I is a hypocrite, cause Bill said so.

Any time you’d care to explain the hypocrisy of condemning me for having “sealed documents” while you just claimed to have a document that was sealed in the Peace Order hearings, please share. Think of it as a “teaching moment” for all of us.

Bill Schmalfeldt in an approved comment on this blog

This is another response to my Questions of Bill Schmalfeldt.  The question was…

More important to several readers than to me is the issue of sealed documents you’ve freely printed on your various blogs in the past.  They would like to know who revealed sealed court documents to you.  I, however, have worked in “real journalism” and have no issue with this.  For one, it is obvious who shared them with you, and two, as a journalist you should never name your anonymous source.  But it does show a specific bias in your alleged reporting.  YMMV.

Me on my own blog

Oh the hypocrisy.  To quote Robert Stacy McCain, “All that is necessary to discredit Bill Schmalfeldt is to quote Bill Schmalfeldt.”

But I like to write, so I’ll try to do it myself.

First, I’ll point out that I never claimed to have copies of the sealed documents.  I have a primary source that has told me that documents exist, but are under seal.  I also never indicated what court preceding the documents were in.  I now have additional sources that have shown me documents that they obtained from means not disclosed but assumed to be screen captures of the document in the wild.  In other words, documents that were not under seal.

Second, I’ll point out that since I’ve not shown behavior that is contrary to my professed beliefs, and others have.  If anyone has claimed to be a member of the Society of Professional Journalists and yet fails to comport themselves to the SPJ Code of Ethics, then perhaps they should not look to me for hypocrisy.

And if anyone needs reminding, the entire SPJ Code of Ethics can be found here. I would first look to the section entitled Minimize Harm.  YMMV.

Update:  I just found this.

Screenshot 2014-06-09 15.01.45

I can but laugh.

There was also this.

Screenshot 2014-06-09 15.09.42

Anyone want to speculate on the chances of a retraction?


12 thoughts on “I is a hypocrite, cause Bill said so.

  1. Anyone want to speculate on the chances of a retraction?


    He doesn’t read too well. You were clear that you knew of the images, and that you understood them to be under seal. You also indicated that others may have copies that pre-existed the issuance of that seal.

    Unless there was a gag order whereby those others were identified and ordered not to reveal that image; the possession is a non issue for the courts.

    However; it is also my understanding that TBBBBS has at least once published a copy of a unique document that was created in response to interrogetories in a lawsuit. Those responses were requested to be sealed and that request was granted upon submission. In this case, there cannot have been pre-existing copies that were immune to the seal. TBBBBS came into possession of and made public documents that were created for the court, and sealed by the court. TBBBBS eventually became aware of the status of these documents. To this date, I am not aware that TBBBBS ever removed the documents, retracted the post or apologized for the disclosure of the sensitive material thereon.

    At the least TBBBBS is accesory to contempt of court. Were I a judge in MD, and if I learned of the contemptuous behaviour exhibited by TBBBBS toward the courts; I would take a very dim view of any purported shenanigans by TBBBBS in my courtroom.

    Bill would do well to comport himself appropriately in his defence against Mr. Hoge’s lawsuit.

    • I agree with the sentiments, but would remind you that while the judge may be in MD, it is in federal and not state jurisdiction. A quibble, nothing more.

      I’ll also say that I have been a journalist. And journalist receive sealed documents all the time. The only time a journalist gets in trouble is when the court asks and the journalist doesn’t reveal the source. And as a good journalist, should a court ask he should go to jail and not reveal his source. But until a court asks, Bill has done nothing wrong in reporting on the sealed document.

      I’ll also give Bill the caveat that considering his health, no “real journalist” would look unkindly on Bill if shortly after going to jail he gave up the source. I’ll also say that if Bill were to go to jail protecting his source, I’d gladly donate money to whatever journalist organization would support him. Sources are a big deal.

      • I don’t know whether it matters, but Bill didn’t just report on or about the sealed document. He published it in it’s entirety. Somehow to me that seems different.

      • Probably because most journalist don’t do it. They don’t do it to protect their source. It happens, such a the Snowden releases, but is rare. Generally they will report on what is contained in the document.

  2. Darn…forgot to say something about the hy[pocracy of having seal docs. I’ve never heard a single cry about HAVING the docs. Nu. THe problem has always been his RELEASING the docs. And specifically cherry picking what docs were released, and how they were fit into a narrative he was trying to sell.

      • “Clownish” is apt.

        Many view BS as stupid. I have repeatedly said that I disagree (that doesn’t mean that I view him as a genius).. I have read many of his comments: he has the capacity to be superficially plausible and reasonably articulate in addition to his default attributes of rudeness, profanity, deviousness, and cruelty.

        But “clownish” does describe much of his behavior. He hides his malevolence behind a mask of foolishness. You can’t help being stupid, but you can help pretending to be stupid.

Comments are closed.