Acme Legal Citation Du Jour

@weltschmerz201502081354ZIt will be amusing to see how The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt tries to spin the facts to show damage to his First Amendment rights because a bunch of folks said truthful things and published opinions about him on the Internet.

25 thoughts on “Acme Legal Citation Du Jour

  1. “Also, just wondering here, I still don’t understand how a letter…”


    They get paid to deal with scumbags like you, all we get is LOLz.

    We’re not going to help you, you know. Why do you expect those that you insult, threaten, and harass to aid you?

    Just so you know, for every trivial and obvious legal error of yours we point, there’s a dozen that we keep to ourselves… Don’t worry, we still LAUGH AT YOUR STUPIDITY… just not where YOU can read it.

    • I object when people say the great BM of Elkridge always lies. Here is an example of pure, unvarnished truth: “I don’t understand.”

  2. Indeed it would be interesting to see how my pal William the Witless Wonder of the World could show any abridgment of his rights under the First Amendment if someone defamed him.

    • He’s still able to run his mouth. Hence no first amendment issues. Nevermind that the first amendment is about the GOVERNMENT infringing upon citizens rights. D’oh! What a moron. Oh wait. This is Bill we are talking about. Sheesh…

    • No, see Blob wants to stomp on the 1st Amendment right of others and you need a federal court to do that! Just ask Judge C.J. “Forget Bradenberg [sic], let’s go with” Vaughey.

      • Unfortunately, you are probably right that my pal William the Witless learned from Vaughey being overruled that the courts in Maryland ULTIMATELY do defer to the Supreme Court of the U.S. and that they will not squelch speech on some ridiculous theory that truth or opinion can be defamatory (see Kimberlin’s state case.) So now the Witless Wonder is off to see whether federal courts know less about the federal constitution than state courts.

        But it would be so much more FUN to watch him argue that, because a defendant MAY elect a defense that sounds in the federal constitution, the plaintiff must be entitled to federal venue and state courts cannot hear such a defense.

  3. No, actually they don’t raise first amendment issues. It’s possible that our gracious host could raise First Amendment defenses to the defamation and false light claims, and these would raise First Amendment concerns. Even then, the core of the dispute would be whether Hoge has defamed or invaded CBBS’ privacy, not whether Hoge’s speech is protected under the First Amendment.


    1) Simply because a defendant may raise the First Amendment as a defense does not raise a Federal Question.

    2) In order for there to be a Federal Question, the constitutional issue must be central to the claim or defense. If the constitutional issue is merely tangential to the claim or defense, the suit does not involve a federal question.

    There is plenty of case law on both of these points, which CBBS is free to explore.

    • Ahh egd, we were going to have so much FUN with Willy the Witless Whale, and now you have to spoil it by making the common sense observation that if there is no defamation there is no free speech issue even tangentially related and by suggesting that there are actual reported cases on the issues involved.

      • Don’t you worry your pretty little avatar, JeffM. You know as well as I do that the adjudicated stalker isn’t bright enough to recognize, much less accept and act on, good advice. Even when the advice comes from a real lawyer. Even from a lawyer whose advice he solicits. Among others, Mr. Kim tried to warn him.

      • I’m just a lowly lickspittle. I hardly expect CBBS to take the smart approach and drop this suit before it gets him in trouble.

  4. I’m but a simple and silly foreigner with a penchant for fun, but doesn’t the First Amendment begin with the phrase “Congress shall make no law..”? I also understand that the Fourteenth Amendment applies that prohibition to state and local government.

    Were the Lulzsuit Four been elected to something when I wasn’t looking?

    On the other hand, it would be the funniest thing in the world if Howard turned out to be Paul Ryan and Krendler is Boehner.

    • That would be funny but there’s not the slightest chance. Howard and Krendler are FAR more willing to return fire than Boehner has ever been. If Krendler were actually Boehner, he would already have preemptively surrendered (spun as “compromise”) to BS. Furthermore, he’d be undermining the rest of the Lickspittles at every turn.

Leave a Reply