Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

There are times when I wonder if The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin actually reads the pleadings we defendants file in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness or if, perhaps, he thinks that the judge doesn’t. Consider this allegation he makes in his opposition to the Malking/Twitchy motion to dismiss.ECF 67-p4On the contrary, we defendants had already addressed the non-existence of a RICO conspiracy in our motions to dismiss. This is from the Malkin/Twitchy motion.ECF 41-p18This is from my motion to dismiss.ECF 5-18All the other defendants who had filed motions to dismiss by the time TDPK filed his pleading had poked similar holes in his allegation.


54 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. Money laundering on a massive scale, huh? Why the heck didn’t I hook up with you guys sooner?

    *Necessary indication of sarcasm due to accusatory nature of TDPK and team, et al

    • Yeah…I mean…I was supposed to be Kimberlin Unmasked at one point…shouldn’t I have gotten some of the action?

      /s *I’ll add my indication of sarcasm as well.

      • I likewise have not been sued or threatened by Kimberlin.

        Please give me advice for which Brett Kimberlin crimes I need to start writing more about in order to get him to sue me. I feel guilty over the thought that I must not be doing a good enough job.

  2. well, to be precise, we do ignore this “fact” because it is not a fact. It is an allegation and a false one at that. And we have pointed out repeatedly how the allegation is insufficient. someday when this case is truly over I will show you just how incompetent his complaint is on this point. I mean, not John. John knows. But all you nice people out there in TV land, I will show you. There is one astonishing oversight in there that will demonstrate he can’t find his legal arse with two hands and a flashlight.

  3. This case will be dismissed for failure to state a claim. I don’t believe any of the Defendant’s have been put on notice as to that they are alleged to have done, despite 80 some pages of rambling nonsense. Federal pleadings require a short, plain statement, that also pleads with specificity what each Defendant is alleged to have done. That means, as to each defendant, there needs to both a factual assertion and a legal assertion, for each element of the charge against them. In well written pleadings, the charges are broken down into counts (letting the court see where each charge begins and ends).

    Kimberlin makes lots of factual allegations, but often fails entirely in connecting the factual allegation to any element of any offense. If Kimberlin failed to allege that each specific defendant was guilty of actions which support each specific element of the offense, then the case will be dismissed as to each defendant for which he failed to properly plead a claim. (assuming the defendant argues their case properly in a motion to dismiss). There are two important considerations:

    1) the Judge has still not decided to allow the SAC

    2) the Judge said no more amendments (the SAC is the last bite at the apple).

    So, Kimberlin’s SAC fails to state a claim as to most, if not all, of the defendants. He cannot fix that, the judge already said so. Right now the defendants need to sit back and do nothing while Kimberlin tries to figure out how to properly serve the remaining defendants so that they too can file motions to dismiss and requests for attorney’s fees. If I were Kimberlin, I would be very concerned about the possibility of being sanctioned and required to pay each defendant’s legal fees.

    • Being ordered to pay people has never troubled Kimberlin’s tiny, fetid black heart before. Why would it do so now?

      “Hey, what’s this hole doing in my corporate veil?”

    • All quite true and accurate Esodia, but Opsec would prefer that we let Hizzonor explain the failings ex post facto. The leniency afforded the pro se moron plaintiff may yet result in a Third AC. Of course I have no faith in TDPKs ability to correct even the most obvious errors in his filings. His hubris prevents him from admitting there are any mistakes.

      • I think twitchy’s counsel used the term first. Not sure which pleading kept referring to Kimberlin’s SAC, but it is a lot easier to write and I laughed the first time I read it.

  4. It’s as if Kimberlin posited a vague idea of a form of transportation (e.g. “it’s got wheels and makes noise and moves, people can ride it”) and expects the result to be that he is granted worldwide patents on every commercial jet aircraft. What a twit.

  5. One does wonder whether the judge reads the filings of the defendants.

    Why does this case still exist at all? Why has the judge ignored the admitted forgery of documents in his court – documents *from* his court. That is still out there after all this time. That the response to that was not immediate is telling to me.

    I have opined before: Judge Grimm is not duped by BK, he is well aware of his background. Because he is in on it.

    • It is possible that the courts are working to build a case to declare BK a vexatious litigant and to dismiss with prejudice. This will make it damn near impossible for him to continue his lawfare.

      • Sure, it is possible. Do you think that is what is happening? Really?

        That the court is letting the defendants dangle, and spend time and money while in legal jeopardy as it is trying to figure out some way to get BK?

        If the court just researches its own records, everything necessary is there.

        Think on this:

        “On 11 March, TDPK filed his answers to Judge Grimm concerning why he should not be sanctioned for forging a summons sent to Twitchy in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness and why some of the defendants in that case should not be dismissed for lack of service of process”

        It has been nearly 2 months since BK admitted, in wriiting, forging documents that were supposedly from the court. And at the same time, there was an issue about “lack of service of process.” The Judge sent him a letter having done all of the homework for how to properly serve Breitbart, then gave him more time – at all of the other parties’ expense – to go do that. If the judge is giving him 60 more days to serve a party, he is not about to shut the case down before that.

        So, you said it is a possibility. Do you think that is what is really going on?

      • Honestly Earl; in the federal case; I think Hizzonor is trying to build an appeal proof judgement and make this thing go away. What our host has studiously declined to broadcast, are the plans for counter-suit. Thus, I buy popcorn and wait patiently.

  6. The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they grind finely. Get over your need for instant gratification.

    By giving BK more rope to hang himself, it is also possible that his front organizations will also be destroyed.

    He is now on the offensive, but sooner or later he must play defense. And he is grossly outclassed.

    It would not surprise me if he winds up back in jail.

    • It isn’t a desire for instant gratification. You didn’t really answer my question. Do you believe that the judge has not yet responded on the forgery because he is trying to figure out how to really stick it to Kimberlin?

      Does the judge have so little regard for the defendants that he would continue to waste their time and money in his goal of really sticking it to BK?

      I pointed out that the forgery and service issues were submitted the same day. While not one thing has been said regarding the forgery, the judge had plenty of time to research who the agent was for Breitbart and write up a tutorial for BK, and then extend the time limits. And, also, he seems to be considering Twitchy a party because they are responding.

      So, how fine is it grinding?

      • To expand on my above, I think Judge Grimm is irritated and doing his best to be aloof and judicial. Additionally, his docket, like too many others is full; and this suit is a nuisance to him joint and differently with the defendants.

      • Actually, I have answered your question. While BK may think he cannot be touched, I do not think he understands what could happen to him. I guess he learned nothing while doing time.

      • Perhaps. But I still think this “give him enough rope to make a case appeal-proof” story is wishcasting. Why would the judge care about appeals anyway? Would an appeal go on his scorecard as negative, and then he gets his pay docked? Maybe he loses his job?

        The man has a lifetime appointment and nearly unlimited power. If he wanted this nuisance gone he could have already dismissed it. If he wanted to dismiss it with prejudice and go for the vexatious litigant designation, he has everything he needs. He could have dismissed the case and made BK apply to a special master or whatever in the future as sanctions. He can just pull up all of the bogus cases from the past. He has the resources.

        If he did not do that because he just doesn’t have time in his busy schedule, how is it that he had time to research Breitbart and provide a tutorial on how to conduct litigation to BK? Is that normal for a judge to reach down from the bench and help pro se litigants in proper service process – even after that pro se litigant has demonstrated bad faith through forgery?

      • “And, also, he seems to be considering Twitchy a party because they are responding. ” This is distressing to me anyway.

      • Earl,

        Normally I tend to be anti-krytocratic and quite cynical in re judicial activism. However, in this particular case, I don’t think Judge Grimm is shielding TDPK. Occam and Hanlon both suggest self interested pragmatism and a desire to “make this all go away”.

        As far as appeal proofing; there may be some professional pride, but I think more to the point, the Appeals Court may be inclined to remand a flawed decision back to the originating court. This would mean at the least one of Judge Grimm’s peers would be stuck cleaning up his mess. Or worse, he himself would have to muck with the terrorist diddler and a whole other trial.

        I think honesty requires us to admit that those of us not privvy to Hizzonor’s counsel lack sufficient knowlege to predict his motives accurately. Thus we are only left with optimistic or pessimistic prognostication.

      • Too impatient you are to be either a Jedi or a Sith Lord.

        I am not a lawyer (I am a Professional Engineer, licensed and everything) and it may well be that you are also not a lawyer.

        As a non-professional in the field, I understand that how the professionals must do their job may seem like total and utter BS to those of us who do not practice law.

        For all I know, you may well be correct in your assessment that the judge already has enough to screw over BK royally. It may also be true that what he has the ability to do now and what he will have the ability to do in the next few months may be orders of magnitude worse. Simply because we do not know the law.

        Call it “wishcasting” if you want, but there is a big difference between “close enough” and “game over”. And as a Professional Engineer, there is a certain standard of care that I must apply in any professional situation. There is a big difference when “close enough” has sufficient design margin to ensure safety and when I am called as an Expert Witness, when a court demands “game over”.

        Professionals also act prudently. That means that when presented with a suit against them, they take precautions (standard of care) that will ensure an effective defense even when the issue of service is an open question. They may argue that service is defective, but any lawyer who relies on that as a sole defense is a fool. So they respond as if the service were valid in case it is not dismissed; they have answers ready and they scrupiously adhere to any and all deaadlines.

        So, leave the practice of law to the lawyers.

      • Darth –

        I am an engineer, too, though not a licensed one. I have been in courtrooms, and I am not a lawyer, but then neither am I practicing law. I am commenting on a blog, for which no license is required.

        My point is that people seem to be speaking out of hope or wishing on the events here. There is no evidence that would lead one to believe that Judge Grimm is winding up so he can land a power punch on BK. In fact, rather the opposite. BK is given a third bite at the apple to serve Breitbart. And not only is he given yet another attempt, he was provided with explicit direction on how to do it, and the judge provided him with legal research to assist him attaining his goal. When the judge is plainly acting as assistant counsel to the plaintiff, it might be worthwhile to consider a motion for mistrial. (I understand that there is a balance here – if you have something before a judge that you are hoping to get a favorable ruling on, it probably isn’t a good idea to accuse him of misconduct. But one has to ask what the odds are of a favorable ruling. I suppose the motion for mistrial would come after the denials of the MTD’s.)

        If he has time to assist the plaintiff in conducting his case, surely he has time to consider a sanction for someone forging paperwork in his own name (essentially, if not literally)? Apparently too busy researching corporate records in California to attend to misconduct admitted to him in writing.

        It doesn’t take a Jedi to see this. You have been in courtrooms – ask yourself what would have happened if *you* provided false documentation in your testimony? Hell, I just had an attorney threaten me with a motion to compel because my attorney signed something that under the rules of the court I was supposed to sign. I had to run my ass over to my attorney’s office and sign something so he could fax it over to avoid the hassle of a hearing.

        I cannot imagine offering something to a judge and then having to admit that I had MADE IT UP. I know that the consequence would happen right then and there. Not lying around unresolved some two months hence.

      • And I am saying that since you and I are not lawyers and have no clue as to what the judge is thinking, let alone how he is bound by his actions, perhaps you should leave the technical practice of the law to those who have been educated in it.

        The part about the license is that once you are a licensed professional, you are automatically held to a higher standard. I am sure there are things I know about the actual practice of engineering as far as knowledge of codes, technical standards and standard of care that you may not know. Also, since I am regulated by my state of licensure, you can be sure I take that quite seriously. Since you are not licensed, you are held to the same standard as I am on a professional level.

        The same is true for other “learned professions”. The whole “I spend a lot of time in courtrooms, and I am only commenting on a blog and not practicing law” thing is weak tea.

        Unless you can actually read the judge’s mind, you absolutely have no clue as to what or why he is doing what he is doing. Giving additional time to serve a victim is a way of making it non-reversible (I believe, since BK cannot say he was not afforded any and all chances to make his case. Bending over backwards for a creep is a way to diffuse the “No Fair!!!” claim).

        Likewise, while we all are dismayed that BK seems to be getting preferential treatment, there may be good reasons based in the LAW as to why this is so. There may also be good reasons in the practice of law as to why things are transpiring the way they are. Neither you nor I have the education or experience to know that. However, we certainly have a finely tuned sense of what “fair play” is all about, and I agree, this does not seem fair.

        I am sure some of the lawyers and others who have had intimate contact with the justice system who lurk here (Aaron among others) get royally torqued by having to listen to uninformed opinions as to how the system works. And, friend, both of us have nothing but uninformed opinions on this topic.

        For all we know, when this goes to trial, one of the first actions might be to throw BK in jail for his forgeries. Now, do I know this? Hell no! But who knows what the judge and DA and/or Federal Prosecutor are cooking up? Maybe something, maybe nothing.

        Time will tell.

      • Indeed, time will tell.

        But as I noted, I do not feel that opining in blog comments requires licensure.

        I do get that “the law is an ass,” especially to us engineering types, wherein a thing is what it is, while in the law, we can argue about what the meaning of is is.

        So, you are right. None of us know the interior thoughts of the judge, nor what else might be going on behind the scenes, It is not impossible that an FBI SWAT team is getting ready to break down a door in Bethesda and haul someone off to jail. It is not impossible that the judge is trying to be “appeal-proof.”

        By the same token, what I have posited is not impossible, either. If you think that opining about this case in the comments of this blog is worthless, you are not acting on thought because you go right on opining, despite your lack of a law degree. And neither am I.

        I am opining not on what could be, but rather on the evidence that has been presented to us. We don’t have everything, we have not heard everything, most of us have not been in these hearings, and most of us don’t have PACER accounts where we can see all of the documents. We are mostly dealing with open source here. I am making my comments based on what I have seen. And while I am rooting for the defendants, my belief in the “justice” system (and yes I put it in scare quotes) has been shaken by many things I have seen and experienced – this case is just one of them.

        Fairness? I don’t know there is much of it. It doesn’t work like Law & Order. People lie in court, and no amount of glaring or clever questioning will cause them to suddenly blurt out their guilt. And while the courts move slow on some things, they are capable of moving swiftly in others.

        I still don’t believe that you have answered my question, but you say you have. You answered that BK may be in for a big surprise – which doesn’t really answer what I am asking. I want to know if you think that the reason for the long delay on the response from the judge on the forgery is indicative of a trap being drawn for BK. Not “could” it be that. Sure, it could. But do you think that is why? What experience do you have with the courts, and with people in general, would lead you to that conclusion?

        Not to go all Randian, but there are no contradictions. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.

      • If you want an answer, I can honestly say “I don’t know.” For all we know, he has had a communication with the US Attorney regarding the forgery.

        How they choose to proceed, it has not been made public. Is it possible that the US Attorney has declined to prosecute? Sure. Assuming the US Attorney and Judge are honest brokers, and is not beyond the realm of possible outcomes, they are bound by an ethical code which, if violated, undermines the whole “rule of law” thing.

        I personally choose to operate under the delusion that actually means something. In addition, one should never underestimate that a personal affront (such as committing a fraud on the – his! – court) might simply trump any supposed party loyalty.

        But the fact remains, until proven otherwise, that you are certainly allowed to post whatever uninformed nonsense you so choose.

      • Well, thank you for permitting me to post here.

        So, same to you, sir. And the horse you rode in on.

      • Earl, I have been staying out of these debates. But I have earlier noted your almost conspiratorial ideas of why Kimberlin gets away with a lot. And I do not agree with you either. So it’s just this one guy on here disagreeing with you. I just did not feel the need to comment since I had no specifics to add (which is merciful because I know I proved how long-winded I can be in other threads).

        But on the matter you are discussing, I admit I don’t know for sure either way how one particular matter will go. I do believe that even if the good guys win, they do not deserve the expense and hassle Kimberlin is deliberately putting them through, and so: can you donate to the defense effort?

      • BKWatch – how do you know that I haven’t?

        My view here is not conspiratorial. I don’t believe that Judge Grimm sits on some IRC channel plotting with TK the next moves. But I think that he recognizes BK as someone on his side. He cannot possibly be ignorant of BK – the defendants have told his story in their responses. If the judge can research California corporate records, I presume he can work the Google machine. I do not find it credible that he does not know about BK’s past – since that is theoretically what the case is about – so I cannot buy into the “well he was duped” explanations for his decisions in favor of the plaintiff.

        So on to the “he’s giving him enough rope” explanation. This presumes that the judge has already decided that he is going to lower the boom on Kimberlin, but he needs to let BK establish enough proof that this action is correctly decided, and so is giving him significant leeway in his conduct now so that later he can say, “see, I was MORE than fair to him.” Note that this “appeal-proof” argument presumes that the judge has already decided that he will rule against BK, either with a dismissal, or with a verdict – though this is supposed to be a jury trial. I find this argument at odds with the notion that is, oh how did he put it:

        the US Attorney and Judge are honest brokers, and is not beyond the realm of possible outcomes, they are bound by an ethical code which, if violated, undermines the whole “rule of law” thing.

        I cannot reconcile the idea that the judge is acting judiciously with the idea that he has already decided to rule against BK. That is why I call it wishcasting. You can’t simultaneously say that this guy is being studiously fair to the plaintiff, while at the same time say that he has already decided the case against him.

        Another problem with the “appeal-proof” argument is that if the judge is being MORE than fair to BK, he is being LESS than fair to the defendants. Suppose the case ends up with the defendants losing? This is not impossible. Won’t the defendants appeal? And won’t the extra effort the judge gave to the plaintiff now accrue against him on appeal? Sure it will – but of course, I note that the judge really has no reason to care about the case being appealed. It costs him nothing if it happens. And, if he is really super serious about judging, then he should be concerned about arriving at the correct decision under the law in his courtroom, not about what will happen in some other court.

        Anyone is free to come up with their own theory of what is happening here. Even the lawyers here don’t know what is going on in the judge’s mind or behind the scenes. If you want to believe that the judge’s rulings that are apparently in favor of the plaintiff and detrimental to the defendants are because really, secretly, in his heart of hearts he is against the plaintiff, go with it. You may even be right! Stranger things have happened.

  7. Kimberlin Unmasked wrote: “There are a few others. What about Brooks Bayne aka Jason Wade Taylor? Wasn’t he “in” with Team Kimberlin for a while?”

    I am not familiar with any Jason Wade Taylor involvement with Team Kimberlin (doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened), however , Brook Baynes is not JWT as far as I know. I do know that Jason Wade Taylor is aka Randy Hahn.

    And, I have long believed that foul-mouthed @whoisnumbernone account is none other than the sawed-off, creepy, domestic terrorist himself. Or, that Child Porn freak Gillette. Of course, I could be wrong.

Leave a Reply