Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (924127)	3/2/2016 10:57:27 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576226

"aren't we in an el nino like we were back during 1998, the previous warm peak?" Well, how 'bout that? = Justice Department Refers Exxon Investigation Request to FBI The U.S. Justice Department has forwarded a request from two congressmen seeking a federal probe of ExxonMobil to the FBI's criminal division. U.S. Representatives Ted Lieu and Mark DeSaulnier sought the probe last year to determine whether the oil giant violated federal laws by "failing to disclose truthful information" about climate change. In response, the Justice Department deferred to the FBI, saying it is that agency's responsibility to conduct an initial assessment of facts that prompted the congressmen's request. Such action is considered standard procedure, according to former federal prosecutors who say the response appears ambiguous as to what action may be taken by the FBI. "As a courtesy, we have forwarded your correspondence to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)," said a letter to the congressmen from Peter J. Kadzik, an assistant U.S. attorney general. "The FBI is the investigative arm of the Department, upon which we rely to conduct the initial fact finding in federal cases. The FBI will determine whether an investigation is warranted." The Justice Department's referral letter to the FBI, however, has not been released, so it is not known if it contained any specific instructions. The referral was made to the assistant director of the FBI's Criminal Investigative Division. The FBI and Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment. DeSaulnier said he would have preferred a more aggressive response, though the DOJ's position did not surprise him. "I would very much like the attorney general to get involved and I think it's inevitable that will happen because of the growing recognition of how the public was misled," he said in an interview with InsideClimate News. Even if the FBI invests minimum effort in a due diligence inquiry, DeSaulnier said he thinks the facts will prompt a deeper investigation. "I will continue to make the argument there is too much compelling evidence not to hold companies accountable," he said. Lieu said he believes the letter is a signal from DOJ to the FBI to begin a preliminary investigation. "They (DOJ) could have just said ‘thank you’ or declined to get involved," Lieu said. "It makes sense in a case this complex that you would want the investigative arm of the Justice Department involved." The congressman said he believes there is enough on the public record that forms a solid foundation for the FBI to conclude a full-blown investigation is justified. "There is substantial evidence to support a full investigation and prosecution," he said. Even if the FBI does not investigate thoroughly, DeSaulnier said more heat is being applied to Exxon and the industry, with an investigation underway in New York and probes being considered in other states, including California and Maryland. "There is going to be a moment of judgment both politically and legally," he said. "I think a moment of judgment will be quite critical of the fossil fuel industry in terms of obfuscating the scientific facts and for not adhering to their moral and legal responsibility to the public." Exxon declined to answer questions about the Justice Department's letter. John Marti, a former federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Minnesota, called the Justice Department's response a "punt." "The department appears to be reluctant to engage in this matter," Marti said. "They are being careful to remain neutral." Yet at the same time, he said, the letter puts the FBI in the position of seemingly requiring at least a rudimentary review of the issues raised by the congressmen. That review could consist of nothing more than reading the news stories detailing Exxon’s climate research and its history of sowing doubt about the science to performing a detailed inquiry, he said. He said he would expect the FBI to proceed cautiously. "They are not going to be excited over what they may perceive as a dispute over public policy as opposed to violations of federal criminal laws," Marti said. Lieu and DeSaulnier, both Democratic members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said in their letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch requesting an investigation that they were "alarmed" by the possibility that Exxon withheld vital climate change information and tried to discredit the science confirming global warming. The congressmen made their request for a federal probe following disclosures in an InsideClimate News series that Exxon scientists were warning of potentially catastrophic effects of a buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide from fossil fuels as early as 1977. The letter also cited a story published later by the Los Angeles Times addressing Exxon’s research into melting Artic ice. The request by Lieu and DeSaulnier is one of a number of investigation requests to the attorney general, including appeals by both Democratic presidential candidates. In addition, a coalition of nearly 50 environmental, civil rights and indigenous people's groups have urged Lynch to open a federal investigation into whether ExxonMobil purposefully misled the American people on climate change. Lieu and three colleagues also called on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to look into Exxon's past federal filings to determine if the company violated securities laws by failing to adequately disclose material risks to its business posed by climate change. Mary Jo White, chair of the SEC, told Lieu in a letter she could not comment on the issues he and the other representatives raised or acknowledge the existence or non-existence of any investigation. "But I want to assure you that the Commission's staff will consider carefully the information included in your correspondence in connection with our statutory and regulatory responsibilities," according to White’s letter to Lieu. Exxon is the subject of an investigation by the New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. Investigators for Schneiderman served a subpoena on Exxon last year to turn over documents related to its research into the causes and effects of climate change. Sharon Eubanks, a former U.S. Department of Justice attorney who won a racketeering case against the tobacco industry in 2006, said deferring to the FBI is customary in cases like this, though federal prosecutors generally give more direction. "It would have been much more powerful had the Justice Department said it was asking for an investigation," she said. The language gives the FBI tremendous discretion, Eubanks said. "This could mean it will go into a black hole or it could mean the FBI will be taking some action that could lead to a referral back to the Justice Department," she said. Eubanks said the request puts the two agencies in a delicate position given the high-profile nature of the request and implications of digging into the issues raised by the congressmen. "It’s a hot potato; you take it, no you take it," she said. insideclimatenews.org

To: Brumar89 who wrote (924127)	3/3/2016 12:13:22 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576226

Given our expectation of the next El Niño beginning in 2009 or 2010, it still seems likely that a new global temperature record will be set within the next 1-2 years, despite the moderate negative effect of the reduced solar irradiance. blog.chron.com For 2010, the combined global land and ocean surface temperature tied with 2005 as the warmest such period on record, at 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F). 1998 is the third warmest year-to-date on record, at 0.60°C (1.08°F) above the 20thcentury average. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201013 = July 10th, 2012 some climate scientists, including NASA’s James Hansen, have pointed out that a new El Niño event would likely lead to another record warm year given the combination of El Niño and manmade global warming. climatecentral.org he average global temperature across land and ocean surface areas for 2015 was 0.90°C (1.62°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F), beating the previous record warmth of 2014 by 0.16°C (0.29°F) http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513

To: Brumar89 who wrote (924127)

3/3/2016 7:51:17 AM

From: FJB

2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Brumar89
TideGlider

Respond to of 1576226

Pakistan’s Council on Islamic Ideology says that law for protection of women violates Islamic law Pamela Geller by Pamela Geller This is because the Quran says that women from whom a man “fears disobedience” should be beaten (4:34). To protect the human rights of women violates sharia. Where are the feminists on this? Busy denouncing islamofauxbia. “CII head declares women protection law against Shariah,” ARY News, March 2, 2016 (thanks to The Religion of Peace): LAHORE: Chairman of Council of Islamic Ideology Maulana Muhammad Khan Sherani has declared women protection law against Islamic sharia, ARY News reported. During a meeting of the CII, Maulana Sherani said there was no need to legislate a law for women’s protection when they already had all rights secured under Sharia laws according to the Quran and Sunnah. Earlier yesterday speaking to journalists in Shikarpur, he had said that he could not comment on the women’s protection bill passed by the Punjab Assembly before reading it. However, he termed it a violation of Islamic laws and said it could not be accepted. He said assemblies must consult the CII before enacting such legislations. “The CII is a constitutional body, therefore, every bill should be brought to parliament in the light of its recommendations.”…

Share