OK. You ask Why is more CO2 bad for the planet? I'll go out on limb and answer Why is it bad for life on this planet? (since the planet itself doesn't care)

1. As the climate warms, the temperate zone moves north. With the rapid warming already in effect, the plants adapted to the temperate zone can't keep up.

2. At some point the ice in Greenland and Antarctica melts, creating a rise in sea level. Catastrophic for the infrastructure which has been built on the assumption of a stable sea level.

3. The permafrost begins to melt. Embedded in it are who knows what pathogens we haven't seen for thousands of years.

That's all I have time for.

Allegations of an unwanted sexual encounter:

Paula Jones — A former Arkansas state employee who alleged that in 1991 Clinton, while governor, propositioned her and exposed himself. She later filed a sexual harassment suit, and it was during a deposition in that suit that Clinton initially denied having sexual relations with Lewinsky. Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives over the matter, but acquitted in the Senate. Clinton in 1998 settled the suit for $850,000, with no apology or admission of guilt. All but $200,000 was directed to pay legal fees.


Juanita Broaddrick — The nursing home administrator emerged after the impeachment trial to allege that 21 years earlier Clinton had raped her. Through an attorney, Clinton denied the claim, and there were inconsistencies in her story. However, several of her friends backed her claim. No charges were ever brought. (Refer to the Dateline NBC interview with her in 1999.)

Kathleen Willey — The former White House aide said Clinton groped her in his office in 1993, on the same day when her husband, facing embezzlement charges, died in an apparent suicide. (During a deposition in the Paula Jones matter, Willey initially said she had no recollection about whether Clinton kissed her and insisted he did not fondle her.) Clinton denied he assaulted her; an independent prosecutor concluded “there is insufficient evidence to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that President Clinton’s testimony regarding Kathleen Willey was false.”

Note that no court of law ever found Clinton guilty of the accusations.


Peter Baker, in “The Breach,” the definitive account of the impeachment saga, reported that House investigators later found in the files of the independent prosecutor that Jones’s lawyers had collected the names of 21 different women they suspected had had a sexual relationship with Clinton. Baker described the files as “wild allegations, sometimes based on nothing more than hearsay claims of third-party witnesses.” But there were some allegations (page 138) that suggested unwelcome advances:

“One woman was alleged to have been asked by Clinton to give him oral sex in a car while he was the state attorney general (a claim she denied). A former Arkansas state employee said that during a presentation, then-Governor Clinton walked behind her and rubbed his pelvis up against her repeatedly. A woman identified as a third cousin of Clinton’s supposedly told her drug counselor during treatment in Arkansas that she was abused by Clinton when she was baby-sitting at the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock.”
Update: We were focused on stories that emerged during Clinton’s presidency. But many readers have also urged us to include a reference to Clinton’s post-p**********l travels on aircraft owned by convicted p*******e Jeffery Epstein. Gawker reported that flight logs show that Clinton, among others, traveled through Africa in 2002 on a jet with “an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein’s address book under an entry for ‘massages.’” Chauntae Davies, the actress, declined to discuss why she was on the flight. Clinton has not commented.

Why do you people do that? All these false accusations and baseless assumptions about people just because you don't like their view. Mattoid has not actually stated that he supports the k*****g of Trump. Not once. I wrote a program to scan ALL the pages of a topic in about 6 seconds and I use it to scan for things people say and not ONE person stated they want to see Trump k**led.

You're original post implies that Trump's critics want him k**led. It would appear that is all your own fantasy. Is this your attempt to demonize them or maybe a feeble attempt to make Trump out to be some great threat to our culture?

Let me help you out here, Lily... None of us are all that worried about Trump. Trump is a moron. What we are worried about is the rise in bigotry and ignorance that Trump is tapping into because it leaves us open to future politicians that might actually be smart enough to leverage that and turn our country into the kind of f*****t tyranny that no one really wants.

So if you can drop your idolization of Trump for just one moment you MIGHT give yourself a chance to put credit where credit is due. Trump doesn't scare us. YOU people do. Because if there is one lesson that Trump has taught us, it's that if Adolph Hitler ran for president in 2024, you would very likely v**e for him.

Here's a good example how f*****m is here right now:

PRESS RELEASES JANUARY 19, 2024
Judicial Watch Sues Defense Department for Details of Alleged Conversation between CIA Employees Seeking to ‘Get Rid’ of then-President Trump
https://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-sues-defense-dept/

"(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for reports submitted by a military officer to his superiors regarding an alleged conversation around January 2017 between CIA analysts Eric Ciaramella and Sean Misko about trying to 'get rid' of then-President Trump (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:24-cv-00068)).

"Judicial Watch sued after the Defense Department failed to respond to a January 14, 2022, FOIA request for:

"Any and all reports submitted by a US military officer assigned to the National Security Council to his superiors relating to a conversation he overheard circa January 2017 at an 'all-hands' NSC staff meeting between CIA analysts Eric Ciaramella and Sean Misko regarding trying to 'get rid' of then-President Trump, as discussed in a January 22, 2020 Real Clear Investigations article available at this link.

"Any and all records relating to any investigations conducted by the Department of Defense and/or its sub-agencies and departments into the alleged conversation between Misko and Ciaramella referenced above, including but not limited to investigative reports and witness statements.

"All emails and communications sent to and from members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding the alleged conversation between Misko and Ciaramella and any related investigations.

"The Real Clear Investigations article reported:

"Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Eric Ciaramella – the CIA analyst whose name was recently linked in a tweet by the president and mentioned by lawmakers as the anonymous 'whistleblower' who touched off Trump’s impeachment – was overheard in the White House discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office, according to former colleagues.

"Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new 'America First' foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.

"At a meeting of National Security Council employees two weeks into the Trump administration, the unidentified military staffer, who was seated directly in front of Ciaramella and Misko, confirmed hearing them talk about toppling Trump.

“After Flynn briefed [the staff] about what ‘America First’ foreign policy means, Ciaramella turned to Misko and commented, ‘We need to take him out,’ the staffer recalled. 'And Misko replied, ‘Yeah, we need to do everything we can to take out the president.’

"Added the military detailee, who spoke on condition of anonymity: 'By ‘taking him out,’ they meant removing him from office by any means necessary. They were triggered by Trump’s and Flynn’s vision for the world. This was the first ‘all hands’ [staff meeting] where they got to see Trump’s national security team, and they were huffing and puffing throughout the briefing any time Flynn said something they didn’t like about ‘America First.’ '

"He said he also overheard Ciaramella telling Misko, referring to Trump, 'We can’t let him enact this foreign policy.'

"Alarmed by their conversation, the military staffer immediately reported what he heard to his superiors.

“ 'It was so shocking that they were so blatant and outspoken about their opinion,' he recalled. 'They weren’t shouting it, but they didn’t seem to feel the need to hide it.'

“ 'The intelligence community targeted Trump for removal for daring to question Biden family corruption and e******n i**********e tied to Ukraine and Burisma,' Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. 'The Biden Defense Department’s sitting for over a year on a simple FOIA request on the Deep State targeting of Trump is a cover-up plain and simple.'

"Judicial Watch previously sued for information about Ciaramella.

"In November 2019 Judicial Watch reported that among those visiting Ciaramella at the White House were several officers in l*****t George Soros organizations. [[Soros's Open Society Institute foundations are CIA asset NGOs - Non Government Organizations that partnered with Burisma Ukrainian Mafiosos Kolomoisky and Zolovsky.]]

"In December 2019 Judicial Watch sued the DOJ and CIA for communications between Ciaramella and former FBI agent Peter Strzok, former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and/or the Special Counsel’s Office. In both cases the government refused to produce records, 'refusing to confirm or deny the existence or non-existence of responsive records' because 'confirming or denying the existence or non-existence of responsive records would reveal information protected by the CIA Act, namely the existence or non-existence of an employment relationship between the Agency and Mr. Ciaramella.' And, would constitute an 'unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.'”

The United States has 17 different levels of Intelligence Agencies and nobody knows "who's on first." The Soviet Union had the KGB and GRU and the top knew what the bottom was doing. Let's revamp our loony toons and weed out the riffraff.