Did right-wing bloggers, funded by GOP mega-donor Foster Friess, help spark my arrest over RICO fears?

Robert Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar

Members of a right-wing bloggers' club concocted the notion that I was encouraging a federal lawsuit against them, and other conservative figures, and they wrote about it obsessively in the days leading to, and following, my October 2013 arrest.

At the heart of the matter is a commenter at a progressive Web site who goes by the handle "RogerS" and appears to have a fair amount of knowledge about legal matters--in fact, he was encouraging liberal activist Brett Kimberlin to file a federal RICO lawsuit against members of the bloggers club and other individuals on the right. When Kimberlin did, in fact, file a RICO suit, I wound up in jail roughly one week later. Coincidence? That's hard to say, but let's look at what we do know.

In certain corners of the blogosphere, it became popular to suggest that "RogerS" and Roger Shuler (me) were one and the same--even though I had nothing to do with the comments in question, I was not aware of any possible federal lawsuit, and I have no clue about the identity of "RogerS." Still, evidence suggests I might have paid a high price--loss of my freedom for five months-- for something that did not involve me.  

As for the National Bloggers Club, it operates under a media umbrella created by the late right-wing publisher and provocateur Andrew Breitbart--and its president, Ali A Akbar, has a criminal history and admitted connections to former Bush White House advisor Karl Rove. Akbar also has a history of trolling for gay sex on adult Web sites. (More on that and Akbar's criminal record in an upcoming post.)

For a touch of irony, the NBC reportedly received seed funding from Foster Friess, a wealthy Wyoming businessman. How wealthy is Foster Friess? Reports vary, but assets in his investment-management firm total $15.7 billion, while The Wall Street Journal reported his personal net worth at $530 million. Friess is touted as an "active patron of religious and conservative causes," and he perhaps is best known for backing the 2012 presidential run of the virulently anti-gay and anti-choice Rick Santorum. Friess appears to be setting the table for a 2016 Santorum run at the White House.

The NBC is not Friess' only foray into the right-wing media. He invested more than $3 million to get Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller Web site off the ground. On his blog, Friess seems to be a pro-gun "law and order" conservative, and he has thrown money at Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who is another anti-gay candidate.

With Ali Akbar's criminal record and his apparent tendency to troll for gay sex online, he seems to make a strange bedfellow for Foster Friess. But then, the Friess-supported bloggers club is a strange outfit to begin with. The "RogerS" episode they created out of thin air is one of the most bizarre sagas I've ever witnessed--and it was personal for me, given that I was portrayed as a "boogey man" for something I did not do.   

Were the bloggers, or the people to whom they answer, upset enough about "RogerS" to somehow get involved with my five-month incarceration? On the surface, my arrest grew from a dubious defamation lawsuit filed by Alabama GOP operative Rob Riley and violated more than 200 years of First Amendment law. But NBC bloggers went into a virtual feeding frenzy in the days before and after my arrest, apparently convinced that I was "RogerS," the pseudo lawyer who was encouraging Brett Kimberlin to file a RICO lawsuit against them. (See here and here.)

Were the right-wing bloggers, and their benefactors, worried enough about Kimberlin's lawsuit that they decided to make me pay--for something I was not remotely involved with? Heck, did Foster Friess help bankroll an operation that led both to my incarceration and a legally shaky foreclosure on our house?

Foster Friess: Man Atop the Horse
(From fosterfriess.com)

I don't know the answers to those questions--yet. In fact, I didn't even know my name was linked to such a bizarre Web-generated "controversy" until late 2014, roughly eight months after my release from jail.

But the timing of the episode is curious, and the list of questions it raises is lengthy: Were right-wing interests concerned because they thought I was encouraging a legal action that might unlock some of their secrets? Or was the "RogerS episode" a diversionary tactic to attract attention away from those who really were responsible for having me jailed? Was I actually incarcerated because of my reporting about U.S. Judge Bill Pryor and his ties to 1990s gay pornography?

Did liberal interests, who one might expect to be my comrades, play a role in helping to set me up as "RogerS"? Or did liberals throw the idea out there, more or less as a joke, only to have conservatives run with it in nefarious ways?

I've come to no solid conclusions about all of this. But since I lost five months of my freedom under historic and outlandish conditions--and my wife, Carol, almost joined me in being abducted--I have obvious motivation to learn the truth about what happened.

This much is clear: Ali Akbar himself was deeply invested in the notion that I was "RogerS," as evidenced by this tweet from early November 2013. Does that mean Akbar encouraged members of his bloggers club to spread a false narrative about me?

Public documents show the following: Liberal activist Brett Kimberlin filed a federal RICO lawsuit against Akbar, the bloggers, and other right-wing figures on October 15, 2013, with an amended complaint filed on October 17. Six days after that, a Shelby County deputy entered my garage, beat me up without showing a warrant or stating his purpose for being there, directed pepper spray into my face, and hauled me off to jail.

You see what I mean by curious timing. So let's follow the trail, as we know it so far.

"RogerS" apparently made his first appearance in a September 18, 2013, post at the progressive blog Breitbart Unmasked (BU). Interestingly, that was one day after I broke the Bill Pryor gay-porn story. "RogerS" commented about a possible lawsuit that Kimberlin was planning against a number of individuals connected to the Breitbart Network.

Another commenter on the same post replied: "RogerS is one of two very cool people in Alabama . . . Everyone should read his latest: A very "stiff" portrayal of a federal judge." That's the first sign I can find of connections forming between "RogerS," Roger Shuler, and the Bill Pryor story--and it came from a commenter at a liberal Web site.

On a BU post dated October 11, 2013, "RogerS" wrote in a comment that he was a lawyer who had experience with RICO cases. He then stated the following:

I say this because if Kimberlin had us as his lawyers, we would have advised him to sue under RICO and go after a broad conspiracy, including some deep pockets. The defendants in the state case are very lucky they were not sued under RICO in federal court. It certainly appears that they have engaged in a pattern of racketeering. Those treble damages are very nice.

It didn't take long for conservatives to pick up on the idea that I was RogerS--and I was the "legal wizard" who was encouraging Brett Kimberlin to go after them under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Never mind that my only connection to Brett Kimberlin is one post I wrote about his long-and-winding feud with various conservative bloggers and entities. I've never pretended to give Brett Kimberlin, or anyone else, legal advice--after all, I'm not a lawyer, and I've never claimed to be a lawyer.

Kimberlin, acting pro se, actually filed a RICO lawsuit on October 15, 2013, four days after the "RogerS" comment above. A RICO lawsuit is a civil claim based largely on criminal allegations that typically involve a possible conspiracy. In other words, RICO involves allegations of organized crime, and it can be a pretty unsettling matter to be named as a defendant in such a lawsuit. Kimberlin filed an amended complaint on October 17, and six days later (on October 23, 2013), a Shelby County deputy attacked me in my own home and arrested me.

Again, is that a coincidence? Well, it didn't take long for conservative bloggers to start targeting me as the evil mastermind behind Kimberlin's RICO suit. The first connection on the right apparently came in the comments to a post dated October 24, 2013, at Patterico's Pontifications (written by California lawyer Patrick Frey). That was the day after my arrest, and you can see the first "RogerS"/Roger Shuler comparison in comment No. 65, which was written by "Patterico" himself.

The Other McCain (written by Robert Stacy McCain) took it even further in an October 26 post. At that point, my bunk in the Shelby County Jail had barely gotten warm. From the McCain item:

If, as some have suggested today, “RogerS” is actually the self-same Roger Shuler (Shelby County Jail inmate No. 288928), then his comments at a pro-Kimberlin web site are what lawyers called “evidence.”

Evidence of what? I have no idea, especially since I wasn't, and never have been, "RogerS."

The next day, Allergic to Bull (written by Aaron Walker, also known as "Aaron Worthing") wrote about my arrest, followed by a post on October 28 that analyzes various legal actions in which I've been involved--and might include more inaccurate reporting than any blog post I've ever read. On October 31, Walker joined the "RogerS" debate and even suggested that I might have engaged in criminal activity by falsely posing as an attorney:

And while I feel the evidence is not conclusive beyond a reasonable doubt that “Roger S.” is Roger Shuler, in my opinion there is a high probability that it is.

And this could be a very big problem. As I believe it is in most states, unauthorized practice of law is a crime in Alabama.

Now look, legal advice happens all the time, on the internet. Someone says what someone should do in a suit and that is arguably legal advice, but the bar associations generally let that slide. Everyone knows you aren’t a lawyer, so an intelligent reader will take what you said with a grain of salt.

But if the person actually starts identifying him or herself as a lawyer and then starts dispensing advice on how to handle a suit... that becomes much more problematic.

In a post written two days later, Robert Stacy McCain jumped on the "Roger Shuler must be committing a crime" train. The lengthy November 2 post includes screenshots of comments "RogerS" left at BU and then attempts to draw some conclusions:

See, there are coincidences and then there are coincidences. As anyone can see from the comments I’ve screencapped, “RogerS” had been commenting quite frequently: Oct. 17, Oct. 18, Oct. 19, Oct. 21, Oct. 23 and then . . . silence, beginning the same day Roger Shuler was arrested in Alabama, continuing for a full week until, after Aaron Walker pointed out that it is a crime in Alabama to impersonate a lawyer, suddenly “RogerS” pops up to say he is definitely not Roger Shuler.

What kind of coincidence do you think that was? And don’t you think that authorities in Alabama, who seem to be very zealous in their enforcement of the law, might be able to get a subpoena to determine whether Roger Shuler was indeed the phony lawyer “RogerS”?

Because it seems to me that if there were probable cause to suspect Roger Shuler of actually committing a crime — as opposed to a mere contempt of court problem regarding civil litigation — they could get a search warrant for Roger Shuler’s computer.

McCain seems to be big on "coincidences," so isn't it curious that he has a keen interest in searching the contents of my computer, where perhaps my research related to Judge Bill Pryor was stored?

What does all of this mean? I still don't know, but we have clear evidence of a coordinated campaign to falsely suggest that I was "RogerS"--and I was encouraging Brett Kimberlin to file a RICO lawsuit.

Matt Osborne, editor at Breitbart Unmasked, tried to put the whole thing in perspective with a post titled "Why is Team Akbar So Invested In Believing That Roger Shuler Comments Here?" Osborne stated that "RogerS," whoever he is, posted comments from a geolocation far removed from my home base of Alabama. Osborne also showed that "RogerS" had left a comment just hours after my arrest--and correctly noted that it would have been impossible for me to comment from jail.

Here is Osborne's broader take on the "RogerS" saga:

After the arrest of Alabama blogger Roger Shuler on October 23, right wing blog speculation over the identity of RogerS, who leaves comments here from time to time, reached fever pitch. Robert Stacy McCain, Aaron Walker, John Patrick Frey, Kimberlin Unmasked, and even Ken White (of Popehat blog) all weighed in with excitement bordering on bloodlust. In fact, one might even be tempted to think that all their blogging about Shuler’s arrest was driven by an intense desire to link Mr. Shuler with this website, as if they thought such a link would magically absolve Team Akbar of defamation. But last Thursday evening, RogerS spoiled their plans with a comment from the same IP address that he always uses. . . .

Looking over Team Akbar’s blog coverage of Shuler’s arrest, we find Aaron Walker the most hypocritical. A few weeks ago, Walker pretty much admitted to practicing law without a license in Maryland; now he tries to compensate by speculating about RogerS, Roger Shuler, and whether the latter has broken the law by making litigation-related comments as the former. But for sheer dumbassery, R.S. McCain is impossible to beat. As if to underscore just how desperately he needs to believe RogerS is Roger Shuler, on Saturday McCain wrote a breathless justification for his conspiracy theory. McCain’s writing is far short on proof, but overly long on speculation. He seems to think that Shelby County deputies would be justified in seizing Mr. Shuler’s computer to search for proof of nefarious criminal coordination with McCain’s mythical “Team Kimberlin. . . . ”

(McCain) hates liberals with the utter contempt and eliminationist loathing of a racist. He does no fact-checking against what he thinks he knows. He panders to a reactive audience that actually believes the president was born in Kenya, and (McCain) hoards guns and gold in anticipation of the Second Amendment remedies for Obamacare. The tone is absolutist and authoritarian: if you disagree with McCain’s politics, you are not human, and therefore not entitled to constitutional protections. Team Akbar is characterized by two kinds of thinking, magical and misanthropic, and McCain is the perfect avatar for both.

How is this for irony? I've never had much interest in the Kimberlin v. Team Akbar story. The one post I've written on it was at the request of a valued source. While the story raises some important issues in the digital age, it generally falls outside the boundaries of what I normally report.

Someone, though, decided to drag me into the fray--based on false assumptions that I was encouraging Brett Kimberlin to file a RICO case. I intend to find out more about why that happened.

Before we go, here is a video where Ali Akbar admits (at about the 2:17 mark) that he has worked with Karl Rove:


(To be continued)

It's a sad and grief-filled day as we lose a beloved, four-legged member of our Legal Schnauzer family

Chloe (right) and her brother, Baxter

Today is one of the saddest days in the history of Legal Schnauzer. Chloe, the female half of our brother/sister Tonkinese cat combo, died last night.

The title of this blog is a hint that my wife, Carol, and I are animal lovers, and we've tried to treat and love our pets as if they were true members of the family. We always enjoy hearing from readers about the animals who have brought much joy to their homes. I've written several times about Chloe and her brother, Baxter, trying to give a sense of their personalities--and how much we've enjoyed having them with us. (See here, here, and here.)

Losing Chloe has us in a state of shock and grief--I'm literally typing through tears as I try to write this.

We spent most of last evening at an emergency veterinary clinic, and blood work showed that Chloe's kidneys were shutting down, and her other key numbers were in dangerous territory. She had to be euthanized, and even though she hadn't been eating right for about three months, we thought we had her headed in the right direction. We thought the lethargy she showed yesterday was due to dehydration, and we hoped an IV treatment would make her much better. But it turned out that we were dealing in the past few months with something much worse than what we had imagined.

What did Chloe mean to us--what will she always mean to us? Gosh, it's hard to find words right now. Of the three pets we've had in 25 years of marriage, she wasn't the most active, or the most alert, or the most playful. But she was the sweetest. She had a round "moon pie" face, and gorgeous blue eyes--and while we sometimes joked that she wasn't "burdened with heavy thoughts"--she was invariably good natured and very low maintenance. She loved her "noms" at meal time, and when she was ready for some loving, she would rub back and forth against our legs, and she seemed to enjoy being patted on her rather ample rump. But mostly, she was just a great "chill buddy," a gentle, calming presence in an often stormy world.

We have a tendency to create "personas" for our pets. Murphy, the miniature schnauzer for whom this blog is named, was a feisty, playful sort, who was an utter joy but could be a bit overprotective of her family unit. She reveled in her "humans," but she probably didn't come across as overly friendly to people she didn't know.

Baxter, Chloe's brother (from the same litter), is our court jester and clown. He's got the typical curiosity of a cat and tends to get into things and occasionally causes messes. We think of him as this "dude" kind of fellow, who likes to go to the gym with his guy friends--where they swim, play racquetball, tell off-color jokes, and snap each other in the butt with towels when showering in the locker room. Baxter tends to be right under our feet, but he can turn into a "fraidy cat" when strangers enter the house. (Baxter, by the way, is doing fine, although he seems puzzled by his sister's absence.)

As for Chloe, it's like she never met a stranger. It's not that she would be all over them with affection. But she seemed to say, "Hey, come on in, there's tea in the fridge, snacks in the cabinet, and I'll be around listening to music if you need me. Hopefully, you won't need me, but make yourself at home anyway."

Music was a big part of the persona we created for Chloe. Something about her big, round face and clear blue eyes made us think she would like songs that maybe weren't terribly deep, but had a happy, bouncy vibe to them. We decided that her favorite band was Wings, and she was particularly enamored with the band's lead singer and songwriter, "Mr. McCartney." We imagined that she always thought Mr. McCartney was about to celebrate his 29th birthday--"Girl, we're pretty sure Mr. McCartney is a little bit older than that--and she refused to believe that he ever had played in another band besides Wings. We would say, in our minds, "Girl, Mr. McCartney was in this other band before Wings, and a lot of people actually think they were pretty good." Then we would imagine her shaking her head and saying, "Nope, no way. No band could ever come close to Wings."

Then she would put buds back in her ears and groove along to her all-time favorite song, "Band on the Run." In fact, in the strange little world we created for her, Chloe listened to "Band on the Run" over and over and chatted with her girl friends about the latest Wings news from the Internet. Her dream was to someday see Wings in concert and have them play "Band on the Run" for two hours.

If Chloe had been a child, she would have been one of those quiet, unassuming kids, who maybe isn't a "star" this or "star" that, but gets along with everybody and never causes any problems. She was anything but a "drama queen."

Chloe was a gorgeous, happy, healthy kitty kat until her eating problems developed back in April. First, we learned that she had feline tooth resorption, a condition where tissue essentially grows over the teeth, causing sensitivity and pain. We had several of Chloe's teeth pulled and hoped that would correct the problem. (By the way, this isn't caused by lack of dental cleanings. Scientists apparently don't know what causes resorption, but it happens with many cats.)

When the dental procedure didn't solve Chloe's eating problems and she began to throw up regularly, we took her back to the vet, and an X-ray showed a "thickness" in her gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The vet said it probably was one of two things--(1) Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or (2) Cancer.

The only way to know for sure was to do exploratory surgery and take biopsies. If it was cancer, the only treatment was low-dose chemotherapy, which would provide comfort care but might not extend Chloe's life for very long. If it was IBD, we likely could manage it with a combination of medicine and diet change. Since there were no real positive options with cancer, we elected to treat it as IBD and hope that putting her on a moist, grain-free food, and gut-soothing medicines like Pepcid, would get her back on track. (It's thought that IBD is an autoimmune disorder, with the inflammation caused by an allergy to grain or other additive in many cat foods.)

Chloe seemed to do pretty well on her new regimen. Her vomiting went away for the most part, and her poops began to get more solid. She lost weight, but that seemed to have stabilized in recent weeks, and our hope was that she would start putting pounds back on soon. She often would not eat on her own, and Carol fed her almost every meal by hand and squirted water into her mouth with a syringe.

It wasn't until two days ago that we noticed Chloe looking unsteady on her feet. Then yesterday, all she could do was lay on her side, and her eyes looked sunken. That's when we made the appointment for her regular vet this morning. When we read on the Internet about the dangers of dehydration, we decided to seek emergency care last night. The hope was that IV treatment would make her much better.

The emergency vet palpated her abdomen and said, "This might be something more than IBD." We waited for about half an hour for the results of Chloe's blood work, and the news was devastating. All of her numbers were way off, her kidneys were shutting down, and it looked like she was heading for multi-organ failure. The vet said euthanasia was the only reasonable option.

This was the first time we'd ever had to have a pet "put to sleep," and the experience was gut wrenching. The vet staff put Chloe in a little pet bed, covered her in a blanket, and brought her back to the exam room, so we could say our goodbyes. We patted on her and kissed her and whispered in her ear that we would always love her--and we would always be thankful for all she had done for us. Carol said a prayer, thanking God that He had brought Chloe into our lives, thanking Him for the sheer goodness and grace she brought to our home, and praying that Murphy would be the first to greet her in Heaven.

Chloe's beautiful blue eyes were open, and as we loved on her one last time, we noticed that our tears more or less covered her eyes. The vet came in, injected her with an anesthetic, and she was gone in a matter of seconds.

Our best guess, based on what the vet told us and our research, is that Chloe had feline gastrointestinal lymphoma. It's a form of cancer that comes in two varieties--a small-cell version that is not too aggressive and a large-cell version that is very aggressive. Even with chemotherapy, survival with the large-cell version is about two months.

Thanks to Carol's ability to feed her by hand and vigilantly give her medicine and water, Chloe lived for three months--and except for yesterday, she seemed to gradually be getting better during that time.

We chose to have Chloe cremated, and will get her ashes in a cedar box, engraved: "Chloe, 2003-2015, Our Sweet Girl."

That's how we will always remember her--for her gentle, sweet nature. We pray that she knew how much her guile-free spirit meant to us, especially with the torment we've experienced via the "justice system."

During her 12 years on this earth, Chloe seemed to bring the Biblical concept of "loving-kindness" into our home. Her presence seemed to say, "Everything is going to turn out OK. Look how calm I am. You can be calm, too." It's as if she trusted in a higher power, with a connection that we can't comprehend. To us, she always will represent the "fruits of the spirit," the kind that we so seldom see in humans.

Chloe brought a sense of peace and stability to two people who desperately needed to feel that. She did a tremendous amount of good, and I'm not aware of her ever harming another living being.

Hers, truly, was a life well lived. Thank you, Sweet Girl.

In Chloe's memory, here is the ever-youthful "Mr. McCartney" singing "Band on the Run." Below that, is a video where we introduced Chloe and Baxter to Legal Schnauzer readers.

Oddities point to an ulterior motive in the theft of our home, meaning it likely was a wrongful foreclosure

Circumstances surrounding our forced move last summer suggest the foreclosure on our home of 25 years was not lawful. But there are a number of oddities about the process we haven't addressed yet. Let's take a look at those now, along with the law on wrongful foreclosure in Alabama. (See foreclosure deed at the end of this post.)

Many homeowners seem to have a perception that goes something like this: "If you are behind on your mortgage payments, especially by three or four months or more, you can face lawful foreclosure--no questions asked."

The truth is very different from that. Birmingham lawyer John Watts defends homeowners in foreclosures and has written extensively about the subject at his Alabama Consumer Law Blog. Watts has written an article titled "What Is Wrongful Foreclosure in Alabama?" and it's probably the best overview on the subject you will find. Watts shows that foreclosures often are sloppily conducted, and a whole lot can go wrong to make them unlawful--and turn homeowners into victims.

Here is an example of a lawsuit Watts filed against Chase Mortgage, which held the mortgage on our home. As the complaint shows, the foreclosure process is not always as cut and dried as many homeowners might think.

My primary focus, at the moment, is on an element of wrongful-foreclosure law that is perhaps best stated in a case styled Reeves Cedarhurst Development v. First American Federal Savings and Loan 607 So. 2d 180 (Ala. Sup. Ct., 1992). From the Reeves Cedarhurst decision:

A mortgagor has a wrongful foreclosure action whenever a mortgagee uses the power of sale given under a mortgage for a purpose other than to secure the debt owed by the mortgagor. Johnson v. Shirley, 539 So.2d 165, 168 (Ala.1989); Paint Rock Properties v. Shewmake, 393 So.2d 982, 984 (Ala.1981).

At the heart of the underlying Johnson v. Shirley case was a divorce, where the wife alleged that a bank foreclosed on the couple's home in order to benefit the husband financially. The Alabama Supreme Court found in the wife's favor, ordered the issue go before a jury, and wrote:

The mortgagee cannot use the power of sale for purposes other than to secure the debt owed by the mortgagor. Any improper use of the power for such purposes as oppressing the debtor, or serving the purposes of other individuals, will be considered by the court as a fraud in the exercise of the power.

Were we the victims of foreclosure fraud? Considering that conservative political interests had caused me to be unlawfully thrown in jail, and had also tried to arrest my wife Carol, evidence suggests someone wanted both of us out of the house so it could be scoured for documents I had gathered in research for Legal Schnauzer.

When Carol managed to escape abduction and was able to spread news about my arrest, that apparently foiled Plan A. But Plan B involved foreclosure on our home, which kicked into gear just as I was being released from jail. That process, and the resulting haphazard move, could have allowed our home and belongings to be rifled through--in search of damaging information about conservative political interests--while both Carol and I were gone. If proven, that points to a grossly improper use of the power to secure the debt--and a classic case of wrongful foreclosure and fraud.

What about those other oddities connected to our foreclosure? Here are a few:

* A Huntsville law firm called Stephens Millirons, and an attorney named Robert Wermuth, conducted the foreclosure process on our home. Does that firm conduct its affairs in a competent and upright fashion? Well, it's hard to say, but they still have never supplied us with a copy of the foreclosure deed.

* An outfit called Spartan Value Investors supposedly bought our house at an auction on the steps of the Shelby County Courthouse. I say "supposedly" because we didn't attend the event, and given our experiences with the Shelby County "justice system," I would be amazed if the sale was conducted properly. What is Spartan Value Investors? It apparently is a house-flipping company that originated in Tuscaloosa with a University of Alabama graduate named Clayton Mobley. The firm has a Web site, plus an office on Birmingham's Southside. Are they a noble outfit? Well, Lindsay Jackson Davis, the company's market director, told our representative they would pay $2,000 of our moving expenses if we were out of the house by a certain date. We were out by the date, but we've never seen a dime from Spartan.

* Court records show that roughly two weeks after we left the house, Spartan sold it to JAG Investment Strategies, which appears to be another house-flipping company. Records with the Alabama Secretary of State's office show that the registered agent for JAG is James F. Williams, with an address of 5213 Logan Drive in Birmingham. That's right down the street from our house. Does that seem odd? And why would Spartan go to the trouble of successfully bidding on the house--and then promptly sell it to another house-flipping outfit?

* During our last few weeks in the house, Spartan had most of the utilities put in its name. And at least two of the utility companies--Alabama Power and Birmingham Water Works--made the change without checking with us. At that point, under the law, we were in a tenant-landlord relationship with Spartan--assuming Spartan lawfully bought the house, and that's a big "if." It is standard for utilities to be in the tenant's name because the tenant usually pays them. Why did Spartan want the utilities in their name? Apparently, it was so they could terrorize us by threatening to have the power and water shut off. In fact, they did have the water shut off at one point, which is illegal under Alabama law.

* Let's consider some possible political intrigue. Perhaps no law firm in Alabama is more known for doing work with utilities than Birmingham's Balch Bingham. In fact, the firm pretty much is joined at the hip with Alabama Power. Balch Bingham just happens to be where Jessica Medeiros Garrison serves in an "of counsel" role; that's the same Jessica Medeiros Garrison who is suing me in an ongoing defamation case. It's also the same Ms. Garrison who publicly has stated that her mentor is U.S. Circuit Judge Bill Pryor--and Shelby County deputies started showing up regularly on our property very soon after I reported on Bill Pryor's ties to 1990s gay pornography via nude photographs that appeared at a Web site called badpuppy.com. Did Jessica Garrison and/or her legal compadres connected to Alabama Power help ensure our home would go into foreclosure, and that our power unlawfully might be turned off as part of a scheme to terrorize us? And was this done, at least in part, in retaliation for my reporting on Bill Pryor?

* Speaking of Alabama Power and Balch Bingham, they are connected to a curious outfit called Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE). It sounds like PACE is concerned with keeping energy affordable for consumers. But published reports indicate PACE's primary purpose--perhaps its only purpose--is to ensure that Alabama Power's rates stay at a comfortably profitable level. What law firm helped incorporate PACE? Why, it was Balch Bingham. Who really is behind PACE, and how is it funded? That is not entirely clear, but Mobile-based investigative journalist Eddie Curran is shining considerable light on that question. We never have held Mr. Curran in particularly high regard, mainly because we view his reporting on the prosecution of former governor Don Siegelman as way off base. But we think Curran's reporting on Alabama Power and PACE, at his blog mrdunngoestomontgomery.com, is worth a look. The following post describes the curious relationship between Alabama Power, PACE, and the Montgomery-based political consulting firm Matrix LLC. I never thought I would find myself on the same page with Eddie Curran, but I think he's onto something important with PACE, and I am looking into the matter as well.

* Finally, a friend provided us with a copy of the foreclosure deed on our house, and it shows that Spartan produced a winning bid of $74,359. During the period that we were trying to save our house, Stephens Millirons sent us information, at our request, showing that we could own the house free and clear for a payment of $66,000. My research indicates that it's rare for a house to sale at foreclosure for more than is owed on it, but when that happens, the difference between the two amounts represents equity for the homeowner. In other words, we are owed roughly $8,359, and my sources close to the foreclosure industry say it is Stephens Millirons' responsibility to make sure we receive those funds. Has the law firm sent us a nickel? Nope.

* For the record, a couple named Preston Crider and Angela Gulledge Crider are the current occupants of our home. We know little about them other than they appear to work in or around the nursing field. Are they in our house lawfully? I doubt it. Do they have any idea about the skulduggery that caused our home of 25 years to become available? I doubt it, but then again, who knows how deep all of this goes?

Below is the copy of the foreclosure deed, which a friend found and sent to us. Stephens Millirons, the Huntsville law firm that ramrodded the foreclosure, still has never sent us a copy of the foreclosure deed or any other subsequent paperwork. Our original mortgage, in 1990, was with a company called Troy & Nichols, and we refinanced with Troy & Nichols at some point in the 1990s. A 1993 New York Times article calls Troy & Nichols a "residential mortgage servicer." and reported its sale to Chase Manhattan. Here is how The Times described Troy & Nichols convoluted history:

Troy & Nichols services about $10 billion in residential mortgage loans. The company operates 21 offices in Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, New Mexico and Florida. Chase manages a $35 billion mortgage-servicing portfolio. Last July, First Gibraltar paid the Resolution Trust Corporation $82 million for Troy & Nichols, which had been part of the failed Southwest Savings Association of Dallas. First Gibraltar is owned by the financier Ronald O. Perelman, who also controls Revlon Inc. and Marvel Entertainment Group.

A document that Spartan Value Investors sent us described the auctioneer on our home as James J. Odom Jr., of Troy & Nichols. The foreclosure deed below identifies Odom in a different, and more detailed, way.

(Note: The Alabama State Bar lists a James J. Odom Jr. as an attorney in Pelham, with an office on Yeager Parkway. Could he be related to Michael B. Odom, who with his mentor Jesse P. Evans III, screwed us royally in our defense of the lawsuit that our troublesome neighbor, Mike McGarity, brought against me? That, of course, is Mike McGarity with the extensive criminal record. Wouldn't it be ironic if the lawyer who auctioned our house was related to the lawyer who helped usher in our 15-year Era of Legal Headaches? Odom and Evans took roughly $12,000 of our money, did pretty much nothing that they should have done, refused to file a valid counterclaim after stating they would do it, and then lied to me about their actions. When I requested a refund--as you would do with a mechanic who failed to fix your car--Odom and Evans refused. In my view, they flat-out stole about $12,000 from us.)

Bottom line: We have no idea who actually "owned" our mortgage. Based on The Times article, the paper trail goes something like this: Troy & Nichols > Southwest Savings Association > Resolution Trust Corporation > First Gibralter > Chase Manhattan.

Shuler--Foreclosure Deed (Spartan) by Roger Shuler

Ted Rollins, with his ugly history, has become an adherent of the nutty "conscious capitalist" movement

Ted Rollins

What is Ted Rollins up to, now that he has been ousted as CEO of Campus Crest Communities? Well, he seems to have a new company to play with. But perhaps of more interest, he is part of a business movement that seems to have a serious problem with the English language--to the point that the movement's name makes no sense and is downright comical.

Believe it or not, Ted Rollins now espouses something called "conscious capitalism." Its adherents apparently seek to operate above the greed-driven, dollar-centric norms that mark regular capitalism. Conscious capitalists, in theory, make decisions with the needs and desires of "stakeholders" and the broader community in mind. In a sense, they are to treat business as a sort of higher calling (must . . . not . . . guffaw).

That should be quite a challenge for Rollins, given that public records and laws from at least three states (Alabama, North Carolina, and South Carolina) indicate he is a child abuser, convicted criminal, deadbeat dad, perjurer, fugitive from justice, and abusive litigant. Now that the Campus Crest board of directors has dumped him, you can add "failed CEO" to his list of achievements.

As for Rollins' new company, it's called the Balance Group and is based in Greenville, South Carolina. Where Campus Crest built housing for young people, students near college campuses, Balance Group focuses on housing for old folks--senior living, you might call it.

Campus Crest always seemed an odd fit for Rollins, given his conviction in Franklin County, North Carolina, for assaulting his teen-aged stepson. Perhaps Rollins will be less likely to beat up the seniors who inhabit his Balance Group properties.

As for Rollins' devotion to "conscious capitalism," evidence for that can be found at the Web site for TXG Capital, an investment firm he's had for quite some time--in fact, it apparently predates Campus Crest Communities. At the About page for TXG Capital, we learn the following:

Conscious capitalism is an important part of the business strategy at TXG Capital. It builds on the foundation of capitalism (voluntary exchange, entrepreneurship, competition, rule of law, and freedom to trade), and expands it with four pillars: higher purpose, conscious culture, conscious leadership, and stakeholder orientation, the combination of which yields conscious capitalism.

Our vision is thriving businesses that succeed because of their focus on purpose, customer experience, and corporate responsibility. Headed by Ted Rollins, our team of conscious capitalists will create positive customer experiences while outperforming in the areas of economics, environmental preservation, and social stewardship.

Ted Rollins is going to adhere to the "rule of law"? That's interesting, considering that his divorce from Birmingham resident Sherry Rollins, which spanned two states, was conducted so far outside the law--and in such an abusive fashion--that it left his ex wife and two daughters to rely on food stamps for survival.

Conscious capitalism, by the way, is not something Ted Rollins created. It's the latest business buzz phrase, growing from a 2013 book co-written by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey. The concept even has a Web page, touting its annual CEO summit, this year in Austin, Texas. If you do a Google search on "conscious capitalism," you will receive page after page of articles about CC's potential to transform American business.

That's odd because the very name of conscious capitalism makes absolutely no sense. According to Merriam-Webster, the word conscious means "to be awake and able to understand what is happening around you." In other words, being conscious essentially means that you aren't unconscious, or maybe even comatose.

Does that mean that Ted Rollins, by virtue of being awake, is supposed to be a more effective businessman than someone who is, say, asleep--or maybe in a vegetative state?

My guess is that the movement really should be called "conscientious capitalism." After all, the word conscientious means "to do what is right, to stick by one's principles, to do one's work or duty well and thoroughly." Someone who is conscientious also exhibits empathy, a concern for the rights and feelings of other people.

Maybe John Mackey passed on "conscientious capitalism" as a buzz phrase because he knew many corporate types could not live up to it. That raises the specter of CEOs who do not have a functioning conscience, meaning they are sociopaths. According to the book Snakes in Suits, the workplace is filled with them, especially in management.

No wonder Ted Rollins is aflutter about "conscious capitalism." It's a cool sounding phrase that requires absolutely nothing from him, other than to be awake. "Conscientious capitalism," on the other hand, would require a lot from its adherents, and it might actually empower everyday folks and change the world for the better. It seems doubtful that Ted Rollins could handle that.

What was the real reason that our house went into foreclosure immediately after my release from jail?

We have pointed to evidence that suggests the real reason Rob Riley and Liberty Duke included my wife as a defendant in their defamation lawsuit was so they could have her unlawfully arrested, along with me. With both of us kidnapped and locked away in jail, that meant our house would be unoccupied and someone could rifle through it in search of damaging information about certain conservative interests--material I was planning to use for the Legal Schnauzer blog.

We called that Plan A behind the Riley/Duke lawsuit and noted the likelihood that we would have been killed if we refused to cave into whatever demands they planned to make of us as kidnap victims. That plan was foiled when Carol managed to escape being abducted on the night I was arrested--I heard officers talking about trying to get her that night--and when Shelby County deputies made three visits to our house during the first week I was in jail. After that, the story of my arrest--thanks largely to Carol's efforts and reports by Peter B. Collins and Andrew Kreig--started spreading rapidly around the Web and in mainstream news outlets. It appears Alabama law-enforcement thugs decided it was best to leave Carol alone once the story of my arrest got out.

Keep in mind that the Riley/Duke lawsuit was sealed at the time, and the sealing almost certainly had nothing to do with litigation-related concerns. It was done so that, once Carol and I were in custody, the public would have no way of knowing what happened to us. And it would have provided almost absolute cover had we been murdered.

Carol's ability to remain free and communicate with news outlets threw a major wrench into Plan A. But that doesn't mean the politicos behind the Riley/Duke scheme did not have a Plan B. And that likely involved the foreclosure on our house.

About three days before I was released from jail, I learned that our home was threatened with foreclosure. Trust me when I say that you haven't lived until you've learned about a foreclosure while having been kidnapped and thrown in jail. I can't imagine many worse circumstances, short of learning that all of your loved ones have died in a plane crash.

When I arrived home from jail, it was not exactly a joyous occasion. Yes, I was thrilled to be free, and I think Mrs. Schnauzer was glad to have me home (for the most part). But under the law, we had less than 30 days to try to save our house--and with both of us having been cheated out of our jobs and me suffering from the PTSD associated with having been kidnapped and jailed--we had almost no way to save it. About our only hope was to file for bankruptcy, but we did not qualify for the two primary options--Chapter 13 and Chapter 7.

To make matters worse, a wealthy individual from west Alabama (who shall remain nameless, for now) contacted us and promised to help save our house. We went back and forth with him for roughly three weeks, honestly answering every question that he had, only to have him renege at virtually the last minute. We later discovered that this individual has longstanding ties to University of Alabama trustee Paul Bryant Jr., so we now suspect this person never had any intention of helping us stave off foreclosure. In fact, it appears he conned us from the outset.

That pretty much ensured that we would lose our home of almost 24 years. We had to pack up our things, under extraordinary duress, and try to find another place to live in just a few days' time. We faced the very real possibility of homelessness. In fact, that still is a possibility, although we have shelter for the time being.

We had lived at 5204 Logan Drive since March of 1990. We had made our mortgage payment on time for roughly 23 years--and of the people living in the 24 or so houses on our street, I'm pretty sure we had been there longer than anyone.

Someone else now lives at that address, while we have been forced to live like refugees. Are the current occupants of 5204 Logan Drive in lawful possession of our house? The evidence suggests the answer is no. (More on the law of wrongful foreclosure in an upcoming post.)

Let me make a few quick points here:

* We were behind on our monthly payments, but we had received one extension from Chase Mortgage.

* I'm not an expert on this, but several knowledgeable individuals have told us that when you have considerable equity in a home (as we did) you often are given more than one extension to get things back on track.

* I'm not sure what warning letters Carol might have received from Chase during the last six months or so we were in the house, but I don't think she received any. Even so, with her husband in jail and Rob Riley's court documents threatening to have her arrested, her hands were tied. In a lot of ways, my incarceration helped cost us our home because we had no way to address the looming foreclosure--even though I don't think Carol had much advance warning anyway.

* We were behind on our payments, but that does not necessarily mean a foreclosure is lawful. The key point of wrongful foreclosure, under Alabama law, is this: If a foreclosure is conducted for an ulterior reason, anything other than to collect the debt owed on the mortgage, it is unlawful--and there can be serious consequences for the individuals who helped the homeowners wrongfully lose their house.

What were the likely ulterior motives in our foreclosure? I can think of two right off the bat:

(1) Any move is challenging, but to move because of a foreclosure--especially when one party has been in jail, and you didn't even have the full 30 days to fight it--probably is one of the most nerve-wracking experiences an adult can experience. It throws the homeowners' lives into off-the-charts upheaval and forces you to focus on the bare essentials of life--like shelter. A side activity, like blogging, becomes out of the question. And in fact, my blog went away for several months after we were forced out of our home. Was that part of the plan behind the foreclosure, to bring Legal Schnauzer to a close?

(2) Foreclosure moves, I suspect, tend to be done in a haphazard manner. Ours certainly was. We had almost no time to plan it, and for a variety of reasons, it was done in two or three parts--all the while, the company that supposedly bought our house at auction was threatening to shut off our utilities. In fact, they did shut off our water one day, which is against the law in Alabama--and most other states.

Because of the uber stressful nature of our move, there were several days where part of our belongings had been removed from the house, but quite a bit of our stuff remained--with neither Carol nor me around to help oversee things.

In fact, we still don't have almost one full room of our belongings. And what room was that? You might recall from our previous post that we had turned one room of our house into the nerve center for this blog--we called it the Legal Schnauzer Anti-Corruption Research Center. Almost everything from that room still is missing, and we have no idea what happened to it.

We've been told the purchasing company, Spartan Value Investors, placed the items in a Birmingham storage facility. But we have no idea if that is true. The same company told us they would pay $2,000 of our moving expenses if we got out by a certain date. We got out by that date, and we've never seen a dime from the company.

What happened during those days that possessions remained in our house while we were not around? We're not sure, but with law-enforcement obviously playing a role in the Riley/Duke scheme, it would have been easy for a "professional" to pick a lock, allowing any number of people to enter our home and go through research material I had collected for this blog.

That points to an ugly plan behind the foreclosure on our home. And as we will show shortly, such a plan is wildly unlawful.

Notorious GOP felon Michael Scanlon stood up for Rob Riley's "integrity" during campaign-finance probe

Michael Scanlon

Alabama Republican Rob Riley was on a political hot seat when the U.S. Senate launched a wide-raising investigation of fund-raising practices during the 1996 campaigns. That was the year Rob Riley engaged in activities that sound a lot like money laundering in order to help his father, Bob Riley, get elected to Congress.

The investigation lasted 10 years, finally closing down in 2008, after the Federal Election Commission fined Rob Riley and his father's campaign $10,000 for making and accepting excess contributions. At the heart of the controversy was Triad Management Services, a Virginia-based consulting firm devoted to keeping the Republican majority in Congress, according to its promotional materials in 1995 and '96. Carolyn Malenick, a former fund-raiser for Oliver North, was president of Triad.

According to a number of press reports, Rob Riley likely avoided criminal charges only because Republican Fred Thompson (R-TN) headed the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, and it decided there was insufficient evidence to take the investigation any further.

Who stood up for Rob Riley's "integrity" during this tumultuous time? It was Michael Scanlon, his father's press secretary. That's the same Michael Scanlon who was sentenced to 20 months in federal prison for his role in a public-corruption and fraud scandal involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Michael Scanlon standing up for your integrity? That's a little like having the late John Holmes vouch for your virginity.

According to a 1997 Associated Press story, Michael Scanlon was aghast at the notion that Rob Riley would intentionally circumvent campaign-finance laws. From the AP report:

The son of Rep. Bob Riley, R-Ala., contributed $1,000 to four different political action committees that later donated identical amounts to Riley's campaign, federal disclosure records show.

Robert R. Riley Jr., a Birmingham lawyer, contributed another $1,000 to a fifth PAC that donated $500 to his father's campaign the following day, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Rob Riley

A spokesman for the congressman insisted Thursday that the transactions were "absolutely not'' intended to circumvent federal law that limits individual contributions to $1,000 per candidate per election.

``To say that Rob wrote the checks to the PACs and the PACs wrote the checks to the campaign is incorrect,'' said Mike Scanlon, press secretary to the freshman Republican.

Scanlon didn't stop there; he was just getting warmed up. Here is more from AP:

Scanlon said the congressman's son wrote the five PAC contribution checks and mailed them together in late April or early May to Triad Management Services Inc., a Washington-based firm that advises conservative donors who want to contribute to conservative PACs and candidates.

``Whatever transpired between Triad and these PACs, we have absolutely no idea about,'' said Scanlon. ``That's between Triad and the political action committees.''

Scanlon said the younger Riley wanted to help conservative candidates and sent the PAC checks to Triad ``under the assumption that there was a very good possibility that none of the money would come back to Bob Riley's campaign.''

Is Michael Scanlon a trustworthy source on this subject? Well, to answer that question, we highly recommend an article at breitbartunmasked.com titled "How Rob Riley Learned to Launder Political Money."

We also recommend that you view the following scene from Casino Jack, a Hollywood film about the Abramoff scandal. This scene features Kevin Spacey as Abramoff and Barry Pepper as Scanlon:

Here is a road map for possible VictoryLand discovery related to AG Luther Strange's anti-bingo crusade

Luther Strange

If VictoryLand officials were to seek "preaction discovery" related to Attorney General Luther Strange and his crusade to close the casino, how might the process work? A 1994 ruling from the Alabama Supreme Court provides a road map.

We've shown that Rule 27 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure (ARCP) is a vehicle for parties to conduct "preaction discovery" in order to determine any "cognizable" legal claim they might have--and against whom a potential lawsuit might be directed.

A case styled Ex parte Anderson, 644 So. 2d 961 (Ala. Sup. Ct., 1994) provides insight on how VictoryLand might be able to proceed. The case involved Loyd L. Anderson, who had been fired from his position with the Shelby County Sheriff's Office and sought information for a possible lawsuit against the Shelby County Commission. Specifically, Anderson sought documents from an Alabama Bureau of Investigation (ABI) probe that led to his departure from the sheriff's department.

The trial court granted Anderson's petition. But Major Jerry Shoemaker, head of ABI, appealed to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, which found that Anderson was not entitled to discovery because Rule 27 applied only in cases where evidence might be lost or destroyed.

Anderson appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, which ruled in his favor, stating that the federal counterpart to Rule 27 indeed involved only evidence that might be lost, but the Alabama rule is broader in scope. Here is how the high court summarized the issues at stake:

Anderson alleged in his Rule 27 petition that he expected to sue the [Shelby County] Commission for money he claimed was owed to him as a result of his previous employment. Anderson took the position that he needed to see the ABI's records before he could make a good faith determination as to whether he had a cause of action against the Commission. After conducting a hearing, at which Anderson and the ABI were represented by counsel, the trial court ordered the ABI to comply with Anderson's discovery request. . . .

The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment, holding that Anderson's petition was not sufficiently specific to state a claim under Rule 27 and that he was not entitled under Rule 27 to require the production of the ABI's records, in the absence of evidence that those records were in danger of being lost or destroyed. . . . Presiding Judge [William E.} Robertson dissented, stating that he could find no basis for holding that the trial court had abused its power in granting Anderson's discovery request.

The Alabama Supreme Court wound up agreeing with Robertson, stating:

Although Alabama Rule 27 does not give a potential plaintiff "carte blanche" to "fish" for a ground for filing an action, it nonetheless provides for preaction "discovery under Rule 34," regardless of any need to perpetuate evidence, provided that the requirements of the rule are met and that the trial court is satisfied that such discovery might serve to prevent a failure or delay of justice. . . .

We must agree with Anderson and the trial court that Rule 27 is significantly different from the federal rule and that it does not limit preaction discovery under Rule 34 to perpetuating evidence. We note in this regard that limited use of Rule 27 for the purpose of evaluating a potential claim is entirely consistent with the underlying purpose of both Rule 11, Ala.R.Civ.P., and the Alabama Litigation Accountability Act, Ala.Code 1975, § 12-19-270 et seq., in that Rule 27 provides a limited means by which potential plaintiffs (and their attorneys), within the discretion of the trial court, can examine evidence before actually deciding whether they have a reasonable basis for filing an action.

What does this mean for VictoryLand? While it doesn't have "carte blanche" to "fish" for information (whatever that means), it is entitled to discovery that might help it evaluate a potential claim or respond to an appeal, which Strange has filed. The Anderson ruling suggests that even a law-enforcement agency can be subject to discovery under Rule 27. The court, however, did provide this qualifier in a footnote:

We make no judgment as to whether the ABI's records are protected from disclosure under other provisions of Alabama law. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment on the holdings that Anderson's petition was not sufficiently specific to state a claim and that he was not entitled to preaction discovery of the ABI's records for the purpose of evaluating a potential cause of action. It did not rule one way or the other as to whether the ABI's records should be the subject of a protective order. Our review in this case is limited to those particular holdings.

As we noted in our previous post on this subject, prosecutors generally are immune from suit, and our guess is that records of the Attorney General's Office likely are protected under some provision of state law. But VictoryLand's interest might be in seeking information from, or about, those individuals or entities that it believes have influenced Strange and the Alabama Supreme Court to act unlawfully against it--resulting in damages that likely reach the tens of millions of dollars, if not more.

Who might some of those individuals and entities be? Likely candidates include former Governor Bob Riley, attorney Rob Riley (the former governor's son), House Speaker Mike Hubbard, anti-gambling activist Eric Johnston, former Strange campaign manager Jessica Medeiros Garrison, and officials with the Poarch Creek and Mississippi Choctaw tribes.

Discovery related to those individuals, and perhaps others, almost certainly would bolster VictoryLand's  position on appeal--and for any action it might bring in the future to recover economic damages.

Perhaps the most inspiring video you will ever see was filmed in Birmingham's Historic Five Points South

We deal with a lot of unpleasant subjects here at Legal Schnauzer, so we (and probably our readers) could use something uplifting once in a while.

I can't think of anything more inspiring than the video for a song called "Every Praise," by Brooklyn, New York, pastor and gospel artist Hezekiah Walker. Maybe best of all, the video was filmed (expertly so, I might add) in the Historic Five Points South district of Birmingham, Alabama.

Why was Birmingham chosen for the filming? I don't know, but it's very familiar territory for me; I used to work about three blocks down the hill from where this was shot. And to see the area used to help send a soaring message that crosses racial, religious, and political boundaries . . . well, it touches the soul.

The video apparently first appeared on YouTube in October 2013. Ironically, that's the same month I was unlawfully arrested and thrown in jail for five months because of a defamation lawsuit filed by GOP operative Rob Riley. (No wonder I'm just now finding out about "Every Praise" and its video.)

My incarceration represents the ugly underbelly of the Alabama political/legal world--one that still is ruled by greed, race-based fear, white privilege, and disregard for the constitutional principles that are supposed to bind us as a nation.

So how great is it to discover that Birmingham was the site for a video that seeks to touch the best in men's souls--to give us hope for justice and a better tomorrow? Better yet, the video now has more than 5 million views on YouTube, and the song went to No. 1 on the Billboard gospel chart.

As regular readers know, my musical tastes tend to run toward what I call "1970s white guy pop/rock." But I've long had a fondness for classic church music--hymns like "Morning Has Broken," "God of Our Fathers," and "Holy, Holy, Holy." And there is no doubt that a rousing gospel tune can touch this white boy's heart. Years ago, I was fortunate to attend a performance of Mama, I Want to Sing! at the Birmingham-Jefferson Civic Center Concert Hall. It remains one of the finest theatrical performances I've ever seen--filled with rousing gospel music--and I highly recommend the show to anyone who ever has a chance to see it.

After watching the above video, all I can say is, "Thank you, Hezekiah Walker, for helping to write and perform a song that deserves to live for the ages. Thank you for bringing your choir to Birmingham, Alabama, and for choosing our city as the location for your video. May the spirit that jumps off the screen from 'Every Praise' help transform our city, state, and nation."

Hallelujah!

Here is the likely reason that Rob Riley and Liberty Duke sued my wife and tried to have her arrested

Carol Shuler, from her Facebook page

If Rob Riley and Liberty Duke had no factual basis for including my wife, Carol, as a named defendant in their defamation lawsuit against me and Legal Schnauzer, that means they had no lawful grounds to seek her arrest for alleged contempt of court--in a case that did not involve her. So why did they do it anyway?

Let's look at the evidence, and use a little common sense, to arrive at a likely answer to that question. Here are a couple of unsettling hints: (1) Our house, or rather a desire to scour the contents of our house, was the driving motivation behind the ugly events of fall 2013; (2) Carol and I, and our pets, were at significant risk of being killed.

As we noted in a previous post, suing Carol (or "Mrs. Schnauzer," as we most often call her here) is like suing tennis great Steffi Graf for something her husband, fellow tennis great Andre Agassi, wrote in his 2009 autobiography, Open. It's absurd, nonsensical, unlawful, and a classic example of what lawyers like to call "vexatious" litigation. That means it has no purpose other than to harass and annoy, and if our case had a legitimate judge other than Claude Dent Neilson, Riley and Duke would have been hit with sanctions.

Including Carol in the Riley/Duke lawsuit probably had a purpose other than to harass and annoy. Our guess is that it was designed to steal and terrorize, which makes it even more unlawful--perhaps even criminal. Why do we say that?

For starters, let's stipulate that Carol, because she was named in the lawsuit, was targeted for arrest. Jay Murrill, from the Riley Jackson law firm, sent her a letter after I had been in jail for several weeks, stating that he and his client/boss never had any intention of having her arrested. But Carol and I both know that is a lie.

When I was being arrested on the night of October 23, 2013, dragged from our home with pepper spray dripping off of me, I heard three or four officers on the scene talking about trying to arrest Carol. She was asleep in an upstairs bedroom, and somehow managed to remain asleep while deputy Chris Blevins beat me up and left debris all over the floor in our garage two stories below. I could hear officers talking about trying to nab Carol ("the wife") that night, but they apparently were reluctant to knock down our front door to get at her.

During the first week I was in jail, Carol reports that deputies made three more trips to our house--at least one of them at night, with lights being shined into our windows. They again pounded on the front door and yelled something, apparently trying to get Carol to come to the door so they could make off with her. Wisely, she did not fall for it and managed to get word out to various news outlets about my arrest. During one night-time visit, Carol was on the phone with Andrew Kreig, of the Justice-Integrity Project, so he was able to get a sense of the siege she was under.

Only when the story began to spread, with the help of Andrew Kreig, Peter B. Collins, and many other journalists, did the threatening visits to our house stop.

So what was the purpose of this terror campaign against someone who, as Riley and Duke seemed to admit in court documents, had nothing to do with writing or editing the posts in question--or any other Legal Schnauzer posts, at the time?

It took me awhile to arrive at an answer to that question, perhaps because of the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) I've experienced since being released from five months in jail--apparently the first journalist in American history to be incarcerated under such circumstances. By the way, I'm not loosely throwing around the term PTSD; multiple medical professionals have diagnosed me with the disorder, and I am receiving treatment for it, although I feel its effects every minute of every day.

Carol also has been diagnosed with PTSD. Perhaps of more concern at the moment, she has not been able to receive medication for a thyroid condition, and the lack of treatment puts her health at serious risk. That's what happens when you've been cheated out of your jobs--and your health insurance--kicked out of your house, and forced to move to an unfamiliar area.

Here is the likely answer to why Riley/Duke named Carol in the lawsuit and sought her arrest; it seems abundantly clear to me now, after months of wondering, "Why on earth did they do that?"

Carol and I now are convinced that the Riley/Duke lawsuit was all about our house--or rather the imagined contents of our house.

In the fall of 2013, I was conducting research on a number of sensitive, and potentially explosive, topics regarding the tribe of white, elitist conservatives who more or less run Alabama. Some of that research led to posts about U.S. Circuit Judge Bill Pryor and his ties to 1990s gay pornography via badpuppy.com--a series that drew national and international attention, given Pryor's status as a controversial Bush-era appointee who was known for his numerous anti-gay public statements and actions.

Bill Pryor, at badpuppy.com

The Pryor-porn connection was not the only touchy subject I was exploring. There were three or four others, and some have not made it to print--yet. But political/legal elites knew at least some of what I was working on because I had conducted, or sought, interviews with individuals connected to certain topics. I also had gathered evidence in various forms--paper files, digital and hard-copy notes, court documents, tape recordings, video recordings, photographs. We essentially had turned one room of our home into the Legal Schnauzer Anti-Corruption Research Center.

As noted here previously, the Riley/Duke complaint had almost nothing in common with a standard defamation lawsuit. It didn't seek a trial, it didn't seek a jury, it didn't seek monetary damages, it didn't seek discovery to prove the material in question was false or defamatory. That's because it wasn't about defamation or a civil dispute (lawsuit)--it was about having me thrown in jail.

And it was about having Carol thrown in jail. Why her, too? That's where common sense enters the picture--and it took me several months to regather my wits in order to figure this out.

What happens when the two human occupants of a house--we also have two much loved and slightly spoiled kitty kats--are arrested and thrown in the slammer? The house suddenly becomes free of human barriers and open to thorough "investigation."

With the help of law-enforcement officials or "security specialists," who can easily pick locks and comb through possessions, anyone could go through our house from top to bottom. They could rifle through everything we owned--and even steal items that held a special interest for them.

We feel certain they would have found plenty of interest, especially in one room. That's why it was so important to arrest Carol. With both of us stashed in jail cells some 20 miles away, our house would have become an open book. And it's important to keep this in mind: The Riley/Duke lawsuit file was sealed, so the public would not have known the case even existed--we would have vanished, with the general public having no way of knowing what happened to us. Readers likely would have started asking questions when my blog suddenly stopped, with no explanation, but authorities easily would have been able to fend that off.

Carol's ability to escape abduction almost certainly threw a major wrench into the plans. But individuals close to Rob Riley had reason to know that our house contained information that could be highly damaging to their interests. So they had another trick up their sleeve--a Plan B, if you will.

We will spell that out in an upcoming post, and I think this much will be clear: Carol and I have been the victims of organized crime. And that's because Alabama is a dysfunctional, red state that is run by a band of white, "conservative" elites who, when threatened, resort to tactics that are criminal and organized.

How serious is this? Well, Carol and I were the targets of a conspiracy to kidnap. And had we both been abducted, and we failed to produce the desired information, I think we likely would have been killed; our pets almost certainly would have been killed. And with the lawsuit file sealed, it's likely no one ever would have known what happened to us. The local press probably would have portrayed our disappearance as "suicides" or an "accident."

If that doesn't scare you, no matter where you live . . . well, this story isn't over. Wait until you hear about Plan B.


(To be continued)