Trump Admin, Congress Slam Airbnb Boycott of Israel as ‘Anti-Semitic’

Decision to stop some services in Israel met with strong opposition

SHARE

TWEET

EMAIL

Getty Images

BY: Adam Kredo  The recent decision by Airbnb to stop its services for Jews living in the West Bank of Israel is being met with criticism by the Trump administration and pro-Israel leaders on Capitol Hill, according to sources who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon about the company's choice to join the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, or BDS, which aims to wage economic warfare on the Jewish state.

Airbnb, a growing tech company that allows travelers to rent lodging across the globe, announced that it removed some 200 Jewish-owned rental homes in the West Bank, sparking fury in pro-Israel circles.

The deepening controversy over Airbnb's decision to join the BDS movement is beginning to be discussed within the Trump administration and its allies on Capitol Hill, who could potentially penalize company. Already, there is discussion that Airbnb's move could trigger state and federal laws barring discrimination based on religion and ethnicity.

A State Department official, speaking to the Free Beacon about the matter, categorically rejected Airbnb's boycott.

"The administration's strong opposition to boycotts, divestitures, and sanctions is well-known," the official said.

On Capitol Hill, Trump administration allies are turning their attention to Airbnb. The move to delist Jewish homes could provide the momentum necessary for Congress to finally pass anti-boycott legislation that has long been stalled.

"Airbnb's actions, sadly, have contributed to the rising tide of anti-Semitism that we've seen happening all over the world," Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), a vocal pro-Israel champion, told the Free Beacon. "They caved to pressure from the anti-Israel boycott movement, which promotes falsehoods in its campaigns against the world's only Jewish state."

"This kind of persecution has no place in any society and must end," Cruz said. "Airbnb should reverse its decision, and I will continue to work with my colleagues to combat anti-Semitism here and abroad."

Newly elected Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a former member of Congress, told the Free Beacon he is reviewing a range of options to penalize Airbnb

"AirBnb's decision to single out Jews living in Judea and Samaria is abhorrent and will lead to adverse consequences for the company," said DeSantis, who has long positioned himself as one of Israel's most vocal champions. "I am reviewing Florida's anti-BDS laws and am evaluating Florida's relationship to AirBnb to determine what actions I can take as Governor to fight back against this wrongheaded policy."

"Under my administration," DeSantis said, "Florida will stand strongly with Israel and we will not look favorably on those who join forces with the BDS movement."

Airbnb, which has its own company-wide anti-discrimination policy, appears to have run afoul of not only legislation barring Israel boycotts, but also its own in-house ethos, observers say.

"Why has Airbnb singled out Israel from all the nations?" asked Eugene Kontorovich, a director at the Kohelet Policy Forum in Israel and a professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia School of Law, in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed.

"The company tried to ward off accusations of hypocrisy by noting, ‘each situation is unique and requires a case-by-case approach.' But so far the only situation unique enough to warrant delisting is the one involving Jews," Kontorovich pointed out.

In subsequent remarks to the Free Beacon, Kontorovich noted that Airbnb appears to have run afoul of anti-discrimination laws in the United States and seems to be violating fair housing practices, if not by the letter of the law, certainly its spirit.

"This shows the urgent need to pass the Israel anti-boycott law" that is languishing in Congress, he said.

Airbnb also stands to harm its own bottom line, Kontorovich noted.

While the company is not yet publicly traded, it is likely to be soon. This could trigger state-level anti-boycott laws, such as in Florida and Illinois, which bar these local governments from doing business with any company supporting boycotts of Israel.

"Airbnb's exclusion of Jewish communities in the West Bank cannot be ignored," Kontorovich wrote in his WSJ piece. "Many states, such as Florida and Alabama, let public employees traveling on official business use Airbnb, These governments should immediately suspend permission to use Airbnb until its discriminatory policy is reversed."

Airbnb is likely to feel the heat further on Capitol Hill, where its boycott announcement has been met with outrage by Cruz and a good number of other pro-Israel leaders.

"Congressional Democrats may be moving away from Israel but there's still a bipartisan consensus in Congress that we oppose entities that wage economic warfare against Jews," said one senior congressional staffer who works with the Trump administration on Israel issues. "That's also true across dozens of states, many of which have passed anti-boycott laws. Airbnb is siding with anti-Semites who want to destroy Israel, in an effort to undermine America's Israeli allies. How do they think this ends?"

Airbnb did not respond to a request for comment.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/trump-admin-congress-slam-airbnb-boycott-israel-anti-semitic/

Court cites 'cultural norms' in acquitting Muslim rapist

Tuesday, November 27, 2018

 | 

Michael F. Haverluck (OneNewsNow.com)

Facebook44TwitterEmailMore15

Select Language​▼

A Muslim refugee from Bangladesh was acquitted of the rape of a high school girl – with a French court excusing the sexual attack due to the young man’s “different cultural norms.”

The young Islamic migrant was also charged with sexually assaulting another young girl, but his defense argued that he should not be held responsible because he could have misinterpreted his aggressive sexual contact with the girl due to his Muslim “cultural codes.”

Excuses, excuses

The politically correct explanation for acquitting the rapist contended that he should not be accountable for the attack because of the way Muslim men traditionally sexually victimize and abuse women back in Bangladesh.

“Experts who investigated the man described him as narcissistic and self-centered and that in the male culture of Bangladesh – his country of origin –  ‘women are relegated to the status of sexual object,’” the Voice of Europe reported.

Back in 2015 – when the rapist was 18 – he attacked a 16-year-old from his high school after taking her for a walk and inviting her to his house in Saint-Lô, France.

“There, he kissed her, touched her and groped her [private parts],” the French publication informed. “The girl managed to leave the room, [and] she then reported the incident to the principal of her school, who informed police.”

The Muslim refugee saw nothing wrong with his sexual attack on the girl, who subsequently tried to kill herself after the abuse.

“In custody, the refugee says that the girl was consenting, and the police closed the case – after which the young girl attempt[ed] suicide in late 2015 [and] was hospitalized for a week,” the Voice of Europe noted.

With France’s lax handling of the matter – going hand-in-hand with its tolerance of militant Islamic behavior – the young Muslim was back in attack mode in just a few months.

“Four months later, the refugee was arrested again, and the final verdict was handed down [last Wednesday],” the French paper pointed.

Even though he will not be punished for raping his second victim, the Muslim man will spend some jail time for sexually attacking his initial victim at his home.

“The refugee is acquitted of the rape but sentenced to two years in prison as a suspended sentence for the sexual assault of the first victim,” the Voice of Europe explained. “He will be registered in the sex offender file – according to the court’s decision.”

Empowering Muslims to rape?

Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer argues that the religion of Islam justifies the raping of women and that the French court is now backing down from enforcing its own brand of punishments of such abuse out of fear of offending or triggering retaliation from the Muslim refugee community.

“Yes indeed, his ‘cultural norms’ are ‘different,’ but why are they paramount?” Spencer posed in his report on the incident on Jihad Watch. “Why can’t France enforce its own ‘cultural norms?’ … Why can’t any Western country?”

He asserted that the Muslim rapist in France justified his behavior through teachings found in Islam’s holy book – the Quran – which is often used by attackers to excuse their aggressive sexual attacks on females in France and other European nations.

“[The Muslim rapist’s] cultural norms stem from Islam,” Spencer argued. “One survivor of a Muslim rape gang in the U.K. said that her rapists would quote [the] Quran to her and believed their actions [to be] justified by Islam.”

Spencer went straight to Islamic scripture to prove his point.

“The Quran teaches that infidel [non-Muslim] women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take ‘captives of the right hand,’ 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30),” Spencer explained. “The Qur’an says: ‘O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful (33:59).’”

In other words, if women are not very modestly dressed according to Islamic cultural standards, they are asking for – or deserve to be – sexually attacked by Muslim men, Spencer indicated.

“The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused – and that such abuse would be justified,” the leader of Jihad Watch impressed.

Not isolated events …

Islamic teachings spurring incidents of rape and other sexual attacks are by no means isolated events across Europe, which has widely welcomed Muslim migrants over the years to alleviate the so-called “refugee crisis” seen in war-torn Islamic nations in the Middle East and Africa.

In fact, groups of Muslim migrants can be found in various European nations gang-raping or  “passing around” European females to rape them.

“Last month, an 18-year-old girl was raped outside a disco in German by eight men, including seven Syrians,” WND recounted. “In September – in the latest trial in England of the widespread problem of Muslim ‘grooming gangs,’ – a woman testified via video that she was ‘passed around,’ beginning at age 13, by about 100 men.”

Left-leaning tolerance of problematic Muslim behavior has let many Islamic adherents off the hook for being sexual predators – conduct for which non-Muslim Britons would be punished, according to the law.

“The British government’s senior legal adviser charged last year that judges were giving lighter sentences to Muslims convicted of raping young girls because of ‘political correctness,’” WND noted. “At the time, the city of Newcastle Upon Tyne was the center of a child sexual-abuse scandal, with 17 Muslim men and one woman convicted of raping more than 100 underage white girls – some as young as 13.”

Tolerance of Muslim refugees’ vicious sexual and militant behavior has also been seen to the east of the English Channel.

“In June … the arrest of an Iraqi immigrant in the murder of a 14-year-old Jewish girl in Germany stoked criticism of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s immigration policy – including a call from an opposition party for her to resign,” WND recalled. “The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung said such cases ‘seem to be adding up.’”

Multiple acts of sexual aggression – coupled with acts of violence against European women – have been witnessed in Europe within the last year, including these two:

“In March – BBC News noted – an Afghan asylum seeker was sentenced to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of student Maria Ladenburger,” WND added. “Last December, an Afghan migrant was arrested on suspicion of stabbing his 15-year-old ex-girlfriend to death.”

https://www.onenewsnow.com/legal-courts/2018/11/27/french-ct-acquits-muslim-rapist-of-teen-citing-cultural-norms

Trump and the Ongoing Culture War

Robert Knight

Since November 2016, the media and the progressive Left have been pounding the same two claims.

The first is that Donald Trump was not really elected, since Hillary Clinton got more popular votes. 

The second is that anyone who voted for Mr. Trump or supports him today is a white male supremacist bigot. And probably homophobic and xenophobic to boot.  Regardless of actual race or sex. 

Regarding the first claim, Hillary’s national margin of 2.8 million votes can be explained entirely by California, which has become a one-party, socialist state with enormous potential for voter fraud.  

Mrs. Clinton collected 4.3 million more votes in the Golden State than Mr. Trump, and, as Investor’s Business Daily noted after the final count, “If you take California out of the popular vote equation, then Trump wins the rest of the country by 1.4 million votes. And if California voted like every other Democratic state — where Clinton averaged 53.5% wins — Clinton and Trump end up in a virtual popular vote tie.”

There weren’t even any Republicans on the ballot in the U.S. Senate race, and no Republicans were running for House seats in nine of California's 53 congressional districts, of which 45 now are represented by Democrats.  It’s a good bet that if nothing changes – and it could – all will eventually go Democrat.  The DMV now automatically registers people to vote who renew their driver’s licenses regardless of citizenship status unless they opt out, and the state has an estimated 3 million illegal aliens.  It’s beyond scary that California now accounts for nearly one-sixth of the U.S. House of Representatives.  The upside is that it has only two U.S. senators.

So, yes, Hillary is president in California by popular acclaim, but not in the rest of the nation.


The second claim is the Left’s chosen narrative for smearing anyone not aboard their socialist express.  They can’t now credibly claim that Democrats have any workable ideas for the economy, so they’re waging a culture war pitting identity groups against one another.   Actually, they’re pitting all identity groups against the dreaded white male bigots.  Hence, the “white supremacist” threat will be a constant refrain, along with phony charges of “voter suppression.”

It doesn’t matter if you’re a Hispanic or black or Asian conservative in the growing #WalkAway movement from the Democratic Party; you are a white male bigot.  Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was not even included in the National Museum of African American History and Culture.  Feminists have been declaring conservative women to be non-female for decades for not worshiping at the shrines of abortion and sexual anarchy. 

Well, a lot of people have had enough of our progressively dysfunctional culture, which is the main reason that Donald Trump was elected.  Many Americans saw their country being changed beyond recognition into an un-American regime aimed at criminalizing Christianity and common sense while advancing socialism and showing contempt for the economic victims of corporate globalism and technological change.  Mr. Trump’s genius was in recognizing the enormous hunger for a champion to stop the drift toward an iron-fisted political correctness. 


As cultural critic Joseph Epstein wrote this past week in the Wall Street Journal, the typical Trump voter wants someone to “make America straight again, make America anything but what it is becoming … Mr. Trump was chosen as a rebuke to the progressivism that has made life in America seem chaotic, if not a touch mad, and that now threatens to take over the Democratic Party.”


There is even method to Mr. Trump’s frequently caustic tweets.  As Dilbert creator Scott Adams has written, they reinforce a central point of agreement before moving on to incendiary taunts that enrage the Left and send the media into attack mode.  Mr. Adams concludes that the tweets are far more carefully crafted than just bursts of pique. 

For a truly in-depth analysis of Mr. Trump’s grasp of the American psyche, it’s worth spending an hour watching “The Trump Effect: Deprogramming the American Mind,” a remarkable film by Cuban refugee  Agustín Blazquez that features a running commentary by author and filmmaker Laurence Jarvik.   

In a sort of “My Dinner with Andre” format, Mr. Jarvik explains, with many visual illustrations, Donald Trump’s successful reading of the American character and why his crusade as “deprogrammer-in-chief” against political correctness translated into electoral success. 


The presidential election really was about much more than the economy.  It actually was all about “making America great again.” 

If the Democrats mock that message again in 2020, they will do so at their own peril.

https://townhall.com/columnists/robertknight/2018/11/27/trump-and-the-ongoing-culture-war-n2536512?fbclid=IwAR28pJalMyw-CdxUAdZij4g-96pdNS418SQjpW32XWtZBE7rkWazls0A3HM

If you don’t believe in borders, should you be deciding US immigration policy?

Despite what Beto thinks, the United States doesn’t have an obligation to every distressed mother with a four-month-old

Roger Kimball

 

A Central American migrant wrapped in a US flag looks at the almost dry riverbed of the Tijuana River near the El Chaparral border crossing

As the teeming mass of mostly male, partly criminal, humanity stews about on Mexican side of our Southern border, entertaining itself by throwing rocks at US border officials, emoting for CNN cameras, and periodically rushing the fence in an effort to break through to America, it is worth stepping back to ask a few large questions.

But first, let’s step out of the rancid pool of sentimentality with which the media, in its anti-Trump frenzy, has surrounded this episode. That sentimentality ranges from the astringent, Jim-Acosta sort, in which a reporter barks little virtue-signaling rhetorical bombs at the President of the United States, to the truly emetic effusion by Robert Francis ‘Beto’ O’Rourke, failed senatorial candidate, who began with this heart-tugger:

It should tell us something about her home country that a mother is willing to travel 2,000 miles with her four-month old son to come here. Should tell us something about our country that we only respond to this desperate need once she is at our border. So far, in this administration, that response has included taking kids from their parents, locking them up in cages, and now tear gassing them at the border.

‘This administration,’ Beto? Surely you know — but will not say — that the Trump administration has been doing exactly what the Obama administration did. Remember those photos of kids behind wire fences? CNN pretended they were contemporary. In fact, they were from 2014, when the great Calmer-of-the-Seas was in charge. The policy is the same: separate children from illegal alien adults when keeping them together would pose a danger to the children. Let me pause to point out that if you don’t want to be separated from your child (when she is your child and not your underage sex toy), do not enter the Unites States illegally.

As for ‘tear gassing them at the border,’ that’s another trick that the Trump administration has — rightly in my view — taken over from the Obama years. As far as I know, this was the first time the Trump administration used tear gas on migrants who violently assaulted the border fence in an effort to gain illegal entry to the United States. Maybe there are other instances. During the Obama years it happened about once a month, but Beto somehow neglected to mention that.

The rich Texas progressive then goes on to suggest that the migrant crisis is actually the fault of the United States because of its past interactions with Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. It’s because of us, you see, that thousands of people are massed at our Southern border violently trying to break in.

But back to those large questions. Every country has immigration laws. The laws of the United States, as it happens, are among the most generous in the world. We currently allow into the country about one million legal immigrants a year. Should we? Is that too many, especially when you factor in the rate of illegal immigration, which is estimated to be two to three times that?

Step back further. What is a country? It is a political entity defined in part by borders. It harbors citizens, who owe allegiance to that country and to whom the country owes its first solicitude. Does the United States have an obligation to every distressed mother with a four-month-old? Beto may posture and pretend that the answer is yes. But in fact, the answer is no. It’s a sad fact, perhaps, but it is a fact nonetheless, and to pretend otherwise exhibits not your finer moral make-up but your hypocrisy.

From 1927 until 1965, when Senator Edward ‘Chappaquiddick’ Kennedy introduced legislation that transformed our immigration policy, the United States favored immigration from Western Europe and the Anglosphere. It did this because such immigrants were considered most likely to possess the cultural capital to be able to make a contribution to the United States.

Which brings me to another question: What is the purpose of immigration? No country is required to welcome immigrants. But for those who do, what should their criteria of acceptance be? Should immigration policy be a species of progressive virtue-signaling, according to which we welcome the ‘Other’ just because he is as different as possible from ourselves? Or should we look for people who are likely to make a positive contribution to our society? I am firmly in the latter camp.

Those who say that Democrats are for lax immigration policy and lax enforcement of immigration laws because the more poor immigrants that flood into the country, the more welfare recipients and, hence, probable Democratic voters there will be are right. How far that process can go before the country is destroyed is a question we cannot answer.

It comes down to this. There are those who believe in the integrity of countries. There are what Donald Trump calls ‘nationalists.’ Then there are the transnational progressives who believe that nation states are an atavistic form of political organization and who in any case wish to harm the United States by degrading the character of its population and increasing the burdens on its social services. I am firmly ensconced in the former camp. Beto and his smiling confrères are in the latter camp, though I suspect he would change his tune eftsoons and right speedily if a few busloads of ‘asylum seekers’ were to show up next door to his 4,700-square-foot Hacienda-style house in El Paso.

https://spectator.us/borders-us-immigration-policy/

SECRETARY NIELSEN REPORTS

BY SCOTT JOHNSON IN IMMIGRATION, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION

We have been following the progress of the so-called caravan that has now reached Tijuana and Mexicali. Most recently, John noted Sunday’s attempted breach of the border between Tijuana and San Diego. Via DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s Twitter feed, I see that Secretary Nielsen has issued a statement “regarding the recent crisis on our southern border.” The statement is posted here on DHS’s Facebook page, though not on the DHS press release page. I thought readers might want to take it in unfiltered by our media tutors. Here it is:

Given the activities of the last 24 hours at the San Ysidro Port of Entry, I want to provide an update on what occurred and attempt to dispel many of the rumors and much of the misinformation circulating.

First, the violence we saw at the border was entirely predictable. This caravan, unlike previous caravans, had already entered #Mexico violently and attacked border police in two other countries. I refuse to believe that anyone honestly maintains that attacking law enforcement with rocks and projectiles is acceptable. It is shocking that I have to explain this, but officers can be seriously or fatally injured in such attacks. Self-defense isn’t debatable for most law-abiding Americans.

Second, the caravan is far larger and more organized than previous ones. There are 8,500 caravan members in Tijuana and Mexicali. There are reports of additional caravans on their way.

Third, the overwhelming majority of these individuals are not eligible for asylum in the United States under our laws. Historically, less than 10% of those who claim asylum from #Guatemala, #Honduras, and #ElSalvador are found eligible by a federal judge. 90% are not eligible. Most of these migrants are seeking jobs or to join family who are already in the U.S. They have all refused multiple opportunities to seek protection in Mexico or with the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency. Seeking employment or family reunification are not grounds for asylum under our laws, or any international obligation. There are, however, legal ways to seek a job or to be reunited in the U.S.

Fourth, the caravan members are predominately male. It appears in some cases that the limited number of women and children in the caravan are being used by the organizers as “human shields” when they confront law enforcement. They are being put at risk by the caravan organizers as we saw at the Mexico-Guatemala border. This is putting vulnerable people in harms way.

Fifth, we cannot confirm the backgrounds and identities of all caravan members which possess a national security and public safety risk to our country. However, at this point we have confirmed that there are over 600 convicted criminals traveling with the caravan flow. This includes individuals known to law enforcement for assault, battery, drug crimes, burglary, rape, child abuse and more. This is serious. Additionally, Mexico has already arrested 100 caravan members for criminal violations in Mexico.

Sixth, our Border Patrol agents and officers responded admirably and responsibly to the events on Sunday. It is a testament to their training and professionalism that no one was injured. The accepted use of nonlethal force (also used by the Obama Administration in 2013) prevented further injury to agents and a mass illegal rush across the border. We will not shy away from protecting our people. I ask parents to avoid violent caravan groups and refrain from attempts to illegally enter our country – these acts will put your children in danger.

Seventh, I want to thank President Donald J. Trump again for the decision to send @DeptofDefense to the border to bolster our ports of entry and provide force protection for Customs and Border Protection. This decision likely prevented injuries to personnel and migrants or additional damage to property. Instead of “a political stunt,” as suggested by some, this was in fact the act of a leader concerned about the rule of law.

Eighth, this Administration has been working nonstop to fix our immigration system to address the crisis at the border. We have proposed legislation and asked Congress to pass it. The President has repeatedly made clear what is needed to secure our border and negotiated in good faith. It is time for Congress to do its job. Absent Congressional action courts have misinterpreted existing laws and have made the job of law enforcement far more difficult. But the men and women of DHS will continue to do all we can to enforce the law and DHS and U.S. Department of State will continue negotiations with Mexico and our other partners in the region. We are optimistic that cross border collaboration can help make America, indeed the entire region, more secure.

Finally, this Administration warned about the danger of the caravan. We predicted the violence we saw on Sunday. We prepared to address it with additional personnel and DOD deployments. We will continue to prepare for the next assault while looking for lasting solutions with Congress and our Mexican partners. As always, I want to thank those officers and agents in San Ysidro who, under tremendous strain, used professionalism and restraint to ensure that no one was injured as they were attacked themselves. I also thank DOD and our state & local law enforcement who were on scene to support our people.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/secretary-nielsen-reports.php

EXPOSED: A KEY ELEMENT OF THE WIND ENERGY FRAUD

 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN ENERGY POLICY

In Wisconsin, a wind turbine farm is being decommissioned and disassembled after only 20 years of operation. It turns out that this is typical. My colleague Isaac Orr explains at Center of the American Experiment’s web site:

What’s really surprising about these wind turbines being decommissioned after 20 years is the fact that people were surprised by it. You’d be astonished at how many people I talk to have no idea that wind turbines only last for 20 years, maybe 25. In fact, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory says the useful life of a wind turbine is only 20 years.

This is the point: the federal government produces figures on the “levelized cost of energy,” comparing coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar and so on. Most people naively assume that the government’s numbers are authoritative. In fact, as usual when it comes to energy, the government’s thumb is firmly on the scale in favor of crony energy that funds politicians:

The short usable lifespan of a wind turbine is one of the most important, but least-talked about subjects in energy policy.

In contrast to wind, coal, natural gas, and nuclear plants can run for a very long time. Coal and natural gas plants can easily run for 50 years, and nuclear plants can be updated and retrofitted to run for 60 years. This has profound implications for the cost of electricity on a per megawatt hour basis that seemingly no one is talking about.

When the federal government puts out their cost projections for energy, the numbers they produce are called the Levelized Cost of Energy, or LCOE. These numbers are supposed to act as a measuring stick that allows policymakers to determine which energy sources will best serve their needs, but these numbers are wrong because they assume all power plants, whether they are wind, coal, natural gas, or nuclear will have a 30-year payback period.

This does two things. It artificially reduces the cost of wind power by allowing them to spread their costs over 30 years, when 20 would be much more appropriate, and it artificially inflates the cost of coal, natural gas, and nuclear by not calculating the cost over the entirety of their reasonable lifetimes.

When it comes to energy, you cannot get reliable information from “mainstream” sources or from the government. “Green” energy investors like Tom Steyer have gamed the system, and whoever pays electric bills–i.e., everyone else–is the sucker in their game.

The best place I know for information on energy policy is AmericanExperiment.org.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/exposed-a-key-element-of-the-wind-energy-fraud.php