Pun Salad

Via Power Line, Bjørn Lomborg has a reality check:

Climate campaigners tell you green is cheap

It isn't

Global green transition cost is now $16+ trillion, rising with over $2 trillion/year (2% of global GDP)

113x our spending to avoid hunger

Still, fossil CO₂ emissions set another record last yearhttps://t.co/ypTLqfQ2Hq… pic.twitter.com/xHqj9eFUXi

— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) February 10, 2026

The link in Bjørn's tweet goes to a Bloomberg study, hardly a hotbed of climate-change denialism.

Also of note:

• OK, so what's Plan C, Donald? Andrew C. McCarthy is a little put out! Before explaining Why Trump’s Section 122 Tariffs Are Illegal (NR gifted link), he has some observations on Trump and Congress:

  President Trump’s attacks on the Supreme Court are an unmitigated disgrace. The Court tried in good faith — and, for what it’s worth, successfully in my view — to uphold the law. By now, the president has to know that the fallout of his ravings will be harassment of the justices by elements of his base that are as deranged as he is. Is the plan to ignite a riot on the Supreme Court steps this time, while he can still pardon the rabble-rousers as he did the Capitol rioters?

  Moreover, what value is there in an oath to execute the laws faithfully from a man who either has no regard for the law or delusionally sees the law as what he personally wants — with what he doesn’t want seen not merely as illegal but treasonous?

  Those are first-order challenges. Because congressional Republicans are derelict — because they’ve demonstrated that they care about the rule of law only when Democrats are in the White House — there is no point right now in dwelling on questions about fitness for office. Tapping Congress’s robust arsenal for dealing with executive abuses of power requires bipartisan consensus as well as courage, and both are in short supply.

  So what about Trump's "Plan B", imposing new "Section 122" tariffs? Well, in words even I can understand:

  In Section 122, Congress endowed the president with narrow, temporary authority to impose tariffs “to deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits” (emphasis added). What Trump is complaining about — something he insists is a crisis but is not — is the balance of trade, not of payments. The United States does not have an overall balance of payments deficit, much less a large and serious one.

  So, does this mean another trip back to SCOTUS? I guess we'll see.

• Awful person promises more awfulness. Jonathan Turley looks at what looms in our probable future: “It’s Not Going to End Well for Them”: Susan Rice Joins Call for a Revenge Purge After Democrats Re-Take Power.

  

  As Democrats plan for the possible takeover in the midterms and 2028 election, they are already openly discussing their push for radical changes in our political system, including packing the Supreme Court to guarantee that those changes are allowed. Many are also pledging trials, impeachments, and investigations of anyone who supported President Donald Trump in a purging of politics and government. The latest to join the revenge purge pledge is Susan Rice, Democratic powerbroker and top policy adviser to both President Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

  In an interview this week, Rice declared that supporters of Trump can expect the proverbial knocks on their doors: “A very prominent public figure, who has served at nearly the very highest levels, once told me … ‘Revenge is best served cold,’ and the older I get, the more I see the wisdom of that.”

  Jonathan has a new book out. (Amazon link at your right.) The Portsmouth (NH) Public Library has ordered a copy without me even asking them to, so good for them.