The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Why Does Ezra Klein Hate Gays?

Posted on | March 14, 2014 | 91 Comments

It’s a silly question, but his fellow liberals are trying to tell Klein he can’t hire who he wants at Vox.com:

Hipster Homophobia: Ezra Klein’s Vox
hires Falwell-loving gay-bashing “gay”
— John Aravosis

Ezra Klein’s Queer New Hire
— American Prospect

Vox’s Unbelievably Terrible New Hire
— Slate

Since when did having the “correct” opinion about homosexuality become a necessary qualification for a reporter?

 

Category: Gays

Death at SXSW

Posted on | March 14, 2014 | 12 Comments

Madness:

Rashad Charjuan Owens, 21, the driver in a deadly downtown wreck who police suspected of driving drunk, will be charged with two counts of capital murder and 23 counts of aggravated assault with a vehicle after the car plowed through a crowded street full of people waiting for a South by Southwest concert, according to police.
An Austin woman riding on the back of a moped and a man from the Netherlands on a bicycle were killed when the car hit a crowd of people outside Mohawk. More than 20 others taken to the hospital.
The Travis County Medical Examiner’s Office said 27-year-old Jamie West of Austin was killed after Owens’ car slammed into a moped she was riding on.
According to a post on MassiveMusic.com, one of the victim’s was 35-year-old Steven Craenmehr. “This is an irreplaceable loss for the MassiveMusic family and we are grateful for the years we spent with him,” the statement said. Craenmehr was on a bicycle at the time of the crash.
Two people remained in critical condition, and three others had serious injuries and were being treated at area hospitals, Austin-Travis County EMS Chief of Staff James Shamard said.

Category: Crime

‘I’d Had Enough of the Insanity’

Posted on | March 13, 2014 | 77 Comments

Inside the madhouse of Kremlin-funded Russia Today:

Staci Bivens knew something was seriously wrong when her bosses at Russia Today asked her to put together a story alleging that Germany — Europe’s economic powerhouse — was a failed state.
“It was me and two managers and they had already discussed what they wanted,” Bivens, an American who worked in RT’s Moscow headquarters from 2009 through 2011, said of a meeting she’d had to discuss the segment before a planned reporting trip to Germany. “They called me in and it was really surreal. One of the managers said, ‘The story is that the West is failing, Germany is a failed state.’”
Bivens, who had spent time in Germany, told the managers the story wasn’t true — the term “failed state” is reserved for countries that fail to provide basic government services, like Somalia or Congo, not for economically advanced, industrialized nations like Germany. They insisted. Bivens refused. RT flew a crew to Germany ahead of Bivens, who was flown in later to do a few standups and interviews about racism in Germany. It was the beginning of the end of her RT career.
“At that point I’d been there for a little bit and I’d had enough of the insanity,” Bivens said. She stayed until the end of her contract in 2011 and didn’t make an effort to renew it.
Judging by interviews with seven former and current employees, Bivens’ story is typical. RT, the global English-language news network funded by the Russian government, has come into the spotlight since the Russian invasion of Crimea, which the network has defended tooth-and-nail. The invasion has led to two high-profile rebellions within the ranks: first, an on-air condemnation of the invasion by RT America host Abby Martin, followed days later by the live resignation of another host, Liz Wahl. Martin, who hosts an opinion show, said that Russia’s actions were wrong; Wahl, a news anchor, went one step further, saying that she could not work at a network that found Russia’s actions acceptable.
The public shake-up and skewed coverage of Ukraine has pulled aside RT’s curtain, exposing the network’s propaganda apparatus, which relies on a number of Western reporters and producers. . . .

Read the rest by Rosie Gray at BuzzFeed. (Yes, I know — everybody hates BuzzFeed, but this is a good story.)

 

Category: Media Bias, Russia

‘An Honest Mistake?’ Has Brett Kimberlin Ever Done Anything ‘Honest’ in His Life?

Posted on | March 12, 2014 | 39 Comments

U.S. District Judge Paul W. Grimm has been thrown onto the horns of a legal dilemma by the extraordinary procedural misconduct of pro se plaintiff Brett Kimberlin. As the attorney for Michelle Malkin and Twitchy has pointed out, this is unprecedented:

Mr. Kimberlin’s conduct has taken this Court into uncharted waters. Twitchy’s research has not found a single case, Federal or State, involving a party’s forgery of a court summons — much less, the subsequent sending of it through the U.S. Mail with the intent to deceive. This is a serious matter, and obviously one that calls for a severe sanction. . . . [D]ismissal with prejudice and a significant award of fees against Mr. Kimberlin is warranted. . . .
[T]he questions raised to date regarding Mr. Kimberlin’s “summons” to Twitchy and other certifications to the court, against the backdrop of his many crimen falsi convictions, make this lack of authentication central. Neither the defendants nor this Court can have any confidence that anything Mr. Kimberlin attaches to his filings, is what it purports to be.

Now, Kimberlin has filed a Second Amended Complaint, even while overwhelming arguments against his First Amended Complaint have yet to be ruled on by Judge Grimm. Kimberlin’s heinous abuse of the court process has already damaged the defendants’ ability to get justice in this case and now, after the fatal legal flaws in his First Amended Complaint have been thoroughly exposed, we are confronted with the Second Amended Complaint that in many ways amounts to an entirely different lawsuit. We are left hanging in limbo, wondering whether (a) Judge Grimm will require us to reply to the Second Amended Complaint, or (b) Judge Grimm now has enough evidence of Kimberlin’s mala fides to dismiss the whole thing in toto.

Obviously, I hope and pray that it is (b), but Judge Grimm must consider the likelihood that if he dismisses Kimberlin’s (entirely meritless) lawsuit, this will mean that the Fourth Circuit will have to deal with Kimberlin’s (equally meritless) appeal. Alternatively, then, Judge Grimm — who must be laughing his ass off at the absurdity of the crackpot paranoia evident in Kimberlin’s Second Amended Complaint — can let the big-dollar lawyers rip it to tatters, which will impose a near-term burden on the defendants, but which almost certainly guarantees that when Judge Grimm does dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, it will be gone for good, with no hope that Kimberlin could ever succeed on appeal.

Meanwhile, we have Kimberlin’s answer to Judge Grimm’s “show cause” order in regard to the forged Twitchy summons:

Plaintiff has apologized to counsel for Defendant Twitchy on several occasions for the mistake he made when serving Twitchy. Plaintiff explained to counsel that the mistake was not in any way done with an intent to mislead. Instead, it was a misunderstanding of the process, which Plaintiff as a pro se litigant did not understand, but now understands full well.
Plaintiff did include Defendant Twitchy in the Complaint in several paragraphs as a named Defendant but Plaintiff inadvertently left Twitchy off the caption.
When the Clerk initially sent Plaintiff 21 summons, Plaintiff spent hours compiling them with the Complaints, the envelopes and certified cards only to discover that the summons for Twitchy was missing. At the time, Plaintiff assumed that the Clerk had inadvertently forgotten to include that summons since Twitchy was named as a Defendant in the Complaint and Twitchy’s address was listed in paragraph 25 of the Complaint. Therefore, Plaintiff typed the address on a summons and included it with the Complaint to Defendant Twitchy and sent it certified to that address. . . .
Plaintiff apologizes once again to Defendant Twitchy and counsel, and to the Court for this misunderstanding. Plaintiff assures the Court that this will not occur again. . . .
Plaintiff urges this Court not to impose sanctions on Plaintiff since this was an honest mistake, he is proceeding pro se and was unaware of the proper procedure, he has learned from the mistake, he has apologized to all parties, and Defendant Twitchy was not prejudiced.

Twitter reaction to these excuses was rather amusing:

Joking aside, the problem is that Kimberlin’s habitual dishonesty and procedural misconduct in his previous pro se court cases is so thoroughly documented — as several of the defendants have pointed out in their filings — that it strains credulity for him now to claim he made an “honest mistake” because he “was unaware of the proper procedure.” Hell, no. Brett Kimberlin deliberately falsified a court document, thinking he was so clever that the defendants wouldn’t notice his clumsy forgery. This is analogous to how Kimberlin got caught in 1978, brazenly trying to forge documents while driving a car with evidence of his bombings in the trunk. Kimberlin has spent the past 35 years blaming others for his own stupidity, trying to convince people that his conviction was the result of a corrupt government conspiracy, never once expressing regret for blowing off Carl DeLong’s leg, while presenting himself to naive “progressive” donors as a former “political prisoner.” But I digress . . .

The Perjuring Pro Se Pipsqueak continues trying to get Ace of Spades’ lawyer Paul Alan Levy thrown off the case, and it is mordantly amusing to watch the notorious felon Brett Kimberlin present himself as a self-appointed Arbiter of Legal Ethics.

 

Category: The Kimberlin Files

Feminist Professors Gone Wild

Posted on | March 12, 2014 | 40 Comments

Evidently, “pro-choice” is a synonym for “shut up” on our nation’s campuses, Jennifer Kabbany reports at The College Fix:

A department of feminist studies professor [at University of California Santa Barbara] has been accused of going berserk after coming across a campus prolife demonstration that used extremely graphic displays, leading a small mob of students to chant “tear down the sign” before grabbing one of the signs, storming off with it, then allegedly engaging in an altercation with a 16-year-old prolife protestor who had followed the educator to retrieve it.
Much of the scuffle was recorded on a smartphone by the 16-year-old, Thrin Short. The yet-to-be-released video is now in the custody of Santa Barbara law enforcement officials, who are investigating the March 4 incident.
The professor at the heart of the controversy is Mireille Miller-Young, an associate professor whose area of emphasis is black cultural studies, pornography and sex work, according to her faculty webpage. . . .
Most of the prolife demonstrators attend Thomas Aquinas College, a private, Catholic institution nearby, and none are enrolled at UCSB, [said Kristina Garza, a spokeswoman for Riverside-based Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust ].
As the prolife demonstrators tried to engage students one-on-one in conversation during a lull in the chanting, that’s when Miller-Young allegedly grabbed one of their signs and stormed off, followed by two UCSB students, Garza said, adding Thrin followed the threesome with her older sister, Joan, in tow and calling 9-1-1. . . .
According to the Santa Barbara Independent,which first reported the story, Miller-Young declined to comment and has retained an attorney, who stated on her client’s behalf that “it is a pending matter, so it is not appropriate to comment at this time. … We will let the process take its course. I am confident that it will become clear that the events did not unfold as the anti-choice demonstrators say they did.”
The Santa Barbara Independent also attempted numerous times to obtain a statement from local law enforcement, but they did not return the newspaper’s repeated request for comment.
Garza said her group is eager to publish the video, and will post updates on their website as they become available.
Joan Short, 21, also published her version of events.
“Although we were interrupted, we reached a lot of students,” she stated. “Many of them will not be able to think complacently about abortion ever again. … With babies dying every day, we know that we have to use even our spare time to do something to end abortion. We will continue to bring the truth about abortion to UCSB.”

Hat-tip: Jim Treacher at the Daily Caller.

 


Category: Abortion, Education, Feminism

E-Mail to a Friend: Are We Being Too Judgmental About the Duke Porn Star?

Posted on | March 12, 2014 | 115 Comments

@Belle_Knox is Duke freshman Women’s Studies major Miriam Weeks.

If nothing else, the controversy over Miriam Weeks, a/k/a “Belle Knox,” is proving the truth of Rule 5 (“Everybody Loves a Pretty Girl“), as the most popular posts here in recent days have been the ones about the Duke University freshman’s pornography career. And the second-most popular story Tuesday at the New York Daily News had this headline:

Duke University porn star
Belle Knox denies report that
her parents are heartbroken
The Duke University coed who turned to porn to pay tuition claimed Monday that her parents are not upset with her X-rated off-campus activities.
Miriam Weeks, 18, denied a report that her dad, an Army doctor, was heartbroken when he learned of her moonlighting gig upon returning from deployment in Afghanistan.
“My parents aren’t upset,” Weeks told the Daily News Monday in between filming scenes for an upcoming adult film.
“I want my family left out of it. If people criticize me that’s one thing, but leave my family alone,” Weeks said.
She said she was “really, really upset” over an online article Monday in The Daily Mail that identified her parents as Dr. Kevin and Harcharan Weeks, devout Catholics from Spokane, Wash.

Except, of course, that in earlier interviews conducted behind a pseudonym, she conveyed the idea that her parents’ inability (or unwillingness) to pay her tuition at prestigious Duke was responsible for her decision to do porn. In other words, her family was relevant, as long as Miriam Weeks could tell stories about them without anybody being able to fact-check her. However, once journalists started doing some actual reporting — rather than just acting as stenographers for the privileged prep-school graduate — suddenly her family is off-limits, because their version of the story doesn’t exactly match her version.

Considering that Miriam Weeks told Real Clear Education that she started watching porn when she was 11, maybe there is something about the story between her and her family worth examining, but I rather doubt her Catholic parents are overjoyed that their daughter was the No. 1 most-viewed video on PornHub Sunday. “Oh, look! Our daughter’s bisexual female co-star described Miriam as ‘quite the little freak.’ Isn’t it wonderful? Her teachers at Gonzaga Prep will be so proud.”

Controversy requires disagreement and conflict, and one friendly reader e-mailed to say I was “out of line” using the plain English word “whore” to describe Miriam Weeks. But why play word games? You can call her a “sex worker” or “adult entertainer,” and your preference for politically correct language doesn’t change the reality of what she does. So I sent my friend the following e-mail reply:

We can agree to disagree on porn and sluts. Remember: I’m a father of six, including two daughters. My oldest daughter graduated high school at 16, worked her way through community college and state university, and graduated summa cum laude, debt-free.
What we are being asked to believe in the case of Miriam Weeks, the youngest daughter of an affluent doctor — his reported income is $200,000 a year, and his home is valued at nearly $500,000 — is that it was so important for her to attend Duke (ranked #7 nationally) that she turned down a full scholarship to Vanderbilt (ranked #17) and, poor pitiful thing, she was practically compelled to do porn to pay the bills.
What originally irritated me about this (as with so many stories I report about) was the way the media handled the story, trying to tell us what to think, and just flat-out lying:

  • First, the Duke Chronicle and other outlets tried to pretend that “Lauren”/”Aurora” was still anonymous, when (a) evidently everybody on campus at Duke had known for weeks that her name is Miriam Weeks and that her porn name is “Belle Knox”; and (b) anybody with Google could find this out.
  • Second, tasteful euphemism was deployed to disguise what Miriam Weeks actually gets paid for — e.g., sucking c**k on camera — and we were told that her career was “empowering,” so that Belle Knox was presented as a sort of feminist hero role-model. Would you want that message conveyed to your daughters? I think not.
  • Third, the media tried to sneak a sort of clever reversal of morality past us, telling us that while (a) there was nothing shameful about an 18-year-old girl getting paid for sucking c**k on camera, on the other hand (b) there is something deeply shameful about disapproving of Miriam Weeks’s choice of careers.

While I am a social conservative, I am not a prude, nor am I ignorant of the ways of the world. Remember, I used to be a Democrat, and in my hedonistic hellbound youth, I worked briefly as a strip-club DJ and dated a few dancers. However, as a DJ, it was my job to remind patrons of the club’s “touch-and-go” rule:

“Gentlemen, all of our lovely Kelly’s Girls are here for your viewing pleasure, but let me call your attention to the large man beside the door. Say hello to Bruno. You can look all you want, but if you decide to touch, our friend Bruno is in charge of enforcing our touch-and-go policy here at Kelly’s and, trust me, you don’t want to argue with Bruno. All right, now, guys, put your hands together for the beautiful Shondra, coming up on the main stage!”

Dancers are not hookers, in other words. There is a difference between being nude — live on stage, or posing on camera — and getting paid to have sex. The admiration of beauty is one thing, and hired fornication is another. Perhaps many people, whether they generally approve of porn or not, don’t see the real distinction between the two, but it is important to keep it in mind.
Would I approve of my daughter posing in Playboy? No, of course not. But merely posing nude would not be as so objectionably sinful and morally corrupting as being paid to have sex on camera (or off-camera, for that matter).
If you would disapprove of your daughter or sister doing porn — as I think most men would — isn’t it in some sense hypocritical to say that it’s OK for other women and girls to do it? Let’s grant that there have always been prostitutes in the world, and some women are going to do it, no matter how much anyone may disapprove. But what the enthusiastic admirers of Miriam Weeks are trying to tell us is that we do not have the right to disapprove, that anyone who disapproves is somehow less “enlightened” than those who approve of porn, so that in effect we are being bullied into the “enlightened” view that there is nothing wrong with an 18-year-old girl getting paid to do bisexual three-ways on camera.
And hey, what about the bondage-and-rape scenes Miriam Weeks was doing? Are you telling me that having this petite, innocent-looking teenager enact the sadistic rape fantasies of perverts is harmless? Is it really “empowering” to send a message to weirdos that young girls enjoy having sex imposed on them violently? Excuse my skepticism.
The story of Miriam Weeks isn’t really about Miriam Weeks. I have no personal animosity toward her. How could I? I don’t even know her. And I wish her no harm. No, this is a story about the elite intelligentsia and their enlightened friends in the liberal media trying to tell us what to think, trying to impose their nihilistic amoral secularism on allegedly benighted Americans who, in Our President’s memorable phrase, are clinging to their guns and Bibles. But I’d rather my daughter go to a state college and maintain her dignity, than to have her go to some elite university and become an “empowered” feminist whore.
Ultimately, I believe, dignity and honor are more valuable than any prestigious credential. And I hope most Americans agree.
Respectfully yours,
— RSM

The elite are free to enjoy their prestige, but they have no right to tell us how to think. We are still free to disagree with them. We are doomed, if we lose our liberty to call sin by its right name.

 


 

PREVIOUSLY:

 

Category: Education, Feminism, Sex

LIVE AT FIVE: 03.12.14

Posted on | March 12, 2014 | 9 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


TOP NEWS
CIA Pushes Back Against Senate Spying Accusations

CIA director Brennan denies agency hacked Senate computers

Senator Feinstein Takes Feud With CIA Public


Cold War Media Tactics Fuel Ukraine Crisis
Former Soviet Agitprop worker Atbashian sees echoes of Cold War in Ukraine debate



Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 Search Widens
Passengers carrying stolen passports identified



POLITICS
David Jolly Says Obamacare Frustration A Factor In Special Election Win

The new Republican Congressman from Pinellas County, Florida

Tops Democrat Alex Sink 49-47, Libertarian candidate gets 5%


Administration Lagging Far Behind Obamacare Enrollment Goals


General Sinclair Won’t Plead Guilty If He Winds Up On Sex Offender Registry, Defense Says

Vermont Lawmaker’s Proposal To Tax Both Plastic And Paper Bags Draws Fire

Records Show Dead Michigan Woman Voted In 2010 Election

Activist Tied To Muslim Brotherhood To Host Fundraiser For Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.)



THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Crude Prices Fall For A Third Day As US Stockpiles Expand: NYMEX $99.52, Brent $108.17
S&P 500 Falls From Record Levels, Commodities Slump
JCP Writing Feel-Good Sequel?
Trade Battle Ferments Over European Cheese
Asian Stocks Give Ground, Copper Takes A Spill
Mens’ Wearhouse Buys Joseph A. Bank
Plug Power Shares Soar On Walmart Deal
Happy Birthday, Internet!
Dong Nguyen Considering Resurrecting “Flappy Bird”
Sprint Owner’s New Appeal For T-Mobile Merger
Amazon Kindle Paperwhite Gets Goodreads, Parental Controls In Update
Want To Play Tetris On A Skyscraper?



SPORTS
No Place Like Home: Pens Blank Caps At Consol 2-0

Crosby brings the puck up the ice

Pittsburgh sweeps home & home series as well as season series from fading Capitals

Durant, Westbrook Lead Thunder Past Rockets

Hall Lifts Oilers Over Wild In Shootout

Lakers To Announce Kobe Bryant Done For The Year

Stars Beat Blues In OT After Dedicating Game To Ailing Peverley

NASCAR To Allow Cooling Units In Qualifiers

Vrbata Leads Coyotes To 3-1 Win Over Panthers

Nationals Edge Yankees 3-2 At Space Coast Stadium



FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
“Hogan’s Heroes” Actress Cynthia Lynn Dies, 76

Pictured with (now) sole survivor of cast, Robert Clary (Cpl. LeBeau), Lynn played Colonel Klink’s secretary Helga

Cause of death: multiple organ failure

Unspeakable Armenian Crashes Car In Beverly Hills

Juan Pablo: Worst “Bachelor” Ever?

“Game Of Thrones” TV Show Creators Already Know How Book Series Ends

Tilda Swinton Tweaks Putin At SXSW

“Glamour” Puts Lena Dunham On Cover. Ugh.

Chelsea Handler Sticks It To Piers Morgan

Jason Sudeikis In Talks To Star As Fletch In “Fletch Won”

Britney Spears Plans Attention-Getting Wedding At Graceland

Ed Helms To Star In Comedy “Epic Fail” For Lionsgate

Lorde Responds To Taylor Swift Lesbian Joke, Slams Radio Host After Ellen DeGeneres Comparison

Miley Cyrus Performs In Her Underwear After Missing Costume Change During Milwaukee Show



FOREIGNERS
UN: Front Companies, Embassies Mask Nork Weapons Trade
Turkey Tense Ahead Of Funeral For Teenage Boy Killed By Police During Anti-Regime Riots
Russia Calls US Aid To Ukraine In Crimea Standoff Illegal
Spate Of Reports Sounds New Alarm On Syria’s Humanitarian Crisis
Harper Piecing Together Markets To Diversify Trade Away From US
Indian Maoists Kill 16 Policemen
Pakistani Court Hearing Musharraf Treason Trial Adjourns
Bachelet Sworn In Again As Chile’s President
Haitians Sue UN Over Cholera Epidemic
Swedish Journalist Gunned Down In Central Kabul
El Salvador Conservatives March to Demand Recount



BLOGS & STUFF
First Street Journal: Ain’t Karma A Bitch?
Doug Powers: Climate Emergency – Global Warming Has Raised Ocean Level So Much, Cory Booker Can No Longer Drive To Hawaii
Twitchy: “Insensitive Morons” – Progress Texas Touts Sleazy Photoshops Of Paraplegic Greg Abbott
The Quinton Report: The Sun Sets On Red Maryland
American Power: Seizing Additional Bases, Russia Cements Control In Crimea
American Thinker: Breeders – How Gay Men Destroyed The Left
Blackfive: If You Are a GWOT Vet Or Know One, Read This
Conservatives4Palin: “What Is Lois Hiding?”
Don Surber: Daily Scoreboard, March 11
Jammie Wearing Fools: De Blasio Facing Three Lawsuits Over Attempt To Shut Down Charter Schools
Joe For America: Is Facebook Censoring Conservative Content?
JustOneMinute: Upcoming Obamacare Waivers
Pat Dollard: Issa Releases Damning Report On Lois Lerner
Protein Wisdom: McConnell To Tea Partiers – Kneel Before Zod!
Shot In The Dark: Everyone’s A Minstrel
Stump: Obamacare Watch – Holding Them To It
The Jawa Report: Libyan Civil War Not Quite Over
The Lonely Conservative: Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) Claims He Drove To Hawaii
This Ain’t Hell: Who Is On TSO’s Kindle – Fantasy Edition
Megan McArdle: February’s Middling News For Obamacare


Shop Amazon – Gift Ideas in Computers & Accessories

Category: Live at Five

Brett Kimberlin and ‘False Narratives’

Posted on | March 11, 2014 | 20 Comments

‘Speedway Bomber’ Brett Kimberlin was sentenced to 50 years in 1981

“Brett C. Kimberlin schemed to elude justice with a series of bizarre plots designed to murder, maim and rob his enemies, create havoc at Speedway and discredit the chief government prosecutor.
“These plots occurred as lawmen followed the trail of the man who terrorized Speedway with bombs in 1978. . . .
“Kimberlin seemed to be the only one with a possible motive — to distract police attention from the Scyphers murder and delay or halt their quiet investigation of him.”
— R. Joseph Gelarden, “Bizarre plots planned by Speedway Bomber; Kimberlin case a maze of murder, deceit,” Indianapolis Star, Oct. 18, 1981

Avaunt! and quit my sight! let the earth hide thee!
Thy bones are marrowless, thy blood is cold;
Thou hast no speculation in those eyes
Which thou dost glare with! . . .
Hence, horrible shadow!
Unreal mockery, hence!
— Macbeth, Act 3, Scene 4

As much as I’d rather be reading the latest news or the several freebie books I picked up at CPAC last week, instead I’ve been reading Brett Kimberlin’s conspiracy theory masterpiece, “Second Amended Complaint for Damages, Violation of Civil Rights, RICO and State Law Torts.” I first saw this Saturday, so while Dave Weigel was getting the story of Steve Stockman’s awesome hot tub party, I was actually sitting amid the revelry  in the same hotel suite (#4105) skimming through the Pro Se Pipsqueak’s 83-page farrago of lies. Here you go:

ECF 100-2 Redacted

By my count, Kimberlin uses the phrases “false narrative” or “false narratives” 61 times. On at least one occasion, he uses these phrases three times in the same paragraph, although I’m not sure if the convicted perjurer ever explains what exactly is false about these “narratives” with which he seems so evidently obsessed. And really, this was the problem with the whole story from the start, long before I’d ever heard of the name “Brett Kimberlin.” In October 2010, Patrick “Patterico” Frey published an extensive account of Kimberlin’s “history as a convicted bomber, drug smuggler, perjurer, and suspected murderer.” In response, Kimberlin threatened to sue Frey, who replied:

My post is based primarily on a number of published news articles. I ask you to specify anything in my post that you claim is false. If I have made any mistakes I am always happy to correct them. But I won’t take down anything that is true.

To this, Brett Kimberlin infamously replied:

“I have filed over a hundred lawsuits and another
one will be no sweat for me. On the other hand,
it will cost you a lot of time and money . . .”

Patterico repeated his request that Kimberlin specify any falsehood in the post which, so far as I know, Kimberlin still never has.

Eight months after that e-mail exchange, in July 2011, Patterico was SWATted. This may be Just Another Random Coincidence, but Patterico doesn’t think so, and the question of who actually perpetrated that SWATting — or the SWATtings of Mike Stack (June 2011), Erick Erickson (May 2012) and Aaron Walker (June 2012) — has never been determined as a matter of law. Why? Because the FBI’s cybercrime unit is totally incompetent? Because protecting the First Amendment rights of bloggers is a low priority for the Justice Department? Hey, I’m just asking questions here, but according to Kimberlin’s RICO suit, Patterico actually knows for a fact that Kimberlin had nothing to do with his SWATting, yet nevertheless deliberately “imputed” that Kimberlin was responsible, then conspired with others to spread this malicious falsehood. And anyone who says different — anyone who argues that Patterico’s suspicions are sincere, who believes Patterico would be happy if the FBI could actually solve these SWATting cases — is thereby part of “an online mob engaged in a multi-year defamation campaign,” furthering “a conspiracy to threaten, assault and intimidate Plaintiff,” according to Kimberlin’s Second Amended Complaint.

The phrase “according to Kimberlin” is worth noting, because one of the additions to the perjuring plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (in paragraphs 33-37, pp. 7-10) begins like this:

In 2009, three military intelligence contractors, HBGary, Berico Technologies and Palantir created a secret group called “Team Themis” to destroy progressive organizations and their staff on behalf of corporate clients and federal agencies, including the United States Chamber of Commerce and FBI.

What follows in the next three pages is about 900 words of evidence that the tinfoil in Brett Kimberlin’s hat isn’t very effective in blocking out the Secret CIA Mind-Control Beams. It’s basically an adaptation of the conspiracy theory Neal Rauhauser published in February 2012 as “Andrew Breitbart’s ISR Cell?”

This theory was paranoid gibberish when Rauhauser first published it, and it is still paranoid gibberish now that Rauhauser’s “client” (or “associate”) Brett Kimberlin recycles it in his vexatious federal lawsuit. Apparently, then, Kimberlin decided that the problem with his original complaint was that it wasn’t insane enough, so he added an extra helping of crazy, and now expects U.S. District Judge Paul W. Grimm to approve a lawsuit which claims that nearly two dozen defendants are part of a clandestine plot against Kimberlin “on behalf of … federal agencies, including the … FBI.” Welcome to Crazyville, Your Honor.

Of course, it is possible to believe two things simultaneously:

  1. That Brett Kimberlin is suffering from paranoid delusions;
    and
  2. That the defendants did actually conspire against Kimberlin.

But the question before Judge Grimm is not whether the Plaintiff is sane, nor whether there was a pattern of cooperation among the defendants, but whether Kimberlin has adequately pleaded, as a matter of law, that he has suffered actual injury as a consequence of illegal action. We haven’t reached the fact part of litigation and are still at the law stage. This means that Kimberlin’s strategy — allege! allege! allege! — is still less important than his competence in legal tactics. I’m not a lawyer, but his endlessly repetitive elaboration of claims seems rather unlikely to persuade Judge Grimm, e.g., paragraphs 76-77, pp. 22-24:

76. Plaintiff has been under siege by the Defendants for more than two years. They have been engaged in constant cyber bullying and cyber stalking of him and his family by using information and communication technologies to support deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior to harm Plaintiff. He lives in constant fear for himself and his family because of the bullying and threats against him. Virtually every time Plaintiff appears in Court, Defendants Walker and Hoge have stalked him, and Plaintiff fears that Defendant Walker will assault him again. Both Defendants Walker and Hoge constantly write blog posts, some with photos of their shots at the shooting range, stating how they are armed and dangerous and will not hesitate to use their weapons against Plaintiff. Plaintiff has witnessed Defendants Walker, Akbar, McCain,Frey and Hoge attack anyone online who questions their conduct, and at least one reporter has received many death threats after writing about the Defendants.
77. Defendants Akbar, Hoge, Walker, Thomas aka KimberlinUnmasked and McCain have continued to defame and publicly attack Plaintiff after the filing of this Complaint with thousands of tweets and blog posts falsely calling Plaintiff a swatter and stating that he caused Defendant Walker’s termination. In virtually every post and tweet, these Defendants use Plaintiffs name along with a criminal accusation to have that title listed on Internet search engines in order to cause the maximum damage to Plaintiff, his reputation, his family, his businesses and his livelihood.

See, these claims that I am engaged in “cyber bullying” and “cyberstalking” of Kimberlin, that I “defame and publicly attack Plaintiff” are merely word games; I report and comment and Kimberlin seems to think that by applying pejorative labels to my writing, he has proven that I’ve done what he says I’ve done. He’s suing me in federal court for $2 million, and separately suing me in state court for $1 million, and I’m supposed to pretend this isn’t happening? I’m not allowed to update readers on the process? But never mind that: Where are all these “thousands of tweets and blog posts” I’ve supposedly published “after the filing of this Complaint . . . falsely calling Plaintiff a swatter and stating that he caused Defendant Walker’s termination”? For that matter, the sequence of events between (a) Aaron Walker becoming a target of Kimberlin’s wrath, and (b) Aaron Walker getting fired from his job, may be examined by anyone, and it is difficult to say that (a) was wholly unrelated to (b), even if Walker was otherwise somehow at fault.

Bad things happen to people Brett Kimberlin doesn’t like. Yet, according to Kimberlin’s theory, for us to observe facts plainly in evidence, and to draw from those facts the inference that there may be a non-coincidental relationship between these facts, is evidence of malice and intentional defamation. Meanwhile, however, Kimberlin alleges that there is a causal relationship between (a) the defendants writing about him, and (b) “many death threats” against Kimberlin.

Question: How many people have been arrested, prosecuted and convicted for making “death threats” against Kimberlin?

Not a single one, to my knowledge, so why am I being sued for allegedly having incited alleged “threats” for which the threateners themselves have never been prosecuted? And all of this, of course, ignores the landmark Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling.

If I were to write, “Michael Moore is a fat, worthless, America-hating commie who deserves to die a slow, painful death,” no court could hold me responsible if some misguided reader decided to kidnap Moore, tie him to a tree and dismember him with a meat cleaver.

Michael Moore is indeed both fat and worthless, but no court would rule that even the most vehement expression of contempt for him would be “likely to incite or produce . . . imminent lawless action.” My reference to Moore’s “slow, painful death,” could easily be interpreted as the hope that he’d suffer a fatal immune system breakdown resulting in his entire body being covered in oozing herpes lesions.

If Brett Kimberlin “lives in constant fear,” why is that?

His own guilty conscience, I dare say. Like Macbeth facing Banquo’s ghost, perhaps Kimberlin is haunted by the thought that “blood will have blood,” that the departed spirits of Carl DeLong and Julia Scyphers still moan in the quiet hours of night, demanding justice.

Does the plaintiff dislike being reminded that there is no statute of limitation for murder? So be it — such reminders are not torts.

In his Second Amended Complain, Kimberlin cites a May 29, 2012 article I wrote at the American Spectator which described him as “a dangerous man who by all rights should still be behind bars.” In point of fact, in 1981, Kimberlin was sentenced to 50 years in prison. Because he was sent to prison before the passage of federal “Truth in Sentencing” laws, Kimberlin served only 17 years of that sentence and, I am informed, is still a parolee and will be until 2030. Is it controversial to argue that persons convicted of serious violent crimes should be required to serve more than one-third of their sentences? So be it — but controversial opinions are not torts, either.

“Conspiracy, my ass. He chose poorly.”
— Robert Stacy McCain, July 31, 2013

Arguing with an “all-around sociopath” (to quote Slate’s description of Kimberlin) is never a pleasant experience. Fortunately, Michelle Malkin’s attorney Michael F. Smith does masterful work:

Mr. Kimberlin’s conduct has taken this Court into uncharted waters. Twitchy’s research has not found a single case, Federal or State, involving a party’s forgery of a court summons — much less, the subsequent sending of it through the U.S. Mail with the intent to deceive. This is a serious matter, and obviously one that calls for a severe sanction. . . . [D]ismissal with prejudice and a significant award of fees against Mr. Kimberlin is warranted. . . .
[T]he questions raised to date regarding Mr. Kimberlin’s “summons” to Twitchy and other certifications to the court, against the backdrop of his many crimen falsi convictions, make this lack of authentication central. Neither the defendants nor this Court can have any confidence that anything Mr. Kimberlin attaches to his filings, is what it purports to be.
None of the additional factual material [in Kimberlin’s response to Malkin’s motion to dismiss] is relevant to the issue before this Court: whether Mr. Kimberlin validly has stated a claim, or whether dismissal is appropriate. . . . All of it is simply an attempt to portray himself as persecuted, and use this Court as a “trampoline” for his excess energies and need to have the last word. . . .
Mr. Kimberlin and the nearly two dozen defendants he has sued have diametric political views and philosophies, and when three conservative bloggers/commentators found themselves “swatted,” various defendants commented publicly about the unusual coincidence of their criticism of Mr. Kimberlin. Reading the allegations of the [First Amended Complain] in a light most favorable to him . . . what Mr. Kimberlin brings this Court is a garden-variety defamation complaint that he seeks to whip into a massive conspiracy and treble-damage claim under RICO. . . .
The outrageous parallel Mr. Kimberlin tries to draw between himself and various persecuted individuals and groups through the ages is preposterous, and deserves no response other than to note that none of those tragic victims ever blew anyone’s leg off, perjured themselves, or concocted a lie specifically designed (and timed) to throw an election for the Presidency of the United States. . . .
[T]he conduct at the heart of Mr. Kimberlin’s supposed “conspiracy” is protected by the First Amendment; his Response fails to counter that. Dismissal is appropriate.

You can read the whole thing. Having spent all day plowing through Kimberlin’s crap, I’m ready to write about something cheerful and encouraging: Sarah Palin’s unwanted “neighbor” died. Also, you’ll be glad to know Justin and Selena are back together.





 

Category: The Kimberlin Files
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin