Thursday, September 6, 2018
Despite Seven Months of Litigation and a Court Order, Episcopal Priest Bob Malm Still Refuses to Specify How He Was “Threatened”
As if there were any doubt that Episcopal priest Bob Malm’s true motive in filing a civil request for a protective order against me, a former parishioner, was to try to suppress criticism, the following excerpt from my recent court filing eloquently underscores this conclusion. This conclusion is bolstered by numerous emails, in which Bob attempts to find some way to use the Alexandria police department to suppress free speech.
In my brief, the accuracy of which the plaintiff (that would be Bob) has not disputed, my attorneys and I point out that despite seven months of litigation and a court order to do so, Bob Malm still will not identify those statements he claims constitutes threats.
It belabors the obvious that Bob should be able and willing to let his “yes be his yes and his no be his no.” If he really believes he was threatened, he should not only have been willing to do so; he should have been eager to do so.
So, now Dysfunctional Bob is stuck with the consequences of his actions: A ticked off blogger, active in social media, who likes to protest. And through at least January 2020, I plan to be active in all those spheres.
Bob’s actions in this matter increasingly look like an episode of “Dumb and Dumber.”