White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Friday caused a stir when her remark ‘we disagree with the comments of the president’ went viral on social media.
But KJP wasn’t talking about President Joe Biden, who have made several comments that were ‘walked back,’ including his pronouncement that the Covid-19 pandemic was ‘over.’
“The pandemic is over,” Biden said in an interview on 60 Minutes. “We still have a problem with COVID. We’re still doing a lot of work on it. But the pandemic is over. If you notice, no one’s wearing mask, everybody seems to be in pretty good shape. And so I think it’s changing and I think this is a perfect example.”
According to a report by Politico, multiple White House Covid advisers were taken by “surprise.” Politico also attempted to walk back the White House’s statement by pointing to the latest data on Covid-19 “cases.”
Instead, KJP was talking about World Bank President David Malpass, a Trump appointee who caused a furor by casting doubt on the radical left’s belief that manmade “climate change” represents an existential threat to the planet.
"*" indicates required fields
“What is the White House’s take and the President’s take on World Bank President Malpass’s comments on climate change?” a reporter asked. “Does the President still have confidence in Mr. Malpass?”
“So I’ll take your — I guess — well, I guess I’ll take both your questions first,” Jean-Pierre responded.
“So, we disagree with the comments made by President Malpass,” she continued. “We expect the World Bank to be a global leader of climate ambition and mobilization as well, of significant — of sigvican- — significantly more climate finance for developing countries, as is the business of the World Bank.”
“The Treasury Department, which oversees our engagement with international financial institutions, has and will continue to make that expectation clear to the World Bank leadership,” she added.
“And with regard to the confidence that the President has or does not have?” the reporter pressed.
“Again, we disagree with the comments of the president,” she replied. “I’ll leave it there.”
KJP created a stir with the remarks as a context-dropped version of the video made the rounds on social media before being deleted upon discovery that she was talking about World Bank President Malpass and President Biden. That was believable enough, in part, because the White House had walked back the president’s remarks on Covid and on Taiwan.
But in many ways, Jean-Pierre’s comments on President Malpass were highly notable.
The New York Times‘ heated consternation about Malpass’s comments illustrates how important it is to the radical left to weaponize banks in the ‘fight’ against climate change.
David Malpass catapulted onto the international stage three years ago when he was nominated by President Donald J. Trump to become president of the World Bank. He was charged with improving the economies of poor nations, many of which are being battered by extreme weather fueled by climate change.
Yet Mr. Malpass barely spoke of global warming, careful not to rankle Mr. Trump, who famously called climate change a “hoax” and pulled the United States out of the Paris climate agreement.
This week, Mr. Malpass’s refusal to acknowledge that the burning of fossil fuels is rapidly warming the planet exposed a debate inside and outside of the institution about whether the bank is doing enough to help nations that are now struggling with devastating floods, heat, drought and other impacts, and whether its financing of new oil and gas projects is exacerbating the problem.
But an exhaustive, peer-reviewed study about “climate change” finds that most of the radical left’s claims about the existential threat it purportedly poses can be easily debunked.
Climate data going back decades show that there is no evidence that hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, and droughts are significantly increasing in frequency or intensity. Furthermore, deaths from climate disasters are down 99% over the last hundred years.
Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg has shredded the United Nations for its constant misrepresentation of the data on natural disasters to overstate the case for global intervention.
“When the UN analyzed the number of disaster events, it made a basic error—and one that I’ve called it out for making before: It basically counted all the catastrophes recorded by the most respected international disaster database, showed that they were increasing, and then suggested that the planet must be doomed,” Lomborg states.
“The problem is that the documentation of all types of disasters in the 1970s was far patchier than it is today, when anyone with a cellphone can immediately share news of a storm or flood from halfway around the world,” he added.
This drastic increase in reportage is being weaponized to misrepresent the alleged threat posed by global warming — most if it being entirely natural and something that man cannot do anything to “fight.” Human beings can adapt, like animals have been doing throughout global warming and cooling periods for eons.