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.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Convicted Terrorist Brett Kimberlin’s Attempt to Save his Second Amended (RICO) Complaint

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 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 her, 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, James O’Keefe III, Patrick “Patterico” Frey, Mandy Nagy, Lee Stranahan, Erick Erickson,, the Blaze, Mercury Radio Arts, Red State, the National Bloggers Club, and  Simon and Shuster 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.

Earlier I shared with you happenings in the state case, and I will talk more about it, soon, but things have happened in the Federal case, too.  As you might recall, Brett filed a motion to amend the complaint.  I filed an opposition, here, as did Mr. Hoge, Dan Backer and DB Capital Strategies, and Michelle Malkin and Twitchy.  Brett could have filed at least four different responses and go into a lot of detail, but instead he decided to whine and spit venom for only one omnibus response, which has been published at Hogewash.  So go read it already and then come back.  We’ll discuss.

Okay, back?

So he starts right off by being dishonest, writing in ¶ 1:

In short, [the objecting defendants] argued that Plaintiff failed to comply with Local Rule 103.6(c) by missing a few, non-prejudicial bolds and strike-throughs in the redlined copy he provided to them.

By way of background, that rule requires that when you file an amendment to a complaint you provide also a “redline” copy of it showing all the changes that were made.  The purpose of that rule is obviously to aid us and the court in determining whether his amendments were sufficient.

So of course we were prejudiced.  We had to make that determination without the help that the court requires him to give us.  We had to make the comparison ourselves.

And his claim that there were only a few errors is not true.  There were over forty by my count.  And I might have missed a few.

Next, in ¶ 3, he claims we have never addressed the merits of the claim.  This is not true and even if true, it is irrelevant.

First off, this is not the time to address merits.  If we addressed merits, the judge would kick Brett’s arse so hard he would go into orbit.  Right now all well-pleaded allegations are treated as automatically true.  Yes, as crazy as it sounds, our legal system treats any proper allegation by this convicted perjurer and document forger, who now has admitted to forging a summons in this case and altering a document related to service of process in the state case, as automatically true.  As I jokingly say, Brett Kimberlin is the worst case scenario of a great deal of our laws and rules.

Second, even though it is not the time, a great deal of the merits have been addressed.  I filed a motion that spent several pages, for instance, outlining how he actually tried to frame me for a crime.  No, not all the merits of his silly allegations have been addressed, but to claim we have dealt with none of them is simply a lie.

And bluntly the courts are not there to do some kind of roving investigation.  It is there to deal with cognizable causes of action, which is what Brett doesn’t have.  That is even if everything he properly alleged is true, he hasn’t made out any case of action mostly because he sucks at this.

In ¶ 4 he writes that:

However, in order to address these complaints and fully comply with rule l03.6(c), Plaintiff subjected his Second Amended Complaint to the "Compare Copy" tracking program in WORD and sent all the attorneys by e-mail and Defendants Hoge and Walker by USMail a copy of the updated redlined copy of the SAC.

Too little too late.  The time to comply was before we filed our oppositions.  And indeed by subjecting it to a “Word” comparison, he demonstrated how easy it was to comply all along.  In other words that hurts him, not helps.

In ¶ 5 he writes:

The five Defendants have used their motions to make arguments properly made in a Motion to Dismiss, such as challenges to the various claims on the ground that the amendments are futile because they fail to state a claim.

What exactly does he think “futility” means?  It means that even with the amendments it doesn’t address fundamental flaws in the last complaint.

In ¶ 6, he writes:

Additionally, in an abundance of caution, Plaintiff also modified his Complaint to allege that the Defendants' false statements were pleaded under defamation and/or false light...

Um, can someone diagram that sentence?

In ¶ 7, he writes:

The Defendants make the incredible argument that Plaintiffs SAC is not a short statement of the claim after arguing in their Motions to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint that Plaintiff did not state sufficient facts to state a claim.

Yes, we are saying he goes on and on about stuff that doesn’t help him and meanwhile doesn’t say enough about the things he needed to allege.  That is he doesn’t say enough of what he has to, and says too much about what he doesn’t have to.

A perfect example is his craziness about Team Themis in the Second Amended complaint.  Mind you, I am kind of glad he wrote it, because an opponent going the full lunatic in court is rarely a bad thing, but ultimately it was several paragraphs of crazy irrelevance.

In ¶ 8 he writes:

Defendant Walker relies on a show cause Order from Judge Titus in Plaintiffs copyright infringement case to argue against allowing him to amend his complaint. However, once Plaintiff showed cause, Judge Titus on March 20, 2014, granted Plaintiff leave to file his Amended Complaint in that case and ordered the Clerk to issue summons.

Which of course is killing a straw man.  I cited Titus’ order in the copyright suit for the prospect that Brett is not the ignorant pro se litigant he professes to be.  Judge Titus didn’t change his mind on that point.

¶ 9:

Defendants argue that Plaintiffs Complaint is simply an attack on conservatives, implying that the Defendants do not commit torts. This is belied by the fact that many other people have recently sued eleven of the Defendants in this case...

“They have been accused of torts by others and therefore they are guilty!”  The fact others are suing some of the Defendants is irrelevant.  Indeed media organizations get sued all the time.  It is an unfortunate operating expense of such endeavors.  And him noting in ¶ 10 that he is also suing us in state court really isn’t probative given his documentedly litigious nature.

Then in ¶ 11 he decides to tell the judge he got it wrong, again.  I kid you not:

The issue before the Court is whether Plaintiff should be granted leave to file his Second Amended Compliant. In the Court's Order of February 21,2014, ECF88, the Court stated that it was granting Plaintiffs request to file that amended complaint: "BecaUfieFed. R Civ. P. 15 calls for amendments to be freely granted, Plaintiffwill be permitted to amend his complaint as he has stated he intends."

“But you promised, your honor, that I would be allowed to amend it.  Won’t you keep your promise?”

Maybe he should suggest the judge is ruling in the wrong case again.  I am sure that is a winning strategy.

The point of this exercise, of course, isn’t just to say he is wrong.  Of course he is wrong.  The point is that he is obviously wrong, in a way that Judge Grimm is not likely to miss.  I don’t believe I will have an opportunity to present these arguments, but I don’t have to.  They are obvious on their face.


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 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.

No comments:

Post a Comment