Russell Cook
I don’t just write about these things, I try to get something done. Upon learning the news on Feb 23 that the Supreme Court will be adding the effort to hear the concerns about the Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County situation, I fired off the verbatim email below to the main lawyer representing the energy companies (I spelled out the individual web links instead of embedding each one as I’ve done below; the bold highlighted words below where highlighted the same way in my email).
It bothers me no end how the defendants in the “ExxonKnew” lawsuits argue endlessly on esoteric jurisdiction technicalities when the golden opportunity to outright kill each one of these lawsuits is practically right in front of them in every lawsuit where the claim is that they ran ‘disinformation campaigns.’ No, it’s the enviro-activists who are putting out the disinformation, and this whole lawfare effort is deserving of deep investigation for fraud activity by the Department of Justice. I don’t just write about that suggestion, either; I’ve put in to major tip efforts to the DoJ about it.
—————————————————————-
Mr Shanmugam,
I just learned of the news about SCOTUS scheduling a hearing over the climate cases.
Forgive me for the bluntness of my question, born out of frustration from my own documenting of the fatal faults in the current “ExxonKnew” lawsuits ever since they started appearing in 2017:
Are the defendants in these cases literally unaware that the core accusation elements within essentially all of them in one form or another (Boulder v Suncor contains the false accusation against skeptic climate scientist Dr Willie Soon, apparently plagiarized out of the 2017 San Francisco v BP filing are all completely without merit?
- These lawsuits make claims that two leaked memo sets – the notorious “reposition global warming” and the notorious “victory will be achieved” sets which were never implemented anywhere;
- These lawsuits claim particular old newspaper advertorials prove disinformation campaigns happen where two of those ads were never actually published anywhere and the third ad that was published is disingenuously cropped to wipe out ad text that contains no disinformation;
- These lawsuits make claims about Dr Willie Soon accepting Exxon bribes that are so false that they may stray into epic defamation territory (“List of the Climate Lawsuits Falsely Accusing Dr Willie Soon of Taking Exxon Bribes“)
So . . . . why is it not argued that these lawsuits should be dismissed because they do not present a prima facie case that ‘industry disinformation campaigns employing skeptic scientists’ happened?? Why is it not suggested that the collective climate litigation lawfare efforts should be referred to the Department of Justice as possible instances of widespread fraud activity? (please see: “The Plagiarism Problem Plaguing the ‘ExxonKnew’ Lawfare Lawsuits — Summary for Policymakers“)
Again, forgive my frustration on this matter. Set aside the angles about dubious science and Federal vs state jurisdiction – plaintiffs hand their heads on a silver platter to defendants over the blatantly false political accusations in these lawsuits. Please do feel free to ask me any questions you have about my decade-long work on this narrow angle of the climate issue. There’s much more to it all, I can elaborate at huge depth.
– Russell Cook
GelbspanFiles.com
—————————————————————-
I have my fun with popular movie lines in this blog occasionally to drive home points concerning the climate issue. The image below is one of those, the ‘bad guy’ in a particular movie who nevertheless had a line I can turn 180° against the promulgators of the “crooked skeptics” accusation. They think they are the good guy “Equalizer” bringing ‘justice to ClimaChange™ victims, and if they knew about me, they’d think I’m the bad guy. I’m not. I’m a threat to their entire agenda, as will be any major people with influence who can put a stop to all the lies and defamation and actual disinformation in the climate issue.
