Previous post
A New York judge ruled Tuesday that the Attorney General had completely failed to show proof that Exxon Mobil hid facts about climate change from their investors.
Not long ago, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders went all in on lambasting Exxon Mobil for being so mean to the environment and operating as climate killers. Then there’s AOC and her grandstanding just last month. Insisting to a crowd of Bernie supporters that Exxon Mobil knew what it was doing way back in the 1970’s, she pointed fingers of blame at the company for this climate crisis we are supposedly in.
“”They dumped millions of dollars into lobbying a campaign of doubt,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “That is exactly why we have to acknowledge that the climate crisis is not an accident.”
“The reason we are in this crisis is because oil and gas has been one of the most profitable industries of the modern era,” she added.”
Remember her arm flapping diatribe last March? I do.
Exxon Mobil was such a bad guy that the State of New York decided to make an example of the company, and went after them for securities fraud. How does that tie into climate change? Well, New York’s stance on this was that Exxon defrauded their investors by hiding costs of greenhouse emissions from them.
““a Potemkin village to create the illusion that it had fully considered the risks of climate change regulation and it had factored those risks into its business operations.” The suit also claimed the company knew that “its representations were not supported by the facts and were contrary to its internal business practices.””
My goodness, such drama by the State of New York!
The lawsuit was such that it was attempting to hold Exxon Mobile responsible for not having a crystal ball as to the severity of climate change, and for not telling investors that climate change was going to be such a super duper nightmare for all of us.
Never mind that most of the climate change “science” is devoid of facts. Never mind the fact that much of the new technology of climate change is way more costly than that of oil and natural gas, and let’s just ignore that data used to support climate change is incredibly inconsistent.
According to AOC, Tomahawk Liz, and Bernie the Socialist, Exxon Mobil is BAD! and all climate change regulation is TERRIFIC! Even if said climate change regulation will bankrupt the world. Never mind that, we must do SOMETHING before the sky falls in 12 years, 18 months, 6 weeks, …never?
The judge’s decision, which you can read here, was HARSH. When a judge points out that the state’s witnesses aren’t credible, you know their presentation of the case was bad. Really bad.
Here's how the judge compared the credibility of the Exxon witnesses with the expert witness New York brought in, who argued that the announcement of California that it was opening an investigation into Exxon constituted evidence that Exxon had misled investors. pic.twitter.com/WqcnWUzzoI
— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) December 10, 2019
Some of the State’s witnesses in the case didn’t even understand the models they were supposed to be experts on! Not only that, but when one argued that a stock dump after the announcement meant the company was guilty…
The judge straight up scorns the New York expert witness who equated merely opening an investigation with evidence that Exxon had committed a crime. pic.twitter.com/ANagZm4gMr
— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) December 10, 2019
Oh gee, where in the world have we heard that ‘there there’ means guilty of bribery or obstruction or something? Can we say impeachment?
But I digress. The fact is, this was a major defeat to the New York Attorney General. Their spin essentially admits as much.
“James, however, said the case “laid out how Exxon made materially false, misleading and confusing representations to the American people about the company’s response to climate change regulations.”
“The oil giant never took seriously the severe economic impact that climate change regulations would have on the company, contrary to what they were telling the public,” the Democrat said in a statement.”
What Exxon Mobil was doing was attempting to plan ahead by evaluating POSSIBLE costs. Those costs were world wide regulatory costs, and costs specific to individual projects.
For some reason, the State of New York didn’t like that and went after the company. If the state was so interested in finding out if Exxon had harmed investors, how come no investors were called to testify? Could it be because none of the investors had a problem with Exxon?
This was a purely political move by the State of New York. They wanted to be the first to take down one of the climate bad guys and somehow save our planet by doing so. They failed big time.
Feature Photo Credit: Oil rig pump jack via Pixabay, cropped and modified
Joe in PNG says: What is it with Stalinist and show trials?
Kevin says: Hey, there was a big settlement that the NY Attorney won this week that you didn’t report on … Mr. Trump using his “non-profit” foundation to pay his personal debts. Who would have ever thought a President of the United States would be convicted of illegally using funds (not his money mind you, but money given by other people) to pay his personal debts. Even money meant to go to our veterans.
the NY Attorney General … you win some and you lose some. Mr. Trump loses most things.
The word “grifter” comes to mind.
John C. says: The oil companies make a profit of 8% per gallon of gasoline they sell, which is a rather low profit margin compared to most industries, though of course they sell LOTS of gasoline. The federal, state, and local governments collectively take 19.5% of the price of gasoline in the form of taxes. And the government has the gall to complain about oil company profits.
Gerard M. Delaney says: “They wanted to be the first to take down one of the climate bad guys and somehow save our planet by doing so.”
They also wanted to be the first to tap Exxonmobil’s till.
GWB says: the State of New York didn’t like that
Pfft. That wasn’t what NY state didn’t like at all. What they didn’t like was there was money out there – sweet, sweet lucre – they couldn’t get their hands on. So a lawsuit – just like they railroaded the tobacco companies – was dreamed up with the current witchery (“climate change”!) as the fault, and shoved into the maw of the judicial establishment in hopes that the black robes would acquiesce and steal that money from the big, bad company (’cause all big companies are bad, you know).
Then the Democrats who brought the suit would have more lucre to spend on their re-election efforts (being incumbents), so they could sue the next big company, for more money, to get re-elected again. Until there’s no one left to sue – but of course, they’ll be retired and living in luxury by then.
They’re not interested in saving Mother Nature at all. Just in exploiting it to achieve more money and more power. Hey, that golden egg goose – like Epstein – isn’t going to kill itself.
5 Comments