I believe he has.
If you search Twitter for his name (not handle), there are always several identical tweets from different users touting the same link to Klayman's latest video.
I believe he has.
And I suspect that, somehow and purely accidentally, the corresponding Forms 1099 never get filed with the IRS (must be that doing so would violate GIL's religious beliefs as a Jew, Christian, any religion that he can sponge off that day).northland10 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 2:01 pm I suspect GIL has been getting a salary but also getting paid through legal costs that Freedom Watch pays to him or his "law firm" for representation.
I had some of the 990s I pulled but I need to get them from an older laptop that I have not used in a while (or go back to Guidestar or somewhere and pull them again).
And now,northland10 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 2:42 pmThe judge ordered a joint scheduling report but GIL has not been responsive to attempts at communication so the judge files an OSC. Silly, judge. Does he not realize that Klayman had people to indict, a constitutional convention to run, a press release grifting for his loss handed down by the conservative hating Trump appointee, and a new class-action suit to grift.northland10 wrote: ↑Wed May 19, 2021 10:25 pm I keep wondering who he suing now when I see a new case on Pacer, but then find, oh, it is somebody else who has removed from state court. This has been a popular thing with GIL defendants. I assume he goes to state thinking he is more likely to be able to get to discovery and harass the defendants through depositions.
This time, it is the National Law Review. They were mean and repeated stuff about his discipline issues.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59 ... media-llc/
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 9.11.0.pdfAs of today 20 July, nothing filed yet.it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Within TEN (10) DAYS from the date of entry of this Order, Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this action should not be dismissed due to Plaintiff’s failure to timely participate in the scheduling conference and in the filing of a jointly-proposed scheduling report as previously directed by this Court.
2. Failure to respond timely to this Order may result in a final order of dismissal without prejudice without further warning from the Court.
3. Defendants’ informative motion [DE 3] is DENIED AS MOOT without prejudice to renew following submission of Plaintiff’s show cause statement.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida this 12th day of July, 2021.
This is actually from a few days ago so not really continuation of the Friday Smackdown.ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH SHOW CAUSE ORDER AND CLOSING CASE. Any pending motions are terminated as moot. This case is CLOSED. Signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra on 7/27/2021. See attached document for full details. (ir) (Entered: 07/27/2021)
When you're looking for charity financial disclosures, ProPublica will often have you covered (and they're worth supporting for other reasons too). Here's Freedom Watch's history.
Legal fees reported in Freedom Watch's 2013-2018 IRS disclosures: $77K for 2013; $20K for 2014; $64K for 2015; $77K for 2016; $89K for 2017; $137K for 2018.northland10 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 2:01 pm I suspect GIL has been getting a salary but also getting paid through legal costs that Freedom Watch pays to him or his "law firm" for representation.
Thanks for all this information!KickahaOta wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 12:02 pmLegal fees reported in Freedom Watch's 2013-2018 IRS disclosures: $77K for 2013; $20K for 2014; $64K for 2015; $77K for 2016; $89K for 2017; $137K for 2018.
The disclosures do not mention the purpose or the recipient of the legal fees, just the total amount (and that appears to be the only disclosure that's required).
You are correct. The contribution amounts listed are the gross amounts.woodworker wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 5:02 pm Am I correct in believing that the gross dollars contributed is before cost of raising the money, not net? Otherwise, what the hell is Freedom Watch spending money on other than GIL?
It's worth noting that this is presumably where most of the costs of actual 'public policy education' came in, especially printing costs. There were $11860 in postage and freight charges for that year, so presumably they were mailing a substantial amount of stuff out the door.
Yeah; to me, this all sounds like the it-takes-money-to-make-money part of the grift. Newsletters, web sites, fundraising firms, etc., all cost money. And a not-insubstantial portion of the recently decided Klayman/Judicial Watch battle was about Klayman's post-firing attempts to access or otherwise replicate Judicial Watch's member/donor lists.KickahaOta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 10:31 pmIt's worth noting that this is presumably where most of the costs of actual 'public policy education' came in, especially printing costs. There were $11860 in postage and freight charges for that year, so presumably they were mailing a substantial amount of stuff out the door.
Of course, it's presumably also where a lot of the fundraising costs would go. And it's a just-plain-big number -- well over one-third of total expenses -- with no real visibility as to what's inside. And that appears to be by choice. The instructions for "other expenses" just say "Attach a schedule showing the type and amount of each expense." There's not a preset list of expense categories that need to be filled in. If Freedom Watch had wanted to be more transparent about what costs went into what forms of marketing, they could have done that.
JACOB WOHL, [09.08.21 10:11]
It’s really too bad that this unscrupulous lawyer managed to cause damages to Laura Loomer far in excess of what she could have ever crowdfunded based on his ill-fated civil complaint.
I’m sure that CAIR will go on a proverbial jihad to collect the $125K that a federal judge ordered Loomer to pay them.
ABA Journal (https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... ts-founder)
A federal appeals court has upheld a $2.3 million judgment obtained by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch against
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article ... ts-founder
Johnathan FordLeftwards arrow
@FordJohnathan5
#BreakingNews Larry Klayman, a conservative activist and the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch is suing Roger Stone for 5 million dollar for defamation. @JudicialWatch
A Florida lawyer has filed a $5 million defamation suit against conservative crony Roger Stone, alleging that Stone made defamatory remarks involving sexual contact with his kids, according to the Associated Press. Larry Klayman, a conservative activist and the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, filed the suit Thursday over remarks Stone reportedly wrote on the right-wing social network Gab, claiming that Klayman was a “warped former lawyer that the 11th circuit found guilty of molesting his own children.” When Klayman asked Stone to take the false claim down, Stone doubled down and further insulted Klayman, the lawsuit says. Klayman said the allegations stemmed from a messy divorce in which his ex-wife made wild claims, including the molestation one, which he said had been investigated and he had never been charged. Klayman’s law license was suspended in Washington, D.C., but he is still licensed in Florida.
Stone did not respond to the AP’s request for comment. Klayman garnered headlines last year after he sued the Chinese government for $20 trillion over the COVID-19 pandemic.
So the PNT/City Pages lawsuit, AGAIN.A Florida lawyer has filed a $5 million defamation suit against conservative crony Roger Stone, alleging that Stone made defamatory remarks involving sexual contact with his kids, according to the Associated Press.
So Stone was wrong about which court. Klayman, from all his defamation losses, knows that's immaterial.Klayman is seeking compensation in the lawsuit filed Monday in Palm Beach County, Florida over comments Stone made about him on the social media platform Gab, claiming they were false.
The suit alleged Stone called Klayman a "warped former lawyer that the 11th circuit found guilty of molesting his own children," on Gab. Then, after Klayman demanded the comment be removed, Stone proceeded to post a "clarification" insulting Klayman more.
I have no doubt that Klayman's desire.northland10 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 7:14 pm What's the legal perspective on suing the lawyers of a defendant? It would seem to me that this is an attempt to deny the defense counsel of their choice and to prevent an attorney from giving his client legal advice.
Roger Stone, [21.08.21 12:46]
Bar suspended lawyer and gutless asswipe Larry Klayman has filed 11 individual lawsuits against me. Two of them have already been dismissed and in both cases the judge ordered Klayman to pay my legal expenses. After leaking my six hour deposition to the media Klayman was a no-show for his own deposition last Wednesday. That's because my deposition will ultimately expose his illegal and unethical behavior and hasten his total disbarment. Klayman said that the COVID-19 pandemic made it too dangerous for him to fly from LA where he really lives to Fort Lauderdale for the Deposition. Funny ,he had no trouble flying to Philadelphia for a rally two weeks ago. This is the legal definition of a true cocksucker. Ultimately all of these harassment and baseless lawsuits will be dismissed and Klayman will be disbarred forever - #JudicialWatch