Trumpdillyicious!

[IIFFOFRDB]

TICK TOCK, TICK TOCK, TICK TOCK, TICK TOCK...

Till the Paris Accord get's Flushed Down the SHITTER!


Multinational Banks and Corporations Trigger Immediate Angst Over Trump Withdrawal From Paris Treaty…

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...ge-1/#comments

Posted on May 31, 2017 by sundance


Every word we read, every corporate broadcast, every espoused punditry opinion, every angle that’s visible, everything surrounding the Paris Climate “Treaty”, All.Of.It., is driven by multinational banks and corporations who have a vested financial interest.

The Paris Climate Treaty has nothing to do with “climate” and everything possible to do with economics, globalism and the controlled redistribution of economic wealth as constructed through decades of advanced policies of multinational financial interests.

There are factually TRILLIONS of dollars at stake.

When you consider the pontificating pearl-clutching from the financial and industrial elites, ask yourself this very basic question:

If Elon Musk (Tesla), Tim Cook (Apple), Larry Page (google), Mark Zuckerberg (facebook), or any of the myriad of multinational executives really cared about “climate change”, then why are they doing business in China?



The primary concern for every affiliated entity surrounds economics, not climate. “Climate” issues are the Trojan horse, the false ruse, the talking point, the scheme to get economic systems in place -yes, political systems- to control the distributive flow of larger economic wealth within all nations. Period.

What ObamaCare was to your loss of healthcare individualism, so too is the Paris Treaty a political tool to deconstruct national economic individualism. FULL-STOP.

To understand the larger objectives of the global and financial elite it is important to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to protect. Global financial exploitation of national markets:

♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.

♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.

♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).

♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.

The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focuses exclusively on bilateral trade deals with specific policy only looking out for the national interests of the United States.

Under President Trump’s Trade positions exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped. This puts the multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding interest of an asset they cannot exploit.

If you can see the ramifications, and can grasp the inherent anger, you can begin to understand the severity of the opposition to President Trump.

Multinational corporations and billionaire financiers use climate change as a tool toward furtherance of collected global wealth. Their strategy is quite simple, and has been played out for several cycles. Create an institutional trade instrument (housing financial bubble example), control it, drive the pricing to an apex and reap the financial rewards.

Their expressed holy grail for human control is a global tax on all people more commonly known as a “carbon-trading tax”. A planetary tax on personage, behavior and activity, through a market-based trade vehicle (Paris Agreement), which they exclusively control; and which subverts the national economic interests of sovereign nations.

The “Carbon Trading” fundamental financial instrument is the foundational block of the financial interests behind modern climate change. The latest exhibition of a decades long series of international construct was the Paris Climate Change agreement.

[bamscram]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...pelled-tweet-/

[Muy Largo]

If you've paid attention to climate change issues through the past 20 years you would know that big corporations, especially the conventional ones, were very slow to come on board with the threats posed by atmospheric degradation. That many larger corporations and many nations and many influential institutions are now worried about climate change and atmospheric degradation is due to the evidence. We can continue to allow fossil fuel pollution to rivers, land and sky. Or we can do the right thing and continue to carefully change course at a prudent speed.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

If you've paid attention to climate change issues through the past 20 years you would know that big corporations, especially the conventional ones, were very slow to come on board with the threats posed by atmospheric degradation. That many larger corporations and many nations and many influential institutions are now worried about climate change and atmospheric degradation is due to the evidence. We can continue to allow fossil fuel pollution to rivers, land and sky. Or we can do the right thing and continue to carefully change course at a prudent speed.

Minnesota......Al Franken, is that YOU ? !

[TheDaliLama]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

If you've paid attention to climate change issues through the past 20 years you would know that big corporations, especially the conventional ones, were very slow to come on board with the threats posed by atmospheric degradation. That many larger corporations and many nations and many influential institutions are now worried about climate change and atmospheric degradation is due to the evidence. We can continue to allow fossil fuel pollution to rivers, land and sky. Or we can do the right thing and continue to carefully change course at a prudent speed.

That's total Bull Shit.

I'm glad that we have a President that sees it for what it is.

TOTAL BULL SHIT

[Muy Largo]

Sorry Dumbo, You're ill-informed and don't know it. All hung up about being uninformed. Wanting to be uninformed. Stubburn? Probably. Read any good books lately? Maybe something by Glenn Beck, perhaps?
Just kidding. Dumbo knows little and it's pretty damn obvious.
Read some objective information about atmospheric degradation, dumbo.
I dare you. Read something objective.

[TheDaliLama]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

Sorry Dumbo, You're ill-informed and don't know it. All hung up about being uninformed. Wanting to be uninformed. Stubburn? Probably. Read any good books lately? Maybe something by Glenn Beck, perhaps?
Just kidding. Dumbo knows little and it's pretty damn obvious.
Read some objective information about atmospheric degradation, dumbo.
I dare you. Read something objective.

I have.

You still lose.

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

Sorry Dumbo, You're ill-informed and don't know it. All hung up about being uninformed. Wanting to be uninformed. Stubburn? Probably. Read any good books lately? Maybe something by Glenn Beck, perhaps?
Just kidding. Dumbo knows little and it's pretty damn obvious.
Read some objective information about atmospheric degradation, dumbo.
I dare you. Read something objective.

[TheDaliLama]

There is nothing in that agreement that will effect the climate either way.

It's just another bogus feel good thing for politicians to spend your money on and to get re-elected.

But of course I'm sure Muy Largo feels he is going to save the planet so we MUST spend our children's future on it.

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

There is nothing in that agreement that will effect the climate either way.

It's just another bogus feel good thing for politicians to spend your money on and to get re-elected.

But of course I'm sure Muy Largo feels he is going to save the planet so we MUST spend our children's future on it.

Mucho Lardo, Does not care about pollution. Mucho Lardo is all about control, just like his daddy, The 0zombie King...

https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2...op-with-paris/

Don’t Stop With Paris
BY ANDREW C. MCCARTHY MAY 31, 2017



FILE - In this Oct. 13, 1973 file photo, then-vice presidential nominee Gerald R. Ford, right, listens as President Richard Nixon, accompanied by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, speaks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington. Overseas reaction to Nixon’s resignation in 1974 was mixed: The Soviets expressed worry about the future of detente. North Korea reacted brashly, calling Nixon’s exit the “falling out” of the “wicked boss” of American imperialists. South Vietnam put its forces on high alert because it feared the North Vietnamese would take advantage of the vulnerable U.S. political situation. (AP Photo/Harvey W. Georges, File)



It is welcome news that President Trump will pull the United States out of the Paris climate agreement. The pact promises to damage the economy while surrendering American sovereignty over climate policy to yet another international, largely anti-American enterprise.

It is unwelcome news, nevertheless, that so much was riding on the president’s decision to withdraw the assent of his predecessor, Barack Obama -- America’s first post-American president.

In reality, Trump’s decision is monumental only because America, in the Obama mold, has become post-constitutional.

The Paris climate agreement is a treaty. We are not talking here about a bob-and-weave farce like the Iran nuclear deal. That arrangement, the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” was shrewdly packaged as an “unsigned understanding” -- concurrently spun, depending on its apologists’ need of the moment, as a non-treaty (in order to evade the Constitution’s requirements), or as a binding international commitment (in order to intimidate the new American administration into retaining it).

The climate agreement, to the contrary, is a formal international agreement. Indeed, backers claim this “Convention” entered into force -- i.e., became internationally binding -- upon the adoption of “instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession” by a mere 55 of the 197 parties.

For all these global governance pretensions, though, why should we care? Why should the Paris agreement affect Americans?

Yes, President Obama gave his assent to the agreement in his characteristically cagey manner: He waited until late 2016 to “adopt” the convention -- when there would be no practical opportunity to seek Senate approval before he left office. But Senate consent is still required, by a two-thirds’ supermajority, before a treaty is binding on the United States.

At least that’s what the Constitution says.

But it is not what post-American, transnational progressives say.

They note that in 1970, President Richard M. Nixon signed a monstrosity known as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Think of it as “the treaty on treaties” -- even though you probably thought we already had an American law of treaties.

Under Article 18 of the treaty on treaties, once a nation signs a treaty -- or merely does something that could be interpreted as “express[ing] its consent to be bound by the treaty” -- that nation is “obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty.”

In other words, the Constitution notwithstanding, once a presidential administration signs or otherwise signals assent to the terms of an international agreement, the United States must consider itself bound – even though the Senate has not approved it, even though it has not been ratified.

If a subsequent president wants to get the United States out from under this counter-constitutional strait-jacket, it is not enough merely to refrain from submitting the treaty to the Senate. The later president must take an affirmative action that withdraws the prior president’s assent. That is why Trump cannot not just ignore the Paris agreement; he needs to openly and notoriously pull out of it.

Want to know how far gone we are? The treaty on treaties has never been ratified by the United States.

So why do we care about it? Because Nixon signed it. Could the reasoning here be more circular? The Constitution requires a signed treaty to be ratified before it becomes binding, yet we consider ourselves bound by signed but unratified treaties because a signed but unratified treaty says so.

How does that square with the Constitution? Wrong question. The right one, apparently, is: Who needs the Constitution when you have the State Department? That bastion of transnational progressives advises that, despite the lack of ratification under our Constitution, “many” of the treaty on treaties’ provisions are binding as -- what else? -- “customary international law.”

President Trump is taking a significant step in removing the United States from the Paris agreement. But the step should not be significant, or politically fraught, at all. President Obama’s eleventh-hour consent to the agreement’s terms should have been nothing more consequential than symbolic pom-pom waving at his fellow climate alarmists. It should have had no legal ramifications.

Think, moreover, of how badly the treaty on treaties betrays our constitutional system, which is based on representative government that is accountable to the people. The Constitution’s treaty process is designed to be a presumption against international entanglements. Unless two-thirds of senators are convinced than an agreement between or among countries is truly in the national interests of the United States -- not of some “progressive” conception of global stability, but of our people’s interests -- the agreement will not be ratified, and therefore should be deemed null and void.

Yet, the treaty on treaties enables senators to ignore their constituents’ interests without accountability. Senators from Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere are not forced to cast a vote on whether international climate standards, and the unaccountable bureaucrats behind them, should strangle their states. They get to say, “Don’t look at me. The issue has already been decided by the president, so our only remaining choice is to ‘save the planet’ by implementing these painful global mandates.”

President Trump should not stop at Paris. While he’s at it, he should affirmatively withdraw the United States from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. We don’t need an international convention on that. We have a Constitution that renders multilateral boondoggles unbinding in the absence of super-majority Senate consent. Want to put “America first”? Then it is past time to reify our sovereignty and the rule of law -- our law.

[WTF]

Libya , Nicaragua and now the United States...


What do they all have in common?

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by WTF

Libya , Nicaragua and now the United States...


What do they all have in common?

They have hovel builders ?

[IIFFOFRDB]

The 0zombie Lullaby...

[Muy Largo]

It was a shame our society decided to transition away from whale blubber as an energy source. Think about the subsequent economic damage, not to mention all the unemployment. What a travesty. Those narrow-minded politicians decided to transition away from whale blubber only because there were clever, powerful economic interests representing other, competing energy sources who were insensitive to the needs and traditions of the whaling industry.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Muy Largo

Sorry Dumbo, ...You're ill-informed and don't know it.

Typical dumbass parrot response.

So where is the FACTUAL EVIDENCE that "climate change" is the consequence of Man's activities or inactivities?

Let me save you some time ... there is NONE!