Chapo Trap House - BONUS: Steven Donziger’s Case Goes To Trial

Episode Date: May 15, 2021

Will catches up with lawyer Steven Donziger as the Chevron-backed case against him finally goes to trial. For background on Steven’s case, check out episodes 418, 503 & 523 For more information, go to www.makechevroncleanup.com. To learn more about or get involved with Steven’s case, or even dial in and listen to his hearing on March 10, go to https://www.freedonziger.org. You can follow him on Twitter: @SDonziger.

All right. Joining us now is Steven Zanzinger, a person whose case you may be familiar with from the show. He has just gotten out of court in what is the first week of his trial. I'm not going to belabor the whole backstory. You should go back and listen to my two previous interviews with Steven. But I just want to check in now, now that the trial has begun, and just ask you, you've been under house arrest for two years now. What did it feel like to finally be in the inside of a court trying your case? And what have you seen so far in the opening days of this trial? Well, thank you for having me once again. Love your podcast. Basically, this is a very bizarre, unfair trial. It's not a trial. trials are commonly

understood in the United States. There's no question that I will be convicted. There's no jury to judge Loretta Presca as a member of the Federalist Society. Chevron's a major funder. It's the first corporate prosecution. My prosecutor comes not from the government, but from a private law firm that has Chevron as a client. It's just really bizarre, and I would say it's unprecedented. If this were happening in another country, it would be probably condemned by our State Department, by our government. But it's happening right here in New York Federal Court to me. And I think it's happening as retaliation for the fact that I played a leading role helping indigenous peoples win a very large pollution judgment against Chevron in the Amazon.

That's why Chevron really has orchestrated this whole thing. So far, the main witnesses have been Chevron lawyers. They've admitted that Chevron has funded their work, paid first class plane tickets for them to fly into New York and work with the private corporate prosecutor. So it doesn't feel great as a defendant to be in a situation where you can't get a fair trial. On the other hand, I have a great legal team headed by Ron Kuby and Marty Garvis, both legendary lawyers who are helping me pro bono. And we're doing our best to get our truth out. The judge is extremely biased. She just ruled yesterday that I really can't defend myself. I mean, you know, I want to get up on the stand and explain the many legal and ethical reasons

that I could not comply with a couple of court orders from a U.S. judge ordering me to turn over my computer and self under Chevron, which again is unprecedented. And she said she won't let me. That's not an issue in the case. So we're basically fighting to lay a record for an appeal. Well, there will be a conviction and I believe she will try to put me in prison. And again, the bigger picture, it's much bigger than me. The Chevron is using this process to really try to attack and criminalize effective human rights lawyering. So it's complicated and it's that we're fighting it and we're hopeful and we're going to keep pushing to get our truth out. Well, I mean, I've been I've been following the case through your Twitter and listening to the

opening days of it or the certain certain things leading up to the trial. And I just want to mention a few issues that, you know, that stand out in terms of how odd what's going on here is. The first one is, could you talk about Judge Prescott's decision to limit zoom access to the trial and also withhold seating from sort of like international legal observers from participate or even witnessing what's taking place in this trial? Sure. So, you know, the United States, unlike, say, a country like China, we actually have public trials in this country. And Judge Prescott has tried to limit access and limit public scrutiny and she's done that by cutting off zoom access. You know, what's odd is during COVID every trial

in America, almost every trial has had zoom access, including my trial, this trial, I mean, this case and world could listen via zoom. And this is particularly important in this case, where there's so much public scrutiny, because the process is so unfair, combined with the fact that my clients in Ecuador cannot travel here to be here in person. So cutting off zoom access to me was inappropriate, and was nothing more than an attempt by Judge Prescott to limit public scrutiny, because she knows this case is already been decided even before the evidence is being heard. So cutting off zoom access is bad. She was disrespectful. There's a team of international trial monitors headed by Ambassador, US Ambassador Steven Rapp. He's one of the leading

war crimes prosecutors in the world. He worked at the International Criminal Court for many years. President Obama appointed him as an ambassador, and he's a lawyer monitoring the trial with another team of prominent lawyers. And she wouldn't even, they wrote a letter asking for seats in the courtroom or zoom access, and she just didn't respond. I mean, for months, she finally responded and gave them gave them nothing that they requested. So, you know, there's a real effort to limit access. And I think it's for the obvious reason that when you're engaging in this kind of unfair process, you don't want scrutiny. And that's what's happening. The other issue that I was hoping you could explain to me was, I think like a day or two before the trial started, was it members of the

legal team prosecuting you who removed themselves from the trial to avoid being put on the witness stand or like Chevron attorneys who dropped out of the case in some way to avoid being put under oath? Yeah, that's amazing. So, first of all, this is the Chevron show, this trial, through and through. I mean, again, the prosecutor is a private Chevron lawyer. The judge has links to Chevron. And the main witnesses are Chevron lawyers from the law firm that Chevron has literally paid hundreds of millions of dollars to over the last 10 years to target me. Law firm is called Gibson Dunn and Crutcher. And the two lead lawyers who have probably collectively built $200 million to Chevron to try to destroy me over the last several years were slated to be the lead witnesses.

And they backed out. And they backed out after we found out that a few years ago, they had tried to get me criminally prosecuted by the Southern District of New York, the federal prosecutor here, who turned them down then. And they tried to do it again with this case. And that office turned them down for a second time. There were probably other efforts that didn't succeed. So, what they did, because they've obviously had a 10-year plan to lock me up, is they went directly to this private law firm via a judge who appointed the law firm bypassing the regular federal prosecutor. And the law firm has Chevron as a client. I mean, you just can't make this stuff up. And this sounds really like something that would happen in no disrespect to all the Russians,

I know. But this is something Putin would do for Erdogan and Turkey. And I'm telling you, it is happening right here in federal court in the United States. And then, as far as your legal defense, which you said is being headed by two pretty legendary attorneys, Ron Cubie and Martin Garbus, one of the ways in which they have been sort of hamstrung by the judge or just sort of denied the ability to present a defense on your behalf in this case. Well, thank you for the question. I mean, first of all, they're doing a great job working with what she's giving them to get the truth out. However, there's probably 50% of our story, our narrative, our facts, that she's not letting in, even more. I mean, basically,

she ruled that I simply, whatever I was doing to fight for my clients in Ecuador, that contradicted the orders of Judge Kaplan. And again, the main order is he ordered me to turn over my attorney-client-protected, privileged, confidential case file to Chevron, unprecedented. I've never heard of that. No lawyer has heard of a lawyer being ordered to turn over his privileged information to his adversary in the middle of a case. It's never happened. So when I said, look, I can't do that because of my ethical obligations to my clients, please allow me to appeal it. And he kept delaying and delaying and trying to undermine my ability to appeal. I finally got my appeal up and apparently he got so angry about that he

charged you with criminal contempt. And the view of Judge Presca, who by the way, was appointed by Judge Kaplan to oversee my case, usually cases are assigned randomly in New York, not this one. He appointed the judge and the prosecutor, but again, both with connections to Chevron. She has a very narrow view. She basically says, you're guilty if a judge orders you to do something and you don't comply, even if it's blatantly unlawful. And that to me is what happens in authoritarian or totalitarian countries. That's not the United States. There have been thousands of lawyers I've learned well who have challenged what I was challenging, which is a civil discovery order, discovery meaning get information, and have never been

charged criminally, ever, until me. And again, I think they're targeting me because of our success in winning a big judgment against Chevron. You mentioned just a second ago that the Southern District of New York had declined to prosecute you on two different occasions for this same thing. Are you trying to, are you going to make any effort to call the district attorneys or like the representatives of the Southern District who made the decision not to prosecute you in the first place to explain why they didn't? It's interesting you ask. We have sought to call Jeffrey Berman, who was the head of that office when they declined to prosecute me. And we're, you know, Chevron, or I should say the Chevron link prosecutor is opposing it.

You know, Judge Presca is taking a dim view of the importance of this critical witness as a way to sort of keep out the narrative that the professionals in our society who we entrust with the power to determine who gets prosecuted, who potentially will be deprived of their liberty and go to prison. Those professionals refuse to prosecute this case. They refuse. So she doesn't want that story told in her court. And even though we're trying to get Mr. Berman in, it's unclear if it's going to happen. But you know, again, this is all improving our prospects on appeal because the more she does to shut down my ability to explain my defense and to present witnesses on my behalf, the more unfair it's going to appear and the more likely it will be

that she will be reversed on appeal. But the problem I have, if she could find me guilty and sentence me to prison, appeal is going to take 12 to 18 months. And I might end up in prison even if I win an appeal, because I think that's the goal here. Chevron wants to be silenced and locked up so I cannot work on this case. I think you're right. And I think if they were attempting to have a judgment that was stood scrutiny, they wouldn't be proceeding with this open travesty that is taking place right now. I think the goal is to silence you and to just, to be frankly, fuck your life up as much as possible to make an example of anyone else who wants to follow in your footsteps. That's exactly right. And again, I'll repeat, this is much larger

than me. You know what this is really about? It's about the ability of the people who do the frontline human rights work and environmental justice work to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for its pollution and its destruction of the planet. And this is a big judge. We want a $10 billion judge on behalf of communities and equitable rural communities, indigenous groups, they just can't handle it. And they are spending literally billy rather than pay the judgment or try to settle the case. They're spending all that money that could go to a cleanup in Ecuador, where people are dying from the literally they dump 16 billion gallons of cancer causing waste into indigenous lands. People are dying and they're spending $3 billion on 60 law firms

and 2000 lawyers to attack me and my colleagues. I mean, that's just a moral outrage. And the world needs to know about this. You know, there's people in Ecuador suffering. I'm their lawyer. They've been deprived of their main lawyer. Luckily, there's other lawyers working on this. So, you know, Chevron still faces great risk, but it's obvious what's happening here. They're trying to intimidate anyone from doing this critically important work, which is necessary to save the planet. You know, I know. And the last time I spoke to you, we talked about the lack of media coverage of your case, the lack of interest from, you know, from any major journalistic outlets, certainly the New York Times or any of the national or even local press and a case that is

happening 20 blocks away from the New York Times building. Since then, I have noticed that some people have begun to take an interest and mention your your name and print, but from the other side from the people attacking you. And I'm talking particularly about an editorial in the Wall Street Journal and in a piece in the National Review, both of which tried to paint you as some kind of ambulance chaser or criminal. And I think there's something grim in calling you an ambulance chaser as it relates to this case, because you're talking about, you know, thousands and thousands of ambulances to chase because of what Chevron did in Ecuador. That's totally true. But you know, it's interesting when you get close to their money, when they're feeling the heat is when these

articles, they start planning these articles. And, you know, the National Review guy is basically, I mean, they fund the National Review. He's completely right-wing and not an objective reporter. And there's like two or three reporters to sort of do their bidding. I mean, luckily, we've had some fairly decent press in the nation. They intercept the independent press, but the real tragedy to me, New York Times has totally avoided this story. I mean, they're reporting on human rights issues all over the world. And there's literally one 30 minute walk from their newsroom, a major human rights problem in America, you know, where I'm locked in my home for two years on a misdemeanor without being convicted. They haven't yet to do the story.

Yeah. But I mean, but to your point about how like the negative press or attacks on you and on this case, I mean, I think that, you know, you rightly interpret this as a good sign, right? Because I mean, like if it were all smooth sailing for them, they wouldn't mention you at all. If they had totally stitched up, they wouldn't have to write an editorial in the Wall Street Journal. That's completely the case. I mean, whenever they start attacking me, and this is crazy, and I'm honored to say this, I've had literally, I've been attacked eight times by the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal and these unsigned editorials. They should frame every one of them. And like, that's a badge of honor for human rights lawyer

who's successful. But you know, what it does tell me is we're winning. I mean, we are winning. And I don't think this would be happening if this was what they, I mean, they claim this whole thing is a fraud. Well, if it's such a fraud, why are they spending billions of dollars to attack me? Why are they even worried about it? And if it's such a clear cut, if it's such a clear cut case of fraud as well, why isn't the New York State District Attorney or federal, any of the federal or New York State District attorneys prosecuting you? Well, that's exactly right. And you know, the reality is there was a fraud. You know, the fraud was, it was their fraud where they tried to frame me with paid witness testimony here in New York, and they continue to attack me,

and they're orchestrating and really directly prosecuting a criminal case in contravention of, you know, our Constitution. I mean, you know, the other issue will is I've asked the Department of Justice, the Biden administration's Department of Justice, Merrick Garland, to step in and take the prosecution out of the hands of this private Chevron law firm and prosecute me directly. It's bizarre, right? I'm probably the only lawyer in America who wants to be prosecuted by the Department of Justice right now. But I need to deal with professionals. I mean, I wouldn't be locked up if I had the DOJ as my prosecutor. I mean, they would deal with me professionally. Frankly, they'd probably dismiss the case because they don't want to take it. So we've got to get

it out of the hands of the private Chevron law firm that should not be private, criminal, corporate prosecutions in the United States of America. This is new territory. You know, for people worried about corporate control in our society, the Koch brothers, all that money this will spend over the last decades, you know, the Federalist Society, it's all happening through my case. In other words, all that influence that was bought and created over the last several decades in this country is being used to control a prosecution or for Chevron to control this prosecution. It's not right. I mean, yeah, I mean, that's that's what fascinates me about your case. And that's why I think it's so vitally important that more people know about it. But I mean, I guess just in closing, like,

it seems that like from your perspective, at least for the short term future, the outlook is pretty bleak. But I mean, are you and your attorneys, you still in this interview and like to meet, you seem fairly confident that in the long term, you will prevail in this matter? I believe we have, well, two issues. We have won the case. And they the fact they're taking such extreme measures to me is the surest sign that we have been successful. Okay. However, we have not collected the money Chevron owes you $10 billion to clean up the Amazon so people can live with dignity and lives can be saved. And so we haven't completely finished the job. And that's what they're trying to prevent. But I am hopeful. I'm optimistic. Personally, I feel strong and resilient. Well,

I've, by the way, we've gotten so much support because of this crazy overreach of a prosecution. You know, I have now I have 68 Nobel laureates demanding my release. They also wrote a letter to Merrick Garland demanding he take over the prosecution. You know, hundreds, thousands of lawyers around the world are associations, the International Association of Democratic Law professors like Charlie Messon from Harvard. I mean, it's incredible. And like, I didn't have this support before. And because of this crazy prosecution that everyone is bothered by, the support has been growing and growing. And I think we're going to the duties of Ecuador are going to win. Now I might have to pay and I am paying a heavy personal price right now.

But I'm also working with my clients to build a movement. And I think ultimately that movement will hold Chevron, not just partially accountable, but fully accountable. I guess in closing for anyone who's listening to this and is interested in your case. Is there a way that you would recommend them show their support to you or way to contact Biden's Justice Department on your behalf? And then also, if they are in the greater New York City tri-state area, if they would like to show up at the courthouse, how would you recommend doing that? Or like, when and where should they show some support? Thank you. Okay. So for those who live in New York, come to my trial on Monday morning of next week, which is the beginning of the defense case,

we're going to have a rally in front of the federal courthouse and sorry for the noise, in downtown Manhattan at 830 in the morning. And that's at 500 Pearl Street. The other thing people can do is go to our website. It's called freeDonziger.org, F-R-E-E-D-O-N-Z-I-G-E-R. And join the campaign. There's information about a petition to Merrick Garland. You can call the Department of Justice, the numbers there. And you can also help us by contributing if you're so inclined to our legal defense fund, because obviously it takes money to deal with these monsters. But just the important thing is go to the website, freeDonziger, and freeDonziger.org, and just join our effort in any way you can. That's what we need. So but if you are in New York City, this

upcoming Monday, 830 in the morning, 500 Pearl Street, there'll be a rally in support of you and the people of Ecuador, really. Yeah, exactly. So, you know, we just, we need support and we need to continue to build. This is a citizen's movement, and that's the only thing that will hold these courts in Chevron ultimately accountable and stop this abuse of power, which is really what it is. Well, Stephen, I want to thank you for your time. You were literally walking down a street in Manhattan right now, having just gotten out of the courthouse. I want to thank you for taking the time to check in with us and extend you all our admiration and support here from the podcast family and our listenership. And just wish you the best and stay strong and good luck in

fighting this ongoing Travis Steve Justice. Thanks so much, Will, for the opportunity to speak once again on this platform. I love your work. Keep up the great work. I'll keep you posted. Thanks a lot. Stephen Donsinger, ladies and gentlemen.