Exxon Goes To Trial Today Over ‘Climate Change’, And The Lawsuit Has Shrunk

The original lawsuit was going to Take Down Exxon (despite all sorts of Warmists, from the supporters to the government agencies filing the suits, using lots of fossil fuels, including from Exxon). Now? The NY Post Editorial Board has thoughts

The incredible collapsing ‘#ExxonKnew’ climate change lie

On Tuesday, the progressive legal war on Exxon will head to trial in a case most notable for … how badly it has fizzled.

It started back in 2016, with “a move many are hailing as a ‘turning point,’ ” as EcoWatch proclaimed: 20 state attorneys general launching an “unprecedented, multi-state effort” to probe and prosecute the oil giant.

The central charge — seemingly bolstered by Pulitzer-nominated journalists: Exxon had for decades hidden “key climate science.”

Actually, only a few AGs — including then-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who spearheaded the effort — led any investigations. And today, only two cases exist: the one from the New York AG’s office, and another from the Massachussets AG — which is on hold and likely dead.

So, what’s happening

The claim: Exxon had long known that consuming oil would cause global warming but hid the facts. In fact, the company for decades published findings closely matching mainstream science. No one has ever produced any evidence of a coverup.

Which is why Schneiderman (before the revelation of horrifying personal conduct ended his career) was forced to find a different rationale: Big Oil, he said, might be “overstating” its assets by “trillions,” by failing to account for potential future regulations that restrict fossil fuels.

Oops: The company had warned about the risks of new rules; that’s why a Securities and Exchange Commission probe cleared it of those charges.

And the case that now-AG Letitia James takes to trial Tuesday is a huge comedown from even that claim, charging that Exxon fraudulently used two sets of books to state the risks. The company says it merely releases different estimates for different purposes, with full disclosure.

The charge is not only a far cry from the original #ExxonKnew allegations, it’s also almost certain to fail. Putting the best face on this fact, climate-change warrior Andrew Revkin tweeted Wednesday: “Some lawsuits are fought for the win, some are fought for the documents. The NYS #exxonknew suit is far more likely to be the latter.”

In fact, the entire thing has been a shameless exercise in prosecutorial abuse, from the outrageous harassment of nonprofits whose research the climate-crisis crew dislikes to the ethically dubious private funding of staff in the New York AG’s Office.

They wrap up with

If you have a real case, you don’t have to make up fake ones

So what is AG James trying to accomplish? The “we need to destroy Exxon” thing has been reduced to getting some documents. The State Of NY is more than welcome to stop using fossil fuels for state operations. This was a bullying operation, which Exxon refused to bow down to. It still would have been great had Exxon, and all the other fossil fuels companies, simply refused to sell gas and oil to those states.

Read: Exxon Goes To Trial Today Over ‘Climate Change’, And The Lawsuit Has Shrunk »

Saving The Republic: Democrats To Delay Impeachment

Democrats keep telling us that impeachment is Very Important, that the very republic is at stake. That Orange Man Bad did very bad things. Yet, they refuse to take a formal vote on holding an impeachment investigation, block Republicans from being a part of it, do stuff in secret, don’t seem to want the so-called whistleblower involved, and…

From the link

House Democrats are facing a time crunch to quickly wrap up their investigation into allegations President Donald Trump abused his office in pushing Ukraine to probe his political rivals, prompting growing expectations that votes on impeaching Trump could slip closer to the end of the year.

Some Democrats had hoped that a narrow probe — focused on whether Trump put on ice efforts to bolster relations with Ukraine and provide US military aid to the country until it carried through with a political favor — could conclude swiftly, with a potential vote to impeach Trump by Thanksgiving.

But that has proven to be more complicated than it initially seemed, according to multiple Democratic lawmakers and sources. The reason: Each witness has so far provided more leads for investigators to chase down, including new names to potentially interview or seek documents from. (snip)

The challenge facing Democrats: They want to conduct a thorough investigation, but prolonging the probe will continue to consume Washington — and risks bumping into the presidential election season if proceedings drag into the new year. (snip)

“I think it’s more like between Thanksgiving and Christmas” for the end of the investigation, said one Democratic member involved in the probe. “After that, it’s a strategic decision about when to bring it to the floor.”

A committee source said that “putting an artificial time limit is the wrong way to run a credible investigation.”

The problem for them is, of course, that the whole Ukraine thing is disappearing from the public conscience, and while they say they will eventually hold public hearings and release transcripts from the secret ones, people will have moved on, as well as realized that this is international politics, heck, domestic politics, that it happens all the time. And they’re all afraid that they will have to vote at some point. That they won’t now shows that they are afraid.

The Democrats want to drag it out, hoping their pals in the news keep covering it. But, how did that work with Russia Russia Russia? Adam Schiff swore he had everything necessary on it, yet, provided nothing, and it all become a big nothing burger. Think Trump won’t remind people about that?

Read: Saving The Republic: Democrats To Delay Impeachment »

Gun Grabber Beto O’Rourke Wants To Add Boyfriends To Growing List Of Banned People

Now, on the surface, does it make sense to temporarily restrict current and former boyfriends (why not girlfriends?) who are violent and/or threaten violence from possessing a firearm? How about putting them on the watch list to deny purchase permits? Realistically, if they’ve already been convicted, they’re already banned. But, this is not a surface thing

Beto O’Rourke Adds Gun Ban for Boyfriends to AR-15 Grab

Democrat presidential hopeful Robert “Beto” O’Rourke tweeted on Saturday his support for closing what the left refers to as the “boyfriend loophole.”

This latest loophole began to emerge in the leftist thought in 2014, when Gabby Giffords pushed a gun ban that would treat a “dating partner” on par with a spouse as far as gun possession was concerned. The push has since been championed by Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety, where it is presented as an effort to close the “boyfriend loophole.”

This effort ultimately expands the National Instant Criminal Background Check System’s (NICS) prohibited purchaser’s list, adding certain dinner dates or brief, former dating partners to the left’s growing list of people who cannot purchases firearms.

O’Rourke is on board with the ban:


See, the idea is to continuing adding more and more people who can file Red Flags against people, and expand who can have one filed against them. And, since most Red Flag laws have no due process in place, nor penalties for those who frivolously and/or falsely accuse, it is easier to just file away to erode 2nd Amendment Rights.

A goodly chunk of states already have laws that restrict firearm possession by those credibly accused of stalking and domestic violence. This is just a way to accuse and deny. Because no one has falsely accused other people of something that didn’t happen, right? There have been no false allegations of sexual assault and hate crimes, right?

The left’s efforts to use domestic monikers to prevent gun ownership by a boyfriend or dating partner is presented as a way to keep women safe. But the reality is that a woman is often at a disadvantage in an attack whether a gun is involved or not, and a woman with a gun can level the playing field (if not turn the tables altogether).

See, the gun grabbers aren’t interested in protecting women, otherwise they would make it easier for them to purchase a firearm. They want to take guns away from women, too. And that’s what their push is about: disarmament.

Read: Gun Grabber Beto O’Rourke Wants To Add Boyfriends To Growing List Of Banned People »

If All You See…

…are horrible evil fossil fueled vehicles, you might be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Real Climate Science, with a post on Alarmists getting exactly what they wanted.

BTW, someone asked why I still use Warmist in these posts, rather than Alarmist or climate cultist or something. These posts are meant to tweek the noses of ‘climate change’ believers while offering up a beautiful lady, as well as being an open post to discuss what you want. They aren’t meant to be hardcore, but light-hearted.

Read: If All You See… »

Boomers And GenXers Need To Use Their White Privilege And Join Extinction Rebellion Or Something

Remember, this is all about science, not left wing politics

It’s time for Boomers & Gen Xers to put their white privilege to good use! Join Extinction Rebellion mass arrests NOW!

I know. Most of the time we are made to feel guilty about having white skin, something none of us chose, but finally there’s a way to put that boomer/Gen X white privilege to some actual use for the cause!

Join Extinction Rebellion mass arrests NOW!

Jane Fonda, Sam Waterston arrested for protesting climate change

George Monbiot arrested for defying climate protest ban

Young, poor and brown folk get the living bejesus smashed out of them by the Police and the book is always thrown at them legally, but Police won’t dare treat white boomers/Gen Xers with that level of force and in Wellington released everyone who had been arrested without charge.  

You know, writer Martyn Bradbury has a point. All these overly white middle and upper class XR nutters are often getting slaps on the wrist. But, we do not know what would happen to young, poor, brown folks if they were getting arrested, because so few are involved with XR. That said

Time to put that white privilege to good use folks, in the words of Boomer warrior poet Mario Savio…

There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part. You can’t even passively take part! And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop! And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it — that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!

…forcing the political establishment to directly challenge the economic interests of the corporate polluters is the operation of the odious machine and our arrests that can clog up the judiciary and city systems themselves is our bodies upon the gears and wheels.

Not a left-wing gripe-fest at all. Funny thing, though

(UK Daily Mail) A British billionaire who donated £200,000 to climate activist group Extinction Rebellion also has a £630 million stake in the owners of Heathrow Airport.

The UK’s seventh biggest tax payer Sir Christopher Hohn, has so far given the biggest individual sum to the group, but also has a major holding in Ferrovial – one of the biggest European infrastructure companies in the world.

Will XR be giving the money back? Doubtful. Most are just hypocrites. Very white, middle and upper class hypocrites. And, as a Gen Xer, I have better things to do than get involved with this scam, nor attempting to deny the same lifestyle I’ve been able to live during my years.

Read: Boomers And GenXers Need To Use Their White Privilege And Join Extinction Rebellion Or Something »

Washington Post: Say, Why Won’t Democrats Embrace Carbon Taxes?

The Washington Post editorial board is on a roll in calling carbon taxes the best solution for Hotcoldwetdry, and want Democrats to embrace them

Why won’t Democrats embrace this solution for climate change?

IN AN ideal world, our leaders would acknowledge the danger of climate change and seek the best way to combat it. If they did, they would easily find an answer that is effective and progressive: The latest bulletin from the International Monetary Fund maps what it would take to restrain warming to tolerable levels without wasting massive amounts of money or unnecessarily harming workers, companies and households.

In our far-from-ideal world, President Trump can’t even acknowledge the problem, and the Democrats who call for immediate action seem to be running from the best solutions.

The IMF reiterates what economists have long understood: Enacting a carbon tax is “the single most powerful and efficient tool” because pricing mechanisms “make it costlier to emit greenhouse gases and allow businesses and individuals to choose how to conserve energy or switch to greener sources through a range of opportunities.” Politicians should favor choice and flexibility over central planning. “People and firms will identify which changes in behavior reduce emissions — for example, purchasing a more efficient refrigerator versus an electric car — at the lowest cost.”

The IMF wouldn’t actually have a vested interest in this, right? Somehow they think that it would increase consumer choice.

The IMF found that the average global price is a paltry $2 per ton of carbon dioxide, while the world requires a $75-per-ton global carbon tax by 2030 to keep warming below the 2-degree Celsius threshold scientists advise. Electricity prices would rise 70 percent on average — though only 53 percent in the United States — and gasoline prices 5 percent to 15 percent in most places.

But that’s the picture before one considers what the money raised by a carbon tax could do. If governments recycled the revenue back to low-income and vulnerable people, and cut economically inefficient taxes — such as income taxes — a $50-per-ton carbon tax would feel to the economy more like $20 per ton. The plan would help low-income households and place a higher burden on the upper-income bracket. There could also be money for essential research and development to aid the energy transition.

See? It would only feel like $20 a ton! Because the government would give money back! Which would make citizens more beholden to government.

So is this the plan that the Democratic presidential candidates have embraced? If only. Though former vice president Joe Biden and former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke have cautiously acknowledged the importance of carbon pricing, they are far more specific in their ideas for spending lots of money. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) recently adopted a regulate-and-spend program. And Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would have the federal government establish its own utilities and build its own power-generation facilities, from scratch, according to, yes, a central plan.

Here’s my carbon tax plan: it will apply to all news organizations. It would immediately start at $75 per ton. Gathering and disseminating the news is a pretty CO2 intensive business, what with all the energy used, the travel with fossil fueled vehicles, and the killing of trees. They are just as bad as coal energy companies. Think the WP editorial board would be so hot to trot on carbon taxes then? Because they think that said taxes wouldn’t apply to themselves. The same WP post published this in September of this year

For example, while nearly half of adults say they would be willing to pay a $2 monthly tax on their electricity bills to help combat climate change, just over a quarter say they are willing to pay $10 extra each month. And while two-thirds support stricter fuel-efficiency standards for the nation’s cars and trucks, increases in the gas tax remain deeply unpopular.

That meshes with many other polls that show a majority aren’t willing to spend more than or even spend as much as $10 a month to “solve” Hotcoldwetdry.

I agree, though: Democrats should embrace carbon taxes. Go full hog on them. It’ll be just another nail in their coffin.

Read: Washington Post: Say, Why Won’t Democrats Embrace Carbon Taxes? »

NY Times: If You Support Trump On Impeachment, You’re A Raaaaacist

The only thing that’s truly surprising about this op-ed by Darlena Cuhna is that it took so long. You would have thought it would have come sooner, because devolving to throwing down the raaaaacism card is a default position of the Democratic Party (which works hard to keep minorities, particularly blacks, down in urban area slums). This is the top opinion piece on the web front page

How Florida Republicans Are Talking About Impeachment

A few weeks ago, I sat on a park bench, watching my 11-year-old twins pass a soccer ball and push their friends on a tire swing. I turned to the mother of my daughters’ classmate to talk about the second whistle-blower coming forward about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

“Oh, I don’t care about that,” she said. “I’m just glad he’s standing his ground during this witch hunt.”

I’ve been in this state for almost a decade, yet its politics still surprise me. Fox News tag lines come out of real people’s mouths. “I work hard. I don’t want the government giving my money away to people who don’t,” another mother added.

My acquaintance agreed with her. “It’s one thing to need help, but so many people scam the system. Why should they get away with that? Having kids just for the welfare, using food stamps for steak and beer, finding every excuse not to work, and then I have to carry them with my tax dollars?”

You can see the direction, right?

As the impeachment inquiry marches on, several polls show more American support for impeachment than not. Of course, we learned in 2016 that polls can sometimes mislead, and in this particular case, digging a little shows a deeply partisan divide. While nearly 50 percent of people polled now support impeachment, that number is made up of nearly 85 percent Democrats. Just 12 percent of Republicans support impeachment and upward of 70 percent of Republicans believe the president’s dealings with Ukraine are within typical presidential limits. Most Republicans think he meant to stop corruption and protect American interests, according to a CBS News poll.

Obviously, that is a Problem

With a damning reconstructed phone call transcript, a detailed whistle-blower report, several high-ranking Trump surrogates being subpoenaed and testimonies well underway, how can such a seemingly cut-and-dry issue be read in an oppositional way? With farmers left in the dust, discrimination against pre-existing conditions returning to insurance coverage and taxes rising for millions, how can Republicans continue to support the president?

Simple. They identify with him.

Working-class Republicans in Alachua County see Donald Trump as a white businessman who made a lot of money. They like to think that could be them. The only thing standing in the way of achieving that dream, they tell me, are policies that elevate people of color, immigrants and poor people without health care. My neighbors misidentify what is holding them back, but they don’t want to correctly identify the actual problem — corporations, billionaires, white privilege, late-stage capitalism — because they hope to be part of that world someday. They think they have rightfully earned it.

See? It’s raaaaacism. Along with a smattering of “you’re entitled to your opinion, but, you’re Wrong.” Heck, it’s probably Raaaaacism that people are holding on to those Wrongthink views!

Darlena also managed to work in a dude who just suddenly sat down with her and started talking to her who had few teeth but was against Universal Health Care. That view from the man is probably raaaaacist, too.

Anyhow, here’s Lindsay Graham, because the media is attempting to spin his comments

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of President Trump’s most vocal supporters on a variety of issues, said in a recent interview that he is open-minded about supporting impeachment.

“Sure, I mean show me something that is a crime. If you could show me that, you know, Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing,” the South Carolina Republican said on “Axios on HBO.”

The so-called whistleblower had zero firsthand knowledge of the call, the readout shows nothing beyond normal international politics, and there was no crime in any form or fashion. Heck, former Obama communications director Jen Psaki admitted that this kind of stuff is the norm, that it happens all the time.

But, if you support Trump, you’re a raaaaacist.

Read: NY Times: If You Support Trump On Impeachment, You’re A Raaaaacist »

Hot Take: Mom’s Demand Action Is Not Anti-Gun

And they’re grassroots!

From the article

Moms Demand Action is a grassroots organization advocating for stronger gun control measures, founded as a Facebook group the day after the that took the lives of 26 people, 20 of whom were young children. But while its members advocate for an assault ban, Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts says that it’s a “misnomer” to call the group anti-gun.

“Often people think that because we’re doing this work, we’re anti-gun or we don’t support the Second Amendment. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Watts said in an interview with CBS News chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett in this week’s episode of “The Takeout” podcast. Watts noted that many volunteers the organization were gun owners or married to gun owners.

“This is simply about restoring the responsibilities that go along with gun rights,” Watts said. She added that while the top priorities for Moms Demand Action are background checks, red-flag laws and disarming domestic abusers, the organization also advocates for an assault weapons ban and has worked with municipalities on the issue.

She is right, because it is a misnomer to call the group anti-gun and anti-2nd Amendment: they are also very much anti-4th Amendment, being happy to remove people’s due process in order to take their guns. Anyhow, if they are calling for taking away people’s guns, at least relating to law abiding citizens, which they are, then they are anti-2nd Amendment. They do not advocate for making sure that Red Flag laws protect other Constitutional rights, that they aren’t abused (even the ACLU is worried about Red Flag laws), they advocate for no provisions for protection.

Shannon runs Mom’s Demand, which is funded via Everytown, which comes from billionaire Mike Bloomberg, and, all her tweets seem to be about electing people who want to enact massive gun control on law abiding citizens and blaming guns for crimes.


Read More »

Read: Hot Take: Mom’s Demand Action Is Not Anti-Gun »

If All You See…

…is snow from the climate crisis, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post wondering if the U.N.’s reputation can get any lower.

It’s sweater week (if the server stops crashing).

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriotic Pinup Vaughan Bass

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. Getting some much needed rain from Nestor, the Devils finally achieved two wins after start 0-4-2, and Fall is in the air. This pinup is by Vaughan Bass, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers has bad lip reading with Joe Biden
  2. Vox Popoli discusses science fiction ethics
  3. The Right Scoop highlights Kamala melting down when pressed on Guiliani’s “crimes”
  4. The Quiet Towers explains what does and doesn’t count as a conspiracy
  5. The People’s Cube wants you to remember when Hillary pushed the Russian asset button
  6. The Lid covers Tom Arnold’s Trump assassination chic
  7. The Last Tradition covers the dangers of RINOs and what to do with them
  8. The First Street Journal note’s 2016’s sore loser lashing out again
  9. The Feral Irishman has 3 days of CNN condensed
  10. Raised On Hoecakes features the Halloween grinches being out in force
  11. Pacific Pundit discusses Beto and #NationalPeriodDay
  12. Moonbattery covers how much it costs Seattle to clean up after the homeless
  13. Living Freedom has some good advice to protect against your computer dying (my 2 cents: get an external hard drive, preferably a solid state one, and backup every few months. More if you are saving a lot of stuff. I lost a bunch of stuff when my last computer saw a slow HD die-off)
  14. Legal Insurrection explains what happened at a St. Greta rally in Canada
  15. And last, but not least, Jihad Watch shows what happens to Muslims and non-Muslims when they do something bad in Britain

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 »

Bad Behavior has blocked 10774 access attempts in the last 7 days.