Whither Impeachment?

/

  • On Wednesday evening, the House voted two Articles of Impeachment against President Trump. The first alleges “abuse of power,” and the second claims “obstruction of Congress.” Neither is a crime.

  • So we now know the answer to the question posed in the title of my post of November 13, “The Trump Impeachment: What Is The Crime?” The answer is that we’re not even pretending that there is a crime. . . .

  • What next? If your answer is, on to the trial in the Senate, you are not fully thinking through all the posturings and maneuverings that our politicians are capable of. Just because the odds that President Trump will be removed from office might be zero, that doesn’t mean that there is only one procedural route to get to that final result.

  • The posturings and maneuverings began yesterday, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi declined to transmit the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, and indicated that she was seeking to exact some procedural concessions from that body before sending the Articles over.

  • In other words, we demand that the Republicans who control the Senate give us a forum to continue playing our talking points for another few days or weeks. Well, two can play this game. . . .

Read More

Who Is Winning The Climate Wars? (2)

/
Who Is Winning The Climate Wars? (2)

  • A few weeks ago (November 22), in a post titled “Who Is Winning The Climate Wars?”, I undertook to begin documenting the ever-growing chasm between the unhinged rhetoric of climate campaigners and the reality out there in the world.

  • You probably know that the UN held its annual big climate conference this year in Madrid during the first two weeks of December. That event provided the occasion for many campaigners to ramp up the volume of their claims, trying once again to stampede government representatives into agreeing to impoverish their people.

  • Let’s collect a few data points over the past several weeks. . . .

  • Bottom line: It’s not just uber hypocrites like Mike Bloomberg and his four private jets. The fact is that outside of some wildly guilty European countries and the loons of the U.S. Democratic Party far left, fewer and fewer people pay any attention whatsoever to the absurd climate apocalypse rhetoric. . . .

Read More

President Trump Was Absolutely Right To Ask Ukraine To Investigate The Bidens

/

  • As of today, it appears that the House of Representatives is moving toward voting Articles of Impeachment against President Trump as early as next week.

  • Although the version of the Articles currently in circulation may change somewhat before the voting, all indications are that what we’re now looking at is substantially what they intend to go with. Really?? It looks like most everything they were previously talking about that sounded remotely serious is gone!

  • The “abuse of power” being referred to here consists entirely of dealings with the country of Ukraine occurring during the summer of 2019 . . .

  • Really then, this has to be about number (2), asking Ukraine to announce an investigation into Joe Biden. And the question is, is there anything wrong with that? My answer is, absolutely not. In fact, I’ll go farther: Trump would be completely remiss in his obligations to the American people to fail to ask Ukraine to find out what the hell was going on with Joe and Hunter Biden in Ukraine. . . .

Read More

One Of The Stupidest Litigations In The Country Dies With A Whimper

/
One Of The Stupidest Litigations In The Country Dies With A Whimper

  • One of my recurring missions is the effort to assist the readership in identifying the stupidest litigation that has been brought anywhere in this big country. Mostly this effort has resulted in nominating for the title cases that in some way involve issues of “climate change” or, in other words, the idea that if we only sue the right bad guy for enough money we can improve the weather.

  • A problem with these types of cases is that, as stupid as they are, they tend to kick around the courts for years without much happening. Often, the courts just don’t know what to do with them.

  • So it’s actually highly unusual when one of these litigations that I have put in the “stupidest” category proceeds to a full trial on the merits, complete with live witnesses testifying for weeks on end in a courtroom in front of a judge. However, that just happened in a case that I covered in an October 22 post titled “A Serious Contender For Stupidest Litigation In The Country Goes To Trial.”

  • This was the case brought by the New York Attorney General against Exxon, claiming that “Exxon knew” about the risks of climate change and its own role in same, and hid those risks from the public. That certainly sounds nefarious. Here is a picture of demonstrators outside the courthouse on the day of the opening statements.

  • Justice Ostrager makes short work of the AG’s case. I would say that he does it in much more moderate and measured tones than I would have used — but then, a New York State court judge has good reason not to gratuitously offend the AG when ruling against her. I’ll give you a few choice quotes. . . .

Read More

The Ascendency Of Magical Economic Thinking In The Democratic Contest

/

  • It is not difficult for me to articulate an honest argument for the progressive position. In brief summary, it goes something like this: The government is the right vehicle to provide enhanced social services to the less fortunate, and therefore the government must impose an appropriate amount of increased costs on the productive sector of society in order to fund a more generous level of government services than we currently have.

  • And then there is the dishonest argument, which can be summarized as: Costs? What costs? Vast new taxes and corresponding government spending will create a gusher of economic growth and new wealth out of thin air.

  • With all the leading Democratic candidates for President proposing greatly increased federal taxing and spending, it was only a question of time until this magical thinking came front and center into the political debate. And sure enough, it’s now here in full force.

  • But that’s not how this works. Which brings me once again to Elizabeth Warren. She’s the one with the endless list of some 50+ “Plans,” each one of them promising some large new government spending and bureaucracy and/or taxation to grow the compulsory sector of the economy. There will be vast new spending . . . . Clearly, the costs will be large. How could they not be?

  • The answer is simple: You simply announce that each of your new programs will “grow the economy.” And of course you then find that there is an extensive network of left-side journalists, intellectuals and pundits who will buy into this idea and repeat it endlessly, no matter how ridiculous it may be. . . .

Read More

Contrast Of Climate And Energy Policies, And Economic Results, In The U.S. And Germany

/

  • If you are reading your normal diet of “mainstream” press, you are getting hit with a constant barrage of climate alarm, together with a near total boycott on any good economic news for as long as Trump remains President.

  • As a result, it is very easy to lose track of the widening chasm in the climate and energy policies, and also in the economic results, between the U.S. and its major European competitors. When you put some easily-available numbers together in one place, the contrast becomes very striking.

  • And then there are the positions on these subjects of the candidates for the Democratic nomination for President. I find those positions beyond belief.

  • You probably know that the so-called “fracking” revolution in oil and gas production has led to a large increase in U.S. production of those fuels over the last ten or so years. The actual numbers are quite remarkable.

  • Over in the economic news category, the U.S. continues to thrive.

  • And then there’s Germany. . . .

Read More