The Brett Kimberlin Saga:

Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Brooks Bayne Joins Team Kimberlin


This is the latest post in what I half-jokingly call The Kimberlin Saga®.  If you are new to the story, that’s okay! Not everyone reads my blog.  The short version is that Kimberlin has been harassing me since last December, his worst conduct being when he attempted to frame me for a crime.  I recognize that this might sound like an incredible claim, but I provide video and documentary evidence of that fact; in other words, you don’t have to believe my word.  You only have to believe your eyes.  So, if you are new to the story, go to this page and you’ll be able to catch up on what has been happening.

So for a while now Brooks Bayne has gone after some of my friends on the internet (for instance calling Patrick "Patterico" Frey "Swatterico" and cackling laughter at the crime committed against him) and I hoped to ignore his asinine tendencies (even as Twitchy called him out for his support of Palestinian terrorists).  My focus was on Kimberlin.  He seemed like a distraction.

But he has recently revealed that what he really is, is either on Team Kimberlin, or being manipulated by the same to the point that he is effectively on their team.  Let me give you a few examples.  On August 30, Breitbart Unmasked (which we believe is written by Brett Kimberlin and in any case serves as his mouthpiece), wrote a post stating that the federal case had been dismissed.  I wrote the whole truth about what happened, here.  And what a coincidence, that very same morning Brooks comes at me mocking that it had been dismissed, writing as follows:


Notice it wasn’t asking a question, it was making an accusation.  I tried to straighten him out as follows:


And I gave him life advice:


And in this “Brettbart Unmasked” is my joking name for Breitbart Unmasked:


But he still thought this was the most important thing ever:


Oh but my explanation is not good enough:


And this:


So somehow I have to have documentation of what the judge's chambers said.  Really.  And he passed on another piece of disinformation from Brett Kimberlin:


What he is referring to is Ali Akbar.  Mr. Akbar does have a criminal history, and there have been some harsh criticisms of him.  From my point of view, the man had my back.  He has given me financial relief at a time in which Kimberlin has tried to financially ruin me.  And I will tell you something else.  When I was concerned I might be arrested again due to Kimberlin filing even more false charges against me, he was ready to provide bail if needed.  He even offered to keep an eye on my wife if I was in jail overnight, so she wouldn’t be alone in that situation.  Later she made arrangements with a woman instead because frankly women would rather stay with women, obviously, but he made the offer.

And Brooks wants me to throw this man under the bus, out of some sense of honor?  I don’t know, his concept of honor seems pretty dishonorable to me.

And in any case, and this is key, Ali is not affiliated with the Blogger’s Defense Team.  He has absolutely no part of it at all so even if you believe the absolute worst about Ali (and I know some nice people who do), you can give to the Blogger’s Defense Team with no concern at all.

Then a few days later, Brooks, coincidentally, passes on another talking point from Team Kimberlin:


This is another falsehood Kimberlin has repeated over and over, indeed it is a compound falsehood.  First I lost my job because they were afraid of Kimberlin not because they felt I ran a bigoted blog.  Second, the site, Everyone Draw Mohammed, was not anti-Muslim.  It was not even anti-Islam (although an anti-islam site is not anti-muslim).  As I said repeatedly it was part of a pro-free-speech, anti-terrorism protest.  Here’s what I wrote about it recently:

As regular readers know I participated in the Everyone Draw Mohammed movement.  The idea behind it was very simple: the terrorists said that they would kill everyone who drew Mohammed; therefore we figured we would all draw Mohammed.  “After all,” we reasoned, “they can’t kill us all.”  We hoped on one hand that the terrorists would recognize that they couldn’t really kill everyone who drew their prophet and stop issuing those threats.  And we hoped that the media would recognize their impotence and stop being afraid to depict Mohammed.

On the first metric, demonstrating the impotence of the terrorists, it was a smashing success.  On the second, demonstrating the impotence of the terrorists to the terrorists, I think it was an equal success.  Oh, they still thump their chests, but I don’t think they are making any serious effort to kill any of the artists, including the really prominent ones like the creators of South Park.  But then again, Comedy Central is still apparently afraid of letting South Park actually depict Mohammed, so we have not achieved victory on that third metric.

So this was defamation, straight out of Kimberlin’s mouth and onto Brooks’ twitter feed.

And then we finally get to Brooks becoming a full on SWATting Truther.  First he tries to deny I was SWATted at all:


Got that?  I wasn’t SWATted badly enough for Brooks’ taste, as I pointed out (yes, with a small typo):


He goes on into full SWATter Truther mode:
  

Yeah, pardon my bad language but I kind of took it personally.  Go figure.

And indeed I had pointed out that Mike's SWATting seemed the worst in terms of effects (Erick Erickson's seemed the worst in terms of intent).  When I was on Lee Stranahan’s show for instance, I wondered how rough it must have been on Mike in particular.  I mean when it happened to Patrick, he knew what happened to Mike so he kind of understood what was happening.  Mike more than likely had no idea.  And both of us could produce our wives to prove that the whole call was a hoax.  Mike had no wife, so how the hell does he prove himself innocent of murdering a wife he doesn’t have?  So I have always made it clear that what I went through was much milder, often praising how the Prince William County Police handled this in a much calmer fashion.  But then again, I also had the chance to warn them.

But that wasn’t good enough for the SWATting Truther Brooks:


And of course to really prove I am wrong about him being a jerk… by threatening me with silly internet bravado:


And then this guy, who claims to dislike gay people writes this:


And the SWATting Truth is out there:


On reflection I should probably refine that definition further as a false report of a serious criminal situation in order to provoke a strong police response, usually by impersonation.  Not sure that would have fit in a tweet, but there you go.

So next Brooks claims that it isn’t SWATting unless a SWAT team actually comes out.  And you can see me poke a pretty big hole in that theory pretty quickly:


And by the way, that was an Occupyrebellion talking point: we weren’t SWATted because technically a SWAT team didn’t come out.  Funny how he echoes that.

So then he comes up with a new definition.  Yes, you can literally see him trying to come up with a definition that covers Mike but not me.  Isn't that delightfully ad hoc?


And then he declares that this means that only Mike has been a victim of this crime, forgetting about a certain person:


But then after all that, Brooks reveals that he hadn’t done the slightest bit of research on the subject:


And indeed, it is present at this blog, right here.  Admittedly it doesn’t tell you much, but there you go.

And as if that is not bad enough, he then asks about how the police responded.  So apparently he hadn’t even read my post on the SWATting itself:


And that post, for your reference, is here.

And if all that wasn’t clueless enough, he then wrote this:


That’s right, after glomming onto the Kimberlin story for over four months he had no idea what Kimberlin had done to me.  Not even in a thumbnail sense.

And of course he went on to thoroughly disprove my claim that he was a d*ck:



And perhaps I signed off for a while in a less than polite fashion:


Meanwhile we have Mike Stack, aka Crying Wolfe Blog.  I don’t talk about it much because it is somewhat of a distraction, but Mike has disclosed to me he is bi-polar, i.e. manic-depressive.  I suppose he has reached his manic stage because he decided to make a claim that is outright false:


I later verified he was talking about my SWATting call, and what he was conveying was an absolute falsehood.  I have never heard the SWATting call.  You literally know as much about it as I do, that I asked the police if someone said that I shot my wife, and they said yes, and there is literally a lot of room for significant differences.

So... either Mike was lying, or he was being lied to.  But he was insisting it was the gospel truth.

Then later in the evening Brooks removed any doubt that he was down with Kimberlin’s conduct, when he wrote:


The mask comes off at last.  First there is the fact that he doesn’t seem the least bit bothered by the judge’s ruling.  As I point out in response, you would think that Brooks wouldn’t want to see schmucky behavior on the internet criminalized, if only out of self-interest.

But even worse than that, he absolves Kimberlin of all responsibility for what the judge did.  While I do fault Vaughey for his poor decision, and I fault the commissioner for issuing an arrest warrant based on the word of a perjurer, let’s not forget that but for Kimberlin’s conduct—especially in the form of lying to the court—no peace order and no arrest warrant would have been issued.

But Brooks, pretending to be a conservative, writes this:


And here:


And over and over again I point out that he is absolving Kimberlin of responsibility, and he pretends he is justified in doing so.

Now, with that feeble defense of Kimberlin, he has fully outted himself as a dishonest broker, bizarrely enough a defender of Brett Kimberlin.  And if he is not consciously a part of Team Kimberlin, then he is an even bigger fool.  And nothing he writes or has written should be trusted without independent verification.

---------------------------------------

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right.  And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

1 comment:

  1. Brian CatesSeptember 6, 2012 at 8:14 PM

    Brett Kimberlin cons people into giving his nonprofits hundreds of thousands in donations.

    Time to wonder if any of that is ending up in Brook's pockets.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)