Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

For all the practice they’ve had, Team Kimberlin is amazingly inept at cyberthuggery. After I posted a Legal LULZ Du Jour a couple of years ago today that engaged in pointage, laughery, and mockification of the Cabin Boy™ for having several Twitter account suspended, I received the comment documented below. I wrote about it in a post called Hit a Nerve, Have We?

* * * * *

An anonymous coward sent this comment—TK201512212015Z

Here’s the image that the comment links to (I wouldn’t want the Gentle Reader to miss anything)—Screen-Shot-2013-03-20-at-8.46.14-PM-700x336

The URL for the link is brietbartunmasked dot com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-20-at-8.46.14-PM-700×336.png, but that’s not the original URL for the image. Originally, it was found at  brietbartunmasked dot com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-20-at-8.46.14-PM-700×336.png. It had been posted there by the Cabin Boy™ when he was editor of Breitbart Unmasked Bunny Boy Unread, but if you try to find it using the original URL, you’ll get a 404.BUScreenShot404That’s probably because Matt Osborne has tried to memory-hole as much of Schmalfeldt’s defamatory or otherwise embarrassing material as he can find. Here’s a snippet of the original “Liberal Grouch” post that used the image.BU20130322I’ll leave it to the Gentle Reader to theorize about how and why the image was reposted and about who might have sent the comment.

And, yeah, the backups are really that extensive.

UPDATE—And Bunny Boy has memory-holed the image linked to in the comment.

* * * * *

The image is a frame from a video about me posted by my friend and fellow blogger Peter Ingemi (Da Tech Guy). Schmalfeldt used my face cropped out of the frame in one of the homoerotic porn images he posted in 2013. I guess the Cabin Boy™ thinks that picture of me with my mouth opened wide during a conversation is supposed to bother me. Meh. It looks a bit silly out of context. So what? Using it makes someone look stupid, but that someone isn’t me.

OTOH, the images that I’ve been sent (but never published) of my wife’s face crudely photoshopped into unflattering or pornographic images were offensive, as were the multiple copies of a still from Psycho of Norman Bates’ mummified mother labeled as my wife. I began receiving then after she was diagnosed with stage four cancer.

Gentle Reader, I write about those images not to complain or to seek sympathy, but to bluntly describe the depravity of these punks.

I’m not done with them yet.

22 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. Of course they are inept. Let’s not forget that when Bill Schmalfeldt sent an email to the court, in his “defense”, for the hearing on the Harassment Prevention Order I requested against him, Bill also cc’d Brett Kimberlin. Brett, in all of his technical wizardry, did a “Reply All”, which sent his comments, including the one questioning the Judge’s competence and character, to the two court employees Bill had mailed it to. It was this email, with Brett’s comments, that was presented to the court, and the one I was given a copy of. Not Bill’s original, but the one with Brett’s comments. The judge was not happy……

    I’d also like to point out that not only did Bill Schmalfelt lie in that email to the court, but he also attached proof of some of his lies, thinking that he was actually proving something in his favor. We don’t call him Dumbf*ck for nothing…..

  2. I think it was Stacy McCain who used the phrase “Accuse the Accusers” as the tactic used by Brett and his merry band of Pedos. As in, Whatever they accuse you of is what they are already doing. It really fits in Schmalfeldt’s case.

    • Wasn’t it right after that his own lawyer laughed him out of his office and promptly dropped his case?

        • By the way here is FRCP 41(a)(1)(B)

          Rule 41. Dismissal of Actions

          (a) Voluntary Dismissal.

          (1) By the Plaintiff.

          (A) Without a Court Order. Subject to Rules 23(e), 23.1(c), 23.2, and 66 and any applicable federal statute, the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing:

          (i) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or

          (ii) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.

          (B) Effect. Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal- or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.

  3. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 12.21.17 : The Other McCain

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s