JUNE 7, 2012 – The Board of Directors of the Pacific Institute announced yesterday it was “pleased to welcome Dr. Peter Gleick back to his position as president” of the organization. The announcement comes three months after Gleick, a prominent climate scientist, confessed to stealing confidential board documents from The Heartland Institute.
Gleick also circulated a memo, purportedly describing Heartland’s “climate strategy,” that he originally claimed to have received from Heartland, and later claimed to have received “in the mail” from an anonymous source. Heartland and others identified the memo as a fake and continue to believe it was most likely written by Gleick himself to damage Heartland’s reputation.
Since the “Fakegate” scandal broke in February, environmental groups including Greenpeace and 350.org have used the fake memo to launch disinformation campaigns against Heartland’s donors and the scientists who participate in its climate change research programs.
The following statement from Joseph Bast, president of The Heartland Institute, may be used for attribution. For more information, contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or 312/377-4000.
“Fakegate – which began when a fake memo was circulated to defame the world’s most prominent source of skepticism on man-made global warming – has now generated a fake investigation claiming to exonerate the person at the center of the scandal.
“Whereas The Heartland Institute has been open and honest with the public and the press, sharing emails and the results of its own internal investigations, the Pacific Institute has refused to identify who conducted its investigation, to release its report, or even to respond to our inquiries about what questions were asked of Gleick.
“As near as we can tell, this was not an investigation. It was a whitewash.
“The Pacific Institute’s board of directors has failed to perform its duty and should be deeply ashamed. We have asked the federal government to prosecute Gleick for what we believe were serious crimes he committed, and we await its decision.”
# # #
Note: shortly before I received this statement from Heartland, I got an email identifying the investigating organization. I’ve made Heartland aware of this. This is the update I posted on the main story at 11AM today. I received the email from Ross at 9:20 AM but was awaiting verification before releasing this news.
Pacific Institute Communications Director Nancy Ross sent me an email this morning stating:
The investigator is Independent Employment Counsel, LLP.
I am waiting for confirmation that they performed the review from one of the two partners at the firm. http://www.iecounsel.com/ – Anthony
gator69 says:
June 7, 2012 at 11:48 am
“Who was the client/customer here? Whose interests did this firm protect?”
Independent Employment Counsel, LLP did exactly what they were paid to do. And they were only hired after a clear understanding of what was expected of them was agreed to.
As I have commented ever since the UoP and Muir Russell serial whitewashes, the truth will never emerge except in an adversarial setting, whether criminal or civil. The relevant questions will never even be asked. As we see, the only answers were in response to irrelevant questions. Classic misdirection, and a deceptive re-framing of the issues away from Gleick’s admitted wrongdoing.
Only by allowing an adversary to question Gleick [or Jones, or Mann] under oath will the truth come out. Everything else is just whitewash.
Liberal elites will not even fire a University Professor when they are admitted Communists. They do not remove them for having sexual relations with students. So, a little cheating on the numbers and published papers is just proving their strong belief that the end justifies the means.
The funny thing to me are the people thinking the Pacific Institute worries over ethical considerations. If that were true PI wouldn’t exist in the first place. They’re a Democrat PR/lobbying firm. Nothing else.
As corrupt or more so as Media Matters, Think Progress, Talking Points Memo, the Tides Foundation.
There doesn’t seem to be any indication that this “independent” investigator ever contacted anyone from Heartland. If they had Heartland likely wouldn’t be so completely in the dark about who was conducting the investigation or what questions were being raised, although the alarmist crowd could still suggest that they are being disingenuous about that. Given the fundamental role Heartland played in this affair, that neglect would seem to disqualify the results of the “investigation”, although that hasn’t seemed to work for all the previous climate science investigations which followed a similar approach. An approach which is analogous to police investigating a bank robbery by limiting their interviews to the guy who was caught leaving the bank with a satchel full of money, taking him at his word that the cash really was his, and never bothering to even talk to anyone from the bank. Dillinger would have loved these guys.
Back when I worked for an evil multi-national corporation (ITT in the 1980’s), there was an incident at a weekend meeting at the Sheraton Hotel in Bridgeport, CT. Some groups from the Programming Technology Center in Stratford had just returned from a European trip to examine programming practices at various sites helping develop what was supposed to be the next-generation digital phone switch. Present were managers, technical staff, and some secretaries (I was not part of the meeting — different group).
Anyway, after a day of various presentations there was a break for dinner and the announcement the meeting would resume after dinner so one of the returned travelers could show some slides from the trip.
When people returned after dinner the slideshow got started. It turned out not to be about ITT sites visited but some nude and semi-nude pictures accompanied by what was supposed to be witty commentary. That was I believe on a Friday evening.
By noon Monday, the person who showed the slides had been fired together with his manager. The manger was fired because he was the senior person present and did not immediatly stop the presentation once it was clearly not work related and offensive (he did not know and had not approved what his subordinate was going to present). Apparently complaints from some of the secretaries made it to senior executives in New York over the remainder of the weekend and they made their termination decisions by first thing Monday morning.
Several weeks later there were a series of sessions for everyone at our facility conducted by corporate legal staff from New York on exactly what was and was not permissible when undertaken in ITT’s name. With the summary firings fresh in our minds, we all paid closer attention than we probably would have otherwise.
ITT had some years earlier been dragged through the mud as part of the Nixon Watergate and related scandals and they apparently were determined to avoid another trip.
It’s clear the people from Independent Employment Counsel, LLP are from a kinder, gentler school of corporate governance.
Scottish Sceptic said:
June 7, 2012 at 11:37 am
Strange coincidence …. just bought the domain “climatejustice.co.uk” on the off chance we might need it in the near future … will it be sooner than we think?
———————————————
In the States the anarchists agitators like to yell “NO JUSTICE – NO PEACE!”
Maybe your website motto could be “NO JUSTICE – NO CLIMATE!”
🙂
I wish Heartland good luck with the current DOJ .
Gleick admitted to breaking 3, possibly 4, laws….
…what is the problem with prosecuting him
Another classic example of:
Not all the crooks are in the climate change industry, but all those in the climate change industry are crooks.
I would suspect that the “EEO counseling” specialties of IEC were the most relevant part of the “investigation.” To wit: Don’t spill the beans on the boss, or we will quietly find ways to terminate you, making sure you have no recourse against any of us! Believe us, we know how!”
I went through just that scenario when part of an organization where megalomania was epidemic (among the elitists) and one of them was caught with multiple Social Security Cards in his possession while crossing the Mexico/American border. In fact, IEC, LLP seems to ring a bell with my memory banks…
Dave Wendt says: June 7, 2012 at 2:09 pm
There doesn’t seem to be any indication that this “independent” investigator ever contacted anyone from Heartland… Given the fundamental role Heartland played in this affair, that neglect would seem to disqualify the results of the “investigation”.
Yes. This is the hallmark of every single investigation so far. Plus whatshis name who used Anthony’s hard-won unpublished work for his own contrary ends, without asking permission.
Deafening nonmention of all of us non-people, except as “deniers”.
It is for very good reason that the classic court of law follows the fourfold sequence of Prosecution, Defence, Prosecution Answers Defence, and Defence Answers Prosecution.
IMHO WE NEED A LAW SUIT that might finally give our side a global voice – assuming that Western democracy has not degenerated that far into communism/fascism – and make people generally aware of this perversion of justice, this gagging and silencing and denial of our rights to be heard, which has happened.
This is a complete waste of time. The main point is that Gleick committed a crime and that he needs to be prosecuted. The fact that the “pacific Institute” has exonerated him is as the |Australians would say is rat###t. On the other hand if it found that this whole exonberation thing has been made up AGAIN this is a real story HA. Inthis case \gleick needs to be committed to an insane institution and not prosecuted LOL
I would be curious as to how many of these “independent” review organizations Pacific Institute had to approach before finding one that would touch this with a ten foot pole to give the paid for response. It must have cost a bundle. Independent Employment Counsel, LLP will now need to morph into something of a different name. The internet will keep up with the principles.
If this happens to be another false alarm by Gleick a lot will sink with him LOL
Ms. Cynthia E. Maxwell
Partner
Independent Employment Counsel, LLP
5561 Rathbun Rd.
Cazenovia, NY 13035
Work: 3158154126
Email: iecounselcem@msn.com
Web Address: http://www.iecounsel.com
Fee Policy
Basic Fees:
Employment Arbitrations: $275.00 per hour
Neutral Investigations: $275.00 per hour
Labor Arbitrations: $1,275 per day
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/conflictres/rosterofneutrals/allneutrals.html?action=detail&id=3208
30 pieces of silver amounts to about 15 oz. of silver. Thirty pieces of silver, based on the current value of silver at $29.7/oz,.would be worth around $ 445.00.
My reading of the situation is that the independent investigation of employees is a growing industry amongst lawyers enabling employers to demonstrate to courts that they undertook a thorough investigation into an employee suspected of misconduct, using independent counsel. Employers have been advised not to use their existing attorneys or staff for such investigations, in order to avoid a conflict of interest.
Lawyers acting as independent investigators in respect of the alleged misconduct of employees emanated from several court cases, in particular Cotran vs. Rollings Huding Hall. In this case it was found that if the employer made the wrong decision with regard to an employee’s misconduct, the employer could use the results of an independent, reasonable and good-faith investigation in defence of their actions in dealing with the employee.
Gleick is clearly liable for the actions he has admitted to and could be found liable in some respect for the forged document. The liability may be both criminal and civil. The Pacific Institute appears to have had an independent counsel conduct an investigation and provide a report, primarily to allow them to lift Gleick’s suspension.
The report can now be used in any litigation to try to show that PI acted in good faith. However the report would come under intense scrutiny so it is essential that it represents a thorough, wide-ranging and detailed investigation of all aspects of Gleick’s actions and the allegations against him.
I would guess that an important consideration of the investigation into Gleick would be to try to determine whether the Pacific institute has any vicarious liability for Gleick’s actions against Heartland and others.
It should be said that most MSM media have allowed Heartland to make the same statement posted here so its probably looking like a real baddie for Mr Gleick.
HenrikM says:
June 7, 2012 at 11:30 am
I can’t belive that the information about the Investigator can be true. This must be some kind of a bad joke. Have they used lawyers instead of technicians to clear Gleick…?? Is there something I do not understand (english is not my first language)?
_____________________________________
They used lawyers who specialize in employment law obligations …” harassment, discrimination, retaliation, fraud and other workplace misconduct claims….”
The determination seems to be centered around whether anyone else beside Glieck was in on the fraud.
Jason says:
June 7, 2012 at 1:11 pm
A couple months back, I thought I read that independent writing experts pegged Gleick as the likely forger of the fake memo.
_______________________________
Anthony had a post on the subject.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/14/professional-forensic-stylometric-analysis-of-the-fake-heartland-climate-strategy-memo-concludes-peter-gleick-is-the-likely-forger/
It seems to me that the Board at PI did not care if Peter Gleick committed crimes in an attempt to damage the Heartland Institute. Heck, might even give him a raise for that, or at least nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize! The investigation was to determine if Gleick might have violated some internal company policy or labor relationship practice that would draw the Pacific Institute directly into the fray. To the board…that would be a punishable offence!
At the Pacific Institute, Gleick will probably return to a hero’s welcome!
Latitude says:
June 7, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Gleick admitted to breaking 3, possibly 4, laws….
…what is the problem with prosecuting him
The DOJ is run by people who habitually overlook crimes by political allies, and Gleick is a political ally. Heartland are political foes and the victim of those crimes.
That’s the problem. I’d bet no action will take place by the DOJ until at least 2013.
Lucyskywalker, yes we need a massive lawsuit. I would imagine the Heartland Institute is going this route if they are as white and clean as what we are led to believe. I surely hope so!
Latitude says:
June 7, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Gleick admitted to breaking 3, possibly 4, laws….
…what is the problem with prosecuting him
__________________________________________
It is not up to Heartland. It is up to the government paid Attorney to do the prosecution.
For example in the case of Mary Jo Kopechne’s drowning death, Ed Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received a suspended two-month sentence. He was never brought up on charges of homicide despite leaving her (ALIVE) in the car over night to drown before contacting the police.
In the case of the Dollarhites, they face a $90,643 fine that will become 3.9 million if they try to fight it. Their crime? A spec of rust and an inspector who eyeballed their rabbit cages and said they were 1/4 inch too small.
There are plenty of other examples but it is not the crime it is WHO you are that matters and Gleick is closer in power to Ed Kennedy than he is to the Dollarhite family.
eyesonu says:
June 7, 2012 at 4:42 pm
I would be curious as to how many of these “independent” review organizations Pacific Institute had to approach before finding one that would touch this with a ten foot pole to give the paid for response. …
___________________________
It is a little two person outfit from what I could tell from Anthony’s link and this: http://www.iecounsel.com/about.html
Great inquiry. Looks like they found a useful patsy to arrive at their foregone conclusion.
HI needs to get a writ of mandamus to compel the Chicago office of the FBI and the state prosecutor to do their job and file charges in this case.