Kamala Harris Lied About #ExxonKnew Lies

Guest “liar, liar, pants on fire” by David Middleton


Climate activists are calling out presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) for saying on national television that she had sued ExxonMobil. At last night’s CNN climate forum, in the midst of pandering to climate activists, Sen. Harris falsely claimed she had sued ExxonMobil. But the climate activists that had pushed her to do just that were the quickest to call her out on her lie – oops!


For the record, Harris never sued ExxonMobil. Several biased media outlets said she did when she served as California’s Attorney General, because they were trying to make it seem like there was momentum in the #ExxonKnew campaign, but she never did. Her successor, Xavier Becerra, has also declined to open an investigation, even when he was threatened by a primary challenger who campaigned on the issue.


It goes without saying that even if she had investigated ExxonMobil, she would have been hard pressed to find anything to prosecute them over. The original #ExxonKnew reporting has been thoroughly debunked by editorial boardslegal scholars, and us


In addition to disappointing climate activists, Harris is also unlikely to gain the support of any American who supports affordable, reliable, clean-burning energy. “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” she said at the CNN forum, adding that she’s “prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal.”

Last night was a big misstep for Sen. Harris, who was hoping to revitalize her campaign by talking tough on climate. But by rewriting her resume to paste over a major sore point for activists, she managed to alienate that constituency as well as all those who oppose misguided lawsuits against energy producers.

Energy In Depth EID Climate

How can you tell if Democrat is lying about energy and/or climate change?

Their lips are moving. Is it any surprise that Kamala Harris would lie about her résumé? No.

Little Oil vs. the Democrat-Climate Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization

EID Climate is a project of the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA). IPAA is “little oil”, which is actually pretty big in aggregate…

Unlike “little oil,” which produces results, #ExxonKnew produces nothing but lies and their own legal defeats…

NY Attorney General Defies Judge’s Order in Exxon Case

What Did Exxon Know and When Did They Know It?

This is the sort of thing “Exxon knew” years before Al Gore & Jimbo Hansen invented Gorebal Warming…

What Exxon knew during “The Ice Age Cometh.”

By 1978, Exxon knew that Gorebal Warming was 97% horst schist and that future climate models would fail miserably.

By 1982, Exxon’s “brilliant climate modelers” (/SARC) predicted that, apart from the recent El Niño, HadCRUT4 would remain within the “range of natural fluctuations (climatic noise) for at least the next 40 years.

Exxon: The Fork Not Taken

An amazing feat, considering that “the first-ever synthesis of land and marine temperature data – i.e., the first global temperature record” didn’t exist before 1989.

Further Reading

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 1)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part Deux, “Same as it ever was.”)

What did ExxonMobil Know and when did they know it? (Part 3, Exxon: The Fork Not Taken

“Smoke & Fumes”… The dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

“Smoke & Fumes,” Part Deux: Exxon Knew “The entire theory of climatic changes by CO2 variations is questionable.”

Even dumber than the dumbest attack on ExxonMobil evah’

What Did Shell Know and When Did They Know It?

The Guardian: “Climate change denial won’t even benefit oil companies soon”… Is it even grammatically possible to deny climate change?

NY Attorney General Defies Judge’s Order in Exxon Case

HuffPost: The Dumbest #ExxonKnew Article… EVAH!

ExxonKnew Epic Fail: Oil Companies DID NOT build “their rigs to account for sea-level rise”

Defending Mann’s Hockey Stick because #ExxonKnew

Featured Image

Humble Oil eventually became ExxonMobil

Humble Oil was founded in Humble, Texas in 1911. In 1919, Standard Oil of New Jersey acquired a 50% stake in Humble Oil. They acquired the other 50% in 1959. Eventually all of the affiliates were merged into Exxon Corporation in 1973 and ultimately merged with Mobil Oil Corporation, a descendant of Standard Oil Company of New York, in 1999 to become ExxonMobil (Texas State Historical Association).

46 thoughts on “Kamala Harris Lied About #ExxonKnew Lies

  1. Are implosions louder than explosions? Does it depend on where you are standing? What does it feel like to be the person who implodes?

  2. Whatever else you might have expected, don’t expect honesty from Kamala Karris. She rose to current status through feral, unethical maneuvers. It appears her reputation has finally caught up with her however, as her campaign for the US presidential nomination is sinking rapidly.

    • There is just something about the way she speaks. It is hard to explain.

      I listen to podcasts where they often incorporate audio clips of her speaking. She comes across like an idiot who is talking down to her audience.

      She is condescendingly stupid.

  3. Harris has a really amusing manner on TV. Particularly, when she puts on her “cross-examination prosecutor” act. She obviously thinks it makes her look smart but in my opinion it makes her come across as stupid.

    • My brother, a lawyer, passed this bit of knowledge to me:
      Generally the first rule of litigation is that during a proceeding, a lawyer never asks a question of a witness/respondent that they don’t already know the answer to.
      The issue with Ms. Harris is that she ‘thinks’ she knows the answers, but she is utterly wrong.

  4. Her lie about the filibuster rule in the U.S. Senate was obvious too.
    The Senate Majority controls the rules in the Senate, not the President. So a President Kamala Harris would have ZERO constitutional authority in that matter as the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled 9-0 that the internal rules of Congress are up to Congress and Congress alone to decide. It is not even a partisan issue, as every Justice agreed that was the case.

    But most of her already ignorant Liberal audience of Billy Madisons was left even more ignorant by her saying she would abolish the Filibuster as President.
    I award her 1x Billy Madison for saying that.
    Only 1x…. because when you are that ignorant, even 1,000 Billy Madison gaffes can’t really matter when you are that stupid, sort of like physicists pressing Absolute 0 K in solid matter physics.

  5. I’ve been a fan of this site for many years. Many thanks to Mr. Watts, the mods & all the contributors. I never contribute because I don’t know enough but have learned a lot. I know it’s hard to resist but another great article had to add Gorebal in it. I get it but I have several Democrat friends & family that probably voted for Gore. It’s because of the snark that I’m reluctant to send folks to this site. It would immediately turn them off and stop any chance to make our case.

    • Joseph, If your friends are that sensitive, it may help to broaden their shoulders coming here. You should encourage them to come and visit the real world more often.

    • Joseph,
      I get your point, and I too get tired of the snark sometimes, especially the old worn-out stuff. But I have to say that this particular site has very little of that compared to most news sites that allow comments, facebook, twitter, etc. where the hate and vitriol is as dense as a neutron star. Honestly, your family and friends would be much better off here because at least they will learn new things along the way while being offended only rarely. And if their skins are really that thin, maybe they should consider staying off the Internet; it’s often a very uncivil place.

    • Two Aggies were driving north on SH 14, as they passed through Mexia, they started arguing about how to pronounce the name of the town: Mex-ee-yaa or Meh-hay-ya. So they pulled over at a fast food joint and asked the person at the counter, “Ma’am, how do you pronounce the name of this place?”. She very slowly answered, ” Day-ree Ka-ween.”

  6. @ David Middleton

    “How can you tell if Democrat is lying about energy and/or climate change?

    Their lips are moving”

    No David, get it right, that is the test for ALL politicians.

      • I agree strongly with David Middleton. Yes we know politicians are known to be liars. But, since Trump came in office, the level of disinformation from the left media has spread like a virus amongst the Democrat party… and they have the support of the media to lie blatantly to a pre warmed audience. The Dem Party is wholey dishonest down to almost every detail of every issue we face today. I stand by my comments.

    • I can tell a politician just by walking down the street, their noses appear much longer than everyone else’s!

    • “…No David, get it right, that is the test for ALL politicians…”

      Not all Democrats are politicians.

    • Yeah, we haven’t even gotten to that part of her life yet, have we. 🙂

      Perhaps her personal life won’t be an issue as she seems to be losing political traction already.

      The Democrats sure do have a weak field, which is a good thing for our personal freedoms. The bad news is the Leftwing Media still has too much influence and is relentless in trying to tear down Trump and conservatives.

      We won’t know if they are successful or not until Nov. 2020. After that, we will all have a better understanding of the situation we are in with regard to who holds the political power in the United States. My bet is on the Silent Majority. The same one that elected Ronald Reagan..

      • My bet is on massive voting fraud. The Dim leadership has already shown they believe “the end justifies the means.” What have they got to lose?

  7. What puzzles me is that politicians who are under close scrutiny are stupid enough to make false statements on matters of fact that can easily be checked. It does not inspire confidence in their promises for the future.

    • Call it an extreme form of “win the day” politics perfected by the Clintons no matter the truth. Now it can be abbreviated to “win the moment” in their minds, again no matter the truth. Of course that requires an assumption of extreme ignorance on the part of the viewers and near-zero attention span audiences.

    • I think the fear is that if they say “I don’t know”, they look uninformed. Personally, I’d rather appear “uninformed” than “ill-informed”.

      • Perhaps the best answer may be the most truthful:
        “There are many conflicting opinions and reports regarding this subject, and I have yet to fully inform myself to take a position.”

      • I worked as a teaching assistant and whenever a question was asked to which we didn’t know the answer, the correct response was “I don’t know. I’ll find out.”

  8. If Leftists told the truth about their failed ideology, power grabs and the $teilli9ns they waste every year, they’d never get elected, so they lie about pretty much everything…

    For example, Leftists were screaming all year the 2019 Arctic Ice Minimum would be the lowest evaaaa, but two days ago, it hit its minimum, and it was about 900,000 KM^2 larger than the 2012 Arctic minimum:


    DMI’s Average Arctic Surface temps just fell to -3C, so Arctic Sea Ice will start to increase rapidly from today.

    Of course the MSM won’t mention this fact so the initial lie will continue to be believed…

    Another Leftist lie silently bites the dust…

  9. Exxon knew their oil and gas would help make the US an economic powerhouse, raising standards of living for all Americans. Shame on them. They knew it would help provide us with the strongest military, able to attack and destroy (with help) the Nazi war machine. Shame on them. They knew it would continue to power our country well into the 21st century, and beyond. Shame on them. What they didn’t know about was fracking, because it hadn’t been invented yet. Shame on them – they should have cleaned up and dusted off that crystal ball of theirs. They have one, right?

  10. Rod Evans

    Of course folks will see & probably expect snarky comments from folks on our side of the fence. I just thought a Gorebal mention dampened a well written, well researched article which is what they would read & hopefully pay attention to.

  11. Big companies – not only in energy – always shake the tree to see what might fall down. I call it forward-thinking identification of potential risks. This does not mean they believe that those things will happen or even that they might happen. They know that activist groups will happily jump on any bandwaggon to hurt them and identifying such causes – no matter how ridiculous hey might always be – ahead of time might turn out to be advantageous. Know the enemy. That’s not collusion, that’s not concealing evidence, that’s not fraudulent, that’s not criminal. That’s prudent planning. But what Mrs. Harris did was blatantly lying. If you go to bed with dogs, mind the fleas.

  12. I remember when Nixon used the term, “silent majority”, and I’d thought ever since that he invented it, but it seems to have more history to it than that:
    From Wikipedia:
    This article is about the political phrase. For other uses, see Silent majority (disambiguation).
    The silent majority is an unspecified large group of people in a country or group who do not express their opinions publicly.[1] The term was popularized by U.S. President Richard Nixon in a November 3, 1969, speech in which he said, “And so tonight—to you, the great silent majority of my fellow Americans—I ask for your support.”[2] In this usage it referred to those Americans who did not join in the large demonstrations against the Vietnam War at the time, who did not join in the counterculture, and who did not participate in public discourse. Nixon along with many others saw this group of Middle Americans as being overshadowed in the media by the more vocal minority.

    Preceding Nixon by half a century, it was employed in 1919 by Warren G. Harding’s campaign for the 1920 presidential nomination. Before that, the phrase was used in the 19th century as a euphemism referring to all the people who have died, and others have used it before and after Nixon to refer to groups of voters in various nations of the world.

Comments are closed.