Just over a week ago President Trump was accused of flipping on immigration with his DACA decision, and now he’s now being accused of prepping a flip on the Paris Peace Accord.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the White House is prepping an announcement that we’ll remain in the agreement.
But just as soon as they published the story, the White House rebuked it saying there’s “been no change in our position.”
And then SecState Rex Tillerson chimed in on Sunday morning to add that we might stay in ‘if’ things improve in the agreement.
So it’s basically a game of climate accord hokey pokey.
If Trump does pull out, the question is whether his original announcement was just a ploy to get China, France, and others to play his game.
We’ll soon see.
Here’s more from Redstate…
Patterico had a whiplash moment on Saturday, when he brought you a Wall Street Journal report that suggested that the Trump administration would not pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement. He then posted an update, based on a statement of denial from the White House.
The White House denies the new @WSJ report saying the US will not withdraw from the Paris climate deal pic.twitter.com/X71VzHytuS
— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) September 16, 2017
So which is closest to the truth?
I’d pay close attention to the wording of the statement from the White House, especially the use of that word, “unless.”
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson did the Sunday morning talk show thing today, and he’s adding a bit of perspective.
Tillerson said on “Face The Nation” Sunday that President Trump feels the U.S. commitments to the agreement — in which each country sets its own commitments and there’s no punishment for not following through with them — are too strict.
“We are willing to work with partners in the Paris climate accord, if we can construct a set of terms that we believe is fair and balanced from the American people and recognizes our economy and our economic interest,” he said.
There’s another qualifier in there – “if.”
Yeah, that’s a loaded word.
Tillerson suggested that the disparity between the United States and China in the Agreement was troublesome.
