Think Progress Makes a Martyr Out of Brad Friedman, While Censoring Any Mention of His Business Partner, Convicted Bomber Brett Kimberlin
[Welcome, Instapundit readers! This post has information about the anti-speech thuggery of convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin, and his business partner Brad Friedman, against me.]
Think Progress is making Brad Friedman into a martyr by pretending that the Chamber of Commerce is targeting Friedman and his “family.” But what Think Progress isn’t telling you: the Chamber of Commerce was far more interested in Friedman’s business partner, convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin.
Think Progress published parts of internal Chamber of Commerce e-mails talking about Friedman. But what Think Progress hides from you is that the Chamber was actually primarily interested in Kimberlin. They described Kimberlin as having “a bit of a checkered past and has been associated with some more radical and violent activities.” That’s a pretty mild description of a guy who set off several bombs, one of which blew off a man’s leg. Meanwhile, they were very kind to Friedman, describing him as “much more mainstream” and someone who “can often be seen on many of the political talk shows.”
Their focus was Kimberlin. But Think Progress cut out any mention of Kimberlin. Entirely.
Luckily, you have me here to tell you what Think Progress won’t.
Here’s the background.
You may recall that Larry O’Connor published a post in October titled Unrepentant Domestic Terrorist Behind Anti-Chamber of Commerce Internet Campaign:
Has the White House been influenced by a convicted domestic terrorist for its attack on the Chamber of Commerce?
The latest assault on the Chamber has been spear-headed by none other than the President himself and picked up by David Axelrod, MoveOn.org and all the usual Astro-Turfers who receive marching orders from the DNC. . . .
But one group was well ahead of the curve on this movement to stop the Chamber of Commerce. In fact, they even own the URL “StopTheChamber.com”. That group is the infamous Velvet Revolution headed by convicted violent criminal and bomber, Brett Kimberlin. In her extensive and detailed article on Kimberlin and his past violent crimes, Liberty Chick noted that left-wing blogs and main stream media organs routinely site Kimberlin and his partner, Brad Friedman as legitimate sources and as normative “watch-dogs” over-seeing right-wing election shenanigans. The problem is, Kimberlin is a convicted domestic terrorist who has been described as a habitual liar by those who have looked into his past.
It is perhaps no surprise that the Chamber of Commerce was interested in knowing who their opponents were, and late last week Think Progress reported that the Chamber was “working with set of ‘private security’ companies and lobbying firms to undermine their political opponents, including ThinkProgress.” Think Progress expressly labeled one of the opponents as Brad Friedman:
Another target was Brad Friedman, co-founder of The Brad Blog. Barr’s profile of Freidman included information about his life partner and his home address (sensitive information redacted by ThinkProgress):
Think Progress then published a (redacted) screenshot of an internal e-mail from one of the security companies, which had the previously described information about Friedman.
How did Think Progress get the e-mails, you might wonder? Did the security company accidentally forward their e-mails to Think Progress? Mmm, not quite. In the post that mentions Friedman, Think Progress describes the e-mails simply as “e-mails obtained by ThinkProgress,” but if you follow the link back to their original expose from earlier Thursday, you’ll see that members of a hacking group called “Anonymous” hacked into the e-mail of executives of one of the private security firms and published thousands of company e-mails.
In other words, the astounding invasion of Brad Friedman’s privacy — namely, a private investigator snooping on him — was revealed through the hacking of company e-mail. No privacy breach that.
In any event, Brad saw a cross and rushed to throw himself on it. He has published several posts referencing the discussion of him, and even ran to Democratic Underground to shout: U.S. CHAMBER’S THUGS TARGETED ME & MY FAMILY, NOW BRAD BLOG IS DOWN. Brad darkly insinuated that his site had been hacked, and even DU members were suspicious. One wrote: “Nobody has taken away your freedom of speech, Brad. Your Web host has shut down your site.” And then a guy called Vinnie from Indy had the gall to mention . . . Brett Kimberlin, saying: “Brett Kimberlin, I believe, is the other co-founder of the VR site with Brad.” Vinnie from Indy then linked a Google search for “Brett Kimberlin Speedway bomber.”
It’s weird how people from Indiana tend to remember him.
Regular readers of this site are familiar with Kimberlin. If you need a refresher, read this post. In short, Kimberlin set off numerous bombs, blowing the leg off a man with one of them. He later killed himself. The local paper reported that Kimberlin planned a murderous escape from prison, and was a suspect in arranging the shooting murder of an elderly woman.
Now he is partners with Brad Friedman.
Do you think the Chamber of Commerce was interested in Brett Kimberlin? Or Brad Friedman?
Think Progress mentioned only Brad Friedman in their post. But that e-mail they took a screenshot of? Here’s how that e-mail begins:
(Click to embiggen.)
This is the e-mail that describes Kimberlin as having “a bit of a checkered past and has been associated with some more radical and violent activities,” while describing Friedman as “much more mainstream” and someone who “can often be seen on many of the political talk shows.” You can click the image to read all of this.
If you want to see the entire e-mail, with appropriate redactions of personal information, you can see it here. Anonymous has put the hacked e-mails online, and they can be searched here. (I could give you a direct link to the unredacted e-mail, but I won’t.)
The salient point is this: there is not one word about Kimberlin in Think Progress’s post, even though Kimberlin was clearly the Chamber’s primary focus.
The left has been covering up Kimberlin for years. Friedman himself is deathly afraid that people will learn about Kimberlin’s past — so much so that he censors mention of Kimberlin in his comments. For my efforts in shining the spotlight on this violent and dishonest man, Kimberlin has threatened to sue me, and has written numerous letters to my bosses at my office, accusing me of stalking him and the like. It is guaranteed that this post, which makes a legitimate point about a site’s censoring of important information on a topic of public interest, will lead to another e-mail to my boss.
So be it.
His goal is to shut me up.
That’s not going to happen.
Maybe Think Progress will bury the truth about Brett Kimberlin.
I won’t.
P.S. Thanks to Ron Coleman of Likelihood of Confusion, who has agreed to represent me in any suit that Kimberlin might file. Coleman has an excellent reputation for handling blog-related litigation, and his blog is a new addition to my blogroll. Be sure to check it out.
P.P.S. Thanks to Liberty Chick for performing the redactions. After I found the e-mail that mentioned Kimberlin, I told her about it. She may have more today at Big Journalism.
UPDATE: Thanks to Instapundit for the links. Please consider bookmarking the main site, and follow my updates on Twitter here.
You can read the other related Think Progress post here. It is a post that details the anti-speech thuggery that convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin and his business partner Brad Friedman engage in towards critics like me, even as they decry similar behavior in others.
My backgrounder on convicted bomber Kimberlin, who is threatening to sue me for telling the truth about him, is here. He is a serial litigant who has filed over 100 lawsuits, so I am expecting this will happen soon.
Finally: although I have pro bono counsel, I would certainly welcome any help towards litigation costs and the cost of local counsel. If you want to help out, the donation buttons are on the right. Please consider becoming a “subscriber” and making a recurring donation of $9 per month. I expect to give special non-public litigation updates to subscribers if the lawsuit is filed.
Hmm… I wonder, will Kimberlin will actually file? It seems that from the little I know about litigation, discovery might be problematic for him. Assuming the suit is for defamation and/or libel, isn’t the truth a defense? Looking forward to future developments.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 2/14/2011 @ 1:18 amI’d like to see Ron’s take on the Sherrod lawsuit of Breitbart…
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/14/2011 @ 2:56 amI really like Ron’s blog.
And thank goodness for people like him.
Thinkprogress is beyond pathetic to cover for a terrorist for political reasons. They may think it’s a cute way to smear the Chamber, but in reality, it’s a great way to keep Brett’s con going against as many dupes as possible.
Comparing this ridiculous bias to the silly hysterics over Fox News’s anonymous (fake) insider, and Think Progress is really on a roll lately.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 4:07 amI was thrilled to see that Ron touched on the “7 Habits” issues with Schlock Mercenary…
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/14/2011 @ 4:27 amits like beck and piven all over again. liberal has a real life link to violence. and a conservative is called dangerous for noticing.
That being said, proving thinkprogress to be dishonest is a bit like shooting fish in a barrel.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/14/2011 @ 5:36 amWhat really bugs me about Brad Friedman’s constant BS is that there is a really important issue behind all of it. All good con artists know to pick something with an element of truth and abuse human nature to exploit it for money.
It’s a shame that Brett and Brad are taking energy meant to preserve truthful elections, and using that to make myths about this issue. The left and the right should have tremendous common ground, and also a lot of room for both sides to agree on a general set of improvements.
Instead, it’s delusional nonsense about Iran hacking local elections and Karl Rove murdering whistleblowers. And oh, don’t forget to contribute.
Like with the Sherrod lawsuit, I almost wish for a lawsuit so that I see depositions, but how many people have the time and energy to deal with that?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 5:54 amCrissyhooten should be by to defend his buddy, the election integrity expert.
JD (d56362) — 2/14/2011 @ 5:57 amHooten’s one of those guys who knows the value of honesty and fairness, and then drops it as soon as it doesn’t help him personally.
That’s worse than the common troll who has no interest in discussion.
A reasonable, patriotic person, who is a tad gullible, could be completely taken in by Brad/Brett’s particular style of lying. Their fear for the loss of their country’s true elections could overwhelm reason, and before they know it, they’ve entered their credit card number in, and Brad and Brett are a little richer.
Chris could have taken this lesson as a chance to become a little more street-wise, but instead, he takes it personally that he was fooled. It’s a shame, because I don’t think he’s an bad person at all… just pushed to being extremely defensive.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:14 amRon Coleman is good people.
Meanwhile, the Think Progress people show that they are what I find on my shoes when I make the mistake of walking through the dog park.
And they wanted to annoy Fox News about making up stuff?
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:23 am“In any event, Brad saw a cross and rushed to throw himself on it.”
Nicely done.
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:32 amSo blowing a mans leg off leading to a untimely death, plotting to kill someone and a murderous plan to break out of prison nets you a “checkered past” denotion – I wonder what adjective will be ascribed to Bin Laden? Dark Revolutionary? Troubled soul?
geez..
EricPWJohnson (cfc629) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:59 am‘well known Saudi dissident,’ just like Ghandi and Sakharov, that was Reuters take around 2002.
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:01 amSo Braddy is complaining that illegally obtained but unvalidated emails based upon open source information about he and his relationship with convicted domestic terrorist Brett Kimberlin are being leaked to the internet by his ALLIES. The emails allegedly were assembled by the agents of the target of a baseless smear campaign promoted by Brad and his allies last Fall. Brad is pretending his blog, so vital to the functioning of democracy, is being attacked by dark forces.
The Horror, The Horror.
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:15 amSPQR
exactly. i didn’t plan it this way, but my post yesterday perfectly complements this one.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:18 amIt’s not proven WHY Brett set those bombs, but if you look into what the investigators eventually came think about it, it’s incredibly dark. I realize the shooting of the grandmother and the child molestation issues are stale now. They will never be proven in a court of law, and simply stand as the most reasonable explanations for why bombs were set (as a diversion). Someone did execute Julia Scyphers, the person trying to protect her pre-teen granddaughter from then 20 something Brett Kimberlin, who she was thought was a creep for taking the child on roadtrips. When Julia insisted on keeping a personal watch on the pre-teen girl, Brett threatened to kill himself, but instead, someone executed Julia. The only witness died of cancer two weeks later.
Some investigators think that Brett used the bombings to distract from the Julia execution investigation, but the crimes Brett was convicted off carried a penalty of up to 230 years. Sadly, Brett conned the system into paroling him, and while in prison, also conned reporters about Dan Quayle in conspiracy theory that wouldn’t be out of place on his partner, Brad Friedman’s blog today.
His actions with the fabricated Dan Quayle pot deal con-game are more relevant to what Brad is doing today, but when you come to appreciate just how completely awful Brett is as a human being, you start to get quite disgusting with the people who are trying to silence a discussion about him.
This man was caught red handed dealing with explosives and timers conclusively linked to a man’s death. Brad is director of an organization houses in Brett’s residence that is very coy about how Brett is compensated.
Do not give any money to anyone affiliated with Brad Friedman or Brett Kimberlin, because they are con artists, in my opinion, and at least one of them is a vicious sort who has put prosecutors on his hit list before.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:24 am“Disgusting” should read “disgusted.”
At any rate, I think it is important that more people talk about this in more places. That’s the best response to SLAPP tactics.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:27 amDustin, obviously Patterico has dealt before with people every bit as vicious, deceptive, conniving and violent as Kimberlin. But it is a good idea that others be aware of the risks of playing with this pack of scum and is aware that these people are dangerous in several ways.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:37 amThese are the people William Yelverton looks to for news.
JD (2da347) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:45 amSPQR, I agree. I think Brett’s actually dangerous, and I worry in particular about Socrates, the progressive commenter who has been dealing with these people for quite a while.
I’m no tough guy, here. And frankly, I’m not going to dismiss the risk to Patterico, even though I agree with you he seems to be able to deal with it. Someone did post his address. That was a warning.
What’s interesting is that I know Brett’s address because we were going through VR’s tax records, and I made a point of not mentioning it (even though it’s helpful, because it shows that Brett is living well despite his victim(s) not living at all).
I think this is why Patterico respects Aaron Worthing. Aaron’s a great blogger, though he’s often unpolished, because he just isn’t afraid to stick his neck out.
I don’t want to goad Brett into proving he’s still got it in him to act beyond the harassing employer stage, and I think it would be wonderful if bloggers on the left would lend a hand to discussing and repudiating this creep, rather than white washing him the way Think Progress did.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:48 amDustin,
I want to know how this guy sets off 8 bombs injuring people and is walking around free in the first damn place
What the hell do you have to do to get someone put away?
How in the sam hill do you convince a breathing parole panel that – gee I terrorized a city, plotted a murderous prison rampage, plotted to kill a witness but I’ve paid my debt to the same society I tried to eliminate in the first place
and be FREAKin walking around…
EricPWJohnson (427c1e) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:02 amThat is infuriating Eric. It makes no sense to me. He was caught, dead to rights, and convicted. They could have left him in prison on those charges for three lifetimes, and instead, he lives well and free.
It’s a real insult to society as a matter of justice or practicality. I know they parole cons to save money, but in some cases, that’s extremely expensive in the long run.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:16 amDustin
> I think this is why Patterico respects Aaron Worthing. Aaron’s a great blogger, though he’s often unpolished…
So I make spelling errors alot. Its like Watters under the bridge, right?
(If a person can’t laugh at themselves, they are pathetic. I try not to be pathetic.)
> …because he just isn’t afraid to stick his neck out.
Wait, are you saying that Kimberlain has a deity I can insult to bring his wrath down on me? That might almost be a reason to do it.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:16 amEric
on the federal level they have a principle called “truth in sentencing.” basically, the time they sentence you to, is the time you serve. parole, good time, and all that, barely exists. it can shave a little of your time off, but you don’t hear of a guy sentenced to serve 20 years and getting out less than 18 years later.
Now, what they also do is reduce the sentence given in the first place. what it comes down to, is that almost all the decisions made typically by a parole board are made by the judge in the sentencing process up front. So what they give you is what you get.
some states have adopted similar approaches.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:20 amBrett Kimberlin is a walking, talking, living, breathing character from a Thomas Harris novel. His bombing spree and subsequent trial demonstrated that he is a remorseless, easily enraged, egomaniacal nut-job. He is without a moral compass. He lacks the intellectual framework that restrains most humans from becoming monsters. I confess that I am shocked and horrified to find out that this misanthrope is walking free.
Gunga (8c6ea3) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:33 amHey I heard that somebody said that ThinkProgress just makes stuff up. What do you think about that?
Gesundheit (aab7c6) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:38 amWhy is Brett Kimberlin walking around?
Progressives who seek mass revolution first must discomfort society and undermine the institutions of authority. One way to do that is to loose career criminals on an under-defended population. It shows the current government is unable to maintain order, and makes a case for regime change.
Modern social revolution thus becomes the current instigator of unrest and the promise to alleviate the suffering it fostered, along with the usual list of entitlements. Prisons are the breeding ground for the revolution’s shock troops, who of course will be summarily dispatched once they’re no longer needed.
ropelight (16b214) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:41 amThere is no progress when you merely Think Progress
Bill Maher (03e5c2) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:59 amHere’s his parole commission appeal.
He was sentenced to 50 years in prison, but paroled far before that.
Joe Biden got complaints that he wasn’t paroled much sooner, as retribution for Brett exposing Dan Quayle (the story was published the same day as one of his parole decisions), but thankfully no one bought that scam. As many have noted, Brett’s tendency is to attempt to pose as the victim of a high level conspiracy. Coincidences are manufactured, much as they are on bradblog. Things are mentioned together even if they have no relationship, but in a way that cleverly looks extremely suspicious. Enough truth is there to build on with a series of outright lies.
It’s very interesting.
Anyway, the guy should have been left in prison for 50 years.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:02 amThere’s a legal tactic known as “complexify”, which is employed by defense attorneys and mocked as “the chewbacca defense” these days.
When you try to discuss every aspect of a bradblog claim, or Brett Kimberlin generally, you wind up unable to discuss every element because there are so many of them. I think a lot of people who encounter this topic wind up unable to digest the entire thing. That’s why he brought in Dan Quayle and wrote Joe Biden. Enough people’s eyes glazed over eventually to the notion that this is more than just a psycho terrorist.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:06 amYes, but who found Kimberlin, and made the connections with Biden and the like, this seems to have been an early run at the Journolist with Newsweek and Gary Trudeau starting the ball rolling.
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:11 amNo, biden isn’t connected aside from his oversight as a Senator on the Judiciary Committee, Narciso. He did no wrong in this case. Brett wrote him a letter, basically. He has no affiliation.
He would like it to appear there was some seriousness to his Dan Quayle drug conspiracy, and how it led to him being punished as though he had a pattern of violence, but as the judge said “a decision above the guidelines appears warranted because your offense behavior involved the following aggravating factors: You were involved in multiple bombings.”
Like I said, complexify. Once someone tries to tell the whole tale, it does not make sense (pretend I said that in Johnnie Cochran’s voice) and people start to wonder if the whole case doesn’t make sense, instead of just ignoring the static.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:19 amHe wasn’t even a model prisoner.
He kept playing tricks with his phone calls, against regulations, finally getting caught, claiming he didn’t know it was against the rules, and then getting caught again.
It’s also clear that NBC News and Nina Totenburg and Kimberlin were trying to time this story to screw up the 1988 presidential election. Nothing surprising there, but this is the kind of dedication to democracy you can expect from Velvet Revolution and Bradblog. And NBC or Nina, for that matter, for airing a story without verification.
According to my link, Brett would tell the media his life was in danger, and then when the prison isolated him from the population because the media reported his life was in danger, Brett would complain that the Bush/Quayle campaign was putting him in isolation to prevent the truth about Quayle’s drug habit from being told.
And now we know there was no drug habit at all. It was the best possible scenario for Brett’s con that his story was kept from scrutiny until after the election, with the double benefit of Brett claiming oppression.
I think that kind of behavior should not have resulted in Kimberlin being considered a “good” prisoner. But I don’t know what kind of behavior those ratings are meant to prevent.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:35 amgary gulrud:
I have deleted your utterly off topic comment and the ones responding to it. I don’t blame anyone but you for throwing the conversation off topic, so I hope nobody else apologizes. As for you, if you are trying to demonstrate your complete lack of concern for a topic that has me getting letters to my boss and lawsuit threats from a serial litigant, you picked a great way to do it.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:08 pmNow I look slightly obsessed, but bear in mind (folks who didn’t see the thread earlier) I was trying to steer it back on topic.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:15 pmIf Aaron wants to start a “let’s argue about Sarah Palin’s fiscal policy in Alaska” thread he is welcome to. You can even pick an existing thread that has something to do with Palin, and does not concern a topic like this one that has real-world relevance for me.
But to come in and start discussing an utterly unrelated topic in this thread — if I have to explain how rude that is and why, it’s going to irritate me more.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:15 pmDustin: you are obviously interested in the topic of the post and I appreciate that.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:18 pmMy apologies for my contribution to the hijacking, Patterico.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:33 pmGary, you make an intelligent point, but your conduct in helping obfuscate away a serious story plays into the hands of Think Progress, Brad, and Brett. You also completely undermine your serious issue by bringing it up here.
You did it because you saw EPWJ’s handle and are ticked off. I have to admit, I used to do the exact same thing to him. Now I see just how annoying I was being.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:37 pmIt’s really un believable how they are willing to whitewash a sociopath for their own political ends,
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:39 pmand then as with Beck, ‘stigmatize’ anyone willing
to point it out.
narciso, left leaners could easily play sister souljah in this case and gain credibility (and feel good).
Your word “unbelievable” captures Think Progress taking the other path. What in the hell does it take to become toxic? I thought online folks generally agreed that calling someone’s boss or filing a lawsuit was crossing the line when we’re engaged in discourse.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:48 pm37. 43. Ok, won’t happen again. I was wrong.
gary gulrud (790d43) — 2/14/2011 @ 12:54 pmWell one thinks of when Horowitz and Collier left
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/14/2011 @ 1:02 pmthe Panthers milieu in the early 70s, over the Van Patter (sic) case, or what Whitaker Chambers had to put up with, when he started revealing secrets,
There is also an irony in Brad’s nailing himself to a cross over people gathering information on him and his convicted bomber friend — while his bomber friend is actually actively trying to harm me professionally, for telling the truth about him.
Of course, being a convicted bomber tends to harm one’s credibility when making complaints. But hey: it’s the thought that counts.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 1:15 pm“There is also an irony in Brad’s nailing himself to a cross over people gathering information on him and his convicted bomber friend — while his bomber friend is actually actively trying to harm me professionally”
Patterico – I think Braddy has proven himself immune to irony since he himself also tried to harm you professionally as I recall after to so thoroughly pantsed him on the subject of the ACORN tapes.
As an environmentalist, Braddy should climb down off that cross, we need to save that wood.
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 3:24 pmSo, Kimberlin did the crimes in the late 1970s and was paroled in the 1990’s. And Friedman didn’t get involved with him until the 2000’s. So why does Friedman have any connection to the crimes that Kimberlin committed about 25 years before they became business partners?
And how do you know that the Chamber of Commerce weren’t interested in finding out everything they could about both people?
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/14/2011 @ 5:09 pmJim, why do you think that strawmen are impressive here? Why do you think that misrepresenting what people are saying adds to your credibility? And why are you defending people who attack others’ political opinions while associating with violent criminals?
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:08 pmJim, the story covered above explains that Think Progress surgically deleted an exculpatory aspect of the story.
And I think there’s more to Brett than the bombings decades ago. There’s the fact he concocts massive politically oriented fabrications. That Brad tells tall tales and has a secret partner who is proven to concoct massive political stories (and has absolutely no scruples) is very interesting. You can’t understand Brad Blog if you don’t understand Brett Kimberlin. And Brad gets it. Go over there and post a comment just mentioning that name. I date ya! I’ll eat my own head if you can.
He’s covering that whole aspect up because he’s a liar.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:11 pmthanks for asking, btw. I’ll never get tired of this story.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:11 pm“So, Kimberlin did the crimes in the late 1970s and was paroled in the 1990′s.”
Jim – Brett violated his parole agreement and got sent back to the slammer for a few years. I think he finally got out early last decade.
“And how do you know that the Chamber of Commerce weren’t interested in finding out everything they could about both people?”
Jim – Would there be a problem with that given the $200,000 bounty Velvet Revolution put out for information on the Chamber of Commerce? If you were the Chamber would you wonder who these dirtbags were?
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:27 pmThis is ancillary to the main point but I was nevertheless impressed (or maybe I should say shocked) to read in the email the following:
If that is correct, VR and its organizations have a tremendous reach. That alone should make us care about who is involved and what they believe.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:29 pmDRJ – I think that statement embellishes quite a bit.
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:38 pmI hope it’s an exaggeration. Maybe they bought a lot of mailing lists.
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:49 pmI’m still confused as to How after reading his case file he was rated the most dangerous and still got parole – is their anyway to undo this?
How was he rated an 8 and its was calculated to be eligible in 228 months out of sentence of 600 and yet got parole much earlier
Am I reading it wrong?
And Pat, I apologize but when I am constantly attacked by Daleyrocks, SPqR Gary and JD when I comment on the topics and they have to try and bring up other things to attempt to discredit me – then you see where this can lead – I will refrain from it in the future – they wont because they have no intention of ever contributing to your blog – take a look at JD’s comment is it germain to the topic or a personal attack on someone?
But, like I said I will refrain from it in the future and I do apologize – it is a serious topic to me and others
EricPWJohnson (427c1e) — 2/14/2011 @ 6:52 pmLunkheads-R-Us
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:01 pmDRJ
Is writing letters, interfering with a public official a federal parole violation?
EricPWJohnson (427c1e) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:19 pmLook, Dustin and Daley, I’m not defending Think Progress’ deletion of the earlier background of Kimberlin.
But how do you know whether the Chamber of Commerce selected one of the two for their primary focus? Patterico’s story at one point says that the Chamber was interested in both but later asks the question (without answering it) whether Kimberlin was the primary interest. Not enough proof for me.
As to the connection with the violent criminal, there’s no indication that Friedman had anything to do with Kimberlin for about ten years after he was paroled, much less any indication that Friedman had anything to do with Kimberlin in the 1970s when he committed the crimes. Sorry, but you need to have better evidence connecting the two or evidence showing that Kimberlin has been violent after he was released.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:26 pmAnd how does O’Connor know Kimberlin is “unrepentant”?
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:34 pmSo ” Jim” does not have the spine to denounce Kimberlin. SHOCKA
JD (aab31a) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:41 pmJim – When did Kimberlin finally get out of prison and when was Velvet Revolution founded?
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:42 pmThis is Yelverton right, just so we’re clear.
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:43 pmJim, I don’t have to show that Kimberlin has been violent after his release to call him a violent criminal. It remains a factual description.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:43 pmnarciso, hey, Jim is hanging his hat on the claim that Kimberlin hasn’t threatened to kill anyone lately… or bought any bomb making materials lately ….
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:44 pmJim, your question confirms what your earlier comments merely suggested: you haven’t followed the links, haven’t read the source material, and don’t know what you’re talking about.
To those who have, you are embarrassing yourself — badly.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:45 pmKind of like how Ayers and Dohrn have NLT bombed anyone, recently.
JD (aab31a) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:46 pmI have read the materials, Patterico. You just haven’t convinced me that this is anything more than a grown-up version of two girls having a hair-pulling hissy fight in the high school bathroom.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:52 pmSPQR, I agree you can say he was a violent criminal. But how does anyone know the “unrepentant” part based on the materials linked?
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/14/2011 @ 7:55 pmActually, it’s not quite like Obama’s lame excuse that Ayers didn’t try to kill anyone since Obama was a wee baby.
Patterico’s already told us this guy is trying to reach out and screw with his job. And the legal intimidation tactic might not scare Patterico, who is, after all, a lawyer, but what about Socrates? What about the other untold folks who were successfully silenced before we ever heard bout this?
Kimberlin is a thug today. He’s a thug under the auspices of protecting Brad’s organization, Velvet Underground, which brings in a very large sum of money peddling fiction to dupes.
Jim, take Patterico’s advice and read the post. If this is Yelverton, pick up the silly hassle routine in another thread. this isn’t a good one to be an ass about.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:21 pmI’m not sure why you asked me but I have no idea, especially the way your question is phrased. Are you asking if writing letters or interfering with a public official can be a parole violation? The latter seems more likely than the former, depending on what the letter said, who it was sent to, and the terms of parole. Plus, wasn’t parole abolished in the 1980s for most federal offenders?
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/14/2011 @ 8:54 pmCriminal acts committed after October 1987 aren’t eligible for parole consideration in federal criminal law, having been replaced with the sentencing guidelines, as Aaron said.
Of course, Brett committed his most serious offenses before 1987.
I’m not an expert on this.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:01 pmDustin,
You’ve read this story more carefully and in depth than I have. Is Kimberlin still on parole? I think the Indystar article said he was paroled in 1994, had his parole revoked in 1997, and was released in 2001. Was the last release also a parole?
DRJ (fdd243) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:11 pmJim, this is not a game.’Kimberlin’s actions resulted in a man’s leg being blown off. That man committed suicide as a result. Kimberlin is utterly unrepentant and anyone who has bothered to follow the story on my site knows it.
You are a small man playing semantic games with a cold reality of a violent and remorseless criminal. You are wasting my time and are essentially siding with evil by being too lazy or partisan to learn about the facts.
In short, I feel contempt for you, and will not approve any further comments by you that further reveal you to be a clueless boob who would rather issue pointless carping from the sidelines rather than acquaint yourself with the facts.
Until you bother to learn the facts, you can take your pathetic and ignorant pleas on behalf of evil somewhere else, where such sophistry will garner a warmer reception.
Contemptuously yours,
P
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:42 pmTell that to Carl DeLong’s family, scum.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 9:44 pm“I have read the materials, Patterico.”
Jim – If you have read the material, why do you ask such ignorant questions? Are you just plain stupid?
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:00 pmDaley,
As you obviously already realize, Jim is most likely lying about having read all the material.
You are correct that rank stupidity is the only other logical explanation.
Patterico (88bcc3) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:04 pmWell, to be fair, deliberate lying could also explain it. Considering the subjects being discussed, that’s my odds-on favorite explanation.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:09 pmWhat I mean is, he could have read all the material. The lying is everything he has said since. Seems to be a pattern with several of the people you’ve written about.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:11 pmStashiu3 – Not to be unfair to Jim, but deliberate obtuseness or lying are among his most frequently used commenting tools on this blog. Those and stupidity.
daleyrocks (479a30) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:15 pmAnd a fanatical devotion to the Pope.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:26 pmEminently fair, IMO. 😉
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 2/14/2011 @ 10:26 pmPatterico, go take some meds. He was paroled for a crime he committed thirty years ago. Do you have any proof or even any possible evidence that he is “unrepetant”? If so, link to it.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/15/2011 @ 8:48 amSo you want proof that he has never, not once, shown remorse?
How about, since you disagree and wish to dispute the claim, you show that he has ever expressed remorse.
You will, of course, fail in your attempt, but who am I to stop you?
Scott Jacobs (218307) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:53 amJim, the unrepetent part is demonstrated by his conspiracy theories about his prosecution.
Now, why are you defending this violent criminal?
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:56 amDRJ, I’m not aware of Brett’s status, and while he sued the Parole Commission in 2001, I have a hard time learning his status today. I assume he was on Parole in 2001, though.
I wish I could be more helpful. Brett Kimberlin has filed an unbelievable number of lawsuits. I’ve never seen one where Brett was right on the facts and law.
—
Jim, you’re ignoring the entire post.
You claim the only thing that matters is the violence, and that it was a long time ago. Why wouldn’t the more recent news fabrications be important?
The only reason we’re paying attention to Brett today is that he and Brad and Larissa and the longer list of creeps are conning people. In digging deeper, some have found themselves targeted professionally or by legal threats, but the core of this story is that they are liars.
And when we talk about their honesty, Brett’s con artist pattern is worth a lengthy examination.
I seem to recall you began trolling this blog frequently, using different handles and proxy IPs, around the time this blog started looking into Brett. Now you’re insulting Patterico personally, telling him to take meds, because he responds to someone who is threatening him with lawsuits, and trying to get him fired.
Larissa is the creep who, after Michael Connell died, suddenly claimed she and Connell were working on exposing a huge conspiracy, and Connell had confided he was being threatened. At the same time, Brett Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution reported an anonymous tip that Karl Rove threatened Connell. It appears that Brett found Larissa in the Ukraine (where he worked for associates of people he met in prison, though I realize that sounds like a B-movie plotline).
Why is the person working closely with Brett Kimberlin to sell conspiracy nonsense also telling people Brett didn’t set his bombs, Jim? I thought you said Brett was repentant for the bombings and death he caused.
And as Socrates noted, Larissa worked with Jason Leopold, another creep who made up nonsense to scam a few bucks out of idiots on the internet.
Socrates’s take on this is that these people make the left seem crazy. They distract from important issues, such as actual election problems, but they also discredit more general political factions. It’s a bit like how some conservatives see the most aggressive form of birther.
—
I was only reminded of Larissa because Jim’s comment reminds me of her reaction when someone tried to associate Brett Kimberlin with Raw Story (she makes quips about taking meds). I seem to recall that Jim, who switches names a lot, links Raw Story all the time.
I think, at least, Jim is a loyal fan of these kooks. He’s a footsoldier, and the only weapon he has is to pretend he doesn’t know the facts and then dismiss the story’s importance.
But perhaps there’s more to it than that. Brett’s extremely active on the internet, and he has taken a deep personal interest in this blog’s comments. Where is he? Was he the guy who posted Patterico’s home address?
This story has an interview with Brett near the end.
Finally, Brad knew that Brett was violent and politically motivated. He knows that this post sent a message of political intimidation, as it shows Kimberlin can get to Karl Rove’s family.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/15/2011 @ 11:49 amI am shocked to see “jim” still being an apologiest for Kimberlin.
JD (306f5d) — 2/15/2011 @ 12:39 pmJim is a liar
He asks for evidence that Kimberlin is “unrepetant.” I told him to follow the links in the post. He claimed he had, yet continued to ask for evidence Kimberlin is unrepentant (or “unrepetant”).
In this post I provide a link to this post — which is, I tell the reader, the best post to read for people unfamiliar with Kimberlin.
If you follow that link, there is plenty of evidence Kimberlin is unrepentant: namely, his dishonest claims that he was incarcerated for First Amendment activity:
There is, of course, much more. Kimberlin has implausibly maintained his innocence of the bombings in the face of overwhelming evidence. I have discussed this extensively on this site, and further information is available in the links I have provided.
Jim didn’t read any of that information. If he had, he would not be asking us all where the evidence is that Brett Kimberlin is unrepentant.
I want you to bookmark this comment. I want you to remind Jim about this every time he leaves a comment.
Jim is a liar.
Patterico (bf5920) — 2/15/2011 @ 1:16 pm-Brett Kimberlin expressing deep remorse for maiming Carl Delong with a bomb.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/15/2011 @ 1:32 pmJim will now flee this thread.
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:23 pmPatterico, it looks like he was originally convicted in 1980 or 1981. He claims to have been persecuted while in prison for threatening to go public with the story that he sold dope to Quayle while he was a law student. I can’t find anything in your links about whether he is repentant for the original crimes that he was imprisoned for.
From the Singer article: “In 1992, when he made the decision to write about Brett Kimberlin, who claimed to have sold marijuana to Dan Quayle when the future Vice-President was a law student and had been persecuted by the Bureau of Prisons for attempting to tell his story to the press just prior to the 1988 Bush/Dukakis election….” And his answers in the interview suggests that he thought he was punished while in prison (the link to the entire interview doesn’t work).
Why should it matter whether he’s repentant or unrepentant over something that he wasn’t imprisoned for? Oh, and by the way, even O’Connor didn’t try to do a bait and switch over which things Kimberlin was unrepetant for. O’Connor’s headline clearly says it was the original crimes: “Unrepentant Domestic Terrorist Behind Ant-Chamber of Commerce Internet Campaign”.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:30 pmAbsolutely not, Patterico. You’ve done a nice bait and switch about what he should be repentant about. I still think I’m right and you’re wrong.
Jim (ad29d8) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:38 pmYes it’s not surprising, he makes up lies, like Hatfield, who said he was set up, his prison record
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:39 pmdidn’t stop him from being used to slime W. And his subsequent passing, was taken by the nutroots community, much the same way as the Connell matter.
Jim,
The TIME Magazine article that Liberty Chick cited — remember Liberty Chick? the first link in my “refresher” post? — says this:
What? He still professes his innocence?
That sounds almost . . . unrepentant!
Again, you didn’t read the source materials and you spouted off about something you didn’t know about. You lied. You embarrassed yourself.
Keep digging, friend!
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:42 pmIt’s Yelverton all right, the stink of denial, is everpresent
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:47 pmBecause he isn’t.
WE DON’T CARE ABOUT THE POT FOR QUAYLE THING!!!!!
We are focusing, you thundering ret@rd, on the BOMBS he set. One of which took off a man’s leg. A man who would eventually take his own life because of the ungodly pain he was always in.
He has never – not once – made a public statement expressing any sort of remorse for those brutal, vicious, disgusting acts.
And that is why we loath him even more than we would a normal terrorist who might later show remorse. He feels no shame for what he did, and should be reviled and shunned.
because a man who feels no shame, who remains unrepentant, is quite capable of committing those acts again.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 2/15/2011 @ 6:52 pm“Jim” hearts being an apologist for Kimberlin.
JD (0d2ffc) — 2/15/2011 @ 7:29 pmBizarre that “Jim” even thinks that scum like Kimberlin need his defense.
SPQR (26be8b) — 2/15/2011 @ 7:39 pmI think the liberal notion is to put as much uncertainty into the system, whether Piven’s overloading the welfare system, or making us doubt
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/15/2011 @ 7:51 pmthe result of election, the test run was in 2000, then they insisted the electronic voting was the solution, then just as quickly, came RFK jr and
the ‘black box blogger (ps; he really does seem tofloat every scam from AGW, to stolen elections to the autism/vaccine connection) meanwhile enabling
real voter fraud.
For all we know, Jim is Kimberlin. I realize that’s unlikely, but he is very interested in little things like comments on this blog, and the identity of some of the people leaving them.
Or maybe it’s just a Raw Story kook fanboy like Yelverton who just doesn’t feel sympathy for a person who isn’t a hero of the conspiracy movement.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/15/2011 @ 7:54 pmnarciso, enabling real voter fraud is a major part of their game.
In their screeds will be some reference to how Conyers identified efforts to suppress the vote. Things like making sure people didn’t commit election fraud, largely.
That’s probably the worst part of the modern day election discussion. Too many people knowingly hamper reforms because they suppress fraud. I don’t think Kimberlin cares at all about that.
That interview I linked above near the end of comment 85 gives some insight into Kimberlin’s psychological problem.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/15/2011 @ 8:00 pmIt’s curious the way that Time story is written, his inprisonment for the bombings, is almost an oversight, whereas we know at least two violent
narciso (c8ccf1) — 2/15/2011 @ 8:10 pmex cons, Roeder and the late Van Bruenn, ‘relapsed’ back in 2009, and they tried to tie them to the DHS memo. Calabresi was one of those who painted Joe
and Valerie, as some kind of martyrs to the Bush administratio, so the template continues
The blurb for the band directly addressed what O’Connor addressed, and I have done so in a comment that destroys your argument. I predict you will now turn tail and run.
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:14 pmWhy does Jim get to decide what Brett should be repentant about? How does that work? He can dismiss the entire post, and the discussion of Think Progress’s dishonesty, and the discussion of a con artist or violence… if Brett isn’t proven unrepentant?
Leaving aside the fact that Brett’s proud of what he’s done, and shows no remorse, ever (because he isn’t mentally healthy enough to admit flaws), Jim’s entire train of thought makes no sense at all. It’s a diversion.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:18 pmJim loves him some bombers.
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:20 pm“Jim” is fundamentally dishonest.
JD (855f87) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:22 pmCommon Cause and Rache MadCow are being overtly dishonest about the Koch Brothers and Justice Thomas. MSNBC is now the TV arm of thinkregresss.
JD (855f87) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:26 pmPat,
In my experience in the 70’s everyone carried around individualized pipe bomb timers and who knows maybe the police just picked him out of the 78,000 other random residences and planted them on him because that’s how the MAN acted bac in those days – dispensing injustice upon everyone who wasnt them
And its just a freakin coincident that the bombing miraculousy stopped after Kimberlin was arrested, that was exceedingly bad luck or a smart bomber who saw a patsy arrested and decided – hey – I’m insane but I’m not stupid and stopped that day in 78 and never ever set off anymore again
Or – the F&ckers guilty and still should be in prison
Doesnt his interfering with a law enforcement official violate his parole (is he still under supervision)
EricPWJohnson (be6834) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:33 pmsorry about the typos residences should be residents…
EricPWJohnson (be6834) — 2/15/2011 @ 9:35 pmJim fled the thread, as I predicted.
And so did everyone else! Despite an Instapundit link, not one comment was left on this thread all day long.
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/16/2011 @ 8:23 pmKimberlin is a coward, so it only follows that his sycophants like “Jim” and brad Freidman would be too.
JD (d4bbf1) — 2/16/2011 @ 8:43 pmI sent Patterico proof that Brad Friedman revealed my name to a cyberstalker. Unlike many who throw that word around too loosely, I spoke with a local detective and shared with him part of what I’ve been through.
I never minded being trolled on as this username or socrates, but when my real life was brought into it, that’s when it got very creepy and unfair.
I wouldn’t be getting this real life stalking if not for the actions of Brad Friedman. What was my sin that led him giving my name and email address to a predator? Here’s the backstory.
A person I was having trouble with visited one of my blogs. I knew it was him after googling the ip. What had caught my attention was that it derived from his geographical area. It led me to a post that was clearly his. Some but not many websites do post ip’s
At the time I was a semi-regular at BradBlog. Now let’s face it. We often suspect someone might be a sock puppet or such and such, but without proof, we’re just voicing opinions which may or may not be signs of paranoia.
I was getting trolled on at BradBlog. I suspected it was that individual. I asked Brad if the person at his website had the same ip. Brad confirmed it.
I posted Brad’s email confirming it was the same troll. Brad’s excuse for giving away my personal info was a goose meet gander one. However, Brad’s address wasn’t a private one, as it had been circulating elsewhere on the net. All the email did was verify that two anonymous usernames were the same person. On the other hand, the subsequent Brad email provided a cyberstalker with my real name. For months Brett had been emailing me asking for it. All he had to do the whole time was ask Brad!
I think my sin in Brad’s eyes was my having investigated Brett Kimberlin, their relationship, and their activities as internet businessmen.
What motivated me was the fantasy centered around Michael Connell. That’s when I came up with the Prepostericity name, as in that’s preposterous!
I had a very successful thread at Democratic Underground. A semi-famous free-lance reporter got in touch with me. He said I had become a player as Prepostericity. By the way, that thread at DU was completely deleted despite having almost 100 posts and 5000 views in the election integrity section, one where threads are lucky to get 10 replies and 200 views. It was still growing too.
I went over my schtick on internet prepostericity with the journalist. Unfortunately, he said he couldn’t do the story. He could only have done it if election fraud was proven. No one would back him to do a piece on internet convolution.
I’m being sued by Brett Kimberlin for cyberstalking. What I could use is legal representation in Maryland. I’m not looking for anything fancy, just what’s needed to prevent a default judgment against me just because I’m thousands of miles away and not the richest bloke on the block.
I need people with connections. I wrote many months ago to the lawyer Patterico uses but never got a reply.
I did not cyberstalk Brett Kimberlin. I don’t know where he lives or what his phone number is. I only emailed him once to tell him to stop sending me emails. He did. I’ll give him credit for that.
I have multiple college degrees. I’m sorry if that makes me sound like a snob, but my point is I understand academic principles. I know the difference between fact and opinion. I hate to toot my own horn, but the reason Brett is going after me is because I have been the most prolific researcher into his internet schtick and criminal past. I’m not saying I scooped anything, well maybe some bits and pieces, but that I have been at the forefront of making sure this story and its connection to Brad Friedman didn’t get buried.
Patterico, maybe you could help me get in touch with your blogger lawyer. Maybe some of you know of an attorney in the Maryland area who can represent me. I am not looking for money, and perhaps Kimberlin could be the one covering all the ensuing bills.
I’m getting my ass cyberstalked because of Brad Friedman revealing my personal information. This is beyond ironic. I’m being sued for cyberstalking by the buddy of the man who has enabled myself to be stalked.
It’s no fun. This is a very sadistic world we live in. I thought journalists weren’t supposed to give away personal information. I had first made contact with Brad to share info I had come across on a Mr. Steven Hertzberg of the Election Science Institute.
Journalists aren’t supposed to rat out sources. Brad revealed who I am to a cyberstalker. Patterico was shown the proof.
This is beyond partisan politics. I’m a lefty. You guys are on the right. It doesn’t matter, for the truth is the truth. In my case, this has been about two people who didn’t like my effective cyber sleuthing of them through open source materials. Brad gave my name to a cyberstalker. Now I am being sued by his business partner for cyberstalking. That’s fried.
Prepostericity (119980) — 2/17/2011 @ 10:01 pmHey, I’m sorry you’re dealing with this stalker. It is creepy and as you say, unfair, to have someone using ‘I know where you live’ as an argument.
You have done a good job digging into Brett, and no doubt this is an effort to silence you. I very much hope you can get a Maryland attorney to assist you. Partisanship doesn’t mean a thing here. Truth is truth, like you said.
I hope you get back to blogging, BTW.
Maryland’s SLAPP section.
I’m no expert on Maryland law, but does this seem a little too vague to anyone else?
I think Prepostericity needs assistance to file a motion to dismiss.
He will also need an affidavit explaining the extent of his communications about Brett Kimberlin’s awful history.
Propostericity, if you’re unable to get help, I urge you to go ahead and pay for an attorney. Take the initial SLAPP motion to dismiss seriously, to avoid further problems. Yeah, that means Brett hurt you IRL, which is what he wanted with this thuggish lawsuit in the first place.
I think it should be damn loudly publicized that if you email Brad Friedman, he will pass your personal information to stalkers, and you could possibly end up SLAPP sued by his terrorist buddy.
Also, by god I don’t think Socrates’s actions would have led him to reasonably expect to be hailed by MD’s courts. His contacts with Brett are that he spoke about this online? ?Has Calder v Jones been distinguished from just posting things online?
BTW, please understand this isn’t advise for Socrates to put in a motion to dismiss, but rather my own sentiment about the unfairness of MD summoning him to defend his blogging. It’s extremely aggravating.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/17/2011 @ 11:45 pmThanks Dustin,
I haven’t been summoned yet. Brett sent me court documents saying I’ve been sued as anonymous cyberstalker prepostericity and socrates. I think he’s asking for 2.6 million.
I copied and pasted what I wrote above for a new entry. I’ve an idea for another one too, but it would be on movies. I like writing, but all this other stuff has really put a damper on it.
I now realise blogging is a dead end. No one cares about any of us. We’re pissing into the wind.
Even a guy like Patterico. He’s a nice guy. This is a fairly popular blog. But it’s only the few who make it into the big picture of the zeitgeist.
It’d be nice to see this backfire on Kimberlin. Not so I get famous or money or anything like that. Just because this is somewhat of a story, imho. I just happen to be the real person behind a specific keyboard who made a lot of noise at DU and also in the Daily Kos part of the internet. I had a decent post at Huffington concerning Michael Connell, Larisa Alexandrovna, Brad, and Brett, but it got deleted many months after the fact. That crowd who Anonymous Army referred to as the Lefty Liars Club have inside power at major lefty blogs.
Maybe I could find a good one, but my fifteen minutes have passed. I’d rather shoot the breeze in a safe environment than get into politics and flame fests. I’ve a few ideas for my new entry. I’m thinking Gone With The Wind was overrated. I just watched A Clockwork Orange. I was disappointed. All About Eve was very good. I like Hollywood movies that critique Hollywood and the culture of personality. Mulholland Drive came close to greatness. Sunset Boulevard nailed it. Sorry to hijack the thread with my movie schtick. It’s just this other stuff tends to give me a headache. But at least I can sleep at night knowing I didn’t set bombs because I was the prime suspect in a murder investigation.
Prepostericity (119980) — 2/18/2011 @ 12:13 amAlso, remember what happened to Julia Scyphers (albeit, he wasn’t charged because the witness died) and Carl Delong. I’m concerned about your safety.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 12:26 amDustin,
Thanks for the SLAPP link.
Lawmakers suck at writing, huh? They always have these modifying phrases that they leave dangling out at the end of long sentences, leading the reader to guess how much they modify.
Patterico (c218bd) — 2/18/2011 @ 7:14 amYes, the movie A Clockwork Orange is terrible. It’s completely overrated and I have no idea why.
The book has an additional chapter at the end, where the protagonist is redeemed by the power of personal choice, which was the point of the story, but even then it’s not anything spectacular. The movie, on the other hand, lacks even that merit.
And Mulholland Drive is a great film. It’s even relatively easy to push into a coherent narrative, unlike, say, Inland Empire. Though both really deal with the good and bad personal qualities of Hollywood.
LOL. Yeah, at least you got that. I’m pretty surprised with how similarly we see things, despite our radically opposite politics.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 8:55 amMaybe I don’t fear death because of an episode of Kung Fu. The Scyphers story is troubling. It’s the elephant in the room.
I’m going by memory, so take this for what it’s worth. The jury wasn’t allowed to hear the part about Scyphers. Part of their problem was trying to figure out Kimberlin’s motives behind the Speedway bombings.
Like you and others have pointed out, the evidence against him was overwhelming.
Thanks for explaining something was missing from A Clockwork Orange. There’s that Hitchcock movie I think called Suspicion. The ending was ridiculous, just because God forbid Cary Grant played a killer. Most everyone who’s seen it has wondered how such a good movie could have such a crap ending.
A Clockwork Orange has some value. But now it can seen it’s missing the ending.
There’s a lot more to life than politics and partisan bickering. I first started blogging in late 2005 at Huffington, before Ariana made us register. I got caught up in the right wing versus left wing fisticuffs. There was one guy named BJ Clinton who kept saying,”We’re driving the bus.”
A lot of this political, blogging milieu we have found ourselves in has been mere marketing. Democratic Underground, Daily Kos, and Huffington are perhaps the three most successful so-called lefty blogs. They feasted off of the animosity between right and left.
Let me tell you, none of them are lefties. Markos Moulitsas is a big fan of the CIA. Bob Marley said, “Rasta don’t work for no CIA.”
The guy who owns DU has direct ties to the DLC. The DLC is the right wing of the Democratic Party. Huffington? She’s as fake as a three dollar bill. Even Olbermann seemed to be trying to draw in disaffected right wingers to watch his show. It’s all about fame and money to too many Americans.
Prepostericity (1c6874) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:29 amThe DLC no longer exists, and even if it did, to suggest that DU is anything other than leftist strains credulity. Kos, ditto. Arianna may not be as leftist as some would want, but that she is of the left is not easily disputed. Olbermann trying to draw in disaffected right is a freaking joke.
JD (d4bbf1) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:36 amThis is all Soros’s sandbox, they just let you play in it, Socrates, the DLC, like the late Misteer Kurtz, is deader than the Norwegian Blue parrot
narciso (e694f9) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:38 amJD, it’s still pretty reasonable to doubt Huffington’s sincerity whatsoever. I do think Pre is right that she’s simply after money, and tailored her site to cater to an easily duped crowd.
DLC represents something I actually liked, but then… my politics are conservative and I want democrats to be as conservative as possible. I’m not sure what the DU is. Every time I’ve tried to read it, it’s like some kind of Orwellian Satire. It’s like a conservative’s fantasy about evil democrats. I can’t say what the operator thinks of politics, but the way they exclude sincere arguments is pretty amazing. If ‘they’ turned out to be moderate in philosophy I would be shocked too, but if they turned out to simply be cynically exploiting far lefties, I wouldn’t be surprised at all.
I think most people have figured out that Markos is a bastard.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:43 amAnd all of the above are not a concern to me. If someone wants to have a website that is hostile to certain politics, or cultivates others, I don’t mind at all.
Huffington, Markos, etc… they are titans of virtue compared to Brad Friedman, let alone Brett.
Pre is right about Julia.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:44 amWell ‘Depleted Uranium’ is such a vile ‘den of scum and villainy’ that I wouldn’t put it past that it’s
narciso (e694f9) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:48 ama put up job. Most DLC partisans with the exception of Lieberman, (Bayh, Webb,) capitulate to the left
too readily,
Well, what was up with people claiming Obama is a socialist or lefty? He is in the middle. Those people I mentioned are historic liberals. They are capitalists. I don’t see any of them asking for dramatic military cuts or a redistribution of wealth. Real lefties aren’t allowed at the political dinner table. They can only get things done at grassroot levels.
Prepostericity (1c6874) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:52 amSocrates – It is a mistake to consider the CIA in any meaningful way “rightwing”. The agency allowed an insider to send her own husband on a junket for the purpose of providing confirmation for her own preordained conclusion in a serious national security matter. When even his biased investigation showed she was incorrect his report was willfully misrepresented.
There are plenty of people working at the CIA who would get along fine with a dishonest, lefty hack like Markos.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:59 amThe middle of the left, maybe. But not the middle. No way. Simply claiming so does not make it so. Maybe he is to the right of you, but that ain’t the middle.
JD (d4bbf1) — 2/18/2011 @ 10:59 amEverybody sees things based on their POV.
To some, Obama cannot possible be moderate, due to his State record on abortion, or his spending, but to some, Obama’s adoption of some of Bush’s GWOT positions means he’s a moderate.
I think if we look at a lot of Obama’s administration, we;ve seen quite a few very liberal people, such as Van Jones or Anita Dunn.
I think it really depends on what issues you prioritize. For me, debt is the big lately, so Obama seems incredibly in favor of a very large government, and therefore liberal. But Obama ran as a blank slate, and a lot of people who are liberal are smacked by gob now.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:06 amWhat I was awkwardly trying to say is liberalism isn’t the same as left. It’s left only in that it wants to tinker or reform the status quo. Liberalism is fundamentally a right wing value. That’s what history has shown.
Prepostericity (1c6874) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:06 amI will concede Obama is a bit left of center. Dustin makes a good point that it depends on what issues we are talking about.
I don’t know how the CIA can be considered anything other than right wing. Just look at the regimes it has backed.
As to the debt, uhm, didn’t it get out of control under Reagan and Bush I? Didn’t Clinton start to get it under control? Didn’t it rise again under GW?
Prepostericity (1c6874) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:17 am@ Prepostericity: what makes ‘backing totalitarian regimes’ …’right-wing’?
jdsmallcaps (776c36) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:23 amSo true, man.
Well, Reagan lost that battle, and he did so because of his priorities. The democrats made this a battle in the first place. Similarly, Clinton was very smart in how he did not fight the GOP on this issue, which is why the government worked a lot better domestically after the 1995 shutdown. However, the power of the purse should be linked closely with who runs the House. I think we’re about to see the GOP fumble on that.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:24 amWhich isn’t to say Clinton didn’t fight on this issue. However, he was smart in how he picked his battles. If the democrats were full of Bill Clintons, they would dominate. And despite Clinton being more moderate than Obama, the country would eventually trend far more leftward because he was effective.
Obama’s 2009 was the greatest gift the GOP has ever received.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:26 amI think it is eminently fair to blame Bush for leaving the country in a state with great debt. He did attempt to reform the SSA, and that shows his trademark guts, but in so many ways he failed and that left this country, politically, vulnerable to Obama kicking debt up several notched while using W’s record as a smokescreen.
That’s the folly of our generally wonderful 2 party system. If one part can remove a distinction like democrats can with Bush’s spending, we can create a crisis, as we have with spending.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:29 amThe “right” (i.e. conservatives) support individual liberty, a small and severely restricted state, and free enterprise. The “left” (i.e. liberals (a term which does not fit their actual goals but was fraudulently apropriated by them))support a powerful, overarching state with the power over every citizens behaviour and wallet.
Take a look at the countries you accuse the CIA of supporting. How many of them have a small and restricted government? How many of them support unbridled individual liberty? How many of them have a government which could not decide, on awhim, to confiscate a citizens property and throw him in jail?
Have Blue (854a6e) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:32 amIn so far, as Clinton cut anything it was defense and national security, which in retrospect was exactly the wrong time, we had more revenue due
narciso (e694f9) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:36 amto capital gains and other matters, but that eventually formed a bubble, that was popped by the oil minispike, and the rate going up from ’99-01.
So where was this real balanced budget. Another in teresting detail was how taxing certain salary benefits, led to the wide spread adoption of stock
options in lieu of cash
There were quite a few interesting bubbles at the end of the 90s. I admit, the budget wasn’t quite balanced, but come on. I would love to go back to the Clinton era on spending. It’s a little unfair to the people who fought clinton to get the spending where it was, but I don’t mind giving Clinton credit if democrats can agree we need to get back to that spending level.
Build Bill Clinton Statues and make a national day of Clinton, for all I care. Just pass the budget he signed and ask Obama to sign it too.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 2/18/2011 @ 11:40 amI don’t for one intend to support anyone asking for money for legal funds or otherwise. I am a conservative, and I believe in conservative values. If you go out and do something and someone else makes an issue out of it, then you damn well need to make sure you are able to support your position. If you go out and taunt others to sue you or whatever, then you better be able to back it up with your own money.
I was taught at an early age to work for a living. These liberal lefty’s sit around all day on their lazy butts and then ask conservatives to support them. You can see them on the streets begging for money. They claim they can’t work, but they have plenty of time to roam the streets begging for money or sitting around a computer all day writing stories. But when troubles come who do they end up asking for money from? Conservatives, those who went out and worked for a living.
If you need money get off your computer and go out and get a JOB. And don’t spread that liberal left bull about no jobs are around for you. I am sure that if you had time to write all day you would have time to go out and deliver pizza or work in construction or even deliver papers in the morning. You don’t need to beg for money like the homeless do. And that is what you remind me of when you are begging for money here. Oh, I wrote something bad or good or whatever and now others have to pay for it. Look Mister whatever your name is, go get a job and pay for your own representation. If you had degrees as you say, then go get a job and pay for your own legal problems.
I never heard of such gall. Go out and write stories as a liberal and then come here and beg conservatives for help. Acting all of a sudden as if your liberal stench just got up and left you lol. I don’t believe you, and while that may not make a difference to you, I can say that for me I would never find myself supporting you or asking anyone I know to help you. Go ask those liberals you have been writing about for money, see how they defend you…
Sorry Pat, Dustin and all, I don’t believe this guy one bit. Get a JOB knucklehead, and support yourself. And don’t come back with I am a poor disabled person. I am a disabled vet and I still have a job. And if I piss someone off then I expect to pay for it out of my own pocket. If not, I don’t piss on people. I don’t walk around in bars trying to pick a fight just so I can then go out and beg for money to support my stupidity. That is the part I don’t believe about you. You are not making any case other than for yourself. And I have no intention of supporting some lefty liberal who got stung by his lefty liberal friends.
Sorry, no sale.
Bill Grish (38c0be) — 2/19/2011 @ 3:44 pmBill,
This is what the guy wrote about Kimberlin
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/26/689223/-Is-Brett-Kimberlin-Really-an-Exonerated,-Ex-Political-Prisoner
EricPWJohnson (89f1cb) — 2/19/2011 @ 4:08 pm