The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

An Interesting Admission: The Lies of Team Kimberlin and ‘The Gaped Crusader’

Posted on | October 12, 2013 | 124 Comments

“Especially important is the warning to avoid conversations with the demon. . . . He is a liar. The demon is a liar. He will lie to confuse us. But he will also mix lies with the truth to attack us. The attack is psychological, Damien, and powerful. So don’t listen to him. Remember that — do not listen.”
— The Exorcist (1973)

Patterico cites Paul Lemmen’s retraction of false accusations he made last year against Brett Kimberlin’s enemies:

Robert Stacy McCain
Patrick “Patterico” Frey
Ali A. Akbar
Blog Bash
National Bloggers Club
Lee Stranahan

Lemmen says the “friends” who fed him these lies were:

Brooks Bayne
Osborne Ink
Crooks and Liars
Alex Brant-Zawadzki
Bill Schmalfeldt

This admission is interesting, I say, and quite timely considering certain allegations in the Kimberlin v. Walker, et. al, lawsuit. Because I think anyone can see the purpose of these smears. I wonder which of Kimberlin’s unnamed associates might be implicated?

“Facts don’t matter, that’s the perception of the situation, and the world is going to act on that basis.”

Hi, Neal.

 

Category: The Kimberlin Files

Comments

124 Responses to “An Interesting Admission: The Lies of Team Kimberlin and ‘The Gaped Crusader’”

  1. K-Bob
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:10 am

    This is how it starts.

    I’m going to go do inventory.

  2. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 6:29 am

    The problem in this was the claim was made that it was a 501(c)3 organization. If people give, and they are doing so with the assumption that their donation is tax deductible, then there is a serious problem.

  3. ThomasD
    October 14th, 2013 @ 12:19 pm

    In other words, based upon your limited knowledge, you have no credible basis for making your initial assertion.

    Thanks for clarifying that.

    Is spewing false or misleading opinion your only stock in trade?

  4. Wombat_socho
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:18 pm

    Well, there’s deductible and there’s deductible. If you’re not itemizing, it doesn’t matter how much you gave to your church or the NBC, you can’t take it off your taxes.

  5. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:24 pm

    That’s a good point, but I haven’t seen anyone saying the NBC is that kind of organization for quite a while now. I am not privy to the details, but I think they ran into problems getting this certification, and I think my prior comment is probably on the right track as to reason why. But that’s just a hunch.

    I think this issue was twisted into “Ali and Aaron and all of them are scammers”, which was never backed up. And now the loudest voice in that “they are scammers” meme has admitted it and repudiated the smear, saying he was working with Neal and pals.

    It’s important that you make your point clear. You’re saying donations to help bloggers via this organization may not be tax deductible, and donors should know that. That’s totally legit, but without clearly saying that I think some will misunderstand what you’re saying and think you’re making the much more sinister accusation.

  6. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:45 pm

    True. And it could be that none will itemize. That’s not something I would want to risk, however, if I am claiming something that isn’t so.

  7. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:51 pm

    If you are making that kind of statement, then no problem. From what I recall, however, the claim was made for a status that did not exist. One commenter over at Patterico’s place was saying you can say that you’re a 501(c)3 org if you have applied, but if you make that claim and are turned down, then you have a problem.
    One of the problems is that Ali has a past too. Combine that with a claim that may not be true and you have a bomb on your hands of the sort that tends to go off at inconvenient times. Saying something about such a situation is not a smear, but a warning.
    Frankly, I think it’s better for such things to be out front and open and simply not try to mess with the IRS. I have no problem with applying and getting the status, if you can. But, given the deep corruption of the IRS, it’s not something I’d bet the ranch on, and when you deal with the IRS, that’s probably what you are doing.

  8. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 2:57 pm

    I have no reason to like/dislike/trust/mistrust. I base what I said on what I read. In my job I am very language dependent and I will re-read things several times when I see something like what Hoge printed about the relationship. What chaps me is people going off half cocked when they have not absorbed the nuances of what was written. Hoge’s post, however, was not exactly the most subtle thing I’ve read.

  9. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 3:01 pm

    The parable of the debtor is instructive here. The way some have gone off on the matter reflects far more on them than on Lemmen. There is nothing wrong with keeping a bit of distance from a man that confesses and asks forgiveness so as to allow them to prove themselves.
    For those refusing to forgive, the final outcome for the debtor is also instructive. It should strike terror as the prison Christ will send you to allows no time off for good behavior and eternity is a very, very long time.

  10. DaveO
    October 14th, 2013 @ 3:11 pm

    Convolutions worthy of the “Game of Thrones.”

  11. robertstacymccain
    October 14th, 2013 @ 4:12 pm

    What happened, happened, and cannot be undone. But it is for the injured to assess their own damage and, if some are more or less forgiving than others, that’s their business. I hate to see the comments turn into a chaos of recriminations.

  12. robertstacymccain
    October 14th, 2013 @ 4:13 pm

    Yep: “Accuse the Accusers” is one of Neal’s games, and “Conflict Cupid” is another.

  13. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 4:43 pm

    ” One commenter over at Patterico’s place was saying you can say that you’re a 501(c)3 org if you have applied, but if you make that claim and are turned down, then you have a problem.”

    That’s my understanding. If a charity makes a good faith application but the IRS never does anything with the application, as we know now they actually do quite a bit, then this problem comes up.

    Since as I said previously, I just asked the target of the donations, the person who needed the aid, if he was really getting the aid, and he was.

    The rest of your commentary about a past and a ticking timebomb is what Breitbart Unmasked said and what Lemmen was saying in those posts he is now repudiating as a smear. It’s interesting that you’re repeating Paul’s claims while showing a ton of weird hostility to Paul’s critic Dianna. I’m skeptical of your intentions.

    If someone wants to donate to the blogger’s club, they should also verify the recipient of that donation is getting the donation. That goes for donations to the Red Cross or the RNC or whatever, too. It’s just “trust and verify”. When you go beyond that to these smears I tune out.

  14. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 5:19 pm

    My computer is making it a touch difficult to reply.

    “Patterico’s place was saying you can say that you’re a 501(c)3 org if you have applied, but if you make that claim and are turned down, then you have a problem.”

    Indeed the IRS’s failure to be fair about tax exempt status is a huge problem for all Americans, and a major facet in the corruption we face as a country.

    However, you seem to be saying that you see this as a good faith effort to establish a 501c3 that wasn’t approved by the IRS for no apparent reason. I am not privy to that information, but like I said above, I asked Aaron if the charity was really giving him the help promised. I guess that was what I really cared about.

    The rest of your comment could have been lifted directly from one of the bag guy’s blogs. I’ve tuned out from this mess, but the pattern is to claim there’s some vague upcoming ticking time bomb, base it on an accusation that is vague, and then point to that accusation as its own evidence of wrongdoing. That and your weird hostility to Dianna make me kinda skeptical of what you’re doing. I mean, for all I know you’re Paul Lemmen! That’s a joke, but consider that when you bring up these kinds of claims about Kimberlin’s critics. There have been so many of these revelations of dishonesty directed at Kimberlin’s critics that you need to back up your claims. What specifically are you saying is being done with the donations to the National Bloggers Club? What is your evidence for thinking this? It’s great to “trust but verify”, but go ahead and attempt some verification before you buy into what the bad guys are saying.

  15. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 5:39 pm

    It’s been a day since Bob brought thus up, and we haven’t had a response from either Lemmen or RMNixondeceased. Of course both were active participants on the thread so they saw the claim and haven’t denied it.

  16. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 6:29 pm

    I’m not Paul Lemmen.

    When the stuff first blew up last fall, donations were being taken by the NBC and claims were being made it was 501(c)3 organization. A number of people that were not Paul Lemmen called attention to the fact that they could not find anything that verified it was so registered. Given Ali’s past, it did not go over well.

    I understand that Aaron Worthing was helped by NBC, and I have no reason to believe that the money going to anything that it was not supposed to be going to.

    I have no “inside” knowledge of the NBC, so I can only give you my understanding of the matter. Suffice it to say, that if there were claims that NBC was a 501(c)3 org, and it was not, then there could be an explosion in the future because of it.

    There will be no further response on this matter from me. I’m simply sick of the entire matter, and I very seriously doubt that the people that can respond to the question above will do so.

  17. Quartermaster
    October 14th, 2013 @ 6:32 pm

    Worse, however, is a certain person doing Kimberlin’s work for him in your comment section. That’s the shame of it.

  18. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 7:49 pm

    No one actually said you’re Paul Lemmen. Thanks for denying it, I guess. Relax, though. No one cares if the angry and hysterical guy actually admits being the other one.

    “Suffice it to say, that if there were claims that NBC was a 501(c)3 org, and it was not, then there could be an explosion”

    Look, I asked you what your basis is. You said you didn’t have one, but you seem to think this makes the situation worse. You seem to agree with me that the donations did actually go where they were meant to!

    I have not come across anyone who has donated who is angry that they may not get their tax deduction (and I actually know some of the donors). Have you? If I did, I would tell them to email Ali for a refund of the part of their donation that represented the tax break. If he refused, I would criticize him for that. I think this is the most reasonable outcome until you actually show some kind of bad faith (for example that they never attempted to file as a 501c3, or that they blew the donations on a Maserati, or whatever).

    You seem to want to take this a lot farther than that. Go for it, but don’t expect anyone sane to buy the anonymous rants about Kimberlin critics if you don’t bring some hard justification.

  19. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 7:52 pm

    No one actually said you’re Paul Lemmen. Thanks for denying it, I guess. Relax, though. No one cares if the angry and hysterical guy actually admits being the other one.

    “Suffice it to say, that if there were claims that NBC was a 501(c)3 org, and it was not, then there could be an explosion”

    Look, I asked you what your basis is. You said you didn’t have one, but you seem to think this makes the situation worse. You seem to agree with me that the donations did actually go where they were meant to!

    I have not come across anyone who has donated who is angry that they may not get their tax deduction (and I actually know some of the donors). Have you? If I did, I would tell them to email Ali for a refund of the part of their donation that represented the tax break. If he refused, I would criticize him for that. I think this is the most reasonable outcome until you actually show some kind of bad faith (for example that they never attempted to file as a 501c3, or that they blew the donations on a Maserati, or whatever).

    You seem to want to take this a lot farther than that. Go for it, but don’t expect anyone sane to buy the anonymous rants about Kimberlin critics if you don’t bring some hard justification.

  20. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 7:52 pm

    No one actually said you’re Paul Lemmen. Thanks for denying it, I guess. Relax, though. No one cares if the angry and hysterical guy actually admits being the other one.

    “Suffice it to say, that if there were claims that NBC was a 501(c)3 org, and it was not, then there could be an explosion”

    Look, I asked you what your basis is. You said you didn’t have one, but you seem to think this makes the situation worse. You seem to agree with me that the donations did actually go where they were meant to!

    I have not come across anyone who has donated who is angry that they may not get their tax deduction (and I actually know some of the donors). Have you? If I did, I would tell them to email Ali for a refund of the part of their donation that represented the tax break. If he refused, I would criticize him for that. I think this is the most reasonable outcome until you actually show some kind of bad faith (for example that they never attempted to file as a 501c3, or that they blew the donations on a Maserati, or whatever).

    You seem to want to take this a lot farther than that. Go for it, but don’t expect anyone sane to buy the anonymous rants about Kimberlin critics if you don’t bring some hard justification.

  21. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 7:56 pm

    “I have no reason to like/dislike/trust/mistrust.”

    But you just harshly attacked her saying “you are not to be trusted”.

    Maybe in the future if you have no reason to level a harsh personal attack, you shouldn’t. Maybe next time if you disagree with an interpretation you can just say “this is my interpretation, and this is why I think you’re mistaken”.

    People will be less skeptical of your motives if you behave that way.

  22. Dustin
    October 14th, 2013 @ 7:58 pm

    “I have no reason to like/dislike/trust/mistrust.”

    But you just harshly attacked her saying “you are not to be trusted”.

    Maybe in the future if you have no reason to level a harsh personal attack, you shouldn’t. Maybe next time if you disagree with an interpretation you can just say “this is my interpretation, and this is why I think you’re mistaken”.

    People will be less skeptical of your motives if you behave that way.

  23. RE: Paul Lemmen And My Critics | The Camp Of The Saints
    October 14th, 2013 @ 9:58 pm

    […] example from the TOM post entitled, An Interesting Admission: The Lies of Team Kimberlin and ‘The Gaped Crusader’ […]

  24. Bob Belvedere
    October 14th, 2013 @ 10:01 pm

    I answer my critics here.