Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Internal Trump admin showdown over Paris Climate Agreement this week?

Internal Trump admin showdown over Paris Climate Agreement this week?

Politico reports an internal showdown this week, but that may be wishful thinking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDYNVH0U3cs

Shortly after being elected President, Donald Trump expressed that he wanted to find ways to remove the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement and put a stop-payment on a $500 million check Obama wrote for the UN Climate fund days before Trump’s inauguration.

However, close to Trump’s 100-day presidential milestone, it is now being reported that a showdown between Trump’s advisors and cabinet members is set to occur next week over this inane international agreement.

President Donald Trump’s most senior advisers will huddle next week to resolve long-simmering tensions over whether the United States should stay in the Paris climate change agreement, a major point of dispute between the moderate and nationalist wings of the White House, three administration officials told POLITICO.

National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, senior adviser Jared Kushner and chief strategist Steve Bannon are expected to be at the table. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, but sources cautioned that the timing and number of attendees is still in flux.

The advisers and Cabinet officials hope to be able to reach consensus on a recommendation to the president, though that could prove difficult, as they are divided over whether to abandon the agreement.

Bannon and Pruitt are said to be strongly opposed to remaining in the agreement, while Kushner and Tillerson are said to be in favor of staying. Cohn and McMaster have not yet staked out a position in internal discussions at the White House, but they are also expected to argue for staying in the pact.

I must admit, I am a bit skeptical of the level of drama presented in this report. The elite media, no fans of President Trump, often distorts White House activities in ways that attempt to undermine his support among those Americans who like Trump’s energy and business policies. Furthermore, these epic battles between the “progressive” vs “alt-right” wings are very likely to be a media construct.

Additionally, there are several key data points that indicate that the “showdown” is likely to be as thrilling as a standard business meeting.

1) EPA head Scott Pruitt officially called for the US to exit the Paris Climate Agreement.

President Trump’s top environment official called for an “exit” from the historic Paris agreement Thursday, the first time such a high-ranking administration official has so explicitly disavowed the agreement endorsed by nearly 200 countries to fight climate change.

Speaking with “Fox & Friends,” Pruitt commented, “Paris is something that we need to really look at closely. It’s something we need to exit in my opinion.”

“It’s a bad deal for America,” Pruitt continued. “It was an America second, third, or fourth kind of approach. China and India had no obligations under the agreement until 2030. We front-loaded all of our costs.”

2) This past week, leading energy officials from the Group of Seven industrial nations failed to construct a joint declaration on climate change because of the new U.S. administration.

…Italy’s economic development minister, Carlo Calenda, told a news conference that those areas remained “key priorities for other G-7 countries and the EU” but that the United States “reserves its position” while the review is underway.

“Therefore it was not possible to sign a final joint declaration, since it would not cover the whole range of topics in the agenda,” he said.

Energy Secretary Rick Perry led the U.S. delegation to the talks that were being closely watched by climate change activists after President Donald Trump signed an executive order that was part of his pledge to undo much of his predecessor’s efforts against global warming.

3) China is now expressing its displeasure with the accords.

Top Chinese Climate Negotiator Xie Zhenhua has responded to a parade of official reassurances about the Paris Climate Agreement, by demanding to know when “developed” countries will start paying China the money which was promised in Paris.

….In my opinion the only reason China signed up to their non-commitment to do something about CO2 emissions, is they expected the USA to borrow money from China, then return that money back to China as climate aid – which would have left US taxpayers an international laughing stock, paying off loans which have already been paid back to China.

Now Trump seems likely to cancel the payments, China wants to know why they should keep pretending.

Given the reports on the productive and friendly meetings between President Trump and China’s President Xi, I surmise that they both view climate change alarmism as a distraction that hurts the economies of both countries as well as the rest of the world.

4) Finally, and perhaps the most important point: After Obamacare, the Paris Climate Agreement is probably former President Obama’s most significant “success”. Trump has been targeting Obama’s legacy projects with the accuracy of a drone and the power of a MOAB. The Paris Climate Change agreement has been on his radar for quite some time.

Based on the data points above, I theorize that the showdown will be limited to Tucker Carlson and the eco-activist who will be arguing whether or not Trump is going to kill the planet….again.

[Featured Image via YouTube]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

DINORightMarie | April 16, 2017 at 9:09 am

Politico.

Hacks.

More than likely it’s agitprop, not reality.

Stirring up strife seems to be the only reason PolLUtico exists!

Unknown3rdParty | April 16, 2017 at 9:12 am

It’s very simple: the base science on which the Paris Climate Change pact is built–that CO2 is a dangerous gas–is patently false. Therefore, it follows that any and all subsequent arguments, no matter how cogent, still cannot be accurate, and any premise built on a falsehood cannot sustain itself, and requiring submission to a falsehood under penalty of law is disengenous and unsustainable.

The agreement is non binding. Every signer will do as they please.

“Trump has been targeting Obama’s legacy projects with the accuracy of a drone and the power of a MOAB.”

Fantastic quote 🙂

President Donald Trump’s most senior advisers will huddle next week to resolve long-simmering tensions over whether the United States should stay in the Paris climate change agreement…

I notice it doesn’t say President Trump will be part of the “huddle”. Just his “most senior advisers”.

Get back to me after President Trump has made HIS decision.

This is a quote early on from a similar “inside story” from Vanity Fair:

“But now, in full view of the country and the world, we are watching what happens when a president is elected on the basis of an incoherent and crowd-sourced agenda, one that pandered to white nationalists and stoked economic anxiety.”

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04/jared-kushner-steve-bannon-white-house-civil-war

There is a lot you can do while “sticking to facts” when someone with that mind set states their opinion. For one, I don’t recall incoherency. And this “white nationalist” meme is an outrageous lie and anyone making that argument should be immediately dismissed for being a vicious liar. And “stoked economic anxiety”? So in a world where average incomes are in decline while the cost of everything explodes (but no inflation), where people have to train the HB1 immigrant replacing them at half-salary assuming their jobs are not being exported, where health insurance and pensions are about to implode,… no cause for anxiety there!!!

And now we see the Trump admin being completely restaffed by NYC liberals in less than 100 days into Trump’s presidency. Hey, I’m cool. Me worry? Hah!

Go figure but Exxon-Mobil has long supported reducing carbon emissions to stop “climate change”. Yes, I’m thinking of Tillerson.

Terrific piece, Leslie. Lots of important information. Pres. Trump would be better advised in these matters had he appointed Dr. William Happer as his Science Advisor by now.
Happy Easter to all.

Someone in a coma could advise on climate better than bloviating political hacks and manipulators.

China and India are polluting the plant. Talk to them.

Just because ExxonMobil has pissed away millions of dollars on climate change PC “see me, see me, I’m spending money on Leftist wet dreams” bullshit, doesn’t mean Trump Admin has to continue pissing away money so ExxonMobil and Tillerson doesn’t look stupid and can’t make money on crony government algae fuel for the military.

It has not been approved by Congress and technically has no budget. Of course that only seems to bother Republican administrations.

    ronk in reply to puhiawa. | April 16, 2017 at 4:45 pm

    Trump’s best way out, put it to the senate for advise/consent vote. that should end it for once and all

What does Ivanka want?

Dump the climate agreement for it is based on hysteria and horrible science. But then again should you really consider my opinion as valid? Likely not for being a research chemist with 30+ years of experience and over a hundred research papers, I am likely considered the wrong kind of scientists to have a valid opinion. It would be far better to consider the opinion of someone who majored in Lesbian Dance Theory who naturally understands the science of global warming far better than I.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend