Trump Is Definitely Going to Pull the U.S. out of the UN Paris Climate Agreement

Chip Somodevilla/Getty

President Trump is definitely going to pull the U.S. out of the Paris climate agreement, the head of his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team has confirmed.

At a press conference in London – the one where the media delegates’ heads all exploded – Myron Ebell told his appalled audience that Trump would certainly be honouring his campaign promise to pull out of the UN Paris agreement. The fact that incoming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson disagrees with this is, Ebell suggested, an irrelevance.

An apparent contradiction emerged in recent weeks between Trump’s position and that of his incoming secretary of state Rex Tillerson, who said the US will “remain part” of UN climate discussions. When asked about these contrasting positions, Ebell said it is impossible for him to predict the outcome, but “in a disagreement with the president, who do you think will win?”

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Trump, May and The Return of the Anglosphere Will Make the World a Better Place

Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

“If we are together nothing is impossible. If we are divided all will fail.”

That was, of course, Winston Churchill, talking about Britain and the US in his 1943 Harvard Speech. As so often, he was spot on.

Never in modern history have the prosperity, security and stability of the world been more assured than when the two greatest nations of the Anglosphere acted in concert. [I recommend Andrew Roberts’s book on this A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900]

We saw off the Kaiser in 1918; Hitler in 1945; the “Evil Empire” of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s.

Now – after the triumphant meeting of Theresa May and Donald Trump – we are back together again in the greatest affirmation of the Special Relationship since the days of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

President Trump gets it. Prime Minister May gets it. The good guys are back in charge and the world is all the better for it.

I’m talking like this partly because it’s so absolutely guaranteed to annoy the hell out of grisly, unpatriotic lefties like Laura Kuenssberg, the bitter-lemon-tonselled BBC News political editor who tried to sour the mood of the May/Trump love-in with a typically chippy, snobby BBC question pouring scorn on President Trump.

She asked:

Mr President, you’ve said before that torture works, you’ve praised Russia, you’ve said you want to ban some Muslims from coming to America, you’ve suggested there should be punishment for abortion.

“For many people in Britain those sound like alarming beliefs. What do you say to our viewers at home who are worried about some of your views and worried about you becoming the leader of the free world?”

If Trump thought this was representative of the way Britain really thinks, the Special Relationship would have died there and then. But he knows Britain well enough to realise that the BBC is not the voice of Britain, only the voice of a remote, unrepresentative metropolitan liberal-left elite which tried to stand in the way of Brexit and which would have much preferred the raddled, left-wing crook Hillary to have won the US presidential election.

In other words, Trump understands that the BBC is the voice of the losing minority not the winning majority.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Donald Trump Is Going to Make the European Union History

Here’s a perfect example – in which Trump’s prospective new Ambassador to the European Union, Ted Malloch, tells it like it is in an interview with Andrew Neil on the BBC’s Daily Politics show.

Neil asked Malloch why on earth he’d want to be Ambassador to the EU.

AN: I mean you’re clearly not a great fan of Brussels or these bureaucrats like Juncker.

TM: Well, I had in a previous year a diplomatic post where I helped to bring down the Soviet Union, so maybe there’s another union that needs a little taming.

Later, Neil asked Malloch what he thought of the President of the EU Commission.

AN: What do you think of Mr Juncker?

TM: Well Mr Juncker was a very adequate mayor of some city in Luxembourg and maybe he should go back and do that again.

Neil laughed like a man who couldn’t believe his luck. Politicians are hardly ever this frank on TV politics shows. Diplomats even less so because supposedly it’s their job to be discreet, smooth things over, not ruffle feathers. As for the EU – no one of influence, with the exception of Nigel Farage, has ever talked about it so disparagingly on television.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Remember, Mrs May, You’re Prime Minister Not Tess of the D’Urbervilles

There are those – like me – who think that discussions should be used to enhance the Special Relationship and to help fast-track the bilateral trade deals President Trump is so keen to arrange with Britain.

And then there are those, such as this columnist in the Guardian, who appear to believe that Theresa May should spend the time discussing her vagina.

Not literally her vagina, perhaps. But you know what I mean. What this Guardian hack and Channel 4 news and the usual feminazi suspects and rent-a-gob female MPs generally are arguing for is that Theresa May should waste official business time parading her “gender” and trying to score points off the Donald by showing how heartily she disapproves of his alleged misogyny and sexism and locker-room banter.

For a nasty moment earlier this week it looked like Theresa May was actually going to accede to this ludicrous interpretation of her priorities, which seemed to demand that she should consider herself a woman first and the British Prime Minister only second.

Asked in an interview about President Trump’s “misogynistic and racist remarks,” May replied: “I’ve been clear about those areas where I feel some of the comments he has made were unacceptable. The whole point about [a special relationship] is that we can sit down and be very frank with each other about what we think.”

This was over-interpreted by the Mail to produce the headline: “Cut out your sexist insults, Mr President: Theresa May prepared to use first summit to tackle Trump’s abuse of women… as 2 million march in protest.”

Since then, though, May has given every indication that she intends to take a more mature and sensible approach to the encounter.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

The One Where James Smokes Weed with Dave; Gets Told Off for Talking Like Trump

You’ll especially enjoy the bit at the end where I let slip a Trumpian crudity, get told off by Isabel, and am forced to pay for her lunch as a punishment.

Also, you’ll hear the true story of how she persuaded me to go on the record about my youthful drug indiscretions with David Cameron for her unauthorised biography – co-written with Lord Ashcroft – Call Me Dave.

Basically – spoiler alert – it’s because I’m a fan. When she’s on BBC Question Time Oakeshott is one of the very few panellists you can always rely on to talk straight. This is much, much harder than you think: it requires balls of steel and an indifference to what other people think bordering on the autistic.

Everyone at home always thinks they could do better but when you’re sitting there with the cameras and a (usually) hostile audience in front of you, it’s all too tempting to mouth platitudes that will earn you a round of applause. The technical term for this is “virtue-signalling”. It is, of course, disgusting, insincere and makes for extremely dull viewing – but almost everyone does it, politicians especially. (The only politician who never does it is Nigel Farage: telling it exactly like it is is his brand.)

Another of Oakeshott’s strengths is that she rarely displays any obvious urge to suck up to the Establishment. I shan’t name names but I’ve never failed to be mildly nauseated by the way so many of my journalistic contemporaries have trimmed their sails over the years, according to whichever bunch of shysters happen to be holding the reins of power. It’s understandable, I suppose, for journalists – political ones especially – to want simultaneously to feel part of the Inner Circle and not sound too remote from the prevailing political fashions. But it makes for damn dull journalism; dishonest, compromised journalism too.

Oakeshott doesn’t believe in career safety. It was a tremendous risk, you could argue, for her to team up with David Cameron’s avowed antagonist Lord Ashcroft to write an unauthorised biography at a time when Cameron was still a figure of some significance and expected to crown what was then thought to be a successful Prime Ministerial career by winning the EU Referendum for the Remain camp.

But she clearly prefers to be with the bad boys and the troublemakers, such as Farage’s mate and backer Arron Banks – with whom she recently co-wrote The Bad Boys of Brexit.

Despite Trump, despite Brexit, the liberal elite of the old Establishment is still very powerful – and more than capable of sabotaging the populist revolution that has made 2016 such a good year for most of us in this parish.

I’m still by no means convinced, for example, that the current British government can really be trusted to do the right thing with so many Remainers – including the Prime Minister Theresa May, and the Chancellor Philip Hammond – in the cabinet.

Entrenched Establishments will go to any lengths to protect their privilege as we saw in the immediate aftermath of Brexit when the Remain camp recovered its grip far more quickly than the Leave faction did – as it showed by sticking the knife into the Brexiteers’ main surviving prime ministerial candidate Andrea Leadsom with a ruthlessness I still find gobsmacking.

We discuss this in the podcast – Oakeshott feels as strongly about this one as I do. Yes, you could argue that the Brexiteers brought disaster on themselves as a result of the Blue-on-Blue action when Michael Gove took Boris Johnson and, as a consequence, himself out of the race.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Theresa May’s Government Is Still Lying About Wind Energy

For a brief moment – a very brief moment – it looked as if Britain had finally acquired a Prime Minister with the gumption to take on the troughers and con artists of the renewable industry and restore some common sense to our energy economy.

One of the first things Theresa May did on entering Number 10 was to abolish the – entirely unnecessary – Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC); then she appeared to be considering nixing the overpriced and already outdated Hinkley Point C project; then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid made some very positive noises about fracking. All these offered encouraging auguries of even better things to come.

Sadly, it is not to be.

Theresa May is now showing every sign of being almost as deluded, cowardly, and dishonest as her thoroughly useless predecessor Dave “Husky Hugger” Cameron. One of her senior advisers Nick Timothy is known to be sceptical on green energy – he described the Climate Change Act as a “monstrous act of self harm”.

Consider this report on the levelised costs of UK electricity from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This is the department that absorbed DECC and – in the process, clearly – its army of green zealot civil servants.

If you believe the report, something truly amazing has happened to the bat-chomping, bird-slicing, taxpayer-indulged atrocity that is Britain’s onshore wind industry.

Apparently, it is now producing Britain’s cheapest electricity – cheaper, even than gas power.

image_thumb72

You have to read the small print – as Paul Homewood has done – to realise what a corrupt artefact this is.

The only reason that subsidised, overpriced, environmentally destructive onshore wind works out cheaper is because whichever shyster compiled this faux-economic pile of greenie propaganda has tacked on something called “carbon costs” – and randomly ascribed it a value which suddenly makes cheap, reliable fossil fuel like gas look super expensive.

See for yourself:

image_thumb73

And the dishonesty doesn’t end there. After all, if you’re going to price for externalities like “carbon costs”, then surely it only makes sense to price for countervailing externalities like “avian fauna sliced and diced”, “property values blighted”, “grid destabilised”, “countryside ruined by extra pylons”, “diesel generators kept on standby”, “pensioners dying in fuel poverty” and so on. If those were added, onshore wind energy would look like the environmentally disastrous, economically suicide con trick it actually is.

Remember, this nonsense comes straight from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Theresa May’s Government Is Still Lying About Wind Energy

One of the first things Theresa May did on entering Number 10 was to abolish the – entirely unnecessary – Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC); then she appeared to be considering nixing the overpriced and already outdated Hinkley Point C project; then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid made some very positive noises about fracking. All these offered encouraging auguries of even better things to come.

Sadly, it is not to be.

Theresa May is now showing every sign of being almost as deluded, cowardly, and dishonest as her thoroughly useless predecessor Dave “Husky Hugger” Cameron. One of her senior advisers Nick Timothy is known to be sceptical on green energy – he described the Climate Change Act as a “monstrous act of self harm”.

Consider this report on the levelised costs of UK electricity from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This is the department that absorbed DECC and – in the process, clearly – its army of green zealot civil servants.

If you believe the report, something truly amazing has happened to the bat-chomping, bird-slicing, taxpayer-indulged atrocity that is Britain’s onshore wind industry.

Apparently, it is now producing Britain’s cheapest electricity – cheaper, even than gas power.

image_thumb72

You have to read the small print – as Paul Homewood has done – to realise what a corrupt artefact this is.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

No, Donald Trump Hasn’t Suddenly Gone Soft on ‘Global Warming’

“In shift, Donald Trump says humans may be causing global warming,” says PBS.

According to The Washington Post, meanwhile:

President-elect Donald Trump appears to be softening his tone on whether climate change is real and on his stated plans to scrap the recent multinational agreement to limit carbon emissions.

The name for this nonsense is “fake news” – as becomes clear when you read the transcripts of what President-Elect Trump actually said at his meeting with The New York Times.

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, opinion columnist: But it’s really important to me, and I think to a lot of our readers, to know where you’re going to go with this. I don’t think anyone objects to, you know, doing all forms of energy. But are you going to take America out of the world’s lead of confronting climate change?

TRUMP: I’m looking at it very closely, Tom. I’ll tell you what. I have an open mind to it. We’re going to look very carefully. It’s one issue that’s interesting because there are few things where there’s more division than climate change. You don’t tend to hear this, but there are people on the other side of that issue who are, think, don’t even …

ARTHUR SULZBERGER Jr., publisher of The New York Times: We do hear it.

So at this point, Trump is gently introducing the NYT‘s liberals to the concept that not everyone thinks the same way on climate change as they do.

Let’s carry on, shall we?

FRIEDMAN: I was on ‘Squawk Box’ with Joe Kernen this morning, so I got an earful of it.

[laughter]

TRUMP: Joe is one of them. But a lot of smart people disagree with you. I have a very open mind. And I’m going to study a lot of the things that happened on it and we’re going to look at it very carefully. But I have an open mind.

SULZBERGER: Well, since we’re living on an island, sir, I want to thank you for having an open mind. We saw what these storms are now doing, right? We’ve seen it personally. Straight up.

FRIEDMAN: But you have an open mind on this?

TRUMP: I do have an open mind. And we’ve had storms always, Arthur.

SULZBERGER: Not like this.

TRUMP: You know the hottest day ever was in 1890-something, 98. You know, you can make lots of cases for different views. I have a totally open mind.

My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know. I know we have, they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists. Where was that, in Geneva or wherever five years ago? Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind. I will tell you this: Clean air is vitally important. Clean water, crystal clean water is vitally important. Safety is vitally important.

And you know, you mentioned a lot of the courses. I have some great, great, very successful golf courses. I’ve received so many environmental awards for the way I’ve done, you know. I’ve done a tremendous amount of work where I’ve received tremendous numbers. Sometimes I’ll say I’m actually an environmentalist and people will smile in some cases and other people that know me understand that’s true. Open mind.

Trump, it is obvious to anyone with half a brain, is taking the piss.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Trump at NASA: Hasta la Vista Climate Fraud and Muslim Outreach…

NASA’s top climate scientist Gavin Schmidt has warned President-Elect Donald Trump that the planet just won’t stand for having a fully-fledged climate denier in the White House.

Good luck with that one, Gavin. Or “Toast” as we’ll shortly be calling you…

Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), told the Independent:

“The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”

Unfortunately, Schmidt doesn’t feel so strongly on the issue that he is prepared to offer his resignation:

Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial, Dr Schmidt said this was “an interesting question”. It would not cause him to quit “in and of itself”, he said.

“Government science and things generally go on regardless of the political views of the people at the top,” Dr Schmidt said. “The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way or asked not to talk about your results. Those would be much more serious issues.”

Schmidt’s principled position on skewing results is somewhat ironic given that skewing results is what he does best.

Last year a German professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert – a retired geologist and data computation expert – accused NASA GISS of having tampered with the raw data so extensively that it had effectively “invented” global warming.

As I reported at Breitbart:

He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

Ewert listed some of the trickery employed by Schmidt and his egregious predecessor James “Death Trains” Hansen to exaggerate the appearance of “global warming”.

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

This chart, comparing the satellite temperature records with Schmidt’s adjusted version, gives you an idea of the scale of the climate fraud being committed by NASA GISS.

Screen-Shot-2016-11-16-at-10.17.48-PM-768x577

Among Schmidt’s many outrageous adjustments are the ones he made to Iceland’s temperature data sets.

You can see – courtesy of Paul Homewood – what he did to the one at Reykjavik:

station-6

So long and slippery are Gavin’s tentacles that, it would appear, he has somehow persuaded the Iceland Met Office to accept these adjustments, where previously it had rebutted them. You can read the full story at Real Climate Science.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Milo: Well, Would YOU Let This Dangerous Radical Near Your Vulnerable Schoolchildren?

Milo Yiannopoulos has been banned from speaking at his old school, Simon Langton grammar in Kent.

Not by the teachers –  who were naturally eager to hear his views on Donald Trump, free speech and the alt right (quite topical at the moment…). Not by the children, more than 200 of whom had already signed up to hear his talk. But by a hitherto unknown section of Britain’s Department of Education called the “counter-extremism task force.”

So secretive is this “counter-extremism task force” that it is now denying responsibility for the ban which it effected.

Here’s the weaselly statement issued by the Department of Education:

When concerns are raised by members of the public following media coverage in advance of an event, the department would contact the school as a matter of routine to check they had considered any potential issues. The decision to cancel the event was a matter for the school.

Hmm. That isn’t what the teachers are saying. They wanted Milo to come, apparently, but were overruled by this mystery section of a government ministry which presumably – to judge by its name – was established mainly to protect children from dangerous terrorists.

It’s true that Milo does advertise himself as “dangerous”. But he is using the term ironically in order to mock the hypocrisy and hysteria of the regressive left – and its ludicrous belief that anyone who doesn’t share its political outlook must therefore be a fascist and a menace to society.

The real problem the liberal-left has with Milo – and I entirely understand this fear – is that he is so eloquent, charming, well-informed and articulate. They cannot rebut his arguments so instead they demonise him.

His recent encounter with Channel 4 newsreader Cathy Newman is a case in point. For the last few days, Cathy – an ardent feminist – has been crowing about all the tweets she has been sent congratulating her on having performed so well against this terrible person.

Here are some examples:

Read the rest at Breitbart.