Four attorneys general are investigating Exxon Mobil’s public statements and private scientific knowledge over the years, and the company struck back on Wednesday in a filing in Texas against Claude Earl Walker, the attorney general of the United States Virgin Islands, and a private law firm working with his office on the investigation.
The filing called Mr. Walker’s actions a “flagrant misuse of law enforcement power” that “violate Exxon Mobil’s constitutionally protected rights of freedom of speech.
Interesting that they want intentional lying to be protected 'free speech.'
If that's the case, I understand that:
1.Andrew P. Swiger, ExxonMobil Senior Vice President and Principle Financial Officer
2.Michael J. Dolan, ExxonMobil Senior Vice President
3.Darren W. Woods ExxonMobil President
4.J.P (Jack) Williams ExxonMobil Senior Vice President
5.Mark W. Albers ExxonMobil Senior Vice President
And
6.Rex W. Tillerson, ExxonMobil Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
are all serial rapists and murderers. To be sure, I don't know this for a fact, but this is what I've heard.
However, even if I state this as a fact and am either wrong or lying, it seems according to ExxonMobil that my lying or misstatement should be considered protected free speech.
So, according to them, I'm fine either way.
You say all this as if it's illegal to lie (it's not).
Except I'm not making an argument. I'm pointing out a flaw in the standard spiel. I don't expect you to see it, this is more for the reader.
So apply your statement in cases where it applies and not with my argument where it doesn't apply.
Right, when your side uses local weather as example of AGW it's fine, further proof in fact, but when the other side does it, those people are idiots. This makes perfect sense (somehow).
