Donald since WE are your boss...listen up Mr. We want this creep out of the advisor pool. He is untrustworthy and really out for himself and his buddies who pump green energy and take the cash when it fails. I really dislike this clown and I bet most people here feel the same. Pop this pimple Mr President.......

He's there to get a tax reduction bill done - that's it. The sooner McConnel and Ryan get it passed the sooner the guy can go - and he should go.

Donald rid yourself of this Libotomized Sachs-Goldman Snake Cohn and while you are at it both your Libotomized son in law Kuschner and your Libotomized Daughter Ivanka.

Thank you, as we did not vote to have the Libotomized, rino's and elitists at your side advising you AGAINST the best interests of the USA.

You Sir are waist deep in the quicksand time to throw the leakers and the swamp Snakes out.

Ivanka and Jared are NOT who we voted for...neither is liberal banker Cohn. Fire ASAP.

Alot of this going around lately...

Trump wanted him
-we gripe-
Trump picked him anyway
-we gripe-
Trump back stabbed
-we gripe-

Pray tell how did you get so smart?

In other words- Trump supporters.

Mr Trump, please free the swamp from climate snakes. You are the only one who can do it.

LOL> He appointed the swamp which this article is talking about. What the hell is wrong with you people on here?? I see, we didn't elect Ivanka, we didn't elect Jared, we didn't elect Gary Cohn; Trump placed these people so hold him accountable or this madness never ends...........

Well well now... obviously a Hillary Clinton supporter you be. Yes, Donald has appointed a fair number of people most of us do not approve of. He has also appointed a good number of people we do approve of, and the vast majority of actions he has actually taken we approve of as well. So you coming in here trying to get the base to call for Trumps impeachment is going nowhere.

What a snakes tongue you have. First off, I never called for Trumps impeachment you demon! Secondly, I am tired of you Rino Cucks bringing up Killary every single time. That Witch lost and is the past. Rino Trump has flip flopped on about 90% of his promises. So you can get on your knees for Goldman Sachs all you want... However, I voted for America First and will hold any politician accountable for their lies.....

Yeah, if Cohn actually said "is it binding?" Then he knows so little about the US constitution that he should either be forced to attend Hillsdale College, or be fired.

It is absolutely non-binding until the Senate, by a two thirds majority, approve it. No doubt, no question, no uncertainty.

Lying Ryan and Turkey neck McConnell are the problem.

We need to get rid of these Rats as soon as we can

Be a sheep .................vote demo crap

Don't forget the other Rino, John ("gang of 8") McCain!

Ok. That's reasonable. After it's passed, then we cut him loose. Easy peezy.

Prettt sure Cohn is going to come out of the white house with his pants belted around his thighs and just cry silently at the microphone this week.

The only way to get anything done is if Cohn's buddies in destroying America-- McConnel and Ryan-- go with him...

On Tuesday May 30th.............

President Trump needs to clean house.

Cohn, Mattis and McMaster should all be fired since their stated positions on crucial issues (global warming, Islamic terrorism) are at variance with their boss - president Trump.

"Mad Dog Mattis" doesn't lose sleep at night, instead he has other people losing sleep. You, Mr. President have a model there. DONALD J - 'ten-hut!
Either your inner circle comports with acting in concert on campaign promises or you fire them. The unpleasant blow-back of any failure to do so in the morning (even before sending another tweet) will far outweigh gains from short-term tactical considerations.

Amen to that... Agree 100%

Well, there are 6 more Goldman Sachs cabinet members other than this demon. So, Trump would have to drain the swamp that he appointed. So we voted for Trump to drain the swamp that he filled even more. Very deceptive things going on here...

Donald doesn't care about you Jethro. He thanks you for your blind support though!

Yea and 0bama and Hilary have are best interests at heart, a Muslim and a crook...ill take Donald Trump any day.

Let's see who history remembers as the crook.

Yes, lets.
Cats outta the bag Gruber.

Obama illegally systematically violates 1,000's of Americans 4th Amendment rights by spying on them. Phone calls and E-Mails.
Judge chastises Obama and FBI for breaking FISA court rules.

global warming is a hoax period

Gotta be accurate, the earth does go through warming periods. However, it is NOT anthropogenic, it is not man-made. If we're not accurate, these leftist Neo Marxists will convince people that we don't believe that the earth warms or the climate changes.

Right. The sun changes and so does the climate. To think we could control cosmic factors affecting the earth is absurd. It is a money making scheme and a way to control people.

Hahaha!! Maybe there are more contributors to warming than the sun. You know how a blanket can warm you on a cold day? It's like that. Do you own a blanket? Do I need to use shorter words for you to understand?

Except that your global warming myth has been repeatedly shot down by REAL scientists and data. Nice try though.

That's not true. It's been shot down by people proven to be liars.

Really? Give an example. I'll go first. The famous hockey stick graph from alarmists. Horribly flawed and proven to be created with the intent to deceive. Second.....Nasa scientist comes out stating temp data changed to account for no warming over 12 yrs. Ok show us a lie by skeptics

He still thinks the earth is flat..... on FB an atheist had a article bout it and I quoted him sum scripture sayin the circle of the earth.... he came back and said your truth is your truth and my truth is my truth and I replied the earth being a circle is universal truth

Yeah I don't get your point. Is there a point? Who thinks the earth is flat? And you ought to get off of FB, what a waste of time.

A circle? You must mean a sphere. It doesn't help the cause of illustrating the absurdity of the AGW hoax when people who don't understand basic geometry chime in with their two cents.

I think it was more like no warming in 20+ years.

You are lying.

Wow what a comeback. The truth must certainly be on your side, lol. My examples are researchable incidences. Look into them. Or show me a skeptical scientist who has lied

incidences? go back to 4th grade, do not pass go, do not collect $200

Really? Is that all you got? Not enough to get you out of your mom's basement

Oh, what the heck! I'll just share some reviewer comments from the assessment report (the part that the IPCC didn't want the public to know):

"Executive Summary
This individual review paper focuses on IPCC's three most essential modelling and core parameter errors. The impacts on all modelling results would be so tremendous that if the TAR would be corrected for these errors, there would hardly be any more justification for it. So this paper addresses only few individual TAR fallacies, but focuses on the nondisclosed flawed science it is based on.

"Solar impacts
Taking into account the impact of solar variability on global warming, best fit studies have revealed that solar forcing is amplified by at least a factor 4. By leaving out this 'Svensmark factor' and using an exaggerated aerosol cooling, IPCC maintains a CO2 doubling sensitivity of 2.5 °C that is about a factor 3 too high.

"Carbon cycle
Our global Carbon Cycle Model reveals a half-life time of only 38 years for any CO2 excess. With present constant global CO2 emission until 2100, the temperature would only further increase by 0.15 °C. Scenario IS92a would end up with 571 ppm only. IPCC assumed that far more fossil reserves would be burnt than being available. Using a flawed eddy diffusion ocean model, the IPCC has grossly underestimated the future oceanic CO2 uptake. Hardly coping with biomass response, limited fossil reserves and using a factor 4 temperature sensitivity, all this leads to an IPCC exaggeration factor of about 6 in yr 2100. The usable fossil reserves of 1300 GtC burnt by 2090, merely cause 548 ppm – not even a doubling. The WRE 650, 750 and 1000 ppm scenarios, projected until 2300, are infeasible. Emission reduction is absolutely useless: the realistic temperature effect of Kyoto till 2050 will be only 0.02 °C.

"Radiative forcing
The additional IR absorption (being evaluated here for CO2 doubling) is the energy source for global warming. HITRAN transmission spectra – the fringes being by no means saturated yet – can be used to compute this absorption, mostly occurring near ground. A simple radiative energy equilibrium model of the troposphere yields an IPCC-conforming radiative forcing which is here defined as the additional energy re-radiated to ground. Coping with water vapor overlap on the low frequency side of the 15 µm band, the clear sky CO2 forcing is considerably reduced to 1.9 W/m². With vapor feedback and for cloudy sky the equilibrium ground warming will be about 0.4 to 0.6 °C only – a factor 4 to 6 less than IPCC's 'best guess' for CO2 doubling.
The detailed paper titled "IPCC's most essential model errors" is in HTML, with 16 figures at http://www.microtech.com.au.... I am a known contrarian (see John Daly's Website), and I suppose IPCC can hardly cope with my arguments. So as I basically do not consent with the TAR, please do not use my name within the listing of reviewers."

Source: "IPCC WGI THIRD ASSESSMENT REPORT – (TAR)
GOVERNMENT/EXPERT REVIEW – APRIL-JUNE 2000
COLLATED EXPERT COMMENTS"

You do realize you're trying to use Logical arguments with an illogical being, right? :op

I know. But if I never shared stuff like this, how many others would know about it otherwise? The Media works overtime to strip this kind of stuff away from the public consciousness, or lessen its impact on the discussion. I want to make sure it stays in the public eye to elicit further intellectual discussion and debate.

Actually, he isn't really lying about that. There is a piece of code that, no matter the numbers fed into it, it will generate a hockey-stick graph. Here is some of the code that has been used to generate such graphs:

;
; PLOTS 'ALL' REGION MXD timeseries from age banded and from hugershoff
; standardised datasets.
; Reads Harry's regional timeseries and outputs the 1600-1992 portion
; with missing values set appropriately. Uses mxd, and just the
; "all band" timeseries
;****** APPLIES A VERY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION FOR DECLINE*********
;
yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]
valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,$
2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor
if n_elements(yrloc) ne n_elements(valadj) then message,'Oooops!'

That is revision e code, which is the final code that was used to connect tree-ring proxy data with averaged, infilled, instrumental temperature data in publications. They had to do that because the data did not connect otherwise. The proxies were showing a decline in temperatures in the region where the proxies were sampled.

They also use exaggeration factors when it comes to CO2, as was seen in the IPCC TAR, but which the public did not know was the case until someone leaked the information to the public. I have seen that scathing review that never was published by the IPCC. Have you?

Yep. typical libtard.
Claim someone else is lying, but give nothing to back up that claim.

Face it, you've got Nothing, unless your community organizers spoon-feed it to you. :op

Not an argument