Climate Change: The Biggest Hoax and Land Grab in History ⋆ The Constitution


Climate Change: The Biggest Hoax and Land Grab in History

By: Robert Darby

All the talk today is about Climate Change and how it will change our world, when in fact Climate Change is nothing more than a big hoax and one of the biggest land grabs in history. The question Democrats, Scientists and most other people are asking is why President Donald Trump pulled out of The Paris Climate Change Agreement.

In fact it has become such a heated discussion that there have been scientists as well as other people that have violently protested over the fact that America has pulled out of it. In reality if a person were to look at it from a more rational point of view they would realize that it is a big sham and one of the most fatalistic thefts in history.

The Paris Climate Change Accord is another way of moving America closer to Socialism (Communism) and America would become a Communist Nation which is what Adolf Hitler tried to achieve during World War II.

The Paris Climate Accord and Agenda 21 are essentially the same thing. Agenda 21 names many horrific changes to America. The Paris Climate Change (Agenda 21) would promote sustainable development for communities to live in harmony with the environment and the United Nation would take control over all property rights in the United States.

Agenda 21 would insure access to all land and households and encourage land to be collectively owned and managed which would replace traditional individual home ownership with collectivism.   It would supposedly benefit the urban and rural poor as well as marginalize and disenfranchise groups but the only thing it would do is to redistribute America’s wealth.


Agenda 21 would depopulate America by forced sterilization, abortion and euthanasia which is what Adolf Hitler did to control the population of Germany during World War II. The Paris Climate Change Accord (Agenda 21) would also re-wild about on half of the United States which would set aside about half of the country as a giant wilderness preserve and humans could not travel there.

Americans would be crammed into super cities where it would be easier to control our every movement. Agenda 21 would subjugate America’s elected leaders at the Federal, State and local levels to the United Nations and its bureaucrats to form a One World Government based at the United Nations. Our elected leaders are not paying attention to Agenda 21but should be.

Americans need to support legislation at the local, state and Federal level to stop its progress in America.   Alabama and Virginia are moving against Agenda 21 in their own legislatures. It is time for the entire Federal Government to reject its anti-American very sever or cruel demands.

There will be no social justice according to the United Nations until people all over the world have access to wealth redistribution thanks to the United States and the United Nations will decide how the wealth will be given out.   (Information cited comes courtesy of The Sovereignty Project)

More Evidence of Debunking Climate Change:

  1. Obama’s Scientists have been taken to court because they have been found guilty of falsifying the numbers for Climate Change. The claim that the polar regions are are getting warmer is not true because in fact they are getting colder.
  2. Climate Change debunked when 8 plus inches of snow accumulated in the Mountains of California.
  3. Even Australia got in the act of debunking Climate Change
  4. Obama fired his scientists for not lying about the CO2 levels
  5. The claim that cats, dogs, horses, pigs and other animals cause Climate Change.

Why Is This Not a Story?


By: Debra J. Saunders

Why Is This Not a Story?

WASHINGTON — Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., the former Democratic National Committee chairwoman known in political circles as DWS, is knee-deep in a scandal that involves a laptop, money and possible foreign entanglements.

Unlike the Trump Russian scandal, however, The Washington Post and New York Times have barely reported on the story, which has conservatives observing — with President Donald Trump’s Twitter account concurring — that the mainstream media have a double standard.

In February, the House sergeant-at-arms yanked House computer network access for five information technology staffers who worked as shared employees for some 30 House Democrats. Capitol Police told members that the five were under criminal investigation for possibly violating security policies — and asked members to update their security settings. By March, most Democrats had fired the five, if only because they could no longer do their jobs.

To the puzzlement of many…

View original post 768 more words

Life in fossil-fuel-free utopia – Paul Driessen

Paul Driessen
Life in fossil-fuel-free utopia
 Al Gore’s new movie, a New York Times article on the final Obama Era “manmade climate disaster” report, and a piece saying wrathful people twelve years from now will hang hundreds of “climate deniers” are a tiny sample of Climate Hysteria and Anti-Trump Resistance rising to a crescendo. If we don’t end our evil fossil-fuel-burning lifestyles and go 100% renewable Right Now, we are doomed, they rail.
Maybe it’s our educational system, our cargo cult’s easy access to food and technology far from farms, mines and factories, or the end-of-days propaganda constantly pounded into our heads. Whatever the reason, far too many people have a pitiful grasp of reality: natural climate fluctuations throughout Earth history; the intricate, often fragile sources of things we take for granted; and what life would really be like in the utopian fossil-fuel-free future they dream of. Let’s take a short journey into that idyllic realm. 

Suppose we generate just the 25 billion megawatt-hours of today’s total global electricity consumption using wind turbines. (That’s not total energy consumption, and it doesn’t include what we’d need to charge a billion electric vehicles.) We’d need more than 830 million gigantic 3-megawatt turbines!

Spacing them at just 15 acres per turbine would require 12.5 billion acres! That’s twice the land area of North America! All those whirling blades would virtually exterminate raptors, other birds and bats. Rodent and insect populations would soar. Add in transmission lines, solar panels and biofuel plantations to meet the rest of the world’s energy demands – and the mostly illegal tree cutting for firewood to heat poor families’ homes – and huge swaths of our remaining forest and grassland habitats would disappear.

The renewable future assumes these “eco-friendly alternatives” would provide reliable, affordable energy 24/7/365, even during windless, sunless weeks and cold, dry growing seasons. They never will, of course. That means we will have electricity and fuels when nature cooperates, instead of when we need it.

With backup power plants gone, constantly on-and-off electricity will make it impossible to operate assembly lines, use the internet, do an MRI or surgery, enjoy favorite TV shows or even cook dinner. Refrigerators and freezers would conk out for hours or days at a time. Medicines and foods would spoil.


Petrochemical feed stocks would be gone – so we wouldn’t have paints, plastics, synthetic fibers or pharmaceuticals, except what can be obtained at great expense from weather-dependent biodiesel. Kiss your cotton-polyester-lycra leggings and yoga pants good-bye.

But of course all that is really not likely to happen. It would actually be far worse.

First of all, there wouldn’t even be any wind turbines or solar panels. Without fossil fuels – or far more nuclear and hydroelectric plants, which rabid environmentalists also despise – we couldn’t mine the needed ores, process and smelt them, build and operate foundries, factories, refineries or cement kilns, manufacture and assemble turbines and panels. We couldn’t even make machinery to put in factories.

Wind turbines, solar panels and solar thermal installations cannot produce consistently high enough heat to smelt ores and forge metals. They cannot generate power on a reliable enough basis to operate facilities that make modern technologies possible. They cannot provide the power required to manufacture turbines, panels, batteries or transmission lines – much less power civilization.


My grandmother used to tell me, “The only good thing about the good old days is that they’re gone.” Well, they’d be back, as the USA is de-carbonized, de-industrialized and de-developed.

Ponder America and Europe before coal fueled the modern industrial age. Recall what we were able to do back then, what lives were like, how long people lived. Visit Colonial Williamsburg and Claude Moore Colonial Farm in Virginia, or similar places in your state. Explore rural Africa and India.

Imagine living that way, every day: pulling water from wells, working the fields with your hoe and ox-pulled plow, spinning cotton thread and weaving on looms, relying on whatever metal tools your local blacksmith shop can produce. When the sun goes down, your lives will largely shut down.


Think back to amazing construction projects of ancient Egypt, Greece or Rome – or even 18th century London, Paris, New York. Ponder how they were built, how many people it took, how they obtained and moved the raw materials. Imagine being part of those wondrous enterprises, from sunup to sundown.

The good news is that there will be millions of new jobs. The bad news is that they’d involve mostly backbreaking labor with picks and shovels, for a buck an hour. Low-skill, low-productivity jobs just don’t pay all that well. Maybe to create even more jobs, the government will issue spoons, instead of shovels.

That will be your life, not reading, watching TV and YouTube or playing video games. Heck, there won’t even be any televisions or cell phones. Drugs and alcohol will be much harder to come by, too. (No more opioid crisis.) Water wheels and wind mills will be back in fashion. All-natural power, not all the time. 

More good news: Polluting, gas-guzzling, climate-changing cars and light trucks will be a thing of the past. Instead, you’ll have horses, oxen, donkeys, buggies and wagons again … grow millions of acres of hay to feed them – and have to dispose of millions or billions of tons of manure and urine every year.

There’ll be no paved streets – unless armies of low-skill workers pound rocks into gravel, mine and grind limestone, shale, bauxite and sand for cement, and make charcoal for lime kilns. Homes will revert to what can be built with pre-industrial technologies, with no central heat and definitely no AC.

Ah, but you folks promoting the idyllic renewable energy future will still be the ruling elites. You’ll get to live better than the rest of us, enjoy lives of reading and leisure, telling us commoners how we must live. Don’t bet on it. Don’t even bet on having the stamina to read after a long day with your shovel or spoon.

As society and especially big urban areas collapse into chaos, it will be survival of the fittest. And that group likely won’t include too many Handgun Control and Gun Free Zone devotees.

But at least your climate will be stable and serene – or so you suppose. You won’t have any more extreme weather events. Sea levels will stay right where they are today: 400 feet higher than when a warming planet melted the last mile-thick glaciers that covered half the Northern Hemisphere 12,000 years ago.

At least it will be stable and serene until those solar, cosmic ray, ocean currents and other pesky, powerful natural forces decide to mess around with Planet Earth again.

Of course, many countries won’t be as stupid as the self-righteous utopian nations. They will still use fossil fuels, plus nuclear and hydroelectric, and watch while you roll backward toward the “good old days.” Those that don’t swoop in to conquer and plunder may even send us food, clothing and monetary aid (most of which will end up with ruling elites and their families, friends, cronies and private armies).

So how about this as a better option?

Stop obsessing over “dangerous manmade climate change.” Focus on what really threatens our planet and its people: North Korea, Iran, Islamist terrorism – and rampant poverty, disease, malnutrition and early death among the billions who still do not have access to electricity and the living standards it brings.

Worry less about manmade climate cataclysms – and more about cataclysms caused by policies promoted in the name of controlling Earth’s climate, when they really end up controlling our lives.

Don’t force-feed us with today’s substandard, subsidized, pseudo-sustainable, pseudo-renewable energy systems. When better, more efficient, more practical energy technologies are developed, they will replace fossil fuels. Until then, we would be crazy to go down the primrose path to renewable energy utopia.

Fears that deadly Yellowstone supervolcano about to BLOW after 1400 earthquakes hit

Mountain Republic

If Yellowstone erupted… what would be left?

YELLOWSTONE volcano has been struck by 1,400 earthquakes in recent weeks, leading to fears that the supervolcano is ready to blow and WIPE OUT life on Earth.

Seismic activity around the Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, US, is not uncommon, but the heaviest swarm in half a decade has people very concerned.

Since June 12, there has been over 1,400 tremors in the region, and experts state that the swarm could go on for another month.

The Yellowstone Caldera supervolcano last erupted 70,000 years ago but a spike in seismic activity around the national park has unsettled nerves.

If the Wyoming volcano were to erupt it would kill an estimated 87,000 people immediately and make two-thirds of the USA immediately uninhabitable. The as the large spew of ash into the atmosphere would block out sunlight and directly affect life beneath it creating a…

View original post 21 more words

Egregious Media Dishonesty Overshadows Important Economic Observation

International Liberty

While it’s quite clear that the establishment media leans to the left, I don’t get too agitated about bias. Though every so often I can’t resist the temptation to comment when I come across egregious examples on issues such as poverty, guns, Greece, jobs, taxes, and education.

The bias extends to politics, of course, though the only time I felt compelled to comment was when ABC News rushed to imply that the Tea Party somehow was connected to a mass shooting in Colorado.

Well, I now feel compelled to comment again. But this example goes beyond bias and should be characterized as blatant and disgusting dishonesty. The hacks at Time took a quote from Charles Koch and then used selective editing to completely misrepresent what he actually said.

In a just world, the person who engaged in this bit of mendacity would…

View original post 461 more words

Emails Show Media Reluctance To Pursue Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Meeting Story

“… make the attorney general appear in a more favorable light.”

For some media outlets, the June 2016 tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General was a major piece of news, coming near the peak of speculation over the outcome of the federal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal.

Then, there were the reporters from the New York Times and The Washington Post, whose reluctance to pursue the story come through in emails disclosed by the American Center for Law and Justice as part of its effort to find the truth behind the meeting.

Former President Bill Clinton and Lynch met privately on her plane at the Phoenix airport. Both insisted the conversation was purely social. Former FBI Director James Comey has said the meeting concerned him and was one catalyst for his decision to circumvent standard procedures and go public with his assessment of what the FBI found in its investigation.

The ACLJ said the documents it received “paint a clear picture of a DOJ in crisis mode as the news broke of Attorney General Lynch’s meeting with former President Clinton. In fact, the records appear to indicate that the attorney general’s spin team immediately began preparing talking points for the attorney general regarding the meeting before ever speaking with the AG about the matter.”

It also said “there is clear evidence that the mainstream media was colluding with the DOJ to bury the story.”

At the same time, other media organizations were sharing the concern Comey expressed.

Matt Zapotosky of The Washington Post was asking the Department of Justice for a “hopefully, quick conversation on the AG-Clinton meeting,” according to a document obtained by ACLJ through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit

“My editors are still pretty interested in it and I am hoping I can put it to rest by answering just a few more questions of how the meeting came about,” the email read.

“The same Washington Post reporter, interacting with the DOJ spin team, implemented specific DOJ requests to change his story to make the attorney general appear in a more favorable light,” ACLJ said on its website.

Mark Landler, the White House correspondent of the New York Times, told the Justice Department he had been “pressed into service” by the paper, which was several days behind other media outlets in reporting about the meeting.

The Times and Post were not alone.

A Justice Department email from Melanie Newman, director of the Justice Department’s Office of Public Affairs, said, “I just talked to the ABC producers, who said they aren’t interested, even if Fox runs with it.”

ACLJ noted there were multiple documents form the Department of Justice and FBI about the meeting — contradicting claims from Comey that none existed — but that much of the content was redacted.

Unscrupulous Maxine Waters thinks Putin is Vice President, wants him impeached.

PUMABydesign001's Blog

Dirty, wicked and unscrupulous Maxine Waters is running her mouth so much that her brain can’t keep up with her twisted realities.

Hyper-liberal Congresswoman Maxine Waters left audience members and television viewers scratching their heads on Friday; confusing Mike Pence with Russian President Vladimir Putin and calling for the impeachment of the Vice President for absolutely no reason.

The Trump-hating liberal was speaking with the View when she was asked about her previous tweets, alleging Vice President Pence was “planning his inauguration” alongside outgoing Press Secretary Sean Spicer in the wake of Robert Mueller’s never-ending investigation of President Trump.

“Vice President Pence is already planning his inauguration. Is that a joke or do you really think that?” asked the host….

Continue Reading

View original post

Imran Awan Had Access to Every member of Congress — sold secrets to Foreign Agents!

BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

Looks like the noose is tightening around Schultz…better yet, her henchmen just might go down as well. But then again, the Swamp goons are alive and well. How careless of both Congress and Clinton. But to get justice, we have to overcome:

Imran Awan worked for Debbie Wasserman Schultz for thirteen years since she came into office in 2004 as a Florida representative. She only fired him this past week and would have kept paying her “IT expert” even when he was living in Pakistan. As an aside,

Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan were barred from computer networks at the House of Representatives in February.

Most of the House Members fired the Awans…

View original post 160 more words

‘The Inherent Danger In Judicial Overreach’

The Inherent Danger In Judicial Overreach July 25th, 2017

The purpose of this blog is to discuss the virtual absolute authority vested in Federal Court judges, their lifetime tenure, and the inherent danger that represents to America. Nowhere is this more perfectly exemplified than in Trump’s limited travel ban being halted by three U.S. District Court rulings that were subsequently affirmed by Appellate Courts. Please be assured that this blog is not about the merits and ramifications of the ban, but rather its relevance to the tenure and power of Federal Court judges.

My focus herein is on radical sanctimonious judges who erroneously think donning a black robe exalts them to God-like status, and thusly, can rule as they please with impunity. This mindset enables activist judges to overreach their constitutional authority by issuing rulings based on ideology instead of applicable law, and that can serve to subordinate America’s best interest to their personal agendas: That scenario is untenable: it represents a danger to the traditions, culture, and values of America’s future. 

To better understand the function of Federal judges and authority vested in them by the Constitution it might be beneficial to briefly describe the basics of their job’s derivation, tenure, and description. Your indulgence is appreciated for any redundancy on these topics.

U. S. Constitution Basics: The U.S. Constitution is the law of the land. It divides the federal government into three distinct branches to ensure centralization while preventing an individual or group from having too much control, commonly referred to as the separation of powers. Those branches and their respective compositions are as follows:

  • Legislative – Congress (Senate and House of Representatives)
  • Executive – President, Vice President, and Cabinet
  • Judicial – Supreme Court and various lower federal courts

Exclusivity of Legislative and Judicial Powers: The separation of power between these branches is intended to ensure judicial rulings are made pursuant to applicable law and not to further personal agendas by legislating. It is briefly described below.

  • Article 1 Section 1 vests the legislative power to enact laws exclusively in Congress
  • Article III Section 1 vests judicial power to interpret, apply and determine the constitutionality of laws in one Supreme court and various lower courts periodically established by Congress, e.g., appellate and district courts

Appointing Federal Judges: Article 11, Section 2 Clause 2 of the Constitution sets forth the process wherein the President nominates persons to fill federal judgeship’s, with the appointment of each nominee requiring Senate confirmation. As most people hire in their own stead, one can logically assume and history has proven that appointing a federal judge is not much different.

Tenure of Federal Judges: Article 111 section 1.2 of the Constitution conditions tenure on continued ‘good behavior’ which has been interpreted as a life time appointment. Termination can occur through resignation, retirement, and impeachment and conviction by congressional vote. The good behavior provision dates to 15th Century England where judges were appointed for life to prevent the King from pressuring them to rule as he wanted, and was adopted by the founding fathers who wrote the U.S. Constitution.

Trump’s Constitutional Authority: Trump’s ban was issued under an Executive Order that cited, tracked and complied with 8 USC 1182 (f) verbatim. This statute, set forth below, vests the President with the absolute authority to suspend the entry of aliens or any class of aliens for national-security purposes for any period of time that he deems necessary.

  “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

The statute is abundantly clear on its face and the ban should have stood. It is also clear that the judicial decisions halting it were made by radical, activist liberal judges in blatant violation of and indifference to the Constitution. They knowingly ventured from their exclusive domain of interpreting and applying the law into verboten territory of legislating new law to further personal agendas.

Usurpation of Presidential Authority: The net effect of the reckless self-serving judges halting the ban was to usurp the exclusive power vested in the President under 8 USC 1182 (f) and exercise it themselves. As a matter of record, the Supreme Court has ruled that the power assigned to each branch must remain with that branch, and may be expressed only by that branch. Learn more Here, In each instance the judges willfully violated the Constitution by assuming the legislative role knowing is was exclusively vested in Congress.

Left Wing Judicial Activists: The radical judges meting out their biased version of justice halting Trump’s Executive Order in blatant violation of the Constitution are neither rogue nor naive. In fact, they are among the reprehensible group of arrogant, left wing activist jurists that flourished and became mainstream under Obama, who routinely trashed the U.S. Constitution as a matter of course.The District Court judges involved were as follows:

  • James Robart – WA
  • Theodore Chuang – MD
  • Derrick Watson – HI

The judiciary’s role and rule of law as specifically set forth in the Constitution are of total indifference to this ilk of judge. Rather, both are trumped by self-serving ideological decisions cleverly underpinned by Marxist political correctness. The impact of such decisions has consistently been to erode our rights and subordinate America’s best interests to minorities. These judges masquerade under black robes feigning judicial neutrality while using their powerful positions to propagate personal agendas, and Supreme Court justices are not excluded from that group.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts: One of the most egregious examples of judicial activism occurred when Obama’s pal, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, legislated to help him out of a jam by rewriting Obamacare twice to make it legal. Thanks to Roberts far too many people have experienced the financial pain resulting from that fraud. The late, astute Honorable Justice Scalia ripped Roberts in a scathing dissent you can read Here

Judicial Accountability: Unless a Federal judge is convicted of committing an impeachable offense, the consequences for Constitutional violations are meaningless. Decisions by Appellate and District Court judges are subject to being reversed; Supreme Court Justices rule with a free rein. In essence, these Federal Court judges rule for life with impunity, which does not bode well for America.

The Need for Change: The appalling scenario emerging from Trump’s travel ban classically exemplifies judicial overreach as well as the power vested in Federal judges that enables them to control the future of America’s traditions, culture, and values. Specifically, Presidential authority was wrested from Trump by overriding a sound Executive Order issued pursuant to and in compliance with the Constitution. In so doing, judges simultaneously adjudicated by halting the ban; legislated by issuing rulings that propagated their personal agendas; and violated the Constitution. Since Federal judges are not accountable for violating the Constitution their rulings were made without being subjected to meaningful consequences.

In my opinion, the ramifications of this are extremely troubling, particularly considering the number of left wing activist judges who bought into and temper decisions with Obama’s anti-America agenda of ‘fundamental transformational’. Suffice to say that until the Constitution is amended to hold Federal judges accountable for violating it by imposing meaningful consequences and setting realistic term limits, the dangerous status quo will remain.

Why the Private Sector Does a Better Job than the Government

International Liberty

When I give speeches about the economic case for small government, one of my main points is that people in the private sector (workers, investors, managers, entrepreneurs, etc) are motivated by self interest to allocate labor and capital efficiently. To be more specific, the pursuit of higher pay and greater profit will lead people to allocate resources productively.

I freely admit that people in the private sector make mistakes (most new business ventures ultimately fail, for instance), but I explain that’s part of a dynamic process in a market economy. Every success and every mistake leads to feedback, both via the price system and also via profits and losses. All of which leads to continuous changes as people – especially entrepreneurs – seek to better serve the needs and wants of consumers, since that’s how they can increase their income and wealth.

In other words, Adam Smith

View original post 801 more words