Good Morning, DUMBFUCK!

 

I think a DUMBFUCK wouldn’t mind if I rephrase his Tweet a bit more accurately:

This is called “mockery.” R.S. McCain has phrased it “The best way to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt.”  This practice gives me “butthurt.” I wish it was against the law in Maryland. And the coffee I spilled is evidence that I need to buy a new suit.

Like(0)Dislike(0)

Author: Paul Krendler

The Thinking Man’s Zombie

25 thoughts on “Good Morning, DUMBFUCK!”

  1. Consider, for a moment, the level of stupidity required to maintain the following positions:

    1) Writing about Bill Schmalfeldt is stalking, and against the law.
    2) Repeatedly contacting John Hoge, even after multiple C&D demands, is protected speech under the First Amendment.

    Consider it. Marvel at it. Say a little prayer of thanks for DUMBFUCK, the gift that keeps on giving.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. That he does. He's like the wrapper on a little, itty bitty piece of salt water taffy that got wet and now it is STUCK on the DAMN CANDY and you can't peel it off, no matter HOW. HARD. YOU. TRY! FK!

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
    2. How many dozens of blogs and twitter feeds were all HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGE!!! psychosis all the time?

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  2. https://twitter.com/Grouchcast365/status/618044835044433920

    Yes, DUMBFUCK, Acme Law.

    That's where your fat little fingers Google up torts most foul, your lips move as you read the words on the screen, but you Just. Don't. Get. what it actually takes to prove those torts and recover damages.

    Here's a freebie, DUMBFUCK: it takes more than butthurt.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
      1. And he should realize that under the definitions of defamation and invasion of privacy he's using, he's done all that and more to a lot of the "lickspittles".

        Remove the damn book!

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
      2. Public Figure? Me? Hardly. And even if I were found to be a limited public figure, all I have to do is prove malice. How hard will that be?

        I'm even less of a public figure than he is. And it's so obvious from his Axis of Weasels that he was attacking me, (and Kyle and others) purely out of malice.

        But then he's never felt that he had to stick to the standards he demands others abide by.

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
      3. https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=broadway+bill+schmalfeldt
        Looks like a public figure, waddles like a public figure it must be a public figure.

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
      4. He really should investigate the legal definition of "malice", first.

        And before he demands a jury trial, read back over his own products.

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
  3. I may have to alter my claim that "Bill Schmalfeldt contacted my wife, for no reason ...." slightly. In reviewing the details of things this past weekend, I realized that Bill sent that email intended for my wife to a public email address at a business - the equivalent of help@amazon.com or such, only on a smaller scale. So while his intent was to contact her (the very first thing in the email was "Dear Mrs. Hinckley"), he couldn't even do that right. And as to his claim that my wife forwarded that email to me, I'd list the names of the half dozen or so people who saw that email, as it is their responsibilities to check that email inbox for any mail meant for them, but I don't want to expose these people to wild harassment claims from Bill. And he sent that attempt at intimidation to a business (a legally registered corporation) - can you say tortuous interference in a business? Across state lines, no less? He didn't just step in it with that move, he threw his fat ass down into the puddle and rolled around in it.
    BTW, I have no legal connection to that business - it is entirely owned and operated by women, and employs only women. The courts LOVE to support such organizations.

    Like(0)Dislike(0)
    1. To be fair, agiledog, your statement that Bill "contacted your wife for no apparent reason" is still correct. It would have had to have been someone else sending that email for your statement to be false. And we all know that he has bragged about it, so...

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
    2. So you're saying that the "private" photo of his wife on her (nearly) death bed was sent so that many people who have no reason to want (never mind need) to see it did?

      He really, really didn't think that one through, even more than his usual not thinking things through, didn't he. 😀

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
      1. Correct, LG. He sent that email to many people, regardless if he meant to or not. And all of them were disgusted that a man would send such a picture of his wife to ANYBODY, let alone strangers.

        And there is no language in the email prohibiting the distribution of the photo.....

        Like(0)Dislike(0)
    3. So he contacted your wife's employer?

      Gosh, it's a good thing he swore to leave wives out of it and swore he never contacted employers to get people fired!

      He's a lunatic. Him and reality aren't even in the same time zone.

      Like(0)Dislike(0)
  4. If you have a bittorret client here is some interesting reading.

    Schmalfeldt v. Grady
    https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mdd.315389/gov.uscourts.mdd.315389_archive.torrent

    Like(0)Dislike(0)

Comments are closed.