Welp

Posted on by

giphy3

I got an email from Schmalfeldt.

Here it is:

Subject: I know I’m wasting my time, still…

Marvin,

It’s clear to me that you fear being seen as a “pussy” more than you fear the very real possibility of paying civil penalties for your blatantly false and defamatory claims. You and Scott “agiledog” Hinckley have entered into legally perilous territory and it’s clear based on your recent postings that you have no intent of ceasing or desisting from that disastrous path. Hinckley has even admitted to filing a false “fraud complaint” with the OPM and has been reported to the Office of the Inspector General to see what sort of penalties he may face for letting his personal hatred of me overwhelm his common sense and future security.

This is to tell you that I am not interested in debating the issue with you or Hinckley. I will not accept any “answer” from you that is not sent to me at this e-mail address.

You are not under any deadline, Marvin. I have already decided what, if anything, I am going to do about this.

You are advised that you have been asked to cease and desist any further defamation.

Bill Schmalfeldt

How much do you want to bet he’ll read this?

First of all, I’m not sure why I need to know anything about Scott Hinckley. I’m not even sure why it matters.  While Schmalfeldt claims to have sent a recent doctor’s report to OPM after they requested one from him,  it seems odd that this all happened shortly after he found Hinckley’s comment from another post on this blog.

https://twitter.com/BroadwayBillBTR/status/1001288479513432067

What could also happen is that the Inspector General may decide to take a close look at Schmalfeldt and follow up on Hinckley’s claim. Wouldn’t that be interesting?

Bill likes to project motives on me which are entirely his own. This has nothing to do with how others who comment on my blog may feel about me. It also has nothing to do with whether I feel I’m in any real legal danger.

A lawsuit is a serious matter.  If and/or when Schmalfeldt decides to take legal action against me, then we’ll see what happens. I will not tip my hand. I will say it was less than a year ago he threatened my job and my family unless I gave into certain demands. I still have the recordings. He continues to imply those same threats. What could possibly go wrong?

Schmalfeldt is under the belief that he has a better understanding of the legal system than I do especially in the area of defamation and libel.  He often parrots that as defendants we are risking our fortunes.  Part of his shtick is to speak for, if not as, the judge when communicating his demands.  He even goes as far to speak for authority.

And so far, he’s been nothing but wrong.  It’s almost as if those judges, inspector generals, police officers and sheriff’s know something he doesn’t.

As far as his advisement, I have not and will not defame him. All posts I make are of my own opinions backed up by facts provided by none other than Bill Schmalfeldt.  He is free to explain how his progressive disease required him to give up a job with in home care in 2011, moving to Wisconsin in 2015 and being able to drive a car after a year, take a radio broadcast job in Iowa, and then create a GoFundme asking for $15,000 to drive around the country in less than 45 days to produce a documentary – all of which he freely shared.

My response will be posted tomorrow as promised. He’s free not to read it.

41 thoughts on “Welp”

  1. Bill in the federal circuit you have floated filing you are a limited purpose public figure, see [FIND YOUR OWN CASE LAW]. That means you have to prove actual malice and your mistaken private individual “little old Bill” per se torts are out the door.

    Being a prolific author (you admit your an author don’t you?) and on the subject of Parkinson’s itself, the 9th circuit considers authors to have participated sufficiently in public controversies to have involved themselves in matters of public concern to become public figures. That’s precedent and controlling case law and something you don’t find on general law websites.

    Oooopsie pooopsie.

    I would suggest you should focus on potty training your new kitten and maybe yourself too. Leave understanding the law to the smart people.

    I’m not sure Aaron would take the case or not, but why would a proud man like yourself want to become Aaron’s bitch again?

    Liked by 13 people

    Reply ↓

  2. You don’t understand, SC!

    1. You said it!
    2. You allowed other people to repeat it!
    3. You have a physical location that he can find where the fed-to-federal marshals can serve you when he files his pauper’s LOLSUIT!
    4. His butt hurts!

    Those are the four elements of libel per se (strange how no one ever commits libel per quod against him, innit?) as defined by ACME Law School & Day Care!

    It’s worked for him every other time!

    Face it, buddy. You’re so doomed-ed.

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply ↓

  3. He’s still never figured out the legal definition of defamation, despite quite clear explanations from a number of sources. Some were even completely disconnected from any conflict involving Kimberlin or Schmalfeldt. He’s somehow never figured out why Kimberlin lost on the issue of falsity. Hint: no one proved that Brett Kimberlin is a pedophile. Even bigger hint: Kimberlin was unable, because of his own actions, unable to prove that is was unreasonable to have the opinion that Brett Kimberlin is a pedophile. Extra humongous giant hint: if your self-reported actions are inconsistent with your self-reported level of disability, you will never prove that it is unreasonable to believe that you are lying about your self-reported level of disability.

    Liked by 8 people

    Reply ↓

    • None of these losers have a clue what the legal definition of defamation is. Repeating what one has posted about oneself is not defamatory. In #ThomasMix case he has no excuse, either his lawyers never told him or he is ignoring them. That man litterly thinks calling him a homosexual is defamatory. And yet he posts all the time he is a gay man.

      Drawing correct conclusions from what a person post is not defamatory.

      Liked by 5 people

      Reply ↓

      • Never mind correct, it’s not defamatory to even be wrong. If you’re speaking in a factual manner, your statements only need a reasonable basis in disclosed facts. It doesn’t matter if the conclusions you draw ultimately turn out to be incorrect, if you have a reason to draw those conclusions. Schmalfeldt has provided all the basis a commenter could ever need to doubt his disability.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply ↓

  5. It’s clear to me that you fear being seen as a “pussy” more than you fear the very real possibility of paying civil penalties for your blatantly false and defamatory claims.

    You should fear taking your next breath more than paying any sort of penalties to DUMBFUCK. The former is at least going to happen and you could inhale a gnat or something.

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply ↓

    • If there is one thing certain in this world, it’s that Bill Schmalfeldt has ABSOLUTELY ZERO FEAR of being seen as a pussy.

      Okay, if there are TWO THINGS certain in this world, they are 1) Bill Schmalfeldt has no fear of being seen as a pussy, and 2) Bill Schmalfeldt’s a) self-reported behavior and b) his objectively observable behavior both contraindicate the truth of his self-reported diagnosis.

      Liked by 7 people

      Reply ↓

  6. I have to admit, I like the tone of the letter. It reads as if written by a guy who just returned from the bank after cashing a check from a previous defendant.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply ↓

  8. Ah, the Solicitous Bill part of the cycle. He’s sitting at the table, with a busted flush, assuring you that since the pot is obviously his you should just fold that aces high full house.
    I once played a lot of penny ante poker in a group with a ‘friend’. One night a newcomer watched the play for a while and then leaned over and whispered “Do you know your ‘friend’ is cheating?” And I whispered back, “We all know.” So he whispered, “Why do you keep playing with him?” And I said, “Because he still loses all the time. He’s not even good at cheating.”

    Liked by 9 people

    Reply ↓

  10. And before Bill thinks about trying to shame me or give me any grief with my friends and my wife’s business, he should consider that these are hard-core dog people – some of them call their dogs their “fur babies” – just how will they treat a person who has abandoned at least three dogs and two cats? Someone who has had a restraining order from a three year old? Someone who has had at least 5 outstanding restraining orders at the same time? “All it takes to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt.”

    Liked by 9 people

    Reply ↓

    • Heck, the pet thing is the least of it. People recoil in horror when then find out the height of his comedy is writing about cub scout aged kids being anally raped. That is some sick and twisted shit but Bill claims it’s comedy.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply ↓

  11. now why is Bill the Sub getting all butt hurt over someone supposedly filing a fraud claim report against him??
    didn’t he say if anyone thought he was a faker they should do so??
    many times as I recall…

    there just aint no way to make some people happy I guess
    😉

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply ↓

  14. Please stop using logic and pertinent legal analysis to dissuade William Schmalfeldt, the valor stealing, Parkinson’s faking shitbag (#wheresonyx) from filing his LOLsuit. I was looking forward to the ramifications of court documents showing he is a liar.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply ↓

  16. This latest email is disconcerting.

    Bill Schmalfeldt has a new apartment in a new city, a new fiance and a new cat. All of the aforementioned, taken together, constitute ‘a new life.’ I don’t understand why he can’t take advantage of that by quitting the internet. Sit back and enjoy The Love of His Life along with the beach sunsets over his remaining Golden Years.

    Schmalfeldt’s constant rebranding, his obvious desire to be a public figure, constant attention seeking and his dogged pursuit of a community which only uses his own words and actions against him bespeak some pretty large personal problems. IMHO. Don’t sue me, Brett.

    I can only figure that the voices in Bill Schmalfeldt’s head are becoming increasingly rancorous.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply ↓

  17. Bill’s legal acumen is such that, by his own actions, you could very probably call him a rapist without consequence.

    Dismissing a claim like that with prejudice could tend to support a conclusion that it’s true.

    In that one act alone, a DUMBFUCK may have made himself libel-proof.

    Not that it matters. He’ll file suit on fucking Krypton, making it all moot.

    Liked by 7 people

    Reply ↓

  19. Pingback: Year in Review – Top Five Posts of 2018 | Sonoran Conservative

Leave a comment