From Energy In Depth (h/t to Matt Dempsey)
A new batch of emails, released late Friday afternoon, pulls back the curtain further on the level of collusion and coordination between anti-fossil fuel activists, their funders, and the attorneys general that have launched climate investigations into people, companies, and think tanks with which they disagree on the issue.
These emails, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by brought by The Competitive Enterprise Institute and Chris Horner, show that key activists behind this campaign had hoped they could make a case for prosecuting climate “deniers” under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. But, due to multiple warnings from experts that such a case would be have no chance to actually succeed, they decided instead to shift their strategic focus to state-level attorneys general to get the job done. Interestingly, these emails date back to last summer, months before the Rockefeller-funded InsideClimate News and the Columbia School of Journalism published their #ExxonKnew investigations.
The key players that emerge from this latest batch of emails are George Mason University (GMU) professors Jagadish Shukla and Edward Maibach, who spearheaded a letter in September 2015 with several other colleagues to Attorney General Loretta Lynch and President Obama asking them to explore RICO charges against climate “deniers” and their funders.
Here are some other key revelations that come from these emails:
#1: Activists were colluding with state AGs much longer than initially thought
The activists pushing for the climate RICO investigations have been claiming that the “investigative reporting” by InsideClimate News (ICN) and the Columbia School of Journalism were what spurred them to action. But as these new emails reveal, the master plan was already in place and well under way before those articles were published.
In one email, GMU professor Ed Maibach reached out to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) to enlist its help in getting activists from every congressional district to sign on to their letter. Peter Frumhoff of UCS replied to that request by saying his organization would not join the effort — because UCS did not think the case was strong enough to have a chance of eliciting the intervention of the federal attorney general. Frumhoff went on to admit that they were already pursuing a possible path via state AGs, noting “we think there’ll likely be a strong basis for encouraging state (e.g. AG) action forward, and in that context, opportunities for climate scientists to weigh in.”
Note: shortly after publication, an edit was added from the original website to correct an attribution error in the second paragraph to mention CEI, rather than the Free Market Law Clinic. – Anthony
A little clique of “climate ” grant seekers solicits green activists . Does sound like the “science is settled ” ? They dismay that certain a certain ethnic group isn’t drinking their cool-aid . What is the matter with those Hispanics ? How much in grant money went to pay Shukla’s family ?
As I understand it, this whole thing started with comments by Senator Greenhouse that criminal prosecutions of “doubters” and the fossil fuel companies that fund them (BTW I’m still waiting for my payment, in case anyone at Exxon Mobil is on line today) would be a good thing. That’s the kind of mouthiness that is typical of many politicians when they get really engaged about something and drift away from their usual substance-free wittering on the party line. I somehow doubt that he ever intended it to be taken as the basis for action. The idea that the “RICO 20” could actually solicit prosecution by attorneys-general is pretty naive and sending their letter feels like a really bad move, probably done without even thinking about consulting lawyers with experience in the RICO law.
I have the feeling that the whole thing is going to fizzle and get forgotten by the public at large (if it ever appeared on their radar anyway, which I doubt). The one good thing that may come out of it all is that Shukla will quite possibly be exposed to criminal prosecution. That said, the public probably won’t take much notice.
However much “we” as sceptics, want to make the fact that Prof. Shukla appears (on the basis of information published here and at Climate Audit) to be a greedy, manipulative, mendacious, conspiratorial cheat, liar and thief a direct consequence of his warmist beliefs, that will be impossible to prove and probably untrue anyway. Those negative character attributes are no more a product of his scientific opinions than they are of his ethnic origin. To make a real difference, it would have to be a really high profile warmist, like Al Gore who gets prosecuted, then the media and the public might notice.
This is a clear case of AG’S improper use of the law and people in their states should complain to the State Supreme Court. The AG’S should be diseplined.
It would be appropriate for the person who gave the following oath to take action:
“I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
But he is probably too busy saving the world.
“At the Attorney General Nomination Hearing for Loretta Lynch, George Washington University Law School professor and nationally recognized legal scholar Jonathan Turley, scathingly rebuked actions taken by President Obama and current Attorney General Eric Holder, saying that the “Justice Department is at the epicenter of a constitutional crisis.” cnsnews
Shukla and Maibach deserve tar and feathers and to be run out of town, each for different character flaws and behaviors but neither less deserving of the punishment.
What disturbs me is what about the AGs? What do you do with officials who operate with an alarming bone-headed lack of basic ethics and debased knowledge of the law. When people with the authority of the justice system behind them abuse their power in order to abuse the rights of citizens and undermine the tenets of a free and open society, a firing squad comes to mind as appropriate and I am not even for capital punishment. Maybe they could use rubber bullets.
I’d sure love to be a fly on the wall. No one’s going to be happy at the moment. Those AGs will be having second thoughts about it all too, I should imagine. I expect some fun ahead.
Didn’t Maibach run the 2016 American Meteorological Society member survey on Climate Change?
Hifast, You have depressed me no end. AMS needs to secure the raw data fast.
Here is the AMS 2016 Survey Report.
https://gmuchss.az1.qualtrics.com/CP/File.php?F=F_cRR9lW0HjZaiVV3
I will take a look later today – if no one else has.
More than anything, this is the result of that ethereal concept known as “confidence” level. You know the one. Cook stove settings: low, medium, high. To the feeble minded, reeling from the lack of animal protein in their brain and waaayyyy too much bud, any use of the word “confidence” in ISEEPEEPEE reports or whatever the hell the acronym is for that sleezy group, sends them into a frenzied placard painting morning followed by lots of afternoon sitting-ins and chaining-ups. So. Where to place the blame for this mess? Right at the feet of “you should know better” quasi-hippy scientists with visions of grandeur “chair of diss and dat” dancing in their heads. And the &#@ur momisugly$ dissertation committee that let these pot heads through.
Breath Pam. Sip some wine. Relax.
My favorite part of their conspiracy theory is how they claim a few guys at Exxon “settled the science” on Climate Change several decades ahead of the combined efforts of academia and governments around the world.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ABsQe9XjhLI/UwQvUpnGdGI/AAAAAAAABFs/9DGyiy_OeU8/s1600/i-see-stupid-people.jpg
Fighting Back: AGs ask judge to block climate change ‘fishing expedition’
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/18/fighting-back-ags-ask-judge-to-block-climate-change-fishing-expedition.html?intcmp=hpbt2
Seems to me these Attorney Generals have exposed their own incompetence.
Maybe they should resign, before the Trump Administration, uses them to demonstrate that rule of law and protection of the constitution are back.
Course it will be a dead certainty these political hacks will be campaigning for Hillary, protecting both her and themselves from orange jumpsuits.
In American politics, incompetence is not a negative.
Nor is it among the alarmist clique.
The President has no say over who states select as their AG, nor any power to remove them.
When were fossil fuel companies saying anything about climate change? I have never seen a single fossil fuel advertisement asking people to use more. The pitch is always, use our brand, not theirs. To equate this with the tobacco industry, which featured ads that blatantly tried to prove the “safety” of smoking, is just total nonsense. Or am I missing something?
In the later half of the last century was held the last official western book burning of a scientist in the good old USofA. His daughter hid some equipment and notes and came to OZ to escape for a while she died about two years ago just before my friend and I got some amazing results that have so far confounded scientists that have seen the results. So nothing new under the sun in America, it will take a Trump or more to sort out for the history of ill deeds is long and entrenched.
” Peter Frumhoff of UCS replied to that request by saying his organization would not join the effort — because UCS did not think the case was strong enough to have a chance of eliciting the intervention of the federal attorney general”
Notice here that the refusal was predicated upon the higher probability of failure and not on the moral high ground that “science” should not be legislated.
Yes, they are shrewder than I thought. I wish they were all as arrogant and careless in their shenanigans as this lot.
The Spin Begins
00000039
From: Jeff Nesbit
To: Edward W. Maibach
Date: 9/24/2015 8:52
Subject: Re: respond?
Comment: Maibach ups the ante. He suggests contacting Chris Mooney (that well known “journalist”, writer of the ever so enthralling “The Republican War on Science”). So they know there’s a suitably compliant and non-incredulous MSM talking head that they can use to get their spin out there.
+-+-+-+-+
00000025
From: Edward Maibach
To: Shukla
Date: 9/24/2015 9:05
Subject: Re: Media Question on alleged funneling of climate funding Fox News
Comment: From his shoe phone, Maibach advises Shukla to contact Chris Mooney at the Washington Post. Maibach offers to arrange it. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say ‘na more!
+-+-+-+-+
00000026
From: Edward Maibach
To: Chris Mooney
Date: 9/24/2015 16:24
Subject: Re: Mason climate scientist Jagadish Shulka
Comment: Maibach contacts Mooney and defends Shukla as “honest and honorable”. Interestingly, though Mooney is not a GMU email address, it shows up using “friendly name”. Meaning that he’s in Maibach’s address book. I wonder what other suitably compliant and non-incredulous reporters are in there?