55 % of Farmers and Ranchers in Agri-Pulse Polll Support Trump

With your Agri-Business Update I’m Susan Allen. Agri-Pulse one of most trusted farm and rural policy sources in Washington, D.C. conducted a new nationwide poll from Oct. 15-18 on how farmers and ranchers will vote in the presidential election. 55 percent of those surveyed in say they'll support Donald Trump while 18 percent are throwing their support behind Democratic Hillary Clinton. Only 2 percent plan to vote for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson and just 1 percent for the Green Party's Jill Stein. 15 percent of respondents said they were undecided and 8 percent refused to answer. Trump attracted 59 percent of the male and 37 percent of female voters, while Clinton drew support from 15 percent of the males and 33 percent of the females. Some 18 percent of the female respondents said they were undecided. The GOP nominee scored particularly well in two battleground states, with support from 68 percent of the farmers and ranchers in Ohio and 58 percent in Florida. The Agri-Pulse Poll, conducted by Aimpoint Research reached out to commercial operations of 200 acres or more. When asked if they were satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country, a whopping 86 percent said they were “somewhat” or “very dissatisfied.” Indicating uptick from another Agri-Pulsepoll conducted in late January of this year. AgInfo.net

The Hillary Treatment for Climate Fraudsters?

by Paul Driessen

This past March, 17 attorneys general launched a coordinated effort to investigate, pursue and prosecute companies, think tanks and other organizations that say there is little credible evidence that human “greenhouse gas” emissions are causing “dangerous” or “catastrophic” manmade climate change.

The AGs said their targets’ actions constitute “fraud” – which they described as using “polished public relations campaigns” to “muddle the truth,” “discredit prevailing climate science,” and “mislead” people about threats from higher temperatures, rising seas, floods and more severe weather. Their real goal is to intimidate and silence targeted groups, and bankrupt them with legal fees, court costs and lost funding.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, Heartland Institute, ExxonMobil and other “climate denier” organizations fought back vigorously, refusing to surrender their constitutional rights to participate in this vital public policy debate. The AGs’ bravado and prosecutions began fraying at the edges.

But one wonders: How will these intrepid protectors of the public interest respond to Real Climate Fraud? To intentional misrepresentations of material facts, with knowledge of their falsity, and for the purpose of inducing persons or institutions to act, with resulting injury or damage.

Will those AGs – or other state AGs, Congress, state legislatures or the Justice Department – investigate the growing list of highly questionable actions by scientists and others who receive billions in taxpayer and consumer funds for renewable energy programs and research into manmade climate cataclysm scares … to justify policies, laws and regulations that raise energy costs, destroy fossil fuel companies and jobs, force layoffs in other industries, and harm poor, minority and working class families?

Or will they respond the way FBI Director Comey did to Hillary Clinton’s reckless disregard for national security secrets: ignore the bad conduct, and reward transgressors with more money, prestige and power?

The case for widespread misconduct by members of the $1.5-trillion-per-year Climate Change & Renewable Energy Complex grows more compelling, and disturbing, by the day. A complete listing and analysis would require books, but these few examples underscore the seriousness of the global problem.

READ ENTIRE COLUMN 

Let's not forget this:

The coalition of 17 inquisitors are calling themselves “AGs United for Clean Power.” The coalition consists of 15 state attorneys general (California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington State), as well as the attorneys general of the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands. Sixteen of the seventeen members are Democrats, while the attorney general for the Virgin Islands, Claude Walker, is an independent.

Yes, New Mexico's AG, Hector Banderas, has joined in with Al Gore and the other extreme environmentalists on this witch hunt.  Banderas says: 

Attorney General Hector Balderas announced today that New Mexico has joined Attorneys General from across the nation in an unprecedented coalition of 17 top law enforcement officials to protect and expand progress the nation has made in combatting climate change. The states agreed to work together on key investigations, such as ongoing or any potential investigations into whether fossil fuel companies misled investors and the public on the impact of climate change on their businesses.

“We have been impacted by climate change, and we see its drastic effects in New Mexico---extreme drought, increased risk of severe forest fires, and the ruin of our wildlife and natural habitats,” Attorney General Balderas said. Our efforts will ensure that progress is made on climate change and that the public is fully aware of the effects on the health and well-being of New Mexico families.”

 See my previous posts, AGs subpoenaed over prosecuting climate change skeptics, Massachusetts AG Demands Docs From More Conservative Skeptic Groups, and the post AGs Use Exxon Probe To Target Dozens Of Conservative Groups And Scientists, which reports:

 Democratic attorneys general (AG) are using the investigation into ExxonMobil’s global warming stance to target communications between the company and 142 conservative groups, skeptic scientists and other academics...The Daily Caller News Foundation obtained an unredacted version of the subpoena sent to Exxon containing the names of 88 organizations and 54 scientists, academics and other experts. Exxon’s countersuit to Walker’s subpoena says “three-quarters” of the organizations Walker is targeting “have been identified by environmental advocacy groups as opposing policies in favor of addressing climate change or disputing the science in support of climate change.”

New Mexico Senators Udall and Heinrich, and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan have long done the bidding of the enviro-left, and now we have NM AG Banderas doing the same.  Are you starting to feel surrounded?

How do Trump and Clinton differ on conservation?

Joshua Zaffos


...While speaking at a media summit last week organized by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership in Fort Collins, Colorado, Trump Jr., an avid hunter and angler, defended keeping federal lands managed by the government and open to the public. He also reiterated his father’s strong support for U.S. energy development, proposed some corporate sponsorships in national parks, questioned humans’ role in climate change, and criticized Hillary Clinton for “pandering” to hunters with “phoniness.” U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson, D-California, spoke for Clinton’s campaign at the summit a day later, and provided plenty of contrast between the presidential candidates.

Trump Jr. has served as an adviser to his father on natural-resources issues and has even joked with family that, should his father win, he’d like to be Secretary of the Interior, overseeing national parks and millions of acres of federal public lands. In Fort Collins, he said he’s not “the policy guy,” but repeated his frequent pledge to be a “loud voice” for preserving public lands access for sportsmen. Trump Jr. also mocked some gun-control measures, such as ammunition limits, boasting, “I have a thousand rounds of ammunition in my vehicle almost at all times because it’s called two bricks of .22 … You know, I’ll blow…through that with my kids on a weekend.”

Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate, partly distinguished himself among other GOP candidates during primary season—not that that was a problem for the New York real-estate developer—by balking at the transfer of federal public lands to states or counties. While Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and others expressed support for public-land transfers, kowtowing to some Western conservatives, Trump rejected the idea. Speaking to Field & Stream in January, Trump said: “I don’t like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don’t know what the state is going to do. I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble? And I don’t think it’s something that should be sold. We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land.”
Trump Jr. reaffirmed that stance, but also supported more input for states as long as those efforts don’t jeopardize public access.

 READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

You probably missed this climate change promise hidden in Clinton’s speech

by Ben Adler

Hillary Clinton’s official campaign launch speech Saturday was largely greeted with yawns from the political cognoscenti. Her theme of economic fairness — highlighted by making her announcement speech in Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island in New York City — has been telegraphed for months, and the speech itself reads like a State of the Union address: a laundry list of center-left policy proposals.

Environmental organizations such as the League of Conservation Voters and NextGen Climate issued statements praising Clinton for highlighting climate change as a priority...

But then Clinton offered one line that promised better policy on a major climate change issue: raising the U.S.’s scandalously cheap rates of fossil fuel leasing.

Clinton said her administration will use “additional fees and royalties from fossil fuel extraction to protect the environment.” The Obama administration has been giving away leases to extract fossil fuels from federal land for bargain-basement prices far below their market-rate value, and even farther below a price that accounts for the government’s own estimates of the social cost of carbon...

Interior Secretary Sally Jewell announced in March that her department will study modernizing its fossil fuel leasing programs to bring them in line with the administration’s goal of reducing climate change. It’s unclear how much the current administration will raise the rates. But it is clear now that if Clinton succeeds Obama, she intends to finish the job.

READ ENTIRE POST