Just in case you missed it, California is blaming their failures on big oil. So, they’re going to court. Yes, they claim big oil caused Climate change. What happened to mankind being the culprit?
The American Petroleum Institute, an industry group also named in the lawsuit, said climate policy should be debated in Congress, not the courtroom.
“This ongoing, coordinated campaign to wage meritless, politicized lawsuits against a foundational American industry and its workers is nothing more than a distraction from important national conversations and an enormous waste of California taxpayer resources,” institute senior vice president Ryan Meyers said in a statement.
If big oil caused this, why not sue for damages? But the state wants the establishment of a fund to offset future costs from extreme weather events and climate mitigation efforts. In other words, it rains, or snows, big oil pays.
Let’s hope that all who were there and especially those who disagreed with the cowardly retreat are allowed to talk. And the hearings must be open to the public.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy set social media ablaze on Thursday after he pushed back against a reporter’s assertion that he launched an impeachment inquiry “without evidence.”
“AP reported that McCarthy’s impeachment inquiry was launched ‘without evidence,’” GOP operative Arthur Schwartz posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Thursday. “Here’s McCarthy forcing an AP reporter to admit that there was lots of evidence to support an impeachment inquiry.”
In the clip, Associated Press reporter Farnoush Amiri asked McCarthy about fellow Republicans who have said that the investigation into President Biden has yet to show an impeachable offense at this point. “Is that an assessment you share?” Amiri asked.
“You know, an impeachment inquiry is not an impeachment,” McCarthy responded, “What an impeachment inquiry is to do is to get answers to questions. Are you concerned about all the stuff that was recently learned?”
McCarthy then went through a list of instances that many have characterized as possible evidence of wrongdoing from the president.
“Do you believe the president lied to the American public when he said he’d never talked to his son about his business dealings?” McCarthy asked “Yes or no?”
“I can’t answer that,” Amiri replied.
“Do you believe when they said the president went on conference calls? Do you believe that happened?” McCarthy asked. “That’s what the testimony says,” Amiri answered.
Do you believe the president went to Cafe Milano and had dinner with the clients of Hunter Biden, who believes he got those clients because he was selling the brand?” “That’s what the testimony said,” Amiri answered.
“Do you believe Hunter Biden, when you saw the video of him driving the Porsche, that he got $143,000 to buy that Porsche the next day? Do you believe that $3 million from the Russian oligarch that was transferred to the shell companies that the Bidens controlled after the dinner from Cafe Milano took place?” McCarthy asked.
McCarthy then asked Amiri again if she believed the president lied, to which she responded, “But is lying an impeachable offense?”
“All I’m saying is I would like to know the answer to these questions,” McCarthy said. “The American public would like to know.”
The clip was immediately picked up by conservatives on social media who slammed the narrative from many on the left who have claimed there is no evidence of wrongdoing related to President Biden and his family.
“This is what happens when reporters follow the White House’s commands to engage as activists with the Republican inquiry instead of as journalists impartially seeking facts,” GOP strategist Matt Whitlock responded on X.
“It’s on days like today where we see what the left wing foundations that bankroll the Associated Press get for their money,” former Ted Cruz spokesperson Steve Guest posted online.
“’Is lying an impeachable offense,’” The Spectator Editor Stephen L. Miller posted on X. “Oh you sweet summer child…”
In a statement to Fox News Digital, a spokesperson for the AP said, “The Associated Press stands by reporter Farnoush Amiri, an established and respected journalist covering the U.S. Congress.”
McCarthy officially gave the go ahead for an impeachment inquiry on Tuesday after saying that House Republicans have “uncovered serious and credible allegations into President Biden’s conduct.”
“Today, I am directing our House committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden,” McCarthy announced in a statement at the Capitol. “This logical next step will give our committees the full power to gather all the facts and answers for the American public.”
Appeals court overrules affirmative action judge. Affirmative action judge Steve Jones denied Mark Meadows to move his trial to Federal Court. He also denied granting a stay until an appeal is filed. So, Meadows went to a real judge. We have this from ABC News.
An appeals court on Wednesday granted former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows’ request for an expedited review of his emergency motion seeking to block a lower court’s ruling that kept his Georgia election interference case in state court.
Meadows filed the request for an emergency stay with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals after Judge Steve Jones last week rejected Meadows’ bid to have his case moved, based on a federal law that calls for the removal of criminal proceedings brought in state court to the federal court system when someone is charged for actions they allegedly took as a federal official acting “under color” of their office.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy walks through Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., July 19, 2023. (Leah Millis/Reuters)
White Progressives are at it again. They’re asking social media to lie for them again. The folks in the White House are again calling on their friends in Social media to attack the House Impeachment Inquiry.
Since Wednesday morning the MSM AND THE LEFT WING TALKING HEADS started the personal attacks and lies. Where were they when the fake January 6th commission based on lies and fake news impeached a President? This from CNN Business.
The letter was sent to executives helming the nation’s largest news organizations, including CNN, The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS News, and others, a White House official familiar with the matter said.
The official tally is in and it is brutal: Americans suffered the biggest drop in household income in 2022 in a dozen years.
Real median household income was $74,580 in 2022, a drop of 2.3 percent from the prior year, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.
This is the biggest drop in household income since 2010, when it household income fell 2.6 percent. That means it is worse than the pandemic decline of 2.2 percent. It is the fourth worst year in records going back to 1985.
The declines were driven by high inflation. The measure of inflation that is used to calculate real income rose 7.8 percent, the worst inflation since 1981.
The real median earnings of all workers—including part-time and full-time workers—declined 2.2 percent between 2021 and 2022. Median earnings of those who worked full-time, year-round fell 1.3 percent in 2022.
The figures are even worse once taxes are figured into the equation. Real median post-tax household income in 2022 fell 8.8 percent in 2022.
Income inequality also got worse in 2022 once taxes are calculated. Pre-tax, income inequality—as measured by an gauge of income distribution called the Gini index—declined for the first time since 2007. After taxes, however, the index increased 3.2 percent. An increase in the Gini index signals increasing income inequality.
The official poverty rate in 2022 was 11.5 percent, with 37.9 million people in poverty. This was unchanged from the prior year.
A few weeks before Interior Secretary Deb Haaland announced that she would withdraw more than 336,400 acres of public land from mining and drilling with a 10-mile buffer around Chaco Culture National Historical Park, Navajo Nation lawmakers passed legislation opposing the move.
Although Haaland’s action was applauded and supported by environmentalists and tribal members from the Navajo Nation and Pueblo tribes, not everyone is happy. Among the critics are Navajo allotment holders who are worried about what this will do to their livelihood.
Navajo tribal leaders also voiced displeasure, including Speaker Crystalyne Curley and President Buu Nygren, who both released statements about the 10-mile radius buffer zone.
“The Secretary’s action undermines our sovereignty and self-determination,” said Nygren. “Despite my concerns and denunciation, the Department of Interior has moved forward, which is highly disappointing. Secretary Haaland’s decision impacts Navajo allottees but also disregards the tribe’s choice to lease lands for economic development. Ultimately, this decision jeopardizes future economic opportunities, while at the same time placing some 5,600 Navajo allottees in dire financial constraints.”
The legislation, passed in April by Navajo Nation lawmakers, rescinded the previous administration’s bill opposing H.R.2181 and S.1079, the Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2019, and recommending the proposed buffer zone be reduced to five miles, rather than 10 miles that encompass the 336,400-acre land withdrawal.
The new bill does not support any buffer zone and opposes the intent for any withdrawal.
Haaland said the decision to create the buffer came after “significant consultation” with other tribes, and she noted that the 20-year withdrawal applies only to public lands and federal mineral holdings and does not apply to minerals owned by private, state or tribal entities.
It also does not affect valid existing leases. Production from existing wells could continue, additional wells could be drilled on existing leases, and Navajo Nation allottees can continue to lease their minerals.
But former Navajo Council Delegate Mark Freeland had reported during an April 2022 government-to-government consultation meeting that those who could be most deeply affected are those who live around Chaco Canyon, and who are the ones being ignored on this issue.
“The White House, as did Congress, stated that the rule would not apply to individual Indian allotments or to minerals within the area owned by private, state, or tribal entities,” Freeland said. “In reality, the rule would have a devastating impact because the indirect effect would make the allottees’ land primarily worthless from the standpoint of energy extraction.”
He reported that withdrawal of land affects 53 individual allotments, generating $6.2 million a year in royalties for approximately 5,462 allottees. Many Navajo families rely on this income to meet their daily needs. It is estimated that 418 unleased allotments are also associated with about 16,615 allottees, and the withdrawal could adversely affect well over 22,000 allottees.
“Collectively, leadership of the Navajo Nation is equally concerned that environmental organizations have made a point to target Chaco Culture National Historical Park for political or financial gain,” Freeland said, “without listening or taking into account the people who are from the region. Chaco Canyon is located on Navajo Nation lands.”
At the forum, he noted that the National Park Conservation Association has been one of the primary advocacy groups to launch a campaign for buffers around national parks most threatened by oil and gas production, and Chaco Canyon was on top of their list.
Freeland reemphasized that those living in the Chaco Canyon area have been ignored, and for the past six years Congress has considered multiple proposals to create a buffer zone around the historical park at the additional request of the All Pueblo Council of Governors.
“Protecting Indigenous lands is important for future generations to understand our country and to respect the Pueblos’ sacred culture,” said Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association after Haaland announced her decision.
“There are limits to this administrative protection, as 20 years is significant but also the equivalent of an eye blink on this timeless landscape,” Pierno said. “The National Parks Conservation Association calls on Congress to finish the job and approve legislation championed by the entire New Mexico delegation to permanently protect the region.”
Those who live around Chaco Canyon, who were born there before it became a National Historic Park, and are descendants of those who lived in the area for generations have always expressed their dismay about a buffer zone and Haaland’s stance on the issue.
Delora Hesuse is a Navajo allottee and has been advocating on the allotments and the challenges of what fellow allotment owners are trying to let people know. One conflict is Haaland’s position on Chaco Canyon and whether she would be able to really listen to those living in the area.
“There is a conflict with everything that is going on,” said Hesuse, adding that Haaland “never once met with us when she was a congresswoman. I say this too, as another Native woman, does she have respect for other tribes? Does she have respect for us?”
She described the elders who receive royalty payment from oil and gas and said they are grateful. This income from oil and gas is income that Navajo allottees depend on and they are living a better life because of it. She also noted she has never heard of anyone getting sick from the effects of oil and gas production.
Within the Navajo Nation, 35.8% of households have incomes below the federal poverty threshold, and about 10% live without electricity. The Chaco Canyon drilling ban would strip an energy source from the Navajo Nation, and could cost Navajos an estimated $194 million over the next two decades.
“We have all these environmentalists coming in and telling us how we should be or how we should live,” Hesuse said. “Remember, we are the first people here.”
Voter fraud?
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer
Poor baby. Maricopa County Recorder Complains That Following Signature Verification Law Will Require More Work.
The county recorder ( a never Trumper ) is crying because he got caught taking the easy way out when he, Hobbs, and the Arizona AG took the easy way out on signature verification.
It looked as if they skirted Arizona law and decided to use any form for verification. I guess you could even use a note from your teacher and that would count ( I think you get my point. ). We have this from The Arizona Independent.
The additional responsibility for county recorders became clear after Yavapai County Superior Court Judge John Napper declared in ruling last week that the 2019 Election Procedures Manual (EPM) by Hobbs “create[d] a process that contradicts” the law. That ruling rejected Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ motion to dismiss an Arizona Free Enterprise Club lawsuit alleging that Fontes’ interpretation and enforcement of signature verification law, which aligned with that of Hobbs, did not match the actual statute’s language.
In response to Napper’s ruling, the press raised alarm among voters in its coverage featuring Richer. Arizonans were warned their early vote may not count because election officials would be required to verify signatures using registration records only, versus signatures from other documents or past ballots. Echoing Richer, their reporting speculated signatures could be rejected en masse due to the signature on file being an older variation, or warped by MVD digitization.
That means for two major elections, an unlawful signature verification process was enforced. Napper reminded Secretary of State Adrian Fontes that he has a “non-discretionary duty” to properly instruct county recorders on lawful vote tabulation.
FILE - California Attorney General Rob Bonta fields questions during a press conference, Aug. 28, 2023, in Los Angeles. Marcio Jose Sanchez / AP Photo
Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina and Texas had bills introduced in 2023 that would require districts to disclose a trans student’s gender identity to parents.
And why shouldn’t a parent have a right to know if a teacher or a school is hiding from parents this personal information? California requires a school to contact a parent if they want to give a child an aspirin, but you have an AG who wants to sue school districts that notify parents on what goes on in reference to schools who want parent notification.
“It’s disgusting that we now have union-controlled politicians fighting to keep sexual secrets from other people’s children,” said Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, in an email to The Center Square. “These radicals believe children are the property of the State, and many of them won’t reverse course any time soon because it’s part of their deeply held socialist views. The far left has infiltrated the government school system and they are using it for ideological indoctrination as opposed to education. These extremists see the school system as a means of raising other people’s children with their own worldview, and they won’t stop without accountability.”
The Free Speech Movement Cafe entrance sign located on the University of California Berkeley Campus, San Francisco Bay area Sundry Photography / Shutterstock.com
California colleges struggle in free speech rankings.
The Center Square) – According to national free speech rankings published by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, 59% of California colleges rate from “below average” to “poor,” with only one California college of 27 — California State University, Los Angeles — ranked “above average.”
The survey was conducted from a selected group of 55,102 undergraduates enrolled at 254 four-year degree institutions across the United States drawn from more than 750,000 verified undergraduate students and recent alumni by college opinion research firm College Pulse.
“Each year, the climate on college campuses grows more inhospitable to free speech,” said FIRE Director of Polling and Analytics Sean Stevens in a public statement. “Some of the most prestigious universities in our country have the most repressive administrations. Students should know that a college degree at certain schools may come at the expense of their free speech rights.”
Scores were largely based on students’ comfort expressing ideas, tolerance for liberal speakers, tolerances for conservative speakers, prevalence of disruptive conduct towards speakers, administrative support for free speech amid controversy, on-campus conversation openness regarding political issues. Select actions, such as supporting or disinviting speakers, supporting or sanctioning student groups for speech, or supporting or sanctioning scholars whose speech rights were threatened during controversy, could earn or lose further points.
Coming in at 33 of 254 universities ranked nationwide but first in California, California State University was the only California university to rate as slightly above average, and was followed within California by the University of California, Merced, then Claremont McKenna College. Meanwhile, the worst-rated school in California, the University of California, Davis, ranked 237 nationally, was the one school in the state to receive a “poor” speech rating, and placed 250th for tolerance of disruptive conduct and 221st for tolerance for conservative speakers.
According to FIRE, the University of California, Davis, disinvited two campus speakers between 2019 and 2023. During one cancelation in 2022, administrators canceled a Turning Point USA speaking event when a fight broke out before the event in front of the venue.
Excluded from relative rankings for its bottom-barrel “warning” rating, Pepperdine University was criticized for a speech code that bars speakers from “statements that disparage God, Jesus Christ, or religion; language that demeans and exploits any identities; explicit lyrics; and references to sex, alcohol, and narcotics/drugs,” or using “profanity or tell obscene jokes or stories of any kind whatsoever during the performance.”
