Blogsmoke in Court

Rather that post an episode today, I’ve decided to post this bit of my testimony from The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin’s examination of me when he called me as his witness during the Walker v. Kimberlin, et al. trial. (I was called by both sides.)

MR. KIMBERLIN: Do you, on your blog, ah, do you have a character, an Internet sheriff? Blogsmoke?

MR. HOGE: Ah, yes. Um, a website that I believe is associated with you called Breitbart Unmasked, ah, did a satirical piece about me trying to cast me as somebody who was the Internet sheriff and, ah, used the term Blogsmoke, so I in return stated a feature that is a takeoff on the Gunsmoke radio program, uh, that was on in the ‘50s. And yes —

MR. KIMBERLIN: You kind of consider yourself an Internet sheriff.

MR. HOGE: No, I don’t. I consider that a way of poking fun at the people at Breitbart Unmasked by taking their idea and running with it and having a running gag that’s lasted for about two-and-a-half years now.

MR. KIMBERLIN: You also consider yourself a Star Wars hero.

MR. HOGE: (Laughing) Not in the least.

MR. KIMBERLIN: Have you ever posted graphics or photos of yourself as a Star Wars hero?

MR. HOGE: I have, people have sent me graphics of my face to replace, um, who’s the guy who played Obi-wan Kenobi, the older fellow, um, this is what happens when you’re old, um, Alec Guinness, Sir Alec Guinness, with my face instead of Alec Guinness’ as Obi-wan in various cartoons. I think they’re funny, and I’ve posted a few that were sent to me, and other people have picked up on that as well and sort of run with it. It’s, it’s something of a running gag in certain quarters of the Internet.

I couldn’t make that up no matter how hard I tried.

21 thoughts on “Blogsmoke in Court

    • …as is every malignant Narcissist trying desperately to avoid the truth about themselves. The potential agony of self knowledge is fearsome enough to trigger any psychological defense mechanism, regardless of how maladaptive it may be in the medium and long term.

  1. Posting pictures of Brett Kimberlin’s face on Pedo Bear doesn’t make Brett Kimberlin a pedophile – Brett Kimberlin having sex with girls under the age of 15 makes Brett Kimberlin a pedophile.

    Calling Bill Schmalfeldt a child pornographer doesn’t make Bill Schmalfeldt a purveyor of child pornography – Bill Schmalfeldt writing, performing, producing and offering for sale audio “comedy” bits featuring fictional minors being sexually abused makes Bill Schmalfeldt a purveyor of child pornography.

  2. When you live in a fantasy world, you tend to believe the fantasy.

    When you help design satellites for freakin’ NASA you tend to have big dreams, but a firm grip on reality.

    Whoda thunkit?

  3. How the hell does this man continue to “NOT LOSE” in case after case? He asks the most irrelevant and dumb questions in an attempt to enter even more irrelevant and dumb testimony. I can’t understand how Kimberlin is still free to sue anyone and everyone he wants.

    • Respectfully disagree. He understands it far too well, and lives in constant unrelenting soul crushing terror of the truth it highlights.

  4. mr hoge. you once mentioned everything and foreseen. are you admitting to the unlicensed practice of sorcery in Maryland?

  5. … even if you considered yourself a Jedi Internet Sheriff, how would even an admission of such have served his case in any way? If it weren’t for the venue it’d have been worth it to do that Jedi pointing thing and say “Nevermind, I retract the question.”
    Assuming a stupid, questioning look in reply, simply say “Apparently not.”

  6. Found this:

    Construing the Complaint liberally in light of Bernath’s pro se status, the Court has examined the plausibility of the claims asserted by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s Complaint in this instance is a rambling, disjointed pleading with regard to his claims against Defendants. Plaintiff strings together multiple facts addressing various topics that are impertinent, scandalous, and immaterial to the causes of action Plaintiff is attempting to allege. (Doc. #1). At the beginning, Plaintiff states causes of action, in bold, with no underlying facts to support the causes of action. (Doc. #1 at 1-2). Plaintiff does not even state a recital of the elements for a majority of the causes of action he asserts. Rather, he just lists several causes of action without any sort of separation or underlying facts, violating Rule 10(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b) (requiring that “each claim founded on a separate transaction or occurrence – and each defense other than a denial – must be stated in a separate count or defense”). As best the Court can decipher, Plaintiff attempts to allege elements for numerous common law causes of action, but without supporting facts, these causes of action still fail pleading requirements. Beneath each heading are various conclusory allegations regarding certain elements of the purported claims, but in every instance Bernath fails to set forth allegations which comprise an entire, viable cause of action. Despite the length of the Complaint, the allegations made by Bernath are neither legally adequate nor specific enough to survive dismissal.


    • I love watching Don Shipley’s videos that out these assholes who pretend to be Navy Seals in some of the very worst Stolen Valor case. The details on the above site and its links are very limited, do you have any other good links to this case? It boils my blood when Bernath mentions that “some” plaintiffs will file an extra crazy original complaint, loaded with bullshit to force defendants to spend $50,000 on it. Then by the time the “real” amended complaint is filed they are already out big bucks in attorney fees & expenses.

      OT — I wonder if we could we find that our ‘Stolen Valor Billy’ claimed to be a Navy Seal at some point after his Navy career?

Leave a Reply