Sen Reid brags about threatening coal industry: ‘I will do everything I can to hurt your investments, your company’ – ‘I won, they lost.’

Speaking to the Nevada Lambda Business Association, Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid recalls how he successfully threatened utility executives over the planned construction of “four or five” coal-fired power plants in Nevada: “I told them, ‘You will rue the day you do that…I will do everything I can to hurt your investments, your company.” Senator Reid says, “I won, they lost.”

LAMBDA Business Luncheon
KTNV Channel 13 Las Vegas
August 16, 2016

Also see: Daily Caller: Harry Reid Brags About Personally Threatening Coal Executives With Financial Ruin – Here’s what Reid told reporters at a luncheon Wednesday, according to KTNV’s Jon Ralston:

But here in Nevada we don’t even have—NV Energy has not been the biggest help. We had companies come here wanting to spend money [inaudible] but they ended up pulling away [inaudible] they lost large amounts of money. [inaudible] is doing the accounting now and he’s doing a lot better now, but there’s still a lot they need to do. They announced that they—because you know, I came out there—but a number of years ago and I learned they were going to build four to five new coal fire generating plants in Nevada. Why? Because it’s pristine. Out there, nobody complains. I complained. My staff and everybody said “why are you doing that? You’re going to hurt yourself.” And maybe I did. But I won, they lost.

I called two of the companies that built plants there and I told them go ahead and do it, but I am going to do everything to hurt investments in your company. So they decided perhaps—decided to get rid of the coal plants. We don’t have a coal fire generated plant open since Reid-Gardner. And it was 40 years [inaudible]. Yesterday, they announced they announced it is going to close a year early. There’s only one coal fire plant left in Nevada and that’s on its way out too. So we’re making progress in Nevada.

Reid has talked about his efforts to keep coal plants out of Nevada, but he’s never admitted to threatening company executives.

Read more:



74 Responses

  1. This man is either supremely evil or supremely stupid/senile. Either way he is a danger to freedom loving citizens of Nevada and this country.

    Reid is a Power, Perk and Privileged Politician. The founding fathers never intended politicians to be in a position to threaten constituents. The idea is public service not public rule.

    If he thinks standing in the way of affordable energy and driving up the cost of electricity to consumers is public service he has a perverted and aggrandized sense of his role in a Representative Republic.

  2. Reid has lost his marbles. He is legacy creating and in doing so has created a fantasy world of achievement.Just like Obama, Hillary, Boxer and Feinstein.

  3. He won. Nevada electric prices can skyrocket just like Obama promised.
    He just created another TV ad for Trump to play in Nevada.
    Electricity prices from “renewables” vs coal fired plants are a matter of record.

  4. Wouldn’t such an action by an elected state official be worthy of examination by the SEC, as their stated mission is to protect investors…..?

      1. You’re going to sue someone trying to stop air pollution, acid rain, and climate change for the next 100,000 years.

        That would be fun to watch.

        1. Yes, it would be fun to watch … noting that coal-fired power plants are far cleaner than they have ever been with scrubbers of NOx and SOx considered industry standards. “Acid rain” was dealt with decades ago. “Climate change” (your crowd doesn’t even dare stick with your original mantra of “global warming” since it isn’t selling to the American public) is a garbage can term, to mean anything your crowd deems helpful in the moment to scare people away from using our abundant resources and be less dependent on foreign sources of energy.

          Why don’t you look over (study) for an education about true energy abundance, environmental stewardship and human benefits?

        2. Comical. The only reason Harry went after them is because they must have failed to grease his palms. He has no problem taking money from the silver, gold, and platinum miners in Nevada. It’s just a coincidence, I’m sure, that he made sure bills requiring those companies to pay royalties on those minerals mined on Federal lands never reached the Senate Floor. Odd that oil and coal companies pay royalties when they extract from federal land (the second leading source of tax money for the feds, by the way). I’m sure the Nevada Mining Association naming him their ‘Man of the Year” in 2010 was just another coincidence. And your statement is ridiculous on its face, and is more proof that you Liberals have a religion, not political beliefs.

          I challenge you to check out my statements, knowing in advance that you won’t. For you, that would be like doing a drawing of the ‘Prophet’ Mohamed – sacrilegious.

  5. He is a disturbed little man at best. The sad thing is he along with the rest of these condescending pricks in Washington are incapable of doing anything other than ruining peoples lives for a fictitious problem.

    1. <<hp.. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!il449r:….,…..

  6. This is the kind of crap you would expect from a pitiful little man who is losing is grip on power and his mental condition. Harry Reid has been as corrupt or more so than the Clinton’s since his day with the Nevada Boxing Commission. He is a warped, vindictive and vicious little man. I would be on the Cl9nton’s meeting him in hell one day.

  7. Coal is the engine which powers this great empire. Only misguided politicians with a distorted anti-American agenda, like Reid and Obama, would propose the demise of a legitimate industry. It is none of the government’s damned business which industries should succeed or fail.

    1. <<tr. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!ir58m:….,….

          1. CO2’s heat capacity is irrelevant, because that’s not how manmade global warming works. It’s a radiative phenomenon…. Do you understand the difference?

            1. David, to the CAGW alarmists, the heat retention capacity of CO2 is of primary importance. Either the earth’s atmosphere is fragile and sensitive to additions of CO2 or it is resilient and insensitive to those inputs. If mankind adds 30 billion tons of CO2 per year to an atmosphere that already contains 850 billion tons of CO2, what percent is mankinds contribution to that total? What percent is naturally added, therefore?

              1. Yes, heat retention is important, BUT IT DOESN’T HAPPEN THROUGH STANDARD THERMODYNAMIC PROCESSES like heat capacity.

                It happens radiatively.

                Do you really understand the difference?

                    1. So all those credentialed scientists know less about radiative transfer than you do?

                    2. Radiative transfer isn’t rocket science — it’s basic physics.

                      You could learn it too, if you want, and if you have a solid background in physics.

              2. “If mankind adds 30 billion tons of CO2 per year to an atmosphere that already contains 850 billion tons of CO2, what percent is mankinds contribution to that total?”

                Firsd, there is now about 3,100 billon tons of CO2 in the atmosphere.

                Humans emit about 40 Gt CO2 annually. About half of that is (for now, at least) absorbed by the ocean and land.

                That’s why atmo CO2 is rising — now 45% higher than before the industrial era. All from humans.

        1. Oh, my. No one disputes that coal isn’t the cleanest way to produce energy. The dispute arise as to whether it is worth trashing our economy to get rid of it. The industry has spent billions (in the US) to upgrade systems. Getting rid of it without replacing it at least one for one with cleaner systems that are comparable in price just makes us less competitive. That means fewer jobs, smaller tax base, lower quality of life. It’s also HIGHLY questionable whether coal has ‘climate changing properties”. The people that say it does resort to fact picking and outright lies to bolster their case. It is NOT settled science. They even invented a new pejorative to belittle people that don’t agree with them – a childish technique used by the left to to an extreme. And the utter hypocrisy of Harry Reid, the Nevada Mining Association’s Man of the Year 2010 is disgusting,

          1. Coal is about the DIRTIEST way to generate energy.

            It isn’t even a 20th century fuel — it’s a 19th century fuel. It’s filthy. It should be done away with even before considering its climate changing properties….

            1. I don’t even disagree. Just as soon as an economically equivalent clean technology is in place. Of course we can’t have nukes, even though they bear NO relationship to 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, or Fukishima. Can’t have dams. Solar and wind are okay, but NIMBY.

              1. I favor nuclear fission as a bridge to truly sustainable energy producing technologies.

                Now, can we bury the nuclear waste somewhere on the outskirts of your town?

                    1. Until you actually update your brain hard drive with new information, you will be useless to discuss this issue with. Nuckear fusion has not been shown to be commercially viable yet. Fission has been for over 50 years.

                    2. I am all in favor of nuclear fission as a bridge to a truly sustainable energy production system.

                1. Take a drive through the American West and tell me we have nowhere to store used fuel, unless of course it’s being done by the current administration in New Mexico. By the way, the latest technologies will reduce that waste immensely. I’m actually a wind/solar to hydrogen type of guy, myself.

                    1. It doesn’t need to be in anybody’s back yard. That’s a ridiculous argument. Do you put trash in a can? Is the dump in your back yard? Do you use any electronics? Do you want the factory in your yard? Do you drive a car? Do you want the mine in your back yard? All as ridiculous as your ‘argument’.

                    2. I know, nobody wants nuclear waste anywhere near them. Nor do they want a large number of trucks hauling it through their states and towns and neighborhoods.

                      Other than that, I’m all for nuclear fission. We need to stop emitting CO2 as soon as possible.

              1. I didn’t write an insult there. I asked you a question. Are you going to answer it?

                PS: I don’t watch MSNBC. In fact, I don’t even own a television.

                1. I don’t really need to, because you can’t you prove the opposite. Your side is the one with the case to prove. When the so-called climate scientists stop fudging numbers and outright lying they will have more credibility. As it happens I am a firm supporter of getting rid of fossil fuels, but not by trashing the economy or lowering living standards. Harry Reid on an eco bandwagon is ‘reidiculous’ given his unwavering support for other industries that are proven to pollute. We have numerous excellent alternatives that the knee jerk left/liberals won’t allow. Why? Because they are as bought and paid for as any on the right, in fact more so. Reid is a prime example.

                  1. Every December I attend the Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco. It’s a gathering of about 25,000 climate scientists, planetary scientists, and some geologists. It is the biggest meeting of their fields.

                    No one there — and I mean NO ONE — disputes that man is causing climate change.

                    They know the science. They know man is responsible for climate change. They have moved on to figuring out the consequences and reprecussions.

                    So, what are your credentials?

                    1. I attended Comic-Con in San Diego where they told me conclusively that Star Trek was better than Star Wars.

                      And how can I argue with all those ‘experts’? We all know the Climate never changed before the advent of the SUV.

                    2. Comic Con?????????

                      That’s your equivalency??? Comic Con????

                      Hilarious. Really hilarious.

                    3. “We all know the Climate never changed before the advent of the SUV”

                      How do you climate changed before?

                    4. Seriously? There were no ice ages and subsequent global warming? That is settled science.

                    5. How do you know there were ice ages and earlier global warming? Who told you that??

                    6. Simply answer the question.

                      Who says there where ice ages and previous global warmings? Who discovered those?

  8. Got to love Liberals! They whine about jobs going overseas, then do everything they can to make it difficult to do business in the US. All the while their billionaire supporters produce their stuff overseas. Obama’s killed the last lead smelter in the US, meaning we ship lead ore to China and buy back lead ingots or lead products. That is exactly the type of economic transaction liberals complain about us doing to other countries. Can’t have coal, oil, or nuclear. Dams are terrible, windpower kills birds and that solar? Well, put it somewhere else. I think we should take all the libbies on welfare and make them pedal stationary bikes for 8 hours a day to earn their welfare.

Leave a Reply