Awkward: Four former EPA heads refuse to corroborate Obama’s global warming claims

There was a bit of an awkward moment in Wednesday’s Environment and Public Works Subcommittee hearing when Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) asked four former EPA officials – point blank – whether they agree with President Obama’s sensational global warming claims… and no one did.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

“If you happened to see Senator Sessions on the Hill yesterday, he questioned four former EPA heads. These four EPA heads were invited to the hearing by the Democrats,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “And, of course, the Democrats want you to know the globe is heating even faster than it was 15 years ago and we’re headed towards climate crisis, climate chaos. We have to take care of this right away. Right?”

In November 2012 the President claimed, “the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted, even ten years ago.” He followed that up in May 2013 by saying, “we also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or ten years ago.”

After quoting President Obama, Sessions asked those testifying to raise their hand if they agree with the President’s sentiment. No one did.

“So I would ask each of our former administrators if any of you agree that that’s an accurate statement on the climate. So if you do, raise your hand,” Sessions said. “Thank you, the record will reflect no one raised their hand.”

Watch the awkwardness ensue below:

“That’s incredible,” Glenn said. “How is that not on the news?”

Stu was quick to point out that the media did in fact cover the hearing – just not this particular part.

“Oh, it’s in the news. You were talking about the story, so I searched real quick about the EPA chiefs going to Congress,” Stu said. “And there’s a story right here, EPA chiefs to Congress: Act on climate. That’s the summary.”

While it probably doesn’t surprise you to hear the mainstream media didn’t report on the fact that the EPA chiefs flat out refused to corroborate the President’s claims, it is a disturbing trend.

It’s good we are doing it because it doesn’t seem like anyone picked that one up out of there. ‘It’s not important.’ Like when the president says something like that, you’re a denier for disagreeing with it,” Stu concluded. “Yet later on, years down the road when we find out it wasn’t true then, you are still a denier for having opposed it in the past. [Then] the moment you realized you were right, it doesn’t get recorded.”