Several days ago, the Web site “Breitbart Unmasked” published pictures of Aaron Walker and his wife taken outside a Maryland courthouse. I have blurred out the faces from the photographs, but want to otherwise reproduce them here for you:

The site attributed the grainy, stalkerish photos to a “witness” that the site refused to name.

Today, Aaron Walker names the “witness”: Brett Kimberlin.

In a post that describes an apparent escalation of Kimberlin’s obsessive behavior towards Aaron and his wife, Aaron describes how Kimberlin has shown up twice at a courthouse at times when Aaron was there.

The first time, Aaron says, Kimberlin took pictures or video footage of Aaron’s wife while she was waiting in the car outside the courthouse. Aaron had seen Kimberlin inside the courthouse and asked his wife to wait in the car, where he thought she would be safer. But Kimberlin slipped outside without Aaron noticing. According to Aaron’s post, Kimberlin parked his car behind Aaron’s, circled the car, saw Aaron’s wife, pulled his car around to face her, and took footage or pictures of her as she sat inside the car. Aaron says Kimberlin smiled as he did this, which is extraordinarily creepy.

Aaron and his wife reported the incident to police, and Kimberlin photographed them as they did so (see the second picture). Aaron’s wife was reportedly in tears for much of the rest of the day.

On another day when Aaron had a scheduled hearing, Aaron says, John Hoge of Hogewash saw Kimberlin circling the parking lot on two different occasions, presumably looking for Aaron’s car again. (A car with Virginia plates stands out in a Maryland parking lot.)

That Kimberlin was the mystery witness described by the “Breitbart Unmasked” web site should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention. “Breitbart Unmasked” is a site devoted to dishonest character assassination, and its targets have one thing in common: they have been critics of Brett Kimberlin. The site has published scoops on court appearances involving Kimberlin minutes after those appearances have ended.

What is surprising is that the site would actually bother to document Kimberlin’s stalkerish behavior. It’s as if they are proud to publish these photos, which send a chill down the spines of normal people.

This news comes on the heels of reports that Kimberlin and his associate Neal Rauhauser have made calls to the establishment hosting the BlogBash party, which Aaron plans to attend, threatening the establishment with protests by Muslims due to Aaron’s involvement with the “Everyone Draw Mohammed” web site, which Aaron and others created to stand up to Islamic extremists who would kill those who dared to depict Mohammed.

Given Kimberlin’s well-documented history, the pictures shown above and the behavior described in Aaron’s post cause me concern. I encourage Aaron and John Hoge to stay safe.

MORE from Stacy McCain and John Hoge (here and here).

Lee Stranahan got this message from his web host:

Hello,

While monitoring the servers, it was brought to our attention that your domain, leestranahan.com, was undergoing a brute force attack. The purpose of the attack was meant to gain access to your wp-admin area, allowing an authorized person to have complete control of your site.

The email lists URLs of specific posts that have been attacked.

Many of them are related to Brett Kimberlin.

P.S. There will be a major hearing in Aaron Walker’s case against Brett Kimberlin on Tuesday. It is worth noting that Kimberlin has pled the Fifth with respect to Walker’s discovery requests. One of those requests relates to Kimberlin’s knowledge about SWATting. Ted Frank notes on Twitter that, in the civil context, the court is entitled to draw an adverse inference from a litigant’s invocation of the Fifth (something a prosecutor could never do in a criminal trial, of course).

All of this makes for a potentially very interesting day on Tuesday. And raises the question: why does Brett Kimberlin think it might incriminate him to answer a question about what he knows about SWATting?

UPDATE: Thanks to Instapundit for the link.

I have learned that my wife and I are being sued by Nadia Naffe, who leveled accusations at James O’Keefe last year, and was the subject of criticism at this blog earlier this year. Also named in the lawsuit are Los Angeles County, and Steve Cooley, the District Attorney of Los Angeles County. The complaint has been filed in the U.S. District Court in the Central District of California, Case No. 2:12-cv-08443-GW-MRW, and is captioned Nadia Naffe v. John Patrick Frey, et al.

Brett Kimberlin associates have played a role in instigating this lawsuit. Kimberlin’s associate Neal Rauhauser recently admitted in a complaint to my office that he introduced Naffe to attorney Jay Leiderman:

I brought this situation to the attention of Los Angeles attorney Jay Leiderman, then introduced he and Naffe, and he is now representing her in a civil case against Frey.

In the same document, Rauhauser declared that if Naffe is successful, he believes it will put an end to my career as a Deputy D.A.:

[T]he lawsuit he faces from Nadia Naffe is another matter and it is understood that if she prevails that may put an end to Frey’s career in the DA’s office.

Above: Neal Rauhauser and Nadia Naffe, 2012

As regular readers are well aware, Rauhauser has long wanted me sued, fired, and so forth for several reasons — one of which is the fact that I have defended James O’Keefe on this blog. Here is a quote from Rauhauser from July 2011:

This new situation is a little different. Patterico I want to see fired from his Deputy District Attorney job, barred from practicing any sort of law, sued to the point of bankruptcy, or criminally charged. Better yet, all five of these would not be sufficient for this tiresome little punk. The motivation, briefly, is that he used to spend his time vigorously defending that little creep James O’Keefe, and his behavior of late seems to indicate he had a hand in the stalking and smearing of Congressman Weiner.

I have not seen the complaint, but a tort claims action Naffe filed earlier this year primarily related to my publication of public documents from the federal PACER system in this post. (The PACER system is open to the public. This, by the way, is the same PACER system that Leiderman encourages his Twitter followers to consult, for details on the lawsuit.)

Naffe’s previous claim also attaches Brett Kimberlin’s State Bar complaint against me. That is one of several details showing a connection between Kimberlin (and his supporters) and Naffe. To cite just a few examples:

• Rauhauser and Naffe discussed the issuance of a subpoena for James O’Keefe’s emails.

• Kimberlin issued a subpoena for those emails, in a lawsuit (Kimberlin vs. Allen) where there had already been a final judgment.

• Rauhauser has claimed that he then rode the train with Naffe to collect the emails.

• Brett Kimberlin supporter Breitbart Unmasked claimed that “we” have Naffe “covered” after another Kimberlin supporter complained about my blogging about Naffe:
  

  

• Breitbart Unmasked also told Naffe to complain about me to my office, reasoning that such complaints cause me to have less power as a blogger:
  

  

I am fortunate to have pro bono representation from two fine lawyers: Kenneth P. White (whom you may know from Popehat), and Ron Coleman (whom you may know from Likelihood of Confusion). I will be responsible for expenses, so any help would certainly be appreciated. The tip jar is on the sidebar.

I don’t know to what extent (if any) I will be blogging on this case as it develops. However, I am confident that the court will see that my speech about Naffe was protected under the First Amendment.

On the advice of Ken and Ron, I will not be allowing comments on this post.

[For those new to the Kimberlin story, the Cliff’s Notes version is here.]

Via the Instapundit, the Senator is on the case:

U.S. Senator Saxby Chambliss strongly criticized the Department of Justice on Wednesday for its “notably silent” response to a string of anonymous pranks wherein authorities have been dispatched guns ablaze to the homes of conservative commentators after bogus shooting claims.

Chambliss’s letter is below. Note that he says Holder personally assured him that he would give special attention to this matter, but then sent a boilerplate response that was silent on whether federal law enforcement is looking into all the cases:

Sen. Chambliss demands further response from AG Holder over "SWAT-ting"

I was told my case was closed earlier this year, and that Mike Stack’s had been closed as well. After that, Erick Erickson and Aaron Walker were SWATted. Since that time, I have not been interviewed about the SWATtings by a single law enforcement official — except for a brief conversation with the cops who had just shown up at Aaron Walker’s door.

I don’t know what they’re doing — but if they haven’t even talked to one of the victims of the four SWATtings, after two new SWATtings have occurred, I suspect they’re not doing much.

Many people have asked for a basic and relatively brief summary of the events surrounding Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Ron Brynaert — who have gone after critics with over-the-top harassment. I provided the long version of the story, with much of the supporting evidence, here. This is the shorter version. If you have been struggling to understand this story, and you feel like you don’t have the time to follow it all, this is the post for you.

I speak of myself in the third person in this post, so that this can be distributed to non-readers of this blog without confusion.

THE PEOPLE

Brett Kimberlin

• Convicted bomber and perjurer

• After release became leftist activist

Brett Kimberlin is the “Speedway Bomber,” who set off 8 bombs in Speedway, Indiana in 1978. He was convicted and received a 50-year prison sentence but was paroled after 14 years. In addition to the bombing convictions, he has been convicted of perjury, drug smuggling, and other offenses. One of his bombs blew off the leg of Vietnam veteran Carl DeLong, who later committed suicide as a result of his injuries. DeLong’s widow won a $1.61 million dollar judgment against Kimberlin for DeLong’s wrongful death, as well as damages relating to her own injuries from the bombing that had maimed her husband. Kimberlin was returned to prison for refusing to pay the judgment in violation of his parole. He has never paid the judgment. He claims innocence and falsely claims to have been exonerated by a secret settlement with the Justice Department. He currently runs two non-profits in Maryland: Justice Through Music and Velvet Revolution, which are generously funded through large grants from donors such as the Tides Foundation and Barbra Streisand.

Neal Rauhauser

• Tech-savvy dirty tricks leftist operative

• Associate of Kimberlin

Neal Rauhauser is a far-left activist who has engaged in violent rhetoric, contacts members from the hacking group Anonymous, and is an admitted associate of Brett Kimberlin’s. He has written how-to guides regarding methods to use phony identities and hide one’s Internet activities from law enforcement.

Kimberlin has described Rauhauser in open court as his “associate.” Rauhauser has written of working with Kimberlin and meeting with him personally. Rauhauser has appeared at numerous court hearings with Kimberlin. He has sat at counsel table with Kimberlin and passed him court documents. He has helped push Kimberlin’s false narrative that Kimberlin was exonerated, as well as the blatantly false claim that the judge in the DeLongs’ wrongful death suit against Kimberlin was imprisoned for extorting Kimberlin. Rauhauser has spoken of working with Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution organization on Occupy events. In 2011, Rauhauser talked of a new job that he had, and of moving to Maryland — the state that is home to Brett Kimberlin and his “Velvet Revolution” nonprofit.

Rauhauser has supported the idea of using litigation for the express purpose of costing his political opponents both time and money. He appears to have found a kindred spirit in his associate, the serial litigant Brett Kimberlin, who has filed over 100 lawsuits, including lawsuits for insufficiently provocative pornography, and for the right to play electric guitars in federal prison.

Ron Brynaert

• Former Raw Story editor, obsessed with Weiner and Kimberlin stories

• Audio expert says his voice probably the SWATter’s voice

Ron Brynaert has been a guest blogger at a blog run by Brad Friedman, a partner in Brett Kimberlin’s nonprofit “Velvet Revolution.” Brynaert is a former editor of Raw Story, a publication that has formed loose partnerships and coalitions with Friedman, Friedman’s radio show, and Velvet Revolution. Brynaert was on the phone with Patrick Frey when Frey’s SWATting occurred, and an audio expert has said the voice of Stack’s and Frey’s SWATter is probably Brynaert’s. In 2011 Brynaert regularly published details of Kimberlin’s litigation on his Twitter feed and republished emails from Rauhauser. Brynaert sent Frey numerous tweets threatening to punch Frey for ignoring what Brynaert considered to be evidence of Kimberlin’s innocence in the bombings.

THE HARASSMENT

Even if no SWATtings had ever occurred, it would still be the case that Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Ron Brynaert have each engaged in intimidation tactics — much of it directed at critics of Brett Kimberlin. In most cases, the tactics appear to be used as a form of “brass knuckles reputation management” — Kimberlin personally attacks and harasses anyone who dares mention his criminal history. They may disagree with what you say, but they will harass you to the ends of the earth for exercising your right to say it.

The following is a non-exhaustive list of tactics that these men have used:

• Harassment of wives and family members

• Publication of home addresses and pictures of people’s homes

• Workplace complaints

• The filing or threatening of frivolous lawsuits, often supported by false statements under oath

• Frivolous applications for restraining orders

• Outing people’s identities

• Whisper campaigns

• Frivolous claims and reports to law enforcement of criminal wrongdoing

• Frivolous State Bar complaints or threats to file State Bar complaints

• Publication of a photo of a nude man that was falsely claimed to be a photo of the victim

• Defamation

• Daily abusive name-calling, mocking, and profanity on Twitter

• Threatening emails, tweets, or notes

• Discussion of a victim’s personal history and past traumatic events in a disparaging manner

Each man has participated in at least some of the above tactics, often against the same victims.

THE SWATTINGS

During the same time period, there have been four SWATtings. A “SWATting” is a false claim that there has been a shooting at an innocent victim’s residence, causing the police to come to the victim’s home expecting to find a violent and armed man, when the victim has no idea what is going on. In Patrick Frey’s case, police pointed loaded firearms at him as he opened his front door. SWATting is a dangerous crime that could result in the death of innocent victims and police. The SWATtings at issue include the following victims and dates:

• Mike Stack, June 23, 2011

• Patrick Frey, July 1, 2011

• Erick Erickson, May 27, 2012

• Aaron Walker, June 25, 2012

It is not known who did the SWATtings. It has been claimed that Frey has “accused” one or more people of involvement, but this is false. However, Frey has presented evidence that could suggest circumstantial ties between these men and the SWATtings.

Animosity towards SWATting victims

Kimberlin and Brynaert both complained to Frey’s workplace, while Rauhauser has encouraged complaints against Frey, and stated that he wants to see Frey fired, prosecuted, disgraced, disbarred, imprisoned, sued, and bankrupted — all for purely political reasons.

Kimberlin and Brynaert both tried to “out” Aaron Walker’s identity when he used a pseudonym. Kimberlin succeeded. Rauhauser threatened that Kimberlin would do so.

Kimberlin’s site published Frey’s home address and pictures of his home; Kimberlin put Walker’s home address in court documents; Rauhauser published Frey’s home address.

Kimberlin, Rauhauser, and Brynaert have all made false and abusive criminal allegations against Walker and Frey.

Brynaert sent Frey numerous tweets relating to his wife, including one threatening to “shit” on his wife. Rauhauser asked his readers for pictures of Frey’s wife.

Kimberlin filed State Bar complaints against Frey and Walker. (Kimberlin’s complaint against Frey alleged, among other things, discrimination against the “disabled” — because Frey wrote about Kimberlin’s felonies, which “disable” him from voting.) Brynaert threatened State Bar complaints against Walker, Frey, and Frey’s wife; and Rauhauser has publicized Kimberlin’s State Bar complaint against Frey.

Kimberlin has threatened suit against Frey and Walker, as has Brynaert.

Walker, Erickson, and Frey have each written extensively about Kimberlin, while Stack has left a comment mocking Kimberlin.

Kimberlin unnecessarily included Walker’s home address in court documents, while a Velvet Revolution-run site published Frey’s home address.

Stack and Frey were each central figures in the Anthony Weiner story, and were both accused by Rauhauser, in documents sent to law enforcement, of somehow “setting up” Weiner.

Timing of SWATtings

The timing of certain SWATtings is also notable. Stack and Frey were SWATted while writing about the Anthony Weiner story after Weiner resigned, at a time when few were still following the story. Rauhauser is obsessed with “Weiner Trutherism” — the irrational belief that Anthony Weiner was hacked, despite Weiner’s admission that he wasn’t. Three days after Frey was SWATted — and months before Frey’s SWATting was publicly revealed — Rauhauser published a blog post titled “Patterico’s Penalization,” accusing him and a Kimberlin critic of possible involvement in cyberstalking Anthony Weiner. Later that month, again before Frey’s SWATting was publicly revealed, Rauhauser wrote a post titled “Weinergate Perps Pay Dearly” — about the two SWATting victims at that time: Mike Stack and Patrick Frey.

A Rauhauser Twitter associate named OccupyRebellion told Stack and Frey that they both have a “special place in [her] heart” and suggested that someone with “bigger balls” than her had made her enemies pay, and that she will take her secrets “to the grave.” She has insinuated that she has a close relationship with Anthony Weiner.

Erickson was SWATted two days after he first wrote and spoke publicly about Brett Kimberlin. Aaron Walker was SWATted hours after winning a well-publicized court case against Kimberlin.

Rauhauser uses same incorrect address as SWATter

Rauhauser wrote Stack a cease and desist letter addressed to Stack at the same incorrect home address used by Stack’s SWATter.

Voice comparison analysis

Presented with a sample of Ron Brynaert’s voice, the Stack and Frey SWATting calls, and a fourth anonymous caller to a BlogTalkRadio program, a voice expert stated: “it is my expert forensic examiner opinion that it is probable that all voice samples come from the same person.”

Aaron Walker has transcribed some significant bits of the July 5 hearing in which he successfully appealed Brett Kimberlin’s latest frivolous peace order — the latest example of Kimberlin’s abusing the court system with deceptive and overbearing legal actions. Go to Aaron’s post to read it all, but I’ll highlight a couple of parts here that reinforce points we’ve made here in the past: namely, that Kimberlin takes defensive actions and statements, and dishonestly characterizes them as “attacks”:

B: In the blog that you have offered to the court today, can you cite any specific portion of that blog where Mr. Walker said he was going to assault you or harm you in any way personally? Personally? Is there any particular page—

K: Over and over he has said he is going to make me pay. Make me pay.

B: For filing charges against you [Walker?] and other things that turned out not to be true, right?

K: He said he was going to make me pay, and he said he went out and bought two guns, or had two guns.

B: And the context on that was that he was afraid of you and he was going to protect himself if you came to his home, correct?

K: I have never been to his home, I would never go to his home.

Let’s stop right there. We’ve been through this before, but since Kimberlin keeps alleging that Aaron threatened him by talking about getting guns for self-defense, let’s look at precisely what Aaron said:

I also purchased a handgun. I had owned a shotgun since law school for home defense, but I wanted something I could more easily carry in public. As they say, better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. And I made sure Kimberlin’s crew knew I was armed, to make them realize that I was not defenseless.

It’s all about Aaron defending himself. But with this crew, if you talk about defending yourself against their attacks or potential attacks, they say you’re attacking them. Back to the transcript:

B: Are you familiar with the term “SWATting?”

K: [long pause] yes.

B: And have you caused Mr. Walker to be SWATted by the Fairfax County or the Prince William County Police?

K: That is a despicable claim, and—

B: Yes or no.

K: —I resent it. I resent it! He knows I didn’t. And you know I didn’t. And you’re trying to again harass me, you are harassing me, just like—

B: I’m asking [begin crosstalk] if you are responsible for someone calling the police,[end crosstalk]

K: No! You’re harassing me. This man, this man, this man.

B: Excuse me sir, I am asking you, yes or no, are you responsible—

K: No! Absolutely not.

B: —directly or indirectly?

K: And it’s despicable!

B: So you didn’t call, or ask somebody else to call and tell the police that there have been shots fired at Mr. Walker’s home so the SWAT team would show up there. You didn’t do that, you’re not responsible?

K: Did you do that? I did it as much as you did it. I mean that’s ridiculous—

B: Sir, did you have anything to do with that or do you know who did?

K: No, I don’t.

Kimberlin says it’s harassment to ask him a question in court. In a proceeding to lift a frivolous peace order he should never have sought in the first place.

This is how these people operate, folks. They attack you — and if you have the temerity to defend yourself, or tell the world what they are doing, they call that an attack on them.

I’ll give you one more example of how this works. This one is not from Kimberlin himself, but from one of his supporters, the vile OccupyRebellion. Earlier this morning I pointed out how she threatened to publish pictures of my children and family, Lee Stranahan’s children, and Mandy Nagy’s niece — all because of the actions of a completely different person. I published a blog post last night embedding her unconscionable tweets. Here is one example:

Today — you guessed it — she is calling my blog post an “attack” on her:

It’s a playbook. You’re not allowed to defend yourself, or even point out their attacks, or they will call it an attack.

P.S. More than $706 has been raised so far for Aaron, in tribute to OccupyRebellion’s harassment of him on July 6.

Brett Kimberlin and Neal Rauhauser supporter OccupyRebellion brings family into it:

The repeated references to “Jay” are to a tweeter and blogger who has alleged that Neal Rauhauser owes tens of thousands of dollars in child support. I have not linked those pieces on this blog, but apparently those pieces are my fault anyway, such that OccupyRebellion feels justified in threatening my kids.

Oh, and then we have this, from “true conservative” Brooks Bayne:

Unclear whether he is accusing me of being the SWATter, or simply mocking the fact that I was SWATted — an action that could have gotten me killed. Either way, it’s despicable. But despicable behavior is this guy’s stock in trade as of late.

Weird that much of the harassment and defamation I get these days is from this guy — who claims he’s on the right.

Aaron Worthing won the appeal of Brett Kimberlin’s peace order against him, but that was a foregone conclusion. Congratulations to him and everything, I guess, but it’s like congratulating the sun for rising again.

Here are the parts that, while also unsurprising, are well worth noting:

1) Kimberlin thinks it’s harassment to defend yourself in one of his frivolous legal actions:

Of course the highlight of the hearing came when my attorney sought to cross examine Kimberlin. Of course he gave Kimberlin an epic cross-examination back on April 11, but today he was more focused but equally effective. Interestingly, he didn’t go through the entirety of Kimberlin’s criminal history, or indeed any of it. But he did ask Kimberlin about when I was SWATted, about a week and a half ago and Kimberlin went into a rage at the suggestion. He called it a “despicable” question, falsely claiming that I and others had blamed him for it “without a shred of evidence” (in fact when I wrote about the SWATting, and talked about it on the radio, I was careful not to blame him because I can’t prove he had anything to do with it). But he was absolutely furious at even the simple question of whether or not he was involved in it, shaking his finger at my attorney in rage and saying to him, “You’re harassing me” by even asking the question. That is, a lawyer asking a person a question in court is harassment, according to Kimberlin.

and

2) Neal Rauhauser is with Brett Kimberlin all the way, baby. All. The. Way.

And there is one other thing to note. Neal Rauhauser was there again, and seen exchanging documents with Kimberlin, further verifying their connection.

But those facts were not just true today. Please note this tidbit from a commenter:

I happened to see the Norton v Kimberlin and Kimberlin v Norton event.

Kimberlin claimed that “they” were harassing him when Norton’s attorney asked him if he was convicted for perjury.

Rauhauser was there, too.

P.S. Kimberlin said it was harassment when Seth Allen filed a responsive pleading in the lawsuit Kimberlin filed against Seth Allen.

So there is a clear pattern here: Kimberlin initiates a legal action, generally frivolous, and if the opposing party has the nerve to defend himself, Kimberlin calls it harassment.

And has Neal Rauhauser helping him out.

P.P.S. If you think this is the end of all this, you’re mistaken:

I am extraordinarily grateful to @OccupyRebellion for these tweets. They are money in Aaron’s pocket. Money he needs, because as @OccupyRebellion makes quite clear, the lawfare did not end today. Why, it’s just beginning! And they’re damned proud of it!

So go to Aaron’s site and hit one of the donation buttons.

Do it for @OccupyRebellion.

Or do it for the “so-called First Amendment.”

I just did. You should too.

FLASHBACK: If only someone had talked about Neal Rauhauser’s connection to Brett Kimberlin a long time ago!

Oh, wait! Someone did — one year ago today:

July 5, 2011

Neal Rauhauser’s New Friend: Brett Kimberlin, Speedway Bomber; Rauhauser Asks Kos Kids for a Picture of My Wife

Always trust content from Patterico.

Read it all at Aaron’s place. I think this part is worth pointing out:

Kimberlin makes it sound like Aaron came out of nowhere — just one stalker helping another. But, in fact, Kimberlin initiated contact with Aaron, not the other way around. Kimberlin had filed legal papers seeking Aaron’s true name, ostensibly so that Kimberlin could call Aaron as a witness on January 9. But when Kimberlin learned all of Aaron’s personal information, he didn’t use it to subpoena Aaron. Instead, he put that personal information — Aaron’s home address, Aaron’s work address, specific information about one of Aaron’s past lawsuits, names of schools Aaron attended, etc. — in court documents.

Then, Aaron showed up on January 9 to have all that personal information sealed. This was the very hearing where Kimberlin supposedly needed Aaron as a witness — yet Kimberlin didn’t call Aaron. What Kimberlin did do is oppose Aaron’s motion to seal all of that personal information. This would cause a reasonable onlooker to decide that Kimberlin wanted all that information public — perhaps so that it could be published on the Internet, to harass Aaron.

With all that in mind, look at the section of transcript in the screenshot. Why, this Aaron guy came out of nowhere, judge! I have no idea who he is! He just showed up at a hearing!! He’s a STALKER!!!

Just one example of Kimberlin’s use of deceptive lawfare to retaliate against people who criticize him. Read it all here.

The post is titled Lying Felon Brett Kimberlin Scores a Draw in Maryland Hearing, but the key part is Stacy’s description of the Rauhauser/Kimberlin strategy of accusing the accusers:

It is genuinely amazing to think that anyone could read that 1981 article by Indianapolis Star reporter Joe Gelarden — please print it out and read the whole thing — without recognizing that Kimberlin’s characteristic modus operandi has scarcely changed in the past 30 years.

By accusing others of wrongdoing, Kimberlin seeks to evade responsibility for his own wrongdoing. What I’ve called the “accuse the accusers” strategy – which is also witnessed in the actions of Kimberlin’s associate Neal Rauhauser — looks very much like obstruction of justice.

. . . .

Kimberlin uses his own civil action against Allen as evidence to discredit Allen, thus to discourage Frey (or anyone else) from relying on Allen’s work. So when we see Kimberlin attempting to employ spurious legal complaints to discredit Aaron Walker, we know that eventually Kimberlin will accuse others of criminal wrongdoing because of their relationship (real or alleged) with Walker.

Accuse the accusers — and then use your own accusations as “evidence”!

I will immodestly point out that this is not a new observation; I pointed this out on March 27, 2012:

[P]erversely, threats against a blogger not only serve as an attempt to intimidate, but are used as a tool to delegitimize the blogger. Here’s how it works: if a blogger criticizes someone in the public eye, the anti-free speech thug simply attacks the blogger in real life. If the attack fails to intimidate him, the thug now has the argument that anything the blogger posts about the thug in the future is done out of “revenge.” Even though the thug is the one who made it personal, while the blogger was simply reporting on the news, the thug’s personal attack on the blogger now enables the thug to claim to be the victim of a personal attack.

This is how the thugs use their weapons of real life attacks: not just as intimidation, but as attempts to delegitimize. They also can report you to the authorities for made-up crimes and ethical lapses, and then describe you as being “under investigation.”

It’s all part of a playbook.

I put that up fully two months before I revealed my SWATting story publicly, but I knew what I was talking about and so did many other commenters here. You can see it in operation when Rauhauser sends a missive to the FBI describing me as being under investigation for “cyberstalking” Kimberlin, it gives some faux legitimacy to the idea that I’m a bad guy. Yet the only investigation is one that Rauhauser’s associate Kimberlin started — and it was filled with nonsense and lies.

They accuse you, and cite their accusations to delegitimize you.

Stacy also has an interview with Brandon Darby which is very important, and fits right in with the “accuse the accusers” strategy. McCain asks Darby about the Rauhauser crew’s claims that Darby is the SWATter, which is of course absurd. If Darby is right, these guys are very much on the ropes:

Some parts of this network never intended to receive this much attention. Now they are realizing they are likely going to face justice and get caught. It seems they are now engaging in a preemptive defense strategy where they are making public allegations focusing on someone connected to the FBI, so that when they get busted they can claim that they were close to “uncovering the truth” and their charges are nothing more than political retribution from the FBI or an effort from the FBI to silence them for “getting too close” to the truth.

See how it works? If they think you’re about to reveal something about them, they start accusing you first so they can portray your reveal as retaliation. If they are going after someone associated with the FBI, they may be trying to set up a pre-emptive defense in case they are arrested by the FBI. “You guys are prosecuting us because we were revealing the truth about your informant Darby!” Something like that.

Viewed this way, their accusations against Darby may suggest they are worried about federal prosecution.

McCain is on fire these days, as these posts show. Bookmark him and stay glued to his site.