Hansen – Lying To Congress For Almost 30 Years

ScreenHunter_2454 Sep. 01 15.58

ScreenHunter_2455 Sep. 01 15.59

The Milwaukee Journal – Google News Archive Search

In 1986, Hansen told Congress that the US had warmed 1-2 degrees since 1958, but his own graph showed no warming since 1958, and cooling since the 1930s.

ScreenHunter_2453 Sep. 01 15.57

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Whither U.S. Climate?

Whither U.S. Climate?
By James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato — August 1999

in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases — in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country (Figure 2).

About these ads

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Hansen – Lying To Congress For Almost 30 Years

  1. Gail Combs says:

    Contempt of Congress

    Contempt of Congress is initiated by a resolution reported from the affected congressional committee which can cite any individual for contempt. The resolution must then be adopted by the House or Senate. If the relevant chamber adopts the contempt resolution recommended by one of its committees, the matter is referred to a U.S. Attorney for prosecution. The U.S. Attorney may call in a grand jury to decide whether or not to indict and prosecute. If prosecuted by the courts and found guilty of contempt, the punishment is presently set at up to one year in prison and/or up to $1,000 in fines.

    The last high-ranking federal official to be held in contempt was Anne Gorsuch, then administrator of the EPA, in 1982. The House voted the citation for her refusal to provide requested documents concerning the Superfund to the Energy and Commerce Committee then chaired by Rep. John Dingell (D-MI). Prosecution of her case was halted after the Reagan White House negotiated an agreement to allow access to the papers.

    Contempt resolutions have most often been issued in two categories: (1) for reasons of refusing to testify or failing to provide Congress with requested documents or answers, and (2) bribing or libeling a Member of Congress. Contempt citations are limited to matters which relate to legislative purposes and which fall within the affected committee’s established jurisdiction.

    Several Supreme Court decisions have upheld the contempt authority of Congress…

    http://www.yuricareport.com/Law%20&%20Legal/ContemptOfCongress.html

    That is a piddling little penalty and tough to make stick. No wonder so many lie to Congress with impunity!

    But Congress can get a bit nastier: Congressman Introduces Bill to Withhold Eric Holder’s Paycheck

    Congressman Blake Farenthold may or may not be able to get Obama Attorney General Eric Holder impeached and removed from office, but the bill he just introduced would hit Holder where it hurts the most — in the wallet.

    Congressman Farenthold, who represents the 27th congressional district in Texas, along with fellow Republican congressmen Scott DesJarlais (TN-04) and James Lankford (OK-05), have introduced the Contempt Act (H.R. 4447), which would withhold the compensation of any government employee or official who is held in contempt of Congress.

    Eric Holder, the first sitting Cabinet member to be held in contempt in the history of the United States, was held in contempt in June of 2012 for his refusal to release information regarding the Obama-Holder gunrunning operation known as Fast and Furious, which sent guns to Mexican drug lords. 17 Democrats joined with Republicans, resulting in a 255-67 vote against the Obama attorney general, with 108 Democrats choosing to abstain.

    Rep. Farenthold briefly mentioned the bill last week, stating that, “If he [Eric Holder] continues refuse to resign, my bill would at least prevent hardworking American taxpayers from paying his salary,” and that any regular American citizen who refused to honor subpoenas like Holder has “would be in jail.”

    House votes to hold Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress

    Of course she still has to be found ‘guilty’.

    Now the matter will be referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. The contempt charge will then be referred to a grand jury for further review, but it is unclear how the Justice Department will proceed. Politically, however, House Republicans will be able to declare victory after working swiftly in the last year to investigate the matter and hold a senior IRS official accountable for the agency’s decision and her unwillingness to cooperate with a congressional investigation.

    Expect it to be quietly swept under the rug and forgotten.

    No one among America’s Ruling Class actually wants to punish one of their own but the Great Unwashed has to be treated to bread and circuses occasionally and the illusion that they have ‘choices’ must be maintained.

  2. nielszoo says:

    Gail’s nailed it as usual. Nothing will ever be done until we flush the sewer that is Congress, then we flush the Executive branch’s bureaucracies by paring them back to their Constitutional limits and then we start impeaching federal judges who have willfully ignored the Constitution. While that’s going on we need the States to get together and repeal the 17th Amendment to give them back their leash on the feds and then chop the commerce clause back to what it was designed to do, keep the States from cheating each other, not federal control of life, the universe and everything. The illegal interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Section 1 needs to be stopped as well. Whether that takes another amendment or just teaching judges how to read is an open question.

    Without clearing out the cr*p and getting back to founding principles we will be saddle with an exponentially increasing number of Obamas, Holders and Hansens, putting forward their destructive agendas… as long as it increases government power and control over us dumb serfs they will never stop unless we stop them.

  3. NancyG says:

    We need term limits. Our president can’t serve more than 2 terms, our senators and congressmen should have limits too.

    • Gail Combs says:

      Lawyers should be completely barred from public office except in the judiciary branch because it is a conflict of interest for lawyers to write the laws that later will put money in their pockets or the pockets of their law firms.

      Get rid of lobbying especially by foreign countries and international NGOs. It is OUR country and Congress should be concerned with OUR interests and not that of China or India or Israel or the World Wild Life Fund. More over the US government should NOT give any funding to NGOs.

      Corporations should not be considered “persons” and should be completely barred from interfering in politics.

      Of course this is all wishful thinking because the low information voter will keep putting the elites hand picked pets into office and we will continue to have what rights we have left eroded.

      • mjc says:

        I don’t mind the ‘personhood’ of corporations…if it’s not only benefits of ‘personhood’ that are granted but the responsibilities and penalties, too.

        There’s this nice little part of being a non-profit that’s often overlooked…no political involvement. Many, if not all, the NGOs are non-profits…

        As to lawyers being legislators…simple solution. Instead of outright barring them from office…they have to give up their license to practice law while in office AND for 20 yrs after leaving office.

  4. Edmonton Al says:

    Will sitting lawyer approve any law[s] to restict or ban future lawyers??
    NFL.

  5. Gail Combs says:

    mjc says: “….There’s this nice little part of being a non-profit that’s often overlooked…no political involvement. Many, if not all, the NGOs are non-profits…”

    Yes, you can thank Senator Lyndon B. Johnson for putting that muzzle on churches. Note that it is ONLY churches (and politically incorrect non-profits) that are held to the “…no political involvement….” The UN sanctioned international NGOs easily get around it by setting up another corporation that is politically active and receives funds from the NGO.

    As with all other laws it is the SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT that is the real I gotcha.

    One guy (Sanchojones) had a brother working for the EPA. He was instructed to go after the Mom and Pop businesses and leave the big boys alone. There is plenty of evidence that the FDA and USDA follows a similar policy. Shielding the Giants: USDA don’t look don’t tell policy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s