Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


On Monday, I posted Michael Smith’s motion on behalf of Eugene Volokh seeking leave to file an amicus brief with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in the Walker v. Maryland, et al. case. The Gentle Reader will probably not be surprised to find out that the Kimberlins have strongly opposed Prof. Volokh’s motion.

Lt. Kaffee was unavailable for comment.

Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen.

Meanwhile, it’s T-minus 7 days and counting in the Hoge v. Kimberlin, et al. lawsuit.

85 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

    • I see he trotted out the “sexual predator” baseless ad hominem again. Move to strike as scandalous/impertinent etc.? I’m sure the reflexive opposition to such a motion he’s guaranteed to file would provide additional PLM.

  1. “Walker is an attorney and has adequately represented himself.”

    OOOoooooo… I bet that just burned your little hobbit butt to put into your legal motion, didn’t it midget?

    • Enough that the little guy put some research in to this one-

      Sometimes he get’s lit and sometimes he just phones it in.

  2. Scene from moot court in law school:

    “I oppose this motion.”

    “Aren’t you forgetting something…?”

    “I strongly oppose this motion?”

    “There you go! Motion denied!”

  3. ‘Oh you must have misunderstood me Judge, I STRONGLY oppose any brief from Professor
    Volokh. I’ve argued five idiotic, unrelated and conflicting reasons for you to deny his request. But all you really need to know is I’m Brett Kimberlin and …..I STRONGLY Oppose It….!!!!!!’

    <<<<<<<>>>>>>

    <<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

    • He was called a “gadfly” by Politico last year and I guess it stung, pun intended. It seems his entire legal strategy is to regurgitate the language that has successfully been used against him, without any clear understanding of meanings or logical mechanics. See “res judicata” as one of the latest phrases he bandies about, without having the slightest clue how to properly argue. I’d say it makes him a legal mynah bird.

  4. The Dread Pedo’s version of “conflict of interest” is hilarious. In fact, it’s so stupid that it actually weakens the rest of his silly motion.

    • Yea, I’m no big city lawyer, but I always thought that a conflict of interest actually involved interests… that conflict.

      Same guys defending free speech in various cases. Seems pretty straightforward and consistent to me. But I’m a simple guy, not some sophisticated jailhouse lawyer.

    • For reasons not the least of which is that the proposed amicus deals with the the Constitutionality of the law, not The Diddler’s antics.

  5. I think the Kimberlin(s) [Brett signs many things at the end of the motion; Tetanya signs fewer times] wins teh Internetz for the day, for the use of the term “legal gadfly” in a motion.

    A dictionary definition of “gadfly”:

    >>> (Start of definition) <<>> (End of definition) <<<

    Does "lawsuits for the rest of their lives" have any relation to "legal gadfly"?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    • I myself was quite interested in wondering if Brett could turn his gaze more appropriately to find a true “legal gadfly.” Made me snort my energy drink!

  6. (Oops, forgot that the less-than and greater-than symbols (from SGML? I forget) tend to have magic powers. Replaced them with hyphens below, so that the definition appears.)

    I think the Kimberlin(s) [Brett signs many things at the end of the motion; Tetanya signs fewer times] wins teh Internetz for the day, for the use of the term “legal gadfly” in a motion.

    A dictionary definition of “gadfly”:

    — (Start of definition) —

    noun, plural gadflies.
    1.
    any of various flies, as a stable fly or warble fly, that bite or annoy domestic animals.
    2.
    a person who persistently annoys or provokes others with criticism, schemes, ideas, demands, requests, etc.

    — (End of definition) —

    Does “lawsuits for the rest of their lives” have any relation to “legal gadfly”?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    • Yea. He clearly doesn’t understand that calling a notable legal professor a “gadfly” reflects a heck of a lot more on him than the prof.

      • Indeed. Especially since he’s just coopting language. He’s got a bad case of crazy person echolalia.

  7. It’s a moot point anyway. The professor can just email Aaron, then Aaron can use that email as an appendix on one of his motions. That’s allowed, right?

    • Only if the prof *PRETENDS* to be a journalist. Since he actually has published things that others have read, then it fails Schmallaw roolz of pro se dure.

  8. “Oh, and you shouldn’t let Michael Smith opine, because he once represented a person I sued. And a company I didn’t really sue, I just forged a court document to make it look like I did.”

    Way to open the door, Einstein.

  9. I don’t know. What motivates Bill Schmalfeldt to do thse things?

    • The first time I had the displeasure of encountering Schmalfeldt, he engaged in an extended campaign of mocking a mother over her very recent stillborn child. Not mere mockery, but an unbelievable campaign to torment the poor woman, to insult her and even blame her for the tragedy. This inhuman harangue went on day after day, until even his leftist buddies, normally unencumbered by conscience, recoiled in disgust. And still he continued, comparing her medically supervised home-birth to a cat having a litter “in a laundry hamper”.

      (Note – a few years prior to this I witnessed a friend’s struggle with postpartum depression. Here was a woman with a great life, who had never had a problem with depression before, gave birth to a healthy happy perfect baby — and within 48 hours was convinced that the only way she could help her baby was to kill herself. PPD is real. It is viscious.)

      At the time, when Bill was torturing that poor woman, i recall wondering how anyone could be so heartless, so depraved, so absolutely _evil_, and still pretend to be human. To this day, Schmalfeldt is unrepentant over his abuse of a woman at her most vulnerable. He’ll mutter about what a bad guy her husband is, as if that excuses it. Oh yeah, he’ll also bitch and moan that people weren’t nice to him when his wife died. Boo fucking hoo!

      (The following is addressed directly to the subhuman in question,..)

      Bill, I’m sick of sitting by while you stalk, extort and bother so many other people. So sue me. You need a recent reason? Okay —

      1 – You are FAT. A disgustingly obese blob. The only reason you are losing some weight is the strict methamphetamine diet you share with your ugly toothless soulmate. (Let’s see if she stilll loves you the day before your disab direct deposit, when you are all out and are both climbing the walls. The check won’t last the month for much longer.)

      2 – I wanted to laugh in your face after your wife died from your neglect. It couldn’t have happened to a more evil piece of trash than you.

      3 – You are faking your medical condition, exaggerating some symptoms, lying about others. I acknowledge that many years ago, some doctors reluctantly diagnosed you with PD. I am saying that TODAY, no movement disorders specialist would look at you and say “this man has Parkinson’s Disease”. Prove me wrong. Post a *recent* doctors note. You _have_ been seeing your doctor 2 – 3 times a year, right? What meds does he have you on? What are the settings on your IPGs? I just had both replaced. How long do _your_ batteries last?

      4 – you are still very very FAT.

      So do I get added to your lolsuit? You know I’m a real person, not a sock. You have my real name. All you need is my address. Surely you can discover that, with all the clues I’ve given you. I’ll even give you more — I do not reside in any of the states where your current victims live, so it won’t interfere with your idiotic (mis)understanding of diversity,

      So, SUE ME!

      (You really are quite fat.)

      • dr grills office was shocked and totally dismayed when they were told about his conduct, so was the Vanderbilt hospital police unit commander. bill harassing people for years before he met us hogians

        • Thanks SF, I couldn’t quite suss that out either; I mean Bill is Fat obese, but Rick kept dancing around the issue.

      • Rick – YOU, sir, are quite fantastic! Bravo!

        And, the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt is FAT! Very FAT! Morbidly and disgustingly so. *gack*

  10. “…first, Eugene Volokh is not filing as a friend of the Court but rather as an enemy of Brett Kimberlin and a long time legal advisor to Walker…”

    There is no reason that he can’t be both. Rather, I’d think being a friend of Kimberlin AND the Court seems more unlikely.

    Though, there is no reason to believe that the man himself sees himself as Kimberlin’s enemy, though I can’t say the same as for the reverse. But. Well. Just because you see someone as an enemy doesn’t imply they’d be unable to offer useful information to the court, as often the reason you see them as an enemy is because they can offer useful information to the court.

  11. I thought the Professor adequately brandished his credentials in his motion noting he has been mentioned 150x + in federal court decisions. But no, Brett wants to point out more strenuously he’s also a Washington Post writer too. Way to make his resume look even better, Brett.

    • What’s the deal about the amicus not being useful in other cases? It’s not some butthurt tort claim, the case is about the overbroad law and the reasons it violates consitutional protections for all – a law that chills OTHER people, and could be used in other cases to shut up speech the government has no right to shut up, speech that is fully protected by the bill of rights.

      • Aww. Look at Wee Wee Willy Fifi Ferguson (Team Kimberlin’s impotent, little anklebiter) stick his dumb, mangy head out from under his cowardly porch to play faild0xing games with the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt.

        Yip. Yip. Yip. *yawn*

  12. The court will likely grant Volokh’s motion.
    It would really be something if the “worst lawyer in the world” ended up making a massive name for himself because of Team Evil.

  13. Oh, and how can Aaron ever adequately represent himself … isn’t Aaron supposed to be the world’s worst lawyer? Kimberlin loves to throw Schmalfeldt under the bus doesn’t he?

  14. I asked after one of Brett’s filings in the Hoge v. Kimberlin case if he could be any more of a whiny bitch in a court filing.

    Today, the answer is a resounding yes.

  15. The gratuitous insult of Walker really spoils the opposition, IMHO.

    Brett Coleman Kimberlin(Google bomb!) would have done himself a favor by leaving that out.

    He can’t help himself…

  16. “volokh wasted his time.”
    Well based on his record getting cited throughout all circuits and SCOTUS he’s winning, which is usually not a waste of time…

  17. You can’t simultaneously argue a brief is completely redundant and gives a party a distinct unfair advantage of an additional brief, unless, of course, you are Brett Kimberling.

  18. His objections were internally inconsistent, but also WTF in many places, especially the amicus strictly limited to a question affecting every citizen in Maryland, and having nothing to do with the malicious prosecution claim except that both claims were raised by the plaintiff and Volokh is interested in preserving protected speech and legislation that encroaches on it improperly.

    Brett whines it affects only only only him and only this case and no other before the court, but the constitutional question is before the court, and that affects every person potentially prosecuted under that law.

  19. I will just leave this here.

    Doc No./Seq No.: 170/0
    File Date: 06/21/2017Entered Date:06/21/2017Decision:
    Document Name: Correspondence from Judge Hecker to Schmalfeldt regarding ex parte communication etc.

    • No. Frigging. Way. After the SC court *just* whacked his peepee for that very thing.

      Just when you think DUMBF*CK couldn’t get possibly doing anything more stupid… there he goes again.

  20. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 01.21.17 : The Other McCain

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s