Duke Energy Says EVs Are Totally Competitive With Regular Cars Now Or Something

By William Teach April 16, 2021 – 3:00 pm

This article from WRAL reads more like a sponsored article written by Duke Energy, with zero questions asked

Cost of electric vehicles now competitive with gas-powered cars, according to Duke Energy

The price of a owning an electric vehicle is now closer to that of gas powered cars, and experts say the savings not seen on the sticker price could make them even more appealing.

Scot Wingo is the CEO of Raleigh-Durham based “Spiffy,” a vehicle maintenance company which now operates in 20 markets across the country. He hopes his large fleet of service vans will soon run just like his own battery-powered Tesla.

“Our vision is to move towards electric vans totally in the next two or three years. They are just not available today,” said Wingo. (snip)

Though the vans still run on gas, the equipment inside Spiffy vehicles run on electric power. An “EV” owner since 2014, Wingo understands the potential savings at the end of the year.

“Well over $1,500, and that’s just saved on the gas component,” said Wingo.

What charges the equipment? $1,500 saved compared to? Let’s say that’s true. Over 4 years, the average time people keep their cars, that would be $6,000 savings. But, a Honda Accord EXL is $30K, a base Tesla is around $37k. Once again

Beyond that, who’s paying for the EVs? They aren’t cheap, you know. The least expensive out there, excluding the tiny ones like those you rent in places like Bermuda (which makes sense there), is the Mini Cooper SE, with a range of 110 miles and a base price of $30,750. For that kind of money you could get a Honda Accord EXL or the Toyota Camry equivalent, higher end standard sedans, or the same trim levels for the CRV or RAV4. Their hybrid versions aren’t that much more expensive. And will go a lot longer, have a much lower cost of ownership, and much higher residual values.

What would the residual value of an EV be after 4 years? Even now, hybrids drop like a stone vs straight gas cars, because people are worried about replacing the batteries, even if it is a 3 year old Prius with 36,000 miles coming off lease. A straight EV?

(Autoweek) The folks over at the Mach-E Club forum snagged some alleged documents from Ford to dealers saying dealers should expect about a 40 percent residual value on the new EV after three years and near 30 percent by year four. That puts a $60K Mach-E at about $18,000. An average car loses about 25 percent in the first year, and 15-18 percent from years 2 to 6, according to Black Book. Overall, residual values average about 52 percent over 36 months. But the Mach-E isn’t alone in this depreciation, as many EV owners are learning the same thing. (snip)

The Kia Soul EV, with a 111-mile range, has a residual of just 29 percent of its original value over three years, according to Kelley Blue Book. The Nissan Leaf (150 miles) is at 34.3 percent; the Hyundai Ioniq Electric (124 miles) is 35.5 percent; the Chevy Bolt, with its solid 238-mile range, comes in near the Mach-E’s expected rate at 41 percent.

The residual on a 2021 Honda Accord EXL is 56%. The only only hybrids on the top 100 list are 2 Prius’. No EVs. And that $7,500 tax rebate only applies to the 1st owner, and goes away after so many are sold. And, it’s not $7500 in your pocket. Just a tax liability depreciation.

Duke Energy offers an EV cost calculator to compare gas vs. electric vehicles.

“The electric vehicles you’re seeing on the road coming out by the manufacturers now are much better than they were five or 10 years ago,” said Randy Wheeless, a media spokesperson for Duke Energy.

That’s not saying much.

According to Wheeless, when EV owners like Wingo charge up, more than half of it is more likely to come from nuclear, solar and hydroelectric power.

Except, most Warmists and eco-nuts are dead set against nuclear, and sue to stop hydro. Oh, where does the other half come from?

Wingo says that’s his and his company’s mission. “Our customers care deeply about the environment. So do we,” he said.

Yet, hasn’t replaced those vans yet.

Read: Duke Energy Says EVs Are Totally Competitive With Regular Cars Now Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Energy, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 16, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a lonely tree surrounded by carbon pollution drought, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on nothing being able to placate the BLM mob.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Iran Claims It Has Enriched Uranium To 60% Purity

By William Teach April 16, 2021 – 10:30 am

Real, or just a way to attempt to demand more stuff from China Joe-Kamala?

Iran says it has enriched uranium with 60% purity

Iran started enriching uranium up to 60% purity on Friday after an attack targeted its Natanz nuclear plant, Tehran’s parliament speaker said.

Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf tweeted: “I am proud to announce that at 00:40 last night, and on the night of the pilgrimage of Sayyid al-Shuhada, young and pious Iranian scientists were able to obtain a product of 60% enriched uranium.”

He added: “Congratulations to the brave people of Islamic Iran on this success.”

The alleged enrichment level is now at its highest ever and comes in the wake of a sabotage at the Natanz nuclear plant last week. Iran said Israel was responsible for the attack.

Though 60% enrichment of the chemical element is is a record high for Iran, it is still below the 90% threshold required for nuclear weapons.

Friday’s announcement marks a significant escalation of tensions in the Middle East and casts doubt over the chances of finding any middle ground on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.

The 2015 accord between Iran and six nations — Germany, China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — is currently under discussion among representatives in Vienna.

The officials are hoping to resuscitate a deal that has been on life support ever since former US President Donald Trump announced Washington’s withdrawal.

This is all about attempting to sway Biden, extorting him to give Iran all sorts of stuff while removing every single sanction, and all Biden gets back is Iran pretending to abide by the deal that they were breaking the minute Obama signed it. Iran never once hit the 60% threshold, even before the silly Iran deal, when they were mostly free to do so.

(Jerusalem Post) Former IDF intelligence chief Aharon Ze’evi Farkash told The Jerusalem Post that “I would treat the announcement at this point as a signal of intent to improve its [Iran’s] negotiating hand on the eve of returning to negotiations this week in Vienna with the EU-3.”

Exactly.

Rather, the threat or any 60% enrichment could be minimal and symbolic so as not to risk getting so close to the nuclear threshold that Israel might feel the need to launch a major preemptive strike.

BTW, where are they getting all this uranium and enrichment infrastructure? Even if Trump pulled the U.S. out, the rest of the nations were still in it. Weren’t they supposed to give all that stuff up? Maybe China Joe could send them pallets of cash.

Read: Iran Claims It Has Enriched Uranium To 60% Purity »

Posted in Iran, Joe Biden | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Apple Pledges $200 Million, Promises To Be Carbon Neutral By 2030 Or Something

By William Teach April 16, 2021 – 7:16 am

I wonder if this means that most of their products will no longer be primarily produced in China, including iPhones, iPads, computers, and earbuds. It’s not all in China, they have factories around the world. What’s the carbon footprint of all that plastic and such used and shipped on fossil fueled autos, ships, and planes? Who will ultimately pay for this?

Apple launches $200 million fund for climate change

Apple has created a $200 million fund to invest in forestry projects to help remove carbon from the atmosphere while also generating financial returns for its investors, the company said Thursday. The Restore Fund will invest in forest properties that are managed to increase carbon removal and produce timber. The goal is to remove 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually from the atmosphere.

Apple said last year it wants to eliminate its contributions to climate change and become carbon neutral by 2030. The company says it will directly eliminate 75 percent of emissions from its supply chain and products by 2030, and the Restore Fund will help address the other 25 percent of its emissions. Apple’s partners in the Restore Fund include the nonprofit Conservation International and the Goldman Sachs group which will manage the fund.

“Through creating a fund that generates both a financial return as well as real, and measurable carbon impacts, we aim to drive broader change in the future — encouraging investment in carbon removal around the globe,” Lisa Jackson, Apple’s vice president of environment, policy, and social initiatives, said in a statement. “Our hope is that others share our goals and contribute their resources to support and protect critical ecosystems.”

So, a company with a huge supply and distribution/sales chain wants to get all climaActivist? Who, exactly, is going to “drive broader change”? It’s cute verbiage, but, you can bet that if we come back to this in 2030 we’ll find that Apple hasn’t really done anything in their own operations, that product is still be made primarily in China and shipped all over the world, and that they really didn’t invest all that money. And, for what little they are doing they just raised the price of their products. This is a company that wants you to buy a new phone every year or two. If they really cared, they would make ones that lasted longer, rather than being made to die in a year or two. A lithium battery should last 10+ years without losing the ability to hold charge. It is planned obsolescence. It’s built in. And what happens to these devices? Landfills?

There’s some controversy around the strategy of using forests as a way of offsetting greenhouse emissions. The World Economic Forum launched an initiative last year to plant a trillion trees to cut emissions. But its effort cited a study that greatly overestimated the impact such an effort would have on the environment, researchers later found.

You know why? Because Donald Trump pushed this initiative, hence, Warmists were against it.

Read: Apple Pledges $200 Million, Promises To Be Carbon Neutral By 2030 Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Chicago Police Release Bodycam Footage Of Shooting Of Adam Toledo, Pushing “Hands Up” Narrative

By William Teach April 16, 2021 – 6:57 am

As the police released the footage, most media outlets either forgot to mention very important information, or buried it deep

In several fateful seconds, video appears to show 13-year-old Adam Toledo toss gun, turn with empty hands raised before Chicago cop fires fatal shot (warning: graphic content)

It happened in seconds: the pause in a dark Little Village alley, the officer’s shot fired, the 13-year-old crumpling to the ground.

Video of Adam Toledo’s fatal shooting by police was released to the public Thursday (warning: link contains graphic content), more than two weeks after the teen’s killing left the neighborhood in anguish and Chicago on edge.

Authorities released extensive video from body-worn cameras, surveillance footage, gunfire detection data and 911 recordings. Taken altogether, the video appears to show Toledo with a gun that he discards as he turns toward the officer with his empty hands raised.

And the city’s focus inevitably turned toward the crucial split second showing the shooting itself — the grainy, graphic end to the life of the youngest person fatally shot by Chicago police in years.

The video from the body-worn camera of the officer who fired the shot captures the instant Toledo was struck, moments after the officer begins chasing the teen down the alley. The materials were published on the website of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability, which is now charged with investigating.

All three of the links above have excellent video of the incident. Here’s a quickie

https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson/status/1382860299364147205?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1382860299364147205%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2021%2F04%2F15%2Fchicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-warns-chicagoans-to-brace-themselves-for-footage-of-13-year-old-being-shot-by-police%2F

This all did happen in a spit second, and even the above Chicago Tribune leaves out vital information

Police have said officers were dispatched to the Little Village neighborhood shortly before 3 a.m. on March 29 after the department’s ShotSpotter technology detected the sound of eight gunshots. When they arrived, Toledo and a 21-year-old man ran away. While chasing the teen, there was an “armed confrontation” during which the officer shot him once in the chest.

Again, what was this child doing out at 3am on a Monday morning, hanging with a 21 year old who was firing off shots in an area that has tech to pick up gun shots? A known gang area

“If the defendant does not bring the 13-year-old with him, if he doesn’t bring his gun with him while on gun offender probation, if he doesn’t shoot that gun seven to eight times on a city street with the victim standing in arms length of him while he’s firing those shots … none of it would have happened,” Assistant State’s Attorney James Murphy said in court, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Lightfoot said earlier this month she instructed Chicago Police Department officials “to use every resource to track down the origins of this gun – through tracing, fingerprinting and DNA and any other means – and to find the person responsible for giving it to Adam.”

And what is Adam’s culpability, being out at 3am? Perhaps he shouldn’t have been hanging. The area is know for the Latin Kings gang. Toledo is of Mexican American descent. Where were his parents when he was out at 3am?

It is interesting that so many people are caterwauling about this (while forgetting the important details) while not giving a damn about the dozens shot and even killed every single week in Chicago. We know the narrative will be about him having his hands up, ignoring the gun in his hand as the cop chased him and dropped a split second before whipping around.

Read: Chicago Police Release Bodycam Footage Of Shooting Of Adam Toledo, Pushing “Hands Up” Narrative »

Posted in Current Affairs | Comments Off on Chicago Police Release Bodycam Footage Of Shooting Of Adam Toledo, Pushing “Hands Up” Narrative | Trackback URL

Say, How Much Does The U.S. Owe The Rest Of The World For Climate Crisis (scam)?

By William Teach April 15, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Climate cultists who won’t give up their own money or modern lives have a question

How much does the US owe the rest of the world for climate change?

John Kerry, America’s special envoy on climate change, is on a whirlwind global tour to drum up support for a climate “leaders summit” on Earth Day next week. He’s hoping to re-establish the US as a climate leader and extract more serious ambition from his peers, but has been dogged by a familiar complaint from officials in developing economies: the global race to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions is fundamentally unfair.

Every country needs to reach net-zero emissions no later than 2050 to avert catastrophic climate change, according to the UN. Not all countries have contributed to the problem equally. Historically,  the US and Europe have emitted more than half of cumulative global emissions, and still produce far more climate pollution per capita than other countries. Should the countries most responsible for climate change pick up the bill for everyone else? Politicians in China, and emerging big emitters like India or Brazil, argue they shouldn’t be asked to lift their citizens out of poverty or recover from the pandemic while phasing out the fossil energy resources that Americans and Europeans continue to take for granted. (snip)

Kerry and his colleagues should be prepared to buy back US credibility on climate change with cold hard cash, argues Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based think tank Power Shift Africa. “International equity is a fundamental tenet of the UN convention on climate change, but most rich countries refuse to pull their weight,” said Adow. “They have to be dragged kicking and screaming simply to adopt [climate commitments] that fully reflect their responsibility for the climate crisis.”

Tell you what: how much does the world owe the U.S.? We’ve saved it twice in world wars and again from the menace of the Soviet Union. Some of the biggest developments in the modern era have come from the U.S., from cars to planes to computers to medical, and so on. We’ve given more than enough of the taxpayer money to all these 3rd world shitholes developing nations who never seem to develop. We fund all sorts of groups under the United Nations and such more than any other nation. How about they repay the U.S.?

The US can raise climate capital from other sources as well. A first step could be for the US to emulate European countries by doubling its Green Climate Fund commitment. It could also make first-time contributions to other internationally-managed funds like the Adaptation Fund and the Least Developed Countries Fund, and increase its provision of low-interest loans for clean energy projects, especially in situations where a country’s only financing alternative is China-backed fossil fuels.

We’ve been funding these nations for over 50 years, and they rarely do anything, and rarely say “thanks.”

But US climate policies run the risk of harming developing countries’ economies. The drive to quickly phase out fossil fuels, without cheap clean energy to replace them, could cost poorer countries. A proposal to end US financing for fossil fuel projects abroad, for example, could leave hundreds of millions of people without reliable and affordable access to electricity. On April 9, officials from India, China, Brazil, and South Africa complained the EU’s plan to tax high-carbon imports was “discriminatory” against low-income exporting countries, because customers in importing countries bear responsibility for the emissions, but the economic pain falls on exporting nations. “The scale and speed of climate finance from developed countries has to increase considerably,” they wrote.

The hell you say!

We have people with their own problems, even before the COVID pandemic. Let’s take care of our own first.

Read: Say, How Much Does The U.S. Owe The Rest Of The World For Climate Crisis (scam)? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 15, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful low carbon bike, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on the Florida House passing a bill banning men from playing women’s sports.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Liberals Are Super Excited For Police To No Longer Make Traffic Stops

By William Teach April 15, 2021 – 10:30 am

Seriously, what could possibly go wrong if police no longer make traffic stops? USA Today thinks they’re making a point

What would happen if cops didn’t make certain traffic stops? This North Carolina city offers a case study

Before dawn one morning in Fayetteville, North Carolina, a Black woman in her late 60s was pulled over by a police officer. The officer said she’d run a stop sign.

She denied the charge. She was just trying to get to her Bible studies class, she told him. He ran her license and concluded the stop with a warning. The incident disturbed her nevertheless. While he did not ticket her, the officer questioned her reason for being out that morning – it was too early for Bible study groups, he said sarcastically.

This did not sit well with her Bible study group that day in 2013, especially one of its newer attendees, whose husband was the new Fayetteville police chief. She relayed the incident.

Harold Medlock was exasperated. Apparently one of his officers had been randomly stopping people in their neighborhoods.

She blew the stop sign and should have gotten a ticket, not a warning. Don’t want to get pulled? Don’t blow a stop sign. Just trying to get to her Bible studies class is not an excuse.

It was precisely the kind of policing he was there to change. “It never occurred to me that I would have a cop out there doing everything wrong, from the way you treat somebody to the basic protocols and procedures for traffic stop,” he said.

Medlock had arrived in Fayetteville already convinced that the police department’s focus regarding motor vehicles should be on speeding, stop sign/light violations, DWI and reckless driving – moving violations of immediate concern to public safety.

She blew a stop sign. Why was the new Chief upset? It was exactly the type of moving violation that is of immediate concern to public safety.

Stopping drivers for non-moving violations such as equipment failures or expired registration ought to be minimized or avoided altogether, he told his department.

Except, they encoded in law, and police are supposed to uphold the law. Take tail-lights: they give clues to people driving behind them, right? If one is broken, that clue could be late in being seen. That’s why the federal government passed a law requiring the 3rd tail light and that it be higher up in the driver’s viewing field. Expired registration? Perhaps this person shouldn’t be driving that car. Perhaps the brakes failed inspection, meaning it is a danger to other people.

My friend was stopped for a dead tail light. The cop walked up, said, your taillight is out, need to get that fixed. Then “have a good day.” Most people don’t know until someone tells them. Cops would rather not have to do this, because some people have hissy fits (or worse), but, it’s necessary to increase safety on the road, especially with more and more cars. And more and more people paying less attention to the road and more to their phones. I don’t remember complaints from the media about officers pulling people over for using their phones after laws in some places were passed banning the usage in cars.

Numerous studies have shown that Black and Hispanic drivers are disproportionately targeted for traffic stops, and once stopped are more likely to have their cars searched during the stop.

Police and activists agree that these stops are fraught with danger for both citizens and police. As a cop, Medlock knew there was a complicated way to fix this, and a simple one. He went with the simple one: get cops out of the habit of pulling over people unless they needed to do so to protect the safety of others on the road.

So, they see an expired tag and do nothing? How soon till they aren’t supposed to pull people over for other infractions?

In North Carolina, police make about a million traffic stops a year. Half of those, according to Frank Baumgartner, political science professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, are not safety-related stops.

He thinks stopping a driver because of a broken taillight or equipment violation does little for safety. “And it comes with a cost in terms of public trust and confidence in the police.”

In the tech age, it should be simple, as a cop told me: pull them over, tell them the problem, tell them to fix it, send a picture of it being fixed. But, notice, they aren’t really giving anything other than expired tags and taillights. Take those two out, and you still have cops pulling people over for moving violations. And people going wacky instead of just taking the ticket.

The rest is just about trying to paint police as Bad Guys. They might be pulling people over for reasons, because they know something funny is going on.

In Fayetteville from 2013 to 2016, the effects of Medlock’s enforcement directions were easily measurable: stops for non-moving violations went way down; investigative stops went to zero all four years; and stops for speeding increased dramatically.

Meanwhile, focused traffic enforcement for moving violations such as speed or stop/red light violations skyrocketed from 13,000 a year to 46,000 a year in four years.

I wouldn’t mind that, as people blowing stop signs makes me nuts. It’s so dangerous. Of course, other crime has gone way up in Fayetteville, and lots of those other stops could have put a stop to them.

At the end of the day, though, if people don’t like the stops they should ask the city, counties, and states to take those violations off the books.

Read: Liberals Are Super Excited For Police To No Longer Make Traffic Stops »

Posted in NC News | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If It’s Such A Climate Emergency, Why Do So Few Act Like It?

By William Teach April 15, 2021 – 8:13 am

It is a good, and relevant question, but, not one climate cultists really want to answer, because they think words matter more, and want to apply their Beliefs to Other People

‘Words matter’: Numerous news outlets to use ‘climate emergency’ instead of ‘climate change’

Forget climate change. It’s a climate emergency.

The evidence is irrefutable, and now dozens of news outlets worldwide are joining the thousands of scientists who have been clamoring ever more loudly for the world to take note of the existential, self-made threat facing humanity — and act on it.

“Journalism should reflect what science says: the climate emergency is here,” wrote Scientific American senior editor Mark Fischetti, explaining the magazine’s decision to swap out the term “climate change” for “climate emergency.”

If it’s irrefutable, why are these news outlets continuing to use fossil fuels to gather and disseminate the news?

“This idea is not a journalistic fancy,” Fischetti wrote. “We are on solid scientific ground.”

That ground has been laid by myriad experts over the past several decades, including more than 11,000 scientists from 153 countries who in 2019 signed a declaration warning of “untold human suffering” if climate change is not stemmed. The number has since increased to 13,802 scientists and 156 countries, according to the Alliance of World Scientists at Oregon State University.

These same people are not giving up their own use of fossil fuels and making their lives carbon neutral. If your doctor tells you to stop smoking and eat healthier, yet, smells like smoke and is clearly overweight, do you listen to them?

Moreover, at least 1,859 jurisdictions in 33 countries, covering more than 820 million people, have issued climate emergency declarations, according to the monitoring website Climate Emergency Declaration, as Scientific American noted in an earlier op-ed.

That includes Spain, which declared a climate emergency in January of last year; the southern German city of Konstanz, near the Swiss border, which did so in May 2019, according to The Associated Press; the European Union Parliament, as AP reported at the end of 2019, and the U.S.’ own Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling on President Biden’s administration to declare a climate emergency in February of this year, AP reported.

Not to beat a dead horse, but I will because it matters, that’s mostly all they are doing, is declaring it, but not making changes to accord with that belief.

“Why ‘emergency’?” the journalism statement said. “Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately.”

Actions matter more.

Read: If It’s Such A Climate Emergency, Why Do So Few Act Like It? »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Fascist Party To Unveil Bill To Pack The Supreme Court

By William Teach April 15, 2021 – 7:56 am

How many times have you seen a Democrat yammer on about protecting our democracy? That voting matters? That every vote should count? Well, since they can’t get their own way on the Supreme Court, they’ve moved one step closer to implementing their Progressice (nice Fascism) agenda

Democrats to propose legislation expanding the Supreme Court

Several House Democrats are set to unveil legislation Thursday to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court.

Supporters of the proposal plan to hold a news conference on the steps of the Supreme Court building. They include U.S. Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and U.S. Reps. Jerry Nadler and Mondaire Jones, both of New York, and Hank Johnson of Georgia.

Given Democrats’ control of the White House and Senate, the legislation could allow the party to supersede the court’s current conservative majority by “packing” the Court with liberal justices.

Some Republicans quickly derided the proposal.

“Does expanding the Supreme Court count as infrastructure too?” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote on Twitter. (snip)

The legislation will propose expanding the court to 13 justices, from nine, The Intercept reported Wednesday.

The shame of this all is that it shouldn’t matter how many justices serve on the court, because they should be following the Constitution as their only principle, but, Democrat appointees rarely do that. They apply their politics (not that some Republican appointees don’t go off the reservation, usually toward the Democrats opinions). They take an oath to the Constitution. And, the Supreme Court is supposed to be independent from the Legislative and Executive Branches. This would truly make those 4 justices in the back pocket of Biden-Harris.

(Washington Times) The Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869. Prior to that, it fluctuated in size from five to 10 justices. The Constitution does not set a number of justices for the high court.

Why? Because it works. It didn’t go well when FDR tried to pack the court.

Mike Davis, president of the conservative Article III Project, said lawmakers who are part of this effort should be “ashamed” of themselves.

“Democrats who would destroy the independence and legitimacy of the high court must be disavowed as political pariahs by every last one of their colleagues. Packing the Supreme Court would be a declaration of war that could not be undone. President Biden and Democrats in Congress should tread extremely carefully. Packing the Supreme Court is a red line they must not cross. If they actually love their country, they should stand down immediately,” Mr. Davis said.

Except, pretty much every elected Democrat will back this. You might get just enough in the Senate to kill the legislation, but, that’s it. And, if it does make it through, calling it a declaration of war might not be just hyperbole, as this would immediately change the rulings to protect the hardcore Democrat agenda.

Read: Fascist Party To Unveil Bill To Pack The Supreme Court »

Posted in Constitution, Democrats, Dems in Charge: Now What? | 12 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove