{"id":237809,"date":"2023-01-05T10:45:22","date_gmt":"2023-01-05T09:45:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=237809"},"modified":"2023-01-05T10:45:28","modified_gmt":"2023-01-05T09:45:28","slug":"municipalities-of-puerto-rico-v-exxon-mobil-et-al-part-2-rico-teering","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=237809","title":{"rendered":"Municipalities of Puerto Rico v. Exxon Mobil, et al. Part 2: RICO-teering"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Russell Cook<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bad enough that this lawsuit filing from the Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman LLC law firm has a no-win appearance of being either a mismanaged effort guided by the Sher Edling law firm without any disclosure of that partnership, or it appears to be a spectacularly inept and possibly unethical plagiarizing of the accusation content and other bits from the 16 boilerplate copy Sher Edling lawsuits<\/a>. I detailed all of that in my Part 1 blog post<\/a> (handily reproduced at WUWT<\/a>, enabling me to reach a wider reading audience).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Exponentially worse for Milberg Coleman is the widespread news assertions that their lawsuit filing \u201cis unique\u201d because it is \u201cthe first climate case against fossil fuel companies alleging harms against cities as a class of plaintiffs, and the first climate case to include Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims<\/em><\/a>\u201d as if this tactic is some kind of new idea. Many \u2018news\u2019 outlets belched out this RICO idea<\/a> without questioning anything about it. It seems this mob is oblivious to the central hallmark of far-leftists, namely how they project what they do<\/em><\/a> as accusations of what their political opposites do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why is all of this bad for Milberg Coleman? Because their RICO tactic doesn\u2019t point to anything done by \u2018Big Coal & Oil\u2019 and skeptic climate scientists, it instead points an arrow the size of Texas at one of the core promulgators<\/strong> of the \u201ccrooked skeptic scientists\u201d accusation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meaning Naomi Oreskes. She\u2019s not just some person who invented the anti-science idea of a \u201c100%<\/strong> scientific consensus<\/a>\u201d for catastrophic anthropogenic global warming<\/em><\/strong> (CAGW), who penned a book essentially claiming skeptic climate scientists\u2019 CAGW denial stemmed from their political beliefs<\/em><\/a> (no joke!<\/a>), who now claims she has a mountain of evidence<\/a> that \u201cExxon Knew\u201d their products caused harm from CAGW but ran disinformation campaigns<\/strong> to hide what they knew (Exxon knew no such thing<\/a>, but that\u2019s<\/a> a whole other story).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The irony here is where the real disinformation is found in abundance. Naomi Oreskes is where she is today because of her initial, and ongoing<\/a> enslavement to the worthless<\/a>, never implemented<\/em><\/strong> proposal<\/a> documents containing the specific \u201creposition global warming as theory (not fact)\u201d \u2018sinister directive<\/a>\u2019 (along with an unsolicited alternative name<\/a>, and never-implemented audience targeting suggestions<\/a>). At my June 17, 2022 GelspanFiles blog post<\/a>, I detailed her level of enslavement and basic once-per-minute average of offering outright disinformation items about those memos and the Western Fuels Association \u201cICE\u201d<\/a> public relations campaign those documents are falsely attributed to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Piling on, she ineptly felt compelled to say (more than once<\/a>!) the documents, including newspaper \u2018advertorials,\u2019 were archived at the American Meteorological Society D.C. archives<\/a> (they are not<\/strong>), and in one more act of clumsiness, claimed she was alerted to all these AMS archive copies by a person separated by just one degree from Al Gore\u2019s 1991-\u201992 Senate office<\/a>. For those who don\u2019t know, Gore spoke of \u2018leaked documents to his office<\/a>\u2019 about that same newspaper campaign in his 1992 \u201cEarth in the Balance\u201d book that Oreskes is enslaved to.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, what\u2019s does the arrow the size of Texas in this Milberg Puerto Rico<\/em> filing also inadvertently point to? When you take into consideration that \u201cpsychological projection\u201d is a hallmark of far-left liberals, it\u2019s no surprise: Naomi Oreskes\u2019 2012 La Jolla, California \u201cEstablishing Accountability for Climate Change Damages: Lessons from Tobacco Control<\/a>\u201d workshop. It was a brainstorming effort she created<\/a> on how the RICO statute could be used against Big Oil\u2019s \u2018tobacco industry-like disinformation efforts.\u2019 But remember who it is \u2013 and which side of the CAGW it is \u2013 who has an apparent stranglehold on disinformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Blogger \u201cShub Niggurath\u201d exposed the massive problem about Oreskes\u2019 workshop back in 2015: \u201cRICO-teering: <\/strong>How climate activists \u2018knew\u2019 they were going to pin the blame on Exxon<\/a>.\u201d Oreskes\u2019 workshop wasn\u2019t a one-time effort \u2014 hold that thought until the end of this post.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now \u2013 speaking of unified disinformation efforts \u2013 who were the participants at Oreskes\u2019 La Jolla brainstorming session on how to wage a lawsuit war against Big Oil?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n