Other Democrat AG's wary of following lead of NY AG against Exxon

Washington Free Beacon:

Democratic officials who enlisted in a legal campaign against the country’s largest oil company privately expressed misgivings about the effort and its crusading leader, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, internal emails reveal.

Schneiderman recruited nearly 20 other state attorneys general last year to participate in a coordinated legal campaign against ExxonMobil. However, Schneiderman appears to be the only official still actively pursuing the effort.

Emails obtained by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute through open records requests help explain their apparent lack of enthusiasm. The emails show that AGs involved in the effort grew wary of Schneiderman’s aggressive tactics.

His campaign centers on allegations that Exxon lied to shareholders and the general public about the financial dangers posed by climate change. Schneiderman has subpoenaed the company, and other states have followed suit, though many have either withdrawn their probes or put them on hold.

Ahead of a March meeting that kicked off the effort, some AGs were already expressing unease about their involvement.

“Just talked with Tom,” an aide to Iowa AG Tom Miller wrote to a colleague on March 25, a few days before Schneiderman convened AGs involved in the effort. “He thinks we may be locked in on this and have to ride it through.”

After the meeting, another Miller aide described Schneiderman as “the wild card for all.”

In a statement accompanying the release of those and other emails, E&E said they demonstrated the legal weaknesses underlying New York’s legal strategy.

“The investigations began with Schneiderman and in just five short months he has watched his support collapse, such that he once again stands alone in his crusade to harass his political opponents under the guise of upholding the law,” the group said.

As the anti-Exxon efforts progressed, other AGs’ offices expressed concern at their apparent scope. They worried Schneiderman was publicly enlisting them in a campaign in which they were not sure they would—or could—participate.
...

There is much more.

There are ample reasons for their wariness.

The facts do not appear to support his original contentions and he has been forced to change his theory of the case.  He is new theory is even weaker than his original and shows a lack of understanding of securities law and accounting principles.