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

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 »

Mitch McConnell Implements Impeachment Theater Kill Switch

Cocaine Mitch is making sure that the typical Democrat games will be limited

The Impeachment ‘Kill Switch’: McConnell Dismissal Rule Corners Democrats, Blocks Antics as Trial Commences

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is as of now including in the U.S. Senate impeachment trial rules a “kill switch” that effectively allows for the president’s legal team to seek an immediate verdict or dismissal of the case should Democrats engage in any shenanigans like they did in the House process.

The revelation comes after the House finally late last week formally sent the Articles of Impeachment it adopted before Christmas—after holding them for more than a month without transmission—to the U.S. Senate, thereby triggering the start of a Senate trial. The Senate will formally commence its trial procedures in votes this coming week, and while some Republicans want to outright dismiss the charges altogether from the outset, others believe a trial should take place.

In so finally transmitting the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also named impeachment case managers—the Democrats who will present and manage the House’s case to the Senate—last week. They include House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY). Both Schiff and Nadler were widely panned for the highly unfair process they ran in the House of Representatives, and many Senate Republicans do not trust them to refrain from playing games that seek to make the Senate trial unfair to the president as the highly partisan process in the House ended up.

Republicans on the House side, who were essentially powerless to stop the Democrats’ shenanigans since they are in the minority in the lower chamber, are warning Senate Republicans to be on the lookout for Schiff’s gamesmanship and that from his ilk.

“It’s incumbent upon the Senate to preserve the right of the President’s legal team to ask for a verdict or move to dismiss this sham impeachment anytime they see fit during the Senate trial,” a source close to House GOP leadership told Breitbart News. “Otherwise, Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans risk allowing Adam Schiff and his conspiracy caucus to hijack and take control of the trial.”

What does it all mean?

Democrats are surely going to want to include new “evidence”, ie, things that they are just making up, they’ll want silly witnesses, all the standard things, so, if they give this a whirl, the president’s team can demand a vote. And you know Democrats will attempt to pull shenanigans just like in the House

Vice President Mike Pence, in an exclusive interview with Breitbart News late last week, made it clear that “when it comes to the Senate trial, it’ll be for the senators to decide [on witnesses and process], but I think the fact that you hear people talking about witnesses in the Senate just proves how weak the case underpinning the Articles of Impeachment really is.”

“The fact that we’ve heard they had an open-and-shut case, that despite the fact the American people can read the transcript, see the fact the president did nothing wrong, no quid pro quo, the military aid was released,” Pence added. “The American people have the facts. We heard that Congress did what the facts demanded, and now suddenly we hear Democrats saying they need more facts and they need more witnesses. My view on this is the American people see through all of this—the sham investigation followed by a partisan impeachment. They’re saying ‘enough is enough.’”

Mike Pence is one of the good guys in politics. He wouldn’t be defending Trump if he thought there was a problem. And, yes, if the case was so slam dunk, why do they need more witnesses and such? Democrats are saying that they have no case.

Read: Mitch McConnell Implements Impeachment Theater Kill Switch »

Bummer: Oregon GOP Resists Climate Scam Bill

How dare they block the Democrats attempt to turn the clock back to 1499 and institute a pseudo-religious government with lots of taxes?

Democrats: Oregon climate bill is priority; GOP resists

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown and the speaker of the House of Representatives, both Democrats, said Friday that passing legislation aimed at stemming global warming is their priority when lawmakers return to the Capitol next month.

But Rep. Christine Drazan, the leader of the minority Republicans in the House, said she opposes the so-called cap and trade bill that was unveiled this week. The 35-day session of the 2020 Legislature begins on Feb. 3.

“The only thing that cap and trade guarantees is that prices for individual Oregonians will go up, their daily cost of living is going to go up under under this proposal,” Drazan said.

Their comments at an Associated Press forum in the Oregon State Capitol on Friday foreshadowed a fight over the same issue that in the 2019 legislative session triggered a walkout by Republican senators.

The new bill largely authored by Senate Democrats includes changes designed to assuage critics in the manufacturing and utility sectors, and create fewer impacts for rural Oregon but maintains a commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by certain percentages below 1990 levels.

The new bill splits the state into three geographic zones that would be phased in separately for rules that would likely increase gas and diesel prices, with Portland being affected first, then other large urban areas, and finally rural regions. That approach is designed to address concerns that last year’s failed measure would have disproportionately affected rural communities where distances between homes and towns are great, with residents having little option but to drive.

I have a suggestion: split Oregon into 36 counties. Whelp, that’s already done, as you see below. Institute this Hotcoldwetdry bill in the eight counties in blue, which consistently vote Democrat. Run this experiment for 10 years, and let’s see how it goes. If there is no cost of living increase for citizens, no job losses, etc, then the rest of the state can try it. BUT, the citizens who live in the blue areas who vote Democrat are not allowed to move to red Oregon areas. And they aren’t allowed to change their voter registration to fake it.

Oregon counties by 2016 votes

Read: Bummer: Oregon GOP Resists Climate Scam Bill »

If All You See…

…is a world flooded from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on Iran refusing to release the black boxes from the plane they shot down.

It’s surfing week!

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! A fantastic day in America. The weather is great, people are working, and Astros need to have their World Series title pulled (that opinion causes controversy). This pinup is by Ralph Burch, with a wee bit of help

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Moonbattery covers Martha McSally touching a liberal nerve
  2. Newsbusters notes that consumer confidence is the highest in 20 years, so, where’s the media?
  3. Noisy Room wants Trump to declassify the Obama era letters to Iran
  4. Pacific Pundit features the Jew and Israel hating signs from the Women’s March
  5. Power Line discusses the Parnas problem
  6. The Daley Gator notes that truth is not a leftist value
  7. The Last Refuge covers massive incompetence in Puerto Rico with Hurricane Maria aid
  8. The Lid discusses the FBI and others investigating Ilhan Omar
  9. The Other McCain has thoughts on #Megxit
  10. The Right Scoop notes that Parnas is denying actually speaking with Trump
  11. Weasel Zippers covers 5 members of Biden’s family getting rich
  12. Independent Sentinel features a warning from a Va. state Republican over the gun march
  13. Jihad Watch has videos from Iran that Pelosi should watch
  14. IOTW Report covers the Babylon Bee laughing at CNN
  15. And last, but not least, Geller Report News notes a politician who’ll bring even more Jew hatred to NYC

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me.

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Team Trump Asserts Impeachment Theater Constitutionally And Legally Invalid

They NY Times doesn’t spend a of time on the actual documents from Team Trump, but on the Democrats #TDS point of view

Trump’s Defense Team Calls Impeachment Charges ‘Brazen’ as Democrats Make Legal Case

President Trump’s legal defense team strenuously denied on Saturday that he had committed impeachable acts, denouncing the charges against him as a “brazen and unlawful” attempt to cost him re-election as House Democrats laid out in meticulous detail their case that he should be removed from office.

In the first legal filings for the Senate impeachment trial that opens in earnest on Tuesday, the dueling arguments from the White House and the House impeachment managers previewed a politically charged fight over Mr. Trump’s fate, unfolding against the backdrop of the presidential election campaign. (snip)

In a six-page filing formally responding to the House impeachment charges submitted shortly after and filled with partisan barbs against House Democrats, Mr. Trump’s lawyers denounced the case as constitutionally and legally invalid, and driven purely by a desire to hurt Mr. Trump in the 2020 election.

“The articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president,” they said in the response, which was Mr. Trump’s first legal submission in the impeachment proceeding, ahead of a fuller brief that is due on Monday. “This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away.”

It might have been nice had they included the actual documents from Team Trump for their readers to read, but, then, their readers might have been informed, and the Times can’t have that. Regardless, including the Team Trump view, which is the view from Republicans, that this is just an extension of the Democrat freakout from losing the 2016 election (remember the screaming at the sky stuff?)

The president’s lawyers did not deny any of the core facts underlying Democrats’ charges, conceding what considerable evidence and testimony in the House has shown: that he withheld $391 million in aid and a White House meeting from Ukraine and asked the country’s president to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son, Hunter Biden.

They don’t have to deny anything: a defendant is innocent till proven guilty under our system. Has the Times forgotten that? Probably so, since that’s the view the House Democrats took, and reinforced by refusing to allow GOP witnesses. And violations for that, along with due process, are one of the issues Team Trump noted

(Breitbart) President Donald Trump’s legal team argued Saturday that the impeachment articles sent to the Senate by House Democrats are “constitutionally invalid” and should be rejected.

The letter was authored and filed by Trump’s attorneys Jay Sekulow and Pat Cipollone in response to the Senate summons for the impeachment trial.

“The articles of impeachment are constitutionally invalid on their face,” the response read. “They fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever let alone ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ as required by the Constitution.” (snip)

The team will also argue that the impeachment hearings themselves were defective, violating the president’s right to due process.

If Democrats thought Trump would take this meekly, they should really have been paying attention since they day he started running for office

“It’s going to be a full-throttled address, we will take the facts head-on and we believe that the facts will prove and have proved that the president did nothing wrong,” the source said.

If Democrats were smart they’d avoid calling witnesses, because the GOP will give Trump the opening to level the Democrats. The full document is that Breitbart article.

Read: Team Trump Asserts Impeachment Theater Constitutionally And Legally Invalid »

St. Greta Says “You Have Not Seen Anything Yet” Or Something

We should all listen to teens blowing off their education on world affairs, right?

‘You have not seen anything yet,’ climate activist Greta says ahead of Davos

Swedish activist Greta Thunberg marched with 10,000 protesters in the Swiss city of Lausanne on Friday and said “you have not seen anything yet” before some head to Davos next week to challenge the global financial elite to fight climate change.

The 17-year-old, who launched the #FridaysforFuture movement that has sparked worldwide protests, denounced a lack of government action to cut heat-trapping emissions before it is too late.

“So, we are now in a new year and we have entered a new decade and so far, during this decade, we have seen no sign whatsoever that real climate action is coming and that has to change,” Thunberg said in a speech in Lausanne.

“To the world leaders and those in power, I would like to say that you have not seen anything yet. You have not seen the last of us, we can assure you that. And that is the message that we will bring to the World Economic Forum in Davos next week.”

OK, let’s take all the smartphones, tablets, and laptops away from the “protesters.” Only allow them to eat veggies that they either grow themselves or buy from a local farmer. Only wear clothes that come from local sources. No fossil fueled travel. No AC or heat. Etc. Oh, right, right, they want Someone Else to suffer for their beliefs, not themselves.

Last year was the Earth’s second-hottest since records began, and the world should brace itself for more extreme weather events like Australia’s fires, the U.N. World Meteorological Organization said on Wednesday.

Well, except for all the arsonists. And warming is no proof of anthropogenic causation.

Hey, remember when were only supposed to listen to people with degrees in climate science?

Read: St. Greta Says “You Have Not Seen Anything Yet” Or Something »

If All You See…

…is a horrible fossil fueled vehicle causing heat snow, you might just be a Warmist

IAYS – snow

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on more reasons Trump was elected.

Read: If All You See… »

Hot Take: Trump Voters Motivated By Raaaaacism May Be Violating The Constitution

This is not something from some fringe bat guano insane lefty website: NBC News allowed this from Noah Berlatsky. This is a serious Hot Take from people unhinged over losing an election

Trump voters motivated by racism may be violating the Constitution. Can they be stopped?

If the Trump era has taught us anything, it’s that large numbers of white people in the United States are motivated at least in part by racism in the voting booth. Donald Trump ran an openly racist campaign for president, calling Mexicans rapists and criminals, regularly retweeting white supremacists and at least initially balking at repudiating former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Trump made it clear in his campaign that “Make America Great Again” meant that America was greater when white people’s power was more sweeping and more secure. White voters approved of that message by a whopping 58 percent to 37 percent.

But, see, in Liberal World, everyone who voted for Trump is a raaaaacist, so, y’all are all motivated by raaaaacism, even those who were actually voting against Hillary Clinton rather than for Trump (like myself).

Some politicians deny the evidence, no doubt because they don’t want to alienate white voters, including prejudiced ones. Other commentators try to parse whether Trump’s racism will be a winning strategy in 2020. Terry Smith, a visiting professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, offers a different response in his new book, “Whitelash: Unmasking White Grievance at the Ballot Box.” Rather than excuse racist voters or try to figure out how to live with their choices, he argues that racist voting is not just immoral, but illegal. The government, Smith says, has the ability, and the responsibility, to address it.

This sounds radical. But Smith argues that it’s in line with the Constitution and with years of court rulings. For example, Smith points out that racist appeals in union elections are illegal and that an election in which one side uses racist appeals can be invalidated by the National Labor Relations Board. Similarly, in the 2016 case Peña v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court ruled that when a juror expresses overt bigotry, the jury’s verdict should be invalidated.

“When voters go to the booth, they’re not expressing a mere personal preference,” Smith told me. According to Smith, voters who pull the levers to harm black people are violating the Constitution. If the Constitution means that overt racist appeals undermine the legality of union elections, it stands to reason that they undermine the legality of other elections, as well.

Well, good luck making this happen. Wrongthink will be verboten! And, of course, they want to do away with voter ID, because it’s raaaaacist….say, isn’t it rather real racism to think that blacks are too dumb and/or poor and/or lazy to obtain a proper ID? It’s not really hard to do, and all states with voter ID laws will give people for free the proper ID for voting.

Even more ambitiously, Smith suggests expanding the Voting Rights Act to address the racist patterns of voting in Senate elections in the South. Because the majority of white voters in the South vote Republican, and because they outnumber black voters, there isn’t a single Democratic senator from the Deep South other than Doug Jones in Alabama, who may well lose his seat in 2020. Smith argues that we could remedy these disparate, racially motivated outcomes by creating Senate districts. Presumably, that would make it at least possible for black voters to elect a senator who would support their interests.

Ah, see, they want to change elections in areas they tend to lose in order to win.

It’s difficult to address injustice, however, if you’re unwilling to say injustice exists. Politicians and pundits, Republican and Democratic alike, have been unwilling to reprimand voters or hold them accountable. But voters are not well-intentioned innocents who are helplessly manipulated by malevolent leaders. They make important decisions as constitutional actors, for which they have moral responsibility. Racist voting isn’t an accident. It’s a choice that may violate the principles of our Constitution and our legal system. We should say so, and then we should find ways to reduce the harm it causes.

What about blacks who vote dis-proportionally for black candidates? Asians for Asians? Muslims for Muslims? Hispanics for Hispanics? And so forth? Will they be blocked from voting? Of course not. This is all an extension of Trump Derangement Syndrome, for Hillary getting beaten fair and square.

Say, what of Democrats knocking all the blacks out of the primaries?

Read: Hot Take: Trump Voters Motivated By Raaaaacism May Be Violating The Constitution »

So Sad: Kids (astroturfed) Climate Suit Tossed In Federal Court

All that time and money for nothing. But, there’s an idea for the kids at the end

From the link

A federal appeals court on Friday tossed a climate change lawsuit brought by a group of children who sought a court order to force the U.S. government to phase out fossil fuel emissions.

A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said that while the lawsuit raised critical issues concerning the government’s promotion of fossil fuels, they were beyond the court’s power to resolve.

“Reluctantly, we conclude that such relief is beyond our constitutional power,” Judge Andrew Hurwitz wrote for the majority. “Rather, the plaintiffs’ impressive case for redress must be presented to the political branches of government.”

Exactly. This is a function of the Legislative Branch, not the courts. Of course, we see all the polls that show that while people might care about Hotcoldwetdry in theory, they aren’t so interested in paying for it themselves.

https://twitter.com/JesseLonnen/status/1217923451698044929

Of course, they always want That Guy to pay for it. Someone got me in a convo in the Real World (I usually avoid political convos) and went down the typical road of Warmists, namely that Big Companies should pay, and that someone should pass a law that the Big Companies should not be allowed to pass on the increased costs to consumers. Warmists never want to take responsibility of their own behavior.

Read: So Sad: Kids (astroturfed) Climate Suit Tossed In Federal Court »

Pirate's Cove