Biden Admin Used Border Wall Funds On ‘Environmental Planning’ And Cleanup, Government Watchdog Says thumbnail

Biden Admin Used Border Wall Funds On ‘Environmental Planning’ And Cleanup, Government Watchdog Says

By The Daily Caller

The Biden administration spent taxpayer dollars meant to fund a border wall to pay for “environmental planning,” according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

At the request of Republican Reps. Jack Bergman of Michigan and Jodey Arrington of Texas, the GAO investigated whether the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) broke the law when it effectively blocked the use of taxpayer dollars to build a wall along the southern border. While GAO’s final report clears the DHS of breaking the law, it confirmed that DHS used congressionally-appropriated funds meant for the wall to pay for “environmental planning” and efforts “to remediate or mitigate environmental damage from past border wall construction.”

Republicans on the House Budget Committee, including Bergman and Arrington, characterized the GAO’s finding as confirmation that the Biden administration has spent taxpayer funds meant to enhance border security to further its environmental agenda.

Mayorkas Unsure What Executive Actions Could Be Taken On Border Crisis — Even As Biden Privately Weighs Options

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) April 23, 2024

Congress previously approved funds for DHS to build a border barrier between fiscal year 2018 and fiscal year 2021, but President Joe Biden and his appointees quickly instituted a new policy whereby “no more American taxpayer dollars (would) be diverted to construct a border wall” upon entering office in 2021. Cabinet secretaries, including DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, were ordered to work together to produce plans for how to shift funds away from border wall construction.

In 2021, DHS released a report detailing how it would look to redirect funds meant for the wall to instead pay for things like “environmental planning,” reviewing upcoming eminent domain actions and considering environmental remediation efforts in areas that had been the site of previous construction, according to GAO’s report. The agency then changed its plans in July 2022, applying an amendment that made environmental remediation a top priority for the agency’s expenditure of the funds appropriated for fiscal years 2018-2021.

The Biden administration has made great efforts to roll back or replace many of the immigration and border policies of former President Donald Trump, but the situation at the border has deteriorated massively since 2021. There have been nearly 8 million land encounters at the southwest border since October 2021, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Congressional Budget Office reported in January that more than 3.3 million people came to the U.S. illegally, were released into the country via parole or overstayed their permission to remain in the country in fiscal year 2023 alone.

The situation at the border set the stage for congressional Republicans to attempt to impeach Mayorkas earlier this spring. The House voted to impeach Mayorkas in February, but the Senate quickly dismissed an impeachment trial along partisan lines earlier in April.

Neither the White House nor the DHS responded immediately to requests for comment.





Biden Admin Spending Big To Make Ports Of Entry Green While Trying To Yank Border Wall Funds

Texas Border Operation Captures Half a Million Illegal Immigrants, Thousands of Felons

Terrorists Welcome: Chronic Counterterrorism Lapses at the Border Demand Investigation and Congressional Intervention

Biden Admin Mulling Plan To Give Legal Status To Illegal Alien Spouses

RELATED VIDEO: What “Allahu Akbar” Really Means

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

DAVID BLACKMON: Having Biden Declare A Climate Emergency Is A Crazy Idea thumbnail

DAVID BLACKMON: Having Biden Declare A Climate Emergency Is A Crazy Idea

By The Daily Caller

I recorded a podcast this week in which the host told me I am an “outlier” for being willing to write the truth about the destructive nature of the Biden administration’s energy policies. It was one of the kindest things anyone has ever said to me, frankly.

So, I guess I will be an outlier again when I write that the idea being considered again by White House officials of having President Biden declare a climate emergency so he can implement a draconian crackdown on the domestic oil and gas industry is frankly crazy. That’s the truth.

Bloomberg reported Thursday that unnamed officials inside the White House said the idea of declaring a climate emergency, first considered in 2021 and again in 2022, is once again under consideration. The only “emergency,” of course, is the president’s flagging approval ratings among impressionable young voters that threaten to derail his re-election chances. Declaring a climate emergency would arm the president with dictatorial powers to hamstring the domestic industry more than his regulators and hundreds of executive orders have already managed to do.

According to Bloomberg’s sources, actions being considered would include suspending offshore drilling, restricting exports of oil and LNG, and “throttling” the industry’s ability to transport its production via pipelines and rail. Given the industry’s crucial nature, it all sounds like a recipe for massive economic disaster.

“The average American is certainly not demanding a climate emergency declaration. It’s the losing team of left-wing Democrat activists and the shrinking base of elites who are,” U.S. Oil and Gas Association President Tim Stewart told me in an interview. “It’s not about climate, it’s about control: Control over the entire U.S. economy, control of production, manufacturing, distribution, and consumption. If you control energy, you control all these things. Which means you have control of the people.”

Stewart notes that the use of emergency powers in this instance would represent the same playbook used by federal, state, and local governments to restrict citizens’ freedoms and choices during COVID pandemic. But for the president, it would also be a means of shoring up support among the billionaire class that funds both the climate alarmist movement and so many Democrat Party campaigns, including his own campaign for re-election.

That angle was echoed by Tom Pyle, president of the D.C.-based think tank, the Institute for Energy Research. “By now, we have gotten used to incredibly damaging and stupid decisions from the Biden administration, but the idea of declaring a ‘climate emergency’ is in a class by itself,” Pyle told me. “Like the freeze on new LNG permits, the only emergency President Biden is seeking to address with this latest threat is his slippage in the polls among young voters.”

Others with whom I spoke on the matter were skeptical that the White House would really take such an extreme step in the middle of a re-election effort, but that outlook seems naïve, really. After all, who would have predicted last December that the administration would halt all permitting of new LNG export facilities purely for political reasons? Who would have predicted in late 2021 that the president would order the draining of 40% of the nation’s wartime Strategic Petroleum Reserve for no reason other than a pure political calculation designed to try to influence the 2022 midterm election?

Anyone thinking such a move would be made out of a real, good faith effort to somehow impact climate change needs to consider this: Demand for oil and natural gas is a global phenomenon that will not be reduced just because Biden cracks down on the U.S. domestic industry. Such a crackdown would inevitably create the flight of billions of dollars in capital to other parts of the world where environmental regulations are far less stringent than in the United States.

The climate alarmists advocating for this crazy policy action like to ignore the reality that the Earth has only one atmosphere which everyone shares. The U.S. oil and gas industry has dramatically cut emissions of both methane and CO2 even as it has achieved new records in production. No other nation on Earth can make a similar claim.

This is indeed a crazy idea, but it would be a mistake to assume it is not being seriously considered, and for all the wrong reasons.



David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.


Biden Vowed To Protect American Steel — But Another Effort Of His Could Destroy It

‘Clear Violation Of The Law’: Biden’s Multi-Billion Dollar Broadband Plan Defies Congressional Mandate, Experts Say

Biden Admin Trampled States’ Rights To Signal ‘Extreme’ Abortion Views, Idaho AG Says Before Major SCOTUS Case

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

MARC MORANO: Biden May Declare ‘Dictatorial U.S. Climate Emergency’ Bypassing U.S. The Constitution thumbnail

MARC MORANO: Biden May Declare ‘Dictatorial U.S. Climate Emergency’ Bypassing U.S. The Constitution

By Marc Morano

Morano on Fox talks Biden’s access to ‘COVID-like powers’ if he declares a national ‘Climate Emergency’ – ‘Dictatorial Powers’

Fox Business – The Bottom Line w/ Dagen McDowell & Sean Duffy – Broadcast April 19, 2024

Sean Duffy: The White House told Fox Business that it is now considering declaring a national ‘climate emergency.’ If the President declares a climbing emergency, what impact would that have?

Marc Morano: This is the serious story of the day. NBC News has reported that if Joe Biden declared a national climate emergency, he would have COVID-like powers under that emergency and NBC also compared the climate emergency powers to the 911 emergency powers. The Center for Biological Diversity has estimated Joe Biden would get about 130 wartime-like powers by which to bypass democracy and impose the Green New Deal on America without a single vote of Congress. This is truly a  Halloween story, not a story for Earth Day. This is a truly frightening story, and he might just be desperate enough to declare it.

This is being widely reported in the media. The Biden White House is leaking this out. This might happen, and it is going to give Joe Biden these kind — you want to say the words dictatorial powers. He doesn’t need no stinking democracy to impose the Green New Deal if he does this.

Fox Business – The Bottom Line w/ Dagen McDowell & Sean Duffy – Broadcast April 19, 2024 – White House weighs declaring a national climate emergency: Climate Depot executive editor Marc Morano reacts to President Biden reportedly planning to block millions of acres in Alaska from oil and gas drilling on ‘The Bottom Line.’

Sean Duffy: Here now reaction,, executive editor Marc Morano. Marc, good to see you so. As we talk about Joe Biden taking millions of acres out of exploration in Alaska. …

Marc Morano: They are doing everything possible to make our country more expensive to live in, disrupt supply chains, create inflation, harm economic growth, and impact our national security. In addition to just the obvious oil and gas drilling limits, this affects a copper mine access road that would have helped us directly compete with China, which has record copper production and is now a top-three country in the world with its copper Mining. The Republic of Congo is number four, which China largely dominates. And the Biden administration’s going after the rare Earth mining, oil, gas, at the same time, they’re claiming it’s all for the climate. The climate’s not going to notice one bit, but this is going to hammer Americans. I can’t imagine, other than cheap politics for their environmental base, why they thought this was a good idea six months before the presidential election. …

Dagen McDowell: Do these dumb asses know that an oil derrick here is the same as an oil derrick over there when it comes to well emissions and the climate because? It’s called global warming, not national warming, you deep dongs.

Marc Morano: Well, it’s even worse than that because if we’re outsourcing now to these other nations in the Middle East or Venezuela, the Biden administrations beg them for more oil, and whether it’s the Mining from China, they have lower environmental standards, lower human rights, so it’s actually not only are. We are outsourcing our emissions to virtue signal and say we meet our climate goals. Instead, we’re actually raising global emissions, much higher than they would have been had we done the energy production here in the United States — It takes half a million pounds of materials to make one 1000 pound EV battery. By shutting down oil and gas and shutting down this exploration of copper in Alaska, we just made energy a lot more expensive and made the U.S. much more reliant on China. Donald Trump’s 2000 2012 tweet about climate change benefiting China comes true every single day.

Sean Duffy: The White House told Fox Business that it is now considering declaring a national ‘climate emergency.’ If the President declares a climbing emergency, what impact would that have?

Marc Morano: This is the serious story of the day. NBC News has reported that if Joe Biden declared a national climate emergency, he would have COVID-like powers under that emergency and NBC also compared the climate emergency powers to the 911 emergency powers. The Center for Biological Diversity has estimated Joe Biden would get about 130 wartime-like powers by which to bypass democracy and impose the Green New Deal on America without a single vote of Congress. This is truly a  Halloween story, not a story for Earth Day. This is a truly frightening story, and he might just be desperate enough to declare it.

This is being widely reported in the media. The Biden White House is leaking this out. This might happen, and it is going to give Joe Biden these kind — you want to say the words dictatorial powers. He doesn’t need no stinking democracy to impose the Green New Deal if he does this.

Dagen McDowell: Marc Morano, thank you so much.

End transcript


April 17, 2024: Bloomberg News: White House Renews Internal Talks on Invoking ‘Climate Emergency’ Before 2024 Election – ‘Could be used to halt exports, drilling’

2023: Watch: NBC News: ‘Biden urged to declare climate change a national emergency’ – ‘Can unlock special powers for a president in a crisis without needing approval from Congress’ – Similar to COVID & 9/11 Emergency Powers
Hallie Jackson of NBC – Aug. 22, 2023: “So what would that even do? Declaring an emergency can unlock special powers for a president in a crisis without needing approval from Congress, thanks to a law passed nearly 50 years ago. Since then, every President has declared at least one emergency during their time in office. Former President Trump for example, signing one in the pandemic. Former President George W. Bush declaring one after 911.”

2022: What it would mean for Biden to declare a national ‘climate emergency’ – ‘Triggers ability for him to deploy around 130 different powers’ – Center for Biological Diversity

Watch: The Weather Channel demands to know why Biden hasn’t declared a ‘climate emergency’ – Presses White House Climate Advisor Ali Zaidi

If Biden declares a ‘Climate Emergency,’ he would seize 130 new powers – Seeks repeat of COVID-style lockdowns with bypassing of democracy – Morano Responds

2023: LA TIMES EDITORIAL: Biden says he’s ‘practically’ declared a climate emergency. – ‘He should’ do it for real – ‘With GOP-controlled House blocking climate action, the country needs the executive branch to respond more aggressively’

August 27, 2023

Biden Admin Announces Massive Restrictions On Alaskan Oil Reserve And Hampers Key Mining Project In One Fell Swoop – The Department of the Interior (DOI) finalized a plan that will restrict future oil leasing and development on about half of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), an area in the state’s north approximately the size of Indiana first designated by former President Warren Harding as an emergency source of fuel for the U.S. Navy, according to Bloomberg News. The DOI also moved to all but shoot down the Ambler Access Project, a previously-approved proposal for a mining company to build a 211-mile long road needed to mine copper reserves potentially worth billions of dollars.

Copyright © 2024 Climate Depot, All rights reserved. .

Biden Admin Weighs California’s Latest Green Gambit That Could Set Off Chain Reaction Of Economic Pain thumbnail

Biden Admin Weighs California’s Latest Green Gambit That Could Set Off Chain Reaction Of Economic Pain

By The Daily Caller

The Biden administration could allow California to implement a rule designed to push green locomotives, but a growing list of stakeholders are warning that the regulation would severely impact the state’s economy and the national rail industry.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could soon determine whether it will allow the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to move forward with a state regulation that would ban the use of locomotives that are more than 23 years past their manufacturing date unless they run using zero-emissions technology, according to Progressive Railroading.

The rule could disrupt supply chains and saddle the state’s railway industry with huge new costs that would flow to consumers, with the effects of the rule potentially spilling out in other parts of the country, according to numerous trade groups, lawmakers and policy experts who believe the Biden administration should reject CARB’s request.

CARB passed the locomotive rule in April 2023, but the agency must first receive the EPA’s permission before it enacts a regulation that goes above and beyond federal rules, according to the EPA’s Federal Register entry on the request. Monday was the last day to file comments with the EPA about the matter, signaling that a final determination could be coming soon.

“When you look at regulations in California, they’re being promulgated by people who don’t really understand the ramifications of what they’re requiring,” Edward Ring, a veteran of the railroad industry who is now the director of water and energy policy for the California Policy Center, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “CARB is asking for something — zero-emissions locomotives — that do not yet exist. And what’s going to happen is it’s going to dramatically raise the cost of shipping anywhere in California, and that’s going to have a ripple effect across the country. This is another example of California’s environmentalist regulations raising the cost of living.”

California Is Staring Down The Barrel Of A Yawning Budget Deficit. Can It Even Be Fixed?

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) April 11, 2024

The rule for locomotives would take effect in 2030, assuming EPA allows CARB to proceed. Some of the rule’s critics say that timeline is too tight to meet given the current lack of dependable, affordable zero-emissions technology available for locomotives on the market.

Moreover, the rule also would require locomotive operators to pay into their own trust accounts to fund the acquisition of zero-emissions locomotives and related infrastructure, according to CARB. The payment structure requires operators to contribute more into the accounts for operating dirtier locomotives than they have to put up for running cleaner ones.

Because many other states adhere to CARB guidelines, the EPA’s approval could set off a chain reaction expanding the impact of the rule well beyond California’s borders, according to Ted Greener, vice president of public affairs for the Association of American Railroads (AAR).

“If EPA approves the waiver the rule becomes a national matter on the first day. Roughly 65% of the locomotive fleet goes in and out of California and almost all of the freight rail traffic that moves in the state of California traverses state lines,” Ted Greener, vice president of public affairs for the Association of American Railroads (AAR), told the DCNF. “Moreover, EPA granting the waiver enables other states to opt-in and replicate the regulation in full – including the phase out dates and the spending accounts. Such a balkanized system would be unspeakably costly, but also disruptive to the flow of goods.”

A “large number” of locomotives would be impacted by the rule, Greener told the DCNF. Typically, locomotives have a lifespan ranging from 30 to 50 years, and they are regularly upgraded or otherwise modified to be more fuel-efficient, Greener added.

Other rail industry interest groups, such as the American Short Line and Railroad Association (ASLRRA), have also opposed the rule.

“While the spirit behind this rule is consistent with short lines’ environmental commitment, the rule itself is impractical, unworkable, and simply not feasible for most short lines,” Chuck Baker, president of ASLRRA, said of CARB’s rule in May 2023. “In addition, this rulemaking does not acknowledge the impact of the elimination of some short line rail service to Californians … Short lines would not in fact be able to pass on these costs to their customers and some of them would be eliminated by this rule.”

For its part, CARB downplays most of these criticisms and concerns.

“Despite the availability of cleaner options, railroad companies have failed to make investments to replace their outdated, dirty locomotives that contribute to the state’s air quality problems and endanger the lives and health of Californians,” a CARB spokesperson told the DCNF. “Passenger vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, ocean-going vessels, heavy off-road equipment, small off-road engines used in landscaping, among other emissions sectors are all doing their part. It’s time for the rail industry to join and work with us to become part of the solution rather than focusing their efforts on litigation and PR campaigns.”

“In addition, under CARB’s Locomotive Regulation, railroads need not purchase new locomotives, but instead have many options available to them, including the use of zero-emission tender cars, rail electrification, or retrofitting of their existing locomotive fleet to ensure zero-emission operation while operating within California,” the spokesperson continued.

California is suing oil companies over climate change

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 17, 2023

Labor unions, including the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, have filed comments with EPA making their opposition to CARB’s rule clear.

Moreover, a diverse coalition of more than 60 trade groups — including the National Association of Manufacturers, the Beer Institute and the Aluminum Association — wrote a letter Friday to Karl Simon, the director of EPA’s Transportation and Climate Division, expressing significant concerns with the rule should CARB be allowed to proceed.

“This regulation from CARB has the potential to create significant disruptions in the supply chain for all sectors of the U.S. economy, especially manufacturers and shippers who rely on consistent, reliable rail service,” the letter reads. “This rule could lead to delays for businesses and increased costs for both shippers and consumers that could ultimately lead to a massive supply chain crisis. If railroads are forced to spend large amounts of money to ensure compliance with this rule, those costs will be passed along the entire supply chain and could inhibit rail service at facilities across the country – not just in California.”

“The issue is that no viable technology exists today to move freight beyond yards on a zero-emissions basis,” the letter continues. “Despite aggressive [research and development] and innovation in the rail sector and significant private investments, the technologies to achieve this rule simply do not exist at this point.”

Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and 11 Republican Senators also wrote their own letter expressing concern about the CARB rule to EPA Administrator Michael Reagan on April 16. In addition to raising questions about the legality of CARB’s rule, the lawmakers urged the EPA to “carefully consider the environmental, supply chain, and modal shift implications that EPA approving CARB’s waiver request would have.”

The EPA did not respond immediately to a request for comment.





California’s High-Speed Rail Isn’t Built, But It Is Putting Money In Unions’ Coffers

What Has California’s War On Fossil Fuels Actually Accomplished?

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

On Earth Day 2024 we remember Michael Crichton’s revelation that ‘Environmentalism is a religion’ thumbnail

On Earth Day 2024 we remember Michael Crichton’s revelation that ‘Environmentalism is a religion’

By Dr. Rich Swier

On September 15, 2003 American author, screenwriter and filmmaker Michael Crichton made the following remarks at the Common Wealth Club in San Francisco, California.

We reprint this given that what he said in 2003 has come to pass in 2024 in America as the climate doomsayers are now in control of the current administration. They are now part of the Red/Green/Rainbow alliance. The green part comes in two shades of green. The green of the Islamic terrorists and the lighter shade of green of the Eco-terrorists. Both demand absolute power over us.

It is fitting that we publish this on Earth Day 2024 as we see Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. announce $7 billion in government grants for rooftop solar solar panels in his Earth Day message.

It is also fitting we recognize Dr. Michael Crichton, the creator of Jurassic Park and ET, whose passing on November 4, 2008 from cancer. Michael’s new book titled ERUPTION is set for release on June 3rd, 2924 and is based on his unfinished manuscript.  ERUPTION is co-authored by James Patterson and is now available for pre-order. ERUPTION is described as:

The biggest thriller of 2024: A history-making eruption is about to destroy the Big Island of Hawaii. But a secret held for decades by the US military is far more terrifying than any volcano.

The master of the techno-thriller joins forces with the master of the modern thriller to create the most anticipated mega thriller in years.

I have been asked to talk about what I consider the most important challenge facing mankind, and I have a fundamental answer. The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance.

We must daily decide whether the threats we face are real, whether the solutions we are offered will do any good, whether the problems we’re told exist are in fact real problems, or non-problems. Every one of us has a sense of the world, and we all know that this sense is in part given to us by what other people and society tell us; in part generated by our emotional state, which we project outward; and in part by our genuine perceptions of reality. In short, our struggle to determine what is true is the struggle to decide which of our perceptions are genuine, and which are false because they are handed down, or sold to us, or generated by our own hopes and fears.

As an example of this challenge, I want to talk today about environmentalism. And in order not to be misunderstood, I want it perfectly clear that I believe it is incumbent on us to conduct our lives in a way that takes into account all the consequences of our actions, including the consequences to other people, and the consequences to the environment. I believe it is important to act in ways that are sympathetic to the environment, and I believe this will always be a need, carrying into the future. I believe the world has genuine problems and I believe it can and should be improved. But I also think that deciding what constitutes responsible action is immensely difficult, and the consequences of our actions are often difficult to know in advance. I think our past record of environmental action is discouraging, to put it mildly, because even our best intended efforts often go awry. But I think we do not recognize our past failures, and face them squarely. And I think I know why.

I studied anthropology in college, and one of the things I learned was that certain human social structures always reappear. They can’t be eliminated from society. One of those structures is religion. Today it is said we live in a secular society in which many people—the best people, the most enlightened people—do not believe in any religion. But I think that you cannot eliminate religion from the psyche of mankind. If you suppress it in one form, it merely re-emerges in another form. You can not believe in God, but you still have to believe in something that gives meaning to your life, and shapes your sense of the world. Such a belief is religious.

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it’s a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.

There’s an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there’s a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe.

Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday—these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don’t want to talk anybody out of them, as I don’t want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don’t want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can’t talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith.

And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren’t necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It’s about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them.

Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not. Because we know a lot more about the world than we did forty or fifty years ago. And what we know now is not so supportive of certain core environmental myths, yet the myths do not die. Let’s examine some of those beliefs.

There is no Eden. There never was. What was that Eden of the wonderful mythic past? Is it the time when infant mortality was 80%, when four children in five died of disease before the age of five? When one woman in six died in childbirth? When the average lifespan was 40, as it was in America a century ago. When plagues swept across the planet, killing millions in a stroke. Was it when millions starved to death? Is that when it was Eden?

And what about indigenous peoples, living in a state of harmony with the Eden-like environment? Well, they never did. On this continent, the newly arrived people who crossed the land bridge almost immediately set about wiping out hundreds of species of large animals, and they did this several thousand years before the white man showed up, to accelerate the process. And what was the condition of life? Loving, peaceful, harmonious? Hardly: the early peoples of the New World lived in a state of constant warfare. Generations of hatred, tribal hatreds, constant battles. The warlike tribes of this continent are famous: the Comanche, Sioux, Apache, Mohawk, Aztecs, Toltec, Incas. Some of them practiced infanticide, and human sacrifice. And those tribes that were not fiercely warlike were exterminated, or learned to build their villages high in the cliffs to attain some measure of safety.

How about the human condition in the rest of the world? The Maori of New Zealand committed massacres regularly. The dyaks of Borneo were headhunters. The Polynesians, living in an environment as close to paradise as one can imagine, fought constantly, and created a society so hideously restrictive that you could lose your life if you stepped in the footprint of a chief. It was the Polynesians who gave us the very concept of taboo, as well as the word itself. The noble savage is a fantasy, and it was never true. That anyone still believes it, 200 years after Rousseau, shows the tenacity of religious myths, their ability to hang on in the face of centuries of factual contradiction.

There was even an academic movement, during the latter 20th century, that claimed that cannibalism was a white man’s invention to demonize the indigenous peoples. (Only academics could fight such a battle.) It was some thirty years before professors finally agreed that yes, cannibalism does indeed occur among human beings. Meanwhile, all during this time New Guinea highlanders in the 20th century continued to eat the brains of their enemies until they were finally made to understand that they risked kuru, a fatal neurological disease, when they did so.

More recently still the gentle Tasaday of the Philippines turned out to be a publicity stunt, a nonexistent tribe. And African pygmies have one of the highest murder rates on the planet.

In short, the romantic view of the natural world as a blissful Eden is only held by people who have no actual experience of nature. People who live in nature are not romantic about it at all. They may hold spiritual beliefs about the world around them, they may have a sense of the unity of nature or the aliveness of all things, but they still kill the animals and uproot the plants in order to eat, to live. If they don’t, they will die.

And if you, even now, put yourself in nature even for a matter of days, you will quickly be disabused of all your romantic fantasies. Take a trek through the jungles of Borneo, and in short order you will have festering sores on your skin, you’ll have bugs all over your body, biting in your hair, crawling up your nose and into your ears, you’ll have infections and sickness and if you’re not with somebody who knows what they’re doing, you’ll quickly starve to death. But chances are that even in the jungles of Borneo you won’t experience nature so directly, because you will have covered your entire body with DEET and you will be doing everything you can to keep those bugs off you.

The truth is, almost nobody wants to experience real nature. What people want is to spend a week or two in a cabin in the woods, with screens on the windows. They want a simplified life for a while, without all their stuff. Or a nice river rafting trip for a few days, with somebody else doing the cooking. Nobody wants to go back to nature in any real way, and nobody does. It’s all talk-and as the years go on, and the world population grows increasingly urban, it’s uninformed talk. Farmers know what they’re talking about. City people don’t. It’s all fantasy.

One way to measure the prevalence of fantasy is to note the number of people who die because they haven’t the least knowledge of how nature really is. They stand beside wild animals, like buffalo, for a picture and get trampled to death; they climb a mountain in dicey weather without proper gear, and freeze to death. They drown in the surf on holiday because they can’t conceive the real power of what we blithely call “the force of nature.” They have seen the ocean. But they haven’t been in it.

The television generation expects nature to act the way they want it to be. They think all life experiences can be tivo-ed. The notion that the natural world obeys its own rules and doesn’t give a damn about your expectations comes as a massive shock. Well-to-do, educated people in an urban environment experience the ability to fashion their daily lives as they wish. They buy clothes that suit their taste, and decorate their apartments as they wish. Within limits, they can contrive a daily urban world that pleases them.

But the natural world is not so malleable. On the contrary, it will demand that you adapt to it-and if you don’t, you die. It is a harsh, powerful, and unforgiving world, that most urban westerners have never experienced.

Many years ago I was trekking in the Karakorum mountains of northern Pakistan, when my group came to a river that we had to cross. It was a glacial river, freezing cold, and it was running very fast, but it wasn’t deep—maybe three feet at most. My guide set out ropes for people to hold as they crossed the river, and everybody proceeded, one at a time, with extreme care. I asked the guide what was the big deal about crossing a three-foot river. He said, well, supposing you fell and suffered a compound fracture. We were now four days trek from the last big town, where there was a radio. Even if the guide went back double time to get help, it’d still be at least three days before he could return with a helicopter. If a helicopter were available at all. And in three days, I’d probably be dead from my injuries. So that was why everybody was crossing carefully. Because out in nature a little slip could be deadly.

But let’s return to religion. If Eden is a fantasy that never existed, and mankind wasn’t ever noble and kind and loving, if we didn’t fall from grace, then what about the rest of the religious tenets? What about salvation, sustainability, and judgment day? What about the coming environmental doom from fossil fuels and global warming, if we all don’t get down on our knees and conserve every day?

Well, it’s interesting. You may have noticed that something has been left off the doomsday list, lately. Although the preachers of environmentalism have been yelling about population for fifty years, over the last decade world population seems to be taking an unexpected turn. Fertility rates are falling almost everywhere. As a result, over the course of my lifetime the thoughtful predictions for total world population have gone from a high of 20 billion, to 15 billion, to 11 billion (which was the UN estimate around 1990) to now 9 billion, and soon, perhaps less. There are some who think that world population will peak in 2050 and then start to decline. There are some who predict we will have fewer people in 2100 than we do today. Is this a reason to rejoice, to say halleluiah? Certainly not. Without a pause, we now hear about the coming crisis of world economy from a shrinking population. We hear about the impending crisis of an aging population. Nobody anywhere will say that the core fears expressed for most of my life have turned out not to be true. As we have moved into the future, these doomsday visions vanished, like a mirage in the desert. They were never there—though they still appear, in the future. As mirages do.

Okay, so, the preachers made a mistake. They got one prediction wrong; they’re human. So what. Unfortunately, it’s not just one prediction. It’s a whole slew of them. We are running out of oil. We are running out of all natural resources. Paul Ehrlich: 60 million Americans will die of starvation in the 1980s. Forty thousand species become extinct every year. Half of all species on the planet will be extinct by 2000. And on and on and on.

With so many past failures, you might think that environmental predictions would become more cautious. But not if it’s a religion. Remember, the nut on the sidewalk carrying the placard that predicts the end of the world doesn’t quit when the world doesn’t end on the day he expects. He just changes his placard, sets a new doomsday date, and goes back to walking the streets. One of the defining features of religion is that your beliefs are not troubled by facts, because they have nothing to do with facts.

So I can tell you some facts. I know you haven’t read any of what I am about to tell you in the newspaper, because newspapers literally don’t report them. I can tell you that DDT is not a carcinogen and did not cause birds to die and should never have been banned. I can tell you that the people who banned it knew that it wasn’t carcinogenic and banned it anyway. I can tell you that the DDT ban has caused the deaths of tens of millions of poor people, mostly children, whose deaths are directly attributable to a callous, technologically advanced western society that promoted the new cause of environmentalism by pushing a fantasy about a pesticide, and thus irrevocably harmed the third world. Banning DDT is one of the most disgraceful episodes in the twentieth century history of America. We knew better, and we did it anyway, and we let people around the world die and didn’t give a damn.

I can tell you that second hand smoke is not a health hazard to anyone and never was, and the EPA has always known it. I can tell you that the evidence for global warming is far weaker than its proponents would ever admit. I can tell you the percentage the US land area that is taken by urbanization, including cities and roads, is 5%. I can tell you that the Sahara desert is shrinking, and the total ice of Antarctica is increasing. I can tell you that a blue-ribbon panel in Science magazine concluded that there is no known technology that will enable us to halt the rise of carbon dioxide in the 21st century. Not wind, not solar, not even nuclear. The panel concluded a totally new technology-like nuclear fusion-was necessary, otherwise nothing could be done and in the meantime all efforts would be a waste of time. They said that when the UN IPCC reports stated alternative technologies existed that could control greenhouse gases, the UN was wrong.

I can, with a lot of time, give you the factual basis for these views, and I can cite the appropriate journal articles not in whacko magazines, but in the most prestigeous science journals, such as Science and Nature. But such references probably won’t impact more than a handful of you, because the beliefs of a religion are not dependant on facts, but rather are matters of faith. Unshakeable belief.

Most of us have had some experience interacting with religious fundamentalists, and we understand that one of the problems with fundamentalists is that they have no perspective on themselves. They never recognize that their way of thinking is just one of many other possible ways of thinking, which may be equally useful or good. On the contrary, they believe their way is the right way, everyone else is wrong; they are in the business of salvation, and they want to help you to see things the right way. They want to help you be saved. They are totally rigid and totally uninterested in opposing points of view. In our modern complex world, fundamentalism is dangerous because of its rigidity and its imperviousness to other ideas.

I want to argue that it is now time for us to make a major shift in our thinking about the environment, similar to the shift that occurred around the first Earth Day in 1970, when this awareness was first heightened. But this time around, we need to get environmentalism out of the sphere of religion. We need to stop the mythic fantasies, and we need to stop the doomsday predictions. We need to start doing hard science instead.

There are two reasons why I think we all need to get rid of the religion of environmentalism.

First, we need an environmental movement, and such a movement is not very effective if it is conducted as a religion. We know from history that religions tend to kill people, and environmentalism has already killed somewhere between 10-30 million people since the 1970s. It’s not a good record. Environmentalism needs to be absolutely based in objective and verifiable science, it needs to be rational, and it needs to be flexible. And it needs to be apolitical. To mix environmental concerns with the frantic fantasies that people have about one political party or another is to miss the cold truth—that there is very little difference between the parties, except a difference in pandering rhetoric. The effort to promote effective legislation for the environment is not helped by thinking that the Democrats will save us and the Republicans won’t. Political history is more complicated than that. Never forget which president started the EPA: Richard Nixon. And never forget which president sold federal oil leases, allowing oil drilling in Santa Barbara: Lyndon Johnson. So get politics out of your thinking about the environment.

The second reason to abandon environmental religion is more pressing. Religions think they know it all, but the unhappy truth of the environment is that we are dealing with incredibly complex, evolving systems, and we usually are not certain how best to proceed. Those who are certain are demonstrating their personality type, or their belief system, not the state of their knowledge. Our record in the past, for example managing national parks, is humiliating. Our fifty-year effort at forest-fire suppression is a well-intentioned disaster from which our forests will never recover. We need to be humble, deeply humble, in the face of what we are trying to accomplish. We need to be trying various methods of accomplishing things. We need to be open-minded about assessing results of our efforts, and we need to be flexible about balancing needs. Religions are good at none of these things.

How will we manage to get environmentalism out of the clutches of religion, and back to a scientific discipline? There’s a simple answer: we must institute far more stringent requirements for what constitutes knowledge in the environmental realm. I am thoroughly sick of politicized so-called facts that simply aren’t true. It isn’t that these “facts” are exaggerations of an underlying truth. Nor is it that certain organizations are spinning their case to present it in the strongest way. Not at all—what more and more groups are doing is putting out is lies, pure and simple. Falsehoods that they know to be false.

This trend began with the DDT campaign, and it persists to this day. At this moment, the EPA is hopelessly politicized. In the wake of Carol Browner, it is probably better to shut it down and start over. What we need is a new organization much closer to the FDA. We need an organization that will be ruthless about acquiring verifiable results, that will fund identical research projects to more than one group, and that will make everybody in this field get honest fast.

Because in the end, science offers us the only way out of politics. And if we allow science to become politicized, then we are lost. We will enter the Internet version of the dark ages, an era of shifting fears and wild prejudices, transmitted to people who don’t know any better. That’s not a good future for the human race. That’s our past. So it’s time to abandon the religion of environmentalism, and return to the science of environmentalism, and base our public policy decisions firmly on that.

Thank you very much.

Michael Crichton’s legacy—as the man, the author, the filmmaker, the doctor, the teacher, the visionary, and more—is very much alive and important today.

3 Blue State Offshore Wind Projects Scrapped In Blow To Biden’s Green Agenda thumbnail

3 Blue State Offshore Wind Projects Scrapped In Blow To Biden’s Green Agenda

By The Daily Caller

Three New York offshore wind projects were canceled Friday in the latest sign of trouble for the stumbling industry and President Joe Biden’s green energy agenda, according to Politico.

The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), the agency that handles offshore wind contracts, disclosed Friday that it could not finalize power purchase agreements with three developers that received conditional awards from the state in October 2023, according to Politico. The announcement amounts to a cancellation of the projects, which deals a blow to New York’s goal to reach 70% green energy generation by 2030 and Biden’s goal to install enough offshore wind capacity nationwide to provide enough electricity to power 10 million U.S. homes by 2030.

New York announced awards for the three projects canceled Friday after the state’s Public Service Commission (PSC) shot down a push by other developers to charge more for the power their projects would produce to offset rising costs, according to Politico. Several other projects were canceled following the PSC’s rejection, with similar dynamics playing out in other blue states like New Jersey and Maryland in recent months as well.

Biden’s Climate Bill Boosted An Offshore Wind Giant, But His Economy Brought It To The Brink

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) November 3, 2023

Despite notable progress, the U.S. offshore wind industry is still in its infancy. As [with] any new sector, challenges are expected & require resolve from [federal], state & private sector to overcome,” Doreen Harris, NYSERDA’s president and CEO, wrote in a Friday post to X. “[NYSERDA] will take proactive measures to address these issues head-on. Next steps soon.”

The offshore wind industry is stumbling despite the availability of generous tax credits contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Biden’s signature climate bill. Inflation, higher borrowing costs and logistical problems are gumming up projects and contracts that appeared lucrative and viable around the time that Biden signed the IRA into law.

Biden’s 2030 target continues to fall further out of reach with Friday’s cancellation, as Reuters reported in November 2023 that the goal already appeared to be unattainable given headwinds in the industry.

The White House, the office of Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and NYSERDA did not respond immediately to requests for comment.




RELATED ARTICLE: Environmental Laws That Impeded Pipelines For Years Could Trip Up Biden’s Sprint Toward Offshore Wind

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

158 Washington, D.C. cherry trees get axed – UN vs. UN on ‘2 years to save world’ thumbnail

158 Washington, D.C. cherry trees get axed – UN vs. UN on ‘2 years to save world’

By Marc Morano

158 Washington, D.C. cherry trees get axe – UN vs. UN on ‘2 years to save world’ – Kerry declares YOU are ‘GREEDY’ – EU: ‘Climate inaction’ violates human rights.

Sean Hannity: The publisher of Climate Depot, Marc Morano, is back. Good to see you. … Marc, you have spent the better part of your adult life debunking the climate alarmist religious cult. Now it’s it’s fully in gear and it’s spending all of this money. What do people really need to know about what they are pedaling and how it’s based on phony science, not real science? You know, look at the study that came out a couple of weeks ago; electric cars may pollute the planet more than gas-powered cars, but all of this never gets told to the American people in the media mob.

Marc Morano: The UCLA historian Saul Friedländer described the central planners of the 20th century as using the bureaucracy to enforce ‘magical beliefs.’ The ‘magical beliefs’ here are that we can spend trillions of dollars and magically transform our vehicles from gas power to EVs. ‘Magically’ transform our electrical grid to solar and wind and claim we’re doing something to save the climate. Even if we faced a ‘climate catastrophe,’ the last thing you’d want to do is the Biden administration approach — a central-planned top-down government plan of picking winners and losers. You would need to unleash innovation if that’s what we actually faced. You’d want a wealthier country; you would want a technological explosion. You would want capitalism unleashed because the cleanest environments are the freest environments.

They take the exact opposite approach here, and it’s ‘magical thinking’ from beginning to end in terms of the green agenda. This is just going to hammer the American people. They’re spending so much money that there are parts of California where they don’t have enough bureaucrats to spend the climate cash flowing in from the Inflation Reduction Act and from the Biden administration. They have to hire bureaucrats even to figure out how to spend it all.


The National Park Service — the organization supposedly missioned to preserve “unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations”– will, after the 2024 National Cherry Blossom Festival, cut down 300 trees in Washington, D.C., 158 of which will be cherry trees. Their reason? To “fight” “climate change” — the 300 will be disposed of to make room for a reconstructed seawall around the Tidal Basin and Potomac River so D.C. can “withstand about 100 years of future sea level rise.”

At this point, climate change is like the dishrag punchline of a washed-up comedian — predictable and disappointing. As the bit goes, climate change is exacerbated by CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere — except that CO2 levels today are the same as they were 3 million years ago. The oceans are going to cataclysmically rise — except that in the last 122 years, the oceans have risen a grand total of eight inches with, at this rate, another 1,800 years before they reach apocalyptic levels. This must be why climate change activists like the Obamas and Neil DeGrasse Tyson keep buying beachfront properties.

The Pravda media are no different, insisting the cherry trees reached their earliest peak bloom in 20 years because of “an abnormally warm winter, consistent with climate change trends.” They scream, “Be afraid! The end is nigh!” while failing to mention the just-as-crazy winters from decades ago. For example, in mid-February of 1930, there was an abnormally warm 10-day period with recorded temperatures including 89 degrees Fahrenheit (Jefferson City, MO), 76 degrees (Burlington, IA), and 82 degrees (Richmond, VA).

What’s more, this “unusually warm winter” was not all that unusual when considering the eruption of the underwater Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano in January 2022 followed by the arrival of El Nino in 2023. Under the circumstances, the unusual event would have been having a normal winter in the middle of this convergence.

The truth is, the “common knowledge” that 97 percent of scientists agree climate change is man’s fault is about as reliable as Barack Obama’s autobiography. And the cherry on top is that we could very well be heading for an extended period of cooling caused by diminished solar activity.

The Park Service says it will plant a variety of new trees following the project, but why chop down 300 trees in the first place, just to start over with immature trees and needless walls to the tune of $113 million? Money and power are the surface answers. Climate change is not science, but it is big business, with the federal government doling out billions of dollars a year on the subject and the spending only increasing. The power comes with restrictions on peoples’ travel (in both cars and airplanes), international carbon taxes, attempting to prosecute “ecocide” as an international crime, and shutting up anyone who raises a hand to question “the science.”

But there may also be a more disturbing and painfully ironic reason, both for the cherry tree demolition and the perpetuation of climate change fearmongering: the love of destruction for the sake of destruction.

Maintaining order and enforcing justice are the bare-bones requirements for any civilization. But the real, gold-standard civilizations — the Roman Republic, Victorian Britain, and the United States up to 1963 — go above and beyond the basics by promoting the arts and sciences and encouraging what de Tocqueville called the manly passion for equality — encouraging each individual to be the best he can and reach full, 100 percent capacity.

Look at the feats of architecture or entire artistic movements like Art Deco. Look at the accomplishments of Dickens, Frost, Hemingway, Tennyson, Disney, and Ford in the arts or at the Hoover Dam, the moon landing, and the rebuilding of Europe and Japan after 1945 — a civilization is supposed to create with purpose, and what it creates has to be good and beautiful. It needs to fill and lift the soul. Even dads in their garages were, once upon a time, encouraged to manifest themselves in this way.

Compare that to the regime under which we currently live. Now, works of art are attacked — in some cases completely destroyed — with only a whimper of counter-energy. In fact, when the suggestion is made to make beautiful things again, it’s decried as dangerous and fascist. Our institutions do worse than nothing — they aid and abet this mindset.

Look at the National Endowment on the Arts and Humanities, whose prime job is no longer to inspire and push people to the stars, but to applaud the latest manifestation of the zeitgeist. These include: plays with “Black Lives Matter” themes; Shakespeare performances that showcase an anti-Trump bent; “queer” theatre; mime performances about racism; an art exhibit dedicated to the life of Yuri Kochiyama, who once claimed Osama bin Laden as one of the people she “admired”; and theatre performances that allow people to “commune” with a cactus. The education system does its part by graduating fewer and fewer students who can read and add, meaning fewer students who can differentiate between art and slop.

Of course, most acts of creation involve some destruction; our own Republic was created by destroying the British Empire circa 1763. And, oftentimes, the destruction that does take place will be a compromise to prevent something even worse. Butdestruction for the sake of itself — or for the sake of a fiction — threatens what is good, instills fear, and is a sign that a civilization is in decline.

Fear is the antithesis of hope — the mind-killer that eventually dissolves our humanity into a spineless glob, eager to hand over the keys to the algorithm. Whether it’s through skewed warnings about the end of “democracy” or the claim that the planet could burst into flames and floods at any moment, the Borg is determined to control our lives through fear. This is why, in the eyes of the elites, beauty itself is too dangerous. It causes people to dream, to push themselves, and, at its highest, imparts hope — it threatens their ability to wield fear.

Ultimately, beauty — from an Art Deco building to a blossoming cherry tree — makes us human. But that is what the Borg cannot allow, at any cost.

Nathan Stone is a storyteller who looks at culture, politics, and religion from a different POV on his YouTube channel Nate on the Stone, and who exercises the moral imagination in his writing. A lover of books, music and the outdoors (especially with dogs) he earned a masters in American history from Liberty University in 2016. Subscribe to his channel and follow him on Twitter.

EDITORS NOTE: This Climate Depot column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Will feds decimate one owl species to help another? thumbnail

Will feds decimate one owl species to help another?

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

Nearly 500,000 barred owls in northern California, Oregon, and Washington state will soon be under the gun if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service goes ahead with its latest scheme to save the endangered northern spotted owl.

In November, the Fish and Wildlife Service unveiled its barred owl management proposal, the centerpiece of which is the removal of approximately 500,000 barred owls via the shotgun or other forms of euthanasia from the habitat of its smaller cousin, the northern spotted owl.

“Barred owl removal is not something the Service takes lightly,” Jodie Delavan, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Service, told McClatchy News on March 26. “However, the Service has a legal and ethical responsibility to do all it can to recover northern spotted owl populations.” A final barred owl “management strategy” and a record of decision is expected later this year, Ms. Delavan told McClatchy News.

Since the barred owl is protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, killing them — in this case, by the hundreds of thousands — will require a federal permit or regulation. And that is a step the feds appear to be prepared to take.

That the barred owl is covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is quite appropriate because the bird — beginning in the early 20th century — began migrating westward from eastern North America. By the 1980s, it was well established in the Pacific Northwest, where it occupies the same habitat as the smaller northern spotted owl. The two species feed on the same prey, with the more aggressive barred owl outcompeting its cousin, sometimes even killing northern spotted owls.

When the problem first garnered public attention in the early 1990s, the preferred explanation from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and environmental groups was that the commercial logging of old-growth forests was responsible for the loss of the northern spotted owl’s habitat and thus was behind the bird’s dwindling numbers. Saving old-growth forests, where Douglas fir and hemlock prevail, was seen by the Clinton administration as the preferred solution, and policies were put in place that restricted logging on federal land in the Pacific Northwest. Those policies succeeded in shutting down many sawmills and destroying timber-dependent communities throughout the region.

The Clinton administration even orchestrated an “Owl Summit” at which federal officials and environmentalists congratulated themselves for caring so much about the fate of the northern spotted owl. Those who pointed out that the problem lay not with old-growth forests but with the encroaching barred owl were ignored.

Over 30 years after the summit and the bird’s being added to the Endangered Species List, the situation faced by the northern spotted owl has worsened. While ignoring the mistake it made in blaming the loss of old-growth forest for the northern spotted owl’s declining numbers, the feds now acknowledge that the problem lies with the barred owl. Seizing the bull by the horns — to mix metaphors — the Fish and Wildlife Service initiated an experiment that involved the killing of 2,485 barred owls with 12-gauge shotguns in five different areas, the Modesto Bee reported March 26.

Having concluded that nonviolent removal of the barred owls was impractical, the feds appear to have settled on a lethal approach. This means showing a preference for one species of owl over another, with the “invasive” barred owl coming up short. But is the barred owl really an invasive species, or is it simply expanding its territory, as many species of birds and mammals are prone to do?
The Owl Research Institute, a Montana-based nonprofit focused on owl conservation, is reviewing the government’s proposal.

“Central to this discussion is the determination of whether Barred Owls truly meet the criteria for an invasive species, or if they represent a more adaptable species capable of natural expansion by themselves, as some have suggested,” the institute said in a March 26 statement emailed to McClatchy News.

The Fish and Wildlife Service is operating under the 1973 Endangered Species Act, a statute that has fallen woefully short in fulfilling its mission of recovering species at risk. In the case of the northern spotted owl, the law was used in the 1990s to curtail commercial logging in the Pacific Northwest. That was a political goal pursued by environmentalists in and out of government. As is now clear, it did nothing to improve the lot of the northern spotted owl.

Today, federal wildlife managers are seriously considering an avian version of ethnic cleansing to carry out their “legal and ethical responsibility” under the Endangered Species Act. The statute allows bureaucrats to play God, even if their policies turn out to be ungodly. If they go through with their plan and shotguns are trained on hundreds of thousands of owls, the Endangered Species Act will have reached a new level of absurdity.

This article originally appeared at The Washington Times


Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner R. Cohen is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research, where he concentrates on energy, natural resources, and international relations. He also serves as a senior policy adviser with the Heartland Institute, senior policy analyst with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, and as adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Articles by Dr. Cohen have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Investor’s Business Daily, New York Post, Washington Times, National Review, Philadelphia Inquirer, Detroit News, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Miami Herald, and dozens of other newspapers in the U.S. and Canada. He has been interviewed on Fox News, CNN, Fox Business Channel, BBC, BBC Worldwide Television, NBC, NPR, N 24 (German language news channel), Voice of Russia, and scores of radio stations in the U.S. Dr. Cohen has testified before the U.S. Senate committees on Energy & Natural Resources and Environment & Public Works as well as the U.S. House committees on Natural Resources and Judiciary. He has spoken at conferences in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Bangladesh. Dr. Cohen is the author of two books, The Green Wave: Environmentalism and its Consequences (Washington: Capital Research Center, 2006) and Marshall, Mao und Chiang: Die amerikanischen Vermittlungsbemuehungen im chinesischen Buergerkrieg (Marshall, Mao and Chiang: The American Mediations Effort in the Chinese Civil War) (Munich: Tuduv Verlag, 1984). Dr. Cohen received his B.A. from the University of Georgia and his Ph.D. – summa cum laude – from the University of Munich.

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Enormously Naïve’: JPMorgan CEO Slams Biden’s Natural Gas Pause, Issues Warning About Economy thumbnail

‘Enormously Naïve’: JPMorgan CEO Slams Biden’s Natural Gas Pause, Issues Warning About Economy

By The Daily Caller

Jamie Dimon, long-time CEO of JPMorgan Chase, criticized the Biden administration’s pause on new liquified natural gas (LNG) projects and gave a key warning about the future of the economy in a letter released Monday as a part of the company’s annual report.

Dimon emphasized the usefulness of LNG as a form of affordable energy for the U.S. and its allies, with the project pause increasing dependence on oil and coal and harming economic and geopolitical advantages, according to the statement. He also issued a warning for the economy that the current high rate of inflation could stick around for longer than expected, which would also mean that the Federal Reserve’s federal funds rate could remain elevated to suppress inflation amid high levels of government spending.

“Trade is realpolitik, and the recent cancellation of future liquified natural gas (LNG) projects is a good example of this fact,” Dimon said in the statement. “The projects were delayed mainly for political reasons — to pacify those who believe that gas is bad and that oil and gas projects should simply be stopped. This is not only wrong but also enormously naïve. One of the best ways to reduce CO2 for the next few decades is to use gas to replace coal. When oil and gas prices skyrocketed last winter, nations around the world — wealthy and very climate-conscious nations like France, Germany and the Netherlands, as well as lower-income nations like Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam that could not afford the higher cost — started to turn back to their coal plants.”

He also pointed out key global events that he believes threaten the U.S. economy and require Americans’ attention.

“It is important to note that the economy is being fueled by large amounts of government deficit spending and past stimulus,” Dimon said in the statement. “There is also a growing need for increased spending as we continue transitioning to a greener economy, restructuring global supply chains, boosting military expenditure and battling rising healthcare costs. This may lead to stickier inflation and higher rates than markets expect.”

The national debt is currently nearly $34.6 trillion as of April 4, according to the Treasury Department. In February, the federal government spent more than double what it took in, adding $296 billion to the national debt.

Prices have risen 18.5% since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, most recently rising 3.2% year-over-year, far higher than the Fed’s target of 2%. In response, the federal funds rate had been placed in a range of 5.25% and 5.50%, the highest level in 23 years.

JPMorgan reported record profits in 2023 despite a crisis that rocked many medium and small banks, which was started by a bank run at Silicon Valley Bank. Following the collapse of First Republic Bank, JPMorgan purchased the bank’s assets.

JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon weighs in on the LNG pause in his Annual Shareholder letter 🎯

“The projects were delayed mainly for political reasons — to pacify those who believe that gas is bad and that oil and
gas projects should simply be stopped. This is not only wrong but also…

— Shaylyn Hynes (@ShayHynes) April 8, 2024

“There are downside risks to watch,” Dimon said in the statement. “Quantitative tightening is draining more than $900 billion in liquidity from the system annually — and we have never truly experienced the full effect of quantitative tightening on this scale. Plus the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East continue to have the potential to disrupt energy and food markets, migration, and military and economic relationships, in addition to their dreadful human cost. These significant and somewhat unprecedented forces cause us to remain cautious.”

JPMorgan declined to comment further to the Daily Caller News Foundation.





Can The Climate Crusaders Please, For The Love Of God, Stop Trying To Control The Weather?!

Biden’s Electric Vehicle ‘Mandate’ Might Just Be A Surprise Gift To China

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Robinette Hood: Here’s How Biden’s EV Agenda Will Take From The Poor And Give To The Rich thumbnail

Robinette Hood: Here’s How Biden’s EV Agenda Will Take From The Poor And Give To The Rich

By The Daily Caller

President Joe Biden’s massive electric vehicle (EV) agenda will subsidize the lifestyles of America’s well-to-do while hitting average people the hardest, economists and auto market analysts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Biden administration is aggressively regulating the U.S. auto market to drastically increase the proportion of EVs sold over the coming decade, but consumer demand has not taken off as quickly as proponents had projected despite the subsidies made available by Biden’s flagship climate bill, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Manufacturers are slashing prices of their EVs to make the vehicles more appealing to consumers, which will increase prices for internal combustion engine (ICE) cars to compensate; this dynamic will only pick up speed and infect the used-car market favored by lower-income consumers as the administration’s stringent regulations kick in over time, economists and auto market analysts told the DCNF.

EVs benefit from direct subsidies, such as the IRA’s $7,500 consumer tax credit, but they also will increasingly benefit from a hidden cross-subsidy whereby manufacturers drop their prices and offset those losses by boosting prices of ICE vehicles, experts explained to the DCNF.

“As the mandated market share of EVs grows, the number of ICE vehicle sales must shrink. A decreasing number of ICE vehicle sales would have to prop up an increasing number of EV sales. The price hike per ICE vehicle would have to increase to offset losses on the ever-larger volume EVs sold,” Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the DCNF. “Used cars compete with new cars for customers. If new car prices rise, so will used car prices. Even with generous federal, state, and manufacturer incentives, EVs cost thousands of dollars more than comparable ICE vehicles, and millions of middle-income households are already priced out of the market for new vehicles.”

The Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have each promulgated major emissions or fuel economy regulations designed to effectively require massive increases in the number of EVs sold in the 2030s. Despite these regulations and massive federal spending intended to help advance EV production and demand, American manufacturers are losing billions of dollars on their EV product lines.

Here’s Another Way Biden Admin Is Routing EV Charger Subsidies Into America’s Wealthiest Neighborhoods

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 1, 2024

These losses are poised to kick off a chain of second-order consequences on the auto market that will disadvantage lower-income consumers whose needs are especially not well-suited by EVs, O.H. Skinner, the executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, told the DCNF. Democrats set aside billions of dollars to help build out a national EV charging network in the bipartisan infrastructure package of 2021, but those funds have so far only led to a handful of charging stations coming online across the country while “range anxiety” remains a very real concern for consumers.

One of the most pernicious effects of the EV agenda is the skyrocketing cost of many traditional models. When D.C. and California elites fixate on wiping away the majority of the cars on the market, it distorts the market — the cars that people want are in shorter and shorter supply, leading to higher prices and requiring consumers to pay over list price to snag what is available, while the market is flooded with EVs that consumers aren’t interested in, even at steep discounts,” Skinner told the DCNF.  “And this will roll forward into the used market as well, as the same shortages flow through for years, hurting those who most need affordable cars that meet their family needs.”

The general effect that Skinner describes projects that increased costs of new gas-powered cars — driven by manufacturers’ desire to offset losses on EVs and increase demand for a decreased number of available new gas-powered models — will boost demand for used cars as consumers turn to that market for better deals. In turn, that increase in demand will put upward price pressure on the used car market, making cheaper options less affordable to the detriment of demographics that do not have the means to splurge on pricier automobiles.

REPORTER: “The first quarter of this year, Ford lost $700 million on their EV program…Is that what we can expect from Bidenomics?”

DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY: “Bidenomics is having a tremendous impact.”

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) June 27, 2023

The used vehicle market is significantly larger than the market for new cars.

In 2022, approximately 38.6 million used vehicles were sold, compared to 13.6 million brand new vehicles, according to data aggregated by Statista. The regressive impacts of the administration’s EV agenda stand at odds with much of its rhetoric on its broader environmental agenda, which broadly seeks to promote climate policy and social justice at the same time.

“Even if it’s not explicitly stated, the only way that automakers can survive billions in losses from one division (EVs) is because of profits from the other division (conventional car),” Mark Mills, the director of the National Center for Energy Analytics, told the DCNF. The long-term and downstream impacts of this cross-subsidization are “profoundly regressive,” he added, alluding to the fact that the government and manufacturers are taking actions in ways that make luxury EVs less expensive while driving up the costs of models favored by the everyman.

EV adoption is lagging in the American heartland relative to coastal and more densely-populated states like California, which had more than four times as many EV registrations as of 2022 than the next state on the list, according to Department of Energy data.

The White House did not respond immediately to requests for comment.





Biden Admin Classifies Martha’s Vineyard, Elite Locales As ‘Low-Income’ To Push EV Charger Subsidies

Biden To Visit NYC For Record-Shattering Celeb Fundraiser Same Day Trump Honors Fallen Cop

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Biden’s Electric Vehicle ‘Mandate’ Might Just Be A Surprise Gift To China thumbnail

Biden’s Electric Vehicle ‘Mandate’ Might Just Be A Surprise Gift To China

By The Daily Caller

The Biden administration has put in place regulations that would require many Americans to adopt electric vehicles (EV) in the coming years despite U.S. companies struggling to produce the products, leading some experts to wonder if vehicles from China will be needed to meet current goals.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized emission standards in late March for light-duty vehicles that would effectively require 67% of new models sold to be electric or hybrid by the end of 2032 in hopes of speeding up an EV transition to reduce carbon emissions. The regulations are in spite of sluggish American EV demand that has led to both concerning losses and slowdowns in production for automakers, with both Tesla and Rivian missing production expectations for the first quarter of 2024.

China’s EV industry could fill the gap left by the lagging U.S. market, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“China’s EV production would pose no risk to American consumers or U.S. geopolitical security if we had a free market allowing U.S. companies to concentrate on their comparative advantage in pickups, SUVs, and minivans, and allowing consumers to decide which types of vehicles best meet their needs,” Marlo Lewis, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the DCNF. “EV mandates, however, create a captive market for EV producers, and China is today the world’s top EV producer.”

BYD, China’s top EV maker, has experienced a meteoric rise in recent years, with yearly profits growing 80.72% year-over-year in 2023 amid global expansion, but has so far been priced out of the American market due to current restrictions. EVs and hybrids made up 30% of all Chinese car sales during the first 11 months of 2023.

China also has broad command over the current EV supply chain due to its control over minerals needed to build batteries required for electric vehicles. The country currently controls 87% of the world’s mineral refining capacity, with U.S. attempts to increase its own capacity not yet yielding sufficient results.

The Biden administration has sought to incentivize the purchase and manufacturing of certain American EV models with a $7,500 tax credit in an effort to drive down costs for consumers, conditioning the subsidy on manufacturers not using a certain level of components from foreign entities of concern, like China. Despite incentives and mandates, sales for new EVs in the U.S. grew only 2.7% in the first quarter, below the 5% that sales for all new vehicles grew, leading to a drop in auto market share to 7.1% for EVs.

Automakers, including Bentley, GM, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Honda, have scaled back their previous EV goals as consumers decline to buy the product.

“So, if U.S. manufacturers are forced to keep making high-priced EVs, their market share could contract while BYD’s increases,” Lewis told the DCNF. “Global auto industry leadership would shift from the United States to China. California and EPA’s EV campaign could end up helping fulfill China’s ambition to be the world’s leading superpower.”

The Biden administration has also put forward restrictions on heavy-duty vehicles, like trucks, that effectively require at least 25% of new long-haul trucks and 40% of all new medium-sized trucks to be electric or zero-emission by 2032.

Several American auto manufacturers have posted huge losses due to EV development and sales, including Ford, which lost $4.7 billion on EVs in 2023, losing nearly $65,000 on each EV that it sold. General Motors lost $1.7 billion in just the fourth quarter of 2023, despite strong profits overall.

Bidenomics In One Lesson: Latest Job Gains Fueled By Foreign-Born Workers, Gov’t Employees

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) April 5, 2024

“Americans rely on too many critical goods and raw materials from China, which is why we need to ‘strategically decouple’ from CCP supply chains as soon as practicable,” Adam Savit, director of the China Policy Initiative at the American First Policy Institute, told the DCNF. “That goes most especially for critical high-tech and defense needs, such as semiconductors, AI, quantum computing, and rare earth elements. U.S. policymakers have made us increasingly dependent on EVs for transportation, so as long as such policies are in place, we must decouple from CCP EV supply chains as well.”

Savit pointed to the current tariffs on EVs as the reason Chinese EV makers have been unable to break into the U.S. market and are unlikely to if current trade restrictions were to remain the same. The Trump administration put in place a 25% import tax on EVs, which Biden has so far kept in place.

BYD has sought to infiltrate the American market through possibly building EV plants in Mexico, which, under current restrictions, could skirt around tariffs, delivering EVs that could compete with even gas-powered vehicles in terms of price to American buyers. Chinese EVs are also often of lesser quality, have access to cheaper materials and can utilize less expensive labor.

“Even American-made EVs are produced with a lot of Chinese inputs, including critical minerals,” Savit told the DCNF. “Many EV-related CCP supply chains are tied to human rights abuses and forced labor in Xinjiang.”

Former President Trump, in a campaign speech in mid-March, called for putting a 100% tariff on every single car manufactured outside the U.S., which would severely hamper China’s ability to sell in the country, while also reducing competition for domestic manufacturers, according to CNN.

Chinese EVs have already made large headwinds in the European market, with around 19.4% of EVs sold on the continent in 2023 being made in China, which is expected to rise to 25% by the end of 2024, according to an analysis from the European Federation for Transportation and Environment. The European Union announced in September 2023 that it had launched an investigation over whether to impose punitive tariffs on Chinese EVs due to artificially cheap prices from state subsidies, according to Reuters.

The White House did not respond to a request to comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.





DAVID BLACKMON: Biden Must Stop Playing Politics With The Strategic Petroleum Reserve

‘The Swamp Is Getting Deeper’: EPA Awards Billions From Biden’s Landmark Climate Bill To Orgs Loaded With Dem Insiders

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

New England’s Last Coal Plants Set to Close thumbnail

New England’s Last Coal Plants Set to Close

By The Geller Report

“And ultimately the impact is going to be less reliable electricity, higher prices for Americans … it’s going to have a disproportionate impact on the poor.” — Ayn Rand, Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution.

“There’s a concerted effort to shift away from reliable sources of electricity generation to unreliable sources. And ultimately the impact is going to be less reliable electricity, higher prices for Americans — it’s going to have a disproportionate impact on the poor.” — Daren Bakst, Director, Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment.

‘Earning heavy criticism’ from some experts who noted the importance of having baseload, dispatchable power generation. While renewable sources like wind and solar are intermittent, or heavily dependent on weather conditions, coal, natural gas and nuclear can quickly be turned on in times of high demand.

According to the Energy Information Administration, coal, natural gas and nuclear power plants produce 49%, 54% and 93% of their listed capacity, respectively, while solar panels produce just 25% and wind turbines produce 34% of their listed capacity.

So when they run out of energy, red states should not bail them out.

Climate crap is all a big lie.

In Western Europe, in the preindustrial Middle Ages, man’s life expectancy was 30 years. In the nineteenth century, Europe’s population grew by 300 percent—which is the best proof of the fact that for the first time in human history, industry gave the great masses of people a chance to survive.

If it were true that a heavy concentration of industry is destructive to human life, one would find life expectancy declining in the more advanced countries. But it has been rising steadily. Here are the figures on life expectancy in the United States (from the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company):

1900 – 47.3 years
1920 – 53 years
1940 – 60 years
1968 – 70.2 years (the latest figures compiled)

Anyone over 30 years of age today, give a silent “Thank you” to the nearest, grimiest, sootiest smokestacks you can find.

New England’s last coal plants set to shutter, ushering in era of green energy

Environmentalists cheered the announcement as a ‘breath of fresh air’

By Thomas Catenacci, Fox News, April 6, 2024:

The final coal-fired power plants in New England are slated to shutter in the coming years, making it the second region to phase out the energy source that powered the U.S. economy for decades.

In an announcement late last month, New Hampshire-based power provider Granite Shore Power said it had reached an agreement with federal officials to shutter its Schiller Station in 2025 and its Merrimack Station by mid-2028. The action underscores the region’s and, more broadly, the nation’s steady march toward a future dominated by green energy. Environmental activists have called for this change for years — energy advocates have warned against it.

Continue reading,


Pamela Geller


Germany goes back to burning coal as its energy crisis deepens


Remember when Obama started the war on coal?…

— Jen B.Doll🌎❤️🗽🇺🇸 (@JenBDoll) April 2, 2024

A coal-fired power plant in China’s Dai city.

China emits more CO2 every year than the rest of the developed world combined—completely cancelling out all the sacrifices you are being forced to make in the farcical pursuit of Net

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) April 7, 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Oil is Power, CO2 is Food. Globalists Want Control of Both thumbnail

Oil is Power, CO2 is Food. Globalists Want Control of Both

By Karen Schoen

The big threat to the planet is people: there are too many, doing too well economically and burning too much oil.” — Sir James Lovelock, BBC Interview, Contributor to UN Agenda21/2030

How often do I say everything is connected. Nothing is more evident than that. Just look at what we see going on in the world.  Can you make the connection? Climate change is not about the climate it is about control. Oil is about power. Cheap oil gives people power. Global elite will never give people power. That would cut into their wealth.  Allowing the people to own private property and create competition is not acceptable. Who controls the food (CO2) controls the people. Who controls the energy/power (Oil) controls the country.

Cheap oil makes affordable business possible. It powers the economy. The cost of good are cheaper. Inflation is slowed.  Global elite don’t want people to have power because it cuts into theirs. No competition allowed. Wealth redistribution is what climate change and control of oil is about. I believe the globalists don’t want Americans to control oil because then they can’t control the people. Too much mobility.

Where do globalists get their “data”. They program it. Data is only as good as the people who do the programming. By going back in time thousands of years and charting climate cycles you can see that climate changes. It gets hot. It gets cold. Sometimes very hot, sometimes very cold. Regardless of man and industry, climate changes. Today we find that, the ice caps are not melting unless your pictures are from the summer, polar bear population has increased and the seas are not rising. The globalists know that or they wouldn’t be buying mansions on the ocean. They just think we are too stupid to notice.  By using data in a shortened time frame you can skew the results. I found this to be interesting. This is a time lapse video of 25 years showing no erosion on the beach. No sea level rising. Its all about the money.

To get a thorough appreciation of the Climate hoax I strongly recommend

Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth). The story of the corruption of Science:

Once you grasp the power and control the world crises begin to make sense. Let’s take the Middle East.  It is a given that the radical Arabs, Hamas, Hezbollah, hate and want to obliterate the Jews. They say it often enough. It is sad to see young Americans putting their energy into a fight they don’t understand for a group that in the end will subjugate them as well because they are infidels who treat women like slaves and have criminalized homosexuality with a punishment of death.  David Crystal, today’s guest, will give you the historical background of the conflict. Take a look at some of the headlines over the past few months. Tell me if you think they were designed to stir the pot against Israel.

Washington Post , February 1,  Biden imposes sanctions on Israeli West Bank settlers.

Defense News, November 28th 2023, Senate Democrats want Israel conditions in latest defense package snarl.

Reuters, November 7th 2023, US Senate Democrats block Republican aid to Israel, not Ukraine.

Huffington Post, February 13th 2024, the Biden administration is investigating Israel’s possible war crimes despite public claims to the contrary.

Tablet , March 6th 2024, Hamas  industry of health fakes casualty numbers.

New York Post, March 20th 2024, Hamas’s Gaza death toll stats are pure fiction yet the world media and the leaders like Joe Biden still use them to smear Israel.

Daily Mail, February 5th 2024, Biden calls Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu a bad effing guy in the latest foul mouth tirade from 81-year-old president.

Times of Israel,  March 20th 2024,  poll over 70% of the Palestinians still maintain Hamas correct to commit October 7th atrocities.

JNS Jewish News Syndicate, March 17th,  Biden administration reportedly delaying arms shipment to Israel.

Jerusalem Post, February 25th 2024  Joe Biden, most Palestinian support Hamas editorial.

New York Times, January 20th 2024. Biden presses Netanyahu on working towards a Palestinian state.

Who would have thought America would be involved in this conflict. Anthony Blinken just said he wants a 2 state solution A state for Palestinians and a state for Israel . He wants Ukraine in NATO. Blinken managed to piss off Russia and Israel in the same day. Now Johnson wants to take the Russian Oligarchs money and give it to Ukraine   Is this regime looking for WWIII? Why are we even involved?

Do you know what is going on in Europe or Canada? The noose is getting tighter and coming to America soon. Have you seen the demonstrations largely created by farmers who know, no farmers, no food. The farmers are exposing the evil of the green agenda, net zero, and the war on energy and food. Remember their goal: DEPOPULATION. Not because the planet can’t hold this amount of people but because more people to control and feed. The globalists can’ say out loud, lets kill of millions of people but they can devises schemes to have others do the killing for them like: funding Hamas and Hezbollah, over regulating farmers forcing them to limit herds, produce less crops, funding Ukraine.  All produce the same results, people will die.  This is a worldwide problem but America is the prize.

Make no mistake both parties are destroying America. Between the illegals, the escalation of crime, inflation, massive debt, America is undergoing a managed decline. This decline is the plan pushed on purpose by our selfish, narcissistic  criminal leaders. They use an issue with no solution, get us to fight each other so they can slip in new regulations destroying the middle class. That is the globalists method. It works.  I fear soon we will have no rights as they are currently ignored by the regime.  Are enough people finally waking up and beginning to fight the real enemy the globalists and not each other. That remains to be seen.

The late Rosa Koire warned Europe and America  between 2010-2015 about “the blueprint, the comprehensive plan of action for the 21st century to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all minerals, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all law enforcement, all health care, all food, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world.” This is now called the Great Reset.  America must be subordinate to the UN for their plan to work. Tis is the plan used in China by the CCP. Tis is the plan in the Middle East of the Mslims under Sharia.  Clare Lopez, my guest will explain on today’s show.

The W.H.O. the Globalist UN World Health Organization is setting this policy and the RINOS in the House just made this possible. The WHO decided they should control world health under any emergency they declare like climate change.  Our bobblehead legislators just funded the WHO again. Speaker Johnson is either afraid or was bought off just like the rest of the criminals in congress who are leaving early so the House will flip to the Democrats.  The new plan is to flip the house before the election so the Dems can write legislation to use the 14th Amendment of remove Trump from the ballot.  The Dems know they can’t win unless they cheat. They must silence the voice of “We the People”.  We are the enemy and the more we learn the more they will try to crush us. Prepare. Do not let that happen the stakes are too high.

I do not want our legislators to give away our national sovereignty or money to a group of power hungry control freaks in the UN. Tell your legislators. Communicate with congress, join the Sovereignty Coalition and read The Pandemic Treaty That Won’t Prevent a Pandemic.

It is us, you and me against a powerful machine comprised of the government, NGOs, Chambers, political leaders, media and Hollywood. They all lie. That was the hardest thing I had to realize. A real slap in the face. Recognizing everything I grew up and learned was a lie designed to bloat the government and give them more power until we are their slaves. You will own nothing and be happy or will you?

OBiden has allowed our enemies to infiltrate. They are here anxiously waiting for the command (probably on the phones we gave them) to strike. Between the Islamists, Chinese and Cartels are you prepared?  Our guest and friend Clare Lopez will describe what we could face. I believe as the election draws closer and it is evident OBiden will lose, they will create another summer of love.  OBiden just had a phone call with XI. He showed Xi so much strength. We should be proud, Not.

Nationalists will dream of their future, their life and set a plan to achieve that dream. Globalists will have a visions of life and demand you fit into their vision without deviation. If you disagree squash you.

All Globalists want is Money, Control and Power. They can only get Power if we give it to them. Don’t give them yours. Challenge them with the truth. Doing Nothing is Affirmation. The Regime will not go quietly, Prepare.

Share with your 5. So join me today.

©2024. Karen Schoen. All rights reserved.

Ford Puts Dent In Biden’s Plans To Expand EVs thumbnail

Ford Puts Dent In Biden’s Plans To Expand EVs

By The Daily Caller

Ford Motor Corporation announced Thursday that it would be delaying the production of new electric vehicle (EV) models as domestic demand for electric cars falters, despite heavy federal investment.

Ford joined General Motors and Mercedes-Benz in reeling in its EV production strategy, pivoting instead to producing more hybrid vehicles, according to a Thursday press release. The high-profile retreats from the EV market follow billions in federal spending by the Biden administration aimed at supporting the industry.

“As the No. 2 EV brand in the U.S. for the past two years, we are committed to scaling a profitable EV business, using capital wisely and bringing to market the right gas, hybrid and fully electric vehicles at the right time,” Ford President and CEO Jim Farley said.

Ford’s EV division posted a $4.7 billion loss in 2023, before accounting for interest and taxes. The corporation’s gas and hybrid division, by contrast, posted a $7.5 billion profit, according to The New York Times.

“We have said our EV business needs to be profitable in its own right,” a Ford spokesperson told the Daily Caller News Foundation, adding the delay of new models “support the development of a differentiated and profitable EV business over time.”

Auto manufacturers are responding to slowing growth in the EV sector.

EV sales only grew by 2.7% in the first quarter of 2024, a far cry from the 47% growth the vehicles saw in 2023, according to CBS News. Auto sales on the whole, meanwhile, grew by 5%.

“EV demand is growing, just at a slower rate than the industry forecast,” the Ford spokesperson said. “We expect continued growth in global Ford EV sales in 2024, though less than anticipated.”

General Motors and Mercedes-Benz have both delayed plans to transition to EV-only manufacturers.

Ford electric vehicles are coming, and we promise you’re in for an exhilarating ride.

— Ford Motor Company (@Ford) October 14, 2019

As automakers retreat from EVs, and consumers react to them lukewarmly, taxpayers are left on the hook for the billions the Biden administration has spent subsidizing the vehicles.

The administration allocated $7.5 billion to build EV charging stations across the country, in accordance with the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure bill. Despite billions allotted, only seven stations have been built using those funds.

The Biden administration also made $12 billion available to automakers to repurpose existing factories to manufacture electric vehicles.

The White House wants 50% of all new cars sold by 2030 to be EVs. EVs only accounted for 7.1% of U.S. sales in the first quarter of 2024, down from the previous quarter, CBS News reported.





Ford Slashes Electric Vehicle Jobs As Sales Slow

Org That Wants To Cut Carbon Emissions Sues To Close Zero-Emission Nuclear Power Plant

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Biden Regime Builds a ‘Climate’ Youth Army thumbnail

Biden Regime Builds a ‘Climate’ Youth Army

By The Geller Report

The Biden regime shoved this line item into their obscene bankrupting, bloated budget – an unimaginable eight billion billion dollars  to fund a goodstepping ‘Climate Corps’ program that would hire over 50,000 “climate activists”—more employees than NASA and the EPA combined.

It evokes a climate red guard. Or Hitler youth.

Climate is a hoax.

Biden Builds a Domestic Green Army

He’s shrinking the real Army but arming a political Climate Corps.

By The Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal, April 2, 2024:

Who says Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has no influence? Her vision to mobilize a government Climate Corps to promote green politics is becoming a reality. President Biden wants to shrink the real Army, but his budget includes more than $8 billion for a domestic green political army.

The political model is FDR’s Civilian Conservation Corps, which paid Americans to work when nearly one in four were jobless. The U.S. now has a labor shortage, but the Biden Administration wants to mobilize more than 20,000 initially for the Climate Corps—and some 50,000 by 2031. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey want the Climate Corps to employ 1.5 million over five years.

“This is not summer camp for climate activists. It’s a job-training program,” says Trevor Dolan of Evergreen Action, a green nonprofit that has lobbied for the Climate Corps. He says participants will learn to install electric heat pumps, solar panels, EV charger and pollution-monitoring equipment, fight forest fires, do wellness checks on the elderly during heat waves and help communities develop disaster plans, among other tasks.

The Sunrise Movement, another far-left outfit, says the Climate Corps can “raise the bar for all employment” and “allow us to use the government as a way of designing our own society and setting new norms for the workplace.” Ah, yes, a children’s crusade to remake America—paid for by your tax dollars.

A Climate Corps memorandum of understanding signed in December by six federal agencies and AmeriCorps says that, “to the extent permitted by law,” the program “will offer a range of compensation and benefits such as housing, transportation, health care, child care, educational credit, scholarships and student loan forgiveness, stipends, non-financial services and benefits that address barriers to employment and job retention, and other benefits as determined by specific program and participant needs.”

Not a bad gig if you don’t want to contribute to the real economy. This is an income redistribution program to finance left-wing nonprofits and bureaucracies to employ and train a cadre of political activists.

The MOU says the Climate Corps will promote the Administration’s goal that 40% of overall federal climate-change investments should “flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved, overburdened by pollution, and experiencing disproportionate impacts of climate change.”

The perverse priority of this program is hard to believe when the President is racking up record budget deficits and shrinking the U.S. military despite rising global threats. The Climate Corps plan shows how much Mr. Biden remains in thrall to the Democratic left and its climate-change obsessions.

Continue reading.


Pamela Geller

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Blatant Violations’: Watchdog Challenges Key Data Used By Biden Admin To Push Sweeping Climate Agenda thumbnail

‘Blatant Violations’: Watchdog Challenges Key Data Used By Biden Admin To Push Sweeping Climate Agenda

By The Daily Caller

A government watchdog group has filed a complaint with the Biden administration over its use of a dataset frequently used to push its climate agenda.

Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) filed the complaint with the Commerce Department over the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) “Billions Project” dataset, which purports to keep track of natural [and climate] disasters that have caused at least $1 billion in damages going back to 1980. The billion-dollar disasters (BDD) data — cited frequently by the Biden administration to insinuate that climate change is intensifying and justify sweeping green policies — is based on opaque data derived from questionable accounting practices, PPT alleges in the complaint.

“American families and businesses continue to struggle with persistently high inflation, which many attribute in large part to the energy policies and government spending of the current administration. The idea that blatant violations of scientific integrity could be underlying the rationale for these policies should concern every American,” Michael Chamberlain, PPT’s director, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Unfortunately, this is far from an isolated incident. The Biden Administration came into office pledging that its decision making would be grounded in the highest-quality science, but all too often has failed to live up to those promises.” 

PPT Scientific Integrity Co… by Nick Pope

The complaint was filed with the Commerce Department, as NOAA operates under its auspices, Chamberlain told the DCNF.

PPT’s complaint alleges that NOAA does not adequately disclose its sources and methods for compiling the BDD dataset, adds and removes BDD events from the dataset without providing its rationale for doing so and produces cost estimates that are sometimes significantly different than those generated by more conventional accounting procedures.

While NOAA states that it develops its BDD data from more than a dozen sources, the agency does not disclose those sources for specific events or show how it calculates loss estimates from those sources, PPT’s complaint alleges.

The complaint further alleges that NOAA’s accounting methods are opaque and “produce suspect results.”

For example, when Hurricane Idalia took aim at Florida in 2023, NOAA initially projected that the storm would cause about $2.5 billion worth of damages before insured losses ultimately came in at about $310 million, according to PPT’s complaint, which cites the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation for that figure. Nevertheless, NOAA subsequently marked up its estimate for how much damage the storm caused to $3.5 billion, a discrepancy for which NOAA provided no explanation, PPT alleges in its complaint.

NOAA researchers have disclosed in the past that the agency considers factors such as functions pertaining to livestock feeding costs — in addition to more conventional types of damages — in their cost calculations.

Further, the complaint alleges that BDD events are quietly added and removed from the dataset without explanation, citing Roger Pielke Jr., a former academic who believes climate change to be a real threat but opposes politicized science. In a forthcoming paper analyzing the merits of BDD statistics, Pielke compared the dataset in late 2022 to the dataset in the middle of 2023 and found that ten new BDD events were added to the list and 3 were subtracted without explanation.

Apart from the issues with methodology alleged by PPT in its complaint, the use of BDD events as a proxy for climate change’s intensity is inherently misleading because economic data does not reflect changes in meteorological conditions, Pielke has previously explained to the DCNF.

For example, increasing concentrations of assets, especially in coastal areas, can confound the usefulness of BDD events as an indicator for the intensity of climate change, as Energy and Environment Legal Institute Senior Policy Fellow Steve Milloy has previously explained to the DCNF. Hypothetically, the same exact hurricane could hit the same exact place, decades apart, with vastly different damage totals; this would be the case because there are simply more assets sitting in the way of the storm, not because the storm was any more violent due to worsening climate change.

NOAA has acknowledged this limitation of the dataset in prior communications with the DCNF.

Additionally, NOAA will add disasters to the list retrospectively because it adjusts for inflation, meaning that a hurricane that caused $800 million in damages in 1980 dollars would be added to the list because the damages exceed $1 billion when adjusted for inflation, for example.

The Biden administration has frequently cited the BDD dataset to substantiate its massive climate agenda.

For example, Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk cited the dataset in written testimony submitted to lawmakers in February explaining the White House’s decision to pause new approvals for liquefied natural gas export terminals.

The BDD statistics are also referenced Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5), the Biden administration’s landmark climate report that is intended to provide the most sound scientific basis for lawmakers and officials to craft climate policy.

NOAA asserted that the increasing frequency of BDD events is a sign of intensifying climate change in a January press release and blog post summarizing 2023, and then defended the use of the dataset in subsequent communications with the DCNF.

“Sensational climate claims made without proper scientific basis and spread by government officials threaten the public’s trust in its scientific officials and undermines the government’s mission of stewarding the environment,” PPT’s complaint states. “It also poses the danger of policymakers basing consequential government policy on unscientific claims unsupported by evidence.”

NOAA declined to comment, citing the active nature of the scientific integrity complaint. The White House and the Department of Commerce did not respond immediately to requests for comment.





The Entire Push To Halt New Natural Gas Exports Traces Back To One Ivy League Prof And His Shaky Study

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Read Biden’s Letter To Me On Energy Which Contains 10 Lies and 3 Truths thumbnail

Read Biden’s Letter To Me On Energy Which Contains 10 Lies and 3 Truths

By Dr. Rich Swier

Dear Mr. Swier,

Thank you for writing to me.  Our Nation has a long history of producing the energy that fuels our cars, heats our homes, and keeps our lights on [TRUE].  Unfortunately, for too long, we have also relied on foreign nations to help meet our energy needs.  As President, I am fighting to keep energy prices low by promoting domestic energy production [LIE], cracking down on price gouging [LIE], and laying a new foundation for true and lasting energy independence [LIE] by investing in a clean energy future.

Since I came into office, companies in the United States have produced record levels of oil and gas [LIE].  And to bring prices down at the pump [LIE], my Administration released millions of barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve [TRUE].  Across the country, oil and gas companies have thousands of permits that allow them to drill in the United States right now [LIE]—but they are choosing not to.  And my Administration is calling on them to use their permits or lose them.

As President, it is my job to focus on the energy needs of Americans today and of the future [LIE].  To be truly free from our reliance on foreign oil [LIE], we are investing in all forms of energy here at home [LIE], including wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal power, and vehicle electrification [TRUE].  These investments are creating good-paying jobs and will lower energy costs for Americans [LIE].  And as we do this, we are making sure we leave no one behind—including rural America, the heartland, and energy communities [LIE].

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts about how we can bring true energy security and independence to America.


Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Blatant Violations’: Watchdog Challenges Key Data Used By Biden Admin To Push Sweeping Climate Agenda

White House Shoots Down Mike Johnson’s Plan To Link Ukraine Aid And Liquefied Natural Gas Reversal thumbnail

White House Shoots Down Mike Johnson’s Plan To Link Ukraine Aid And Liquefied Natural Gas Reversal

By The Daily Caller

The White House said Tuesday that it would not entertain a compromise with Speaker Mike Johnson to connect an aid package for Ukraine with a reversal of the Biden administration’s moratorium on approvals for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals, according to Bloomberg News.

Johnson reportedly suggested that such a compromise could be a workable solution for both parties to take care of high-priority items on their respective agendas, but the White House has made clear that the deal is dead on arrival, according to Bloomberg News. The right flank of the House Republican conference has opposed a new major aid package for Ukraine, while the White House is doubling down on its LNG exports pause after environmentalist groups showered the Biden administration with praise for its Jan. 26 decision on the issue.

“The president has been clear that House Republicans should pass the bipartisan national security agreement that already passed the Senate as soon as possible to get Ukraine the aid it urgently needs to defend itself from Russian tyranny,” the White House said in a statement, according to Bloomberg News. “The president supports the pause on pending, additional approvals of LNG export licenses to evaluate the economic and climate impacts on consumers and communities.”

Could Joe Biden’s Natural Gas Pause Cost Dems The Senate In November?

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 29, 2024

The Senate passed a $95 billion aid package for aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan in February, but the House has yet to approve the bill and send it to President Joe Biden’s desk. The president has called on House Republicans to pass the foreign aid bill on numerous occasions, including during his State of the Union Address in March.

During a Sunday appearance on Fox News, Johnson intimated that he was thinking about linking the two issues together in a single piece of legislation when the House returns to Washington after its spring recess.

Johnson reportedly floated the idea to connect Ukraine aid and a LNG pause reversal to Biden during a one-on-one meeting in March, according to Bloomberg News, which cited an individual with knowledge of the situation. Reuters previously reported that some in the White House were potentially willing to reverse the moratorium depending on what else was included in the compromise, but White House officials disputed that claim.

Climate activists — including the confrontational outfit called Climate Defiance and a 25-year old TikTok influencer — lobbied the Biden administration to impose the LNG moratorium ahead of the decision to do so. The pause will not reduce global emissions, but instead empower natural gas production in places like Russia and Qatar, energy sector experts previously told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The climate lobby and its activist voters are poised to be a key bastion of support for Biden in the 2024 race, with several organizations already endorsing his reelection campaign or declaring their plans to spend big to stave off former President Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House.

The White House did not respond immediately to a request for comment.





The Entire Push To Halt New Natural Gas Exports Traces Back To One Ivy League Prof And His Shaky Study

Biden Admin Leaned On Questionable And Misleading Science To Justify Halting Natural Gas Hub Approvals

Trump-Appointed Federal Judge Smacks Down ‘Arbitrary And Capricious’ Biden EV Scheme

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

Climate change increases female genital mutilation. True or false? thumbnail

Climate change increases female genital mutilation. True or false?

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

Female genital cutting is a barbarous practice that should have been consigned to the ash-heap of history long before this world experienced the pleasure of beholding my angelic baby face. Unfortunately, however, for the first time after a steady decline over two decades, it is now on the rise worldwide.

Sadly, the biggest contributors to this increase are a few African countries where the custom has never been sufficiently stigmatised. And the main factor behind it is rapid population growth. In other words, more women are now living in countries where the practice persists, which means more women, in absolute terms, are getting cut.

This is according an analysis by UNICEF, which was published this past International Women’s Day (March 8), The New York Times reporter who covered it clearly knew this, given that she’s covered the subject for two decades, and even referenced the report. And yet, somehow, she still managed to drag in climate change as a major factor behind the resurgence of the practice.

Weather disasters linked to climate change, so her argument goes, make “people increasingly vulnerable and more reliant on traditional community structures.” The implication is that, in places where those traditional structures include female cutting, climate change drives up the practice.

Upon sober examination, this reasoning makes very little sense. For one, erratic weather has been a constant feature in Africa forever. Additionally, multiple extreme weather events occurred during the two decades in which female cutting declined precipitously. Furthermore, even those countries and regions where female cutting has been effectively eradicated often experience extreme weather events.

In short, there is no evidence that climate change has anything to do with the recent resurgence of female cutting. The spurious attempt to link them is just the latest instalment in an absurd trend by pundits and commentators to pin the blame for age-old African maladies to climate change.

It’s not limited to Africa, of course, but it is particularly notable in contemporary foreign media coverage of the continent.

Consider the movement – about which we wrote recently – to eradicate food insecurity on the continent by promoting the cultivation of neglected traditional crops. This scheme is motivated, in part, by the conviction that the effects of climate change will make it increasingly difficult to grow introduced crops – like rice, maize and wheat – on the continent.

But there are two major problems with this position.

The first is that it is self-defeating. Traditional crops grow better, not because they are immune to climate change, but rather because they’ve been cultivated on the continent for longer, and so are better adapted. There is no reason to believe that drastic weather events, caused by climate change, wouldn’t affect them as much as introduced crops.

The second problem, which is more important, is that climate change is in fact a minor factor behind food insecurity in Africa (if at all); food insecurity has been a problem for decades but has improved tremendously in the last few decades. Where it persists, it’s often because of conflict or other forms of instability. Even the snobs at the World Economic Forum know enough to acknowledge this.

But doesn’t climate change at least drive conflict as well, so that it drives up food insecurity, at least indirectly?

Well, not really. Most of the armed conflicts in Africa have complex roots, few of which can be convincingly traced back to the changing climate. One would need to be decidedly quixotic to assert that, hadn’t the climate changed, Somalia wouldn’t have spiralled into its eternal civil war.

Likewise, any sensible betting man (if that isn’t an oxymoron), would be wise to put their odds squarely on the likelihood that the two military thugs currently tearing up Sudan would still be doing so even if the temperatures in Khartoum had remained at their pre-industrial levels. Ditto Mr Kagame’s marauding mercenaries in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Now, that the climate has been changing lately isn’t in question. And though the degree to which human activity is driving that change is debatable, it is obvious that it has played a meaningful role. It therefore makes sense that, in so far as climate change is bad for us and the planet, and to the extent that we can do something about it, we should do something about it.

Moreover, those who care deeply about this issue are perfectly within their rights to campaign for such action. But that doesn’t mean they get to shoehorn it into every conversation about human suffering and social ills. It isn’t that climate change is irrelevant; the climate is, after all, all-encompassing. But so is oxygen, and yet we never blame oxygen as for murders, though all murderers live on it.

Seeing all tragedies as functions of climate change smacks of desperation and elite snobbery. And, what’s worse, it is likely to do more harm than good, especially in Africa. For it is with regard to this continent that we most need to be serious when diagnosing the root causes of developmental and social ills, given that so few of them have been solved here.

Blaming genuinely horrific occurrences, such as the resurgence of female genital cutting, on climate change effectively obviates the efficacy of any potential attempts to tackle them in the near term, since the climate is unlikely to stop changing any time soon, even if humans stopped contributing to it immediately.

It may very well be that the motivations of those who do so are humanitarian, but I despair of the righteousness of anyone who would so casually condemn millions more women and girls to this barbarity until China stops burning coal.

Is climate change being blamed for too many planetary problems? Leave your comments below.  



Mathew Otieno is a Kenyan writer, blogger and dilettante farmer. Until 2022, he was a research communications coordinator at a university in Nairobi, Kenya. He now lives in rural western Kenya, near the shores of Lake Victoria, from where he’s pursuing a career as a full-time writer while concluding his dissertation for a master’s degree. His first novel is due out this year.

EDITORS NOTE: This Mercator column is republished with permission. ©2024. All rights reserved.

Biden’s Marxist EPA announces that their new job is to destroy the U.S. Constitution thumbnail

Biden’s Marxist EPA announces that their new job is to destroy the U.S. Constitution

By Geoff Ross

The Communists installed at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continue installed White House squatter Marxist Joe Biden’s assault on essential supply chains, transportation vehicles and our free markets.

The unelected official’s at the EPA have bypassed the U.S. congress and announced an insane strict set of guidelines for heavy vehicles – including cement mixers, garbage trucks, RVs, ambulances and school buses.

Joe Biden’s Marxist plan to put oil companies out of business is part of the reason his EPA is now forcing 25 percent of long-haul trucks and 40 percent of medium size trucks must be “non-polluting” by 2032.

Obviously the adult capitalist entrepreneurs in the room understand this will make it next to impossible to do business and would inflict significant economic damage on our republic.

The EPA obviously has zero congressional authority to enact this policy and although on the outset we Americans are angry at this insane decision we must stay calm and be thankful these bottom feeding cockroach communists are implementing this now during an election year.

President Trump on day one in office will terminate the employment of these low IQ trilobites infesting this unnecessary government agency at the EPA funded by the low IQ Republican controlled congress.

Unconstitutional policies like this come out of the Karl Marx manifesto and to quote the unelected EPA Administrator Michael Regan-

‘This is another giant step forward to protect future generations from climate change,’

He sounds like he’s trying to emulate Neil Armstrong’s first step on the moon speech. What a joke.

Climate change is a massive fraud created to dismantle the oil industry and selectively turn the United States into a third world return to the caves country.

Our planet has a constant cycle of climate change created by the sun, the earth’s rotation and volcanic activity. Grandma working a part time job driving a school bus is not affecting our climate.

So ladies and gentlemen stay patient and in November go vote for Donald Trump so these slimy Marxist stinky filled diapers running the EPA can be changed.

Don’t forget these EPA Marxists drive to work in big SUVs and Biden creates plenty of CO2 flying on Air-force 1 for fund raising with his Communist pal Obama and Epstein connoisseur pal Bill Clinton.

If Obama was concerned about climate change flooding the planet he would not have purchased a mansion close to the ocean. Bill Clinton definitely racked up thousands of pounds of CO2 emissions flying on Epstein’s jet to pedophile island.

The EPA communists also played the race card when they said that around 72 million people in the United States live next to truck freight routes, and they are more likely to be people of color or from low-income households.

Total communist propaganda horse crap. My family are people of color and we have friends of color who drive gasoline powered trucks to feed their families and put a roof over their heads. We ain’t worried about the imminent collapse of our planet’s ecosystem.

The EPA is an organization that Trump will either dismantle but most definitely he will take immediate action fire these low life scum Marxists in January 2025.

Trump will hire new employees and management who actually understand the role of the EPA does not include interference in our free market economy. Better yet defund the entire ball of wax.

©2024. Geoff Ross. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: To Control or not to be Controlled, that is the Question