Okay, good!  A nice example of fake news as a lead in to an editorial.  Trump has said many things about global warming with the most recent the most representative of what he might do in the future.  Nevertheless, the RG quotes old words that have not been repeated and in fact essentially withdrawn to build its case.  So the whole argument is based on a false premise.

This is not about holocaust, oops, I mean warming deniers, this is about whether proposed carbon reductions can play a meaningful role in reducing the global warming problem.  Note that nowhere in the editorial do the writers mention the percentage reduction in carbon emissions expected as a result of the Paris accords.  Anything short of 75%, will only slow global atmospheric carbon build up.  So is a ten percent reduction worth the very high cost of closing all coal plants just to build new natural gas fossil fuel plants?  A question worth considering.  Close coal for nukes, maybe a different story.