• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dem AG Targets 90 Conservative Groups in Climate Change Racketeering Suit

B

bubbabgone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
37,003
Reaction score
17,942
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In a subpoena issued in March, the office of USVI attorney general Claude Walker demanded from Exxon Mobil copies of communications between the oil company and 90 different political and policy organizations “and any other organizations engaged in research or advocacy concerning Climate Change or policies.”
The subpoena was part of a national, coordinated legal campaign by state attorneys general and left-wing advocacy groups to use the legal system against companies and organizations that disagree with and advocate against Democratic policies to address global climate change.
Click to expand...

Conservative Groups Targeted in Climate Change Racketeering Suit

When the IPCC projections don't pan out you have to try to keep people from mentioning it.
 
joG said:
That is quite a liberal take on the Constitution..
Click to expand...

No, just an unexpected application of racketeering law.
 
Deuce said:
No, just an unexpected application of racketeering law.
Click to expand...

It might be an interesting approach to politics to subpoena every organization holding opinions to present their proof. At least that would put an end to most social programs, if voters are rational.
 
joG said:
It might be an interesting approach to politics to subpoena every organization holding opinions to present their proof. At least that would put an end to most social programs, if voters are rational.
Click to expand...

I am unsure why you think that would put an end to most social programs.
 
Deuce said:
I am unsure why you think that would put an end to most social programs.
Click to expand...

Because viewed rationally, they are inefficient.
 
Deuce said:
No, just an unexpected application of racketeering law.
Click to expand...

More like the supression of free thought. Unless global warming is a law...is it?
 
joG said:
Because viewed rationally, they are inefficient.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't eliminate the need for having them.

Our military is inefficient, but I think we should still have one.
 
apdst said:
More like the supression of free thought. Unless global warming is a law...is it?
Click to expand...

Funny, I can't find anything in racketeering laws that make it criminal to think.

Also, the earth's climate is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US congress so is unlikely to feel the need to adhere to legislative requirements.
 
Deuce said:
Funny, I can't find anything in racketeering laws that make it criminal to think.

Also, the earth's climate is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US congress so is unlikely to feel the need to adhere to legislative requirements.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, which means it isn't a crime to disagree with the global warming theory.
 
Deuce said:
But that doesn't eliminate the need for having them.

Our military is inefficient, but I think we should still have one.
Click to expand...

I am sorry. I put it sloppily. It is inefficient for government ie a public entity to produce most social programs. This is because they are private goods and not like the military public ones.
 
Last edited:
bubbabgone said:
Conservative Groups Targeted in Climate Change Racketeering Suit

When the IPCC projections don't pan out you have to try to keep people from mentioning it.
Click to expand...

The inquisition of non-believers has begun!

  • Punishing Climate-Change Skeptics - Some in Washington want to unleash government to harass heretics who don’t accept the ‘consensus.’
    Galileo Galilei was tried in 1633 for spreading the heretical view that the Earth orbits the sun, convicted by the Roman Catholic Inquisition, and remained under house arrest until his death. Today’s inquisitors seek their quarry’s imprisonment and financial ruin. As the scientific case for a climate-change catastrophe wanes, proponents of big-ticket climate policies are increasingly focused on punishing dissent from an asserted “consensus” view that the only way to address global warming is to restructure society—how it harnesses and uses energy. That we might muddle through a couple degrees’ of global warming over decades or even centuries, without any major disruption, is the new heresy and must be suppressed.

    The Climate Inquisition began with Michael Mann’s 2012 lawsuit against critics of his “hockey stick” research—a holy text to climate alarmists. The suggestion that Prof. Mann’s famous diagram showing rapid recent warming was an artifact of his statistical methods, rather than an accurate representation of historical reality, was too much for the Penn State climatologist and his acolytes to bear.
    .
  • The Climate Change Inquisition
    Speaking out against conventional wisdom is dangerous. Throughout history, few crimes have been more severely punished than heresy. We’d like to believe that, in this more enlightened age, we’ve left behind barbaric practices like the Inquisition. We laugh at the ignorance of the small minds who punished Galileo and Socrates for pursuing unpopular truths. But the Inquisition is alive live and well, having traded in its implements of torture for expensive suits and legal briefs. - See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/...imate-change-inquisition#sthash.sICxw3bj.dpuf
    .
  • 16 Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against ‘Climate Change Disbelievers’
    Beginning in 1478, the Spanish Inquisition systematically silenced any citizen who held views that did not align with the king’s. Using the powerful arm of the government, the grand inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada, and his henchmen sought out all those who held religious, scientific, or moral views that conflicted with the monarch’s, punishing the “heretics” with jail sentences; property confiscation; fines; and in severe cases, torture and execution.

    One of the lasting results of the Spanish Inquisition was a stifling of speech, thought, and scientific debate throughout Spain. By treating one set of scientific views as absolute, infallible, and above critique, Spain silenced many brilliant individuals and stopped the development of new ideas and technological innovations. Spain became a scientific backwater.

    As an old adage says, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. So we now have a new inquisition underway in America in the 21st century—something that would have seemed unimaginable not too long ago.

    Treating climate change as an absolute, unassailable fact, instead of what it is—an unproven, controversial scientific theory—a group of state attorneys general have announced that they will be targeting any companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change religion.

How soon will this tactic be extended to any aspect of liberal / progressive ideology and the people that doubt those?
 
apdst said:
Exactly right, which means it isn't a crime to disagree with the global warming theory.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. What gave you the idea that anyone thought otherwise? "Thought crime" was something you came up with, not anybody else.
 
joG said:
I am sorry. I put it sloppily. It is inefficient for government ie a public entity to produce most social programs. This is because they are private goods and not like the military public ones.
Click to expand...

Why have the military be a public good?

Serious question. I'm wondering what the criteria is for deciding what goods should be private and what should be public
 
Howler63 said:
Oh, you're free to think it. Just don't say it. But you can think it.

For now.
Click to expand...

Ahhh yes. The liberals are going to start reading your thoughts and punishing yooooouuu!

Also Bush did 9/11 on behalf of the lizard people
 
Deuce said:
Why have the military be a public good?

Serious question. I'm wondering what the criteria is for deciding what goods should be private and what should be public
Click to expand...

In short, goods that evade market pricing because they are non-exclusive are considered 'public goods' by economists. Their optimum amount of production cannot be determined by the market therefore.
The public can do a better job.

The article about 'public goods' in Wikipedia is a quite good intro that I can recommend.
 
joG said:
In short, goods that evade market pricing because they are non-exclusive are considered 'public goods' by economists. Their optimum amount of production cannot be determined by the market therefore.
The public can do a better job.

The article about 'public goods' in Wikipedia is a quite good intro that I can recommend.
Click to expand...

So what makes the market better at deciding the "optimum" social program?
 
Deuce said:
No, it isn't. What gave you the idea that anyone thought otherwise? "Thought crime" was something you came up with, not anybody else.
Click to expand...

These charges qualify as a thought crime.
 
Threegoofs said:
But they pretty much have panned out.

Contrary to Contrarian Claims, IPCC Temperature Projections Have Been Exceptionally Accurate
Click to expand...

Lindzen was right, whatever warming that was/is taking place was/is the natural recovery from the LIA.
The IPCC insists, for their well-known reasons, that it's greater than that and further insists it's all man made.
That's where they go off the deep end. Correlation is not cause.
Temps were increasing in the 1800's and it sure as hell wasn't because of CO2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom