No, Wonkette's Not Giving Larry Klayman $75,000, LARRY.

As a wise woman once said (it was me!) GO SUE SOMEONE ELSE.

Larry Klayman, he's this lawyer. As he explains in his lawsuit against me, your editrix, personally, he is a very famous man, a public figure even, and I, your editrix, have committed defamation most foul by saying he seemed , based on (not his first) bar disciplinary proceedings, not to be a very good lawyer. He also seemed , based on his saying Obama administration employees were Barack's "white slaves," and based on his suing Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Louis Farrakhan, and Black Lives Matter, for "starting a race war," to be some flavor of white supremacist. He also seemed , based on those disciplinary proceedings, to have sexually harassed a woman. (I said "harassed," but Larry Klayman, in his lawsuit against me, added [sexually] before harassed in the excerpt from my story, because he is so "honest.")

Also, I let Jamie laugh at him some. And she DID say "sexually" harassed, which I wouldn't have said because it was romantic harassment (and definitely stalking), but she's the First Amendment attorney, not me, so I let it ride. Shall we read some lawsuit, like I read all 185 pages including the footnotes of his HARROWING DC bar disciplinary report, together?

Part One: The Parties

Larry Klayman, very famous public figure. Thank you for establishing that, LARRY.

Here Larry Klayman is oh-for-three. This is my Montana office right here:

BUY SOME MERCH! https: //wonkettebazaar.com/  

As you can probably tell, it is in my house, thus the "registered agent" so's my home address, in Montana, isn't all over the Internet any more than is necessary. But I hope you liked serving my old landlady in LA, LARRY.

Does Wonkette misrepresent facts and persons in the news? Swing and a miss! While we certainly have opinions , and are allowed to, being opinion writers and all, we actually do NOT misrepresent facts and persons in the news. That's the guy who writes news saying he can indict and arrest Barack Obama, everyone else, and, most recently, Robert Mueller.

Am I a resident of Los Angeles? No, though I was for almost 40 damn years! But a Google search more recent than 2008 when my modest little book of essays came out (which Klayman is weirdly attached to) would show that. I mean, it might be the kind of Google you have to fork over $34 a month for, cancel anytime, but it definitely shows I live here.

Larry Klayman: Bad at Google, bad at ... ???

Let me help you out here, Larry. In 2012, I bought Wonkette. There was no "corporate form," I ran it as a sole proprietorship. Then, in 2016, after the year I made forty thousand dollars with a family of three, I had to pay TWENTY THOUSAND of them in taxes! I am a liberal! I love taxes! But that was un-fucking-cool. I paid the same percentage in taxes that Hillary Clinton paid on a million-million dollars that year, and the same raw amount that Bernie Sanders paid on some hundreds of thousands. I cried! (I only finished paying off those taxes last year! And yet I did pay them off, LARRY, because some of us pay our bills.) And then I incorporated. In Montana. Where I live.

Is Montana somehow MORE federal "diversity" than Los Angeles or something? I don't think so, but anyway Klayman made a big deal out of it. Probably just padding his lawsuit since he couldn't put it in 18-point type.

(Side note, I actually called my mom to see whether she thought it was okay to incorporate or if I was being a big TAX HATER CORPORATION of GROSSNESS. She said I am perfect, 50 percent taxes on $40,000 for a family of three is NOT FAIR, and I am the ONLY example of incorporating that isn't being a BIG JERK. PRINCIPLES!)

Wonkette, opinion and news site, persistently and regularly writes about Larry Klayman, a person who keeps indicting Robert Mueller and suing Joe Biden because he, Klayman, got kicked off Youtube (?) and thus is "in the news."

Wonkette, opinion and news site, runs solely on donations from PEOPLE LIKE YOU : D (This is our donations widget, but it is not the end of the article. Just saying.)

Facts Pertaining to the First Defamation

Haha, good headline, me! : D 

Anyway, "lots of reasons Jamie defamed him, with her opinions, which we cited evidence for and stand by."

Facts Pertaining to the Second Defamatory Article

Let us link you here to Imagine if Your Stalker* Was Larry Klayman, so you can adjudge for yourself.

I don't know if I mentioned this (I mentioned this), but I read all 185 pages of the DC bar's disciplinary committee report, including the footnotes. It honestly was heartbreaking. Did I misrepresent the hearing committee report in ANY manner? I did not! I did quote from it extensively, though, just as Klayman quotes extensively from me. But there is a difference! Klayman always, somehow , manages to elide the facts that I had typed out in between what he calls his "smears."

It's a good thing you can't be sued for defamation for things that you allege in court proceedings, LARRY. Of course, you also can't be sued for true reporting on official proceedings, which this was. But that's never stopped Klayman before! 

YUP! Thanks Larry!

Thanks for adding [sexually], which I never said.

Let's see what came before those sentences. I wonder if it will (further) invalidate his case?

Oh, and then he told the DC Bar committee that was investigating him that the lady must have made it all up because she thinks everyone wants her. What a crazy nutjob that lady must be! What a hysterical narcissist! Oh, there were letters, months and months of them, where he wrote down all his love for her and all his complaints about her lack of same? And he admitted his deep, otherworldly love for her in a deposition before his closing statement of "bitches be lying"? Well, nobody ever said Superlawyer Larry Klayman is good at "lawyer."

That's right, I remember now! And?

In 2010 and 2011, Klayman was representing Elham Sataki in her sexual harassment case against Voice of America. The DC Bar hearing committee found that, in the course of that representation, he violated eight rules of professional conduct in 14 different instances. Just little things, like "the worst case we have ever seen" of abusively haranguing a client for not loving him back, not following the client's instructions to "please don't sue Hillary Clinton over this, she has nothing to do with it" and "please don't move for Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to recuse herself by calling her an 'arrogant' and 'corrupt' Clinton lover," not keeping the client informed, and continuing to make motions after the client fired him. You know, picayune shit like that.

They're probably more like "suggestions" than "rules" anyway, right DC Bar hearing committee? No? Well, we are Not A Lawyer, and possibly Larry Klayman won't be soon either.

We can't speak to the section near the end of the report about "hey, did we mention that on top of the 'abusiveness' and 'self-pitying,' Larry Klayman is a jackhole who files nine-page single-spaced motions that are repetitive, rambling, and ELEVEN MONTHS LATE, and also he lies flagrantly about really disprovable things like whining that he was not ALLOWED to have discovery when the judge invited him to move for discovery and then he fucked off and never even did it but he still said he'd been denied discovery?" because again, we are Not A Lawyer. But it seems like those would make Klayman — 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.

Emphasis added!

Klayman's conduct toward his client, as explained by him in his own letters and depositions, certainly met the Department of Justice's definition of stalking, and was very clearly harassment, and the DC bar is the one that said his case was the worst they had ever seen. Is romantic harassment sexual harassment? I'd venture yes. The man chased her into a hotel women's room after she fled his car! It was awful!

Let's go to a looooong excerpt, because Klayman oddly didn't include it in his. It's long! Are you ready?

A Looooong Excerpt Are You Ready? Yes

Still, in 185 pages, the fucking gaslighting in one footnote (yes we read the footnotes) was what got us most. First, the receipts, both in the form of depositions of Klayman and his former client, and long, incessant emails written not just to his client but also to the therapist she was seeing, whom his client had asked for help in getting Klayman off her jock:

CLIENT: It started with that he started getting upset why I'm not inviting him to the gatherings or to places that I go and I don't take him with me. That made him upset. And so I had arguments with him. He would nonstop text or email, or phone calls, and talked to me that I talk about respect, that I'm not respecting him, and why I'm not taking him to the gatherings.

Then he explained his feelings to me and told me that he loves me and then he told me that he never loved anyone the way he loved me ever in his life and that nobody is going to love me the way he loved me, no other man can ever love me the way he loves me.

And so this was going on, and he -- and I through the whole time asked him to be my friend, but the most I can -- he's my attorney and the most I can do is a friendship, nothing more than friendship. Then he would lecture me on a friendship, what a friendship is, and then he would put lines of emails that a friend wouldn't do this or a friend wouldn't do that . . . . So, I -- the reason I couldn't, even as a friend, take him anywhere was because of his body language or the way he would look at me.

I was in a sexual harassment case and I couldn't have my attorney in public acting in the body language and the eye contact the way that people are going to say . . . "Oh . . . she has something going on with her attorney?"

His client sought help from her therapist, Dr. Aviera, in addressing the persistent harassment.

On April 7, 2010, in advance of the meeting, Respondent [that's Klayman!] wrote to Dr. Aviera a three-page, single-spaced letter in which he stated, inter alia: . . .

KLAYMAN: Ellie is more than important to me, as I have told you and her. I think there is a very beautiful side to Ellie and this has touched my heart, to understate things. . . . I have not helped her for money; I love Ellie; Ellie thinks that I am acting improperly like a "jealous boyfriend." I do not believe this to be true. . . .

Today, she called me about her case and the conversation unfortunately turned personal in part. I said to her that while we have no personal relationship, we are partners professionally and that we need to be considerate of each others' [sic] feelings. . . .

Ellie in my view is not capable of seeing the forest from the trees at this time. I discount a lot, but I am human and have feelings. Because I do care so much about Ellie, I too have trouble seeing the proverbial forest from the trees. Its [sic] very hard to be a lawyer and feel so much for your client. . . .

Ellie will not do anything with me on a personal basis (even watching a film on DVD) and makes up reasons, most of which don't make sense, why this is so. (She also tries to get rid of me as quickly as possible when I am in her presence). . . .

She shut the door to ever having a personal relationship with me. . . . Ellie is going through a difficult time . . . . I don't think Ellie can, because of her state, come to any conclusions on her own at this time as to why she and I are having problems, much more how we can together solve them. . . . I don't want to make her life more difficult, but only better. From the moment I met her, I wanted to see her happy. I knew that I had met a very special person.

Did he stop there? Have you met Larry Klayman?

On April 23, 2010, Respondent wrote to [his client] another long message, in which he stated, inter alia:

KLAYMAN: When someone u deeply care for tells u stuff like, "you'll never be my Boyfriend . . . how would u feel? Last nite u did not respect me. You could have called me from the home of ur rich Persian family friend. I am very sad because I really do love u Ellie. . . . Its [sic] best for me and u that I get out of ur life in a personal sense. U would never want to be with a non-Persian anyway.

And more!

KLAYMAN: I never demanded that u love me. I never asked you for anything. Its [sic] just that you keep slamming the car door in my face. Going to Turkey with u, or even to Movieguide, does not require u to love me. I am human. You are -- and this is not said for effect -- the only woman I've ever really loved. You know, when I walk down the street in Beverly Hills and see an attractive woman, my thoughts immediately flip to you. I see no one else. This has never happened like this with me before. This is, as I wrote in my book, by far the most important and personally rewarding thing I've ever done. My loving you has given me true meaning in my life.

That was a lot to read for this kicker, are you ready?

In response to Disciplinary Counsel's investigation of the issue, Respondent denied that he sought a romantic relationship with [his client].DX 51 at 1-3; see also Tr. 1430. He suggested that "she imagines that people are sexually coming on to her," "often claims sexual harassment" or "perhaps, she is just lying."DX 51 at 3; Tr. 1424-33.

WHO'S a big malicious defamer, Larry Klayman? Is it your Wonkette? I REST MY CASE.

Wonkette's Insidious Business Model

50: Nope.

51: Gawker sold Wonkette in 2008 to some guy who sold it to me fours year later. I rule you IRRELEVANT and TRYING TO GET THE GAWKER JUDGE and PREJUDICIAL and PFFFFFT.

52: Suck.com was terrific and is much-missed still. What does the tagline for a website that's been gone for decades and once employed a writer who hasn't been at Wonkette for decades have to do with Wonkette? That's a question only a really A-plus lawyer knows for sure!

It's true, I am very tired with this fucking nonsense all the time, particularly today, and it would be terrific if you sent money to keep this bitch afloat.

I mean, Verso Books, my publisher, which is a real publisher, wrote the description. Your publishers maybe didn't write your book description? I don't know, they look like this:

But ... and?

HOLD THE PHONE! The book jacket from the year 2008, four years before I bought Wonkette and 12 years ago now, didn't include my education or training that would qualify me to understand, analyze, or critique legal matters, lawsuits, or the actions of lawyers?

COUPLE THINGS, LARRY!

That 2008 book jacket would have said I have been a journalist and political writer for 17 years, if we'd cared to include that irrelevant information. Those 17 years are 29 years now, because I have aged, which is fortunate considering the alternative. Since 2008, I have been editor-in-chief of a weekly newspaper, earned a master's degree in journalism, taught political science and journalism in the University of California system, when I lived there, and run a news and opinion site for SHIT almost eight years now!

Also, you know who is specifically qualified to understand, analyze, or critique legal matters, lawsuits, or the actions of lawyers? The DC bar disciplinary committee, whose 33-month suspension you are appealing so apparently you think it doesn't count.

Fortunately, my excellent undergraduate and graduate education in journalism taught me some stuff about "First Amendment." Did yours?

Actual Malice, Blah Blah Blah

Klayman says some more words.

But How Are You Feeling, Becca?

LOL I am fine! Remember when that 40-millionaire sued us? THAT WAS SCARY! Larry Klayman suing us? We'll be fine. Should you send us money anyway, for lawyers if we don't get a pro bono dude or chick with all the pros and bonos? Absolutely.

[shortcode-donation-form]

We love you.

[ Klayman sues your Wonkette ]