Connect with us

Politics

Exposed! John Kerry Allegedly Allowed Leftist Environmental Groups Influence Decision Making

Published

2 years ago

on

According to recently revealed emails, John Kerry’s office had consulted several environmental groups concerning policies being crafted. The office had several discussions with these far-left groups, deliberating with them about policy-making resolutions.

According to documents obtained by government watchdog Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT), officials from his office were found to have discussed key national agendas with far-left groups. These groups included non-governmental organizations like the Sierra Club and the United Nations Foundation. However, the documents show that Kerry’s office, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC), had no similar discussions or meetings with fossil fuel energy groups or companies.

“You’ll see from the participants’ list that there’s a lot of interest in this conversation,” Alden Meyer wrote in an email planning a Zoom call between environmental organizations and SPEC officials. Mayer is a climate policy consultant and senior associate at the green group Third Generation Environmentalism. His email subject was dubbed “Zoom info and topics for tomorrow’s G7 discussion.”

The mail sent weeks prior to the G7 meetings held in the United Kingdom, included different subject matters to be discussed in the zoom meeting. The mail also copied four SPEC officials whose names were hidden and the leaders of 13 different environmental groups. These redacted officers were also linked to all 13 ecological organizations.

One subject matter discussed in the email was the United States’ stance on a G7 statement. The statement was about ending fossil fuel infrastructure financing, phasing out traditional gas-powered vehicle sales, and phasing out coal power generation. In addition, they also spoke about the United States’ intentions to coordinate a global effort to reduce methane emissions. 

Another topic of discussion in this virtual call was a supposed “clean counteroffer” to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) proposed by the Chinese government. The BRI is a massive infrastructure project stretching from China to Europe.

free hat

Following this meeting, the Biden administration suddenly declared a $200 billion counter to the BRI in June, choosing to make climate change a preeminence over infrastructure. In November, the United States also entered into a global methane pledge during the United Nations climate summit. The president set a goal to ensure that at least 50% of all vehicle sales are electric by 2030 in August 2021.

Moving on, an email from Jake Schmidt, the managing director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s (NRDC) international program, was also revealed. Several environmental groups were invited to a SPEC and National Security Council briefing about overseas fossil fuel finance. He wrote to this cabal on the 16th of December 2021 to give them an update: “I’ll send a calendar invite with the Zoom details but wanted to put this on your radar. The State Department (ENR and SPEC) plus the NSC have offered a briefing … to brief the community on the International Energy Engagement Guidance.”

It was discovered that Schmidt’s mail was sent to leaders of organizations who had pushed for an immediate shift from fossil fuel energy to green sources.  They included Friends of the Earth, Oxfam, Sierra Club, Oil Change International, the Climate Reality Project, World Resources Institute, the Bank Information Center, RMI, and the Center for International Environmental Law.

An explanation for why environmental groups were debriefed but industry groups favoring traditional forms were not informed has still not been provided. The documents further showed that officials discussed keeping specific discussions off “paper” as it was seemingly of the utmost discretion.

PPT Director Michael Chamberlain has explained the possible cause of these one-sided meetings and calls. He said: “Just as FOIA revealed that teachers’ unions exerted undue influence in the development of policy regarding school reopening, these conversations seem to provide evidence that large, powerful activist organizations may be pushing the same expensive climate policy that just passed as what some are terming the ‘Green New Deal Lite.’”

Chamberlain added, “For an administration claiming to be guided by science, there are more than a few indications that the input of their political allies may be a bigger driver of policy… Little wonder that the American public’s trust in its government is in free fall.”



Related Topics: