Exxon Mobil Under Investigation in New York Over Climate Statements

New York Times ^ | November 5, 2015 | JUSTIN GILLIS and CLIFFORD KRAUSS

[reaganaut1]

First Amendment be damned -- thou shall not question the gospel of Global Warming. I think it may be happening but that people or companies should not be prosecuted for doubting it.

[rbg81]

Yes, if you disagree with the Church’s ....eh Government’s position on Science, you will be burned at the stake.

[Jolla]

Everyday the paperboy brings more.

[muglywump]

When will the Detroit automakers receive their subpoenas?

[subterfuge]

Exxon better push back hard. This is insanity.

[fwdude]

First Amendment be damned -- thou shall not question the gospel of Global Warming

It really is the established State Religion demanded of the Left, isn't it? Gaia is their prophet(ess).

[Toddsterpatriot]

including a period of at least a decade when Exxon Mobil funded groups that sought to undermine climate science

Is that why they can't predict the weather worth a damn? Exxon's fault?

[dsc]

“Exxon Mobil funded groups that sought to undermine climate science.”

Is that a fact? There were groups that sought to undermine science?

Bias much?

[Norm Lenhart]

Yea but it’s the direct result of people determined to ‘win’ with ‘lesser evil’. Now their victory means a govt filled with leftists in both parties and no one to stop the insanity.

Actions have consequences.

[oh8eleven]

Kenneth P. Cohen, vice president for public affairs ... was still deciding how to respond.
Really? I'm thinking first you have to grow a pair and the rest will come naturally.

[montag813]

Somewhere in hell, this man is smiling...

[SteveinSATX]

Maybe I’m asking the wrong question but doesn’t GW have to be at least codified into law just to give prosecutorial legal standing?

[SamuraiScot]

Isn’t Exxon big enough to squash Schneiderman like a bug?

[Starboard]

Its no coincidence that this is happening one year before the 2016 elections. Its nothing but a shakedown for political contributions from Exxon.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

Its nothing but a shakedown for political contributions from Exxon.

I read something here recently that Exxon had stopped contributing to the Clinton Foundation.

Same difference.

[justlurking]

Maybe I’m asking the wrong question but doesn’t GW have to be at least codified into law just to give prosecutorial legal standing?

Under Sarbanes-Oxley, or "SOx", a public company can be prosecuted by not anticipating future risks and reporting them to investors.

However, that's federal law. New York may have a different or even more stringent interpretation. If so, I don't know why any company actually does business there, unless the return outweighs the risk.

[Milton Miteybad]

Maybe I’m asking the wrong question but doesn’t GW have to be at least codified into law just to give prosecutorial legal standing?

Indeed...seems like there would need to be some law or regulation already in place, where the potential financial effects could be measured, before XOM would have any duty to caution investors about any such effects, if any there may be. I'd say the prosecutor has a real uphill climb here, unless all he's trying to do is wrangle some sort of nuisance settlement out of XOM.

[phormer phrog phlyer]

Thought control commissars.

[Milton Miteybad]

Just saw your post. Thanks for the clarification.

[DJ MacWoW]

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can