Ecf 180

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

NORTHERN DIVISION

BRETT KIMBERLIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL BLOGGERS CLUB, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: CVPWG-13-3059

MOTION BY DEFENDANTS PATRICK FREY AND MANDY NAGY
TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), defendants Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagel, by
undersigned counsel, submit this Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint with
prejudice.
In support hereof, defendants shall rely on a Memorandum of Law to be filed
contemporaneously herewith, the certification of counsel with attached exhibits, and the full
docket and record of the proceedings herein and such other proceedings and matters as are duly
incorporated by reference therein and regarding which the Court shall see fit to take judicial
notice.
Respectfully submitted,
GOETZ FITZPATRICK LLP

By: ________________________________
RONALD D. COLEMAN (Pro Hac Vice)

One Penn PlazaSuite 4401
New York, New York 10119
(212) 695-8100
rcoleman@goetzfitz.com

T. Bruce Godfrey (Bar No. #24596)
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of 2
2

LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE GODFREY
Box 444
Reisterstown, MD 21136
(410) 561-6061
!"#$%&'()%*+&!"#$%&',+"-
Attorneys for Defendants
Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagy

Dated: August 11, 2014

Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2 of 2
1

NORTHERN DIVISION

BRETT KIMBERLIN,

Plaintiff,

v.


Defendants.


Ronald D. Coleman, under penalty of perjury, testifies and says as follows:
1. I am a partner at Goetz Fitzpatrick LLP, attorneys for defendants Patrick Frey and
Mandy Nagy in this lawsuit. I make this certification based on personal knowledge.
2. Attached as Exhibit A is a true copy of the PDF printout version of a blog post
dated May 25, 2012 on Pattericos Pontifications, found at
http://patterico.com/2012/05/25/convicted-bomber-brett-kimberlin-neal-rauhauser-ron-brynaert-
and-their-campaign-of-political-terrorism/ as of the date hereof.
3. Attached as Exhibit B is a true copy of the PDF printout version of a blog post
dated June 25, 2012 on Pattericos Pontifications, found at
http://patterico.com/2012/06/25/aaron-walker-swatted/ as of the date hereof.
4. Attached as Exhibit C is a true copy of the PDF printout version of a blog post
dated October 10, 2011 on Pattericos Pontifications, found at
http://patterico.com/2010/10/11/brad-friedmans-partner-and-buddy-a-convicted-bomber-
perjurer-and-drug-smuggler-suspected-murderer-and-election-integrity-hero/ as of the date
hereof.
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-l Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of 2
2

5. Attached as Exhibit D are three screen shots, each of which corresponds
respectively to Exhibits A, B and C (the blog posts) which accurately reproduce the
appearance of the disclaimer utilized on Pattericos Pontifications in the visual context of each
of the respective blog posts as seen on a computer utilizing a standard Internet browser such as
Microsoft Internet Explorer, which was utilized to generate these views. Exhibit D is included
because the blog posts as shown in Exhibits A, B and C were generated, for ease of examination,
in PDF format, which omits the right-hand navigation bar present when viewing the respective
posts online and which includes the disclaimer, which reads as follows:
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author.
They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of
the author's employer.

For purposes of this submission each screen shot in Exhibit D has been augmented with a red
arrow to indicate the disclaimer. The red arrow is not found on the blog itself.
6. Attached as Exhibit E is a true copy of the PDF printout version of an article
dated June 8, 2012 on Breitbart.com, found at http://www.breitbart.com/Big-
Government/2012/06/08/Erickson-CNN-SWATting as of the date hereof.
7. Attached as Exhibit F is a true copy of the PDF printout version of an article dated
June 8, 2012 on Breitbart.com, found at http://www.breitbart.com/Big-
Journalism/2010/10/11/Progressives-Embrace-Convicted-Terrorist as of the date hereof.
I hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge. I understand that if any of the foregoing is known by me to be false, I am
subject to punishment.

___________________________
RONALD D. COLEMAN
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-l Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2 of 2
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-2 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of l8

EXHIBIT A
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-2 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2 of l8
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-2 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l0 of l8
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-2 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page ll of l8
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-3 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of 2

EXHIBIT B
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-3 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2 of 2
8/11/2014 Patterico' s Pontifications Brad Friedmans Partner and Buddy: A Convicted Bomber, Perjurer, and Drug Smuggler, Suspected Murderer . . . and Electi
http://patterico.com/2010/10/11/brad-friedmans-partner-and-buddy-a-convicted-bomber-perjurer-and-drug-smuggler-suspected-murderer-and-election-integrit 1/31
10/11/2010
Brad Friedman`s Partner and 'Buddy: A Convicted Bomber, Perjurer, and Drug
Smuggler, Suspected Murderer . . . and Election Integrity HERO!!!
Filed under: Brad Friedman,Brett Kimberlin,General,Velvet Revolution Patterico 1:00 pm
|Note: this post is a supplement to the amazing post by Liberty Chick at Big Journalism today. That post
sets out the important Iacts about Brett Kimberlin and his relationship to Brad Friedman. This post sets
Iorth many oI the same Iacts in my own way, and highlights a Iew points not mentioned in Liberty Chick's
piece. But you should deIinitely read her piece Ior the deIinitive takedown. It is tremendous.|
Brett Kimberlin set oII eight bombs in Speedway, Indiana in 1978 over the course oI several days. One blew up a
police car. Another blew the right leg oII oI a Vietnam veteran named Carl DeLong. DeLong`s leIt leg was also
severely injured, and two oI his Iingers were blown oII and then reattached. DeLong carried shrapnel in his body,
causing him constant pain . . . which apparently became too much Ior him. DeLong committed suicide in 1983 by
sitting in his van in his garage with the engine running.
Kimberlin was identiIied by store clerks who sold him bombmaking materials. A search oI his car revealed timers
similar to those used in the bombing, as well as traces oI the explosive used. He was convicted oI the bombings. He
has never been exonerated by any court.
Authorities suspected Kimberlin did the bombings as a distraction Irom a murder investigation. Kimberlin was
enamored oI a pre-teen girl named Jessica |a pseudonym given her by Mark Singer| who went on several
unsupervised out-oI-state trips with him. Jessica`s grandmother expressed her disapproval oI the relationship, and
insisted that the granddaughters move into her house to get away Irom Kimberlin. Kimberlin became suicidal. Then
the grandmother was shot in the head at her house. Nobody else in the world had a motive to kill her except
Kimberlin. AIter police arrested Kimberlin and several conIederates in Texas in a massive drug smuggling
operation, the sole eyewitness to the murder identiIied one oI Kimberlin`s conIederates as the man who killed
Jessica`s grandmother. But the witness soon died oI cancer, and no charges were ever brought against Kimberlin
Ior the murder.
While awaiting trial on the bombing, Kimberlin plotted with an inmate to murder a prosecutor on his case. He
promised another inmate bail money to go set oII another bomb with similar components while Kimberlin was
incarcerated, creating an alibi Ior Kimberlin.
In addition to his convictions Ior the bombings, Kimberlin was convicted at trial oI impersonating a military oIIicial.
(He sometimes posed as a military oIIicial as part oI his smuggling operations). He also pled to the drug smuggling
charge in Texas. For all these crimes, Kimberlin was sentenced to 50 years in Iederal prison Ior these and other
crimes, but was somehow paroled in the early 1990s.

EXHIBIT C
Now Kimberlin is partnered up with Brad Friedman oI the BradBlog the guy who has made such a big deal out
oI whether James O`KeeIe was wearing a pimp outIit at ACORN. The guy who has repeatedly trumpeted the Iact
that O`KeeIe was a Iederal criminal Ior O`KeeIe`s pissant misdemeanor violation oI entering Iederal property
under Ialse pretenses.
With Friedman, Kimberlin runs VelvetRevolution.us. Together, they report wild-sounding conspiracy theories about
voting irregularities, and solicit donations. Kimberlin and Friedman oIIer rewards oI hundreds oI thousands oI
dollars Ior news oI voting Iraud. Larisa Alexandrovna oI Raw Story once told people at Democratic Underground:
I know Brett. and I know the story oI his arrest and what really happened. he has been Iunding the
voter Iraud allegations, the aIterdowningstreet people, etc.
With all this Iunding oI investigations, oIIering oI rewards, and such, Kimberlin to my knowledge has yet to pay
DeLong`s widow any money on the $1.6 million civil judgment she received against him Ior blowing up her
husband.
Speaking oI crazy allegations against political Iigures, remember the guy who claimed that he had sold pot to Dan
Quayle?
Yeah, that was Kimberlin.
Garry Trudeau made Kimberlin Iamous by writing a series oI comic strips about Kimberlin`s unsubstantiated
allegations about Quayle. Trudeau passed on the story to his Iriend Mark Singer, a writer Ior the New Yorker who
wrote a sympathetic article about Kimberlin. Singer then wrote a book about him. But as he wrote the book,
Singer started to realize that Kimberlin is a con artist. As Joe Gelarden, who wrote about Kimberlin during his trial,
memorably stated, Kimberlin 'was convicted oI perjury in Iederal court beIore he got out oI high school. Think
about that Ior a moment. In a passage in Singer`s book, Kimberlin is depicted as encouraging Singer to create
Iictional tales about him, saying: 'Make it all up. Make the whole thing up.
This Iabulist, this convicted perjurer, is the guy behind many oI the blockbuster stories about voter Iraud published
at BradBlog.com.
Kimberlin has taken to claiming that he was a political prisoner. For example, he had a band called Epoxy, and the
band`s page oI biographies Ior the band members says this about Kimberlin.
Brett Kimberlin
Epoxy arose out oI the hellish depths oI Brett`s time in prison Ior exercising his First Amendment
rights to speech and political activity. Without any trial, Brett was hauled oII to Iederal prison aIter
being targeted by right-wingers who wanted to punish him Ior being a musician, writing a book and
speaking out about politics.
From an interview:
5. Your views and political stance landed you time in prison Did your views and/or ideas
change because oI the time you spent in prison?
My views about justice only got stronger in prison. I got to see and Ieel injustice Iirst hand and spent a
lot oI time Iighting Ior the rights oI prisoners who were uneducated or Irom Ioreign countries. I have
kept it up since being released, spending a great deal oI resources on civil rights and liberties.
6. Many groups and organizat ions took up your cause and rallied Ior your release, did this
surprise you and how did the media pick up your story?
My case is very convoluted but in essence, I was punished Ior exercising my First Amendment right to
speech. Fortunately, many enlightened people came to my deIense, along with the American Civil
Liberties Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and that is why my band is donating
a portion oI each sale to those groups. It did not really surprise because the actions oI the American
Government were so blatant and thereIore it was hard to ignore. What does surprise me is that so
many people did and do not care what happened to me. My Ieeling is that iI people don`t stand up to
government sponsored injustice, it will only get worse.
The Indianapol is Star sets the record straight:
Kimberlin was paroled in 1994 aIter serving about 13 years oI his 50-year sentence. But when he
made no eIIort to pay the DeLong judgment his parole was revoked in 1997 and he went back to
prison Ior about Iour more years, released again in 2001.
Many questions remain about the investigations Kimberlin has supposedly done with Brad Friedman. The guy
appears to be a career criminal along the lines oI Tookie Williams. The similarities are great: an intelligent violent
criminal involved in multiple acts oI deadly violence, who hatches a plot to escape Irom incarceration by means oI
murder. When that Iails, he starts a massive publicity campaign, mobilizing the politically strident but Iundamentally
naive segment among the leIt who love to stand up Ior prisoners. As part oI his campaign, he uses lame 'art to
convince people he is a serious person.
The main diIIerence is that Tookie got caught, convicted, and was never let go. Kimberlin? He walked in 1994, and
is now a progressive hero walking the streets.
For more, read Liberty Chick`s post, and poke around the blog oI a Socrates, who has been writing about the
connection between Kimberlin and Friedman Ior months.
NEXT UP: ProoI that Friedman is censoring mention oI Kimberlin at Bradblog. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Kimberlin has now threatened to sue me Ior this post. To be clear: the post is based almost entirely on
published reports Irom the Indianapol is Star , TIME Magazine, and other news publications. II there are any
errors, I invite Mr. Kimberlin to speciIy them. I will happily correct and retract any mistakes. However, I will not
remove anything that is true.

Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-5 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of l

EXHIBIT D
b BERTY CHCK (JCOUMNSTSJBERTY-CHCK) 8 1un zo:z
POST A COMMENT (JBG-GOVERNMENTJzo1zJo6Jo8JERCKSON-CNN-SWATTNG#COMMENTS)
Toduy, CNN IeuLured u sLory cenLerIng uround CNN conLrIbuLor
und RedSLuLe munugIng edILor ErIck ErIckson, LIe IuLesL vIcLIm
(ILLp:JJwww.redsLuLe.comJerIckJzo1zJoJz;JswuLLIng-
LIe-erIcksonsJ) In u serIes oI IncIdenLs In wIIcI un ImposLer
mImIcs LIe pIone number oI u LurgeL, LIen cuIIs LIe poIIce und
conIesses Lo u vIoIenL crIme. SucI conIessIons oILen resuIL In Iuw
enIorcemenL personneI, muny LImes specIuI weupons und LucLIcs
Leums (SWAT Leums), respondIng Lo cuIIs wILI IuII Iorce, rIskIng
LIe IIIe und IeuILI oI LIe LurgeL. TIIs LucLIc Ius been cuIIed
SWATLIng by LIe B (ILLp:JJwww.IbI.govJnewsJsLorIes
Jzoo8JIebruuryJswuLLIngozoqo8).
TIe CNN sLory IeuLured LIe q11 pIone cuII LIuL Ied Lo ErIckson`s SWATLIng on Muy z;,
zo1z. L cun be Ieurd beIow.
On LIe IeeIs oI LIuL SWATLIng, BreILburL News conLrIbuLor ee SLrunuIun decIded Lo
conducL u podcusL (ILLp:JJwww.bIogLuIkrudIo.comJdurby-sLrunuIunJzo1zJo
Jz8JpuLLerIco-dIcusses-swuLLIng-kImberIIn) IuLe LIuL sume evenIng Lo dIscuss LIe IncIdenL;
LIe podcusL exLended InLo LIe very eurIy mornIng Iours oI Muy z8, zo1z. SLrunuIun Iud
InvILed guesL PuLrIck rey, u depuLy dIsLrIcL uLLorney uL os AngeIes CounLy DIsLrIcL
ALLorney's OIIIce wIo uIso bIogs under LIe pseudonym PuLLerIco (ILLp:JJpuLLerIco.comJ),
Lo oIIer InsIgIL InLo IIs own experIence us u vIcLIm oI SWATLIng. rey wus LIe LurgeL oI u
sImIIur IncIdenL In June zo11, un uccounL LIuL rey Ius deLuIIed exLensIveIy
(ILLp:JJpuLLerIco.comJzo1zJoJzJconvIcLed-bomber-breLL-kImberIIn-neuI-ruuIuuser-
Obumu IusIbuck: 'We're euvIng
BeIInd u SovereIgn, SLubIe und
SeII-ReIIunL ruq'
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.comJBreILburL-
TVJzo1qJo8Jo;JObumu-IusIbuck-
Were-euvIng-BeIInd-u-SovereIgn-
SLubIe-und-SeII-ReIIunL-ruq)
8 comments o minutes co
Rure Recess HeurIng Lo DeuI wILI
EboIu TIreuL (ILLp:JJcdn.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8Jo;JRure-
Recess-HeurIng-Lo-DeuI-wILI-EboIu-
TIreuL)
::; comments : minute co
MIcIeIIe Obumu: 'Women Are SmurLer
TIun Men' (ILLp:JJcdn.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8
Jo6JMIcIeIIe-Obumu-Women-
Are-SmurLer-TIun-Men)
o comments : minutes co
CDC ReIuses Lo denLIIy WIere
PrevIous EboIu TesLs OrIgInuLed
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.comJBIg-Peuce
Jzo1qJo8Jo6JCDC-ReIuses-
Lo-denLIIy-WIere-PrevIous-EboIu-
TesLs-OrIgInuLed)
z;(o comments z hours co
SuruI PuIIn GIves ConservuLIve
!" # $#%
!"
#$%& ()*&$+,
BOOMBERG
CNN Plays 911 Call in Erickson SWATting Case http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/08/Erickson-CNN...
1 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM

EXHIBIT E
ron-brynuerL-und-LIeIr-cumpuIgn-oI-poIILIcuI-LerrorIsmJ) uL IIs own bIog In recenL weeks.
rey Ius uIso uIIeged u mucI brouder, proIonged cumpuIgn oI IuwIure und IurussmenL
uguInsL u group oI poIILIcuI wrILers.
WIuL IoIIowed on LIe Muy z8 podcusL wus sIockIng.
PurLwuy InLo LIe progrum, uL ubouL qq:z8 on LIe podcusL, wIIcI cun be Ieurd by cIIckIng
Iere (ILLp:JJwww.bIogLuIkrudIo.comJdurby-sLrunuIunJzo1zJoJz8JpuLLerIco-dIcusses-
swuLLIng-kImberIIn), u cuIIer wILI un unIdenLIIIed pIone number greeLed LIe SLrunuIun
und rey, und LIen cIuImed Lo be LIe SWATLer Irom rey`s June zo11 IncIdenL. Here Is LIe
LrunscrIpL:
CAER: L`s me. Hey PuL, you remember me, buddy? L`s me LIuL SWATLed you,
buddy. How ubouL punk you one more LIme Ior oId LImes` suke, IuI? (IuugILer)
You sLIII LIere, buddy?
STRANAHAN: YeuI, we`re Iere. Now wIy ure you suyIng.now gIve us some
prooI LIuL you`re LIe person wIo SWATLed PuL. (sIIence) And, LIey`ve gone.
A sLunned PuLrIck rey commenLed LIuL LIe cuII wus preLLy spooky, und LIuL Ie IeIL IIke
LIIs wus u bud movIe.
MomenLs IuLer, LIe bruzen cuIIer reLurned, uL ubouL 6:qo on LIe Lupe
(ILLp:JJwww.bIogLuIkrudIo.comJdurby-sLrunuIunJzo1zJoJz8JpuLLerIco-dIcusses-
swuLLIng-kImberIIn). Here Is LIe LrunscrIpL. NoLe LIuL uL LIIs poInL on LIe podcusL, LIe
uuLIor oI LIIs posL Iud cuIIed In:
CAER: Hey, PuL, buddy, wIuL Is LIIs, ee? AIrIgIL. You wIngnuLs muke me
IuugI. TIIs Is uII so Iunny. meun, MIcIeIIe wILI Ier cousIn sLIII mIssIng, Ior
wIuL, Ier cousIn oIIs IerseII, LIuL`s so Iunny, sLIII IuugI ubouL LIuL. Hey PuL,
Iow`d LIuL IeeI wIen you goL SWATLed LIuL nIgIL? wus wuLcIIng Irom ouLsIde,
buddy, LIuL wus kIndu Iunny, wuLcIIng your uss go ouL In IundcuIIs. (IuugILer)
BERTY CHCK: Your voIce sounds kInd oI Iunny.
STRANAHAN: Your voIce sounds Iunny, you`re LuIkIng u IILLIe Loo IusL.
CAER: OI, `m sorry, um speukIng Loo IusL Ior you, buddy?
STRANAHAN: Try IL sIow. Do LIe wIoIe ' sIoL my`.do wIuL you suId on LIe
cuII. RepeuL wIuL you suId on LIe cuII.
CAER: WIuL cuII? don`L know wIuL you`re LuIkIng ubouL, buddy. LIougIL
you InvILed me Lo LuIk some serIous LIIngs Iere. Or ure we noL?
STRANAHAN: You sound IIke Seun Penn us SpIcoII, LIuL`s wIuL you sound
IIke. BuL II you couId sIow IL down u IILLIe bIL, wIuL dId you sound IIke on LIe cuII?
CAER: don`L know, buddy.
REY: WeII, weII, LeII us wIy you dId IL. I you`re LIe guy, LeII us wIy you dId IL.
(CuIIer Iungs up).
TIe MIcIeIIe Lo wIom LIe cuIIer cuIIousIy reIerred wus presumubIy MIcIeIIe MuIkIn,
wIose cousIn LrugIcuIIy wenL mIssIng (ILLp:JJmIcIeIIemuIkIn.comJzo11JoJo;JmIssIng-
murIzeIu-perezJ) In MurcI oI zo11. DurIng LIuL evenIng`s podcusL, SLrunuIun Iud
menLIoned MuIkIn`s recenL eIIorLs In brIngIng exposure Lo LIe sLorIes oI LIe SWATLIngs
und Lo LIe uIIeged brouder, proIonged cumpuIgn oI IurussmenL (ILLp:JJpuLLerIco.com
Jzo1zJoJzJconvIcLed-bomber-breLL-kImberIIn-neuI-ruuIuuser-ron-brynuerL-und-LIeIr-
cumpuIgn-oI-poIILIcuI-LerrorIsmJ) over LIe course oI LIe IusL yeur uguInsL u group oI
poIILIcuI bIoggers. MuIkIn Iud uIso been LweeLIng (ILLps:JJLwILLer.comJmIcIeIIemuIkIn
JsLuLusJzo6q81o8zq8qz6qq) ubouL SLrunuIun`s podcusL jusL momenLs beIore LIe
uIIeged SWATLer cuIIed In.
One ImporLunL deLuII Lo noLe: SLrunuIun scIeduIed LIe Muy z8 podcusL sponLuneousIy, In
response Lo LIe ErIck ErIckson IncIdenL LIuL sume evenIng. He unnounced LIe progrum on
TwILLer onl six minutes prior to its stcrt.
TIe sLory ubouL LIe SWATLIngs und ubouL LIe uIIeged brouder cumpuIgn oI IurussmenL
SUSCRIE
Response Lo EIIzubeLI Wurren's
ProgressIve CommundmenLs
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8Jo;JSuruI-
PuIIn-GIves-ConservuLIve-Response-
Lo-EIIzubeLI-Wurren-s-ProgressIve-
CommundmenLs)
z8p comments o minutes co
ox News NuLIonuI
MoLIer, grundpurenLs oI 8-yeur-oId boy
neurIy sLurved Lo deuLI ordered Lo sLund LrIuI
(ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnews
JnuLIonuIJ-JQvOsSEIMqkJ)
; Au zo:(, :z PM PDT
AnoLIer suspecL cIurged In border ugenL's
sIuyIng uL cenLer oI boLcIed gun-smuggIIng
probe (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-J_InyOIScQMgJ)
; Au zo:(, ::8 PM PDT
Mun cIurged wILI sLurLIng zo1 wIIdIIre In
YosemILe NuLIonuI Purk, CuIIIornIu's
rd-IurgesL (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-JMqTkYI_zqsJ)
; Au zo:(, ::( PM PDT
decudes uILer sIockIng muss suIcIde-
murder, remuIns oI q JonesLown bodIes
Iound In DeIuwure
JnuLIonuIJ-JgqRuqq_bJ)
; Au zo:(, :: PM PDT
MIIes uwuy und decudes on, CumbodIun
AmerIcuns reIIsI verdIcL uguInsL KImer
Rouge Ieuders (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-JNqJnZ-xReAJ)
; Au zo:(, ::o( PM PDT
NEWSETTER
(JSysLem
JBreILburL%zoSend%zoA%zoTIp?puge=%zIBIg-
GovernmenL%zIzo1z%zIo6%zIo8%zIErIckson-
CNN-SWATLIng)
2 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM
guIned LrucLIon IusL week, uILer one oI LIe LurgeLs wus recenLIy juIIed Ior vIoIuLIng u peuce
order, wIIcI wus un unreusonubIe resLruInL oI IIs IrsL AmendmenL rIgILs by u judge wIo
LIougIL commenL In LIe pubIIc domuIn consLILuLed IurussmenL. An ouLcry Irom LIe
poIILIcuI bIoggIng und ucLIvIsm communILy - Irom boLI sIdes oI LIe poIILIcuI specLrum -
Ius now prompLed InLervenLIon Irom members oI Congress. eLLers Irom boLI RepubIIcun
SenuLor Suxby CIumbIIss (ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.comJBIg-GovernmenLJzo1zJo6Jo6Jsen-
cIumbIIss-demunds-doj-InvesLIguLIon-oI-uLLucks-uguInsL-poIILIcuI-commenLuLors) oI
GeorgIu und Texus Congressmun Kenny MurcIunL (ILLp:JJmurcIunL.Iouse.gov
JNewsJDocumenLSIngIe.uspx?DocumenLD=zq888) Iuve urged LIe DepurLmenL oI
JusLIce Lo InvesLIguLe LIe SWATLIng IncIdenLs Lo deLermIne wIeLIer or noL IederuI Iuws
Iuve been vIoIuLed.
We Recommend
mpIate=coIorbox&tabooIa_utm_source=breitbartcom&tabooIa_utm_medium=bytabooIa&tabooIa_utm_content=ab_thumbs-2r_ratio-1x1:Bottom Main CoIumn:)
pIate=coIorbox&tabooIa_utm_source=breitbartcom&tabooIa_utm_medium=bytabooIa&tabooIa_utm_content=ab_thumbs-2r_ratio-1x1:Bottom Main CoIumn:)
(ILLp:JJnuLuruIyn.comJ1o-ceIebrILIes-wIo-owe-LIeIr-smIIes-Lo-cosmeLIc-denLIsLryJ?uLm_source=LubooIu&uLm_medIum=cpc&
uLm_conLenL=deskLop&uLm_cumpuIgn=nuLuruIynceIebLeeLIdeskLop)
-. /&0&1%)2)&+ 34$ 56& 74&)% 89)0&+ 2$ /$+9&2): ;&<2)+2%=
>?2@%?0=<
(ILLp:JJwww.dermsLore.comJIId.pIp?IId=18;111q&uLm_source=LubooIu&uLm_medIum=reIerruI)
;)2:4 A$@% B%$6 C&<:)0 D<* 7%= 74)+E
;&%9+2$%&
(ILLp:JJwww.uncesLry.comJs6o6q1JLo;qJrd.usIx?uLm_source=LubooIu&uLm_medIum=reIerruI)
84$:F)<G H?+2 >?9& #&?<)<G+ ?<* 5%)G)<+
D<:&+2%=I:$9
(ILLp:JJwww.uncesLry.comJs6o6q1JLo;qJrd.usIx?uLm_source=LubooIu&uLm_medIum=reIerruI)
(ILLp:JJLIesLIr.cuIemom.comJIn_LIe_newsJ16qo1JkuLe_mIddIeLons_bIzurre_beIuvIor_uL?quIck_pIcks=1&uLm_medIum=semz&
uLm_source=LubooIu-s&uLm_cumpuIgn=LubooIu-s&uLm_conLenL=LubooIu-s_mur_LesL&pr=LubooIu-s&uLm_sILe=breILburLcom)
J?2& #)**0&2$<K+ B)L?%%& B&4?()$% ?2 M(&<2 N&2+ M(&%=$<& 7?0F)<G
82)%%)<G ;?)0=
(ILLp:JJLIesLIr.cuIemom.comJIn_LIe_newsJ16qo1JkuLe_mIddIeLons_bIzurre_beIuvIor_uL?quIck_pIcks=1&uLm_medIum=semz&
uLm_source=LubooIu-s&uLm_cumpuIgn=LubooIu-s&uLm_conLenL=LubooIu-s_mur_LesL&pr=LubooIu-s&uLm_sILe=breILburLcom)
(ILLp:JJdIsIwusIers.revIewed.comJIeuLuresJgoodbye-grunILe-LIe-6-IoLLesL-counLerLop-IInIsIes?uLm_source=TB_puId&
uLm_medIum=cpc)
74)<F)<G $O 8&00)<G A$@% P$9&Q N&2 R)* $O N%?<)2&
R&()&6&*I:$9
(ILLp:JJdIsIwusIers.revIewed.comJIeuLuresJgoodbye-grunILe-LIe-6-IoLLesL-counLerLop-IInIsIes?uLm_source=TB_puId&
uLm_medIum=cpc)
(ILLp:JJwuIIsLcIeuLsIeeL.comJenLerLuInmenLJLvJ1q-Lv-sIows-IIkeIy-Lo-geL-LIe-uxe-uILer-LIIs-seuson.ILmIJ?reI=LbIu)
-S 7T 84$6+ 74?2 D%& P&?*&* O$% /?<:&00?2)$<
3?00 82I /4&?2 84&&2
(ILLp:JJwuIIsLcIeuLsIeeL.comJenLerLuInmenLJLvJ1q-Lv-sIows-IIkeIy-Lo-geL-LIe-uxe-uILer-LIIs-seuson.ILmIJ?reI=LbIu)
3 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM
(JBreILburL-TVJzo1z
Jo6Jo8JConservuLIve-BIoggers-Speuk-OuL-On-SWATLIng)
ConservuLIve BIoggers Speuk OuL On 'SWATLIng'
4 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM
68 Comments

Guest
had no idea CNN was still on the air... and the Federal Government needs to take
away the Militant Departments within the Civilian Police Departments nationwide.
f Police need Military style assistance then the Police need to call the Military.

Guest
This is some of what "stimulus" (future tax) money bought. Why bother the
military when you've got your own drone.

constructionworker
The US military is not an option. t will be a sad day when you see the the US
military used against it's citizens!

Guest
Won the Civil War, Freed the Slaves, Saved the United States of
America.
The U.S. Military, and U.S. Military alone, did all those things by killing
Citizens.

kIg1956
Yes, but citizens joined the military forces, they picked sides
(some fought for the north, some south) of their own free will and
this SwatTing is being perpetrated by citizens [left wing idiots]
activists against unsuspecting citizens........(probably with help
from Obama Admin, George Soros, DOJ Eric Holder, e.g.) and if
some right winger gets killed, then it's really funny, right? The left
and progressives are militant and disgusting. t's only terrible if
it's Gabby Giffords, a Democrat, then we're supposed to feel
outraged for shootings.

Guest
Some Fought against the USA, and some fought for the USA.

Guest
Actually they defeated a separate nation in the civil war by killing
enemy soldiers, not citizens. You may not know this, but the
confederacy was a separate nation at the time. They were called
the Confederate States of America, They had their own federal
government, and army, and navy, and even currency. So they
were not killing their own citizens, they were killing former
citizens.

Guest
Battlefield losses on both sides in the Civil War were counted by
the United States Military as American Citizens.
The United States Military being the only authority able to make
the distinction and count the dead.

5 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM
ox News PoIILIcs
Key ObumuCure oIIIcIuI IIkeIy deIeLed emuIIs now
sougIL In House probe (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcsJ-JOIAqCErrIgJ)
Records sIow Obumu meL jusL once wILI SIInsekI
durIng VA scunduI (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcsJ-Jq8qxOyPCRQcJ)
; Au zo:(, z:( PM PDT
srueII PrIme MInIsLer NeLunyuIu suys mIIILunLs
need 'Lo be sLopped` (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcsJ-J1RSeTHCE1LEJ)
; Au zo:(, ::p PM PDT
Dem Sen. WuIsI drops ouL oI MonLunu SenuLe
ruce uILer pIugIurIsm scunduI
(ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcs
J-J;1yVZXIScJ)
WIILe House won`L commIL on sLoppIng poLenLIuI
'genocIde` In ruq, buL weIgIIng opLIons
J-JCLKmXXqc_wJ)
; Au zo:(, ::: AM PDT
ox News NuLIonuI
MoLIer, grundpurenLs oI 8-yeur-oId boy neurIy
sLurved Lo deuLI ordered Lo sLund LrIuI
(ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuI
J-JQvOsSEIMqkJ)
AnoLIer suspecL cIurged In border ugenL's sIuyIng
uL cenLer oI boLcIed gun-smuggIIng probe
J-J_InyOIScQMgJ)
YosemILe NuLIonuI Purk, CuIIIornIu's rd-IurgesL
J-JMqTkYI_zqsJ)
decudes uILer sIockIng muss suIcIde-murder,
remuIns oI q JonesLown bodIes Iound In DeIuwure
J-JgqRuqq_bJ)
AmerIcuns reIIsI verdIcL uguInsL KImer Rouge
Ieuders (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnews
JnuLIonuIJ-JNqJnZ-xReAJ)
ox News SporLs
CunudIun Leen Brooke MuckenzIe Henderson
udvunces Lo US Women's AmuLeur quurLerIInuIs
(ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnewsJsporLs
J-JOy6QVxLJoJ)
; Au zo:(, :zo PM PDT
UnIversILy oI MInnesoLu presIdenL wunLs
RedskIns nume bunned Irom sLudIum uL VIkIngs
gume (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnews
JsporLsJ-J8P1Iusr8;cJ)
BrIdgewuLer geured up Ior gume ucLIon wILI
VIkIngs, us ScIuub reudIes Ior debuL wILI RuIders
J-Jju;qGqvI;oJ)
Soup's on: Murcus HurrIs mukIng un ImpucL so Iur
uL GIunLs cump (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJsporLsJ-JGLoAzuydkNwJ)
; Au zo:(, z: PM PDT
NuLs wuIk oII In 1LI on Hurper's HR
J-JNDepQOzUrQJ)
; Au zo:(, z:z8 PM PDT
6 oI 6 8/7/2014 7:19 PM
!"#$% '"(!)
b BERTY CHCK (JCOUMNSTSJBERTY-CHCK) :: Dct zo:o
POST A COMMENT (JBG-JOURNASMJzo1oJ1oJ11JPROGRESSVES-EMBRACE-CONVCTED-TERRORST#COMMENTS)
TIIs pusL JuIy, In u IormuI requesL
(ILLp:JJwww.veIveLrevoIuLIon.usJImugesJGANSER-
COATS_OKEEE.pdI) IL IIIed wILI LIe prosecuLors oI MuryIund
sLuLe und LIe cILy oI BuILImore, u IeIL-IeunIng orgunIzuLIon known
us VeIveL RevoIuLIon (ILLp:JJveIveLrevoIuLIon.usJ) urged
prosecuLors Lo press crImInuI cIurges uguInsL Jumes O'KeeIe und
HunnuI GIIes Ior wIuL IL suys wus u vIoIuLIon oI MuryIund's
WIreLuppIng und EIecLronIc SurveIIIunce AcL. BuL LIe IeLLer uIso
wenL u sLep IurLIer, numIng Andrew BreILburL us u conspIruLor In
musLermIndIng LIe wIoIe operuLIon
(ILLp:JJwww.veIveLrevoIuLIon.usJImugesJGANSER-
COATS_OKEEE.pdI).
TIe uccusuLIon uguInsL BreILburL Is oI course puLenLIy IuIse und buseIess. No evIdence
exIsLs Lo even suggesL sucI un uccusuLIon, becuuse IL sImpIy dId noL Iuppen LIuL wuy. TIen
uguIn, LIIs sLory's noL ubouL Andrew BreILburL. L's ubouL !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+, LIe source
mukIng LIe cIuIm.
ProgressIves ure uIso ruIIyIng beIInd !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+ Ior unoLIer oI ILs mosL recenL
cumpuIgns - AmerIcunCrossRoudsWuLcI (ILLp:JJwww.veIveLrevoIuLIon.us
JucrwJsIgnup.pIp), wIIcI, Lo LIe deIIgIL oI IumIIIur IoIks IIke KuroII uL Crooks und Iurs
(ILLp:JJcrooksundIIurs.comJkuroIIJprogressIves-IIgIL-buck-1ooooo-bounLy-kurI-), Ius
oIIered u $1oo,ooo bounLy "jor injormction lecdin to the crrest cnd contiction oj Kcrl
Rote or cn principcl oj Americcn Crossrocds jor mone lcunderin, election riin,
or jelon ccmpcin jincnce tiolctions." L IeuLures u WANTED posLer:
kImberIIn-wunLed
nLeresLIng, LIuL LIe words "IeIony" und "WunLed" wouId be used. AguIn, consIderIng LIe
source.
You see, wIIIe !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+ Ius InspIred quILe u IIurry oI excILemenL Irom ILs
progressIve purLners LIese duys, wIo seem Lo be IroIIckIng In LIeIr uppurenL muckrukIng
eIIorLs, LIeIr gIurIng omIssIon und uLLer IypocrIsy Is ubsoIuLeIy usLonIsIIng. WILI so mucI
dIrL dIggIng goIng on, one wouId be very Iurd pressed Lo beIIeve LIuL none oI VeIveL
RevoIuLIon's cIeerIeuders Iud uny Ideu wIuLsoever LIuL u convIcLed vIoIenL IeIon Is one oI
ILs co-Iounders. n un envIronmenL Loduy wIen LIe IeIL Ius repeuLedIy IuIseIy uccused mosL
opposILIon oI beIng rucIsL, IuLeIuI und vIoIenL, Iow convenIenL LIuL progressIves wouId IuII
Lo ucknowIedge LIe IypocrIsy oI LIeIr own ImpIIcIL supporL oI recl vIoIence und
Iuw-breukIng.
TIe sLory beIInd !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+ begIns wILI musIcIun-ucLIvIsL Lurned ImmIgrunLs'
rIgILs deIender Lurned voLIng rIgILs ucLIvIsL, BreLL KImberIIn
(ILLp:JJwww.IndependenLmusIcuwurds.comJImuJjudgesJbreLL-kImberIInJ), wIo uIso runs
Obumu IusIbuck: 'We're euvIng
BeIInd u SovereIgn, SLubIe und
SeII-ReIIunL ruq'
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.comJBreILburL-
TVJzo1qJo8Jo;JObumu-IusIbuck-
Were-euvIng-BeIInd-u-SovereIgn-
SLubIe-und-SeII-ReIIunL-ruq)
( comments o minutes co
Rure Recess HeurIng Lo DeuI wILI
EboIu TIreuL (ILLp:JJcdn.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8Jo;JRure-
Recess-HeurIng-Lo-DeuI-wILI-EboIu-
TIreuL)
::z comments o minutes co
MIcIeIIe Obumu: 'Women Are SmurLer
TIun Men' (ILLp:JJcdn.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8
Jo6JMIcIeIIe-Obumu-Women-
Are-SmurLer-TIun-Men)
o comments minutes co
CDC ReIuses Lo denLIIy WIere
PrevIous EboIu TesLs OrIgInuLed
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.comJBIg-Peuce
Jzo1qJo8Jo6JCDC-ReIuses-
Lo-denLIIy-WIere-PrevIous-EboIu-
TesLs-OrIgInuLed)
z;(o comments : hour co
SuruI PuIIn GIves ConservuLIve
Response Lo EIIzubeLI Wurren's
*+

,-./ 012/-3)
!" !
NEWSX
Flashback: Progressives Embrace Convicted Terrorist http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2010/10/11/Progressives-Embr...
1 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-7 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l of ll

EXHIBIT F
LIe "JusLIce TIrougI MusIc ProjecL (ILLp:JJwww.jLmp.orgJ) (JTMP)." AccordIng Lo
journuIIsL Brud rIedmun (ILLp:JJwww.brudbIog.comJ?p=q61;) oI LIe Brud BIog, Ie und
KImberIIn co-Iounded !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+ LogeLIer, u deLuII rIedmun Ius specIIIcuIIy
noLed In u number oI posLs sucI us LIIs one Irom J1Jzoo; (ILLp:JJwww.brudbIog.com
J?p=q61;).
kImberIIn-LImez (ILLp:JJwww.LIme.comJLImeJmuguzIneJurLIcIe
Jo,q1;1,1;q161-1,oo.ILmI)
Once dubbed "TIe WIzurd oI Odd (ILLp:JJwww.LIme.comJLImeJmuguzIneJurLIcIe
Jo,q1;1,1;q161-1,oo.ILmI)" by TIme MuguzIne, you muy recognIze LIe nume BreLL
KImberIIn Ior mucI more LIun ,)-%*." /01()20 3)-*. or !"#$"% '"$(#)%*(+,
especIuIIy II you're Irom ndIunu. TIuL's becuuse In 1q81, KImberIIn, LIen LIe owner oI
vegeLurIun resLuurunL Good Ecrth, wus IInuIIy convIcLed oI u week-Iong bombIng spree In
ndIunupoIIs, N In wIIcI eIgIL sepuruLe bombs cuused exLensIve properLy dumuge,
desLroyed u poIIce cruIser, und severeIy muImed u mun, wIIcI evenLuuIIy Ied Lo LIe mun's
suIcIde. KImberIIn's sLory Ius so oILen been overIooked or undersLuLed by LIe nuLIonuI
medIu, wIIcI unIorLunuLeIy uII buL IuIIed Lo IoIIow up on wIuL were IuLer proven by LIe
sume journuIIsL wIo IIrsL reporLed on IIs sLory Lo be mIsLruLIs. BuL IocuIs Lo N know
exucLIy wIuL Iuppened und Iuve never IorgoLLen IL sInce. L's LIme LIe pubIIc goL LIe IuII
sLory.
4./55 6178/.91:; !<//2=>? 4-78/.
nIumousIy known us "TIe Speedwuy Bomber (ILLp:JJbIogs.IndysLur.comJsLurIIIes
Jzo1oJoqJo1JLIe_pIunLom_speJ)," BreLL KImberIIn expIoded IIs eIgILI und IInuI bomb
on SepLember 6, 1q;8, wIIcI neurIy bIew oII LIe rIgIL Ieg oI IIs vIcLIm, CurI Deong, und
serIousIy Injured LIe mun's IeIL Ieg und rIgIL Iund, cuusIng IIs Ieg Lo be umpuLuLed.
Deong commILLed suIcIde Lwo yeurs IuLer, unubIe Lo cope wILI LIe puIn und devusLuLIon oI
IIs InjurIes. TIe vIcLIm's wIIe Sundru IuLer won u cIvII judgmenL uguInsL KImberIIn Ior $1.6
mIIIIon.
PoIIce Iud ImmedIuLeIy suspecLed KImberIIn In LIe bombIng cuse. He'd been In LroubIe
sInce IIgI scIooI, wus u suspecLed drug LruIIIcker und Ie wus uIreudy LIe suspecL In u
murder LIuL Iud occurred onIy monLIs eurIIer. As LIe Indicncpolis Stcr
(http:,,uuu.indstcr.com,crticle,pppppppp,NEWSo,:oop:po:) recounLed recenLIy:
On JuIy zq, 1q;8, Speedwuy resIdenL JuIIu ScypIers, 6, unswered u knock uL Ier
door. A mun sIe dIdn'L know wus sLundIng on Ier sLoop uskIng ubouL ILems sIe'd
recenLIy LrIed Lo seII uL u yurd suIe. SIe IeL IIm InLo LIe guruge Lo Iook uL LIe ILems und
Ie sIoL Ier In LIe Ieud.
Mrs. ScypIer's Iusbund, red, 68, Ieurd LIe bung und cume ouL In LIme Lo see u cur
puIIIng ouL oI LIe drIvewuy. He wouId IuLer LeII poIIce Ie'd goLLen u gIImpse oI LIe mun
wIo'd come Lo LIe door.
WIen poIIce begun IookIng Ior u moLIve In LIe ScypIers sIuyIng, LIey Iound LIere'd
been u recenL IumIIy cIusI. JuIIu ScypIers' duugILer, Sundru BurLon, Iud become
InvoIved wILI u mun wIo seemed Lo Mrs. ScypIers Lo be InordInuLeIy cIose Lo one oI
BurLon's young duugILers. Mrs. ScypIers LoId IrIends sIe wus so concerned LIuL sIe'd
urrunged Ior boLI oI Ier grundduugILers Lo come IIve wILI Ier. WIeLIer or noL Mrs.
ScypIers' Ieurs were correcL (no cIurges were ever IIIed Lo LIuL eIIecL), LIIs IncIdenL
Ied InvesLIguLors Lo sLurL IookIng uL BreLL C. KImberIIn.
nvesLIguLors Iud Ieurned LIuL Sundru BurLon's pre-Leen duugILer Iud uccompunIed
KImberIIn, In IIs zo's, on severuI ouL oI sLuLe LrIps. WIen LIe gIrI moved In wILI Ier
grundmoLIer us u proLecLIve meusure on LIe IumIIy's purL, KImberIIn LIreuLened Lo commIL
suIcIde.
BuL poIIce sLIII needed Lo coIIecL more evIdence In boLI LIe bombIng und murder cuses.
AILer Ie wus IdenLIIIed by u sLore-owner wIo'd unwILLIngIy soId IIm LIe LImer Ior one oI
LIe bombs, KImberIIn wus subsequenLIy reporLed Lo LIe U.S. Army by u neurby prInL sIop
owner wIo Iud become suspIcIous wIen KImberIIn wunLed Lo reproduce mIIILury drIver's
IIcenses. And wIen Ie reLurned Lo LIuL prInL sIop weurIng u securILy guurd unIIorm wILI
SUSCRIE
ProgressIve CommundmenLs
(ILLp:JJwww.breILburL.com
JBIg-GovernmenLJzo1qJo8Jo;JSuruI-
PuIIn-GIves-ConservuLIve-Response-
Lo-EIIzubeLI-Wurren-s-ProgressIve-
CommundmenLs)
:;8 comments o minutes co
ox News NuLIonuI
AnoLIer suspecL cIurged In border ugenL's
sIuyIng uL cenLer oI boLcIed gun-smuggIIng
probe (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-J_InyOIScQMgJ)
YosemILe NuLIonuI Purk, CuIIIornIu's
rd-IurgesL (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-JMqTkYI_zqsJ)
decudes uILer sIockIng muss suIcIde-
murder, remuIns oI q JonesLown bodIes
Iound In DeIuwure
JnuLIonuIJ-JgqRuqq_bJ)
AmerIcuns reIIsI verdIcL uguInsL KImer
Rouge Ieuders (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-JNqJnZ-xReAJ)
JenIse WrIgIL seurcI: CIIId's body Iound
neur mobIIe Iome purk
JnuLIonuIJ-Jsznbg_ZE;ZoJ)
; Au zo:(, :z: PM PDT
NEWSETTER
(JSysLem
JBreILburL%zoSend%zoA%zoTIp?puge=%zIBIg-
JournuIIsm%zIzo1o%zI1o%zI11%zIProgressIves-
Embruce-ConvIcLed-TerrorIsL)
2 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-7 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2 of ll
un IIIeguI DepurLmenL oI DeIense InsIgnIu, un Army InvesLIguLor wus presenL Lo busL IIm
Ior vIoIuLIng LIe Iuw. PoIIce used LIe opporLunILy Lo obLuIn u wurrunL Lo seurcI KImberIIn's
veIIcIe, wIere LIey Iound LIe sume LImers und expIosIve cIemIcuI used In LIe bombs. A
seurcI oI IIs IumIIy's properLy uIso Lurned up u burIed sLeeI Lunk LIuL conLuIned 1,ooo Ibs
oI murIjuunu. nvesLIguLors IuLer Iound LIuL KImberIIn und some consLrucLIon workers Iud
purcIused expIosIves In 1q; Lo bIusL uwuy LIe ureu so LIey couId bury LIe Lunk. TIose
expIosIves were LIe sume us LIose used In LIe Speedwuy bombIngs.
kImberIIn-monLuge
WIIIe poIIce conLInued Lo sLrengLIen LIeIr cuse uguInsL IIm Ior LIe bombIngs, KImberIIn
goL urresLed on drug cIurges In 1q;q In Texus uILer u pIune deIIvery oI 1o,ooo pounds oI
CoIombIun murIjuunu wenL uwry. He und severuI oLIers Iud been buIIdIng u mukesIIIL
IundIng sLrIp In LIe mIddIe oI LIe deserL und renLed u smuII uIrpIune Lo coIIecL LIeIr curgo,
wIIcI Iud been ubundoned by ILs scIeduIed pIIoL due Lo bud weuLIer. WIen cuugIL durIng
LIe drug urresL, poIIce conIIscuLed un ursenuI oI weupons LIuL IncIuded u TASAR (brund
new LecInoIogy uL LIuL LIme), pIsLoIs wILI sIIencers, AR1 rIIIes, poIson LIpped buIIeLs, und
mukesIIIL securILy guurd unIIorms.
TIe IncIdenL guve InvesLIguLors uddILIonuI LIme Lo pIece LogeLIer more evIdence Irom LIe
bombIng cuse, us weII us LIe deLuIIs oI LIe murder cuse In wIIcI KImberIIn wus u suspecL.
EvenLuuIIy, In LIree sepuruLe LrIuIs, KImberIIn wus convIcLed oI LIe bombIngs und
senLenced Lo u IIILy-yeur Lerm oI ImprIsonmenL Ior munuIucLurIng und possessIng u
desLrucLIve devIce, und muIIcIous dumuge by expIosIves wILI personuI Injury. He receIved u
concurrenL LweIve-yeur senLence Ior ImpersonuLIng u IederuI oIIIcer, IIIeguI use oI u
DepurLmenL oI DeIense InsIgnIu, und IIIeguI use oI LIe PresIdenLIuI SeuI, und u IIve-yeur
Lerm Ior receIpL oI expIosIves by u convIcLed IeIon. He wus uIso gIven u Iour-yeur senLence
by LIe UnILed SLuLes DIsLrIcL CourL Ior LIe SouLIern DIsLrIcL oI Texus on un eurIIer,
unreIuLed convIcLIon Ior conspIrucy Lo dIsLrIbuLe murIjuunu. KImberIIn's senLences were
uggreguLed by LIe Bureuu oI PrIsons und LreuLed by LIe CommIssIon us u sIngIe uggreguLe
senLence oI 1 yeurs, sIx monLIs, und nIneLeen duys (ILLp:JJILp.resource.orgJcourLs.gov
JcJJ;J;.d.z;.qz-6o8q.ILmI).
TIe ScypIers murder cuse Iowever Ius remuIned open. One suspecL wus IdenLIIIed und
cIurged uL LIe LIme, buL LIe vIcLIm's Iusbund, LIe onIy wILness In LIe cuse, dIed oI cuncer
Lwo weeks IuLer, IeuvIng LIe uuLIorILIes wILIouL u IIvIng wILness.
DespILe LIe evIdence (ILLp:JJIndysLur.comJusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;6q1q.PD) uuLIorILIes
were guLIerIng, KImberIIn never wouId be IormuIIy cIurged wILI LIe murder. SLIII, Ie dId
serve neurIy 1; yeurs In prIson Ior boLI LIe bombIngs und LIe drug cuse. AILer LIe
convIcLIon, more deLuIIs were reveuIed ubouL LIe cuse LIuL unruveIed u compIex und creepy
serIes oI uddILIonuI crImes LIuL KImberIIn pIunned uguInsL numerous LurgeLs, mosL noLubIy
LIe cIIeI governmenL prosecuLor, Bernurd (Buddy) PyIILL, wIo Iuppened Lo Iuve poIILIcuI
umbILIons Ior governor. Indicncpolis Stcr reporLer JosepI GeIurden (ILLp:JJIndysLur.com
JusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;6q1q.PD) LIorougIIy documenLed LIe enLIre pIoL bused on
InIormuLIon und documenLs LIuL were provIded by LIe InvesLIguLors uILer KImberIIn's
convIcLIon. L reuds IIke u IIcLIonuI mude Ior TV movIe, compIeLe wILI u IIL IIsL oI "sIx Lo be
kIIIed, Lwo or LIree Lo be rougIed up und one or Lwo Lo be robbed," uccordIng Lo LIe urLIcIe
(ILLp:JJIndysLur.comJusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;6q1q.PD).
IndysLurz (ILLp:JJIndysLur.comJusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;6q1q.PD)
DurIng IIs LIme In prIson, KImberIIn cerLuInIy mude u nume Ior IImseII In u vurIeLy oI
oLIer wuys. HIs cIuIm Lo Iume us "LIe guy wIo suId Ie soId poL Lo Dun QuuyIe" evenLuuIIy
IoIsLed IIm InLo LIe IIcLIonuI cIurucLer oI poIILIcuI prIsoner und supposed "vIcLIm" oI LIe
RepubIIcun esLubIIsImenL, u cIurucLer LIe IeIL wus uII Loo euger Lo creuLe jusL beIore LIe
presIdenLIuI eIecLIon oI LIe senIor George H. W. BusI. And wIIIe LIe poL-smokIng
uIIeguLIons were IuLer dIsmIssed by LIe pubIIc us IIcLIon, KImberIIn conLInues Lo LIIs duy Lo
recycIe LIuL myLI Lo LIe IeIL.
As LIe Indicncpolis Stcr (http:,,blos.indstcr.com,stcrjiles,zo:o,op
,oz,the_bomb_thct_m,) recounLed on SepLember z, zo1o:
3 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
Ive yeurs IuLer, In 1q88, KImberIIn vuuILed IImseII InLo LIe nuLIonuI news wIen Ie
cIuImed Ie`d once soId poL Lo Dun QuuyIe, LIen u U.S. SenuLor und cundIduLe Ior vIce
presIdenL. QuuyIe veIemenLIy denIed LIe cIurge und KImberIIn produced no prooI
excepL IIs own word, wIIcI wusn`L worLI mucI Lo LIose wIo knew LIIs sLory. BuL
mosL peopIe ouLsIde oI ndIunu Iud never Ieurd oI KImberIIn und LIe nuLIonuI
poIILIcuI press guve IL some pIuy Ior u wIIIe.
KImberIIn wus puroIed In 1qqq uILer servIng ubouL 1 yeurs oI IIs o-yeur senLence.
BuL wIen Ie mude no eIIorL Lo puy LIe Deong judgmenL IIs puroIe wus revoked In
1qq; und Ie wenL buck Lo prIson Ior ubouL Iour more yeurs, reIeused uguIn In zoo1.
WIere Is Ie now? usL we Ieurd Ie wus IIvIng In BeLIesdu, MuryIund.
And IIvIng In BeLIesdu, MuryIund Ie Is. So wIuL's KImberIIn doIng Loduy?
#@5/. A.13-:) 4./55 6178/.91:; A.-B./3310/ #C510135
BeIore beIng reLurned Lo prIson In 1qq; Ior vIoIuLIng IIs puroIe, KImberIIn Iud been
IobbyIng CupILoI HIII In 1qqq (ILLp:JJurLIcIes.cIIcugoLrIbune.comJ1qqq-o-1JIeuLures
Jqqo1oz6;_1_breLL-kImberIIn-prIson-convIcLed) on beIuII oI u IeIIow prIsoner IrIend,
DuvId SusIunsky (ILLp:JJurLIcIes.cIIcugoLrIbune.comJ1qqq-o-1JIeuLures
Jqqo1oz6;_1_breLL-kImberIIn-prIson-convIcLed), un IIIeguI ImmIgrunL oI LIe Iormer
SovIeL UnIon, usIng IIs new-Iound Iume Lo wrungIe Lop IeguI supporL Ior SusIunsky's
"rIgILs" us Ie wuILed In IImbo In un NS deLenLIon cump. SusIunsky's Iormer counLry
reIused Lo Luke IIm buck due Lo IIs IeroIn convIcLIon.
HuvIng been reIeused Irom prIson uguIn In zoo1, KImberIIn now runs LIe JusLIce TIrougI
MusIc ProjecL (ILLp:JJwww.jLmp.orgJ) (JTMP), wIIcI descrIbes ILseII us "un orgunIzuLIon
LIuL works wILI Iumous bunds Lo InspIre youLI Lo purLIcIpuLe In LIe poIILIcuI process by
voLIng und supporLIng cIvII rIgILs." RS records IdenLIIy JTMP us u communILy IounduLIon
(ILLp:JJbesLprucLIces.coI.orgJcommunILyJVIewSLundurd.cIm?ILemNumber=qo1) "wIIcI
receIves u subsLunLIuI purL oI ILs supporL Irom u governmenLuI unIL or LIe generuI pubIIc
1;o(b)(1)(A)(vI)," under LIe cIussIIIcuLIon oI "VoLer EducuLIon und RegIsLruLIon."
AccordIng Lo ILs mosL recenL qqo Tux-ExempL OrgunIzuLIon IIIIng
(ILLp:JJdynumoduLu.IdncenLer.orgJqqo_pdI_urcIIveJz;oJz;oo1q6;
Jz;oo1q6;_zoo81z_qqoEZ.pdI) Ior zoo8, on wIIcI KImberIIn Is IIsLed us u dIrecLor,
JTMP Ius receIved u LoLuI oI over $1. mIIIIon In pubIIc gIILs und grunLs sInce zoo Ior
LIese eIIorLs.
kImberIIn-JTMP1
As we know, KImberIIn uIso co-Iounded VeIveL RevoIuLIon (ILLp:JJveIveLrevoIuLIon.usJ)
wILI Brud rIedmun oI BrudBIog (ILLp:JJwww.brudbIog.comJ). TIIs orgunIzuLIon Is
Iunded by, umong oLIers, LIe noLubIe TIdes ounduLIon (ILLp:JJwww.LIdesIounduLIon.org
JIIIeudmInJLI_pdIsJTIdes-ounduLIon-IsL-oI-GrunLees-zooq.pdI). By zoo;, KImberIIn
Iud receIved noLorIeLy us un "eIecLIon und cumpuIgn reIorm ucLIvIsL," monILorIng voLIng
processes und ruIsIng eIecLronIc LubuIuLIon Issues. He runs LIe very orgunIzuLIon LIuL
Loduy Is demundIng LIe prosecuLIon oI Andrew BreILburL, KurI Rove, und muny oLIers wIo
Iuppen Lo oppose progressIve poIIcy, wIIIe oILen busIng uccusuLIons on IILLIe eIse LIun
opInIon.
BeLween LIe LIme Ie wus reIeused Irom prIson und Loduy, KImberIIn Ius been InvoIved In u
number oI progressIve cuuses LIrougI IIs orgunIzuLIons. Among LIese ure eIecLIon und
cumpuIgn IInunce reIorm, eIecLronIc voLIng InvesLIguLIon, ImmIgruLIon rIgILs, unLI-wur
ucLIvIsm, und u vurIeLy oI oLIer cIvII rIgILs cuuses.
TogeLIer wILI oLIer progressIves, KImberIIn's Veltet Retolution even cIumpIoned LIe cuII
Lo InvesLIguLe LIe deuLI oI MIcIueI ConneII (ILLp:JJwww.veIveLrevoIuLIon.us
JprosecuLe_roveJ) us u poLenLIuI IomIcIde. ConneII, u Iormer T consuILunL Ior KurI Rove
wIo'd uIso deveIoped nLerneL sLruLegIes Ior LIe zooo und zooq BusI-CIeney cumpuIgns,
wus kIIIed In December zoo8 wIen LIe pIune Ie wus pIIoLIng uIone crusIed on IIs wuy
Iome Lo OIIo Irom WusIIngLon DC. Veltet Retolution und oLIer progressIve sILes IIke
BrudBIog (ILLp:JJwww.brudbIog.comJ?p=6;6) Iuve InsIsLed IL wus u deIIberuLe ucL oI
suboLuge Lo proLecL WIILe House "secreLs." OIIIcIuI NTSB reporLs
(ILLp:JJwww.cunLonrep.comJnewsJx6qo8ooqqJErrors-weuLIer-cILed-us-IucLors-In-Dec-
4 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
zoo8-IuLuI-pIune-crusI) evenLuuIIy sIowed LIuL LIere wus no evIdence oI suboLuge, und
cILed LIe pIIoL's spuLIuI dIsorIenLuLIon us LIe cuuse oI LIe crusI.
Some progressIves muInLuIn Lo LIIs duy LIuL KImberIIn wus persecuLed by u RepubIIcun
conspIrucy IeII-benL on sIIencIng IIm Irom speukIng Lo LIe press ubouL IIs uIIeguLIons LIuL
Ie soId Dun QuuyIe poL. L's conspIrucy LIeory LIuL Ius sInce been spun InLo urbun Iegend.
BuL courL records Irom LIe US CourL oI AppeuIs, SIxLI CIrcuIL (ILLp:JJILp.resource.org
JcourLs.govJcJJ;J;.d.z;.qz-6o8q.ILmI) cIeurIy speII ouL LIe LruLI.
As Ior KImberIIn's uIIeguLIons ubouL VIce PresIdenL QuuyIe supposedIy creuLIng un
uppeurunce oI poIILIcuI vIndIcLIveness In LIe CommIssIon's decIsIons, 5D/ 2135.1C5
C-E.5 C-../C59? C-:C9E2/2 5D>5 6178/.91:; :-5 5D/ F-771331-:; C./>5/2
5D13 ><</>.>:C/G He Ius neILIer proven nor uIIeged LIuL LIe CommIssIon's
decIsIons were ucLuuIIy InIIuenced In uny wuy by IIs sLuLemenLs ubouL LIe VIce
PresIdenL--Indeed, KImberIIn's counseI dId noL menLIon QuuyIe durIng oruI urgumenL.
n LIe ubsence oI prooI or un uIIeguLIon oI ucLuuI vIndIcLIveness, no IuwIuI busIs exIsLs
Lo seL usIde LIe CommIssIon's senLence. AIubumu v. SmILI, qqo U.S. ;qq, ;qq-8oo,
1oq S.CL. zzo1, zzoq-zzo, 1oq .Ed.zd 86 (1q8q) (wIere Peurce presumpLIon does
noL uppIy, burden remuIns upon deIendunL Lo prove ucLuuI vIndIcLIveness). Were IL
oLIerwIse, uny prIsoner couId muke pubIIc uccusuLIons prIor Lo u CommIssIon's
decIsIon, und LIen urgue LIuL LIe decIsIon wus LuInLed by un uppeurunce oI
vIndIcLIveness.
SupporLers InsIsL LIuL KImberIIn wus exoneruLed under u "specIuI secreL deuI" oI some sorL
wILI LIe JusLIce DepurLmenL LIen IIs puroIe revoked us u conspIrucy by KurI Rove und LIe
IIrsL BusI udmInIsLruLIon Lo keep KImberIIn quIeL. TIe LruLI oI LIe muLLer Is LIuL
KImberIIn's puroIe wus revoked In 1qq;, us noLed eurIIer, 8/C>E3/ D/ ./@E3/2 5- 7>H/
<>?7/:53 -: 5D/ I/J-:B KE2B7/:5 1: ./9>51-: 5- 5D/ !<//2=>? 8-781:B3. No
sucI exoneruLIon exIsLs.
MucI oI LIIs IIsLory und KImberIIn's creuLIve ImugInuLIon Is cupLured In LIe book by Murk
SInger, "CILIzen K: TIe DeepIy WeIrd AmerIcun Journey oI BreLL KImberIIn
(ILLp:JJwww.umuzon.comJCILIzen-DeepIy-AmerIcun-Journey-KImberIIn
JdpJo6;qqzqqqq)." SInger, wIo InILIuIIy beIIeved KImberIIn's sLory und reporLed on IIs
cIuIms Lo Iuve soId murIjuunu Lo Dun QuuyIe wIIIe u sLudenL In Iuw scIooI, evenLuuIIy
reuIIzed Ie'd been conned und wroLe u repenLunL book In response. KImberIIn uIso
receIved u porLIon oI LIe udvunce Ior LIe book. n u revIew Ior SuIon, CIurIes TuyIor
(ILLp:JJseurcI.burnesundnobIe.comJCILIzen-KJMurk-SIngerJeJq;8o6;qqzqqqq) summed
up LIe book us IoIIows:
5 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
TIe Iurce Murk SInger descrIbes In Citizen K mIgIL be cuIIed u journuIIsL's versIon oI
LIe SLockIoIm Syndrome, LIe psycIoIogIcuI pIenomenon wIere cupLIve bonds wILI
cupLor. TIe Irony In LIIs cuse Is LIuL SInger's "cupLor" wus IImseII u prIsoner, BreLL
KImberIIn, u suspecLed murderer und bomber und u convIcLed poL smuggIer und
deuIer. n LIe weeks beIore George BusI's 1q88 eIecLIon, KImberIIn LoId LIe press LIuL
one oI IIs eurIy ';os cusLomers wus LIen-Iuw-sLudenL "Dunny" QuuyIe.
n 1qqz, SInger, u Neu Yorler sLuII reporLer, wroLe u zz,ooo-word urLIcIe Ior LIe
muguzIne deLuIIIng KImberIIn's cIuIms LIuL Bureuu oI PrIsons oIIIcIuIs Iud denIed IIs
consLILuLIonuI rIgILs by prevenLIng IIm Irom mukIng IIs cIuIms ubouL QuuyIe Lo LIe
press. TIe urLIcIe Ied Lo LIe deuI Ior LIIs book, u deuI LIuL guve KImberIIn u cuL oI LIe
proIILs. BuL, us SInger InvesLIguLed IIs subjecL's drug-runnIng pusL - und
LrunsIormuLIon InLo u juIIIouse Iuwyer wILI u prodIgIous LusLe Ior IILIguLIon us weII us u
wouId-be pIuyer on LIe nuLIonuI poIILIcuI scene - Ie IeIL u duwnIng cerLuInLy LIuL Ie
Iud been Iud.
Citizen K - LIe LILIe reIers boLI Lo KImberIIn's vIew oI IImseII us KuIkuesque vIcLIm
und Lo IIs LuIenL Ior LIe nobIe posLurIng oI CIurIes osLer Kune - Is u very sIy pIece oI
work. L's noL oILen LIuL journuIIsLs, LIe mosL deIensIve oI proIessIonuIs, udmIL Lo
beIng conned. SInger uIerLs us Irom LIe sLurL LIuL LIere's someLIIng oII In KImberIIn's
sLorIes, buL by uIIowIng IIm LIe room Lo spIn IIs LuIes, Ie IeLs us experIence
KImberIIn's seducLIve powers. SInger's pubIIc reveIuLIon LIuL Ie wus u wIIIIng sucker
wIII uImosL sureIy prompL oLIer journuIIsLs Lo cIuIm LIuL LIey wouId never Iuve been
IooIed. BuL IIs demonsLruLIon oI Iow eusy IL Is Lo be Luken In by u musLer prevurIcuLor
IIke KImberIIn sIouId uIso muke LIem uncomIorLubIe. Here Is u con mun wIo cun
converL every evIdence oI IIs guIIL InLo prooI oI IIs Innocence, wIo cun IIuLLer LIe
press und Iuwyers wIo Luke up IIs cuse LIuL LIey ure servIng noL onIy LIeIr proIessIon
buL AmerIcun jusLIce.
$/<E21>51-:L
Toduy, LIe ImpucL oI KImberIIn's InIIuence cun eusIIy be seen onIIne In progressIve
InILIuLIves. He's oILen pruIsed Ior IIs eIIorLs Lo brIng ubouL pecce in the uorld, IIs unLI-wur
songJvIdeo "Huppy SprIngLIme: BusI Is Over (ILLp:JJwww.youLube.com
JwuLcI?v=JcoqeLIHwuE)" IrequenLIy LouLed on progressIve websILes. Be sure Lo noLe LIe
"rettSons,Innocent Music" credIL uL LIe end. (Does unyone eIse see LIe Irony In LIIs?)
I you Luke u Iook uL LIe AmerIcunCrossRoudsWuLcI (ILLp:JJwww.veIveLrevoIuLIon.us
JucrwJsIgnup.pIp) websILe, un InILIuLIve oI KImberIIn's und Brud rIedmun's Veltet
Retolution LIuL InLends Lo InLImIduLe LIe rIgIL-IeunIng poIILIcuI udvocucy orgunIzuLIon
AmerIcun Crossrouds (ILLp:JJumerIcuncrossrouds.orgJ), you'II see LIuL ILs purLners IncIude
noLubIe groups IIke SLopTIeCIumber.com (ILLp:JJsLopLIecIumber.comJ), un
unLI-CIumber oI Commerce group InILIuLed by CIunge Lo WIn
(ILLp:JJwww.cIungeLowIn.orgJ) unIons, und DemocruLs.com (ILLp:JJdemocruLs.comJ),
umong muny oLIers. TIe buzz oI goIng uILer LIese Veltet Retolution LurgeLs Ius goL
everyone Irom RucIeI Muddow (ILLp:JJwww.umerIcuncrossroudswuLcI.org
JIndex.pIp?q=nodeJ6z) Lo DuvId AxeIrod (ILLp:JJpoIILIIucL.comJLruLI-o-meLer
6 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
JsLuLemenLsJzo1oJsepJz8JduvId-uxeIrodJduvId-uxeIrod-IndependenL-groups-beIInd-
uds-uLLuckJ) jumpIng on LIe bundwugon Lo Lry und expose wIuL LIey perceIve us LIe evII,
scury "SIudow RNC."
ACW (ILLp:JJwww.umerIcuncrossroudswuLcI.orgJIndex.pIp?q=nodeJ6z)
So Iow Is IL LIuL 18 yeurs IuLer, Iere we ure uguIn, LIe medIu, und now LIe bIogospIere, ure
beIng IooIed by LIe sume cIurucLer? WIIIe LIe IeIL IuIseIy uccuses LIe Teu PurLy und sImIIur
groups oI beIng rucIsL und vIoIenL, Iere LIey Iuve orgunIzuLIons Iounded by u convIcLed
LerrorIsL IeudIng progressIve cumpuIgns LIuL ure smeurIng LIe rIgIL, once uguIn.
Hus unyone In LIe muInsLreum medIu or In LIe progressIve bIogospIere boLIered Lo Luke
noLIce LIuL LIIs InIumous cIurucLer wIo once IooIed noLed journuIIsLs InLo IuuncIIng u
IuIse rIgIL-wIng smeur cumpuIgn Is now uL LIe cenLer oI u number oI progressIve
cumpuIgns Lo sLIIIe LIe rIgIL?
s unyone cIuIIengIng LIe popuIur progressIve bIoggers Irom sILes sucI us Crools cnd
Licrs (http:,,croolscndlicrs.com,lcroli,proressites-jiht-bccl-:ooooo-bount-lcrl-)
und rcdlo (http:,,uuu.brcdblo.com,?p=(:;) wIo Iuve been rIdIng LIe couLLuIIs oI
KImberIIn wIIIe uL LIe sume LIme IIdIng beIInd LIe unonymILy oI IIs orgunIzuLIons'
numes? WIIIe some Iuve pusIed sLorIes LIuL Iuve been suspecLed Lo Iuve been sourced by
KImberIIn, LIe medIu Lurns u bIInd eye Lo LIIs IndIvIduuI's Iong, crImInuI IIsLory oI IyIng
und spInnIng LuII LuIes. PerIups we sIouId be revIsILIng some oI LIose sLorIes und LIeIr
sources.
And Iow ubouL LIe Iumous bunds und musIcIuns (ILLp:JJwww.jLmp.orgJ) wIo Leum up
wILI IIs orgunIzuLIons? Are LIey even uwure oI KImberIIn's IIsLory?
WIy ure noLubIe IeIL wIng pIIIunLIropy orgunIzuLIons IIke TIe TIdes ounduLIon
(ILLp:JJwww.LIdesIounduLIon.orgJIIIeudmInJLI_pdIsJTIdes-ounduLIon-IsL-oI-GrunLees-
zooq.pdI) (wIIcI uIso Iunds ,/21> ,>55/.3) IundIng u group ussocIuLed wILI u
convIcLed domesLIc LerrorIsL?
LIdesz (ILLp:JJwww.LIdesIounduLIon.orgJIIIeudmInJLI_pdIsJTIdes-ounduLIon-IsL-oI-
GrunLees-zooq.pdI)
WIIIe LIe IeIL-wIng medIu spends counLIess Iours oI ILs producLIon LIme LryIng Lo creuLe
LIe pIcLure oI ImproprIeLy uround LopIcs IIke AmerIcun Crossrouds und Andrew BreILburL,
wIy noL spend even jusL one Iour reseurcIIng LIe groups uccusIng sucI ImproprIeLy?
WIII unyone come ouL und repudIuLe LIeIr ussocIuLIon wILI u convIcLed LerrorIsL? n LIe
end, LIIs Isn'L so mucI ubouL KImberIIn, buL ubouL LIe IypocrIsy oI LIe IeIL.
And oI course, wIuL musL LIe cILIzens oI ndIunupoIIs LIInk ubouL KImberIIn's recenL
success, uII oI LIe money IIs orgunIzuLIons Iuve been uwurded by donors wIo seemIngIy
embruce u convIcLed crImInuI wIo cuused LIeIr communILy sucI devusLuLIon und
IeurLucIe? WIuL musL Deong's IumIIy LIInk? n zoo;, wIen Time Mcczine IeuLured
KImberIIn In ILs "WIzurd oI Odd SLory," noLed Indicnpolis Stcr reporLer Joe GeIurden
(ILLp:JJIndIunu.Lypepud.comJIwobJzoo;Jo1JsubjecL_oI_LIme.ILmI), wIo cIoseIy covered
uII oI LIe KImberIIn cuses In greuL deLuII uL LIe LIme, Iud someLIIng Lo suy
(ILLp:JJIndIunu.Lypepud.comJIwobJzoo;Jo1JsubjecL_oI_LIme.ILmI) ubouL LIe pubIIc's
embruce oI KImberIIn:
7 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
BreLL KImberIIn Is u LerrorIsL. WIIIe IIrmIy beIIeve In LIe docLrIne oI redempLIon und
conversIon, remember u Iew LIIngs ubouL BreLL LIuL gIve me greuL puuse.
IrsL, Ie wus convIcLed oI perjury - In IederuI courL - beIore Ie goL ouL oI IIgI scIooI.
TIInk ubouL LIuL Ior u momenL.
Second, Ie wus noL convIcLed oI smokIng u coupIe oI joInLs wIen Ie wus In IIgI
scIooI. He wus u mujor drug deuIer wIo oIIIcIuIs beIIeve goL InLo LerrorIsm Lo LIrow
oIIIcIuIs oII LIe LruII oI u murder.
TIIrd, Ie pIunLed u serIes oI bombs In Speedwuy, ndIunu LIuL noL onIy endungered u
IoL oI IIves, buL, wIen u guy benL over Lo pIck up u gym bug In u scIooI purkIng IoL -
CurI Deong jusL wunLed Lo Lurn In LIe bug Lo LIe scIooI becuuse Ie LIougIL IL
conLuIned u puIr oI $o sneukers - IL expIoded.
TIe bIusL sIuLLered Deong's body und LIuL oI IIs IoveIy wIIe Sundru.
TIese usserLIons ure noL jusL words on some bIog, LIey ure In LIe record oI LIe sLuLe
und IederuI courLs.
LIInk LIuL preLLy mucI suys IL uII, Irom u respecLubIe ndIunupoIIs journuIIsL wIo IIved
LIrougI LIe sLory IImseII.
Iollou the entire Kimberlin histor cs it hcppened ct the Indicncpolis Stcr:
"TIe Speedwuy Bomber PurL 1 (ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.comJurLIcIeJqqqqqqqqJNEWSo6
J1ooq1qo1z)" und "PurL z (ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.comJurLIcIeJqqqqqqqqJNEWSo6
J1ooq1qo1)."
"KImberIIn GuIILy; CouId GeL zo Yeurs" - TIe SLur, 1oJ16J1q81 (ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.com
JusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;q1q.PD)
"KImberIIn cuse u muze oI murder, deceIL" - TIe SLur, 1oJ18J1q81
(ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.comJusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;6q1q.PD)
"KImberIIn GeLs o More Yeurs" - TIe News, 1zJoJ1q81 (ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.com
JusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;;q1q.PD)
"MysLery SLIII CIouds KImberIIn Cuse" - TIe News, 1zJ1J1q;8 (ILLp:JJwww.IndysLur.com
JusseLsJpdIJBG16qz;8q1q.PD)
We Recommend
mpIate=coIorbox&tabooIa_utm_source=breitbartcom&tabooIa_utm_medium=bytabooIa&tabooIa_utm_content=ab_thumbs-2r_ratio-1x1:Bottom Main CoIumn:)
pIate=coIorbox&tabooIa_utm_source=breitbartcom&tabooIa_utm_medium=bytabooIa&tabooIa_utm_content=ab_thumbs-2r_ratio-1x1:Bottom Main CoIumn:)
M+ F/9/8.151/3 ND- O=/ 'D/1. !719/3 5- F-37/51C I/:5135.?
P>5E.>9?:
I15CD Q-E. 4.-= A/:C19 #:2 '.? 'D13R
I/.735-./
(ILLp:JJwww.pressroomvIp.comJcIIId-ceIebs-wIo-grew-up-und-Lurned-ouL-Lo-be-good-IookIngJ?uLm_source=LubooIu&
uLm_medIum=breILburLcom)
FD192 F/9/83 ND- S./= T< >:2 'E.:/2 OE5 5- 4/ S--2 J--H1:B
A./33.--7U(A
(ILLp:JJwww.pressroomvIp.comJcIIId-ceIebs-wIo-grew-up-und-Lurned-ouL-Lo-be-good-IookIngJ?uLm_source=LubooIu&
uLm_medIum=breILburLcom)
(ILLp:JJmovIeseum.comJ1o-LIIngs-you-never-noLIced-ubouL-your-IuvourILe-dIsney-movIesJ?uLm_source=LubooIu&
8 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
uLm_medIum=reIerruI&uLm_cumpuIgn=pc&uLm_conLenL=breILburLcom)
M+ "19>.1-E3 "122/: V-H/3 1: I13:/? ,-01/3
,-01/3/E7
(ILLp:JJmovIeseum.comJ1o-LIIngs-you-never-noLIced-ubouL-your-IuvourILe-dIsney-movIesJ?uLm_source=LubooIu&
uLm_medIum=reIerruI&uLm_cumpuIgn=pc&uLm_conLenL=breILburLcom)
(ILLp:JJwww.InsLyIe.comJInsLyIeJpuckugeJLrunsIormuLIonsJpIoLosJo,,zozqo1zo_1oq8z6_o16qq6,oo.ILmI?xId=LubooIu)
#:B/91:> V-91/W3 FD>:B1:B J--H3
(:!5?9/GC-7
(ILLp:JJwww.InsLyIe.comJInsLyIeJpuckugeJLrunsIormuLIonsJpIoLosJo,,zozqo1zo_1oq8z6_o16qq6,oo.ILmI?xId=LubooIu)
(ILLp:JJwww.weuILIIronL.comJcJ&Lype=TubooIu&cumpuIgn=oLIerq8sLuLeseLIscIwubdeskLop&conLenL=eLI-nexL-scIwubJLoJeLI
JsecLIonsJIeuLuresJzz18q-weuILIIronLs-nusI-on-beIng-LIe-nexL-scIwub.ILmI)
ND? N/>95D@.-:5 13 A-13/2 5- 4/ 5D/ P/X5 FD>.9/3 !CD=>8
%'YGC-7
(ILLp:JJwww.weuILIIronL.comJcJ&Lype=TubooIu&cumpuIgn=oLIerq8sLuLeseLIscIwubdeskLop&conLenL=eLI-nexL-scIwubJLoJeLI
JsecLIonsJIeuLuresJzz18q-weuILIIronLs-nusI-on-beIng-LIe-nexL-scIwub.ILmI)
9 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
40 Comments

ZiIIa of the Resistance
Quoted & linked here:
http://marezilla.com/2012/05/v...
Dear Liberty Chick,
am sorry that more people were not aware sooner of what this terrorist cretin has
been doing, but it looks like there will be an army of us working to take him down for
good now. Thank you for providing this excellent resource on that horrible "man"'s
background! God bless you.

Evi L. BIoggerIady
Who is Brett Kimberlin?
Hint: Think the opposite of "Who is John Galt"

BarackMugabe
Famous heroes of the left:
Mao
Hugo
Che
Stalin
Ted Kennedy
OJ
Robert Byrd (aka, the "Democrat Conscience of the Senate")
Fidel
Rodney King
Bill Ayers
Leftists are freaks.
FREE MUMA!

pscuIIy17
After reading this and theblaze.com, it is utterly.apparent that a violent end to
this mans life would be highly acceptable! The article focuses on the tactics, but
the real monstrosity here is, the legal system is severely broken. This guy is not
of civil reason, therefore, he must, and say, it is likely that very soon, kimberlin
will be snuffed.

MichaeI Ferguson
Can't his parole be revoked if he is convicted of even a minor
harassment charge? f he was convicted in 1981 he should still be on
parole right, where is his parole officer and why hasn't any of this been
pointed out to him?

Not My Goodies
Michael Deaver,
Reagan's Chief of Staff, was convicted of lying to both a
congressional
committee and to a federal grand jury about his lobbying activities
after he left the government. He received three years probation
and was
fined $100,000 after being convicted for lying to a congressional

10 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-7 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l0 of ll
ox News PoIILIcs
Records sIow Obumu meL jusL once wILI SIInsekI
durIng VA scunduI (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcsJ-Jq8qxOyPCRQcJ)
; Au zo:(, z:( PM PDT
srueII PrIme MInIsLer NeLunyuIu suys mIIILunLs
need 'Lo be sLopped` (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJpoIILIcsJ-J1RSeTHCE1LEJ)
; Au zo:(, ::p PM PDT
Dem Sen. WuIsI drops ouL oI MonLunu SenuLe
ruce uILer pIugIurIsm scunduI
J-J;1yVZXIScJ)
WIILe House won`L commIL on sLoppIng poLenLIuI
'genocIde` In ruq, buL weIgIIng opLIons
J-JCLKmXXqc_wJ)
; Au zo:(, ::: AM PDT
Sun runcIsco poIILIcuI cundIduLe cumpuIgns In
LIe nude In TImes Squure
J-JgHD-okBeIkJ)
; Au zo:(, :o: AM PDT
ox News NuLIonuI
AnoLIer suspecL cIurged In border ugenL's sIuyIng
uL cenLer oI boLcIed gun-smuggIIng probe
J-J_InyOIScQMgJ)
YosemILe NuLIonuI Purk, CuIIIornIu's rd-IurgesL
J-JMqTkYI_zqsJ)
decudes uILer sIockIng muss suIcIde-murder,
remuIns oI q JonesLown bodIes Iound In DeIuwure
J-JgqRuqq_bJ)
AmerIcuns reIIsI verdIcL uguInsL KImer Rouge
Ieuders (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnews
JnuLIonuIJ-JNqJnZ-xReAJ)
JenIse WrIgIL seurcI: CIIId's body Iound neur
mobIIe Iome purk (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJnuLIonuIJ-Jsznbg_ZE;ZoJ)
; Au zo:(, :z: PM PDT
ox News SporLs
CunudIun Leen Brooke MuckenzIe Henderson
udvunces Lo US Women's AmuLeur quurLerIInuIs
J-JOy6QVxLJoJ)
; Au zo:(, :zo PM PDT
UnIversILy oI MInnesoLu presIdenL wunLs
RedskIns nume bunned Irom sLudIum uL VIkIngs
gume (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.comJ-rJIoxnews
JsporLsJ-J8P1Iusr8;cJ)
BrIdgewuLer geured up Ior gume ucLIon wILI
VIkIngs, us ScIuub reudIes Ior debuL wILI RuIders
J-Jju;qGqvI;oJ)
Soup's on: Murcus HurrIs mukIng un ImpucL so Iur
uL GIunLs cump (ILLp:JJIeeds.Ioxnews.com
J-rJIoxnewsJsporLsJ-JGLoAzuydkNwJ)
; Au zo:(, z: PM PDT
NuLs wuIk oII In 1LI on Hurper's HR
J-JNDepQOzUrQJ)
; Au zo:(, z:z8 PM PDT
11 oI 11 8/7/2014 7:07 PM
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-7 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page ll of ll
NORTHERN DIVISION

BRETT KIMBERLIN,

Plaintiff,

v.


Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT
OF THE MOTION BY DEFENDANTS PATRICK FREY
AND MANDY NAGY TO DISMISS THE
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Ronald D. Coleman (Pro Hac Vice)
New York, NY 10119
(212) 695-8100
rcolemangoetzIitz.com

T. Bruce GodIrey (Bar No. #24596)
Box 444
(410) 561-6061
!"#$%&'()%*+&!"#$%&',+"-

Attorneys for Defendants
Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagy
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................ iv
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ................

1
STATEMENT OF FACTS ................ 3

A. The Iactual context oI the allegations oI the
Second Amended Complaint is a matter oI
incontrovertible public record.

............................................................

3
B. The Iacts alleged in the Second Amended
Complaint Iail to allege the existence oI a claim
Ior which relieI can be granted as a matter oI
law.

................

6

1. Blogs and blogging protected speech
oI deIendants Frey and Nagy

................

7
2. The 'swatting directed at various
deIendants and the claim that Mr. Frey
deIamed plaintiII by accusing Kimberlin
oI instigating these incidents

................

8
3. The SAC`s conclusory but Iactually
unsupported allegations that Mr. Frey
acted under color oI state law

................

14
C. PlaintiII sues all his 'enemies ................ 11
LEGAL ARGUMENT ................

16

A. The Court treats only the well-pleaded
allegations oI the Second Amended Complaint
as true.

................

16
B. The SAC Iails to state a claim under RICO
................

17
1. PlaintiII has no standing to make a
RICO claim because the SAC Iails to
allege injury proximately caused by a
predicate act.

................

19
iii

2. The SAC Iails to allege Iacts concerning
its Iraud-based claims with particularity.

................

21
3. The SAC Iails to allege a pattern oI
racketeering activity

................

22
C. The SAC Iails to state a claim against
deIendant Frey under 1983

................

22
1. The SAC Iails to allege Iacts suIIicient
to show action under color oI state law
by deIendant Frey.

................

23
2. The SAC Iails to allege Iacts suIIicient
to make out a deprivation oI his
constitutional rights due to conduct by
deIendant Frey

................

27

D. The SAC Iails to state a claim under 42
U.S.C. 1985

................

27
E. The SAC Iails to state a claim Ior Ialse light
invasion oI privacy.

................

29
F. The SAC Iails to state a claim Ior
interIerence with prospective economic
advantage.

................

32

G. The SAC Iails to state a claim Ior intentional
inIliction oI emotional distress

................

32
H. The Court should dismiss without leave to
amend

................

34
CONCLUSION ................ 35

iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES

A.S. Abell Co. v. Kirby, 176 A.2d 340 (Md. 1961). 31
Adams v. Peck, 288 Md. 1 (1980). 32
Alston v. United Collections Bureau, Inc., CIV.A. DKC 13-0913,
2014 WL 859013 (D. Md. Mar. 4, 2014).
34
Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (1999) 23
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) 17
Bailey v. Atl. Auto. Corp., CIV.A. MJG-13-1243, 2014 WL 204262
(D. Md. Jan. 17, 2014)
22
Bailey v. Prince George's Cnty., 34 F. Supp. 2d 1025 (D. Md. 1999) 23
Baron Fin. Corp. v. Natanzon, 471 F. Supp. 2d 535 (D. Md. 2006). 32
Bell Atlantic Corporation v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 554 (2007) 17
Bhari Info. Tech. Sys. Private Ltd. v. Sriram, PWG-13-1480, 2013
WL 6231389 (D. Md. Dec. 2, 2013)
17
v

Brown v. Experian Credit Reporting, 12-CV-2048-JKB, 2012 WL
6615005 (D. Md. Dec. 17, 2012)
30
Cobin v. Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc., 561 F. Supp. 2d 546
(D.S.C. 2008)
3
Crowley v. Fox Broadcasting Co., 851 F.Supp. 700 (1994) 29
DeBauche v. Trani, 191 F.3d 499 (4th Cir. 1999) 23
District 28, United Mine Workers of America, Inc. v. Wellmore
Coal Corp., 609 F.2d 1083 (4th Cir.1979)
16
Ford Motor Company v. B&H Supply, Inc. 646 F.Supp. 975 (D.
Minn. 1986)
18
French v. Chosin Few, Inc., 173 F. Supp. 2d 451 (W.D.N.C. 2001),
affd sub nom. French v. The Chosin Few, Inc., 60 F. App`x
942 (4th Cir. 2003).
3
Furman v. Sheppard, 130 Md. App. 67 (2000) 29
Globe International, Inc. v. Superior Court (Collins) (1992) 9
Cal.App.4th 393
17
Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88 (1971) 28
H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989) 17, 18
Harrison v. KVAT Food Mgmt., Inc., 766 F.2d 155 (4th Cir. 1985) 28, 29
vi

In re Valentine, 357 B.R. 744 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2007) 26
Interphase Garment Solutions, LLC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.,
566 F. Supp. 2d 460 (D. Md. 2008).
30
Jackson v. Nat'l Ass'n for Advancement of Colored People, 12-
20399, 2013 WL 5530576 (5th Cir. Oct. 8, 2013).
19
Kimberlin v. DeLong, 637 N.E.2d 121 (Ind. 1993) 4, 5
Kimberlin v. Dewalt, 12 F. Supp. 2d 487 (D. Md. 1998), affd sub
nom. Kimberlin v. Bidwell, 166 F.3d 333 (4th Cir. 1998)
6
Kimberlin v. U.S. Department of Justice, 788 F.2d 434 (7
th
Cir.
1986)
5
Kimberlin v. White, 7 F.3d 527 (6th Cir. 1993) 4
Martinez v. Colon, 54 F.3d 980 (1st Cir. 1995) 24
Menasco, Inc. v. Wasserman, 886 F.2d 681 (4th Cir. 1989) 18, 22
Mixter v. Farmer, 215 Md. App. 536 (2013). 32
Morales v. Richardson, 841 F. Supp. 2d 908 (D. Md. 2012) aff'd,
475 F. App'x 894 (4th Cir. 2012)
24
Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265 (1986) 16
vii

Philips v. Pitt Cnty. Mem'l Hosp., 572 F.3d 176 (4th Cir. 2009) 3
Piscatelli v. Van Smith, 35 A.3d 1140 (Md. 2012) 29, 31
Proctor v. Metro. Money Store Corp., 645 F. Supp. 2d 464 (D. Md.
2009)
21
Randall v. United States, 30 F.3d 518 (4th Cir.1994) 16, 17
Rockwell v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, CIV.A. RDB-13-
3049, 2014 WL 949859 (D. Md. Mar. 11, 2014)
28, 33
Roginsky v. Blake, 131 F. Supp. 2d 715 (D. Md. 2000), aff'd, 238
F.3d 414 (4th Cir. 2000)
26
Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc. 473 U.S. 479 (1985) 18
Smith v. Esquire, Inc., 494 F.Supp. 967 (D. Md. 1980) 29
Snyder v. Phelps, U.S. , 131 S.Ct. 1207 (2011) 33, 34
Taylor v. Vickers, CIV.A. RWT-13-786, 2014 WL 956530 (D. Md.
Mar. 11, 2014)
27
Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308 (2007) 3
U.S. ex rel. Oberg v. Pennsylvania Higher Educ. Assistance
Agency, 745 F.3d 131 (4th Cir. 2014)
3
viii

Van Ort v. Stanewich, 92 F.3d 831 (9th Cir. 1996) 24
Walters v. McMahen, 684 F.3d 435 (4th Cir. 2012) cert. denied,
U.S. , 133 S. Ct. 1493, 185 L. Ed. 2d 548 (U.S. 2013)
19

RULES AND STATUTES

Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b)

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b0(6)

5 U.S.C. 552a

18 USC 1962

42 U.S.C. 1983

42 U.S.C. 1985

Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. 5-105 (West)
18, 21, 22

1,3

6

15, 17, 23

15,22, 23, 26

2, 15, 27, 28, 29

29

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), deIendants Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagy,
through their undersigned counsel, respectIully move this Court to dism iss the Second
Amended Complaint ('SAC).
This litigation is a vexatious attempt by a convicted domestic terrorist plaintiII Brett
Kimberlin to use this Court to silence anyone who dares re port or comment on his violent
past or his present-day activities, associations, and conduct. The time is at hand Ior the Court
to put an end to plaintiII`s abus e oI its oIIices and oI deIendants and, as set Iorth herein, the
Court has ample legal grounds to do so.
PlaintiII, the public record shows, has made a career oI Iili ng inane and abusive
lawsuits. This case is no exception; not one oI t he claims in the Second Amended Complaint
constitutes a cognizable claim Ior relieI. Rather, plaintiII`s latest 'achievement in that career
is no more than an ugly attempt to misuse the powers and privileges aIIorded civil litigants to
punish deIendants Patrick Frey and Mandy Nagy (and about 20 others) Ior exercising their
First Amendment rights.
But publishing the unIlattering Iacts about a conv icted criminal`s violent past is not a
tort. Publishing dam ning commentary about his harassm ent oI cr itics is not a conspiracy.
And recounting his history oI litigation abuse is not sanction Ior m ore litigation abuse. The
only reality behind the SAC`s cookie-cutter verbiage and Internet legal Ilotsam is a ham-Iisted
and legally meritless attempt at intimidation and censorship via litigation.
As set Iorth in detail below, this Court should dism iss the SAC Ior the Iollowing
reasons:

2

(1) The complaint Iails to state a cl aim under RICO. Pl aintiII is not a
victim oI any oI the alleged racketeering acts, his allegations oI Iraud are not pled
with particularity, and he has Iailed to allege a pattern oI racketeering acts.
(2) The complaint Iails to state a cl aim under 42 U.S.C. 1983. PlaintiI I
has Iailed to allege Iacts amounting to action under color oI state law by Mr. Frey,
and Iails to allege that he was deprived oI any constitutional rights.
(3) PlaintiII has Iailed to state a cl aim under 42 U.S.C. 1985 against Ms.
Nagy, as he has not alleged any invidious discrimination against any protected
class.
(4) PlaintiII`s Ialse light claims are barred by the sta tute oI limitations;
they Iail to identiIy Ialse statem ents with speciIicity; they Iail to a llege Iacts
showing actual m alice; and the statem ents about which they complain are
protected by privilege under Maryland law.
(5) PlaintiII`s claim Ior interIeren ce with prospective econom ic Iails
because plaintiII Iails to allege any speci Iic Iuture business relationship aIIected
by deIendants` alleged actions. And,
(6) The cla im Ior intentional inIliction oI emotional distress does not
speciIy damages as req uired by Maryland law, and targets speech concerning a
matter oI legitimate public concern that is protected by the First Amendment.

Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-8 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page l0 of 43

3

For these reasons, as set Iorth in detail herein, the Court should dismiss the SAC without
leave to amend.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. The factual context of the allegations of the Second Amended Complaint is a
As the Court is aware, in considering whether, under Rule 12(b)(6), a pleading states a
cause oI action, the plausible allegations oI the complaint (here, the SAC) are assumed to be true.
Typically the suIIiciency oI those allegations is reckoned without reIerence to any Iacts other
than those expressly alleged and 'documents incorporated into the complaint by reIerence,
Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308, 322 (2007), 'as well as those attached
to the motion to dismiss, so long as they are integral to the complaint and authentic, Philips v.
Pitt Cntv. Meml Hosp., 572 F.3d 176, 180 (4th Cir. 2009). See also, U.S. ex r el. Oberg v.
Pennsvlvania Higher Educ. Assistance Agencv, 745 F.3d 131, 136 ( 4th Cir. 2014). 'But in
exceptional cases, as high authority shows, the dictates oI |mechanical| logic will yield to the
demands oI justice, and the courts, in order to reach a just result, will make use oI established
and uncontroverted Iacts not Iormally oI record in the pending litigation. French v. Chosin
Few, Inc., 173 F. Supp. 2d 451, 457 (W.D.N.C. 2001), affd sub nom. French v. The Chosin Few,
Inc., 60 F. App`x 942 (4th Cir. 2003). It is particularly appropriate Ior the Court to do so where,
as here, the gravamen oI a pro se plaintiII`s claims is deIamation but the pleadings do not include
the actual publications that are the subject oI those claims. See, Cobin v. Hearst-Argvle
Television, Inc., 561 F. Supp. 2d 546, 552 (D.S.C. 2008) (collecting cases).
matter of incontrovertible public record.
Here the Court`s consideration oI the public record, which deIendants place beIore the
Court solely based on Iacts set Iorth in reported judicial opinions, is also proper and, as will be
seen, maniIestly just. While, as demonstrated below, plaintiII`s allegations Iail as a matter oI
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-8 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page ll of 43

4

law to set Iorth a single cause Ior which relieI may be granted, the Iacts oI record concerning
Kimberlin`s past his criminal conviction and his record oI abusive litigation should also
inIorm the Court`s appreciation oI the legal suIIiciency oI this lawsuit, especially as regards the
question oI whether additional leave to amend should be granted. In general, however, it is
respectIully submitted that the Court should at all times view this motion in light oI the Iact that
Kimberlin instituted this action to repress public discussion oI his past. Thus deIendants place
beIore the Court a precis oI the Iacts Kimberlin asks this Court to repress through the
continuation oI this litigation.
The narrative begins with Kimberlin`s most notorious act, the Iacts regarding which have
been thoroughly adjudicated. This is Kimberlin`s cold-blooded maiming oI Carl DeLong, a
Vietnam veteran and captain in the Army Reserves employed at General Motors, by a bomb
placed in a parking lot that exploded as DeLong and his wiIe were leaving a high school Iootball
game. See, Kimberlin v. DeLong, 637 N.E.2d 121, 130 ( Ind. 1993). The extent oI DeLong`s
suIIering; that oI his wiIe, who was also injured by the blast; and the tragic outcome oI
Kimberlin`s terrorist act are summarized in Kimberlin v. White, 7 F.3d 527 (6
th
Cir. 1993):
Kimberlin was convicted as the so-called 'Speedway Bomber, who terrorized
the city oI Speedway, Indiana, by detonating a series oI explosives in early
September 1978. In the worst incident, Kimberlin placed one oI his bombs in a
gym bag, and leIt it in a parking lot outside Speedway High School. Carl Delong
was leaving the high school Iootball game with his wiIe when he attempted to
pick up t he bag and it exploded. The blast tore oII his lower right leg and two
Iingers, and embedded bomb Iragments in his wiIe`s leg. He was hospitalized Ior
six weeks, during which he was Iorced to undergo nine operations to complete the
amputation oI his leg, reattach two Iingers, repair damage to his inner ear, and
remove bomb Iragments Irom his stomach, chest, and arm. In February 1983, he
committed suicide.
In addition to being convicted Ior this crime, Kimberlin was sued by DeLong`s widow Ior
damages. She was awarded $360,000 Ior her own injuries as well as $1.25 million arising Irom
the suicide oI her husband, which the trial court concluded were proximately caused by the

5

injuries to DeLong`s body and spirit inIlicted by Kimberlin. The Indiana Supreme Court agreed,
Iinding that DeLong`s death 'was within the scope oI harm intended by Kimberlin`s intentional
criminal conduct. Kimberlin v. DeLong, 637 N.E.2d at 128.
It should not be lost on the Court that the 1993 Indiana ruling concerned compensation
Ior a crime committed by plaintiII in 1978 15 years earlier. As the Indiana high court noted,
this phenomenal delay in the dispensing oI justice was no mere procedural quirk: 'The unusual
delay in this case results Irom the intervening trial and appellate proceedings related to the
resolution oI Kimberlin`s attempt to initiate this appeal at public expense. Id. at 124, n.1.
Indeed, to his repertoire oI domestic terrorism, Kimberlin had by this time added the dark art oI
abusive litigation. Kimberlin employed his newIound talent in a manner calculated to deny
justice to his victim, Carl DeLong`s widow, Ior as many years possible, at the greatest possible
expense to Mrs. DeLong. Warring at once both through and with the court system, Kimberlin`s
eIIorts to evade satisIaction oI the judgment against him went beyond the standard deIensive
stratagems oI an ordinary judgment debtor. Instead, he employed audacious guerilla tactics, in
the Iorm oI aIIirmative litigation, to impose expense, delay and anxiety on his victim`s widow
a cynical, subversive approach to litigation that should inIorm this Court`s view oI this action.
There is no better example oI Kimberlin`s contumacious relationship with the justice
system than the Iacts recounted in Kimberlin v. U.S. Department of Justice, 788 F.2d 434 (7th
Cir. 1986), which explains that Mrs. DeLong learned that the incarcerated Brett Kimberlin was
transIerring substantial sums through his prison commissary account to avoiding satisIaction oI
the money judgment against him. Mrs. DeLong instituted an action to attach those Iunds.
Kimberlin`s response was to Iile his own Iederal lawsuit against her, her lawyer, and a host oI
Bureau oI Prisons and Department oI Justice oIIicials on the spurious ground as ultimately

6

determined by the Seventh Circuit that their actions constituted a violation oI his privacy under
the Iederal Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a. His meritless claim was dismissed but Kimberlin
had, again, succeeded in manipulating the court system to harass, delay and punish his
adversaries exercising their rights . . . just as he seeks to do through this litigation.
Released on parole, Kimberlin paid no heed to the conditions oI his release, much less to
his moral obligations to pay the judgment. To the contrary, he set to erecting a web oI shell
entities and Iake transactions to shield his income and assets Irom collection. T he result,
ineluctably, was the revocation oI his parole. No less ineluctably, Kimberlin instituted an action
to overturn this determination. Unsurprisingly as well the parole revocation was aIIirmed in
Kimberlin v. Dewalt, 12 F. Supp. 2d 487, 493 (D. Md. 1998) affd sub nom. Kimberlin v.
Bidwell, 166 F .3d 333 ( 4th Cir. 1998) (Williams, J.) and Kimberlin was returned to prison.
Even this did not abate his use oI the courts Ior sport, however, as typiIied by Kimberlin v.
Department of Justice, 318 F .3d 228 ( D.C. Cir. 2003), in which Kimberlin unsuccessIully
demanded the right to an electric guitar in prison.
As Irivolous as Brett Kimberlin`s electric-guitar case was, the themes oI his career are no
joke: cold-blooded violence; a pathological lack oI remorse; a consistent disregard Ior the truth;
and contempt Ior the legal system paired with a determination to manipulate it as a cudgel. It is
discussion oI these Iacts, judicially determined and incontrovertible stripped oI the 'legal
window dressing that Brett Kimberlin through this lawsuit seeks to censor.
B. The facts alleged in the Second Amended Complaint fail to allege the
While the Iacts summarized above provide context Ior the Iactual allegations oI the SAC,
even in isolation the SAC`s Iactual allegations concerning deIendants Frey and Nagy Iail to
existence of a claim for which relief can be granted as a matter of law.

7

allege conduct that could serve as the Iactual basis oI a cl aim Ior which relieI can be granted.
These allegations are summarized brieIly in this section.
1. Blogs and blogging - protected speech of defendants Frey and Nagy
The SAC alleges that Ms. Nagy is a blogger. ( 15.) Mr. Frey is, it a lso alleged, a
blogger, and is employed as an 'Assistant State`s Attorney Ior Los Angeles. ( 24.) The SAC
alleges that on October 11, 2010, Ms. Nagy 'wrote an article smearing PlaintiII that appeared
on 'Breitbart.com. Mr. Frey Iollowed with a 'similar article about plaintiII on his blog,
'Patterico`s PontiIications ('the Blog). ( 38.) Though he claims that these posts 'smeared
him, Kimberlin does not identiIy a single Ialse statement oI purported Iact in either post.
PlaintiII also alleges that a man named Seth Allen sent Mr. Frey, Ms. Nagy, and others an
email 'telling them that he was planning to come to Maryland and murder` plaintiII. PlaintiII
alleges that Ms. Nagy contacted the authorities, but that Ior some reason complains Mr. Frey did
not duplicate Ms. Nagy`s actions and independently contact the authorities. ( 41.)
In 2011, deIendant Aaron Walker 'was co-hosting DeIendant Frey`s blog and Mr. Frey
'supervised DeIendant Walker in that capacity. ( 40.) PlaintiII alleges that Mr. Frey, Ms.
Nagy, and Mr. Walker consulted with one another on legal pleadings 'attacking PlaintiII and the
judge who issued a deIault judgment against Seth Allen in plaintiII`s lawsuit against Mr. Allen.
( 43-45, 49.) When Mr. Frey was 'swatted shortly aIter criticizing Kimberlin (the Iirst oI
three swattings oI plaintiII`s critics, as set Iorth below), deIendants Nagy, Walker, and Frey
allegedly exchanged private emails in which Mr. Frey complained oI being harassed by plaintiII
( 46), discussed the possibility oI seeking an investigation by law enIorcement as to whether
Kimberlin was involved in the swattings ( 43, 47-48, 50-51.), and, again privately, expressed
his opinion that Kimberlin indeed had some hand in his swatting ( 45.). These private
statements pre-date PlaintiII`s complaint by more than one year. No allegation is made oI any

8

speciIic public statement by Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy claiming that Kimberlin was responsible Ior
any swatting.
PlaintiII also alleges that in January 2012, Mr. Frey, Ms. Nagy, and Mr. Walker
'concocted a 'Ialse narrative to the eIIect that Kimberlin caused Mr. Walker to be terminated
Irom his job; that Kimberlin was not assaulted by Mr. Walker; and that Kimberlin IalsiIied his
hospital records. ( 58.) DeIendants and others, the SAC alleges, 'planned ways to push their
Ialse narrative into the media to 'demonize plaintiII ( 60), a convicted terrorist. The SAC
also alleges that deIendants and others decided that Kimberlin 'would be the Iirst smear target
oI deIendant National Bloggers Club ('NBC) through a plan called 'Everybody Blog About
Brett Kimberlin Day set Ior May 25, 2012. PlaintiII claims that he received several threats oI
injury and death by unnamed persons who read the allegedly 'Ialse narratives. ( 60, 73-75.)
Kimberlin also claims that deIendants and others 'conspired to intimidate state attorneys
and judges in Maryland. In particular, Mr. Frey and others allegedly 'condemned Judge
|Cornelius| Vaughey online, which 'intimidation, Kimberlin claims, 'resulted in the judge
being targeted by having his home phone number and address posted online. ( 80.) No
deIendant is alleged to have published this inIormation; Judge Vaughey is not a party to this
action; and it is not explained how his alleged 'intimidation is related to the publication oI
inIormation about him by third parties.
2. The ~swatting directed at various defendants and the claim that Mr.
Frey defamed plaintiff by accusing Kimberlin of instigating these
incidents
'Swatting is the act oI calling police and Ialsely reporting the present occurrence oI a
serious, potentially violent crime at the address oI the swatting victim, initiating a massive police
or SWAT team response that both unnerves and intimidates the victim but place him and his
Iamily in mortal danger. ( 2.) According to the SAC, at some point between December 2011

9

and May 2012, Mr. Frey, Mr. Walker, Mr. Erickson, and others 'concluded that they had to
create a more sinister Ialse narrative against PlaintiII that would result in criminal and
Congressional investigations. They did so, the SAC alleges, by deciding to Ialsely accuse
Kimberlin oI having 'swatted them. ( 37.)
It is no Iiction, however, that three oI the deIendants are public critics oI Kimberlin and
have been swatted. Mr. Frey was swatted at his CaliIornia home in June oI 2011, according to
the Second Amended Complaint. ( 57.)
1
PlaintiII cites Mr. Frey`s blog post
2
oI May 25, 2012,
and provides a speciIic URL Ior the post (http://patterico.com/2012/05/25/convicted-bomber-
brett-kimberlin-neal-rauhauser-ron-brynaert-and-their-campaign-oI-political-terrorism/). ( 8 2)
The blog post cited by the SAC, however, does not state, or even suggest, that Kimberlin is
personally responsible Ior the swatting. In that post, incorporated into the SAC, Mr. Frey
described the ordeal as Iollows:
At 12:35 a.m. on July 1, 2011, sheriII`s deputies pounded on my Iront door and
rang my doorbell. They shouted Ior me to open the door and come out with my
hands up.

When I opened the door, deputies pointed guns at me and ordered me to put my
hands in the air. I had a cell phone in my hand. Fortunately, they did not mistake
it Ior a gun.

They ordered me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. They
handcuIIed me. They shouted questions at me: IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN
THE HOUSE? and WHERE ARE THEY? and ARE THEY ALIVE?

I told them: Yes, mv wife and mv children are in the house. Thevre upstairs in
their bedrooms, sleeping. Of course thevre alive.

Deputies led me down the street to a patrol car parked about 2-3 houses away. At
least one neighbor was watching out oI her window as I was placed, handcuIIed,

1
Contrary to the date set Iorth there, however, Mr. Frey was actually swatted on July 1, 2011.
2
All blog posts by Mr. Frey and articles on Breitbart.com by Ms. Nagy reIerred to herein are
reproduced Iully in the certiIication oI counsel Iiled herewith.

10

in the back oI the patrol car. I saw numerous patrol cars on my quiet street. There
was a police helicopter Ilying overhead, shining a spotlight down on us as I
walked towards the patrol car. Several neighbors later told us the helicopter woke
them up. I saw a Iire engine and an ambulance. A neighbor later told me they had
a HazMat vehicle out on the street as well.

Meanwhile, police rushed into my home. They woke up m y wiIe, led her
downstairs and to the Iront porch, Irisked her, and asked her where the children
were. Then police ordered her to stand on the Iront porch with her hands against
the wall while they entered my children`s bedrooms to make sure they were alive.

The call that sent deputies to my home was a hoax. Someone had pretended to be
me. They called the police to say I had shot my wiIe. The sheriII`s deputies who
arrived at my Iront door believed they were about to conIront an armed man who
had just shot his wiIe. I don`t blame the police Ior any oI their actions. But I
blame the person who made the call.

Because I could have been killed.

The SAC claims that Mr. Frey 'imputed |sic| that PlaintiII was responsible Ior the
swatting. But in Iact, the post does not accuse; does not suggest; does not so much as speculate.
Instead, it lays out objective Iacts. Thus, aIter describing the swatting and saying that 'someone
had made the call, the post reIerred to in the SAC lays out what Mr. Frey describes as a pattern
oI harassment by Kimberlin and his associates directed against Mr. Frey and several oI the other
deIendants. He supports this by setting out numerous examples oI such harassment not one of
which is swatting. The harassment laid out in the post included, just as some examples:
PlaintiII`s calling Mr. Frey`s workplace and telling Mr. Frey`s colleagues that Mr.
Frey was a 'stalker because Mr. Frey had written about PlaintiII;
PlaintiII`s Iiling spurious complaints with multiple law enIorcement agencies Ior
'stalking due to Mr. Frey`s truthIul blogging;
The publication on a website owned by an entity controlled by plaintiII oI Mr.
Frey`s home address and pictures oI Mr. Frey`s home (well aware oI the Iact that

11

Mr. Frey is a prosecutor oI gang murders and that publicizing his address put his
Iamily at risk);
Kimberlin has never disputed any oI the Iacts that make up the pattern oI harassment described
in Mr. Frey`s post, including in the SAC. Nor does he deny the post`s contention that Kimberlin
undertook these actions to retaliate against Mr. Frey`s Ior publishing, on his blog, the established
Iacts oI record concerning plaintiII`s extraordinary history oI violence and dishonesty. While
Mr. Frey does, in the post, note that in general, the FBI associates swatting with acts oI
harassment such as those described, the post never accuses plaintiII oI involvement in the
swatting incident.
The SAC goes on t o acknowledge that deIendant Erick Erickson, also a critic oI
PlaintiII`s, was swatted at his Georgia home on May 27, 2012 ( 83); and that deIendant Walker,
a third critic oI plaintiII`s, was swatted at his Virginia home on J une 25, 2012 ( 86). The
juxtaposition in time oI these incidents with deIendants` public criticism oI Kimberlin is not
addressed directly in the SAC, but it does allow that Mr. Erickson had contacted his local police
and expressed concern that his recent criticism oI PlaintiII might result in his being swatted
which, in Iact, he was, within days. ( 83.)
From these Iacts, however, plaintiII alleges that the wrong committed was that Mr. Frey,
in concert with Ms. Nagy and others, allegedly 'began publicly implying and stating that
PlaintiII had him swatted in 2012. DeIendants, the SAC claims, 'concocted a plan to get the
swatting smear into the mainstream media which they accomplished by 'recruiting Mr.
Erickson, a paid commentator at CNN. ( 83.) In a June 8, 2012 a ppearance on CNN, Mr.
Erickson noted entirely accurately, which the SAC does not deny that 'the same Iact pattern
applied in each oI the cases, 'where the bloggers wrote about PlaintiII and within weeks they are

12

swatted. ( 85.) T his statement, according to the SAC, 'imputed |sic| that PlaintiII was
responsible Ior the swatting through his Ian club.` The SAC does not, however, allege that Mr.
Erickson actually accused Kimberlin oI anything merely that he laid out Iacts which are
themselves not disputed.
3
The SAC, however, does eventually return to allegations that directly bear on statements
made by Mr. Frey, namely comments made by Mr. Frey in a telephone interview conducted by
deIendant Glenn Beck on his radio program. The allegations oI the SAC are that that Mr. Beck
allowed Mr. Frey and Mr. Walker to 'impute, imply and state that PlaintiII targeted DeIendant
Frey with swatting and caused DeIendant Walker to be Iired. ( 87.) The SAC even cites a
YouTube video oI Mr. Beck conducting the interview Iound at the URL
SigniIicantly Ior this motion, moreover, the SAC does not allege that
Mr. Erickson attributed any aspect oI his comments to Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy, much less that Mr.
Frey or Ms. Nagy made any Ialse claim about Kimberlin themselves.
http://www.youtube.
com/watch?vo8F0gXl8bUE. ( 87.) Far Irom supporting the SAC`s conclusory
characterization oI Mr. Frey`s statements, however, the interview Iound at the link provided by
the SAC negates it: At no point during the interview does Mr. Frey ever state that plaintiII was
responsible Ior the swatting. Indeed, while Mr. Beck, in introducing the topic, states (at eight
minutes and 24 seconds into the interview), 'Help me out. Help me out on, now, this is you
can`t directly tie this to him. However you had a SWAT team at your house!
(http://www.youtube.com/watch? vo8F0gXl8bUE at 8:24), Mr. Frey does not, indeed, 'directly
tie Kimberlin to the swatting.

3
In Iact, Mr. Erickson never did make such a statement. This is readily conIirmed by viewing
the entire CNN appearance, which is incorporated into the SAC, at
http://www.youtube.com/watch? vT150I46AwIM. Counsel Ior Mr. Frey and Ms. Nagy can, iI
the Court requests Ior its convenience or otherwise, provide a transcription oI the interview as
well.

13

The SAC also alleges that during that interview, Mr. Frey stated that he is a Deputy
District Attorney. ( 87.) The SAC omits, however despite the Iact that it is readily available at
the link provided by the SAC and incorporated by reIerence the Iact that Mr. Frey expressly
disclaimed speaking as a Deputy District Attorney. His complete statement, per the interview
reIerred to in the SAC, is: 'I`m a deputy district attorney. Now, saying that, I`m obviously
speaking in my personal capacity today; I`m not speaking on behalf of the off ice.
(http://www.youtube.com/ watch?vo8F0gXl8bUE at 10:02; emphasis added).
In a similar vein, the SAC alleges that on June 25, 2012, Mr. Frey published a blog post
'implying that PlaintiII was responsible Ior the swatting oI DeIendant Walker and advising
other bloggers to call the police iI they planned to write about plaintiII Kimberlin because they
could end up being swatted too. ( 9 4.) The actual passage, however, at the URL cited by
plaintiII (http://patterico.com/2012/06/25/aaron-walker-swatted/) does not support this
allegation. It states only this:
Any blogger or even commenter who has taken an aggressive position talking
about this storyespecially people who know they have come onto Brett
Kimberlin`s radar screenshould consider talking to their local police about the
possibility that they could be SWATted. It is no joke, and worrying about looking
silly is a poor reason not to act.

The post says nothing about who might be behind past or Iuture swatting. Perhaps in an eIIort to
make good this Iactual deIiciency, the SAC then alleges that the three swatting victims Mr.
Frey, Mr. Walker, and Mr. Erickson (all critics oI plaintiII) accused plaintiII oI orchestrating
these swattings in communications with unidentiIied members oI the U.S. House oI
Representatives and Senate and urging a criminal investigation. ( 98.) The SAC does not
identiIy the dates on which these alleged statements were made; it d oes not speciIy which
deIendants allegedly communicated with any speciIic Representatives or Senators naming only
Case 8:l3-cv-03059-GJH Document l80-8 Filed 08/ll/l4 Page 2l of 43

14

one Senator, and, again, without any Iurther detail; it does not allege the method oI
communication used; and above all it does not claim that Kimberlin was in way damaged or even
aIIected by these alleged communications, much less how he came to learn oI them.
PlaintiII also cites some private emails Irom December 2011 and January 2012. ( 44-
51). These emails, which are not alleged to have been made public by Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy,
show only that Mr. Walker, Ms. Nagy, and Mr. Frey were discussing, amongst themselves, the
question oI whether the swatting oI Mr. Frey was connected to Mr. Frey`s previous criticism oI
Mr. Kimberlin. As noted below, all oI these private statements were made more than one year
beIore plaintiII Iiled his complaint in October 2013.
3. The SAC`s conclusory but factually unsupported allegations that Mr.
Frey acted under color of state law
PlaintiII asserts in a conclusory Iashion that Mr. Frey, as an 'Assistant District Attorney,
acts Ior all purposes, including his blogging and public commentary related to his blogging
under color oI the law oI the State oI CaliIornia. ( 117.) The SAC makes only cursory mention,
however, oI the express disclaimer prominently posted on the blog that its contents consist solely
oI Mr. Frey`s personal opinions and are not made in any oIIicial capacity. PlaintiII claims that
Mr. Frey denies any connection to his work to maintain 'plausible deniability, but does not
allege Iacts that suggest that Mr. Frey`s denial is anything but plausible indeed, that any
contrary allegation is Iatally implausible. T he SAC, in Iact, alleges no facts to support its
conclusion that Mr. Frey`s personal blogging was conduct done under color oI law, or indeed to
justiIy its inane suggestion that blogging could ever be considered within the job description oI
an Assistant District Attorney anywhere on earth even Los Angeles County. ( 117-122.)

15

C. Plaintiff sues all his ~enemies
Kimberlin sued Mr. Frey, Ms. Nagy, and about a score oI other deIendants whom he
evidently deems his tormentors, under a wide variety oI preposterous legal theories.
1. In his First Claim Ior RelieI, PlaintiII asserts that deIendants violated the
'Racketeer InIluences |sic| and Corrupt Organizations Act under 18 USC
1962(c) and 1962(d).
2. In his Second Claim Ior RelieI, PlaintiII asserts that Mr. Frey violated his civil
rights in violation oI 42 U.S.C. 1983 (' 1983) by (i) 'creating Ialse narratives
about PlaintiII; (ii) 'planning gang attacks on PlaintiII based on Ialse narratives
known that such attacks would result in threats oI injury or death; (iii) Iailing to
contact law enIorcement when someone allegedly threatened to murder plaintiII;
(iv) attempting to get the 'Anonymous group to retaliate against him; and (iv)
directing other deIendants to create Ialse narratives and make Ialse criminal
accusations against him.
3. Kimberlin`s Third Claim Ior RelieI asserts a violation oI 42 USC 1985, against
various deIendants including Ms. Nagy (but not Mr. Frey) Ior allegedly depriving
him oI various constitutional and civil rights in unspeciIied ways.
4. PlaintiII`s Fourth Claim Ior RelieI alleges deIamation against other deIendants,
based on unspeciIied statements regarding plaintiII`s involvement in swattings.
This claim is not alleged against Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy.
5. PlaintiII`s FiIth Claim Ior RelieI alleges 'Ialse light invasions oI privacy by
numerous deIendants, including Mr. Frey and Ms. Nagy, apparently in connection
with the same alleged deIamatory statements that are the subject oI the Fourth
Claim Ior relieI (which is not alleged against Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy).

16

6. PlaintiII`s Sixth Claim Ior RelieI is Ior 'interIerence with business relations.
This claim is not alleged against Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy.
7. PlaintiII has two claims labeled 'Seventh Claim Ior RelieI. PlaintiII`s Iirst
'Seventh Claim Ior RelieI is Ior 'interIerence with prospective economic
advantage, against all deIendants. The second so-called 'Seventh Claim Ior
RelieI ' is Ior battery, against deIendant Walker only.
8. PlaintiII`s Eighth Claim Ior RelieI seeks compensation Ior intentional inIliction oI
emotional distress on hi m arising, again, Irom the same alleged Ialse statements
about his involvement with swattings.
9. PlaintiII`s Ninth Claim Ior relieI simply alleges a conspiracy among deIendants to
commit the various tortious acts alleged in the SAC.
DeIendants Frey and Nagy address the legal insuIIiciency oI the respective claims against
them as Iollows.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
A. The Court treats only the well-pleaded allegations of the Second Amended
Under the well-known standard Ior evaluating a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6)
Ior Iailure to state a claim, a court treats as true the 'well-pleaded Iacts in a complaint, in
contrast to allegations that are merely conclusory, unwarranted deductions oI Iact, or
unreasonable inIerences. The Court is not 'bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as
a Iactual allegation. Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286 ( 1986). 'Were it otherwise, Rule
12(b)(6) would serve no Iunction, Ior its purpose is to provide a deIendant with a mechanism Ior
testing the legal suIIiciency oI the complaint. District 28, United Mine Workers of America,
Inc. v. Wellmore Coal Corp., 609 F.2d 1083, 108586 (4th Cir.1979); see also, Randall v. United
Complaint as true.

17

States, 30 F .3d 518, 5 22 (4th Cir.1994) ('we are not . . . bound by the plaintiII`s legal
conclusions). T hus a complaint that relies upon 'labels and conclusions, and a Iormulaic
recitation oI the elements oI a cause oI action does not suIIice to state a cause oI action. Bell
Atlantic Corporation v. Twomblv, 550 U.S. 554, 555 ( 2007). Moreover, '|I|actual allegations
must be enough to raise a right to relieI above the speculative level . . . . Id. In other words, a
complaint must be 'plausible on its Iace meaning that the plaintiII must plead 'Iactual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inIerence that the deIendant is liable Ior the
misconduct alleged. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Under these black-letter rules
oI law, the SAC must, as a matter oI law, be dismissed as against Mr. Frey and Ms. Nagy.
B.
PlaintiII uses the civil RICO statute in a vain attempt to give the impression oI heIt to his
meritless, and legally inconsequential, core complaint: that people talked about him in ways he
didn`t like on the Internet. But 'RICO was intended to combat organized crime, not to provide
triple damage to every tort claimant. Globe International, Inc. v. Superior Court (Collins)
(1992) 9 Cal.App.4
th
393, 401. Courts are thus consistently hostile to makeweight RICO claims
especially where, as here, the supposed torts supposedly providing the predicate acts Ior
plaintiII`s RICO claims are themselves patently deIicient.
The SAC fails to state a claim under RICO
'To state a claim Ior relieI based on a violation oI 18 U.S.C. 1962(c), a plaintiII must
allege (1) conduct (2) oI an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) oI racketeering activity. Bhari
Info. Tech. Svs. Private Ltd. v. Sriram, PWG-13-1480, 2013 WL 6231389 (D. Md. Dec. 2, 2013)
(citations omitted). At least two unlawIul predicate acts must be alleged to satisIy RICO`s
pattern element. H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 492 U.S. 229, 237 (1989).
Additionally, a series oI such acts Iorms a pattern oI racketeering activity only when a plaintiII
shows both continuity and a relationship among them. Id. at p. 240. The Iirst component,

18

continuity, can be either 'open-ended prior conduct that projects into the Iuture with a threat
oI repetition or 'closed-ended, meaning a lengthy period oI repeated prior conduct. Id. at pp.
241-42. T o establish the second component, i.e., a pattern, the allegations must make out
'repeated criminal |or tortious| activity, not merely repeated acts to carry out the same . . .
scheme. Ford Motor Companv v. B&H Supplv, Inc. 646 F.Supp. 975, 1000 (D. Minn. 1986)
(emphasis added).
Put another way, the requirements oI continuity and relationship among alleged predicate
acts requires the plaintiII to plead Iacts in which the acts alleged are central, not incidental, to a
deIendant`s business operation. In other words, they deIine the so-called 'racket where 'the
predicates can be attributed to a deIendant operating as part oI a long-term association that exists
Ior criminal purposes or where it is shown that the predicates are a regular way oI conducting
deIendant`s ongoing legitimate business . . . . , or oI conducting or participating in an ongoing
and legitimate RICO enterprise.` H.J. Inc., supra, 492 U.S. at 242-43 (internal quotations
omitted). Thus even two predicate acts, iI 'isolated Irom the overall operation oI racketeering
activity, do not constitute a pattern. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc. 473 U.S. 479, 497, I n.
14. (1985). Furthermore, because RICO is a cause oI action sounding in Iraud, a plaintiII must
satisIy the heightened pleading standard oI Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) and allege Iraud with
particularity to avoid dismissal. Menasco, Inc. v. Wasserman, 886 F.2d 681, 684 (4th Cir. 1989).
Kimberlin has Iailed to allege a legally cognizable injury to himselI proximately caused
by any predicate act, which deprives him oI his claimed standing to make the RICO claims; he
Ialls Iar short oI the legal standard Ior pleading Iraud with the required particularity; at best he
has imagined a single 'scheme against a single victim not a pattern oI racketeering activity, as
the RICO statute requires; and the 'scheme itselI is no more than lawIul expression protected

19

by the First Amendment. In view oI the legal standards, as detailed below, the SAC`s RICO and
RICO conspiracy claims collapse as a matter oI law.
1. Plaintiff has no standing to make a RICO claim because the SAC fails
The most glaring deIiciency oI the SAC`s RICO claim is the lack oI any allegation oI
injury caused by a predicate act. It is axiomatic that a RICO plaintiII must allege that he suIIered
such harm arising Irom the predicate acts; Iailing the same, he lacks standing and his claim will
be dismissed. See, Walters v. McMahen, 684 F.3d 435, 443 (4th Cir. 2012) cert. denied, 133 S.
Ct. 1493, 185 L. Ed. 2d 548 (U.S. 2013) (dismissing civil RICO claim Ior Iailure to plead injury
proximately caused by tortious acts). It is not enough to allege injury suIIered as an indirect
result oI the predicate act; the allegations must, on their Iace, 'establish proximate causation
between |the| asserted injury and the RICO activity to establish standing to bring a civil RICO
claim. Jackson v. Natl Assn for Advancement of Colored People, 12-20399, 2013 WL 5530576
(5th Cir. Oct. 8, 2013). The wide-ranging, paranoid allegations oI the SAC even iI accepted as
true simply Iail to meet at that legally required point that embodies (1) a tortious act, (2)
proximately causing (3) injury to plaintiII.
to allege injury proximately caused by a predicate act.
That is not to say that the SAC is short on generalized and Iormulaic allegations oI a wide
variety oI supposed wrongIul acts by deIendants. The SAC, Ior example, alleges albeit in the
most vague and conclusory way that deIendants engaged in 'mail Iraud and 'wire Iraud. But
the alleged victims oI these acts are unnamed and unidentiIied 'citizens people who are not
Brett Kimberlin. Two amendments into his complaint, Kimberlin still does not allege that he was
a victim oI these alleged Iraudulent acts. They cannot, thereIore, constitute RICO injuries with
respect to PlaintiII.

20

Similarly, the SAC alleges conduct amounting to obstruction oI justice by the deIendants,
claiming that Ialse inIormation provided by deIendants 'caused Iederal, state and local law
enIorcement oIIicials to waste valuable time and resources. ( 180.) Nowhere, however, is it
alleged that this conduct proximately, or otherwise, caused injury to Brett Kimberlin. Kimberlin
has not been deputized to vindicate the wasted time oI law enIorcement in any jurisdiction; nor is
RICO a statutory vehicle by which violent Ielons are invited to cast themselves as private
attorneys general. Similarly, while he alleges again vaguely that the deIendants tried to
'intimidate him with respect to his prospective involvement in unidentiIied legal proceedings,
the SAC does not even attempt to suggest that he was actually intimidated quite clearly he was
not or otherwise personally damaged by these acts. They are not RICO injuries either.
The SAC goes on to allege the Iiling oI a malicious Iederal lawsuit against him. It would
hardly suit Brett Kimberlin, a serial litigation abuser, to claim that engaging in litigation is
tortious, however; thus he characterizes certain settlement discussions by the deIendants as
extortion. These allegations do not even allege any involvement in those discussions by Mr.
Frey or Ms. Nagy, but in any case the SAC neither makes out a cognizable claim Ior extortion or,
more signiIicantly Ior this discussion, any connection between this activity and some injury
suIIered by Brett Kimberlin. These litigation-based allegations do not establish RICO injuries.
Similarly, the SAC alleges that the National Bloggers Coalition ('NBC) is nothing but a
money-laundering scheme a Ilight oI Iancy, by every indication, yet even then not one that is
alleged to have injured plaintiII. Nor does plaintiII allege that Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy are
members oI NBC, made any Ialse allegations regarding NBC, or had anything whatsoever to do
with Iunds sent to NBC. Because he neither claims damage arising Irom the NBC`s activities or

21

connects Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy to the supposed 'money laundering by the NBC, Kimberlin`s
NBC-related allegations cannot provide standing Ior his RICO claims against them either.
Because none oI the alleged predicate acts alleged in the SAC even purports to have
proximately caused injury to plaintiII, he lacks standing to assert a RICO claim against any oI
the deIendants, and certainly against Mr. Frey and Ms. Nagy. For this reason alone, that claim
Iails as a matter oI law.
2. The SAC fails to allege facts concerning its fraud-based claims with
To the extent that the SAC`s RICO cause oI action relies on predicate acts sounding in
Iraud, it is also deIicient as a matter oI law because it Iails to allege Iacts amounting to Iraud with
the level oI particularity required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b). 'When mail and wire Iraud are
asserted as predicate acts in a civil RICO claim, each must be pled with particularity, pursuant to
Rule 9(b). Rule 9(b) requires pleading the time, place, and content oI the Ialse representations,
the person making them, and what that person gained Irom them. Proctor v. Metro. Monev
Store Corp., 645 F. Supp. 2d 464, 473 (D. Md. 2009) (internal quotes and citations omitted).
particularity.
The SAC Iails to meet these requirements concerning the Iraud-based claims against Mr.
Frey or Ms. Nagy. The vague allegations oI Iraud-based predicate acts in the SAC amount to
nothing but conclusory allegations that certain deIendants not Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy
misrepresented the nature oI the NBC to persons unknown and induced such persons to send it
money; or that they generally committed undescribed acts oI wire or mail Iraud aIIecting
unidentiIied victims. Nowhere does the SAC set Iorth what Iraudulent statements were made,
where the statements were made, who made them, or last, but not least how they were
Iraudulent. Because none oI the Iraud-based predicate acts oI the SAC`s RICO claims is alleged

22

with the particularity required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) regarding Mr. Frey and Ms. Nagy, those
claims against these two deIendants should be dismissed.
3.
Another Iatal Ilaw oI the SAC`s civil RICO causes oI action is the absence oI a legally
cognizable allegation oI a pattern oI racketeering activity, which 'requires at least two acts oI
racketeering activity . . . To state a plausible claim oI a pattern oI racketeering activity, the
plaintiII must allege Iacts establishing that the racketeering predicates are related and that they
amount to or pose a threat oI continued |unlawIul| activity. Bailev v. Atl. Auto. Corp., CIV.A.
MJG-13-1243, 2014 WL 204262 at *18 (D. Md. Jan. 17, 2014) (internal quotes and citations
omitted). T hat activity, moreover, must be speciIically allege acts constituting 'Iraudulent
conduct beyond that directed to PlaintiII . . . Id. at *19, citing Menasco, supra, 886 F.2d at 684
(alleged actions directed towards a 'single Iraudulent goal Iail to satisIy the continuity prong oI
RICO's pattern requirement).
Here too the SAC alleges, Ior all its twists and turns, nothing but a scheme by deIendants
to 'spread Ialsehoods about or 'smear one and only one alleged victim: Brett Kimberlin. His
vague, unrelated allegations oI wire Iraud and money laundering unrelated conceptually or
Iactually to the supposed 'Kimberlin smear scheme cannot be graIted onto the latter to
create a sort oI hybrid RICO pattern. Such a 'scheme does not, as a matter oI law, constitute
'a pattern oI racketeering activity, and Ior this reason, too, his RICO claim should be dismissed.
The SAC fails to allege a pattern of racketeering activity
C.
The SAC`s second claim is against Mr. Frey only, and is brought under 42 U.S.C. 1983.
It claims, in essence, that because Mr. Frey allegedly works in law enIorcement Ior the State oI
CaliIornia, anything he says or does in his personal liIe, especially iI it involves commentary or
reporting that happens to involve criminal activity, is done 'under color oI state law. It is well
The SAC fails to state a claim against defendant Frey under 1983

23

established, however, that this is not the law. Moreover, to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983,
Kimberlin had to plead that Mr. Frey`s 'under color oI state law conduct deprived Kimberlin
oI some constitutional right. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). The SAC`s 1983 claim
against Mr. Frey, however, Iails to plead Iacts suIIicient to satisIy either oI these elements, as set
out in detail below.
1. The SAC fails to allege facts sufficient to show action under color of
The 'state action and 'color-oI-state-law requirements oI 1983 exclude claims Ior
'merely private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongIul. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co. v.
Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40, 50 (1999) (quotations and citations omitted). The SAC does not allege
Iacts suIIicient to establish that Mr. Frey`s conduct, even iI it did constitute a deprivation oI
Kimberlin`s constitutional rights (as discussed in the next section, it does not), qualiIies as action
taken under color oI state law, and Iails to state a claim Ior relieI under 1983.
state law by defendant Frey.
Action taken under color oI law is deIined as conduct 'Iairly attributable to the state.
See DeBauche v. Trani, 191 F.3d 499, 506 (4th Cir. 1999). It is never enough merely to recite
that the deIendant is an employee oI the government, or even that his work is in law
enIorcement, to transIorm his private conduct into state action. Even '|a|cts oI police oIIicers in
the ambit oI their personal, private pursuits Iall outside oI 42 U.S.C. 1983. Bailev v. Prince
Georges Cntv., 34 F. Supp. 2d 1025, 1026 -27 (D. Md. 1999) (internal quotes and citations
omitted), citing Revene v. Charles Countv Commissioners, 882 F.2d 870, 872 ( 4th Cir.1989).
Thus '|a|n oIIicer can be on-duty, in uniIorm, in the station house itselI and still not be acting
under color oI state law. Bailev, 34 F. Supp. 2d at 1027. As the police cases where the
'color oI state law is most likely to be inIerred demonstrate, '|m|erely private conduct, no
matter how discriminatory or wrongIul, is not state action. . . . The state action requirement

24

ensures 1983 i s maintained as a shield that protects private citizens Irom the excess oI
government, rather than a sword that they may use to impose liability upon one another.
Morales v. Richardson, 841 F. Supp. 2d 908, 913 (D. Md. 2012) affd, 475 F. App'x 894 (4th Cir.
2012) (internal quotes and citations omitted).
To overcome this burden, then, a plaintiII must allege plausibly that when the deIendant
committed the supposed constitutional deprivation, he was actually and literally 'acting within
the scope oI his employment. Id. As the police 'uniIorm examples demonstrate, it is oI no
relevance whatsoever whether, and to what extent, a deIendant is perceived as acting under
color oI law. Accord, Jan Ort v. Stanewich, 92 F.3d 831, 839 (9th Cir. 1996), citing Martine: v.
Colon, 54 F.3d 980, 986 (1st Cir. 1995) ('Merely because a police oIIicer is recognized as an
individual employed as a police oIIicer does not alone transIorm private acts into acts under
color oI state law). Here, however, plaintiII cannot even Iall back on t he discredited 'police
uniIorm argument that the acts complained oI could be perceived as state action Ior there is no
plausible allegation that Mr. Frey`s conduct is related to his duties as an 'Assistant District
Attorney. Nor does the SAC posit some meaningIul connection between Mr. Frey`s job and his
private actions as a blogger, notwithstanding PlaintiII`s ritual insertion oI reminders that Mr.
Frey is an Assistant District Attorney into sentences having nothing to do with his job. For
example, in 41 oI the SAC, Kimberlin claims as Iollows:
On or about August 17, 2011, Seth Allen sent an email to Andrew Breitbart, and
DeIendants Walker, Frey and Nagy telling them that he was planning to come to
Maryland and 'murder PlaintiII. DeIendant Frey, an Assistant District Attorney,
did not contact PlaintiII or law enIorcement oIIicials to report the murder threat.

Assuming the truth oI this claim, as the Court must, the 'Iact that someone threatened, in an
email to Mr. Frey, to go to Maryland and 'murder plaintiII would not make Mr. Frey`s alleged
inaction conduct taken under color oI state law especially where, as here, the SAC

25

acknowledges that someone else (Ms. Nagy) was, in Iact, already taking such action. PlaintiII,
hardly a shrinking violet, still does not have the audacity to allege that reporting 'threats arising
out oI heated political debates among people separated by hundreds or thousands oI miles are
part oI a Los Angeles County prosecutor`s scope oI employment. Nor would such an allegation
be credible iI it were made.
The SAC attempts to bracket other allegations concerning Mr. Frey`s conduct, in
particular as a blogger or commentator, with reminders oI what he does Ior a living, as iI by
doing so his blogging and other public expression would be somehow transIormed into state
action. This is particularly true oI 110 - 114 oI the SAC, all oI which reIer to blog posts that
mention the Iact that Mr. Frey is a prosecutor, but none oI which has anything to do with his
work as a prosecutor. Only the latter, however, could iI plausible place Mr. Frey`s conduct
within the ambit oI 1983. PlaintiII`s argument is especially misleading given that Mr. Frey
includes a disclaimer on the sidebar indicating that he speaks in his private capacity and not on
behalI oI his oIIice. Indeed, in the bodv oI the one oI the posts cited by plaintiII and incorporated
by reIerence in the SAC, the post dated May 25, 2012, Mr. Frey explicitly states: "As alwavs,
opinions on this site are mv own, and do not necessarilv reflect the views of mv emplover. I speak
in mv personal capacitv and not mv official capacitv, and do not intend to speak on behalf of mv
office in anv wav."
It is not until 117 that Kimberlin truly attempts, however incompetently, to connect Mr.
Frey`s employment with the Los Angeles County District Attorney`s OIIice to the supposed
injury suIIered by him. In that paragraph, Kimberlin makes the Iantastic, albeit dramatic, claim
that 'the State oI CaliIornia . . . has given |Mr. Frey| Iull authority and permission to smear
PlaintiII, Ialsely accuse PlaintiII oI swatting, and deIame PlaintiII. No Iactual details are

26

provided to Iill out the incredible claim that the great 'State oI CaliIornia could and did grant
(not even that it purported to grant, but, per the SAC, that it actually did grant) such authority to
Mr. Frey who, incidentally, is employed by the County oI Los Angeles, not the State oI
CaliIornia. The SAC does not even hint at how Kimberlin came to know how Mr. Frey`s job
duties as a Los Angeles County gang murder prosecutor metamorphosed into a sort oI trans-
jurisdictional Minister Ior Kimberlin AIIairs.
These allegations make interesting reading, as do the similarly preposterous ones in
118-122, which juxtapose Mr. Frey`s blogging and reporting work with his job duties, scaling
new heights oI implausibility. But none oI them suIIices to transmogriIy his private avocation as
a blogger into 'state action under 1983. See Roginskv v. Blake, 131 F. Supp. 2d 715, 719 (D.
Md. 2000), affd, 238 F.3d 414 ( 4th Cir. 2000) (rejecting conclusory allegation oI state action
premised on va gue claim oI conspiracy involving state due to lack oI Iactual detail regarding
conspiracy); In re Jalentine, 357 B.R. 744, 754 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2007) ('to the extent the
complaint may have attempted to allege state action on the part oI the probate court as a
participant in the conspiracy . . . i t has done so in only a conclusory manner and has made no
speciIic Iactual averments in support oI the claim that the alleged conspirators acted under color
oI state law).
4
For these reasons, the SAC simply Iails plausibly to allege state action on the part oI Mr.
Frey, and Ior this reason the 1983 claim against him should be dismissed.

4
Based on these authorities, the Court should also dismiss the SAC`s ninth claim Ior relieI, the
vague throwaway count Ior 'conspiracy to commit state law torts.

27

2. The SAC fails to allege facts sufficient to make out a deprivation of his
The 1983 claim is legally unsustainable Ior an additional reason: The SAC Iails to
plead Iacts establishing the deprivation oI a right protected by the Constitution oI the United
States by anything allegedly done by Mr. Frey. Yes, Kimberlin claims that Mr. Frey 'has used
his position to intimidate, harass, stalk, threaten and harm PlaintiII, directly and through others
and 'target|ed| PlaintiII with smears, Ialse narratives and the unkindest cut oI all 'legal
analysis |sic|. (118. 122.) But there is no constitutional right not to be annoyed, much less
when the annoyance arises out oI reminding the public oI the vicious and unrepented crimes oI
violence Ior which one has been convicted. As this Court explained in Tavlor v. Jickers, CIV.A.
RWT-13-786, 2014 WL 956530 ( D. Md. Mar. 11, 2014) , general bills oI complaint such as
Kimberlin`s SAC, claiming a wide range oI oIIenses and injuries but never actually enunciating
a basis Ior legal relieI, do not deserve limitless judicial patience:
constitutional rights due to conduct by defendant Frey
PlaintiII makes generalized claims oI due process and equal protection violations,
but provides no particulars as to what liberty interest was violated or how he was
treated diIIerently Irom others. Indeed, it would appear that these claims are
bound up with his burglary, robbery, Ialse imprisonment, Ialse arrest, malicious
prosecution, invasion oI privacy, vigilantism, racketeering, emotional and mental
distress, and loss oI consortium claims. For reasons previously articulated by this
Court, the claims shall be dismissed.
Here, too, plaintiII`s generalized bill oI irrelevant and irrational particulars despite the splendor
oI its multiIaceted legal theories and its byzantine claims oI state-sponsored conspiracy and
intrigue should be dismissed because it Iails to state Iacts supporting a violation oI his
constitutional rights, just as it Iails to allege even a legally cognizable injury at all.
D.
The SAC`s claim Ior conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. 1985(2) and (3) appears to have
been included Ior no other reason other than the providing Kimberlin with the imagined cachet
The SAC fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1985

28

oI suing a conservative blogger, deIendant Mandy Nagy (Mr. Frey is no longer a deIendant on
this claim) under the Ku Klux Klan Act. Conspiracy claims under 1985(2) are based on acts
impeding or obstructing justice in a state court in order to deny equal protection oI the laws,
whereas those brought under 1983( 3) arise Irom conduct depriving a plaintiII oI the equal
protection oI the law or oI equal privileges and immunities under the law. 'Under both oI these
theories, however, 'the objective oI the conspiracy must be to deprive the victims oI their equal
protection rights based on their membership in a constitutionally protected class. Rockwell v.
Mavor & Citv Council of Baltimore, CIV.A. RDB-13-3049, 2014 WL 949859 (D. Md. Mar. 11,
2014). But Kimberlin is neither a member oI, nor does he claim in the SAC to be a member oI,
any such class. As this Court explained in Rockwell:
In order to establish a claim under 1985(3), the plaintiII must prove that:

(1) a conspiracy oI two or more persons, (2) who are motivated by a specific
class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus to (3) deprive the plaintiII oI
the equal enjoyment oI rights secured by the law to all, (4) and which results in
injury to the plaintiII as (5) a consequence oI an overt act committed by the
deIendants in connection with the conspiracy. A Societv Without A Name [ v.
Jirginia, 655 F.3d 342, |346 |(4th Cir.2011)|, (citing Simmons v. Poe, 47 F.3d
1370, 1376 (4th Cir.1995)).
Id. at *9-10 (emphasis added). The same requirement must be met under 1985(2), the statute
relied on by Kimberlin. Id. It is not enough, thereIore, to allege that Ms. Nagy had an animus
against Kimberlin Ior him to sustain his claim under 1985(3). He must allege that the animus
results Irom his membership in a specified class of people protected by 1985, i.e., that that
act complained oI was motivated by 'some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously
discriminatory animus. Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 102 (1971).
The SAC does not so much as allege that Ms. Nagy was motivated by such an animus
not even that she targeted Kimberlin because oI his extreme political views, though even that
would be Iail to meet the pleading standard to state a claim under this statute. See, Harrison v.

29

KJAT Food Mgmt., Inc., 766 F .2d 155, 161 ( 4th Cir. 1985) ('we Iind little support Ior the
contention that 1985( 3) includes in its scope oI protection the victims oI purely political
conspiracies.). PlaintiII`s allegations under 1985 are completely meritless as a matter oI law,
and that claim should be dismissed.
E.
PlaintiII`s Iourth claim Ior relieI, Ior deIamation, does not name Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy as
deIendants. He does, however, include them as deIendants in his IiIth claim, Ior Ialse light
invasion oI privacy. This claim is legally deIicient on numerous grounds, including the statute oI
limitations and other deIiciencies arising Irom Maryland`s law on deIamation.
The SAC fails to state a claim for false light invasion of privacy.
To prove a claim Ior Ialse light invasion oI privacy, a plaintiII must show the deIendant
has given publicity to a matter concerning the plaintiII that places the latter beIore the public in a
Ialse light 'iI (a) the Ialse light in which the other person was placed would be highly oIIensive
to a reasonable person, and (b) the actor had knowledge oI or acted in reckless disregard as to the
Ialsity oI the publicized matter and the Ialse light in which the other would be placed. Furman
v. Sheppard, 130 Md. App. 67, 77 ( 2000). 'In Maryland, a claim Ior Ialse light invasion oI
privacy may not stand unless the claim also meets the standards Ior deIamation. Crowlev v. Fox
Broadcasting Co., 851 F.Supp. 700, 704 (1994).
These standards include the statute oI limitations. Smith v. Esquire, Inc., 494 F.Supp.
967, 970 ( D. Md. 1980). For this reason alone, the SAC`s Ialse light claim is barred. Under
Maryland law an action Ior deIamation must be Iiled within one year Irom when it accrues. Md.
Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. 5-105 (West). 'False light claims in Maryland are subject to the
same legal standards as deIamation claims. Piscatelli v. Jan Smith, 35 A.3d 1140, 1146-47 (Md.
2012) 'A cause oI action Ior deIamation generally accrues upon the publication oI the

30

deIamatory material. Interphase Garment Solutions, LLC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 566
F. Supp. 2d 460, 464 (D. Md. 2008).
The initial complaint in this case was Iiled on October 15, 2013, a date that is more than
one year aIter any oI the blog posts, media appearances, or even private emails on which the
SAC`s Ialse light claims are premised. The only posts on Mr. Frey`s blog cited in the SAC and
which are alleged to be deIamatory were published on October 11, 2010 ( 38), May 25, 2012 (
65), and June 25, 2012 ( 94.). PlaintiII also cites a post by Ms. Nagy that he says was published
on October 11, 2010. ( 38). PlaintiII also cites some private emails (which clearly would not
serve as the basis Ior a Ialse light publicity claim) that were allegedly sent in December 2011
and January 2012. ( 44-51). The SAC also cites the aIorementioned appearance by Mr. Frey on
deIendant Glenn Beck`s show that occurred on May 25, 2012. ( 87.) Mr. Frey`s June 25, 2012
post, the last oI all the alleged Ialse light statements by Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy, was also
published more than one year beIore the Iiling oI plaintiII`s initial complaint on October 15,
2013. No other speciIic statement by Mr. Frey or Ms. Nagy is alleged to have been made in
connection with the SAC`s Ialse light claim that Ialls within the one-year bar.
Moreover, the Ialse light claim Iails because the SAC Iails to meet Maryland`s
requirement that a deIamation claim both speciIy the alleged deIamatory statements and allege
Iacts demonstrating that the statement in question placed him in an objectively false (as opposed
to an unIlattering) light. The Iailure oI a complaint 'to speciIy any inaccurate statements is Iatal
to a deIamation claim and, concomitantly, to a Ialse light claim. Brown v. Experian Credit
Reporting, 12-CV-2048-JKB, 2012 WL 6615005 (D. Md. Dec. 17, 2012).
Moreover, a deIamation plaintiII must allege speciIic Iacts showing that the deIendants
acted with actual malice where, as here, the plaintiII is a public Iigure and the topic oI discussion

31

is a public matter. Mavfield v. Natl Assn for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc., 674 F.3d 369, 377-78
(4th Cir. 2012) (dismissing deIamation claim including only conclusory allegation oI malice).
While it ritually intones a conclusory allegation oI actual malice, the SAC contains no factual
allegations on which a Iinding oI actual malice could, as a matter oI law, be based.
Finally, virtually all the statements Kimberlin complains oI are privileged. He does not
allege a single speciIic statement by Ms. Nagy or Mr. Frey purporting to be Iact that is Ialse
not one. To the extent that PlaintiII bases his claims on opinions expressed by Mr. Frey or Ms.
Nagy, those opinions are protected by the 'Iair comment privilege oI Maryland law and by the
First Amendment. In Maryland, 'any member oI the community may, without liability, honestly
express a Iair and reasonable opinion or comment on matters oI legitimate public interest. The
reason given is that such discussion is in the Iurtherance oI an interest oI social importance, and
thereIore it is held entitled to protection even at the expense oI uncompensated harm to the
plaintiII's reputation. Piscatelli, 35 A.3d at 1151-52, citing A.S. Abell Co. v. Kirbv, 176 A.2d
340, 342 (Md. 1961).
Obviously, the issue oI whether critics oI a convicted domestic terrorist are being swatted
because they criticize him is a matter oI legitimate public interest. This conclusion is reinIorced
by the Iact that, as plaintiII concedes, the issue was discussed on national television, and, as he
alleges, was the subject oI letters Irom Congressmen to the Attorney General oI the United
States. And on t hat note, to the extent that Kimberlin complains about Ms. Nagy or Mr. Frey
approaching law enIorcement or members oI Congress with their concerns about him Ior the
purpose oI seeking the initiation oI a criminal prosecution against PlaintiII, that too is absolutely
privileged conduct under Maryland law as well it should be, as a matter oI policy. Statements
made with the direct purpose or eIIect oI producing a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding are

32

absolutely privileged. Adams v. Peck, 288 Md. 1, 4 (1980). The privilege to report misconduct to
law enIorcement or other public oIIicials applies 'even iI |the witness`s| purpose or motive was
malicious, he |or she| knew that the statement was Ialse, or his |or her| conduct was otherwise
unreasonable, to allow the greatest possible Ireedom to witnesses to speak without Iear oI being
sued at some later date. Adams, 288 Md. at 3.
F. The SAC fails to state a claim for interference with prospective economic
Kimberlin`s claim Ior interIerence with prospective economic advantage is also invalid
on its Iace. To maintain such a cl aim, 'an individual must allege more than a disruption oI a
Iuture relationship to a yet to be determined party a reasonable probability` must be shown
that a contract will arise Irom the parties' current dealings.` Baron Fin. Corp. v. Natan:on, 471
F. Supp. 2d 535, 542 (D. Md. 2006). Where a party 'has Iailed to identiIy a speciIic Iuture
relationship . . . that would have occurred absent the deIendant`s alleged conduct, 'there can be
no interIerence with prospective advantage. Mixter v. Farmer, 215 Md. App. 536, 549 (2013).
advantage.
Such is the case here. The SAC`s vague allegations that deIendants 'deprive|d| plaintiII
oI some unspeciIied 'Iuture business ( 266) and that he has 'suIIered actual damage and loss
( 268) do not remotely meet the requirement that one seeking relieI Ior this tort identiIy a
specific Iuture relationship that was ruined, via some plausible chain oI causation, by
deIendant`s acts. This claim, added to the SAC as mere ballast, should be dismissed with
prejudice.
G.
The SAC`s claim Ior intentional inIliction oI emotional distress is also legally deIicient:
The SAC fails to state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress
Under Maryland law, a plaintiII must allege the Iollowing elements to state a
claim Ior intentional inIliction oI emotional distress: (1) the conduct must be
intentional or reckless; (2) the conduct must be extreme and outrageous; (3) there
must be a causal connection between the wrongIul conduct and the emotional

33

distress; and (4) the emotional distress must be severe. In general, Maryland
courts have only imposed liability sparingly and have limited the tort to situations
where the wounds are truly severe and incapable oI healing themselves.
Accordingly, Maryland courts require the element oI severe emotional distress to
be pled with particularity.
Rockwell, supra, id. First, the SAC does not allege the required level oI particularity as to
damage. In Rockwell, this Court dismissed a cl aim similar to Kimberlin`s, explaining: 'In this
case, the sole allegations in the Complaint pertaining to emotional distress are that PlaintiIIs
suIIered pain and suIIering` and mental anguish.` . These allegations Iail to plausibly allege
the extreme and severe emotional distress necessary to satisIy the requirements oI Maryland law,
and as such, the claim must be dismissed. Id. Kimberlin`s make-weight claim Ior emotional
distress should be dismissed Ior the same reason.
Second, the conduct Kimberlin complains oI debate and commentary on a subject oI
public interest is protected by the First Amendment, and hence absolutely exempt Irom attack
as inIliction oI emotional distress. This was clariIied once and Ior all in Snvder v. Phelps, 131
S.Ct. 1207 ( 2011), in which the United States Supreme Court struck down an intentional
inIliction oI emotional distress judgment against deIendants whose conduct waving vile and
abusive placards in a protest outside the Iuneral oI a U.S. soldier killed in action overseas was
Iar more outrageous than anything Mr. Frey and Ms Nagy are alleged to have said about the
plaintiII. Yet as obnoxious as this conduct was, the Court held that a claim Ior intentional
inIliction oI emotional distress, even premised on 'outrageous speech, cannot lie when that
speech was directed at a matter oI public concern, Ior such expression is entitled to 'special
protection under the First Amendment. 'In public debate |we| must tolerate insulting, and even
outrageous, speech in order to provide adequate breathing space to the Ireedoms protected by the
First Amendment. Id. at 1219.

34

Kimberlin`s claimed heartache pales in pathetic comparison to the anguish inIlicted on
the plaintiIIs in Snvder by the phenomenal cruelty exhibited by the deIendants in that case. His
claim Ior intentional inIliction oI emotional distress arising Irom being reminded oI his own acts
oI cruelty acts whose wounds went Iar beyond those inIlicted by even the most callous
expression certainly deserves no better Iate than did theirs.
H.
Leave to amend a complaint should be denied where 'the amendment would be
prejudicial to the opposing party, there has been bad Iaith on the part oI the moving party, or the
amendment would be Iutile. Alston v. United Collections Bureau, Inc., CIV.A. DKC 13-0913,
2014 WL 859013 ( D. Md. Mar. 4, 2014) . The Iacts and law above demonstrate that Brett
Kimberlin`s Second Amended Complaint already his third bite at the apple constitutes such a
case.
The Court should dismiss without leave to amend
Brett Kimberlin`s Second Amended Complaint is a Irivolous and malicious attempt to
grind his critics into dust with the gross crushing weight oI the legal system. An attempt to
retaliate against those who will not let his victims` suIIering be lost in a miasma oI radical chic
posing, Kimberlin has bogged down countless parties and counsel, many oI whom (including the
undersigned) are acting pro bono publico with a numbing sheaI oI Iactual claims that are either
oI no legal signiIicance or which constitute implausible and hyperbolic Iantasy all to support a
series oI legal theories that are patently untenable under well-established law and which, iI
proIIered by an attorney, would readily provide grounds Ior severe sanctions. Notwithstanding
Kimberlin`s display oI simulated victimhood and bathos, the only injustice beIore the Court is
that so many have had to waste so much time, eIIort, and spirit to Iend oII a serial abuser oI the
judicial system whose habit oI submitting material misrepresentations to courts oI law has been
repeatedly augmented even in this action.

35

And the darkest irony oI all is that this plaintiII should impose this pain on these men and
women as retaliation Ior what? For their audacity in recalling the unceasing pain he the same
cold-hearted, unrepentant Brett Kimberlin imposed on a young Iamily with everything to live
Ior, beIore he took it upon himselI to blow up one its members as they sought to enjoy a game oI
Iootball on a brisk autumn morning.
Enough hurting by this plaintiII is enough. The Court should dismiss the SAC without
leave to amend.
CONCLUSION
Based on the Ioregoing, this Court should dismiss the Second Amended Complaint with
prejudice.


By:
RONALD D. COLEMAN (Pro Hac Jice)

New York, NY 10119
(212) 695-8100
rcolemangoetzIitz.com

T. Bruce GodIrey (Bar No. #24596)
Box 444
(410) 561-6061
!"#$%&'()%*+&!"#$%&',+"-

Attornevs for Defendants
Patrick Frev and Mandv Nagv



Ecf 180

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ecf 180

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

You might also like