Mulieris Dignitatem: Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Their Transparent Empire of Lies UPDATE: ‘Anonymous’ Connection

11 June 2012

Brett Kimberlin, Neal Rauhauser, and Their Transparent Empire of Lies UPDATE: ‘Anonymous’ Connection

Posted on | June 10, 2012 | 26 Comments and 155 Reactions

FROM AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION
Seventy members of the House of Representatives are reportedly prepared to unite in support of Senator Saxby Chambliss’s call for a Justice Department investigation of the “SWATtings” against Mike Stack, Patrick Frey and Erick Erickson.
There is also reportedly interest among Republicans in Congress about the “lawfare” aspect of the Kimberlin case, along the lines of what Ace of Spades talked about Friday: Legislation to prevent a convicted felon from using claims of “harassment” to intimidate people who are guilty of nothing but telling the truth about his criminal past.

Beginning with his lawsuit against Seth Allen in October 2010, Kimberlin and his allies have used this strategy in a number of variations. In some cases, as with Allen and Aaron Walker, legal action seemed chiefly intended to get behind the online aliases of those who were publicizing Kimberlin’s heinous history.
Allen used the pseudonyms “Socrates” and “Prespostericity,” while Walker was known as “Aaron Worthing” in the blogosphere. Once the actual human beings behind those aliases were discovered — I believe the colloquial term for this is “patched” — then Kimberlin and his surrogates could mount personal attacks against these online critics. This could happen two ways: Either by using negative personal information about the critics in an effort to discredit them, or else by contacting the critics’ employer (or, in the case of Walker, their spouse’s employer) to claim that the critic was engaged in wrongful activity by blogging about Kimberlin’s criminality.
The success of Kimberlin in employing this tactic shows one reason, by the way, why using online aliases creates a vulnerability for anyone engaged in what we might call “combat blogging.” There is no such thing as a pseudonym that is totally secure. You may think that your online alias protects your private life, but if you ever get into heavy-duty blogwars — giving an antagonist a motive for wanting to know who you really are – your privacy becomes a weakness.
As soon as I began digging into the Kimberlin story on May 17, I became aware that what Ken at Popehat has called “Team Kimberlin” includes a number of persons operating behind Twitter pseudonyms who were involved in publicizing negative information about Kimberlin’s critics. And I also learned that Team Kimberlin had been trying to “patch” Ace of Spades.
Perhaps readers now see why I have spent the past three weeks in scramble-the-jets mode. “But wait a minute,” you say, “why Ace?”
The answer involves WeinerGate, Kimberlin’s 501(c) Velvet Revolution, the late Andrew Breitbart and a guy named Neal Rauhauser.

Readers who have been following the series of posts I call “The Kimberlin Files” have become familiar with the name Neal Rauhauser. You know about the lunatic conspiracy theory Rauhauser published under the title, “Andrew Breitbart’s ISR Cell?” You know that Rauhauser has described Kimberlin as his “client,” and that Rauhauser accompanied Kimberlin to the May 29 hearing in Maryland at which Aaron Walker was arrested.
Focusing on the Kimberlin-Rauhauser connection is, I think, the key to unlocking a mystery that has puzzled me and others for a while: What are they trying to hide?
The frenzied intensity of attacks we’ve seen from Team Kimberlin in the past three weeks strikes many observers as suggestive of what criminologists call “consciousness of guilt.”
A source familiar with the investigation of “Team Kimberlin” told me that recent exposures caused them to “freak out,” and that certain streams of communication between their team members suddenly went into “radio silence” mode. Meanwhile, certain of their pseudonymous online presences have begun frantically attacking those who are helping shine the light on Kimberlin, even to the point of sending veiled threats and “disinfo” messages to anyone who seems to be connected to the light-shiners.
While it is interesting to speculate on the actual identities behind the various online personas employed by Team Kimberlin, their general mode of operation very much resembles what Neal Rauhauser was doing in the 2010 “TwitterGate” scandal. As I’ve said to several people familiar with the case, we seem to be looking at “Beandogs 2.0.”
Today, I needed to clear my head and relax, so I went driving around and, among other things, visited a fireworks store to do some Fourth of July shopping. But I also made some phone calls, and learned of some interesting evidence showing a direct connection between Neal Rauhauser and the international criminal hacker conspiracy known as “Anonymous.”
Before I show you that, however, let me point out a basic fact: Brett Kimberlin is a liar. He lies to reporters. He lies under oath in court. His apparent compulsive lying is one of the great constants of Kimberlin’s life, going back to when he was convicted of perjury as a teenager. Patterico calls attention to how blatantly Kimberlin lies:

[Kimberlin said] that he does not maintain any online presence and said he and his family have been victims of threats themselves and accused the bloggers of constructing a “false narrative” about him.
“I don’t blog, I don’t comment, I don’t tweet on any blogs at all. This is a right-wing attack on me and my organizations and it’s a smear job. It’s a swift boat action against us,” Kimberlin said.
– Arlette Saenz, ABC News, June 6

“[I]t’s part of my job to, to work on the Internet because it’s basically a social networking job and so I get Google alerts all the time mentioning my my organizations . . .”
– Brett Kimberlin, in Montgomery County court hearing vs. Aaron Walker, May 29

These two statements seem incompatible. If Kimberlin is “on the Internet” doing “a social networking job,” how is it that he never uses Twitter or writes on blogs? With whom does he network on the Internet, and how does he do it without using the most common tools for online social networking?
Ah, but there is that evidence I mentioned earlier, involving Neal Rauhauser and the “Anonymous” hacking conspiracy.
UPDATE: E-mail communications in September 2011, in regard to “Occupy Boston” protests, involving Neal Rauhauser (claiming to speak on behalf of Kimberlin’s non-profit Velvet Revolution) and someone named Gregg Housh:

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Alex Pearlman
Date: Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: FYI Clarence Thomas message goes to Occupiers
To: Gregg Housh
Cc: neal rauhauser , Marisa Egerstrom <
megerst…@gmail.com>

We also have the general site, occupyboston.com. I’m part of the
Media/Message team and can get this to them ASAP. Thanks so much!

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Gregg Housh wrote:

> Also, Boston has this:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/occupyrevolution/home
>
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 3:13 PM, neal rauhauser wrote:
>
>>
>>   Gregg,
>>
>>   Thanks for the intro – I just put out a ‘clarification’ to the NYGA’s
>> Declaration of Occupation. It’s a bit more literate than what they did and I
>> think I’ve got the overall tone and content about right. Is this something
>> we can get people to discuss? I didn’t have the patience to get to speak in
>> one GA, can’t imagine how to do outreach to a whole bunch all at once w/o
>> begging assistance.
>>
>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/66968871/NYCGA-Declaration
>>
>>   Keep in mind I work with the guy who triggered the investigation into
>> Clarence Thomas over the Citizens United payoff and there is a lot of
>> similar stuff like that sitting around here. Those groups get in the mood to
>> clean house, we’ve got the treasure map for them.
>>
>>                  Neal
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Gregg Housh wrote:
>>
>>> Ive been in on the Boston planning. The people you want to talk to for
>>> it to start to get any sort of cohesion will probably be these two: “Marisa
>>> Egerstrom” , alexnpearl…@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:25 AM, neal rauhauser wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>   We’re getting in position to drive part of the narrative for the
>>>> Occupiers. Here is how it’s being done.
>>>>
>>>>    Overnight I created a fairly complete list of the OccupyWhatever
>>>> Twitter accounts.
>>>>
>>>> http://twitter.com/#!/list/WeOccupyAmerica/occupations
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    There is now a paper.li so we can see what they are talking about:
>>>>
>>>> http://paper.li/WeOccupyAmerica/1317378132
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    And we have our Press Agent running on @WeOccupyAmerica. This account
>>>> had 2,500 hand picked followers, mostly Progressives, no bots, no junk, no
>>>> wingnuts. It’s picked up 300 followers in the last day and since I’m using
>>>> it in this fashion now I can’t be aggressive about policing who follows.
>>>>
>>>>    This is what we’re doing message wise:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   1. Continuous low speed trickle of Eight Rules, nonviolent engagement
>>>> advice from Cynthia Boaz
>>>>
>>>> http://weoccupyamerica.blogspot.com/2011/09/eight-rules.html
>>>>
>>>>   2. We can use the list of accounts to send them individual public @
>>>> messages, so far we have said:
>>>>
>>>>      a. please help us find the rest of you
>>>>      b. please look at Andrew Krieg’s article on 20 House members
>>>> pushing investigation of Clarence Thomas (started 9/30 early AM, will run
>>>> all day)
>>>>
>>>>   3. Next steps with this will include some of the following
>>>>
>>>>      a. other Velvet Revolution activities – American Crossroads seems
>>>> most likely to draw their eye
>>>>      b. If we can get Seema Kalia’s work on Wall Street corruption
>>>> positioned right that will be HIGHLY inflammatory
>>>>      c. Keep an eye on progress against Thomas & labor uptake, maybe we
>>>> get a shot at Scalia for this NLRB/Boeing stuff he & his son do
>>>>      d. taking suggestions from the folks in the bcc: on what else needs
>>>> attention, as well as from @Occupier accounts
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    I’ve personally visited the Wall Street occupation, to establish some
>>>> grassroots cred specific to this movement, to renew contact with old
>>>> friends, and to meet new ones. I’ve got my fingers into the D.C. planning
>>>> and I’m going to make a run to Baltimore to help get that one moving, too. I
>>>> may well go back to New York for a bit if it’s warranted and I’m going to
>>>> check my Amtrak miles to see if I can swing a trip to Boston.
>>>>
>>>>    There are already back channels developing but it’s so chaotic I
>>>> can’t discern which ones are important. I would greatly appreciate those of
>>>> you who have an occupation near you skulking a bit, and bringing me half a
>>>> dozen contacts for each. If you’re actually getting involved up close and
>>>> personal, well, let’s *talk*.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     The visible emails are Jen Preston of New York Times, Mark Ames of
>>>> ExiledOnline, and Adrian Chen from Gawker – three of the four journalists I
>>>> know who don’t suck. The rest of you down in bcc: are free to hit reply if
>>>> you have something you want to give one of them, and I’ll validate you as a
>>>> source. If you’re feeling sneaky you can pass me stuff and I’ll hand it off
>>>> to them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    So … reform or bust, what say you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> –
>>>> mailto:nrauhau…@gmail.com//
>>>> GV: 202-642-1717
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> –
>> mailto:nrauhau…@gmail.com//
>> GV: 202-642-1717

While the readers begin to dissect the information in that e-mail thread, I’ll clue you in: Gregg Housh is well-known as an operative of “Anonymous,” and has been involved in a business partnership with someone who was raided by the FBI this year.
UPDATE II: To make explicit what this means: First, in November 2011, it was announced that Gregg Housh had agreed to co-author a book about “Anonymous” with the group’s public spokesman, Barrett Brown, for a reported six-figure advance.
Second, Housh has been described as a “seventh-grade dropout, devout atheist, and proud computer troll” who once served “three months . . . in federal prison for copyright infringement via software piracy.” Third, in March of this year, the feds busted the “Anonymous” offshoot known as “LulzSec” and, apparently in connection with those arrests, the FBI raided Barrett Brown in Texas.
Now, read that e-mail thread I’ve posted very closely, and tell me what you see about the connection between Rauhauser and Housh. I’ll be back to explain more, in case you don’t immediately spot the key bit of information.
UPDATE III: Did you spot it? “Gregg, Thanks for the intro.”
That is to say, when Rauhauser was looking for an introduction to the leaders of “Occupy Boston,” he asked Gregg Housh — with whom he clearly had a prior acquaintance — to make the introduction. Housh has a federal felony record and had a co-authorship deal with Brown, the “Anonymous” spokesman raided by the FBI in March of this year. And at some point prior to September 2011, Rauhauser and Housh were already good enough buddies that Neal could ask his buddy Gregg for a favor, namely this intro to the leadership of “Occupy Boston.”
Rauhauser proposed to transact official business of Kimberlin’s 501(c)3 Velvet Revolution with the “Occupy” movement via this connection obtained via his contacts with “Anonymous” operative Gregg Housh. And why would a paid agent of a tax-exempt non-profit organization have this kind of connection? Why was Rauhauser interested in “Anonymous,” and how did that interest overlap with the activism of Velvet Revolution?
Let reporters start asking those kinds of questions.
Let members of Congress start asking. Let the FBI start asking. And the next time Neal Rauhauser shows up at one of Brett Kimberlin’s court proceedings, how about somebody start asking Kimberlin about Neal, and then start asking Rauhauser about Brett. Who knew what, and when did they know it?
How about a little hint?
In a June 2, 2011, post at Daily Kos (where he used the pseudonym “Stranded Wind”), Rauhauser offered this bizarre claim:

Congressman Anthony Weiner was stalked, set up, smeared, and this was coordinated to protect Clarence Thomas from scrutiny.

What did Rauhauser link? A petition by Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution demanding impeachment and prosecution of Justice Thomas. Read more background on Raushauser here.
Is there more? Oh, yeah — lots and lots more. But I think readers will agree that this is enough to push the story forward one more day, and you can chew on this until Monday afternoon, when I plan to peel this onion just a bit more.

-– Robert Stacy McCain, Whereabouts Unknown

THE KIMBERLIN FILES: