Washington Times Echoes Chevron's Lies in Hit Piece

Exclusive Washington Times Daily Briefing (July 8, 2015)

Many studies have shown that taxpayers continually are less satisfied with government services than private-sector services, and watchdogs say federal agencies should do away with costly satisfaction, opinion surveys and PR projects — instead focusing on improving their dismal performance.

Instead of cleaning up, the company attacks the very villagers it poisoned and sues the lawyers who have led the legal charge demanding adequate compensation. September 02, Nuclear deal will make war with Iran more likely, former top military officials say in report By Kellan Howell - The Washington Times A group of former top military officials and intelligence analysts released a new report Wednesday concluding that the nuclear deal with Iran will threaten American interests and increase the probability of military conflict in the Middle East.

Donziger trial. During the appeals process, Chevron's bogus claims of fraud were reviewed and dismissed by the higher court in Ecuador. The dumping happened from to , when Chevron operating as Texaco abruptly pulled out of the country.

Howell in an email at the time, this is not what I think of as journalism — it's trying to generate a reaction, rather than reporting on facts in the world. First, Judge Kaplan did not actually find that Amazon Watch had said anything that was false. During Amazon Watch's year history, we have been supported by donations from many thousands of individuals and dozens of institutional funders.

Washington Times Echoes Chevron's Lies in Hit Piece HuffPost

Howell might be liable. Aug 14, Read more. Then he has a dispute with Donziger over money, he quits, offers his services to Chevron, and disavows his earlier estimate.

During the appeals process, Chevron's bogus claims of fraud were reviewed and dismissed by the higher court in Ecuador. Of course, virtually all of AW's funders either ignored Ms. In that proceeding, a US District Court found that Chevron had not shown that Amazon Watch had done anything wrong in relation to the Chevron litigation, or that Amazon Watch had engaged in fraudulent conduct or furthered a conspiracy against Chevron.

As part of its intimidation campaign, Chevron did attempt to subpoena Amazon Watch's documents and testimony.

Federal agencies spend billions on self-promotion

You have logged in Check it Out Close. As one newspaper handbook explains, "The fact that a person is quoted accurately is not in itself a defense to a subsequent libel action, if the quoted statement contains false information about someone. Our supporters are proud of and share in our successes to hold Chevron to account and continue to demonstrate that support to this day.

Judge Cousins quashed Chevron's attempts to open up Amazon Watch's files, and found that "there is nothing to suggest that Amazon Watch's campaigns and speech were more than mere advocacy and were likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action," and that "[a]ll that Chevron has shown this Court is that Amazon Watch has been very critical of Chevron's operations in Ecuador. Archives Revue de presse - Start Free Trial.

Miro Guide - The National Taxpayers Union Presents "Speaking of Taxpayers"

Edwards argued that the government should not be engaging in such self-promotion because, unlike private companies that need to promote their services, the government faces no market competition for most of its services.

Did the foundation know that its contributions to Amazon watch was being used to perpetuate false evidence in this case? In its report, the council argued that the deal is not an alternative to war with Iran, as many of its supports have claimed, but would actually make war more likely. Yet, much to Chevron's chagrin, our donors' steadfast support and refusal to be intimidated comes across clearly in the article despite the author's attempts to cast us in a negative light.

Washington Times: Federal agencies spend billions on self-promotion Open the Books

In fact, the U. Howell's article completely omits the fact that a US District Court found — rejecting Chevron's argument that Amazon Watch had done anything wrong — that "there is nothing to suggest that Amazon Watch's campaigns and speech were more than mere advocacy and were likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action," and that "[a]ll that Chevron has shown this Court is that Amazon Watch has been very critical of Chevron's operations in Ecuador.

Howell's writing here is probably not libelous; it's just biased reporting.