This was presented to the US Attorney’s office by the Jones-Day legal firm on behalf of the Heartland Institute in connection with the theft of documents by Dr. Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute one year ago today.
It is a PDF document of a PowerPoint presentation. There are some redactions (black strips) in the document that are placed to protect the privacy of some of the people involved who were the the victim of Dr. Gleick’s actions.
I present it here without comment, published at the embargo time.
Criminal Referral of Dr. Peter H. Gleick Talking Points (PDF 5.6 MB)
=============================================================
UPDATE: Here is the press release from Heartland:
Why Isn’t Pacific Institute’s Peter Gleick in Jail?
The Heartland Institute today released a 57-page slide presentation produced by its legal counsel, Jones Day, titled “Criminal Referral of Dr. Peter H. Gleick Talking Points.” The report, presented to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois, asked the government to prosecute Pacific Institute President Peter Gleick, a prominent climate scientist and environmental activist.
Several presentations based on information contained in this document were made to the staff of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, including David Glockner, at the time head of the criminal division, and Gary Shapiro, now acting U.S. Attorney. So far, the government has not prosecuted Peter Gleick.
[NOTE: No redactions were included in the presentation to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, with the exception of personal information on a donor’s check. More redactions are included in this document to protect the privacy of those Peter Gleick victimized.]
The following statement by Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast may be used for attribution. For more information, please contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org and 312/377-4000.
“Today marks the one-year anniversary of ‘Fakegate,’ the day Pacific Institute President Peter Gleick sent to liberal activists and reporters documents he stole from The Heartland Institute and claimed to have obtained from a ‘Heartland insider’ and later from an ‘anonymous source.’ The documents included Heartland’s annual budget, fundraising plan, and other confidential documents. Media outlets in the U.S. and around the world reported on the ‘leak’ of ‘secret plans’ by an anonymous ‘insider’ at the world’s most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made global warming.
“Gleick eventually confessed to being the ‘insider’ and explained that he had stolen the identity of another person – a member of Heartland’s board of directors, it soon became known – in order to steal the confidential documents. There was no ‘leak.’ Gleick also admitted to lying about the nature of one document he originally claimed had come from Heartland, a ‘strategy memo’ that purported to describe Heartland’s plans to address climate change in the coming year. That document was quickly shown to be a fake, written to misrepresent and defame The Heartland Institute. Gleick denied he was the author of the fake memo.
“The Heartland Institute, a nonprofit organization, retained legal counsel to formally request that the U.S. Attorney prosecute Peter Gleick for the federal crimes of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. Today, one year after the crime was revealed and nearly one year after Gleick’s confession, the U.S. Attorney still has not filed charges against Gleick.
“We urge everyone who has an interest in the global warming debate to review the ‘Criminal Referral of Dr. Peter H. Gleick Talking Points’ presentation and decide for themselves whether Peter Gleick should be tried for his crimes. We ask the reporters and activists who were fooled by Gleick’s lies and who used the documents he stole and may have forged to attack The Heartland Institute, rather than come to our defense as the victim of a serious crime, to revisit their decisions and cover the story again, this time honestly. And we urge everyone to ‘look under the hood’ at the real science behind the global warming scare and recognize that man-made global warming is not a crisis.”
The Heartland Institute is a 29-year-old national nonprofit organization headquartered in Chicago, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our Web site or call 312/377-4000.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Then magnanimously, Heartland could offer complete forgiveness to Gleick and to each of the organizations for their spiteful actions. Then just to be sure that the sincerity of the forgiveness is understood, Heartland should write the letters again every year, as open letters to the media as well, adding any new outfits that gather Gleick into their fold, and pointing out that despite Gleick’s unforgivable criminal behavior and the unethical and reprehensible approvals of his confederates, they are all still forgiven and Heartland is still praying for them. (Tevia’s prayer for the Czar comes to mind). Wouldn’t that be the high road?”
Not the high road so much as the road to the looney bin, which I suspect you might be on yourself.
In the UK when the Crown Prosecution Service (equivalent probably to US Attorney’s Office) decline to prosecute then you can as an individual, organisation or company issue private Criminal proceedings through the Magistrates Court. This is then dealt with by the courts in entirely the same way as if the prosecution were being taken by the CPS.
Given that US law is derived from English law is there no similar avenue open to Heartland in the USA?
The Offices of the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois are on South Dearborn Street in Chicago according to their web site. Of course there is no connection between their inaction and “Chicago Rules.”
pokerguy says:
February 14, 2013 at 10:22 am
Wouldn’t that be the high road?”
Not the high road so much as the road to the looney bin, which I suspect you might be on yourself.
—————
If you can’t have a little fun with this thing it WILL drive you crazy.
If Heartland did a Gleick on Gleick I wonder if they would get the same support from the MSM and disinterest from the law?
Stonyground says:
I don’t think that we should ever forget that Glieck posted a negative review of the Delinquent Teenager without reading it. It cannot be proved that he wrote the forged part of the stolen documents, but when you take a look at the things that he imagines that a book he could’t be arsed to read might have said, it certainly puts him in the frame.
Matt Skaggs says:
February 14, 2013 at 7:23 am
….. The stuff about liberal judges and threatening subpoenas is all hyperbole.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since I am at this moment taking a break from dealing with putting together and refreshing my memory on a criminal legal briefing that should have been over and done with 4 years ago I have first hand knowledge of just how corrupt the system is. My case would not have seen the light of day if the democrats continued in the District Attorney’s office. With a new cast of characters I have received an apology from a bewildered prosecuting attorney who stated he could not believe a case this old had not been tried years ago.
If the people controlling the court’s do not want to let the crime into the courthouse then you are completely out of luck. You can commit grand theft (my case) or murder (a neighbor) and it will never make it to first base.
My county is KNOWN for massive corruption. Another neighbor had to bring in the DEA to deal with the drugs in the neighborhood because all the local cops did about it was give him a traffic ticket every time he left the driveway. A colleague who worked part time at the animal shelter overhead some of the local politicians making drug deals and had to quit after she had her child threatened if she tried to do anything about it. Heck I live in the middle of no where, hardly have any contact with my neighbors and I have seen at least two drug deals and can name four drug dealers, six thieves and one murderer living on the street.
If you think the US legal system works, you have never had the misfortune of having to deal with it.
Despite what they say, it seems difficult to buy the Heartland story, “it will harm our supporters”. I would think that many donors would be proud to be part of some anti warmist suit (except for those embarrassed for supporting Heartland, okay, I take it back.) However, back when this came out, a year ago, I remember many commenting on the fact that Heartland would never move on this because they had too much to lose if they were subpoenaed by a clever defense. That hypothesis has not been shown to be incorrect. Other than prosecute, I am not sure what Heartland could do to disprove that hypothesis.
Doug Proctor, nice insight. Even if the government wanted to prosecute, you are right that it could be a tough case because of the political overtones–one single diehard believer could hang the jury. But that is the point of jury selection–to keep those with axes to grind off the panel.
The evidence here speaks for itself, and it should be a very winnable case. The Obama administration (who controls US Federal prosecutors) obviously has no interest in prosecuting, however. I wonder what it would do if the shoe were on the other foot, and a conservative activist committed wire fraud to obtain the private donor list of Greenpeace or WWF?
Coalsoffire says: “How about Heartland sending a letter to Gleick and to each of the organizations to which Gleick belongs or which embrace him from time to time, reminding them of the criminal and unethical behavior of their confederate.”
So, what if the Climategate robbers were made known and East Ang. sent such letters to Wattsup and other organizations? Would you despise them or cheer them? Perhaps your idea might have an effect opposite what you intend.
trafamadore,
Funny, I do not remember “many commenting” as you claim. How about posting those “many” comments.
And what, exactly, does Heartland have to lose? They have already lost plenty due directly to the thoroughly unethical Peter Gleick, who seems to be some kind of hero of yours.
Finally, I note that you are still dodging this question from another thread: how much Arctic ice is the right amount? Be specific. Since you claim to know what you’re talking about.
Why doesn’t the board member that Gleick impersonated just file charges himself for identity theft/fraud and/or sue him himself? Heartland could pick up the legal tab and that neatly sidesteps any discovery mess with Heartland’s donors. Keep it simple.
trafamadore says:
February 14, 2013 at 12:30 pm
“So, what if the Climategate robbers were made known and East Ang. sent such letters to Wattsup and other organizations? Would you despise them or cheer them? Perhaps your idea might have an effect opposite what you intend.”
The same warmist left that endorses every whistleblower when it suits them now is against transparency?
The climategate e-mails were subject to FOIA laws anyway. The fact that the warmist researchers would fight every FOIA request is endorsed by the transparency-loving warmist left? Why?
Is that not a rather stunning amount of hypocracy even for the warmist left.
Heartland BTW was never affected by FOIA laws as they are not publically funded.
If you endorse theft of documents from Heartland, would you also endorse theft of documents from say, the Bilderbergers, Fenton communications or TIDES? I would sure love to see what exactly George Soros pays for. For instance.
Try filing it the complaint in a state that will be more sympathetic. Perhaps Joe Arpaio might be interested assisting in the upkeep of the law.
Doug R writes : “Why doesn’t the board member that Gleick impersonated just file charges himself for identity theft/fraud and/or sue him himself? Heartland could pick up the legal tab and that neatly sidesteps any discovery mess with Heartland’s donors. Keep it simple.”
I like it. Maybe send them an email to make sure they see it? Though on second thought, it’s hard to figure how that person was harmed in any important way. Perhaps I’m just not seeing it.
trafamadore says: February 14, 2013 at 12:21 pm ” … Heartland would never move on this because they had too much to lose if they were subpoenaed by a clever defense. …. I am not sure what Heartland could do to disprove that hypothesis. … ”
Entirely understandable that you would say that if you operate on the premise that there actually is a clever defense available to Gleick et al. As I noted further up, Heartland has nothing to lose and everything to gain by going on the offensive against their accusers. AGW promoters seem to be beyond oblivious of how suicidal their efforts are in lobbing corruption accusations at Heartland. I’ve been baffled by the illogic of such character assassinations that are backed by zero evidence, and hugely frustrated that skeptic organizations haven’t comprehended how vulnerable their critics are on this specific fault.
My problem with this situation is that Gleick won’t be tried in the court of public opinion, either. The media simply don’t care.
So, the end result is the Gleick gets away with it, with no ramifications.
Is there ANYONE willing to stand up on these issues?
The US. Attorney
Which of the 170 Assistant U.S. Attorneys made the decision not to prosecute? Which even saw the “Criminal Referral”? Why are names of specific officals so absent?
As for the PPT. Is it just me or are others supprised that the particular laws violated are not listed until slide 48, 50?
Slide 3:
?…and a Fake Strategy Document? There is too much fluff in these points. It should have stuck to the essentials.
“It doesn’t matter what I believe.
It only matters what I can prove!” – A Few Good Men
trafamadore says:
February 14, 2013 at 12:30 pm
So, what if the Climategate robbers were made known and East Ang. sent such letters to Wattsup and other organizations? Would you despise them or cheer them? Perhaps your idea might have an effect opposite what you intend.
______
There are climategate robbers? When that is established we can talk about it.
So HI is declaring open season on themselves: “violate our rights and we will make you a hero”?
Mike Haseler says:
“They are claiming that $5million of reputation isn’t worth the small risk that clients will be put off by them going to court (and that somehow all the publicity will not get them new clients).
In short – it doesn’t stack up. Or perhaps more accurately, they have decided that they do not wish to have the “rule of law” ”
Doug R. says:
Why doesn’t the board member that Gleick impersonated just file charges himself for identity theft/fraud and/or sue him himself? Heartland could pick up the legal tab and that neatly sidesteps any discovery mess with Heartland’s donors. Keep it simple.
and I wonder if HI has considered that they may have disappointed anyone who made sympathy donations in expectation of legal prosecution and may lose more donations as a result of the appearance of cowardice. It may be that HI, by their decision, not only contribute to the heroic legend of the gleick, but also earn a reputation that further shames associates.
I fully expect to hear this refrain in the msm as a result:
Gleick was innocent. Had he been guilty, he would have been prosecuted or at least charged. Obviously HI had nothing on him and was only trying to keep people distracted from what he revealed and what else they had to hide.
If the tail were smarter than the dog, the tail would wag the dog.
DirkH says:
February 14, 2013 at 1:05 pm
trafamadore says:
February 14, 2013 at 12:30 pm
“So, what if the Climategate robbers were made known and East Ang. sent such letters to Wattsup and other organizations? Would you despise them or cheer them? Perhaps your idea might have an effect opposite what you intend.”
The same warmist left that endorses every whistleblower when it suits them now is against transparency?
The climategate e-mails were subject to FOIA laws anyway. The fact that the warmist researchers would fight every FOIA request is endorsed by the transparency-loving warmist left? Why?
Is that not a rather stunning amount of hypocracy even for the warmist left.
Heartland BTW was never affected by FOIA laws as they are not publically funded.
If you endorse theft of documents from Heartland, would you also endorse theft of documents from say, the Bilderbergers, Fenton communications or TIDES? I would sure love to see what exactly George Soros pays for. For instance.
—————————————
You beat me to the punch. But let me also add that the climategate emails did not contain forgeries.
A man shoots and kills another man. Was his act morally justified? Depends on the details, doesn’t it. FOIA outed emails that legally belonged to the public to scrutinize, without forgery. Gleick outed information that did not legally belong in the public domain, with a forged document mixed in. The acts of publicly distributing information obtained by whatever unknown method in the climategate case and by wire fraud in Gleick’s case are possibly similar. The ethics are not.
Gleick knows he is guilty, he confessed publically.
So, he actually has no legal position of innocence unless he claims one of the following defenses: 1) recants his confession; or 2) pleads temporary insanity; or 3) claims mitigating circumstances that were beyond his control that forced his criminal behavior.
1 ) A Gleick defense involving a recanted confession on his part would be evidence of another higher order of magnitude of deceit and lying above his already serious level of deceit and lying. Digging himself a deeper legal hole.
2 ) A Gleick defense involving temporary insanity which was precipitated by his involvement in an closed / mentally isolated environment which was only populated by people with crazed fanaticism about saving the earth from freedom loving humans is actually quite plausible. He can cite some other well documented instances of climate science focused individuals with integrity challenged ethics behaviors justified by crazed fanaticism about saving the earth from freedom loving humans e.g. like: Hansen of NASA; Harrabin of BBC; Revkin of the almost extinct NYT; Mann of psuedo-statistical hockeystickyness; Gore from la la Gaiaville; Pachauri and Overpeck of IPCC AR4 infamy (see CG1 and CG2); plus others of CG1 and CG2 fame. I recommend that Gleick’s defense team use this very credible temporary insanity defense. : )
3 ) A Gleick defense involving compelling and seducing mitigating circumstances might work. And this is also the most entertaining type of Gleick defense for skeptics to witness. One example of such defense is him claiming that he was mortally threatened by the idea that Al Gore might sit on him if he did not help stem the successful HI efforts that have increased the skeptic tide. Another example of such mitigating circumstances type defense would be for Gleick to claim that Gavin at RC threatened to take away Gleick’s coveted skeptic comment censorship privileges at RC unless Gleick contributed more to ‘the cause’ wrt defanging HI. But the very best mitigated circumstance type Gleick defense is for Gleick to claim his Gaia loving and HI hating hairdresser made him a totally irresistible offer of free lifetime hair permanents like the ones Gleick constantly needs to maintain that crazy permed looking hairdo of his. : )
As I said in a previous comment => Gleick is a: liar, cheat, self-confessed idiot fraud and immoral bigot.
As I also said in a previous comment => I request all government grants to Gleick and the P.I. should be suspended pending the legal closure / resolution of his self-confessed crimes.
John
Matt Skaggs says:
February 14, 2013 at 9:27 am
Chuck Nolan wrote:
“Matt, I’ve often wondered what flavor is the koolade CAGWist drink?”
—–
Sorry for my mistake.
My point is even the media are accepting this administration’s letting this type of activity slide.
I don’t think the case is important because I doubt it would ever get to trial.
I just don’t like them not arresting him and making him go through the motions.
He said he was guilty.
It should be documented in the legal system.
Make him write a letter to Heartland admitting what he did and promise he will never be seen driving garbage in the vicinity again………..oops, wrong story.
But, Holder won’t even do that. Some people seem to get away with an awful lot.
That’s what worries me.
Again, sorry for my mistake.
cn
Well, the US attorney won’t prosecute. The city of Chicago’s District Attorney apparently won’t prosecute. The State of Illinois apparently won’t prosecute. Perhaps Heartland should move to another state that isn’t captured by the Democratic party?
So if turns out Gleick’s actually a hero, because, er, he”s published lots of papers on climate change. Well that’s what Scott Mandia thinks, and Michael Mann retweeted the link, http://profmandia.wordpress.com/2013/02/14/peter-gleick-vs-heartland-intitute-scorecard-one-year-later-and-the-winner-is/