Crime & Federalism

Since we live in an era of identity politics where all opinions are prefaced with, "As a strong independent woman, I believe," I'll share my views on the Baltimore Riots as a white male libertarian.

1. I've worked on actual police misconduct litigation cases for years and am one of few people who understand Section 1983 litigation. If you don't know what qualified immunity is and don't get the "Scalia's new police professionalism" inside joke, you aren't allowed to have an opinion on my civil rights bona fides. (I'm talking to you, hashtag activists.)

2. I've known and spoken out about the problem of police misconduct for almost 20 years. The problem has only gotten worse and will continue to get worse until liberals question some of their deeply-held assumptions about how the world does and should work.

3. Police unions make it nearly impossible for a police force to fire a corrupt or abusive officer. The same hashtag activists posting on Twitter are pro-union. The cognitive dissonance astounds.

Also, under most police union contracts, officers themselves are not held liable for their misconduct. If an officer beats you with a baton, you sue and win, it's the city who pays up.

4. Affirmative action, another darling of liberals, allows abusive and unqualified officers to be hired for the force, and because of unions, it's nearly impossible to fire them.

5. Black officers are just as likely to beat a black man as a white officer is. Power is color blind, and weird things happen to people when they put on that blue uniform, pin on a shiny badge, and strap themselves with a Glock.

6. Congress could cut police misconduct in half by eliminating the judge-made doctrine of qualified immunity.

7. In fact, qualified immunity is the most important issue in civil rights cases. Anyone who is not talking about qualified immunity is a talking head who lacks serious understanding of police misconduct.

8. Qualified immunity provides  police who break the law get a free pass. This NY civil rights lawyer explain the doctrine well:

I often write about qualified immunity. This a legal doctrine that allows public defendants in civil rights cases to win the case if their objectionable actions did not violate clearly established law even if, in hindsight, the court finds that their actions were in fact illegal.

In other words, ignorance of the law is an excuse if you're a cop. Conduct covered by qualified immunity has included using a tazer to torture a man, sodomizing a man with a police baton, and sexually assaulting a woman. 

How can police get a pass for obviously immoral conduct? Simple. Power protects power. Judges view themselves as being on the same team as police and prosecutors. 

9. If you want to reduce police abuses, petition Congress to abolish qualified immunity. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for citizens, and it should be no excuse for those who have sworn to uphold the law.

10. Police misconduct is such a problem that when I and my white civil rights lawyer friend were confronted by police, we felt our safety was in legitimate danger.

Simply put, blacks are abused by police because blacks have more encounters with police. Blacks should be taught to avoid police at all costs and to be super police and compliant. Is that racist? Whatever. I care about saving lives rather than getting a pat on my head for being a good little white person.

You can cry about racism and hashtags and say black lives matter. Unless and until police unions are reformed and qualified immunity is abolished, nothing will change.

But the truth is, we don't really care.

These riots are just another show to watch. If we're lucky, maybe we'll status signal and "hash tag activate" our ways to being seen as an "acceptable white."

Maybe we'll get a column in Slate or Salon, where we can continue to status signal how good-and-decent we are to upper-class liberal white people.

Or maybe we will get famous. The 24 hour news cycle always needs new talking heads. Ignorance of the law is no barrier to entry! (And besides, qualified immunity is a boring legal doctrine that puts people to sleep.)

But we don't really care.

If we did care, we'd stop posting to hashtags and start demanding Congress and the President hold police officers accountable for violating the law.

But we won't.

I'll post this article online. Some people will call me a racist, others will call me anti-cop, and nothing will change. Ever.

As a candidate for President of the United States, Barack Obama made a promise to the Armenian people. This was not a sort-of-promise. There was no ambiguity.

Here is what Candidate Obama promised:

Section 354.4 of the California Code of Civil Procedure extends the statute of limitations until 2010 for claims arisingout of life insurance policies issued to “Armenian Genocide victim[s].” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 354.4(c) (West 2006).

The primary issue in this appeal is whether § 354.4 interferes with the national government’s conduct of foreign relations.

We conclude that it does, and accordingly, we hold that the California statute is preempted. The district court’s order denying the Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss is reversed.

Censorship is a growing problem, and in fact the biggest threat to free speech in the U.S. is not from the government, it's from private actors.

Imagine you learn that someone has committed a crime or engaged in other harmful conduct. You  exercise your free speech rights to write about this person. 

Or imagine you receive shoddy service at a restaurant or are scammed by a business. You speak out.

Now imagine you receive a very scary letter from a lawyer. This lawyer threatens to sue you. Take down your article, apologize immediately, or prepare to go deep into debt.

I was the victim of a bully who tried to censor me.

After a lawyer gave his client poor representation, I spoke out. Along with the Washington Post, American Bar Association, and dozens of other lawyers, I was named as a defendant in a case later styled Rakofsky v. the Internet.

This case could have bankrupted me, and I incurred substantial legal fees. As I was sued in New York State, I had no remedies. New York does not have an anti-SLAPP law worth a damn.

Even though the case against me was frivolous, I had to pay my lawyer each month. My legal bills would have been staggering had a local New York personal injury lawyer, Eric Turkewitz, not provided representation as New York local counsel to me and my co-defendants.

Could you afford substantial legal bills, or would you be required to fold?

If I had not been a lawyer confident in the outcome who could also afford to pay legal fees, I'd have been silenced.

Another censorious bully tried silencing me. California's anti-SLAPP law saved me.

When I learned a wealthy former NFL player had played a role in covering up sexual misconduct in the Vikings locker room, I called him out. He was outraged and threatened to sue me.

As he was a rich man, I knew the lawsuit threat was not empty. He had the means and motivation to bully me into silence.

California's anti-SLAPP law saved me from a frivolous lawsuit.

I invited him to file his lawsuit. As a California resident, I have no fear of frivolous defamation lawsuits.

California has an anti-SLAPP law, which means anyone who files a frivolous lawsuit against me will be forced to pay my legal fees.

Nevada's anti-SLAPP law is under attack.

If Nevada successfully repeals its anti-SLAPP legislation, other states will follow suit. Rich bullies will have a playbook to censor critics.

If you live in Nevada, let your voice be heard. You can leave a comment to the legislators here.

You can also find out more information at Marc Randazza's law blog. Mr. Randazza was my free speech lawyer in both of the cases I mentioned above, and he himself helped draft Nevada's anti-SLAPP legislation.

Free speech ain't free. Let your voice be heard today or be silenced tomorrow!

Go here to speak out.

How you can help stop SB444.

1. Go to this page.

2. Enter "SB444" without any spaces.

3. Click the "Get Bill Information" button.

4. Type in your comments.

5. Enter your name and address, which is kept confidential. 

6. Click submit.

What if you don't want to post a comment using your real address?

No problem.

You can signal boost this article or any other articles on Twitter under the #SB444 or #StopSB444 hash tags.

Click here to go to Twitter to signal boost articles opposing censorship.

In yesterday's comprehensive #GamerGate article I observed, "Any idiot or troll could say, 'I hate all women and want to kill them! #GamerGate.'"

Today that happened. A troll made a nasty remark to Anita Sarkeesian in the #GamerGate hashtag. Ms. Sarkeesian was more than happy to Tweet this nastiness out to her gullible followers.

Hundreds of gullible morons retweeted it and no doubt felt much sympathy for Ms. Sarkeesian, who now earns several-hundred-thousand-of-dollars a year for making a YouTube video every month or two.

Thanks for showing how trolls exploit #GamerGate. This account has NEVER used the tag before: https://t.co/aVwjcW96qS pic.twitter.com/6PxQH9AEqC

— Adrian Chmielarz (@adrianchm) April 16, 2015

There were two problems with the #GamerGate Tweet.

1.) The user had never used the #GamerGate hashtag before posting a mean Tweet. (This is easily verifiable for yourself.)

2.) People who regularly use the #GamerGate hashtag (the pro-#GamerGate people) quickly reported the account to Twitter in an effort to get the amount suspended or banned.

As you can see, rumors of #GamerGate being a misogynistic hate campaign have been greatly exaggerated. 

Does the Internet have a problem with trolls and vile people?

Of course. In fact, I have been vicitimzed by trolls. Zoe Quinn doxed me, posting my home address as well as pictures of my home to her 30,000 Twitter followers. In addition, Ms. Quinn was a member of Hell Dump, a doxing and Swatting board at Something Awful.

Her friend Margaret Pless encouraged people to call the Los Angeles Police Department on me simply because they did not like what I wrote on the Internet. 

Yet the problem with troll has more to do with the Internet itself and it's simply unfair and contra to the evidence to label #GamerGate a hate campaign.

In fact, it's simply illogical to label #GamerGate a harassment campaign when I myself have been doxed and when people have reported me to the LAPD and California State Bar for engaging in constitutionally protected speech.

However, there's simply too much money in #GamerGate for the controversy to end anytime soon.

Trolls will troll for the lulz, and Ms. Sarkeesian will keep collecting fat paychecks.

#GamerGate is a consumer revolt concerned with ethics in journalism. (The # is in front of GamerGate as #GamerGate is a hashtag people post to on Twitter.) As you might imagine, journalists do not enjoy being accused of corruption, and instead have claimed #GamerGate is a controversy involving the harassment of women.

Having no leader, #GamerGate does not have a singular definition. There are many in #GamerGate who will say this article is 100% wrong and that I clearly do not understand #GamerGate at all!

 There is no corporate office, 501(c)(3) paperwork, corporate charter, or registered agent for service of process. #GamerGate is instead a grassroots movement and is as democratic as you can imagine, which is no surprise as most people associated with #GamerGate are left-leaning.

Ultimately #GamerGate is a fight against corruption in journalism and has its origin in a dramatic break-up between an e-celeb (that's defined, below) and her boyfriend.

This break-up spread across the Internet Streisand Effect style after major websites like Reddit and 4Chan banned all discussion of it and after a court order was obtained barring a rape victim from discussing the abuse he suffered at the hands of a manipulative woman.

To understand #GamerGate, begin at the beginning. An e-celeb who was "famous for being famous" cheated on and  raped her boyfriend and then sought a court order to cover it up.

Zoe Quinn is an e-celeb.  E-celebs are the Internet's version of reality TV stars, that is, e-celebs want to be famous for any reason at all, and that includes famous for being famous.

Ms. Quinn spent years crafting a public persona, networking online, meeting with journalists, and otherwise trying to raise her public profile. 

In seeking out fame, Ms. Quinn would often write odd and inflammatory articles.

Ms. Quinn wrote about her bizarre views of rape and sexual assault. For example she claimed  having sex with your partner after you've had unprotected sex with another person is rape. Cheating, in other words, was rape.

Unbeknownst to the general public she was lecturing about morality, Ms. Quinn enjoyed having unprotected sex behind the back of her boyfriend.

Calling cheating rape is a bit weird, to put it mildly, but as Quinn called cheating rape it's fair to hold her to her words. Zoe Quinn is a rapist.

It was thus to her ex-boyfriend's ire when he found out Ms. Quinn had slept with several games journalists in order to get coverage for a video game she had "developed." (There's a program that lets you "develop" video games sort of how we used to "build" websites in GeoCities.)

After cheating on her boyfriend (Eron Gjoni) with five guys, Ms. Quinn learned a harsh lesson in fame. Once you've interjected yourself into the spot light, people will look at everything.

That's a lesson in fame for all to learn. You do not have the power to decide what others choose to see once you've begged for their attention. Often people will notice aspects of your life you'd wish they hadn't seen.

Such is the price of fame.

Eron Gjoni exposes Quinn/is "dramatic." 

Mr. Gjoni took to the Internet to talk about how Quinn not only cheated on him, but how she potentially spread STDs. Indeed, that was his right.

It is my patriarchal views of rigid gender construction that has me calling a young man who was cheated on and emotionally abused a "drama queen." I'd never write about a woman cheating on me in such detail.

Perhap Mr. Gjoni he should have kept this relationship stuff to himself, but he had every right to share Quinn's betrayal to the broader world.

Indeed, if Mr. Gjoni were a person calling others rapists for cheating, the Internet would have rightfully criticized him after being exposed as a hypocrite.

Mr. Gjoni had every right under the law and under the code of moral conduct to reveal Ms. Quinn's betrayal of him.

Ms. Gjoni posted Facebook chats, emails, and other chat logs substantiating his claims.

Zoe Quinn, by her own words and own definition, raped Eron Gjoni.

The Internet goes crazy.

Gamers had long suspected "games journalists" played favorites with game developers and e-celebs. Now they had proof. A wannabe game developer was actually sleeping with games journalists, favorable articles were being written, and no one was disclosing these personal relationships.

They thus went to Reddit, 4Chan, and other websites to talk about how Ms. Quinn slept with several games journalists, allegedly for favorable coverage.

Moreover, there was a bit of, "Gotcha!" involved. 

Ms. Quinn is a famous social justice warrior who claimed cheating was rape. There was now proof that Ms. Quinn was a hypocrite.

The Internet loves exposing hypocrites, whether those hypocrites are fundamentalist Christians getting massages from gay men or whether it's SJWs being caught in the act of rape.

The Internet gets "censored."

Reddit, 4Chan, and other sites deleted and prohibited any commentary about Ms. Quinn's affair with a games journalist. This was unprecedented. Never had a topic been so off-limits.

Moreover, the Internet thrives on drama involving the sexual lives of e-celebs. Gawker, Reddit, and other sites would publish leaked nudes of celebs and those sites allowed all sorts of vile remarks. Indeed, Gawker published the Hulk Hogan sex tape, which it had obtained illegally!

Yet some reason all discussion of Quinn was "censored." Some thought there was a conspiracy behind the scenes. Were games journalists working behind the scenes to cover-up their unethical behavior?

Indeed, that was revealed to be true, once a mailing list of journalists surfaced.

At GamesJournoPro, an online email discussion board, journalists would actively conspire to control the #GamerGate narrative.

This made what should have been a brief affair into an all-out war. Telling people they can't talk about something makes them want to talk about it more.

Ms. Quinn actually censors the Internet.

While Reddit, 4Chan, and any other privately-owned company may "censor" discussion, we do not put censorship in quotes when the government does it, because there is something known as the First Amendment.

Ms. Quinn obtained a restraining order that violated the First Amendment. The restraining order was prior restraint on speech. Under the restraining order, Mr. Gjoni was not allowed to talk about Zoe Quinn at all. He was completely barred from sharing the emotional abuse and rape he suffered.

Moreover, Ms. Quinn committed perjury to obtain the unconstitutional restraining order.

How I got involved in #GamerGate.

What is a 37-year-old lawyer who doesn't even play video games doing in #GamerGate? 

As old school readers of Crime & Federalism know, I am pro-free speech and believe abuse and rape accusations (such as the Rolling Stone rape hoax) against men are too easily believed.

I was sued for defamation after exposing misconduct by a lawyer and was once threatened by a federal prosecutor for exposing prosecutorial misconduct. I have often paid for court records out of my own pocket to act as a watch dog of free speech abuses.

When I found out an unconstitutional restraining order had been issued against Zoe Quinn's ex-boyfriend, I ordered the court records.

The restraining order was indeed unconstitutional. For you First Amendment wonks, it was a textbook Kimberlin v. Walker issue and I discussed it here.

#GamerGate is a battle of narratives.

As we all know, criticizing a woman for any reason (even when she's a rapist by her own definition) equals misogyny.

Hence the media has run with stories claiming that #GamerGate is about the harassment of women.

Claiming #GamerGate is a misogynistic campaign is an odd one.

Approximately 150,000 people are pro-#GamerGate. If #GamerGate really were about the harassment of women, why aren't there more crimes being committed? 

Consider FBI statistics or other crime data. If you lived in a city of 150,000 people, you'd expect some rapes, murders, thefts, and other smaller crimes.

Why aren't people in #GamerGate being escorted out in hand cuffs?

Could it be  #GamerGate is largely comprised of left-leaning people who are a bit nerdy and pose no threat to anyone?

What does pro-#GamerGate and anti-#GamerGate mean?

#GamerGate is a scandal, much like Watergate was a scandal. Some would say it thus makes no sense to call someone pro-#GamerGate. After all, everyone opposes corruption and cover-ups.

While that makes sense in theory, in reality the terms pro- and anti- are being used. Generally speaking a pro-#GamerGate person believes journalism, especially games journalism, is unethical and needs reformed.

Those who ascribe to anti-#GamerGate views believe journalism is just fine and that gamers are just overgrown white man children who hate women.

#NotYourShield proves #GamerGate is not a bunch of angry white men.

Frustrated with having privileged white people purport to speak out for them, many women, minorities, and trans* persons began posting under the #GamerGate-related hashtag #NotYourShield.

The media has ignored the existence of #NotYourShield, proving journalism is more about narratives than in telling the truth.

After all, if #GamerGate is a harassment campaign, it has many women and minority members. Those women and minorities should be called out!

Rather than address women and minority members of #GamerGate, the media has ignored them.

Acting as if women and minorities do not even exist and failing to debate them is racism and misogyny on a level far greater than anything #GamerGate is accused of. 

Is anyone in #GamerGate actually harassing women?

#GamerGate has been ongoing for around 7 months. Given that nearly 150,000 people have posted to the hashtag, it'd be something else to claim no one "from" #GamerGate has harassed women.

There's a problem with the question, however. How do you know if someone is "from #GamerGate." Again, any idiot can post to a hashtag. Who the heck is even "from #GamerGate"?

Yet none of the so-called central figures have harassed any women.

Who are the central figures of #GamerGate?

If #GamerGate is about harassment of women, have the "leaders" of #GamerGate harassed any women?

Incidentally, calling someone a "leader" or "central figure" of #GamerGate is inaccurate, as #GamerGate is a hashtag, not a 501(c)(3) with a registered agent of service of process.

Most pro-#GamerGate people remain anonymous, as they fear losing their jobs. Anti-#GamerGate is fond of calling employers, making false accusations against pro-#GamerGate members. Indeed, a "journalist" named Ben Kuchera even tried getting a young man fired from his part-time job at a sporting goods store.

Lacking people who write online under their real names, anti-#GamerGate has identified some "central figures," "poster boys," and "leaders."

According to the anti-#GamerGate, side, the central figures of #GamerGate are:

• Christina Hoff Sommers, a feminist who has written books about feminism.
• Milo Yiannopoulos, a British journalist for Brietbart.
• Adam Baldwin, an actor.
• Mike Cernovich (that's me), a lawyer, author, and podcaster.

Adding me to that list is amusing, as I don't even post to the #GamerGate hashtag often.

Since I'm a controversial person at times, the anti-#GamerGate side feels its helpful to list me as some sort of leader. This allows them to use guilt-by-association tactics, a favorite of social justice warriors.

While I am not a leader of #GamerGate, I'm  as much of a "bad person" as you'll find in #GamerGate.

Could you even imagine a kind, thoughtful, intelligent scholar like Ms. Sommers harassing women?

How could a high-profile celebrity like Adam Baldwin get away with harassing women? TMZ would be all over him.

Milo is a professional journalist. If he were harassing women then a war pack would be declared against him.

While I  post  controversial articles and even Tweets at times, so what?

Have I harassed any women or broken any laws or even made veiled threats against a person's safety or well-being? No.

I'm a licensed attorney in California, for crying out loud. While I certainly speak my mind, I stay well within the confines of the law.

The truth is no one from #GamerGate is harassing women.

Anti-#GamerGate claims I have harassed women.

The claim has been made I harass women.

After Zoe Quinn doxed me to her 30,000 Twitter followers, I hired a private investigator to conduct a risk assessment. I was concerned with being Swatted, as Quinn belonged to a forum on Something Awful called Hell Dump. 

Hell Dump was a forum devoted to harassing, doxing, and Swatting people. Quinn was a proud member, and I was concerned for my safety after she posted pictures of my home  as well as my home address to her 30,000 followers and fellow Hell Dump members.

Yes, I hired a PI to look into Quinn and I will do it again if people post my personal information online.

Again, I'm as "bad" as it gets as far as #GamerGate goes. If the anti-#GamerGate side can't point to how I've harassed women, you can see they have no evidence #GamerGate is a harassment campaign against women.

Harassment hoaxes.

Sensing fame and realizing fame equals money, others have attached themselves to #GamerGate and some figures have created hoaxes, much like the Rolling Stone rape hoax.

For example, e-celeb Brianna Wu has been caught posting threats against herself on 8Chan, a 4Chan successor. 

Zoe Quinn had previously been caught posting threats against herself on 4Chan. A former Hell Dump member (Hell Dump was a doxing and Swatting board at Something Awful), Ms. Quinn knows how to fake threats and harassment.

Randi Harper, an admitted drug user who has also been in jail, falsely claimed I made rape threats against her.

After posting these "threats," the e-celebs link to their Patreon accounts. (Patreon allows users to donate money to people who do nothing other than post on Twitter all day.)

There is a lot of money in harassment hoaxes, with Wu at one point earning $13,000 a month for doing...nothing.

How can you know #GamerGate isn't harassing women?

Harassment these days means disagreement. For example, the police were called on me because I posted publicly-available court records showing Zoe Quinn committed perjury in obtaining an unconstitutional restraining order.

Yet it's hard to say no one "from #GamerGate" harasses people, as it's a hashtag. Any idiot or troll could say, "I hate all women and want to kill them! #GamerGate."

Here's an experiment: Go to Twitter. Post a threat against women in the #GamerGate hashtag. Watch how quickly you'll be swarmed by pro-#GamerGate forces.

You'll see quickly that #GamerGate opposes actual threats against women. There is even an actual #GamerGate anti-harassment patrol led by a courageous woman named Margaret Gel.

What is #GamerGate?

#GamerGate is a fight against unethical journalism.

As there are no central figures or leaders of #GamerGate, anyone can say what they think #GamerGate is about.

To me, #GamerGate means exposing corruption in journalism and ending censorship. Just today #GamerGate exposed a journalist who admitted to lying about people.

Others disagree, seeing dollar signs. They will continue to claim #GamerGate is a harassment campaign. 

As there's a lot of money in pretending to be a victim these days, do not expect #GamerGate to cool down anytime soon.

#GamerGate is here to stay.

GamerGate will be around for years. There's too much money to be made in claiming to be a victim. The Rolling Stone rape hoax, which elevated many to stardom and fame, proves it's worth pretending to be a victim.

Chances are you won't get caught. When you get caught, no big deal. (The author of the Rolling Stone rape hoax never lost her job. Moreover, none of the hundreds of journalists who linked to and promoted the Rolling Stone rape hoax article faced any repercussion.)

There is a lot of money accusing men of being misogynists and there are a lot of corrupt journalists.

Whatever your opinion of #GamerGate, one fact is clear: #GamerGate isn't going anywhere, and #GamerGate is watching.

Kate Bevan is a writer for the Guardian (UPDATE: She hasn't written for the Guardian in a long time) who admits to committing journalistic fraud. In a move that left some shaking their head, Ms. Bevan gave readers a guide to committing journalistic fraud and libel in the publications she writes for.

Step 1. When writing about someone, put in something true. Then "Throw in a false anecdote or two. Then, when you've got things suitably warmed up, the fun can begin."

Step 2. "And do it in a space they don't control. It's no good doing it on their Facebook page or blog, where they can delete comments." 

Step 3. Write an article where reader comments are not allowed.

That's it. There is your three-step guide to lying about people.

Think this is a joke? See the screen caps below. Ms. Bevan's comments speak for themselves.

Kate Bevan a journalist, who comments as "blossiekins," advocates libel.

We need serious reform in journalism.

When a journalist like Kate Bevan feels comfortable admitting to lying about people, we know journalism is broken.

Let's hope the Guardian and other publications do not allow Ms. Bevan to libel people and commit journalistic fraud in their publications!

Sources:

Kate Bevan endorses libel (Archive).

Kate Bevan admits to commenting under the username/handle "blossiekins" (Archive).

Alisha Grauso, someone I had never heard of, recently pondered, "Why do people retweet Mike Cernovich? He's a vile person."

So far as I can tell, social justice warriors (SJWs) don't do much other than mine Twitter for offensive conduct, form online hate mobs, and try getting people fired.

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe those brave warriors for justice are writing inspirational articles and encouraging and helping others rather than trying to tear down people like me. (By the way, haven't you gotten bored yet? You're not going to beat me. Ever.)

Do you SJWs have an actual message? 

I have a question for Ms. Grauso and other social justice warriors: Where is your positive message? Your inspirational writing? 

I don't believe in false modesty. I've published over 600 articles at Danger & Play and given away nearly 100 podcasts. You can read iTunes reviews to hear what others have to say.

I will post three articles up against any SJW's three articles.

• My Two Year Fight With Red Skin Syndrome.
• How to Survive Hell
• Let go of the Past.

We can hold a contest. If you can show me an SJW who has written three articles better than this, then I'll donate $1,000 to a suitable charity. I prefer Operation Smile, but if you have another preference, let me know.

Some of you may say this is a publicity stunt, but we are past that point, aren't we?

You all know who I am.

You cluck about "Cernovich," "juicebro," "juice lawyer," and whatever nickname you've given me recently.

Besides, my audience is larger than yours. My websites get more readers than John Scalzi's, and Scalzi is viewed as an SJW with a large audience. (I'll gladly post my stats publicly next to Mr. Scalzi's to prove I'm right.)

Anyhow, please point me to an SJW who has an actually message.

I'd love to read his or her writing. Moreover, I'd be happy to link them.

I don't believe the vast majority of people are actually "vile" or "evil." Most of us are a mixed bag.

Hence I would have no issue with sharing links to articles written by my "enemies."

Please share some links with me, Ms. Grauso.

Even better, find an SJW who does better work than I do, so we can all learn, grow, and donate to charity together!

Although the media has run with the narrative that "#GamerGate is about the harassment of women," one look at who is pro- and anti-GamerGate reveals the truth.

Here are some truly vile people. Each of these claims are sourced. Click on the little blue text to learn more. (They are blue when I type the post but red on the screen. Whatever the case, "Trust but verify." All of these claims are supported by the evidence.)

Jian Ghomeshi - Jian Ghomeshi is a former CBC radio host, Women's Study major, and rapist. Although Ghomeshi hasn't been convicted of rape, he has said before women do not lie about rape. It seems fitting to hold Mr. Ghomeshi to his words. Moreover, Ghomeshi's case isn't he-said-she-said. It's more like he-said-8-shes-said, as 8 different women have come forward. (UPDATE: 15 women have come forward with accusations of rape and assault against anti-#GamerGate hero Ghomeshi.)

Arthur Chu - Arthur Chu either covered up a rape or refused to report one. In his words: "I have known nerdy male stalkers, and, yes, nerdy male rapists. I’ve known situations where I knew something was going on but didn’t say anything—because I didn’t want to stick my neck out, because some vile part of me thought that this kind of thing was normal." 

Geordie Tait - Geordie Tait wished the Holocaust on anyone who has ever posted in a hashtag on Twitter. You can find his full rant on his Facebook page.

Chris Kluwe - Chris Kluwe said he knew of "underage girls"  in a "compromising situation" with football players. He has refused to help these underage girls find justice.

Randi Harper - Randi Harper falsely accused me of making a rape threat. False accusations are never OK, right? Ms. Harper also has a criminal record, having been in jail multiple times. Harper has also admitted to having a drug problem and once had a Twitter meltdown after taking too many benzos. (Harper appears to have deleted those incriminating Tweets.)

Zoe Quinn - Zoe Quinn committed perjury in her quest to obtain an unconstitutional restraining order. Quinn also attempted to get Mike Cernovich Swatted. Quinn also emotionally abused her boyfriend, although that doesn't count because men cannot ever be the victim of domestic violence or emotional abuse.

Margaret Pless - Margaret Pless is an unpaid Daily Kos intern. She posted my name, address, and full "dox" on the Internet. She also filed and incited others to file false police reports with the LAPD.

Hugo Schwyzer - Hugo Schwyzer attempted to murder his ex-girlfriend. Trivia: Anita Sarkeesian built Hugo's webpage.

Anil Dash - Anil Dash advocates doxing, that is, he supports posting the names and addresses of his ideological opponents online in an effort to intimidate and harass them. Anil Dash also sent an Internet hate mob, who ultimately made rape and death threats, to attack a girl who made a bad joke on Twitter.

If #GamerGate is about the harassment of women, why are the bad guys opposing #GamerGate? Could they be projecting their own desires onto #GamerGate?

I'm a controversial fellow who posts mean Tweets online. I get a lot of heat, and much of it is deserved. In fact, if you said you viewed me as the biggest asshole online, I'd be OK with that.

Unfortunately people have gone beyond calling me out and instead have been falsely accusing me of making rape threats online.

Background: Why was I falsely accused of making a rape threat?

A few months ago I attracted a large hate mob for my support of the First Amendment. I was able to obtain court records showing a woman abused the court system (even lying under oath) in order to obtain an unconstitutional restraining order.

As regular readers of Crime & Federalism know, I have often ordered court records out of my pocket to expose abuse of legal processes. I even had to pay a considerable legal bill after being sued for defamation by Joseph Rakofsky. (I and my co-defendants won that case.)

A group of oddballs who call themselves social justice warriors (SJWs) were not used to such scrunity. They began an online assault. I was doxed (my home address as well as pictures of my home were posted online), the police were called on me, and multiple frivolous reports to the State Bar were made.

That wasn't enough. I also had to be falsely accused of a rape.

The false rape accusation.

One SJW named Randi Harper became obsessed with me. She called me "creepy" for writing posts about my enjoyment of sex.

If I understand one subject well, it's women. I also understand projection. When people cast aspersions over you for your enjoyment of an activity, chances are the person enjoys the same activity.

I went through Randi Harper's archived blog (the Internet never forgets) and immediately had my suspicions confirmed.

Ms. Harper was active in the BDSM scene and was also a sex worker. 

Ms. Harper was a sub. She enjoyed being tied up. I even found a picture of her wearing a dog collar.

That's totally cool, by the way. Everyone has his or her kink, and as long as your kink involves consenting adults, it's none of my business.

I taunted Ms. Harper a bit, as I do. (Yes, I can be an asshole sometimes.)

Her reaction, however, surprised me.

Rather than accusing me of being a misogynist or slut shamer, she falsely accused me of making rape threats.

You can see my original Tweet. In what world is this a rape threat?

She continues to repeat the lie, which makes her seem desperate for me.

(I never posted her current home address. I found a "police blotter" article from ten years ago, when Ms. Harper lived in another state, confirming Harper had been in jail.)

Where are my white knights?

There are men who go online to fight Internet harassment. They claim it's not because they want to impress women.

No, these men just really don't like cyber harassment, and they are going to fight it.

Fair enough. 

How many men have called out Ms. Harper for making an accusation that not only harms me, but also harms legitimate rape victims by trivializing a serious crime?

None. Zero. Zip.

No one called her out for making a verifiably false accusation. Ms. Harper has refused to apologize, and seems to think I should spend tens of thousands of dollars suing someone with multiple tax liens rather than write this article.

The  accusations against me are verifiably false.

Fortunately I have multiple web platforms to combat the accusations.

What about the poor schlub who isn't a master of public relations? What can innocent victims of Ms. Harper's conduct do?

What about rape victims who aren't believed because women like Ms. Harper lie about rape?

What about men who are actually arrested and jailed for false rape accusations?

Everyone is all about that call-out culture, but when a woman falsely accuses a man of making rape threats, no one seems to care.

Why the silence?

Incidentally, there is a hilarious post-script to this story.

Ms. Harper has started a non-profit organization with the stated goal of fighting Internet harassment and cyberbullying.

Apparently falsely accusing a man of one of the most heinous crimes imaginable doesn't count as "harassment" or "cyberbullying" to the radical left.

Don't believe the hype.

The radical left throws around rape accusations like a football at a Sunday BBQ.

That these false accusations harm actual rape victims, who are less likely to be believed now that rape has no meaning, doesn't seem to deter people from making these accusations.

You must never believe the word of social activists calling themselves SJWs (short for social justice warriors) as they appear to have a defect causing them to lie about everything. How bad do they lie? 

They lie even about even trivial matters.

It really is something to behold.

Here's an example of an SJW lying.

A person posted a quote of mine onto his Facebook. He tagged me in his status update.

Someone guy named Adam Fisher, who I had never heard of, immediately posted a link to an article critical of me.

I responded to Mr. Fisher's post, laughing at him for being offended by Tweets. (Mike Cernovich, "Twitter Conduct.")

Mr. Fisher replied by saying he had no ill will towards me and did not want to talk to me. He replied three times in a row to tell me how he really doesn't care about me at all!

I responded to him and then he replied to to me again.

After posting a Facebook reply, he posted this status update on Twitter:

"apparently #gamergate has leaked over into my real life because cernovich is literally yelling at me on his personal FB acct."

First of all, Facebook is not real life. Mr. Fisher is implying that I knocked on his door or have done something to harass him. How can I "literally yell" at someone online?

What a liar.

Second of all, Mr. Fisher is the one who posted an article critical of me. He is the one who began the conversation. I did not find him.

I had never heard of Mr. Fisher, although he clearly had heard of me. Yet he lied in his earlier Facebook post, claiming "I posted that link without any comment or indication of malicious intent."

Mr. Fisher does not like me, and that's totally cool. I can respect people who are honest about why they do not like me. That's integrity.

What sort of man lies about his motivations? Why not simply say, "I think Mike is an asshole. Here's why."

Integrity is in short supply these days.

This is all trivial beyond measure, and that's why I bring it up.

SJWs have zero integrity. Even when it comes to trivial nonsense like this, they will lie.

Never, ever believe an SJW about anything.