CNN's John King: 'Every leader, whatever his party should be talking about climate change. You can have a debate about what to do about it. But that the President of the United States, at this moment in the world, did not mention climate change in even a sentence is, just frankly, a disgrace- any president, Democrat or Republican.'
'Democrats believe that animates their coalition, they believe it helps them, they believe, especially on the issue of climate change, especially on the issue of voting rights, it helps them to talk about things that the president won’t talk about.'
Climate Depot's Marc Morano's Response: CNN's John King said, 'Every leader, whatever his party should be talking about climate change'.
Morano: "I agree! President Trump should have repudiated the silly and activist written federal National Climate Assessment, he should have appointed Princeton scientist Dr. Will Happer as science czar who could have re-framed and debunked the climate change debate and he could have defunded the climate establishment. The Trump administration has an opportunity to expose the con of the man-made global warming premise and claims, but alas, instead there is no official government push-back on activist and media 'climate change' claims."
“We have unleashed a revolution in American Energy – the United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas in the world,” Trump said. “And now, for the first time in 65 years, we are a net exporter of energy.”
"They fear that if Mr. Trump was able to withdraw based on his signature, a future president could easily rejoin with another signature. Their solution: have the Senate take a vote to ratify the deal as a treaty, and defeat it. Yet withdrawal takes more than three years and full withdrawal won’t be finalized until after the 2020 election, according to the treaty’s terms, meaning if Mr. Trump were defeated, a future administration could reimpose it.
“President Trump made the least satisfactory choice among three alternatives when he announced he would keep his campaign promise to get the United States out of Paris,” Mr. Ebell said. “He accepted that President Obama’s mere signature accepting the treaty was valid, and that all he needed to do was send another signed letter of withdrawal.”
Some scientists who are skeptical of extreme climate change scenarios embraced the idea of forcing a Senate vote now. Dr. Richard Lindzen said the Senate should go even further and revoke any consent it has given to the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change, launched in 1992, whose semi-regular reports help propel the debate and provided the framework for Paris negotiations.
“Bush 41 signed this to lay claim to being our ‘environment president.’ Unfortunately, he committed us to the global warming alarm narrative,” Mr. Lindzen said.