The trial between the New York attorney general and ExxonMobil kicks off in New York today. In the lead up, we couldn’t help but notice that the Rockefeller echo-chamber seemed to be in full force, giving new life to the term “orchestrated campaign.”

As we know from a meeting of activists hosted by the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF) back in 2016, and the infamous 2012 La Jolla conference, the campaign against energy producers like ExxonMobil has been organized from the beginning to turn public opinion against the company, using the courts, research reports, paid-for media coverage and the political arena as avenues for doing so.

And just days before the New York attorney generals’ lawsuit was set to begin, all these areas were activated as a part of a coordinated effort. Even still, editorial boards in New York are calling out the attorney general’s farce. The New York Post called the case “a shameless exercise in prosecutorial abuse,” while the Wall Street Journal called it a “show trial.”

Here are 5 things you need to know about the case:

1. Rockefeller Echo Chamber Activates Day Before Trial to Promote Rockefeller Op-Ed

Today, the New York Times published an op-ed by Rockefeller Family Fund Director Lee Wasserman which outlined all the activist arguments against ExxonMobil deployed during the “Exxon Knew” campaign. Within minutes, the piece was picked up and spread around by a who’s who of the Rockefeller activist network, including Bill McKibben, Stephen Kretzmann, Naomi Oreskes, Naomi Ages, and Geoffrey Supran.

Remind us again about how much the Rockefellers have contributed to https://t.co/y9Ign5itr1 and other organizations supporting the climate litigation campaign? https://t.co/wSIx5823em

— Energy In Depth (@EnergyInDepth) October 21, 2019

The coordinated amplification comes right out of the Rockefeller playbook, as laid out in the leaked memo from their January 2016 meeting, which featured many of the same actors, including McKibben, Kretzmann, and Ages:

“Does this group want to establish a rapid response and coordination structure to react to new research, revelations and legal developments as they happen? A higher level of coordination with a war room, joint social media, and coordinated organizing and media pushes?”

As the old saying goes: “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.”

And these activists are yelling in unison and not even attempting to hide it.

In his piece, Wasserman freely admitted that his group is behind the national litigation campaign currently targeting energy companies.

“New York is just one front in a legal struggle against the fossil fuel industry, one that the organization I direct has been involved in by financing legal advocacy groups representing plaintiffs in two other lawsuits against the oil giant… For coastal communities, the cost of defending against rising seas alone will exceed $400 billion, according to a recent study by the Center for Climate Integrity, which the Rockefeller Family Fund supports.” (emphasis added)

Wasserman’s confession follows a similar pattern he’s used in the past to try to deflect criticism. Energy In Depth has previously called out anti-energy groups and operations for failing to disclose that they received funding from Wasserman’s group, leading Wasserman to come clean at a later date in an attempt to make it seem that the Rockefeller Family Fund is transparent with its funding. But the is organization is anything but transparent and has failed to disclose its grants for the past several years, in spite of Internal Revenue Service reporting requirements. This latest revelation confirms recent reporting by Energy In Depth.

2. This Trial Isn’t About Climate, It’s About Accounting

Despite years of buildup, millions spent on conferences, lawyers, research, and a massive “Exxon Knew” public relations campaign, the actual trial taking place in New York isn’t even about climate. Activists who have spent all this time grinding their gears with allegations that Exxon “knew” about climate change and tried to hide their findings from the public surely have to be disappointed that their manufactured agenda fell apart.

After the New York attorney general’s office spent three years investigating over four million pages of company documents, it eventually conceded there was no case to be made on the “Exxon Knew” allegations, so it ultimately filed a lawsuit alleging that ExxonMobil misled its investors in how it applied proxy costs of carbon to its investment decisions.

But that charge just doesn’t add up either. As ExxonMobil explains:

“…ExxonMobil considers two costs when assessing the potential impacts of climate policies on certain parts of the business. ‘Proxy Costs’ assess the potential impacts of a broad mosaic of climate policies and regulations on global demand for oil and gas. By contrast, ‘GHG Costs’ forecast the direct effect of actual and anticipated greenhouse gas (‘GHG’) related regulations on specific ExxonMobil projects.”

3. “New” Report Shows Desperation Continues

In another attempt to distract from their failed legal strategy and generate fresh headlines, Supran, Oreskes and others released a report Monday that provides little new information and relies on old, debunked arguments alleging that energy companies misled the public on climate change. Just a day before the trial gets underway, the timing is very convenient.

This report relies so heavily on debunked arguments in fact that much text is actually lifted word for word from their previous “study” and the authors pawned it off to the media as new research.

Who was the main journalist to write up the “new” but very old research from Supran and Oreskes? Why Susanne Rust, of course! The same journalist who oversaw the original reporting by the Columbia School of Journalism students that ran in the Los Angeles Times and kicked off the #ExxonKnew campaign. And who funded the students’ reporting? The Rockefellers. It all comes full circle.

As a quick refresher on the report itself, the authors used small, cherry-picked data and only reviewed four internal ExxonMobil documents and a single advertorial but making a sweeping accusation that the company promoted a public position on climate change contradictory to its own internal documents.

So, it shouldn’t be a surprise the authors have massive credibility problems. Their work has been proven to be biased scholarship, and unsurprisingly, they’ve also received funding from the Rockefeller Family Fund.

4. Massachusetts Attorney General Stirs the Pot to Get Media Attention

In a bid to advance their PR campaign, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey threated to bring her own lawsuit against ExxonMobil. Healy’s timing is no coincidence. She’s seeking to stir the pot just as the New York trial gets started and generate more headlines.

Healey was on stage with Al Gore and disgraced, former-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman at the AG’s for Clean Power press conference in 2016, which the Rockefeller network helped organize, and has long been intent on bringing forth her own litigation.

ExxonMobil called Healey’s move exactly what it is: a play to get media attention. Bloomberg reports:

“‘The timing of the Attorney General’s threat is no coincidence,’ company lawyers told a state court on Oct. 17, calling it ‘an intentional and cynically transparent ploy to distract ExxonMobil from its trial preparations’ and get media attention.”

5. ‘Exxon Knew’ Ringleaders Head to Capitol Hill

In attempt to distract from their failed legal strategy in New York, other “Exxon Knew” ringleaders will be in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday testifying at the House Oversight Committee’s Subcommittee on Civil Right and Civil Liberties.

The hearing will feature Oreskes and attorney Sharon Eubanks among others and the hearing memo cites InsideClimate News, the Columbia School of Journalism, and the Union of Concerned Scientists – three Rockefeller-funded organizations that have played key roles in advancing the “Exxon Knew” campaign.

Realizing that the court room is a dead end, these activists have turned to Congress to help keep their unsubstantiated narrative alive and all the media hype that comes with it.

Bottom Line

The Rockefeller network’s echo chamber is in full force this week as the New York takes ExxonMobil to trial.

Media? Check.

Contrived reports? Check.

Activate the courts? Check

Capitol Hill hearing? Check.