Vile Lie-Peddler @Karoli Kuns and the Posthumous Vindication of Breitbart

Posted on Comments

“Liberal bias is not a matter of unfairness, but rather a matter of dishonesty — deliberately ignoring some facts, and misrepresenting other facts, in order to misinform the public by portraying to them a politically falsified view of events and personalities. If there were ever any honest person employed by the New York Times (we stipulate the hypothetical), that person would have been obligated to quit Thursday morning [July 25], when the banner headline on the front page of the paper should have been: ‘ANDREW BREITBART WAS RIGHT.'”
— Robert Stacy McCain, “Beauty, Brains and Bias,” The American Spectator, July 26

Andrew Breitbart had a special contempt for Karoli Kuns, whose hatefulness and ignorance are exceeded only by her stunning dishonesty. Of course, there is no such thing as an honest Democrat, but the vile lies peddled by Karoli Kuns are especially odious because she has made a habit of hatefully smearing honest and decent people.

It’s formulaic: Anyone who tells the truth, Karoli Kuns calls a liar, while she reserves her highest praise for people whose dishonesty is notorious. And speaking of Neal Rauhauser, here is how Karoli Kuns praised the head “Weiner Truther” in November 2012:

From the moment the Anthony Weiner scandal broke, Neal Rauhauser smelled a rat, and as it turns out, he was right. . . .
I’m certain the Breitbots expected all left-wing outrage over the setup to evaporate when Rep. Weiner resigned. . . .
One person wouldn’t let it go, and that one person was Neal Rauhauser, who kept on with it and keeps on with it until this day.

Well, well, well, Karoli Kuns. Seems you’ve changed your tune, eh?

Whereas in 2012, you were certain that Anthony Weiner was an innocent victim of a “setup” by “Breitbots” — and thus, Weiner’s defender Neal Rauhauser was deserving of praise — now that Andrew Breitbart has been vindicated and Anthony Weiner has been disgraced, you say the Weiner story is “not of national concern.”

Because you peddle vile lies, that’s why.

There was never any “setup” of Anthony Weiner by anyone. All honest and intelligent people recognized this in 2011, but Neal Rauhauser manufactured a series of lies intended to deceive the ignorant and Rauhauser was, as you say, the one person who “wouldn’t let it go.” He was the acknowledged leader of “Weiner Truthers” and he kept lying about Andrew Breitbart even after Breitbart was dead.

Karoli Kuns of Ventura, California, interviewed on GRITtv, 2010

Were you stupid enough to believe Neal Rauhauser’s lies about Andrew Breitbart, Karoli Kuns? I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, and instead conclude that you knew Rauhauser was lying — as any intelligent person would — and deliberately helped him peddle vile lies, because that’s all you’ve ever done in your entire life.

And here’s the truly interesting thing, Karoli Kuns: The title of that dishonest 3,000-word November 2012 blog post of yours didn’t even mention either Andrew Breitbart or Anthony Weiner.

Neal Rauhauser, Brett Kimberlin,
and a Right Wing Blueprint

Isn’t that interesting, Karoli Kuns? Your entire purpose was to defend the notorious liar Neal Rauhauser and the convicted felon Brett Kimberlin.

And how did you do that? You peddled vile lies.

Here’s what you wrote about Neal Rauhauser:

Neal Rauhauser in particular has been robbed of his ability to earn a living simply because right wing bloggers decided to make him the devil incarnate with no evidence, no actual wrongdoing, and no foundation in truth.

“No foundation in truth”? When were you ever interested in truth, Karoli Kuns? I would ask you to go read “‘A Faint Whiff of Vigilante Hysteria’: Weinergate’s Kimberlin Connection,” if I thought you were interested in truth, but you’re not now and never have been.

Rauhauser hasn’t been “robbed of his ability to earn a living.” Certainly “right wing bloggers” have not prevented any liberal group from hiring Rauhauser. The problem is, Neal is so compulsively dishonest even liberals don’t want to work with him. Which is amazing, considering some of them don’t mind being associated with you.

As for your “who are we to judge” attitude toward Brett Kimberlin — “Whatever the truth about Kimberlin’s past is,” as if the facts weren’t actually known — there are a couple of important names missing from your account: Julia Scyphers and Carl DeLong. Once people know about Julia Scyphers and Carl DeLong, it tends to affect their attitude about Brett Kimberlin. Not in a good way, either.

Hey, did you know Tetyana Kimberlin fears for her life?

Please don’t pay any attention to the facts, Karoli Kuns.

All honest and decent people share Andrew Breitbart’s contempt for you, but whatever you do, don’t ever repent your vile lies.

Because we wouldn’t want you to save your soul from Hell.

 

68 comments

  1. There is a point where “that incredibly stupid” becomes unbelievable and “complicit in evil” becomes the most obvious explanation.

    So many leftists have just gone off the deep end and plunged into pure evil, defending murderers and pedophiles.

    And yet they continue to influence so many people who are just to lazy to think on their own and we continue to slide into the abyss with monsters like this leading the way…

  2. You are correct. Nobody is forcing them to defend the indefensible. They do this voluntarily, because they love evil and hate truth.

  5. Which is why I say (in various forms; the gist is always the same), “Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil.”

    Indistinguishable, not only in its effect on the victims, but in the moral content of their afflictor.

  6. And you will find, that if you click on the enlarged image of Andrew’s Tweet, it will open in a new window, so that you may re-Tweet to your heart’s content.

    I would have simply embedded it, but wanted to preserve it, for fear that perhaps someone in custody of his account might delete it, as they seem to have deleted some of his discourse with the foul Neal Rauhauser, whom he equally loathed.

Comments are closed.