Moar comments


You know, the axiom “if your opponent is busy making mistakes, don’t interrupt” applies here.


As I understand it, the burden of proof is on our friend, Bill. Truth is an absolute defense for libel, and it’s on my side. He is the subject of the truth.

Remember, this is a guy who doesn’t understand jurisdiction so it goes without saying that he lacks basic understanding of legal principles. It’s more than just filing as a pro-se plaintiff with a questionable IFP application .

Speaking of jurisdiction, here is his response to Pablo’s comment:


From my perspective, Pablo just baited him into confirming he doesn’t understand jurisdiction.



10 thoughts on “Moar comments

  1. There are soooo many things that fuckwit doesn’t understand.

    Among them being: it isn’t libel for “person A” to publicly disbelieve a claim made by “person B” which has no evidence to back it up.

    Put up or shut up, Dumbfuck.

    Liked by 6 people

      • I might argue that getting holes drilled into your head if you don’t really need them for medical reasons should certainly lead to some psychiatric diagnoses.

        Liked by 3 people

      • That there is a tentative diagnosis of a disease that cannot be definitively diagnosed short of an autopsy, and of which the subject – formerly diagnosed – acts in ways that definitely contradict his earlier claims and *documents these contradictory actions all himself* means that he isn’t being libeled by anyone doubting his claims. Nope. Not.

        For the record, given the preponderance of the self-provided evidence, I do not believe that Bill Schmalfeldt suffers from Parkinsons disease; I do not claim any medical expertise, I simply note the contradictions between his earlier statements and his many, many statements concerning his activities and behavior. You cannot sue someone for noting that he does *NOT* appear to suffer from Parkinson’s, relying upon his own evidence.

        Thanks for playing!

        Laptop, home.

        Liked by 1 person

    • it isn’t libel for “person A” to publicly disbelieve a claim made by “person B” which has no evidence to back it up.

      especially when person B has person A’s own words to base his disbelief on…

      Liked by 5 people

      • If Schmalfeldt has to prove PD I’d think the ‘discovery’ would be potentially (likely-) so onerous that it wouldn’t be worth it.

        Bill will happily come to court with his decade-old (how far does this go back?) medical records. But-

        Seems to me the Defense will request all travel records for the last 5-10 years since the initial diagnosis. Including names of people he dealt with in hotels so they can be questioned with respect to competency and symptoms (apparent or not).

        Want records for all domiciles. Including names of apartment managers.

        Record of all travel since the initial diagnosis.

        Records for all vehicles. Records for gas station stops and restaurants.

        Names of people he interviewed with for the 2 jobs we know of. They need to be deposed.

        All Trumpthump recordings. All other public recordings including the cub scout tapes. What tremors?

        All ‘books’ published.

        All tweets for the last 5-10 years. Does that volume suggest deteriorating faculties? Hmmm… Given his politics we may need to strike that one.

        All blog posts on non-Parvo blogs documenting intentions to sue. Goes to pattern of behavior, your honor.

        All paperwork, including the final recommendation, from the Free Lawyer in Chicago. This one’s not PD-related, but… See above.

        All correspondence to the courts in Maryland and NC proclaiming physical inability to travel.

        And. Finally. A new and complete PD-specific exam by a qualified doctor. That doc will be questioned at the trial and asked to reconcile his findings vs. aforementioned documented behavior and a illness which always gets progressively worse and never better. I assume Bill will have to pay expenses for his expert witness.

        My point is that Parvocampus can be asked to come up with all of this. And more.

        That thar’ is a tar baby.

        Liked by 4 people

  2. Child rape advocate, liar, harasser of small children, forger, serial perjurist, holder of multi state multiple restraining orders, child pornographer, still unsold author, master of pet theory of invisibility, safe word.. webelo, scum who harassed the mother who lost a precious daughter, the last man standing.. at the buffet, fired by almost every national liberal blog….

    Liked by 8 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s