Alongside a brutal communist dictator, Obama used his infamous pen and his huge ego this weekend to “save our planet” from the essential-to-life gas carbon dioxide. At least that is what he wants people to think. In the city of Hangzhou, China, Obama announced his pretended “ratification” of a massive United Nations treaty on alleged man-made global warming, working in tandem with Communist Chinese dictator Xi Jinping and Beijing's rubber-stamp legislature. Congress, though, was not consulted.
Amid an illegal plot to “ratify” a United Nations treaty on “climate change” without the constitutionally required advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, Obama is behaving more and more like a tinpot dictator looting what remains of a collapsing banana republic. As part of the effort to defend the unconstitutional scheme to bypass Congress and “ratify” the UN climate regime, however, the White House and its globalist allies are twisting themselves into legalistic and rhetorical pretzels — and setting up the UN scheme for failure. The formal announcement ahead of the upcoming Communist Chinese-led G20 confirms what The New American first reported over two years ago.
Despite a historic opportunity for third parties to do well this presidential election, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson seems determined to blow it. In the equivalent of shooting himself in the political foot, Johnson announced support for a deeply unpopular tax on emissions of carbon dioxide, or CO2, to stop alleged “climate change.” And he sought to deceive voters while doing it, framing the tax scheme as a “fee” and a “free-market approach.”
VIDEO - Alex Newman discusses the attack on “climate deniers,” where AGs have launched investigations on their “fraud.” While learning that only 40% of Americans believe people are being harmed by climate change today, and that even in the satellite record global warming has not been seen in over 20 years, will free speech prevail in order to expose the truth?
The United Nations has produced several "research" papers predicting that soon it will be too hot to do any labor-intensive work.
In addition to the devastating blow dealt to globalism generally, the historic British “Brexit” vote to exit the European Union could have far-reaching implications for the United Nations “climate” regime. Concocted in Paris last year by the UN and its member governments, the controversial deal is unprecedented in terms of its full-blown promotion of regional governments such as the EU as crucial players in imposing the international agenda. But with Brexit, that gamble has turned against the globalists, and now they are scrambling to save face amid a victorious “leave” campaign led largely by climate skeptics and realists.
Oops! Rockefeller-funded “climate” alarmists caught conspiring with rogue officials to persecute their critics by abusing the legal system are almost certainly kicking themselves right now. Responding to what multiple legal experts have described as a potential “criminal conspiracy” among far-left prosecutors and global-warming theorists to target skeptics of their increasingly discredited theory, conservative-leaning state attorneys general have now fired back — big time. Basically, if the same legal logic used by the alarmist prosecutors were applied to climate alarmists, the warming theorists could find themselves in serious trouble.
Whether or not Donald Trump was serious when he threatened to “cancel” the United Nations climate agreement negotiated in Paris last year, the White House appears to be taking the threat very seriously. According to media reports and statements by senior Obama “climate” officials, the administration is hard at work “Trump-proofing” the controversial global-warming pact. Regardless of the efforts, though, a President Trump could easily kill the UN scheme — especially because it is not even legally valid, since Obama has not presented it to the U.S. Senate for ratification as required for all treaties by the U.S. Constitution.
We all want to leave the world a better place for our children, as the United Nations would share in that sentiment.