KimberlinFiles.org

Posted on Comments


The National Bloggers Club has been a valuable ally in supporting and defending bloggers targeted by harassment and intimidation. Today is “Everybody Blog Brett Kimberlin Day.” I join with National Bloggers Club president Ali Akbar in sincerely requesting that readers concerned about defending First Amendment rights online visit the club’s special site, KimberlinFiles.org, and please give generously. Fellow bloggers can help by including the image and link in their coverage of the Kimberlin case.

— Robert Stacy McCain, Whereabouts Unknown

UPDATE: As of 2 p.m. today, the top eight threads on the Memorandum blog aggregation site were:

So I guess this whole “suppress the truth through intimidation” thing is working pretty good for Brett Kimberlin, eh?

UPDATE II: In response to queries from donors who would prefer to pay via PayPal rather than credit card, the National Bloggers Club has created THIS LINK HERE THAT YOU CAN CLICK to contribute that way.

112 comments

  3.  Let me ask you one question: What makes you think it’s ok to tell foundations what they can do with their money?

    Not all foundations are left wing. Most are very quiet and low key, and fund things you probably approve of.

  5. It’s Blog About Bottom Feeder Brett Kimberlin Day…

    Like many conservatives I have followed the story of Brett Kimberlin that first came to my attention through a blog post at…

  7. It was a pleasure and an honor to talk with Stacy on the Andrea Shea King Radio Patriot show tonight. He gave me a shout out and good words and we talked about Kimberlin and his negative impact on ex-cons trying to live honest lives. BigFurHat followed me on the call-in list and he also talked about the differences between folks on the right who still distrust me (I have no heartburn over that, I made my bed, so to speak) and folks on the left who embrace Kimberlin and crew, fund them and actively use them. I prefer the folks on the right, even though it limits my audience, inhibits the dissemination of the words I write. I would rather have to prove myself every day to a sceptical readership than slip back into criminal activities because no one called me to account.
    All in all, it was a great show, with Stacy telling the abridged version of his posts (with some tid-bits not in them) and was capped off by the Glenn Beck interviews of Patrick Frey and Aaron Walker.

  14.  Short version:  Orrin Hatch advocated for revocation of Kimberlin’s parole in 1997, and was sued by BK for it, which led to a unanimous resolution of the US Senate decrying the suit, which was dismissed by the court later.

    And people think Hatch is going to lose?  Heh, that’s cute.

  17. Smitty’s disqus settings are probably set to email.  Either that or disqus is messed up.  My disqus settings are to NOT email me any replies to my comments, but I got an email reply from Smitty to a totally “talking about the weather” kind of comment. His was a one-line reply of no import, and just for the fun of it.  Somehow I got it in my email.  So that might be why you got an email.  (my word economy is bad today, sorry.)

    The policy here is to not poke the Ewok with sticks and stuff.  I was doing some poking.  NTTAWWT.  I am happy to oblige the concilium regni.  Besides, I’d rather have a beer with Ace than most bloggers, even if I have stopped hanging out at his site.

    Ace is definitely a good guy to have on your side.

  20.  Hatch is probably going to win, but this has and will have nothing to do with that. How many people outside the political blogosphere know about this Kimberlin guy? Probably very, very few, because nobody’s talking about him. The most effect Kimberlin will have on the election MIGHT be to add to Romney’s margin of victory in Indiana.

  21. With all due respect: and do what judicially or legislatively?
    And are you sure you want to follow that rabbit?

    The one big thing is, as stated above by Dave, that there are some criminal charges that could be filed…and you can shed light on the dude and his associates (all of them), as well as who is giving him money (all of them).  Vote for people who would be willing and able to do that; give money to charitable groups that have steered clear of people like him (with both, good luck finding them, but they are likely out there).

    But what else is there?  Take away tax exemption?  Take away internet anonymity?  As for the SWATTING, how are you going to completely stop that nasty little game — more surveillance of everyone and their mother?
    You sure you want to go there? (and rest assured what do you think the people in power will do with your pleas to “do something!” — isn’t that what got us the healthcare bill? the NDAA/SOPA?  we said “do something!  right now!” and they did)   I’m sure a lot of people in power would be really happy if give you those things if you ask for it, even ask for it nonspecifically (that’s the reason they have people like BK and his pals as buddies).

  22. That’s the sticky to this icky, isn’t it?  ‘mother brings up a good point, but then again so do you.

    This will likely end badly — it’s a good attitude to take; you’re never disappointed!

  23. Certainly more can be done to prevent harassment of the sort we’re protesting. Restricting excessive pro se litigation, or reinstituting laws against barratry would be one way to shut down Kimberlin’s little lawfare spree. As for preventing SWATting, that just requires getting local LE and prosecutors to do their jobs – something often best accomplished by local pressure from the voters. Throwing up our hands and moaning. “Oh, this will only make Leviathan stronger, boo hoo!” certainly isn’t going to stop this kind of nonsense.

  27. Well put.  Also, let us not forget that we now know that Ace has been targeted by these thugs, so unless he’s done something really horrible to you or your friends, it is imperative for all of us to defend him.

    I haven’t seen any proof TCLP that he’s such a person.

  32. But the problem is that we have elected officials that will be quite eager to shut down freedoms for all (in the name of fixing things, et. al.), rather than the things you just suggested IF we aren’t very exact in what we want done.

    Unfortunately we no longer can say simply “do something” and expect the right thing to be done.  Unfortunately too many people are probably going to do just that.

    Kimberlin could or should be open for a vexatious litigation suit (among other things), whoever was behind the SWATTING should be open for criminal charges (among other things)…and whoever their cronies/associates/fellow travellers are should be called out for hanging with them…but it has to be targeted specifically; otherwise the payback could be great.

  33. Ending tax exemptions for all forms of charitable giving is both principled and tactically expedient and will in fact end well.

  34.  I’d prefer they just end them on the percentage that’s not spent directly on the causes they purport to promote. The part that goes towards wages, salaries, and advertising should be considered taxable income. The part that is actually spent directly helping people should not be taxed. Some charities start out doing good work, then as they grow, they start spending more on salaries, perks, and bonuses, and of course advertising their causes. A smaller percentage goes to the cause. The Wounded Warrior Project is a good example of a charity that started out doing great work but which now is allegedly spending more and more on salaries for executives and other bullshit, including paying high salaried actors like Lorraine Braco to star in advertisements, like nobody is going to donate if some performer paid performer doesn’t urge them to do so.

  35.  I have to agree with you here in spirit, if you’re not careful you can really open up a can of worms.

    Unfortunately, there are already laws against what I would love to see somebody do to Kimberlin, and crossing state lines to do it would just make matters worse. And, you know, he is somebody’s son, or father, brother, etc. (like I give a good fuck about that). So I’ll just reiterate, I don’t recommend such an action. I don’t discourage it, wouldn’t tell it if I found out it was in the works, but I don’t recommend or encourage it.

    So it might be necessary at some point to consider some kind of legislation or judicial what the fuck ever, as there might not be any other options most decent people would be comfortable with. Otherwise, Kimberlin might just be the first wave of a new trend.

  36. The ONLY proper purpose of tax policy is to raise the revenue needed for government to perform it’s proper duties, ALL other tax policies are leftist social engineering.

  37.  Really?

    Seriously, foundations must give away 5% of the market value of their assets every year. Were we taxed, normally, on our income, and allowed to deduct our expenses only, not the grants we give, the government would not receive a whole lot of money, and the benefit we give to the community would be seriously impaired.

    Now, I have issues with the government telling anyone what they can do with their own money, never mind if it’s a foundation or an individual. What makes me howl with laughter is when supposed conservatives suddenly decide that foundations somehow need to be told how they may spend their own money.

  40. Whether individually or in incorporation people have the right to spend THEIR money as they please, subject to a very few and specific limitations.

  41. Tax preferences give them the right to spend my money. If you are suggesting that I am willing to imperil the good work done some Foundations and other NGOs in order to throttle the left your assessment is correct.

  43. There are examples of good legislative efforts that stifle frivolous and malicious lawsuits. There are surely responsible yet limited ways of dealing with someone who has engaged in over a 100 losing civil actions.

  44. Kimberlin has conducted numerous lawsuits that are basically whiskey t foxtrot of nature — I think there is some recourse against him that (as well as his associates).  
    I’m sure that uncovering his past doesn’t help his “charitable organizations” and reporting on his present probably does no good either (that goes for his associates as well).
    The SWAT thing (and other instances) are breaking criminal law.

    It appears to me that we do  not necessarily need more legislature (more rules that apply to the innocent as well, who likely don’t know how to go about circumventing them — like some people do)….we simply need what we already have enforced.

    As for your other alternative: I’d highly doubt it happening; that’s really far-fetched (and quite frankly, when you really think about it, most likely very unnecessary).

Comments are closed.