It’s not about EVs. It’s about driving your car.

 

John Hinderaker at PowerLineBlog explains why we’ll never be driving electric vehicles:

Electric Vehicles Are Not The Future

The mania for electric vehicles is a fad that is driven 100% by government regulation. The consumer verdict on EVs has been in for a century. Some of the earliest cars were battery-powered, but they lost out to gasoline-powered cars because gasoline-powered vehicles are better.

Those who have been paying attention understand that there is zero chance that our existing motor vehicle fleet will be converted to EVs. Mark Tapscott sums up some of the reasons. I want to focus on just one of his points, the fact that the lithium batteries needed to replace our current vehicle fleet would require ridiculous amounts of mining of minerals, particularly lithium, the price of which is already sky-high. How do liberals intend to accomplish this unprecedented global mining project?

Answer: they don’t. Mark quotes from a report by an environmental organization:

This report finds that the United States can achieve zero emissions transportation while limiting the amount of lithium mining necessary by reducing the car dependence of the transportation system, decreasing the size of electric vehicle batteries, and maximizing lithium recycling.

Reordering the US transportation system through policy and spending shifts to prioritize public and active transit while reducing car dependency can also ensure transit equity, protect ecosystems, respect Indigenous rights, and meet the demands of global justice.

This is what liberal politicians are not telling you–yet. They don’t really plan to replace your car with an EV, they don’t want to replace it at all. . . .

"Transit equity"?  That's New World Order-speak for all of us peasants; the elites will travel in limousines and private jets. We'll ride the bus.  Read the rest of the column here.

# # #

Ukraine and Washington corruption: re-broadcast schedule on OAN

image credit: the DefuniakHerald

Yesterday, I posted a report about One America News Network’s (OAN) special investigative reports. Reporter Chanel Rion interviewed Rudy Giuliani and several witnesses from Ukraine, all of whose testimony undermines the framework for the “impeachment” process. The report did not break through today to the MSM, but OAN will be re-broadcasting parts 1 & 2 as well as premiering part 3 this weekend.   Mark your calendars or set your recording devices.  The programming is not showing up yet on the TV schedule for this weekend on ATT-TV, but the OAN website has this:

Catch All 3 Parts of One America News Investigates with Chanel Rion THIS SATURDAY Starting at 9am ET/6am PT

# # #

Ukraine and Washington corruption exposed

image credit: the DefuniakHerald

Most of the blogging here concentrates on local and state level developments as well as national news that affects core Tea Party values.  But this is so newsworthy that I decided to post anyway.  It was Sundance at Conservative Treehouse that tipped us off to the program.  Our household watched OAN’s 2-part investigative report this evening, with reporter Chanel Rion interviewing Rudy Giuliani and several witnesses from Ukraine. It was an eye-popper, and I hope it is picked up by headlines all over the place tomorrow.  Mark Tapscott at Instapundit was on it this evening:

ONE AMERICA NEWS (OAN) GOES WHERE MSM WON’T: Former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko tells OAN all about former U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovich’s “untouchables” list. If OAN can go to Ukraine and interview principals in the impeachment scandal, why can’t ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post, New York Times, etc. etc.?

UPDATE (FROM GLENN): Answer: Because they’re not interested in knowing what actually happened.

ANOTHER UPDATE (FROM GLENN): I’m bumping this up because it’s very important, undercutting the thesis of the whole impeachment endeavor. And this is the evidence that the House prosecutors will be confronted with if there’s a trial in the Senate.

I did not see that OAN was re-running the two-hour broadcast this coming week, so I have emailed them to see if it will re-run the two programs or make them accessible at their website. If you’ve been frustrated by the “impeachment” testimony and all the scandals that never lead to indictments, you’ll be glued to this. Meantime, I will be on the lookout for excerpts and footage. And you can read Sundance's report here.

# # #

Safety at the RNC in Cleveland

photo credit: cleveland.com

The Republican National Convention convenes next month. Do you think downtown Cleveland will be safe? Last month, Cleveland.com reported on the Cleveland Police Dept.'s and Safety Director's plans for the July event. But it's not just about crowd control and preventing damage and violence by the expected rent-a-mobs. Mark Tapscott at Daily Caller reports on “Five Ways Political Correctness Kills Americans.” It is scary. And Clevelanders should be concerned for their safety during the RNC in July:

Political correctness in the federal government protected radical Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen in at least five ways during the months leading up to his deadly assault on a gay nightclub in Orlando, according to a national security expert.

“The fact is that the FBI did recognize Omar Mateen, twice in fact, but as a matter of official policy under the Obama administration’s politically correct ‘countering violent extremism’ policies, the institutional rules of our national security agencies as a matter of intentional design ensure that investigative clues are obscured,” Patrick Poole told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Poole is co-founder of Unconstrained Analytics, non-profit group dedicated to analyzing “evidence unconstrained by preconceptions and biases” concerning international terrorism. He has been a guest lecturer on counter-terrorism issues at the U.S. Army War College and a speaker at the Army Provost Marshal’s annual Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection conference.

PC blinds homeland defenders: Among the most controversial of the five factors Poole cited was a 2011 decision by FBI officials to remove from its counter-terrorism training materials references to all terms found objectionable by a team of Muslim experts retained by the Department of Justice. Despite congressional protests, the material was never restored.

As a result, “violent extremist” effectively became the official federal designation for individuals like Mateen, San Bernadino attackers Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook, Boston Marathon bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and Fort Hood killer Nidal Malik Hasan, despite their shared devotion to radical Islamic movements, including ISIS and al Qaeda.

PC perverts religious tolerance: The FBI’s head-in-the-sand approach is also seen in a recently completed Department of Homeland Security report that directs federal officials there “not to use any language that might be ‘disrespectful’ to Muslims, including (but not limited to) the words ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia’ and ‘takfir.’” Poole said the policies recommended by the report are in effect throughout the federal government.

Among the federal agencies in DHS are the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration.

PC discourages witnesses. . .

PC gives cover to terrorist allies . . .

PC hamstrings Congress. . . .

Much more from Tapscott here.

Michelle Malkin outlines the terrifying context in which the Orlando terror attack took place in her column here.

# # #