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.

Showing posts with label Wilson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wilson. Show all posts

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Why the Wilson Wife-Beating Story is Probably Not Being Covered

In a follow up on a post yesterday about accusations that Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-generate) beat his wife, Geraghty asks why there is so little coverage of the allegations.  Well, one is always reasonable to suspect biased media coverage, but let me offer a potentially exculpatory explanation.  Maybe they don’t realize how credible the accusation is.

As I noted in my post yesterday, if the lawyer had misrepresented the contents of the deposition, he would have been subject to severe discipline, if not disbarment.  It was for this reason that his claim that Wilson admitted to beating his wife, with specific citations to the deposition, was so credible.  But many in the media might not know that.  So they might say, “well, let’s get verification.”  And even I wanted verification writing to people in Ohio who would be in a position to provide more information.  So far I haven’t heard back.  So who knows?  Maybe in the next 24 hours, copies of the deposition or formal findings of fact, might suddenly emerge all over the place.  That defense lasts, in my humble opinion, a week at most—because a lot of it might be in deep storage.  And after that, then, it is more than fair to conclude that the media is deliberately ignoring the story.

Also while I am quibbling with the man, Geraghty tries to distinguish this from the foibles of Jack Ryan.  I think he is making a valid argument, but I don’t agree.  To be blunt, if your senator is enough of a freak that he wants to have public sex with his wife in a swinger’s club, I think the public has a right to know and they can rightfully hold that against him.  Also, let’s remember who he was married to:


That is 7 of 9 folks, the body that launched a thousand puberties.  That’s right the man blew it with that woman by being a complete jackass.  I think the voters have every right to consider him too stupid to be their senator.  Even if his replacement was, well, this:


That’s right, Jack Ryan not only drove away that incredible hottie, but paved the way for the worst president in my lifetime.  Nice going, dick.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Is Charlie Wilson a Wife Beater?

Now, first, this is not the man made famous with the movie Charlie Wilson’s War, but a Democrat running for reelection in Ohio.  And so far it does not look good.  Big Government has the trial brief filed in his divorce and it states that Wilson actually admitted to the beatings in depositions.  Now you might say, well, yeah, that is the word of a lawyer.  And while lawyers are not typically more honest (or more dishonest, for that matter) than anyone else, the thing is most bar associations would seriously discipline any lawyer who made such a claim without factual basis.  I dare say it would be merit disbarment if he did it.

I have attempted to reach out to the lawyer in that case and obtain some more documentation of his claims—such as factual findings by the court or transcript of the depositions itself—but it would be so unusual to lie that brazenly, I have to assume all things being equal he is telling the truth.  But you can decide for yourself and certainly Wilson will be asked about it very soon.

That being said, how relevant is this?  Well, here I have to confess that I have had someone close in my life whom I helped to escape an abusive marriage.  Does that mean I am biased, or that I see the issue more clearly than others?  I believe it’s the latter, but that is your call, not mine.  Myself, I think there is no place for such a man in Congress unless there is powerful evidence of reform.  Besides the fact that we are depending on this man not to discriminate based on sex, I believe that people who abuse also have poor impulse control making him generally unfit for offices of high trust.  But you make up your own mind.

And if I learn more, I will keep you posted.