Malcolm Nance has been there and is going back....
Tech Bros and TRump want Greenland for a cold fresh water for their Technocracy, and Putin wants him to destroy NATO.
Most of our soon to be FORMER allies are on a war-footing to defend Greenland. Here's how things in America "as we know it" ENDS if we invade GREENLAND! Break NATO and this is what happens:
The facts involve impossible land, air and sea logistics---no roads, Canadian air space, a mile thick ice sheet, and armed/trained forces determined to defend the three airstrips. They know all our tricks and equipment; they been using them beside us for 75 years. Denmark is far from powerless.
Thom, please get Malcolm on your show ASAP. He's done his homework. We could lose overland access to Alaska. A big portion of the debt could be called-in overnight. TRump and his psychos and sickos could cost us almost everything, including some service members. See you in the streets.
Machado handing Trump that framed Nobel Prize certificate didn't make him a Nobel laureate any more than one of us handing our framed university degree certificate to someone would make them a graduate of our university. She gave him a framed fancy piece of paper, nothing more
It’s time for the rest of the world to seriously decouple their economies from ours. Running two casinos into the ground only highlights his grasp of fundamental economics. As in he doesn’t have any.
It seems that our only chance of help, is an economic collapse. Incredibly according to Politico, Hispanic Voters powered Trumps comeback and are now having buyers remorse:
The only reason I can figure that Hispanics would vote for Trump is that they are culturally conservative, culture warriors, and Trump has appealed to that part of their psyche. He basically announced he was going to wage war on Latin's and non whites.
When Wall Street and the Techbros start watching their fortunes collapse, then something will happen.
My thought is that the Democratic Party so utterly failed to fight for them (or anyone else for that matter) that they turned to Trump - after all his agenda sounded good to them. And then they started pulling family members out through the windows of cars,
Hey, I wonder why ICE hasn’t tried this bullshit (okay, so I’m getting mad) in Miami or Phoenix.
You are probably correct, there is always more than one motivation for the choices we make. Don't discount the effect of cultural conservatism, patriarchialism and the culture war.
Actually, we won in 2016 and 2024, but the election was stolen. You keep blaming the victim.
Our Bastianos still support him, but one of our 3 House members splits with him on immigration.
On economics, many consider Trump is an idiot. I'm in several discussion groups. This BS retaiation over the Federal Reserve is only one factor. IMHO tariffs are much more important. Despite what you think, most of the Trump supporters fared poorly in the fourth quarter. Contrast that with Canada, which increased 5 .95. % in the fourth quarter.
His emphasis on oil, which IMHO is a dimishing asset for many reasons is insane.
I asked AI whether investment in alternative energy has a greater upside than in development of fossil fuels
Financial Returns: Historically, renewable energy investments have delivered strong returns, with a study noting renewables yielded 200.3% returns versus 97.2% for fossil fuels in the US over a period, with less volatility.
Cost Competitiveness: Solar and wind power are now cheaper than coal and natural gas for utility-scale electricity generation in most areas. In 2024, 91% of new renewable projects were more cost-effective than any new fossil fuel alternatives.
Market Share & Growth: Renewables are expected to surpass coal as the largest source of global electricity generation by the end of 2025 or mid-2026. The clean energy infrastructure market is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 9.2%.
Risks: Fossil fuel investments face significant risks, including potential stranded assets, increased regulatory compliance costs, and physical property risks from extreme weather. The potential losses from new fossil fuel investments are estimated to be twice as large as potential gains.
Job Creation: The clean energy sector creates significantly more jobs. By 2030, an estimated 14 million new jobs could be created in clean energy, resulting in a net gain of 9 million energy sector jobs, while fossil fuel production jobs are expected to decline.
Energy Security: Investing in diverse renewable sources enhances energy security and protects countries from the unpredictable price swings and geopolitical shocks associated with a reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Ultimately, the long-term outlook and upside potential strongly favor alternative energy due to overwhelming market trends, economic fundamentals, and global policy shifts.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed against major oil companies by states, cities, and individuals, primarily alleging that the companies deceived the public for decades about the dangers of fossil fuels and should be held financially responsible for climate change-related damages.
Plaintiffs: The lawsuits have been filed by a growing number of U.S. states (including California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Minnesota), the District of Columbia, and dozens of city, county, and tribal governments.
Legal Arguments: Plaintiffs typically use state law claims such as public nuisance, private nuisance, failure to warn, and consumer protection/deceptive trade practices statutes.
Requested Relief: The lawsuits generally seek two types of relief:
Compensation for Damages: Funds to cover the costs of climate-fueled disasters (e.g., wildfires, hurricanes, sea-level rise) and infrastructure adaptation.
Injunctive Relief/Penalties: Orders to end deceptive practices, fund public education campaigns, and sometimes disgorge profits.
Industry Response: Oil companies (including ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, and Shell) have vigorously fought the cases, primarily by arguing that the claims belong in federal court and are preempted by federal law. They have also lobbied for a federal "liability shield".
Current Status and Recent Developments
Moving to Trial: A significant trend is that many cases are advancing in state courts, with multiple federal appeals courts and district courts rejecting the industry's arguments for moving them to federal jurisdiction.
Supreme Court Involvement: The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly declined the oil companies' requests to intervene and block the cases from proceeding, which is viewed as a major win for the plaintiffs and increases the likelihood of the cases going to trial.
Novel Cases: New types of lawsuits are emerging, including:
The first wrongful death lawsuit in the U.S., linking a death during a heat wave to climate change.
Class-action lawsuits from homeowners seeking to recover increased home insurance premiums caused by climate-related extreme weather events.
Legislative Efforts: In a counter-move, states like Vermont and New York have passed "climate superfund" laws, which aim to make large fossil fuel companies pay into a fund for climate damages based on their emissions. The U.S. Department of Justice under the current administration has sued these states to block the laws.
The cases collectively represent more than one in four people living in the United States and echo the legal strategy used in successful lawsuits against the tobacco industry in the 1990s. The industry itself has admitted that it could face "massive monetary liability" if the lawsuits are successful
We’re going to disagree on some things and agree on others. I believe that’s how politcal systems need to operate. I’m not a Democrat but I have the opportunity to vote otherwise because I live in a Democratic state and district. But believe me, if there was a threat that a Republican would win I’d be first at the polls.
As for solar we just put in an 11 kVolt system. Excess power goes back to the utility. We’re able to install it because we have the siting and the money but not everybody is so lucky. I don’t know how poor communities are going be able to get systems up and runnin.
Why is “brainwahed” used so frequently. You say you are Big tent but “brainwashed” seems to be in opposition. As far as brainwashing itself I was pretty far to the left since before Vietnam. If you don’t care for the left what would you have us do in its stead?
The Dems didn't fail; they have their hands full when fighting bullshit with the truth. Donnie lied about his power to reduce prices on eggs and gasoline "on Day One", neither of which he has any power to do, and they bought the conman's lie.
I also fault the MSM which didn't call him out for this boast.
No "Louise's Song" today. I started listening just recently, and they are really good. I will listen to all of them going forward, but is there a link where I can listen to past versions? And who actually writes and sings them? We need more of this.
Trump does get off on assigning guilt by association and using that to malign and attack even when there is no actual guilt that can be assigned legitimately.
The Nobel prize has been debased, not by Machado giving it to Trump, but by the committee giving it to Machado. She did nothing but win an electionm then debases the award. In fact they gave it to Obama after he was elected, not for doing anything but aspirationally, and then he OK's use of drones to kill American citizens.
The press quotes Trump about tariffs on Eu countries against his takeover of Greenland . That these countries “ are putting a level at risk at play that is untenable…”
Who’s actually pulling the strings? I just can’t imagine Trump to have the vocabulary to use the word untenable.
Ironically, his support of adquiring foreign fossil fuels conflicts with the outlays of the magnificant 7. In fact, fold like Mush, Gates, Bezos et al are heavily invested in alternative energy.
These are the countries that Trump announced today will be subject to a 10% tariff on their goods exported to the US, which he will increase to 25% on June 1st if they don't bend to his will in annexing Greenland: Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland — you know, our closest allies in Europe and key NATO members.
Putin's wet dream is becoming more of a reality every morning he wakes up.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is dithering on whether using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs by a president circumventing the Article I power of Congress is even legal. It's not, of course, but when has what the Constitution clearly states ever mattered to the Roberts court? And of course, the longer Roberts delays, the better it is for Trump's crackbrained schemes to come to fruition.
Malcolm Nance has been there and is going back....
Tech Bros and TRump want Greenland for a cold fresh water for their Technocracy, and Putin wants him to destroy NATO.
Most of our soon to be FORMER allies are on a war-footing to defend Greenland. Here's how things in America "as we know it" ENDS if we invade GREENLAND! Break NATO and this is what happens:
Malcolm Nance EXPOSES Trump's Plan to HIJACK ...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DRrp3fHrUEDA
The facts involve impossible land, air and sea logistics---no roads, Canadian air space, a mile thick ice sheet, and armed/trained forces determined to defend the three airstrips. They know all our tricks and equipment; they been using them beside us for 75 years. Denmark is far from powerless.
Thom, please get Malcolm on your show ASAP. He's done his homework. We could lose overland access to Alaska. A big portion of the debt could be called-in overnight. TRump and his psychos and sickos could cost us almost everything, including some service members. See you in the streets.
Thanks for the link!
We watch Malcolm, bought his books. The guy to get on the show with him is Dan Bacon, R. NE. Retired general.
GOP congressman splits with Trump over Greenland, calls it 'buffoonery'
Portrait of Kathryn PalmerKathryn Palmer
USA TODAY. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/01/15/don-bacon-trump-greenland-impeachment/88195826007/
It only takes 3 Republican House members to stop this cold.
Machado handing Trump that framed Nobel Prize certificate didn't make him a Nobel laureate any more than one of us handing our framed university degree certificate to someone would make them a graduate of our university. She gave him a framed fancy piece of paper, nothing more
Stolen valor.
A “murder” of crows descending on a MAGA hat wearer is an event for which I would pay for a ticket for see!
BF Skinner! Behavioral analysis.
It’s time for the rest of the world to seriously decouple their economies from ours. Running two casinos into the ground only highlights his grasp of fundamental economics. As in he doesn’t have any.
It seems that our only chance of help, is an economic collapse. Incredibly according to Politico, Hispanic Voters powered Trumps comeback and are now having buyers remorse:
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/14/latino-voters-powered-trumps-comeback-now-theyre-turning-on-his-economy-00726548?nname=politico-toplines&nid=0000018f-3124-de07-a98f-3be4d1400000&nrid=42ecbc9c-a83f-4180-b2df-1ff110f90989
The only reason I can figure that Hispanics would vote for Trump is that they are culturally conservative, culture warriors, and Trump has appealed to that part of their psyche. He basically announced he was going to wage war on Latin's and non whites.
When Wall Street and the Techbros start watching their fortunes collapse, then something will happen.
My thought is that the Democratic Party so utterly failed to fight for them (or anyone else for that matter) that they turned to Trump - after all his agenda sounded good to them. And then they started pulling family members out through the windows of cars,
Hey, I wonder why ICE hasn’t tried this bullshit (okay, so I’m getting mad) in Miami or Phoenix.
You are probably correct, there is always more than one motivation for the choices we make. Don't discount the effect of cultural conservatism, patriarchialism and the culture war.
Don’t worry, William, I won’t.
Actually, we won in 2016 and 2024, but the election was stolen. You keep blaming the victim.
Our Bastianos still support him, but one of our 3 House members splits with him on immigration.
On economics, many consider Trump is an idiot. I'm in several discussion groups. This BS retaiation over the Federal Reserve is only one factor. IMHO tariffs are much more important. Despite what you think, most of the Trump supporters fared poorly in the fourth quarter. Contrast that with Canada, which increased 5 .95. % in the fourth quarter.
His emphasis on oil, which IMHO is a dimishing asset for many reasons is insane.
I asked AI whether investment in alternative energy has a greater upside than in development of fossil fuels
Financial Returns: Historically, renewable energy investments have delivered strong returns, with a study noting renewables yielded 200.3% returns versus 97.2% for fossil fuels in the US over a period, with less volatility.
Cost Competitiveness: Solar and wind power are now cheaper than coal and natural gas for utility-scale electricity generation in most areas. In 2024, 91% of new renewable projects were more cost-effective than any new fossil fuel alternatives.
Market Share & Growth: Renewables are expected to surpass coal as the largest source of global electricity generation by the end of 2025 or mid-2026. The clean energy infrastructure market is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 9.2%.
Risks: Fossil fuel investments face significant risks, including potential stranded assets, increased regulatory compliance costs, and physical property risks from extreme weather. The potential losses from new fossil fuel investments are estimated to be twice as large as potential gains.
Job Creation: The clean energy sector creates significantly more jobs. By 2030, an estimated 14 million new jobs could be created in clean energy, resulting in a net gain of 9 million energy sector jobs, while fossil fuel production jobs are expected to decline.
Energy Security: Investing in diverse renewable sources enhances energy security and protects countries from the unpredictable price swings and geopolitical shocks associated with a reliance on imported fossil fuels.
Ultimately, the long-term outlook and upside potential strongly favor alternative energy due to overwhelming market trends, economic fundamentals, and global policy shifts.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed against major oil companies by states, cities, and individuals, primarily alleging that the companies deceived the public for decades about the dangers of fossil fuels and should be held financially responsible for climate change-related damages.
Plaintiffs: The lawsuits have been filed by a growing number of U.S. states (including California, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Minnesota), the District of Columbia, and dozens of city, county, and tribal governments.
Legal Arguments: Plaintiffs typically use state law claims such as public nuisance, private nuisance, failure to warn, and consumer protection/deceptive trade practices statutes.
Requested Relief: The lawsuits generally seek two types of relief:
Compensation for Damages: Funds to cover the costs of climate-fueled disasters (e.g., wildfires, hurricanes, sea-level rise) and infrastructure adaptation.
Injunctive Relief/Penalties: Orders to end deceptive practices, fund public education campaigns, and sometimes disgorge profits.
Industry Response: Oil companies (including ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, and Shell) have vigorously fought the cases, primarily by arguing that the claims belong in federal court and are preempted by federal law. They have also lobbied for a federal "liability shield".
Current Status and Recent Developments
Moving to Trial: A significant trend is that many cases are advancing in state courts, with multiple federal appeals courts and district courts rejecting the industry's arguments for moving them to federal jurisdiction.
Supreme Court Involvement: The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly declined the oil companies' requests to intervene and block the cases from proceeding, which is viewed as a major win for the plaintiffs and increases the likelihood of the cases going to trial.
Novel Cases: New types of lawsuits are emerging, including:
The first wrongful death lawsuit in the U.S., linking a death during a heat wave to climate change.
Class-action lawsuits from homeowners seeking to recover increased home insurance premiums caused by climate-related extreme weather events.
Legislative Efforts: In a counter-move, states like Vermont and New York have passed "climate superfund" laws, which aim to make large fossil fuel companies pay into a fund for climate damages based on their emissions. The U.S. Department of Justice under the current administration has sued these states to block the laws.
The cases collectively represent more than one in four people living in the United States and echo the legal strategy used in successful lawsuits against the tobacco industry in the 1990s. The industry itself has admitted that it could face "massive monetary liability" if the lawsuits are successful
We’re going to disagree on some things and agree on others. I believe that’s how politcal systems need to operate. I’m not a Democrat but I have the opportunity to vote otherwise because I live in a Democratic state and district. But believe me, if there was a threat that a Republican would win I’d be first at the polls.
As for solar we just put in an 11 kVolt system. Excess power goes back to the utility. We’re able to install it because we have the siting and the money but not everybody is so lucky. I don’t know how poor communities are going be able to get systems up and runnin.
You falsely accuse Democrats as if we contol anything. We don't.
We are a "big tent" party. We have virtually no party loyalty. IMHO we need unity.
You are brainwashed.
I my state, the "sunshine state," the governor and state legislature oppose subsidizing solar energy.
Why is “brainwahed” used so frequently. You say you are Big tent but “brainwashed” seems to be in opposition. As far as brainwashing itself I was pretty far to the left since before Vietnam. If you don’t care for the left what would you have us do in its stead?
The Dems didn't fail; they have their hands full when fighting bullshit with the truth. Donnie lied about his power to reduce prices on eggs and gasoline "on Day One", neither of which he has any power to do, and they bought the conman's lie.
I also fault the MSM which didn't call him out for this boast.
No "Louise's Song" today. I started listening just recently, and they are really good. I will listen to all of them going forward, but is there a link where I can listen to past versions? And who actually writes and sings them? We need more of this.
Trump does get off on assigning guilt by association and using that to malign and attack even when there is no actual guilt that can be assigned legitimately.
He who smelled it dealt it.
https://substack.com/@dieselcat/note/c-201125658?r=2ohns5&utm_source=notes-share-action&utm_medium=web
tRUMP needs to tread very lightly over Greenland......
Maybe after the Goebbels thing the Nobel prize committee could have worked out that maybe the medal was a bad idea.
Give the award and the prize, take a picture, and go home a Nobel winner. Nothing to transfer.
The Nobel prize has been debased, not by Machado giving it to Trump, but by the committee giving it to Machado. She did nothing but win an electionm then debases the award. In fact they gave it to Obama after he was elected, not for doing anything but aspirationally, and then he OK's use of drones to kill American citizens.
PPK [Putin's Puppet Krasnov] is intent on destroying the USA and NATO.
He's abjectly mental. As are his cult members [Voters.]
Just b/c he says what they think:
"I [Agent Krasnov] hate non-whites, Muslims, and Jews."
Vote the loon out.
The press quotes Trump about tariffs on Eu countries against his takeover of Greenland . That these countries “ are putting a level at risk at play that is untenable…”
Who’s actually pulling the strings? I just can’t imagine Trump to have the vocabulary to use the word untenable.
Ironically, his support of adquiring foreign fossil fuels conflicts with the outlays of the magnificant 7. In fact, fold like Mush, Gates, Bezos et al are heavily invested in alternative energy.
These are the countries that Trump announced today will be subject to a 10% tariff on their goods exported to the US, which he will increase to 25% on June 1st if they don't bend to his will in annexing Greenland: Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland — you know, our closest allies in Europe and key NATO members.
Putin's wet dream is becoming more of a reality every morning he wakes up.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is dithering on whether using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs by a president circumventing the Article I power of Congress is even legal. It's not, of course, but when has what the Constitution clearly states ever mattered to the Roberts court? And of course, the longer Roberts delays, the better it is for Trump's crackbrained schemes to come to fruition.
Saw you on Velshi--you are such a great historian, Thom! Thanks!
These are indeed dark times; but, if we as a society are to survive, we must persevere.