Posted on | October 9, 2013 | 252 Comments
— Roger Simon (@rogerlsimon) October 9, 2013
As if to demonstrate the deliberate cruelty of “lawfare,” former federal official Shirley Sherrod, who filed a meritless lawsuit against Andrew Breitbart, is continuing her vindictive litigation even after his death by suing his widow. J. Christian Adams of the Election Law Center wonders who is paying the steep fees at Kirkland & Ellis:
There are plenty of leftist Sugar Daddies who would relish harassing Andrew Breitbart. Some of them are wicked enough even to harass his widow. . . . If a Sugar Daddy is funding Sherrod’s case, then Sherrod ought to say so. She ought to confess that the lawsuit is a crusade funded by outsiders, and not about justice. . . .
They might take the matter on a contingency fee. When you are finished laughing, consider the other means they can fund the lawsuit. Big Law has become notorious for helping left wing causes for free. They use the money from paying clients, like AOL, Boeing, Walgreens, Avis and others in other matters to subsidize left wing litigation. That’s how the attacks on voter ID are funded. That’s how GITMO terrorists got free representation at Covington and Burling.
Read the whole thing. Last night, while researching my defense against the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., lawsuit — in which a convicted felon is suing me and four others for $1 million — I was studying the recent case in which Patterico was sued by Nadia Naffe, a frivolous lawsuit incited by Brett Kimberlin’s associate Neal Rauhauser that was subsequently dismissed. Who paid the attorney’s fees in that case?
The Left’s entitlement mentality — Shirley Sherrod seems to imagine she had a right to be employed by the federal government, and that Andrew Breitbart unjustly deprived her of that right — is at the root of this trend toward “lawfare” harassment.
Over and over during the past 17 months, while I have been repeatedly harassed and defamed by Brett Kimberlin and his supporters, my friends have often asked me why I never sued or filed criminal charges. It is one part pragmatism and one part principle.
From the pragmatic standpoint, as a journalist, it is very difficult (and certainly inadvisable) to write about a civil case in which one is a plaintiff or a criminal case in which one is a victim. In the latter case, cops will tell you not to discuss an ongoing investigation, and in the former case, no wise lawyer wishes to represent a plaintiff who won’t shut up about his litigation. (See “Nadia Naffe Won’t Shut Up, But She’ll Threaten You To Make You Shut Up,” by Ken White.)
In point of fact, I have been careful in writing about my status as a defendant in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., lawsuit, even though the whole point of Kimberlin’s lawsuit is to silence me, an unrighteous purpose he cannot lawfully achieve, neither by means of his own harassment, nor by proxy through the actions of his supporters, nor by his vindictive (and laughably flawed) pro se litigation.
Even as such evil and deranged personalities as Neal Rauhauser and Bill Schmalfeldt continue lying about me, I must balance my concern for counteracting the deliberate harm they intend to inflict through their falsehoods, and my determination not to be intimidated, with a rational concern for my interests as a defendant.
Yet it is a self-evident truth that Brett Kimberlin falsely accuses me of having done to him what he is now in fact doing to me:
“Defendants . . . have conspired to engage in a pattern
of filing abusive civil suits, peace orders and
criminal charges against Plaintiff. . . . These filings have
been done with malice and without probable cause.”
I never sued Brett Kimberlin. I never filed criminal charges nor have I ever sought a restraining order against Brett Kimberlin. All I have done is to tell the truth about Brett Kimberlin, and there is nothing Brett Kimberlin hates as much as he hates the truth.
The dishonest pro se litigant Brett Kimberlin, whose false assault charge against Aaron Walker was the subject of Walker’s own 28,000-word opus that first attracted my interest as a journalist, has never cared what harm his wickedness causes to others. Nor is Brett Kimberlin guided by any principle of honor, whereas I have striven to heed the wisdom of Andrew Jackson’s mother:
“Never tell a lie, nor take what is not your own, nor sue anybody for slander, assault and battery. Always settle them cases yourself.”
Brett Kimberlin has covered his own name in dishonor, and the Kimberlin v. Walker, et al., lawsuit is part of his ongoing attempt to evade responsibility for his crimes, something that was evident to another of Kimberlin’s targets, progressive blogger Seth Allen:
This whole lawsuit in and of itself was libel. I proved that in court. The only reason Kimberlin received [a $100 judgment] was because of the default judgement.
I believe Kimberlin actually believes a lot of the things he says.
But not all. I think a long time ago he wrote a script in his mind in order to explain away what happened all those years ago in Speedway, Indiana.
So said Seth Allen in December 2011, six months before I had ever even heard the name “Brett Kimberlin” and, while Seth is wrong about many things, but he was certainly correct about that. No one on the Left — not a single liberal blogger of note — would stand up for their fellow progressive Seth Allen’s First Amendment rights, and the Left’s continued silence about Kimberlin’s wickedness is consistent with their tacit support for Shirley Sherrod’s vindictive “lawfare” against Susie Breitbart, the widowed mother of four children.
Shirley Sherrod resigned. She is not suing Tom Vilsack, nor is Shirley Sherrod suing Vilsack’s boss, Barack Obama. Somebody should ask the President what he thinks about this, but there is not one honest reporter in the White House press corps.
We live in an age of wickedness, injustice and dishonor. You can do something genuinely good by mailing a check today:
— Lee Stranahan (@Stranahan) October 9, 2013
— Donlyn Turnbull (@DonlynTurnbull) October 9, 2013
Simply awful. Going after the families of those who you disagree with? Really?
Yes, really. Remember when Bill Schmalfeldt threatened my wife? Remember all the evil Schmalfeldt did to Lee Stranahan’s family? And the Lonely Conservative speaks the gospel truth:
More and more I’m beginning to believe that there are very few people on the left who are decent. . . .
I really don’t know these rotten leftists sleep at night. They really are evil.
Amen, sister! Preach it!