Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Both of The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s vexatious lawsuits in which I am a defendant are grinding their ways through the state and federal courts. Given the frivolous nature of TDPK’s complaints, I have optimistic expectations concerning the final results of the suits. There have been several recent developments that lead me to believe that Brett Kimberlin is becoming desperate. Indeed, it seems that panic has driven him to turn the stupid knob up to 11 12.

All is proceeding as I have foreseen—and I hope to be able to share the details of some of TDPK’s latest mistakes before long.

Stay tuned.

UPDATE—As I’ve noted above, good legal strategy prevents me from publishing everything I know about. However, I’ve been given clearance to share this example of TDPK’s going full-Acme.

IANAL, I’m an engineer. I’m not sure how lawyers would describe that proposed motion, but we engineers would categorize it as bullshit.

113 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. “Breathlessly raced to the court house”
    cue Chariots of fire theme music” –

    Kimberlin cardio

  2. IANAL – I am a chemist and biologist by schooling, and I can verify that the attachment does indeed possess all the required elements to make it bullshit.

    • What’s a PLANITIFF?

      Has Dogbreath (for “Running Dog” – any long term visitor to China knows what this term means!) come up with a new legal word?







      Stop it, Brett! I can’t stand it! What a maroon! Where did you learn about the law??? in the pen???


      is that a new definition for Schmalfeldt??? Someone who is so confused that he can’t even Twitter correctly, let alone proofread?

      Who is your proofreader?


      • That or he just added it to his custom dictionary, totally amazed that whoever made the spellchecker didn’t include ‘Planitiff’ to begin with. Hubris.

  3. How many times can he use the phrase “false narrative” in 11 pages? He must really be enamored of it. Or else he assumes that if he uses it often enough people will start to buy it.

    I also thought it interesting that he’s saying that Twitchy is not a defendant. When did that happen? I thought his whole claim was that they were and I don’t recall a judge ruling that he couldn’t add that yet.

    • He is saying that Twitchy is not a defendant in the state case.
      He does, however seem to mistakenly refer to “Plaintiff” Twitchy a number of times in his motion.

      • That makes more sense. It’s hard to keep track of which case he’s talking about when. I suspect he was having trouble too.

  4. Um, as one who used return receipts in business for decades, I NEVER had a postal employee check the box for me. You fill out the form yourself, all they will do is peel off the tape backing and attach it to the mail. And his excuse is laughable – if it HAD to be only Akbar who could sign for it to satisfy the requirements of service, then it was too late when he got the return card, and even an idiot would understand that.

    To me the most amusing aspect is the tone. It’s as if he is giving the judge a lecture in procedure.

    Of course, judges LOVE being told what they are doing wrong by amateurs.

  5. He’s doubling down with “Hey, how was I to know that you couldn’t add the check mark in the box? No big deal, I’m a simple pro-se.” Right now he has to plead ignorance and hope the court buys it. I don’t think the court will ignore it because it seems too obviously dishonest to let slide.

    • Is this the same case where the Judge told him “Don’t go that route with me” when Kimby tried the “I’m just a pro se” excuse before?

    • “Hey, how was I to know that you couldn’t add the check mark in the box? No big deal, I’m a simple pro-se.”

      At some point there ought to be trigger warnings at each post that proposes such absurdity. Or else I too, may have cause to sue.

  6. I notice that he also is too ignorant to understand the difference between “flaunt” and “flout.”

  7. I agree with Kimberlins motion that the judge sanction the Plaintiff in the case

    As a point of law Brett is correct – the Plaintiff used the filings as a method of harassment, the plaintiff did not assert that the claims were factually accurate

  8. My favorite line, which was buried in there, was “Defendant Akbar, as in this case, avoided service for months on end.Therefore, Plaintiff filed a motion for alternate service, and when doing so noticed the postal office has not checked the restricted delivery box on the green box as Plaintiff had requested. Therefore, Plaintiff checked the box.” Facepalm.

    Kimberlin moves for sanctions because 1) the Twitchy’s attorney filed a pleading without having sufficient facts to support it (they had the transcript, btw, which is all that was necessary… it was made an exhibit for the Judge in the federal case) 2) Twitchy’s attorney relied on the “false narrative” breathlessly provided by Walker and Hoge (btw, the Judge is now on notice that false narrative means the truth), 3) the “false narrative” was that Kimberlin had forged documents filed with the court in the state case – which twitchy argued showed a pattern of misconduct (it does) 4) A reasonable inquiry would have uncovered that Kimberlin merely checked the box, indicating restricted delivery, despite the fact that he had not paid for nor had the post office delivered via restricted delivery, and filed the document with the court without indicating to the court that it was the plaintiff who had checked the box, not the post office, and that restricted delivery had not been made, as required… facepalm.

    It takes some hutzpah to call the other side a bunch of liars while admitting what they said about you was true IN THE SAME PLEADING!!!

      • One of my first posts on this matter simply said “Sanctions”. This is the only real solution to a vexatious litigant. When it’s all said and done, having to face real consequences for your political beliefs, such as in this case, has always been the effective response. All the defendants in this and future cases should be granted their motions for significant sanctions, whether at the state or federal level. In my humble opinion, the federal sanctions will hurt more!

        The real “PLANITIFF” here should be “permanently disbarred” for ineffective assistance of counsel and gross malpractice!

        After sanctions, I believe a visit to someone’s parole office would be in order.

  9. Seems to me that BK’s enumerations of the justifications for Rule 11 sanctions apply more to himself than to Mr. Smith, Esq.

  10. My favorite line….

    He asks the Court to cherry pick a few statements of Plaintiff and the judge at the hearing

    What is left unsaid here is “where Kimberlin admitted to the judge that he did indeed forge the check mark on the green card”

    Does he not think the judge will read the transcript where Kimberlin had to admit to yet another case of forgery and trying to mislead the court?

    • Just like Hoge keeps cherry picking incidents in Kimberlin’s life to make him appear odious. Like the time he left the bomb at a football game, left the timers in his car, and went to forge some IDs. Or those innocent vacations with a very underage girl he introduced to a friend as “my girlfriend.”

  11. Is there any record of TDPK seeking leave to file this motion, as per the standing case management order? Or is Judge Grimm not going to look at his 27 8×10 color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one is? Because that would be a shame. A man needs to get his laughs where he can find them.

    • I was just thinking that. I was going to ask but you beat me to it. Unless Kimberlin first wrote a letter first seeking permission to file this, the standing Order is for the clerk to remove it from the file, I believe. If he did not, perhaps he can write a letter explaining that he intended to write the letter seeking leave, and that the clerk did not do what he intended, and that the court should rule on his motion anyway, despite his not having followed the procedure .

    • Perhaps we were thinking of when the Judge wrote, “Until a case management Order is entered, no further pleadings will be permitted without advance permission from the court.” I would imagine a case management Order was entered (I am not sure it was made available to us) which is why we were laboring under the belief that further pleadings needed prior permission of the Court.

    • Wow, so he actually did something right – giving the other side advance notice of a pending motion for sanctions before filing it with the court.

      It doesn’t matter, since the issue isn’t ripe. But at least he’s trying.

    • It hasn’t technically been filed. The rules say it must be served first, let to sit for 21 days and then if Mike does not cave before his legal brilliance, he can file it.

      So we shall see.

  12. Kimberlin complaining about Smith:
    “….when he has no first hand knowledge of the issues or facts or hearings, and he has done so in order to poison this case and make Plaintiff appear odious.”

    So, Kimberlin really thinks Smith has to be present during the discovery of a forgery in open court in order to report the fraud to another court? (“I din’t do that, and you din’t see me!”)

    And since when was it ever hard to make the Plaintiff appear odious?

    • Heh. If that were the case, none of the precedents that all attorneys and in fact, all judges rely on would be inadmissible unless the attorney citing said precedent was actually in the courtroom themselves.
      How many Brandenburg references would be excluded?
      Talk about fantasyland!

  13. …and now Mr. Smith is relying on and cooperating with them in order to harass Plaintiff in this case…

    So, Motion to Dismiss = harassment. The Diddler is giving Acme a bad name.

  14. Every time I read this, I see something new. It’s like Christmas! “Mr. Smith has jettisoned his role as an advocate and has become a harasser of Plaintiff using false narratives just as the Defendants (sic) have done for the past several years.” Anyone want to take odds on Kimberlin trying to add Mr. Smith to the suit, now that he has officially be recognized as a harasser of Plaintiff?

    Kimberlin has really stepped in it with this filing, though. In his SAC, the term false narrative appears seemingly hundreds of times. Its never really clear just what the hell he is talking about when he uses it. This pleading will put the Judge on notice – if the Judge reads it – that false narrative means “the objective truth.”

    As a small point, when speaking about a defendant or the defendants, the d isn’t capitalized. When speaking about what Defendant did (when merely substituting the word defendant with the name of the individual or individuals) the d is capitalized. A minor point, but it is why I wrote (sic) in case some of you were wondering. Defendant and plaintiff are not always capitalized.

  15. Also this:

    “Mr. Smith has used his “quote” Memorandum to violate the Court’s Management Order.”

    That’s just bad writing.

    • I thought that too.
      It’s like he’s writing these with speech to text software and just ranting at his computer.
      I did that once for a paper my freshman year in college mostly to humor myself. You can imagine how poorly I did on such paper. Not only was it riddled with typos and grammatical errors, it also was merely train of thought. The good news is the paper didn’t count for much.

    • The amusing thing is that the memo was a request to file. Which was granted. I am in good company in wondering if Brett requested leave for this filing?

  16. Mr. Hoge, I am deeply disappointed in you. You haven’t been giving us the whole story. Where are these harsh admonishions of which TDPK speaks? Must I slog into the pit that is Patriot Ombudsman to review such honesty?


    As if. LOL.

    • BK probably considers every denial of a motion to dismiss as an “admonition”.

      • I think you mean:

        BK probably considers every denial of a motion to dismiss as a “quote” admonition.

  17. We need to stay flexible and follow Mr. Hoge’s updates on this case. The flexibility will be necessary for us all to gather at the respective courts on acquittal / dismissal day.

    I can think of nothing finer than 50 people outside said court(s) to all point and laugh heartily at the terrorist diddler.

  18. Wow. First thought: you have got to be shitting me. Second thought: the balls on this guy.

    I would not read this as desperation. It is important to remember that the defendants are playing chess, perhaps n-dimensional chess. The plaintiff is playing Royal Fizzbin. He really doesn’t have time for the “rules.”

    BK is simply trying to harass. Regardless of whether this is bullshit or not, Smith is going to have to take time to respond to it. My guess: BK is going to drop this after Smith responds, and then say that he got Smith to apologize for his behavior, and then drop it to show his magnanimity.

    He is also testing his boundaries. State judges told him forgery doesn’t matter. The Federal judge has to this point agreed. Yes I know, patience, he has not yet ruled on it, but by the same token, he has not yet, after two months, ruled on it.

    So now that the courts have given him the okay to forge documents in court, he wants to make it actionable to bring up his forgery.

    From his perspective, what is the worst that could happen?

  19. Oh, and it is like Christmas. I especially like the use of the triple question mark!

  20. Of course, The Diddler of Little Girls (aka Brett Coleman Kimberlin) will cite Professor Hoge’s sharing this document as evidence of a RICO conspiracy amongst the Defendents…


    • I think the term “quote” terrorist diddler, “unquote,” takes too long too type. And it can be misinterpreted too easily – does he diddle terrorists or is he a terrorist who diddles? – the distinction is important!

      Henceforth I shall refer to him as T-Diddly.

      Feel free to join in!

  21. This is a very dangerous motion. Michael Smith may have a fatal coronary from laughing at it when he reads it.

    Seriously, Kimberlin seems to be completely unaware that this motion, and the admissions he makes together with the implausible story he tells to “excuse” his own actions, actually makes Smith’s case that Kimberlin deserves to be sanctioned even stronger.

  22. I would simply note that Aaron Walker helped Seth Allen. Kimberlin responded by filing a bar complaint against Aarron. Later Kimberlin sued Walker. Dan Backer provided Aaron Walker with counsel. Kimberlin complained about Backer, filed for sanctions and, later sued him. When an attorney represented Walker in Kimberlin’s state suit against Walker he filed a motion for sanctions against him. When that same lawyer represented Ali Akbar, Kimberlin filed a motion for sanctions against him for representing his client. Now, Micheal Smith is being subjected to a motion for sanctions.

    It seems like we live in one of two worlds. In one world there is an apparent conspiracy among several members of the bar association to “harass” Brett Kimberlin. In the other world, Brett Kimberlin doesn’t accept that parties in a lawsuit are entitled to seek counsel, and, retalitates against that dare defend his targets. One merely has to ask the judge which way Occum’s Razor cuts?

Leave a Reply