The Front Page Cover
Featruring:
Will Russiagate Backfire on the Left?
by Pat Buchanan
.
.
Reassessing liar-nObama's CAFE Mandates
By Arnold Ahlert: Last week, President Donald Trump announced his administration will reassess the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) mandates the liar-nObama administration's EPA tried to lock in before the Jan. 20 transition of power. "We're going to work on the CAFE standards so you can make cars in America again," Trump told a cheering crowd of auto workers in Ypsilanti, Michigan. "We're going to help companies so they are going to help you. We're going to be the car capital of the world again."
New EPA chief Scott Pruitt promised his agency will coordinate with the Department of Transportation's (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to decide whether the liar-nObama administration mandates will remain in place. The deadline for making the decision is April 2018.
Why the reassessment? "In 2012 the EPA set ambitious mileage standards that required auto makers to achieve an average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, nearly twice the 2011 mandate," the Wall Street Journal explains. "The increases were backloaded such that manufacturers had to hit 36.6 miles a gallon by 2017 and 46.8 miles a gallon by 2022. In the last three years, car makers would need to squeeze an additional eight miles out of each gallon."
In a letter sent to Pruitt in February, the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers (AAM) insisted no government agency "had ever set emissions standards so far into the future," and that the final determination engendered by liar-nObama's EPA was "riddled with indefensible assumptions, inadequate analysis, and failure to engage with contrary evidence."
The AAM further explained meeting those standards would cost far more than the $200 billion originally estimated by liar-nObama's EPA because the "electrified technologies" needed to meet them would raise the price of vehicles and depress auto sales. As the Journal notes, the onerous standards might have been feasible when gas cost $3.60 per gallon and passenger cars comprised more than half of all vehicle sales. But when the price of gas dropped, sales of trucks and SUVs skyrocketed, with trucks gaining a 61% market share in 2016. Moreover, the decline in gas prices mitigated the benefits of customer fuel savings the EPA used to justify the increased CAFE standards.
Those standards also increased vehicle production costs, driving vehicle manufacturers to Mexico in search of cheaper labor.
The liar-nObama administration knew all of this and originally promised the incoming administration would get a "midterm review" of the CAFE standards to be completed by April 2018.
Make that an incoming liar-Clinton administration. When Trump was elected, liar-nObama's EPA set the 2012 standards in stone, even though their own projections revealed fewer than 1% of gas-burning cars would comply with the 2022 mandate, and none would meet the standards set for 2025.
Trump's having none of it. "We are going to restore the originally scheduled midterm review and we are going to ensure that any regulations we have protect and defend your jobs, your factories. We're going to be fair," Trump said. "That is why I'm proud to say I followed through on my promise."
Predictably, Democrats and their eco-zealot allies are furious. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) characterized the review as "all-out assault" to "dismantle important environmental protections." Kristin Igusky, Climate Program Associate at the World Resources, declared "the administration is creating more uncertainty and blocking progress toward cleaner, more efficient vehicles for America."
Christian Science Monitor columnist Zack Coleman joins the chorus. "Transportation is now the leading sector for greenhouse gas emissions in the United States," he writes. "The lower the so-called Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard, the smaller will be the reductions carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles."
Not quite. The expansion of the aforementioned "electrified technologies" necessary to meet the liar-nObama EPA standards have environmental problems of their own as onerous, if not more so, than vehicles themselves. "So we're chasing the car that is fueled solely by the electricity that comes out of our walls," writes columnist Rich Cromwell. "That electricity is apparently generated by magic, never coal, so battery-powered options would reduce cars' carbon footprint and create a more sustainable future."
While environmentalists and their Democrat allies in Congress are quick to tout the transparent benefits of electric cars or CAFE standards, they are rather myopic regarding the unforeseen — or is that conspicuously ignored — deleterious tradeoffs that accompany them.
And not just environmental tradeoffs. As Robert Tracinski explains, one would have to drive a $90,000 electric-powered Tesla for 30 years to equalize the costs between it and a $45,000 gas-powered Lexus, based on the average number of miles most Americans drive, coupled with slightly higher gas costs than they're currently paying. Thus, many "green energy products" are a long way from being economically viable. On the other hand, Tracinski adds, they remain "very much a plaything or status symbol for the wealthy and upper middle class, the sort of people who uniformly believe in man-made global warming and who can afford to spend tens of thousands of extra dollars just to feel good about themselves."
One suspects ordinary Americans who can't afford a Tesla or a Lexus and struggle to make ends meet are less "high-minded."
And what if CAFE standards are solely about holier-than-thou self-aggrandizement? The benefits touted by the liar-nObama administration — a "decrease global temperatures by 0.007 degrees to 0.018 degrees Celsius in 2100" — would be more than offset by "massive losses" imposed on consumers who would increase the number of miles they drive with more fuel-efficient cars offsetting carbon reductions. Many would also eschew higher-priced new car purchases and "delay upgrades, leaving older vehicles on the road longer."
Pruitt has assured the nation his review of CAFE standards will engender a program that is "good for consumers and good for the environment." Such balance is a refreshing change from the liar-nObama administration's "kill the economy to save the planet" mindset.
Nonetheless, he will face resistance. As columnist Ned Barnett reveals, the EPA is still infested with careerists who "believe their own views on global warming and a host of other environmental issues are the only 'true' positions. The president, for his part, is clearly preparing to take the challenge directly to the EPA's permanent staff."
Hopefully under a swamp-draining a Trump administration, there's no such thing as administrative permanence.
~The Patriot Post
.
.
Here's what we know about
the Russia investigation
by Todd Shepherd
{washingtonexaminer.com} ~ The first hearing by the House Oversight Committee investigating Russia's interference with the 2016 elections lasted about six hours on Monday... After all that time talking, even Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., had to admit he hadn't learned much by the conclusion. For all the fanfare given to Comey's appearance, at least one more public hearing is scheduled, and committee members have said more open hearings beyond that are possible as well. The ranking Democrat on the committee, Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is urging Nunes to compel testimony by subpoena, if necessary, further down the road. Here's where some major issues and questions stand at present... http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heres-what-we-know-about-the-russia-investigation/article/2618057#.WNHwZXiJMyo.twitter/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Examiner%20Today&utm_source=StructureCMS
liar-nObama's Saboteurs/ or
Undermining Our Republic
by JUSTIN O. SMITH
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ A dangerous precedent for the future of America, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other Leftist propaganda machines and an army of the liar-nObama administration's holdovers, nothing less than saboteurs... have waged a war of innuendo and speculation and felony leaks for months in an attempt to destroy President Donald Trump's administration and the government American voters demanded. They have turned their backs on the Constitution and the American people, their oath to protect and defend both, and they have sought to undermine our democratic process and the Republic of the United States of America. Classified information leaked to the media - a felony - set speculation in motion as the New York Times and the left-leaning Mother Jones alleged collusion between Donald Trump and his advisors and Russia for the past six months, even though their own reports show an initial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) warrant targeting Trump and several associates was denied and nothing criminal was ever proven. Essentially, Donald Trump was not named in the second FISA warrant, but surveillance of him and his inner circle, private citizens such as Michael Flynn, Roger Stone and Paul Manafort, continued up to the general election. One can only surmise that liar-nObama and his leftist minions banked on finding information that would defeat Trump; and after Donald Trump won , they continued surveillance in hopes of eventually impeaching and unseating President Trump... http://www./publications/detail/obamas-saboteurs-or-undermining-our-republic?f=must_reads
.
Israel Intercepts Syrian Anti-Aircraft Missile
Amid Heightened Tensions
by Ari Lieberman
{frontpagemag.com} ~ On Monday, Arab media reported that Israeli Air Force jets struck another Hezbollah weapons convoy snaking its way to Lebanon from Syria... Israel refused to comment on the report but if accurate, it would represent the third Israeli strike against targets in Syria in as many days. Less than 24 hours earlier, an Israeli drone liquidated Yasser al-Sayed, while he was driving along the Damascus- Quneitra road near the town of Khan Arnaba. Lebanese media reported that he was a Syrian air defense commander. Other Arab media reported that he was a pro-Assad militia commander who was coordinating planned attacks against Israel with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Hezbollah of course, claimed he was a civilian. Israel remained silent on the circumstances of al-Sayed’s death but has in the past bluntly informed its enemies, including Assad, Iran and Hezbollah that it would not remain idle in the face of threats emanating from Syria and elsewhere and would act when necessary to preserve its security interests... http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266183/israel-intercepts-syrian-anti-aircraft-missile-ari-Lieberman
.
Iran is Doubling Down on Yemen
by Daniel Greenfield
{frontpagemag.com} ~ Iran is sending advanced weapons and military advisers to Yemen's rebel Houthi movement, stepping up support for its Shi'ite ally in a civil war whose outcome could sway the balance of power in the Middle East... regional and Western sources say. Sources with knowledge of the military movements, who declined to be identified, say that in recent months Iran has taken a greater role in the two-year-old conflict by stepping up arms supplies and other support. This mirrors the strategy it has used to support its Lebanese ally Hezbollah in Syria. A senior Iranian official said Major General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Qods Force - the external arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps - met top IRGC officials in Tehran last month to look at ways to "empower" the Houthis... http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/266187/iran-doubling-down-yemen-daniel-greenfield
.
Israel's New Rules
by A.J. Caschetta
{meforum.org} ~ Hugh Lanning, a British citizen and chairman of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, was denied entry into Israel on March 12, the first militant anti-Zionist to fall "victim" to a new law banning entry to any foreigner... "who knowingly issues a public call for boycotting Israel." "Whoever acts against Israel should understand that the rules of the game have changed," Strategic Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan said afterwards. Prior to the new law, anyone from a "friendly country" who came to the Jewish state could stay on a three-month entry visa unless specifically singled out for non-entry by the Interior Ministry. As Miriam Elman notes, the new law places the onus on visitors connected to boycott movements to explain why they should be granted admission... http://www.meforum.org/6602/israel-new-rules?utm_source=Middle+East+Forum&utm_campaign=be5d27bf75-caschetta_aj_2017_03_21&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_086cfd423c-be5d27bf75-33703665&goal=0_086cfd423c-be5d27bf75-33703665
..
Will Russiagate Backfire on the Left?
by Pat Buchanan
{freedomsback.com} ~ The big losers of the Russian hacking scandal may yet be those who invested all their capital in a script that turned out to based on a fairy tale.
In Monday's Intelligence Committee hearings, James Comey did confirm that his FBI has found nothing to support President Trump's tweet that President liar-nObama ordered him wiretapped. Not unexpected, but undeniably an embarrassment for the tweeter-in-chief.
Yet longer-term damage may have been done to the left. For Monday's hearing showed that its rendering of the campaign of 2016 may be a product of fiction and a fevered imagination.
After eight months investigating the hacking and leaking of the emails of liar-Clinton campaign chief John Podesta and the DNC, there is apparently no evidence yet of Trump collusion with Russia.
Former Director of National Intelligence Gen. James Clapper has said that, as of his departure day, Jan. 20, he had seen no evidence of a Russia-Trump collusion.
Former acting CIA Director Michael Morell also made that clear this month: "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all. ... There's no little campfire, there's no little candle, there's no spark. And there's a lot of people looking for it." Morell was a surrogate for the liar-Hillary Clinton campaign.
But while the FBI is still searching for a Trump connection, real crimes have been unearthed -- committed by anti-Trump bureaucrats colluding with mainstream media -- to damage Trump's presidency.
There is hard evidence of collusion between the intel community and The New York Times and The Washington Post, both beneficiaries of illegal leaks -- felonies punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
While the howls have been endless that Trump accused liar-nObama of a "felony," the one provable felony here was the leak of a transcript of an intercepted conversation between Gen. Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador.
That leak ended Flynn's career as national security adviser. And Director Comey would neither confirm nor deny that President liar-nObama was aware of the existence of the Flynn transcript.
So where do we stand after yesterday's hearing and eight-month FBI investigation? The Russians did hack Podesta's email account and the DNC, and while the FBI has found no evidence of Trump campaign collusion with the Russians, it is still looking.
However, the known unknowns seem more significant.
How could DNI Director Clapper and CIA Director Morell say that no connection had been established between Trump's campaign and the Russians, without there having been an investigation? And how could such an investigation be conclusive in exonerating Trump's associates -- without some use of electronic surveillance?
Did the FBI fly to Moscow and question Putin's cyberwarfare team?
More questions arise. If, in its investigation of the Russian hacking and a Trump connection, the FBI did receive the fruits of some electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign, were Attorney General Loretta Lynch, White House aides or President liar-nObama made aware of any such surveillance? Did any give a go-ahead to surveil the Trump associates? Comey would neither confirm nor deny that they did.
So, if liar-nObama were aware of an investigation into the Trump campaign, using intel sources and methods, Trump would not be entirely wrong in his claims, and liar-nObama would have some 'splainin' to do.
Is the FBI investigating the intelligence sources who committed felonies by illegally disclosing information about the Trump campaign?
Comey would not commit to investigate these leaks, though this could involve criminal misconduct within his own FBI.
Again, the only known crimes committed by Americans during and after the campaign are the leaks of security secrets by agents of the intel community, colluding with the Fourth Estate, which uses the First Amendment to provide cover for criminal sources, whom they hail as "whistleblowers."
Indeed, if there was no surveillance of Trump of any kind, where did all these stories come from, which their reporters attributed to "intelligence sources"?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from any role in the Russian hacking scandal. But the Justice Department should demand that the FBI put the highest priority on investigating the deep state and its journalistic collaborators in the sabotage of the Trump presidency.
If Comey refuses to do it, appoint a special counsel.
In the last analysis, as Glenn Greenwald, no Trumpite, writes for The Intercept, the real loser may well be the Democratic Party.
If the investigation of Russiagate turns up no link between Trump and the pilfered emails, Democrats will have egg all over their faces. And the Democratic base will have to face a painful truth.
Vladimir Putin did not steal this election. liar-Hillary Clinton and Barack liar-nObama lost it. Donald Trump won it fair and square. He is not an "illegitimate" president. There will be no impeachment. They were deceived and misled by their own leaders and media. They bought into a Big Lie.
In Monday's Intelligence Committee hearings, James Comey did confirm that his FBI has found nothing to support President Trump's tweet that President liar-nObama ordered him wiretapped. Not unexpected, but undeniably an embarrassment for the tweeter-in-chief.
Yet longer-term damage may have been done to the left. For Monday's hearing showed that its rendering of the campaign of 2016 may be a product of fiction and a fevered imagination.
After eight months investigating the hacking and leaking of the emails of liar-Clinton campaign chief John Podesta and the DNC, there is apparently no evidence yet of Trump collusion with Russia.
Former Director of National Intelligence Gen. James Clapper has said that, as of his departure day, Jan. 20, he had seen no evidence of a Russia-Trump collusion.
Former acting CIA Director Michael Morell also made that clear this month: "On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all. ... There's no little campfire, there's no little candle, there's no spark. And there's a lot of people looking for it." Morell was a surrogate for the liar-Hillary Clinton campaign.
But while the FBI is still searching for a Trump connection, real crimes have been unearthed -- committed by anti-Trump bureaucrats colluding with mainstream media -- to damage Trump's presidency.
There is hard evidence of collusion between the intel community and The New York Times and The Washington Post, both beneficiaries of illegal leaks -- felonies punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
While the howls have been endless that Trump accused liar-nObama of a "felony," the one provable felony here was the leak of a transcript of an intercepted conversation between Gen. Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador.
That leak ended Flynn's career as national security adviser. And Director Comey would neither confirm nor deny that President liar-nObama was aware of the existence of the Flynn transcript.
So where do we stand after yesterday's hearing and eight-month FBI investigation? The Russians did hack Podesta's email account and the DNC, and while the FBI has found no evidence of Trump campaign collusion with the Russians, it is still looking.
However, the known unknowns seem more significant.
How could DNI Director Clapper and CIA Director Morell say that no connection had been established between Trump's campaign and the Russians, without there having been an investigation? And how could such an investigation be conclusive in exonerating Trump's associates -- without some use of electronic surveillance?
Did the FBI fly to Moscow and question Putin's cyberwarfare team?
More questions arise. If, in its investigation of the Russian hacking and a Trump connection, the FBI did receive the fruits of some electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign, were Attorney General Loretta Lynch, White House aides or President liar-nObama made aware of any such surveillance? Did any give a go-ahead to surveil the Trump associates? Comey would neither confirm nor deny that they did.
So, if liar-nObama were aware of an investigation into the Trump campaign, using intel sources and methods, Trump would not be entirely wrong in his claims, and liar-nObama would have some 'splainin' to do.
Is the FBI investigating the intelligence sources who committed felonies by illegally disclosing information about the Trump campaign?
Comey would not commit to investigate these leaks, though this could involve criminal misconduct within his own FBI.
Again, the only known crimes committed by Americans during and after the campaign are the leaks of security secrets by agents of the intel community, colluding with the Fourth Estate, which uses the First Amendment to provide cover for criminal sources, whom they hail as "whistleblowers."
Indeed, if there was no surveillance of Trump of any kind, where did all these stories come from, which their reporters attributed to "intelligence sources"?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from any role in the Russian hacking scandal. But the Justice Department should demand that the FBI put the highest priority on investigating the deep state and its journalistic collaborators in the sabotage of the Trump presidency.
If Comey refuses to do it, appoint a special counsel.
In the last analysis, as Glenn Greenwald, no Trumpite, writes for The Intercept, the real loser may well be the Democratic Party.
If the investigation of Russiagate turns up no link between Trump and the pilfered emails, Democrats will have egg all over their faces. And the Democratic base will have to face a painful truth.
Vladimir Putin did not steal this election. liar-Hillary Clinton and Barack liar-nObama lost it. Donald Trump won it fair and square. He is not an "illegitimate" president. There will be no impeachment. They were deceived and misled by their own leaders and media. They bought into a Big Lie.
Comments