Richardson, Craig e&e

confluence of ati, dc, e&e?

===

grift sideline?

919 seems a going concern

https://eelegal.org/fellows-advisors-2/

omfg

craig@hypno-happiness.com

http://hypno-happiness.com

Hypno-Happiness

MORE INFO

About

I'm an intuitive hypnotherapist helping in behavioral transformations; relationship strategies; motivation; & health & recovery goals. Skype and phone too.

1350 Beverly Rd., #115-445, McLean, VA 22101

Phone: 202-810-2001

Email: Info@eelegal.org

EIN	82-3127477
Name in IRS Master File	SPEAK UP 4 LIBERTY INC
Address	1350 BEVERLY RD STE 115 # 445 MCLEAN, VA 22101-3917

EIN

82-3127477

Name in IRS Master File

SPEAK UP 4 LIBERTY INC

Address

1350 BEVERLY RD STE 115 # 445

MCLEAN, VA 22101-3917

https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/15/green-new-deal-trump/

no lnx

WHY WAS LIBERAL BILLIONAIRE TOM STEYER SO QUIET ABOUT HIS SUPPORT FOR THE GREEN NEW DEAL?

5:11 PM 02/15/2019 | ENERGY

Chris White | Energy Reporter

Analysts say they are not surprised that billionaire Tom Steyer is staying mum on the Green New Deal given the plan’s recent stumbles.

Liberal megadonor Steyer is laying low on the Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal as Democratic presidential hopefuls line up behind the plan.

Steyer appears to be focusing on impeaching President Donald Trump over championing Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal.

Billionaire Tom Steyer is keeping a low profile with respect to his support for the Democratic Party’s Green New Deal. It’s an unusual position for one of the environmentalist movement’s biggest advocates.

Steyer has stayed mum on an all-encompassing climate resolution that promises to completely remake the American economy. He’s given faint praise for the GND in a tweet and a few sparse press statements, but the Democratic megadonor is instead focusing on impeaching the president.

The climate resolution, which was rolled out by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Feb. 7, calls for “10-year national mobilizations” toward a series of goals aimed at fighting global warming. A separate fact sheet claims the plan would “mobilize every aspect of American society.” Steyer’s relative inaction comes as critics slam the GND’s coming out party.

Ocasio-Cortez’s office provided NPR the GND resolution and its accompanying FAQ document that laid out its goals, namely to “[m]ove America to 100% clean and renewable energy” within 10 years. The FAQ document dump turned into a millstone around Democrat’s proverbial necks.

Among other things, the document claimed that Americans must “upgrade or replace every building in US for state-of-the-art energy efficiency,” if they are to rid the country and world of all forms of pollution and greenhouse gases. It also stated that the GND would provide benefits for people “unwilling to work.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s staff was forced to ding the document from the website and clarify the lawmaker’s position. The drama unfolded less than a day after the Feb. 7 rollout of the now-beleaguered deal. Steyer, for his part, issued a tweet on the day of the rollout cheering the New York Democrat’s ambitious play.

[kind of bugeyes?

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaks to the media about Amazon scrapping its plans to build a new headquarters in Queens, New York, on Capitol Hill February 14, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

“A real solution proposed in Washington? About time!! Let’s make the liars and deniers explain why this doesn’t HAVE to happen,” he told his Twitter followers at the time. Steyer didn’t mention the GND again until several days later when Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts published a statement on his website noting Steyer’s support.

“Our society needs to turn dramatically and immediately towards the shared goals of environmental justice, broad-based prosperity and health. The Green New Deal is that turn,” Steyer said in the Feb. 13 statement. Steyer’s political action group NextGen America has not responded to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Some critics believe it makes sense why the former hedge fund manager is staying mum. Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told TheDCNF that Steyer’s reticence to leap into the fray is probably a smart tactic given the GDN’s controversy.

“I think I would avoid wide circulation, too,” Horner said, adding “that the same people who couldn’t create a healthcare website apparently can’t even properly post to a website.” He often engages in legal battles against attorneys who sue energy companies over climate change.

Other analysts shared similar sentiments. “He’s calculating. It’s not overly popular,” E&E Legal President Craig Richardson told The DCNF, referring to the GND, which received waives of support from various Democratic presidential candidates.

“He’s all in on climate program. It’s a trial balloon, so he’s smart enough not to jump into that right away. It’s really not politically expedient to come all the way out for it,” he said of Steyer’s reticence. Richardson’s group is also on the front lines in battles against anti-oil activists.

Steyer is plowing another $6 million into what some Democratic leaders worry is an ill-fated attempt to impeach the president. He decided not to run against President Donald Trump in January, citing concerns about his business dealings and past fossil fuel investments.

Follow Chris White on Facebook and Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

TAGS : ALEXANDRIA OCASIO CORTEZ DONALD TRUMP TOM STEYER

Craig Richardson, Executive Director

Craig Richardson is the Executive Director of the American Tradition Institute.

Richardson is a seasoned professional with more than twenty-five years of experience. He previously served as Executive Director of the American-Danish Business Council, a group he helped establish at the request of the Danish Embassy, The National Park and Recreation Foundation, and Leadership for America’s Future PAC(LEADPAC), a PAC founded by former Congressman Steve Largent.

In addition, he has provided strategic communications and fundraising services to political clients, including serving as akey aid to former Majority Leader Tom DeLay. He also worked for the re-election campaigns of several U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives. He co-managed Largent’s bid for Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1998, and has participated in numerous issue campaigns including anti-tax and deregulation initiatives.

In 1995, Richardson co‐authored, Red Tape in America, published by the Heritage Foundation. The book details excessive government regulation, its impact on the U.S. economy, and its citizens.

Richardson began his career in 1984 working for former Secretary Elliot Richardson’s U.S. Senate campaign in Massachusetts. He then served as a Research Analyst for the National Republican Senatorial Committee in Washington for the 1986 Cycle, and returned to Boston in 1987 to work at a regional public relations and advertising agency. In 1990, he returned to Washington to serve as an Account Supervisor for a Weber Shandwick-owned national public relations firm. In 1993, he started his own research, communications, and fundraising business before co-founding Washington Strategies, where he worked for nearly 10 years. In 2002, he sold his interest in Washington Strategies and joined DCI Associates as Vice President. In November 2003 he founded Richardson Consulting.

Richardson received a B.A. degree from Bowdoin College and holds an M.A. degree from Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College.

NOLA icccc 818 huffpo

...Craig Richardson, executive director of E&E Legal,a conservative legal group that repeatedly sued the Obama administration's regulatory agencies, said he now sees his group as "trying to be a supportive arm of this new administration." But he lamented what he and others called "virtue signaling" by corporations "jumping on climate change."

Richardson complained about ExxonMobil leaving the conservative advocacy group, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), over a clash on climate policy. (Last year, Heartland wanted ALEC to approve a resolution calling on the EPA to withdraw the endangerment finding. Exxon was among several corporations and utilities that convinced ALEC to shelve a vote on the resolution.)

Heartland co-founder Joseph Bast provoked laughter by recounting carmaker GM's response to the Trump administration proposal unveiled last week to freeze fuel economy standards. Quoting the vision statement of GM CEO Mary Barra—that the company is working toward a future of "zero crashes, zero emissions, and zero congestion"—Bast said: "That is impossible, and it's absolutely ludicrous. Zero of each of those things mean zero cars. It means zero respect for people's personal choices of transportation. It would mean a devastating impact on the economy."

"Big companies," Bast said, "are willing to throw their customers under the bus when it comes to appearing to be green or when it comes to appeasing an administration," a reference to carmakers' deal with the Obama administration that led to the fuel economy standards. The auto companies now want the rules weakened, though not as aggressively as Trump has proposed.

Heartland has received funding in the past from Exxon and other fossil fuel interests. The group is not required to disclose its funders. Conservative hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer, who helped bankroll Trump's campaign, is known to be a donor, according to Mercer Family Foundation tax returns.

Peter Ferrara, Heartland's senior fellow for legal affairs, told the conference that his group opted not to intervene in the climate lawsuit that San Francisco and Oakland filed against Exxon and other oil companies because of the risk that it would be forced to disclose its donors. Instead, Heartland laid out its arguments against mainstream climate science on its website and in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. The oil companies' victory in that case would be a "valuable precedent," he said. Others in attendance criticized the oil giants for not opposing, in their legal arguments, the science that global warming is human-caused.

'Hearts and Minds of Americans'

The highest Trump administration official to appear at the conclave was Brooke Rollins, the former CEO and president of the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation. Rollins serves in the White House as assistant to the president in the Office of American Innovation. Heartland President Tim Huelskamp, a former Kansas Congress member who chaired the Tea Party caucus, asked her if Trump would take on the endangerment finding and other "golden calves of the left." Rollins offered no answer, but urged the group to keep pushing.

"We know the research of CO2 being a pollutant is just not valid," Rollins said. "And yet it's time to really continue research, and continue making that argument, and continue changing the hearts and minds of Americans."

Jay Lehr, the Heartland Institute's science director, noted the "major role" that Heartland played in urging Trump to withdraw from the Paris climate accord.

Lehr asked Rollins if Trump would stay the course. "People keep thinking he could still back down," he said.

"All of my experience has proven out that when this president says he believes in something, then there is no one more bold or courageous or fearless," Rollins said. "Does that mean I can say today he will never change his mind? No. But it does go to the question of how important organizations like Heartland and Texas Public Policy Foundation are."

PUBLISHED UNDER:

CLIMATE DENIAL

POLITICS

DONALD TRUMP

see hinderaker

POSTED ON FEBRUARY 26, 2015 BY STEVEN HAYWARD IN CLIMATE

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD

Our pals at the Energy and Environment Legal Institute issued the following press release today, which I post here in full:

For Immediate Release:February 26, 2015

Contact:

Craig Richardson

Richardson@eelegal.org

703-981-5553

Following Rep. Grijalva Inspiration, E&E Legal Files FOIA Request with the University of Delaware Seeking Records Relating to the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy

Washington, D.C. — Today, the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), in conjunction with the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic (FMELC) and the Caesar Rodney Institute (CRI), filed a Delaware Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) with the University of Delaware related to Dr. John Byrne,Director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy and Distinguished Professor of Energy and Climate Policy.

Specifically, the FOIA request seeks documents describing the University of Delaware’s policy or policies relating to disclosure applying to Dr. Byrne; records in the University’s possession relating to outsidefunding, grants, or other contributions made to support Dr. John Byrne’s work at or relating to the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy; records involving Dr. Byrne’s outside funding, including consulting fees, promotional considerations, speaking fees, honoraria, travel expenses, salary and other compensation or monies given to Dr. Byrne which did not originate with the University itself; financial disclosure forms in which Dr. Byrne lists the University of Delaware or the State of Delaware as his affiliation; and records reflecting Dr. Byrne’s total annual compensation for each year at the University of Delaware.

Those who have followed recent news reports may notice that this FOIA request was inspired by and even replicated the request that U.S. Representative Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) made to seven universities, including Delaware. In his letters, Congressman Grijalva notes that the “disclosure of a few key pieces of information will establish the impartiality of climate research and policy recommendations published in your institute’s name…[C]onflicts should be clear to stakeholders, including policymakers who use scientific information to make decisions.” Although the University responding to Rep. Grijalva is discretionary, processing FOIA requests from Delaware citizens is not.

“We certainly appreciate Congressman Grijalva’s rhetoric about the importance of disclosure and transparency,” said Chris Horner, E&E Legal Senior Legal Fellow and the attorney who filed the FOIA request on behalf of the three organizations. “His insistence that the Constitution compels him to demand these records — citing to no authority for why the universities should provide them — so moved us that we followed in his footsteps, if in our case by proceeding under Delaware law.”

It is possible that Representative Grijalva assumes that congressional letterhead carries authority to insist such demands be satisfied. Regardless, E&E Legal, FME Law and CRI appreciate the Congressman’s enthusiasm that the University dedicate itself to producing such records.

The groups far more narrowly tailor the period of time covered by their request, otherwise modeled after Rep. Grijalva’s nearly verbatim (also changing of course the party whose records are involved, which we are confident is not material to whether records should be released). The requesters look forward to the University of Delaware taking to heart Rep. Grijalva’s embrace of transparency, and satisfying this request made pursuant to Delaware’s statute which implements the legislature’s determination that, for institutions including the University, “it is vital that citizens have easy access to public records in order that the society remain free and democratic”. FOIA § 10001.

“We have followed Rep. Grijalva’s footsteps for our request, if under actual statutory making our request, unlike the Congressman’s, not discretionary. UDel has provided records in the past to Greenpeace, and we are confident that the State of Delaware will comply with this request,” concludes Horner.

Heh. By the way, learning some fun things about Rep. Grijalva, and his lead “investigator” for this witch hunt, Vic Edgerton, who turns out to be a formerGreen Party candidate for local office in Connecticut, because, he said at the time, he needed to shine a light on issues Democrats ignore. Edgerton also previously worked for Keith Ellison, and Dennis Kucinich. He clearly knows how to pick leading statesmen.

Stay tuned. More to come

Democrats' climate probe brings ‘witch hunt’ accusations

Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva is on a mission to expose climate skeptics. Some say he's going too far.

By ALEX GUILLÉN

2/27/15 5:51 AM EST

Updated 2/28/15 6:28 AM EST

Now conservatives are the ones complaining about being the victims in a politically motivated “war on science.”

In a turnabout from years of debate about intrusion into scientific research, Democratic lawmakers launched investigations this week into the funding sources of several scientists whose work is popular with skeptics of manmade climate change. And that’s bringing a furious counterattack from congressional Republicans and right-wing pundits — including some who cheered on a past probe by former Republican Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli into a leading scientist whose research pointed to man-made causes of climate change.

Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, sparked the latest dispute by asking universities to turn over documents about grants, congressional testimony and other activities involving seven scientists who have testified at congressional climate hearings. Grijalva was following up on a New York Times story reporting that Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon, a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, had gotten $1.25 million in undisclosed money from fossil fuel companies.

Three Democratic senators then took up the case, asking more than 100 energy companies and trade groups to provide details on their research spending.

Supporters of Soon’s research say it casts doubt on human activity being a major driver of global warming. That made the Times story a public relations coup for the green activists who originally uncovered the documents on his funding. But Grijalva’s broadened inquiry prompted conservatives to accuse him of staging an ideological witch hunt, and even one green-minded science group expressed qualms he may have gone too far. Eleven Republican senators rebuked both Democratic probes on Friday as “wholly inappropriate.”

Still, Democrats are undeterred, saying the two cases are in no way comparable. They note that a strong majority of climate scientists say climate change is real, is primarily driven by human-caused greenhouse gas pollution and poses a threat to civilization.

“Republicans went after amazing scientists doing honest and great work on climate change,” said a spokesman for Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who helped lead the Senate Democrats’ information request to the energy trade groups. Spokesman Eben Burnham-Snyder added, “What’s different here are some clear indications that the very same companies and trade groups who have been sowing doubt on climate change and stopping any sort of legislative action in Congress, also may have been participating in these ‘denial for hire’ operations where they would pay very specifically for results.”

Grijalva was unavailable to comment on the flap Thursday.

But critics of his document request were quick to liken it to McCarthyism — or worse.

“Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Climate Skeptic?” asked a headline on the conservative blog Power Line, which appeared atop a post written by one of the researchers Grijalva is probing,Steven F. Haywardof Pepperdine University. The climate skeptic blog Junk Science alleged that Grijalva’s probe “closes in on 1933 Germany, and the Soviet Union.”

ButPower Line had a different take on Cuccinelli’s climate probe five years ago, after the then-attorney general ordered the University of Virginia to turn over 11 years of emails and a raft of other documents involving former UVA scientist Michael Mann. Cuccinelli said he wanted to know whether Mann had manipulated data as part of his research, which included a now-famous “hockey stick” graphic showing a sharp increase in global temperatures linked to human activity.

“Cuccinelli’s subpoena has been greeted with howls and protests from warmists and others who view inquiry into a scientist’s work as an infringement of academic freedom — the freedom, that is, to make stuff up, hide or falsify data, and thereby impose trillions of dollars of costs on consumers, all while being supported by taxpayers,”Power Line’s John Hinderaker wrote in May 2010.

Similarly, JunkScience’s Steve Milloy wrote in The Washington Times five years ago that greens’ claims that Cuccinelli was threatening academic freedom were “so much rot.”

“A thorough investigation by someone not in cahoots with the climate mob is the only way to answer legitimate questions related to the expenditure of taxpayer money,” Milloy wrote at the time.

Much like Markey’s spokesman, Hinderaker said Thursday that the Cuccinelli and Grijalva probes are “completely different.”

“The Cuccinelli [document demand] related to the substance of work done by Michael Mann,” Hinderaker wrote in an email to POLITICO. He added: “The Grijalva ‘investigation’ is merely an attempt to smear scientists and others by claiming that they received funding from various private sources; it does not relate to the substance of anything they have written … As you know if you have read my posts, I believe that it is government money, not private money, that is corrupt, because government is the main party in interest in the global warming controversy.”

Cuccinelli’s probe fizzled after the Virginia Supreme Court ruled he did not have the power to demand the university records.

Unlike Cuccinelli, who sought the documents under Virginia’s Fraud Against Taxpayers Act, Grijalva and the other Democratic lawmakers don’t have subpoena power to back up their requests. But the Democrats are citing a motivation similar to what Cuccinelli had offered: protecting taxpayers from policy influenced by bad science.

“Companies with a direct financial interest in climate and air quality standards are funding environmental research that influences state and federal regulations and shapes public understanding of climate science,” Grijalva wrote in letters Tuesday to seven universities, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Colorado and Georgia Tech. “These conflicts should be clear to stakeholders, including policymakers who use scientific information to make decisions.”

Grijalva requested information dating back to 2007, including all drafts of the scientists’ testimony before government bodies, the researchers’ sources of external funding, their financial disclosure forms and “communications” regarding their testimony and funding sources.

Markey and Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Barbara Boxer of California followed up the next day by asking more than 100 energy companies and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and the National Mining Association, to disclose details on their research funding over the past 10 years.

“This investigation will help to determine who is funding these denial-for-hire operations and whether those who are funded by these fossil fuel interests are keeping their funders’ identities secret from the public and legislators,” Markey said in a statement.

The mining association responded to POLITICO that it “has not financed scientific research on climate change,” although it has commissioned studies on topics including “the serious and far reaching economic consequences of proposed policies ostensibly advanced to address climate change.” API said it is looking into the matter.

Grijalva’s investigation and the Democratic senators’ questions got a rebuttal Friday from all 11 Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who wrote to the same universities, energy groups and companies to tell them the inquiry was out of line. “We ask you to not be afraid of political repercussions or public attacks regardless of how you respond,” the Republicans wrote.

The scientists themselves were quick to denounce Grijalva’s probe.

“I know with complete certainty that this investigation is a politically motivated ‘witch hunt’ designed to intimidate me (and others) and to smear my name,” Roger Pielke Jr., a professor at the University of Colorado’s Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, wrote on his blog Tuesday under a photo of former Sen. Joe McCarthy.

“I have no funding, declared or undeclared, with any fossil fuel company or interest. I never have,” he added, a statement the university backed up.

Pielke rejects the label of climate skeptic but has questioned the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are connected to the increasing costs of natural disasters. He notes that he supports EPA’s climate regulations and has advocated a small tax on carbon emissions. Still, his views have made him a target for liberals, leading him to quickly part ways last year with the website FiveThirtyEight just a few months after its relaunch.

“Incessant attacks and smears are effective,” Pielke lamented this week.

Other researchers Grijalva is targeting include David Legates of the University of Delaware, John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Judith Curry of Georgia Tech and Richard Lindzen of MIT. Many of them reject the notion that they are climate change skeptics, although their work has drawn the attention of the skeptic camp. Christy, for example, testified before Congress that climate models overstate the atmosphere’s sensitivity to greenhouse gases, while Curry has maintained that forecasting the climate is more uncertain that many scientists admit.

Curry took to her own blog to blast Grijalva’s request.

“I don’t think anything good will come of this,” she wrote. “I anticipate that Grijalva will not find any kind of an undisclosed fossil fuel smoking gun from any of the 7 individuals under investigation.”

Hayward, from Pepperdine, wrote on Power Line that he has received “no grants, honoraria, consulting fees, good karma baubles, or even Christmas cards from any fossil fuel interest, though I’d be proud and open about it if I did.” He also questioned the wisdom of judging scientists’ work based on who pays for the research.

“Is the good congressman really telling us that he is incapable of assessing factual claims and judgments about the wisdom of policy on the merits alone?” he wrote. “That doesn’t speak well of his probity.”

Even some groups that support acting on climate change have expressed worries that Grijalva’s questions may intrude on academic freedom. Michael Halpern of the Union of Concerned Scientists wrote in a blog post that Grijalva’s questions about funding are appropriate, but said his request for drafts of congressional testimony amounts to an investigation into private communications.

“Just as I have supported universities’ efforts to protect communications among academics that constitute the research process, so, too, I see justification in protecting drafts of congressional testimony,” Halpern wrote.

The American Meteorological Society jumped into the fray Friday, writing to Grijalva that “publicly singling out specific researchers based on perspectives they have expressed … sends a chilling message to all academic researchers.”

Mann, the former University of Virginia scientist, told National Journal that Grijalva’s letter “does come across as sort of heavy handed and overly aggressive.”

Meanwhile, some climate-skeptic groups chose to mimic Grijalva’s probe by filing a similar request for information about University of Delaware climate scientist John Byrne.

“The sole distinctions are, first, that we far more narrowly tailor our request in comparison to Rep. Grijalva’s; second, our request is made pursuant to statutory authority,” wrote the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and the Caesar Rodney Institute.

REQUEST UNDER THE DELAWARE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT February 25, 2015 Lawrence White Vice President and General Counsel 124C Hullihen Hall University of Delaware Newark, DE 19716 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL -- lawwhite@udel.edu Dear Mr. White/University FOIA Officer,

Christopher C. Horner, Esq. for the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic Mailing address for productions: 1489 Kinross Lane Keswick, VA 22947 __/s/__ Craig Richardson Executive Director Energy & Environment Legal Institute 722 12th ST NW 4th Fl Washington DC 20005 __/s/__ David T. Stevenson Director, Center for Energy Competitiveness Caesar Rodney Institute 420 Corporate Blvd Newark, DE 19702

:{horner http://eelegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/EELI-FME-Law-Delaware-Byrne-FOIA-request.pdf

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/climate-change-study-funding-raul-grijalva-115568.html#ixzz3TXnLkCMi}: