monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

You do not want to insult the Black and Hispanic communities that have been sucked in do you?

I thought that the British production, called Threads, was pretty devastating as well. I've read that it influenced nuclear policy in the UK.

Italian Investigators Just Uncovered a Major Russian Election Meddling Plot


motherjones

You
totally nisinterpreted that, and I mean TOTALY. He's not saying Democratic control, he's saying democratic control, i.e. the people should have control of every aspect of their lives, not government, not billionaires, not cororations. That permeates the whole article "FOVERNMENT led by the people"-that's pure Abe Limcon. Your last quote, whoever that is from, is pure sour grapes, no relation to anything liberals think. It's pure unfounded projection.

llighten up and be glad that your dentures are like fingerprints. ( now If we can only find your dentist). Course your DNA can be used if your corpse isnt all crispy .

Nonsense every time you repeat it.

I realize that facts are highly inconvenient to the left. But no, facts are not nonsense.

BLM really does exist for the goal of preventing police officers from defending themselves when black people try to murder them.

Texas demopoop bigshot goes down in human trafficking scheme:

https://www.puppetstringnews.com/blog/texas-democrat-mark-benavides-goes-down-on-six-counts-of-human-trafficking?fbclid=IwAR0R8tFAmbTzrd8oN0ctPNQeG54Q5j4lufnKT9qqIoWG3h_cbhKY5ZVutUY

White House cuts off talks with California over fuel standards
By Gregory Wallace, Stephanie Becker, Cheri Mossburg and Rene Marsh, CNN

Updated 1:31 PM ET, Thu February 21, 2019

(CNN)The Trump administration has cut off talks with California over vehicle emission standards, setting up another high-profile legal showdown between the Democratic-controlled state and the Trump administration.

This time, the dispute is over California's authority to set its own auto emission standards that are stricter than the Trump administration's proposal. The Trump administration is expected to slow down or freeze annual increases the Obama administration scheduled each year until 2025.

Automakers cringe at the concept of two different auto markets in the US resulting from two different standards: one, set by California that also applies to 13 other states that follow its lead, and the federal standard that applies elsewhere.

California and the 13 states that follow it make up 40% of the US auto market, according to Dan Becker, whose Safe Climate Campaign backs California's position.

California regulators want to retain their decades-old authority to set pollution standards that stems from the 1970 Clean Air Act, and their environmentalist allies fear a weak or non-existent standard set by the Trump administration.

In a statement, the White house said that "Despite the Administration's best efforts to reach a common-sense solution, it is time to acknowledge that CARB has failed to put forward a productive alternative since the SAFE Vehicles Rule was proposed. Accordingly, the Administration is moving forward to finalize a rule later this year with the goal of promoting safer, cleaner, and more affordable vehicles."

California Air Resources Board spokesman Stanley Young said the two sides have not met since December 19 and that the meetings had been "entirely non-substantive, and discussions never reached the level that could be called 'negotiations.'"

"The administration broke off communications before Christmas and never responded to our suggested areas of compromise -- or offered any compromise proposal at all," Young said in a statement. "We concluded at that point that they were never serious about negotiating, and their public comments about California since then seem to underscore that point."

The Environmental Protection Agency did not respond to a request for comment, and the Department of Transportation, which also has a role in the standards, referred questions to the White House.

California has already filed more than three dozen lawsuits against the Trump administration, most recently over the president's declaration of a national emergency. Earlier this week, the administration withdrew nearly $1 billion of funding for a California high-speed rail system, and said it hoped to claw back $2.5 billion in prior funding for the canceled project.

Last May, California sued the Trump administration, alleging it wrongly decided to review the emission standards.

Experts watching the process expect the state will ultimately file a second challenge when the final rules are released.

They expect the Trump administration this spring to finalize a new plan for car emissions that would apply to model years 2022 to 2025.

The Obama administration's 2012 plan for model years 2017 through 2025 called for the standards to automatically increase every year. It also required a review at the halfway point, which the administration completed before the 2016 election. It decided not to change the plan.

Soon after the Trump administration took office, the Auto Alliance -- a vehicle manufacturer industry group -- asked the Trump administration to reconsider. It did, and announced it would develop a new plan.

Becker expects the document to formally rescind California's authority.

"The administration seems hell-bent to run these emission regulations off the cliff," he said of the Obama-era standards.

Sen. Tom Carper, the senior Democrat on the environment committee, urged the EPA to negotiate in good faith because "litigation is not the best option here."

"It wastes time, money, creates uncertainty for American automakers and harms the environment," he said in a statement. "I encourage automakers to speak out quickly, loudly and clearly against this decision, since each and every automaker previously urged the administration not to proceed with this misguided, legally questionable and irresponsible path."

Russian Christianity.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47331764

Some good news for once.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47334894

Lying again as usual, oralloy. Yiur "facts" are not facts, they are merely illogic and supposition unsupported by fact,

The basic reality is that cars made since the mid 90s, if maintained decently, do not create enough pollution to worry about. All of this bullshit makes new cars unaffordable and you should ask yourself, at what point are you endangering people's lives by forcing them to try to keep 20 and 30 year old cars running.

All you really need is to eliminate leaded gas and insist on modern engines with cdi ignition, fuel injection and computer control of fuel. The **** they're talking about in Californicatia is about controlling people's lives and not about clean air or safety. That is part of why 53% of californicators want out.

https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=53+percent+of+californians+want+to+leave&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&fbclid=IwAR1u1gCnl_QF3c0IAHlHR8JrlHeKQ7lQK3Wq1Y96IbTJudlm5i76HNFbV5k

What this means for the nation is frightening. It means that even one more democrat presidency, and fifty three percent of AMERICANS will want out.

And funny thing... the nations to which an American might want to flee at that time will have all observed what happened. They will only be taking the bright, the productive, the industrious, and the intelligent.

All that will leave back here in the states will be de-moKKKer-Rats and sundry other forms of vermin and wankers. They'll have to change the name of the place and call it Wankria or Loseria or something like that.

Partly because not everyone WANTS a new car, I'll keep my '73 Vette on the road, thank you very much. And partly because auto makers can't seem to tell the truth about their products.

Ford investigating possible problems with fuel economy, emissions tests
PUBLISHED FRI, FEB 22 2019 • 6:13 AM EST | UPDATED FRI, FEB 22
Reuters

KEY POINTS
Ford Motor said it had hired outside experts to investigate its vehicle fuel economy and testing procedures after employees raised concerns.

Ford said it did not know whether it would have to correct data given to regulators or consumers.

Ford said it was evaluating changes to the process it uses to develop fuel economy and emissions figures, “including engineering, technical and governance components.”

Ford Motor said on Thursday it has hired outside experts to investigate its vehicle fuel economy and testing procedures after employees raised concerns, and did not know whether it would have to correct data provided to regulators or consumers.

The issues involving Ford’s testing processes do not involve the use of so-called defeat devices — hardware and software designed deliberately to deceive government emissions tests, Kimberly Pittel, Ford’s group vice president for sustainability, environment and safety engineering, told Reuters.

The automaker since last fall has been investigating concerns raised by employees that incorrect calculations were used to translate test results into the mileage and emissions data submitted to regulators, Pittel said.

Ford said it was evaluating changes to the process it uses to develop fuel economy and emissions figures, “including engineering, technical and governance components.”

Ford shares dipped slightly in after-hours trading following the disclosure.

Ford has hired the law firm Sidley Austin to lead an independent investigation into possible discrepancies in calculations used to produce emissions and fuel economy figures, Pittel said. The company is using an independent laboratory to conduct testing.

U.S. and California regulators have been cracking down on automakers for emissions cheating following revelations in 2015 that German automaker Volkswagen had used defeat devices to make models equipped with diesel engines appear to comply with emissions standards when they emitted far more pollution than allowed in real-world driving.

“We have voluntarily shared this information” with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board, Pittel said. Ford notified the agencies this week, she said.

The EPA said in a statement on Thursday that information from Ford’s investigation is “too incomplete for EPA to reach any conclusions. We take the potential issues seriously and are following up with the company to fully understand the circumstances behind this disclosure.”

The investigation has started with testing of the 2019 Ranger pickup truck, and the company expects data back next week, Pittel said.

She said it was not clear what impact the review will have on advertised mileage or fuel economy data submitted to regulators, nor is it clear how many vehicles could be affected if Ford is required to revise the data.

“We cannot predict the outcome, and cannot provide assurance that it will not have a material adverse effect on us,” Ford told investors in a regulatory filing Thursday.

“We are going to go where the investigation takes us,” Pittel said.

Ford has been embarrassed in the past by errors in fuel economy claims. In 2013, the automaker cut by seven miles per gallon the claimed fuel economy for its C-Max hybrid model following complaints that real-world mileage did not match the claimed fuel economy. In 2014, Ford lowered fuel economy ratings for six other models and offered compensation to customers.