>No one said anything like this The top comments on this article are following that exact logic. Stuff like: >Its important to be reminded regularly that ther

>No one said anything like this The top comments on this article are following that exact logic. Stuff like: >Its important to be reminded regularly that there are perfectly legal ways for people with lots of money to endlessly bully people that annoy them. >My mom was an attorney. A really sound piece of advice she gave me was, "Never get into a legal battle with a lawyer. You can't win." The average non-attorney is not capable of getting into the kind of mistakes that Chevron was able to pin on Donziger. Even a SLAPP suit for defamation wouldn't get you put into house arrest for two years before you even get tried. At worst the system brands you a vexatious litigant. > All your talking seems to be an attempt to distract from this nasty truth, to carry water for one of the more evil companies of today, and that's saying an awful lot. No, I'm trying to explain how Chevron got away with murder, not say that they should be able to do so. The only reason why it even matters whether or not Donziger bribed anyone in Ecuador is because the US courts refused to try the original case. The US has much stronger rule-of-law than Ecuador does. This, ironically, let Chevron play off accusations of corruption against judges that will absolutely fuck over the corruptible. This is what I mean by "tunnel vision": they were so worried about the possibility of a bribe happening that they threw out the judgment entirely and fucked over the attorney involved instead, which is what Chevron wanted. It is corruption in the name of anticorruption.