Posted on 09/17/2017 5:56:52 PM PDT by upchuck
There's a lot of noise surrounding a WSJ story today saying the Trump administration has changed its mind on the Paris climate accord and isn't pulling out. The White House responded that there has been "no change" in the position on Paris and that the U.S. is "withdrawing unless we can re-enter on terms that are more favorable to our country."
Trump's position announced in June was the U.S. is bailing but willing to renegotiate. Remember it actually takes several years to formally withdraw.
Our thought bubble: Nobody has really taken this "renegotiation" idea especially seriously. Why people are surprised today is that it wasn't believed the administration was serious about really engaging on this at all. It is still a very big question how genuine their efforts are, but today's news represents the next stage regarding what Trump already said in June he was willing to do. He said the U.S. is going to withdraw unless it can get a better deal.
Bottom line: The basic question here is whether the U.S. might be cracking the door open slightly to a more serious willingness to stay in with a softened commitment.
Go deeper: What we've written before about the Trump administration's climate outreach.
Used to have a lot of respect for the WSJ.
“The White House responded that there has been “no change” in the position on Paris and that the U.S. is “withdrawing unless we can re-enter on terms that are more favorable to our country.”
This is what President Trump has been saying all along. Nothing new in that regard.
It takes zero years to pull out!! This POC was not ratified by the Senate!!! GET out like he said !! There is no man made” climate change” what a joke. GET OUT!!
It was, still is and ever will be a piece of Ob CRAP!
If it doesn’t come out of President Trump’s own MOUTH I consider everything I read and hear to be FAKE NEWS and everyone should too
Why would we renegotiate based on a false premise? Anyone?
Well that is not very reassuring. I don't want Trump to negotiate a "better deal" on climate change -- I don't want us to accept the premise of "Climate Change" and I want us to stay the heck out of it all together.
Amen! Agree 100%.
Precisely. All these false flags by Durbin, et al are just to cause anxiety and stress among Trump supporters. Hopefully they are too smart to fall for that.
Open borders psychopaths at the WSJ made this lie up.
No it doesn't. The United States never agreed to this nonsense, just Obama. And he didn't have the authority to do so.
No part of it or its totality is binding. We can and should cease all involvement with a snap of President Trump's fingers.
[[and that the U.S. is “withdrawing unless we can re-enter on terms that are more favorable to our country.”]]
Why ‘reenter” a SCAM?
[[Why would we renegotiate based on a false premise? Anyone?]]
Exactly! There is NO legitimate reason to even consider ‘renegotiating’ to become a part of this damn scam under ANY circumstances- IF the US enters this agreement for ANY reason- or under ANY renegotiated terms- it’s over- We will be crippled as a country financially in ensuing years- period-
“unless we can re-enter on terms that are more favorable to our country. ... This is what President Trump has been saying all along. Nothing new in that regard.”
yep. and Merkel and all the rest have said that hell will freeze over before they would re-negotiate better terms for the U.S.
Withdrawal is a done deal, despite the latest lies from the WSJ, which I pay not the slightest bit of attention to since their paywall blocks me 100%.
Obama signed the COP21 agreement committing the US and Trump will have to unsign the document. This is no different from when Bill Clinton signed the COP3 Kyoto agreement and GW Bush unsigned it.
There is a yearly conference of parties(COP) and the US will continue to attend these conferences with COP24 being next year and COP25 the year after.
The US is still a party to the treaty aka UN Convention on Global warming which we signed and ratified in 1992.
It is even more complicated because there are several inter connected events. The first event was 2007 SCOTUS ruling that CO2 was a pollutant. The second was the endangerment finding that the EPA did in 2009 that determined the risk that CO2 plays. The 3rd was the Clean Power Plan that was written to alleviate the risk in the endangerment findings and the 4th was the COP21 agreement in Paris in 2015 that Obama signed. The Clean Power Plan was required to meet the COP21 agreement in 2015 in Paris that Obama signed.
Hypothetically: If Pruitt can't undo the endangerment findings, then Pruitt and Trump have to regulate CO2 in some way and if they regulate CO2, they might as well stay in the COP21 agreement.
Now get us the hell out of the un!
“Trump’s position on the Paris accord hasn’t changed”
That’s true, it seems the wiggle room was there from the start.
Ditto. What’s so hard about that? I think Pelosi first presidential term started when she told trump when and what to tweet on daca. Politics are clearly not working for everyday Americans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.