Hoge’s Victory Lap

Posted on Comments

After his stunning courtroom triumph today over the atrocious troll Bill Schmalfeldt, John Hoge recounts at length exactly what kind of atrocious troll Bill Schmalfeldt is:

On 14 February, I received 40 tweets in less than one hour from @BreitbartUnmask ranting about Lee Stranahan, Aaron Walker, and me. Just after midnight on 15 February, I posted a notice on this blog and on Twitter addressed to @OldUncleBastard, @BreitbartUnmask, and @OccupyRebellion demanding that they stop communicating directly with me.

Now this relates to two sections of Maryland law, Harassment (§3-803) and Misuse of Electronic Communication (§3-805), that Hoge had read and which apparently Schmalfeldt hadn’t.

Understand this: It is one thing to say mean things about someone, but another to say mean things to someone.

The use of e-mail or Twitter to communicate hateful messages to someone — when the recipient has demanded that you cease such communications, notifying you that further messages will result in a complaint under the above sections of the law — is quite foolhardy.

And . . . Bill Schmalfeldt is quite a fool.

Such a fool is Bill Schmalfeldt that he supposed he might bring legal action against Hoge — don’t ask me to explain that — and listened to some of his online friends (including “Breitbart Unmasked”) who encouraged him to think that he, Schmalfeldt, was actually a victim.

Sadly, no.

Friday afternoon I talked to a friend, an attorney of no small reputation, who was somewhat skeptical of the use of Maryland’s law in this manner, which he felt might establish a bad precedent — a chilling effect on free speech, as it were. And so I began to say in a very serious way, how deeply I was concerned about the possible infringement of Bill Schmalfeldt’s First Amendment rights.

Then I laughed and laughed and laughed.

After I’d finished laughing — it took a while, I gotta tell ya — I eventually went over to Hoge’s blog and hit the tip jar. Everybody should.

And then you, too, can laugh and laugh and laugh and . . .

 

53 comments

  1. Thanks, Stacy! Yes, Cabin Boy Bill is frothing at the keyboard over the end of online journalism. I guess I should apologize for putting you out of work.

    No, actually, the only kind of “journalism” affected by today’s case is the shoddy pseudo-journalism practiced by the likes of Bill Schmalfeldt. The law’s application is very narrow. BS is to refrain from communicating to me. He can write about me all he pleases so long as he avoids threats or defamation. This is nothing like the unconstitutional peace order that Brett Kimberlin sought against Aaron Walker (and was overturned on appeal).

  3. To see your enemies receive judgement against them, and to hear the lamentation of their blogposts.

  4. I am reminded of a recent piece by one RSM, with some embellishment:

    “You can’t do that.”
    But it makes me feel good.
    “It’s against the law.”
    Then we should change the law.
    “Why?”
    Because it makes me feel good, and I’m special. Plus, did you know I’m disabled?
    “Who cares about your feelings?”
    Hater. Did I mention I’m disabled?

  5. To be perfectly clear, the disability card is the equivalent of the race card here – it is designed to elicit sympathy, where otherwise there would be none. It is a tactic designed to emotionally confuse the target.

  10. Maryland gets one right.

    Maybe they should boot O’Malley and just let that inmate who’s been running the Baltimore Jail run the state. Of course everyone will have to get his name tattooed on their bodies, but efficiency has its costs.

  11. There’s a story I’ve heard once about a boy who recklessly hollers to the people in the village he grew up in that a wolf is down in the midst of the flock, killing sheep. Everyone believes him the first couple of times, because his alarming tone was so convincing. However, there was no wolf to be seen and the villagers scowl at the boy as they return to their homes. But one day, there was a wolf in the fields, picking off the sheep one by one. No one would believe the boy, and the entire flock was killed. You’re like that boy, except there never was a wolf.

  12. You may ask anything you like, but you have placed yourself in the line of fire. Whether you sympathize with those punks like Kimberlin, there are ways to make a point without engaging in illegality. You’ve harassed people that asked you to stop and leave them off your distribution list. You didn’t. Your problem is self inflicted.

    You have lost none of your rights. You’ve simply been told to leave someone alone. If you can’t see the difference, then you are in need of more help than you will ever be able to get here (or, likely, anywhere else, for that matter).

    As for the ridicule. Don’t associate with known felons and you can avoid a lot of trouble. My 12 year old grandson learned that early, why haven’t you?

    And spare us the wounded act. It won’t fly here, or among any other collection of sane adults.

  14. It’s a small start and we can hope they continue to grind until they catch Kimberlin between the stones.

  15. Are you Becca? Because that post was directed to her response.

    Are you Christian? Where in the Bible did he say to shun ex-prisoners? I missed that part. I thought he was all about forgiveness and all that.

    What law did I break? When did the “@mention” become what Twitter itself says it is not? How am I supposed to respond to lies told about me if the person lying about me does not allow me to respond?

    You know nothing about me. You are operating based on your preconceptions. I have harassed no one. I have RESPONDED to horrible things said about ME! But I no longer have that right, according to the good folks of Carroll County, Maryland. Hoge is now free to write whatever nonsensical tripe he cares to write about me, raise money off of my name like Stace does, like Aaron Walker does, like Lee Stranahan does, and you right wingers think that’s just fine. Make the “lib” just sit there and take it.

    Well, sir or madame… bullshit.

    @mentions are not direct contact. The Twitter Rules and Regulations have guidelines of what a user is supposed to do if he doesn’t want to be contacted by someone. Hoge bypassed those guidelines and went to the courts. Which is bullshit.

  16. I can’t speak for Becca, but I’ve read your work. You’re reprehensible and not fit for decent company.

  18. Back when I lived in Chicago, people would stand on street corners with bull horns, and blare out their
    political message. It was annoying, but the equivalent of the
    eccentrics who used to stand on soap boxes on street corners so that people would see them
    while they spoke about their pet cause.

    In both cases, it was possible to simply ignore them if you didn’t care to listen. As most people did most of the time; the cops wouldn’t bother the speakers unless they bothered other people.

    This worked on the concept that while the First Amendment says “freedom of speech”, it does not say people have to listen to other people’s speeches. It came down to something that lefties everywhere embrace passionately, unless it inconveniences them: freedom on choice. It’s not explicit in the Constitution, but the Constitution is all about choosing. God knows the lefties keep on preaching that mantra.

    So, we can choose not to listen, which enrages lefties, who are all about the messaging, even if the message content is zero, or less than zero.

    The INTERNET and other modern communication techniques changed that. The angry street speakers who got into the faces of passer-bys (and often a billy club along side the head) are the ancestors of the INTERNET troll. Now lefties, using their trolls, can direct their meaningless messages right into our faces, and the era of smacking rude cretins with a blackjack is behind us, alas. The freedom of choice has been taken away by thugs.

    So creatures like Bill Schmalfeldt can harass people with a greater degree of flexibility. Not “freedom”, but the abuse of freedom, where creatures like Bill Schmalfeldt (at the behest of their masters, I’m sure) can giggle in the privacy and comfort of their home while they harass other people they don’t like.

    Bill Schmalfeldt is not oppressed. His freedom of speech is still there under this order. He is merely inconvenienced and frustrated at not being able to fling poo where ever he chooses, whenever he chooses. Bill has been, metaphorically speaking, smacked along side the head with a billy club, and he is whining about being disciplined.

    He can rant and rave on his blog, Facebook, and other places, so long as he addresses the world in general, and not Hoge directly. Because no one has to listen, and that’s not the way he wants things to be. Bill has a message, you see, and by God, people are going to hear it!

    Save, now, they don’t have to. The freedom of choice has been restored. Hence his hissy fit.

  19. Gee, Bill, I thought you were all about the freedom of speech. Pablo and QM just exercised their rights, and you have a problem with that?

  21. You don’t say. I say you do, as evidenced by your response.

    That’s MY freedom of speech, Bill.

  22. Now, now, Bill! If you behave improperly, people will see you in a negative light, and say so. If you don’t like criticism, you shouldn’t be dishing it out.

    “@mentions are not direct contact.”

    Semantics. As for suing, mayhaps you might remember: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

    Just a thought.

  24. I doubt you would fight to the death for anything, Bill.

    Just my opinion, of course. I appreciate the thought, though.

  25. Not at all. I’ve been a commenter on many blogs for years, and have had many a fine debate with people on the other side. Some were friendly, some not. The unfriendly ones were sometimes FAR more unfriendly than you.

    But when anyone comes to a private forum and starts bleating about “freedom of speech” and “freedom of response” when folks simply disagree with their message, I know I am dealing with a troll. And trolls, by definition, are not there for debate or discussion. They don’t respect boundaries, and use rhetorical or emotional arguments to present their case. Not logic or factual ones. And counterarguments don’t work.

    In a nutshell, that’s you. You wouldn’t have been dragged to court otherwise.

    Criticisms are not an insults. If I insult you, it’s because you have been rude or dismissive, which is insulting behavior. As I said, if you don’t like it, don’t dish it out.

    OK, enough of this — have a nice day!

  27. 1. I’ve read both your writings and your tweets. Your words. I’ve heard you, with my own two ears, call into a radio program and proceed to insult (with vile comments) people who have provided you with a free and open forum. Your actions speak volumes.

    2. Pro tip: don’t start your appeal to someone with the supposition that their acquaintances are con artists and liars. It doesn’t help you.

  29. No, the words aren’t the problem, it’s the hateful stupidity. Mean and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

  31. We know what you write, you malignant little toad. We have your words, your tweets, your posts. All we need, you’ve given us.

  33. So you threaten to do something and when someone believes your threat you mock them? You need serious therapy. YOU brought this on. You wrote vile things and by using the @ symbol you sent them TO people. You were asked to stop. You could have very easily stopped using the @ symbol but you didn’t. I’m not sure if you are that stupid or someone egged you on to do their dirty work so they could keep their hands clean. In any case you did not stop when asked. So now there is a PO saying you can’t contact someone. Now you rant and rave and pretend this is the end of journalism. This is all very simple. You kept contacting people. You were asked to stop. You didn’t stop and escalated you actions. Now that a judge is making you stop you cry like a baby. Grow a set and accept responsibility for your actions.

  34. I’m pretty sure, judging by this thread alone, that I would rather hang out with Hoge. Mr. Schmalfeldt appears (to this layman, I am no shrink) to need some serious therapy for obsession disorder.

  35. I know I’ve never had the urge to go comment on the sites of people I consider to be my political enemies. It reminds me of an animal trying to urinate to mark its territory.

  36. When you are on your own turf, you might be able to act like an emperor and demand answers to your questions. Just like on Lee Stranahan’s radio show, you’re not in charge here. That appears to infuriate you. So, Bill, I’ll pray for you, that God sends his Holy Spirit to comfort you and to give you peace. Happy Father’s Day!

  37. So, let’s keep the discussion in the reality-based sphere, say wot?

    Reality seems to be your problem.

  41. Btw, it is funny watching Schmalfeldt pretend he is like an open book, given that he has blown off two subpoenas of his documents. But hey, “don’t look at what these documents I refuse to turn over show. No, no, just believe my word…

    “after I was proven a liar in court.”

    Exactly who is going to buy that?

  46. And this reply just goes to further prove that you STILL refuse to take any responsibility for your actions. You seem to think that you can keep trying to contact someone and it’s their responsibility to find a way to block your vile rantings. If I stood outside your house and yelled vile things to you using a bullhorn would it be your responsibility to wear earplugs to block me out, or would it be my responsibility to stop when asked? Same difference here. You were asked to stop contacting someone. You refused and indeed stepped up your contacts. End of story. It’s a simple law and simple to follow.

  47. “”Cabin Boy” is not defamatory.”

    I seem to remember you threatening to take people to court and sue them for calling you that.

  48. See Bill, you can’t help using insulting language. No one here is calling you names but you can’t but help to call Stranahan “Stranny” . Being insulting is your stock in trade. You can’t help yourself can you? You lose credibility when you can’t speak without being insulting.

  49. NO, Genghis Khan was asked what the best thing in the world was and the quote ends with “lamentation of their women.” Jerry Pournelle had the quote in one of his anthologies of the “There Will Be War” series.

    I only read a couple of Conan The Barbarian comics. Didn’t care for the swill in comic form, so I didn’t go see the swill in theaters.

Comments are closed.