America may be headed for a new type of energy crisis. While fracking technology still gives us relative energy independence, there is a distinct possibility that an electricity energy crisis awaits us. What if the demand for electricity significantly exceeds the supply over the next decade? We’d have soaring prices and rolling brownouts. That crisis could easily be triggered by the electric vehicles (EVs) Biden’s administration is pushing.
By his Executive Order and an associated Action Plan, Biden’s administration calls for 50% of all new vehicles sold in America by 2030 to be EVs. That means an additional 50 million new EVs on the road in the next nine years, all in an effort to lower Green House Gas (GHG) emissions, namely CO2.
On December 13, 2021, the administration announced its plan to spend $7.5 billion to construct 500,000 EV charging stations throughout the US. The plan’s funding comes from the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure & Jobs Act Biden signed on November 15, 2021.
Then, on January 20, President Biden signed Executive Order 13990—Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis. This EO includes a wide range of environmental policies including vehicle fuel economy standards. The scariest of those policies is a set of new regulations from the EPA called SAFE, which stands for The Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Final Rule for Model Years 2021-2026:
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalize updated Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish new standards, covering model years 2021 through 2026.
Fun Fact: These standards, imposed on car manufacturers, set the minimum average fuel economy limit (i.e., 40 miles per gallon) for their entire fleet of vehicles. A gas-powered fleet alone cannot meet these standards. Instead, car companies must sell more EVs to increase their fleet-wide average fuel economy. One way is to hawk EVs as more fuel-efficient.
On the EPA-mandated sticker on new EVs, you’ll see a fuel economy designation called MPGe (Miles Per Gallon equivalent). It’s usually greater than 100, making unwary consumers believe the vehicle is several times more fuel-efficient than a comparable gas guzzler. However, EVs are not really several times more fuel-efficient (but that’s a topic for another day).
Americans bought or leased about 15 million new cars and light trucks in 2021 and that number is forecasted to grow to 17 million by 2030. Assuming a ramp-up in EV sales from 2.3 million in 2021 to 8.5 million in 2030 (50% of 17 million), there would be 50 million more new EVs plugged into our electrical grid. The big question, then, is where vast amounts of so-called “clean energy” come from to charge all those EVs and what will it cost consumers.
Fun Fact: The current average price of electricity that residential consumers pay is $.14 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), although it varies from $.09 to $.23 per kWh based upon local supply and demand. Imagine if the price of electricity in your area increased by 50%. Or worse, imagine there is no electricity to heat and cool your home or…charge your brand-new EV.
Most major auto manufacturers (and a few trendy new ones) are rushing to market with all-electric vehicles. However, they are not spending billions on EV development because of consumer demand. Instead, onerous CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) and EPA imposed GHG emission standards force them into the EV market.
The NHTSA (National Highway Transportation Safety Administration) latest proposed CAFE standards directly respond to Biden’s Executive Order 13990 and call for a whopping 8% per year increase (up from the current 1.5% per year) in average fleet fuel economy from 2024 to 2026. That’s an average increase of 12 miles per gallon above the 2021 standard. Eventually, gas-powered vehicles alone won’t be able to meet these standards, making EV’s the only real alternative.
Image: Electric vehicle charging by frimufilms. Freepik license.
In the next few years, Biden’s administration will allocate $5.0 billion to individual states and award another $2.5 billion to selected contractors to facilitate installing 500,000 new charging stations. Simultaneously, the administration will use various regulatory means—e.g., CAFE standards, GHG standards, and EV tax credits—to put 50 million new EVs onto the road by 2030. Unfortunately, America won’t have the electricity needed to charge those EVs unless new and expanded fossil fuel-based power plants are built now.
The average EV consumes over 25 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electrical power to go 100 miles or 3,000 kWh to go 12,000 miles per year. That means an additional 150 billion kWh of electricity to charge 50 million new EVs. In 2020, total U.S. retail electricity sales to end-use customers were about 3.7 trillion kWh (3,700 billion kWh). An additional 150 billion kWh would be a 4% increase in total demand over the next nine years—just to charge new EVs!
America Electric Power Grid is already strained in many parts of the country. In 2020, our electric power generation makeup was 40% natural gas, 19% coal, 20% nuclear, 8% wind, 7% hydro, 2% solar, and 4% other fuel sources, meaning roughly 60% of our electricity comes from fossil fuels and another 27% comes from nuclear and hydroelectric power plants. The administration doesn’t plan to build new nuclear or hydroelectric plants.
Fun Fact: America imports 47 billion kWh each year from Canada to meet peak demand. America’s largest natural gas-powered plants, like those in Gila Bend, Arizona, can generate 2.2 GW, and the largest coal-powered plants, like the Robert Sherer power plant in Georgia, can generate 3.5 GW of continuous electric power, at full capacity. But because electricity can’t be stored and, because the demand fluctuates dramatically with the weather and the time of day, power plants operate at only about 40% of their maximum output capacity, on average. Thus, a 2.2 GW plant operating at 40% capacity generates about 7.7 billion kWh of useable electricity in one year (2.2 GW x 40% x 8760 hours/year).
Wind and solar power will continue to grow but such power plants are not nearly large enough to provide the continuous power needed to meet the demand of 50 million additional EVs. For perspective, the capacity of America’s largest wind farm, Alta Wind Energy of California, is 1.5 gigawatts (GW) and the capacity of America’s largest solar farm, Solar Star of California, is .6 GW. Worse, they only generate electricity when the wind blows and the sun shines. Therefore, wind farms typically operate at less than 50% capacity and solar farms typically operate at only 25% of capacity A huge 1.5 GW wind farm (32,000 acres) operating at 50% capacity will generate about 6.6 billion kWh of useable electricity per year (1.5 GW x 50% x 8760 hrs./yr) and a huge .6 GW solar farm will only generate about 1.3 billion kWh per year (.6 GW x 25% x 8760).
Here’s the bottom line: There isn’t nearly enough electrical power available or in the pipeline to fuel 50 million new EVs by 2030. That would require an additional 150 billion kWh’s per year of deliverable electricity. Even the largest power plants only deliver about 8 billion kWh’s per year.
To achieve the administration’s climate change policy goals for EVs, America must build and commission about 20 large new fossil fuel-powered plants or several dozen large new wind and solar farms. That’s impossible by 2030 because large power plants take years to plan, build and bring online. Which means 2030 will either collapse the energy grid or result in a lot of cars that won’t go.
Jerry Korth is a seasoned entrepreneur and inventor having founded several small high-tech businesses. He is currently working on a green energy project to convert waste motor oil into low sulphur marine diesel fuel. Email: jerry.korth@prsmip.com
THE BARONESS OF LA RAZA NANCY PELOSI AND HER TESLA STOCK CON
The president shared a clip Monday highlighting a CBS 60 Minutes report featuring author and Breitbart senior contributor Peter Schweizer’s investigation into Pelosi and her husband participating in at least eight different stock IPOs while in Congress.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY'S BRIBES SUCKING KLEPTOCRACY
Watters' World' investigates Nancy Pelosi's financial dealings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M4QZJxb9D\
Nancy Pelosi, a horrid woman equally as without heart and soul, on Tuesday refused to have the names of the thirteen soldiers killed in Kabul read out on the floor of the House. That should permanently indict her for being the wicked witch she is. She is more devious, more calculating than the irresponsible Biden but every bit as beyond redemption as he is. She will do anything to try to convince the American people, for whom she has only contempt, that whatever she and her party do is righteous no matter how loathsome and totalitarian. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Stench of corruption: Nancy Pelosi buys Big Tech call options
By Monica Showalter
Nancy Pelosi has grown very rich while in public office. She's amassed a reported $120 million fortune on a $223,500 annual congressional salary.
And like Hillary Clinton, she's an expert stock picker. In her case, she trades a lot on stocks of companies she writes the laws for, and somehow, it always seems to go her way.
Last year, her pick was Tesla. This year? All about Big Tech.
She's laying the money down. According to Mediaite:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) placed up to $3 million in bets this month on a handful of companies to succeed in 2022 — including Google, SalesForce, and Disney.
Pelosi and her husband, Paul Pelosi, put the money on call options in the four-day period from Dec. 17-21, according to disclosures made public on Thursday by the House Clerk. Their largest investment was for call options for SalesForce, valued at $500,000 to $1.250 million. The options came with a strike price of $210 on Jan. 20, 2023, compared to $65 as of Dec. 29. Google ranked as their second-highest investment, with $500,000-$1 million for calls at a strike price of $2,000 on Sept. 16, 2022, compared to $109 on Thursday.
Other investments included $250,000-$500,000 on call options for Micron Technology, at a strike price of $50 on Sept. 16, 2022; the same amount for calls on Roblox, at a price of $100 on Jan. 20, 2023; and $100,000-$250,000 for calls on Disney at $130 on Sept. 16, 2022.
The disclosures, which members of Congress are required to file, reveal monetary ranges for their investments, but not exact figures.
The Pelosis, both 81, have developed a reputation for prophetic ability when it comes to picking stocks. Their trades last made headlines in January, when they purchased between $500,000 and $1 million in call options in Tesla at a strike price of $500. That stock hit a new historical high last month in excess of $1,200.
To explain those options -- what she's betting is that a company like Google's stock price is going to rise and be at a certain level. When she buys an option, she's buying a derivative that gives her the right, but not obligation, to purchase that stock at a certain "strike price," meaning, she thinks everyone else is going to have to buy it at a higher price. That's where the money is to be made. In the case of Google, she's betting the price of a share of that company will be well above what it is now (currently at around $2,900 today) by the strike price date of Sept. 16, 2022. But she will have the right to buy it cheaper, which should be very profitable should she decide to sell it afterwards. For instance, and to take a hypothetical example, if the share price of Google goes up to $3,000, and she exercises her call option to buy her share at $2,000, well, she can then sell the share at a $1,000 profit, which is a nice piece of cake. The price of the call option is not the same as the price of the stock since it's a derivative of the stock. According to Investopedia:
The price difference between the underlying stock price and the strike price determines an option's value. For buyers of a call option, if the strike price is above the underlying stock price, the option is out of the money (OTM). In this case, the option doesn't have intrinsic value, but it may still have value based on volatility and time until expiration as either of these two factors could put the option in the money in the future. Conversely, If the underlying stock price is above the strike price, the option will have intrinsic value and be in the money.
And according to Mediaite:
Pelosi and her husband, Paul Pelosi, put the money on call options in the four-day period from Dec. 17-21, according to disclosures made public on Thursday by the House Clerk. Their largest investment was for call options for SalesForce, valued at $500,000 to $1.250 million. The options came with a strike price of $210 on Jan. 20, 2023, compared to $65 as of Dec. 29. Google ranked as their second-highest investment, with $500,000-$1 million for calls at a strike price of $2,000 on Sept. 16, 2022, compared to $109 on Thursday.
A $2,000 call, versus a previous $109 call price? She obviously thinks Google is in for some good times.
According to Mediaite, she's really good at this:
By some estimate, Pelosi and her husband made a 45.59 percent return on stocks last year, along with a 66.7 percent return on options trading.
Most fund managers would kill to make those kinds of returns. These are comparable the kinds of profits only art geniuses such as Hunter Biden can make on their 'output,' while real artists make quite a bit less.
See the problem?
And sure enough, the New York Post has reported that Pelosi herself is blocking legislation that would force Google and some of the other tech baronies to level their playing fields on commercial search results. The Post ran this on Nov. 4:
As a bipartisan group of Washington lawmakers mounts a battle to rein in Big Tech, some insiders say it faces a formidable and possibly surprising obstacle: Nancy Pelosi.
The 81-year-old Democratic House majority leader has made symbolic gestures to defy Silicon Valley such as refusing to take calls from Mark Zuckerberg and declaring 2019 that “the era of self-regulation is over.”
Nevertheless, insiders say she’s slow-walking legislation, including a so-called “non-discrimination bill” that would put a major dent in tech firms including Google and Amazon. The proposal would prohibit the practice of the companies giving their own products favorable treatment in search results.
The bill — sponsored by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) — was one of six that passed the House Judiciary Committee in June. A nearly-identical companion bill sponsored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) was introduced last month in the Senate and is gaining steam.
Which sounds a little funny, now that Pelosi is laying money down on where she thinks the price of Google's stock is going to be.
Pelosi herself has defended these smelly moves, the idea of congress members trading on stocks in industries they make laws for as the work of "free-market economy" (free for whom?) while the tech barons at Twitter have banned a popular Twitter page called Nancy Pelosi Portfolio Tracker, or @NancyTracker which must have bothered Pelosi mightily.
Now we see one last galloping call in favor of Big Tech, which she is all to willing to go to bat for in Congress, and given Big Tech's heavy-handed censorship and other manipulations of the 2020 U.S. election, she obviously owes political favors to.
See how this works? She ought to be forced by a bipartisan group of Squadsters and Republicans to hold a vote on the measure she's blocking this year. And come November, Republicans at the helm should put a stop to this kind of activity, and send in the special counsels to investigate these curious investing activities of Pelosi's. It ought to be Item A on the agenda.
Scarborough: Zuckerberg, Musk ‘Robber Barons’; Tax Cuts ‘Grotesque’
0 seconds of 1 minute, 59 secondsVolume 90%
TRENT BAKER
16 Dec 20210
MSNBC “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough blasted Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Tesla founder and space entrepreneur Elon Musk on Thursday.
Scarborough described the two tech giants as “robber barons.” He also lamented the tax cuts from the 1980s and 1990s, which he supported, as well as the GOP’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, arguing they “created the greatest income redistribution in the history of the planet.”
“I don’t know that anybody since John Rockefeller has had as unfeathered power as Mark Zuckerberg has right now where no one stands up to him inside his company, no one stands up to him on the board, no one stands up to him in Congress, no one stands up to him at the White House, no one really stands up to him in the media. He is a robber baron. Elon Musk is a robber baron. These people are robber barons,” Scarborough proclaimed.
“And we have seen the greatest transfer of wealth, which Republicans love to say, ‘Oh, we don’t like to redistribute income.’ Oh, really? Well, the tax policies that I have supported through the ’80s and ’90s and continued to be supported by Republicans in the 21s century have created the greatest income redistribution in the history of this planet from middle-class Americans to the Elon Musks of the world,” he added. “It’s grotesque.”
Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent
‘We’re a Free Market’: Nancy Pelosi Rejects Ban on Lawmakers, Spouses Trading Individual Stocks
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
PAUL BOIS
16 Dec 20210
2:39
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said members of Congress and their
spouses should not be barred from trading individual stocks as part
of the STOCK Act, citing a “free market economy.”
During a press briefing on Wednesday, in response to a report from Insider showing that 49 members of Congress (Democrats and Republicans) have failed to disclose their transactions in accordance with Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012, Pelosi was asked if members of Congress and their spouses should be banned from trading individual stocks, thereby preventing insider trading,
“We’re a free-market economy,” Pelosi explained. “They should be able to participate in that.”
Pelosi did note that members of Congress should be revealing their stock transactions, which would show possible insider trading:
As noted by Insider, the STOCK Act of 2012, legislation Andrew Breitbart heavily backed, was designed to combat possible insider trading and conflicts of interests among members of Congress, forcing “lawmakers to be more transparent about their personal financial dealings”:
A key provision of the law mandates that lawmakers publicly — and quickly — disclose any stock trade made by themselves, a spouse, or a dependent child.
But many members of Congress have not fully complied with the law. They offer excuses including ignorance of the law, clerical errors, and mistakes by an accountant. Insider has chronicled this widespread nature of this phenomenon in a new project, “Conflicted Congress.”
Lawmakers who violate the STOCK Act could be fined up to $200, a small penalty that has led several ethics watchdog groups to call for harsher penalties or an all-out ban on lawmakers from trading stocks – a practice by which Nancy Pelosi and her husband, Paul, have become considerably wealthy. This year, for instance, weeks prior to the House Judiciary Committee’s vote on the antitrust legislation aimed at some major Big Tech companies, Paul Pelosi began “exercising call options to acquire 4,000 shares of Alphabet, the parent company of Google, at a strike price of $1,200,” according to Bloomberg. The trade netted Pelosi a $4.8 million gain.
Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer has been a heavy proponent of the STOCK Act since its inception with his 2011 book Throw Them All Out, which formed the basis for a 60 Minutes report about unethical stock trades in Congress.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY OF INFLUENCE PEDDLERS, BRIBES SUCKERS AND CORPORATE RENT BOYS FOR HIRE
THE CASE AGAINST NANCY PELOSI, SILENT PARTNER AND ABETTER TO SOME OF THE MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS IN U.S. HISTORY, INCLUDING HER COLLEAGE DIANNE FEINSTEIN, KAMALA HARRIS, JOE BIDEN AND THE BIDEN CRIME FAMILY, HILLARY AND BILLARY AND THE OBOMBS WITH THEIR $500K BANKSTER SPEECH FEE BRIBES AND FRAUDULENT $62 MILLION BOOK DEAL THE TAX PAYERS ACTUALLY PAID FOR.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY'S BRIBES SUCKING KLEPTOCRACY
Watters' World' investigates Nancy Pelosi's financial dealings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M4QZJxb9Dw
Nancy Pelosi, a horrid woman equally as without heart and soul, on Tuesday refused to have the names of the thirteen soldiers killed in Kabul read out on the floor of the House. That should permanently indict her for being the wicked witch she is. She is more devious, more calculating than the irresponsible Biden but every bit as beyond redemption as he is. She will do anything to try to convince the American people, for whom she has only contempt, that whatever she and her party do is righteous no matter how loathsome and totalitarian. PATRICIA McCARTHY
Pelosi Pushes Electric Vehicle Subsidies As Husband’s Tesla Stock Soars
Paul Pelosi owns up to $1 million of Tesla call options
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D., Calif.) husband hit pay dirt on Monday as Tesla's valuation rose to $1 trillion.
The news comes as Pelosi spearheads legislation that doles out tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to the electric vehicle industry, including Tesla, with provisions to build charging stations for cars and incentivize electric car purchases through tax credits.
The financial dealings of Pelosi's husband, Paul, came under scrutiny earlier this year when he purchased as much as $1 million of Tesla call options, one of the largest transactions of Tesla shares disclosed by a member of Congress. At the time, Republicans charged that the House speaker was cashing in on her power.
Members of Congress and their spouses are legally allowed to buy and sell stock, as long as it is not based on insider information. Members are required to disclose their transactions to the House Committee on Ethics, as Pelosi did with the Tesla transaction on Jan. 21.
Pelosi is spearheading negotiations with the White House as Democrats look to pass Joe Biden's Build Back Better plan and a reconciliation bill that includes the electric car incentives. Tesla, a pioneer in the electric car industry, is poised to see a significant boost from the legislation, according to industry watchers.
Democrats are proposing nearly $120 billion to fund various clean energy projects, and another $34.5 billion dedicated to zero-emission vehicles. The reconciliation bill also proposes $42 billion in tax credits for purchases of electric vehicles, which Democrats hope will incentivize new car buyers to purchase electric vehicles instead of gas-powered cars. The bill offers up to $12,500 in credits for each car. It also calls for tens of billions of dollars in spending to build charging stations for electric cars across the country.
Tesla's dramatic rise is likely attributable to several factors beyond the Democrats' spending proposals. Tesla founder Elon Musk recently announced he is moving the company's headquarters from California to Texas, which has no state income tax. Tesla's cars have also gained in popularity without federal incentives.
And while Tesla and other clean energy companies stand to gain with environmentally friendly Democrats in power, the company opposes some aspects of the reconciliation proposal, such as an additional credit for the purchase of electric cars made in unionized factories. Musk has publicly opposed unionization efforts.
Pelosi's office did not respond to requests for comment.
RIDING THE DRAGON: The Bidens' Chinese Secrets (Full Documentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRmlcEBAiIs
CHINA’S OLD WHORE SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, AMERICA’S BIGGEST WAR PROFITEER, WAS FIRST TO ENDORSE BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT. WONDER WHY???
As Glenn Bunting of the Los Angeles Times reported in 1997, Feinstein’s husband Richard Blum “has expanded his private business interests in China – to the point that his firm is now a prominent investor inside the communist nation.” In 1995, Dianne Feinstein became a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “giving her a prominent platform for her efforts to support China’s trade privileges.”
As Ben Weingarten noted in the Federalist in 2018, Feinstein’s husband has “profited handsomely from the greatly expanded China trade she supported.” The senator also “served as a key intermediary between China and the U.S. government, while serving on committees whose work would be of keen interest to the PRC.”
For 20 years, through three election cycles, Feinstein maintained on her staff a Chinese spy who would even attend consular functions for the California Democrat. One wonders what the FBI knew, when they knew it, and what they did about it, if anything.
Other politicians with China business connections include Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi, whose husband has conducted a series of deals in the Communist nation. Recall that Speaker Pelosi kept Eric Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee even after his “PoonFang” liaisons with a Chinese spy (FEINSTEIN LONG EMPLOYED A CHINESE SPY).
Donald Trump Questions Nancy Pelosi’s Corruption
CHARLIE SPIERING
President Donald Trump questioned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s dubious participation in stock market initial public offering shares, enriching her family.
The president shared a clip Monday highlighting a CBS 60 Minutes report featuring author and Breitbart senior contributor Peter Schweizer’s investigation into Pelosi and her husband participating in at least eight different stock IPOs while in Congress.
"The House gone rogue! I want to remind you a little bit about the ring leader in this whole rogue operation against the President of the United States..." @MarkLevinShow
60 Minutes reporter Steve Kroft confronted Pelosi on the topic in 2011, but she denied any impropriety.
The report noted that Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering of Visa in 2008, while credit card regulation was underway in the House of Representatives. The Pelosis bought 5,000 shares at the initial price of $44 and shares were trading at $64 just two days later, according to the report.
“Congress has never done more for consumers nor has the Congress passed more critical reforms of the credit card industry than under the Speakership of Nancy Pelosi,” Pelosi spokesman, Drew Hammill, said in a statement, according to CNN after the 60 Minutes report aired.
The clip was featured on Mark Levin’s Fox News show Life, Liberty and Levin on Sunday.
Turns out Biden's family not the only one to benefit from Ukrainian fossil fuels
On Sept. 24, 2019, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the official impeachment inquiry that would be led by the Intelligence Committee and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). At first, this was a curious decision to objective persons, since the Judiciary Committee has the authority over this type of procedure. At the time, Pelosi indicated a threat by President Donald Trump to our national security during the July 25 conversation between him and President Zelensky of Ukraine. She did this without the benefit of the transcript, but she doubtless already knew much of the CIA "whistleblower's" complaint. Further, the Ukrainian president disputes her version.
But this is not the rationale for her haste to convene the investigation. It appears that the D.C. swamp benefits another powerful family. The Biden family has gotten special treatment from Ukrainian oil interests, and the Pelosi family has a similar advantage. Paul Pelosi, Jr. was a board member of Viscoil and an executive at its related company NRGLab, which was involved in energy business in Ukraine. Perhaps the use of the Intelligence Committee has given the Democrats the opportunity to limit Republican questioning and maintain secrecy over the responses from subpoenaed witnesses. This would prevent any official record implicating Pelosi's son. This also explains her reluctance to take a vote authorizing the investigation, since the minority party would gain some rights.
This is interesting also since much of the Democratic Party rejects carbon-based energy sources. Biden has made this a part of his campaign. The Green New Deal proposals will eventually end dependency on oil and gas as an energy source. But this does not stop these politicos from benefiting financially from this sector of the economy. This reminds one of the financial benefits that Al Gore's father had from Occidental Petroleum, which was one of the great polluters (remember Love Canal?). He chose to make money selling carbon offsets to atone and make his own name.
The Ukrainian oil company Burisma used many well connected members of the D.C. establishment connected to the Obama administration. This interlocking swamp is a threat to the USA. But the media have managed to convince a vast number of Americans that Trump is the threat. When Trump railed against Pelosi in Louisiana on Friday, he was accusing her of not just splitting the nation politically, but also ignoring the financial benefits to powerful families at the detriment of our national security. This also helps explain the constant discussion in public about Biden's son Hunter, in addition to the political advantage he might gain.
No wonder the establishment (including many Republicans) wants to impeach Trump. Family security always "trumps" national security in the D.C. swamp.
SURELY YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT PELOSI PAYS A LIVING WAGES TO HER ILLEGALS WORKING AT HER ST. HELENA, NAPA COUNTY, MEXIFORNIA WINERY, DO YOU?
NANCY PELOSI GOT RICH OFF ELECTED OFFICE AND SERVICING THE “CHEAP”
LABOR LOBBIES - Jim Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”
CALL NANCY PELOSI Washington , DC - (202) 225-4965 San Francisco , CA - (415) 556-4862
EMAIL NANCY PELOSI sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.
Pelosi's Stake in Illegal Immigration
________________________________________
The Minuteman Project, founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the liberal press.
So it was no surprise that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”
Gilchrist did not stop there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the Foley page controversy.
Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.
At the same time, Pelosi has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus Mall.
How many other terrorist suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the “matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’ licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally register to vote in our elections.
Pelosi also believes in giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the deportability of alien terrorists.
Jim Gilchrist cut to the chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want you to read:
"As we’ve shown again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."
Pelosi sees Jim Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker of the House.
Gilchrist, of course, is accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the "Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans. Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance, which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement declaring:
“The Minutemen are not a legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is illegal.” (Emphasis added)
We have come to the point in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border and reporting illegal entry to the authorities.
Leftist slogans like “no human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants, but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values, not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be thrown aside now?
What we are witnessing is a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out?
It is high time, as Jim Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.
Pelosi - Illegals - Sunkist - Her investments!
Pelosi's corrupt insider passing of bills that make her rich.
Check for yourself
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_get_wage_breaks_and.html
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home House District includes San Francisco.
Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi's home district.
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.
Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.
Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million dollars of Star-Kist stock.
In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than their competition's.
Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an "economic development credit in American Samoa".
Pelosi has called the Bush Administration "corrupt".
Check some more for yourself
http://www.snopes.com/politics/pelosi/americansamoa.asp
Conservative Activist Jumps Pelosi's Fence With Illegal Aliens to Prove a Vital Point
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/01/14/conservative-activists-jump-pelosis-fence-with-illegal-aliens-to-prove-a-vital-point-n2539038
Conservative activist Laura Loomer, who is known for going undercover with James O'Keefe, took alleged illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala to Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home in California. There, the group jumped the fence and Loomer demanded the group be let into the home. The group set up a pop up tent with the word "morality" on it and hung the pictures of those who were killed by illegal aliens, The Daily Caller reported.
