The Guardian article is just as much propaganda - it twists the details of the case to fit their long-running narrative about big fossil fuel companies. For exa

The Guardian article is just as much propaganda - it twists the details of the case to fit their long-running narrative about big fossil fuel companies. For example, this part makes it look like the claims it mentions are just something that Chevron likely made up and the US courts believed for no reason: "Chevron claiming that his team ghostwrote what should have been an independent assessment and offered a $500,000 bribe to sway the judgment. Donziger denied any wrongdoing and the Ecuador supreme court later affirmed the original ruling, but Chevron has refused to pay the $9.5bn in damages". In reality, there's a whole papertrail from his team that was obtained in discovery where they carry out the process of getting an expert appointed by the Ecaudorian court who'll go along with this, ghostwriting his supposedly independent assessment, and getting it falsely presented as the expert's work, whilst talking about exactly what they're doing and why, and the US court rulings cite that extensively as their evidence.