wsj2bak

see tag and main nodeowned by murdochmaybe neglected b/c i'm no long surprised?
capt 419
=an 6 23
in an extraordinary move, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito last week <a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-propublica/" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">made an effort to preempt</a> a then-forthcoming ProPublica investigation that shed light on a trip the conservative judge took with a Republican donor who later had cases before the court.

For University of Michigan Law School professor Leah Litman and New York University School of Law professor Melissa Murray, Alito’s op-ed, which appeared in the “ideologically friendly” Wall Street Journal, was “just the latest example of Alito’s insistence on enjoying the country’s respect even when he fails to act respectably.”

The pair shared their opinion on Alito’s prebuttal in an <a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-06-25/supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-problem" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">article published Sunday</a> by the Los Angeles Times.READ MORE:<a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-propublica/" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">WSJ publishes 'weird' attempt by Justice Alito to preempt ProPublica report on Supreme Court recusal</a>

Alito’s Wall Street Journal op-ed, described by Litman and Murray as “indignant” and “bizarre,” included a reference to “two charges” levied against the justice, as well as a blanket declaration that “neither charge is valid” — though, as Litman and Murray write, Alito himself “does not dispute that he flew on a private jet and enjoyed a luxury fishing vacation in Alaska free of charge.”

Instead of replying to a list of questions ProPublica journalists sent to Supreme Court spokesperson Patricia McCabe, Alito “opted to bitterly and preemptively complain about the story in an ideologically friendly outlet,” Litman and Murray write.

“Alito appears aggrieved that the public has the audacity to criticize him,” the pair noted, adding that the justice’s “reaction is entirely consistent with the worldview he has revealed within and beyond his jurisprudence time and time again.”<div id="story_page_incontent_p2_target" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ins class="adsbygoogle" data-ad-client="ca-pub-5155643920455169" data-ad-slot="6339868799" data-ad-format="auto" data-full-width-responsive="true" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; text-align: center; margin-bottom: 20px; display: block;" /></div>READ MORE:<a href="https://www.alternet.org/supreme-court-2661651070/" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">' This just keeps getting worse': Sheldon Whitehouse rips apart Alito’s defense of gifts from GOP billionaire</a>

“Because even though Samuel Alito is a Supreme Court justice with lifetime tenure and all the power that position entails, he still wants more,” Litman and Murray wrote.

Arguing that Alito seems “to believe that he and the court are so thoroughly supreme that they must be free of even a whiff of public criticism,” the law professors slammed him for “[demanding] perpetual public and professional affirmation — a safe space, if you will, where he is protected from micro-aggressions, bathed in praise and consistently depicted as reasonable and judicious regardless of whether he actually is.”

"And when his reception falls short of that, he lashes out at his critics no matter who they are,” the law professors added.READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-2661840109/" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Behind the scenes of Justice Alito’s unprecedented Wall Street Journal prebuttal</a>

“The man who represents an institution charged with interpreting the 1st Amendment can’t bear others exercising their free speech rights to criticize him,” Litman and Murray declared. “Instead, he uses his stature and appearances to take potshots at those bold enough to question an institution that, as we keep learning, is loath to observe rules or restrictions”

Turning their attention to the “conservative legal movement” as a whole, Litman and Murray bemoaned Alito as “a prominent face of that project, who insists on the prerogatives of an emperor-king, among them unstinting general adulation and complete insulation from critique.”

“It’s no wonder the court’s public standing is in trouble,” the law professors added. “Some of the justices seem to be letting the term ‘supreme’ go to their heads.”<a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-06-25/supreme-court-justice-samuel-alito-problem" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Read the full op-ed at the Los Angeles Times.</a>
READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-2661793089/" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Petition demands Alito recuse from student debt cases tied to billionaire benefactor</a><div id="story_page_post_article" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="tp-cxense-placeholder-inline tp-widget-placeholder"><div id="cxense-ff213be4f89eb23ae78d1f6cdb9c24c7b1534ebf" /></div></div><div class="around-the-web" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="from-your-siteheadline" style="font-weight: 700; text-transform: uppercase;">FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES</div><ul class="around-the-weblist" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.444px; list-style: none;"><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-alaska/" class="from-your-sitelink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Alito’s defense of Alaska fishing trip with billionaire includes claim taking a private jet saved US money ›</a></li><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/supreme-court-2661651070/" class="from-your-sitelink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">'This just keeps getting worse': Sheldon Whitehouse rips apart Alito’s defense of gifts from GOP billionaire ›</a></li><li class="from-your-siteitem"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/alito-propublica/" class="from-your-sitelink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">WSJ publishes 'weird' attempt by Justice Alito to preempt ProPublica report on Supreme Court recusal ›</a></li></ul><div class="around-the-webheadline" style="font-weight: 700; text-transform: uppercase; margin-top: 10px;">RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB</div><ul class="around-the-weblist" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.444px; list-style: none;"><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://theweek.com/behind-the-scenes/1024487/was-samuel-alitos-wall-street-journal-prebuttal-a-journalistic-ethics" class="around-the-weblink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Samuel Alito's Wall Street Journal essay prompts ethics concerns ... ›</a></li><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-courts-alito-defends-ethics-questions-rcna90308" class="around-the-weblink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Supreme Court's Alito defends against ethics questions ›</a></li><li class="around-the-webitem"><a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/supreme-courts-alito-says-abortion-leak-meant-intimidate-court-wsj-2023-04-28/" class="around-the-weblink rm-stats-tracked" target="blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s; font-weight: lighter; line-height: normal; display: inline-block; margin-top: 10px;">Supreme Court's Alito says abortion leak meant to intimidate cour</a>t...</li></ul></div>=<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">mma 6 23</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">after former President Donald Trump was indicted for his alleged mishandling of highly classified documents, right-wing media has gone into a tailspin to defend Trump from the charges while accusing Democrats of committing similar offenses. </div>With this indictment, Trump has <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/what-is-espionage-act-what-might-it-mean-donald-trump-2023-06-11/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">become</a> “the most high-profile person to ever face criminal charges under the Espionage Act.” The <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/3601538-what-is-the-espionage-act/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">post-World War 1 legislation</a> makes the mishandling of sensitive government documents that concern national defense <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">illegal</a>, and has been used to prosecute whistleblowers such as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/23/us/reality-winner-nsa-sentence.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Reality Winner</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/13/daniel-ellsberg-interview-pentagon-papers-50-years" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Daniel Ellsberg</a> since its passing. Special Counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump under the section of the law that <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/06/09/espionage-act-what-to-know-about-the-century-old-law-trumps-being-charged-under/?sh=78f38c973f2f" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">prohibits</a> unauthorized possession of top-secret national defense information and makes it a crime to “wilfully [retain]” that information or fail to “deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it.” The former president’s allies have attempted to divert attention from the severity of his charges by <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-indictment-clinton-classified-documents-republican-claims-7681bc9807ecd8bc37fd3f39b9756cc7" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">comparing</a> alleged violations of the Espionage Act by Democrats, including former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and President Joe Biden. The FBI, however, determined that by using her private email, Clinton did not intend to break the law and therefore did not act with “wilful retention or obstruction.” After another investigation into classified documents at Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware, residence, the FBI found that “no evidence has emerged to suggest that anyone intentionally moved classified documents or tried to impede the FBI from recovering them.” Although there are many fair criticisms of the Espionage Act and its <a href="https://theintercept.com/2023/03/30/julian-assange-congress-rashida-tlaib/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">constitutionality</a>, Trump was not acting as a reporter or whistleblower by allegedly showing top-secret documents to civilians like <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-kid-rock-video-maps-b2355972.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Kid Rock</a>.  In the days since his indictment was released, right-wing media have attempted to cast doubt on what charges Trump should face, citing the Presidential Records Act as a more applicable framework and claiming that the suit against the former president should therefore be a civil one.Following his presidential defeat, Trump took <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/national-archives-says-trump-took-15-boxes-white-house-records-florida-rcna15260" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">15 boxes of documents</a> that fell under the Presidential Records Act and belonged to the national archivist with him to Mar-a-Lago. The 1978 act <a href="https://www.archives.gov/news/topics/presidential-records-act#:_{:text=In%201978%2C%20Congress%20passed%20the,the%20end%20of%20the%20administration.}" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">states</a> that “any records created or received by the President as part of his constitutional, statutory, or ceremonial duties are the property of the United States government and will be managed by NARA at the end of the administration.” However, Trump also had <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/8/13/23304194/the-espionage-act-trump-documents-mar-a-lago" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">11 tranches of documents</a> with varying classification markings, and did not return all these records, thus raising concerns related to the Espionage Act and prompting the search of Mar-a-Lago. In a Reuters article about the indictment, lawyer Bradley Moss was cited arguing that the Presidential Records Act argument <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/donald-trump-presidential-records-act-clintons-sock-drawer-defense-2023-06-09/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">does not hold water</a> because “the question of whether the documents were personal or presidential records is beside the point." Moss was also quoted pointing out that “the records at issue in this indictment still have classification markings and contain information relating to the national defense” and are therefore being rightfully examined under the framework of the Espionage Act. <h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 0px 1rem;">Right-wing figures argue that the Espionage Act is the wrong framework under which to charge Trump, suggest the Presidential Records Act instead:</h3><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; clear: both; list-style: none; padding: 0px;"><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">As a guest on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier, Trump attorney <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/4007072" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Jesse Binnall</a> argued that “Congress has decided to make presidents and former presidents specifically subject to [the Presidential Records Act] rather than Espionage Act” and that “Jack Smith's team has it completely legally wrong by charging crimes that quite frankly don't apply.”</li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">On Fox News’ The Five, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/4007074" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Jeanine Pirro</a> called Jack Smith a “loser prosecutor, Jack Smith, who has been slapped down by the United States Supreme Court” and accused him of having a “political agenda” and said the case is “all over the Presidential Records Act, which is a civil suit.” She later whined that “what they do is they put out this narrative indictment, ‘This is a story of wrongdoing, national defense, and let's put an espionage, we’ve got to tie it into the Russia collusion.’”  </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">Fox News legal analyst <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/4007079" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Greg Jarrett</a> joined Fox News’ Hannity to insist that there are  “two systems of justice. … One for Donald Trump and one for everybody else,” claiming that “Garland chose to bastardize the law [ by raiding Trump's home and then seeking an indictment.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">As a guest on Fox News’ Jesse Watters Primetime, Article III Project founder <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/4007077" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Mike Davis </a>also suggested that “the Presidential Records Act, not the Espionage Act, applies.” Davis later said, “You know, I doubt a uniparty judge is going to go along with that, and so this will probably have to get resolved by the Supreme Court,” calling the potential charge a “bogus conviction.”  </li></ul><h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 0px 1rem;">Right-wing figures allege that Democrats have committed comparable offenses without being criminally prosecuted:</h3><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; clear: both; list-style: none; padding: 0px;"><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">Fox News host <a href="https://twitter.com/marklevinshow/status/1667932664286830592" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Mark Levin</a> said Biden, former Vice President Mike Pence, and Hillary Clinton “clearly violated the Espionage Act,” bemoaning the fact that “None of them were criminally charged.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;"><a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/09/trump-loses-two-lawyers-just-hours-after-being-indicted-00101263" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Freshly-resigned</a> Trump lawyer <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/4007071" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Jim Trusty</a> argued on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle that the Espionage Act was “not in play when Hillary bleached 30,000 emails that were under subpoena,” also claiming that the prosecution has a “whole bunch of rotating theories because they can’t find the facts they want.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">An op-ed for <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2023/06/08/democrats-indictment-frenzy-isnt-just-about-taking-out-trump-its-about-eliminating-wrongthink/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">The Federalist</a> claimed that if “taking documents home from the White House is a crime,” there would have been a DOJ investigation of “Biden and his classified documents.” The piece went on, claiming that the case is an example of the “deep state” targeting “dissenters” like Trump and a universal, presumably conservative, “you.”  </li></ul><h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 0px 1rem;">Several right-wing personalities claimed ill intent or misguided thinking motivated Trump’s indictment:</h3><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; clear: both; list-style: none; padding: 0px;"><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">Turning Point USA’s <a href="https://twitter.com/dannydeurbina/status/1666572064596058112" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Danny De Urbina</a> tweeted, “The DOJ indicting Trump under the Espionage Act after they literally spied on him as a private citizen is the ultimate gaslight.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">The Wall Street Journal’s <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-indictment-classified-documents-jack-smith-mar-a-lago-biden-justice-department-81591082?mod=djemalertNEWS" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">editorial board</a> published an op-ed questioning the indictment, saying that the “charges are a destructive intervention into the 2024 election” and that “the Justice Department has taken a perilous path” by indicting Trump. The board also wrote that while Trump may have been “cavalier with classified documents, Mr. Trump did not accept a bribe or betray secrets to Russia.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;"><a href="https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1667284207817588736" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Rogan O'Handley</a> (who operates the right-wing social media account DC Draino) argued that the initial DOJ and FBI aid of Mar-a-Lago was “so they could steal back evidence of their spying on President Trump in the Crossfire Hurricane documents,” also alleging that the indictment is “all a coverup.” </li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 3rem; position: relative;">A <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/10/trump-indictment-espionage-danger-democracy/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Washington Post</a> op-ed by right-wing columnist Gary Abernathy pushed back on the indictment, saying that while there was not a “good excuse” for Trump to keep sensitive documents, “bringing charges related to the possession of classified documents against a current or former president for anything short of colluding with our enemies or selling them on the black market is unnecessary, unwise and destructive to democracy.” </li></ul><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">As NYC is inundated with wildfire smoke, Rupert Murdoch’s WSJ calmly shows link to climate crisis, while Murdoch's Fox News mocks it</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">WRITTEN BY JOHN WHITEHOUSE</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM SAGE HODIL</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">PUBLISHED 06/07/23 </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">New York City is currently inundated with a hazardous level of wildfire smoke, making the skies appear yellowish-orange.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The smoke is from wildfires in Canada, which scientists say are “becoming bigger and more frequent” due to climate change, as reliably explained by Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal:</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Wildfires like those ravaging Canada are becoming bigger and more frequent as forests around the world increasingly dry out amid the warming climate, many scientists say.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Some of the biggest fires are breaking out in the boreal forests of the Northern Hemisphere such as most of the ones in Canada. That is because the Arctic region has warmed nearly four times faster than the rest of the world, said Carly Phillips, a Boston-based research scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In the boreal areas—mostly conifer forests with long winters and short summers—of Canada and Alaska, she said the annual area burned has nearly doubled in the past 60 years, along with an increase in the frequency of large fires. Russia’s vast Siberian forests have been consumed by giant fires too. Phillips said this year’s outbreak, while unprecedented in size, is just following the trend.</div><div>“I don’t know if it’s a tipping point, but what this underscores is that the climate crisis is here and now,” Phillips said.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The link is so obvious and uncontroversial that Journal staff members have no problems tweeting it.</div><div>And yet, over at Murdoch’s Fox News Channel, this is just another reason for hosts to punch left, this time at frequent target Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who dared to point out that the country has work to do to adapt to the climate crisis.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video CitationFrom the June 7, 2023, edition of of Fox News' Outnumbered</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>None of this is novel. Fox News (and the Journal’s right-wing editorial board) have for years pushed climate denial on the body politic. Now that the effects of the climate crisis are impossible to miss, the network is still refusing to recalibrate.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Like the Dominion case shows, it’s not clear if Fox’s audience — or whatever is left of it — will allow the network to speak the truth.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Either way, I’d recommend that people working at Fox News headquarters in Manhattan buy some high-quality masks. They might even still have some sitting around.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">THE LATEST</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Linda Yaccarino just started as Twitter’s new CEO, but Elon Musk already destroyed the platform for advertisers</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">06/08/23 9:27 AM EDT</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">200+ things that Fox News has labeled “woke”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">06/08/23 8:58 AM EDT</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Newsmax's Greg Kelly praises the smoke from Canadian wildfires: “It's a beautiful, interesting aura”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">06/08/23 8:45 AM EDT</div><div>Sean Hannity mocks New Yorkers for wearing masks to protect themselves from wildfire smoke</div><div>06/07/23 9:58 PM EDT</div><div>Fox News' Jesse Watters attacks government officials for suggesting masking to protect against wildfire smoke</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">06/07/23 The Wall Street Journal</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Wall Street Journal</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Climate deniers</div></div><div></div><div>whoohoo win!</div><div>
</div><div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/10/7/2127500/-WSJ-Mad-About-Anti-Climate-Disinfo-Efforts-As-CFACT-Pretends-Not-To-Be">https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/10/7/2127500/-WSJ-Mad-About-Anti-Climate-Disinfo-Efforts-As-CFACT-Pretends-Not-To-Be</a></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">
</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">WSJ Mad About Anti-Climate Disinfo Efforts, As CFACT Pretends Not To Be - Daily Kos</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">Daily Kos</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">
</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">We promise that next week it'll be back to bad news only here, but for the third day in a row we're going to do a bit of celebrating, because once again, deniers are losing!</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">Lesley Clark <a href="https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2022/10/06/minn-ag-wins-climate-skirmish-weeks-before-election-00060553" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">reported yesterday at E&E News</a> that "Minnesota’s highest court has delivered a victory to Attorney General Keith Ellison in legal action surrounding the state’s climate liability lawsuit against the oil and gas industry."</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">More specifically, the Minnesota Supreme Court decided not to let tobacco-turned-<a href="https://theintercept.com/2015/08/25/chris-horner-coal/" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">fossil-fuel-backed lawyer and harasser of climate scientists</a> and public servants Chris Horner's <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-19/climate-fact-checkers-hit-with-lawsuits-foias-for-challenging-dubious-claims" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; outline: 0px;">front group try and recreate Climategate</a>, but this time with emails from Attorney General Keith Ellison's office concerning their litigation against fossil fuel companies.Meanwhile, it was heartening to see that CFACT is so desperate for signs of its effectiveness that <a href="https://mailchi.mp/cfact/leftist-hit-pieces-showcase-cfacts-effectiveness" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">it's emailing people</a> to brag about the "six hit pieces referencing [Marc] Morano since July."Two of those are from MediaMatters, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/elon-musk/right-wing-influencers-leading-social-media-crusade-against-esg" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">one where Morano is mentioned by name only once,</a> in passing, and another where <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-tethering-multiple-global-conflicts-green-new-deal-and-esg" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">his appearance was noted</a> in a larger piece on Tucker Carlson. The other four are from yours truly, who CFACT describes as seeming "to have a love-hate relationship" with Morano.Which is true, in that we love how easy it is Morano makes it to write about how deniers are wrong on purpose for money by constantly saying dumb stuff, like that <a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/9/26/2125324/-With-No-Signs-Of-The-Climate-Lockdown-and-Great-Reset-In-2022-Morano-Finds-It-In-1930s" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">some 1930's New Deal book is proof</a> of a 2022 plot for world domination through a Great Reset. The other example they linked also only mentioned Morano in passing, as one of many disinfo-spreaders proving <a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/9/16/2123260/-YouTube-Still-Failing-Miserably-At-Demonetizing-Climate-Disinformation" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">YouTube is failing to enforce its demonetization policy</a>. Not exactly evidence of effectiveness.They unfortunately did not <a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/9/21/2123782/-How-Do-Oil-and-Gas-Employees-Rationalize-Their-Role-In-Climate-Change-Denial-Distraction-Disinfo" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">clear up the mystery of whether our memory</a> that Marc Morano told Bill Nye that he uses Ambien to sleep at night is accurate, but the fact that even our petty sniping is enough to warrant an email blast to subscribers shows how little evidence they actually do have that they're making a real impact. People ridiculing you does not necessarily mean they're threatened by you. Sometimes it just means you're ridiculous.Because this is, admittedly, not exactly a big news outlet with the largest readership in the world, and we're happy about that! This space is for people who have to deal with deniers, the general public shouldn't have to know about professional goobers!Similarly, if some equally small-time, dedicated opposition outlet like the<a href="https://dailycaller.com/2022/10/04/climate-disinformation-hate-speech/" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;"> Daily Caller were to run something on anti-climate disinfo efforts</a>, that wouldn't be worth writing home about either.But if the paper that does have one of the largest subscriber lists, the Wall Street Journal, took the time to complain about something its opposition is doing, that might be something worth celebrating!And what do you know, Thursday's print edition of the Wall Street Journal, going to some 2 million subscribers, featured an editorial complaining about "<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-censorship-campaign-big-tech-social-media-environmental-groups-letter-elon-musk-twitter-11665006072" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">the climate-change censorship campaign</a>."Yes, one of the biggest papers in the country decided that <a href="https://1bps6437gg8c169i0y1drtgz-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Count-The-Climate-Sign-On-Letter-1.pdf" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">a letter from green groups asking Big Tech companies</a> to include climate disinformation when complying with the EU's Digital Services Act was worth its column inches and readers' attention.Given that <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-04/green-groups-ask-social-media-to-disclose-effort-on-climate-lies" title="" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">Bloomberg</a>, <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/10/04/climate-coalition-pushes-social-media-ceos-end-planet-killing-disinformation" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">Common Defense</a> and <a href="https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-change/3674963-environmental-groups-ask-social-media-companies-to-better-address-climate-disinformation/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0px; text-decoration-line: none;">The Hill</a> were the only other coverage, landing news of the letter on the WSJ's pages was quite a score, if even in the shape of it calling on Elon Musk to use Twitter to "shut down the climate censors."Sounds like the WSJ's the one that wants to censor its opponents!</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">----</div></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><div>{{  </div><div>
</div><div>kos ref</div><div>
</div><div><div>paywall</div><div>OPINION REVIEW & OUTLOOK</div><div>The Climate-Change Censorship Campaign</div><div>The left is demanding that social media shut down debate even on solutions.</div><div>By The Editorial Board Follow</div><div>Oct. 5, 2022 </div><div>
</div><div>YOU MAY ALSO LIKE</div><div>WSJ Opinion: Hurricane Ian and Mitigating the 'Climate Crisis' Threat</div><div>
</div><div>Play video: WSJ Opinion: Hurricane Ian and Mitigating the 'Climate Crisis' Threat]</div><div>
</div><div>Politicians tell us that events like Hurricane Ian are symptomatic of a 'climate crisis' that can only be solved by net-zero carbon emissions. But some scientists believe the focus should be on mitigation and innovation. Images: NASA via AP/Reuters Composite: Mark Kelly</div><div>
</div><div>Elon Musk said this week he’ll buy Twitter after all, and the hopeful view for online speech is that his rockets-and-flamethrowers heterodoxy might be an answer for what ails social media. He won’t have it easy. On Tuesday more than a dozen environmental outfits, including Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote to the big tech companies to blame them for “amplifying and perpetuating climate disinformation.”</div><div>
</div><div>What the letter asks for sounds modest, but the implication is clear. The Digital Services Act recently enacted by the European Union includes transparency rules, and the green groups want Silicon Valley “to commit to including climate disinformation as a separately-acknowledged category in its reporting and content moderation policies in and outside of the EU.” Then they could proceed to complain that the tech giants aren’t doing enough censoring.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Continue reading your article with</div><div>a WSJ membership</div><div>
</div></div><div></div><div><a href="https://dailycaller.com/2022/10/04/climate-disinformation-hate-speech/">https://dailycaller.com/2022/10/04/climate-disinformation-hate-speech/</a></div><div>
</div><div>kos ref</div><div>
</div><div><div>POLITICS</div><div>Enviros Are Demanding Big Tech Treat ‘Climate Disinformation’ Like Hate Speech</div><div>Two-thirds of conservatives feel[ings, nothing more than...] like social media is censoring conservative voices, according to a poll.</div><div>Daily Caller News Foundation logo</div><div>
</div></div></div>=an 922On Monday, September 26, the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial board published an editorial attacking Democratic Arizona Secretary of State <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/arizonas-school-choice-election-katie-hobbs-education-savings-accounts-governor-doug-ducey-11663335266?mod=opinion_lead_pos3" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Katie Hobbs</a> — who is running against far-right MAGA Republican and conspiracy theorist Kari Lake in Arizona’s 2022 gubernatorial race — for her views on “school choice.” The WSJ’s editorial board recommended that Lake emphasize “school choice” rather than the 2020 presidential election, which she falsely claims was stolen from Donald Trump. And veteran conservative columnist Mona Charen, in a <a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/what-country-is-the-wall-street-journal-living-in/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">scathing article published by The Bulwark</a> on September 28, slams the Journal’s editorial board for turning a blind eye to Lake’s extremism.In its editorial, WSJ’s editorial board wrote, “The race for governor is close, and Democrats are seeking to rev up turnout by making the election about Donald Trump. GOP gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake hasn’t helped herself or her party by insisting that the 2020 election was stolen. Her election fraud claims put off many Republicans and independents and are a loser in the general election. A winning and unifying issue for Republicans this November is school choice.”The board continued, “(Florida Gov. Ron) DeSantis won in 2018 thanks in part to support from black mothers who were worried his Democratic opponent would take away their kids’ state scholarships. Ms. Lake has a chance to drive a similar message, and Ms. Hobbs has made herself vulnerable by telling parents they can’t be trusted with school choice.”READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/09/glenn-youngkin-election-denier/" target="self" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Why 'polished and ostensibly moderate' Glenn Youngkin is promoting election deniers: columnist</a>Those familiar with Charen’s background know how conservative she is. The 65-year-old Charen worked in the Reagan White House during the 1980s and was a speechwriter for First Lady Nancy Reagan, and the titles of her books include “Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First” and “Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help (and the Rest of Us).” But Charen has been a blistering critic of former President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement, and in 2020, she endorsed Joe Biden for president.In her Bulwark article, Charen notes that she agrees with “school choice” and has been critical of teachers’ unions. But “school choice,” she emphasizes, is no reason to endorse someone as “extreme” as Lake.“Disturbing, extremist, and otherwise unfit candidates dot the national landscape in 2022 like monkeypox, from Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania to J.D. Vance in Ohio to Don Bolduc in New Hampshire, but Arizona surely takes the highest honors for the sheer concentration of ranting incompetents who threaten the democratic process,” Charen writes. “Kari Lake, the Republican candidate for governor, whom the Journal is endorsing, may be in favor of school choice, but that’s a little beside the point when you consider the larger picture. Kari Lake has declared that the 2020 election was ‘corrupt and stolen.’ Regarding the current president of the United States, she has expressed pity, urging that ‘deep down, I think we all know this illegitimate fool in the White House — I feel sorry for him — didn’t win. I hope Americans are smart enough to know that.’”Charen continues, “She has no patience for temporizers. ‘It is not enough to say you are for ‘Election Integrity’ if you are not for DECERTIFYING the 2020 election if wrongdoing, fraud or different results are revealed,’ she tweeted last year. She then boasted that she was the only candidate for governor calling for decertification of the 2020 election. In addition to the standard denial of the 2020 election, Lake has also adopted the smarmy tactics Trump has normalized in the GOP. When former Congressman Matt Salmon, one of her primary opponents, demurred about putting cameras in every Arizona classroom, she accused him of coddling pedophiles and sneered that he was too weak to be governor.”READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/meghan-mccain/" target="self" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Meghan McCain melts down after Kari Lake and other GOP extremists win in Arizona elections</a>According to Charen, WSJ’s editorial board has responded to such “awkward realities” by viewing them “as problems only insofar as they make it harder for her to win.”“Again, I tend to agree with the Journal’s editorial board on many policy matters,” Charen writes. “Pro-school choice? Check. Pro-free enterprise? Check. Anti-regulation? Much of the time, yes. Pro-free trade? Double check. Pro-immigration? Check. Anti-big government? Check. But they are pretending, or perhaps deluding themselves, that the Republican Party remains, underneath it all, the party of Paul Ryan and Larry Hogan and Chris Sununu, and that the country will be better off if Republicans win elections, full stop.”Charen continues, “Yet as Liz Cheney sees and is willing to say, that’s not this Republican Party. This GOP is the party of Mastriano and Vance and yes, Kari Lake. This is a party that cannot be trusted with power, that openly proclaims its eagerness to overturn elections. Next to that, everything else, including school choice and regulation and taxes, pales to insignificance. The Wall Street Journal editorial board has continuing influence with reasonable center-right voters. They owe them better.”READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/ron-desantis-stumping-election-deniers/" target="self" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Why Ron DeSantis is stumping for election deniers in key swing states: report</a>=shillenberger oversight 9 22 refs hansen
<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097</a>

About WSJ
    Opinion  Commentary

The Climate Needs Nuclear Power
If governors are serious about global warming, they’ll preserve this vital source of clean energy.
By James Hansen and Michael Shellenberger
April 4, 2019 [pix The Diablo Canyon nuclear-power plant in San Luis Obispo, Calif.Photo: Corbis via Getty Images

Many environmentalists have changed their minds about nuclear energy over the past decade. While the share of energy produced by solar and wind has grown rapidly, nuclear remains America’s largest source of clean, zero-emissions electricity. Anyone seriously interested in preventing dangerous levels of global warming should be advocating nuclear power.

But two-thirds of U.S. nuclear plants in the U.S. are at risk of being closed prematurely and replaced by natural-gas generation, which is currently cheaper in many states. If that happens, carbon emissions could increase by an amount equivalent to adding 47 million new cars to the road.

Ideally, the federal government would solve this problem, but between Republican skepticism of climate change and Democratic opposition to nuclear energy, that’s unlikely to happen before many nuclear-plant operators must decide whether to shut down. Thus the job of keeping these beleaguered nuclear plants open falls to state governments.

Lawmakers in Ohio and Pennsylvania are considering proposals to keep their nuclear plants operating. Ohio is at risk of losing two plants that produce 90% of its clean energy. Pennsylvania’s five nuclear plants produce nearly as much electricity as do all of America’s solar panels and farms. Nuclear accounts for 93% of the Keystone State’s clean, zero-emissions electricity. If Pennsylvania and Ohio’s nuclear plants close and are replaced by facilities that burn natural gas, it would be like adding 13.5 million new cars to the roads.

Nuclear plants can be saved through modest subsidies similar to the ones extended by lawmakers in Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey and New York between 2016 and 2018. Those subsidies have been smaller than the federal subsidy that wind-energy generators have received for 27 years. In 2017 New York energy regulators gave nuclear power generators a subsidy of $17.34 per megawatt-hour. They also subsidized wind generators at $23 per megawatt-hour on top of the federal subsidy of $22 per megawatt-hour.

The fossil-fuel lobby’s objections to nuclear power are understandable. The American Petroleum Institute wants to replace Ohio’s and Pennsylvania’s nuclear plants with natural-gas plants because its members stand to benefit. But why do groups that claim to be concerned about the climate oppose nuclear power?

Some Democratic lawmakers in Pennsylvania and environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council are urging state legislators not to subsidize nuclear without increasing subsidies for solar and wind. While combining subsidies for nuclear with subsidies for wind and solar worked to get legislation passed in New York and Illinois in 2016, such an approach risks backfiring in Ohio and Pennsylvania, where state lawmakers are more fiscally conservative and tend to be skeptical of renewables.

Saving nuclear plants won’t be free, but keeping them open will keep electricity prices lower than if natural gas is allowed to dominate. Both Ohio and Pennsylvania still produce large amounts of electricity from coal, which is being replaced by natural gas. If both coal and nuclear plants are replaced by gas, ratepayers will be vulnerable to future price increases at the hands of monopolistic gas generators.

New York and California, meanwhile, are moving ahead with plans to close two nuclear plants. In the Empire State, Westchester County’s Indian Point will close in 2021 and, on the West Coast, San Luis Obispo’s Diablo Canyon will go offline in 2025. California is already set to miss its 2030 target of a 40% reduction in emissions below 1990 levels. If Diablo Canyon closes and half of its output is replaced by natural gas, there’s no way they’ll get there.

It is notable that while three natural-gas plants are being built to succeed Indian Point, local opposition to the construction of solar and wind farms has kept them from being built at anywhere near the rate necessary to replace the nuclear facility’s output.

We’ve been here before. Environmentalists promised that solar and wind would replace output from California’s San Onofre Generating Station, which closed in 2013, and the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant, which shut down the following year. Instead, they were replaced mostly by natural gas, and emissions rose in both states. At the rate Vermont is building new wind farms, it would take 474 years to match the electricity generation it lost from closing Vermont Yankee.

The problem isn’t only that nuclear plants generate far more electricity. It’s that solar and wind generate it only sporadically, which means they must be backed up by other sources of power 100% of the time. There is great hype about batteries, and using dams as pumped storage. But those solutions remain extremely expensive, which is why whenever nuclear plants close anywhere in the world, they are usually replaced by coal or natural-gas plants—not solar, not wind and not batteries.

It doesn’t have to be this way. The governors of California, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania can take actions to keep their nuclear plants operating. Governors in those states have in recent years urged more action out of Washington to address climate change. They’ll have far more credibility and influence if they first take action in their home states.
Mr. Hansen is a climate scientist and head of Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions Program at Earth Institute Columbia University. Mr. Shellenberger is president of Environmental Progress.

Appeared in the April 5, 2019, print edition as 'The Climate Needs Nuclear Power'.=mma 922 matt g<div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;">The highbrow elements of the right-wing media complex like to tell a self-flattering story in which the modern American right is controlled by sophisticates such as themselves. The Republican Party’s extremists, in this version of reality, are mere rabble who provide the movement with manpower and votes but have little influence over the course of political events.The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board offered up such a tale in its <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/kenneth-winston-starr-dies-age-76-solicitor-general-independent-counsel-bill-clinton-monica-lewinsky-whitewater-11663366825" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Saturday piece</a> eulogizing former independent counsel Kenneth Starr. The board complained that “Starr’s critics” ignore his role in “putting to rest the conspiracy theories on the right about Vincent Foster,” a senior aide in President Bill Clinton’s White House who took his own life in 1993. “The Qanons of the era argued that the Clintons probably had something nefarious to do with it,” the board wrote. “Starr helped debunk that theory with an investigation concluding that Foster had killed himself.”By tying together the Foster conspiracy theorists of the past with the QAnon fanatics of the present, the editorial board seeks to minimize the influence of both within the right. But in both cases, the conspiracy theory infested every element of the movement over which the Journal pretends to play a leading role.Foster was the <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/seth-rich-conspiracy-theory/fox-news-seth-rich-conspiracy-theory-two-years-later-timeline" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Seth Rich</a> of the Clinton administration, someone whose tragic death was opportunistically seized by right-wing conspiracy theorists seeking partisan gain. And as with Rich, those conspiracy theories bubbled up to the heights of the right-wing press.Indeed, the Journal editorial board itself stoked the Foster conspiracy theories at the time. After Foster took his own life in Virginia’s Fort Marcy Park – leaving behind a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2001/07/19/wsj-names-paul-gigot-to-head-editorials/39d4b02a-f671-4388-9f11-1d795a605793/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">note</a> stating that “the WSJ editors lie without consequence,” a reference to several Journal editorials attacking him – the board <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1993/07/29/the-journal-and-vincent-foster/78a226d3-0152-4211-99e3-645921c27973/%22" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">called for an independent counsel</a> to investigate Foster’s death. “If he was driven to take his life by purely personal despair, a serious investigation should share this conclusion so that he can be appropriately mourned,” the board concluded in its July 22, 1993, piece. That sort of winking paranoia was par for the course for the Journal during the Clinton administration, as the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald <a href="https://www.salon.com/2007/11/14/wall_st_journal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">noted</a> in a 2007 Salon.com review of the editorial board’s “profound hate-mongering and truly deranged accusations.”“This is the Editorial Page that, throughout the 1990s, did more to infect and degrade our public discourse than anyone this side of Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge,” Greenwald, now a regular guest on Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s show, wrote. “But the WSJ Editors were actually far worse than Limbaugh and Drudge, because they put a stamp of establishment journalistic credibility on those rancid dirt-mongers, elevating them to the realm of the credible and influential.”Several <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/discussing-foster-hannity-asked-did-close-friend-hillary-clinton-commit-suicide-or-was" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">investigations</a>, undertaken as Foster conspiracy theories metasticized through the right, ultimately concluded the White House aide had died by suicide. After special prosecutor Robert B. Fiske Jr. released his findings in 1994, the Journal editorial board <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB880412310889191000" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">stated</a>: “Barring some unimaginable new disclosure, we find no reason to doubt that the former White House counsel committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park.” But Fiske’s report did not silence the right’s conspiracy theorists. Nor did the conclusions of the Department of Justice, FBI, and Park Police in 1993; the top Republican on the House’s government oversight committee in 1994; a Senate committee in 1995; or the results of Starr’s investigation in 1997. The Journal did little to establish guardrails against the insanity; responding to Starr’s report, editorial writer Micah Morrison tellingly refused to condemn Christopher Ruddy, the primary champion of the conspiracy theory, writing instead that Ruddy had simply been asking the “obvious questions” that the “mainstream press” refused to ask.And so Starr did not ultimately “put to rest the conspiracy theories on the right,” as the Journal claimed this weekend. Instead, the most powerful forces on the American right continued to stoke the same lies about Foster’s suicide as they sought to damage Hillary Clinton’s political standing. Limbaugh <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/foster-conspiracy-theorist-media-now-promoting-foster-conspiracy-theorist-candidate" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">regularly insinuated</a> during the 2008 presidential primary that the Clintons <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/rush-limbaugh/five-insane-conspiracy-theories-limbaughs-advertisers-have-sponsored" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">may have murdered</a> Foster and that their political opponents <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/rush-limbaugh/limbaughs-faulty-memory-i-dont-know-whos-accusing-hillary-clinton-murdering-anybody" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">might end up</a> in “Fort Marcy Park” or <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/rush-limbaugh/limbaugh-again-invoked-discredited-fort-marcy-park-smear-clintons" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">taking</a> “Fort Marcy Airlines.” He <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/rush-limbaugh/trump-gives-rush-limbaugh-medal-freedom-career-hate" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">received</a> the Medal of Freedom from then-President Donald Trump and was <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/rush-limbaugh-11613594794" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">celebrated</a> upon his passing by the Journal editorial board as someone who “represented traditional American values that the dominant culture too often demeans.”Sean Hannity, the longtime Fox host described as a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sean-hannity-trump-shadow-chief-of-staff-2018-4" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">shadow chief of staff</a> in the Trump White House, was <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/foster-conspiracy-theorist-media-now-promoting-foster-conspiracy-theorist-candidate" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">still talking about</a> “the strange death of Vince Foster” among the <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/hannity-asserted-whitewater-and-death-vince-foster-are-chapters-remaining-open-sen" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">“chapters remaining open”</a> for Hillary Clinton long after Starr’s report. “Did a close friend of Hillary Clinton commit suicide, or was it a massive cover-up?” he asked during one 2007 <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/discussing-foster-hannity-asked-did-close-friend-hillary-clinton-commit-suicide-or-was" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Fox segment</a>. He told his audience of Foster, “depending on which version of the story you believe, he took his own life,” and also claimed that “in the minds of some,” questions regarding the contents of Foster's files following his suicide “may have provided a motive for foul play.” Hannity later became the <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/whats-behind-sean-hannitys-disgraceful-seth-rich-conspiracy-theories" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">most prominent purveyor</a> of Seth Rich conspiracy theories.Trump, who rode a reputation as the nation’s most prominent birther to the Republican presidential nomination, himself <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/media-figures-across-political-spectrum-pillory-trump-invoking-kooky-vince-foster" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">pushed Foster conspiracy theories</a> in the leadup to the 2016 general election. “I don’t bring [Foster’s death] up because I don’t know enough to really discuss it,” he told The Washington Post in a May 2016 <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-escalates-attack-on-bill-clinton/2016/05/23/ed109acc-2100-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trump-clinton-9pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">interview</a>. “I will say there are people who continue to bring it up because they think it was absolutely a murder. I don’t do that because I don’t think it’s fair.”Trump <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/joe-scarborough/joe-scarborough-conspiracy-theory-donald-trump-sending-mob-boss-message" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">loves conspiracy theories</a>, and in recent days, he has started to lean hard into the QAnon movement.[twt qanon rally]he is far from alone. That lunatic movement, once consigned to the fringes of the right, has become increasingly prominent. Its adherents and fellow travelers include <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/here-are-qanon-supporters-running-congress-2022" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">members of Congress</a> and Republican <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/multiple-people-seeking-run-state-elections-are-connected-qanon" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">nominees for posts</a> to oversee state elections. Major right-wing outlets such as Fox either <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/fox-news-dangerous-dance-qanon" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">cozy up to its extremism</a> or <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-floats-conspiracy-theory-qanon-was-created-feds" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">pretend it doesn’t exist</a>. They are all following the <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/gop-extremism-demand-side-problem" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">dictates</a> of the right-wing base, which wants illiberalism and antidemocracy. </div></div><div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Journal editorial board pretends otherwise, but the movement it supports is riddled with conspiracy theorists and extremists from top to bottom. And the inability or unwillingness of elite Republican organs like itself to hold the line against those elements is part of the reason why.</div></div>=no lnx paywallbanana Republic and FriendsApril 19, 2008 no name?Maybe Willie Sutton, the natty thief who robbed banks because "that's where the money is," picked the wrong target. If only he'd gone after oil companies, he could have made more money, avoided jail time, and even picked up an award or two along the way.
Consider Pablo Fajardo and Luis Yanza, two Ecuadorians who on Monday were the toast of San Francisco after winning the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize. Mr. Fajardo, a lawyer, and Mr. Yanza, co-founder of the Amazon Defense Front, have been waging a long legal campaign against Chevron for allegedly despoiling the Amazon hinterland. Late last month, an Ecuadorian court trying the case was handed a report assessing the damages at between $8.3 billion and $16 billion dollars. Chevron is now girding for an adverse ruling from a clearly politicized court.<ol class="references" style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0.5em 3.2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li id="cite_note-WSJ_editorial-23" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em; break-inside: avoid-column;"><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120856180625127903.html?mod=Letters" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent) right center no-repeat, url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" width="%2212%22" height="%2212%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%2336c%22" d="%22M9.995" h5.982v10.5h1.5z="h5.982V10.5H1.5z" e="E" h11v5.39l9.427="H11v5.39L9.427" l-1.31-1.31l5.393="l-1.31-1.31L5.393" l-2.69-2.688="l-2.69-2.688" l4.2="L4.2" z="z" l.022="l.022" l8.2="L8.2" l2.882-2.88-1.85-1.852z="l2.882-2.88-1.85-1.852z" c="C" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data">"Banana Republic and Friends"</a>, Editorial, Wall Street Journal, April 19, 2008; Page A10.</li><li id="cite_note-24" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em; break-inside: avoid-column;"><a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Chevron_Plays'Victim'To_Deflect_Media_Coverage_of_Goldman_Award_for_Ecuadorian_Activists#cite_ref-24" aria-label="Jump up" title="Jump up" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">↑</a> Steven Donziger, <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120916903812846335.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: linear-gradient(transparent, transparent) right center no-repeat, url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" width="%2212%22" height="%2212%22%3E" cpath="Cpath" fill="%22%23fff%22" stroke="%22%2336c%22" d="%22M9.995" h5.982v10.5h1.5z="h5.982V10.5H1.5z" e="E" h11v5.39l9.427="H11v5.39L9.427" l-1.31-1.31l5.393="l-1.31-1.31L5.393" l-2.69-2.688="l-2.69-2.688" l4.2="L4.2" z="z" l.022="l.022" l8.2="L8.2" l2.882-2.88-1.85-1.852z="l2.882-2.88-1.85-1.852z" c="C" padding-right="padding-right" px="px" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data">"Chevron Is to Blame for Ecuador's Oil Pollution"</a>, Letter to the Editor, Wall Street Journal, April 26, 2008; Page A8.</li></ol><div></div><div>
</div><div>mofo</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/foxs-flagship-straight-news-show-promotes-bogus-covid-study-boost-republican">https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/foxs-flagship-straight-news-show-promotes-bogus-covid-study-boost-republican</a></div><div>
</div><div>fox’s flagship “straight news” show promotes bogus COVID study to boost Republican policies</div>Right-wing apparatchiks want you to believe red states outperformed blue states during the pandemic — after they literally rewrote the death statisticsWRITTEN BY <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/author/eric-kleefeld" hreflang="en" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none;">ERIC KLEEFELD</a><div class="dateline--group" style="box-sizing: border-box; align-items: center; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;">PUBLISHED <time datetime="2022-04-13T12:20:08-0400" style="box-sizing: border-box;">04/13/22</time></div><div>
</div><div><div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;">murdoch media outlets are promoting an economic report declaring that Republican-led states did better than their Democratic-led counterparts in the COVID-19 pandemic. But the supposed “study” is simply an engineered conclusion produced by a political front group, which gives extra credit to Republican policies to not implement public health guidance or restrict normal life. And on top of that, it manipulates the typically higher death rates in red states by artificially adjusting them downward, while dishonestly fabricating higher death statistics in blue states.The report, with the grandiose title “<a href="https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/D8File/2022/04/12/committee-to-unleash-prosperity-Which-States-Handled-the-Covid-Pandemic-Best-04-11-2022.pdf?VersionId=zNuPepgqj.9OlNT2iyzHbV4zWBGwXDnP" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">A Final Report Card on the States’ Response to COVID-19</a>,” is the brainchild of right-wing pundit Stephen Moore, along with conservative political organizer Phil Kerpen and libertarian University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan. (Both Moore and Mulligan served as political appointees in the Trump administration.) The report was released through the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, a conservative group advocating the discredited principles of “supply-side” economics that has also promoted “<a href="https://archive.ph/Ufzs1" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">pro-growth and liberty-based responses to COVID-19</a>.”The report, which is not peer-reviewed, also includes a note on the first page thanking Dr. Jay Bhattacharya “for his review of this study and his instructive advice.” Bhattacharya is a Stanford medical professor associated with the right-wing <a href="https://www.hoover.org/profiles/jay-bhattacharya" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Hoover Institution</a>, who has also <a href="https://www.flgov.com/2021/03/18/what-they-are-saying-renowned-doctors-and-epidemiologists-praise-floridas-covid-19-approach-during-public-health-roundtable/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">informally advised</a> Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) — a potential GOP presidential candidate in 2024 — and has appeared multiple times on Fox News and <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/dishonest-doctors-who-were-fox-news-most-frequent-medical-guests-2021-0" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">undermined the COVID-19 vaccines</a> and public vaccination campaigns. Bhattacharya also co-authored the “<a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-news-death-cult-embraces-declaration-calling-herd-immunity" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Great Barrington Declaration</a>,” a reckless libertarian proposal for loosening public health measures in the midst of the pandemic to achieve global “herd immunity.”</div></div><div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><h2 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 0px 1rem;">Fox’s Special Report covered this rigged “study” as if it were straight news</h2>The study was touted on Monday’s edition of Fox’s flagship “straight” news program, Special Report with Bret Baier. A chyron on screen claimed, “Red states fare better on economic and health outcomes.” But as a close examination of the study reveals — briefly alluded to by Fox News correspondent Jonathan Serrie — this conclusion exists only after the authors made some creative adjustments “for age, obesity, and diabetes.”Video Citation From the April 11, 2022, edition of Fox News’ Special Report with Bret BaierThe study was also promoted in stories on <a href="https://archive.ph/t2ktt" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Fox’s website</a>, as well as in the editorial pages of the network’s corporate cousins: the <a href="https://archive.ph/hv2Ni" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">New York Post</a> and <a href="https://archive.ph/RSxW0" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">The Wall Street Journal</a>. FoxNews.com and the New York Post both mentioned the metric of “age-adjusted death rates,” while the Journal was a bit more forthcoming in noting that the study also made adjustments for “the prevalence of obesity and diabetes (leading co-morbidities for Covid deaths).”</div></div><div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;">The reports in these three Murdoch publications all pointed to the report’s praise of Florida as supposedly one of the best-performing states — a possible sign of Bhattacharya’s influence on both Florida’s policies and this report’s verdict. By contrast, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/03/14/covid-death-rates-republican-states-disparity/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">run through numbers</a> from health care analyst Charles Gaba, which found that Florida is actually one of the worst-performing states in COVID-19 death statistics, even accounting for the state’s older population.Moore also appeared on Monday morning’s edition of <a href="https://twitter.com/EricKleefeld/status/1513589398171959300" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Fox Business’ Varney & Co.</a>, during which he claimed, “The big takeaway is that the lockdown strategy was pretty much a total failure. … States that remained open did not have higher death rates from the virus than states that completely shut down.” Serrie later mentioned Moore’s study again, on Tuesday morning’s edition of <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986947" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">America’s Newsroom</a>.Moore has built a career as <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump/cnn-just-hired-worst-economist-world" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">possibly the worst economist</a> <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump/worst-economist-world-says-trumps-tax-cuts-will-do-impossible" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">in the media</a>, making <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/heritage-foundation/conservative-medias-favorite-economist-caught-distorting-facts-about-taxes-and" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">serially wrong</a> pronouncements and <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/foxs-favorite-economist-has-new-bogus-calculation" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">false calculations</a> in service of <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump/what-media-need-know-about-trump-economic-policy-advisers-steve-moore-and-larry-kudlow" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">his political agendas</a>. In March 2019, then-President Donald Trump announced his nomination of Moore to the Federal Reserve Board, only for Moore to eventually <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/02/trump-says-stephen-moore-is-withdrawing-from-consideration-for-fed-1298561" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">withdraw from consideration</a> due to <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/stephen-moore/stephen-moore-previously-attacked-gop-senators-he-now-needs-his-fed-bid" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">multiple controversies</a> over his past political comments.</div></div><div class="paragraph paragraph--type--stories-text paragraph--view-mode--editorial" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="fancy-elems-wrapper field field--name-field-stories-text-formatted field--type-text-long field--label-hidden fielditem" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><h2 style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1; margin: 0px 0px 1rem;">Committee to Unleash Prosperity rewrites death numbers in red states with a fake statistic: “Metabolic-health adjustment”</h2>In order to arrive at the favored conclusion, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity report actually looked at more than just health outcomes. The group’s <a href="https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/final-report-card-on-state-responses-to-covid-19/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">press release</a> explains that it used three metrics for its findings  — COVID-19 deaths, economic performance, and school openings — and declared they were “equally weighted” in the analysis. The result is that the question of saving lives accounts for only one-third of the calculation. The study also essentially just rehashes in pseudo-scientific form Moore’s long-standing contention that saving lives in the pandemic might not be “<a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/stephen-moore/fox-news-stephen-moore-questions-if-californias-steps-prevent-spread-coronavirus-are" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">worth trillions of dollars of losses</a>” and that simply allowing the virus to spread was “<a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-business-panel-says-economic-shutdown-worse-virus-praises-uk-strategy" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">a better strategy</a>” than enduring the economic costs of lockdowns.The concept of age-adjusted deaths across populations is a tricky issue. While it is a <a href="https://www.ccpr.ucla.edu/2020/06/01/patrick-heuveline-and-michael-tzen-have-published-an-article-on-medrxiv-that-proposes-three-indicators-to-compare-covid-19-mortality-with-overall-mortality-and-across-populations/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">legitimate line of inquiry</a>, Fox News has exploited it ever since <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-anchor-florida-coronavirus-deaths-were-elderly-people-who-traveled-so-when" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">the start of the pandemic</a> to create a <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-says-covid-was-overhyped-because-over-4-month-period-majority-those" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">nonchalant response</a> to COVID-19 deaths among the elderly. Looking at this metric from a <a href="https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-adjusted-covid-deaths/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">neutral source</a> does show some interesting effects, but the ranks of worst-performing states would still be Republican-led ones such as Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas.Moore and his compatriots at the Committee to Unleash Prosperity have gone even further, however, by setting up a new metric in the fine print of their supposed study. They call it an adjustment for “metabolic health” in different populations — “the pre-pandemic prevalence of obesity and diabetes.” But what it really amounts to is a manipulation of the statistics to declare that higher death tolls should be discounted in populations that were less healthy to begin with, and to act as if public health responses can be separated from the overall health of the public.<a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/31/covid-deaths-diet-diseases-nutrition-america-517076" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Much of the discourse</a> around the role of obesity in COVID-19 deaths has framed it as “<a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(21)00143-6/fulltext" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">another ongoing pandemic</a>,” and the role of diabetes has been addressed in media as a “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/03/health/diabetes-covid-deaths.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">public health train wreck</a>” and evidence of “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-diabetes-covid/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">America’s diabetes crisis</a>.” But the Committee to Unleash Prosperity instead treats these deaths as somehow a mitigating factor in the public health responses of the states most affected. It’s almost as if, by the standards of Moore and his co-authors, the deaths of unhealthy people are not a problem at all.As a result of this <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986943" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">statistical chicanery</a>, death rates in the South and some other Republican-led states were magically revised downward, while deaths were “adjusted” drastically higher in many Democratic states — skewing the data to make blue states look like the worst offenders.“NV, NY, NJ, and DC were the four states with the highest metabolic-adjusted mortality, even though none is in the top four without the adjustment,” the <a href="https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/D8File/2022/04/12/committee-to-unleash-prosperity-Which-States-Handled-the-Covid-Pandemic-Best-04-11-2022.pdf?VersionId=zNuPepgqj.9OlNT2iyzHbV4zWBGwXDnP#page=13" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">report says</a> — as if that were a good thing for the authors’ credibility — because those four places all have obesity and diabetes rates that are below the national average. By contrast, in the real-world statistics they began with, the <a href="https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/D8File/2022/04/12/committee-to-unleash-prosperity-Which-States-Handled-the-Covid-Pandemic-Best-04-11-2022.pdf?VersionId=zNuPepgqj.9OlNT2iyzHbV4zWBGwXDnP#page=12" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">worst contenders were all red states</a>.Fox News has waged a <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-has-pushed-covid-propaganda-two-years-cost-has-been-staggering" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">two-year propaganda campaign</a> against public health, in which it has <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-news-latest-vaccine-lie-covid-vaccine-makes-you-more-likely-contract-covid-0" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">lied about COVID-19 vaccines</a>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/fox-mentioned-ivermectin-nearly-300-times-then-ignored-new-study-finding-drug-ineffective" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">promoted fake cures</a>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-news-death-cult-embraces-declaration-calling-herd-immunity" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">encouraged the spread of the virus</a>, and turned people defying public health measures into <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/foxs-anti-vaccine-culture-war-heroes-numbers" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">culture war heroes</a> even as their actions have <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-news-wanted-viewers-hear-anti-vax-troopers-story-until-he-died-covid" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">gotten them killed</a>. Fox also clearly does not believe any of what it preaches — see its own <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/fox-news-tells-viewers-fight-back-against-equivalent-fox-news-own-covid-19" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">corporate vaccination and testing policies</a> — but the network nevertheless pursues this framing because it is “<a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/foxs-antivax-programming-moral-abomination-least-its-great-ratings" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; text-decoration-line: none; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">great for ratings</a>.”Who knows, perhaps the network will be able to come up with a study showing that watching Fox News is good for surviving the COVID-19 pandemic, once the analysts can adjust for the comorbidities associated with watching Fox News.</div></div></div><div>=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">an 7 22</div><div style="">Indiana's Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita told Fox News anchor Jesse Watters on Wednesday evening that he intends to open a criminal investigation into the provider who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio that had to travel to The Hoosier State to obtain the procedure.The girl was 45 days along and unable to terminate the forced pregnancy because The Buckeye State banned most abortions past six weeks – with no exceptions for rape or incest – immediately following the United States Supreme Court's right-wing majority decision retracting the constitutional right to abortion in its reversal of Roe versus Wade on June 24th.Indiana allows abortions up until the 13th week <a href="https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/judge-lifts-order-against-indiana-abortion-procedure-ban/2877548/" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">as long as mandated conditions are met</a>. Its rules are likely to tighten, however, when state lawmakers convene in an <a href="https://www.aclu-in.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">emergency session on July 25th to discuss post-Roe </a><a href="https://www.aclu-in.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">policy plans</a>.
READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/a-fanciful-tale-ohio-republicans/" target="self" title="view post: 'A fanciful tale'? Ohio rape suspect arrested after Republicans cast doubt on 10-year-old girl's story" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">'A fanciful tale'? Ohio rape suspect arrested after Republicans cast doubt on 10-year-old girl's story</a>
<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/a-fanciful-tale-ohio-republicans/" target="self" title="view post: 'A fanciful tale'? Ohio rape suspect arrested after Republicans cast doubt on 10-year-old girl's story" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">In Ohio, the restrictions are predicated on what legislators and anti-choice activists claim is the detection of a heartbeat. But that contention is not supported by empirical medical data. </a><a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/heartbeat-bills-called-fetal-heartbeat-six-weeks-pregnancy-rcna24435" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">As an April 17th NBC News report</a> noted, embryos have no structured heart at six weeks. Instead, there is "a tube that generates sporadic electrical impulses that eventually coordinate into rhythmic pulses."<a href="https://www.livescience.com/65501-fetal-heartbeat-at-6-weeks-explained.html" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Live Science also explained in detail last September</a> that "after the detection of the flutter at six weeks, the heart muscle continues to develop over the next four to six weeks, undergoing the folding and bending that needs to happen for the heart to take its final shape."On Tuesday, a 27-year-old suspect was taken into custody and confessed to twice assaulting the child. The arrest occurred while numerous Ohio Republicans – including Governor Mike DeWine, Attorney General Dave Yost, <a href="https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1547307766557155333?s=20&t=c7xhfu1k2r0i6tUauA9E5Q" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">and Congressman Jim Jordan</a> – were publicly suggesting that the story was a fabrication. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board called the account "a fanciful tale." None of them have issued a formal apology in light of the accused rapist's capture.
Incidentally, Yost had expressed his doubts on Monday's Jesse Watters Primetime. During Wednesday's broadcast, Rokita blamed President Joe Biden's immigration policies for the crime despite the alleged perpetrator <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/ohio-man-charged-rape-10-163914748.html" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">having lived in Columbus, Ohio for seven years</a>.
[READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/witnesses-dismember-house-republican-infanticide/" target="self" title="view post: 'That does not happen': Witnesses refute House Republican's 'outrageous' claims of 'infanticide'" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Kevin McCarthy cites disputed fentanyl overdose report to push anti-immigration rhetoric</a><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/witnesses-dismember-house-republican-infanticide/" target="self" title="view post: 'That does not happen': Witnesses refute House Republican's 'outrageous' claims of 'infanticide'" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">"I shouldn't be here. I mean, first of all, this is an illegal immigration issue because likely of Biden's lawlessness at the border and everything going on down there. That's why Indiana as a non-border state has actually filed several independent lawsuits on that," Rokita said.</a>While justice for the victim may be served in an Ohio courtroom, Rokita is taking a much different approach in neighboring Indiana.
"Then we have the rape, and then we have this abortion activist acting as a doctor with a history of failing to report," he continued as Fox displayed a picture of the doctor who aided the underaged victim. "So we're gathering the information, we're gathering the evidence as we speak, and we're gonna fight this to the end, including looking at her licensure. If she failed to report in Indiana, it's a crime to not report, to intentionally not report."
Next, Rokita fired off several conspiracy theories.
READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/house-republican-women-birth-turtles/" target="self" title="view post: House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos</a><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/house-republican-women-birth-turtles/" target="self" title="view post: House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;" /><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/house-republican-women-birth-turtles/" target="self" title="view post: House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">"This is a horrible, horrible scene caused by Marxists and socialists and those in the White House who want lawlessness at the border. And then this girl was politicized – politicized – for the gain of killing more babies, alright? That was the goal," Rokita declared. "And this abortion activist is out there front and center. The lame stream media – the fake news – is right behind it and unfortunately in Indiana, the paper of record is fake news and they were right there jumping in on all this thinking that it was gonna be great for their abortionist movement when this girl has been so brutalized."</a><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/house-republican-women-birth-turtles/" target="self" title="view post: House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Watch below or at this link.</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/house-republican-women-birth-turtles/" target="_self" title="view post: House Republican asks if women give birth to turtles or tacos" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;"></a></div>=<a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;" /><div class="teaser-cardcontent" style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 1.5rem;"><h2 class="teaser-cardtitle" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 1.25; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; font-weight: 700;"><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;"></a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;"></a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Wall Street Journal’s bogus justification — and terrible precedent — to publish Trump’s Big Lie letter</a></h2><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;"><svg viewbox="0 0 24 24" class="icon icon--article" aria-labelledby="icon-label--article" /><use xlink:href="#article" xmlns:xlink="xlink" /><time datetime="2021-10-29T08:59:51-0400" style="box-sizing: border-box;">10/29/21 8:59 AM EDT</time></a></div><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">=</a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">came out against trump on putin bromance after press conf, traitor</a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">===</a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-cardlink" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">moderation la fest book on invest report, actually has some agw, but all about cost of stuff fish, beer etc</a><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/wall-street-journal/wall-street-journals-bogus-justification-and-terrible-precedent-publish-trumps" rel="bookmark" class="teaser-card__link" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; display: block; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;"></a><a href="https://www.wsj.com/news/author/robert%20lee-hotz">https://www.wsj.com/news/author/robert%20lee-hotz</a>but<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-government-report-warns-of-economic-losses-from-climate-change-1543009853">https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-government-report-warns-of-economic-losses-from-climate-change-1543009853</a>... human-caused climate change is overwhelming and continues to strengthen,’ report says
By Robert Lee HotzNov. 23, 2018 4:50 p.m. ETThe

impact of global climate change is being felt across the country and,

unchecked, could cause U.S. economic losses totaling hundreds of

billions of dollars a year by the end of the century, says a new U.S.

government report released Friday.Many

U.S. communities and companies are trying to counteract the effects of

rising temperatures ranging from water shortages or flooding to

worsening wildfires and air pollution. But those measures so far fall

short, according to the latest installment of the U.S. National Climate

Assessment.
...<div align="left">
</div>===<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-a-minor-change-to-how-epa-makes-rules-could-radically-reduce-environmental-protection-98042">https://theconversation.com/why-a-minor-change-to-how-epa-makes-rules-could-radically-reduce-environmental-protection-98042</a><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; left: -12px; position: relative;">Why a minor change to how EPA makes rules could radically reduce environmental protection<p style="margin: 0px 0px 18px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;" align="left">Since the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12291.html" style="outline: none; white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">Reagan administration</a>, federal agencies have been required to produce cost-benefit analyses of their major regulations. These assessments are designed to ensure that regulators are pursuing actions that make society better off.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 18px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;" align="left">
<p style="margin: 0px 0px 18px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;" align="left">[Executive Order 12291--Federal regulationSource: The

provisions of Executive Order 12291 of Feb. 17, 1981, appear at 46 FR

13193, 3 CFR, 1981 Comp., p. 127, unless otherwise noted.By

the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of

the United States of America, and in order to reduce the burdens of

existing and future regulations, increase agency accountability for

regulatory actions, provide for presidential oversight of the regulatory

process, minimize duplication and conflict of regulations, and insure

well-reasoned regulations, it is hereby ordered as follows:]In

my experience working on the White House economic team in the Clinton

and Obama administrations, I found cost-benefit analysis provides a

solid foundation for understanding the impacts of regulatory proposals.

It also generates thoughtful discussion of ways to design rules to

maximize net benefits to the public.On

June 7, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt

proposed changing the agency’s approach to this process in ways that

sound sensible, but in fact are a radical departure from how government

agencies have operated for decades.As the agency frames it, the goal is to provide “<a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-proposes-cost-benefit-analysis-reform" style="outline: none; white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">clarity and real-world accuracy with respect to the impact of the Agency’s decisions on the economy and the regulated community</a>.”

But I see Pruitt’s proposals as an opaque effort to undermine

cost-benefit analysis of environmental rules, and thus to justify

rolling back regulations.<div align="left"><figure class="align-center zoomable" style="margin: 0px 0px 18px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background: rgb(255, 255, 255); position: relative;"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223376/original/file-20180615-85840-19v7y6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip" style="outline: none; word-wrap: break-word; display: block; max-width: 100%;">https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-proposes-cost-benefit-analysis-reform</a><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223376/original/file-20180615-85840-19v7y6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip" style="outline: none; word-wrap: break-word; display: block; max-width: 100%;">
</a><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223376/original/file-20180615-85840-19v7y6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip" style="outline: none; word-wrap: break-word; display: block; max-width: 100%;">[ Today,

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an Advance Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to announce that the Agency is

soliciting public input on whether and how to change the way it

considers costs and benefits in making regulatory decisions.</a><p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear, border-color 0.25s linear, box-shadow 0.25s linear, color 0.25s linear, opacity 0.25s linear, text-shadow 0.25s linear, transform 0.25s linear; font-weight: 700;">"Many

have complained that the previous administration inflated the benefits

and underestimated the costs of its regulations through questionable

cost-benefit analysis," said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.<span style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear, border-color 0.25s linear, box-shadow 0.25s linear, color 0.25s linear, opacity 0.25s linear, text-shadow 0.25s linear, transform 0.25s linear; font-weight: 700;"> "This

action is the next step toward providing clarity and real-world

accuracy with respect to the impact of the Agency's decisions on the

economy and the regulated community."<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Multiple

EPA-related statutes refer to the calculation of costs and benefits,

but implementation has been inconsistent. As a result, EPA has created a

risk of uncertainty and confusion for states, local communities, and

industry. EPA is now considering ways to codify common-sense, best

practices for cost-benefit analysis in rulemaking.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Through

the ANPRM, EPA will seek comments and input for the Agency to consider

in developing any subsequent proposed rule. EPA will take comments on

the ANPRM for 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear, border-color 0.25s linear, box-shadow 0.25s linear, color 0.25s linear, opacity 0.25s linear, text-shadow 0.25s linear, transform 0.25s linear; font-weight: 700;">Background:<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Under

the leadership of President Trump, EPA has taken steps to improve EPA’s

cost-benefit calculations. Consistent with the President’s Executive

Order 13783, EPA updated the social cost of carbon to reflect prior and

best practices. While the Obama EPA estimated the social cost of carbon

to be an average of $36 per ton of carbon dioxide emitted, this EPA

calculated an average of $5 per ton.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;">EPA

has also proposed a different approach to analyzing co-benefits –

benefits from reduced emissions of a pollutant that is not the actual

target pollutant of a regulation. Particulate matter was the co-benefit

most cited by the Obama EPA. In fact, particulate matter co-benefits

accounted for more than 80% of the purported benefits of all of Obama’s

air rules. The Clean Power Plan (CPP), a rule aimed at carbon dioxide

reductions, derived most of its benefits from a reduction in particulate

matter. When EPA issued its proposed repeal of CPP, it provided a

transparent account of the impact of the rule on the “targeted

pollutant” – carbon dioxide. <p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; overflow-wrap: break-word;">Earlier this morning, the <a href="https://usenvironmentalprotectionagency.cmail20.com/t/d-l-bykhlyk-alydlulij-r/" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear 0s, border-color 0.25s linear 0s, box-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, color 0.25s linear 0s, opacity 0.25s linear 0s, text-shadow 0.25s linear 0s, transform 0.25s linear 0s; outline-offset: 2px;">Wall Street Journal</a> published

an editorial on Administrator Pruitt's efforts to "stop the EPA's

numerical shenanigans" and reform cost-benefit analysis at the Agency<p style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: background-color 0.25s linear, border-color 0.25s linear, box-shadow 0.25s linear, color 0.25s linear, opacity 0.25s linear, text-shadow 0.25s linear, transform 0.25s linear; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 1.5em; word-wrap: break-word;"><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/cost-benefit-reform-at-the-epa-1528326402">https://www.wsj.com/articles/cost-benefit-reform-at-the-epa-1528326402</a>  no name<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223376/original/file-20180615-85840-19v7y6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip" style="outline: none; word-wrap: break-word; display: block; max-width: 100%;">
</a><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223376/original/file-20180615-85840-19v7y6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip" style="outline: none; word-wrap: break-word; display: block; max-width: 100%;">]</a></figure></div>==<div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" align="left"><div data-hveid="38" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQgmKAAwAA"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deceptive-new-report-on-climate-1509660882" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">A Deceptive New Report on Climate - WSJ - Wall Street Journal</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-deceptive-new-report-on-climate-1509660882</cite></div>Steven E. Koonin.

Nov. 2, 2017 6:14 p.m. ET. 801 COMMENTS. The world's response to

climate changing under natural and human influences is best founded ...</div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" align="left"><div data-hveid="40" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QtgIIKCgBMAE"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-how-government-twists-climate-statistics/80027CBC-2C36-4930-AB0B-9C3344B6E199.html" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Opinion Journal: How Government Twists ... - Wall Street Journal</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div><div class="th N3nEGc i0PvJb" style="border: 1px solid rgb(235, 235, 235); background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); float: left; overflow: hidden; margin-top: 4px; position: relative; height: 65px; width: 116px;"><a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-how-government-twists-climate-statistics/80027CBC-2C36-4930-AB0B-9C3344B6E199.html" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QuAIIKjAB" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;"><img id="vidthumb2" src="" class="rISBZc" alt="Video for wsj Steven Koonin wall street" style="display: block; border: 0px; position: relative;" width="116" height="65" />▶ 3:41</a></div></div><div style="margin-left: 125px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">www.wsj.com/.../80027CBC-2C36-4930-AB0B-9C3344B6E199.htm...</cite></div><div class="slp f" style="">Apr 21, 2017</div>Former Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin on how bureaucrats spin scientific data. Photo ...</div><div style="clear: left;"><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="43" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQgrKAIwAg"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-red-team-exercise-would-strengthen-climate-science-1492728579" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">A 'Red Team' Exercise Would Strengthen Climate ... - Wall Street Journal</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.wsj.com/.../a-red-team-exercise-would-strengthen-climate-science-1492728...</cite></div>Apr 20, 2017 - Former Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin on scientific ... Mr. Koonin, a theoretical physicist, is director of the Center for Urban ...</div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="46" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQguKAMwAw"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-science-should-rule-u-s-climate-policy-1510084635" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Good Science Should Rule U.S. Climate Policy - WSJ</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-science-should-rule-u-s-climate-policy-1510084635</cite></div>Nov 7, 2017 - It's unfortunate that Steven E. Koonin chose to wait until months after an extensive public review process to critique the Climate Science Special ...</div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="49" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QtgIIMSgEMAQ"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-the-climate-change-debates-you-never-hear-about/64410386-C38D-4902-A53A-1E73B0468D4C.html" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Opinion Journal: The Climate Change Debates ... - Wall Street Journal</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div style="margin-left: 125px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">www.wsj.com/.../64410386-C38D-4902-A53A-1E73B0468D4C.htm...</cite></div><div class="slp f" style="">Apr 21, 2017</div>Former Energy Department Undersecretary Steven Koonin on scientific self-censorship. Photo: istock images.</div><div style="clear: left;"><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="52" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQg0KAUwBQ"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Climate Science Is Not Settled - WSJ - Wall Street Journal</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">www.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565</cite><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&oq=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&aqs=chrome..69i57.6839j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b5" aria-label="Result details" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8Q7B0INjAF" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QqR8INzAF" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:www.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565+wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QHwg4MAU" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">
</a></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:www.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565+wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QHwg4MAU" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">Steven E. Koonin.

Sept. 19, 2014 12:19 p.m. ET. 2921 COMMENTS. The idea that "Climate

science is settled" runs through today's popular and policy ...</a></div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="57" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQg5KAYwBg"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E.Koonin" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Steven E. Koonin - Wikipedia</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E.Koonin</cite><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&oq=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&aqs=chrome..69i57.6839j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b6" aria-label="Result details" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8Q7B0IOzAG" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QqR8IPDAG" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:4TdOElOHgfcJ:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E.Koonin+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">
</a></li><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E.Koonin+wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QHwg-MAY" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">
</a></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Koonin+wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QHwg-MAY" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">Steven E. Koonin (born

December 12, 1951) is a theoretical physicist and Director of the

Center ... In "Climate Science Is Not Settled," a 2014 essay published

in the Wall Street Journal, Koonin wrote that "We are very far from the knowledge ...</a></div><div class="r-iXYlDHYkYYD0" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8Q2Z0BCD8wBg"><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="67" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQhDKAcwBw"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="http://www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/news-events/professor-steven-koonin-discusses-how-bureaucrats-spin-scientific-data-connection-with-climate" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">Faculty News | Steven Koonin | The Wall Street Journal - NYU Stern</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30 bc" style="font-style: normal;">www.stern.nyu.edu › Experience Stern › News & Events</cite><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&oq=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&aqs=chrome..69i57.6839j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b7" aria-label="Result details" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8Q7B0IRjAH" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QqR8IRzAH" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:bvRRNuiHjJcJ:www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/news-events/professor-steven-koonin-discusses-how-bureaucrats-spin-scientific-data-connection-with-climate+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">
</a></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:bvRRNuiHjJcJ:www.stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/news-events/professor-steven-koonin-discusses-how-bureaucrats-spin-scientific-data-connection-with-climate+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">Apr 21, 2017 - Professor Steven Koonin discusses how bureaucrats spin scientific data ... Excerpt from The Wall Street Journal -- "What you saw coming out of ...</a></div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="74" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQhKKAgwCA"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/climate/scott-pruitt-climate-change-red-team.html" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">E.P.A. to Give Dissenters a Voice on Climate, No Matter the ...</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/climate/scott-pruitt-climate-change-red-team.html</cite></div>Jun 30, 2017 - In an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal in April, Steven Koonin, a physicist at New York University, proposed that a “red team” of dissenting ...</div></div></div></div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 28px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="77" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QFQhNKAkwCQ"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058443" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;">EPA: Here's the Obama energy guy that Pruitt might hire -- Monday ...</a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058443</cite><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&oq=wsj+Steven+Koonin+wall+street&aqs=chrome..69i57.6839j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b9" aria-label="Result details" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8Q7B0ITzAJ" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" data-ved="0ahUKEwjNxvC3y4rbAhVJMqwKHa0DBM8QqR8IUDAJ" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:89NetpgNtnsJ:https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058443+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">
</a></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:89NetpgNtnsJ:https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058443+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;">Aug 7, 2017 - In the fall of 2014, Steven Koonin was finishing up an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal. The theme was a contentious one, especially for a ...</a></div></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:89NetpgNtnsJ:https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058443+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"></a><a href="https://www.alternet.org/wall-street-journal-upset-about-having-interact-poor-people-airport">https://www.alternet.org/wall-street-journal-upset-about-having-interact-poor-people-airport</a><a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/wall-street-journal-editorial-board-sticks-giant-fork-steve-bannon">https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/wall-street-journal-editorial-board-sticks-giant-fork-steve-bannon</a>===<a href="https://www.alternet.org/media/wall-street-journal-echoing-trumps-derangement-and-its-own-reporters-are-appalled">https://www.alternet.org/media/wall-street-journal-echoing-trumps-derangement-and-its-own-reporters-are-appalled</a>
During the 2016 election, the conservative Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.poynter.org/news/wall-street-journal-isnt-endorsing-donald-trump" style="text-decoration-line: none;">declined to endorse Donald Trump</a>, recognizing the Republican candidate's manifest personal deficiencies <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gamble-of-trump-1478299393" style="text-decoration-line: none;">posed a clear and present danger</a> to American democracy. While the newspaper has grown more <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-military-junta-1481327373" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Trump-curious</a> since

he was sworn into office, it has largely resisted the overt #MAGA

cheerleading of Rupert Murdoch's other media organs, Fox News and the

New York Post.At

least until last week. Despite multiple indictments being handed down

in the Russia probe, and a separate Trump aide pleading guilty to lying

to the FBI, the paper's once tepid support for the president has reached a fever pitch bordering on dissociation.On October 25, the Journal incurred the wrath of readers and social media alike when it ran an editorial titled "<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-russians-and-the-fbi-1508971759" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Democrats, Russian and the FBI</a>,"

arguing that special investigator Robert Mueller “lacked the critical

distance to conduct a credible probe," and that he should resign his

post for the good of the country.Four days later, in "<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/begging-your-pardon-mr-president-1509302308" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Begging Your Pardon, Mr. President</a>," David B. Rivkin Jr.

and Lee A. Casey called on Trump to issue blanket pardons to every

administration official ensnared in the investigation—himself included.The day after that, an editorial titled "<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-manafort-indictment-1509402445" style="text-decoration-line: none;">The Manafort Indictment</a>"

acknowledged the malfeasance of Trump's former campaign manager, but

managed to single out the Democratic Party for its financing of the

Fusion GPS dossier (opposition research compiled, incidentally, by

former members of the Wall Street Journal).These rantings and ravings have not been lost on the paper's reporters. According to a <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/the-wall-street-journal-editorial-board-coverage-of-mueller" style="text-decoration-line: none;">recent report by Vanity Fair</a>,

staffers fear the opinion page has begun to undermine the publication's

credibility. The Journal has always been a purveyor of neoconservative

dogma, particularly as it pertains to the economy and foreign policy,

but as one veteran editor recently confided, “It does feel like this is a

different level of crazy."“We

could disprove half the stuff [the opinion writers] are saying if they

just read our own reporting," a WSJ reporter told Vanity Fair. "It’s

like living in some alternate universe."Another

staffer likened the paper's editorials on the Mueller investigation to

the dark days of Vince Foster, a former Clinton confidante whose suicide

in 1993 continues to fuel conservative conspiracy theories. (The right

has since added <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3539583/Conspiracy-theorist-claims-Hillary-Clinton-murdered-John-F-Kennedy-Jnr-planning-run-senate-seat-shocking-new-book.html" style="text-decoration-line: none;">John F. Kennedy, Jr.</a> and <a href="https://www.alternet.org/media/could-sean-hannitys-deranged-new-conspiracy-theory-cost-him-his-job" style="text-decoration-line: none;">the DNC's Seth Rich</a> to Hillary's ever-expanding hit list.)Former Wall Street Journal editor Bill Grueskin put things more succinctly in a recent tweet:[img]<div data-twitter-event-id="0" class="SandboxRoot env-bp-350" style="direction: ltr; background: 0px 0px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.4; white-space: initial; position: relative;"><div class="EmbeddedTweet EmbeddedTweet--edge EmbeddedTweet--mediaForward media-forward js-clickToOpenTarget js-tweetIdInfo tweet-InformationCircle-widgetParent" data-click-to-open-target="https://twitter.com/BGrueskin/status/924810328747204608" data-iframe-title="Twitter Tweet" data-dt-full="%{hours12}:%{minutes} %{amPm} - %{day} %{month} %{year}" data-dt-explicit-timestamp="6:28 PM - Oct 29, 2017" data-dt-months="Jan|Feb|Mar|Apr|May|Jun|Jul|Aug|Sep|Oct|Nov|Dec" data-dt-am="AM" data-dt-pm="PM" data-dt-now="now" data-dt-s="s" data-dt-m="m" data-dt-h="h" data-dt-second="second" data-dt-seconds="seconds" data-dt-minute="minute" data-dt-minutes="minutes" data-dt-hour="hour" data-dt-hours="hours" data-dt-abbr="%{number}%{symbol}" data-dt-short="%{day} %{month}" data-dt-long="%{day} %{month} %{year}" data-scribe="page:tweet" data-tweet-id="924810328747204608" id="twitter-widget-0" data-twitter-event-id="1" style="overflow: hidden; cursor: pointer; border: 0px; border-radius: 5px; max-width: 520px; position: relative;" lang="en"><div class="tweet-InformationCircle--top tweet-InformationCircle--topEdge tweet-InformationCircle" data-scribe="element:notice" style="position: absolute; right: 0px; top: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 6px 6px 5px 5px; z-index: 20; line-height: 0;"><span class="u-hiddenVisually" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px; display: inline-block; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: contain; vertical-align: text-bottom; background-image: url(" charset="utf-8,%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%2072%2072%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate(8%208)%22%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23657786%22%20fill-opacity%3D%22.8%22%20d%3D%22M28%203.11C14.278%203.11%203.11%2014.276%203.11%2028c0%2013.723%2011.166%2024.887%2024.89%2024.887S52.89%2041.723%2052.89%2028C52.89%2014.274%2041.724%203.11%2028%203.11z%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20d%3D%22M28%2044.593c-1.718%200-3.11-1.393-3.11-3.112V30.076c0-1.718%201.392-3.11%203.11-3.11s3.11%201.392%203.11%203.11V41.48c0%201.72-1.392%203.113-3.11%203.113z%22%2F%3E%3Ccircle%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20cx%3D%2228%22%20cy%3D%2218.148%22%20r%3D%224.667%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20d%3D%22M28%2056C12.56%2056%200%2043.44%200%2028S12.56%200%2028%200s28%2012.56%2028%2028-12.56%2028-28%2028zm0-49.778C15.99%206.222%206.222%2015.992%206.222%2028S15.992%2049.778%2028%2049.778c12.01%200%2021.778-9.77%2021.778-21.778S40.008%206.222%2028%206.222z%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E" height="height" width="width" border="border" hidden="hidden"><a href="https://support.twitter.com/articles/20175256" class="Icon Icon--informationCircleWhite js-inViewportScribingTarget" title="Twitter Ads info and privacy" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px; display: inline-block; height: 18px; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-size: contain; vertical-align: text-bottom; width: 18px; background-image: url(" charset="utf-8,%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%2072%2072%22%3E%3Cg%20transform%3D%22translate(8%208)%22%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23657786%22%20fill-opacity%3D%22.8%22%20d%3D%22M28%203.11C14.278%203.11%203.11%2014.276%203.11%2028c0%2013.723%2011.166%2024.887%2024.89%2024.887S52.89%2041.723%2052.89%2028C52.89%2014.274%2041.724%203.11%2028%203.11z%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20d%3D%22M28%2044.593c-1.718%200-3.11-1.393-3.11-3.112V30.076c0-1.718%201.392-3.11%203.11-3.11s3.11%201.392%203.11%203.11V41.48c0%201.72-1.392%203.113-3.11%203.113z%22%2F%3E%3Ccircle%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20cx%3D%2228%22%20cy%3D%2218.148%22%20r%3D%224.667%22%2F%3E%3Cpath%20fill%3D%22%23FFF%22%20d%3D%22M28%2056C12.56%2056%200%2043.44%200%2028S12.56%200%2028%200s28%2012.56%2028%2028-12.56%2028-28%2028zm0-49.778C15.99%206.222%206.222%2015.992%206.222%2028S15.992%2049.778%2028%2049.778c12.01%200%2021.778-9.77%2021.778-21.778S40.008%206.222%2028%206.222z%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E">Twitter Ads info and privacy</a>This

is not the first time the Journal has embarrassed itself or its

reporters. In August, editor-in-chief Gerard Baker reprimanded the

paper's staff for its entirely accurate coverage of a Trump rally in

Phoenix, where the president painted himself as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/23/donald-trump-arizona-rally-phoenix" style="text-decoration-line: none;">the true victim of the terrorist attack in Charlottesville</a>. “Sorry.

This is commentary dressed up as news reporting,” he wrote in an email.

“Could we please just stick to reporting what he said rather than

packaging it in exegesis and selective criticism?”</div></div></div>That same month, Politico released a <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/01/trump-wall-street-journal-interview-full-transcript-241214" style="text-decoration-line: none;">full transcript</a> of his <a style="text-decoration-line: none;">interview with the president in late July</a>,

exposing Baker's chummy personal relationship with the Trump family. At

one point during the conversation, he even tells Ivanka, "It was nice

to see you out in Southampton a couple weeks ago."Perhaps

it was only a matter of time before the opinion page began parroting

the talking points of White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee

Sanders. Over the past 18 months, conservative publications ranging

from <a href="https://www.weeklystandard.com/modified-limited-pro-trump/article/1039614" style="text-decoration-line: none;">the Weekly Standard</a> to the <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/online/once-anti-trump-national-review-posts-deletes-tweet-saying-time-to-line-up-for-trump/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">National Review</a> have, at various junctures, embraced the Republican standard-bearer, even after the latter outlet ran an entire issue "<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservative-movement-shouldnt-support-him" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Against Trump</a>." But

as the august Wall Street Journal's descent into authoritarianism and

deranged conspiracy theory reveals, no corner of right-wing media is

immune from the disease of Trumpism.

<div>=</div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/media/wall-street-journal-echoing-trumps-derangement-and-its-own-reporters-are-appalled">https://www.alternet.org/media/wall-street-journal-echoing-trumps-derangement-and-its-own-reporters-are-appalled</a></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>coal booster 817</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/mountaintop-removal-share-international-2480303664.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/mountaintop-removal-share-international-2480303664.html</a></div><div>
</div><div><h1 class="widgetheadline h1" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; cursor: pointer; word-wrap: break-word; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="widgetheadline-text custom-post-headline" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/mountaintop-removal-share-international-2480303664.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; word-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; line-height: 31px;">Coal and the Curse of Commercialization</a></h1><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url expanded" data-url="https://www.ecowatch.com/mountaintop-removal-share-international-2480303664.html" data-headline="Coal and the Curse of Commercialization" data-elid="2480303664" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description"><div class="widget__brief">By Cher GilmoreA

recent Wall Street Journal editorial crowed "Coal Makes a Comeback,"

touting the 14.5 percent increase in weekly coal production nationwide

in 2017 compared to 2016 and the 58 percent increase in exports during

the first quarter alone. That newspaper views the economic growth in

coal-producing states like West Virginia, New Mexico and Kentucky

stimulated by the current administration's policies as something to

celebrate, and the editors conclude that "there's still demand for U.S.

coal if regulators allow energy markets to work."While

the increase in coal production and use may be good news for coal

companies and the states to which they pay taxes, economic growth is not

the only thing to consider when weighing the costs and benefits of an

activity. What about the beautiful Appalachian mountain landscapes

completely destroyed by "mountaintop removal" and the streams and

aquifers filled with toxic mining waste? What about the "black lung"

disease suffered by too many miners, and the deaths from collapsed

mines? And, perhaps most significantly, what about the fact that

coal-burning plants are some of the biggest emitters of the greenhouse

gases causing global warming and wreaking havoc on the planet?</div><div class="js-appear-on-expand" style="transition: all 350ms; height: auto; overflow: hidden; opacity: 1;">These

effects of coal production—the ones that affect the daily lives of

actual people—are not even considered in the calculation. Why would that

be? British author Benjamin Creme said it's because we don't understand

the larger purpose of life. "We have replaced our reverence for life

with commercialization, a market forces economy and the worship of

money. The economy is the new religion of the world, and it is this <a href="http://www.share-international.org/master/2009/ma_2009-05.htm" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">commercialization that is driving us to the very edge of destruction</a>."In

a world of commercialization, everything becomes a commodity with a

price tag. Individuals are seen only as consumers, and those with the

biggest bank accounts are able to buy whatever they want. Those who have

little get little, and what they do get—including basic necessities

like food and water—is often second rate or worse. Corporate and

financial interests rank above the needs of human beings and the health

of the planet, and unhappy people are either lulled into apathy by

24-hour digital entertainment, or turn to drugs and alcohol to escape

from their narrow, unsatisfying lives.In

thrall to market forces, governments compete fiercely with one another,

sacrificing the livelihood and well-being of their peoples. The major

industrialized countries, making up only a third of the world's

population, dominate the global economy and impose their chosen

structure—commercialization or "competition" biased in their favor—on

the other two-thirds. "This," said Creme, "is economic totalitarianism

and must come to an end. It is based on the lie that we all start equal;

we do not."Creme has been the major spokesperson for decades regarding information about the <a href="http://www.share-international.org/maitreya/Ma_main.htm" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">World Teacher for this age: Maitreya</a>.

According to Creme, Maitreya is expected to appear at the invitation of

the world's media on an international television broadcast when the

conditions are right—most likely following the predicted <a href="http://www.share-international.org/archives/economics/ec_mas-prelude.htm" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">world financial collapse</a>, which will awaken humanity to reality for the first time and open us to hearing Maitreya's advice.During

that broadcast, Maitreya will analyze our present problems and show

clearly the consequences of various actions we might take. These

revelations will ultimately bring us to an inevitable choice: to

continue in our destructive business as usual mode and extinguish all

life, or to follow his suggestions for a simpler, saner way of living

that will guarantee a happier future for all people.Maitreya will teach, most basically, the <a href="http://www.share-international.org/maitreya/Ma_prior.htm" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">need to share the natural resources</a> of

the world, which belong to everyone equally and should not be greedily

usurped by the wealthy few. Since this is antithetical to the direction

the developed world in particular is moving, in order for Maitreya's

central principles—justice, freedom and sharing, for all people on

Earth—to be put into practice, the existing social/economic structure

will have to be dissolved. The financial collapse will have that effect.

In its aftermath, we will begin to know ourselves as brothers and

sisters, and with Maitreya's help will come to see that the only way

forward is together, in cooperation, for the common good.When

we have come to our senses, we will not choose to "grow our economy"

regardless of the burdens it places on ordinary people and the planet.

Nor will we choose to promote the burning of coal—which is only today's

example of commercialization gone amok—or any other action whose end

result is planetary destruction. Benjamin Creme's spiritual Master

assures us, "From the ruins of the old, a <a href="http://www.share-international.org/archives/master--/Mas-comingcentury.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">new civilization</a> will

be built by human hands under the inspiration of Maitreya ... Humanity

will overcome this time of crisis and enter into a new and better

relationship with itself, its planet and its source."</div></div></div></div><div>==<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-times-hires-climate-denier-2379607444.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-times-hires-climate-denier-2379607444.html</a><div class="headline-container" style="margin: 0px; padding: 10px 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="headline h1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 22px;">New York Times Defends Hiring Climate Science Denier</h1></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px;"><div class="article-body body js-expandable sm-mb-2 md-mb-4 js-update-url selectionShareable" data-url="http://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-times-hires-climate-denier-2379607444.html" data-headline="New York Times Defends Hiring Climate Science Denier" data-elid="2379607444" style="margin-top: 10px; padding: 0px 12px;"><div class="article-description" style="margin-bottom: 20px;">By Graham ReadfearnThe New York Times has been defending the paper's hiring of a <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-denier" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate science denier</a>, fighting off its critics with what it claims is a standard fashioned from hardened "intellectual honesty."The controversial hire in question is that of <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/bret-stephens" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Bret Stephens</a>, formerly of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/the-wall-street-journal-climate-change-denial-and-the-galileo-gambit-1882199616.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Wall Street Journal</a>, who has joined the New York Times as a columnist and deputy editorial page editor.While at the Wall Street Journal, Stephens consistently undermined and disparaged <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate change</a>, one time describing it as an "<a href="https://www.ff.org/liberalisms-imaginary-enemies/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">imaginary enemy</a>" and another comparing it to religion with a "<a href="https://fcpp.org/2011/11/29/the-great-global-warming-fizzle-the-climate-religion-fades-in-spasms-of-anger-and-twitches-of-boredom/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">doomsaying prophecy and faith in things unseen</a>."Stephens' new boss, editorial page editor James Bennett, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/public-editor/seeking-more-voices-even-if-some-dont-want-to-hear-them.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">told the paper's public editor Liz Spayd</a>:

"The crux of the question is whether his work belongs inside our

boundaries for intelligent debate and I have no doubt that it does. I

have no doubt he crosses our bar for intellectual honesty and fairness."Suffice to say, there are plenty who disagree. One <a href="https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira/status/852975570748964865" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate scientist has already canceled his subscription</a> in protest, with others watching closely.No doubt that Stephens can write—he won a <a href="http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/bret-stephens" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Pulitzer in 2012 for lots of opinions on stuff other than climate</a>.But

like other conservative columnists admired for their poetic prose and

strident opinions while attacking climate change, the methods used by

Stephens might be compared to those of a fake chef producing a lumpy and

unsatisfying word soup.Crap SoupThere's

no real care with the preparation and no quality control over the

freshness or blending of the ingredients, but these indiscretions are

suitably masked with enough flavor-enhancers to give some short-term

satisfaction to unsuspecting diners/readers.But

the New York Times should probably be serving up something far more

substantial than crap soup and three-day-old bread to its massive

audience.Let's take, for example, a <a href="https://www.ff.org/liberalisms-imaginary-enemies/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">November 2015 column</a> which Stephens wrote in the build up to the United Nations <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/paris-agreement" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate negotiations in Paris</a>.Stephens

wrote that a trend in rising global temperatures was "imperceptible"

and that the "hysteria" around climate change ignored how this trend

could be "a product of natural variation."There

is a mountain of evidence that global warming is not caused by "natural

fluctuations" and this evidence has been in existence for decades. To

suggest that it isn't, would be to fall below any bar of intellectual

honesty erected in the newsroom of the New York Times or in any science

academy around the globe.In

the same column, Stephens chose to highlight "the hyping of flimsy

studies—melting Himalayan glaciers; vanishing polar ice" that he said

were being used to push a political viewpoint.Stephens was referring to an error on Himalayan glaciers buried away in a UN report, while choosing to ignore the <a href="http://wgms.ch/latest-glacier-mass-balance-data/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">decades-long trend of melting that has been recorded at glaciers all over the planet</a>.Climate Agnostic?<div id="AdThrive_Content_2_desktop" class="adthrive-ad adthrive-dynamic adthrive-content" data-google-query-id="CMaX19zgwtMCFVGyTwodF4UHCA" style="margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; text-align: center; overflow-x: visible !important;"><div id="google_ads_iframe_18190176/AdThrive_Content_2/58d2e52b44e6236dc5819ee2_0container" style="border: 0pt none;">Stephens himself has told <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/bret-stephens-new-york-times_us_58f12c80e4b0b9e9848bed3e" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Huffington Post</a> that

he's an "agnostic" on climate change and said while it "seems" the

weight of scientific evidence points to human causes for global warming,

that evidence might be wrong because "the history of science is replete

with consensus positions that have evolved."</div></div>Now,

the New York Times' own defense of its hiring of Stephens is almost as

redundant as the arguments that Stephens borrows from climate science

deniers.In an interview with the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/bret-stephens-new-york-times_us_58f12c80e4b0b9e9848bed3e" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Huffington Post</a>, the New York Time's Bennett said there was "more than one kind of denial.""And

to pretend like the views of a thinker like Bret and the millions of

people who agree with him on a range of issues, should simply be

ignored, that they're outside the bounds of reasonable debate, is a

really dangerous form of delusion," he said.Let's think about what the New York Times opinion page might look like if we based it on the beliefs of millions of Americans.According to <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/16915/Three-Four-Americans-Believe-Paranormal.aspx?g_source=paranormal&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Gallup polling data</a>,

some 20 percent of Americans believe in witches, which is roughly half

the number of people who think extrasensory perception is actually a

thing.A <a href="http://www.theharrispoll.com/health-and-life/American-Teens-No-Longer-More-Likely-than-Adults-to-Believe-In-God.html" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">poll conducted by Harris in 2016</a> found

that two out of five Americans think ghosts are real. Belief in

evolution? That's at 49 percent. Creationism? Some 37 percent are down

with that.Lizard

people controlling societies? One in 25 Americans fear their presence,

but where's their representation in the New York Times editorials?Arguing

that someone should be hired to the editorial desk of one of the

world's most influential newspapers because "millions of people" hold a

particular belief is a clear path to supporting the sort of delusional

thinking that has more <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/16915/Three-Four-Americans-Believe-Paranormal.aspx?g_source=paranormal&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Americans believing in the paranormal</a> than <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/10/04/public-views-on-climate-change-and-climate-scientists/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">accepting that climate change is mostly human-caused</a>.That 1970s Cooling MythOpinions

are worth printing when they're based on the preponderance of credible

evidence, not the self-interests of fossil fuel–funded "fellows" at

so-called think tanks or the whimsy of attention-seeking contrarians.In

an August 2011 interview on Fox News Business, Stephens told viewers

"in the 1970s we were supposed to believe in global cooling."Were

we? Well, if you want to base your intellectually robust opinion on a

moldy-old myth based on a couple of 1970s news items, then fine.Alternatively, read a <a href="http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">2008 review of science papers published between 1965 and 1979</a> finding that only seven papers were predicting cooling against 44 saying temperatures would rise.Also in that interview, Stephens lauded an essay by the late author Michael Crichton that attacked the consensus on global warming.In that <a href="http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Crichton2003.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">essay, based on a lecture</a>,

Crichton said: "Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on

something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had."So let's just stop a second and think about what Crichton was advocating here.The

consensus of medical science says smoking will massively increase your

risk of getting cancer and heart disease, even if you can't say exactly

which cigarette killed your wheezy relative. You're being had, folks.Crichton was putting up a straw man argument—that science is done by consensus—in order to then attack it.Climate ConsensusWhen

people talk about a consensus on the causes of climate change, they're

describing the collective findings of thousands of peer-reviewed

articles published in leading scientific journals over decades using

multiple methods from a diverse set of observations.The

consensus that climate change is caused by humans comes from the

long-studied physical properties of greenhouse gases to the measurements

of warming oceans, the atmosphere and the places on the planet where

there is or was, ice.Don't

get me wrong here, folks. You're free to choose a glib sound bite from a

science fiction writer based on a misrepresentation of the concept of

scientific consensus.But

take care not to be had by charlatans promising to chat to your very

dead Aunty Betty or save your soul from the claws of the lizard people.I

think it might be time someone broke into the editorial office of the

New York Times and raised that bar of intellectual honesty.Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/04/25/new-york-times-defends-hiring-climate-science-denier-bret-stephens-claiming-intellectual-honesty" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">DeSmogBlog</a>.</div></div></div></div><div>=</div><div>odd timing on eve of gorsuch and ac vote?</div><div>
</div><div> ==trump fail flynn wsj<a href="http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/22/15021220/wall-street-journal-editorial-trump" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/22/15021220/wall-street-journal-editorial-trump</a>On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-presidents-credibility-1490138920" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">published</a> a scathing criticism of President Trump, warning that “if he doesn't show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he's a fake President.” It also colorfully says that “the President clings to his assertion like a drunk to an empty gin bottle.”The week started on a bad note for Trump, with FBI Director James Comey <a href="http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/20/14982752/trump-wiretap-claims-officially-debunked-fbi-comey-nsa-rogers" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">debunking</a> his wiretapping claims in a hearing on Monday. On that topic, the editorial, titled <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-presidents-credibility-1490138920" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">“A President’s Credibility,”</a> accused

Trump of “rolling out his press spokesman to make more dubious claims.”

In the piece, which unabashedly skewers Trump, the editorial board made

a point of defending White House press secretary Sean Spicer, writing

that he “doesn’t deserve this treatment.”Trump has spent much of the week <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/22/politics/house-health-care-bill/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">stumping</a> on behalf of the <a href="https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS728US729&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=the+american+healthcare+act+explained+vox&*" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">Republican health care plan</a>,which has been criticized by <a href="http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/20/14927252/house-republicans-ahca-obamacare-repeal-oppose" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">members of his own party</a> and, it’s worth noting, by typically pro-Trump media outlets such as <a href="https://twitter.com/heatherscope/status/844554387896832001" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">Breitbart</a> as well.The editorial also goes in on Trump’s attempts to sell unconvinced House Republicans on the bill:<div class="m-ad m-ad__mobile_article_body" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.2rem; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><div id="div-gpt-ad-mobile_article_body" class="dfp_ad" data-cb-dfp-id="unit=mobile_article_body" data-cb-ad-id="Mobile article body" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; line-height: 1.6; margin: 1.2rem 0px; padding: 0.6rem 1.2rem; border-left: 3px solid rgb(79, 113, 119); overflow: hidden;">All

of this continues the pattern from the campaign that Mr. Trump is his

own worst political enemy. He survived his many false claims as a

candidate because his core supporters treated it as mere hyperbole and

his opponent was untrustworthy Hillary Clinton. But now he’s President,

and he needs support beyond the Breitbart cheering section that will

excuse anything. As he is learning with the health-care bill, Mr. Trump

needs partners in his own party to pass his agenda. He also needs

friends abroad who are willing to trust him when he asks for support,

not least in a crisis.</blockquote>That

Trump seems to have lost the editorial board of the Journal shows just

how poor a job he’s doing. Since his election, the paper’s opinion pages

had been moving in a more pro-Trump direction. In February, an op-ed

editor critical of the president was <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/conflict-over-trump-forces-out-an-opinion-editor-at-the-wall-street-journal/516318/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">reportedly dismissed</a>. The same month, Politico’s Joe Pompeo <a href="http://www.politico.com/media/story/2017/02/gerry-baker-wall-street-journal-trump-newsroom-tensions-004928" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: inherit; vertical-align: inherit; font-style: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; transition: color 0.1s, background-color 0.1s, fill 0.1s; border-bottom: 1px solid transparent; font-weight: 600;">reported</a> that there was ongoing tension at the Journal regarding how the paper should treat Trump.Wednesday’s

op-ed is notable for its explosive language — but also for its break

from the direction the Wall Street Journal seemed to be heading in. If

the editorial board thinks it can impact the president’s behavior by

calling him out, though, it’s likely to be disappointed.</div><div></div><div>Legendary

CBS newsman Dan Rather lit into the Wall Street Journal’s

editor-in-chief for saying he was reluctant to call out obvious lies by

Donald Trump by saying one had to consider the president-elect’s “moral

intent.”On Sunday’s Meet The Press,

WSJ’s Gerard Baker was asked about Trump’s penchant to blurt or tweet

things off the top of his head that have no basis in reality. According

to the Baker, calling those things a “lie” would be going too far.“I’d

be careful about using the word, ‘lie.’” Baker said. “‘Lie’ implies

much more than just saying something that’s false. It implies a

deliberate intent to mislead…I think if you start ascribing a moral

intent, as it were, to someone by saying that they’ve lied, I think you

run the risk that you look like you are, like you’re not being

objective.”On <a href="https://www.facebook.com/theDanRather/posts/10157986074875716" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Facebook</a>, Rather blasted Baker by opening with “A lie, is a lie, is a lie.”“Journalism,

as I was taught it, is a process of getting as close to some valid

version of the truth as is humanly possible. And one of my definitions

of news is information that the powerful don’t want you to know,” Rather

wrote. He continued:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“It

is not the proper role of journalists to meet lies—especially from

someone of Mr. Trump’s stature and power—by hiding behind semantics and

euphemisms. Our role is to call it as we see it, based on solid

reporting. When something is, in fact, a demonstrable lie, it is our

responsibility to say so,” he continued. “As I have said before and will

say as long as people are willing to listen, this is a gut check moment

for the press. We are being confronted by versions of what are claimed

to be ‘the truth’ that resemble something spewed out by a

fertilizer-spreader in a wind tunnel. And there is every indication that

this will only continue in the Tweets and statements of the man who

will now hold forth from behind the Great Seal of the President of the

United States.”</blockquote>Rather

concluded by warning news consumers, “You as the paying, subscribing

public, can use your leverage and pocketbooks to keep those who should

be honest brokers of information, well, honest."</div><div>==
<a href="http://www.alternet.org/media/defining-lie-post-truth-america-wsj-editor-brilliantly-explains-mainstream-medias-reluctance">http://www.alternet.org/media/defining-lie-post-truth-america-wsj-editor-brilliantly-explains-mainstream-medias-reluctance</a>

Much like the New York Times and the Washington Post, President-elect

Donald Trump targeted the Wall Street Journal on the campaign trail."I'm

not a believer of the Wall Street Journal, I think it's a piece of

garbage, it's going to lose a fortune, don't work," Trump said on

February 19, 2016 at a rally in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina."Don't worry, it'll be out of business like all the rest of them very soon," Trump added.Wall Street Journal Editor-in-Chief Gerard Baker is used to Trump's attacks by now, or as he calls it, "strange, tough love.""He'd

attack our reporters individually, anything we'd done, anything he

didn't like, and then at the same time you also know how much he

actually reads the newspaper or watches TV," Baker told MSNBC's Chuck

Todd about Trump. But Baker is still hesitant to call out Trump's lies.

Here's why: “I’d be careful using the word ‘lie’,” Baker told Todd.“Lie implies much more than just saying something that’s false. It implies a deliberate intent to mislead.”Baker would prefer to investigate Trump's outlandish claims and gave the example of Trump's lie regarding "<a href="http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-stands-by-his-claim-about-911-cheering-brags-he-has-worlds-greatest-memory/">thousands</a>" of American Muslims being seen celebrating 9/11. Otherwise, he feels the publication risks objectivity.“I

think if you start ascribing a moral intent, as it were, to someone by

saying that they’ve lied,” Baker said. “I think you run the risk that

you look like you are — like you’re not being objective.”Baker

wants the reader to be trusted to make up his or her own mind while

reading the Wall Street Journal and their writers' social media posts....
==
</div><div><a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/12/20/twofer-editorial-proves-wall-street-journal-denial-about-fracking-and-climate-change/214877">http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/12/20/twofer-editorial-proves-wall-street-journal-denial-about-fracking-and-climate-change/214877</a></div><div>
</div><div>The

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) final report on the drinking

water impacts of hydraulic fracturing (aka fracking) has provoked howls

from The Wall Street Journal’s

editorial board, which blasted EPA analysts as “science deniers” pushing

“fake news.” But the editorial’s deeply flawed reasoning is the latest

evidence that the Journal is in

denial when it comes to scientific findings that conflict with its

pro-fossil fuel agenda, whether they relate to fracking or climate

change.In the December 18 <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-epas-science-deniers-1482099327" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">editorial</a>, the Journal misrepresented the changes the EPA made to its draft version of the report, which was released in June 2015:<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 25px 30px 10px; margin: 20px 20px 25px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 0px 6px 0px -4px; clear: both;">After being barraged by plaintiff attorneys and Hollywood celebrities, the

EPA in its final report substituted its determination of no

“widespread, systemic impact” with the hypothetical that fracking “can

impact drinking water resources under some circumstances” and that

“impacts can range in frequency and severity” depending on the

circumstances.[...]The

EPA now asserts that “significant data gaps and uncertainties” prevent

it from “calculating or estimating the national frequency of impacts.”</blockquote>In reality, all of the findings the Journal pointed to in the <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/hfstudy/recordisplay.cfm?deid=332990" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">final version</a> of the report were also present in the <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/hf_es_erd_jun2015.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">draft version</a>. The

draft version stated that “there are above and below ground mechanisms

by which hydraulic fracturing activities have the potential to impact

drinking water resources,” identified “factors affecting the frequency

or severity” of those impacts, and <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/06/05/what-media-left-out-of-epa-fracking-stories-ins/203907" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">acknowledged</a> that

"data limitations" prevent the agency from having "any certainty" of

how often fracking has actually impacted drinking water.The one change the Journal correctly

identified was that in the final version of the report, the EPA

rescinded its draft conclusion that there was no evidence fracking has

“led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources.” But

contrary to the Journal’s claim

that the EPA disavowed that finding because the agency had been

“barraged by plaintiff attorneys and Hollywood celebrities,” it was

actually changed after the EPA’s scientific advisory board, which <a href="https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-science-advisory-board-sab-and-sab-staff-office" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">evaluates</a> the agency’s “use of science,” <a href="https://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/LookupWebReportsLastMonthBOARD/BB6910FEC10C01A18525800C00647104/$File/EPA-SAB-16-005+Unsigned.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">pointed out</a> that the draft conclusion wasn’t supported elsewhere in the report:<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 25px 30px 10px; margin: 20px 20px 25px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 0px 6px 0px -4px; clear: both;">The

[Science Advisory Board] has concerns regarding the clarity and

adequacy of support for several major findings presented within the

draft Assessment Report that seek to draw national-level conclusions

regarding the impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water

resources.[...]Of

particular concern in this regard is the high level conclusion

statement on page ES-6 that “We did not find evidence that these

mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water

resources in the United States.” The SAB finds that the EPA did not

support quantitatively its conclusion about lack of evidence for

widespread, systemic impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water

resources, and did not clearly describe the system(s) of interest (e.g.,

groundwater, surface water), the scale of impacts (i.e., local or

regional), nor the definitions of “systemic” and “widespread.” The SAB

observes that the statement has been interpreted by readers and members

of the public in many different ways. The SAB concludes that if the EPA

retains this conclusion, the EPA should provide quantitative analysis

that supports its conclusion that hydraulic fracturing has not led to

widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources.</blockquote>EPA

Deputy Administrator Tom Burke recently confirmed that the EPA chose to

remove the “no widespread, systematic impacts” language after receiving

feedback from the science advisory board, and “Burke said the EPA

opted to remove the phrase because it ‘could not be quantitatively

supported’ and it ‘showed that sentence did not clearly communicate the

findings of the report,’" as American Public Media <a href="http://www.apmreports.org/story/2016/12/13/epa-fracking-contamination-drinking-water" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">reported</a>.The Journal further claimed

that “the EPA’s faulty construction of a monitoring well caused

contamination” in Pavillion, WY, citing that situation as an example of

how “any technology has the potential to inflict some damage” if

mismanaged. However, that claim – which has been <a href="https://energyindepth.org/mtn-states/wyoming-regulators-ask-epa-to-plug-flawed-pavillion-monitoring-wells/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">pushed</a> by a fossil fuel industry <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2012/12/11921/%E2%80%9Cenergy-depth%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-reporters%E2%80%99-guide-its-founding-funding-and-flacks" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">front</a> <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/%E2%80%98energy-depth%E2%80%99-was-created-major-oil-and-gas-companies-according-industry-memo" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">group</a> – has been debunked by experts at Stanford University, as the Casper Star-Tribune <a href="http://trib.com/business/energy/former-epa-lead-investigator-in-pavillion-releases-study-linking-fracking/article_31b296ee-560c-5832-8768-26bbeff2833a.html" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">reported</a>:<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 25px 30px 10px; margin: 20px 20px 25px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 0px 6px 0px -4px; clear: both;">Industry

critics once argued samples from the EPA’s groundwater monitoring wells

should be discounted because of faulty construction. But the compounds

found in those monitoring wells are more commonly associated with

fracking—not the cements used to encase a well, [Stanford researchers

Dominic DiGiulio and Robert Jackson] say.</blockquote>The Journal concluded

its editorial by asserting that it is “ironic” that liberals who

“denounce anyone who cites uncertainties about carbon’s climate impact

as ‘deniers’” are now “justifying their opposition to fracking based on

scientific uncertainties.” As quite possibly the <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">most frequent purveyor</a> of climate science misinformation in the entire media landscape, the Journal has rightly received <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wall-street-journal-climate-change-ads_us_57602f98e4b071ec19ef45d8" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">substantial</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/may/28/wall-street-journal-denies-global-warming-consensus" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">criticism</a> for its climate denial. The difference, of course, is that there is near-universal <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">scientific consensus</a> that

carbon pollution is warming the planet, whereas both the draft and

final versions of the EPA report show that no such consensus yet exists

about the impacts fracking has had on drinking water resources.Such false equivalency only goes to show that the Journal editorial board is in denial about both climate change and fracking.</div>

<div>

===

Another study, cited by The Guardian [no link]Tuesday, concludes that the growth of conservative media has cemented this gap.

Conservative newspaper The Wall Street Journal was found to publish inaccurate information on the topic, according to a <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">report by Media Matters for America</a>.

"Out

of 93 climate-related opinion pieces published in the Journal during

the time period examined, 31 featured climate science denial or other

scientifically inaccurate claims about climate change (33 percent),"

Media Matters for America said.

A

2013 study found that those Americans who consumed news from

conservative news sources such as Fox had a higher distrust of science

and scientists, than did those who read or watched non-conservative

media.

Breaking

through to those who fiercely deny the existence of climate change is

no easy task, the Ohio State University researchers concluded.

==ref<a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700">http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700</a><div class="item-summary" style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px 30px 15px; margin: 0px 0px 15px; border-bottom: 1px dotted rgb(204, 204, 204); clear: both; line-height: 18.5714px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and The Washington Post all

published climate science denial and other scientifically inaccurate

statements about climate change on their opinion pages over the last

year and a half, while The New York Times avoided doing so, according to a new Media Mattersanalysis of those four newspapers. The Journal published

by far the most opinion pieces misrepresenting climate science, while

all three instances of climate science denial in the Post came from columns written by George Will. The Journal and USA Today also published numerous climate-related op-eds without disclosing the authors’ fossil fuel ties, while USA Today, the Post, and particularly the Journal frequently published some of the least credible voices on climate and energy issues.</div><div class="item-body" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h2 style="line-height: 1.5em; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom: 1px dotted rgb(0, 153, 255);"><a id="denial" name="denial" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; background-color: transparent;">Three Major Newspapers Published Climate Science Denial On Opinion Pages, Led By The Wall Street Journal</a></h2>Analysis: Three Major Newspapers’ Opinion Pages Published Climate Science Denial And Other Antiscience Claims. Media Matters examined op-eds, editorials, and columns in The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The New York Times, and The Washington Post from

January 1, 2015, to August 31, 2016, to determine how often climate

science denial and other false statements about climate science appeared

on each newspaper’s opinion pages. We found that the Journal, the Post, and USA Today all published climate science misinformation on their opinion pages, while the Times avoided doing so. Unlike the Journal editorial board, which has denied climate science, the editorial boards of the Times, the Post, and USA Today all recognize the scientific consensus around man-made climate change. But our analysis found that the Timeswas

the only one of these newspapers that did not publish an op-ed or

column containing climate science denial during this time period. [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PnvucqIBBWlAOgAyBP_G7QLLdtqOIoj0nlW12adewVk/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Climate Denial/Misinformation Spreadsheet</a>; The New York Times, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/29/opinion/the-pope-joins-the-climate-wars.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">4/29/15</a>; The Washington Post, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/just-about-every-big-measure-of-climate-change-was-bad-last-year/2015/07/21/113ecea6-2cc8-11e5-a5ea-cf74396e59ec_story.html?utm_term=.f11af2c1f6b1" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">7/21/15</a>; USA Today, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/11/30/climate-paris-talks-obama-global-warming-editorials-debates/76578684/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">11/30/15</a>]...<h2 style="line-height: 1.5em; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom: 1px dotted rgb(0, 153, 255);">Newspapers Gave Key Climate And Energy Misinformers Significant Exposure</h2>WSJ, USA Today, And Wash. Post Frequently Published Least Credible Voices On Climate And Energy Issues. Our

analysis found that a select group of writers were responsible for much

of the climate- and energy-related misinformation in the four

newspapers: Wall Street Journal editorial board members Holman Jenkins and Kimberly Strassel, Washington Post columnist

George Will, a few high-profile congressmen, representatives of a few

key fossil fuel front groups, and frequent op-ed contributors Bjorn

Lomborg and Matt Ridley. Altogether, The Wall Street Journal published 55 climate- or energy-related opinion pieces by these misinformers since January 2015, while The Washington Post and USA Today each published nine, and The New York Times published just one. [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bRDqPd8Dt4Z64s13dcdyGbcfVHROb4KrAX50qlM_ttQ/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Frequent Misinformers Spreadsheet</a>]<img alt="" src="http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2016/08/31/misinformer-chart.png" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; vertical-align: middle; max-width: 645px; margin: 0px auto; display: block;" width="645" height="456" />Misinforming Columnists At WSJ And Wash. PostHolman Jenkins: 32 Columns. Wall Street Journal editorial

board member Holman Jenkins Jr. frequently writes columns dismissing

science, attacking climate policies, and defending the fossil fuel

industry. During the time period examined, Jenkins authored 18 Journal columns

that mentioned climate change -- 15 of which denied the consensus that

human activities are driving climate change or otherwise misinformed on

climate, such as questioning whether climate change is a “problem” or

disputing the reliability of climate models to predict future warming.

He also frequently attacked actions aimed at addressing climate change

or holding the fossil fuel industry accountable, writing eight columns

criticizing government investigations of Exxon, three criticizing the

Paris climate agreement, and two criticizing the Environmental

Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan. In one column responding to

Climate Nexus’ study of climate denial on the Journal’s

opinion pages, Jenkins declared, "No contributor has written more

frequently on the subject of climate change on these pages,” and claimed

that his views on the subject are “ploddingly conventional.” Yet he

then proceeded to deny climate science by asserting that “science has

been unable to discern signal from noise in the hunt for man-made

warming.” As climate scientist Steve Sherwood pointed out to DeSmogBlog:<blockquote style="line-height: 18.5714px; box-sizing: border-box; padding: 25px 30px 10px; margin: 20px 20px 25px; border: 1px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 0px 6px 0px -4px; clear: both; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">“That’s

just not true. There are dozens and dozens of studies that have done

exactly this. There’s a whole field of climate science looking at

detection and attribution. For example, you can see the human

fingerprint of greenhouse gas warming in precipitation extremes, in the

vertical pattern of change between the stratosphere and troposphere. And

all these studies use observations and models. If you are dismissing

models, then that means the person does not understand the scientific

process.” [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bRDqPd8Dt4Z64s13dcdyGbcfVHROb4KrAX50qlM_ttQ/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Frequent Misinformers Spreadsheet</a>, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PnvucqIBBWlAOgAyBP_G7QLLdtqOIoj0nlW12adewVk/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Climate Denial/Misinformation Spreadsheet</a>; Climate Nexus analysis, accessed <a href="http://static1.squarespace.com/static/534ec657e4b03c887dde2641/t/575f6edd20c647ff95c170a0/1465872094069/FINAL_CN_WSJ_white_paper-0613.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">9/1/16</a>; Partnership for Responsible Growth, accessed <a href="http://www.partnershipforresponsiblegrowth.org/research-1/climatenexusdatabase" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">9/1/16</a>; DeSmogBlog,<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/07/01/wall-st-journal-shows-why-it-under-attack-climate-science-denial-publishing-another-dodgy-column" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">7/1/16</a>]</blockquote>Kimberley Strassel: Six Columns. Journal editorial board member Kimberley Strassel is also a climate science denier, as Mother Jones has documented, and her Journal columns

frequently include climate-related misinformation. Strassel defended

Exxon in a June 16 column that peddled the baseless conspiracy theory

that the real target of the attorneys general investigations is “a broad

array of conservative activist groups that are highly effective at

mobilizing the grass-roots and countering liberal talking points.” In

it, she falsely claimed that the American Legislative Exchange Council

(ALEC) has never “taken a position on climate,” when in fact ALEC has

crafted model legislation that misrepresents science while attacking

climate action. Strassel also claimed that the Koch brothers’ front

group Americans for Prosperity (AFP) has “never taken a dime from

Exxon,” but the group’s predecessor organization received hundreds of

thousands from Exxon, and it remains an open question whether Exxon is

continuing to funnel money to AFP via dark money groups DonorsTrust and

the Donors Capital Fund. In an April 14 column, she claimed that

Democratic attorneys general are “pursuing the bogus claim” that Exxon

“suppressed climate science,” when in fact they are investigating

whether Exxon violated the law by misleading investors about climate

change in order to achieve financial gain, regardless of whether Exxon

published climate research in journals. And in an April 21 column, she

called climate change “the left’s new religion.” [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bRDqPd8Dt4Z64s13dcdyGbcfVHROb4KrAX50qlM_ttQ/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Frequent Misinformers Spreadsheet</a>; <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/06/17/wsjs-kimberley-strassel-pushes-illogical-conspiracy-theory-about-exxon-climate-investigations/211024" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">6/17/16</a>, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/07/08/another-day-another-dodgy-defense-exxon-wall-street-journal/211451" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">7/8/16</a>; Mother Jones,<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/climate-change-skeptic-kimberley-strassel" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">2/13/16</a>]...Bjorn Lomborg: Eight Op-Eds. Bjorn

Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center -- which was

launched in the U.S. with funding from the Koch-linked Randolph

Foundation -- wrote six op-eds in The Wall Street Journal and two in USA Today about

climate or energy. In them, Lomborg frequently distorted climate

science or deceptively criticized climate action. For instance, in one Journal op-ed

in which he suggested that fewer people will die as the planet warms,

Lomborg “misrepresent[ed] the results of existing studies” and “rel[ied]

on flawed reasoning,” according to climate scientists who analyzed his

claims for Climate Feedback. He also cited the global warming “hiatus”

to dismiss concerns about future climate change, and falsely claimed

that spending resources on climate aid to poor countries will deprive

those countries of "medicine, mosquito nets or micronutrients."

Additionally, he frequently cited a Copenhagen Consensus Center study to

claim that the Paris climate agreement would reduce global warming by

only 0.17 degrees Celsius. However, this study was debunked by multiple

experts, and Lomborg’s findings were contradicted by several more

reputable analyses, which found that the Paris climate agreement would

limit global warming by approximately 1 degree Celsius and could lead to

further global warming reduction. In USA Today,

Lomborg again cited his study to call the Paris climate agreement a

“hugely expensive way of doing very little.” He also twisted facts to

claim that ceasing production of electric cars would keep people from

dying. [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bRDqPd8Dt4Z64s13dcdyGbcfVHROb4KrAX50qlM_ttQ/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Frequent Misinformers Spreadsheet</a>; <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PnvucqIBBWlAOgAyBP_G7QLLdtqOIoj0nlW12adewVk/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Climate Denial/Misinformation Spreadsheet</a>, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jWeYul8b1Y4P2zb5LK2OOJibbSBBpW6i_W0MnNr6o5M/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Fossil Fuel Disclosure Spreadsheet</a>, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/12/03/fact-vs-fiction-the-un-climate-talks-in-paris/207185" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">12/3/15</a>,<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/24/for-bjorn-lomborg-shilling-for-anti-environment/202652" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">2/24/15</a><a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/12/03/fact-vs-fiction-the-un-climate-talks-in-paris/207185" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">;</a> Climate Feedback, <a href="http://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/bjorn-lomborg-overheated-climate-alarm-wall-street-journal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">4/6/16</a>]Matt Ridley: Two Op-Eds And One Essay. Matt Ridley frequently contributes to The Wall Street Journal’s

op-ed pages about climate change and sometimes discloses that his

family leases land for coal mining in northern England. During the time

period examined for this study, Ridley authored two climate-related Journal op-eds -- and one additional piece published for “The Saturday Essay” in the Journal’s

Life section, where he asserted that fossil fuels “will save the

world.” One Ridley op-ed co-authored with Benny Peiser, director of the

U.K.-based climate denial organization Global Warming Policy Foundation,

was titled “Your Complete Guide to the Climate Debate” and released

shortly before the international climate talks in Paris. Dozens of

scientists criticized and debunked this op-ed on Climate Feedback,

calling it a “very biased and misleading presentation of the science,”

and adding that it contained “rampant cherry-picking, misleading

statements, and flawed logic.” Climate Feedback assigned the op-ed an

overall credibility score of “Low” to “Very Low.” A previous Media Matters analysis found that between January 2011 and October 15, 2012 -- when Ridley was a columnist for the Journal --

he authored 18 columns about climate change in which he frequently

distorted climate science and compared climate scientists to eugenicists

because eugenicists "insist[ed] that its tenets were beyond reasonable

challenge." In one 2012 Journal column, Ridley asserted that global warming will be a “net good” for the planet. [Media Matters, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bRDqPd8Dt4Z64s13dcdyGbcfVHROb4KrAX50qlM_ttQ/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Frequent Misinformers Spreadsheet</a>, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PnvucqIBBWlAOgAyBP_G7QLLdtqOIoj0nlW12adewVk/edit#gid=0" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Climate Denial/Misinformation Spreadsheet</a>, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/29/meet-the-wall-street-journal-columnist-dismissi/190989" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">10/29/12</a>, <a href="https://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/12/20/wsjs-climate-dynamite-is-a-dud/191923" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">12/20/12</a>; The Wall Street Journal, <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/fossil-fuels-will-save-the-world-really-1426282420" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">3/13/15</a>; Climate Feedback, <a href="http://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/analysis-of-matt-ridley-benny-peiser-your-complete-guide-to-the-climate-debate/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">11/27/15</a>]<a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700">http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/09/01/study-newspaper-opinion-pages-feature-science-denial-and-other-climate-change-misinformation/212700</a></div>==

</div>

<div>their videos pop up, embedded on other sites</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

In a video <a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-carbon-dioxides-champions/46367090-4A43-4E48-BECA-F6E59AB1D9DE.html" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">interview</a> posted on The Wall Street Journal’s website, Journal editorial

board member Mary Kissel told viewers that if they are “confused about

the science surrounding climate change,” they should “trust” Rod

Nichols, chairman of a climate science-denying fossil fuel <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/03/20/will-happer-rebrands-gmi-as-CO2-Coalition-CoalOILition" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">front group</a> known as the <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/12/14/breitbart-news-go-to-outlet-for-academics-for-h/207474" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">CO2 Coalition</a>.

During the interview, Nichols denied that human activities such as

burning oil and coal are responsible for recent global warming, claiming

that “[c]limate change has been going on for hundreds of millions of

years,” that “[t]here is not going to be any catastrophic climate

change,” and that “CO2 will be good for the world.” Kissel asked

Nichols, “why don't we hear more viewpoints like the ones that your

coalition represents,” and concluded that the CO2 Coalition’s research

papers are “terrific.”

Here's the August 17 <a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-journal-carbon-dioxides-champions/46367090-4A43-4E48-BECA-F6E59AB1D9DE.html" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">video</a>:

[img]

<p style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; width: 543px; -webkit-margin-before: 1em; -webkit-margin-after: 1em; margin-top: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 1em !important; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">MARY KISSEL (Wall Street Journal editorial

board member): Are you confused about the science surrounding climate

change? Don't know who to trust? Well, we have help for you! Rod Nichols

is chairman of the CO2 Coalition ... Rod, I want to start with the CO2

Coalition. What exactly is it, and who's involved?

RODNEY

NICHOLS (CO2 Coalition chairman): We formed about a year ago -- a group

of scientists, mostly physicists, a few chemists, engineers,

economists -- who are convinced that the public is being misled about

carbon dioxide. CO2. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is not a

pollutant. But if you read the editorial pages and the news pages of

most papers the word "pollutant" is always used with CO2.

KISSEL:

So does that mean that your group doesn't believe in climate change? Or

doesn't believe in something called "catastrophic climate change"?

NICHOLS:

Climate change has been going on for hundreds of millions of years.

Everybody should recognize that there is climate change. There is not

going to be any catastrophic climate change. CO2 will be good for the

world. CO2

enhances agriculture. Crops tend to grow on the average of 15 percent

more per year given more CO2. And even more important, crops don't need

as much water when they're growing if they have more CO2. You can see

this at the edges of deserts where struggling little green plants -- you

couldn't see them 35 years ago. Thirty-five years later the satellite

photos clearly show that these little green plants -- with more CO2 and

needing less water at the edge of deserts -- they're fluorishing!

KISSEL:

So this is a completely opposite viewpoint than what is represented in,

as you say, most of the media, most of our college classrooms. How did

they get to this point, Rod? Why don't we hear more viewpoints like the

ones that your coalition represents?

NICHOLS:

Well, that's a really good question that I don't have a completely

satisfactory answer to. I shy away from conspiracy theories, I don't

think -- but it's true in the scientific literature, you can find

"skeptics" as we are sometimes called who are arguing against what

appears to be a consensus but their views are not covered. Their

views are not debated. If nothing else, the CO2 Coalition wants to open

up a real debate. Science thrives with discovery and debate. And the

subtitle of our first report, about six months ago, was called "See For

Yourself."

KISSEL:

So where do viewers go to find out more information about what you're

doing and to get educated on science about climate change?

NICHOLS:

Good questions. CO2Coalition.org is a storehouse of very reliable data.

We've surveyed data over decades published in our reports. One is

called White Paper 1, and White Paper 2. You can get these, we'd be glad to send them to you.

KISSEL: And you don't need to be a scientist to understand these papers?

NICHOLS:

They're prepared to be readable by any intelligent citizen. Even my

daughter found them readable and she's not an environmentalist, she's

not an alarmist, she's an art history major. She loved them.

KISSEL: Maybe

even I will find it readable. In fact, it is readable. I have read

these papers. They're terrific. CO2Coalition.org, go check it out, Rod

Nichols is the chairman, thanks for joining us.

</blockquote>

<a href="http://static1.squarespace.com/static/534ec657e4b03c887dde2641/t/575f6edd20c647ff95c170a0/1465872094069/FINAL_CN_WSJ_white_paper-0613.pdf" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Climate Nexus Analysis: How The Wall Street Journal Opinion Section Presents Climate Change</a>

Previously:

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/12/14/breitbart-news-go-to-outlet-for-academics-for-h/207474" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Breitbart News: Go-To Outlet For "Academics-For-Hire" By The Fossil Fuel Industry?</a>

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/02/19/slate-destroys-climate-denier-myth-that-co2-is/208696" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">Slate Destroys Climate Denier Myth That CO2 Is Not A Pollutant</a>

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/08/02/the-wall-street-journal-dismissing-environmenta/189063" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">The Wall Street Journal: Dismissing Environmental Threats Since 1976</a>

</div>

<div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Free

Beacon Writer Mocks Fact That Climate Change Increases Risk Of Asthma

Attacks By Saying Everyone Who Breathes Is A "Child-Killer."

Washington Free Beacon staff writer Lachlan Markay posted a series of

tweets mocking and deriding the Clean Power Plan. He called "carbon

pollution" an "Orwellian phrase" and mocked the fact that climate change

increases the risk of asthma attacks by writing: "Every time you exhale

you're giving a child asthma. I hope you're happy, child-killer":</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">"Carbon pollution" is right up there among the most Orwellian phrases of the Obama era.</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">-- Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) August 3, 2015</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Every time you exhale you're giving a child asthma. I hope you're happy, child-killer. https://t.co/59YhrVNWRS</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">-- Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) August 3, 2015</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">[Twitter, 8/3/15; 8/3/15]</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Free

Beacon's Markay Compares Obama And EPA's McCarthy To Fictional Meth

Dealers. In a tweet responding to a report that West Virginia Attorney

General Patrick Morrisey said "residents [are] turning to drugs because

Obama is shutting down their coal plants," Markay compared Obama and

McCarthy to Walter White and Jesse Pinkman -- fictional meth dealers

from the TV show "Breaking Bad":</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Barack Obama : Gina McCarthy :: Walter White : Jesse Pinkman https://t.co/B9lL0KSVhT</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">-- Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) August 3, 2015</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">[Twitter, 8/3/15]</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">The Wall Street Journal Characterized CPP As A Government Overthrow. The

headline for a Wall Street Journal editorial described the CPP as a

"Climate Change Putsch." The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "putsch"

as "a secretly plotted and suddenly executed attempt to overthrow a

government." [The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/15; Merriam-Webster, accessed

8/3/15]</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Tom

Nelson: CPP Will Result In "0 Fewer Asthma Attacks & 0 Fewer

Premature Deaths." Responding to a tweet by President Obama that said

the CPP would lead to 90,000 fewer asthma attacks and prevent 3,600

premature deaths, blogger Tom Nelson tweeted: "This is ridiculous fraud.

Real results of CO2-tweaking are 0 fewer asthma attacks & 0 fewer

premature deaths in 2030."</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;"> Follow</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;"> Tom Nelson @tan123</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">This

is ridiculous fraud. Real results of CO2-tweaking are 0 fewer asthma

attacks & 0 fewer premature deaths in 2030

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/628283831104237569 …</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">  27 27 Retweets   6 6 likes</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">[Twitter, 8/3/15]</div>

</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">Steve Milloy Disputes That Carbon Is Harmful: "Ask A Plant." Steve

Milloy disputed that carbon is a harmful pollutant by tweeting: "Obama

CO2 announcement: Calls CO2 'harmful carbon pollution.' Ask a plant."</div>

<div style=" font-family: ;">http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/04/the-right-wing-medias-most-unhinged-reactions-t/204764</div>

</div>

<div>

Kimberley A. Strassel (born July 24, 1972) is an author and member of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Journal_Editorial_Board" class="mw-redirect" title="Wall Street Journal Editorial Board" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Wall Street Journal Editorial Board</a>. She writes a weekly conservative column, "Potomac Watch", which appears on Fridays.

<h2 style="margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: none; display: inline; line-height: 1.3; background: none;">Contents</h2>

</div>

<ul style=" list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#Biography" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">1Biography</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#Personal_life" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2Personal life</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#References" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">3References</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#External_links" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4External links</a></li></ul>

</div>

<h2 style=" font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Biography</h2>

Strassel grew up in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buxton,Oregon" title="Buxton, Oregon" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Buxton, Oregon</a>, where she graduated in 1990 from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banks_High_School" title="Banks High School" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Banks High School</a> in nearby <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banks,Oregon" title="Banks, Oregon" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Banks</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[1]</a> She graduated from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_University" title="Princeton University" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Princeton University</a> in 1994 with a B.A. in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy" class="mw-redirect" title="Public Policy" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Public Policy</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations" title="International relations" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">International Affairs</a>. Before joining the Editorial Board she was a news assistant for the European edition of the WSJ in Brussels (1994–1996) and a staff writer covering technology for the WSJ Europe in

London (1996–1999). She moved to New York in 1999 to cover real estate

before quickly joining the editorial page as an assistant features

editor. She became a senior editorial writer and member of the editorial

board in 2005.

In 2001, Strassel was the first mainstream journalist to cover problems with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bellesiles" class="mw-redirect" title="Michael Bellesiles" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Michael Bellesiles</a>'s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arming_America" title="Arming America" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Arming America</a>.

Strassel won an award for her work on the issue, when the concerns that

Strassel raised turned out to be correct; Bellesiles lost his

professorship at Emory University and had his Bancroft Prize revoked.

In 2006, Strassel co-wrote Leaving Women Behind: Modern Families, Outdated Laws (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0742545458" class="internal mw-magiclink-isbn" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">ISBN 0-7425-4545-8</a>), which argues that government regulation interferes with marketplace initiatives to provide women with economic opportunity.

Strassel profiled <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin" title="Sarah Palin" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Sarah Palin</a> in a 2008 article entitled I Haven't Always Just Toed the Line.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-online.wsj.com-2" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[2]</a> The article originally appeared in the Weekend Interview section of The Wall Street Journal on November 1, 2008.

In 2012, Strassel wrote an editorial in the WSJ that alleged the Obama campaign was targeting <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_L.VanderSloot" title="Frank L. VanderSloot" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Frank L. VanderSloot</a>, a national finance co-chair for <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney_presidential_campaign,2012" title="Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign</a> and a top campaign donor.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[3]</a> Strassel's editorial was disputed by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Maddow" title="Rachel Maddow" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Rachel Maddow</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-Maddow050512-4" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[4]</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewiston_Morning_Tribune" title="Lewiston Morning Tribune" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Lewiston Morning Tribune</a> editor Marty Trillhaase,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-Trillhaase2-5" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[5]</a>and David Shere of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America" title="Media Matters for America" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Media Matters for America</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-Shere1-6" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[6]</a> In May 2013, Strassel reported that the IRS (not the Obama campaign) targeted conservatives, including <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_L._VanderSloot" title="Frank L. VanderSloot" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Frank L. VanderSloot</a>.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Strassel#cite_note-7" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">[7]</a>

</div>

<div>

<div>Kimberley

A. Strassel is a member of Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, based

in Washington. Since 2007 she has written the Potomac Watch column. She

joined the editorial page in 1999 as an assistant editorial features

editor for The Wall Street Journal after covering real estate for

Journal's news pages and spending four years in London writing about

technology for the Wall Street Journal Europe. She joined the Editorial

Board in 2005. Ms. Strassel is a graduate of Princeton University.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

<div>The IRS’s Ugly Business as Usual</div>

<div>‘How much has really changed?’ a judge asks. Answer: not much. The scandal goes on.</div>

<div>By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL</div>

<div>Amid

the drama that is today’s presidential race, serious subjects are

getting short shrift. No one is happier about this than Barack Obama.

And no agency withi</div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

<div>Exxon’s Inquisitors Feel the Heat</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Court filings reveal the true aim of this ‘fraud’ case: silencing conservatives.</div>

<div>Massachusetts Attorney

General Maura Healey with other state attorneys general announcing an

effort to combat climate change, March 29. ENLARGE</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>354 COMMENTS</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The first thing to know

about the crusade against Exxon by state attorneys general is that it

isn’t about the law. The second thing to know is that it isn’t even

about Exxon. What these liberal prosecutors really want is to shut down a

universe of their most-hated ideological opponents.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>That became startlingly clear

this week, with Exxon’s latest filing in federal court. The oil company

revealed that it has received another subpoena for documents, this one

from Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey. But Ms. Healey, whose

fervor exceeds her political sense, gives away the game.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The 17 attorneys general

participating in this cause have always been careful to identify Exxon

as their only target. It’s easier to accuse a big, bad oil company of

nefarious deeds, so they make the bogus claim that Exxon somehow

“defrauded” the public and its shareholders by engaging in “climate

denial.” All the better if they can beat Exxon into cutting a giant

check to settle any future charges—a payoff for their states (and for

the trial lawyers helping them).</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>But the Healey subpoena shows

that Exxon is a front. The real target is a broad array of conservative

activist groups that are highly effective at mobilizing the grass-roots

and countering liberal talking points—and that therefore must (as the

left sees things) be muzzled. This is clear from the crazy list of

organizations Ms. Healey asked for information about in her subpoena.

She demanded that Exxon turn over decades of correspondence with any of

them.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Take Americans for

Prosperity. AFP confirms it has never received a dime from Exxon. But

its 2.3 million activists nationwide are highly effective in elections,

and it receives funding from the left’s favorite boogeymen, Charles and

David Koch.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Or, closer to home: Ms. Healey named the Beacon Hill Institute,

a right-leaning think tank in Boston. My sources confirm Beacon Hill

has also never seen Exxon dollars. But it is a perpetual thorn in the

side of liberal Massachusetts politicians like Ms. Healey.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Also named: the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC doesn’t now, and hasn’t ever, taken a position on the climate. The

group is, however, one of the most powerful forces in the country for

free-market legislation, having written hundreds of model bills that

states use in their efforts to reduce taxes, cut regulations and reform

tort laws. Democratic activists have, for the past five years in

particular, waged a vicious campaign to run ALEC out of business, and

Ms. Healey is now doing her bit.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The same tactics were on

display in a subpoena to Exxon from Virgin Islands Attorney General

Claude Walker. He appears to have cut-and-pasted from an anti-Exxon

website maintained by Greenpeace, since his subpoena lists the same

groups in pretty much the same order. The exercise was so sloppy that

Mr. Walker named numerous organizations that have been defunct for

years, listed several targets twice, and misidentified others.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The goal of the Exxon

probe isn’t to protect consumers or help the environment. It’s a

message: Oppose us, and we will marshal our terrifying government powers

to intimidate and threaten you, to force you to spend millions

defending yourself, to eat up the time you’d otherwise use speaking out.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>MORE POTOMAC WATCH</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Trump Can’t Wing It Forever June 10, 2016</div>

<div>Clinton’s Lawyer, Under Oath June 2, 2016</div>

<div>Trump Rakes the Clinton Muck May 26, 2016</div>

<div>The IRS’s Ugly Business as Usual May 19, 2016</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The Exxon investigation is “pure harassment,” civil-liberties attorney Harvey Silverglate

told the Boston Herald this week. “It is outrageous for any law

enforcement official,” he continued, “to be seeking to win this battle

for minds by flexing law enforcement muscle and trying to shut up the

other side.”</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>That goal is all the more

clear given the dishonesty of the legal claim. New York Attorney General

Eric Schneiderman is pursuing Exxon under his state’s sweeping Martin

Act, which covers securities fraud. Yet at a recent panel discussion in New

York, Columbia Law Professor Merritt B. Fox noted that Exxon’s actions

were irrelevant in a market already “well supplied with information

about climate change.” He skewered Mr. Schneiderman for pursuing a case

“so unlikely” to “be a winner.” This was even as he expressed solidarity with concerns about global warming.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The attorneys general are

feeling so much pushback that Mr. Schneiderman felt compelled to give a

speech last week delineating his own made-up limits on free speech.

Groups that question his harassment of them are engaged in “First

Amendment opportunism,” he said, and any right they claim is trumped,

apparently, by his righteous, self-defined calling to pursue “fraud.”

He clearly sent this memo to his persecutors-in-arms, since Ms. Healey

was parroting the same lines this week in response to questions about

her subpoena.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The Exxon campaign is only the latest in liberals’ broad, coordinated strategy to shut down conservatives. We’ve seen it in the IRS targeting, the Wisconsin John Doe probe, the campaign against ALEC, the harassment of conservative donors. And the only way to stop it is for targets to speak out—even louder.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Ms. Strassel is the author of “The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech,” out next week from Twelve. Write to kim@wsj.com.</div>

</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/06/17/wsjs-kimberley-strassel-pushes-illogical-conspiracy-theory-about-exxon-climate-investigations/211024</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board has tried <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/11/10/exxon-is-trying-to-whitewash-its-climate-change/206763" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">every</a> <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/15/las-vegas-review-journal-twists-exxon-climate-c/209272" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">trick</a> in the <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/21/wall-street-journal-continues-to-falsely-attack/209420" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">book</a> to <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/04/04/sen-whitehouse-wsjs-exxon-knew-falsehoods-are-p/209729" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">wrongly</a> <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/10/19/conservative-media-defend-corporations-right-to/206226" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);">defend</a> ExxonMobil

against allegations that the company intentionally misled shareholders

and the public about the science of climate change. Now one

member of the editorial board is pushing yet another defense of Exxon so

riddled with errors that it completely falls apart upon a basic review

of the facts.

In a June 16 <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/exxons-inquisitors-feel-the-heat-1466117071" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">column</a>, the Journal’s Kimberley Strassel alleged that Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s recent <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/16062016/exxon-sues-massachusetts-attorney-general-climate-change-fraud-investigation" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">subpoena</a> of

ExxonMobil shows that the attorneys general investigating Exxon aren’t

really concerned with whether the company’s climate science denial

constitutes fraud. Rather, Strassel declared, “The real target is a

broad array of conservative activist groups that are highly effective at

mobilizing the grass-roots and countering liberal talking points.”

As

supposed proof, Strassel pointed to Healey’s request for Exxon’s

communications with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

Strassel asserted that Healey targeted ALEC because it is “one of the

most powerful forces in the country for free-market legislation,” an

argument she based on the false premise that “ALEC doesn’t now, and hasn’t ever, taken a position on the climate.”

The truth is that ALEC has crafted <a href="https://www.alec.org/model-policy/interstate-research-commission-on-climatic-change-act/" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">model legislation</a> that <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/alec-global-warming-could-be-good-for-you/443700/" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">misrepresents</a> the science of climate change and <a href="http://alecclimatechangedenial.org/climate-denier-speakers-1" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">hosted</a> prominent climate science deniers at its conferences, and ALEC <a href="http://alecclimatechangedenial.org/climate-denier-speakers-1" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">officials</a> – including <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20141002055419/http:/www.nationaljournal.com/tech/alec-ceo-google-s-departure-was-like-getting-dumped-via-text-message-20141001" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">CEO Lisa Nelson</a> – have refused to acknowledge or outright denied the <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">scientific consensus</a> that burning fossil fuels and other human activities are causing climate change. ALEC, a <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/31/media-disclosure-guide-here-are-the-industry-fu/204708#alec" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">corporate front group</a> that connects fossil fuel industry executives with legislators to serve industry interests, has also <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/01/31/1521401/oklahoma-colorado-arizona-alec-bill-teaching-climate-change-denial-in-schools/" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">pushed model bills</a> that

would mandate teaching climate science denial in public schools. So

it’s not hard to understand why Healey would want to know whether Exxon

and ALEC have teamed up to undermine climate science.

Strassel similarly claimed that Healey targeted the oil billionaire Koch brothers’ front group <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/31/media-disclosure-guide-here-are-the-industry-fu/204708#afp" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">Americans for Prosperity (AFP)</a> because

“its 2.3 million activists nationwide are highly effective in

elections.” This must be true, Strassel argued, because “AFP confirms it

has never received a dime from Exxon.”

However, as Climate Hawks <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/16/1539399/-Mass-Attorney-General-Issues-Exxon-Related-Subpoenas" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">explained</a> in

response to a Daily Caller article that made the same claim, “Americans

for Prosperity's predecessor Citizens for A Sound Economy got hundreds

of thousands from ExxonMobil,” meaning that “the group in question

simply went by another name when it was funded by ExxonMobil.”

Moreover,

it remains an open question whether Exxon is continuing to funnel money

to AFP via DonorsTrust and the Donors Capital Fund, dark money groups

largely <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/02/28/how-the-dirty-energy-money-funding-climate-inac/192829" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">backed</a> by the Koch brothers. In October, InsideClimate News <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/29102015/senators-press-Exxon-answers-funding-climate-denial-donors-trust-sheldon-whitehouse-elizabeth-warren" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">reported</a> that

a group of Democratic senators wrote a letter to Exxon “questioning

Exxon's contributions to Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund, which

provide a conduit between well-heeled contributors and various

conservative public policy organizations, including many at the

forefront of climate science denial.” InsideClimate News further noted

that the senators cited research from Robert Brulle of Drexel

University, who provided evidence that Exxon may have engaged in an

effort to “simply reroute its support” of climate denial organizations:

is a leading sociologist who has been published extensively in the

peer-reviewed literature on the climate denial movement.

In

material supplementing one of his studies, Brulle documented Exxon

donations directly to climate denial groups such as the Heartland

Institute, up until about 2008. At about the time Exxon scaled back its

giving to those groups, Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund stepped

up their donations to them.

</blockquote>

Americans

for Prosperity “frequently provides a platform for climate contrarian

statements,” as the Union of Concerned Scientists has <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/fight-misinformation/global-warming-skeptic.html#.V2QkxvkrIdU" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">noted</a>. The Americans for Prosperity Foundation has received <a href="http://conservativetransparency.org/org/americans-for-prosperity-americans-for-prosperity-foundation/?adv=donors&og_tot=199&order_by=year+DESC" style=" box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; outline: none; font-weight: 700; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: transparent;">approximately $23 million</a> in combined contributions from Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund since 2008.

</div>

</div>

<div>https://www.amazon.com/Intimidation-Game-Left-Silencing-Speech/dp/1455591882</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>From

Kim Strassel-one of the preeminent political columnists writing today

and member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board-comes an

insightful, alarming look at how the Left, once the champion of civil

liberties, is today orchestrating a coordinated campaign to bully

Americans out of free speech.

For

nearly 40 years, Washington and much of the American public have held

up disclosure and campaign finance laws as ideals, and the path to

cleaner and freer elections. This book will show, through first-hand

accounts, how both have been hijacked by the Left as weapons against

free speech and free association, becoming the most powerful tools of

those intent on silencing their political opposition. THE INTIMIDATION

GAME provides a chilling expose of political scare tactics and

overreach, including:

<ul style="margin: 0px 0px 18px 20px; padding: 0px; line-height: 22.4px;"><li style=" margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; word-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">How Citizens United set off a wave of liberal harassment against conservative politicians</li><li style=" margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; word-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The targeting of Tea Party groups by the IRS</li><li style=" margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; word-wrap: break-word;">How Wisconsin prosecutors, state AGs, and a Democratic Congress shut down political activists and businesses</li><li style=" margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; word-wrap: break-word; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The politicization by the Obama administration of a host of government agencies including the FEC, FCC and the SEC</li></ul>

Timed

to arrive at the height of the 2016 presidential season, THE

INTIMIDATION GAME will shine a much-needed light on how liberal

governance and the Democratic machine bullies the political process.</div>

<div>

<div> Review</div>

<div>"Progressives' objective is

to extend government's regulatory reach ever-deeper into society's

dynamics. Strassel reveals how fast and how far this project has been

expanded to include an especially sinister objective: Empowering

government to control political campaign speech-speech about the

government's composition and behavior. Her frightening reports come from

many fronts in this war on America's open society. This book is a fire

bell in a darkening night."?George F. Will</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>"There have been a lot of

good books of late decrying the increasingly repressive climate towards

free speech. But none have connected the dots between the Obama White

House, Congressional Democrats, and the spider web of 'grassroots'

organizations the way Kim Strassel does in THE INTIMIDATION GAME. It is

required reading for those who want to know what's behind the supposedly

spontaneous daily outrages we see every day."?Jonah Goldberg</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>"Public shaming encouraged by

leading political figures. Pre-dawn police raids. Federal agencies

targeting groups and individuals because of their political views. It's

hard to believe these things are happening-and taking place with

increasing frequency-in the United States. But they are. And in this

searing indictment of the systematic attempt of the political left to

shut down political debates they cannot win-Kimberly Strassel provides

the often-horrifying details. THE INTIMIDATION GAME is a shocking and

assiduously well-reported chronicle of the illiberal tactics of the new

progressives-and a must-read for anyone who wants to understand American

politics today."?Stephen Hayes</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>"Strassel draws a timely, convincing, and alarming picture of liberal governance and a</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Democratic machine that's eager to bully resistant citizens."?Publishers Weekly</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>"An eye-opening lesson in the

law of unintended consequences: where "a vast new disclosure regime"

intended to curb corruption has spawned a corruption all its

own."?Kirkus Reviews</div>

<div>About the Author</div>

<div>Kimberley Strassel is a

member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, based in Washington.

Since 2007 she has written the "Potomac Watch" column and has worked for

the Wall Street Journal in Brussels, London, and New York. An Oregon

native, Ms. Strassel is a graduate of Princeton University and lives in

Virginia with her three children.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Pre-order The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech for your Kindle today. </div>

<div>

</div>

<div>Hardcover: 416 pages</div>

<div>Publisher: Twelve (June 21, 2016)</div>

<div>Language: English.</div>

</div>

<div>

4. WSJ Op-Ed Claims Finding That Bacon Causes Cancer Is Part Of Climate Change Conspiracy

The Wall Street Journal published a Nov. 9 <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/11/10/wsj-op-ed-claims-bacon-cancer-link-is-part-of-c/206757" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">op-ed</a>, The Climate Agenda Behind the Bacon Scare, which was co-authored by Jeff Stier and Julie Kelly of the oil industry-backed <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=59" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">National Center for Public Policy Research</a> and <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/07/31/media-disclosure-guide-here-are-the-industry-fu/204708#heartland" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Heartland Institute</a>,

respectively. Stier and Kelly asserted that the World Health

Organization’s announcement linking red and processed meats to cancer

“seems particularly well timed” to coincide with the United Nations

climate negotiations in Paris, and baselessly claimed that “[t]he widely

publicized warning about meat isn’t about health. It’s about fighting

global warming.”

</div>

<div></div><div>
</div><div>TAG IMPORT</div><div>
</div><div>
===<p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 25px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">my how the mighty have fallen:<p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1.4; background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll transparent;">Editor's Note: The news last week that <a href="http://tktk.gawker.com/buzzfeed-deleted-posts-under-pressure-from-its-own-busi-1697762873" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll transparent;">Buzzfeed had deleted posts</a> critical

of advertisers got some of us at ProPublica wondering about any

instances when news organizations stood up to advertiser pressure. As it

turns out, ProPublica president Richard Tofel wrote a whole chapter of a

book about one of those cases: In 1954, the Wall Street Journal and its

publisher, Barney Kilgore, confronted General Motors. The

little-remembered incident helped establish the notion that news

organizations could and should preserve their independence from

advertisers.<p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1.4; background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll rgb(255, 255, 255);">Here is an adaptation from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Restless-Genius-Kilgore-Invention-Journalism/dp/B0045EPD0O" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none; background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll transparent;">the book</a>, "Restless Genius: Barney Kilgore, The Wall Street Journal, and the Invention of Modern Journalism."http://www.propublica.org/article/the-time-a-newspaper-stared-down-the-countrys-largest-advertiser

==

There is no death for even the most long-debunked climate myths, especially on the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/09/10/3565758/matt-ridley-error-riddled-wall-street-journal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">pages</a> of

Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal. And the only certainty about

carbon taxes — or indeed any serious climate action — is that the

Journal will try to undercut their moral urgency by giving life to dead

myths.

In the case of the Journal’s Saturday piece, “<a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/climate-science-is-not-settled-1411143565?tesla=y&ref=/home-page" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">Climate Science Is Not Settled</a>,”

we get the umpteenth error-riddled rehash of denier talking points — to

the effect that the remaining uncertainties in climate science

undermine the case for strong action.

The piece is by former BP chief scientist and former Department of Energy official, Steven Koonin,

but this dangerously error-riddled piece is much more BP than DOE — and

its bizarre and unjustified conclusions have already been<a href="http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/09/20/on-eve-of-climate-march-wsj-publishes-call-to-wait-and-do-nothing/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">debunked</a> by leading <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/sep/22/wall-street-journal-downplays-global-warming-risks" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">climate scientists</a>.

In

fact, it has long been known that the reverse is true: Uncertainty is a

major reason climate action is so urgent. Three years ago, a major

climate-assessment study of just the rainfall impacts to this country

conducted by Sandia National Laboratory <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/03/08/207634/sandia-labs-study-uncertainty-climate-change/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">concluded</a>:

“We

want to reemphasize that the methods of this study reveal how

compelling risk derives from uncertainty, not certainty. The greater the

uncertainty, the greater the risk. It is the uncertainty associated

with climate change that validates the need to act protectively and

proactively.”

</blockquote>

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">As a side note, Koonin was in charge of “<a href="http://energy.gov/contributors/steven-e-koonin" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">coordinating and overseeing</a> research across the DOE” when this major scientific report from a DOE lab came out.

Uncertainty

increases the moral necessity of climate action for two main reasons.

First, virtually all the large-scale uncertainty associated with climate

inaction concerns how catastrophic the worst-case scenario is. That’s

because inaction makes the chances of a best-case scenario — tolerable

or manageable impacts — very small.

Climate science <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/14/1009121/science-of-global-warming-impacts-guide/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">makes clear</a> that

“inaction eliminates most of the uncertainty about whether future

warming will be catastrophic.” Worse, inaction introduces the very real

risk that we might render large parts of the currently inhabited and

arable land of the world unfit for human life and/or crops, reducing the

carrying capacity of the planet far below its current level of 7

billion, let alone the 9+ billion people we are projected to have

post-2050.

But

uncertainty at the smaller-scale level is also a key reason we must

act. Critics of climate models like Koonin often note that they aren’t

able to make accurate predictions of local weather. That’s true, and

unfortunately that makes waiting and adapting a far more costly

proposition.

We

know that global warming makes previously rare, city-devastating

deluges increasingly common. We know that devastating deluges of the

kind that have swamped Boulder and Nashville and upstate New York and

Pakistan are becoming more frequent and more intense over time thanks to

climate change. We know the same is true for storm surges like

Superstorm Sandy’s that flattened so much of the New York and New Jersey

coast.

But

we can’t predict exactly where these super storms will strike. So that

means if we don’t spend the money to minimize them from happening

somewhere, we have to spend money preparing for them everywhere. And

that is very, very expensive.

Relatedly, it is a very well known that <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15997972" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">humans dislike uncertainty</a>,

especially uncertainty surrounding the possibility of catastrophic

risks. That’s why we own fire insurance, even though the chances of a

fire are very small. It’s a key reason we own health insurance,

especially catastrophic health insurance. We don’t know who is going to

get catastrophically sick; we only know that if it were to happen to us,

it could easily be a life-ruining, bankruptcy-inducing event.

That’s a key reason uncertainty motivates so much human action.

<p class="photo-caption" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0px 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: italic; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.2em; vertical-align: baseline;">[cartoon resk assess]

</div>

it’s a key reason inaction on climate change is so immoral. It is one

thing to take a potentially catastrophic risk upon yourself — smoking,

eating more and more unhealthy foods — but to impose a potentially

catastrophic risk on billions of people who contributed little or

nothing to the problem is among the most immoral acts imaginable. That’s

particularly true when the prospective damage is irreversible over a

time span of centuries and the cost of even very strong action is <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/09/19/3569692/krugman-imf-global-warming-faster-growth/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">negligible if not zero (or less!)</a>.

Koonin’s

Wall Street Journal piece itself is an embarrassing collection of

errors, denier talking points and hypocrisy. You can find fuller

debunkings by scientists <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/sep/22/wall-street-journal-downplays-global-warming-risks" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">here</a> and <a href="http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/09/20/on-eve-of-climate-march-wsj-publishes-call-to-wait-and-do-nothing/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">here</a>. But a few whoppers are worth highlighting.

Koonin

claims that “the impact today of human activity appears to be

comparable to the intrinsic, natural variability of the climate system

itself.”

No.

Not even close! In fact, the latest report from the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (which Koonin repeatedly mentions but apparently

never read closely) <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/09/27/2691471/ipcc-report-warming-extreme-weather/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">states clearly</a> that the “best estimate is that humans are responsible for all of the warming we have suffered since 1950.”

As Dr. Michael Mann, Director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State, explains in his <a href="http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/09/20/on-eve-of-climate-march-wsj-publishes-call-to-wait-and-do-nothing/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">reply to Koonin</a>:

fact is that the actual peer-reviewed scientific research shows that

(a) the rate of warming over the past century is unprecedented as far

back as the <a href="http://rabett.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-wheelchair.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">20,000 years</a> paleoclimate scientists are able to extend the record and (b) that warming can<a href="http://www.globalchange.gov/browse/multimedia/%EF%BF%BConly-human-influence-can-explain-recent-warming" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">ONLY be</a> explained by human influences.

Indeed, it is the RATE of warming that presents such risk to human civilization and our environment.

</blockquote>

<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Climate scientists Michael Oppenheimer and Kevin Trenberth also <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/sep/22/wall-street-journal-downplays-global-warming-risks" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px none; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: underline;">debunk Koonin</a>,

noting, “Warming is well beyond natural climate variability and

projected rates of change are potentially faster than ecosystems,

farmers and societies can adapt to without major disruptions.”

They

add that Koonin’s main conclusions — that climate science only

justifies increased R&D into renewable energy and “cost-effective”

energy efficiency — “ignore decades of research results.”

Bottom

Line: Although Koonin was technically in charge of overseeing science

at DOE for years, he has chosen to ignore decades of research, including

research done at DOE during his tenure.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/09/22/3570280/wall-street-journal-climate-inaction/

==

Suzanne Somers is still an idiot, and the WSJ prints her error-ridden Obamacare hitjob anyway.

While

Thighmaster spokeswoman Suzanne Somers has matured since her hit TV

show days, her plumpers and politics have pretty much ossified. Her

enlightened take on the Affordable Care Act appeared in the Wall Street

Journal this week, concluding that it’s “a greater Ponzi scheme than

that pulled off by Bernie Madoff.” She wrote 535 hysterical words, in

which Lenin came up in addition to Madoff, on the topic of this dreaded

“socialized medicine.” By the next day, the Journal had published nearly

a fifth as many words in corrections.

But

it did not correct the “Ponzi scheme” assertion, which was based on

flimsy anecdotes about relatives who had bad experiences with Canadian

doctors, and how Somers is hearing on the news that everyone’s premium

is doubling and tripling. (Any guesses as to which so-called news

channel she watches?)

This

piece of rocket science appeared in WSJ’s "The Experts" section, which

bills itself as “an exclusive group of industry, academic and cultural

thought leaders who weigh in on the latest debates.”

This will definitely be our go-to section for expert analysis henceforth.</div>

</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>