Legal LULZ Du Jour

The Cabin Boy™ has a post over at Breitbart Unmasked Bunny Billy Boy Unread (No, I won’t link to it.) in which he says that he is unaware of any time that The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has lied to him.

Uh, huh.

While Schmalfeldt may not realize when Kimberlin has lied to him, it’s easy enough to find an example of when Kimberlin has lied for him. The Dreadful Pro-Se Schmalfeldt filed this as an exhibit to his unsuccessful motion to have Aaron Walker removed as defense counsel in LOLsuit VI: The Undiscovered Krendler. Most of the false statements are highlighted—

Almost every false statement in that had already been made in a previous court case that Kimberlin had lost. Thus, it’s reasonable to assume he knew or should have known that what he was saying was false as a matter of law as well as factually incorrect. Additionally, the statement about a pending motion against Aaron Walker mentioned in paragraph 4 was true on the day the “Declaration” was filed, but the motion was denied later that month by Judge Hazel in the RICO 2: Electric Boogaloo LOLsuit.

71 thoughts on “Legal LULZ Du Jour

  1. Journimalists have sources. And they trust those sources implicitly. Journimalists do not need to corroborate anything that a source tells them. Sources do not lie.

  2. So if person A has never lied to person B, and person B advances person A’s lies to someone else, wouldn’t that make person B complicit in those lies? Hypothetically, of course.

  3. Wait…

    Are you suggesting that when well-known and proven liar Bill Schmalfeldt says that well-known and convicted liar (and let’s be specific – Kimberlin is not just a convict who lies, he has actually been convicted and served time in prison for LYING UNDER OATH. Most people would consider that an instant trust-breaker. But not DUMBFUCK Bill Schmalfeldt.) has NEVER LIED to Bill Schmalfeldt that he’s aware of (although in hindsight that’s not a terribly surprising statement given that DUMBFUCK may have only a dozen functioning brain cells and most of those have never been introduced to one another), that well-known, proven liar BILL SCHMALFELDT IS LYING??

    Next you’re going to tell me today ends in”y” or water is wet, the sun rises in the east, or JWR is red (*HIC*!) or something equally outlandish and unbelievable.

  4. Must a liar lie directly to a person before he’ll believe someone is a liar?
    Must a thief steal directly from a person before he’ll believe someone is a thief?
    Must a bomber kill someone directly associated with a person before he’ll believe someone is a killer?

    Only a fool operates in such a manner.

    See thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.

    The way of a fool is straight in his own eyes; but he that hearken unto counsel is wise.

  5. According to Bwilly’s distorted logic:

    The PedoBomber is a CONVICTED LIAR
    The PedoBomber has LIED for me.
    But, the PedoBomber hasn’t LIED to me (that I know of).
    The PedoBomber is not a LIAR.

    So people will do anything to deny the Truth.

      • The picture is poor quality, but seriously for a minute, if those a brown lesions it the cluster has a typical appearance of melanoma. If that is not bruising, he should still not pass it off as a keratosis or execema. If it’s not bruising, he should Either post a clearer picture (a request I never thought I would make of him) – preferably to a dermatology board, or see a dermatologist pronto. If you have to go through primary care first, do that ASAP.

        If he’s ever spent time on deck at sea or had sunburns in childhood, he shouldn’t dismiss the lesion as a Parkinson’s syndrome issue.

        • Sorry, poor editing there. I’m saying the spotty region, in the poor quality photo, has an appearance typical of melanoma. He shouldn’t wait to see a doc unless he knows that is bruising.

          • If he’s really as smart as he thinks he is, BS should think hard about this. His self-created
            “enemies” look out for him and give good advice when it counts. His “excellent friends” set him up to get screwed in court while laughing behind his back. A wise person would exchange the labels on the two groups of people.

    • How about the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt address how he lied to the court (under penalty of perjury) in his Answer and most recent Motion to Dismiss?

      • Clearly, obviously lied, when the truth wouldn’t have hurt Krendler’s dementia-addled bitch a bit, and when lying poses risk to the repulsive reprobate who is Krendler’s bitch. Again.

    • The only time that I can recall where Hoge might be accused of lying was about the appeal of the peace order after the settlement agreement. But, IIRC, the statement made by Hoge (and not disputed by BS) was that he would not pursue it if there was a change in behavior. But BS violated the agreement within days, and I seem to remember he unilaterally declared it null and void.

      I wouldn’t personally consider that lying. It was not Hoges responsibility to make sure BS showed up in court.

      • See, this is precisely what Bill considers a lie. Nevermind that John told him that it was a conditional. Bill did not change. Therefore John followed through. Ergo, John did not lie. The rest of what happened is all Bill’s fault, but because Bill doesn’t take responsibility for himself or his actions…

        In Bill Schmalfeldt’s world, it doesn’t matter if you see something differently than him. If you see something differently than he does and say it was such, then because he saw it differently then that automatically makes what you said a lie. Normal, rational people realize that the truth can sometimes lie inbetween the two and frequently does. Or, as is more often than not in the case of Bill Schmalfeldt, the truth is found in the person who is NOT Bill Schmalfeldt.

        Oh, and what Bill Schmalfeldt thinks that you think is the truth. And what you *really* think is a lie. Nevermind what you know to be your own truth. HIS belief about what you think is the real truth and you only lie about yourself.

        I think that covers most of the bases.

      • Of course it was conditional. If, then. Not “if that is your plan” but “if you, in fact, do these things you say you will” Bill could not carry through his promise. He was in breach. He expected to get a count to three, as he gleefully threw away his own obligations. No one promised to give him slack, and no one promised to give him second chances or warnings or a mommy count-to-three. He has a phone and uber and taxis and the ability to dial the court clerk even on holidays.

    • “How about all the times HOGE has lied to ME?”

      Prove it Fat F*ck!

      John has proven that your Diddlier Buddy is a LIAR, and he has proven that you are a LIAR.

      So show some factual evidence (not any conjecture on your part), that he lied to you!

      Oh, you can’t!?!?! Thought so, you worthless piece of mucus!

    • I really very serious. Melanoma risk is associated with Parkinson’s and vice versa. He has at least four times the normal risk, from the. Parkinsons Dx alone, and he may have other risk factors.

  6. If Aaron “brutally” assaulted Kimberlin as described, what word would Brett use to describe his prison experiences? Hey Bill, ask your honest buddy if he had some trouser trout when he was locked up. Do you think he’ll be honest because everyone knows little boy Brett had a bullseye on his butt in the joint. Poor Brett always on the receiving end of assaults. I guess that’s why he is a progressive today … liberals glory in being victims. Or it’s an easier racket conning stupid liberals?

  7. Bill sued me for calling him a terrorist, which I did not, and sued me for saying he was associated with violent felons. then he submitted an affidavit in that suit from a violent felon terrorist …….

  8. Wait until the pedo and his mail order bride throw the shitbag under the bus. I bet shitbag’s fake-insons suddenly “clears up” enough to “remember” some falsehoods.

    I’m almost prepared to bet my house on it.

  9. Hey, boss, you forgot to highlight the biggest lie in that statement:

    I Brett Kimberlin declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct…

  10. If Kimberlin said he’ll respect you in the morning, Billy, then he lied to you.

    /Savor that image.

  11. Dear website that I use for legal advice,

    If someone fakes or exaggerates symptoms of Parkinsons as spelled out in section 11.00G3B parts (k) through (iv) and section 11.06(B) on the US Disability website, is that faking or exaggeration considered “lying” in the eyes of the law?

    Asking for a friend.

Leave a Reply