U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry sits with World Economic Forum Founder Klaus Schwab before the Secretary addressed attendees on January 22, 2016, at the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland. [State Department Photo/Public Domain]
Dear Former Secretary Kerry,
We are writing in regard to recent reports suggesting that your office is effectively outsourcing official policymaking functions of the U.S. government to progressive environmentalist groups, and/or utilizing them in an unlawful advisory capacity.
As has been publicly reported, groups have demanded that the State Department elevate climate change above all national security, great power competition, and human rights considerations, to “the top of all [foreign policy] decisions”. They have also advised the Department that “anyone with a history of blocking climate action must be disqualified from senior international appointments”. We request additional clarity regarding your office’s interactions with these groups, your team’s solicitation of their advice, and the Department’s adoption of their recommendations.
Emails reviewed suggest that your office has sent private updates regarding your foreign travel to a small, exclusive cadre of representatives of various non-profit organizations (NGOs), who remain better informed than the American people or the U.S. Congress regarding your whereabouts and policy agenda. The same correspondence shows that your senior staff has asked these NGOs to weigh in on which candidates the United States government should support to fill important leadership positions inside international organizations like the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). One candidate, whom an NGO representative described in emails as “horrible,” went on to win a leadership seat at the OECD. This complicates both present and future diplomatic engagements: Now that it is publicly known that he was viewed unfavorably by American groups with privileged access to U.S. decisionmakers, our working relationships with the OECD and the official’s host government could be jeopardized.
It is one thing, of course, to occasionally consult with outside groups to fill in knowledge gaps and hear a variety of perspectives. It is quite another to use individuals who have not gone through official vetting to form your shadow cabinet, and/or solicit their advice regularly when they have not been lawfully constituted as a federal advisory committee. 5 When either of the latter situations transpires, individuals with considerable sway over U.S. foreign policy are not accountable to the American public, and normal transparency into government processes is lost.
Functions that are inherently governmental – like the conduct of foreign relations and the determination of foreign policy – cannot be contracted out to friends and former colleagues of your staff. 6 Even informal arrangements that do not include financial remuneration would seem to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of this normal contracting rule. Furthermore, elevating outsiders’ perspectives in the reported manner may have the unintended consequence of discounting or making less relevant those innovative policy ideas that have been provided through official Department channels.
It is imperative that you remind all employees and officials within the Department of their legal responsibility to take appropriate measures to collect, retain, and preserve all documents, communications, and other records in accordance with federal law, including the Federal Records Act and related regulations, that are related to House Foreign Affairs Committee members’ series of questions. This includes electronic messages involving official business that are sent using both official and personal accounts or devices, including records created using text messages, phone-based message applications, or encryption software. We request that you preserve all information that relates to Office of the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC) communication, documents, and other records, created or disseminated from January 2021 to present, exchanged with representatives of, and/or referring or relating to, the following entities and individuals:
- E3G
- Performance Partners
- The People’s Justice Council
- Climate Nexus
- Center for American Progress
- Oxfam America
- National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
- Global Strategic Communications Council
- Global CCS Institute
- World Resources Institute
- John Podesta, Senior Advisor to the President for Green Energy Innovation and Implementation
Specifically, this request should be construed as an instruction to preserve all documents, communications, and other information, including electronic information and metadata, that is or may be potentially responsive to a future congressional inquiry, request, investigation, or subpoena. For purposes of this request, “preserve” means securing and maintaining the integrity of all relevant documents, communications, and other information, including electronic information and metadata, by taking reasonable steps to prevent the partial or full destruction, alteration, testing, deletion, shredding, incineration, wiping, relocation, migration, theft, mutation, or negligent or reckless handling that could render the information incomplete or inaccessible. This includes preserving all compilations of documents that have already been gathered in response to requests, even if copies of individual documents may still exist elsewhere in the agency.
Sincerely,
Michael T. McCaul
Ranking Member
House Foreign Affairs Committee
UPDATE 5.17.22: As Klaus Schwab and the WEF prepare to meet once again, it’s important to remember their plan to reshape society as they see fit. One person standing up against the Great Reset and working hard to protect people from invasive medical tyranny is Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology. You may remember Malone from his interview on the Joe Rogan Experience that was banned by most Big Tech censorship boards. In a new interview with The New American embedded below, Malone continues his discussion of the Great Reset and COVID tyranny.
Originally posted January 6, 2022.
The Great Reset is a plan by World Economic Forum executive chairman Klaus Schwab to fundamentally reshape society to his vision of owning nothing, sharing space with refugees from all countries, paying carbon taxes, and various other forms of punishing success. Spectator World explains how Schwab and his cronies want to accomplish their goals by exploiting disasters like COVID. They write (abridged):
‘Welcome to 2030. You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy.” This is not a quotation from George Orwell or Aldous Huxley. It is not even supposed to be dystopian. If it is fiction, it is not because it is implausible, but because it has yet to be accomplished as fact.
These are the opening lines from a social media video issued by the World Economic Forum in 2016, and generated from “the input of members of the WEF’s Global Future Councils.” These visionaries have further delights in store for us: “Whatever you want, you’ll rent… The US won’t be the world’s leading superpower… You’ll eat much less meat… A billion people will be displaced by climate change. We’ll have to do a better job at welcoming and integrating refugees. Polluters will have to pay to emit carbon dioxide.”
In the same month, the WEF announced the Great Reset, its proposals for the post-Covid global system. “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine and reset our world,” said Klaus Schwab, the WEF’s founder, executive chairman and co-author of an accompanying book. In The Great Reset, Schwab calls for greater coordination between government and private capital: technocracy, not democracy. The perpetual Covid emergency confirms the perpetual climate emergency — and justifies the forced transformation of our societies.
The Great Reset has four “building blocks.” We must “change our mindset.” Our worldview was “made up by a depressingly small number of individuals — from Machiavelli to Adam Smith, to Milton Friedman and William Golding,” and we must reject the “myth” that “humans are intrinsically selfish, uncooperative and aggressive.” No more free markets. No more Lord of the Flies, either, in case it gives you ideas.
The ideas we must embrace are to “create new metrics” so that “government, business and citizens” can make informed decisions on the “brave and challenging steps required to move to a more people- and planet-cen- tered way of living.” We must “design new incentives” for the economy beyond shareholder value — planetary wellbeing, for example, or our carbon footprints. And we must allow technology into every corner of our lives: “Build genuine connection — distance is the danger.”
Distance is, in fact, the guarantor of privacy and property, and the liberal democratic polities that are built on them. Intrusive surveillance, the erosion of distance between government and people, and incentives for playing the game (“social credit” scores) are totalitarian. Yet behind the talk of emergencies is an emerging fact. The roots of so many present discontents lie closer to home, in the failure to fully recover from the crash of 2008 by reviving an economic vitality that goes beyond Wall Street and a handful of favored, green-tinged industries. Home ownership and the supply of good jobs are in decline. Renting and the gig economy are the new normal. Your children may not get to choose whether they own nothing, or whether they can afford privacy.
Another emerging fact: the nostrums that were dismissed in 2016 as conspiracy theories are becoming the stuff of bien-pensant convention and even government policy. In October, when the leaders of the West convened in Glasgow for the UN’s COP26 climate summit, documents leaked by Greenpeace to the BBC showed that “plant-based diets” were suggested as a weapon against climate change and beef stigmatized as a “high-carbon” food. In November, Bloomberg Opinion responded to the supply-chain crisis by telling Americans to “buy less stuff” and “be more European,” or face the “accelerating degradation of our environment and the risk that in the near future there will be no stuff at all, because it’s underwater and/or on fire.”
This is coercion by apocalypse. True, the Western democracies are run by nineteenth-century bureaucracies that are increasingly incapable of achieving the desired effects of policy or managing their unforeseen social fallout. But we are being pressed to assent to a false binary: either death by climate change, or eat the soy patty, don’t get on a plane and don’t have children. The transformation of free societies by bureaucratic stealth, corporatization and end-of-the-world doom-mongering pose greater dangers to American democracy than China or climate change do. Imagine, as John Lennon didn’t say in his millionaire’s paean to a property-free society, if we got to vote on what happens next.
Read much more about The Great Reset here.
If you’re willing to fight for Main Street America, click here to sign up for my free weekly email.
