Court Orders Shell Oil To Cut Its Carbon Emissions

By William Teach May 29, 2021 – 7:29 am

Shell should start by refusing to sell its products to the Dutch court system. They should ban the members of the court from purchasing any of their products. All this ruling will do is raise prices and cause more problems for consumers. And a ruling in favor of the climate cult is rare, but, the judges are being captured by the cult

Court orders Royal Dutch Shell to cut carbon emissions by 45% by 2030

A court in the Hague has ordered Royal Dutch Shell to cut its global carbon emissions by 45% by the end of 2030 compared with 2019 levels, in a landmark case brought by Friends of the Earth and over 17,000 co-plaintiffs.

The oil giant’s sustainability policy was found to be insufficiently “concrete” by the Dutch court in an unprecedented ruling that will have wide implications for the energy industry and other polluting multinationals.

The Anglo-Dutch company was told it had a duty of care and that the level of emission reductions of Shell and its suppliers and buyers should be brought into line with the Paris climate agreement.

Judge Larisa Alwin said Shell must “at once” reduce its CO2 output, adding that the ruling would have “far-reaching consequences” for the company and may “curb the potential growth of the Shell group”.

Roger Cox, lawyer for Friends of the Earth Netherlands, also known as Milieudefensie, called on organisations across the world to “pick up the gauntlet”, and take legal action to force multinationals to play their full part in tackling the climate emergency.

He said: “This is a turning point in history. This case is unique because it is the first time a judge has ordered a large polluting corporation to comply with the Paris climate agreement. This ruling may also have major consequences for other big polluters.”

Climate cultists can’t win by convincing people, so, they’re using the courts to jam through their cult beliefs. This won’t harm Shell: it will just increase the cost of product. Which means the cost of other goods that are delivered by fossil fueled vehicle, plane, and ship will increase. That’s a win, right?

If Shell played this right, they’d cooperate by first refusing to sell its products to the Dutch government. Let’s see the Dutch government operate. Then by moving their company, all its assets, and all its operations out of the Netherlands. Which means all its tax money goes bye bye, and citizens and companies are left with fewer options for filling their fossil fueled vehicles. Shell will have carbon neutral footprint then, eh? Instead, they’re playing this game

A Shell spokesperson said: “Urgent action is needed on climate change which is why we have accelerated our efforts to become a net-zero emissions energy company by 2050, in step with society, with short-term targets to track our progress.

“We are investing billions of dollars in low-carbon energy, including electric vehicle charging, hydrogen, renewables and biofuels. We want to grow demand for these products and scale up our new energy businesses even more quickly. We will continue to focus on these efforts and fully expect to appeal today’s disappointing court decision.”

Well, good luck in putting yourself out of business.

Read: Court Orders Shell Oil To Cut Its Carbon Emissions »

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

CNN: Say, We Need To Investigate If COVID Was Released

By William Teach May 29, 2021 – 7:13 am

Well, this is a fine howdoyado, considering CNN had been very much in the camp of “stop with your conspiracy theories about COVID, it came from eating a bat or something in the wet market” for the longest time, unwilling to investigate or even consider the notion that it came from that biological research center, because Orange Man Bad. It’s not like it would be the first time something got out. But, now, a bit of a change, and there is a very interesting revelation

We need to know how Covid-19 emerged so we can stop it happening again

Why does the theory that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, leaked from a laboratory in China endure so persistently?

Above all, it isn’t because public, hard, tested evidence is growing at pace.

The theory instead seems to persist mostly because of several massive coincidences.

Attempting to take a middle ground position, but, getting there! It’s hard to get that hard evidence with the Communist government of China stonewalls and the World Health Organization provides cover. And China Joe shuts down investigations

Firstly, Wuhan, where the disease almost certainly began in China, is home to China’s major biosafety level 4 laboratory, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). It, and two other laboratories in Wuhan, were doing research on coronaviruses, some of it in bats. The WIV sequenced the genetic code of the closest-known ancestor in bats to SARS-CoV-2, a virus called RatG13. It is 96.2% of the way identical to the novel coronavirus that caused the pandemic. One of the WIV’s leading researchers, Shi Zhengli, is called the “Bat Lady.”

Just a coincidence.

Secondly, three of the WIV’s staff fell ill in November 2019, just before the known outbreak started, US intelligence reporting has said. They needed hospitalization, the reporting said. (But we don’t know for what disease. We also don’t have access to any samples taken from them when they were ill, or the results of any SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests after they were ill.) The World Health Organization (WHO) report into this issue, relying on Chinese government-supplied data, presented a different conclusion. It said the staff health monitoring program at the three laboratories in Wuhan showed no antibody test positives, or records of Covid-19-type illnesses, in the weeks prior to December 2019.

Relying on Communist China data.

Finally, there’s a third coincidence. The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, key to virus prevention and detection, moved its laboratory in Wuhan on December 2, 2019. The WHO report, written in conjunction with Chinese officials, notes this fact and says it could have been disruptive to a laboratory’s operations. It also notes the lab moved to a location near the Huanan Seafood Market, the exotic animal trade center thought to have played a major role in the virus’ early spread. The move happened just six days before the first patient experienced Covid-19 symptoms, according to China’s account. (He is, the WHO report said, an accountant working for a family company, with no known history of attending crowded events, animal “wet market” contact, or exotic trips to the wilderness. These facts suggest he may have got it in the city, perhaps from another person).

Well, that’s interesting. I hadn’t heard this before, had you? What’s the chance that someone messed up during the move, that an accident occurred? What’s the chance that an accident or something occurred, even releasing it intentionally, versus a worldwide pandemic with millions killed starting because someone ate a bat or pangolin or something?

These three pretty huge coincidences foster the lab-leak theory, and mean it has not yet gone away. Western intelligence officials CNN has spoken to say they cannot “disprove” the idea — or prove it. These coincidences are perhaps why it sits in this hinterland — never permanently debunked, never proven. Their solution is like “Occam’s razor” — the idea that the simplest explanation is the most likely.

But none of it is solid or even compelling evidence that a lab leak occurred. That evidence may exist, and be super-classified within the government that possesses it. But as it is not public, we can’t presume it exists to confirm a bias that China is hiding something terrible.

We can’t prove that it was because someone ate something in a wet market. There’s really zero proof on that.

So what about the other main theory: that the disease emerged from animals, and was transmitted to humans in a natural process?

This “spillover idea” is messier, and also hard to definitively prove. The WHO investigators share the conclusion of most specialists in this field: that the disease most likely came from bats, via another species, known as an “intermediary animal,” and then infected humans.

And no actual proof, just supposition. Which sounds more likely: lab or bat?

The Lab Leak theory has a spin-off conspiracy here. It suggests the RatG13 virus could have been turned into SARS-CoV-2 through deliberate human manipulation, called “gain of function” research. Scientists do this by altering viruses in a laboratory, to learn more about how viruses infect and impact humans. It can be dangerous, and was put on pause in the US briefly under the Obama administration. Some scientists say attributing virus changes to “gain of function” research is an easy explanation often misused to explain any change in a virus that could have occurred through natural, complex processes. These scientists discount its role in forming SARS-CoV-2.

What is the chance that the Chinese communist government was doing this? I know CNN likes to take the side of China, much like the NBA and Hollywood, but, come on.

Amid all the blame, counter-accusations, suspicions and cover-ups, one problem remains for us humans as a species. We really need to know how and why this virus came to be, so we can stop it from happening again.

Well, at least CNN is willing to consider the lab theory at this point. They’ll be very upset when we have the data that China released COVID.

Read: CNN: Say, We Need To Investigate If COVID Was Released »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Wonky Media | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Hotcold Take: We Should Switch To A Four Day Work Week For ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach May 28, 2021 – 3:00 pm

It’s always something with these people. But, they don’t mean getting your normal hours in four days

Need another reason to switch to a 4-day workweek? It helps fight climate change

When the pandemic first forced offices to close and the number of commuters on roads suddenly dropped, the environmental impact was visible in cities like Los Angeles and New Delhi: Smog disappeared as more cars stayed at home. Carbon emissions temporarily fell. A new report looks at how some of the same benefits could come from a shift in schedules if more companies shifted to a four-day work week.

Except, the smog is not “carbon emission/pollution.” It was glorious with cleaner air, though, wasn’t it?

The report, from the 4 Day Week Campaign and the environmental organization Platform London, found that if the U.K. moved to a four-day working week by 2025, emissions could drop by 127 million metric tons, or more than 20%—roughly equivalent to taking the country’s entire fleet of private cars off roads.

Wait for it

“I think for quite a long time now, especially the last couple of years, the benefits of a four-day working week with no loss of pay—in terms of the boost that we’re given in terms of mental health and well-being of workers—has been very obvious and increasingly understood across the board,” says Joe Ryle, a campaigner with the 4 Day Week Campaign, an organization pushing for a 32-hour workweek (with full-time pay) in the U.K. Some businesses are also realizing that a shorter week can boost productivity because workers are more focused and refreshed when they are in the office. “But actually, there’s a whole other side to it,” he says. “It’s also going to be very good for the environment.”

So, they want Government to mandate a 4 day/32 hour work week while forcing companies to pay for 40 hours. What of those who work 40+ hours? Some work way more. Will they be restricted? Will they be compensated?

Longer working hours are also associated with more consumption, adding to the total carbon footprint. With an extra day off, some studies suggest that people would be more likely to spend their time on low-carbon activities like spending time with family, going to a park, volunteering, or walking to do errands rather than driving.

They’ll just have less money to do stuff as they are forced to work less by Government. If anyone thinks a company is going to pay for a free extra day they’re nuts.

Elsewhere in Climate Cult, clearing out the saved articles

U.S. state treasurers warn Kerry not to pressure banks on climate

Treasurers from 15 U.S. states warned U.S. climate envoy John Kerry in a letter this week that they could withdraw assets from any banks that reduce loans to fossil fuel companies, following reports that the Biden administration has pressured financial institutions over such loans.

Yes, the guy who takes lots of fossil fueled flights

Climate crisis inflicting huge ‘hidden costs’ on mental health

The climate crisis is damaging the mental health of hundreds of millions of people around the world but the huge costs are hidden, scientists have warned.

More like climate cultists fearmongering the coming doom is causing this. And Comrade Bernie has a little bit of a hypocrisy issue on climate and capitalism. He loves his very cold rooms and loves private fossil fueled flights

Read: Hotcold Take: We Should Switch To A Four Day Work Week For ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Comrade Sanders, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 28, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an ocean that’s rising at unprecedented rates because Other People drove a fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on an Atlanta mayoral candidate who’s pushing defunding the police having his car stolen, calling the cops.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Governor Of State With Massive Firearms Restrictions Asks “What The Hell Is Wrong With Us?”

By William Teach May 28, 2021 – 10:30 am

There’s nothing wrong with me. I’m not using my firearms to go on a rampage. How about you?

Following San Jose mass shooting, California Gov. Gavin Newsom asks: ‘What the hell is wrong with us?’

In the wake of Wednesday’s deadly shooting at a light-rail yard in San Jose, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) again called for stricter gun control policies, asking, “What the hell is going on in the United States of America? What the hell is wrong with us?”

Authorities say a gunman opened fire at the Valley Transportation Authority building during a shift change on Wednesday morning, killing eight and injuring several others; the shooter died by suicide. This was one of the deadliest gun incidents to ever happen in Northern California, Politico reports.

“When are we going to come to grips with this?” Newsom asked during a news conference. “When are we going to put down our arms, literally and figuratively, our politics, the stale rhetoric, finger-pointing, all the hand-wringing, consternation that produces nothing except more fury and frustration, more scenes like this repeated over and over and over again.” He said it is time to “take a little damn responsibility, all of us,” and “move beyond the platitudes and usual rhetoric” that come after a mass shooting.

I have zero responsibility. I don’t know the shooter, I didn’t see him getting crazy, I didn’t sell him the gun. California has some of the strictest laws on firearms in the country, and has most of everything that the gun grabbers want. The next step is simply taking guns away, the “Australian solution.” What do we know about the gunman?

The gunman has been identified as Samuel James Cassidy, 57, a longtime resident of San Jose. Cassidy had worked for the Valley Transportation Authority for about 20 years, initially as a mechanic and then more recently as a substation maintainer. Before joining the transit agency, he was employed as a mechanic at a San Jose Mazda dealership.

Although the FBI and local authorities continue to dig into his background, his ex-wife, neighbors and court records paint a picture of a man who often exhibited violent and aggressive behavior and had complained about being mistreated at work. In a 2009 court filing, an ex-girlfriend of his accused Cassidy of rape, sexual assault and “enraged” mood swings fueled by alcohol.

Yet, California did not ban him from owning firearms. And “The three guns were legally obtained and registered, FBI San Francisco special agent in charge Craig Fair told CNN.”

The gunman was armed with three semi-automatic handguns and 32 high-capacity magazines, the Sheriff’s Office said Thursday afternoon. The department had initially reported Thursday morning that the gunman had 11 pistol magazines each holding 12 rounds, making them illegal high-capacity magazines in California, which mandates 10-round limits under state law that is being challenged in court.

Wait, a criminal didn’t follow the law? He was questioned in 2016 by Customs and Border Protection upon returning from the Philippines about workplace hatred.” And he had books about terrorism and fear and manifestos. He also apparently had the precursors to bombs, which started a fire at his house. It’s presumed he intended to set a bomb off after going on his murder spree.

So, a lunatic with anger issues, yet, we’re supposed to Blame all gun owners. At least they can’t blame the scary assault rifles, eh?

Read: Governor Of State With Massive Firearms Restrictions Asks “What The Hell Is Wrong With Us?” »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs, Democrats | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

California Is Keeping Apartment Dwellers From Getting World Healing EVs Or Something

By William Teach May 28, 2021 – 7:04 am

Interesting. It’s apparently government causing problems, not that EVs are very expensive and unaffordably to most citizens

How California Is Keeping Electric Vehicles Out Of Reach For Apartment-Dwellers

electric vehicleBlessed with scenic Pacific coast drives and cursed with smothering smog and drought-fueled wildfires, California was primed to lead the transition away from the internal combustion engine. Nearly half of the electric vehicles sold in the United States each year are sold in the Golden State.

But if you’re among the millions of Californians who live in an apartment or condo complex, swapping a gas-powered automobile for an electric one can be a challenge.

That’s because the state requires just 10% of parking spaces in multifamily garages to include the circuitry needed to set up an electric vehicle charger. Only a fraction actually have the outlet and equipment needed to plug a car in, so a renter would need their landlord to hire an electrician to complete the setup if they actually wanted to use it.

Well, they could pay for it, right? Ask the landlord and say “I’ll pay for the equipment and installation.” Why does personal responsibility never come into play?

Now the state agency that sets building codes wants to require 40% of spaces to have at least that basic infrastructure and 5% of those to have the full suite of equipment and wiring needed to service an electric vehicle.

And now already skyhigh housing costs in California (#2 housing costs in nation, which cause apartments to go high. Only Hawaii is higher) will go higher, as the owners pass on the costs.

But electric vehicle advocates say the state’s proposal doesn’t go far enough, as it would leave the vast majority of residents in multifamily units ― the fastest-growing type of residence in a state whose population infamously outstrips available housing ― without access. And, they argue, it risks slowing the adoption of those vehicles in the next five years, which is when state and federal policymakers have said they should dominate new car sales.

Of course they say this: it’s not their money being spent to comply with the requirement. Will this be a requirement for townhomes and multifamily homes where the homeowners are essentially the landlords?

But the building codes designed today won’t come into force until 2023. Given the time it takes to build, inspect and rent new apartment buildings, it won’t affect real lives and car-buying decisions until 2025 at the earliest.

By then, the International Energy Agency projected in a landmark report this month, the world needs to be just 10 years away from ending all sales of gas-powered automobiles ― or else doom the planet to warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius, an average that spells catastrophic changes. Housing that isn’t designed for that electrified future will require costly retrofits down the road.

It’s an equity problem, too. Tenants in multifamily units are disproportionately Black and Latino, groups that struggle to buy homes in a state where single-family houses make up two-thirds of residences, real estate industry data show. And the state has required builders to equip 100% of new single-family housing with charging circuitry for the past six years.

See, it’s also a raaaaacism problem. These people are all nuts. Anyway, I’m going to stop here, it’s a long, long screed.

Read: California Is Keeping Apartment Dwellers From Getting World Healing EVs Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Energy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

House To Introduce Bills Investigating Origins Of COVID

By William Teach May 28, 2021 – 6:49 am

The Senate has passed their bill requiring China Joe to declassify and release the results of their COVID origins investigation. Here’s what the House is up to

House bills targeting China would launch coronavirus ‘origins’ probe, allow victims’ families to sue Beijing

U.S. House members plan to introduce two bipartisan bills Friday that address the origins of the coronavirus pandemic and would allow victims’ families to sue China.

The first bill, the “Made in America Emergency Preparedness Act,” would establish a 9/11-style bipartisan commission to investigate how the pandemic started. It is being introduced by five Democrats and five Republicans.

The second bill, dubbed the “Never Again International Outbreak Prevention Act,” calls for allowing families of coronavirus victims to sue China by stripping sovereign immunity from it and any other countries “that have intentionally misled the international community on the outbreak.” It will be introduced by U.S. Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., and Conor Lamb, D-Pa.

“In response to this current crisis, we must never again find ourselves caught off-guard, unable to protect our communities,” a press release announcing the first bill says. “We should never again see nearly 600,000 American lives lost at risk and day to day life turned upside down.”

Along with investigating the origin of the virus, the panel proposed by the first bill would also look into the response by the U.S. government and the private sector and determine precautionary steps to take for the future.

While bipartisan, do either have a shot in getting a vote soon? Will Pelosi allow this? Will other Democrats vote for them? Will Biden try and scuttle them?

Unfortunately, both have the opportunity to end up being bloviating, scapegoating (not against China, of course, but, mostly Orange Man Bad), grandstanding, with little reward on what actually happened.

The commission would recommend to President Biden what personal protective equipment and other goods would be necessary to address a national emergency, requiring the items to be manufactured in the U.S.

Um, how much can be made in the U.S. with all the restrictions and high associated costs? Actually sounds like it could end up being a graft situation, overpaying companies and lawmakers getting some kickback. Being Congress, there’s no chance of this being on the up and up, right? Anyhow, I wonder if the investigation will include Democrats wasting time with a stupid impeachment while COVID was growing, along with so many saying “it’s no big deal, get out to your local Chinese restaurant, get on with your lives”?

“As we have seen from COVID-19, the Chinese Communist Party has been intentionally and maliciously misleading the rest of the world about the scope and spread of the novel coronavirus,” Fitzpatrick said.

He added that other international organizations like the WHO must be held accountable for their “inaction” on the pandemic.

Inaction? How about for protecting China? I’m not expecting either to even make it out of committee.

Read: House To Introduce Bills Investigating Origins Of COVID »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | Comments Off on House To Introduce Bills Investigating Origins Of COVID | Trackback URL

Bummer: The UK Is Having A Tough Time Forcing People To Switch To Heat Pumps

By William Teach May 27, 2021 – 3:00 pm

It’s not like they are a lot more expensive than natural gas and electricity home and water heating units, right? Why aren’t all the Warmists rushing out to get them?

The UK is sabotaging its own plan to decarbonize heating

Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHPs) are seen as a crucial tool in the fight against climate change; one that the UK has decided to loudly champion. The technology, which can provide hot water and space heating for homes, is far more efficient that the natural gas systems it’s intended to replace. In November 2020, the country announced a target of 600,000 heat pump installations, per year, by 2028. But the way that the UK currently funds its renewable energy projects means that, for many, adopting a heat pump is not financially viable.

Huh.

And these devices, which use electricity rather than gas to run, are significantly more energy efficient than traditional electric heating. “Heating your home is between 60 to-70 percent of your energy bill,” says Matt Clemow, CEO of Igloo Energy. But some heat pumps, including the one that Clemow has in his own home, are significantly more energy-efficient than natural gas.

There are, however, challenges to heat pumps, including the fact that they require a very different operation pattern to traditional gas boilers. Because they output a lower temperature, they need to run continuously. “You generally don’t have that on-off period in the same way,” said Clemow, “it’s more background heat.” This is, broadly, how most air conditioning systems work, something that very few Brits use at home.

What’s providing the electricity?

Because of the different climates and energy mixes, it’s not easy to map the European situation onto the American one. The federal government does, however, offer a $300 tax credit for householders who install Energy Star-certified ASHPs, offering more generous discounts for ground source heat pumps like Alphabet’s Dandelion, which draw and circulate heat from underground. Individual states offer their own incentives, dependent on the system you install and the applicant’s income.

$300, you American folks! $300!

But encouraging householders to make the switch from their natural gas-fired boilers is going to be difficult. The initial cost is far higher than the price of just installing a new gas-fired boiler, which will put off many would-be adopters. Then, there is the way the UK structures its energy levies, with a far greater burden on electricity over natural gas. Charges levied onto the sale of electricity in the UK include paying for the cost of the country’s smart meter rollout, bankrolling renewable energy projects and offering cash incentives for people to adopt home energy efficiency technologies.

Far higher

A new heat pump can cost between $3,875 to $7,625 depending on the size of your home, energy efficient ratings, brand name, and the type of heat pump you install. A mini split ductless heat pump with 4 multi zone indoor air handler units could cost up to $10,000 to install. 

You can get an electric or gas one installed for much less. In pure fairness, a heat pump is vastly more efficient that an electric or gas furnace/water heater. But, you are pretty much having to replace the one already there that you already paid for. Back to original article

The sales pitch for many clean(er) technologies often focuses on the total cost of ownership being dramatically lower, even if the initial outlay is higher. If you’ve ever spoken to a Tesla owner, you’ll likely have heard about how little each vehicle costs to run. Similarly, when speaking with solar panel installers, the talk is often about how much money you stand to make (or at least save) compared to your existing solution. That conversation, says Clemow, is the wrong way to sell people on the future of heat pumps.

Well, yeah, because most people cannot afford Teslas, and most people don’t have $10k or more lying around to put in solar panels that will most likely never repay themselves.

And, on the financial side, Lord says that the UK needs to look at ways to tax the carbon use of natural gas, with rebates available for the poorest. But he added that it’s not just the running costs that need examination, but how these retrofit projects are financed in general. He compared the average price of a mortgage, currently under 3 percent, with consumer bank loans, which are often three times more expensive. “If you could fund your heat pump purchase for one and a half percent, rather than nine, that would change the economics quite significantly.”

If Brits don’t comply, they’ll just be taxed out the ying yang. Which is already happening for electricity. I’m not against them: just like with EVs, it should be a choice, not government Forcing people to comply.

Read: Bummer: The UK Is Having A Tough Time Forcing People To Switch To Heat Pumps »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 27, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful tropical forest sucking carbon from the air, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Political Hat, with a post on North Carolina vs. Critical Race Theory.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Laugh Riot: Democrats Consider AOC Getting Restraining Order Against Marjorie Taylor Green

By William Teach May 27, 2021 – 10:30 am

It’s hilarious when a rhetorical bomb thrower is upset about someone doing the same against her

Democrats consider the possibility of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seeking a restraining order against Marjorie Taylor Greene

Top Democrats in Congress have discussed whether Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez could seek a restraining order against GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene after the Republican shouted at her colleague in the Capitol earlier this month, Politico reported on Tuesday.

Democratic sources told Politico that Ocasio-Cortez would likely need to seek the restraining order herself.

A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez didn’t immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment on Tuesday.

Greene has repeatedly targeted Ocasio-Cortez over the past few years. In 2019, Greene and several of her associates taunted Ocasio-Cortez’s staffers and vandalized the congresswoman’s guest book outside her Capitol office.

On May 12, the conservative Georgia lawmaker chased Ocasio-Cortez down a hallway as the two left the House chamber and accused her of supporting terrorists and “radical socialism,” according to two Washington Post reporters who witnessed the incident.

“You don’t care about the American people,” Greene shouted at Ocasio-Cortez, according to The Post. “Why do you support terrorists and antifa?”

A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez urged congressional leaders to “take real steps to make Congress a safe, civil place” after the May incident.

We’ve all watched the Moonbattery of AOC (and her Squad) since she took office in 2018. Remember her taking over Nancy Pelosi’s office? She starts things with Republicans, then complains when they respond, even claiming she’s being attacked in a sexist or racist manner. She can dish it out, but not take it. And perhaps Greene does take it too far, but, hey, it’s a legitimate question to ask why AOC has been supporting Hamas and being anti-Jew and anti-Israel, as well as supporting Antifa. Greene should ask AOC why she’s still taking fossil fueled trips when she’s the sponsor of the Green New Deal.

Read: Laugh Riot: Democrats Consider AOC Getting Restraining Order Against Marjorie Taylor Green »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove