Larry Klayman began his June 7 WorldNetDaily column by calling President Obama "our American 'führer,'" and it just kinda goes downhill from there. with Klayman ramping up his already heightened sense of paranoia:
Coupled with the government’s stockpiling of guns and ammunition, intimidation with internal security forces, which deploy black helicopters over our cities firing practice rounds, and other coercive tactics, it is no longer beyond imagination that Obama and his comrades may be intending to seize absolute power with the goal of relegating We the People as his slaves – never relinquishing power.
Because calling the president a "führer" and ranting about black helicopters is a surefire way to be taken seriously in the public arena.
Speaking of not being taken seriously, Klayman has been active on the nuisance-lawsuit end of his so-called lawyering. Wonkette details how Klayman has been suing various media outlets (though, surprisingly, not us or Wonkette) for reporting on a judicial finding in his very litigious divorce that he had apparently engaged in "inappropriate behavior" with his children and that "Klayman would not even answer the simple question regarding what he thought inappropriate touching was" and even invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering it.
The news organizations in question have filed a motion to dismiss Klayman's lawsuit , arguing that Klayman failed to substantiate how what was written about him was defamation. Klayman's apparent response to that was to sue the judge who made that finding about him.
And here's where the real beclowning begins. Klayman kicks things off by insulting the judge as "Jewish, a Democrat and a leftist" who purportedly "detests" Klayman "because he is a Jew who believes in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Son of God and us a cibservatuve activist who has brought many successful lawsuits and taken hard hitting legal actions against Democrats."
Klayman goes on to essentially call his children and ex-wife liars by citing statistics about false child abuse reports, and he complains that he wasn't allowed to enter a polygraph test, "which he easily passed," into evidence as proof of his innocence.
We're not lawyers, but even we can see that the polygraph is utterly meaningless. The questions Klayman was asked in the polygraph involved whether he "sexually abuse[d]" his children or touch his children's "private sexual parts." But he wasn't accused of "sexual abuse." According to the news organization's motion to dismiss, the judge had noted in finding that Klayman had "inappropriately" touched his children:
- Allegations that Plaintiff inappropriately touched his son's genitals;
- Allegations that Plaintiff kissed his son and daughter "all over" their bodies;
- Allegations that Plaintiff had his daughter wash his genitals;
- The children's pediatrician contacted a child welfare agency to report that Plaintiff had possibly molested his son;
- A state social worker found that sexual abuse was indicated;
- One of Plaintiff's female friends took Plaintiff's nine year old daughter to alingerie store and purchased thong underwear for the daughter, which Plaintiff encouraged his daughter to wear;
- Plaintiff's complete lack of credibility; and
- State and federal judges across the country having found Plaintiff to have acted with complete disregard for the judicial process.
The polygraph address only one of the allegations, and asks about a "sexual abuse" allegation that was never specifically made.
WND and its leader, Joseph Farah, have yet to comment on these allegations against its main attorney. Perhaps it's time he does.