Crossed state line, intent to kill None/False Yes Yes
Killed three black False Yes Yes
Was not attacked False Yes Yes
Decision wrong Based on Law and Facts Yes Yes
Should not have been prosecuted Based on facts and
evidence no Yes Yes
+++
Once You Read These Kyle Rittenhouse Lies, It Sort of Explains the Left's Meltdown Over the Case By Matt Vespa
+++
+++
I find it ironic radical Democrats and their mass media lackeys racialize everything and then reject a decision based on fact and law because it goes against their biased rush to judge mentality. Their goal of creating discord, of attacking the rule of law and accusing an entire white race of being guilty is aimed at tearing our society apart. Obama must be gloating, as he sits in his various mansions, that he was successful in transforming our nation. Biden has been a hypocrite and racist for decades and, like Obama, jumped at the opportunity of likening this entire tragedy to white supremacy.
It is comforting to watch as a tide of rejection builds against those who want to destroy our nation. First the defeat of Virginia's Governor, followed by election results in New Jersey and now the upholding of the rule of law by a jury that deserves praise for the verdict they rendered against tremendous intimidation efforts on the part of radical and purposeful false reporting by their mass media brethren.
The road is long and uphill but, at least, the journey has begun. The jury, to my mind, still remains open as to whether our nation can eventually survive the onslaught and return to being the nation our founding fathers intended it to be and has been for over 2 plus centuries.
+++++++
Corrupt elections are the last objective of radical Marxists and will/have become our most dangerous last straw.
While I am on the subject of Marxists, permit me to expand my thinking about why we are where we are. There are many reasons and I will highlight a few that I believe are the most critical.
1) The most effective way to make an impact is to accuse others of what you, yourself, do and intimidate them so they fear to respond.
2) Progressives, radicals, Democrats have perfected the art of hypocrisy, race baiting and weaponization of just about everything conceivable. They have learned how to change the meaning of words in order to radicalize previous meanings that were acceptable. An example would be calling a riot a peaceful demonstration for racial equity (equality) like the one involving Rittenhouse in Wisconsin.
3) The next important step in destroying a democratic society based on freedom of speech, freedom of religion, law and order, trustworthy elections and human productivity is to infiltrate societal institutions pertaining to education, entertainment and mass media, at all levels. While this is occurring make sure you highlight and attack any negative aspect of that society's culture and history.
Everything is done through repetition, intimidation, hypocrisy, political weaponization, taxation, government expansion, power and lying ( think Obama, Pelosi, Waters, Scheer et al.)
These are the weapons Marxists, socialists, radical blacks within the Democrat Party and societal leftists have perfected and employ. There is power in numbers so create BLM's etc.
4) Replace education with indoctrination, starting both at the lowest and highest levels. Infiltrate, by running for election to positions on school boards, libraries, university faculties and administrations, mass media (particularly news related) and political offices at all levels.
When and where possible, weaken the nation's military capability through diminished funding and create discord pertaining to morale and discipline. Increase and or manipulate taxes in order to widen disparity between haves and have nots while funding the expansion, growth and power of government. Weaken the value of the nation's currency and finally make the lower socio economic class increasingly dependent on government through expanded welfare benefits. Weaken the family structure upon which all democracies rest.
5) When it comes to law and order, riot, destroy and pillage and do so in numbers that intimidate law abiding citizens. Use any opportunity of police mis-behaviour to take to the streets while pressing for their defunding and protest the right of citizens to bear arms.
6) Finally, the constant emphasis on repetition, hypocrisy and intimidation will cause exhaustion and weaken resistance and the more outrageous the disruptive and seditious acts the better.
Law abiding citizens are among the easiest to control and intimidate. Dependent citizens are the most vulnerable to deprivation and politicians and office holders are the most likely to throw their lot in with the aggressors, turn feckless and cave when threatened with the loss of power and financial benefits.
The same applies to corporate types because of their desire to appease when confronted by accusations of racism. Witness A T & T, Delta, Coca Cola etc.
Both parties are to blame . The Democrats for their aggression, Republicans for their passivity. American are to blame because, as Ben Franklin was alleged to have said, we failed to keep our republic.
+++++++++++++++++++
Judicial Watch Warns 14 Counties in Five States to Clean Voter Lists or Face Federal Lawsuits
In important news, Judicial Watch sent official notice letters to election officials in 14 counties and five states—Arkansas, California, Illinois, New York, and Oregon—notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
The letters detail how these states’ own reported data show that their counties removed an “absurdly low” or “impossible” number of inactive voter registrations under key provisions of the NVRA. The letters threaten federal lawsuits unless the violations are corrected in a timely fashion.
The NVRA requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the NVRA requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst., 138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
States are required by federal law to report data concerning their removal programs to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Every few years the EAC publishes this data as part of a report it provides to Congress. The most recent report and accompanying datasets were released in August of this year.
The data show that many U.S. counties reported mere handfuls of removals—and often no removals—of registrants who failed to respond to an address confirmation and failed to vote for two consecutive elections. To identify counties that are chronically behind in removing outdated registrations, we looked at the last four years of reported data, from November 2016 through November 2020. We found that some of the largest counties in the country reported absurdly low removal numbers under the NVRA’s statutory removal procedure for change of address during that period. The 14 counties receiving notice letters, the size of their registration lists, and the NVRA removals they reported are:
| County | Total voter registrations in Nov. 2020 | 4-year total of registrations removed after notice and 2 elections |
| San Bernardino County, Calif. | 1,294,038 | 14 |
| Sacramento County, Calif. | 1,049,495 | 0 |
| Contra Costa County, Calif. | 735,818 | 1 |
| Fresno County, Calif. | 573,873 | 2 |
| Stanislaus County, Calif. | 356,744 | 2 |
| Solano County, Calif. | 338,764 | 4 |
| Kings County (Brooklyn), N.Y. | 1,735,372 | 0 |
| Queens County, N.Y. | 1,366,759 | 0 |
| New York County (Manhattan), N.Y. | 1,250,793 | 2 |
| Nassau County, N.Y. | 1,089,467 | 0 |
| Bronx County, N.Y. | 867,716 | 1 |
| Richmond County (Staten Island), N.Y. | 344,375 | 0 |
| Multnomah County (Portland), Ore. | 571,383 | 5 |
| Lane County, Ore. | 274,054 | 2 |
| Total | 11,848,651 | 33 |
Robert Popper, our senior attorney and director of our voting integrity efforts, observed that, “About 10% of Americans move every year. Those counties should generate hundreds of thousands of cancelled registrations. There is simply no way to comply with federal law while removing so few outdated registrations under its key provision.”
Popper, formerly Deputy Chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, emphasized that these numbers come directly from state reports to the EAC.
We also sent notice letters threatening lawsuits against statewide election officials in Arkansas and Illinois on the ground that many counties in those states reported similarly low numbers of statutory removals.
Once again, we are leading the charge for clean voter rolls and election integrity. These letters are just the beginning of another sweep, in federal court if necessary, to clean voter rolls throughout the country.
As you know, in the past our actions have led to a number of voter roll cleanups and successful NVRA lawsuits.
A 2020 letter from us to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania led to the removal of 69,000 outdated registrations. In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld a voter roll cleanup program that resulted from our settlement of a federal lawsuit with Ohio. Kentucky began cleaning up hundreds of thousands of old registrations in 2019 after it too entered into a consent decree in 2018 to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit. California also settled an NVRA lawsuit with us and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls.
In 2020, we sued North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Colorado for failing to clean their voter rolls.
In October 2020, we released a study that found 353 counties nationwide that had more voter registrations than citizens old enough to vote, i.e., counties where registration rates exceed 100%. Based on this research, in 2020, a federal court ordered the State of Maryland to produce complete voter registration records for Montgomery County that include the registered voters’ dates of birth.
In September 2020, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union (ICU) and three of its officers, after Illinois state officials refused to allow them to obtain a copy of the state’s voter registration database. In June 2021, a federal court ruled the lawsuit could proceed.
We expect to take other action soon in other states, so be sure to stay tuned!
Biden Administration Illegally Censored Afghanistan Reports?
The Biden surrender in Afghanistan was a catastrophe, and it was deadly for many Americans. Also, the Biden administration may have broken the law to hide details of the consequences of Biden’s decision-making.
We received 119 pages of records from the office of the Special Inspector General For Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which show Special Inspector General John Sopko’s opposition to the Biden administration’s order to remove Internet access to hundreds of pages of public reports on the weaponry and training the U.S. provided to Afghan security forces.
Judicial Watch obtained the records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request sent on September 13, 2021, for records related to the scrubbing of reports about Afghanistan from the SIGAR web site.
On August 16, 2021, at 3:18 p.m., one day after the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan’s capital Kabul, Carole Clay, an official at the State Department’s Bureau of the Comptroller and Global Financial Services, emails SIGAR official Matt Dove to inform him of the State Department’s “unprecedented request” to SIGAR “to suspend large portions of your website and public access to reports and records:
We request urgent assistance in identifying and temporarily removing (and potentially redacting on a longer term basis) all potentially sensitive and identifying information on U.S. government assistance programs/projects in Afghanistan. A great many of your historical publications contain extensive details about activities and partners that could put individuals at risk in the current environment.
***
We are also making requests to the GAO and OIG communities to assist in this effort. Because SIGAR is probably the most extensive source for vendor and other information in Afghanistan through the information available for your website, it might be easiest to disable the website functionality for accessing reports and other publications and notifications. Obviously we request this as soon as possible.”
Dove responds at 3:43 p.m. and includes Sopko and others: “Thanks Carol and appreciate the chat.”
Mr. Sopko, Gene, and John,
***
Bottom Line: State thinks some of the information in our reports (think Afghan companies/contract information) could put individuals at heightened risk given recent developments in Afghanistan. From my perspective, scrubbing OUR reports would be onerous and not timely (consider the work to just scrub our published financial audits). One option may be to temporarily disable certain portions of the website while the dust settles in Afghanistan and we decide on a long‐term solution—I am not sure the implication of such action given our Congressional mandate to make our reports public, though. This decision is obviously above my paygrade. For what it is worth, my advice would be to consider working with State on this; State is already taking action websites it/USAID controls and the other OIGs/GAO may be taking similar action. I am standing by to move out as instructed or to pass the ball to you for action.
On August 16, 2021, at 4:06 p.m. Sopko writes to SIGAR staff: “Do not take anything down until we receive an official request in writing”
At 4:15 p.m., Sopko notifies Dove that Clay’s approval of removing the reports is “not sufficient. I want it from the secretary or deputy secretary or as the minimum her boss. She is a mere office director. What is the basis of her conclusion that reports that have been public for years are now causing a risk. I repeat do not pull anything down until we get a better and more authoritative request.”
In an email to SIGAR staff, also on August 16, Sopko reiterates his opposition to removing the reports:
Let me repeat. Do not do anything on her request until and unless we receive something in writing from her boss or a senior political appointee. You can advise her if your prior mistake I [sic] agreeing without first clearing it with the IG. Pulling old public documents make no sense since they have been available for years. It also violates the IG act.
At 4:51 p.m. on August 16, Dove writes to Clay: “The IG would like a formal request from the Comptroller, or above, that outlines the request, the reason for the request, and how/why the Department came to the conclusion that reports that have already been made publicly available now pose a new/heightened risk. Standing by to chat if you’d like to discuss.”
In an August 18, 2021, email to SIGAR Deputy IG Eugene Aloise, Dove notes that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) removed over 400reports from its website:
FYSA, I just talked to Carole Clay at State (the originator of this request). As I mentioned when this all first came up, State was working with GAO/IGs to get them to take similar action.
GAO agreed (as you and I did). Since the request on Monday, GAO has temporarily pulled 424 reports dealing with Afghanistan down from its site.
I thought that would further confirm the sound reasoning for our action.
On August 18, 2021, Sopko notes to Clay and others, that scrubbing the SIGAR website of public reports would be a “violation of the IG Act.” After a plea from top State Department officials, the reports were removed from the SIGAR site:
Carole, this is a highly unusual request without any explanation or justification for why you are requesting that we review and delete certain documents that have been posted on our web site — all in violation of the IG Act [see here]. Many of the records you are talking about have been up on our web for 10 or more years and my IT people tell me even if we delete them they are still out there in the internet since there are numerous programs readily available that regularly sweep and capture such material. I would prefer someone at State who is a political appointee explain in writing why you are making such a request as well as what is the basis of the threat and how this very labor intensive request will accomplish anything other than waste taxpayer dollars. John Sopko, SIGAR
On August 19, 2021, the State Department’s Comptroller Jeffrey Mounts writes to Sopko, claiming that it was necessary to remove the reports from federal websites over concern for “the welfare of vendors and individuals who have conducted work with the Department and who have yet to exit Afghanistan:”
Dear Mr. Sopko:
The Department of State is concerned about the welfare of vendors and individuals who have conducted work with the Department and who have yet to exit Afghanistan. Identifying information regarding these individuals is well documented among your audit, inspection, and financial audits/costs incurred audit reports. The Department formally requests that you temporarily suspend website access to these reports until these individuals can safely exit the country.
We acknowledge that the information has already been made publicly available, but we have reason to believe that this week’s events represent extraordinary circumstances of heightened risk and that temporarily removing access to reports with identifying information could possibly shield some of these individuals from harm. The potential benefit of keeping State partners out of harm’s way during these evacuations far exceeds the temporary loss of access to SI GAR reports, and we hope you will help us do what we can to make the current situation safer for our partners.
On August 31, a spokesperson for SIGAR admitted to the media that the agency pulled reports offline: “In recent days, some SIGAR reports have been temporarily removed from the agency’s public website due to ongoing security concerns in accordance with guidance received from the U.S. Department of State. This is in line with actions taken by other U.S. federal agencies and is out of an abundance of caution.”
These extraordinary emails document a cover-up and unprecedented government censorship to protect Joe Biden from further humiliation over his surrender in Afghanistan.
Secret Service Travel Cost $2,252,600.50 For President Biden
When the president travels, he takes security with him, and it costs big money, but the government isn’t keen on publicizing the costs of presidential security.
So Judicial Watch digs and gets the facts.
We just obtained records from the Secret Service in response to FOIA requests for all records concerning the use of U.S. Government funds to provide security and/or any other services to President Biden and any companions. These records detail Secret Service travel costs of $2,252,600.50 for President Joe Biden through August 8 for travel to Delaware and other domestic locations.
The Secret Service travel records show:
- Biden’s August 6-8, 2021, trip to Wilmington, Delaware, cost $176,183.00 in hotels; $18,652.00 in car rentals; $24,322.39 in air/rail travel for a total of $219,157.39
- Biden’s July 23-25, 2021, weekend trip to Wilmington cost $88,575.00 in hotels; $7,378.00 in car rentals; $14,319.69 in air/rail travel for a total of $110,272.69
- Biden also took a trip to Wilmington earlier in July from July 9-11, 2021. That trip cost $74,289.00 in hotels; $23,727.72 in car rentals; $27,561.53 in air/rail travel for a total of $125,578.25
- Biden’s July 3, 2021, trip to Michigan to celebrate progress against COVID-19 cost $151,395.70 in hotels; $18,992.00 in car rentals; $9,388.26 In air/rail travel for a total of $179,775.96
- Biden’s June 18-20, 2021 trip to Wilmington cost $158,818.70 in hotels; $24,475.00 in car rentals; $19,896.21 in air/rail travel for a total of $203,189.91
- Biden’s Delaware trips from January 20, 2021, to June 4, 2021, cost $1,125,646.50 in hotels; $10,893.40 in car rentals; $159,966.28 in air/rail travel for a total of $1,296,506.18
- Biden’s April 29, 2021 trip to Atlanta to celebrate his first 100 days in office cost $11,141.00 in hotels; $22,581.30 in car rentals; $47,659.56 on air/rail travel for a total of $81,384.86
The Air Force has so far failed to respond to requests for information on Air Force One travel costs for these and other Biden trips. And the Secret Service has not yet provided records for other Biden weekend travel to Delaware.
The costs of presidential travel and security is of obvious public interest. It is frustrating that after years of litigation through two presidential administrations, the Secret Service and Air Force are still stonewalling the costs of presidential travel.
Until next week …
The post Biden Cover-Up Exposed! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The political tectonic plates are shifting whether Democrats realize it or not:
How the Democrats could split
Both parties are more fractured than we think
BY ERIC KAUFMANN
With states, cities and even neighborhoods lining up to secede, with all signs of a common culture slowly dissipating, it’s become commonplace to assume that the United States has never been so divided. This is mirrored in the increasing polarisation of the Democrats and Republicans: few are willing to switch their vote from one election to the next.
But the blocs aren’t monolithic. Hairline cracks at the margin of each coalition foreshadow the defections that often decide elections.
That, at least, is the implication of a new report from the Pew Research Center. According to its findings, the Democrats are divided by cultural issues such as critical race theory — look at how many of them flocked to Glenn Youngkin in Virginia — while the GOP are split over economic questions. Indeed, it’s all too easy to forget that an important minority of Democratic voters is patriotic, worried about cancel culture, and wants border control and strong policing. Likewise, a significant bloc of Republican voters is sceptical of banks and large corporations and wants them to pay higher taxes.
These observations echo the analyses of David Shor, Michael Lind, Lee Drutman and others: that the median voter leans Left on the economy and Right on culture. The serious challenge for both parties, then, is whether they can resist influential factions in their respective parties: for the Democrats, that’s the AOC-Elizabeth Warren progressive caucus; for the Republicans, the Paul Ryan-Mitch McConnell corporate tax-cut wing.
Drawing on a large representative sample of Americans, Pew has developed a nine-cluster typology of voters, including four Republican and four Democratic categories, in addition to one in the middle. Clusters group people’s answers to a large number of questions by the degree to which their responses correlate. For example, if people who support Black Lives Matter tend to support higher immigration and higher taxes, then those three questions can be reduced to one measure. If, however, there is a group of people who support the first two but not the third policy, that becomes a separate cluster.
Ignoring the less distinctive middle three clusters of the Pew report yields six groupings: three for each of the two main parties. For Republicans, ‘Faith and Flag Conservatives’ are on the Right of pretty much every question. ‘Committed Conservatives’ are more moderate, with a final category, ‘Populist Right’, who are conservative on immigration, progressivism and race, but moderate on economics and somewhat centrist on religion. ‘Faith and Flag Conservatives’ tend to be older, while ‘Populist Right’ voters are distinguished by lower levels of education and religiosity.
Among Democrats, the ‘Progressive Left’ are very Left-wing on essentially all issues, while the ‘Establishment Liberals’ are a more moderate group. ‘Democratic Mainstays’ are Left-wing on economics, but centrist on cultural issues such as immigration or cancel culture. The ‘Outsider Left’, meanwhile, is largely made up of voters who opted for Biden but are frustrated with the party and its leaders. Of these, the ‘Progressive Left’ make up just 12% of Democratic voters and are the whitest Democratic cluster, at 68%. They are also younger: the share of Progressive Leftists among Democrats under 30 is 18% compared to just 8% among the over 50s.
On the face of it, splitting the two parties into these groupings reveals where the two parties are most strongly united. Across the four Democratic clusters, for example, 75% or more generally support higher taxes for high earners and say big business earns too much profit, while 85% support Black Lives Matter. On the other hand, more than 80% of Republicans oppose BLM; a similar proportion believe that government assistance to the poor does more harm than good, creating welfare dependency. These are the issues which unify each party’s coalition.
More interesting, however, are the fissures that divide them, presenting opportunities for the other party to poach supporters and win the tight contests that mark the current electoral era. This is most clear with the ‘Populist Right’ Republicans and ‘Democratic Mainstay’ Democrats.
Figure 1, above, adapted from Pew’s report, illustrates the responses to two statements. The first highlights threats to free speech: “People being too easily offended by things others say is a major problem in the country today.” The second concerns hate speech: “People saying things that are very offensive to others is a major problem in the country today.”
Notice that all four Republican groups lie inside the red circle in the top left quadrant. This means that most Republicans, more than three-quarters of most GOP clusters, think there is a problem with free speech while only a minority think there is too much offensive speech.
On the other hand, the blue circle includes clusters in both right-hand quadrants; they are less closely aligned. Indeed, despite what a number of progressive politicians would have you think, some 81% of the ‘Democratic Mainstay’ cluster believe people are too easily offended, aligning them with Republican opinion. Nor is this a small minority: this group makes up 28% of the Democratic coalition — and is older, less educated and relatively Black and Hispanic. It voted heavily for Biden in the primaries, but is much cooler toward candidates like Sanders or Warren.
It represents, therefore, an important target group for the Republicans. As Glenn Youngkin’s victory in Virginia revealed, culture war issues can act as an important wedge issue for the GOP, making it imperative for the Democrats to put distance between themselves and unpopular progressive causes. And the ‘Democratic Mainstay’ group diverges from the small ‘Progressive Left’ wing in more ways than one. On increasing legal immigration, 63% of Progressive Leftists agree, but only 28% of Democratic Mainstays do; 71% of the first group think American institutions are systematically biased and must be rebuilt, but only 38% of the latter agree.
Meanwhile, the Right is also riven with its own divisions. The biggest outlier is the ‘Populist Right’ cluster which makes up a sizeable 23% of Republican voters. Its members were more likely to say Trump was the best president in recent times rather than Reagan, whereas other Republican clusters either split or favoured Reagan. 87% of this relatively less educated and less religious group say “the economic system in this country unfairly favours powerful interests”, and more than half want higher taxes on people earning over $400,000 a year.
Crucially, this puts them at odds with most Republican voters — and in the company of most Democrats. Here, then, lies an opportunity for the Democrats: if they can peel away populist Right-wing voters turned off by country-club Republicanism, they can split the GOP and flip some Trump voters while uniting their own ranks.
Similarly, the relatively old and evangelical ‘Faith and Flag Conservatives’ cluster is also distinct in its religious Americanism. Among its members, 75% say the “Government should support religious values and beliefs”, whereas fewer than 30% of Republicans outside this cluster agree. On same-sex marriage and abortion this group is more than 20 points more socially conservative than other Republican groups.
So if Republicans shift too far toward religious conservatism, they will open an opportunity for Democrats. But while Pew’s findings reveal that the Republicans are more fragmented than many would expect, it is still the case that the Democrats should be more concerned. For ultimately, Pew’s research reinforces the conclusions of More in Common’s recent Hidden Tribes report. Using data from 2018, Hidden Tribes identified a heavily white 8% ‘Progressive Activist’ segment of the population that was Left-wing on identity issues, unconcerned with free speech and highly active on social media. Pew’s report finds a similar segment: the 6% ‘Progressive Left’ group, who share the same elite, young and white social profile that David Shor and James Carville warn is too dominant among Democratic staffers.
In both surveys, a much larger group of moderate Left-wing voters — often non-white, older and less educated — reject the activists’ progressive politics. And since cultural issues in recent western elections appear to be more important in motivating voters to switch than economic questions, the activist Left could prove a distinct electoral liability. This was the story told by recent elections in Virginia, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Seattle. And as long as the Democrats fail to realise this, it’s only a matter of time before more of its support base is lured across the political aisle.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Biden shift blame for his own screw ups. What a pathetic leader.
Biden Points Finger and Blames Others for High Gas Prices
By Don Purdum, Independent Political Analyst
Biden Points Finger and Blames Others for High Gas Prices(RightWing.org) – Finger wagging is a time-honored tradition for politicians on the defensive. One of the most memorable was when President Bill Clinton stood at the White House podium, wagged his finger, and stated that he did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky. Ah, but he did, and the stain on the dress proved it.
While Joe Biden is no Bill Clinton in virtually any way, he has a finger, and he loves to use it when he scolds Americans or feels defensive. As gas prices soar, inflation skyrockets and store shelves remain empty, Biden should feel defensive. The president helped get us in this mess. Yet, it’s astonishing that Biden is ready to blame everyone but himself for the problem he caused, and he wants to know why his approval ratings are in the tank?
Biden Starts Energy War He Can’t Win
So, instead of acknowledging he made a mistake or a wrong decision, the president wants to play the blame game. Perhaps that’s not fair… maybe he believes his decisions were the right ones, and he’s doubling down. Either way, it’s still largely on him.
Before Biden assumed office on January 20, the United States was 100% energy independent thanks to President Donald Trump. He worked with energy companies and deregulated where appropriate to spur US innovation to meet America’s energy needs. During the 2020 presidential election, Biden said he would do the opposite. The then-Democratic candidate declared he would eliminate fossil fuels. He hasn’t abandoned his promise, and America is paying for it.
Once in office, Biden immediately went to war with US energy companies by shutting down a pipeline project, and now he’s considering shutting down another. The president also instituted harmful and expensive regulations, and more are on the way.
When gas prices started to climb rapidly over the summer, the president didn’t turn to US companies to solve the problem. Instead, he turned to OPEC and asked them to increase production. Somehow, their oil doesn’t harm the environment, but ours does?
Biden Blames Energy Companies and Calls on FTC to Investigate
On Wednesday, November 17, Biden did the unthinkable. Instead of reversing course to alleviate gas prices, he doubled down. He called on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate anti-consumer behavior by energy companies.
Biden alleges that evidence is growing that oil and gas companies are artificially driving up gasoline prices. The proof, he says, is that Exxon and Chevron nearly doubled their income compared to 2019. To anyone who paid attention, that might make some sense. In 2019, the companies were extracting oil and natural gas all over the country. Does anyone believe that’s cheap to do? Now that they are sidelined by the administration, of course, revenues are up compared to expenses.
This is a poor attempt to deflect attention on the big bad oil people. It’s a move of pure desperation from an administration that has nowhere to turn for help. The industry doesn’t have a relationship with anyone inside the Democratic administration. Worse still, Democrats lack the knowledge to respond to the energy crisis. Their answer is to dog energy companies and claim they’re evil while suggesting that Americans don’t need them. All the country needs are renewable energy sources
How’s that working out in California
Instead of pointing fingers, perhaps Biden should admit when he’s wrong and start talking to people who know about energy and what to do to solve the crisis he created.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chill it:
Artic Sea Ice currently second-highest in 15 years and growing
ELECTROVERSE (Documenting earth changesduring the next GSM and Pole Shift)
Arctic sea ice data is in plain view of the world’s media, yet outlets would still rather quote activist-scientists than show an unambiguous chart. Articles of “catastrophic ice melt” still pepper the global news feeds, even as signs point to a cyclical shift in the northern polar region.
I’m being consciously naive here. I’m fully aware that the media’s job isn’t to inform; rather, it exists to propagandize and to push the agendas and narratives of its backers. Still, I can’t help but wonder, when a placard-brandishing climate alarmist yells “the end is nigh!”, who exactly is it that they’ve put their trust in? Who told them that the sky is falling? I ask because you do need to be informed of the ‘climate crisis’ in order to discern it — your own senses aren’t enough. People aren’t opening their front doors in the morning to an ‘existential emergency’, they aren’t retreating back inside, calling their bosses and saying “I wont be coming in today, you know… ’cause of the climate”. This is supposed to be ‘catastrophic global warming‘, remember? Not ‘random, cherry-picked extreme weather events’? For what is billed as a ‘worldly cataclysm’, this warming sure is illusive, periodic and localized.
The power of propaganda, I guess.
The blind acceptance of sheep.
The poster child for AGW is of course the Arctic. For years, dire tipping point deadlines of an “ice free Arctic” have been prophesied by pedestalled climate ‘experts’, and for years, dire tipping point deadlines have uneventfully passed us all by.
See: Decades Of Failed Tipping Point Prophesies
And: Years Of Failed Arctic Sea Ice Predictions
In a further blow to the credibility of the climate ambulance chasers, there is, as of Nov 17, significantly more ice in the Arctic than there has been in recent years — the difference is stark.
This week, Arctic sea ice is approaching 10,000,000 km2 — the second highest ice extent of any of the last 15 years. Furthermore, the years 2008 and 2005 are on course to be eclipsed in the coming days/weeks, as are many from the early-2000s and mid/late-1990s — this means that 2021 will soon claim the title of ‘the highest Arctic sea ice extent of the past two decades’ (since 2001).
In addition, extent is now comfortably above the 2011-2020 average, and, by next week, is expected to have taken out the 2001-2010 average, too, according to NSIDC data.
Also worth noting is that ‘extent’ is actually highly variable and susceptible to changing wind patterns, etc. A more reliable metric to use when trying to determine the health of an ice sheet is its thickness or volume.
According to the latest data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), Arctic sea ice ‘volume’ has been on something of a tear in recent weeks — it is now tracking above all recent years (black line on the below chart), and shows no signs of abating:
[DMI]
<
>
Here’s a closer look:
“Cold and snow came early to much of the Arctic this year,” reports woodtv.com. This reality, as hinted at above, is a big shift from recent years, and I believe it could indicate a more permanent ‘trend change’ as low solar activity’s impact on Earth’s climate continues to ‘snowball’.
Only time will tell on that front, but backing up my contention is the fact that the South Pole also just witnessed a historically cold winter. As reported last month: “Between the months of April and September, the South Pole averaged a temperature of -61.1C (-78F). Simply put, this was the region’s coldest 6-month spell ever recorded, and it comfortably usurped the previous coldest ‘coreless winter‘ on record: the -60.6C (-77F) from 1976 (solar minimum of weak cycle 20).”
It doesn’t fit the narrative, and so it isn’t reported on — this isn’t how journalism (and indeed science) is supposed to work.
In the absence of open debate, questioning and accountability, authoritarian forces rise.
ARCTIC OWLS SPOTTED IN NORTHWEST SPAIN
In an event thought to be related to the exceptional chill being felt in northern latitudes this autumn, a number of snowy or Arctic owls have been spotted in The Principality of Asturias–a region of northwest Spain.
Biologist Arancha Marcotegi, from Birdwatch Asturias, has confirmed the presence of at least three of these arctic specimens.
Marcotegi explains that the birds’ usual habitat is tundra –-a polar region of low vegetation– and that he does not believe that they will last very long in in Spain, no matter how harsh this coming winter may be.
Another biologist, Nicolás López, head of species conservation at BirdLife, explains that the southernmost latitudes that snowy owls can frequent “never goes beyond the north of the United Kingdom or Scandinavia”.
It is unprecedented to find them this far south.
The theories of how the birds actually got to Spain are numerous. Among the scenarios is that the birds, not being the best migrators, took rest on a boat which wound-up taking them to Asturias. Another theory among experts, and as reported by plainsmenpost.com, is that, yes, you guessed it, that big bad wolf “climate change” is to blame. López says that global warming may gave caused the “extreme phenomena of more iciness in their areas” meaning the birds traveled south to find food.
Sigh.
I’m starting to think that whenever a phenomena occurs in nature that ‘experts’ don’t quite understand, ‘climate change’ is the go-to. The scapegoat. If the theory wasn’t so pervasive and destructive, it would actually be quite funny.
Enjoy your weekend. Stay free.
>
The COLD TIMES are returning, the mid-latitudes are REFREEZING, in line with the great conjunction, historically low solar activity, cloud-nucleating Cosmic Rays, and a meridional jet stream flow (among other forcings).
Both NOAA and NASA appear to agree, if you read between the lines, with NOAA saying we’re entering a ‘full-blown’ Grand Solar Minimum in the late-2020s, and NASA seeing this upcoming solar cycle (25) as “the weakest of the past 200 years”, with the agency correlating previous solar shutdowns to prolonged periods of global cooling here.
Furthermore, we can’t ignore the slew of new scientific papers stating the immense impact The Beaufort Gyre could have on the Gulf Stream, and therefore the climate overall.
No comments:
Post a Comment