Uh, oh: House Committee Scrutinizes Motive of “Green 20” Attorneys General

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and a coalition of attorneys general, supported by former Vice President Al Gore, vowed on March 29, 2016, to hold fossil fuel companies accountable if their words and deeds on climate change had crossed into illegality.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and a coalition of attorneys general, supported by former Vice President Al Gore, vowed on March 29, 2016, to hold fossil fuel companies accountable if their words and deeds on climate change had crossed into illegality.

Washington, D.C. –  Today, 13 Science, Space, and Technology Committee Republicans sent letters to 17 state attorneys general and eight environmental activist organizations. The letters request documents related to the groups’ coordinated efforts to deprive companies, nonprofit organizations, scientists and scholars of their First Amendment rights and their ability to fund and conduct scientific research free from intimidation and threats of prosecution.

Americans are entitled to express their views on matters of science and public policy even if certain groups disagree.

“On March 29, 2016, you and other state attorneys general – the self-proclaimed ‘Green 20’ – announced that you were cooperating on an unprecedented effort against those who have questioned the causes, magnitude, or best ways to address climate change,” the letter states. “The Committee is concerned that these efforts to silence speech are based on political theater rather than legal or scientific arguments, and that they run counter to an attorney general’s duty to serve ‘as the guardian of the legal rights of the citizens’ and to ‘assert, protect, and defend the rights of the people.’”

Former Vice President Al Gore spoke at the March 29 press conference and addressed the need to prosecute fossil fuel energy companies for engaging in fraud. Gore and the Green 20’s efforts are part of a larger strategy to achieve the president’s sweeping, job-killing climate change agenda.

Reports show 14 green-tech firms that Gore invested in benefited from over $2.5 billion in loans, grants and tax breaks as part of the administration’s push to fund U.S. renewable energy industry with taxpayer funds.

In testimony before the Committee, scientists projected the cost of the administration’s carbon dioxide regulations at $39 billion to American consumers and businesses annually.  However, senior administration officials themselves have admitted that these regulations will have a negligible effect on global temperatures.

Since the March 29 press conference, members of the Green 20 have rapidly expanded their legal actions against those who question the administration’s climate change agenda. These legal actions include subpoenas for documents, communications and research that would capture the work of more than 100 academic institutions, scientists and nonprofit organizations.

The Committee has a responsibility to protect the First Amendment prerogatives of academic institutions, scientists and nonprofit organizations and will continue to do so.

The letter(s) to the attorneys general can be found HERE.

The letter(s) to environmental organizations can be found HERE.


139 thoughts on “Uh, oh: House Committee Scrutinizes Motive of “Green 20” Attorneys General

  1. Please, Lord, whisper in these Republican’s ears and tell them to GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

  2. Folks, should hillary get in the white house (and turn the house and/or senate democratic along with), the “green 20” will become the rule of the land. Where would we be now without pushback from a republican congress?

      • NZPete
        This shows how little the internet is used by most people in an attempt to find what has or is really happening, including the history of the Clinton and Bush family. The more information is available it seems the less peole are interested.

      • This summation by Ann Coulter should be forwarded to every liberal/progressive/Democrat in the country, along with a simple question:
        “Are you still seriously contemplating voting for this rape-enabling wench?!!?”
        And that’s before we even get around to discussing bribery, treason, influence-hustling, lying to Congressional committees, fraud, and numerous other felonies and transgressions.

      • Pete:
        You must remember the McCain bid. McCain may have been certifiable but when he aligned himself with Palin, he pretty much gave the executive to Obama. It’s happened twice now.
        There aren’t two parties in the USA anymore. There are the Democrats, who are actually global socialists bent on creating a very small elite (sometimes referred to as the “1%”). They use the Republican party as a foil to present only one choice for election, this time it will be Hillary. The job of the Republican Party is to fall on its sword and come home on its shield. That’s it. Game over.
        There should be no mystery. And no, you don’t have a vote.

      • Bartleby,
        Both Ferraro and Palin were smeared during their campaigns.
        Geraldine Ferraro was well qualified to be Vice-president. She worked to pay for her education. No one gave here anything. Even going to night-school. She was first generation U.S. Italian form Queens, New York City.
        Palin’s father was a science teacher and probably learned about science at home. Back in days when science teachers were educated in science.

      • NZpete: Trump is not done for. Read the article carefully. She was pointing to Bill Clinton as doing all those things NOT Trump!!!!

      • Not in your lifetime. That will be a war for your grandchildren to fight.
        Pack your rifles in cosmoline and leave the country.

  3. Deadline for the attorneys general is noon May 30th, and for the other groups it is noon June 1st..

  4. Meh. I’m not optimistic. Contempt of Congress doesn’t seem to have any practical repercussions. So, why should these people/organizations comply? It’ll be viewed and reported as partisan politics as usual and subsequently, ignored.

    • Congress has subpoena power, no organization could ever get the doc from the attorneys general

    • Contempt of Congress is generally followed by a stiff “don’t do it again” rebuke, but these bozos are in a tough spot because about 1/2 of them are up for re-election in November, and this is the kind of stuff that can derail an election campaign at the state level pretty quickly. What they thought would be a big plus for their election efforts could quickly turn into an albatross.

      • correction, many state do AG’s in off-years, but about half of them will be up in 2017. The same dynamic applies

    • Indeed, this is just theater. There are no consequences for right-think today. As long as your party controls the White House and has at least 34 members of the Senate you can do whatever you want. We now have an elected monarchy.

    • If they are found guilty of conspiring to deprive people of their 1st amendment rights, they can be disbarred.
      It’s a slight chance, and would require pretty absurd amounts of evidence, but even the threat of such a thing would be a bit of a hamper to acting as an attorney general.

      • Might make it tough to get re-elected, but there is no requirement in most states for the Attorney General to have a law license. Surprisingly, there is no requirement for a judge to have a law license either.

  5. Gore is looking very smug in that photo. As if he’s thinking: “My investments are looking pretty good right now”.

    • From the photo it looks like he is packing something on the order of 260 pounds these days… But then, with a lifestyle that would make Elagabalus blush…

  6. Ironic that Gore would never have been anything without Big Tobacco and Occidental Petroleum, isn’t it?

  7. “Former Vice President Al Gore spoke at the March 29 press conference and addressed the need to prosecute fossil fuel energy companies for engaging in fraud.”
    That’s rich, coming from someone who has made hundreds of millions of dollars off the AGW scam.

  8. Dunno how this ends. Do know that it is now in the ‘correct’ political forum. Never was about the science, since that is proving ever more indefensible on many fronts. This looks like the beginning of the ultimate collapse of the whole CAGW political shebang.

  9. I am not sure how effective a House Committee will be given the past experience of such a committee leaning upon NOAA, and NOAA seems to have gotten away with it’s fraud.

      • The Constitution and Bill of Rights are a codification of a certain set of values, not their progenitor or enforcer. If American citizens don’t carry its spirit in their hearts, it’s just words on 240 year old paper.

      • I don’t remember which founding father it was, but he stated that our Constitution was written for a moral people.
        On the other hand, no constitution will hold back an immoral governing class.

    • At the end of the day the House controls appropriation bills and if they don’t have the testicular fortitude to make those arrogant reprobates at NOAA believe their pay-checks and the money to run their precious supercomputers depends on treating the people’s representatives in an honest, forthright and respectful manner, then all is lost. Personally I think it is time to bring control of all executive Email servers under one agency.

    • Especially the second amendment! I am not suggesting armed revolt, just that the amendment is a deterrent to government excess. We should be very suspicious of those who would abridge or repeal it.

      • Interesting coincidence that those who seek to expand government power are also the same people who are most adamant about limiting gun ownership to the government only.

    • I have always liked these quotes:
      “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests”.
      – Patrick Henry –
      While democracy must have its organization and controls, its vital breath is individual liberty.
      – Charles Evans Hughes
      H. L. Mencken, who said: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
      Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
      George Washington

  10. Hello hello hello!
    A rather excellent turnabout!
    Now we need some of the fiscal responsibility Congressmen, e.g. Cruz, Issa; to begin official inquiries, into how alleged green charities spent their monies wooing State Attorney Generals.
    There should be at least four years of Federal back taxes, loans and grants that Congress will want back, with interest and penalties.

  11. And when you start to question things and then follow the money… look where it leads, well well well, 3 holes in the ground. Unreal.

  12. Dammit, I don’t care what the grammar dogs say. English evolves through common usage rules and rids itself of foreign awkwardnesses. “Attorneys general” is wrong. “Attorney generals” is right.
    The phrase “attorney general” is legal deriving from French where adjectives that follow nouns are commonly. recognized. In English our adjectives come before the noun. For that reason in English, following common usage rules, “attorney general” has become a title and is pluralized at the end..
    We are not French. Let us get the frogs out of our throats and say it American — “attorney generals”.
    Eugene WR Gallun
    . .

    • Let us get the frogs out of our throats and say it American…
      Hmm. Would you say that “attorney generals” are always appointed by former “president elects”?

      • Spelled correctly it is a hyphened word — President-elect.
        In one sense it has no plural because only one “president-elect” can exist at a time. Of course, if you speak of those in the past who were once “president-elect” then it has a plural usage — “president-elects” It is a title and so should be “pluraled” at the end.
        Eugene WR Gallun .

      • ‘Hick’ is a language unimpeded by grammar rules, standards and conventions. Apart from ‘attorney generals’ there are numerous other examples where Hick has taken over from English. Particularly annoying is the appendage of redundant direction to nearly all verbs (“Why don’tcha come on off the wagon?”) and even nouns (a tennis match-up having replaced the tennis match).
        Full-throated Hick can be heard from any NASCAR race commentator who will invariably say ‘straight-away’ (redundant direction added to a noun) implying you are always seated on corner 2 or 4, ‘race-car’ (to remind you that this is a car race for race-cars, not ordinary cars) and ‘the 32 car’ for car number 32, which saves the viewer from having to recall which driver is in which car.
        Historical revisionism will surely follow: The TV show “Car 54, where are you?” will be renamed, “Where is the 54 Car at?”

      • A. D. Everard — mothers-in-law vs. mother-in-laws
        isn’t it strange? You think “mother-in-laws” is awkward whereas i think the same about “mothers-in-law”. Again it has become a title and should be pluraled (that’s “pluralized”) at the end.
        I wrote these lines in a poem several years ago
        Great nations in vanquished milleniums
        Foretold their fall with one same cry
        When its Arts begin to die
        A civilization soon succumbs
        I considered “millenia” but who does Latin these days? Without the “S” at the end the people at open poetry readings couldn’t identify it as a plural. And like in 50 years it would sound like something out of “The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner” — when that poem was first published. Way not cool, man.
        {Note: Coleridge deliberately wrote “The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner” using a lot of words that had passed from common usage 50 to 100 years before his day.]
        I remember the day I learned what “I grow old, I grow old, I shall wear my trousers rolled” meant. Good lesson for a poet.
        [Note: Way back then pants were bought unfitted. A tailor had you put them on then he marked them with chalk to indicate the proper cuff length. You took them off, got them back a week later with cuffs. The “New Youth” of Elliot’s time had a fad where they did not have their pants cuffed but instead simply rolled them up. An old man, trying to look young, would make himself out a fool doing that.]
        Eugene WR Gallun.

      • Crispin in Waterloo
        Mostly what was spoken and written by the majority of the people during the hundreds of years of the Roman Empire was “hick” Latin.
        Eugene WR Gallun

    • Logically speaking, you are correct. The phrase “attorney general” acts as a noun, and nouns get pluralized on the end. The proof of that is that the shorthand “AG” is pluralized as “AGs”.
      But the English language is a quirky one.

    • …otherwise it would have to abbreviated to A’sG…rather than the abbreviation AG’s, which appears as current usage.

      • @ Bruce Cobb & NeverReady:
        Acronyms may be pluralized as convenient — RBIs, CSMs, AGs, and so on.
        The terms themselves are NOT pluralized as Eugene would like, generally: Runs Batted In, Command Sergeants Major, Attorneys General, et cetera.

    • Then you what you want is to rename the position “General Attorney” so the adjective is in the right place for English Grammar rules.

    • Sorry, Eugene.
      They are “attorneys” (plural) serving the “general” public (singular)… thus “attorneys general,” your Franco-phobia notwithstanding. Likewise, it’s Mothers-in-law, courts martial, sergeants major, presidents-elect, and runs batted in (RBIs for convenience — just like the other acronyms in this thread — but let’s be real: no one says “run batted ins,” now do they?).
      Anyway, so-called “common usage” is what got us linguistic abominations such as “an historical (document/event/etc.),” which resulted from the “common” mispronunciation of H-words by leaving off the perfectly good consonant at the beginning (“An ‘istorical,” versus “A Historical” — think My Fair Lady). Common usage is determined by mass usage (go figure), and not by a few disgruntled individuals too lazy to think about what they’re saying/writing prior to saying/writing it.

      • Smokey, wait…wait…What about RPMs? I always wanted to know what these “revolutions per minutes” were.
        I have a British bud who says “haych” when spelling a word with an ‘h’.
        One cannot spell a word in Hick, words have to be ‘spelled out’, ‘outwards’ presumably being the direction words go from one’s mouth. Similarly one cannot ‘come’ in Hick. One has to come on, come in, come up, come over, or more popularly, come on over, come on up, come on in and even “Come on off” (heard in the movie, The Patriot).
        One cannot even write a memoir anymore. The linguistically down and out have to write things up, down and or out. Is this constant desire for direction perhaps telling us something profound?

      • Smokey (Can’t do a thing about wildfires)
        “an historical” — In older English “an” was often used in front of consonants. “And an host of furious fancies” comes from TOM O’BEDLAM. So, Smokey, instead of a stalwart defender of the past you are the avant garde complaining about the old fogies.
        I have always liked the river Thames. The frogs added the “h” after the “T” to make it French — preserving their own language while assassinating another — but common usage was so powerful that it still is pronounced “Tames”.
        “Runs batted in” — I have to think about it.
        Eugene WR Gallun
        TOM O’BEDLAM is actually a series of riddles. I figured it out about 20-25 years ago. As far as I am concerned only Shakespeare had the ability and wit to write it. But no name is on it.

    • Don’t get me started on spelling, where the way a word is spelled depends on the language it came from rather than English where it currently resides. Spanish for instance either changes the spelling of foreign words to match the sound, or it changes the sound to match the spelling.

      • NeverReady
        Spelt (Triticum spelta) is dinkel wheat; been around for about 7000 years. Growing it gave people enough free time to sit around the fire arguing about how words should be spelled if they were to invent characters that represented single sounds. Obviously in China the spellers lost the argument. In England the spelters won.

      • It is all Greek to me and I studied Latin in high school. Had to take Italian in college because they did not offer Latin. Apparently my teacher did not like that because he quit and went to a seminary to become a priest.

  13. It’s good to see that these AGs receive negative feedback to their politically motivated witch hunts. My guess is that at least some of them will back away from this prosecutional conspiracy, These are political animals, and do not like the harsh light of bad publicity.

  14. All you idiots hoping that you’ll get a different result because it’s the Republicans/Democrats (choose your favorite party) in charge of something haven’t been paying attention. They’re two sides of the same coin. You don’t think the reoublican whales aren’t getting fat off this scam too? You’re part of the problem. You’re who they’re fooling. You’re the one that keeps the charade going. But, by all means, keep voting. Maybe candidate x will break out of the mold and free you from this box.

    • resistance —
      Ok, you stay up in your tree and pull shit out of your ass to throw down on those below you. Which of the three monkeys are you? See All Evil. Hear All Evil. Speak All Evil. Hmmm…. probably the last.
      Eugene WR Gallun

    • Resistance is correct about the political parties. That is why Trump and Sanders have gained traction. The voters are starting to realize that the establishment is only interested in retaining power for the establishment, not serving their constituents.
      Regarding the Constitution, it is a dead letter. It means only what a majority of 9 unelected justices says it means. The court should rule only in disputes between the states. The states should decide what power they have delegated to the federal government, which is what the Constitution is intended to describe.
      Section 2 of Article I I I gives original jurisdiction to the court for “all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” In other cases, “the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.” The Congress could prohibit the court from ruling in cases concerning abortion, same sex marriage, and other such issues and allow the States to pass laws that cannot be overturned by the supreme Court.

  15. Not much that committees in the House or Senate can do (right now anyway) about Prosecutorial over reach. They’ve been getting away with the destruction and diminishment of our legal system for years now due to a lack of oversight and political will to rein in their excesses.
    They’re still on their witch hunt of conservatives in Wisconsin after being slapped down a number of times by judges rulings so some letter from some low level congressmen aren’t going to scare them much.
    Some bigger guns with bigger pockets and focus needs to go after them and run them into court as often as possible to defend their actions.

  16. “The Committee is concerned that these efforts to silence speech are based on political theater rather than legal or scientific arguments”

    I don’t care if it’s based on legal* or scientific arguments, there shouldn’t be efforts to silence speech, period.
    * Yeah, I know, the “crowded theater” exception, except that’s not prior restraint, it’s after the fact judgement for a specific instance of a specific lie that causes an immediate emergency.

  17. From the article: “Former Vice President Al Gore spoke at the March 29 press conference and addressed the need to prosecute fossil fuel energy companies for engaging in fraud.”
    Fraud? What fraud? One has to be lying about something to commit fraud. What lie did the fossil fuel energy companies tell?
    The truth is the fossil fuel companies have told no lies. Speculating about the Earth’s climate is not the equivalent of lying.
    Al Gore is the one who is guilty of lying. He is claiming there is evidence that humans are causing the Earth’s climate to change, when there is no such evidence.

  18. If the names of the ENGOs Boards of Directors were collated and the names of their funders were collated, then a better picture of what’s presently taking place might emerge.

  19. The GOP establishment will huff and puff and blow themselves off a cliff just as they’ve done on every other controversial battle with Obama.
    The election might fix this issue but the current GOP and congressional Republicans will not. You can take that to the bank.

  20. Interesting. Even a year ago, a conversation like this would not have considered that prosecution against these evil people would have even been possible. Now at least a few people see it as a real possibility. All it actually takes to bring them to book, is that enough people believe they can be prosecuted and then the “ruling elite” will bow to popular demand.

  21. IT is great news to see a clique of lobbyist AG’s are not going to get away with attempting to erode First Amendment rights . The AG’s stood up to lobby for an industry and Gore took the opportunity to use the cloak of credibility of others . This is becoming a reoccurring pattern . Last time it was some scientists this time a group of AG’s . Why weren’t the green lobby groups they are working with onstage too ? Why do these AG’s even have jobs after promoting an industry while on the tax payers dime ? Do any of these AG’s own shares in the industry they are promoting ? How can those AG’s preserve tax payer interests while lobbying for an industry that sucks up $$ Billions in tax payer grants and loan guarantees ? How can this ethically be allowed ?
    Well done to those on the Science ,Space and Technology Committee for standing up for rights so
    many fought to attain .These AG’s need to take their talents to China where their skill set will be accepted .

  22. Nothing but projection from the Greens and Alarmists. If they want to see fraud, all they need to do is look inward.

  23. I am astonished that 20 state Attorneys General would join in the endeavor. It speaks poorly for America’s justice system that so many are willing to eviscerate freedom of speech.

    • The ‘ Green 20’ actually seems to consist of only 17 people, which fits with the accuracy of all things climate related. It is possible, though, that another 3 desperados are hiding out in Al Gores mansion.

  24. Rabbit, isn’t it wonderful what a few $$ and promises won’t accomplish isn’t it? Because it sure stinks to high heaven what these 20 are trying (or were trying) to do.

  25. Where is the Committee letter to Al Gore ? Why the free pass ? Clearly he was there ,he made allegations of fraud and he didn’t just accidentally parachute into a group of AG’s . Where is the correspondence request
    of AG’s to Al Gore and vice versa ? Who invited Al Gore to join the group press conference ?
    “AGs for Clean Power ” . Is that referring to AL Gore ? What role or relationship does any activist group or individual have with this group of AG’s ?

    • Gore did get a letter. See the letter to The Climate Reality Project in the environmental organizations link.

  26. What Coulter says is only the tip of the Clinton iceberg.
    Contra Cocaine, murder, preying on young women in Arkansas and using the state police to do it.
    50 people connected to the Clintons have died in very mysterious circumstances.
    Obama also has a significant dead pool

    • As a friend who lives in Arkansas explained to me – when Bill was running for president everyone in the state was pushing “Vote for Bill – get the Clintons out of Arkansas”

    • Oui , et ils ne recueillent pas de crânes!
      Probablement leurs navires sont déjà chargés et depuis plus d’espace est disponible pour le crâne !

  27. As a brit (with US family) looking in:-
    First off, I wish you well with your endeavours. We have been on the receiving end of the Green propaganda machine and state sponsored Stasi in the UK and Europe for the last 20 years.
    Secondly, If the political elite and the 1% believe what they say and continue to persecute the Power companies, then it would not seem unreasonable that the odd Power company sympathetic to the wishes of these Politicians/1% cease supplying fossil fuelled power to their buildings. I note the Washington DC, PEPCO fuel mix is quoted as: Coal 39.4%, Gas 21.0%, Nuclear 34.9%, Other fossil Fuels 0.3% and the sum of all Renewables at 4.4%. This would be a good place to start.
    Let see A) how effective the alternative arrangements they make are and B) how long they stay in power when the actions they advocate for all, hit home. Let the sword of Damocles hang over their heads.

    • As the coal-fired units go down so does the electric supply. When the repairs are too expensive on a generating unit, they are just shut down.
      Conversion to natural gas not even considered.

  28. The Greens need to get popcorn banned pronto. Too many conservatives are users at the moment.

  29. bevore 2 months General Attorney of NY didn’t know how to read a prepaid iphone.
    On Virgin Island anything goes.

  30. “Gore and the Green 20’s efforts are part of a larger strategy to achieve the president’s sweeping, job-killing climate change agenda.”
    Wouldn’t it be interesting if this conspiracy ended up including the President?

  31. “Gore and the Green 20’s efforts are part of a larger strategy to achieve the president’s sweeping, job-killing climate change agenda.”
    Wouldn’t it be interesting if this conspiracy went all the way up to the president?

  32. Charlie
    Thanks . I missed that . Lets get this straight, some AG’s, without legislated authority or demonstrated State approval define themselves as a group that includes hooking up with a global warming promoter. They threaten to ferret out people in companies that don’t say what they want to hear . They make unsubstantiated allegations of fraud but have no proof so wish to use their government positions to go on a fishing expedition while lobbying for grant seeking companies .
    These people are very well aware of laws to protect freedom of speech and what constitutes a conflict of interest . Why would they do any of this instead of protecting tax payers interests who have subsidized and lost hundreds of millions to companies in the very industry this group is advocating for ?

Comments are closed.