People send me stuff. It seems that one of the two main ringleaders of the RICO20 is trying some legal wrangling this morning to head off disclosure of more documents.
The legal filings (in links below) show that this morning legal council for Ed Maibach rushed to Richmond court seeking an emergency stay of the GMU production of everything RICO20 related – including what was already released, and which new material was supposed to be released today under court order. I’m told that defying that court order, the VA Attorney General/GMU general counsel just now refused to produce the records owed to CEI, citing the fact that Maibach doesn’t want him to comply with the court order, per a filing which…admits there is a court order for him to produce these records.
I’m told CEI will prepare a motion today to compel GMU to comply with the court and seek fees/sanctions as appropriate. What has already been made public due to the court dissolving the protective order is and will remain public, because the Internet never, ever, forgets.
It seems very odd that this rush for ’emergency stay’ should come now given the horse has already left the barn with the first tranche of emails. Obviously, Maibach is panicked, there must really be some damning stuff in the emails and documents he’s trying to prevent being released today.
Public court documents (PDF):
2016 05 23 Exhibit for Maibach Motion for Stay
2016 05 23 Exhibits for Maibach Motion to Intervene (incl Affidavit)
2016 05 23 Maibach motion to intervene MEMO
2016 05 23 Maibach motion to intervene
2016 05 23 Maibach motion to stay
I hope the Courts finally recognize the pattern of behavior that the climate extremists exhibit and treat it accordingly: Full and critical review.
Read the pleadings. Maibach presents an interesting case. VFIOA has an exception for content relating to academic research on grounds it would be chilling to research. Well precedented. That is how Mann escaped the Cucinelli demand for hockey stick stuff.
But by no stretch of the imagination does the RICO 20 letter constitute academic research that would trigger the exception. Maibach previously argued emails concerning RICO 20 were personal and not GMU related, and just a response to Sen. Whitehouse’s WaPo op-ed. He lost because it was done on GMU time using GMU facilities. That same arguement generally ruins his request for a stay.
Now he argues that because he prepared a presentation for Puerto Rico (academic research), the search term RICO triggers the exception. Easy CEI answer: exclude from the VFOIA any emails with the linked sequential words Puerto Rico. Problem solved. Maibach exposed.
this may get the blood pumping (and not surprising) –
http://www.providencejournal.com/news/20160517/ri-shield-bill-is-response-to-climate-change-deniers
ristvan –
In your response to Charlie elsewhere, you say ‘no’ to coordination etc.
I seem to recall from the released Emails that one of Maibach’s correspondents (the guy from UCS?) declined to join the fray, saying he was interested in the ongoing “AG” effort – or somesuch wording.
These Emails sent a long time ago, before the recent A G fiasco.
Isn’t it at least possible that our man was involved in both schemes, giving them all the benefit of his ‘communication’ skills ?
Maibach might hope to survive one, but if CEI disclosures get evidence of involvement in both, what then? Conspiracy? 🙂
If there is nothing in the ‘Puerto Rico’ emails that is relevant to ‘RICO’, they should already be excluded by the research exemption. Maibach is not entitled to the benefit of the doubt. He has already demonstrated that he is not trustworthy. At the very least, they should examined in camera to determine the relevancy.
To state the obvious: a lot of people will be watching this space. There is no shadow of doubt that there was significant conspiracy across State lines coordinating what must be one of the dumbest attempts ever to smear the fuel industries with false charges that ‘they knew’, in spite of the limited material and measurements available at the time, that CO2 could ‘imperil all of civilisation within a few years’ if, for example, the concentration rose from 0.028% to 0.056% when it is well known that it had been as high as 0.700% in the history of the earth.
A RICO charge requires a lot of back and forth about who should do what and to whom. So who lies behind this RICO20 thing? Named in the emails, perhaps?
Seems very odd that someone would use an entry-level attorney at a small-time employment rights law firm to submit a Motion for Intervention and make a claim based on First Amendment Rights. Not only does the nature of the motion sound like a desperate act, it also sounds like he couldn’t get any deep-pocket Greenies to cover the retainer … i.e., “you’re on your own.”
He cannot afford anybody else. He wasnt double dipping to make $600k per year like Shukla was.
Well according to the documents released he was making roughly $180K/yr… which isn’t exactly chump change. My guess he’s realized the university’s was going to cutting its losses and he got the first attorney he could find that had the time to file.
I’ll take a stab on that note. I guess he’s already at the employment rights firm because he has issues with GMU. This has to be because they are not backing him. No legal help, no sanctioning of his actions as being made legitimately on behalf of GMU. They are happy to comply with an order from the court and they will terminate him on any reasonable evidence that comes out for dragging GMU into this anti-science, antidemocratic mess.
This might be the start of the realization for Universities that potential students and sponsors may not wish to be identified with out and out activists that threaten freedom of speech.
All of this will be thoroughly ignored by the “Main Stream” media.
It does make you wonder how “mass cold shouldering” of news stories works. I’ve always suspected that the huge PSA budgets in this country are too big to ignore by media outlets as implied threats from policy makers. It’s the money back story behind the behavior.
When I read something like “XXX is a widely recognized expert in public health and climate change communication”, I am always tempted to ask “Did he tell you that?”
Soon it will be “infamous expert in public health and climate change communication.” This could get him a Nobel Prize of maybe a U.S. government research prize or an invite to the WH.
My question…expert by what standards?
My favorite line in any news story…”experts were shocked to blah blah blah” Ok, if they’re experts, why were they caught unawares? And again, if they were, how are they experts?
@ur momisugly Steven Dietrich, That is because they were nothing but perts before. seeing that they were lousy at being perts they are now experts.
Is the lawyer on his dime or the University?
Maibach’s main argument is that the emails were “personal” and should not be drawn in because he used university email facilities. If it was correspondence about picking up laundry, fair enough. But he signed as “Edward Maibach, George Mason University”, as did others, thereby imputing that their letter had authority over and above that of an individual citizen. Maibach didnt mention this in his affidavit.
Excellent point. That is why the held he is a limited public figure and representing GMU ‘authority’.
All of the RICO-20 signatories attended a NOAA-sponsored Shukla symposium a couple of months earlier.
https://cos.gmu.edu/aoes/cola-hosts-shukla-symposium-on-predictability/
The signatories weren’t just pals who happened to be members of the same bowling league. They had work relationships.
When I signed on with my employer, I was informed that everything I did on a company computer was subject to FOIA, regardless of the subject matter.
And regardless of the time of day. Even if I took the lap top home for the weekend.
From the reading list for Lecture3:
No comment needed…
And to think, our trolls are constantly asking why politics gets brought up around here.
cazactly!
MarkW,
Here’s another one:
Nope, no politics there!
A further thought. Apparently the released email sunset was chosen by Maibach or GMU and submitted to the court for in camera inspection on the issue of whether they were ‘private not university’ or ‘public university’. The time stamps made it clear it was all on university time. This selection for resolving the underlying VFIOA issue Maibach was previously invoking would logically NOT have contained any potentially more controversial/damaging statements.
ristvan,
I think you are reasoning that the remaining tranch of emails is were Maibach & his legal team put items that had higher exposure to legal / professional risk.
Your reasoning has merit.
I wonder why they waited so long to file their request for stay (filed at the very date when they had to release more emails) ? Is that a standard legal strategy to wait to request a stay at the very moment when they were mandated to release info?
Curious.
John
It merely give them the maximum of extra time to scurry by submitting on that day. had they had any strong case, it would have come sooner.
They are VERY desperate it seems
What does Richard Windsor think about all of this?
Maybe we should ask John Beale, eh?
Is he still in jail?
Presuming, for arguments sake, that Maibach is acting to block info release because the yet to be released emails constitute something that does incriminate him. In the event that he loses and the emails are released, wouldn’t the law find him guilty of attempting to block Justice / legal process? Can some of commenters with legal training respond?
John
Generally not, as he is entitled to use the legal process like anyone else. So long as his arguements are plausible, he is entitled to them.
Blocking legal process (obstruction of justice) in the actionable culpability sense you inquire about usually requires some overt ‘blocking’ like intentional records destruction (the Lerner/IRS brouha), failure to comply fully with a subpoena, or perjury under oath. Obstruction of justice can get murky fast, which is why it is usually only invoked in blatant cases. For example, is filing a never ending 20 year long series of appeals in a death penalty case obstruction of justice? In a practical sense, yes. In a legal sense, no. Same thing with Mann v. Steyn in DC. Practically, yes now that the case is at the 5 year point. Legally, no.
The sad reality is that even if the smoking gun is found, the spent cartridges verified, and bullet taken from the victim is confirmed, the current federal D of J still would not follow through,but I find the exciting point here is the hope that a state’s justice system may shine through and simply exercise the process fairly. What a concept! I sincerely hope that Virginia law has a chance to bloom in daylight where the rights of all are protected and guilt, if evident, can be assigned appropriately.
Would asking his co-conspirators to start using e-mail systems that aren’t subject to FOIA searches constitute obstruction of justice?
Dennis Mitchell:
Don’t hold your breath. The current Virginia attorney general has about as much integrity as Holder. Herring was one of the AGs doing the Algore photo-op, so he will probably volunteer to represent Maibach and Shukla. It would be really nice if all the nut jobs who think that Virginia needs to radically change would just go move to a state that already has those “ideal” policies. Leave the rest of us in peace!
The law firm: “The Spiggle Law Firm is one of the largest firms in Virginia devoted exclusively to helping employees win workplace disputes and fight wrongful termination…”
Gee, I guess he is having trouble with his employer!
I recently met a George Mason student about to graduate with a degree in “Environmental Advocacy”.
They really have degrees for that.
I went to a graduate school fair recently, and the GMU rep tried to convince me to consider getting a masters degree in Environmental Policy rather than Biology. Part of her reasoning was that the Biology program was really competitive (though once she realized how that sounded, she tried to back it up and say that EP was also competitive), but I suspect there is also a lot less interest in the policy program. Who needs a masters when so many interest groups are willing to pay tons of money to any one with a pulse who agrees to throw tantrums?
If I wanted to pretend to be a scientist, I would not have bothered taking courses that required actual learning and effort.
If this keeps up, where is the education department going to find new candidates?
How do you unring a bell?
From Exhibits to Maibach Motion to Intervene.
You shall reap what you have sown Mr. Maibach, and the truth can be painful.
If you thought your attempt to abridge the first amendment rights of others would have no consequences then you are a fool. If you joined the the RICO 20 with “eyes opened” then you are receiving your just “rewards”. Either way I see nothing in your motion that would garner sympathy or relief for your actions.
Haha that doesn’t stand a chance unless the court is stacked, because Maibach as shown in the first tranche was involved in the gang that brought about the case against CEI.
So his claim CEI came after him should not stand up to even modest scrutiny
Rule#1 of a preemptive strike: Don’t miss your target.
I mean, I don’t fault him for trying to save his own butt, however it doesn’t matter at this point because he’s already established as the aggressor and is (hopefully) going to get what he deserves.
“Birds of a feather” and “if the shoe fits”!
Everyone will note a complete lack of reporting on this, even the other warmer blogs have not mentioned this conveniently, 0 integrity
“must really be some damning stuff…”
I would warn against assuming that there is some kind of ‘smoking gun’. He may just be trying to protect his privacy.
Valid cautionary point. There may be something very personal in his RICO20 correspondence on his publicly funded university email account about his own personal smoking gun and how much personal smoke it was producing at that time, that none of us have any right peering into ( or through ).
It may not be Earth shattering, but there is obviously something specific there that he does not want seen.
One would think that someone who claims to be an expert int “communication” and psychology would be aware of the Streisand effect.
Anything of a purely personal nature should already have been redacted.
E.Mailbatch , tries to get emergency stay on a batch of emails.
… was that the same black cat ? Wake up, Neo.
: )
John
I’ve long thought that bringing AGW to court was an “unforced error” on anyone’s part who’s trying to use “climate change” for political ends. Potentially an unmitigated disaster, in fact. What competent and prepared lawyers can do with discovery and putting the likes of, say, Dr Mann on the stand, under oath. Grill them on the science and process, nail their hides to the wall if they lie about it.
When you are engaged in an elaborate and detailed hoax, that is getting thread-bare, the last place you want to argue it is in an actual court of law. With penalties for laying, and procedures for evidence and cross-examination, and discovery. All those institutionalized processes for getting past lies.
Given that CSLDF is associated with Spiggle Law Firm to provide attorney assistance to Shukla, then Maibach’s very recent use of Spiggle to file the emergency stay (on production of additional emails) does give credence to the idea that CSLDF is also helping Maibach with attorney aid/assistance.
** http://climatesciencedefensefund.org/2015/10/10/climate-scientist-threatened-with-investigation-by-congress/
John
Nice catch and good inference.Spiggles is the wrong attorney. Shukla will need a criminal defense lawyer over the NSF double dipping and the ‘gift’ tomhis family’s ‘charity’ in India.
Why is it that something about rats, ships and sinking comes to mind?