Ward Smith

Should the US government be on the hook for $15 billion?

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

Yes, they are required for all cross border pipelines regardless of ownership structure, and it’s been the law without substantial changes since at least 1978 https://openei.org/wiki/10_C.F.R._§§_205.320_–_205.329,_Application_for_Presidential_Permit

 

Then the next question  is, have such Presidential permits been granted and then rescinded? This is probably the bottom line.

Who else got a rescinded Presidential permit?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 10:32 PM, Ecocharger said:

Before but not after. In fact, if the defendant comes to court and says, I am no longer violating the principle being complained of, that is tantamount to an admission of liability in the previous period. It might remove liability going forward, but the liability would remain for the previous period. And it would acknowledge the previous liability. "Oh, sorry. I am not going to do that any more." I cannot see that happening.

What they teach in law school is a question formed like this

Are you still beating your wife? Yes or no

Are verboten since logically there's no win. That doesn't stop them from trying something similar every chance they get, it is after all up to your attorney to catch them doing it, and object. 

That said, the govt coming into court and saying they've stopped beating their wife is on them, and deservedly so.

Other than political favors being paid, I've yet to see the Xiden admin justification for yanking of the permit. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

your statement is a lie you pulled out of your arse.

Apparently your dementia is so severe you can't even comprehend what you wrote. Since Californians have said it, you're the liar. 

This is tiresome, outsmarting you is like playing hide and seek with a two year old who covers his own eyes and thinks he's disappeared. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

What they teach in law school is a question formed like this

Are you still beating your wife? Yes or no

Are verboten since logically there's no win. That doesn't stop them from trying something similar every chance they get, it is after all up to your attorney to catch them doing it, and object. 

That said, the govt coming into court and saying they've stopped beating their wife is on them, and deservedly so.

Other than political favors being paid, I've yet to see the Xiden admin justification for yanking of the permit. 

I gave you four reasons for rejections in my post above.  1.Keystone refused to do the spill mitigation study and plan for portions crossing over the Ogalala Aquifer.  These ARE required under the Clean Water Act signed by George HW Bush. and was the subject Rosebud Souix vs US Dept of State involving required consultations with each tribe individually under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 2. Teh US Supreme Court ruled in US v Cooley that the whiteman has to have  written permission to cross lands reserved  for Native American use.  In this case it is exclusive range rights cross the entire western 2/3's of Nebraska.  Dept of State is barred by conflict of interest as part of practice and procedure under the US Judiciary Act a promulgated by the US Supreme Court. No one signed for the tribes representing the various Nations.  The “one and only public hearing” for the pipeline is another case in point, Baker told HuffPost while en route to Nebraska for the event. She said she knew many members of tribes who “desperately wanted to attend,” but are unable to because of bad weather. there has to be a separate hearing for each of the tribes.  as ordered by the US Supreme Court. No one signed for the tribes That is why the Supreme Court stayed the construction across Treaty lands. 3. No permits have been granted for the construction of substations and power lines has been issued. Southwest Power pool has never received the money to prepare the required grid impact study for approximately 800 miles of new 230 kv and 115kv transmission necessary The grid study required under 18 CFR 292  would take about two + years since Keystone's study goes to the  end of the que.  4. TCN knows how to do the application properly since They have obtained the permit to cross the US Canadian border with new lines.  a t Kingsgate so they are not totally stupid.https://stormfieldservicesllc.com/pipeline-developments-to-disrupt-pacific-northwest-gas-inflows-and-spot-gas-prices/ The riginal Keystone line was never held up because TCN built that line after NAFTA.

Edited by nsdp
add link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

20 hours ago, nsdp said:

I gave you four reasons for rejections in my post above.  1.Keystone refused to do the spill mitigation study and plan for portions crossing over the Ogalala Aquifer.  These ARE required under the Clean Water Act signed by George HW Bush. and was the subject Rosebud Souix vs US Dept of State involving required consultations with each tribe individually under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 2. Teh US Supreme Court ruled in US v Cooley that the whiteman has to have  written permission to cross lands reserved  for Native American use.  In this case it is exclusive range rights cross the entire western 2/3's of Nebraska.  Dept of State is barred by conflict of interest as part of practice and procedure under the US Judiciary Act a promulgated by the US Supreme Court. No one signed for the tribes representing the various Nations.  The “one and only public hearing” for the pipeline is another case in point, Baker told HuffPost while en route to Nebraska for the event. She said she knew many members of tribes who “desperately wanted to attend,” but are unable to because of bad weather. there has to be a separate hearing for each of the tribes.  as ordered by the US Supreme Court. No one signed for the tribes That is why the Supreme Court stayed the construction across Treaty lands. 3. No permits have been granted for the construction of substations and power lines has been issued. Southwest Power pool has never received the money to prepare the required grid impact study for approximately 800 miles of new 230 kv and 115kv transmission necessary The grid study required under 18 CFR 292  would take about two + years since Keystone's study goes to the  end of the que.  4. TCN knows how to do the application properly since They have obtained the permit to cross the US Canadian border with new lines.  a t Kingsgate so they are not totally stupid.https://stormfieldservicesllc.com/pipeline-developments-to-disrupt-pacific-northwest-gas-inflows-and-spot-gas-prices/ The riginal Keystone line was never held up because TCN built that line after NAFTA.

None of that is relevant. Keystone was not going to go into court to get those ROWs sorted out until it was clear who would win the election. Biden & Co. were committed to rescinding the Presidential permit, regardless of the ROW issues. No one for the current Prez has ever said that rescission of the permit was related in any way to ROW concerns. Do you have some reference for that?

No other Presidential permit was ever rescinded because of the extended time necessary to sort out ROWs in the court system.

This was all about electioneering. Biden painted himself into a corner by promising to rescind the permit....end of story.

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

None of that is relevant. Keystone was not going to go into court to get those ROWs sorted out until it was clear who would win the election. Biden & Co. were committed to rescinding the Presidential permit, regardless of the ROW issues. No one for the current Prez has ever said that rescission of the permit was related in any way to ROW concerns. Do you have some reference for that?

No other Presidential permit was ever rescinded because of the extended time necessary to sort out ROWs in the court system.

This was all about electioneering. Biden painted himself into a corner by promising to rescind the permit....end of story.

Then we are back to the beginning.

Article 1.  (1)  The Border facilities herein described, and all aspects of their operation, shall be subject to all the conditions, provisions, and requirements of this permit and any subsequent Presidential amendment to it.  This permit may be terminated, revoked, or amended at any time at the sole discretion of the President of the United States (the “President”), with or without advice provided by any executive department or agency (agency).  

Article 3.  Upon the termination, revocation, or surrender of this permit, unless otherwise decided by the President, the permittee, at its own expense, shall remove the Border facilities within such time as the President may specify.  If the permittee fails to comply with an order to remove, or to take such other appropriate action with respect to, the Border facilities, the President may direct that possession of such Border facilities be taken — or that they be removed or that other action be taken — at the expense of the permittee.  The permittee shall have no claim for damages caused by any such possession, removal, or other action.

 

Article 11.  This permit is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, have hereunto set my hand this twenty ninth day of March, 2019, in the City of Washington, District of Columbia.

DONALD J. TRUMP

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

None of that is relevant. Keystone was not going to go into court to get those ROWs sorted out until it was clear who would win the election. Biden & Co. were committed to rescinding the Presidential permit, regardless of the ROW issues. No one for the current Prez has ever said that rescission of the permit was related in any way to ROW concerns. Do you have some reference for that?

No other Presidential permit was ever rescinded because of the extended time necessary to sort out ROWs in the court system.

This was all about electioneering. Biden painted himself into a corner by promising to rescind the permit....end of story.

Dear Doofus, Keystone was already in court over right of way.. Next fairy tale."

 

December 20, 2019
Tribes Win KXL Order in Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Trump

20191220kxl-270x186.jpgOn Friday, December 20, 2019, NARF and their clients, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Community (the Tribes) received some great news from a Montana court. The federal court denied the United States federal government’s and the TransCanada’s (TC Energy) efforts to dismiss the Tribes’ case against the KXL Pipeline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Then we are back to the beginning.

Article 1.  (1)  The Border facilities herein described, and all aspects of their operation, shall be subject to all the conditions, provisions, and requirements of this permit and any subsequent Presidential amendment to it.  This permit may be terminated, revoked, or amended at any time at the sole discretion of the President of the United States (the “President”), with or without advice provided by any executive department or agency (agency).  

Article 3.  Upon the termination, revocation, or surrender of this permit, unless otherwise decided by the President, the permittee, at its own expense, shall remove the Border facilities within such time as the President may specify.  If the permittee fails to comply with an order to remove, or to take such other appropriate action with respect to, the Border facilities, the President may direct that possession of such Border facilities be taken — or that they be removed or that other action be taken — at the expense of the permittee.  The permittee shall have no claim for damages caused by any such possession, removal, or other action.

 

Article 11.  This permit is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, have hereunto set my hand this twenty ninth day of March, 2019, in the City of Washington, District of Columbia.

DONALD J. TRUMP

 

Jay, how about going back to the previous page where you were confused beyond belief, just get that little matter straightened out first. And, no, you did make any point in "the beginning", just another waste of space. Off point as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, nsdp said:

Dear Doofus, Keystone was already in court over right of way.. Next fairy tale."

 

December 20, 2019
Tribes Win KXL Order in Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Trump

20191220kxl-270x186.jpgOn Friday, December 20, 2019, NARF and their clients, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Community (the Tribes) received some great news from a Montana court. The federal court denied the United States federal government’s and the TransCanada’s (TC Energy) efforts to dismiss the Tribes’ case against the KXL Pipeline.

None of these ROW cases in court results in stopping a pipeline, where do you get that idea. They get bounced around and a deal is struck. Your point is irrelevant. Not related to the NAFTA case.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2021 at 11:04 PM, Ecocharger said:

None of these ROW cases in court results in stopping a pipeline, where do you get that idea. They get bounced around and a deal is struck. Your point is irrelevant. Not related to the NAFTA case.

Put on your dunce cap. "Protesters appealed to the D.C. Circuit. In September 20 19, the D.C. Circuit, in City of Oberlin v. FERC, 937 F.3d 599, remanded the case to FERC and directed the  Commosson to explain including foreign shippers when analyzing market need for a domestic pipeline project.. The D.C. Circuit also asked FERC for more robust explanation for why eminent domain was needed or appropriate." https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/exports-eminent-domain-and-the-public-55290/  Nexus is dead in the water unless the DC Circuit changes its mind.

The permit procedures for oil pipelines are still the same a s [5] Border Pipe Line Co. v. FPC, 171 F.2d 149, 151 (D.C. Cir. 1948). 1200 miles is too far for authorization under a presidential permit by the State Dept. I have never seen a Presidential Permit  extend further that the working room for the first black valve (400meters) each side of the border. Without construction permits.how is Keystone going to go from  400 meters inside the border to Steelhead City NEB.  They did not apply for construction permits under the Hepburn Act of 1906. There are different rules for a border crossing pipeline s and Keystone thought they could get away with ignoring them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, nsdp said:

Put on your dunce cap. "Protesters appealed to the D.C. Circuit. In September 20 19, the D.C. Circuit, in City of Oberlin v. FERC, 937 F.3d 599, remanded the case to FERC and directed the  Commosson to explain including foreign shippers when analyzing market need for a domestic pipeline project.. The D.C. Circuit also asked FERC for more robust explanation for why eminent domain was needed or appropriate." https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/exports-eminent-domain-and-the-public-55290/  Nexus is dead in the water unless the DC Circuit changes its mind.

The permit procedures for oil pipelines are still the same a s [5] Border Pipe Line Co. v. FPC, 171 F.2d 149, 151 (D.C. Cir. 1948). 1200 miles is too far for authorization under a presidential permit by the State Dept. I have never seen a Presidential Permit  extend further that the working room for the first black valve (400meters) each side of the border. Without construction permits.how is Keystone going to go from  400 meters inside the border to Steelhead City NEB.  They did not apply for construction permits under the Hepburn Act of 1906. There are different rules for a border crossing pipeline s and Keystone thought they could get away with ignoring them.

Again, these are side issues and not relevant to the NAFTA agreement. These types of issues are common in the pipeline business, not something which is considered by this case.

What is considered is whether or not government actions favored American pipeline companies over Keystone, and whether Keystone received national treatment by the government. Native challenges or ROW challenges are not considered relevant to the question of U.S. government actions.

In other words, what is your point? I see none. The Prez is going to say that he rescinded the permit because he thought that Keystone would lose this action? That would be nonsense.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Again, these are side issues and not relevant to the NAFTA agreement. These types of issues are common in the pipeline business, not something which is considered by this case.

What is considered is whether or not government actions favored American pipeline companies over Keystone, and whether Keystone received national treatment by the government. Native challenges or ROW challenges are not considered relevant to the question of U.S. government actions.

In other words, what is your point? I see none. The Prez is going to say that he rescinded the permit because he thought that Keystone would lose this action? That would be nonsense.

You have obviously never briefed or submitted evidence in an international arbitration.  Unfortunately the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 is a core proceeding.   http://bogc.dnrc.mt.gov/PDF/CBM_EIS PDF/06 Chap-1.pdf

"Consultation with Tribal Governments—Under Executive Order 13175, BLM will provide a meaningful opportunity for input by tribal officials where the EIS would have tribal implications. The Executive Order reflects the federal government’s trust responsibility tofederally-recognized Indian tribes. Pursuant to this trust responsibility, the federal government establishes regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribes on a government-to-government basis when federal activities may affect Indian tribes."

A meeting in Nebraska does not satisfy the requirement for a consultation with tribes in Montana as the appeal  from the district court  in Montana is to the 9th Circuit. Nebraska and South Dakota  district courts are in the 8th Circuit. Keep going, you must: " Consultation with Tribal Governments—Under Executive Order 13175, BLM will provide a meaningful opportunity for input by tribal officials where the EIS would have tribal implications. The Executive Order reflects the federal government’s trust responsibility to federally-recognized Indian tribes. Pursuant tothis trust responsibility, the federal government establishes regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribes on a government-to-government basis when  federal activities may affect Indian tribes. "

Lin Wood, a prominent purveyor of election conspiracy theories, may face additional punishment from a federal judge in Michigan after he shared a video recording of a portion of a court hearing on sanctions related to a debunked election fraud lawsuit, the Detroit Free Press reports.

In legal matters and this now qualifies there is no second amendment right to free speech in legal matters.  All parties have a duty of candor to the tribunal. Mr. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in   Abrams v. United States.

I suggest that  you leave your shingle inside the outhouse door as you are not even qualified to be an out house lawyer. You bear the burden of proof that Mr. Trump conducted"meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribes on a government-to-government basis. State Time and place for the Presidents negotiations with the Montana tribes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

6 hours ago, nsdp said:

Dden of proof that Mr. Trump conducted"meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribes on a government-to-government basis. State Time and place for the Presidents negotiations with the Montana tribes.

Again, your point is without relevance to the issue of "national treatment". How did these issues of tribal consultation cause the Keystone permit to be rescinded? Did issues of tribal consultation cause previous Presidential Permits to be rescinded?

Cite an example where tribal consultation issues caused a Presidential Permit to be rescinded. Show me that tribal consultation issues were related to this rescission of the Presidential Permit for Keystone. As a matter of fact, show ANY issues which caused this Presidential Permit to be rescinded for Keystone.

I will make it even simpler for you. Cite ANY example of a Presidential Permit being rescinded for any reason whatsoever.

You need to show some relevance for the issue of tribal consultation. Tribal consultation has never been cited as a reason for the Keystone rescission.

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

16 hours ago, nsdp said:

In legal matters and this now qualifies there is no second amendment right to free speech in legal matters.

2nd Amendment? Do we get to solve legal disputes with guns now? Sign me up

Edited by Ward Smith
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 billion is peanuts compared to what they are doing overall. Our debt is set to triple from what it is right now in less than a decade.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HermitMunster said:

15 billion is peanuts compared to what they are doing overall. Our debt is set to triple from what it is right now in less than a decade.

If there's a betting pool, I'm in for triple before Xiden is done 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 7/24/2021 at 6:35 PM, Ward Smith said:

If there's a betting pool, I'm in for triple before Xiden is done 

I'm betting that the only way for the free-spending government to get out of this financial mess is to print more money and monetize the debt. That is, increase the money stock and pay off the debt with cheaper dollars. A cheap and easy way out which rewards debtor governments and punishes those who hold government debt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_monetization#Debt_monetization_and_inflation

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.