Posted on 04/24/2017 8:24:06 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
In an open letter to Donald Trump, climate expert Dr. Duane Thresher has urged the President not to give in to his daughter Ivanka’s misguided views on global warming and her insistence that the U.S. remain in the Paris climate agreement ratified by Barack Obama last August.
“Climate treaties like the Paris Agreement have little to do with climate,” Thresher notes in his letter, which he made available to Breitbart News. “They are about economic competition. As the greatest economy in the history of the world, other countries will do anything to cripple the United States.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
If Trump embraces the Paris Agreement, he can forget about MAGA, as it will be limited to the economy we had in 1994.
If he embraces the Paris Agreement, he will have ended the charade and exposed himself as a clandestine member of the #uniparty.
But I doubt that he will. My daughters in Seattle are hopeless liberals (both about her age). I agree with them on virtually nothing political. If I were president, they would have zero sway.
You did not bring your daughter to work with you.
President Trump should have left Ivanka and Jared in New York.
+1
What concerns me are reports over the weekend that Ivanka has hired a Chief of Staff, and is hiring an ex-Bushie as a press advisor.
We have elected this woman to NOTHING!
That’s ok. They would still have no impact because I have a strong viewpoint on AGW and nothing they say will convince me. Even if they threaten to hold their breath until they turn blue.
I can only assume that if Trump embraces the agreement, it is because of his personal take, not her influence.
Which is why I see it that if he does embrace it, he will have outed himself as an impostor. And “my daughter convinced me” won’t fly.
So I don’t expect him to. :)
“Paris climate agreement ratified by Barack Obama”
Fake right there.
From the article, “Ivanka’s misguided views on global warming and her insistence that the U.S. remain in the Paris climate agreement ratified by Barack Obama last August.”
Ratification has a specific meaning as it relates to international “agreements” in our Constitution. The “Paris Agreement” has in no way been “ratified”. The author has given this piece of crap “agreement” much more legitimacy than it deserves.
“The President...shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...” Even if Ivanka were to convince President Trump to go along with this “agreement”... It still will not have been “ratified”. It is telling to me when an article starts off with such a glaring misuse of an important concept.
Sounds like another BS Breitbart story designed to separate Trump from his supporters via palace intrigue crap.
It’s probably best to pay attention and react to only what he does or does not do rather than to pay attention to media stories.
It is telling only because the point of the article is to tear down Ivanka.
That’s not the only point of the article. it’s other point is to make Trump supporters believe that someone other than Trump is guiding his presidency.
Someone who shouldn’t be trusted. Therefore Trump can’t be trusted.
It’s garbage like this that caused me to stop going to Breitbart. They clearly have a beef with Trump over whatever.
Jared is a "Senior Advisor".
......”President Trump should have left Ivanka in New York”....
I have no problem with Jarad as he is low key and not standing in front of cameras for the latest shot or interview....Ivank though is all over the place and makes it “appear” she’ filling the role of first lady.....even if the media is the one pushing her...she’s given enough interviews to state how she influences her father and will continue to do so.
Fine..do that....but stop behaving as if your the new first lady.
So what?
The word “Jared” doesn’t mean anything to me.
Maybe you should stop watching tv news and reading various news stories, because they are not designed to inform you, they are designed to push you in a specific desired direction.
People are trying to take advantage of Republican voters fear of being betrayed by those whom they elected, which is a legitimate fear considering that all the GOP ever does.
Don’t let them stoke it into a paranoia, because that is what they are trying to do.
Other than the headline, Ivanka isn't mentioned in the article. It doesn't surprise me that she like most 30 something year olds I have met has fallen for the hype about “climate change”. Our public school system has created generations of half wits who are unable to think critically about anything that the media and celebrities deem to be sacrosanct.
I think the point of the article and the letter it is based on is to convince President Trump not to waffle on “Climate Change”. This is much worry about nothing however... he has had his mind made up for years, but a good negotiator makes others believe that he hears and understands their point of view. The problem that I have with the article is that in its hysteria it gives more importance to the "Paris Agreement" than it deserves.
The idea of slowing air pollution is a good one. It worked in the United States.
The PROBLEM is that the Paris Agreement is not about the countries who sign it lowering the amount of air pollution in their nations. It is all about creating HUGE SLUSH FUNDS for the leaders of these countries to STEAL MONEY FROM and they want the UNITED STATES to put up the money for the FUND.
My opinion of her sitting in on meetings, conducting interviews, playing host to dignitaries etc. does not come from news...it comes from what she herself has stated in her interviews. She is the source of my opinion of how she sees her “self-created role” in the White House.
Despite the fact she’s Trumps daughter, she admits she’s an ‘activist’ and reason for wanting to be in the White House and in Washington in order to influence those who she might regarding what is significant to her. So it is far ore than just supporting her father Chris.
I have one complaint with Breitbart.
They can help dispel the idea they represent “fake news” by giving links to the sources of things they say they are reporting.
Why don’t they? That leads to my other complaint.
I think one reason is that many reports they make insert their own hyperbole into what is reported. To protect themselves it is not done as a quote from their source, so they have not misquoted. But it does amount to writing that is closer to the NYSlimes style - part information given in what is really an editorial.
I think the unvarnished facts they bring up - facts the LameStreamMedia wants ignored, are more important and less damaging to the cause than their editorializing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.