DA, Portland police clear Al Gore of charges

Posted on  

"DA, Portland police clear Al Gore of charges"

I am happy to pass on any comments you have to the Nobel-Peace-prize-winning former VP.

I wouldn’t normally blog on this sort of thing, but you have no idea how many nasty comments (and emails) I have had to delete on this topic.

Portland’s local TV station KOIN reports:

Portland Police and the Multnomah County District Attorney’s office have cleared Al Gore of criminal wrongdoing in the sex assault case filed by masseuse Molly Hagerty.

“After evaluating the materials submitted by PPB I have concluded that I agree with the assessment that a sustainable criminal case does not exist,” said District Attorney Michael D. Schrunk, in a statement.

As HuffPost reports:

Gore has vehemently denied the charges of sexual misconduct that recently came to light when the Portland Police Bureau signaled it was opening an investigation into the case.

After news broke that the probe would be dropped, Gore spokesman Kalee Kreider said in a statement:

“Mr. Gore unequivocally and emphatically denied this accusation when he first learned of its existence three years ago. He respects and appreciates the thorough and professional work of the Portland authorities and is pleased that this matter has now been put to rest.”

TPM, which has been following this, reposts a memo from the DA’s office, in which prosecutor Don Rees explains “a number of deficiencies” in the case that led to the decision not to prosecute:

1. Ms. Hagerty, who has red hair, states she called Mr. Gore immediately following the alleged incident and told him to “dream of redheaded women” seemingly in contradiction to her assertions that she was terrified of Mr. Gore. Two days after the alleged incident Ms. Hagerty also sent an email to the Hotel Lucia stating that she appreciated the business referrals she received from the hotel. She did not mention any problem with Mr. Gore;

2. Witnesses at the hotel where the alleged incident occurred state they do not remember seeing or hearing anything unusual—directly contradicting Ms. Hagerty’s published claim in the July 12, 2010 of the National Enquirer that she was “shaking and in shock” and “rushed down the hall and to the lobby where the front desk clerk noticed she was upset was asked if she was OK”;

3. Forensic testing of pants retained by Ms. Hagerty as possible evidence are negative for the presence of seminal fluid;

4. Ms. Hagerty has not provided as repeatedly requested medical records she claims are related to the case;

5. Ms. Hagerty has also failed to provide other records related to the case;

6. Ms. Hagerty failed a polygraph examination;

7. It appears Ms. Hagerty was paid by the National Enquirer for her story; and

8. Mr. Gore voluntarily met with detectives and denied all of the allegations.

On the polygraph, Senior Deputy DA Rees explains:

In meeting with Ms. Hagerty and her attorney Ms. Snyder, detectives learned Ms. Hagerty took a polygraph regarding her allegations and failed. Ms. Snyder asked the detectives not to document that failure in their reports. The detectives requested copies of the polygraph so that the questions, answers and associated polygrams could be reviewed, but Ms. Hagerty and her attorney have not provided those materials.

The results of polygraphs are not admissible in trial and Oregon law prohibits the state from requiring victims of sex crimes to take polygraphs as a prerequisite to filing an accusatory pleading (ORS 163.705). In this case however, where the complaining witness voluntarily submitted to a polygraph and failed, it is a highly relevant fact to consider when weighing whether this case is prosecutable. Polygraph results are commonly relied upon by the police, courts and attorneys. Ms. Hagerty’s failure to release the detailed polygraph results to police makes it impossible to review the quality and nature of this particular examination.

Case closed.

« »

51 Responses to DA, Portland police clear Al Gore of charges

  1. Peter Mizla says:

    Joe

    It would be interesting to see who these people are- who use AL Gore as a ‘poster child’ against global warming.

    Most of them are from the far right- they represent the ‘preservation of American Capitalism’ over the saving of a planetary system and its inhabitants.

    Ego centrism and nationalism of unparalleled arrogance.

  2. Brewster says:

    It doesn’t matter that the case against Gore was even less than weak.

    I’ll be in the Denialsphere forever.

  3. Steven Leibo says:

    Hillary _may_ have been wrong about the “vast right wing conspiracy” against Bill Clinton but there certainly has been one against Al Gore!

  4. Jeff Green says:

    THe more successsful someone is at pursuing global warming issues, the more flack you get from the lunies. Two thumbs way up for Al Gore for being out front.

  5. Leif says:

    Mohandas Gandhi: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

  6. Wit'sEnd says:

    I’ve heard people say that Al Gore is a lightening rod for deniers and is a less useful spokesperson for that reason. How ridiculous. The deniers attack him precisely because he is a major threat to the hegemony of the energy corporations – and his movie actually influenced many people who were previously unconvinced that climate change is a serious problem that must be addressed.

    If you’re compiling messages to him please ask him to spare a look at the trees, they need much more than just my blog to save them!

  7. Colorado Bob says:

    That this slur came out before the climate bill died & the separation with Tipper is no accident. “Shoot the messenger ” works in the short term , but the game today is played with a pathology that focuses only on minutiae. And this fits that to a “T”.

    Soldier on Al , soldier on.

  8. Bob Ashworth says:

    There is another story behind her motives, who provoked them, which requires investigation.

    The truely nasty end of denialism will just move on to the next victim if not exposed.

  9. Ranger47 says:

    I wish him all the best…

  10. Leif says:

    The deniers are claiming that the earth alone does not respond to the laws of basic science and thermodynamics.

    Two Palms Up to you Al,
    Leif

  11. Peter Mizla says:

    #9

    Smear & Exploit?

    That is what the GOP has done so splendidly over the last 75 years.

    Have a strong Martini on me ;-)

  12. Colorado Bob says:

    Joe –
    Pass this along to Al , it’ll make him smile, briefly but never the less a smile :

    Bear #339 Arctic Drilling Op-Ed

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZmRuOrk-3E

  13. Colorado Bob says:

    the game today is played with a pathology that focuses only on minutiae. And this fits that to a “T”.
    Exhibit “A” –
    Al is claiming earth is “several million degrees” at “2 kilometers or so down”.

    a pathology that focuses only on minutiae

  14. Colorado Bob says:

    Russia (Reuters) – Raging wildfires spread across parts of western Russia on Saturday, engulfing 30 percent more land in just 24 hours, and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin described the situation as very difficult.

    At least 28 people have been killed and 3,500 evacuated since the fires broke out in the hottest weather since records began 130 years ago. At least 1,260 houses have been burned down.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66T1BI20100731

  15. Colorado Bob says:

    The local head of Pakistan’s largest rescue service said the death toll from flash floods in the country could reach thousands in the next few days.

    Already, over 800 deaths have been reported because of the devastation brought by the floods in the country’s northwest.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-31/pakistan-death-toll-from-flash-floods-in-northwest-rises-to-539-edhi-says.html

  16. Colorado Bob says:

    Pakistan’s meteorological department said 312mm (12in) of rain had fallen over the last 36 hours in the north-west – the largest amount for decades.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10815265

  17. I knew from the get-go that this was trumped up by the Climate Denial Machine and it shows just how immoral those who support it really are.

    Somebody, please follow the money and get those jerks put in jail.

    Mr. Vice President, I salute you and your work. It must be having quite an impact for these fossil-fuel denialists to keep going after you, but realize that those are the fringe. There are plenty of people who are very grateful to you for what you are doing, me included.

  18. Colorado Bob says:

    Joe –
    The News Vine has a particularly active set of deniers , one posted this this morning :

    Temperature and precipitation history of the Arctic
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VBC-50822BB-1&_user=10&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2010&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1407519935&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e501ca20eaac47090ab0cb611fb0d452

    Since I don’t have the $31.50 to read it , let us know when you see it in a more accessible form .

    Here’s the News Vine link from one of the more obnoxious of that group, who put it up.

    http://wingod.newsvine.com/_news/2010/07/30/4787913-temperature-and-precipitation-history-of-the-arctic

  19. Mark says:

    Joe,

    Is it just me, or is there a big gap in your posts? They jump from July of this year to February, so that the Curry, etc. posts are not showing up.

  20. Andy Olsen says:

    This is great to see, and I hope the press reports it as much as they did the allegations.

    Al Gore has been subjected to far more false accusations than the most politician. He has stood up to them with class: composed, firm, and remaining persistent in pursuit of what’s right.

    I hope Vice President Gore pushes back for climate action. It would be great if he could help make climate INaction an issue for the November campaigns.

    Thank you, Al Gore!

  21. cr says:

    Colorado Bob @ 18:

    I have access to that journal through my university. I’d like to say that I understand what they’re saying in the articles in that issue, but I’m not fluent in science-ese. I also suspect that posters and commenters on newsvine aren’t either, though they pretend to be.

  22. Mark says:

    this story made me think of this:

    (Wikipedia)

    In early March 1966, several media outlets, reported that a car manufacturer had tried to discredit Nader, hiring private detectives to tap his phones and investigate his past and hiring prostitutes to trap him in compromising situations. Nader sued the company for invasion of privacy and settled the case for $284,000

  23. Khushali Upadhyay says:

    I am really happy to see that he is officially innocent. The case made against him was EXTREMELY week and there was no reason to doubt Vice President Gore. Now that this drama is over, hopefully we will be able to see more action towards fighting climate change and passing legislation to solve this crisis!

  24. Nick says:

    It’s a comfort to assume that because Al Gore is such an experienced politician, he can deflect a lot of the nastiness that has been thrown at him for so many years. I hope that he has been able to focus on the rest of us out here who respect and appreciate all the work he has done.

  25. Neal Heidler says:

    There certainly was a right wing conspiracy to subvert the Clintons (see David Brock’s Blinded by the Right for an ex-insider’s story), but it is important to not forget the role of big media in undermining the Clintons (e.g.; NYT’s Jeff Gerth reporting on the bogus Whitewater scandal which ultimately led to you know what).

    In the case of Al Gore, the sordid history of unfair, inaccurate, and quite influential reporting and commentary from the likes of Maureen Dowd, Arianna Huffington (in 1999-2000), Frank Rich, Ceci Connolly, and many others that was instrumental in promoting false “conventional wisdom” that Gore was a liar and that this, in a very close election, tipped the scales in favor of Bush, helping to get him s-elected as POTUS.

    My larger point is that we should not be at all surprised by the awful reporting that we now see almost daily in the Washington Post, NYT, CNN, etc., re: climate science. Whatever the mechanism behind it may be, the press is mostly going to do the bidding of Big Oil, Wall Street, and other (very) monied interests and that won’t change in the forseeable future.

    More recently in the NYT we’ve had RPJr inspired, bogus criticism of Gore’s slide show written by Andy Revkin, a jaundiced review of Inconvenient Truth from William Broad, suffered with John Tierney as a “science” blogger (who misleadingly characterized the Hearland Institute’s climate-denier advocacy-fest as a scientific conference). CP readers know many similar examples and know that Revkin writes has a net result of obscuring reality and confusing folks on the science of, and controversies around AGW and climate.

    This said, it’s good to see that Gore’s been cleared of the sexual assault charges….but when will the NYT post corrections re: the above on the front page?

  26. Colorado Bob says:

    Looks like the Khyber Pass is washed out ……….

    Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Province, formerly the North-West Frontier Province, which is already ravaged by terrorism, has experienced the worst flooding. Roads and communications systems there have been badly damaged and bridges have washed away. Floods have also affected parts of Punjab Province.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/world/asia/01pstan.html

  27. Colorado Bob says:

    cr –

    Thanks for the reply , that’s one thing the poster @ the Vine does, post something that can’t be accessed, and draw sweeping conclusions.

  28. Jim Groom says:

    Al Gore had the temerity to speak truth to power and for that he has been attacked over and over by those seeking to sustain the status quo. If it were not so tragic it might indeed by comical. He made a movie that upset the applecart with the usual suspects losing their grip. I can understand that many would find the film offensive or scary. What I have never been able to understand is why the vilification of the former Vice President? I’m sure all readers of this blog remember the challenges for a debate between Al Gore and the denier of the month. Al Gore is not the message, he’s one of the messengers.

  29. CW says:

    It`s been said before but we should not forget that one of the reasons that these types target the man instead of the message is because in their scheme of life, knowledge is gained less, if at all, through reasoning based on facts. Instead it is mostly passively accepted from authority. They believe things to be true because the top of their hierarchy thinks its true, not because they`ve taken facts and used their brain to work out their own take on things. It`s dogma versus reason. It`s my team and its leaders versus yours. All those who keep on trying to appeal to reason with these guys are therefore handicapping themselves. You need to show that their leaders suck and aren`t winners, instead of trying to poke holes their ideas or reasoning.

  30. Chris Winter says:

    An accurate assessment, CW (#29). But I disagree partly with this:

    “You need to show that their leaders suck and aren’t winners, instead of trying to poke holes [in] their ideas or reasoning.”

    We need to do both. Debunking their spurious reasoning helps onlookers get the story straight.

  31. Chris Winter says:

    It’s extremely gratifying that this bogus charge has been officially laid to rest at last. I’m not aware of any evidence that fossil-fuel interests are behind it, but it certainly gave them another hammer to wield.

    I read the woman’s story in the 73-page police report from 2009. Without going into details, I’ll just say that it contained enough “red flags” to be discounted then and there.

    So, Mr. Gore, I obviously can’t say it will be clear sailing from here on, but at least there’s one reef you won’t have to worry about. Thanks for your efforts to date, including Our Choice. I think that book will do a lot of good.

  32. Rob Honeycutt says:

    Was there ever any doubt this was another hoax?

  33. Rob Honeycutt says:

    I find it more than ironic that the very same people who claim that Gore distorted facts in An Inconvenient Truth will also tell you a dozen flat out lies about him without batting an eyelash.

  34. NeilT says:

    Politics 101. If you can’t destroy the message, destroy the messenger and then the message will be cast in doubt.

    Al can take heart that they are having to attack him so vigorously because the message is so robust. I just hope that he feels the pain is worth it.

    What I would like to see is a cataloge of all the attempts to derail the actions to mitigate the impact of climate science. So that When, not if, the work has to start to save lives endangered by a climate running out of control due to human impact, these individuals and companies are brought to book.

    The FDA is able to levy fines of unlimited value on companies which carry out practises that endanger hundreds or thousands of lives. The scope in climate change is millions or billions of lives enangered.

    I see no reason why companies and individuals, who deliberately obscure the need for action on climate change and create the danger to these people by inaction, should not pay the FULL price of those deeds.

    Single malt on the rocks. The way to celebrate this victory!

  35. J Bowers says:

    Tell Al a joke, courtesy of one of Judith Curry’s students back in October 2006, after she’d given him an assignment for a class discussion about Climate Audit…

    “Two statisticians were traveling in an airplane from LA to New York. About an hour into the flight, the pilot announced that they had lost an engine, but don’t worry, there are three left. However, instead of 5 hours it would take 7 hours to get to New York. A little later, he announced that a second engine failed, and they still had two left, but it would take 10 hours to get to New York. Somewhat later, the pilot again came on the intercom and announced that a third engine had died. Never fear, he announced, because the plane could fly on a single engine. However, it would now take 18 hours to get to New York. At this point, one statistician turned to the other and said, “Gee, I hope we don’t lose that last engine, or we’ll be up here forever!””

    (H/T to Willard)

  36. Dan says:

    It is obvious from the memo from the District Attorney’s office that this allegation against Al Gore was totally lacking in merit and was totally baseless. What is odd about this case, though, is that the complainant retained an attorney and underwent a polygraph. Attorneys do not come cheap, and polygraphs cost money. It is extremely unusual for a sexual assault complainant to go to this expense. I wonder who paid for the attorney’s fees and for the polygraph test for the complainant?

  37. Dean says:

    I expect that Hagerty will start pulling in some hefty speaking fees at conservative events talking about the “coverup” that protected Al Gore.

  38. Colorado Bob says:

    Confessions of a Tea Party Consultant –

    “You’re going to see something spectacular,” an old friend who has a knack for black-bag operations said as he proudly downed his vodka. “About a month from now you’ll see ACORN explode from within.” Right on schedule a video was released that showed undercover conservative activists James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles getting advice from employees at the Baltimore office of the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now on how to smuggle underage El Salvadoran girls into a fictitious brothel.

    That’s when I realized this isn’t an average fringe movement. This one is credible, legit and—for the first time in a decade—scaring the crap out of the left. In my years as a campaign hack and then as a consultant, I’ve created more than my share of fake grassroots organizations. Some were downright evil but effective beyond expectations. Did you get an automated call from the sister of a 9/11 victim asking you to reelect President Bush in 2004? That was me. Did you get a piece of mail with the phrase supports abortion on demand as a means of birth control? That may have been me too.

    Read on 7 pages in Playboy …….

    http://www.playboy.com/articles/rogues-of-k-street/index.html?page=1

  39. Prokaryotes says:

    Just watched “Recount”.

    “The future of the nation was hanging by a chad.”
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1000771/

    Now put this in broader perspective with climate change …

  40. TomG says:

    Can Molly Hagerty now wander off scot free after wasting everyone’s time?
    And this polygraph item has me puzzled.
    If it’s not required and the State is actually prohibited from asking for one, why on earth did she submit to one?
    Did her own lawyer not trust her?
    And after she flunked the test why did the lawyer stay on?
    I would think Al Gore would be a rather dangerous target to take on if your client is not exactly on firm ground.
    I’d really like to know if Hagerty was just an independent operator looking to make a quick buck or if someone was whispering in her ear telling her what to do….

  41. Dan B says:

    The “message” from the denier’s camp is fairly straightforward: People who “worship” Al Gore are actually “Socialists” who would end “free enterprise”. (This would be a favorite Koch talking point, of course.)

    What I’m waiting to hear from Vice President Gore, and most anyone who would call themselves a Democrat, is a good solid response that identifies key people. The far Right does it. They attack “Gore” as many times as they disparage climate scientists. They give two things to their base: a focus issue and a person on which to focus their disfavor (to put it mildly).

    What does the knowledgeable liberal left do: Facts, data, charts (confusing charts to anyone with an IQ under 120) etc.

    If this were reframed as an epic battle between a few individuals, like the Koch brothers, and Al Gore it would resonate with a much broader spectrum of the public.

    There are a few core issues that need to be addressed in this “clash” of wills and of the ideology that surrounds Global Warming:

    1. Are fossil fuels or “clean green” energy the future?

    2. Do the Koch’s or the Gore family stand to benefit from which argument or ideology prevails?

    3. Do common folk benefit from one future course (fossil fuels) or the alternative (21st Century clean-green energy)?

    It’s not just a few people in an epic “battle of the titans” but… the public will relate more to the epic storyline than the “one nice person has the true facts” storyline.

    It goes without saying that the protagonist who remains reasonable and displays appropriate emotion. A little outrage, ala Ralph Nader lawsuit wouldn’t hurt if there is a puppetmaster and paymaster for said massage therapist.

    Once the discussion shifts to a “visionary future” discussion it becomes much more challenging for the protectors of the status quo to say that Gore, thus all of us, are up to some evil socialist plot or any other of the pap that passes for passionate and sincere discussion about this issue.

    It is, after all, a discussion about whether or not human civilization can endure on its current path, and if not, what path do we take, and how fast must we move?

  42. Marion Delgado says:

    Joe, seriously, if you are going to pass on the gist of messages, on my part, tell the former VP I still have a copy of EITB and it’s held up well, and that I was not dignifying this any more than he did. You can add that he said enough of the right things in 2000 to make me drop out of the Green Party and campaign for him that year.

  43. Lewis Cleverdon says:

    NeilT at 34 –

    Good points – some of which generate a further question –

    Given that: “The FDA is able to levy fines of unlimited value on companies which carry out practices that endanger hundreds or thousands of lives,”

    and that the EPA has just fully confirmed its endangerment finding re CO2,

    and that the widely documented evidence of deniers’ malfeasance goes back as far as the ’90s when the board of “Global Climate Coalition” (Oil+Coal+Vehicles + business dupes) were told by their own scientists that anthro global warming was then “unequivocal,” but despite this they chose to enlarge their propaganda machine;

    and that the FBI and other agencies will undoubtedly have access to far more evidence than has been made public;

    and that the Joint Chiefs have published their concern over the dire security dimension of climate destabilization as a “threat multiplier”;

    it needs asking just when will the president enforce the law and have the corrupt pro-fossil liars indicted ?

    To date Obama has left scientists hung out to dry for the deniers to slander – the late great Schneider died undefended by his president – and while scientists’ proper debate is with scientists, Obama has provided no example of politicians responding to political attacks against them. In that negligence he has failed to provide cover for other politicians to do likewise, meaning that only the most staunch, such as laureate Gore and senator Kerry continue to speak out clearly and confidently.

    Here in the UK very sober commentators are now starting to question Obama’s integrity over his campaign-funding issues requiring his chronic inaction on climate – if this analysis is pushed in the US, its damage to the public’s perception of his integrity could tip the balance further against his getting a second term.

    Personally I think that the entirely predictable political damage of the climate bill being slowly minced to nothing, during the BP disaster, while Obama did nothing but look dignified, is that serious to his prospects that it patently outweighs both the ‘Rahm-misdirected-him’ and the ‘Big-coal-said-no’ hypotheses for his inaction.

    Both for the sake of keeping climate treaty negotiations credible, and for the prospect of a two-term Democratic government, he needs to take strong visible action. Closing down the commercial funding of denialism is the best option. Notably, doing so would not conflict with the inherited foreign policy of brinkmanship with China. Not only will the release of evidence of corrupt deception assist across the board in November, it will also rebalance the politics of climate in the senate, while also, belatedly, enabling the start of a climate education program in the US. Not least, it would also show the US electorate that Obama does, despite the doubts, possess a pair.

    So Joe, my compliments and warm congratulations to Al Gore, and could you please ask him to consider giving first priority to getting Obama to apply the full weight of the law against corrupt denialism ?

    Regards,

    Lewis

  44. Marion Delgado says:

    The National Enquirer will pay many times more money if you’ll take a polygraph. She probably figured she could weasel through it if she was sufficiently vague and said a lot of “I thought” and “I felt” and “it seemed like he…”

  45. Leland Palmer says:

    I’m also curious about her lawyer Randall Vogt, and who might be paying him.

    Apparently, he specializes in sex abuse cases, and has won some settlements for other clients in the past. Apparently sex abuse cases are his main business.

    It’s strange, though, that he would set up three appointments with Portland police officials, and then cancel them each time.

    Perhaps he canceled the appointments with the local police, because he knew they would not go well?

    National Enquirer paid for the story, but they claim they did not pay the one million dollars that Hagerty was asking for.

    Here’s a testimonial from another client of Vogt’s, from Randall Vogt’s website:

    A Washington County jury has decided that a Beaverton woman should be paid $855,000 by her former landlord after he forced her to perform a sex act with him in exchange for back rent.

    The verdict against Moji Momeni and his company, CJR Inc., which owns 15 apartment buildings, mainly in Beaverton, was handed down Friday by a Washington County Circuit Court jury. The defendant’s name is being withheld by The Oregonian because of the nature of the case.

    The victim’s attorney in the civil trial, Randall Vogt of Portland, said he believed the jury awarded substantially less than the $10 million sought because it was not allowed to hear evidence of similar allegations made by other tenants. Vogt said five other women said they’d been approached by Momeni in a similar fashion.

    “When I didn’t get what i felt like was justice as a victim of sexual assault, I decided to empower myself by hiring Randy Vogt to represent me. From the moment we began our journey through the judicial system they were sensitive to my fears and available to any questions I had. When it came to trial, Randy blew me away with his knowledge and expertise. He won the case for $855 thousand dollars and was worth more than he earned on my case. He cares about his clients and really listens to what they want to accomplish in the process of a civil suit. He and his office team were my angels, truly helping me to begin to put this behind me and live again. I can’t thank them enough for my new life and opportunity to heal again..”

    Perhaps no one is paying him. Perhaps he invests his time, in return for a cut of the settlement, as is done quite often, I guess. I wonder if he got a cut of the Enquirer money? Enquiring minds want to know!

    It’s a little strange, though, how American Spectator jumped on the story. American Spectator used to be funded by the Scaife foundations, and American Spectator was heavily involved in the Clinton impeachment effort. Recently, though, funding from the Scaife foundations has dried up, apparently, and the John Templeton foundation, with minor contributions from ExxonMobil, have been paying the bills.

  46. Ed Franks says:

    You are all completely delusional!

  47. Lewis Cleverdon says:

    So the shills have been told not to let go of a good smear, guilt by denunciation being their stock-in-trade, even though it displays their brazen dishonesty and extends their fantasy of a worldwide warmist conspiracy to include the US courts.

    So what’s new ?

  48. chek says:

    Joe, the two great totems that climate change denial can’t help but focus on are the popular former VP Mr. Gore, and the ‘hockey stick’.
    Despite their ongoing efforts to destroy them both, both still stand, but even so there’s a sub-culture amongst denialists that really, both are broken.

    I’d like to suggest that Mr. Gore make a follow up to AIT showing that there is now a selection of hockey sticks to choose from, and if each could for effect be intercut with some spectacular goal footage to show just how devastating one single hockey stick can be, it may make an even more popular impact.

    Plus it would annoy the hell out of denialist central, but that’s just an auxiliary benefit.

  49. Anne says:

    The close proximity in time with the announcement Al and Tipper separating made these rumors just a hair more believable than they would have been had the marriage stayed intact. I found myself actually wondering if Al Gore really HAD come on to these women — and then — moments later guffawing and laughing out loud and the ludicrous notion. There’s no way! The story is entirely out of character. Plus, Al Gore is “rich and famous” and smart enough to be able to “get his needs met” directly and outrightly in a much classier and more discrete fashion than having to grovel before a massage therapist. Give me a break. Whoever thought that one up is a few towels short of a linen closet.

  50. Raul M says:

    Would be saying something that hasn’t happened yet to cause embarrassment then trying to make the statement a truth.

    I first read “Earth in the Balance” in the mid 90’s. I was amazed that a Vice President would come out with information that affected so many.

    I was amazed that the book had so many footnotes.

    I think that Tipper should be happy that he has done so much out of concern for the public. She should feel free to be herself with him.

  51. Erica Smith says:

    Man bear pig
    They are missing his pecker tracks. That is likely on old cases.