That, folks, is the climate panic-mongers' entire agenda in a nutshell - flawed analysis, lack of full disclosure, questionable science and mathematics, and, as noted, the models are junk. //

But the best part, of course, is that the local people, folks who live near the construction site, got involved. It may have started over concern of messing up their ocean views, but it swiftly became more than that. People looked at the math, they looked at the numbers and the analysis from Shell New Energies and EDF Renewables, who were backing the project, and they didn't like what they saw.

They organized, filed a challenge against the permit, and won. //

The climate-industrial complex is finally facing a breeze it can’t spin.

Kennedy then asked the assistant AG nominee to "explain how this works."

You have a plaintiff and you have a defendant. And the plaintiff files a lawsuit and goes in front of a federal judge. a federal judge has a certain jurisdiction ... and subject matter over the parties; the plaintiff and the defendant. They're the only two people in court. How can a federal judge issue an order that affects everybody else — other than those in front of him or her? How's that possible?

Shumate was on it:

It shouldn't be possible, Senator. But district courts do it all the time. I think on the theory that the courts need to enjoin a federal policy from going into effect, and they also will enjoin it nationwide so all non-parties are protected by that injunction. //

John Kennedy @SenJohnKennedy
·
The universal injunction has become a weapon against the Trump admin.

It’s long past time to put an end to this lawless practice.

12:50 PM · Mar 26, 2025. //

anon-l1t0
15 minutes ago
I remember when Obama wanted to make changes in the law but could not get Congress to agree. He found a willing plaintiff to sue the government, and a friendly judge, and then entered into a Consent Decree to accomplish his desired outcome. Then if someone sane objected, Obama simply pointed to the court order and said that his hands were tied by the court. Lawfare working for rather than against the President and his agenda. That is how it is done.

My crime: I had four kids, now growing into adults, and they are all wonderful. Truth be told, I hadn’t planned on four: we had two, a boy and girl, and life seemed perfect. But I wanted one more: I was one of three, and that seemed like a perfect number. Then we were blessed with twins, something that I never even considered, but which has turned out to be amazing.

The truth is, raising kids is God’s work, and there’s nothing like it that can bring meaning to your life—not career accomplishments, not money, not fame—only family. There are those out there on social media and the like claiming that they’re oh so happy with childless life—they’re able to travel!—but they just don’t understand what it means to raise a child. Meanwhile, call me when you’re 80 and need a helping hand—suddenly, your phone will grow silent. //

The left, in their insanity, has now made having multiple children a bad thing. This directly contradicts the order from the Bible, which commands: "Go forth and multiply." Not to mention Mother Nature, who says basically the same thing

To me, raising children has been the ultimate sacrifice and the ultimate joy. It certainly hasn't been easy; I can tell you that, but I can also argue that for America to return to prominence, we must acknowledge that children are our future.

Without them, humanity ceases to exist. //

anon-jzmf
4 hours ago
You do make sacrifices for your children. But it's not hard. It's easy to make those sacrifices because you love your kids so much that it's easier to give them what they need than it is to short-change them. //

St. Joseph, Terror of Demons
4 hours ago
Here’s where I am more conservative and traditional than even self-described conservative Republicans.

Once a woman has had a child, her primary function is to be at home raising her children. Certainly there are circumstances that require women to go back to work (e.g., the husband can’t work, is unemployed, or is no longer around).

However, the point of this life is not to strive to accumulate as much wealth, items, and comforts as possible, especially when you have a family. The point of this life is to know, love, and serve God, and to do everything that you can to get you and your family to Heaven. //

misterright St. Joseph, Terror of Demons
3 hours ago
When I was growing up in the 1950s and 60s, if your mom worked outside the home (as it was called back then) you were pitied. The notion of warehousing kids in daycare centers not only didn't exist, it was resisted because "that's what they do in the Soviet Union!" How far we've gone downhill in 60 years.

The Left argues that children who don't go to daycare are not properly socialized. My experience teaches me that children who are raised in daycare centers and spend time only with their age group in schools are not well socialized at all. I have never met such a child who could look you in the eye and carry on a conversation with adults. Children raised by their parents and especially if they have the blessing of growing up in close proximity to extended family are much better socialized and able to interact with others of all ages. Children of parents who, in addition to the above, are active in their church are even better socialized. In other words, the Left is absolutely wrong once again.

Marxists need to get their grip on children at an early age. The fact that stay-at-home moms are denigrated by the Left is not an accident. The fact that all daycare centers must be licensed (read: controlled) by the state and are thus turned into indoctrination centers is not an accident. The Left viewed the Soviet Union not as a cautionary tale, but as a model. If we don't drastically change course, our fate will be that of the Soviet Union. We need to start with families and education. //

7againstthebes
4 hours ago edited
The left, by their nature are anti-child. They are pro consumerism, pro hedonist, pro abortion, and pro drug and alcohol.

So, they are childless, materialistic, drug users and drunks. Welcome to your empty life.

As a country, we need to do more to encourage marriage and children. Some of that certainly pertains to an active faith in God as a society.

More than that, as a society we need to return to the traditional roles of society and the acknowledgement of the value added for each role. Further, those that are outside of those roles should be widely viewed as not as valuable to society.

The US tax code needs to be rewritten to substantially increase the child tax credit. To decrease the tax rate of married filing jointly. To offer more far reaching tax write-0ffs for child education costs, and daycare costs.

New civil laws that offer mortgage rate discounts for married couples. Civic planning that encourage and foster community planning that centers around children centric families.

These changes are a good way to start a focus on marriage and child rearing. Let the anti-child left be scorned and seen as valueless. Let their behavior be enough to mark them as useless to society. //

misterright 7againstthebes
3 hours ago
The family is the single most successful social unit in the history of civilization. For that reason, the Left cannot tolerate the existence of a society centered on strong nuclear families. Your comment that "society must be returned to traditional values that work to provide those goals and not against them" is spot on. Expect, however, that the Left will fight strenuously and with everything they've got to make sure that never happens.

there's plenty to say about Chen's reasoning as well. Should a judge be overruling the executive branch based on his own personal feelings about "economic activity" and "public health?" How would "safety in communities" even be affected?

I would posit that none of that should be considered. The only thing Chen should have been analyzing was what the law says and whether the administration was within its legal right to remove TPS in this case. Not only did he not do that, but it appears he completely contradicted the law.

You see, this issue was already litigated under the first Trump administration, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that TPS is not subject to judicial review.

Bill Melugin @BillMelugin
·
Replying to @BillMelugin
Notably, U.S. law says this is not subject to judicial review, and the 9th Circuit upheld that in Trump’s first term.

8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(5):

“There is no judicial review of any determination of the [DHS Secretary] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of

Bill Melugin @BillMelugin_
·
Here is that Prior 9th Circuit decision siding with the Trump admin when he sought to terminate TPS for Haiti, Sudan, Nicaragua, and El Salvador and a district judge tried to block it.

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/09/14/18-16981.pdf
8:48 PM · Mar 31, 2025.

In other words, not only is Chen violating the law with his order by ruling on something already deemed not subject to judicial review, but he's then demanding the administration meet a legal standard that doesn't even exist. //

CaptainCall
7 hours ago
This seems like a perfect judicial order for Trump to ignore. He can simply explain that he is not ignoring the courts...he's following the ruling by the 9th circuit, not the district court.

A customer received $100,000 from American Airlines after getting a ticket they bought for $1,000 refunded. //

The honest customer did not want to keep the money since it wasn't theirs. So the person dialled customer care at American Airlines and told them about the mistake. However, every agent insisted that the refund was perfectly correct. When that didn't work, the person wrote emails to the airline's Revenue Protection group and even put the matter on social media. But nothing worked. //

So the customer then filed a "dispute" about the refund with American Express. //

The refund was received on Feb 21, and the airline acknowledged that a mistake had happened days later. However, it still couldn't be fixed. The airline processed an adjustment on Feb 27, and to the shock of the passenger, charged them $28 million.

This spiralled into a whole other issue since American Express suspended their account due to “high credit exposure" on March 1. The person tried to get in touch with people at Amex but could not reach a person of authority outside of normal business hours. Others who were available at those hours did not have the authority to correct a $30 million error.

Finally, Amex acknowledged the multiple errors on March 3 and removed the $28 million charge the next day. Things didn't end there as the process of fixing the problem had led to $300,000 being refunded, besides currency conversion costs and losses of $75,000.

American Airlines and American Express have apologised for the error and offered an undisclosed amount as compensation to the passenger.

“To think that we can draw some useful analogies from history dramatically underestimates the novelty and scale of the climate challenge.”[2]

“In the contest between geopolitics and sustainable climate policies, the former takes precedence.”[3]

Starting in the early 1980s, I have spent my entire professional life studying climate change, as well as teaching, writing and speaking about it in universities, conferences, and public forums around the world—in 43 countries at the latest count. With such a professional and personal investment in the idea of climate change, it is not surprising that for a long period I uncritically absorbed the notion that climate change represented the pre-eminent challenge facing humanity in the twenty-first century.

Since first immersing myself in the topic in the 1980s, and subsequently being part of the scientific and public story of climate change in the 1990s and 2000s[4], I was easily convinced that the growing human influence on the world’s climate would be a reality that all nations would increasingly need to confront, a reality to which their interests would necessarily be subservient and that would be decisive for shaping their development pathways. For more than half of these 40 or so years, it seemed to me self-evident that relations between nations would forcibly be re-shaped by the exigencies of a changing climate.

But now, in the mid-2020s, I can see that I got this the wrong way round. And I can also see why this was so. Rather than geopolitics having to bend to the realities of a changing climate, the opposite has happened. //

Now, 30 years later, it is the geopolitical truth that power and interests win out. Climate is not the only thing that is changing through our lifetimes, and perhaps not the most important thing. Technology, cultural values, the centres of political, economic and military power have all changed remarkably since I first started studying climate change 40 years ago; and the rules, cohesion and effectiveness of the international order that I assumed were eternal are being seriously called into question. I now see the need for a deeper reading of political realism and power, that goes beyond seeing science as a coercive force that trumps geopolitics, beyond appeals to a superficial cosmopolitanism. To use the language of Jason Maloy at Louisiana University, climate change is neither an emergency or a crisis; it is a political epic, “a process of collective human effort that features gradual progression through time, obscure problem origins, and anticlimactic outcomes.”[25]

The best that we can say is that the world will continue slowly to decarbonize its energy system and, at the same time, the Earth will continue slowly to warm. And societies will continue to adapt to evolving climate hazards in new ways, as they have always done, with winners and losers along the way.

© Mike Hulme, January 2025

This online course is tailored for individuals with technical backgrounds involved in designing or procuring solar powered water systems (SPWS). It offers the flexibility to work on your own schedule while also benefiting from interactive group discussions.

Syncthing, an open-source, decentralized file synchronization tool, provides a continuous, bidirectional sync alternatively that operates in real-time. Unlike OCI Functions, which rely on an event driven model for object replication, Syncthing synchronizes entire file structures efficiently between virtual machines (VMs) while supporting local and OCI Object Storage mounted directories.

In this tutorial, we will deploy Syncthing on OCI Compute instances across two regions using an OCI Resource Manager stack, enabling automatic, bidirectional synchronization between local VM storage and OCI Object Storage mounted directories.

There's a guy by the name of Antonio Gracias, who, as founder and managing partner at Valor Equity Partners, has proven to be a pretty smart fellow in his own right. As a patriotic American, he was willing to work with Elon at DOGE.

And how lucky are we?

Because what Gracias revealed he and the DOGE team found at Social Security 'by accident' after, as he said...

'There are a lot of good people in the system who pointed us in this direction and I want to honor them right now. That work in the government today. Who took risks to show us these numbers and tell us this was going on.'

...is gobsmacking.

What is the 'this' he's referring to that they found?

That the Biden administration in 2024 - one year - gave 2.1 MILLION NON-CITIZENS social security numbers.

There's only one reason to do that. //

The defaults in the system from social security to all of the benefit programs have been set to max inclusion, MAX PAY for these people and minimum collection.

We found 1.3 million of them already on Medicaid as an example. We've gone through on every benefit program we went through, we found groups from this particular group of people, this 5.5 million people in those benefit programs.

And then what was really, really disturbing us was why we're asking ourselves why. So we actually just took a sample and looked at voter registration records and we found people here registered to vote in this population. Yes.

Who did vote? We found some by sampling that ACTUALLY DID VOTE.

We have referred them to prosecution at the Homeland Security Investigation Service. Yeah. Already, already. That is already happening right now. The truly disturbing thing though, I just want you to know this, a truly disturbing thing to me, and the darkest thing about this, to me, the voter fraud is terrible.” //

MUSK: "People think that Biden was asleep at the switch. They weren't asleep at the switch. It was a massive large scale program to import as many illegals as possible, ultimately to change the entire voting map of the United States and disenfranchise the American people and making it a deep blue one party state from which there would be no escape."

GRACIAS: "Human Traffickers made $13-15B off of this. This is a human tragedy. We created a system that created an incentive for people to come here and get taken advantage of by these traffickers."

MUSK: "This is not made up by the right. This is absolutely true...The real reason for these attacks and the burning of the cars, is that we're going to turn off the payments to illegals...I think this is the biggest voter fraud in the history of America by far. If the machine behind the Kamala puppet had won then they would have legalized all the illegals and there would be no swing states."

It's been evident that the Trump family maintains a close relationship with Don's ex — Vanessa seems to be present at most family events — so it's not surprising to hear the president speak fondly of her. It struck me, though, that he seemed genuinely saddened by the breakup of his son's marriage — and it was fascinating to learn he blames it in part on the Russia collusion hoax. We often speak of it in terms of how it affected Trump himself, but it's easy to look past the impact it had on his family, as well.

What was clear from the exchange is that President Trump genuinely cares about both his former daughter-in-law and Woods. It might just be me, but it seems like in addition to seeing a focused and more disciplined Donald Trump these days, we're also seeing a softer side of him.

Since she mentions Social Security, let's start with the obvious. How does an illegal immigrant manage to pay into that program without committing fraud? Social Security numbers are only given to citizens and permanent residents. So is the argument that criminality is fine as long as you contribute taxes along the way? Because that sure seems like the argument. //

In 2024, fiscal outlays totaled around $7 trillion dollars. That means illegal immigrants contribute just 1.43 percent toward total annual expenditures. That already doesn't sound like a lot, but when you consider that illegal immigrants make up 6.25 percent of the population (using the commonly accepted estimate that there are 20 million of them in the country), then their contributions become even more minuscule.

But wait, there's more. That $100 billion number Crockett is citing is actually from a 2022 study conducted by the Institution on Taxation and Economic Policy, and it includes state and local taxes paid as well. So the above percentage I cited is actually much less on the federal level, and when you dig deeper, illegal immigrants only contribute around $25 billion to Social Security. How much does that entitlement cost taxpayers a year? The answer is a whopping $1.7 trillion, meaning illegal immigrants pay for just 1.47 percent of Social Security. That is the supposedly massive, irreplaceable contribution to the program that Crockett and other Democrats are asserting should override immigration laws. //

in 2023, it was estimated that the federal government spent $66 billion on illegal immigrants for medical care and various entitlements like food stamps. That doesn't even count how much it costs to house, clothe, and feed those who are being detained at various Customs and Border Patrol facilities. //

Clare Boothe Lucid
6 hours ago
Let’s just look at education cost. An estimated 620,000 illegal alien children are enrolled in K-12. The average cost is about $18,600 per students (with the ESL and other needs immigrants may cost more, but I’ll use the average). That would be $11.5 Billion per year just for education of the illegal kids. That does not include the anchor babies.