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, March 26, 2015

Convicted Terrorist Brett Kimberlin’s RICO Suit is Still Dead

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 convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin has been harassing me for over two years, 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.  And more recently when his wife came to us claiming that this convicted terrorist had threatened her harm, we tried to help her leave him, and for that, he is suing myself, John Hoge, Robert Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar for helping his wife and he is suing Hoge, McCain, Akbar, DB Capital Strategies, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Patrick “Patterico” Frey, Mandy Nagy, Lee Stranahan, Erick Erickson,, the Blaze, Mercury Radio Arts, Red State, the National Bloggers Club, and  others alleging that we are all in organized crime for reporting factually about the spate of SWATtings committed against myself, Frey and Erickson.  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 the Brett Kimberlin’s RICO suit against me is still dead, and so is General Francisco Franco...

Sorry for the comedic interruption, but that clip is too funny not to have embedded it.

And since we are interrupting, I wanted to thank Newsmax for naming this site one of the Top 50 Conservative Blogs.  This is a truly unexpected honor and...  oh, crap, this means I have standards I must live up to!  It’s a disaster!

"Brett's such a loser."
"Glad I didn't go to that sleepover."
"This is good popcorn."
Joking aside, last time I told you how Judge Hazel dismissed nearly the entire the RICO suit, transforming it into a Civil Rights suit.  And you know what comes next.  First, Brett asks for a motion to reconsider, and then he appeals.  Never mind that there is no basis for it: it’s just what he does.  I suppose next he will start defaming Judge Hazel as corrupt through his mouthpieces.  It is a sadly predictable pattern.

So if you have been following along at Hogewash, you would know Brett filed a request to file motion to reconsider that we learned of Monday (it was actually filed last Wednesday).  And by coincidence, I, John, Stacy McCain and Lee Stranahan filed for a request to file a motion for sanctions on Brett on the same day.  You can read both, here, and I suggest you do read it and come back.

So are you back?

I haven’t talked about that request to file for sanctions.  To the extent that it doesn’t just speak for itself, I will add this.  I think the timing of events works in our favor.  As I noted last time, the judge very likely found out about the new RICO suit within minutes of him filing his memorandum dismissing the last one.  That is, either right as he was putting the final touches on his opinion or right after he put it into the system, this new suit pops up.  I speculated last time that this probably annoyed the judge, that if you were a fly on the wall in his chambers, you would have heard something to the effect of “you’ve got to be kidding me!”  And indeed, that is the PG version of the range of reactions.

My point is this.  If Judge Hazel had only handed down his memorandum opinion and there was no new RICO suit, I feel like our chances of being allowed to file for sanctions was low.  The judge would be likely to assume he is dealing with a relatively ordinary plaintiff, who will accept his loss with relative grace and most of all accept it, and stop suing these people and so on.  He might assume that the thumping his opinion gave would sufficiently chasten Brett.  But instead, with Brett filing another RICO suit so quickly, the judge is more likely to conclude that “this guy doesn’t learn.”  And that makes sanctions more likely to be granted, so that Brett might actually learn.

I would have asked for sanctions whether I felt our chances were good or bad.  What’s the worst that can happen?  The judge says no.  I suppose the judge can get annoyed, except he has called Brett out for his dishonesty.  So the judge is likely to understand where we are coming from, even if he disagrees, and that mental state is unlikely to give rise to true ire.

Of course Judge Hazel might have another, simpler, reasons for denying sanctions: he might feel we should wait until every claim is resolved, and Brett still has a claim against Patrick Frey for alleged violation of his civil rights.  As I said in the letter, the court seemed to want to put off sanctions until the merits are resolved and the judge might feel that this means “resolved for all parties” not just for the four signatories.  We shall see.

As for Brett’s motion to reconsider, well, I already had my answer to that.  Yesterday I filed this letter with the court:

It hasn’t appeared on PACER (the federal docket database) as of this writing, but you will see that the letter is moot anyway.  Still, it says what I thought on the subject...

...which is actually pretty similar to what the judge thinks.  You see, the big news today is that Judge Hazel issued a second memorandum opinion slapping down Brett’s request to file a motion to reconsider.  You can read the whole thing over at Hogewash, and I suggest you do so right now before continuing.

Are you back?  Good.

So as you can see the judge essentially agreed with me about how to read the first part of 42 U.S.C. §1985, colloquially known as the KKK Act.  Now, in my last post, I made the argument that I had an influence over Judge Hazel.  Did that happen again?

Probably not.  I base that assessment on two factors.  First, my letter hasn’t appeared on PACER yet, and I am willing to bet Hazel wouldn’t pay attention to it until it does.  Second, the logic just isn’t similar enough.  Yes, we agree, but we are getting to it by slightly different paths.  I took the simple path of citing the Supreme Court’s language in Kush, and the judge cited a few additional cases.

What this is, I think is simply this.  I may have used this metaphor before, but imagine that one mathematician says 2 + 2 = 4.  And then a second mathematician also says 2 + 2 = 4.  Well are they both saying that two added to two equals four because one is being influenced by the other?  Or is it because that’s the correct answer?

Law, of course, is not typically as clear as math, but sometimes there is a definite right answer and a definite wrong answer.  This is one of those times.

I will also note the judge all but seems to be accusing Brett of reading him in bad faith.  The judge’s argument seems to go like this: “I already told you when discussing 18 U.S.C. §1503 that you had not alleged obstruction of a federal court.  I wasn’t going to repeat myself in relation to 42 U.S.C. §1985(2).  So I dealt with the only part of §1985(2) that I hadn’t already disposed of.”  I admit I didn’t see it when I wrote my letter, but then again I wasn’t the one asking for reconsideration.

So what is the fallout from this today’s ruling?  Well, first, notice that the judge said “no” pretty quickly to Brett’s request to file a motion for reconsideration, but hasn’t responded to our request for sanctions.  I don’t think the judge would say “yes” to us without giving Brett a chance to respond, first, and so maybe that is what he is waiting for?  But that is idle speculation.

Certainly our chances of being allowed to file that motion went up.  It is hard to put my finger on why I feel this, but I get the sense reading Hazel’s opinion that he was annoyed.  And if I am right, that will probably help us in our quest for sanctions.  Likewise, Judge Hazel, who is also overseeing the new RICO suit, is likely to be even less disposed to entertaining Brett for very long in that suit.  As with last time, Brett’s timing couldn’t be much worse, annoying the judge right as we asked him for a motion for sanctions.


My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist (and adjudicated pedophile) 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 donation link 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.



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.


  1. I don't mind the SNL clip. First, it was from when the show was actually funny. Second, when I first saw the title of this entry, the first thing that came to mind was making a reference to Francisco Franco in a comment. You beat me to it!

  2. I work in the legal arena, and I agree with you, this judge is seriously annoyed. No judge slaps down a motion that quickly unless they are.