TheLastRefuge Profile picture
Jun 28, 2022 21 tweets 6 min read Read on X
1) A small example thread using biofuel ideology to explain.

msn.com/en-gb/news/wor…
2) Boris Johnson has proposed dropping biofuel mandates as an approach to quickly produce more food for people. Germany agrees but Joe Biden is blocking.

msn.com/en-gb/news/wor…
3) In the U.S. the Biden administration has mandated (they call it a waiver, but that's a misnomer) that ethanol must increase from 10% to 15% for use in gasoline. That's the E15 "waiver."
4) All gasoline refineries must prove they are using the biofuel by sending receipts for their purchase. These are called purchase credits (known as Renewable Identification Numbers, or RINs).

The purchase receipts or RIN credits must be sent to the EPA.
5) Any gasoline refinery that does not use E15 must purchase these RIN credits from parties that blended or imported biofuels directly.

This sets up a secondary income stream, a trading market for the larger oil companies, refineries and importers.
6) E15 requires a complete change in the infrastructure of the gasoline company from the refinery to storage, to transportation and eventually to the retailer.

E15 infrastructure does not widely exist. So, most gasoline refineries use the RIN credit system to sell non E15 gas.
7) The price of the RIN credits becomes embedded in the price of the gasoline.

When a mandate for E15 year-round is in place, that drives up the cost of gasoline, because more RIN credits need to be purchased. (Current Biden policy)
8) Think of it this way. Metaphor: The govt requires that margarine be used instead of butter in making bread.

The bread makers do not have equipment that will support the use of margarine instead of butter (and the bread customer does not want margarine). Image
9) The govt gives the bread maker the option of paying $1 to the USDA for not using margarine and to continue using butter.

The bread maker is forced to make a decision. Change equipment ($$$) or pay $1 to govt for each continued loaf of bread using butter.
10) The result of bread makers not switching to margarine means each loaf of bread now costs an additional $1 to you the customer.

This bread example is analogous to the RIN credit gasoline refinery issue with biofuels.
11) Mandating increased use of biofuels for gasoline is one part of the climate change agenda. ie. The Green New Deal and/or 'Build Back Better' policy agenda. ImageImage
12) Mandating increased use of biofuels also means farmland used for human food production is now switched to create biofuel.

PM Johnson proposed dropping this approach in order to quickly produce more food with a pending global food shortage looming.

msn.com/en-gb/news/wor…
13) Justin Trudeau (Canada) and Joe Biden (USA) blocked the approach to increase food production, saying the climate change agenda is more important than feeding people. ImageImage
14) NATO and Western Govt, led by the policy of Joe Biden have placed oil and gas sanctions against Russia.

Those U.S-led Russian energy sanctions follow similar sanctions already in place against oil and gas from Iran and Venezuela.
15) Simultaneously the G7, Western Alliance will not allow Africa to develop their own use of natural gas to produce fertilizer to increase crop yield/harvest.

The G7 control food production in Africa by controlling the energy company investment needed to manufacture fertilizer.
16) Again, as with the biofuel issue, the G7 and Western Alliance are prioritizing Climate Change energy policy over food production. Which will ultimately cause food shortages and famine. Image
17) However, now the "WEST" has an ideological problem.

People will figure this out. The absence of food will change things. People will get angry once they realize the absence of food is being caused by Western Govt prioritizing Climate Change over people. Image
18) Things will get intense. Things will get ugly. The Western "leaders" need a scapegoat, a way to focus the world's anger away from them... and toward something else.
19) Their already visible plan (Kirby example) is to place the blame here 👇 Image
20) When the food shortage becomes serious, I mean when it really becomes serious, the blame escalation will need to increase in direct proportion to the hunger, famine and starvation.

This means they will need a direct war with Russia. ImageImage
21) All of this "globally," which includes the energy driven inflation surfacing in the nations participating in the Build Back Better energy policy approach, is being driven by nations in Yellow.👇

This is the geopolitical battle, a narrative war, ahead of the looming hot war. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TheLastRefuge2

May 29
From the New York trade court ruling:

"...[...] in 1962, Congress delegated to the President the power to take action to adjust imports when the Secretary of Commerce finds that an “article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.” Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Pub. L. No. 87-794, § 232(b), 76 Stat. 872, 877 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1862(c)(1)(A)). This delegation is conditioned upon an investigation and findings by the Secretary of Commerce, and agreement by the President. See id. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires that the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) take action, which may include imposing tariffs, where “the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied” or “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” 19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)(1)(A)–(B). The USTR may impose duties also where the USTR determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” Id. § 2411(b)(1). This power is conditioned on extensive procedural requirements including an investigation that culminates in an affirmative finding that another country imposed unfair trade barriers under § 2411(a)(1)(A) or (B) or § 2411(b), and a public notice and comment period. See id. § 2414(b)."...

This is one reason why the ruling can be overturned. The Sec 301/302 investigation was completed by the USTR, with extensive citation.

NY Court citation:

cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/file…

USTR Citation 400 pages:

ustr.gov/sites/default/…Image
The court literally ignored the USTR investigation, AND the Dept of Commerce review and investigation of the same based on the USTR published findings.

This ruling will not pass inspection by a higher court, and as to the motive of the 3-judge panel.... follow the $$$, there are trillions at stake.

This is a ruling to the benefit of the multinationals.Image
USTR Citations for lengthy review:

ustr.gov/issue-areas/pr…
Read 4 tweets
May 19
1. The original agreement between Clinton and Obama going back to 2008 was for Obama to take the nomination, the presidency and then eventually support Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election bid. 

Obama would be President. Obama would appoint Clinton to Secretary of State, Hillary would then use her office to build wealth for herself and her family, and then HRC would exit the Dept of State to begin her presidential run.

John Podesta would enter the Obama administration as Hillary left in 2013.  Podesta would look out for Hillary’s interests from his position inside the Obama White House.  The Clintons and Obamas never fully trusted each other. 

Barack Obama would put all the mechanisms into place that would transition his administration into Hillary Clintons’.  That was always the plan running in the background.Image
2. In 2015 Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had a check-in meeting; just touching base to firm up the goals and objectives as Hillary began her campaign launch.  Podesta left the White House to take up position inside the campaign, and Team Obama would maintain Clinton’s interests as planned without an insider.

All of President Obama’s appointments in after 2015, were essentially through the prism of assisting Hillary Clinton to win in 2016.  Attorney General Loretta Lynch (tarmac meeting), Deputy AG Sally Yates, Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and FBI Director James Comey were all part of that.

This is a key point missed by many. In the last two years of Obama, the cabinet and top-tier members of the administration would align their institutional interests to that of Hillary Clinton.

Technically Hillary had eyes and ears all over the White House at the time, and with Hillary Clinton being a foregone conclusion per the expectations of Washington DC, everyone would fall in line during the transition from Obama to Clinton. 

Again, this was the general plan.  Obama would show up in 2016 to campaign for Hillary and all would be seamless.Image
3. The FBI was aware of the plan for transition from Obama to Clinton, hence their role in eliminating the threat later presented by the Clinton, as Secretary of State, laptop scandal and the subsequent issues of classified information. 

Remember, Clinton’s motive as Secretary of State was to sell her position for material wealth; that’s why she used a personal email, maintained her own servers, and generally controlled how her activity could be monitored and tracked. [Also, she didn’t fully trust Obama]

The FBI activity was to support, defend and facilitate the Clinton effort. This is again a key to understanding "Russiagate"...

After March 2016 (Super Tuesday) it became obvious Donald Trump was going to win the Republican nomination. Trump would be Clinton's opponent.

Using access to the NSA database, the U.S. Govt., specifically "FBI Contractors", began doing political surveillance of Donald Trump's campaign. This intel was then sent to the Clinton team. Clinton would benefit from knowing the communication inside the Trump campaign. All of that intel was in the metadata captured by the NSA and searched by the FBI contractors.

All of this activity was political surveillance, using govt resources to feed the Clinton team the info.Image
Image
Read 5 tweets
May 17
1. OK lawyers, hear me out on my plan to address lower court 'nationwide injunctions' (or TROs) and tell me the flaw.

How about, before any lower court can issue a "nationwide" injunction, they have to get permission or approval from the SCOTUS Justice that presides over that region?Image
2. That singular justice decision (if approved) is then scheduled for a full SCOTUS review every-other-Friday.

[They can work out the communication structure by themselves, even using skype or similar]

Any nationwide injunction issued -hopefully fewer- would be approved by a SCOTUS justice, and then eventually reviewed by the full court.
3. Yes, that means some DEI justices (Sotomayor, Jackson, Kagan), would likely approve regional injunctions. However, the ruling only applies to that region, not nationally.... Until full court approval.

Yes, in the issue of criminal illegal aliens, it essentially means that some regions would be unsafe as deportation processes would be stalled, while in the other regions the repatriation could continue without the TRO applying.Image
Read 4 tweets
May 1
1. Something really weird is going on here....

It didn't just surface with this oddity.

FOR THE RECORD: I have two decades of documented direct connection between Qatar and the CIA.
2. Here is another QATAR example, of just brutally odd statements that run counter to reality. This time by Steve Witkoff.

theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/03/2…
3. And it just continues... Note the 7-minute mark with Tucker Carlson, and his recent statements to Megyn Kelly.

Read 7 tweets
Apr 30
1. The absolute key to the first quarter GDP result is to remember that ‘imports‘ are a deduction in the economic equation of Gross Domestic Product.  The GDP is the valuation of all goods and services produced in the USA *minus* the value of imports.

cc: The insufferable @RandPaul

bea.gov/news/2025/gros…Image
2. The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) releases the results of the first quarter GDP.  The overall economic growth seems low at 0.3% until you look at how U.S. companies responded in February and March to the tariff announcement.

Companies proactively purchased massive amounts of products in advance of the tariffs leading to an overall increase in imports of 41.3%.  Which results in a 5.3% deduction to GDP.  Every dollar of those imports is a deduction to the GDP equation, giving the false appearance of lower domestic production.Image
3. There was a massive surge in import goods purchases of 50.9% versus the prior period [Table 1, line 20].  That’s the largest periodic increase in import purchases I have ever seen.  Simultaneously, fixed asset investment in equipment for domestic production surged 22.5% [Table 1, line 11].

Put both of these metrics together and what you see are U.S. companies building consumer inventory from overseas (imports) while simultaneously preparing themselves to shift production into the USA. 

The massive import purchases are a bridge to cover the time needed to shift the manufacturing from overseas to the USA.  This is exactly what we want to see.
Read 8 tweets
Apr 18
1. I'm getting hit with a lot of newly awakened people wondering about AG Pam Bondi; wondering if the stuff from her old days surfacing is accurate.

I will try to encapsulate and provide receipts. The issues with Pam Bondi are much more serious than most understand.

Pam Bondi was the Florida Attorney General during the incident when George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.

“When I worked with Governor Scott to appoint State Attorney Angela Corey to the case involving Trayvon Martin, I did so with the full confidence that a swift and thorough investigation would be conducted."Image
2. On the evening of February 26, 2012, in Sanford Florida, George Zimmerman fired one shot into the heart of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, fatally killing him.

The Sanford Police lead investigator into the shooting was Chris Serino; the Police Chief was Bill Lee, and the local prosecutor was Norm Wolfinger.

Detective Chris Serino questioned and investigated George Zimmerman, who used a traditional “self-defense” justification for the shooting.  Eventually the case went to trial and the same “self-defense” justification was used in court.  Despite what you might have heard in the media, it was never a “stand your ground” defense.  It simply was not needed.

In addition to questioning Zimmerman, Serino documented two eye-witnesses to the shooting.  One woman in an apartment who saw the initial encounter between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, and another eye-witness, a man in an adjacent apartment who saw and partially recorded, the entire confrontation as it unfolded on the pathway approximately 20 feet from him.

The second witness called 911 and described in real time what he was seeing.  Trayvon was straddling George in an “MMA style” position and slamming Zimmerman’s head into the sidewalk.  During the 911 recording you can hear Zimmerman calling out, “help me; somebody help me.” [NOTE: Both of those witnesses as well as the recording were later buried but came out at trial.]

After a thorough investigation, all of the statements by George Zimmerman were corroborated by the eye-witnesses, the forensic evidence, the audio recording, and all the physical evidence found at the scene.  Detective Chris Serino gave his investigative report to Police Chief Lee along with the recommendation that Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense was valid and justified.  Serino and Lee then consulted with prosecutor Norm Wolfinger who reviewed the evidence and agreed.Image
3. Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, was in a new relationship with his girlfriend Brandy Greene. Ms. Greene was a corrections officer.

Ms. Brandy Greene was eventually put into contact with a Florida “civil rights lawyer” named Benjamin Crump.  After some back-and-forth positioning and discussion, Crump decided to champion a wrongful death case for the Martin family against George Zimmerman, the City of Sanford and the Sanford Police Department.

Benjamin Crump hired a PR firm run by Ryan Julison to create media pressure.  Using his civil rights contacts, Crump requested support from groups like Al Sharpton, Dream Defenders, and allies in the DOJ.  That approach led to AG Eric Holder and eventually President Barack Obama.

Additionally, having worked previously (2007) with Florida prosecutor Pam Bondi in the Martin Lee Anderson case, Benjamin Crump called the now Florida Attorney General Bondi for support. 

The detective (Serino) sided with George Zimmerman.  The Police Chief, Bill Lee, agreed with Serino and the evidence.  The local Sanford prosecutor (Norm Wolfinger) refused to bring a case against Zimmerman based on the evidence.

…. Enter Florida AG Pam Bondi, who told Florida Governor Rick Scott a special prosecutor was needed for her friend Ben Crump.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(