Month: December 2019

Authored by Jake Johnson via CommonDreams.org,

Bolstered by strong support from people of color and younger voters, Sen. Bernie Sanders is in a close second place behind former Vice President Joe Biden in the 2020 Democratic primary race, according to a new national poll published Monday morning.

The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey (pdf) found that Biden is leading the race at 24% support, followed by Sanders at 22%, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) at 17%, and South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 13%. No other Democratic presidential candidate broke the 10% mark. Except you wouldn’t know it by CNN and other major outlets’ continued Bernie “coverage”:

“We’re looking for late action, because it’s so fluid,” Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, said of the primary race.

“I think we’re looking at the last surge” for who could come out on top, Miringoff added.

According to the new poll, Sanders leads the Democratic presidential field among non-white voters (29% over Biden’s 26%), voters under the age of 45 (37% to Warren’s 18% and Biden’s 14%), and progressives (29% to Warren’s 23% and Biden’s 17%).

The Vermont senator’s lead among people of color “might be because of Sanders’ strength with younger voters of color and Latinos,” NPR reported Monday.

This portion of the poll was based on a survey of 704 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents conducted from December 9 to 11. The margin of error is 5.4 percentage points.

The national poll is the latest of a number of strong polls for Sanders, which the senator’s campaign and supporters have highlighted as evidence of a surge with less than two months to go until the 2020 Iowa caucuses.

Sure CBS knows there is a number between 17 and 12. As well as a candidate. pic.twitter.com/3gfifa7a92

— Zaid Jilani (@ZaidJilani) December 12, 2019

In an op-ed for the New York Times last week, scholar and activist Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor attributed Sanders’ strength in the 2020 Democratic primary to his ability to activate a “multiracial working class” coalition with his bold economic policies.

“Mr. Sanders has reached the typically invisible, downwardly mobile working class with his language of ‘class warfare,'” Taylor wrote. “He has tapped into the anger and bitterness coursing through the lives of regular people.”

* * *

The “Bernie Blackout” continues…

After spending much of the past year crisscrossing the globe in the luxury of a state of the art racing yacht while skipping school, spreading the gospel of the climate virtuous, shaming adults who aren’t doing enough to halt global warming by threatening to “put them against the wall”,  and boosting the popularity of her fame-starved opera singing mother while doing the bidding of her eco-friendly QE starved enablers, Greta Thunberg can’t even get a decent ride home.

At least, that’s the narrative Greta wanted the world to believe when the “activist” Tweeted out on Saturday that, on her way home from the UN Climate conference, she was confined to traveling on an overcrowded train through Germany.

How dare the Germans subject Greta to such conditions: to memorialize her predicament, she tweeted a photo of herself, sitting on the floor, looking forlorn and sad like the young, innocent calf inside the crowded cattle car, headed for slaughter. Because, the fight against the evils of climate change knows no bounds. The struggle is real.

Traveling on overcrowded trains through Germany. And I’m finally on my way home! pic.twitter.com/ssfLCPsR8o

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) December 14, 2019

Except when it isn’t. 

Spoiling the latest installment in Greta’s carefully crafted “martyr” narrative, Deutsche Bahn – Germany’s state railway company – chimed in and reminded Thunberg and her millions of followers, that she actually had a seat in First Class. 

The company Tweeted: “Dear #Greta, thank you for supporting our railway in the fight against climate change! We are happy that you travelled with us in the ICE 174. And that with 100 percent eco electricity. It would have been even better if you had also mentioned how friendly and competent the team looked after you in your seat in First Class.” 

Noch schöner wäre es gewesen, wenn Du zusätzlich auch berichtet hättest, wie freundlich und kompetent Du von unserem Team an Deinem Sitzplatz in der Ersten Klasse betreut worden bist. #Greta 2/2

— Deutsche Bahn AG (@DB_Presse) December 15, 2019

Ouch… German Rail responding to Greta tweet: “Thank you for travelling with Deutsche Bahn… It would have been nice had you acknowledged how well and competently our team treated you in your First Class seat.” … 🍿🍿🍿 pic.twitter.com/hVInNJAZ5H

— Peter R. Neumann (@PeterRNeumann) December 15, 2019

Like a deer in headlights, Greta was immediately forced to clarify that the world wasn’t quite as evil and hostile as she had represented it, admitting she had only been on the floor for part of her journey, “and that overcrowded trains were in fact a great sign because that means that the demand for train travel is high!”

Our train from Basel was taken out of traffic. So we sat on the floor on 2 different trains. After Göttingen I got a seat.This is no problem of course and I never said it was. Overcrowded trains is a great sign because it means the demand for train travel is high!

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) December 15, 2019

The bizarre standoff caused a Twitterstorm, with Greta’s supporters wishing her safe travels and lashing out at DB, while her critics jeered.

who calls himself a climate activist has to live with it like everyone else. There is no bonus for a Greta Thunberg. In addition, she has too much luggage for a climate protector as well as fast food

— Karin True (@KarinTrue) December 15, 2019

The railway company stated that Greta traveled in first class. Stop pretending to be a poor, humble laborer, you are just a bored (very smart tbh) MILLIONAIRE. https://t.co/r2KeXAgwFT

— Emilio Porcel López (@PorcelEmilio) December 15, 2019

Oh, so Sorry, overcrowded trains are essential to reduce #CO2 Output.😎
Double trains, double CO2🙏
Go to school, you‘ll learn the easy math 👍

— Hoerby 🇩🇪 🇪🇺 (@hmger_hoerby) December 14, 2019

To be sure, Greta’s stunt had been tried before. Three years ago, Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the UK Labour Party who was crushed by Boris Johnson and the Conservatives last week, claimed that the train he was travelling on was overcrowded and was shown sitting on the floor of the carriage, making a political point about alleged under-funding and mismanagement of the British railways, arguing they needed to be re-nationalized.

Yet later he was found to have passed through an almost empty carriage, where he could have chosen a comfortable seat with a view and a table if he had so wished, before he made the video on the floor of the corridor instead.

So there you have it, just a simple misunderstanding for Thunberg who was returning to her native Sweden after spending much of 2019 traveling from country to country to lecture adults on climate change. Her carbon-neutral journey across the Atlantic ocean in August (in a multimillion euro racing yacht), her speech before UN leaders in New York the following month, and her protest marches outside the COP25 climate summit in Madrid in recent weeks all captured headlines and earned her Time Magazine’s ‘Person of the Year.’

Meanwhile, Greta’s failure to criticize the world’s biggest CO2 emitter, China, her lack of solutions to the world’s climate woes and her insistence on using apocalyptic imagery have earned her the scorn of not just fossil fuel fans, but scientists too,  who say her movement hampers realistic debate on the issues, while prompting questions about who’s actually “ruining her childhood.”

Authored by Nick Cunningham via OilPrice.com,

The flaring and venting of natural gas in the U.S. continues to soar, reaching new record highs in recent months.

The volume of gas that was burned or simply released into the atmosphere by oil and gas drillers reached 1.28 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in 2018, according to the EIA, up from 0.772 Bcf/d in 2017.

The practice is a disaster on many levels. It is wasteful, it worsens air quality and it exacerbates climate change. Venting gas is much worse than burning it since it releases methane into the atmosphere, a potent greenhouse gas.

The New York Times documented several “super emitters” in the Permian, using infrared cameras to visually capture the epidemic. The NYT even recorded an oil worker walking into an invisible plume of leaking methane.  

But shale drillers continue the practice and regulators have shown little interest in regulating them. Even though venting is off limits in North Dakota and restricted in Texas, flaring has largely gone unchecked while methane leaks at virtually every stage of the extraction process.

In the third quarter of 2019, the Permian basin alone vented and flared 752 million cubic feet of natural gas per day, up sharply from 661 mcf/d in the first quarter, according to Rystad Energy. “This represents a new all-time high. Oil production in the Permian Basin is growing at an accelerated pace again, and we observe high, sustained levels of flaring and venting of associated gas in the basin,” Artem Abramov, head of shale research at Rystad, said in November.

Some oil companies trumpet their reduced rate of flaring, but others have flared at higher rates.

“A significant number of operators have exhibited a clear downwards shift in flaring intensity in 2019. Yet there are other examples of a recent increase in flaring intensity, which are primarily represented by some operators active in the Eastern Midland Basin,” Abramov said.

“It’s a black eye for the Permian basin,” Pioneer Natural Resources Chief Executive Officer Scott Sheffield said earlier this year. “The state, the pipeline companies and the producers — we all need to come together to figure out a way to stop the flaring.”

One thing that could be done would be for the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the industry in the state, to deny permits to companies that allow them to flare. But the Railroad Commission has not denied a single request from an oil producer for a flaring permit in years, despite the spike in flaring. The number of permits granted has shot up from around 500 in 2010 to 5,500 in 2018, according to the EIA. There is essentially no cop on the beat.

Earthworks, an environmental group, has extensively documented methane leaks from oil and gas operations, and has filed over 103 complaints with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. “Our field research and complaints of oil and gas operations are doing the job that Texas regulators ought to be doing to protect the public,” Earthworks’ Senior Policy Counsel Aaron Mintzes said in a statement.

The situation reached absurd levels a few months ago when the Texas Railroad Commission approved a company’s request to flare even though the company had pipeline access readily available. One of the main reasons that flaring has reached astronomical levels is because pipeline capacity has not kept up with the surge in gas production. Because the industry is really chasing oil, all of the gas is surplus. And because there is nowhere to put it, they flare it.

That’s the argument anyways. But Williams Cos., a pipeline giant, is suing the Texas Railroad Commission over the agency’s recent decision to grant a flaring permit to Exco Operating Co. Exco has wells in the Eagle Ford that are already connected to a pipeline, but Exco balked at paying the fees. Instead, it just wanted to burn the gas. It’s worth reemphasizing this – the company doesn’t actually need to flare the gas for any technical reason, it just doesn’t want to pay to ship it.

The Railroad Commission granted the permit. Now, Williams Cos. is suing the commission for failing to uphold the state’s own regulations on flaring.

Coming under fire, the Railroad Commission has sought to defend itself. “That’s a very unique case that we almost never see,” Ryan Sitton, a Republican commissioner at the agency, said on Bloomberg Television Thursday, referring to the Exco case. “All we did was grant a permit for seven months to allow the producer to continue to flare while we try to work this out.” Bloomberg notes that the Railroad Commission has issued around 7,000 permits this year, allowing companies to vent or flare.

“At the end of the day, you’ve got 27 million Texans, and what they want is affordable, reliable energy,” Sitton said.

“And they want our energy industry to do well.”

Meanwhile, natural gas is often likened to a “bridge fuel,” but it is now the main driver of higher greenhouse gas emissions globally. “Gas is a major concern,” Bill Hare, chief executive officer of Climate Analytics, told Bloomberg. “Governments are acting as if this fossil fuel is somehow clean. Yet gas was responsible for half the increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption in 2017-18.”

In his first comments to the press in more than a year, and first sit-down interview since settling civil cases filed against him and his bankrupt film studio by more than 30 women, disgraced media mogul, former Democratic fundraiser and living embodiment of misogyny Harvey Weinstein admitted a reporter from the New York Post to his hospital room for a lengthy interview consisting – from what we can tell – of mostly softball questions seemingly angled to help rehabilitate Weinstein’s image, according to Page Six.

Just like he tried to communicate when he first surrendered to police last spring, Weinstein expounded during the interview that he has been wrongfully pilloried by a gang of opportunists and zealots, and as a result, the world has forgotten all of his efforts to help advance the careers of women in Hollywood.

Though his name will likely live in infamy, Weinstein says that he feels like “the forgotten man.”

“I feel like the forgotten man,” the 67-year-old alleged rapist griped last week.

“I made more movies directed by women and about women than any filmmaker, and I’m talking about 30 years ago. I’m not talking about now when it’s vogue. I did it first! I pioneered it!” he bragged.

“It all got eviscerated because of what happened,” Weinstein said bitterly. “My work has been forgotten.”

The interview took place while Weinstein was convalescing from a spinal surgery, an obvious attempt to try and shore up the claims of failing health that his lawyers have employed during his endless legal battles. Weinstein refused to discuss the allegations against him, seemingly the only thing that any reporter would want to discuss with Weinstein.

Weinstein insisted that “this was a major operation,” and that his health issues are no joke. Weinstein lamented the fact that it’s now impossible for him to go out in public in NYC because the city has lost sight of “who I was.” A recent incident in a nightclub reminded all of us just how radioactive he is (hell, the female comic who verbally attacked him got a nice little career bump from the ordeal).

“I want this city to recognize who I was instead of what I’ve become,” he added, wearing a pair of loose blue jeans, black T-shirt and a tube draining blood from his bandaged incision into a container hung from his walker.

For most of the interview, it seems, Weinstein rambled about Gwyneth Paltrow (who accused him of calling her to his room when she was 22 and trying to corner her into giving him a “massage”). He claimed to have gotten Paltrow enormous sums for movies, sums that often eclipsed the payouts of her male co-stars. He even claimed that Paltrow became “the highest-paid female actor in an independent film. Higher paid than all the men,” because of him.

One of the women who has alleged harassment but is not part of the settlement is Paltrow, who won an Oscar for Miramax’s 1999 “Shakespeare in Love.’’ She has said Weinstein lured her to his hotel room under the guise of a business meeting and tried to massage her in 1994, when she was 22.

“Gwyneth Paltrow in 2003 got $10 million to make a movie called ‘View from the Top,'” Weinstein said, referring to the romantic comedy and his decision to pay the star the hefty sum while he was at the helm of Miramax.

“She was the highest-paid female actor in an independent film. Higher paid than all the men,” he crowed.

Weinstein also defended Miramax and the Weinstein company’s record of releasing films with progressive messages, like 2005’s “Transamerica.”

The Weinstein Company released “Transamerica” in 2005, although Huffman didn’t win the Oscar.

He also rattled off countless other films that Miramax and The Weinstein Company produced or distributed with social-justice agendas.

“This was a company that took social issues and tackled them,” he said.

It wasn’t just the movie industry where he said he flexed his humanitarian muscle.

He also spent time bragging about his charity work.

After 9/11, he helped produce a charity concert that raised $100 million for first responders through the Robin Hood Foundation, he said. He resigned from the foundation’s board in 2017 after the misconduct allegations surfaced.

Weinstein remained the characteristic bully throughout The Post interview, threatening to terminate the sit-down each time a question was posed that he didn’t like.

When asked if he felt that the torrent of disturbing allegations against him had canceled out his charitable deeds and perhaps left him in the karmic red, he snapped, “I’ll move on.”

In what appears to be a rare bout of honesty, Weinstein copped to trying to tamper with his ankle monitor.

Weinstein did challenge recent assertions by Manhattan prosecutor Joan Illuzzi-Orbon that he tampered with his ankle monitor to hide his whereabouts.

“I think they wanted to embarrass me,” he claimed.

His monitoring device includes a slim ankle bracelet and a signaling component, which is the size of a cell phone.

The signaling device was docked in a black box, which looks like a phone receiver, by his hospital bed during the interview.

Finally, the NY Post’s interview ended with a comment from Weinstein reminding the public that he is a self-made man who climbed his way to the top of the Hollywood latter through sheer force of will.

“I made a success out of myself. I had no money, and I built quite an empire with Miramax and decided to give back,” Weinstein said, referring to his modest upbringing in Flushing, Queens, and his charity work.

“If you remember who I was then, you might want to question some of this.”

Weinstein was discharged from the hospital Sunday morning.

Accompanying the interview was a series of photos showing Weinstein with a walker in his hospital room – an obvious sympathy play (click here if you want to see them). Given the soft-ball tone of the interview, we can’t help but wonder: Did Rupert Murdoch (owner of the NY Post) owe Weinstein some kind of favor?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,

The Democrats have made the weakest case for impeachment since Andrew Johnson in 1868.

Stocking Stuffer

A quick check shows the Democrat impeachment stocking is stuffed with nothing. It’s the weakest case since 1868.

Honey, We Shrunk the Impeachment

Please consider the Incredible Shrinking Impeachment.

So that’s it? That’s all there is? After all the talk of obstruction of justice, collusion with Russia, bribery, extortion, profiting from the Presidency, and more, House Democrats have reduced their articles of impeachment against President Trump to two: abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Honey, we shrunk the impeachment.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee will vote as early as Thursday on the text of the two articles they unveiled Tuesday, and then they will rush it to the floor next week. It’s enough to suspect that Democrats understand they are offering the weakest case for impeachment since Andrew Johnson, that the public isn’t convinced, and so they simply want to get it over with.

Whatever happened to bribery and extortion? Democrats have retreated instead to charge “abuse of power,” a phrase general enough for anything Congress wants to stuff into it. [Mish Comment: That’s what inspired my Christmas stocking idea.]

They don’t even pretend any more to prove a quid pro quo. Instead they assert that Mr. Trump, in his phone call with Ukraine’s president, “solicited the interference of a foreign government” in the 2020 election “in pursuit of personal political benefit.” They also assert that this “compromised the national security of the United States and undermined the integrity of the United States democratic process.”

Their problem is that Mr. Trump didn’t withhold military aid to Ukraine, and even if he had he would have merely been returning to Barack Obama’s policy of denying lethal aid. How would that have jeopardized national security?

The second Democratic article is weaker in that it amounts to impeaching Mr. Trump because he is resisting their subpoenas. “Without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices and officials not to comply with those subpoenas,” the article charges.

His lawful cause is defending his presidential powers under the Constitution. Every modern President has to some extent or another resisted Congressional or special-counsel subpoenas. Nixon and Mr. Clinton did until they lost at the Supreme Court. House Democrats are refusing even to fight in court, claiming impeachment gives them plenary power to see all documents and any witnesses they want.

This ignores that the Constitution stipulates co-equal branches that each have the right to defend their powers. If Democrats are right in their claim, then every President essentially works for Congress. We should skip elections and let Congress choose the President.

Democrats also claim the emergency of time, and as usual Rep. Adam Schiff puts this case in the least credible way. “The argument ‘why don’t you just wait?’ amounts to this: Why don’t you just let [Mr. Trump] cheat in one more election? Why not let him cheat just one more time?,” Mr. Schiff told the press as the articles were unveiled.

Sorry, Pathetic Witch Hunt

What a sorry, pathetic joke of a witch hunt this turned out to be.

Bribery charges – MIA.

Extortion – MIA.

Dear Democrats, if you are going to present charges, at least present them in a way the general public can understand.

Instead, Democrats want to impeach Trump on the grounds he might do something deserving of impeachment if he gets reelected.

Why This?

Who knows? Certainly not me.

But I do know a pathetically weak case when I see one.

There is no way the Senate will convict on these ridiculous charges.

Democrats Up in Arms

The New York Times reports McConnell, Coordinating With White House, Lays Plans for Impeachment Trial

Mr. Trump said on Friday that he had no preference for how the trial — expected to begin in early January — unfolds, but he has privately pushed for a prolonged process that would allow him to mount a theatrical defense. Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, has resisted that idea in favor of a shorter, more dignified event.

Outraged Democrats, meanwhile, accused Mr. McConnell on Friday of abandoning his duty to render “impartial justice” in an impeachment trial — a response to a television interview in which Mr. McConnell dismissed House Democrats’ articles of impeachment as “so darn weak.” He added that he was “taking my cues” from the White House in shaping the trial.

No Trial?

There may not even be a trial.

The Senate can choose to to not even hear the case.

Unless there are 51 Senators willing to take the case, the process dies.

Monkey Trial?

If the Senate takes the case, it could easily morph into trial of Hunter Biden or other Democrats.

Trump wants theatrics. McConnell may or may not go along. Ultimately, McConnell will do whatever he thinks is best for Republicans, not just Trump.

But also look at it this way: If you make a mockery of the impeachment process by presenting amazingly weak charges, then expect a trial of the monkeys presenting the charges.

One does not have to like Trump to see what a farce this turned out to be. A majority of the US does not support this process.

And if all the Democrats can mount are these feeble charges, then expect the whole process to backfire on the Democrats.

English football club Arsenal is feeling the same heat from China that spurred a major controversy for the NBA just months ago, after a well known Arsenal player made comments critical of the nation.

Arsenal player Mesut Ozil recently made comments critical of the treatment of the Uighur minority in China on social media, according to Bloomberg. On Twitter and Instagram, Ozil accused Muslims of staying quiet over the mistreatment of the Uighurs, making himself one of the most public figures to condemn China for their actions. 

#HayırlıCumalarDoğuTürkistan 🙏🏼 pic.twitter.com/dJgeK4KSIk

— Mesut Özil (@MesutOzil1088) December 13, 2019

“Korans are burned. Mosques are closed. Their schools are banned, but the Muslim community is silent,” Ozil said.

The club immediately tried to distance itself from Ozil’s comments with a post on Chinese platform Weibo, saying:

“The content published is all Ozil’s personal opinion. Arsenal, as a football club, has always adhered to the principle of not involving itself in politics.”

But that wasn’t enough. 

In response, China pulled a live broadcast of an Arsenal match against Manchester City off the air. This was despite the club’s best efforts to disassociate itself from the remarks. China instead aired a prerecorded game of Arsenal’s cross-town rivals Tottenham Hotspur beating Wolves. 

Not unlike the NBA controversy, the comments highlight the risks of upsetting the Chinese government. Citizens on social media have also been “swift” in critiquing companies and individuals who “cross the line” when it comes to China’s policies. 

China’s foreign ministry said on Monday that Ozil “seems to have been blinded by some fake news.”

Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said at a briefing in Beijing:

“What he is not aware of is that the Chinese government protects its citizens’ rights of religious belief, including the Uighur people. He doesn’t know that the measures taken by the Chinese government to counter terrorism have been endorsed and supported by the local people.”

The topic was no longer trending in China on Monday, with Bloomberg predicting this could be a result of web censors discouraging Uighur-related discussion.

Recall, China blacked out some NBA games in October after the Houston Rockets’ owner Tweeted support for protesters in Hong Kong. The NBA’s sponsors in the country cut ties with the league, despite the Rockets’ response, which mirrored that of Arsenal. 

And its not just sports teams that have come under fire. Recently, retailers like Christian Dior and Dolce & Gabbana have also faced backlash from China over “moves perceived to run afoul of local political sensitivities”.