EPA Ethics Panel: It is NOT Unethical to Question Climate Dogma

Watts Up With That?  "Back in March, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt questioned the human contribution to climate change. The Sierra Club immediately raised an ethics complaint against Pruitt’s climate heresy."

The Energy 202: EPA finds no problems with Pruitt’s climate change views

By Dino Grandoni August 3 at 8:39 AM

When Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt went on CNBC last March and said that he did not believe carbon dioxide was the “primary contributor” to global warming, he put himself at odds with the scientific stances of many institutions — including, officially, the EPA itself.

But an internal EPA review has found that the agency can tolerate such a disagreement.

A panel of EPA scientists convened to investigate Pruitt’s commentary found that the administrator was not in violation of the agency’s scientific integrity policy because that policy “explicitly protects differing opinion.”

“This expression of opinion, which was not made in a decisional context, is fully within the protections of EPA’s Scientific Integrity Policy and does not violate that Policy,” the panel found, according to a letter sent to the Sierra Club and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon and other outlets. The environmental group filed a complaint in March that prompted the internal review.

. . .
"Frankly I’m shocked it apparently took the EPA Ethics Committee six months to decide that expressing doubt about a scientific theory is OK. While I am glad the ethics committee eventually reached the only sensible conclusion, the fact this complaint was not immediately laughed out of the EPA in my opinion demonstrates the horrendous pressure on scientists and public figures not to deviate from hardline climate dogma."

FOIA Dump Reveals Collusion Between Lynch, FBI And Media To Bury Bill Clinton Meeting

Zero Hedge   "Back on June 29, 2016, Obama's Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, tried to convince us that the following 'impromptu' meeting between herself and Bill Clinton at the Phoenix airport, a private meeting which lasted 30 minutes on Lynch's private plane, was mostly a "social meeting" in which Bill talked about his grandchildren and golf game.  It was not, under any circumstances, related to the statement that former FBI Director James Comey made just 6 days later clearing Hillary Clinton of any alleged crimes related to his agency's investigation."

But, according to a new DOJ FOIA dump just released by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), it looks increasingly as if nothing reported about this "social meeting" between Lynch and Clinton was grounded in fact...shocking, we know.

First, the new FOIA documents seemingly confirm that the FBI and DOJ simply lied in response to the ACLJ's initial FOIA request filed back in July 2016.  Here is what the ACLJ was told at the time after sending requests to both the Comey FBI and the Lynch DOJ asking for any documents related to the Clinton-Lynch plane meeting:

Is this the "increasingly right-wing press" that then-President Bill Clinton once spoke of?

Colossus of Corruption: Ben Rhodes Unmasked

Daniel John Sobieski  "Somehow it does not surprise that former Obama Deputy Security Adviser Ben Rhodes is now a “person of interest” in the probe of who illegally leaked for political purposes the names of Team Trump players allegedly collected inadvertently in intelligence reports. He joins others on Team Obama such as Susan Rice and Samantha Power in the unmasking designed to subvert the Trump administration in what amounts to a silent coup. As Fox News Politics reports: . . .

. . . "The “Obama whisperer” has quite a track record. Rhodes was up to his eyeballs in the Benghazi corruption, helping to cover up the Obama administration’s criminal negligence that got four Americans killed and helping to craft the video lie that was repeated to the parents of the dead in front of their son’s caskets by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That was no accident, but a calculated part of the Obama administration’s disinformation campaign to protect President Obama’s reelection chances and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chances to be Obama’s successor in the White House. As Investor’s Business Daily editorialized . . .

. . . 

"While it does not surprise that Ben Rhodes may be involved in the unmasking scandal, it does surprise that H.R. McMaster has retained all of Ben Rhodes’ staffers as the question of who is leaking classified information for political purpose remains. That under covered story was brought up by retired U.S. Army Col. Tony Schaffer on Lou Dobbs show on Fox Business:

Ben Rhodes and Barack Obama’s staff are still in the National Security Council. H.R. McMaster has not fired any of them." . . .

. . . "The colossus of Rhodes' corruption and lingering influence must be dealt with. His people remaining in the Trump administration must be fired if not investigated, prosecuted, and incarcerated. His people are undoubtedly among the criminal leakers and part of Obama’s fifth column within the Trump administration." . . .
 This is the Ben Rhodes I'm talking about:

 Ben Rhodes Reveals How Obama Duped America Into The Dangerous Iran Deal  "President Obama—with the help of an equally arrogant 38-year-old national security fabulist, Ben Rhodes—remade the Middle East to empower America’s most hated enemy."

Why is it so hard to hire employees in California?

Rick Moran  "The "official" rate of unemployment in California is a sparkling 4.7%, and according to state labor experts, the job market is tightening.

"But how many more people would be employed if it weren't so darned expensive to hire and keep new people on the payroll?

"How expensive?  Here are the real-world consequences of government policies that make it so easy for employees to sue their companies for a variety of imaginary offenses." . . .

. . . 

"California is not likely to follow Missouri's lead, but the state illustrates how out-of-control lawfare against companies has gotten.  It's no wonder that most companies settle employee lawsuits when the alternative is not only a long legal battle, but potentially millions in damages.

"The system is rigged against companies.  The idea that they are innocent until proved guilty is out the window.  A company doesn't even have to intend to discriminate.  It can be held liable if the number of minorities it employs is below that of similar businesses with a similar number of employees.

"When it becomes so easy to file a lawsuit alleging discrimination or sexual harassment with a good chance of winning, why bother to work when you can reach into the deep pockets of a company for a big payday?"

Rated ‘R’ For Violence, Language, and… Traditional Gender Roles?

NTK
A new movie rating system could age-restrict movies because they portray traditional gender roles.

"For decades, organizations like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) have assigned films a rating (i.e. G, PG, PG-13, etc.) based on their age appropriateness level.

"Screening films for themes like violence, sexuality, and language that could be considered inappropriate for certain age groups, the MPAA has made sure that parents can protect their children from age-inappropriate topics.

"But one group is seeking to add a new criteria to those age-inappropriate themes: gender roles." . . .

"One person who’s happy, though? None other than Chelsea Clinton."

Chelsea Clinton‏Verified account @ChelseaClinton

Thank you @CommonSense for your work helping parents choose films for our kids with positive gender representations:

CNBC’s John Harwood Calls on White House Staffer to Illegally Leak Trump/Putin Call

Weasel Zippers

"Potentially a crime in and of itself. Is it not clear that some in media view themselves as the opposition? They don’t care about violating the law or endangering the United States in their quest to get Trump.

"Via Free Beacon:

New York Times and CNBC journalist John Harwood called on a White House staffer to illegally leak classified information in a Thursday tweet.

After a White House source leaked transcripts of President Donald Trump’s phone calls with the leaders of Mexico and Australia to the Washington Post, Harwood called on the leaker to do the same for Trump’s call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Keep reading…

Professor Mike Adams resigns from UNC-Wilmington

My Resignation from UNC-Wilmington

"On August 12, 2017, I will get in my car and make my annual cross-country trip from my summer home in Colorado to my other home in North Carolina. After I arrive in the Tar Heel State and get settled I will sit down at my computer and do something the leftists at my university have been wanting me to do for years: I will pen my letter of resignation to the Board of Trustees at UNC-Wilmington. 

"However, before I submit that letter, I thought it would be a good idea to write a brief letter of explanation to all of the supporters who have stood by me in the UNC free speech and cultural wars in which I have been engaged over the last 15 years. That is the purpose of today’s column.

"In a nutshell, as of last week, I have now accomplished the five main objectives I have set out to accomplish since the administration started to aggressively fight against the free speech and due process rights of professors and students in the UNC system. Having accomplished all of those goals, I have decided that it is time to start enjoying life instead of fighting against my employers in federal courtrooms and state legislative halls. For those unaware of the struggles that have consumed my time in recent years, here are some of the highlights:"

Oops-sorry, but:

. . . I will decide on my ride home to North Carolina exactly when it will take effect. I promise it will be no later than August 1, 2050. In the meantime leftists, feel free to start another of your annual petitions to fire me. If you ever do succeed, it will mean more time on my hands to write the things that make you angry and keep sane people entertained.

Turn Off the Cameras!

Jonathan S. Tobin  

"Jim Acosta, and others like him, are hurting journalism."

"The debate between Stephen Miller and CNN’s Jim Acosta proved that turning the daily White House press briefing into a TV show is a dangerous thing for journalism. 

"When the Trump administration temporarily refused permission for televising the daily White House press briefing, journalists howled. They claimed that conducting the briefing without the cameras turned on hurt the public and diminished the government transparency that is needed in a democracy. There was some truth to that, especially since the daily presser has become something of an institution in the last few administrations. 

"But after Wednesday’s televised press briefing, it is now clear the cameras need to be turned off. That’s not because it might aid the Trump administration’s efforts to evade accountability. Rather, it is to protect the press from further damaging their credibility in a way that injures not only journalism but also the fabric of American democracy." . . .   More here.

Charles Krauthammer: Once Again, the Guardrails Hold

The Trump presidency is a stress test, and America is passing.

National Review  "A future trivia question and historical footnote, the spectacular ten-day flameout of Anthony Scaramucci qualifies as the most entertaining episode yet of the ongoing reality show that is the Trump presidency. (Working title: “The Pompadours of 1600 Pennsylvania.”) But even as the cocksure sycophant’s gobsmacking spectacle stole the show, something of real importance took place a bit lower on the radar.

"At five separate junctures, the sinews of our democracy held against the careening recklessness of this presidency. Consequently, Donald Trump’s worst week proved a particularly fine hour for American democracy:

"1) The military says no to Trump on the transgender ban.

"Well, not directly — that’s insubordination — but with rather elegant circumspection. The president tweeted out a total ban on transgender people serving in the military. It came practically out of nowhere. The military brass, not consulted, was not amused. Defense Secretary James Mattis, in the middle of a six-month review of the issue, was reportedly appalled.

"What was done? Nothing. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs simply declared that a tweet is not an order. Until he receives a formal command and develops new guidelines, the tweet will be ignored.

"In other words, the military told the commander in chief to go jump in a lake. Generally speaking, this is not a healthy state of affairs in a nation of civilian control. It does carry a whiff of insubordination. But under a president so uniquely impulsive and chronically irrational, a certain vigilance, even prickliness, on the part of the military is to be welcomed.

"The brass framed their inaction as a matter of procedure. But the refusal carried with it a reminder of institutional prerogatives. In this case, the military offered resistance to mere whimsy. Next time, it could be resistance to unlawfulness." . . .
. . . 

Whatever your substantive position on the various issues involved above, we should all be grateful that from the generals to the Scouts, from the senators to the cops, the institutions of both political and civil society are holding up well.

CNN's Zakaria Admits Trump Won Because People Were Tired of Cultural Elites

PJ Media  "CNN's Fareed Zakaria has admitted something that most of the mainstream media were too afraid to say out loud -- that they may have caused Trump to win the presidency. Listen to him say, "The election of Donald Trump is really a kind of class rebellion against people like us-- you know, educated professionals who live in cities, who have cosmopolitan views about a lot of things. And I think there's a whole part of America that is sick and tired of being told what to do by this over-educated professional elite (that Hillary in many ways perfectly represented). And that's way they're sticking with him." What an outrageous statement for a CNN contributor!" Video at the link.

That is indeed a surprise, especially after you see how well documented Zakaria's near-hatred of Donald Trump is.

You just might be a Progressive Democrat if...

"If you want to get me fired or boycott my business for writing this piece, you're probably a Progressive Democrat.  But you're too late.  I'm already retired."

American Thinker  "Jeff Foxworthy made it big with his "you just might be a redneck" routine.  Foxworthy's success inspired me to flatter him, sincerely, with a "you just might be a Progressive Democrat" imitation.  The take-off goes as follows:

"If you think you are the most tolerant person in the room but label all opposing views "hate speech," you just might be a Progressive Democrat.

"If you believe that being gay is hardwired and unchangeable but insist that male and female are merely social constructs and that folks can change their "gender identities" from one day to the next, there's a good chance you are a Progressive Democrat.

"If you lose sleep over a possible two-degree increase in global temperature over the next fifty years and believe that 97% of all climate scientists think the Earth is getting dramatically warmer due to greenhouse gases...and that buying a heavily subsidized Tesla will make things appreciably better, there's a good chance you're a no-windmills-in-my-backyard Progressive Democrat." . . .

"If you are passionate about protecting snail darters, spotted owls, and gray wolves but believe there's a constitutional right to dismember a nine-month-old human baby in his mother's womb, you are quite likely a Progressive Democrat.

"If you cite Pope Francis's comments about global warming and the environment, believing they come from one of the most morally insightful persons on the planet, but pay no attention to papal pronouncements concerning abortion and the family, there's a good chance you are a Nancy Pelosi, cafeteria-Catholic Progressive Democrat." . . .

. . . If you don't acknowledge the violent history of Islam but instinctively associate Christianity with the Crusades, the Inquisition, and Salem's witch trials, there's more than a good chance you are a secular Progressive Democrat for whom "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." . . . 

My pick of them all:

"If you were alarmed by the never confirmed accusation that a single person in a large Tea Party crowd hurled the "n-word" at a black congressman but are unperturbed when leftists actually riot, destroy property, endanger lives, and shut down political speech on campuses – or when an organized group of Black Lives Matter protesters chant, "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon," it is quite likely you are a Progressive Democrat."

Contract With Republicans

Ann Coulter  "In 1994, after 40 years in the wilderness, Republicans swept both houses of Congress, running on Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America," in which the GOP promised to hold votes on 10 popular policies in the first 100 days. They won, fulfilled the contract, and went on to control the House for more than a decade. 

"More recently, the country gave the GOP the House in 2010, the Senate in 2014 and the presidency in 2016. But we're not seeing any difference. The GOP has become a ratchet, never reversing Democratic victories, but only confirming them with teeny-tiny alterations. 

"It's time for the voters to issue a "Contract With Republicans." Unless our elected representatives can complete these basic, simple tasks, we're out. There will be no reason to care about the GOP, anymore. 

"Whether these objectives are accomplished by President Trump or a rhesus monkey, the Democrats, the Bull Moose Party or the U.S. Pirate Party -- it will make no difference to us. We just need somebody to fulfill this contract in order to get our vote. 

"Here are our first three contract terms. " .  . .

Coulter's points of discussion are:
1) BUILD THE WALL 
2) SUPREME COURT 
3) STOP WASTING MONEY AND PRECIOUS LIVES ON POINTLESS WARS