Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

British journalist produces excellent story on yesterday’s riot in DC

Published

1 minute read

Today we are all reacting to yesterday’s riots in Washington where Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building.  Here’s an excellent story from the UK’s ITV News. Reported by its Washington correspondent Robert Moore, much of the footage is shot inside as the violent mob stormed in through doors and broken windows.

It’s well done and a shining example of great reporting. Cudos to Mr. Moore and his crew who reported what they saw, asked questions, and put together an extraordinary piece while being in significant danger.

After excusing violence, Trump acknowledges Biden transition

President Todayville Inc., Honorary Colonel 41 Signal Regiment, Board Member Lieutenant Governor of Alberta Arts Award Foundation, Director Canadian Forces Liaison Council (Alberta) musician, photographer, former VP/GM CTV Edmonton.

Follow Author

Business

New York and Vermont Seek to Impose a Retroactive Climate Tax

Published on

From Heartland Daily News

By Joshua Loucks for the Cato Institute.

Energy producers will be subject to retroactive taxes in New York if the state assembly passes Senate Bill S2129A, known as the “Climate Change Superfund Act.” The superfund legislation seeks to impose a retroactive tax on energy companies that have emitted greenhouse gases (GHGs) and operated within the state over the last seventy years.

If passed, the new law will impose $75 billion in repayment fees for “historical polluters,” who lawmakers assert are primarily responsible for climate change damages within the state. The state will “assign liability to and require compensation from companies commensurate with their emissions” over the last “70 years or more.” The bill would establish a standard of strict liability, stating that “companies are required to pay into the fund because the use of their products caused the pollution. No finding of wrongdoing is required.”

New York is not alone in this effort. Superfunds built on retroactive taxes on GHG emissions are becoming increasingly popular. Vermont recently enacted similar legislation, S.259 (Act 122), titled the “Climate Superfund Act,” in which the state also retroactively taxes energy producers for historic emissions. Similar bills have also been introduced in Maryland and Massachusetts.

Climate superfund legislation seems to have one purpose: to raise revenue by taxing a politically unpopular industry. Under the New York law, fossil fuel‐​producing energy companies would be taxed billions of dollars retroactively for engaging in legal and necessary behavior. For example, the seventy‐​year retroactive tax would conceivably apply to any company—going back to 1954—that used fossil fuels to generate electricity or produced fuel for New York drivers.

The typical “economic efficiency” arguments for taxing an externality go out the window with the New York and Vermont approach, for at least two reasons. First, the goal of a blackboard or textbook approach to a carbon tax is to internalize the GHG externality. To apply such a tax accurately, the government would need to calculate the social cost of carbon (SCC).

Unfortunately, estimating the SCC is methodologically complex and open to wide ranges of estimates. As a result, the SCC is theoretically very useful but practically impossible to calculate with any reasonable degree of precision.

Second, the retroactive nature of these climate superfunds undermines the very incentives a textbook tax on externalities  would promote. A carbon tax’s central feature is that it is intended to reduce externalities from current and future activity by changing incentives. However, by imposing retroactive taxes, the New York and Vermont legislation will not impact emitters’ future behavior in a way that mimics a textbook carbon tax or improves economic outcomes.

Arbitrary and retroactive taxes can, however, raise prices for consumers by increasing policy uncertainty, affecting firm profitability, and reducing investment (or causing investors to flee GHG‐​emitting industries in the state altogether). Residents in both New York and Vermont already pay over 30 percent more than the US average in residential electricity prices, and this legislation will not lower these costs to consumers.

Climate superfunds are not a serious attempt to solve environmental challenges but rather a way to raise government revenue while unfairly punishing an entire industry (one whose actions the New York legislation claims “have been unconscionable, closely reflecting the strategy of denial, deflection, and delay used by the tobacco industry”).

Fossil fuel companies enabled GHG emissions, of course, but they also empowered significant growth, mobility, and prosperity. The punitive nature of the policy is laid bare by the fact that neither New York nor Vermont used a generic SCC or an evidentiary proceeding to calculate precise damages.

Finally, establishing a standard in which “no finding of wrongdoing is required” to levy fines against historical actions that were (and still are) legally permitted sets a dangerous precedent for what governments can do, not only to businesses that have produced fossil fuels but also to individuals who have consumed them.

Cato research associate Joshua Loucks contributed to this post.

Originally published by the Cato Institute. Republished with permission under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Continue Reading

International

EU elections turn ‘sharp right’ as immigration woes wreak havoc in Europe

Published on

Plenary chamber of the European Parliament, Strasbourg,                                                                            FranceHadrian/Shutterstock

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

The recent European Union elections have resulted in significant gains for right wing and nationalist parties across major European countries in a signal move against widespread liberal immigration policies.

As predicted by the European Council on Foreign Relations in January, the EU elections have delivered a “sharp right turn” in the major nations of the European Union.

France saw the biggest gains for population friendly politics, with the right-wing National Rally party (RN) securing up to 33 percent of the vote: more than twice that of President Emmanuel Macron’s party. The map below shows in blue where nationalists won:

This 2022 map below shows the sharpness of the right turn in France in only two years:

Macron has announced a parliamentary election in France, to be held within 30 days.

In addition to the 30 seats won by the RN, led in the EU by Jordan Bardella, the Reconquest party of Marion Marechal took another five seats, leaving nationalists in France with 35 against 13 for the governing coalition. Marechal is the niece of the RN’s National Assembly leader Marine Le Pen.

A full summary of the results at the time of writing is available at Politico.

In Germany, Europe’s most solid anti-globalist party the Alternative for Germany (AfD) came second to the “conservative” Christian Democratic Union of Germany, its 15 seats and 16 percent of the vote putting it ahead of all the parties of the “traffic light” coalition of reds, greens, and yellow liberals. The ruling parties have long threatened to criminalize the AfD, as it continues to rise in the polls.

Geert Wilder’s PVV took the most seats in the Netherlands, winning six – with the anti-globalist Farmer Citizen Movement (BBB) winning a further two.

Hard right and nationalist parties came joint first in Belgium, with the Vlaams Belang returning from destruction by liberal lawfare of its immensely successful predecessor, the Vlaams Blok, to secure three seats.

Hungary’s staunchly pro-family and pro-nation ruling party Fidesz took almost 45 percent, its 10 seats edging out the second placed “conservative” Respect and Freedom Party on seven.

No change at the top of the EU

Yet the encouraging results for the reality-based community are tempered by two facts: the “conservative” faction of Ursula von der Leyen remains the largest, and the real power will still be divided among the ruling liberal establishment.

Von der Leyen is seeking a second term in office, and will likely work with red, green, and liberal globalists to get one.

In an early indication of the response to popular politics by the globalist elite, she has recently announced an enormous EU-wide censorship and propaganda effort. Known as the European Democracy Shield, its purpose is to shield the ruling elite she leads from democracy.

Real power in the EU, as in all “democracies,” is not in the Parliament – but lies with the permanent government at the top.

The real power is not in Parliament

The EU Parliament, whose new makeup now includes 157 seats for a divided right-nationalist faction, does not set EU policies.

The positions which decide EU policy are those on the European Commission and European Council. These, as before, will be allotted to members of the liberal consensus: the EPP group – led by the current EU Chief Commissioner Von der Leyen – remains the largest group with 186 seats and is “conservative” in name only. With 720 seats in total, 361 seats are required for a majority.

The EPP is expected to continue to collaborate with the reds, greens, and liberals to achieve this.

The liberal left has 135 seats – eleven fewer than the nationalists – but being a single group achieves second place as a result.

Added to this, the 79 seats of the liberals grants the globalist uniparty a majority in the EU Parliament.

Why are the nationalists divided?

The nationalist bloc – Identity and Democracy (ID) – is led by the largest party, the French RN. It suspended the AfD in May, as the French group sought to distance itself from continued attempts to discredit the AfD in the German press.

As a result, the AfD’s 15 seats join the 10 of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz in the non-aligned group. These 25 non-aligned seats for the politics of sanity are buttressed by the nationalist ID group of 58 seats, and the national-conservative ECR group with 73. A nominal total of 157 right-nationalists emerges, when the single seat from the Niki party of Greece is included.

General elections

Calls were made for a general election in France and in Germany following the decisive defeat of the ruling parties in the two major nations of Europe.

The French National Assembly has been dissolved by Macron, with a parliamentary election to follow within 30 days. With no presidential election scheduled until 2027 it is likely that Macron will remain the head of state over a Parliament firmly opposed to his personal platform which has delivered war, mass migration, and mounting left wing street violence.

In an early sign of rising political violence, left wing rioters marauded through Paris, smashing windows and burning cars in BordeauxToulouse, and other French cities following the results of the EU elections in France.

In Germany, the leader of the right-liberal Christian Democratic Union called for elections after his “conservative” party topped the polls, with the AfD in second place. The current Chancellor Olaf Scholz ruled out snap elections,  promising  instead to crack down on the AfD and propagandize his people into becoming more “modern” and “progressive.”

This was the prescription written for the ruling parties of the elite in the Council on Foreign Relations’ January warning, which said globalist power must be secured by information control:

Progressive policymakers need to start considering the trends that are driving these voting patterns and begin preparing narratives that can cut through them.

With this report in detail from Ireland, narrative control is compounded with another “conspiracy theory” in action: the replacement of the electorate by mass migration driven by war.

Irish elections ‘rigged’? Globalist replacement in action

Ireland has seen the most widespread popular revolt against what Irish natives call the “plantation” of huge volumes of male migrants into their nation.

Yet this popular upsurge was not reflected in local and EU elections, whose results are yet to be fully declared. The talk in Ireland is of migrants bussed to polling stations, and a media blackout on non-mainstream candidates for an Irish Ireland.

Dublin doctor Jane Holland, had this to say: “Imagine a government operated so poorly they had to import an entire nation of new voters because they lost the citizens’ vote.”

Holland sensibly suggested that “Voting should be reserved for citizens only.” Is she representative of a far-right conspiracy theory known as the “Great Replacement”?

Since 2004, non-Irish residents have been permitted to vote in elections in Ireland. An NGO campaigning for increased migrant rights to Irish homes and benefits has been “bussing” migrant voters to polling stations, ensuring they “vote correctly.”

Both the newspaper which reported this fact above, and the NGO bussing migrants to vote for migrants in elections – are funded by the European Union to do so.

The efforts of this NGO ensured “90 percent of asylum seekers turned out to vote.”

They celebrated many victories, including the first Nigerian woman to hold office in Galway.

Former Irish republican party Sinn Fein, now globalist, has been caught “farming votes from Ukrainians” in Ireland, with the promise of housing and accelerated citizenship in return.

Media ‘lockout’ of non-establishment candidates

Irish people simply do not hear of any alternative, according to critics, thanks to media censorship by omission.

“This is very clear after these elections. The national media worked in a deeply unethical manner to shield the general public from conservative perspectives in particular.”

So said independent journalist Eoin Lenihan, explaining, “There was a blanket lockout of non-leftist and non-establishment parties and independents.”

Lenihan’s statement on X (formerly Twitter) referenced another Irish user’s claim that “Irish journalists working for national media are toxic and a threat to democracy in Ireland. There was a blanket lockout of non-leftist and non-establishment parties and Independents.”

Despite regime efforts to suppress native Irish politics, four nationalists were elected to council positions in Dublin. Pro-life Patrick Quinlan won for the National Party, and Catholic Gavin Pepper is one “working class ordinary Irishman” who managed to break through the “lockout” to win a local council seat in Dublin.

“We’re up against the media” he said in his victory speech, “who don’t let us have a fair say.”

Attempted murder of Catholic nationalist

Another breakthrough came with the victory of pro-life Catholic Malachy Steenson, also in Dublin. Steenson, described as the “Plantation resistance leader,” recently addressed a crowd of 15,000 in a mass demonstration against the “plantation” of migrants into Ireland by its globalist government.

The Irish nationalist was attacked in his office last month by an “antifascist thug” who had arrived to kill him. Having announced his intention to assassinate Steenson to Irish police, he was followed to Steenson’s office, where he was arrested whilst attempting to carry out his threat.

Steenson is a strong critic of Israel’s actions in Gaza, and on his election denounced the Irish state broadcaster RTE as a “government propaganda organization.”

Steenson’s message was simple, stating that with his victory, “The revolution has begun.”

The view from Russia

With the mainstream media a component in the consolidation of globalist elite power, the perspective from a so-called enemy nation is perhaps the most sincere appraisal of the European situation.

When asked about the election results – and why EU policies will not change despite them – Chargé d’Affaires of the Russian Mission to the EU Kirill Logvinov said this on June 10 in an interview with Russian news outlet RIA:

The main reason is that protest sentiments have been ignored for a long time. The attempted violation of rights and freedoms during the pandemic, the failed migration policy, rising inflation, the deteriorating socio-economic situation, the urge to equate pro-European and pro-Ukrainian interests – the public grievances piled up and sooner or later had to find a ‘way out.’

And they found it in the European elections.

It is startling to see how the Russians view Europe: a managed democracy which is radicalizing its own populations against itself. Continuing, Logvinov stated:

In a number of countries, voters have virtually passed a vote of no confidence in the parties in power. Contrary to the rules of political life, however, ‘flawed’ national governments are not obliged to learn lessons immediately, which could lead to further radicalization of society.

The Russian diplomat concluded that the EU system will simply neutralize the will of its people:

Despite the voters’ simple demand for attention to their vital interests, the centrist majority will do its utmost to ‘dilute’ views and approaches that go against the political mainstream.

This is all the easier when MEPs are essentially unaccountable to their own electorate.

With a locked down media and the plantation of an imported voting bloc, Ireland is one nation to watch to see how long the politics of elite repression can continue under the European Union.

Continue Reading

Trending

X