Summary: U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is encouraging the prosecution of those that don’t agree with the theory of global climate change.
In response to a question from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch surprisingly admitted to already having handed the issue over to the FBI to consider prosecuting those that do not agree with climate change issues.
Read Pat Sajak Uses Twitter to Rant About Climate Change.
Lynch explained to the Senate Judiciary Committee this past week that she has weighed the option of pursuing civil actions against “climate change deniers.” Whitehouse urged for the prosecution of those who “pretend that the science of carbon emissions’ dangers is unsettled.”
California and New York Attorney Generals have opened up their own investigations into ExxonMobil for allegedly lying to shareholders and the public about climate change. In a sense, the FBI and Justice Department are being used to investigate and prosecute individuals and corporations for opinions of an unproven scientific theory that has plenty of inaccurate claims against it.
See Report Warns That Climate Change Has Arrived and Will Worsen.
Freedom of speech is supposed to be protected by the First Amendment, but prosecuting those for expressing their beliefs that are contrary to global warming goes against this theory. If the FBI starts investigating and going after dissenting scientists that publish articles and speeches that pose possible flaws in the climate change hypothesis, then the protection of expressing the free flow of ideas will be gone.
Read Supreme Court Blocks Obama’s Global Warming Plans.
The FBI is the most powerful law enforcement agency in our country, and they have been given the green light by the attorney general of the country to investigate if those that have differing thoughts on global warming meet the legal criteria to be prosecuted. If this is the direction our government is turning to when someone has a differing theory, what effect will this have on our freedom of speech?
Photo: rollingstone.com