Liberal Senators Just Want to Know Your Position on ‘Climate Change’

The Left’s obsession with climate change has been on full display in the confirmation hearings of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees. They seem to believe the issue is more important than any other foreign, domestic, or security concern. Indeed, in their minds, it seems to trump even the need for the fair and objective administration of justice.

From Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., to Rex Tillerson, Trump’s nominees have been grilled about what remains a vigorously disputed theory: human-induced, catastrophic climate change. Despite claims to the contrary, no consensus exists that man-made emissions are the primary driver of global warming, or, more importantly, that catastrophic global warming is occurring, is accelerating, or is dangerous.

In fact, climatologists hold widely divergent views on the causes of climate change, the rate at which change is occurring, which sets of climate and temperature data to use, and the accuracy of climate models projecting decades and centuries into the future. But you would never know this from the questions lobbed by the Left at the hearings.

Take former Kansas congressman and newly confirmed CIA Director Mike Pompeo. The CIA’s job is to gather and analyze information about foreign threats to U.S. national security, from terrorist organizations like ISIS to belligerent countries like Russia and North Korea. Getting actionable information that can prevent the next 9/11 or the next invasion of a friendly country or ally is — or at least should be — job number one for the CIA.

But not according to Kamala Harris, D-Calif., the new senator from California and the state’s former attorney general. She cross-examined Pompeo about his views on climate change and global warming, quizzing him on whether he accepts the supposed scientific “consensus” on the issue.

Thankfully, Pompeo understands — even if Harris doesn’t — that the correctness of this theory has absolutely no bearing on the CIA’s mission.

Pompeo told Harris that, as the prospective director of the CIA, he sees no need “to get into the details of climate debate and science.” Rather, he noted, his role would be “to work alongside warriors keeping Americans safe.”

Unfortunately, that answer only led Harris to question Pompeo’s ability to accept evidence and the consensus of the intelligence community — as if the intelligence community should be wasting its time sifting through the competing data and claims regarding global warming.

The senator’s questioning was as predictable as it was off-base. After all, while serving as attorney general of California she joined a coalition of state AGs bent on using state securities fraud and RICO laws to prosecute anyone who disputed the supposed consensus on global warming. In other words, she tried to abuse her power to criminalize scientific debate and silence dissent.

Climate crusaders similarly tried to sidetrack the hearings for Rex Tillerson, the nominee for secretary of state. America faces serious threats from around the globe, and relations with what used to be some of our closest allies — like the United Kingdom and Israel — are badly frayed. Yet Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.,asked Tillerson about climate change and whether we need to increase our efforts to combat it.

Tillerson rightly said that scientific evidence linking climate change with a supposed increase in natural disasters is “inconclusive.” But this sparked only more climate-related questions from Sens. Tom Udall, D-N.M., Ed Markey, D-Mass., Ben Cardin, D-Md., and Tim Kaine, D-Va. Apparently, they must believe that the secretary of state’s position on a scientific theory is more important than his views on how to deal with real foreign relations problems.

Trump’s the attorney general nominee, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., also received questions about climate change. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., told Sessions that as attorney general he would be in a position to bring actions that relate to carbon emissions and climate change. At that point Whitehouse asked: Would he rely on “real facts and real science?” Whitehouse was pushing Sessions to agree that he would prosecute climate change “skeptics.” He tried the same thing earlier with Attorney General Loretta Lynch. During a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting last March, Whitehouse urged Lynch to prosecute those “who pretend the science of carbon emissions’ dangers is unsettled,” particularly those in the “fossil fuel industry” who, Whitehouse asserted, have constructed a “climate denial apparatus.”

There is no legitimate role in science for political influence or threats of prosecution for dissent.

Read rest…

Comments (5)

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    Since getting shellacked at the last election climate change support and legislation in the eco-left’s last hope for America’s surrender to socialism. Everything that is dear to them depends on this last-ditch effort. The wish list is long:

    – Surrender of American sovereignty to a leftist global regime
    – Unelected one-world bureaucratic governance
    – Redistribution of private earned wealth to favored recipients
    – Replacement of free market economics with state controlled collectivism
    – Unrestricted and arbitrary carbon tax schemes
    – Diversion of public funding to support and reward fraudulent business allies
    – Devolution of free market technologies
    – formalized regulation of speech and dissent
    – Establishment of a privileged ruling elite

    Karl Marx is cheering.

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    That’s quite a litany “G” , and I don’t believe you missed anything. The Democrats are trying to keep their flock of climate science-tologist voters together. Good luck deprogramming that bunch.

  • Avatar

    Amber

    |

    Liberal Democrats ask and stamp their feet about global warming for one reason . Their bagmen tell them to .
    Climate is either warming or cooling as everyone knows .
    Is there any scientific organization that can prove humans are somehow now in control of the earth’s thermostat and that natural variables are no longer running the show as they have for over 4 billion years ? How did the climate con ever get this far ? Money .

  • Avatar

    G

    |

    The trouble is that Republicans are skilled at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Capitulation now to the socialist scheme of climate change (in order to receive momentary adulation from the left media) is still a temptation for many lawmakers, and possibly the President. Now is the time to drive a stake through the monster’s heart by exposing the fraud and denying support. Who has the nerve?

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    Surely the Republicans know what’s happening in Ontario. Run the other way as fast as possible. Now!

Comments are closed