sigh, redux [note: this post answers charges made publicly that I am in receipt of a cease and desist letter, sent me because I (knowingly) "serially" "harassed" someone by email. Feel free to skip it if it doesn't interest you. Lord knows it doesn't interest me.]
Frey’s attempts to bullshit readers continues:
I think Dustin has a good point that, not having cleared the release of this information with the recipient, I should have said nothing. It was prompted by anger over the incredible situation of being called a stalker by someone who (I was told) had engaged in his own pattern of e-mail harassment. But 1) actions taken out of anger are never a good idea, and 2) I messed up by mentioning something I had not been given the green light to mention.
Frankly, I never expected Jeff to deny it, and consequently had no idea he would make such a federal case out of it, which puts my friend in an awkward position, since he wasn’t looking to re-escalate the situation, and my comment did that.
The bottom line is that my correspondent and his lawyer are both irritated with me, with some justification, and say they will release everything if Jeff writes him again, in violation of the cease and desist. Otherwise, all they care about is that the harassment not resume, which means not releasing anything as long as he doesn’t contact the person again.
It’s quite frustrating to me, but then again, it’s my fault for saying something without having obtained permission to release the proof.
All I can say is I believe the person who told me this, an I suspect Jeff knows exactly what I’m talking about when I reference his late night rants. At least some of named me, I’m told. Since Jeff doesn’t care about me and doesn’t e-mail anyone about me (does anyone believe that? What did you e-mail RSM about recently? OK then), that should narrow it right down.
All he has to do is e-mail anyone he e-mailed about me this year and everything gets published. Or, since he has the e-mails, he can publish them himself.
That’s all I can do.
Comment by Patterico — 3/16/2011 @ 5:04 pm
Frey said I was sent a cease and desist
order letter.* I said I never got one and asked that it be released, with proof shown that it was sent and that I’d received it. Then I asked a number of questions that have gone conspicuously unanswered. To wit: I asked to what address was the cease and desist letter sent? When? By what means? Did I have to sign for it? Did it have delivery confirmation? Was it registered mail? Email? If so, from whom was it sent? To what email address? I asked the name of the lawyer who supposedly contacted me. Why would the lawyer who had supposedly already been in contact with me be concerned about anonymity, I wanted to know? How does that make sense?
I asked to whom I had supposedly sent “late-night e-mail rants.” I asked why, if this took place, would the recipient not simply block my email rather than take the rather aggressive step of contacting a lawyer to craft a cease and desist letter? Did this person ever ask me to stop sending emails in advance of contacting an attorney? When did this harassment take place? Over how long a period? With what as its impetus? I asked why I would not myself simply release the name; after all, clearly I would know to whom I sent serial harassing emails — and even if I had no memory (because I was undergoing a pyschotic break, say), that name would certainly be on the cease and desist letter, yes? I gave permission for the release of these emails.
And I did so because, though somebody may have received late night email rants with my name attached, they didn’t come from me.
For Frey’s part, since he was so eager to make these accusations in public, I asked what these supposed serial harassing “unhinged” emails contained. Frey claims he spoke to the recipient by email and over the phone. Surely they spoke of what kinds of horrible, harassing things I’d supposedly said? But Frey gives no specifics. Why is that? Frey said last evening he’d never seen the emails. Has he seen them yet?
He says tonight that should I “e-mail anyone he e-mailed about me this year [...] everything gets published.” I don’t have any idea what that means. So is Frey saying he now has the emails, and he’s trying to blackmail me with them? Or is he saying that should I email whomever is the supposed recipient of my previous rants, that person and his or her lawyer will then relent and release the text of my serial harassment?
Is he serious? He makes a bunch of false claims, offers no proof, and then has the audacity to try to bully me into watching whom I email?
How anyone takes this clown seriously is beyond me.
Again, if these emails exist, I want them released. Because though somebody may have received serial rantings with my signature on them, they didn’t come from me. And I never received a cease and desist
order letter. If one was sent, I didn’t get it.
Here’s a fact: Frey knows a troll once took on my identity and posted as me in the comments of my site (I was away for the day), telling people my son had cancer. And I know Frey knows this because what he took away from the incident was the DEATH THREAT I unleashed in response. Which he decided to excerpt and post on RSM’s site to show just how DANGEROUS I am. Threatening violence. Against an identity thief who was going after my family. Does my menace know no bounds?
Yet it never occurred to him — or to the supposed victim of my serial harassment (should such a person even exist) — that perhaps someone has been punking him (or them)?
Frey wants you all to think that, out of consideration for the victim (and, evidently, the victim’s attorney? WTF?), he is going to hold back this clear and vivid evidence of my perfidy and treachery. Bullshit. This is just another one of his oblique broadsides at my reputation. Part of his long-term plan, which he himself laid out in private email exchanges that have actually been published, to drive me off the internet, to “destroy” me.
It’s revolting. But sadly, it is no longer surprising.
As to my email exchanges with RSM (darkly alluded to by Frey). Here is my sent text from our last couple email exchanges:
1) To Stacy’s query about my entering the fray on the feminism debate:
fought this battle with the leftist feminists a few years back. These links might prove useful to give you a background on my thinking.
I haven’t been following the back and forth this time, but I’ll check it out now.
I just don’t think I can afford to alienate anyone else. It’s already to the point that I’m more likely to get a link from the NYT blog than I am many of the “prominent” rightwing blogs.
Other than yours, of course. Which, thanks.
2. A follow up to that same query, in which I mention Frey. You decide for yourself how seriously I was attacking his character:
Here you go. New post.
Just keep Frey off of my uterus.
There you go. Bottom line? More lies.
Next time when I say publicly that I didn’t receive a cease and desist order, and that I haven’t been serially harassing anyone (that I know of), maybe it would be best to bet on my word.
ps. Here are the people whom Frey and I might both know who I’ve emailed (or responded to) this year. Taken from my sent mail folder going back to the beginning of the year. I will leave out emails I sent as thank you notes:
a fine scotch
Shaitan [just added]
Lloyd [just added - Feb 23]
That takes me back to Thanksgiving of last year. If I missed anyone, please let me know. Since Frey intimated that my behavior supposedly took place this year, go on and pick the stalking victim from the crop.
If Frey had a shred of integrity he’d retract and apologize. Because none of this ever happened. But I won’t hold my breath waiting.
update: Frey, who does the lawyer thing for a living, breaks out the semantic fine-tuner and doubles to try to bring home a conviction:
No, I never said “order” and, more importantly, I never said I knew it was sent. Just that I was TOLD it was and I believed it. Still do.
Overstating my claim is a tactic designed to make my inability to prove it look like evidence I am lying. I am telling the truth. This is what I have been told. Do not misrepresent what I said as a rhetorical game.
By the way, the person in question is not on that list he published of people he said he has e-mailed.
I was told the story by someone I believe. He does not want to get involved because the e-mails he got before had his wife on edge to the point where he turned to a lawyer. The fact that I cannot produce e-mail I never saw and never claimed to have seen does not mean that I was not told what I was told. All Jeff’s bluster and overstatements notwithstanding.
First, as I noted last night (and will note again here tonight), I am not a lawyer. I used “letter” and not “order” in the majority of instances in the post. Frey seizes on a technical legal term to try to score a point, ignoring every other instance where I used “letter.” But be that as it may. Is anybody honestly buying that I was “overstating” the claim in order “to make” his “inability to prove it look like evidence” he’s “lying”? Or is it more likely that, not being a lawyer myself, I’m just not as careful about making the legal distinctions. Besides: I’m SAYING he’s lying — or being punked — and I thought I was quite upfront about that. So this suggestion of dark machinations on my part to suggest he’s lying would be redundant on my part, and so is just Frey’s lame attempt to get you to take your eye off the face card.
Second, if the person in question is not on the list, I didn’t email the person in question. I went through my sent emails, in order, going back to Nov 25 of 2010. I’d make screen caps of my sent items, but honestly, why bother? I’ll just be accused of deleting records, etc., — just another part of my convoluted conspiracy to be able to harass people with unhinged rants and not have that information come to light.
– Well, except that I invited the aggrieved parties to release everything I’m supposed to have written. But now we’re just nitpicking. Which is a form of death threat.
Third, once again, Frey wants us all to believe that he — champion of all that is good and pure! — is merely protecting this unnamed, lawyered-up, traumatized individual (even worse, his long-suffering and distraught wife!) from the poison of my unwanted emails, which somehow defy all rules of cyberspace and can in no way be blocked, written as they are in TIGER BLOOD and infused as they are with WINNING! So it’s EVIL mastermind versus traumatized wife who just wants to be left alone to be a good conservative woman who makes delicious biscuits and homemade lasagna for her good conservative man (who no doubt is gainfully employed).
Finally, we now know Frey never saw or even claimed to see the emails or the cease and desist letter. But we DO know that reliable testimony of their existence comes from a very distraught, very unnamed someone whom Frey, out of his deep ethical convictions (like, for instance, the ones that led him to post these accusations without having seen a shred of evidence), will protect to the end times even if it means he’s forced to take the hit. After all, what’s a little short-term embarrassment when what you’re really doing is taking the hit so that a a long-suffering, biscuit baking good Christian women and her equally good husband aren’t yet again confronted by my words.
Is that about it?
Yet I’m being accused of “bluster” and “overstatement.” Whereas the guy who made the accusations he can’t prove? Kind of a hero, if you think about it, the way he’s protecting these abused victims of my late night “unhinged” haranguing…
Christ, what a fucking fraud. And yet some people who still refuse to see it.
Sucks to be them, I guess.