The Troll Wars, Part V
Here is the latest installment in the saga, courtesy of the ever-combative pro se litigant Brett Kimberlin:
Interestingly enough, the “moderately conservative” Worthing’s counsel in this matter, Harmon, Curran, Spielerg, & Eisenberg LLP, also once represented ACORN.
Because he and his “business partner” were involved with the ACORN “issue” as bloggers, Kimberlin believes that Worthing’s Maryland counsel now has a conflict of interest, or at least are guilty of working on the wrong side of the Troll Wars’ ideological train track:
As noted, my organizations and my business partner Brad Friedman have been very involved with the ACORN issue, putting up rewards when their offices were attacked, urging accountability for James O’Keefe et al for their illegal wiretapping of ACORN employees, having Bertha on Brad Friedman’s radio program, writing dozens of articles about the destruction of ACORN, and working with members of Congress and the California Attorney General’s office to get to the truth about the attacks on ACORN. Mr. Worthing has been part of that attack machine, blogging for right wing ACORN hater Patrick Frey. In fact, it was Brad Friedman’s expose of that cabal with regard to ACORN which caused this attack machine to first target him, and then me.
So, then, why would ACORN’s former attorneys, a progressive Washington DC law firm, now decide to represent “anti-ACORN” Worthing pro bono in this matter against pro-ACORN blogger Brad Friedman’s “business partner?”
Could it be that they see this case, Kimberlin v Socrates, as an important one for the upholding of bloggers’ anonymous (or otherwise) free speech rights?
That is right. She or her firm represented ACORN. Yes, that ACORN. And although Andrew Breitbart is peripherally involved in this case (because he was cc’ed on a few of the relevant emails), and I have occasionally blogged at his Big Government and Big Journalism sites, and even though I don’t think my lawyer likes Mr. Breitbart very much, she agreed to represent me. Which says to you, dear reader, that the issues in this case transcend ordinary politics and reach into deeper principles. And it serves as a reminder that most good Americans have a common belief in certain baseline principles, rights and freedoms, freedom of speech being one of the big ones. Most of the people on the other side aren’t evil. At worst, they’re mistaken.
Worthing goes on to offer Mr. Kimberlin a bit of unsolicited non-legal advice which might well go unheeded:
So, if you want all of this to go away, then stop trying to suppress the truth. Stop trying to silence people who tell the truth. And stop trying to bully lawyers for nothing more than giving people legal advice. Ask for the judge to dismiss the injunction against [Socrates] and go away and leave us alone. I barely gave two craps about you before you tried to risk the lives of my wife and I, and if you leave me alone, I will quickly go back to not caring about you again. I can’t tell you what [Socrates] might do, but can’t you see that your conduct has elevated the man?
A “show cause” hearing for contempt of the permanent injunction brought by Kimberlin against Socrates is scheduled for this coming Monday, January 9, 2012, in Maryland.