP Negotiating Witnesses Is Now “Part Of The Cover Up” »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Guy Says He Tried To Warn On Bushfire Threat From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 20, 2020 – 7:07 am

Of course, members of the Cult of Climastrology are always trying to warn on something in order to get Government to implement taxes/fess and Big Government authoritarianism. This is Greg Mullins, a former commissioner of Fire and Rescue NSW and a climate councillor from Australia in the main paper of the Cult of Climastrology, the UK Guardian

I tried to warn Scott Morrison about the bushfire disaster. Adapting to climate change isn’t enough

Not long ago, somebody said to me, “It would take a huge disaster for this government to acknowledge that there is such a thing as climate change.” Tragic, but perhaps true.

While we now seem to have grudging government acknowledgment that climate change is the predominant driver of the current bushfire disaster (notwithstanding it previously being portrayed as “not a factor”, “one of many factors” or a delusion of inner-city latte-sipping greenies, etc), the acknowledgment has yet to be matched by action on the root cause.

Make no mistake: this disaster is a weather-driven event, not a fuel-driven one, underpinned by years of drying and warming. Climate change is the driver of increasing extreme weather.

Particularly devastating because together with 22 former fire and emergency service chiefs from every state and territory I had tried from April 2019 to warn the prime minister about what veteran firefighters, climate scientists and meteorologists all identified as a looming bushfire disaster. We were ignored and trivialised: the government inferred that we were criticising the efforts of current fire chiefs and told us via the media that we could be assured that the “new breed” of chiefs “had it under control”. Of course, this missed the point entirely. We were trying to say things that the existing hard-pressed, hard-working chiefs could not. Our suggestions about better using the military and freeing up processes to allow them to be used in non-firefighting support roles, our request for approval of additional funding for large firefighting aircraft, and better national coordination (following the hollowing out of Emergency Management Australia, which has now been absorbed into the huge Home Affairs bureaucracy) were ridiculed. Until, of course, the disaster worsened, and the media and public called for action. Then the government “took the initiative”.

And, since they didn’t listen

There has been an appalling failure in national leadership from Canberra. Failure to recognise and prepare for what was coming. Failure to accept briefings from experts. Failure to understand and accept the government’s national support role to the states and territories. Failure to provide funding certainty for critical equipment requested by fire agencies in a detailed business case but stalled in Canberra since May 2018.

And what he really blames

And the government is failing again by now suggesting that our primary focus should be on adapting to climate change rather than upping our efforts to tackle the root cause: the burning of fossil fuels. Continuing to burn coal, oil and gas is sending us down a pathway to an even hotter, drier Australia where conditions will get worse and worse.

Interesting. I guess the over 200 people arrested for starting fires has no meaning, right? I know some Warmists outlets are trying to argue that it is meaningless, but, what of the 24 arrested for intentionally starting fires? And then you have the ones who were stupid, like the guy fined $11,000 for tossing a lit cigarette.

And, just like in California, the fires are much worse and harder to contain because Enviroweenies have instituted polices that restrict brush clearing, controlled burns, and fire breaks. You clear your fallen leaves, right? Well, wildfires happen, and they are all either due to lightning strikes or human failure, not because someone ate a burger and refused to pay a carbon tax. Not because the world is a measly 1.5F higher than it was in 1850, which is mostly the fault of natural processes.

Read: Guy Says He Tried To Warn On Bushfire Threat From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove