Tuesday, October 26, 2021

PM Justin Trudeau might want to have a chat with his personal protection.

While popping in on ex-Rebeler and white nationalist memorabilia expert Keean "Tomorrow Belongs to Me" Bexte is normally moderately amusing, this is not ... it's downright frightening:




As if it's not creepy enough that Trudeau's security detail is openly complaining about him to members of the public, Bexte launches into sordid detail:




So, just to be clear, if what Bexte writes above is to be believed, what we have here are the people explicitly tasked with protecting the Prime Minister of Canada, palling around with a known white nationalist and regaling him with how much they dislike the guy whose safety is their only job.

If this is not a firing offense for "Cpl. Bulford," then, fuck, nothing is.

YUP, IT'S FOR REAL: Here's the Prime Minister of Canada's personal sniper bodyguard, publicly telling a known white nationalist how much he despises his boss:



Nothing threatening about that, I'm sure.

P.S. If Cpl. Bulford is still employed by the Government of Canada at the end of the day, that is just fucked up beyond words.

P.P.S. New Canadian Defence Minister Anita Anand's first task should be to tell Cpl. Bulford that he has 15 minutes to pack up his desk, after which he will be escorted to the door to make sure he leaves the building and the property.

JUXTAPOSE!

GOP: "I don't trust Big Government; I trust the American people."

Also GOP: Gerrymanders the fuck out of every voting precinct in the United States to thwart the actual will of the voters.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Still making friends edition.

 


Rebel News: Profiting off other peoples' misery edition.

Just when you think Ezra Levant and his merry band of professional grifters at Rebel News could not possibly sink any lower, they still manage to surprise. Here's predictably talentless hack Alexandra Lavoie, shamelessly milking someone else's misfortune for Rebel self-promotion:



The sleazy self-promotion involved here is a Rebel News petition to "SAVE JOANIE!!!", which Rebel will (if history is any guide) monetize by using all the names collected for subsequent sales pitches, and promotions, and rental to interested parties. What else is new? But here's the twist.

The affiliated Rebel YouTube video has attracted numerous commenters, who are yanking their little puds in outrage over this apparent medical malpractice, shrieking idiocies like "Those doctors should be fired!", or "Their medical licenses should be revoked!", or "They're breaking their oaths!!!" and other ignorant imbecility, apparently unaware that it has always been thus -- when medical services are in short supply (as they are now), it is the responsibility of the medical profession to prioritize delivery, and it's not at all surprising that someone too fucking stupid or irresponsible to look after her own health is going to end up down the list as compared to someone who does not want to be a virus-spewing plague rat, infecting everyone around her in a hospital full of other vulnerable people. But here's the best part.

It behooves us to ask, why is it that beds for non-COVID-19 patients like those waiting for lung transplants are in such short supply that they have to be rationed? Who is forcing health care providers into having to make these life-altering choices?

Ezra Levant and Rebel News. That's who.

There is a certain irony in having watched Ezra and his bottom-dwelling Morlocks at Der Rebel, for all these months, encouraging the public to refuse masks, and reject vaccines, and gather in large groups to the point where the health care systems in numerous provinces were utterly overwhelmed and doctors had to decide who got surgery and who didn't, only to now sob inconsolably over the plight of the very people who are, quite simply, suffering the unfortunate consequences of taking Rebel's really, really, really bad advice. And for Ezra and Rebel to now monetize these peoples' misfortune is truly the icing on the grift-based cake.

Ah, well, it is as a wise man once opined:



Well said, Ezra. Well said.

Monday, October 25, 2021

Well, well, well ... if it isn't the consequences of my actions.

Oh, dear:



Rebel News fundraiser to launch Charter challenge in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Chronicles of Twatrick: Garnishment edition, and fun with math.

It is unlikely that there will be any exciting, breaking news related to Lloydminster's Patrick "Writer Actor Director Author The Whole Fucking Threat" Ross for the next month or two as the Saskatchewan Sheriffs work their way down to our filing in their INBOX, but it behooves us to do the math to see what will happen when my inevitable garnishment order kicks in.

From the current version of Saskatchewan's "Enforcement of Money Judgments Regulations," we can see the effect of garnishment on Patrick's typically meagre income from the string of menial jobs he's had:



So what does this mean in terms of the effect it will have on Lord Baron Twatrick? Well, let's run the numbers.

What is "exempt from seizure" is simply the amount per month that Patrick will be allowed to keep, the rest going to his primary (and only) creditor: me. And how much will be that be?

First, note that there are two alternatives, the exemption amount being the greater of the two choices above, that greater amount being $1,500 when one's income is low. What this means is that no matter how destitute you are and how little you bring home, you get to keep that first $1,500. So if Patrick nets $1,500 or less per month, he gets to keep it all. Every penny. And while that might seem cause for celebration on Patrick's part, it has one ugly consequence: He will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever get out of bankruptcy.

Ever.

If Patrick makes so little every month that his entire take-home pay is exempt from seizure, then he is paying off precisely none of what he owes me, an amount that is now increasing due to accruing interest at just under $500/month. So that's not good for Patrick. But let us continue.

If we imagine Patrick nets, say, $1,600 per month, what happens? Simple: He still gets to keep his $1,500 per month, but must now turn over the surplus $100 to me. Every month. And once again, while Patrick might crow about how this is screwing me over, we once again note that, under this repayment scheme, he will be an undischarged bankrupt for the rest of his life.

$2,000 per month? Easy -- Patrick keeps his $1,500 and I get the remaining $500. And Patrick is barely covering the interest on his debt to me and, again, lifetime undischarged bankrupt. This is not looking good for Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen, is it? So how does Patrick get out of this?

Well, if you check the formulae above, there is a tipping point where Patrick gets to keep more than $1,500 per month, and that is when 70 per cent of his take-home pay exceeds $1,500, and that happens with a net monthly income of $2,143.00; with that monthly net, Patrick still keeps his $1,500, while I get the remaining $643, and it is at that point where any further monthly income on Patrick's part means he can finally keep a little bit more.

For example, say Patrick (through some miraculous fluke of the universe) finds work where his monthly net is $2,500. At that amount (again, at any amount over $2,143.00), formula a) above is used, which means that Patrick gets to keep 70 per cent of that -- $1,750 -- while I get the remaining $750.

$3,000? Patrick gets to keep $2,100, and I get the surplus $900. And so on, and so on, and so on. So if Patrick nets more, he gets to keep more, while I of course will always get to seize more. But the ugly downside for Patrick here is always waiting in the wings: what he owes me is relentlessly increasing by almost $500 per month, so even if I am collecting from him, unless he gets a spectacularly well-paying gig somewhere, he is barely covering that accruing interest. Oh, and it is worth pointing out that what Patrick is allowed to keep per month covers all possible sources of income for him combined, so there are no loopholes there. Getting multiple jobs will make no difference.

Finally, it's worth mentioning what happens if Patrick has a sudden property-related windfall, such as inherited house or farmland; as you might guess, there is zero chance Patrick would be allowed to keep that.

In the end, given all of the above and Patrick's history of unskilled, low-wage employment, it's almost a certainty that Patrick will be allowed to hang onto $2,000, maybe a bit more per month, depending on how lucky he is in convincing someone to pay him a decent salary. But that means that he will never, ever, ever, ever have any nice stuff. No nice new car, no house of his own ... nothing. At best, Patrick might be able to find a crappy one-bedroom apartment and continue driving his Ford Escape from one menial Northern Alberta contract to the next, all the while watching his employer send a sizable chunk of his paycheque to me month after month, for years to come.

Have I missed anything?

P.S. I have been reliably informed that the automatic $1,500 per month that is exempt from seizure is based on the (reasonable) assumption that a debtor needs a minimal net income to simply survive, which might constitute paying for rent, utilities, food, vehicle upkeep and so on. But I have also been informed that, in unusual circumstances, it is possible to petition the court to lower that exemption if it can be shown that a debtor does not have those typical expenses. That is, by arguing that Patrick lives at home and contributes nothing to household expenses, the Court can be convinced to let him keep only, say, $500 per month. (And handing to the Court photographic evidence of his eating habits showing a regular diet of $21 restaurant burgers is not going to help his case.)

It's an interesting possibility and I'll keep it in mind, but I'm not going to obsess over it.

Sunday, October 24, 2021

Rebel News: Small business' kiss of death.

Hey, kids, let's check in on the most recent small business that Rebel News crippled financially while raking in truckloads of donations, not a dime of which will go to said business:




So, just to be clear, after Rebel News hoovered up God-knows-how-many tens of thousands of dollars, encouraging Chris Scott to continue breaking the law and collect fine after fine, the end result is as you see -- three days in jail for Scott, 18 months probation, and tens of thousands in fines and costs, absolutely none of which will be covered by Ezra or Rebel News.

None.

Because that's how Rebel's "Fight the Fines" campaign works -- you get legal representation for free, but you are on the hook for everything else. So one can easily imagine that, if Rebel raised, say, $100,000 to represent Chris Scott, the end result is that Rebel and its lawyers got to keep the entire kitty, while Chris Scott got shafted with probation, jail time, fines and costs, all of which are his to deal with. But it gets worse.

Apparently, Scott is so indescribably addled that he's preparing to bury himself even further:



And, yes, Rebel News is fundraising off of this. Because, you know, money.

BONUS TRACK: It's worth appreciating how many millions of dollars have been sucked up by Rebel's "Fight the Fines" campaign, with so depressingly little to show for it.

As I am on Rebel's mailing list, I get regular self-congratulations from Rebel's in-house troll Sheila Gunn Reid, squealing with glee over the most recent "victory," wherein some Rebel-subsidized lawyer managed to get some piddling, dick-ass fine overturned. If you close your eyes, you can almost hear Sheila's nails-on-chalkboard screeching about the magnificent win of paying one of Rebel's lawyers $7,600 but, by God, they sure got Karen's $350 fine for not wearing a mask in the Dollar Store tossed, so all you generous donors are making a difference!!

(Pay no attention to the fact that most of these insignificant cases had a good chance of being overturned already, simply by having the defendant express remorse in front of a judge, or explain possibly extenuating circumstances, all without the need for a $750/hour lawyer.)

But once one stops obsessing over these trivial cases, one is suddenly forced to confront the fact that -- to the best of my knowledge -- Rebel has not won a single of their high-profile, flagship cases.

Not one.

Rather, their perpetually-flogged cases involving Pastor Art, or the Whistle Stop Cafe, or the other restaurants I wrote about earlier, have not ended with a single victory. Instead, the end result is always the same -- defendants who find themselves saddled with fines, costs, jail time and maybe the loss of their business -- while Rebel's lawyers are off doing the backstroke:




It's truly head-scratching to estimate how much money has been poured into this campaign, when the only people ending up with all that money are the people working for/with Rebel News.

I doubt I could come up with a more magnificently brilliant (while still totally legal) grift if I tried.

CC HQ READER CHALLENGE: If anyone wants to provide a link to a single high-level "Fight the Fines" victory, I will be happy to post it here. And by "high-level," I mean a widely-promoted case with actual strategic litigation value, and not the insignificant "Our brilliant lawyer, Chad Williamson, got Martha's $750 fine thrown out, whoo hoo!!" idiocy we are all so used to.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The babysitting.

If Lloydminster's Patrick Ross thinks he's going through a rough patch in his life right about now, it is entirely possible that it is about to get a bit worse.

As regular readers of this forum will know, with Patrick having been kicked out of bankruptcy due to ongoing, relentless non-compliance with the basic requirements of bankruptcy, he now owes me the full amount of my original 2010 judgment against him for malicious defamation, plus some significant interest that's been accruing over the years (originally two per cent, now five per cent). But that's not the whole story. Oh, no, there's more.

While I have been glibly using the phrase "kicked out of bankruptcy" to describe Patrick's current unenviable status, that's not really accurate; it is more accurate to say that Patrick is, in fact, still in bankruptcy, but that the stay of proceedings that protected him for years from any attempt at collection on my part has been lifted by the Court, thus allowing me to proceed with extracting assets from whatever orifice of Patrick's is available. So let me clarify what that means.

What it means is that, at the moment, Patrick lives in the worst of all possible universes -- he is still an undischarged bankrupt, while having none of the protections of bankruptcy. Put another way, he has all the drawbacks of bankruptcy, with absolutely none of the benefits. And why does this matter? I'm glad you asked.

It would seem that, even as I am now free to start collecting what Patrick owes me, since Patrick is still a bankrupt (with no foreseeable way out other than paying me the full amount that he owes me), Patrick should still be subject to the standard restrictions of bankruptcy, such as not being allowed to have an unsecured credit card, not being able to apply for a bank loan and, most importantly, being legally required to report his status as an undischarged bankrupt when doing things like -- oh, I don't know -- filing a one million dollar defamation action against someone.

So while I'm more concerned with enforcing the collection order I have just filed with the Saskatchewan sheriffs, it seems that it's still worth confirming that Patrick is not violating the terms of his bankruptcy. But it also seems that I am not the one who needs to be babysitting him to see that that's done.

No, it seems to me that, since Patrick is still officially a bankrupt, then it is bankruptcy court that should be monitoring him. That is, even though he is no longer protected by that stay of proceedings, Patrick still technically belongs to bankruptcy court, and I would suggest that it is that court that should be riding herd on him, and smacking his fingers whenever he breaks the rules.

To that end, I will arrange this week to check in with the court and remind them that, as long as Patrick is an undischarged bankrupt, he is still their problem, and it is their job to deal with his conduct under the bankruptcy regime, not mine. Put another way, while I start stripping Patrick of all his assets now and for the foreseeable future from one side, I will make sure bankruptcy court is riding his ass from the other side (something that should not be done at my expense).

In the end, it's entirely possible that Patrick should start getting a whole new set of services, these from the court enforcing the very restrictions and conditions of the bankruptcy that is now doing Patrick no good whatsoever.

I could suggest that it could get even worse for Patrick but, honestly, I have no idea how.

P.S. Tune in next week when I assure you that there is no way Patrick is ever going to inherit the family home he is currently squatting in.

Saturday, October 23, 2021

The dumbfuck stupid ... it burns ...

Uh huh ...



And by "visited Delaware," McDaniel means "went home for the weekend." To Delaware. Where he lives.

This is the level of GOP assholishness up with which we have to put.

JUXTAPOSE!

Rebel News' Ezra Levant, regarding Dr. Jill Biden and her doctorate in education:



Rebel News' Ezra Levant, regarding right-wing dingbat and Rebel News favourite Dr. Leslyn Lewis, with her doctorate in international law:



See how that works?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Awesome ... first commenter points out that while taking a steaming dump on Dr. Jill Biden's doctorate, Ezra Levant happily uses the same title to dignify one of the intellectual cripples at his next Ezrafest, "Dr. Julie Ponesse":




and does the same for blithering crackpot Charles McVety:



Well spotted, commenter. Well spotted.

JUXTAPOSE!

Rebel News: "Professional athletes should just shut up and dribble."




Also Rebel News: "Professional athletes need to be heard."




Pick a lane, kids.

Jesus. Freaking. God.

 


I'm guessing Ezra invited Glenn Beck because Rudy Giuliani and Alex Jones were unavailable.

Rebel News: The small business kiss of death.

Ezra Levant's Rebel News encourages Hamilton's "Nique" restaurant to flout COVID-19 lockdown regulations, publicizes the flouting and fundraises off of it. Result: Nique is closed down and is now for sale, while Rebel keeps all the money.



Ezra Levant's Rebel News encourages Calgary's "Without Papers Pizza" restaurant to flout COVID-19 lockdown regulations, publicizes the flouting and fundraises off of it: Result: Without Papers Pizza is closed down, while Rebel keeps all the money.



Ezra Levant's Rebel News encourages Calgary's "Outlaws Taphouse and Bar" restaurant to flout COVID-19 lockdown regulations, publicizes the flouting and fundraises off of it: Result: Outlaws Taphouse and Bar is closed down, while Rebel keeps all the money.



Johnny, who's our next idiot ^H^H^H^H^H contestant?



Let's watch.

Friday, October 22, 2021

Chronicles of Twatrick: The lawyerizing.

I just can't ...

Rebel News gets results!

 Wheeeeeeeee!



So, if I read the timeline correctly:

  1. Rebel News encourages Without Papers Pizza (WPP) to break the law so Rebel can fundraise
  2. WPP breaks the law and gets fined
  3. Rebel News celebrates convincing WPP to break the law and get fined, and fundraises $3.62 million to "Fight the Fines"
  4. WPP, after stupidly being convinced to break the law, goes under
  5. Rebel News pays none of the fines
  6. Rebel News keeps all the money

Does that sound about right?

A short fiction story.

It is the year 15,846,226,092 AD. The Sun is a dead, burnt-out cinder, floating uselessly in space. What little remains of humanity has burrowed deep into the Earth for whatever residual heat they can get from the dying core of the planet. And somewhere, in a grotto miles underground, a resolute group of humans sits around a struggling fire in total silence, until one of them raises his head slowly, stares balefully at the others, and mutters, "Sure, it's taking a while, but Merrick Garland is going after Steve Bannon for contempt of Congress. Just you watch."

Keean Bexte is the David Menzies of Sheila Gunn Reids.

Learned well from his former master at Rebel News, he has, in terms of flat-out, straight-up lying about shit. Here's Keean "Tomorrow Belongs To Me" Bexte, claiming BIILLLLYYYUNS ...



And then there's reality:



I'm glad we had this little chat.

REGARDING LEARNING FROM HIS YODA, white nationalist and fake journalist Keean Bexte is quietly doing exactly what he learned from his stint over at Rebel News. While putting on airs of being a media outlet, over at "The Counter Signal", it's all about the clicks and pure monetization, almost certainly for the purpose of creating a rentable mailing list.

If you examine any article at that site, each one typically has numerous hyperlinks, ostensibly to substantiate claims being made in the article. But if you look closer, every one of those links is nothing more than a link back to that site which is collecting tracking information about you. Every link. Without exception.

As one example, in the article screen-shotted above, you would think that that link named "Allan Report" would take you to a copy of, you know, the actual report, stored perhaps at Google Docs or reported at CBC News. Here's the underlying hyperlink:

https://thecountersignal.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=e13267a26ec46fed6cd883ea1&id=3bd372173e&e=447891c09e

Bexte's alleged media outlet has nothing to do with news, and everything to do with collecting your personal information in order to sell it down the line.

But you knew that, right?

Chronicles of Twatrick: The bloatening.

For someone who is about to have $104,000 (plus numerous unpaid cost awards dating back to 2012) extracted forcibly from various bodily orifices by the collections enforcement arm of the Saskatchewan sheriffs:




it is passing strange that Lloydminster's Patrick "Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen Quintuple Threat Kid Cash Thunderbolt Sexy Mullet Street Fighting Man" Ross might be a bit more circumspect regarding his bragging about a regular Grande Prairie diet of twenty-one dollar burgers:






And, yes ... all this is being added to the collections package for the Sheriffs.

Thursday, October 21, 2021

The case of the deadbeat defendant.

Quelle surprise ...





Chronicles of Twatrick: Hammer to Fall, Part Deux.

I'm sure you're getting tired of reading of the ongoing Perils of Patrick, but I would be most remiss in not laying out the numbers in play related to the imminent collection proceedings against Lloydminster's Patrick "Quintuple Threat Dragon Fire Thunderbolt Kid Cash Nexus of Assholery MMA Cosplay Street Fighter" Ross.

From Form G of the enforcement instructions to be delivered/filed with the Saskatchewan sheriffs (ideally later today):




It is worth noting that the amount listed here does not include several thousand dollars in cost awards against Patrick from years back that have already been filed as an earlier collection but have been waiting to be bundled with this subsequent filing, so the total to be forcibly extracted from Patrick is several thousand more than you see here.

Also note the brand new post judgment interest rate of 5%, up from the earlier 2%, which means the amount Patrick owes me is now increasing by $5,204.50 every year.

I have already advised my legal representation that all of the docs look good, and can be filed at her earliest convenience.

In case you were interested.

P.S. It may be of some minor interest as to what we are asking for:




So, yes, if Patrick is suddenly a lot quieter in a month or three, well, he's probably a bit busy.

P.P.S. It is not clear what the total bill for all of this will be related to Sheriff's fees for collection enforcement, but there is an initial required deposit of $750, which will be charged to me but will also be added to Patrick's tab.

There are also various hourly rates charged by the Sheriffs for things like producing reports, undertaking investigations, transportation costs, actual seizing of property and so forth; again, charged to me but simultaneously added to Patrick's bill as well. In other words, in the end, Patrick will end up paying for the entirety of the enforcement proceedings against him.

Irony, no?

P.P.P.S. Oh, one more thing. It's worth appreciating that, once the collection process starts, I will have eyes on whatever bank accounts Patrick has, so if he has a job that involves direct deposit of his paycheque, well, I'll be taking that. More to the point, it means that any transfers of funds to Patrick's bank account will be mine to seize. And why is this important? I'm glad you asked.

There's little doubt that Patrick has been subsidized by members of his family, probably via electronic transfer of funds. But now that I'll be waiting for any such transfers, really, their only option to help him out will be handing over cash under the table. And while they might be willing to go along with that for a while, there's no way you can do that month after month or year after year without eventually slipping up.

To pull that off will require constant work on the part of Patrick's family, and one wonders at what point those family members will have had enough of the inconvenience and deception and possible risk to their own financial reporting, and tell Patrick he's on his own.

I guess we're going to find out.

P.P.P.P.S. Man, this never ends, does it? At this point, yes, I would like to know where Patrick is working these days, if anyone knows. It's common knowledge that it is in the vicinity of Grande Prairie, AB, but I know nothing more than that. Having that information means I can tell the Saskatchewan Sheriffs' collection task force where to send the garnishment order.

If I can't supply that information, the Sheriffs predictably have ways of figuring it out, but that is billable time on their part, and whatever it costs will (as above) be added to Patrick's bill.

EVEN MORE: Even though we haven't delivered the collection order to the Sheriffs for enforcement yet, the judgment has in fact been registered with the Saskatchewan Judgment Registry. What this means is that anyone who wishes can pay a small fee, then search the registry by name, at which point they will be informed of my substantial judgment against Patrick. I'm not sure what this means in terms of the consequences of someone running a credit check on Patrick or anything of the sort, but it does mean that the fact I have a judgment against him is now publicly available information for anyone willing to hand over ten bucks to do the search.

IF PATRICK REFUSES TO CO-OPERATE: Knowing Patrick, he will of course be as unco-operative as possible, which will lead into the various possibilities of compelling his co-operation, which are (as I understand it):

  1. Serve Patrick with a Voluntary Questionnaire from the Sheriff
  2. If Patrick refuses to fill that out, follow that up with a Mandatory Questionnaire, also from the Sheriff
  3. If Patrick still refuses to co-operate, the Sheriff can issue a Notice for an Appointment for Examination so we can examine Patrick under oath.

Again, all of the above will be done at Patrick's expense.

Wednesday, October 20, 2021

Chronicles of Twatrick: Hammer to fall.

Regarding Lloydminster's Patrick "Alpha Dog Nexus of Assholery Quintuple Threat" Ross, I have received, just today, all the docs to proofread and return pursuant to filing with Saskatchewan sheriffs to commence collection proceedings against Patrick. They all look good, so I assume they will be filed officially tomorrow. At that point, shit will happen.

Maxime Bernier, and the 9 Circles of Hell.

The book "Inferno,"by SF authors Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, relates the story of SF author Allen Carpentier, who dies a stupid death and ends up wandering the circles of Hell with his guide "Benito." During their travels, the two meet numerous people also in Hell for one reason or another and, without exception, after some conversation, it becomes obvious what the sin was that banished each of those people to the underworld. In short, in every case, each of those people deserved their unpleasant fate.

However, at one point, the two run across one unfortunate soul who seems to have been given a raw deal by God ("Big Juju"):

But outside the power plant was an athletic man chained to a wheelless bicycle set in concrete in front of the exhaust pipe of the generator. Black smoke poured around him, almost hiding him from view.

As we watched he began pedaling furiously. The hum of the gears rose to a high pitch—and the generator inside died. There was a moment of quiet. The man pedaled with sure strokes, faster and faster, his feet nearly visible, his head tucked down as if against a wind. We gathered around, each wondering how long he could keep it up.

He began to tire. The blur of his feet slowed. The motors inside coughed, and black smoke poured out. He choked and turned his head away, and saw us.

“Don’t answer if you’d rather not,” I said, “but what whim of fate put you here?”

“I don’t know!” he howled. “I was president of the largest, most effective environmental-protection organization in the country! I fought this!” He braced himself and pedaled again. The hum rose, and the generator died.

Billy was completely lost. He looked to Benito, but our guide only shrugged. Benito accepted everything. I knew better. This couldn’t be justice, not even Big Juju’s exaggerated justice. This was monstrous.

Corbett had to be guessing when he suddenly asked, “You opposed the thermonuclear power plants?”

The guy stopped dead, staring as if Corbett were a ghost. The dynamo lurched into action and surrounded him with thick blue smoke.

“That’s it, isn’t it?” Corbett said gently. “You stopped the nuclear generators. I was just a kid during the power blackouts. We had to go to school in the dark because the whole country went on daylight saving time to save power.”

“But they weren’t safe!” He coughed. “They weren’t safe!”

“How did you know that?” Benito asked.

“We had scientists in our organization. They proved it.”

We turned away. Now I knew. I could quit looking for justice in Hell. There was only macabre humor. Why should that man be in the inner circles of Hell? At worst he belonged far above, with the bridge-destroyers of the second ledge. Or in Heaven. He hadn’t created this bleak landscape.

I couldn’t stand it. I went back. Benito shrugged and motioned to the others.

Within the cloud of blue smoke his face was slack with exhaustion. “It wasn’t just the problem of where to bury the waste products,” he told me. “There was radioactive gas going into the air.” He spoke as if continuing a conversation. I must have been his only audience in years, or decades.

“You got a rotten deal,” I said. “I wish I could do something.”

He smiled bravely. “What else is new?” And he started to pedal.

I glared at the nothing sky, hating Big Juju. Carpentier declares war. When I looked down, Benito was fumbling through saddlebags attached to the stationary bicycle.

The man cried, “What are you doing?”

Benito took out papers. The man snatched at them, but Benito backed away. He read, “Dear Jon, I could understand your opposition to us last year. There was some doubt about the process, and you expressed fears all of us felt. But now you know better. I have no witnesses, but you told me you understood Dr. Pittman’s demonstration. In God’s name, Jon, why do you continue? I ask you as your sister, as a fellow scientist, as a human being: Why?”

He began pedaling again, ignoring us.

“You knew?” I demanded. He pedaled faster, his head bent. I leaned down and put my face close to his. “You knew?” I screamed.

“Fuck off.”

Big Juju wins again. Too much, but appropriate. As we walked away, Jon screamed after us, “I’d have been nothing if I gave up the movement! Nothing! Don’t you understand? I had to stay as president!”

And there you have it: the sin of hypocrisy and rancidly dishonest self-promotion, as "Jon" -- while railing against nuclear power for allegedly environmental reasons -- actually knew his arguments were bullshit, but did it anyway because it was what made him important. It kept him as the centre of attention. It made him someone.

Which brings us, of course, to the disgustingly narcissistic Maxime Bernier, whose only interest these days is himself. And while Bernier shrieks incomprehensibly about medical things he clearly does not understand:




one can only think of "Jon," lashed to his bicycle because he continued to promote arguments he knew were totally bogus; because it was the only way to continue being someone.

One can only hope there is actually a special corner of Hell for people like that.

JUXTAPOSE!

Having spent the last several months attacking, insulting, denigrating and demonizing the medical profession, Rebel News' Ezra Levant is just plain baffled.




Chronicles of Twatrick: From bad to worser.

And if you didn't think things could go any further downhill for Lloydminster's Patrick "Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen" Ross, you misunderestimate Patrick's insatiable appetite for self-destruction.

First, it would appear that Patrick's recent idiotic and meritless Statement of Claim:




is a nullity (one of Patrick's favourite words) since, as best I can tell, Patrick did not first serve the legally-required Notice of Libel, and he is now past the eight-week deadline for doing so. 

Many legal actions come with a "limitations period" -- a deadline before which you must file your action, or you lose the opportunity to do so. With respect to defamation actions, in Ontario, that's six weeks; in Alberta, it appears to be eight weeks. In short, Patrick's idiotic action above is dead in the water since he spent so much time bloviating and "blar-har-har'ing" over it that he missed the deadline. So not only will that filing be kicked to the curb, but Patrick will be required to pay costs.

As if that wasn't bad enough, independently, the above action is toast since Patrick apparently filed it while concealing his status as an undischarged bankrupt, which disqualifies him from filing any such motion:



Once again, Patrick's filing above is dead on arrival, but it's also possible that Patrick could face criminal charges for knowingly filing an action he was not allowed to file. But, yes, it gets worse.

Apparently, there is the distinct possibility that Patrick, given his long and pathetic history of filing worthless applications, will be declared by the Court as a "vexatious litigant," which means he would not be allowed to file further applications unless he first got the permission of the Court. Now, this seems like overkill given that his status as an undischarged bankrupt already prevents him from doing that, but it would be amusing to be able to write "trustee-less undischarged bankrupt and vexatious litigant Patrick Ross" from time to time.

I might have to set up a hot key.

P.S. If you want howlingly funny evidence of Patrick's vexatious incompetence, well, you'll have to check back tomorrow, as I will have a never-before-told story of Patrick's legalistic cluelessness.

You'll want to read it.

JUXTAPOSE!

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who was born into wealth, did not even finish high school, abandoned French classes after three months, takes seven months of vacation every year and spends an average of 47 minutes per week at his job, will now lecture immigrants on the importance of a solid work ethic.

Tuesday, October 19, 2021

Jerry Agar: Idiot.

What's it like to wake up in the morning and realize your entire philosophical outlook is a Dilbert punchline?






BONUS TRACK: If you want to know what it's like to have a discussion with certain right-wingers and bloviating trolls, you won't get a better education than this. It's particularly funny because it's so depressingly accurate.

The growing legal troubles of Patrick Ross.

On top of all else that Lloydminster's Patrick Ross is dealing with, I've heard from two more independent sources that it is entirely possible that Patrick could be charged criminally for filing a Statement of Claim:




knowing that he was barred from doing so given his current status as an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee:




I'm not saying that he will be charged criminally, merely saying that the potential is there. And if that happens, we'll see how Patrick's employment and travel prospects dry up with a criminal record hanging around his neck.

At this point, it bears repeating -- it's almost mind-numbing how one person could have fucked up his life this spectacularly, while continuing to make things worse on a daily basis.

P.S. If Patrick is charged criminally, I will make sure he is unable to hire a lawyer by watching for any such attempt and seizing any funds he tries to use for that purpose.

P.P.S. While it's common knowledge that Patrick is working in the vicinity of Grande Prairie, AB, I'd still like to identify his current employer for the purpose of the inevitable garnishment order.

Monday, October 18, 2021

JUXTAPOSE!

Rebel News: "To defend freedom and liberty, it is essential that people gather in large groups publicly."

Also Rebel News: "How dare those filthy Muslims gather in large groups publicly?"




Chronicles of Twatrick: The lying.

Oh, dear ... a little birdie tells me that Lloydminster's Patrick "Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen" Ross has spent several hours bad-mouthing me on Twitter, particularly related to my ongoing legal slapfest with professional fundraiser Ezra Levant. Patrick has much to say on the subject (all of it wrong), but perhaps this tweet most aptly characterizes Patrick's mendaciousness:



This is not the first time Patrick has lied about what this is all about. I could go into detail here but those who are unfamiliar with what happened are welcome to read, in detail, about a single aspect related to Ezra's 2016 lawsuit against me. Here, help yourself:

As you can see at those 2019 blog posts, I did not -- as Patrick so dishonestly bloviates -- simply try to criminalize someone who was selflessly trying to help forest fire victims. No, I was pointing out how Ezra was misleading and deceiving donors; a claim that, as you can see, I proved with numbers, and which was confirmed by the Red Cross' Susan Larkin. But here's the truly sad thing about Patrick's dishonesty:

He knows all this.

I've written about this legal action at length over the past few years, in precisely that kind of detail, and I know Patrick has read it. Patrick knows he is misrepresenting what happened, but he just doesn't care. Patrick knows that my criticisms of Ezra Levant's 2016 fundraiser are based purely on the deception and misrepresentation contained therein, but he just doesn't give a shit, and continues to lie about it. And here's the real irony:

It's lying about me that got Patrick where he is today -- an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee that now owes me around $120,000, is about to have the collection enforcement arm of the Saskatchewan sheriffs descend on him like a million-pound shithammer, and is potentially facing criminal charges for filing a knowingly fraudulent Statement of Claim against someone else.

And yet ... and yet ... Patrick simply cannot stop lying. He can't. And he wonders how his life has turned into such utter shit.

The answer is not hard to see.

BONUS TRACK: At the appropriate time, I am going to start blogging about the upcoming trial (still a ways off), but regarding the matching issue mentioned above, there is one point I want to emphasize, and that is that Ezra's lawyer lied to me -- flat-out fucking lied to me -- when, during questioning in late 2016, this happened:




That would be Ezra's lawyer, assuring me that his client had indeed "matched" all donations when he absolutely knew that that was not true. He knew it wasn't true.

I'm not going to identify Ezra's lawyer but, trust me, the fact that he flat-out fucking lied to me during questioning is not going away, and I am going to make goddamned sure it comes back to bite him in the ass.

That's a promise.

BY THE WAY, it's amusing that Patrick continues, to this day, to claim that I suggested that Ezra Levant was, in any way, breaking the law, given that, at the very beginning of the aforementioned fundraiser back in 2016, I published quite openly that I was unaware of any lawbreaking:



It should come as no surprise, then, that Patrick's inaccurate tweet above is pretty clearly defamatory, but there's probably little point in suing him again.

PATRICK ROSS, AND ARGUING IN BAD FAITH: One more point worth making, and that is that anyone who's had any engagement with Patrick Ross is well aware that Patrick is one of the most dishonest debaters imaginable, in that he perpetually argues in bad faith. What I mean by that is that he takes a situation, then proceeds to contort its interpretation beyond all recognition.

He did this above: While my criticism of Ezra Levant's 2016 Fort Mac fundraiser was based solely on what I described as misleading and deceptive claims by Ezra as to the mechanics of that fundraiser, Patrick immediately misrepresents all of that as, "CC was attacking someone who just wanted to help forest fire victims!" See how that works?

In fact, I wrote about precisely this ugly character flaw of Patrick's years ago on this very blog, and anyone who's ever tried to have a conversation with Patrick will recognize this snippet:
As anyone who’s ever dealt with Patrick Ross knows full well, he is the most dishonest debater imaginable. Patrick’s shtick is to argue in bad faith. By that, I mean that Patrick is never, ever, ever interested in an actual, honest exchange of ideas. Rather, Patrick’s M.O. is to hideously distort whatever you say or write, then attack the distortion. Patrick Ross has never been interested in discussion. Patrick Ross has only ever been interested in winning, and a couple examples will demonstrate that quite nicely.
Consider, if you will, the case of Andrew Meyer. As you can read, Meyer was the dumbass who was Tasered at the U of Florida for being an obnoxious, belligerent troublemaker [at a John Kerry talk] who physically scuffled with security until they’d had enough and Tased his sorry ass. Given his behaviour, I and many others opined that, frankly, anyone that much of an idiot deserved to get a good Tasering, and I for one had no sympathy.

Patrick Ross’ rebuttal was as rapid as it was idiotic — “CC thinks people who disagree with John Kerry should be Tasered!!”

See what Patrick Ross did there? Totally stripped the context, and dumped on me for something not even remotely close to reality or what I’d written. And lest you think that was an isolated incident, let us continue.

There was also the case of anti-choice crusader Ed Snell. But Ed Snell was no ordinary shrieky fetus fetishist, oh no. As you can read here, Snell was a delightfully ambitious dingbat, who went to the trouble of building a car-top platform, from where he could continue to howl Scripturally at women even after they’d entered the grounds of an abortion clinic. Once again, a number of people (including myself) really couldn’t muster up any pity for Snell once someone lost it and booted Snell’s ass off the top of his car.

You know what’s coming, don’t you? Yes, you do: “CC encourages violent physical assault of senior citizens!!!!!”

See how Patrick works? To a miniscule grain of reality, Patrick Ross wraps multiple layers of exaggeration, distortion, misrepresentation and utter bullshit. This is what he does. This is how he argues. Invariably. Anyone who has dealt with him for any amount of time knows precisely of what I speak.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it?




Sunday, October 17, 2021

Chronicles of Twatrick: The fraudening.

It occurs to me to wonder about the following. Recently, Lloydminster's Patrick "Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen" Ross publicly and gloatingly filed a Statement of Claim related to defamation:




Even without knowing the full contents of that document, it seems that Patrick -- as an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee -- should have had some difficulty doing this, since Canada's bankruptcy laws state fairly clearly that someone in Patrick's position has no right to file such an action.





Now, I am not a lawyer so I am not going to opine on the niggling details of whether the above restrictions apply to Patrick's case, and certainly Patrick is free to argue before the court regarding whether it does or not. But we can certainly back up and ask a much, much simpler question:

Did Patrick reveal his status in his Statement of Claim?

Whether Patrick can persuasively argue that someone in his situation still has the right to file such an action is one thing, but it is quite another thing to not even mention his current status as a trustee-less undischarged bankrupt who additionally has been kicked out of bankruptcy for perpetual non-compliance.

If Patrick wants to file and argue a defamation action like the above, well, he can always try. But if he filed that Statement of Claim while deliberately concealing his status as an undischarged bankrupt, I'm thinking that is not going to end well once that is brought to the attention of the  Court. In short, it behooves us to wait for the availability of the above Statement of Claim in its entirety to see if Patrick tried to do an end run around Canada's bankruptcy laws, and what the possible consequences are.

Let's watch.

Saturday, October 16, 2021

JUXTAPOSE!

Rebel News is outraged -- OUTRAGED, I TELL YOU!!!! -- by "cancel culture":



On the other hand ...



SURE, LET'S TALK ABOUT "STOCHASTIC TERRORISM": There is something decidedly creepy and unnerving about the current demonization of Justice Adam Germain by the various hacks at Rebel News. Of course, no one at Der Rebel is going to come right out and encourage violence against the judge, but that's not necessary -- it is sufficient to dabble in a little "stochastic terrorism," then sit back and see where that goes:




See how that works? You naturally avoid asking outright for anyone to stalk or harass or commit violence against a judge; that would be really stupid. On the other hand, why not just criticize him, question his competence, denigrate him as deranged, publicly demand his dismissal and then post his picture so he can be easily identified, then sit back and wait for your adoring and intellectually-crippled acolytes to get the message? In fact, Rebel News' Ezra Levant has quite the colourful history of publicly trashing people online, resulting in a tidal wave of harassment and hate speech launched in their direction.

I have several such examples; maybe I'll post them if there's interest.

AND SO IT BEGINS:






If something unfortunate happens to Justice Germain, remember, I tried to warn you.