Oyez oyez, all rise in the case of Superlawyer Larry Klayman vs. Your Perfect and Innocent and Blameless Wonkette! Do you think Circuit Judge Gregory M. Keyser read that post (that link right there!) responding to Larry Klayman's lawsuit against us? Because our attorneys apparently ... forgot ... to include it in their response. Well, I bet he did because ...
Larry Klayman DENIED! Wonkette perfect and innocent and blameless FOREVER!
You never know what's going to happen when it's Palm Beach judges in Florida state court, they might act like you're Gawker and kill you all over again. (And Larry Klayman, in his very excellent defamation suit against your Wonkette and me, your Editrix, personally, tried to make a big deal about "GAWKER REMEMBER THEM?" for some guilt by Gawkery association. See that first link above, again, it was such crap!)
But you do kind of know what's going to happen when your opponent in a court of law is Larry Klayman, because that dude loses A LOT.
A List of Things A Judge Ordered We Can Say About Larry Klayman
The Complaint seeks redress for the following allegedly defamatory statements which are contained in two separate articles:
October 24, 2019 Article: "Empaneling fake grand juries is one of [Plaintiff's] favorite hobbies, after sexual harassment and filing bullshit lawsuits."
October 24, 2019 Article: "You may remember [Plaintiff] from some of his greatest hits, such as suing all the black people, trying to subpoena Bill Clinton's penis, and suing Robert Mueller, the DOJ, FBI, NSA, Jeff Bezos, and others on behalf of none other than Jerome Corsi"
October 24, 2019 Article: "[Plaintiff] IS FUCKING BATSHIT".
October 24, 2019 Article: "[Plaintiff] is president, chief operating officer, chairman, and general counsel of Freedom Watch, and 'organization' that exists mostly so [Plaintiff] has an outlet for all of his conspiracy fantasies."
October 24, 2019 Article: "At the end of the day, [Plaintiff] is a grifter who screams his bigoted conspiracy theories at his computer to try to make money off other white supremacists. And posting incoherent rants to YouTube is a big part of that."
July 26, 2019 Article: "Nota bene, Wonkette believes that Stataki's fleeing Klayman's car and seeking refuge from his rage and unwanted advances shows that Klayman's behavior qualifies as 'stalking' per the Department of Justice…"
July 26, 2019 Article: "Could [Plaintiff] help it if it he fell so deeply in love with her that he couldn't concentrate on her actual case because he was too busy declaring his love for months on end, and flipping out at public events if she talked to other people, and chasing her into a hotel women's room when she jumped out of his car and fled into the hotel for safety? They call the women's room the 'Klayman Room' now, he joked, because of all the remorse he did not have for a solid year of [sexually] harassing his client who was already having a nervous breakdown about her previous sexual harassment case."
July 26, 2019 Article: "Well, nobody ever said Superlawyer [Plaintiff] is good at 'lawyer'."
July 26, 2019 Article: "But it seems like those would make [Plaintiff] – who is currently representing such luminaries as Jerome Corsi and Laura Loomer as well as convening a 'citizens grand jury' to indict and arrest Robert Mueller – bad at his chosen profession."
Which one's your favorite? Mine is all of them.
And what's your favorite part of the judge's order dismissing Klayman's libel suit against us? (Don't worry, you'll get to read it below!) Mine is:
Here, the Court finds that statements made by the Defendants are pure opinion, based on facts set forth in the article or otherwise known to the public, that were conveyed in a tone and manner that is clearly rhetorical hyperbole. Defendants' insinuation that sexual harassment is a "favorite hobby" of Plaintiff, or that he sued all members of a race and subpoenaed a former president's genitals, are obvious exaggerations intended for comedic effect. No reasonable reader would believe these statements factually true within the context of both the article and Wonkette as a publication. Defendants' references to Plaintiff as "Batshit", a "grifter" and a "bigot", are the types of "vigorous epithets" the Supreme Court characterizes as rhetorical hyperbole. Greenbelt Co-op. Pub. Ass'n v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6, 14 (1970). See also Raible v. Newsweek, Inc. 341 F. Supp. 804, 806-07 (W.D. Pa. 1972) ("To call a person a bigot or other appropriate name descriptive of his political, racial, religious, economic, or sociological philosophies gives no rise to an action for libel")[.]
Oh it is an opinion of DELIGHT.
Wonkette would like to thank our attorneys John M. Phillips and Amy Hanna, Circuit Judge Gregory M. Keyser for just "getting it," Larry Klayman, Esq., for being an eternal fount of never-ending blessings and love and sunshine and such good lawyering that is always a joy on which to opine, and YOU. We would like to thank YOU. Because for real and again and not joshing ya, we could not put out our little Mommyblog and Recipe Hub and All Your Larry Klayman Superlawyerin' News Emporium without the support of our erudite and discriminating readers (discriminating in taste, not like someone would do if they were a bigot or a racist douchebag), and we would like to remind you: It is "all a part of [our] communist agenda and [our] desire to make money."
FOR THE CHILDREN.
(Give us money.)
(No, but really, please give us money.)
So after you read the order below, remember to click on our widget. How much would you like to donate today?
We love you, and OPEN THREAD.
Rebecca Schoenkopf is the owner, publisher, and editrix of Wonkette. She is a nice lady, SHUT UP YUH HUH. She is very tired with this fucking nonsense all of the time, and it would be terrific if you sent money to keep this bitch afloat. She is on maternity leave until 2033.