Global warming was not reversed by the year 2000 – yet we are still here.So do you believe a car salesman who tells you this deal is only good for today?
U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not CheckedLink to a PDF copy of the AP article, in case the original is “disappeared”.
PETER JAMES SPIELMANN June 30, 1989
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.
Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.
″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.
…Read more: https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
Sunday, June 30, 2019
Happy 30th Anniversary of "Ten Years to Save the World"
30 Year Anniversary of the UN 1989 “10 years to save the world” Climate Warning
Sunday 6/30/19 Beach Report
A Red Spotted Purple on the cliff wall
A Little Dab of Russiagate
Will do ya! Not much going on; between the Democratic debates and the G20, the news is mostly looking elsewhere, but Sundance at CTH is looking at the plans for the Mueller testimony with a jaundiced eye: Details Emerging of Coordinated Mueller Testimony With Congressional Democrats…
The baseline here is very important. As we have outlined throughout, and especially since the Democrats won the mid-term election, the Mueller “team” is closely coordinating with the Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Cummings group about how best to continue the efforts of the Weissmann and Mueller small group within the DOJ and FBI.Read the whole thing. And in old news, China Hacked Clinton’s Email Server, Congressman Confirms
The connective tissue between House Democrats and the “Small Group” within the FBI (Weissmann and Mueller lead), is the Lawfare group. As noted in the text message between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; and as noted in the hiring of former FBI legal counsel James Baker; and as noted in the Nadler and Schiff hiring of Lawfare members for their staff; the coordination between the seditious group (DOJ/FBI) and the politicians is crystal clear.
CTH advised everyone to pay close attention to the details in the agreements between Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and the corrupt team led by Robert Mueller. Everything they are doing is based on a coordinated plan between ideologues. The effort to remove President Trump is one long continuum… it has not stopped. The Mueller testimony is just another part of this process.
. . .
Pay attention to how these are being structured. Two open sessions with limited questions, and only one opportunity for questions by each member of the committee.
. . .
Notice the closed session without Mueller. This is with Andrew Weissmann and the key members of his investigative unit. This is the heart of the real corruption. Mueller is only the figurehead. Weissmann is the real lead, and the closed door session allows the Democrats to use the Weissmann testimony.
. . .
Limiting the exposure of Mueller is a way for Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler to mitigate the risk. Only one round of questions.
. . .
Nice trick here. Notice the closed door sessions are not classified. This is the way for Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler to get the material -the innuendo and suspicion- injected into their narrative.
The unredacted content will be discussed; that means all of the investigative pathways, including the maliciously corrupt false trails will be put into the discussion. AND the politicians are free to talk about any/all content of that discussion because it is not classified.
The U.S. intelligence community established that China hacked Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized email server when she served as the secretary of state, according to Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas).
In an interview with The Epoch Times published on June 26, Gohmert said that the Chinese “actually hacked Hillary Clinton’s personal server—as our intel community established without any question—even though the FBI refused to ever examine the evidence.
“There’s no question, China was involved,” he added.
Gohmert is the first lawmaker to publicly confirm that China was the foreign actor that hacked Clinton’s server. President Donald Trump is the only other official to have made the same claim.
Just Another Palm Sunday
Linked by Pirate's Cove in the weekly Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup and links. The Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cynthia Kirchner up on time and within budget.
Saturday, June 29, 2019
Reason #6381 that Trump was Elected
U.S. Oil Output Tops 12 Million Barrels a Day for First Time
U.S. Accounts For 98% Of All Global Oil Production Growth
But we still have a way to go. US oil usage averages 19 million barrels a day.
Get Fracking!
Linked by Pirate's Cove in the weekly Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup and links.
U.S. crude output soared to new heights in April, highlighting OPEC’s dilemma just days before the producer group meets amid growing geopolitical threats.
A government report on Friday showed U.S. production grew 2.1% in April to 12.16 million barrels a day. Booming shale production from places like the Permian basin of West Texas have enabled U.S. oil output to overtake Saudi Arabia and Russia. At the same time, trade disputes and escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf have clouded the outlook for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which is expected to extend current output cuts next week.
“It really means that OPEC has to make a decision to balance the market or shale will do it for them,” said Jim Lucier, managing director of Washington, D.C.-based Capital Alpha Partners LLC. “Despite all the talk about Wall Street forcing capital discipline, we’re not seeing any diminishing production yet.”This may not be entirely fair; US oil production was rising under Obama too, though largely against the meddling of his administration. Under Trump, the oil industry has continued to flourish. Most of the oil contributing to this comes for "tight" oil, which is to say, oil for which fracking is needed to extract it.
Crude output from the Permian is expected to jump 50% by 2025, according to BloombergNEF. ESAI Energy forecasts crude and condensate from the Bakken, another prolific play, will surpass record output into next year.
 |
| U.S. field production of crude oil, by source, 1860-2014 |
U.S. Accounts For 98% Of All Global Oil Production Growth
But we still have a way to go. US oil usage averages 19 million barrels a day.
Get Fracking!
Linked by Pirate's Cove in the weekly Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup and links.
Rural Oregonians Protest Cap and Trade, Legislators End Walkout
 |
| Truckers and loggers opposed to the carbon capping bill hold a rally at the Oregon Capitol Thursday morning |
Oregonians brought more than 2,000 trucks, tractors and other vehicles to the state Capitol this morning to protest climate bills and other legislation they say will threaten their livelihoods.
Trucks circled the Capitol, honking. The Capitol steps, mall and surrounding streets were thick with protesters.
Farmers, ranchers, loggers and others whose jobs are dependent on natural resources say the legislation — House Bill 2020, also known as cap and trade — will increase their fuel and energy costs while having a minimal impact on the climate.
 |
| Logging trucks line up in front of the Oregon Capitol. |
“We’ve got climate problems to deal with, obviously,” said Mary Hewitt, 19, waving her sign among a group of other young protesters. Hewitt comes from a family of truckers, fishermen and other working-class people. “So many of my peers have come out supporting these bills. They think they’re fighting for the environment, and I get it. But this is not the way to help the earth. Ride a bike to work. Walk more. Recycle. But don’t crush me and my family. We’re people, too.”
 |
| Demonstrators gather on the steps of the Oregon capitol, at a protest of a cap-and-trade climate bill |
When Senate Republicans walked off the job June 20, aiming to block a cap on carbon emissions, their walkout made national news. This was the second time this session the Senate Republicans fled the state Capitol to deny Democrats a quorum.At least a legislature that can't legislate can't do any harm.
Republicans have now been absent from the statehouse more than a week, and the Capitol is at a standstill with just three days left in the legislative session. According to Gov. Kate Brown, dozens of crucial bills are still waiting for Senate approval.
Senate President Peter Courtney announced Tuesday that House Bill 2020 no longer has the support among Democrats needed to pass. In response, Brown issued a statement in which she appeared to acknowledge the bill was dead.
But GOP senators are not convinced that the bill is dead — and they aren’t coming back yet. They said in a statement Tuesday that because several Senate Democrats have vowed to push the cap-and-trade legislation through this session, “this signals that HB 2020 is not dead.”
The statement also said that GOP senators demand that Brown and the Senate Democrats must promise that any carbon bills must be referred to the state ballot so the people of Oregon can make the final decision on them.
 |
| 2016 Presidential Election vote in Oregon |
Like much of the west, the vast majority of Oregon's area is rural, and there conservative politics prevail; however, the liberal population centers in Portland, Salem, Corvallis and Eugene dominate the state's legislature, Congressional representation and presidential vote.
It's good to see the rural folk in Oregon stand up against the majortarian urban interests who rule the state without much consideration for their lives.
In 2001, Gov. Kate Brown, then OR's Senate Democratic Leader, said she supported House Democrats in not showing up to floor sessions to oppose a measure Republicans, the majority at the time, backed. AP article cited by state Sen. Brian Boquist: https://t.co/lsdzfaucMB #LiveOnK2 pic.twitter.com/k1LiNgwbtM— Joe Douglass (@KATUJoe) June 21, 2019
UPDATE: While I was assembling the post, the Republicans came back: Oregon GOP senators return after 9-day walkout. I guess we'll see if the Democrats can be trusted.
Republican lawmakers returned to the Oregon Senate on Saturday, ending a walkout that began on June 20 over a carbon emissions bill they said would harm their rural constituents.
The minority Republicans returned after Senate President Peter Courtney said the majority Democrats lacked the votes to pass the controversial legislation. The House had previously passed the bill, one of the centerpieces of Oregon's 2019 legislative session, which is scheduled to end on Sunday.
The departure of the 11 Republicans had prevented the Senate from reaching a quorum to vote on the bill that was aimed at countering climate change. They left the state after Gov. Kate Brown ordered the state police to bring them to the state capitol. Meanwhile, more than 100 bills have stacked up in the Senate.
Gideon John Tucker (February 10, 1826 – July 1899) was an American lawyer, newspaper editor and politician. In 1866, as Surrogate of New York County, he wrote in a decision of a will case: "No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session."
Just a Little Russiagate
But some of it's pretty big. Ace get the scoop from Sean Davis, Democrat Rules on Mueller Closed Hearing: It Will Be Unclassified, So You're Allowed to Leak About It, But It Will Have No Transcript, So You Can Make Up Whatever Lie You Like and No One Will Be Able to Prove You're Lying
Who on earth decided there would be no transcripts? What possible good-faith reason could there be to demand testimony while refusing to record or transcribe the proceedings? The *only* reason to do this is so you can leak lies without fear of the truth catching up to you. pic.twitter.com/IGEkucWbct— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 27, 2019
Gee I wonder what their plan is here.No transcript? You must be kidding, right?
Anyone suspect that there will be claims that Mueller totally, totally wanted to charge Trump with obstruction of justice but, for whatever reason, was too ascared to?
And anyone suspect that CNN will suddenly get some more Conspiracy Theory Scoops again?
Althouse,You should read this, from Jonathan Turley. "20 questions for Robert Mueller."
1. When exactly did you determine that no collusion occurred between Donald Trump or his team and the Russian government or other Russian interests either before or immediately after the 2016 presidential election?Just one of several such lists I've seen and linked. Republicans should have no lack of good questions to ask Mueller. Now, if we can just get straight answers to them past the Democrats rules.
2. You met with President Trump after he fired FBI director James Comey. He has said the meeting was an interview for your possible appointment as Comey’s successor. Presumably, Comey’s firing and its basis were discussed. Did Trump explain his reasons to you?
3. Given that you were one of the first outside individuals to meet with Trump on Comey’s firing, didn’t that create a conflict for you as a fact witness in any later investigation? Did you seek an ethics opinion on that alleged conflict?
4. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein also was involved in the decision-making on Comey’s firing, including his memorandum detailing Comey’s violations. Did you seek to interview Rosenstein and, as a result, did you raise the obvious conflict of interest in Rosenstein overseeing the investigation?
5. You met with Rosenstein and Attorney General William Barr weeks before your report’s release. Both reportedly told you to identify all grand jury material to allow for the report’s expedited release. Why didn’t you do so? . . .
And from Elizabeth Vaughn at Red State, Newly Released Documents: Obama Officials Changed Intelligence Sharing Rules In Final Days To Undermine Trump Administration
The changes were intended to increase access to raw signals intelligence by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. Sekulow explains the modifications were made to “pave the way for a shadow government to leak classified information – endangering our national security and severely jeopardizing the integrity and reputation of our critical national security apparatus – in an attempt to undermine President Trump.”
The more officials who have access to classified information, the more difficult it becomes to determine accountability in the event of a leak.
According to Sekulow, the documents show that Clapper was especially “eager” for the adjustments to be made and “rushed to get the new procedures signed by the Attorney General [Loretta Lynch] before the conclusion of this administration.”
The documents reveal DNI official Robert Litt telling the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense’s Director of Intelligence Strategy, Policy, & Integration: “Really want to get this done … and so does the Boss [James Clapper].”
. . .
Related to this was the unprecedented increase in the number of “unmasking” requests made in the run-up to the election. Over 300 requests were carried out in 2016, most of which were recorded in the name of Samantha Powers, who served as Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations. However, Powers denies she was responsible for all of them.
The ACLJ filed their FOIA request for this information from the DNI and the NSA two years ago. They currently have three additional FOIA lawsuits pending.
Sekulow’s revelation adds to the ever-growing pile of evidence indicating that there was indeed a “coordinated effort” by a shadow government which worked to undermine President Trump.
Rule 5 Saturday - Blood and Treasure - Sophia Pernas
Sofia Pernas (born 1989) is a Moroccan-Spanish actress who currently resides in Los Angeles. She appeared in the main cast for the single season of the series The Brave, and stars as the co-lead in the series Blood & Treasure.
She moved to the United States when she was 5-years-old and grew up in Orange County. Her mother is from Morocco, while her father is from Spain, both are multilingual. As a result she speaks four languages including Arabic, English, Spanish and German. Although she initially planned a career in journalism, she was redirected to a career in modeling and acting after being scouted.
 |
| With Katia Winter, previous Rule 5 awardee |
Pernas played Marisa Sierras on The Young and the Restless and appeared on the telenovela Jane the Virgin. She played the character Hannah Rivera, in the main cast of the single season of the series The Brave.Linked by Pirate's Cove in the weekly Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup and links. Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy and FMJRA 2.0: Even Better Than The Real Thing working toward your amusement and education. Linked at The Right Way in Rule 5 Saturday LinkOrama.
Friday, June 28, 2019
A Sad Prediction Comes True
 |
| Mackenzie Lueck on Instagram |
Every so often, the Case of the Missing Blonde becomes a national media sensation. This is predictable — the public has an insatiable appetite for these damsel-in-distress stories — and nine times out of 10, the story ends with police finding her body and then the public loses interest, with the trial of her accused killer attracting little notice. It was the mystery of her disappearance that caused the excitement, and once she’s just another dead girl (usually murdered by an ex-boyfriend), the TV audience interest isn’t quite the same. In the case of missing college senior Mackenzie Lueck, however, her story just took an unexpected turn:
Missing University of Utah nursing student Mackenzie Lueck is a ‘sugar baby’ who sought out men over the age of 35 online, DailyMail.com can reveal.. . .
Lueck, 23, disappeared on June 17 after landing in Salt Lake City, Utah, and taking a Lyft ride to meet a mysterious man in a park around 2am.
The college senior’s social media accounts reveal that she considered herself a sugar baby, and boasted about having at least two unidentified sugar daddies which she found through online sites Seeking Arrangement and Tinder.
DailyMail.com obtained screenshots of Lueck’s posts made nearly three months ago in a private Facebook group where Lueck gave advice on how she finds sugar daddies – wealthy older men who lavish younger women with gifts and money in return for company or sexual favors.
Let’s be blunt: Mackenzie Lueck was a whore. Also notice my use of the past-tense verb “was” — they won’t find her alive. And her parents will have to ask themselves how they failed so badly: Why did their daughter turn into a whore? This has become a widespread phenomenon . . .
Followed by More ‘Red Pill’ ThoughtsWent to bed early Thursday night — it was a long day — and woke up early to start putting together my thoughts on the Democrat debate I missed, but then started engaging the comments on “Missing College Girl Mackenzie Lueck Was a Social-Media ‘Sugar Baby’ Whore.” This inspired some thoughts that I want to record while they’re fresh in my mind, and I’ll get to the debate commentary later. As I said in that post:
If you criticize the “sugar baby” racket, feminists will condemn you for “slut-shaming.” They openly advocate the most irresponsible promiscuity, and consider any criticism to be “sexist.” . . .
Feminist “empowerment” means that there are no moral standards for women, so that the college girl will never encounter anyone in authority on campus who would dare to tell her that whoring around via social media is a bad idea.. . .Anyone with common sense could have told her that whoring herself out as a “sugar baby” was a bad idea, but she was in a bubble, using her private online accounts to conceal this behavior from anyone who might criticize it. Apparently, her friends knew what she was doing, but using social media and dating apps to hustle cash is considered acceptable by many college girls, so she was shielded from any sort of common-sense warnings about the risks involved in this form of “empowered” sexuality.
“Don’t be a whore” is always good advice, but Third Wave feminist ideology effectively prohibits any criticism of female sexual behavior. Because well-mannered men wish to avoid offending women, a sense of chivalry may lead men to cooperate with this prohibition, and some men will play “white knight” by rushing to defend Mackenzie Lueck (and other girls in the “sugar baby” racket) from any condemnation. . .
 |
| Ayoola ‘AJ’ Ajayi |
Fox News reports:She didn't deserve this, but she put herself in danger.
One person has been taken into custody Friday morning in relation to the disappearance of University of Utah student Mackenzie Lueck, Salt Lake City police announced.UPDATE: Mackenzie Lueck is dead. Ayoola ‘AJ’ Ajayi, 31, has been charged with aggravated murder, aggravated kidnapping, obstruction of justice and desecration of a body. DNA evidence confirmed that charred remains found at Ajayi’s home were those of Lueck.
Further details on the arrest — which came a day after police finished searching a home whose owner they identified as a person of interest — were not immediately available.
Lueck, 23, was last seen meeting an unknown individual around 3 a.m. on June 17 near a park in Salt Lake City after being dropped off by a Lyft driver.
Salt Lake City police are expected to reveal more about the arrest at a press conference at 1:30 p.m. ET.
. . .
UPDATE III: A frightening angle in the case:
A handyman in Utah told Fox News exclusively on Friday the suspect arrested in the murder of a University of Utah student had asked to build a secret, soundproofed room in his home’s basement with hooks on its walls. . . .Were these “women coming in and out” prostitutes? As previously reported, Mackenzie was prostituting herself through “sugar baby” sites. Here is a report from Inside Edition on her “seeking arrangements” . . .
Brian Wolf, a local contractor, told Fox News on Friday the individual who owned that home reached out to him in April and asked him to build a “soundproof” room there.
“He slowly added on other requests, like building a secret door and adding hooks to the wall,” Wolf said, explaining how the individual asked him to come to the home and give him an estimate for the potential project.
Wolf added the person said he wanted construction done as soon as possible, “before his girlfriend got back into town.”
The contractor, who owns a home-repair business in Utah, said he was “weirded out” by the whole scenario and turned down the job offer, telling the individual he was too busy. . . .
Meanwhile, a neighbor of the homeowner who is a person of interest told Fox News on Thursday “many women” frequented his home.
“There were always so many women coming in and out at all hours of the night,” the neighbor, who did not want to be identified, told Fox News.
If You Want to Know About the Democratic Debates
Don't ask me; we didn't watch them; I watched Siren while Georgia slept on the couch last night. We rarely watch political events, Democrat or Republican; that seems to me to be the time when politicians lie with the greatest facility and conviction. What I've seen of the coverage convinces me that whoever is nominated by the Democrats will have two main issues, "free" Medicare for all, including illegal immigrants, and open borders, so that all of Mexico and Central America can join the party and suck off what's left of the middle class.
But Stacy watches and reads, so DNC Debate Night I: The Aftermath
and the "Beautiful Lunatic"? Stacy's personal favorite, Marianne Williamson?
But Stacy watches and reads, so DNC Debate Night I: The Aftermath
Stephen Green nails it: “It was a high-speed multiperson press conference where the questions were asked by cheerleaders. That’s the show the DNC wanted, and it’s the show NBC delivered.”Get that? A man pretending to be a women (he may even be convinced he is one) is entitled to a tax payer funded abortion he will never need. When Monty Python can no longer be considered a parody?
Julian Castro had the biggest gaffe of the night:
In the first 2020 Democratic presidential debate on Wednesday, former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Julián Castro said that “reproductive justice” involves allowing “trans females” to get abortions. Even in terms of pandering to the transgender community, this was a huge fail.
“I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom. I believe in reproductive justice,” Castro declared. “Just because a woman, or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community, a trans female, is poor doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the right to exercise this right to choose.” He went on to pledge that he would appoint judges who would uphold Roe v. Wade (1973).
Roger Kimball:And the second debate? Democrat Debate Post-Mortem: MSNBC’s Obvious Bias and the ‘Beautiful Lunatic’
The best comment I heard tonight came from my 11-year-old daughter. Walking into my study at one point and overhearing something Elizabeth Warren said about ‘corporations’ or ‘Medicare for All,’ she asked ‘does she know about a thing called money?’Indeed, while the liberal media seem to think Warren did just fine, her wild-eye attacks on corporations — profit is bad! — indicated a woman who knows nothing about money except how to spend it.
The 10 candidates onstage for Round 2 of the Democratic National Committee debates Thursday night spoke for a combined total of about 66 minutes. Four of those candidates (Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg) consumed 45:21 of that time. In other words, 40% of the candidates got almost 70% of the speaking time. It might be argued, of course, that the former Vice President of the United States deserves more time than other candidates, especially given the poll numbers as reflected by RCP’s national average: Biden 32.0, Sanders 16.9, Elizabeth Warren 12.8, Buttigieg 7.0, Harris 6.6.
Why, however, would Harris — currently polling at fifth place, in single digits, more than 25 points behind Biden — be given more time than second-place Sanders? Isn’t it obvious that the MSNBC hosts made a decision to lift up Harris, to the disadvantage of other candidates?
The MSNBC crowd still has not forgiven Sanders for daring to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016, blaming him for undermining her support and (so they think) contributing to Clinton’s defeat by Trump. Furthermore, it seems obvious, the MSNBC hosts don’t want an elderly white male to be the Democrat nominee in 2020, so they deliberately set up a confrontation between Harris and Biden over the issue of race . . .
 |
| Marianne Williamson |
Jim Geraghty rather humorously describes the performance of my favorite candidate:
I wonder if non-Republicans felt about Donald Trump in 2016 the way I, and it seems quite a few other conservatives, feel about Marianne Williamson. Marianne, you beautiful lunatic. Every time you spoke, I didn’t know whether you were going to do a rain dance, cast a hex, or hold a seance. On those rare moments you got a chance to talk, I leaned forward because I had no idea what kind of absolute insanity was going to come out of your mouth. It was as riveting as a hostage situation. She contends American have chronic illnesses because of “chemical policies,” she wonders where the rest of the field has been for decades (er, in public office), and her first call will be to the prime minister of New Zealand, and she wants to harness the power of love for political purposes. In many ways, she is exactly the candidate that today’s Democratic party deserves.More seriously, my hunch is that the “beautiful lunatic” could have a Trump-like impact. Doesn’t it seem logical that an outsider candidate might have the best chance of beating Trump? If the system is broken, you can’t fix it with someone from inside the system. I can’t get inside the minds of Democrat primary voters, but there’s actual evidence that Williamson caught people’s attention: She was the most-searched candidate on Google after Thursday’s debate. Here’s a video clip of her debate highlights:
The FinalStraw, Really
No, almost certainly not my final post on the anti-straw fad.
No, I don't want one, but if you want to virtue signal, go ahead and order it off my Amazon link. Suck responsibly!
I couldn't figure out who the mermaid is, yet, but the CEO is kind of a babe, Emma Rose Cohen:
Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy working toward your amusement and education.
No, I don't want one, but if you want to virtue signal, go ahead and order it off my Amazon link. Suck responsibly!
I couldn't figure out who the mermaid is, yet, but the CEO is kind of a babe, Emma Rose Cohen:
Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy working toward your amusement and education.
Russiagate: Mueller, Mueller, Mueller?
The discussion of the likely outcome of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's coming testimony to the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees continues to dominate the discussion. On Da Hill, Battle lines drawn for Mueller testimony
David Catron at AmSpec. Robert Mueller: The Guest Who Won’t Leave I think he'd like to sneak away.
Both parties are already drawing their battle lines and laying the groundwork for the contentious hearings.
Democrats are furious at what they say was an effort by Attorney General William Barr to misrepresent Mueller’s findings, and they see the hearing as an opportunity to set the record straight and highlight details from a report that most voters have not read.
. . .
Republicans, who have generally not been opposed to Mueller testifying, assert that the Russia report vindicates the president of allegations of “collusion” with Moscow. And they argue that Democrats are attempting to relitigate Mueller’s investigation in order to score political points against the president heading into 2020.
David Catron at AmSpec. Robert Mueller: The Guest Who Won’t Leave I think he'd like to sneak away.Everyone has met Robert Mueller. He’s the guest who won’t leave the party. You first notice him as an awkward presence gradually eroding the pleasant ambience by hovering silently at the edge of the festivities. Then, after he has had a couple of drinks, he begins to insert himself into random conversations with solipsistic non sequiturs. At length, after everyone else has contrived to leave early, you discover that he’s too drunk to drive even if he could find his keys. You call a cab, but he misses it and you find him asleep in your front yard the next day. This is what it’s like to get rid of someone like Mueller.Rushbo, Clueless Mueller Has to Figure Out What’s in His Report. Some truth in just the title. It seems pretty certain that Mueller was just the figurehead, with Andrew Weissman's hand on the wheel as the Pequod sought the great
. . .
Robert Mueller is the Beltway counterpart of the guest who won’t leave. And, like that feckless character, he has nothing to offer those who invited him to the soirée yet doesn’t have enough sense to know it. In the Nadler and Schiff hearings, he will bore everyone with self-aggrandizing sermons that will irritate his hosts, frustrate their guests in the press gallery, and bore the public. If the Dems know what they’re doing, they will give Mueller the bum’s rush before the voters quietly slip out of their obviously dead party.
That’s one of the reasons he doesn’t want to testify, never has wanted to testify. ‘Cause he didn’t really do the work. Look, that’s understandable. When you have seasoned citizens who’ve spent their lives building a career and establishing a reputation and built businesses, their names go at the top of the masthead and it’s the underlings, the young people, people filled with energy that come in and do the work.A warning from Rep. Meadows: 'Bob Mueller Better Be Prepared' for Republican Cross-Examination (CNS News), and a fine and growing list of questions for him to answer at Do You Miss Harold Finch? Here’re some comments from him.
I’m not even being critical of Mueller. This is just the way these things work. You’d be amazed, I think, at the number of people who get credit for doing a lot of work who never do any. They have underlings do it all. I have resisted that. I’ve had the opportunity to pass off everything to a bunch of staff, but I’ve not done it. You know why? ‘Cause it’s the fastest way to not knowing anything. It’s the fastest way to have to end up faking it all.
From Sundance at CTH, Dershowitz: “Democrats Will Regret Calling Mueller to Testify”…
and more questions:
♦On May 16, 2017, were you applying to become FBI Director?Patricia McCarthy AmThink, Adam Schiff's latest scheme will blow up in Democrats' faces
♦Why did you go to the White House?
♦When did Rod Rosenstein contact you about going to the White House?
♦When did Rod Rosenstein first contact you about becoming special counsel?
♦Did you speak to any members of the DOJ or FBI prior to going to the White House?
♦Were there conversations about a possible ‘special counsel position’ prior to May 16th, 2017?
♦Were you aware President Trump was under investigation prior to your conversation of May 16th, with President Trump?
♦Were you aware of the nature of the investigation, prior to May 16, 2017?
♦Were you aware of the possibility of being appointed ‘special counsel’?
♦Did you take any recording devices into the Oval Office meeting?
♦Did you own the cell phone you left in the Oval Office on May 16, 2017?
♦Between the afternoon Oval Office meeting and the next day announcement to the Gang-of-Eight by Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe, when exactly did you agree to become special counsel?
♦How did Rod Rosenstein contact you between May 16, 2017 and early morning May 17, 2017, about becoming special counsel?
♦Did you immediately agree to become special counsel when asked?
♦How much time transpired between Rosenstein asking you to become special counsel and your acceptance of the position?
Mueller in that last brief press conference seemed as nervous as a guilty man on trial for lying. He has done a lot of lying in his long career; he likes to win at any cost. He destroys people for sport. Is he going to be more confident in front of those two committees? Probably not. He most likely turned the entire "investigation," the corrosive attempt to frame Trump, over to the criminally corrupt Andrew Weissmann. That is who should be called before Congress. Weissmann is a blight on our judicial system but has never been disbarred or charged with the numerous crimes he has committed. He is often referred to as Mueller's "pit bull" and is a rabid dog if there ever was one. See License to Lie by Sydney Powell.A different take by Roger L. Simon, PJ Media, The Ghost of Hunter Thompson Lurks over Mueller's Coming Testimony Fear and Loathing in Washington D.C.
House intel chair Adam Schiff says what he's really trying to do is explain "to the American people the serious counterintelligence concerns raised by the Mueller report." He must assume we're ignoramuses — or is that projection?Dan Sobiesky is still hung up on Dossier 2.0 – Mueller’s Fake Black Cash Ledger Used To Persecute Manafort "Perhaps we need a special counsel to investigate the special counsel. As for Robert Mueller, follow the black cash and lock him up."
Okay, I'm picking on someone for whom a lobotomy would be irrelevant, but he has lied to the American public consistently for over two years and deserves to be punished and humiliated. He undoubtedly knows this, because, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee, he was supposedly privy to the truth all that time. (The number of Democrat politicians who deliberately lied to the public about Russia is extraordinarily long. Hello, Senator Warner... Someone should make a YouTube of their lies when this is over, but the organization would undoubtedly ban it.)
Another issue that has re-reared it's ugly head is Samantha Power's insane use of the "unmasking"; revealing the names of US persons in NSA intercepts. John Solomon on Da Hill, 'Unmasker in Chief' Samantha Power spewed anti-Trump bias in government emails
It turns out that Power — the diplomat whose authority inexplicably was used to unmask hundreds of Americans’ names in secret intelligence reports during the 2016 election — engaged in similar Trump-bashing on her official government email, according to documents unearthed by an American Center for Law and Justice lawsuit. The conservative legal group is run by Trump defense attorney Jay Sekulow.S. Noble, Samantha Power’s Brutal Emails Point to Political Motivations for Unmaskings. Ace, Queen of Unmaskings Samantha Power Showed Extreme Political Bias in Emails
The discovery could add a new dimension — a question of political bias — to a long-running congressional investigation into why Power's authority was used to unmask hundreds of Americans' names in secret National Security Agency intercepts during the 2016 election. That practice of unmasking continues to grow today.
Power’s barbs toward Trump started as early as the GOP primaries, when she used her email to connect Oskar Eustis, the artistic director at the Public Theater in New York, with oft-quoted think tank scholar Norman Ornstein, the memos show.
“Oskar, Norm will explain our political system, in a way that will fleetingly make it seem rational, though maybe not after Trump and Sanders win NH,” she wrote, predicting the future president and upstart socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would win the esteemed New Hampshire primary.
After Trump stunned the world with his general election win over Hillary Clinton, the observations of Power and those emailing her on her official government account turned more vitriolic. . .
So of course she should have unchecked power to "unmask" the anonymized Trump officials the Obama Administration was spying on!I'm not big on enforcement of the Hatch Act at top levels in government; politicians gotta politic. But that last point is important. Some of the surveillance records that Sam signed off on unmasking (I leave the question of whether she actually did or not open), were then leaked to friendly press. That's a felony.
PS: Somehow -- we don't know how, mind you -- those unmasked, de-anonymized surveillance records got leaked to the leftwing press.
Big League Politics, Comey Hid ‘CLINTON EMAILS’ Binder In His Office Safe and Had Hillary’s Backup Email Device. It's touching that he provided such personal service to the queen to be.
Former FBI director James Comey had a white binder marked “Clinton Emails” in his office on May 16, 2017, a few days after he was fired, as the Department of Justice was trying to get back the items in Comey’s office safe.
The State Department and FBI also possessed a “Datto” backup email device for Hillary Clinton’s private email server, which a judge ordered released. Michael Bekesha, who waged the Datto case for Judicial Watch, tells Big League Politics that the State Department is “still processing the FBI investigative file,” even though Datto contents were ordered released by last September.
Bekesha said it is possible that the State Department has not searched the device, which they received from Comey’s FBI, noting, “They have not yet identified the location of all the records that they reviewed and produced.”
Comey got busted by the DOJ for hiding his “Clinton Emails” binder after he got fired from the FBI, as Big League Politics exclusively reported.
Fish Pic Friday
One of the fish girls I follow on Facebook, Brooke Thomas, gave up the field, and switched to become a travel adviser, and now she's sending pictures from Cambodia and Thailand. Well, at least she hasn't given up bikinis. However, the niche is still occupied be some new fisherwomen. Now I give you Bombachelle:Fishing Herald: Michelle Clavette is a Fishing Superstar:
Michelle Clavette is a lady angler that has been fishing since she was about six years old. She remembers that the first fish she caught was a catfish from a canal. That catfish got her addicted to the thrill of feeling the tug of the line. She is a must follow on Instagram! There is a link to her page at the end of this post.
Michelle lives in South Florida, but often goes to Bimini and other locations to pursue her passion as an angler. She simply loves living in South Florida, because it allows her so many angling possibilities so close to home. She enjoys basically being able to step out of her house and start catching fish.
Facebook: Bombchelle Fishing - Home
Bombchelle Fishing Instagram
Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy working toward your amusement and education.
Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy working toward your amusement and education.
Thursday, June 27, 2019
Maryland, Virginia Loosen Crab Fishing Regs
 |
The blue crab winter dredge survey found, and watermen confirm, that it’s a good year for crabs in the Chesapeake Bay. Now, Virginia and Maryland fisheries managers are responding by easing up commercial catch limits a bit.
On Tuesday, the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) approved a slight increase to bushel limits in November, at the end of crab season. VMRC proposed the change in order to “conserve the blue crab resource, while taking into account variations in abundance of this resource.”
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) gave its nod of approval to the management decision. In a statement, CBF Senior Regional Ecosystem Scientist Chris Moore says:
“These modest changes will allow Virginia’s watermen to harvest more blue crabs and are entirely appropriate given strong crab numbers found in the recent winter dredge survey.
Maryland also made slight changes to its catch limits for this season, focusing specifically on mature female hard crabs. In a public notice posted May 30, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) announced slightly-higher bushel limits for all months of the 2019 season, which runs through November 30.
 |
| A better woman than I |
The Potomac River Fisheries Commission (PRFC), responsible for managing the Potomac River from Washington, DC to the Chesapeake Bay, on the other hand, is keeping things “status quo” from last year. PRFC tells Bay Bulletin its Crab Advisory Committee didn’t recommend any changes to the crab catch, and the commission decided at its June 7 meeting to follow that recommendation.Gotta get their fair share!
“However,” says Ellen Cosby, PRFC Assistant Executive Secretary, “if MD & VA are ‘loosening limits’, the Commission may consider options later on.”
I don't have much problem with this. Crab populations are notoriously variable. But I wish they were as quick to restrict fishing when the populations goes down as they are to loosen them when things are looking up.
D.C. Dolphins Get Names
 |
| Seems like an unnecessary warning |
A pair of dolphins that spend summers in the Washington region now have something else in common with many of the other mammals who live here: They have names.
This region is a center of the democratic (small d) idea, and appropriately enough the names, according to an announcement Friday from the Potomac Conservancy and the Potomac-Chesapeake Dolphin Project, were selected by public vote.
One dolphin has been dubbed Mac. If that syllable seems to suggest the last three letters of the area’s major river, the Potomac, that was intentional.
The other great waterway, the renowned estuary known as the Chesapeake Bay, has contributed to the name of the other dolphin. It received the name “Chessie.”
The conservancy describes itself as this region’s “leading clean water advocate.” The dolphin project describes its mission as to better understand and protect the region’s dolphins.
On May 15, the two organizations joined in soliciting names for two dolphins that had for some time been frequenting area waters in relative anonymity.
The conservancy said Friday that more than 1,400 ballots were cast. It said the chosen names received 27 percent of the vote. In second place, with 16 percent of the vote, were the names Cherry and Blossom.
Providing names for the dolphins may serve a similar purpose to bestowing names upon such other animals: It helps in telling them apart. As an aid to tracking dolphins, the project said it identifies them by their dorsal fins and assigns to each a unique name.
So far, the group said, a total of more than 1,000 dolphins have been identified in the river. It said the river and bay may harbor many more. The project said it has provided names to 304 dolphins, including those of presidents, vice presidents, first ladies and members of Congress.The dolphins remained unconcerned.
. . .
The two newly named dolphins had previously been designated only as D1 and D2, seemingly pallid and drab ways of identifying the highly popular creatures.
Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Cheryl Ann Tweedy working toward your amusement and education.
Muelling About with Russiagate
Of course, the talk of "the town" (Washington D.C.) is the upcoming Mueller testimony to the House Intelligence (an oxymoron if there ever was one) and Judiciary (almost as bad) committees on July 17.
Mueller agreeing to testify is a marked contrast with the position he took at his only public appearance since the end of his investigation. “I hope and expect this to be the only time I will speak to you in this manner," Mueller said on May 29. “I am making that decision myself. No one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter.”NYPO, Robert Mueller to testify publicly before House committees next month, CNN, Mueller to testify publicly on July 17 following a subpoena. Well after issuing so many subpoenas himself, ignoring one would be bad form.
At the time, Mueller said he would decline to discuss anything further than what is detailed in his 448-page report and made clear that he didn’t want to speak out again in public.
Democrats have been talking about bringing Mueller in to testify since his investigation wrapped in March, and their decision to issue subpoenas comes more than a month after the initial date that Nadler had floated for Mueller to appear.Liz Shields Morning Briefing at PJ Media, Mueller Agrees to Resuscitate Dying RUSSIA-Collusion Hoax
Since then, Democrats have continued to negotiate with Mueller, holding out hope he would agree to testify voluntarily. While Mueller stated he did not wish appear before Congress, Democrats — and some Republicans — have said they still believe Mueller should testify. Democrats have argued that the American people can hear directly from the special counsel in a public setting, and lawmakers in both parties have said they want to ask him about some of the decisions made during the investigation.
For Republicans, Mueller's appearance offers them a chance to press the special counsel about their concerns regarding the origins of the counterintelligence investigation into the President's team, and pressure Democrats to drop their own investigations into the President.
"I hope the special counsel's testimony marks an end to the political gamesmanship that Judiciary Democrats have pursued at great cost to taxpayers," said Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee. "May this testimony bring to House Democrats the closure that the rest of America has enjoyed for months, and may it enable them to return to the business of legislating."
Why? Well, the politically expedient RUSSIA-collusion hoax is fading from the news cycle. The late-night court jesters are short on unfunny material to quack out. Current and former subpoenaed WH administration officials are not providing theammunitioninformation for show trial hearings and their contested appearances are going to be held up while the Democrats' demands work their way through the legal system. How to keep this story alive? Let's get Mueller to testify! Mueller always plays ball. He gladly held a post-Barr press conference to provide some chum for his media and Democrat allies when the AG wisely stripped Mueller's propaganda report down to its conclusions, denying the #resistance an opportunity to set the "narrative." And now here comes Bob Mueller to attempt to reorient the public consciousness once more.
I think Nadler’s more right than wrong in the clip below if if if he can get Mueller to walk through the details of the report in his answers. That’s all Democrats want out of this — a televised tutorial on the report’s contents from the man who wrote it, amid a media circus that guarantees millions of viewers. No one expects Mueller to say that he personally believes Trump committed obstruction of justice or that Bill Barr abdicated his duty as AG by not including Mueller’s own summaries in his initial letter to Congress about the report’s findings. He’s been clear that he’d rather not testify, warning Congress in his short press conference a few weeks ago that he wouldn’t discuss anything that’s not in the report itself. He’ll try hard not to make any news in his testimony. But that’s fine by Dems. Their chief concern about the report at this point is that many Americans still don’t know what’s in it. Most haven’t read it; all they may know about it is what they’ve heard on Fox or conservative talk radio. Their best bet to counter Trump’s message that he was totally exonerated is to have Mueller himself on TV affirming repeatedly, for hours on end, that he wasn’t exonerated on obstruction. We live in an age of video, not print. If you want your political message to penetrate, you need to put on a show. Just look who’s president!Fresh from the Wombat's In The Mailbox: 06.26.19, Mark Steyn, a Brit, has some interesting things to say about the Mueller matter in Muelling About:
Ten quick thoughts on the hideously corrupted "Russia investigation".and concludes (after nine more):
1) Let me start with an immigrant's observation: My sweetly naïve understanding of an "independent counsel" is that he should be "independent". For example, even in the presently desiccated condition of the Commonwealth, it's generally understood that, when you've got a problem and you want someone independent to investigate it, "independent" means outsider. Three examples off the top of my head
. . .
I appreciate that all the above is easier to do in the remnants of empire than it is in the American system. But there isn't even the figleaf of "independence" when you appoint a career swamp-dweller like Robert Mueller, a man who has relationships with every player in Washington going back decades. The parade of hacks infesting the cable shows to inform us solemnly that they've known Mueller for years and he's the very apotheosis of a straight shooter is, in fact, the strongest evidence of why he should never have been appointed: he's the insiders' insider. When Mueller decided to stage his pre-dawn swoop on Paul Manafort's bedroom, for example, he was raiding the home of a longtime client of his own law firm, WilmerHale.
The FBI and DoJ are in at least as bad a state as the Turks and Caicos government was. So perhaps, if Mueller has the decency to resign, he could recommend a Tripartite Commission of Sir Robin Auld, General de Chastelain and Mr Warner. Absent that:
a) Any future independent counsels should be genuinely independent - ie, non-Washingtonians;It is not unreasonable to conclude that this pseudo-investigation is an elaborate bit of FBI dinner theatre to obscure Strzok and others' attempt to subvert the election. What Strzok and Ohr have done is far worse than anything Flynn and Papadopoulos did: why should only the latter face jail time?
b) They should not use the FBI as their investigators;
c) They should have no authority to charge their targets with federal "process" crimes, such as lying to the FBI (as Flynn and Papadopoulos were strongarmed into confessing to).
Mueller lied about the aforementioned Konstantin Kiliminik, citing him as being a Russian operative in his report while he was actually a State Department informant.Both can be true, but certainly the latter is a mitigating fact inconvenient to Manafort's prosecution that they managed to leave out of the report, and Manafort's trial. And on that same theme, Margot Cleveland at Da Fed notes how Michael Flynn Attorney Suggests Special Counsel Withheld Key Information From His Defense. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence . . .
Daniel Chaitin, WaEx, Third Mueller scope memo proof Rosenstein was 'scared to death' of McCabe, Joe DiGenova says. Not a fan of Rod Rosenstein:
"When history of this scandal is written, one person will be blamed and should be blamed for the entire wasting of two years of President Trump's presidency. Rod Rosenstein was a coward," DiGenova told host Lou Dobbs.Also from Dan (a busy guy), Mark Meadows: DOJ exploring 'unbelievably unusual activity' in final months of Obama administration
. . .
"He didn't know how to tell McCabe and those people to stop fooling around and messing around with Trump," DiGenova said. "He came in, he found out about the Hillary Clinton investigation. He saw how rabidly anti-Trump they were, and he, Rosenstein, caved and gave up the power of the attorney general and the deputy attorney general to a bunch of corrupt FBI officials. And that third scope memo is proof that he was scared to death of McCabe."
Also, Sean Hannity teases bombshell report on Samantha Power emails showing 'anti-Trump bias'
Ooh, ooh! Caught Sam in the Hatch Act trap. Well, if it's a crime for Kelly Ann, it's a crime for Sam! Drag her ass before the Senate!
Sundance at CTH, Jay Sekulow Discovers New Documents To Backstop Obama’s Operation Against Trump – Connects To Evelyn Farkas…
First, from Sekulow:And this mornings musical segment, (Don't let the bag pipes put you off, wait for his statement):
(Via Fox Op-ed) – Stunning new information just released by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) shows that the Obama administration stepped up efforts – just days before President Trump took office – to undermine Trump and his administration.
The ACLJ, where I serve as chief counsel, has obtained records that show the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, under Director James Clapper, eagerly pushed to get new procedures as part of an anti-Trump effort. The procedures increased access to raw signals intelligence before the conclusion of the Obama administration, just days before President Trump was inaugurated.
By greatly expanding access to classified information by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, the Obama administration paved the way for a shadow government to leak classified information – endangering our national security and severely jeopardizing the integrity and reputation of our critical national security apparatus – in an attempt to undermine President Trump.
The documents confirmed what we suspected: the Office of the Director of National Intelligence rushed to get the new “procedures signed by the Attorney General before the conclusion of this administration,” referring to the Obama administration.
The documents also reveal that Robert Litt, who worked in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense’s Director of Intelligence Strategy, Policy, & Integration: “Really want to get this done … and so does the Boss.” Presumably “the Boss” is a reference to Director Clapper.
And documents the ACLJ received that were produced by the National Security Agency show that NSA officials discussed that they “could have a signature from the AG as early as this week, certainly prior to the 20th of Jan.” In other words, certainly before President Trump’s inauguration. (more from Sekulow)
WATCH: Attorney General William Barr plays the bagpipes at a Justice Department event https://t.co/RfKeHkwMFs pic.twitter.com/08MT6Ijhez— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) June 26, 2019
 |
| Kamala Harris 'Hot Sauce" pandering |
Presidents and candidates should protect the independence of the Justice Department. If Democrats think it’s an abuse of power for the president to choose who gets prosecuted and who doesn’t, then they shouldn’t support anything that sounds remotely like presidential interference in criminal cases. And yet, asked if she’d want the Justice Department to prosecute Trump if she becomes president, Senator Kamala Harris answered: “I believe that they would have no choice, and that they should, yes.”
Lawmakers who aren’t running for president don’t have quite the same responsibility. But Congress is hardly irrelevant to what executive-branch departments do. I can’t quite envision a rider on a spending bill forcing the Justice Department to prosecute (or not) some political actor, but it’s not as far-fetched to imagine a committee chair using the budget process to push for specific behavior, or even senators conditioning their confirmation of an attorney general or other nominee on how they’d deal with specific cases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)