If you noticed, I have refrained from getting involved in all the recent Trump headlines. I really do not have anything to add to this discussion. What everyone is now hearing about possible corruption within the Justice Department, readers of this column knew months to a year ago. For me, it is finally validation of keeping you, my readers, on the cutting edge.
What is important to remember is that everything that is being alleged about Russian collusion happened under the Obama Administration. Trump was not yet elected and up to that point had never held elective office. So, in October 2016, at a press conference, this is what happened, according to a Reuters correspondent: “Donald Trump is telling his supporters the election’s rigged. He’s asking to monitor certain areas on Election Day. How concerned are you about the potential for violence? And what about after Election Day? Are you worried the results of the election may be distrusted?”
This is what President Obama replied: “I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It’s unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts. Every expert, regardless of political party, regardless of ideology, conservative or liberal who has ever examined these issues in a serious way will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found. It doesn’t really show the kind of leadership and toughness that you’d want out of a president if you start whining before the game’s even over. So I’d invite Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes.”
Well, Trump did go out and make his case, got elected and now it is the Democrats and “Never Trumpers” trying to discredit the election. Just a reminder, all of the players involved—Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Lynch—all worked for the Obama Justice Department. Until they are investigated, what you are witnessing is a silent coup trying to nullify the last election because they disagree with the outcome.
So, rather than wasting space on this topic, I have concentrated on New York politics. After all, the whole government in Albany is up for election. While I have been concentrating on that, New York City decided to sue “Big Oil,” blaming them for climate change. You are not hearing much about this because there is a trial in California on this very topic that will have implications on New York City’s lawsuit.
Here is what is going on: Back story, earlier this year, Trump backed out of the Paris Agreement. This drove the EPA and State Department bureaucrats nuts. So, right after, out in California, there’s a lawsuit being filed against the fossil fuel companies in a San Francisco courtroom. California v. Chevron is a civil action brought by the city attorneys of San Francisco and Oakland, who accuse the defendants of creating a “public nuisance” by contributing to climate change and of conspiring to cover it up so they could continue to profit. They claim that all of these fossil fuel companies know that they are destroying the planet and are hiding the evidence. They claim in their lawsuit that they know that their business is creating the circumstances that cause climate change. So, they filed this massive lawsuit. The judge in this case decided to have a little seminar before the trial actually began.
You see, the judge in this case is William Alsup, an educated and informed person when it comes to climate change. So, before allowing this case to go forward, the judge wanted to see the evidence. So. they told the judge they had a memo (which they thought was their smoking gun) by Exxon executives and other fossil fuel companies where they admit to themselves, in this internal memo, that they are destroying the planet, that they are engaging in activities causing massive amounts of CO2, causing greenhouse gases and the planet only has so much time.
So the judge said, “Where is it? What does it say?” To the surprise of all, it was the fossil fuel companies that eagerly produced it. The memo was a discussion about a slide show that the UN put together. By producing the memo, the defendants were able to prove the environmentalists have been lying about claiming it’s a smoking gun memo from the fossil fuel companies. It proved, before the judge, that the environmentalists don’t know what they’re talking about and that there is no substance to their allegations at all. This is before the trial even began. This was a preliminary stage.
As this is a civil action, not criminal, it means there would be monetary damages if Big Oil is found liable here. That is what this is all about: money! I really do not think this will go far as the credibility of the city attorneys of San Francisco and Oakland has been shot to hell. If they do lose, you can kiss New York City’s lawsuit goodbye.
This is what I say. What say you?