Re 'collision', honest, officer, I didn't see it comin'.
==============================

Bonus, Nunes,
Hones', funnes'.
Hocus pocus:
Crime in focus.
============

Dang, last line coulda been 'Criminus focus'. He's going after 'em, yes indeedee.
===================================

Click?

Mar 20, 2019 at 8:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

https://climatechangedispatch.com/cfacts-effectiveness-acknowledged-by-leftist-attack-site-desmog-blog/

Sane people moved on from the multiply confirmed Hockey Stick studies, and it's multiply exonerated and distinguished coauthor, oh a decade or more ago. The only people 'dependent' are the delusional fantasists dreaming about some fictional court case that will somehow find the hard data guilty as charged and bring the whole AGW thing crashing down.

Good luck with that.

https://climateaudit.org/?s=nobel

Mar 25, 2019 at 12:34 AM | Phil Clarke

You have confirmed that 97% of Climate Science is composed of lies, deceit, and dishonesty. Do you want to add a few more words to include fraud and corruption?

Trump can strike Climate Science funding from the US Budget

The only people 'dependent' are the delusional fantasists dreaming about some fictional court case that will somehow find the hard data guilty as charged and bring the whole AGW Russian collusion thing crashing down.

So far, so good.

"While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him"

- Robert Mueller

"a complete and total exoneration”

- Donald Trump.

Lying is now just a reflex action for the POTUS. But we knew that.

Sane people moved on from the multiply confirmed Hockey Stick studies, and it's multiply exonerated and distinguished coauthor, oh a decade or more ago.
Mar 25, 2019 at 12:34 AM | Phil Clarke

"a complete and total exoneration”
- Donald Trump.
Lying is now just a reflex action for the POTUS. But we knew that.
Mar 25, 2019 at 8:59 AM | Phil Clarke

You are confirming that Mann's claims to have been exonerated are meaningless.
We all knew that.

Mar 25, 2019 at 12:10 PM | tomo

Obama may be required to provide some evidence, in Court if necessary, though he may end up confirming and proving some things he didn't want to.

Phil Clarke will have as much confidence in Obama proving Clinton honest, as he did in Gergis proving Mann to be honest, even though he now claims Climate Scientists had "moved on" from Mann and his bent Stick.

Why does Climate Science keep requiring million$ to prove Mann, and waste it on people with a dodgy track record of lies/incompetence, whilst simultaneously claiming to have "moved on"?

Trump can have confidence in Happer reviewing Climate Science for failed political dogma, lies and deceit, and as no Climate Scientists has come forward, he will identify the research that is worth saving even if the conclusions are wrong.

The BBC now report with some confidence that Trump may serve two terms in The White House. His detractors may serve some time elsewhere.

The Piltdown Mann's Crook't Stick has not been confirmed and is still the icon of the ignorant. It has not and will not stand the test of time, and its flaws are too well known to be ignored or whitewashed. You should give it and him up, but then whaddya got? Inadequate models and a phony and destructive narrative, which is failing and will not recover.

Phil plays games with 'to exonerate' too. What was found was no collusion and no obstruction, which amounts to exoneration. Phil, and so many other pititful leftists depend upon the language of the report, which is 'no exoneration', a task for which the investigation was not designed.

Rhetoric, and transparent rhetoric, is all you've got. Sad.

And Nunes pushes the criminality of those who criminally spied upon Trump, and criminally sought to bring Trump down.
===========================================================

& TNX clipe for your link @ 12:09 and a comment from Spurwing Plover, one of my alltime favorite commenters.

I remember one blog whose moderater cut out his tongue, devoweling him, and you could still hear the chirping like a first harbinger of Spring. That was many moons ago though.
==========================================

Dang, I meant 'disemvoweling him'.
========================

Kim has a problem with the simple phrase 'It does not exonerate him'.

Hilarious.

Mar 25, 2019 at 5:01 PM | Phil Clarke

Don't make claims for Mann's bent stick that won't survive in Court.

Claiming that Mann has been exonerated simply multiplies the number of people and organisations that are exposed to hilarity, for lying without credibility. Please list them. Are they the same as those that wrote in support of Harvey et al? It should make it easier for journalists to cross-check Happer's conclusions, and for Mann's contribution to the end of the scam to be recognised.

Phil, see Dershowitz re Mueller and 'does not exonerate.

Exonerated is as exonerated does, and Mueller does exonerate Trump; he's just too cowardly to say it.
===================

What's hilarious is that Phil and the leftists are left with words without any real meaning.

Trump is exonerated; he's been calling the collusion investigation a witch hunt for over two years and so it was. And now everyone knows it, including the likes of Phil, who just has a hard time swallowing the truth.

Phil gags. Ha, ha.
==============

What's really hilarious is that Obama and/or his administration spied illegally on Trump in aid of Clinton, and still Trump won. I remember Watergate and this is way way way lightyears worse. This is a corrupted and politicized FBI and DoJ and yet the leftists are glad.

Utterly pitiful, but that's the way they are now.

Awesomely sad, yes 'tis.
================

Actually, Mr Clarke (Mar 25, 2019 at 8:59 AM), if you read the full article (and it must be true 'cos it's on the BBC), you will see that it is a complete exoneration.

Just because Mueller cannot say those words does not make it otherwise.

Radical Rodent & kim,

Unfortunately, Phil Clarke believes that Mann WAS exonerated, and Trump wasn't, because that is what he has been instructed to say. It remains possible that Phil Clarke has the meaning of exonerated back-to-front, and upside down, just as Mann presented his fabulous bent-stick data

Kim has a problem with the simple phrase 'It does not exonerate him'.

Hilarious.
Mar 25, 2019 at 5:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

Phil has a problem with the simple phrase 'no evidence of collusion'.

Hilarious.

"Phil has a problem with the simple phrase 'no evidence of collusion'.
Mar 26, 2019 at 1:28 AM | clipe"

Yes, we are back to Mann's Hockey Stick and Trump.

Mann made a crooked line of climate history appear straight and this is approved by a crooked consensus,. Climate Science has portrayed Trump's straight dealings as crooked, and this has been fictitiously evidenced by a consensus of crooks.

Collusion and consensus are deliberately confused by those indulging in fraud and conspiracy, and no evidence is required at all.

I never mentioned collusion, Clipe, you did. Mueller days his report does not exonerate Dishonest Don of obstructing justice.

All those claiming complete exoneration have this in common:

They have not read the report.