Al Gore joins farces [er, forces] with New York Attorney General to prosecute "deniers"

Al Gore/New York AG press conference on ‘the potential of commencing new investigations or joining ongoing investigations,’ on climate change.

This press conference will likely cover everything from #CleanPowerPlan to #Exxonknew, so those are likely the hashtags to use for Twitter.

Short update from Politico this morning below:

WHAT WILL SCHNEIDERMAN SAY? POLITICO’s Elana Schor: “New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s Tuesday event on climate change will likely discuss ‘the potential of commencing new investigations or joining ongoing investigations,’ a spokeswoman for the Connecticut attorney general said, but that state does not expect to reveal a formal endorsement of Schneiderman’s probe into ExxonMobil. Schneiderman’s planned appearance in New York with former Vice President Al Gore and the attorneys general of six states has stoked speculation about new investigations into Exxon’s communications about its knowledge of climate science.” [federal Pro]

–Schneiderman will appear with Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen and United States Virgin Island Attorney General Claude Walker at at 11:30 a.m. at his Manhattan office, 120 Broadway, 25th Floor.

You can watch the press conference live here:

h/t to Matt Dempsey

123 thoughts on “Al Gore joins farces [er, forces] with New York Attorney General to prosecute "deniers"

    • And there is a reason for that. Marcus, you need to tone it down. A couple of your comments have already been deleted due to them containing some pretty ugly statements. You’ve been warned previously that the sort of comments you have been leaving are violation the site policy. This will be your last warning. Shape up or be shipped out.

      • ..Sorry Anthony..I just realized my bad / derogatory attitude is because I just came here after a long nasty battle at a warmista’s site, and the tone from that site was carried here..I apologize and will stop commenting until my blood pressure gets below 300 ! Tanx for your patience !

      • Anthony, thank you so much for the work you put into this site. Thank you also for putting up with the extra challenges involved. You are truly a saint.

    • Marcus, when you open you doors to your “home” do you expect certain behavior by your guests? I thought so. Same applies here, IMO, at WUWT. We are guests, courtesy of our host. (And for the record I have been chastised too and rightly so). Comments are opinions mostly.
      Proof in open debate *AND* tolerant, to a point, debate, is thanks to our host. And we all thank you AW.

      • Anthony doesn’t need you carrying on like a fool Marcus, that’s my job, and certainly raise your voice at your own pearl. There are many minds at work. it’s sort of refreshing really but I digress, idiom intended 😉

      • Marcus,
        “..Just don’t say the dreaded ” F ” word or you’ll get yelled at !!”
        It is not that you used the “F” word. Many of us have used it many times in the past. It sends your comment to automatic moderation is all. I try to avoid it to spare the mods the trouble of reading my bluster.
        I would also point out that I have not had any real trouble with this site since I don’t mention any famous people who think like I do on the issue of CO2. It is against site policy to mention certain real skeptics or to link to certain sites. That is written in site rules and is above board. It is simple: follow the policy or go elsewhere.
        My point is that a science site wants you to say what you think but with a certain restraint. Think the way UK people can call you names it a certain way that you could say around 8th grade kids. Witty putdowns are allowed.
        So, I advise that you be more careful, but continue to say what you mean.
        Warmest Regards, Mark

    • Hashtag I’d suggest is #PoliticalSuicide. The whole ‘RICO push’ hinges on the idea that industry knew AGW was harmful and paid skeptic climate scientists to lie about it. As I pointed out last October, the RICO 20 really only inadvertently point to one highly questionable source for the accusation:
      But as I detailed way back in 2011 at ClimateDepot, Al Gore has a huge problem with that single source: “Smearing Skeptic Scientists: What did Gore know and when did he know it?” (More on the lineage of a key line in the smear here: )

      • If a woman can get millions for spilling hot coffee into her own lap, than reality means nothing once you enter a courtroom.

      • @MarkW; the Stella Liebeck vs. McDonalds re. the scalding coffee incident is not a good analogy. First, she was hospitalized for eight days with third degree burns. Second, she had initially asked to just have her uninsured medical bills covered (about $20K). Third, there was evidence at trial that McDonalds had a serious problem with other customers being burned and never addressed it. Lastly, they settled for less than a million after she won a larger jury award to avoid an appeal.

      • I’d say, that it’s a very good analogy. When I make a coffee, I boil the kettle, pour water at near 100C into a cup, add a bit of cold milk, so the whole lot would be expected to be what’s commonly know as “Bloody Hot”. I recognise that spilling it onto my lap, is likely to scald me!

      • Anyone who doesn’t know that driving with an uncovered cup of hot coffee between their knees is too dumb to be allowed out of doors without adult supervision.
        McDonald’s kept their coffee hot because that’s what the majority of their customers wanted.
        For every customer who complained that the coffee was too hot, there was another who wanted it hotter yet.
        Just because their are customers that complain is not proof that there is a problem.
        The lady was an idiot, and the lawyers who took the case were shysters out to make themselves rich.

      • Guys, there is a lot of info on Stella and McDonalds out there, even a long Wiki entry, and the link below may not change your mind. But, my point is that common perceptions about arctic ice disappearing, polar bears, competitive wind and solar, or rising sea levels do not stand up to in-depth looks at the available information. Regular readers of WUWT know a lot about climate related subjects, and cringe at a lot of things we hear from the likes of Al Gore, etc. Mark Steyn is an example of someone eager to get his day in court, because he is confident the facts/reality are on his side of the case. The coffee case as remembered in 2016 is merely an example of how a short description of a situation is often not as simple as it would seem. Like a lot of climate topics.

      • “Anyone who doesn’t know that driving with an uncovered cup of hot coffee between their knees is too dumb to be allowed out of doors without adult supervision.”
        Well, at least if it’s a male then they probably don’t get to replicate their bad genes afterwards.

      • Great: 1 ‘american thinker’ does the investigations for x attornys bureaus.
        Regards – Hans

    • Isn’t falsifying government data a felony? Why aren’t the people screwing with temperature records investigated? Maybe a new administration will bring these people to justice.

      • Good question, rbabcock. I was wondering the same thing. The climate science charlatans at NASA and NOAA are the ones perpetrating this climate change deception. They are the ones who should be prosecuted.

      • I’ve pointed out to a few prelates in the Church of the Warming Earth that if Mann, Gleick, and all the NOAA/NASA clowns who “adjust” climate data were corporate executives fiddling with accounting data, they’d be in prison now.
        I received the standard replies. “It’s different if it’s for a good cause” (That’s the best of them – the person was actually willing to believe there was deception.) The rest were fit for your average North Korean courtroom.

      • It was a crime (not sure it was a felony) for a VP to use the resources of the VP’s office (at taxpayer expense) for their own Presidential campaign. A certain someone did that. Admitted to it.
        The unchallenged defense was something along the lines of, “There’s no controlling legal authority.”.
        Congress passes the laws. The Executive Branch enforces the law. The Courts are to say whether either are playing by the rules laid out in the Constitution and remembering that The Bill of Rights was supposed to be the “leash” on all three.
        The only thing wrong with that system of Government is that a few have, for all practical purposes, twisted “We the People” to mean “Me the People (my enablers will dealt with later)”.
        Of course, the “me”‘s always use each other to become the biggest “Me”.
        The biggest problem with any, any system Man has devised is that there are people involved.
        We’re all stinkers.

      • Mods
        Messed the italic / up after “and”.
        If you can fix it, thanks. If not, you all deserve thanks anyway. 😎

    • Jazz Police? Great Leonard Cohen track for toning down blood pressure – album is good too.

    • That only applies to civil suits. This is a criminal investigation. You can’t file motions to dismiss against investigating agencies. Certainly not before they act.
      This is an entirely new level.

    • And since it would be a criminal case, if at all, the rules of discovery, evidence and cross -examination of witnesses can be a help for a strong defendant.

      • Hobbies are taxpayer free and businesses provide an optional service..CAGW simply makes a certain few rich people…richer !

    • Old Al is only and ever after money. Okay I left our power. The easiest power to get is through fear.

      • Stephen, Tim:
        Al is pure in heart and thinks only of saving the planet for generations unborn. The thought of personal gain would never enter his mind.
        (Wait up! I think I see my sarcasm dripping down on the next 14 comments. Beggin’ your pardon, ya’ll.)

    • Has the 21st century Inquisition begun? I’m packing up and departing for friendlier shores when wooden stakes start to appear in town squares across the country. My idea of fun doesn’t include burning to death.

  1. I sure hope they don’t try to come after me…I am not a resident of any of their states and do no business with any of them. They would have to prosecute in federal court as they would have no standing to sue in state court.
    They have a very distinct constitutional problem if they think they have free rein to prosecute anyone they disagree with. The federal courts haven’t all been stacked with statist judges, and the more middle of the road democrat appointees of the past tend to have no patience with anything the looks like a witch-hunt or fishing expedition by state AGs. They may be able to shop for a sympathetic trial judge, but will lose at almost all the en banc appellate courts (with maybe the exception of the 9th, but I think even they would throw it out as venue shopping if the New York and Vermont Attorney Generals are bringing the case in California.)

    • ..The key word is ” Democrat ” !…JFK was a true ” Democrat “. ( and much respected by me, as I have 24 books written about him and his ideas ) There are very few “Democrats” remaining, most are now liberal socialists ! IMHO…..

      • The new democratic party slogan;
        Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you.

      • “Progressives”, or at least in many cases, unwilling to challenge the loony progressive left’s agenda.

      • JFK’s father made his family fortune selling/running alcohol during the prohibition years. The Gore family fortune was derived from coal/oil and tobacco. I wonder how many other “elite” families made their fortunes from illegal activities or from, or connected to, the fossil fuel industry? Seems to be a common theme.

    • After 8 years of Hillary as president, the courts that aren’t stacked will be few and far between.

    • I think any court will be extremely skeptical of this. Even if they did exactly what they are accused of (for which there is no evidence), how would it be racketeering? Not a single law was broken in any course of action, even in this fictional timeline.
      Even the media is hesitant to support this. They might be compliant and sympathetic to the administration, but the first amendment is nearer and dearer to their hearts than anything else, and despite the claims of some, they aren’t stupid. They can see this descending into McCarthy-esque prosecutions of dissent.

    • Owen:
      They’re not coming after you (unless you have gobs of $$) — they are coming after Oil companies.
      This is based on the successful pattern established by the tobacco suits. For years individual plaintiffs lost because “they were warned” cigarettes were harmful. What changed was trial lawyers flew around in private jets and enlisted a bunch of state attorneys general to join based on the states’ payouts for medical and hospital expenses. The states thus became unwilling victims of damages from tobacco use and gained standing to join the suits, in exchange for a major cut of the take. The payouts to various states under the master settlement agreement came to $205 billion over 25 years. To pay for this tobacco companies have been selling their products increasingly overseas. The net morality of this settlement cannot withstand the slightest scrutiny — cigarettes are deadly have have caused massive death and suffering, but to allow the companies to pay for the damages they have caused, we will allow (require!) them to continue selling their products to others. The trial lawyers and states extorted billions by in effect exporting cancer overseas.
      Fast forward to now. Al Gore is trying to repeat the process by getting state attorneys general to join a class action suit for climate change damages against Oil companies. The best part of this scheme is they’re planning to use the projected (i.e, wholly imaginary) climate change mitigations costs as the basis for damages. This would probably not be the first legal award in history for imaginary losses, but it would certainly be the biggest. The argument will be that states must spend billions to (1) recover from warming-enhanced extreme weather, (2) “promote” the adoption of renewable energy, (3) compensate workers and industries regulated out if existence as non-sustainable, etc., etc., and all these costs are directly because oil companies “knew” they were causing dangerous climate change and lied about it.
      Strap in; the ride is just starting. If you offer to cut enough powerful people in on a large enough pot of loot, it isn’t crime any more.

      • that is true, (but I do have stock…)
        I would think most state legislatures would rein these lawyers in, as the expected windfall from the tobacco suits never materialized in the state budgets. These racketeering suits likewise won’t bring any money to the states.

      • Alan,
        As I remember it the tobacco company settlement was supposed in part to pay for the medical expenses of those injured by their smoking and once the media got behind it it became a slam dunk since the officers were demonized. Also as I recall the Lawyers enjoyed a big payout and at least some of the States used the payout to borrow money and spend it elsewhere. Is the money going to medical costs, if so why Obamacare?
        The same seems to be happening for the money settlement for asbestos which often has a low bar for reward to deceased smokers families. Juries will reward based on the MSM propaganda, etc. even under highly questionable circumstances.

      • We now have a bank here in Australia that advertises, on TV no less, that is has no investments in the fossil fuel industry, to protect the climate and all that. I wonder how many customers they have? It’s simply getting out of hand now. This soft of “progress” leads to wars.

    • The court ruled against Gore 7-2. The 5-4 ruling was whether there was still time to order the state to conduct yet another statewide recount.

  2. I think they want to extort money out of corporations which in turn is extorting money from consumers.

  3. As a resident of Virginia, I find that I do not agree with many of activist stances by our AG, Mr. Herring. I just hope he doesn’t come looking for me to prosecute.

  4. So, a guy whose sole career was politics, created a “network”, then sold it to a company owned by an oil sheik is somehow understood to be both an expert AND an unbiased one?

  5. I never thought I would live to see the day you could be prosecuted for simply disagreeing.

  6. No one knows the effect of CO2 emissions on climate now. How can anyone think that Exxon had sure knowledge back in 1975?
    Those people are chasing the dreaded bandersnatch, but the beastly howls you hear in the forest are just the cries of environmental nutcases on the hunt.
    If the case ever does get to trial, it’ll become quickly evident that the AGs have nothing. Maybe when their vacuity becomes fully evident Exxon can then bring charges for abuse under color of authority.

    • EXXON must have had some pretty bright guys back in the 70’s to predict accurate CO2 emissions and to figure out what climate would do, especially since we can’t seem to do it 40 years later with super computers. Imagine the stack of punch cards to run that wonderful in house climate program.

      • I used to have to mess with IBM punch cards. Careful! Don’t drop that stack!
        Digital is much better. 🙂

      • “TA March 29, 2016 at 2:14 pm”
        I am not sure now, but in my days at IBM as a sys-prog with MVS/ESA 4.3.3, the card reader was virtual.

  7. If recent history is any lesson, when Al Gore shows up to the party, things cool down drastically. Brrrrrr.

  8. Are ducking stools, death by burning and other medieval tortures going to return? Why does no other branch of science stoop to this level? To answer my own question; because this is not about science it is about belief, just like it was 100’s of years ago.

    • With luck the green implementation will be to leave you on the beach on your stool to face your imminent ducking from accelerating sea level rise.

    • The American Physical Society, the American Institute of Physics, and the American Chemical society have all gone along with it, and willingly. All of institutional science has stooped that low. One day, I hope they will be required to answer why so.

      • Formerly respectable magazines such as Scientific American and National Geographic have sacrificed their reputations and profits on the same alter.

  9. The founding fathers are probably rocking and rolling in their graves at this. They are attacking the very foundations of democracy, and they do it with a disgusting smugness.

    • On the contrary, I think this means the money is running out and he needs new ways of looting other peoples pockets.

  10. Are you a commie or have you been associated with any commie organization? No, I’m even worse. I’m a climate heretic. I believe that society should base its scientific policies not on junk science, but on empirical based science. Fight Big Brother inquisition.

    • Lord help me, I went to high school with Brian Frosh, the Maryland AG that’s a party to this case. Not content to work on anti-gun legislation and oppose tort reform, he is now trying to suppress free speech and scientific thought. I thought my old high school (Walter Johnson, Bethesda, MD) had reached its low when Carl Pope became the activist head of the Serra Club, but Brian has topped that – another Columbia Law School grad dispensing his own brand of justice …

    • All dictators want to silence their opposition. That is the way they gain and maintain power. Some dictators silence their opponents with the gun, and some use the courts, although violence is always an option, if the courts fail to render the proper verdict.

  11. I have the same issue I’ve always had with this subject – poor definition of terms and words. I accept “Climate Change” – but not as intended by the Goreites as Catastrophic Climate Change. Face it, the only reason it went from Global Warming to Climate Change was to give its proponents greater scope.
    And please look up the difference between “Skeptic” and “Denier”. I accept that there is some human induced component of change, but I don’t believe the theory has been well tested nor do I see more than a minute influence from humanity. This justified skepticism – give me robust evidence and I may change my mind. In the mean time, there are too many holes in recorded versus modeled theory for me to accept it.
    As a professional engineer, I’m already forced to change Life Cycle Costs for Energy Studies modified with carbon offsets – isn’t that enough for MBP (Man Bear Pig) and his followers?

  12. Stay out of New York today.
    The “Gore effect” of course. Could be anything from an ice storm to even terrorist attacks now.

  13. The states involved are all states with run away debt and out of control spending. Who most likely want to use the climate scam as a tool to justify carbon taxes to their citizens. NY state debt for instance, 363,676,004. I’d include the hundred dollar figure but the debt clock is moving to fast to be of any real value. You can select the debt clock for any state in the top left portion of the page from the link below.

  14. Shouldn’t the title be,”Al Gore joins farces [er, forces] with New York Attorney General to persecute “deniers”?? Seems more appropriate to me. Can’t have people contradicting the accepted orthodoxy without punishment. Blasphemy for the 21st century. Burning of heretics is just around the liberal corner.

    • In Cockney rhyming slang a “monkey” was GBP25 quid. I guess Al has redefined that to mean 25mil!

  15. It’s not going to be difficult finding a horde of reputable scientists who can defend the skeptical point of view, although it would not be a simple minded as a claim : “Yes/No, humans are causing global warming.” The key to this case is to paint the picture realistically – skepticism by and large is about the EXTENT and DANGER and prospect of global warming, none of which can be supported by the current data.

  16. What I find mind boggling is the vast majority of scientists globally are literally winging it at the moment re our climatic and geological systems’ interaction, because we dont understand a lot.
    So what exactly could have Exxon known that the rest don’t?
    Totally bogus. Nothing but pantomime folks, an effort to associate all sceptical science with Exxon’s mysterious “proof CO2 causes CAGW” that no one else has come close to proving, Exxon have some damned good scientists on their payroll, not

  17. I’m interested to know what grounds these investigations are justified.
    I know that most of what’s on the idiot box (TV) is garbage but I let my son watch it anyway. Does this mean Al Gore is coming to get me for hiding what I knew? Once he’s done with eevil ExxonMobil that is.
    Barry Kabana knows the US economy is in a parlous state, he’s the top dog after all, but he still keeps banging on about green jobs; maybe he’s ahead of me in the queue for the Goreacle’s witch-hunt. Phew.

  18. Something about a persecution complex comes to mind each time I see noise from Al Gore.
    As a moth is drawn to destruction in the flame, as are these empty vessels drawn to public office.
    Almost like AL desperately wants to be a martyr.
    I am sick and tired of the political scheming that is CAGW.
    Being now convinced of the mendacity and gullibility that drives this mass hysteria, I find it difficult to humour the fools and bandits who strive to gain from this nonsense.
    We are ,as a society, suffering parasitic overload.
    The dead weight of clueless and useless persons, is dragging our civilization to a standstill.
    Al Gore being the perfect personification of the modern Progressive Elite.
    Has any one a single example of Al’s actions benefiting the productive members of his society?
    Any net good come from his decades of feeding at the public trough?
    CAGW feels like a Marie Antoinette moment.
    The freeloaders have come to take their status as in-volatile, not subject to the angry reaction of those they feed off of.
    Welfare states seem to encourage such misconceptions.

  19. Perhaps Exxon Mobil and all the other oil companies should suspend selling all oil related products in the State of New York as a precaution, until this litigation runs its course.

    • Agreed completely. I think oil companies should refuse to sell to states that outlaw fracking and to any activist saying fossil fuel must go. Why should oil companies help these people violate their beliefs?

      • I don’t think you can do that for people merely expressing an opinion. However, there could be a clause written into the sentences for activists engaged in crime such as obstructing drilling, that from then on, energy companies may only supply them with energy from renewable sources. SInce it is difficult to say where any one supply actually comes from, it could be based on a minimum level of wind and solar generation, say 10% of total demand, below which their supplies would be cut off.

  20. The first amendment specifically states the government specifically shall not engage in activities that impact free speech and the freedom to gather. I long for a time when that was a sacred order and heavily defended by all three branches of government.

    • Back when McCain/Feingold was being litigated in front of the Supreme Court, the justices lifted a penumbra and found a “state interest” exception to the 1st amendment.
      That is, government can’t make any law restricting free speech unless it’s in the government’s interest to do so.

  21. I’ve no real handle on what this signifies. Does the Green Blob believe:
    a) Its star is still in the ascendancy and It has sufficient power and public support to suppress effective criticism and opposition for ever?
    b) it is on the ropes and fighting for its life with every tooth and claw it can muster.
    If (a) and it is true with no hope in sight of a skeptic fight back then the skeptics can always just recant on the pyre and accept salvation from the Blob. Or go heroically to their doom like Giordano Bruno.
    If (b) and the Blob loses this fight then there is zero possible hope of salvation for them after scamming the World for nigh on half a Century and blowing untold terabucks of tax payers hard-earned while depriving them of an energy infrastructure and a working economy. If the Blob falters here it will resemble a chopper with a tail rotor malfunction in no time at all.
    Interesting times.

    • And, with any luck, the ‘consensus’ itself will have to provide evidence that it is true, including deposing witnesses ‘under oath’, no less. I hope ExxonMobil does not stipulate to the assumption that is in play with this ‘threat of investigation’ extortion.

  22. What is funny is every time we see alarmists’ emails it turns into another climategate. I would love to read Al Gore’s emails. Can anyone say #convenientFRAUDgate.

    • I see your point but I would modify it – there never was a REAL consensus to begin with. It was a myth and mythology changes all the time – it’s in the nature of the beast, IMO.

    • Legal system? It stopped being a legal system with Holder, IMO. Look at Hillary, running for President when she should be preparing her court case? Not to worry, even if charged, the administration would only pardon her, anyway. You see, some (political) animals are more equal than others. The law only applies to us – not them?

  23. Prosecute Gore for Environmental Fraud, Terrorism, & Extortion! Grab his buddy DiCaprio, too!

  24. They would have to prove that the event being “denied” unambiguoisly and alone caused some actual avoidable harm. I think that is a very tough call

  25. Al Gore joins faeces [er, forces] with New York Attorney General to persecute “deniers”.
    there, fixed.

  26. I would love to see the science debated in court. Go for it Al! You can’t defend your position. Remember the British Courts said that you couldn’t show your movie to British kids unless you revealed the 9 outstanding errors in the science (there were more but they only condemned those 9). Unfortunately, they won’t allow the science to be disputed because those who do the deciding are not scientist. We need a way to deal with scientific issues once and for all – and elimination of the political propaganda. Well, I can dream, can’t I?

  27. I see that there are so many people saying things about climate without having a clue of what climate is. And Al Gore is one of the loudest. Of course, he is a politician trying to gather more votes, but it seems he doesn’t realize how dangerous that is.

  28. The german green party parliaments tell the ‘informed’ media the energy companies did fat marges the last decades.
    and that professinal media serves such uncommented to the people.
    These politicians, they understand the laws that are discussed and they comply?
    If one company wants to buy an other one there is an investigation in preventing monopolization.
    In the end there’s left 5.
    So how fat pofits: 3%, 5% ?
    When every one has to withstand his competitors?
    Just a little example what this kind true belive -and their colleags long gone resigned to teach them.
    And how such goes by media through to ‘the masses’
    Of course such elite stomaches 40 decades 5% sums up to an alltime 200%

    • Of course 40 ys times 5%.
      As many others I’m just bored and tired of that never ending stuff – same as it ever was.

Comments are closed.