It seems as though Bill Schmalfeldt has settled back in after spending time traveling between extended stay hotels. Now back to the task of looking for butthurt to shore up his federal case of woes.
https://twitter.com/breitbitnews/status/892392930790572034
Yes, he went looking for something..
https://twitter.com/breitbitnews/status/892393171719729152
Let’s add it to the binders!
For those not following the Great Quest for Butthurt, the above picture was taken before Schmalfeldt presented his “evidence” to a court appointed attorney in his civil lawsuit filed in Illinois. The attorneys filed a motion to dismiss his case a few weeks later. Schmalfeldt has never shared why the attorney’s had him dismiss the case.
Could it be that butthurt is not a tort?
In a related matter, I bet there are LOTS of discovery material in there he could have used in his defense of Hoge v. Kimberlin et al. His decision not to play by the rules basically makes that entire folder moot.
Sonoran Conservative 
Speaking of butthurt, bill is not the only stupid one when it comes to defamation:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/21/teacher-year-in-jail-for-sex-with-student-now-suing-teen-for-defamation.html
LikeLiked by 4 people
“I had sex with you and you’re not telling the story right! You’re defaming me!”
“No see, here’s all the evidence you provided to me!”
Yeah, this is going to turn out well.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m not sure why anyone is worried about “educating the monkey”. He has pretty much demonstrated over and over and over and . . . that he is incapable of learning from his mistakes, or much of any other way either.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I agree. How many times has Witless sued in the wrong court despite judges explaining the law to him?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Yeah, but this time is different. All of us are aiming our websites towards South Carolina because we’re only letting the landlords see our content.
This from a guy who thought he was being hacked from the anonymous hacker “localhost”..
LikeLiked by 3 people
Let’s deal with a hypothetical here.
A says B is faking a disease to obtain sympathy and disability payments. Is that defamation or not?
Let’s agree for purposes of argument that such a statement would be defamatory if (1) It were false and (2) B were not a public figure. But suppose B is a public figure. It would not be defamatory unless B could show as well that A acted with a reckless disregard for the truth.
Jumping from the hypothetical to the specific, my opinion is that Witless Willie is a public figure and that BPO consequently has little to worry about. In fact, if Witless keeps suing in the wrong court, BPO has nothing to worry about except the aggravation of answering a silly complaint.
LikeLiked by 7 people