From Mike Bastasch at the Daily Caller:
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is now the latest state prosecutor to start investigating conservative groups with supposed ties to ExxonMobil, after she issued a subpoena for 40 years of internal company documents and communications with a handful of think tanks.
Healey’s office subpoenaed Exxon as part of a multi-state effort among liberal attorneys general to investigate Exxon for allegedly trying to cover up global warming science. Healey charges that the oil giant lied to shareholders and consumers about the risks of global warming in its communications and shareholder filings, according to a copy of the subpoena obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Healey demands decades worth or records from prominent conservative think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation and activist group Americans for Prosperity, and also from smaller, lesser known state-based right-leaning groups, such as Boston’s Beacon Hill Institute and the Acton Institute.
But there’s a huge problem with Healey’s subpoena that shows just how broad this investigation has become: At least two of the groups the subpoena demands records from have not received any money from Exxon.
Beacon Hill and Americans for Prosperity have not gotten any Exxon funding, but are still being targeted
Healey isn’t the first AG to target conservative groups that disagree with most Democratic politicians on global warming policy. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker subpoenaed Exxon for records regarding dozens of conservative think tanks, policy experts and scientists in March.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman launched an investigation into Exxon’s global warming stance in November, based on reporting by liberal journalists at InsideClimate News and Columbia University that Exxon had been covering up climate science for decades while funding right-wing activist groups.
Schneiderman hosted a conference in March with other AGs, including Healey and Walker, where it was announced that more prosecutors would probe Exxon and fight back against Republican attacks on federal environmental regulations.
Former Vice President Al Gore attended the event, as did a group of environmental activists — though Schneiderman’s office tried to cover up eco-activists’ involvement. At the event, Schneiderman even suggested global warming skeptics should be put in jail.
“Financial damages alone may be insufficient,” Schneiderman said. “The First Amendment does not give you the right to commit fraud.”
But Exxon hasn’t taken these subpoenas lying down. The oil company has filed a complaint against Walker in Texas court, and two Republican attorneys general have even intervened in the case to squash Walker’s demands.
Exxon has also filed a complaint against Healey, alleging her investigation is nothing more than a predetermined political stunt.
Exxon’s complaint even notes how Maura basically announced the results of her investigation before she even sent her subpoena to the company.
“We can all see today the troubling disconnect between what Exxon knew, what industry folks knew, and what the company and industry chose to share with investors and with the American public,” Healey charged at the March event hosted by Schneiderman.
“Remarkably, she also announced, in advance, the findings of her investigation weeks before she even issued the [civil investigative demand],” Exxon’s lawyers wrote in their complaint, a copy of which was obtained by TheDCNF.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So in these dangerous times of Islamic extremism from the religion of “hate” what do we have in the news today? lets go after “conservative” “skeptics” and “deniers” who would dare challenge the religion of bull shit… AGW… but wait we cant call Jihadist “radical islam” but they can label political enemies by any name they want…. Chutzpah!
““Financial damages alone may be insufficient,” Schneiderman said. “The First Amendment does not give you the right to commit fraud.”
In order to prove fraud, you have to prove the defendant lied about something.
Exxon scientists speculating about the Earth’s climate, is not the same as telling a lie about the climate.
The AG’s are operating on a false [premis]: that CAGW is real, and [that they] are pretending that Exxon was covering this up, when, in fact, one cannot fraudulently hide something that doesn’t exist.
[Only one false premis? .mod]
Correct. The only ‘proof’ of CAGW is in models that failed to simulate the pause, which produce a non-existant tropical troposphere hot spot, and which produce sensitivity about 2x observed. Moreover, Exxon joint with others published over 100 papers on AGW and contributed to several IPCC iterations. For several years (since at least 2010 when they acquired XTO to become the largest US natural gas producer) Exxon has publicly supported a carbon tax, because it hurts coal 3x more than natural gas. All public information, no hidden secret research on CAGW. That is where Schneiderman’s Martin Act fishing expedition will fail. And the Martin Act staute of limitations in this case is 2 years.
The whole Merchant’s of Doubt tobacco analogy is based on a delusional warmunist premise that CAGW and tobacco (Big Oil, Big Tobacco) are equivalent. They aren’t at all from an evidentiary perspective. The AG’s either know or should know that already. Shows political grandstanding.
The harder the AG’s go at it, the worse it will end for them.
Their models not only haven’t predicted the future; they can’t even predict the past.
The lie has to lead to actual loss. If the ‘lies’ helped the stock price, there was no fraud.
Except under the NY Martin Act.
Crispin. If lies are used to raise the stock price, then the buyers were defrauded because they paid a higher price than they would have if the truth is known. Even if it overall goes up over time, they were still cheated out of some of their profits.
That’s not a valid tack in this argument.
Back in the days, I used to think maybe we should have women running the world. they would excell because they would feel under pressure to show their stuff and no old girl networks. I had a sister who was a genius and a very strong smart mother. I was very liberated in those days and mocked chauvinist blather by men who felt women weren’t up to the task.
Now, I’m scared sick at the prospect. I think they have already begun to take over and it seems they are largely of the socialist persuasion. Perhaps because of the activist role women rights types lived through. Maybe the nurturing instinct is too strong (nanny governmental tendency). I guess I invisioned a parade of Golda Meiers and Maggy Thatchers, and not Gloria Steinems and Naomi Orestes.
Hillary could be the end of the world. Ontario’s cabinet has a woman premier and is half women presiding over an agenda that would scare the hello of AL Gore. Their are more a nd more women mayors and governors and premiers and other top officials and all the dog catchers are still men. Political correctness is the new freedom of speech paradigm. We’re free but have to practise self censorship on most topics. Donald Trump isn’t crass or unusually gauche and insensitive. He’s just old fashioned.
Could the old boys and Senator McCarthy have been right? Perhaps they were visionaries.
IMO, this is “legalized extortion”. And if I was Exxon I would leave the U.S. Result would be loss of thousands of jobs which would include the Domino effects on individuals and small businesses.
If this is accomplished, then other companies are also at risk for this same kind of tactic.
If these lunatic Attorney Generals are allowed to continue like this we will see the development of climate sharia laws before long – just like attempted in California just recently. California legislature shelves their ugly attempt at killing the first amendment. If United States Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, had any integrity – she would have stopped these attacks on free thought. However, the executive branch in United States has been completely messed up. A culture of lying and deception, has been revealed in the last bastion of truth and decency – Department of Justice. State of Texas court order against The United States of America. This court order is a must read for all interested in the future of United States.
Here are the quotes I found most essential. This is the introduction to the court order:
“An exchange between two characters from a recent popular film exemplifies what this case is, and has been, about:
FBI Agent Hoffman: Don’t go Boy Scout on me. We don’t have a rulebook here.
Attorney James Donovan: You’re Agent Hoffman, yeah?
FBI Agent Hoffman: Yeah.
Attorney James Donovan: German extraction?
FBI Agent Hoffman: Yeah, so?
Attorney James Donovan: My name’s Donovan, Irish, both sides, mother and father. I’m Irish, you’re German, but what makes us both Americans? Just one thing . . . the rulebook. We call it the Constitution and we agree to the rules and that’s what makes us Americans. It’s all that makes us Americans, so don’t tell me there’s no rulebook . . . .”
“Whether it be the Constitution or statutory law, this entire case, at least in this Court, has been about allegiance to the rulebook. … The question addressed by this Court was whether the Government had to play by the rules. This Court held that it did. The Fifth Circuit has now also held that the Government must play by the rules, and, of course, that decision is now before the Supreme Court. It was no surprise to this Court, or quite frankly to any experienced legal observer, that this question would ultimately reach the Supreme Court. Consequently, the resolution of whether the Executive Branch can ignore and/or act contrary to existing law or whether it must play by the rulebook now rests entirely with that Court.”
Sorry, the link failed:
California legislature shelves their ugly attempt at killing the first amendment
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is just another Harvard lack-luster graduate trying to surf the Hillary wave into relevance. She is representative of the cancer that lilberals have become, and how dangerous they are to the Constitution of The United States. For them, it is Molotov cocktail time for our founding documents. That’s Harvard.
This sorry tale reminds us of an important fact: You will know the day when ‘renewable’ energy suppliers start making seriously renewable profits that are not derived from government subsidies, because that is the day ambulance-chasing lawyers will be all over them like a bad cold.
Lawyers generally aren’t stupid. As the famous bank robber allegedly said in response to the question about why he robbed banks: “Because that’s where the money is.”
I think I’ll have some fried quash for dinner.
Exxon’s complaint even notes how Maura basically announced the results of her investigation before she even sent her subpoena to the company.
Well, of course. The D.A.s of America have been out of control since the 50s at least. The courts are not a place where “fairness” or “justice” are found. The courts are where government law is wielded against the unfortunate.
They need to be disbarred.
They need to be barred. As in behind them.
“Schneiderman said. “The First Amendment does not give you the right to commit fraud.”” That means politicians, climate scientists, activists, the IPCC, etc., do not have the right to commit fraud. These AGs are probably making a lot of other people nervous.
The objective idiocy of the whole “Exxon knew” thing is the presumption that climate models were accurate in 1970. Climate models aren’t accurate now, much less 46 years ago.
Maura Healey has apparently not done any due diligence. She is either willfully ignorant (an impeachable offense, likely), shamefully incompetent (worthy of dismissal), or just plain stupid (how’d that Harvard thing go, again?). Along with all those other As G.
Yup. And on the Harvard thing, University hired Naomi Oreskes with lifetime tenure. Nuff said.
So that has had direct consequences concerning their considerable major giving effort focused on this 3x alumnus over the past decade. Zip, nada, nothing until Oreskes is gone. No matter what School within the university.
Agree with your position, Rud. Universities have fundamentally betrayed their institutional mission of dispassionate truth-seeking. It’s hard to believe their officers have done so unwittingly.
State universities in particular have violated their tenure agreement with the citizens, by politicizing their curricula. They no longer qualify for support with public money.
I believe that state governors should lower the financial boom on them, and make the administrations clean house, especially in the advocacy-riven culture studies departments.
With the MA legislature being almost 100% Democrat, there’s no way a Democrat AG is going to be disbarred. Especially when her crime benefits the Democrat party.
The AG’s are going to have to prove that CAGW exists, before they can prove Exxon tried to hide the fact.
The Climate Change Gurus have not been able to prove CAGW is real, so how much success can the AG’s have at trying to prove it? My guess would be: not much.
I would love to see them try the case of CAGW in a courtroom. That would be worth watching!
With our new and improved politicized judiciary, the judge will just stipulate that CAGW exists, as proven by the states experts. And proceed from there.
More evidence that AGW is religion, not science. It is a belief system and Healey’s statement, “We can all see today the troubling disconnect between what Exxon knew, what industry folks knew, and what the company and industry chose to share with investors and with the American public” requires no proof, it is simply accepted as fact by the believers. Objecting to her stand is just more evidence of conspiracy to her.
“Climate models aren’t accurate now, much less 46 years ago.”
Amen. “Begging the Question.” Where are the correct Predictions from Catastrophic CO2-Climate Change “Science”? Zero.
The present arguments by the CAGW camp use data sets that begin around 1979. The investigation into the communications of skeptics goes back 40 years (to 1976). Apparently anthropogenic climate change was proved back in 1976 and the cover up of climate science began three years before their favorite data set got its first data point.
Let’s see global cooling …the accepted science of the 1970’s , or the grossly inflated climate model projectionists of today . Who you going to believe ?
If the State of Massachusetts knew about the benefits of a warming world why didn’t they tell the public ?
On the other hand, if they thought the earth had a fever and humans were the cause why did they not outlaw the sale of gasoline ,natural gas and other fossil fuels ? Why haven’t they done it considering their pee their pants apparent concern ? Or is it just some lobbyist’s using their positions to try and shake down a company they decide to target . Why Exxon instead of every other end user of a legally produced and sold product ? Has Exxon already agreed to shut up/hurt feeling money and set the precedent for the next company to be targeted ?
Did the State of Massachusetts law makers ban the use of fossil fuels in all State buildings and in all State vehicles when they formed the opinion the world was warming and humans were the cause ? No ? Why would they then think one publically traded company is everyone’s mommy ?
What a transparent stunt to deflect attention and gold dig . I hope Exxon takes these clowns to the cleaners . carbon neutral of course .
Who cares what Exxon knows about anything . I would like to see the legal authority the elected lawmakers of Massachusetts gave the AG to pursue this fishing expedition and the laws they have passed to ban the use of fossil fuels if they think the public is at risk . Let’s see all the correspondence over the last 50 years that relates to climate change fear mongering . Include the global cooling scam of the 1970’s .
If they have not banned all fossil fuels and not protected the public with their knowledge then interest they are wide open to be sued as they have now acknowledged .
Let’s start a fund to harass the AG’s who ceaselessly promote and prolong this kind of pointless aggression. Can’t we sue them in Civil court and incur some personal expense for them? There has to be a way to turn the tables on this predatory behavior.
If you go after a company there will be a long litigation.
Without users, oil companies would not exist. It is better to start with someone who has CONFESSED that he knew that fossil fuels harm our future and kept using them. Such a person must be made an example, and jailed.
The first target should be the Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey. She has all but confessed that she was aware that her fossil fuel based lifestyle destroys the planet, yet she continued. Did she switch his heating to wind (which is all but missing in the winter) and solar (also missing) during the fierce February snowstorms? NO! Did she fly only on that 100% electric plane, which takes a month to cross the ocean? NO! People can put her at the scene of her environmental crime, in Massachusetts.
ALL the people who made a big thing about climate should be jailed first. Mens Rea.
For how long?
It does not make much of a difference, as long as it is at least one year and no fossil fuels are used for their cells. It’s the renewable energy motel in the winter: People check in, but they don’t check out…
********
Here is evidence that Healey HAS used more than wind.
A $11,000 home windmill produces $7 worth of electricity in its 20 years lifetime.
That’s THE BEST SELLING wind turbine.
Consumer Reports did a year and a third long study in Yonkers with a turbine for which the installation was vetted by the building company itself as being perfect. They got 40 cents worth of electricity during that period.
The kit comes with explicit warnings that your roof must be unusually strong to keep the thing from falling through your attic upon you during storms.
See
http://tinyurl.com/9aad5cm
titled
Recouping cost of wind turbine may take more than a lifetime
(more like the whole Homo Sapiens period)
I still think the endgame to all this is to set a precedent that prevents the Global Warming alarmists from being prosecuted for fraud.
It’s the process that is the punishment. It’s not clear what the crime is.
Yes, interesting insight
She has the cutest dimples. That’s how you get to be a really good AG.
If this nonsense drives down Exxon-Mobil stock, I’m going to buy some.
/Mr Lynn
I won’t have a word said against her – she’s a real dish
REALLY MAURA? Let talk about real scientific fraud shall we?
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/05/04/second-drug-lab-scandal-engulfs-state-criminal-justice-system/6Wib5YpC7FJNa5OaFsaebM/story.html