The Climate Change Police Head To Dallas To Assault Exxon-Mobile

And they are particularly happy to trash the 1st Amendment while being climahypocrites

(Watchdog.org) Here are two questions the climate change police declined to answer Monday at the anti-ExxonMobil press conference:

  1. Did you use only renewable fuels to put on your #ExxonKnew coalition confab?
  2. Do you believe groups and individuals that don’t agree with your climate-change agenda have First Amendment rights?

The answer to both questions, of course, is no.

Renewable fuels have limited reach in a world still dependent on coal, oil, and natural gas for its energy needs. Even the most myopic climate change agenda cheerleader ought to know that. The technology used to put on the press call, the Facebook pages and other social media they use to get their message out, the jets they boarded to travel, all are powered by fossil fuels.

And these global warming guardians on Monday’s press call made it clear they have no time for free speech when it comes to “climate change deniers.”

There’s a shareholders meeting in Dallas today, and the Warmists are there protesting, demanding answers. They should answer the two above questions. You know most did not walk, bike, or drive an all electric vehicle.

Further, as we’ve seen, these same people who screech about their First Amendment rights to accuse others of misconduct (and burn the flag, etc and so on), want to shut down the 1A rights of people who do not buy into the Cult of Climastrology. We’ve seen this time and time again. Now they’re doing it with investigations and subpoenas from Attorney Generals, in what are Lawfare fishing expeditions.

I love that one. Beyond the whopping 12 people, they want to arrest a company. With their astroturfed signs.

And there’s a big takeaway: the use of force, preferably Governmental. But, hey, don’t call Warmists fascists, ya know.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

29 Responses to “The Climate Change Police Head To Dallas To Assault Exxon-Mobile”

  1. John says:

    Teach the 1st Anendment does not protect those that are committing fraud
    This is why tobacco sellers had to stop lying
    Now as a former smoking addict and current nicotine addict I would think that this argument woukd be meaningful
    And decentralized solar power gives governments mire power ?????????

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    Guess they’re running out of settlement money for funding their leftwing cohorts.

    https://politicallyshort.com/2016/05/22/the-obama-regimes-criminal-syndicate/

  3. gitarcarver says:

    Teach the 1st Anendment does not protect those that are committing fraud

    You keep saying that as if it applies to this case.

    Are you really saying that disagreement in science is fraud?

    If you are so interested in prosecuting lawbreakers, why not go after the AG’s? It is they who have broken the law. It is they who have colluded as a government official to deny free speech. (That’s the first law they broke.) It is they who advanced the theory of prosecuting Exxon based on RICO statutes despite knowing that the statutes didn’t fit and could never be proven. (That’s the second law they broke.) Then there is the fact that the AG’s hired an outside firm to help with the case. That firm has a financial interest in the outcome of the case. That hiring is prohibited by law yet the AG’s went and did it.

    You should stick to commenting on things you know about like….. ummmm….. like……

    Oh well, just go ahead and comment as your comments show how ignorant you are.

  4. Dana says:

    I wonder what would happen if they actually got their way? If Exxon and the other petroleum companies just shut down, the warmists would all go cold and hungry.

  5. drowningpuppies says:

    Meanwhile,

    In accepting the $100 million, President Bill Clinton hailed Lundin’s contribution, saying “today’s generous support by the Lundin Group is to be applauded because it demonstrates the potential of this global initiative to capture the imagination and support of the mining sector.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/24/exclusive-clinton-foundation-got-100m-from-blood-minerals-firm/#ixzz49gfvrrSk

  6. david7134 says:

    John,
    Actually fraud is prevalent in the climate religion, that is the people that support this religion commit fraud with the so called “science” and the position papers that are published. If we did half the things in medicine that these professors do, we would be in jail in minutes.

  7. Jeffery says:

    The first amendment does not cover lying to investors and stockholders to keep your share price up. That’s known as fraud. If the corporate entity lying to stockholders pays someone to help in the fraud, that someone may also be committing a crime. This is not new.

    Deniers can still lie all they want about global warming without penalty. You just can’t defraud people.

  8. Jeffery says:

    gc is playing dumb. At least we hope he’s playing.

    Exxon is not being investigated for scientific disagreement, they are being investigated for perpetrating a massive fraud on their shareholders. If – if they knew that global warming was real and caused by burning fossil fuels, and if – if they knowingly advised their shareholders that the science was incomplete or controversial, reassuring investors to keep investing – then if the bottom falls out of their stock price because of global warming worries, Exxon may have committed fraud. Lots of “if’s”, but the early signs justify an investigation.

    Crooked Teach and other conservabloggers can lie and deny to their hearts’ content. They are protected by the first amendment. But the amendment does not protect fraud such as stock price manipulation.

  9. gitarcarver says:

    The first amendment does not cover lying to investors and stockholders to keep your share price up.

    That would be an interesting (and easily refutable) point if the AGs were suing under laws covering stocks. They are not.

    Exxon is not being investigated for scientific disagreement, they are being investigated for perpetrating a massive fraud on their shareholders.

    That would be an interesting point if it were true. It’s not, so it is moot.

    Lots of “if’s”, but the early signs justify an investigation.

    You just killed your own argument. There are not only “lots of if’s” but there is no evidence to institute an investigation. There is no probable cause or just cause to demand records from companies.

    The AG’s have an agenda. The first part is about money. After spending and misappropriating the settlement of the tobacco case (which is NOT similar to this case at all) the AG’s are facing budget problems in their states. This is not about fraud. This is about money. In pursuing the money, the AG’s are seeking to restrict what is clearly free speech and protected under the First Amendment.

    Even the tobacco case was never about fraud or the alleged RICO statutes. The head lawyer said the case was never about winning, it was about settling.

    But it is not surprising that Jeffery supports AG’s who are breaking the law because he supports suppressing any dissension that shows that his religion of AGW is a lie.

  10. drowningpuppies says:

    Git,

    Golf clap…

  11. jl says:

    “This is why tobacco sellers hadn’t stop lying.” And John botches another so-called comparison. Tobacco use led to lung cancer, which was killing people. Our bogus “climate change” is killing no one, as there is absolutely no proof that added CO2 is the only cause of deaths. Further, as John frequently uses the tobacco comparison when talking of climate change, let’s take that logic to it’s end. Tobacco was never banned, but it was forced to require a warning label. The astrologers, however, want all fossil fuels not be used anymore, or banned in the end. So John, to use your comparison correctly we’d simply have to place a warning label on all fossil fuel products such as “this product can cause imaginary global warming, use with caution.” The fossil fuels, like tobacco, therefore wouldn’t be phased out, but a warning label would be required and people could use them if they wanted to. And of course all of that would be predicted on finding proof that extra CO2 is dangerous. Proof, not speculation. You really didn’t think think this one out, did you John?

  12. Jeffery says:

    Kleagle-dum is back to fluffing gc. But I thought gc was caucasian. My mistake.

  13. Jeffery says:

    gc,

    Fraud. Is. Not. Protected. Speech.

    There. Is. No. 1st. Amendment. Issue., Except. In. The. Fevered. Minds. Of. The. Denier. Pseudo-victims.

    Of. Course. The. Accused. Doesn’t. Want. An. Investigation.

  14. drowningpuppies says:

    Ah, yes, once again the little guy who exaggerates often has nothing meaningful to express except his fondness for all things gay.

    Perhaps the little guy should search for a little trannny bitch by the name of Nyquisha and/or a prepubescent boy similar to his grandson and indulge himself with his twisted little fantasies.

  15. Jeffery says:

    Now, now Kleagle-dum, don’t get your silk delicates in a twist, we were just kidding.

    We realize you’re incapable of making any meaningful contributions.

    Have you learned your lesson about expressing your white supremacist beliefs?

  16. gitarcarver says:

    Fraud. Is. Not. Protected. Speech.

    We all understand that Jeffery. The issue is that there is no fraud. That’s the point. So you can keep saying the obvious but it doesn’t fit the facts.

    Additionally, the AG’s were advised that what they were pursuing (a violation of the RICO statute) did not meet the facts in this case yet they went ahead nonetheless.

    Twenty-nine other state AG’s (those who are committed to the rights of people) released a statement saying in part:

    This scientific and political debate is healthy, and it should be encouraged. It should not be silenced with threats of criminal prosecution by those who believe that their position is the only correct one and that all dissenting voices must therefore be intimidated and coerced into silence. It is inappropriate for State Attorneys General to use the power of their office to attempt to silence core political speech on one of the major policy debates of our time.

    It should also be noted that the original subpoena from Virgin Islands AG Walker is out in left field because Exxon has no presence in the Virgin Islands. It owns no land, has no offices or employees in the territory. In short, the Virgin Islands has no standing to subpoena anything because of a lack of standing in the case they are trying to make.

    Furthermore, as I said earlier, the acts of the AG’s are outside the law. What they are doing is criminal.

    Why do you continually and falsely assert that this is a fraud case when there is no evidence and yet give the AG’s a pass when their illegal actions are in front of your face?

    Another problem is that no one has been able to explain where the so called “fraud” occurred. You assert that Exxon lied to stock holders, but that is a SEC violation. Even if your assertion is true, it would not rise to the level of fraud.

    You are wrong on the law and wrong on the facts, Jeffery.

    While you want to sit there and keep posting the same lie by saying the case is about fraud, the majority of AG’s disagree with you. The ACLU disagree with you. The League of Concerned Scientists disagree with you. The US Today disagrees with you. The New York Times disagrees with you. The Washington Post and Wall Street Journal disagrees with you. The LA Times disagrees with you. I could go on and on with those who disagree with you, but the point is made. The only people that don’t believe that this is not a First Amendment issue are those deeply wedded to the religion of AGW, and even some of them know it to be a First Amendment case.

    Of. Course. The. Accused. Doesn’t. Want. An. Investigation.

    You’re right. That is why the attorneys who have a “pay to play” deal in place with the AG’s are trying to say that the agreements they made with the AG’s are protected work product. Why is that important? Why don’t they want the agreements disclosed? It is because they violated the law in making those agreements.

    Emails have come out from FOIA requests showing that the AG’s met with outside groups to silence Exxon. The question of “how to silence Exxon” was answered with “let’s sue under RICO and CICO statutes.” The groups didn’t say “we believe that Exxon is violating the law.” They said “how can we stop Exxon and their research?” It is clear that the AG’s and groups wanted to silence Exxon.

    Therefore only an idiot could believe that this is about “fraud.”

    So you have said a couple of things that I actually agree with. First, fraud is not protected speech. By law, the case is not about fraud, so continually bringing that up is just childish on your part. Secondly, accused don’t want to be investigated is also true. People and companies that are innocent of any wrong doing should not be investigated.

    You are wrong on the facts, wrong on the law and wrong in your assertions.

  17. drowningpuppies says:

    Have you learned your lesson about expressing your white supremacist beliefs?

    -that delusional little guy who exaggerates often

    And what would that be, oh great expert on transgenders, dicks, pedophilia, and shoeshine boys?

    Please share.

  18. Jeffery says:

    Kleagle-dum,

    Tell us more about shoe shine boys. Do you think that President Obama is a shoe shine boy?

    Regarding affirmative action presidents:

    Did you mean W? He certainly would not have president except that his dad was.

    Did you mean Stumpy? Without his family millions he’d just be another mobster/grifter from NY.

    Mittens Romney? Luckily his daddy was a governor and gave Mittens a bunch of money.

  19. drowningpuppies says:

    Please continue.

    Everyone here at the Cove breathlessly awaits more of your awesome intelligent comments.

    Also, please share your intimate and unlimited knowledge of transgenderism, incest and pedophilia.

    We’ll wait.

  20. gitarcarver says:

    Also, please share your intimate and unlimited knowledge of transgenderism, incest and pedophilia.

    Don’t forget the rape that Jeffery has admitted to,

  21. drowningpuppies says:

    Hopefully that awesome little guy will provide his reviews of all the best gay/tranny bars
    on Manchester Ave.

    People at the Cove want to know.

  22. Jeffery says:

    The first amendment does not shield corporations from fraud charges. A corporation cannot lie to its prospective investors and current shareholders. It’s against the law.

    If you want a precedent look up Peabody Settlement.

    Peabody has agreed to file revised Securities and Exchange Commission disclosures affirming that “concerns about the environmental impacts of coal combustion … could significantly affect demand for our products or our securities,” said Schneiderman, who characterized the agreement as the first of its kind.

    “As a publicly traded company whose core business generates massive amounts of carbon emissions, Peabody Energy has a responsibility to be honest with its investors and the public about the risks posed by climate change, now and in the future,” said Schneiderman in a statement announcing the agreement. “I believe that full and fair disclosures by Peabody and other fossil fuel companies will lead investors to think long and hard about the damage these companies are doing to our planet.”

    You have to ask yourselves what leverage NY AG Schneiderman had over Peabody to get them change their fraudulent ways.

    Kleagle dum – you seem to know a lot about the gay scene in St. Louis. You’re not that guy in the gold lame short shorts who walks his little spaniel, “Joe Cocker”, down Manchester are you? If so, you’ve reached that age where you should probably put a shirt on.

    The Grove is the business district along Manchester that boasts restaurants and clubs, many LGBT themed, but also including Sweetie Pie’s (see Welcome to Sweetie Pie’s on OWN) soul food restaurant (try the baked pork chops, greens and sweet tea). Ten years ago the area was emblematic of urban blight, but has been revitalized by hard working and risk taking entrepreneurs. That entire urban neighborhood now contains several newly built or renovated biotech incubators, bars, coffee shops, a microbrewery, a brand new IKEA store and is anchored by two major medical centers, not to mention Forest Park – recently hailed as the top urban park in America!

    And this is your last chance to prove your fading white supremacist chops or you’ll lose your appellation!

    guttercleaner – Did I admit to rape in the same thread you admitted that you were convicted of having and sharing child pornography?

  23. Liam Thomas says:

    WAIT. Look at their clothes…yep made with fossil fuels.

    Look at their signs…..yep made with fossil fuels.

    Look at the ink on the signs….again fossil fuels.

    A girl wearing glasses….yep again fossil fuels…

    One gal appears obese….all that food was farmed, packaged and brought to market with fossil fuels…..Okay Ill say it….shes FAT….go on a diet.

    Is that a hat I see……yep fossil fuels from ground to his nitwit head.

    And of course there is the sign…..powered by either Fossil fueled electricity….batteries or perhaps they are break sticks…..

    YEP you got it…….all made with fossil fuels.

    When the day comes that alternatives really make a difference then Ive no problem with shutting down the Exxons of the world but until that day………

    AGW are full of moronic communists with an anti democratic anti capitalist agenda.

  24. Liam Thomas says:

    “SHUT UP!” screams the evironazi as a Truther tries to express his 1st amendment rights in America. “SILENCE YOU TOOL!”

    “WE WILL SUE YOUR ASS INTO BANKRUPTCY IF YOU DARE SPEAK YOUR MIND AGAIN!”

    To wit:

    “We will have you fired from your job. We will boycott your company if you speak out against anything WE BELIEVE IN….we will intimidate you with FEAR and LOATHING…..WE will silence YOU….or you will RUE the day you ever were born.”

    The left says the right uses fear to get votes. I say the left has cornered the market on fear mongering and the big difference has always been the left uses violence and civil disobedience to get their messages across. it is why the right is and has been losing the battle for the hearts and minds for decades now.

  25. Dana says:

    Mr Thomas, the warmists are just today’s version of the Occupiers, the capitalist-hating students nobody would hire because they weren’t as good as their classmates, the socialists who were using every capitalist made product except soap.

    Hypocrisy has always been an identification point on the left.

  26. gitarcarver says:

    Unlike you Jeffery, I actually followed the Peabody case and it is nothing like the Exxon case.

    Of course, that fact would skip by you because you don’t care about rights, the law or anything that gets in the way of your false religion of AGW.

    The AG’s are seeking to suppress and criminalize speech they disagree with. They said in their press conference that there was no reason for anyone not to believe in AGW which is one of the reasons they are suing.

    Disagreement is a First Amendment issue.

    The Supreme Court has already ruled that it is not up to the government to decide what is true or not when it comes to science and other matters of public debate.

    It is interesting that you use the Peabody settlement as a model for your beliefs as it was New AG Schneiderman who “negotiated” (actually extorted) the agreement. What is interesting is that Schneiderman is known to hate businesses and wants them all regulated by the government. He got his butt kicked on a non-starter case of ingredients in nutritional supplements. In that case, Schneiderman claimed one thing but the law and science said another.

    Science doesn’t matter to people like him which is not surprising.

    You like backing liars and criminals. Birds of a feather and all that.

    As to the rape claim, you said it, not me. It is just hysterical watching you say something and not knowing the ramifications of your statements.

    Do your kids know that you are a rapist? Or have you hidden that from them too?

  27. drowningpuppies says:

    Kleagle dum – you seem to know a lot about the gay scene in St. Louis.

    -that little guy who exaggerates often

    Nah, little guy, just a quick Google search but thanks for your personal review.
    I’m sure you and Nyquisha have spent many nights enjoying that scene.

  28. Jeffery says:

    gitarcarver,

    And you admitted to child pornography. 3 years. You got off easy.

  29. Hi there every one, here every one is sharing these kinds of experience, thus it’s
    pleasant to read this webpage, and I used to pay a visit
    this blog daily.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10550 access attempts in the last 7 days.