Trump’s “HUGE” understatement: Paris Climate Accord a “Bad deal”

No Mordecai Jones is he

  • Others calling Obama’s attempt to sell the accord to the country a flimflam is an insult to the integrity of flimfammery
  • It was a lie on the scale of “you can keep your doctor”

Donald Trump is not the only one to describe the Paris Climate Change Accord as a “bad deal” for the United States.

Objective observers, those few there are, could not possibly deny it!

But, how bad a deal was it…few American voters realized. This was not only a ‘bad deal’, this was a model of misrepresentation, duplicity, and treachery more blatant than any international “agreement”, probably in all of history (a final determination of ‘the worst’, however, must await close and honest analysis of the Iran Nuclear Agreement.)

So, how bad was it?:

– Naturally, not widely reported, the Paris Agreement was not intended to address “climate change”. It was an international ‘bait and switch’ swindle , primarily aimed at the United States taxpayer.

– As the N.Y. Post reported, in its story* on the Democrats’ “climate change debate” earlier this month:

“The preamble to the Paris Agreement alone tells you this is at heart a social engineering project, aimed at remaking the capitalist economies of the West.

“Signatories must “respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity.”

– 193 countries signed on to this “agreement**. The vast majority agreed to cut their carbon emissions…if they received $$cash$$ for doing so.

As examples, (Via Washington Times)

– Yemen has promised a whopping 1 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions as part of the global Paris climate agreement.

– North Korea, meanwhile, has said its pollution will double by 2030 compared with 2000 levels — but only if the rest of the world writes a sizable check. (Its pollution will thus increase more if it doesn’t get the check.)

– Peru says it can cut emissions by 30 percent by 2030 compared with its “business as usual” projections, though that would be a net pollution increase of 22 percent and is contingent on billions of dollars in funding.**

– …the vast majority of commitments offered in Paris would result in emissions increases or would require billions of dollars in funding… !!! At least $420 billion has been formally requested under countries’ submissions to the Paris agreement…!!!!!

– The U.S. vowed to cut its emissions at least 26 percent by 2030 compared with 2005 levels…AND to pay $3 billion in the first year of the pact for the privilege! (When the Obama administration finalized the agreement in December 2015, it committed $3 billion to the United Nations’ Green Climate Fund, which is meant to help countries meet their targets.)

– Thanks to the generosity of Barack Obama, on behalf of US taxpayers, the US gave $1 billion before Trump came into office.

– U.N. officials estimated that it would cost at least $100 billion per year, and that figure could rise to more than $400 billion per year by 2020 to ensure compliance….and whom do you expect will be called upon to “share its vast wealth for this worthy project”, far more than any other nation, hmm?

Some analysts say the final figure for worldwide compliance with the Paris pledges would be in the trillions of dollars. U.N. officials estimated that it would cost at least $100 billion per year, and that figure could rise to more than $400 billion per year by 2020 to ensure compliance.


Washington Times:
– “…for many that remain in the accord, the demands for cash are fueling the argument that the Paris agreement, at its core, is as much about redistributing international wealth as it is about saving the planet from climate change.

Supporters of the deal routinely point out that 193 countries have signed on. Although that is technically true, the vast majority of commitments offered in Paris would result in emissions increases or would require billions of dollars in funding — or, in many cases, both.

“Claiming that 193 countries signed on is a meaningless statement, which is likely why it’s made. The meaningful way to view it is that 193 countries agreed that the U.S. should harm itself and to gladly pay on Tuesday for the U.S. to harm itself today,” said Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a leading critic of the Paris pact.” **

Biggest “surprise” reaction (not really) to President Trump pulling out of the “climate accord” comes from Open Borders advocate, anti-US, anti-capitalism, wealth redistributionist, Pope Francis, who “expressed dismay… at US president Donald Trump’s intention to withdraw from the Paris climate deal.”!

“Absent Senate ratification, Obama’s climate pledges to the United Nations are just administration proposals, not commitments of the United States”.  It is probably not necessary to remind readers that Obama bypassed the Senate in violation of the Constitution’s requirements that major treaties are subject to ratification by two-thirds vote of the U S Senate. In his uniquely “cute” style, Obama unilaterally ‘decided’ that the Paris Climate Accord wasn’t really a major international treaty…it was “just an agreement”…like the Chicago fire was intended to toast a few S’mores.

The unbelievably misleading nature of this agreement, the damage to the US economy and the burden it would have imposed on American taxpayers, and the manner in which it was intended to obligate the US, bypassing required Senate ratification, is an alarming reflection on the Obama administration.

We believe it raises legitimate questions about Barack Obama’s true intentions. Could he have possibly believed that this agreement was, in any way, negotiated in the best interests of America…and for that matter, the world?!

We say, “Of course not!” Barack Obama’s motives in this, as in many other things he did, appear to be much darker, and much more intentionally harmful to this country than most Americans believe.


(Note: If you already knew all of the above facts about the Paris Climate Accord, you are certainly a well-read “political junkie”. It is our contention that a lot of this information has not been widely disseminated by the liberal media. Consequently, we believe, that too many Americans are not aware of what an incredibly bad deal President Trump rescued our nation from.)


This entry was posted in UNCATEGORIZED. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *