Should Joe Biden deliver the State of the Union Address from the White House?

[veni vidi vici]

The old test of seeing what Republicans are doing by watching what they blame Dems for doing.
Sarah Huckster Sanders said it all last night. Culture wars, no plans beyond cashing in.
Then there was the idiot wunderkind of the GOP...

"Also delivering a response to President Biden's State of the Union, but in Spanish, was Juan Ciscomani, a newly elected lawmaker in the US House of Representatives from Arizona.

In his speech, Mr Ciscomani focused heavily on the economy and inflation, arguing that the Biden administration's results "speak for themselves".

Well, yes. Yes they do, to anyone who is actually paying attention and not just emitting a foul stench of lies.

Russian Collusion?

 

[badlatitude]

Russian Collusion?

Read the report so you won't have to ask that question again.

On December 29, 2016, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a joint analysis report finding that Russian civilian and military intelligence services had engaged in malicious cyber activity, including the intrusion of a U.S. political party's systems. As a result, both the House and Senate launched inquiries into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election.[1][2][3]

There were at least five investigations related to Russian cyberattacks and tampering in the 2016 presidential election and relations between Russia and the Trump campaign. The following committees were overseeing them:[4][5][6]

• The Senate Intelligence Committee was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and contacts between Trump campaign staffers and Russian officials.
• The House Intelligence Committee was also reviewing Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After Trump accused former President Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower on March 4, 2017, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chair of the committee, said surveillance activities during the 2016 presidential election would also be under review.[7] The committee released a final report finding no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia on April 27, 2018.
• The Senate Judiciary Committee was investigating potential leaks of classified information and documents related to the resignation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who resigned following reports that he did not disclose speaking with the Russian ambassador about sanctions in 2016.
• The House Judiciary Committee was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and potential leaks of classified information.
• The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was investigating the circumstances surrounding Flynn’s resignation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) also confirmed on March 20, 2017, that it was investigating potential ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.[8] Former FBI Director Robert Mueller was named as special counsel to oversee the FBI's investigation on May 17, 2017. Mueller submitted a report of the findings to Attorney General William Barr on March 22, 2019.[9]

Scope of congressional investigations​

Investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the firing and hiring of the FBI director

For information more on the Russia probe and the firing and hiring of the FBI director, view the following articles:

•Senate investigation

•House investigation

•Trump firing of FBI Director James Comey

•Congressional responses to the firing of James Comey

•Considered candidates for FBI diretcor

•Hillary Clinton email investigation

•Reactions to Comey's letter on Clinton email investigation

•Federal policy on Russia

•Robert Mueller

House Intelligence Committee​

See also: House Intelligence Committee investigation on Russian activity in 2016 presidential election
On January 25, 2017, the House Intelligence Committee announced that it was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, including possible links between Russia and any political campaigns. The committee further refined the scope of the investigation on March 1, 2017. It sought to answer the following questions:[10][11]

• What Russian active measures, including hacking, were directed against the U.S. and its allies?
• Did those active measures include links between Russia and any political campaigns?
• How did the U.S. government respond to Russian active measures? How can the U.S. protect itself in the future?
• Were there leaks of classified information related to the intelligence community report on Russian activity?

After President Donald Trump released a series of four tweets on March 4, 2017, alleging that former President Barack Obama had his phones and Trump Tower, the headquarters of the Trump Organization, wiretappedduring the 2016 presidential election, the investigation was further expanded.[12]

The White House requested on March 5, 2017, that the congressional intelligence committees determine whether the executive branch abused its power in 2016 as part of their investigation into Russian activity during the presidential election.[13]

On the same day, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) indicated the committee would include Trump's wiretapping allegations in the scope of its Russian investigation. "One of the focus points of the House Intelligence Committee's investigation is the U.S. government's response to actions taken by Russian intelligence agents during the presidential campaign. As such, the Committee will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party’s campaign officials or surrogates, and we will continue to investigate this issue if the evidence warrants it," Nunes said in a statement.[14]

On March 12, 2018, the committee announced that it was ending its investigation. Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) told reporters that the final report would be released after Democrats on the committee reviewed its contents. The report concluded that there was no evidence of collusion between members of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Russians and that there was no evidence that the Russians wanted Trump to win the election.[15]

Conway said, “We found no evidence of collusion. We found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings, inappropriate judgment in taking meetings — but only Tom Clancy could take this series of inadvertent contacts, meetings, whatever, and weave that into some sort of a spy thriller that could go out there.” He also said that the committee "couldn’t establish the same conclusion that the CIA did that [the Russians] specifically wanted to help Trump.”[15]

Trump praised the findings. He wrote in a tweet, "The House Intelligence Committee has, after a 14 month long in-depth investigation, found no evidence of collusion or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election."[15]

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the report, saying, "By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly. ... If the Russians do have leverage over the President of the United States, the Majority has simply decided it would rather not know."[15]

Final report released​

On April 27, 2018, Republican members on the House Intelligence Committee released the final report on its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The committee did not find evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It did find that Russia interfered in the election.[16]

The committee noted that other ongoing investigations might come to a different conclusion because they might have access to facts the committee could not obtain. The report stated, "We acknowledge that Investigations by other committees, the Special Counsel, the media, or interest groups will continue and may find facts that were not readily accessible to the Committee or outside the scope of our investigation."[16]

Democrats on the committee disagreed with the conclusions. Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee, said in a statement, “To determine whether this evidence of collusion reaches the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal conspiracy, we must await the report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, since the Majority refused to interview the witnesses and obtain the documents necessary to find out."[16]

After the report was released, President Donald Trump wrote in a tweet, "Just Out: House Intelligence Committee Report released. 'No evidence' that the Trump Campaign 'colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russia.’ Clinton Campaign paid for Opposition Research obtained from Russia — Wow! A total Witch Hunt! MUST END NOW!"[16]

The full report can be viewed here.

Senate Intelligence Committee​

See also: Senate Intelligence Committee investigation on Russian activity in 2016 presidential election
On January 13, 2017, the leadership of the Senate Intelligence Committee announced in a joint statement that they were investigating Russian intelligence activities impacting the United States, particularly those active measures taken during the 2016 presidential election.[17] The committee said that it would consider the following issues and information in its investigation:

• The intelligence behind the intelligence community report on Russian activity in the 2016 election;
• Counterintelligence related to ties between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns; and
• Russian active measures, including hacking, to interfere with the 2016 election and other U.S. interests.[17]

The Committee will follow the intelligence wherever it leads. We will conduct this inquiry expeditiously, and we will get it right. When possible, the Committee will hold open hearings to help inform the public about the issues. That said, we will be conducting the bulk of the Committee’s business behind closed doors because we take seriously our obligation to protect sources and methods," Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the chair of the committee, and Mark Warner (D-Va.), the ranking member, said in the joint statement.[17]


After the House Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russian activity was hampered by a conflict over its management, Burr and Warner held a press conference to discuss the future of their own investigation on March 29, 2017. Warner emphasized that the committee's efforts would not be compromised by partisanship. "I have confidence in Richard Burr that we together with the members of our committee are going to get to the bottom of this, and that's—if you get nothing else from today, take that statement to the bank," he said.[18]

On May 8, 2018, Burr said that the committee planned to end its investigation in August 2018. Burr said, "This gives staff the month of August in all likelihood to wrap up our investigation and for staff to work intensely while we're out of here and not getting in their hair."[19]

On July 3, 2018, the committee released a report affirming the conclusions of the intelligence community assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The full text of the report is available here.[20]

Between 2019 and 2020, the committee released five bipartisan reports examining Russian active measures in the 2016 presidential election. The fifth and final volume, which found that Russia "engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence" the election's outcome, was released on August 18, 2020.[21]

Senate Judiciary Committee​

The chair of the committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), announced on July 13, 2017, that he wanted Donald Trump Jr., President Donald Trump's eldest son, to testify before the committee, following a report from The New York Times that he met with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 who he believed to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton, then the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.[22][23]

Trump Jr. released the email exchange related to the meeting on July 11, 2017. In this thread, music publicist Rob Goldstone told Trump Jr. that he knew of someone who could provide information "that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father." He continued, "This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr. responded, "Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. "[24] Trump released the following statement: "My son is a high-quality person and I applaud his transparency."[25]

On August 29, 2017, it was reported that Trump Jr. had agreed to participate in a transcribed interview with the committee in a closed-door session.[26] During his interview on September 7, 2017, Trump Jr. said that he attended the June 2016 meeting with a Russian attorney to see if she had information about Clinton's fitness to be president. "To the extent they had information concerning the fitness, character or qualifications of a presidential candidate, I believed that I should at least hear them out. Depending on what, if any, information they had, I could then consult with counsel to make an informed decision as to whether to give it further consideration," he said in a prepared statement.[27]

For a complete history click the link: https://ballotpedia.org/Investigations_into_Russian_interference_in_the_2016_presidential_election

 

[veni vidi vici]

Read the report so you won't have to ask that question again.

On December 29, 2016, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a joint analysis report finding that Russian civilian and military intelligence services had engaged in malicious cyber activity, including the intrusion of a U.S. political party's systems. As a result, both the House and Senate launched inquiries into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election.[1][2][3]

There were at least five investigations related to Russian cyberattacks and tampering in the 2016 presidential election and relations between Russia and the Trump campaign. The following committees were overseeing them:[4][5][6]

• The Senate Intelligence Committee was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and contacts between Trump campaign staffers and Russian officials.
• The House Intelligence Committee was also reviewing Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. After Trump accused former President Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower on March 4, 2017, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chair of the committee, said surveillance activities during the 2016 presidential election would also be under review.[7] The committee released a final report finding no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia on April 27, 2018.
• The Senate Judiciary Committee was investigating potential leaks of classified information and documents related to the resignation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who resigned following reports that he did not disclose speaking with the Russian ambassador about sanctions in 2016.
• The House Judiciary Committee was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and potential leaks of classified information.
• The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was investigating the circumstances surrounding Flynn’s resignation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) also confirmed on March 20, 2017, that it was investigating potential ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.[8] Former FBI Director Robert Mueller was named as special counsel to oversee the FBI's investigation on May 17, 2017. Mueller submitted a report of the findings to Attorney General William Barr on March 22, 2019.[9]

Scope of congressional investigations​

Investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the firing and hiring of the FBI director

For information more on the Russia probe and the firing and hiring of the FBI director, view the following articles:

•Senate investigation

•House investigation

•Trump firing of FBI Director James Comey

•Congressional responses to the firing of James Comey

•Considered candidates for FBI diretcor

•Hillary Clinton email investigation

•Reactions to Comey's letter on Clinton email investigation

•Federal policy on Russia

•Robert Mueller

House Intelligence Committee​

See also: House Intelligence Committee investigation on Russian activity in 2016 presidential election
On January 25, 2017, the House Intelligence Committee announced that it was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, including possible links between Russia and any political campaigns. The committee further refined the scope of the investigation on March 1, 2017. It sought to answer the following questions:[10][11]

• What Russian active measures, including hacking, were directed against the U.S. and its allies?
• Did those active measures include links between Russia and any political campaigns?
• How did the U.S. government respond to Russian active measures? How can the U.S. protect itself in the future?
• Were there leaks of classified information related to the intelligence community report on Russian activity?

After President Donald Trump released a series of four tweets on March 4, 2017, alleging that former President Barack Obama had his phones and Trump Tower, the headquarters of the Trump Organization, wiretappedduring the 2016 presidential election, the investigation was further expanded.[12]

The White House requested on March 5, 2017, that the congressional intelligence committees determine whether the executive branch abused its power in 2016 as part of their investigation into Russian activity during the presidential election.[13]

On the same day, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) indicated the committee would include Trump's wiretapping allegations in the scope of its Russian investigation. "One of the focus points of the House Intelligence Committee's investigation is the U.S. government's response to actions taken by Russian intelligence agents during the presidential campaign. As such, the Committee will make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party’s campaign officials or surrogates, and we will continue to investigate this issue if the evidence warrants it," Nunes said in a statement.[14]

On March 12, 2018, the committee announced that it was ending its investigation. Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) told reporters that the final report would be released after Democrats on the committee reviewed its contents. The report concluded that there was no evidence of collusion between members of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Russians and that there was no evidence that the Russians wanted Trump to win the election.[15]

Conway said, “We found no evidence of collusion. We found perhaps some bad judgment, inappropriate meetings, inappropriate judgment in taking meetings — but only Tom Clancy could take this series of inadvertent contacts, meetings, whatever, and weave that into some sort of a spy thriller that could go out there.” He also said that the committee "couldn’t establish the same conclusion that the CIA did that [the Russians] specifically wanted to help Trump.”[15]

Trump praised the findings. He wrote in a tweet, "The House Intelligence Committee has, after a 14 month long in-depth investigation, found no evidence of collusion or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election."[15]

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) criticized the report, saying, "By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House, the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly. ... If the Russians do have leverage over the President of the United States, the Majority has simply decided it would rather not know."[15]

Final report released​

On April 27, 2018, Republican members on the House Intelligence Committee released the final report on its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The committee did not find evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It did find that Russia interfered in the election.[16]

The committee noted that other ongoing investigations might come to a different conclusion because they might have access to facts the committee could not obtain. The report stated, "We acknowledge that Investigations by other committees, the Special Counsel, the media, or interest groups will continue and may find facts that were not readily accessible to the Committee or outside the scope of our investigation."[16]

Democrats on the committee disagreed with the conclusions. Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee, said in a statement, “To determine whether this evidence of collusion reaches the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal conspiracy, we must await the report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, since the Majority refused to interview the witnesses and obtain the documents necessary to find out."[16]

After the report was released, President Donald Trump wrote in a tweet, "Just Out: House Intelligence Committee Report released. 'No evidence' that the Trump Campaign 'colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russia.’ Clinton Campaign paid for Opposition Research obtained from Russia — Wow! A total Witch Hunt! MUST END NOW!"[16]

The full report can be viewed here.

Senate Intelligence Committee​

See also: Senate Intelligence Committee investigation on Russian activity in 2016 presidential election
On January 13, 2017, the leadership of the Senate Intelligence Committee announced in a joint statement that they were investigating Russian intelligence activities impacting the United States, particularly those active measures taken during the 2016 presidential election.[17] The committee said that it would consider the following issues and information in its investigation:

• The intelligence behind the intelligence community report on Russian activity in the 2016 election;
• Counterintelligence related to ties between Russia and individuals associated with political campaigns; and
• Russian active measures, including hacking, to interfere with the 2016 election and other U.S. interests.[17]

The Committee will follow the intelligence wherever it leads. We will conduct this inquiry expeditiously, and we will get it right. When possible, the Committee will hold open hearings to help inform the public about the issues. That said, we will be conducting the bulk of the Committee’s business behind closed doors because we take seriously our obligation to protect sources and methods," Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the chair of the committee, and Mark Warner (D-Va.), the ranking member, said in the joint statement.[17]


After the House Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russian activity was hampered by a conflict over its management, Burr and Warner held a press conference to discuss the future of their own investigation on March 29, 2017. Warner emphasized that the committee's efforts would not be compromised by partisanship. "I have confidence in Richard Burr that we together with the members of our committee are going to get to the bottom of this, and that's—if you get nothing else from today, take that statement to the bank," he said.[18]

On May 8, 2018, Burr said that the committee planned to end its investigation in August 2018. Burr said, "This gives staff the month of August in all likelihood to wrap up our investigation and for staff to work intensely while we're out of here and not getting in their hair."[19]

On July 3, 2018, the committee released a report affirming the conclusions of the intelligence community assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The full text of the report is available here.[20]

Between 2019 and 2020, the committee released five bipartisan reports examining Russian active measures in the 2016 presidential election. The fifth and final volume, which found that Russia "engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence" the election's outcome, was released on August 18, 2020.[21]

Senate Judiciary Committee​

The chair of the committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), announced on July 13, 2017, that he wanted Donald Trump Jr., President Donald Trump's eldest son, to testify before the committee, following a report from The New York Times that he met with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 who he believed to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton, then the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.[22][23]

Trump Jr. released the email exchange related to the meeting on July 11, 2017. In this thread, music publicist Rob Goldstone told Trump Jr. that he knew of someone who could provide information "that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father." He continued, "This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr. responded, "Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. "[24] Trump released the following statement: "My son is a high-quality person and I applaud his transparency."[25]

On August 29, 2017, it was reported that Trump Jr. had agreed to participate in a transcribed interview with the committee in a closed-door session.[26] During his interview on September 7, 2017, Trump Jr. said that he attended the June 2016 meeting with a Russian attorney to see if she had information about Clinton's fitness to be president. "To the extent they had information concerning the fitness, character or qualifications of a presidential candidate, I believed that I should at least hear them out. Depending on what, if any, information they had, I could then consult with counsel to make an informed decision as to whether to give it further consideration," he said in a prepared statement.[27]

For a complete history click the link: https://ballotpedia.org/Investigations_into_Russian_interference_in_the_2016_presidential_election

Hello!!!
FBI-DOJ-MSM[b/] were in on the attempted Coup known as Russian Collusion
Hillary campaign paid for the Stelle dossier PHONY[b/] the FBI altered emails submitted to the FISA court for the warrants, the DOJ watched it all happen

 

[Peter Andersen]

Another favorite part...Pro tip Joey - dont go off script. Complaining about lack of production investment while saying; “We’re going to need oil for at least another decade,”

Proving again he has no clue about energy demands.
And they want to outlaw gas stoves.
Electric rates in northeast are up fifty percent this year

 

[badlatitude]

Hello!!!
FBI-DOJ-MSM[b/] were in on the attempted Coup known as Russian Collusion
Hillary campaign paid for the Stelle dossier PHONY[b/] the FBI altered emails submitted to the FISA court for the warrants, the DOJ watched it all happen

You should change your username to "Nurgle."

 

[Ishmael]

Steve Schmidt is obviously enraptured by the quiet beauty of Sarah Sanders.



The Trump story isn’t just hollow. It has become boring and shallow. The evidence of that was the hackneyed response speech on behalf of MAGA Republicans, delivered by the pathological liar and daughter of political grifter Mike Huckabee.

Donald Trump disdained America’s soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. He called them “suckers and losers.” The sight of combat wounds revulsed Trump, who made clear his contempt for wounded warriors when they were out of sight and the show was off camera.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders was among Trump’s most accomplished liars, gaslighters and abusers of the American people during her shameful public service. Apparently, she was just getting warmed up.

Last night, Huckabee Sanders ludicrously proclaimed herself the voice of a new generation. She isn’t, but if she were the name would be “Generation Rotten.”

She peddles fear and platitudes in a stew of performative outrage, seasoned with two dashes of malice, a sprinkle of division and a dollop of imbecility.

The most astounding moment in her response occurred when Huckabee Sanders — vessel for ceaseless lies in the service of a grotesque man and a cause riddled with insurrectionists, thugs, neo-Nazis, extremists, conspiracy theorists and criminals — claimed that she stood as a sentinel holding back craziness from breaching normalcy. The performance wasn’t just dark and bitter, nor simply delusional and self-serving. It was a cynical rant from an alternate reality where Jesse Walters is a truth teller, and Judge Jeannie would be a great Supreme Court justice. The Republican response was a sophomoric audition tape for the FOX News prime time crazy hours, during which paranoia is mixed with venom and conspiracy to make billions, while lashing the nation.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a hideous figure in American life. She lacks character, dignity, honesty, self-awareness and respect. By that measure, she was the perfect choice to speak for a party in which a low man like Kevin McCarthy has risen to the top — or at least to the short line at Mar-a-Lago. What a disgrace, and what an embarrassment for Arkansas.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders: a hideous figure in American life

The Trump story isn’t just hollow. It has become boring and shallow. The evidence of that was the hackneyed response speech on behalf of MAGA Republicans, delivered by the pathological liar and daughter of political grifter Mike Huckabee. Donald Trump disdained America’s soldiers, sailors...

steveschmidt.substack.com

 

[Swimsailor]

Another favorite part...Pro tip Joey - dont go off script. Complaining about lack of production investment while saying; “We’re going to need oil for at least another decade,”

Proving again he has no clue about energy demands.
And they want to outlaw gas stoves.
Electric rates in northeast are up fifty percent this year

Who wants to outlaw gas stoves? Democratic leadership?

 

[Bus Driver]

Who wants to outlaw gas stoves? Democratic leadership?

That's a good one for the easily duped.

 

[Swimsailor]

Thread drift...

But this is what was actually proposed...

We also request that the CPSC consider taking the following actions to help protect Americans from the hazards of gas stove emissions: ● Require gas stoves to be sold with range hoods that meet mandatory performance standards, assessing their efficiency of removing the pollutants, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address steady-state-off leakage, including requiring automatic shut-off valves, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address the health impacts of hazardous emissions, ● Require labels on gas stoves that educate consumers about their exposure risks, ● Launch a public education campaign on the health risks of cooking with a gas stove, and steps that consumers can take to minimize their risk.

Ignore the headline and actually read the proposal...

Ban on gas stoves being considered because of link to childhood asthma

The debate over the safety of gas stoves is heating up and it's a federal agency that is fanning the flames. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Richard T

cbsaustin.com

 

[Ishmael]

Who wants to outlaw gas stoves? Democratic leadership?

Nobody. Another stupid lie to attract stupid people.

 

[Bus Driver]

Thread drift...

But this is what was actually proposed...

We also request that the CPSC consider taking the following actions to help protect Americans from the hazards of gas stove emissions: ● Require gas stoves to be sold with range hoods that meet mandatory performance standards, assessing their efficiency of removing the pollutants, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address steady-state-off leakage, including requiring automatic shut-off valves, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address the health impacts of hazardous emissions, ● Require labels on gas stoves that educate consumers about their exposure risks, ● Launch a public education campaign on the health risks of cooking with a gas stove, and steps that consumers can take to minimize their risk.

Ban on gas stoves being considered because of link to childhood asthma

The debate over the safety of gas stoves is heating up and it's a federal agency that is fanning the flames. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Richard T

cbsaustin.com

Please don't bring facts into this. The Faithful have their dander up about "outlawing" stoves, as if it happening.

 

[Steam Flyer]

Please don't bring facts into this. The Faithful have their dander up about "outlawing" stoves, as if it happening.

They can have my gas stove when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers!!
Oh wait, I don't even have a gas stove, nor do I care for cooking with them. If I'm going to cook over a fire, it will be wood that I gathered myself while fighting Indians! Yeah that's the ticket!

 

[Bus Driver]

They can have my gas stove when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers!!
Oh wait, I don't even have a gas stove, nor do I care for cooking with them. If I'm going to cook over a fire, it will be wood that I gathered myself while fighting Indians! Yeah that's the ticket!

I have a gas stove. Love it. When I bought my house, my first born was quite young. I wondered about the implications of burning a fossil fuel, indoors. So, I had an environmental agency conduct an air quality test. The test was more comprehensive than just pollutants from the flame. Suffice it to say the lack of an exhaust fan of adequate power was discovered. We quickly upgraded to one that exceeded the recommended minimum exhaust flow.

THAT is one of the major points in this whole mess. Gas stoves without adequate exhaust fans/hoods contribute to indoor air pollution, and have been linked to more than 12% of cases of childhood asthma.

 

[Raz'r]

Thread drift...

But this is what was actually proposed...

We also request that the CPSC consider taking the following actions to help protect Americans from the hazards of gas stove emissions: ● Require gas stoves to be sold with range hoods that meet mandatory performance standards, assessing their efficiency of removing the pollutants, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address steady-state-off leakage, including requiring automatic shut-off valves, ● Where feasible, issue mandatory performance standards for gas stoves that address the health impacts of hazardous emissions, ● Require labels on gas stoves that educate consumers about their exposure risks, ● Launch a public education campaign on the health risks of cooking with a gas stove, and steps that consumers can take to minimize their risk.

Ignore the headline and actually read the proposal...

Ban on gas stoves being considered because of link to childhood asthma

The debate over the safety of gas stoves is heating up and it's a federal agency that is fanning the flames. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Richard T

cbsaustin.com

When the study first came out about indoor pollution from gas ranges (which is a well, "Duh" kinda thing) I put in place a "fan on when using the range" rule. Now, with 3 women in the house the uptake took a bit, but once we had good habits, my "seasonal" allergies all about disappeared. Was it the gas pollution? Cooking pollution? Don't know. I can say that if one of us forgets though, you can smell the gas "smoke" almost immediately throughout the house. While I wish my wife would try a modern induction cooktop, we'll likely have this range until either it, or we, die, so the exhaust fan will be our ticket to clean, indoor air.

 

[d'ranger]

This sure got the hardcore 30% RWNJs all fired up - right JT? Beyond the burn it down storm the capitol crowd I don't think any voters were very impressed by the antics of last night nor Huckabee's rebuttal. 2024 can't come soon enough since absolutely nothing will get done with this congress.

 

[veni vidi vici]

I have a gas stove. Love it. When I bought my house, my first born was quite young. I wondered about the implications of burning a fossil fuel, indoors. So, I had an environmental agency conduct an air quality test. The test was more comprehensive than just pollutants from the flame. Suffice it to say the lack of an exhaust fan of adequate power was discovered. We quickly upgraded to one that exceeded the recommended minimum exhaust flow.

THAT is one of the major points in this whole mess. Gas stoves without adequate exhaust fans/hoods contribute to indoor air pollution, and have been linked to more than 12% of cases of childhood asthma.

Lol .. so now that we know that we won’t need the government anymore
I call BS on your %12 claim

 

[Bus Driver]

Population Attributable Fraction of Gas Stoves and Childhood Asthma in the United States​

Abstract​

Indoor gas stove use for cooking is associated with an increased risk of current asthma among children and is prevalent in 35% of households in the United States (US). The population-level implications of gas cooking are largely unrecognized. We quantified the population attributable fraction (PAF) for gas stove use and current childhood asthma in the US. Effect sizes previously reported by meta-analyses for current asthma (Odds Ratio = 1.34, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.12–1.57) were utilized in the PAF estimations. The proportion of children (<18 years old) exposed to gas stoves was obtained from the American Housing Survey for the US, and states with available data (n = 9). We found that 12.7% (95% CI = 6.3–19.3%) of current childhood asthma in the US is attributable to gas stove use. The proportion of childhood asthma that could be theoretically prevented if gas stove use was not present (e.g., state-specific PAFs) varied by state (Illinois = 21.1%; California = 20.1%; New York = 18.8%; Massachusetts = 15.4%; Pennsylvania = 13.5%). Our results quantify the US public health burden attributed to gas stove use and childhood asthma. Further research is needed to quantify the burden experienced at the county levels, as well as the impacts of implementing mitigation strategies through intervention studies.

 

[Raz'r]

This sure got the hardcore 30% RWNJs all fired up - right JT? Beyond the burn it down storm the capitol crowd I don't think any voters were very impressed by the antics of last night nor Huckabee's rebuttal. 2024 can't come soon enough since absolutely nothing will get done with this congress.

While I wouldn't mind a bit of tax reform, I don't mind a do-nothing congress. Dems got the basics right the last 2 years, giving time for those programs to come up to speed is fine.

 

[veni vidi vici]

Population Attributable Fraction of Gas Stoves and Childhood Asthma in the United States​

Abstract​

Indoor gas stove use for cooking is associated with an increased risk of current asthma among children and is prevalent in 35% of households in the United States (US). The population-level implications of gas cooking are largely unrecognized. We quantified the population attributable fraction (PAF) for gas stove use and current childhood asthma in the US. Effect sizes previously reported by meta-analyses for current asthma (Odds Ratio = 1.34, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.12–1.57) were utilized in the PAF estimations. The proportion of children (<18 years old) exposed to gas stoves was obtained from the American Housing Survey for the US, and states with available data (n = 9). We found that 12.7% (95% CI = 6.3–19.3%) of current childhood asthma in the US is attributable to gas stove use. The proportion of childhood asthma that could be theoretically prevented if gas stove use was not present (e.g., state-specific PAFs) varied by state (Illinois = 21.1%; California = 20.1%; New York = 18.8%; Massachusetts = 15.4%; Pennsylvania = 13.5%). Our results quantify the US public health burden attributed to gas stove use and childhood asthma. Further research is needed to quantify the burden experienced at the county levels, as well as the impacts of implementing mitigation strategies through intervention studies.

and what other factors were ruled out?
How about kitchen with off white paint ?
Or dish detergent
Or type of carpet
Or pets
Or … on and on
Statistics that’ll fool loinfomofo’z every time!
Curious how the “study “ came out only months before the attack on gas stoves
Just a coincidence I suppose, ya know me being a paranoid kook

Why are not these , well even one , liberal controlled cities shining beacons of success?
And why are otherwise happy and successful people forced into compliance with these experimental social programs
.
See the thread asking for examples of loss of personal freedoms

 

[Bus Driver]

It would appear vvv's parents cooked over a campfire in the living room, and made sure to keep the windows closed.

The boy is most certainly dain bramaged.