What is a SLAPP suit? 

It’s a lawsuit designed to intimidate, retaliate, threaten and silence criticism, it’s designed to render political opponents and members of the public to become burdened by the costly burden of a legal defense, exhausted by fighting the menacing litigation, until hopefully the Plaintiff bullies the Defendant into silence. SLAPP lawsuits are seldom won, and Plaintiff’s frequently do not expect to win these suits. Instead Plaintiffs, such as Stacy Parks Miller, leverage SLAPP law suits to silence their critics and immobilize them with fear and the burden of litigation. They file SLAPP suits in retaliation for public criticism under the false guise of “defamation.”

In many states, legislation prohibits and even punishes SLAPP lawsuits. They waste the time of the courts, frequently lack any legitimate claims, and are a dubious and archaic practice reminiscent of the McCarthy era or similar to the practices of North Korea.

SLAPP lawsuits are calculated to take away an individual’s freedom of speech. A government official who files a SLAPP law suit is in direct contradiction with American values, and is a dirty politician who seeks to silence her opposition so she can prevail politically. What is an American political process without robust criticism of a public official. American’s don’t fear speaking, or shouldn’t fear speaking, out against their government. That process in itself is inherently American, it’s our process, it’s embedded in our roots, it’s part of our culture, it IS our history, it is what makes America what it is. SLAPP lawsuits are an assault on our collective American identity, they are commenced by bullies, tyrants, lawbreakers and sleaze buckets.

Why did this bully file a SLAPP suit against the county?

  • We discovered her texting during criminal trials, violating the 6th amendment rights of the accused in the criminal justice system. This was immensely embarrassing, because it had an obvious appearance of impropriety and was an ethical red flag. Judge Bradley Lunsford resigned due to the Court texting. To this day, we do not know how many cases were “fixed” by the District Attorney striking text message deals with the Judge because the District Attorney is too embarrassed and ashamed to release the damning records.
  • We unearthed a potential litany of criminal activities by the DA. She was tampering with records, stealing money (theft of services).
  • We found numerous and extensive violations of the DA in her statements to the media that broke the rules of professional conduct. She was discussing evidence in cases that was not yet ruled admissible publicly in the media. She was making statements designed to heighten the public condemnation of the accused prior to a trial. She was expressing her opinions of guilt or innocence on defendants she was prosecuting in the media, thereby tainting the jury pool.
  • She was running the operations of her office like a thug, boldly engaging in closed door meetings in which criminal defendants were excluded – involuntarily – from the criminal proceedings and witness testimony that would decide their fates.
  • She was catfishing Defendants (already represented by counsel), and witnesses to cases she was prosecuting while posing as a 20 year old Penn State Student. Imagine your parents were charged with a crime, and you were a 13 year old kid contacted by a 19 year old bikini clad Facebook friend who was actually the DA in disguise. She was fishing for information from you – an unwitting victim – so she could use it against you to harm your family by collecting evidence without the knowledge of a Defense attorney so she could throw you in jail.
  • A look at the records show the number of people eligible for work release was declining, her penalties were too harsh and they were dependent not on the nature of the crime but on how “high profile” the case was, and who the attorney was. She was prosecuting without any regard for the individual accused in the case.
  • She was lying in publicly filed pleadings and court room transcripts.

A group of lawyers and citizens slowly began to unravel the travails of the District Attorney, and they were horrified. Some politicians became whistleblowers, a private citizen and former employee came out with a witness statement to attest to the forgery. A criminal investigation by the Bellefonte police ensued. The District Attorney filed two desperate quo warranto actions to stop the investigation before turning the case over to the OAG office. Bruce Castor was running for District Attorney in Montgomery County at the time, had he won that election, perhaps he would have been the one prosecuting Kane. Perhaps they struck a deal, like the kind of deal Bruce Castor struck with Cosby’s lawyer: If you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.

The stuff Stacy Parks Miller was doing was not cute. It was corrupt and criminal, and completely in opposition to what she was presenting to the public. The DA’s office had left all of it’s dignity behind in the disgrace of this. Centre County elected a prosecutor that was all about winning and not about justice, or the people whose fate was in her hands. She was crooked, striking closed doors deals and fixing cases. She was making a spectacle of herself in court, and making a mockery of the criminal court proceedings. She was hell bent on winning at whatever costs, and had no regard to the actual guilt or innocence of the parties she was prosecuting. She was sunbathing her wins in the media, and enjoying all the attention on Facebook.

If you look at our beloved valley in the Post-Sandusky aftermath, you’ll find a valley that is profoundly image conscious, profoundly sensitive to sex crimes (particularly against children) and profoundly ashamed of Sandusky and profoundly dissident to accept that any further scandal could possibly transpire in this valley. We were reeling from Sandusky, and she saw each and every weakness and vulnerability and took our good faith and trust in her, and went on a personal joy ride.

Prosecutors have the power to change lives. They can look at each case on a case by case basis and ask themselves, given the facts, is rehabilitation possible? From there they can establish a plan. Jail. Jail. Jail. No work release. Jail. Jail. Jail. This is no plan for a community. Recidivism of offenders sky rocket with overly harsh sentences, too long periods in jail. Yet while she was being extremely and depravedly harsh on some Defendants, others were slipping through, sex crimes for instance. The cases that were the hardest to prosecute, with the least amount of evidence and the most gun shy victims.

Defiance and recalcitrance marks her, as she spent the last week on a personal vacation in Mexico. The court is backed up with cases as she is distracted with civil litigation meant to silence her foes, and put some money in her pocket. We have yet to see – with the exception of Mark Smith – any lawyer remain in her office for any extended period of time. This has nothing to do with the salary that the County pays ADA’s, this has to do with the leader of that office. Lawyers get uncomfortable with unethical activities. Stacy’s footprint is one of ruined relationships, broken trust and dishonesty.

As fast and hard as we are trying to rebuild Centre County, she is taking it down. She is a deeply emotionally sick woman, with deep rooted problems. She is not our elected leader, she is a tyrant and a threat to freedom of speech and the very integrity we place in our judicial system. She is a crook, a common garden variety criminal. She is someone we would normally pity, except that she has such profound and unchecked power to bully people and destroy lives. And she is destroying them, day by day, piece by piece, without apology, remorse and in wanton disregard of the rules of professional conduct and the laws.

Trials are public, court proceedings are public. I would encourage you to go and watch. What you see is an overly emotional, vitriolic, temper tantrum prone, unprofessional prosecutor with an ego the size of Texas. You see someone so cut up with plastic surgery procedures and pumped up in botox that it is difficult to move her face. You see a woman who frequently employs her sexuality – with much pride – in very inappropriate circumstances. You see a high heeled, over the hill, manic ranting lunatic, bent on winning and callously unaware of the grave responsibilities she has a prosecutor and the lives that she holds in her hands. You see a political animal, who intermittently cowers and viciously strikes, like a cornered rat.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. The fraternal order of the police, ever cognizant of the powers at be, have receded apprehensively with their support of her. The community, silenced by her threats, intimidation, cruelty, and SLAPP suit has been silenced. The media – god knows what is happening there – seems scared to death to report. The house of cards is crumbling. With all the darkness we watch unfold, we see more and more of this abusive conduct emerge daily as time passes and the records slowly become public. We elected Stacy Parks Miller for stability, for a certain liberal quality she displayed a democrat. She had a concerned mom look to her, prior to altering her appearance with all that outlandish plastic surgery.

Continue Reading:


Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation

Media Law Minnesota



Free Speech

Meet the CEO of Gab, The Free Speech Alternative to Twitter

by Charlie Nash

I recently got the chance to sit down and talk to Andrew Torba, CEO of, a new freedom of speech-focused social network. Though the Twitter-style network was only launched last Monday and is still very much in early beta, thousands of people are currently waiting in line for an invitation to the service, which aims to act as a shelter for freedom of speech and expression.

Charlie Nash: Censorship has been rampant on social networks such as Facebook and Twitter for quite some time now. What was the final straw that pushed you into developing

Andrew Torba: If I had to pick a single event that pushed me over the edge to take action, I would have to say it was the suppression of conservative sources and stories by the incredibly biased Facebook Trending Topics team.


CN: You’ve already attracted thousands of people who are currently waiting in line to join the social network. Has their reaction been mostly the same? Would you describe them almost as digital refugees looking to leave the totalitarian regimes of Twitter and Facebook?

AT: It’s been an incredible week, in just four days 10,000 people registered for our beta through nothing but word of mouth. Our mission is to put people and free speech first. That mission statement is connecting with tens of thousands of people not only in the United States, but around the world. The sentiment and feedback has been phenomenal and very exciting. It’s also refreshing to see that this issue of censorship is not strictly limited to conservatives as many progressives are also joining Gab and expressing interest in a user-first, pro-free speech platform.

CN: A few of the Breitbart Tech guys, including myself, are already over there testing it out. Have you seen much interest in other media professionals or public figures? Will we see Mike Cernovich, Adam Baldwin, or Julian Assange there soon?

AT: At Gab we welcome anyone who wants to speak freely. One of our new users today is Kassy Dillon, a conservative influencer, who has experienced the censorship of Twitter directly. We are actively reaching out to influencers from all backgrounds who are searching for an alternative. We welcome everyone and want to encourage open, honest, and authentic discourse on the internet.


CN: You currently have a much more different approach to verification, unlike Twitter or Facebook. You’re giving the checkmark to people who should have had it on platforms such as Twitter or Facebook, like any journalist or public figure, however were never given it due to their politics. You’re also giving it to normal members of the public who can verify that they are real, even if they wouldn’t normally meet the professional or social criteria for verification on other social networks. Do you think this will speed up the process of bringing over influential figures and media professionals?

AT: Unlike other social networks, we don’t use verification checkmarks as an elitist social ranking system. We use them for one purpose – verifying identities. Currently, we verify accounts if they have a high likelihood of being impersonated, but very soon every Gab user will have the ability to verify their identity if they so choose. We believe that when people verify their identity they are much less likely to harass others.

It’s easy to harass folks online behind an anonymous profile, but much more difficult to do so when your name is attached. We want to make sure everyone on Gab can find who they want to find, and protect their identity or brand. That being said there is no requirement to verify your identity. We believe anonymity is important for some to feel comfortable expressing their right to free speech, and we don’t want to infringe on that right.


CN: You said in the launch post that will never bow down to political or otherwise avoidable censorship, and that you’ll remain a service for the people. Do you intend on taking an 8chan-style view on content, and only removing things that are illegal or dangerous?

AT: We believe that the only valid form of censorship is self-censorship, an individual’s freedom to opt-out. Gab empowers users to self-censor and remove unwanted followers, words, phrases, and topics they don’t want to see in their feeds to help stop and prevent different forms harassment.

However, we do take steps to protect ourselves and our users from illegal activity. Our rules are very simple: no illegal pornography, a zero tolerance policy for promoting terrorism or violence, and users are not allowed to post other’s confidential information without their consent. We expect these guidelines to develop overtime and we will discuss and get feedback on these changes with the community as we scale.

CN: is already looking great, and I love the aesthetic of it at the moment, but what other features are you planning to implement soon? Can you give us an estimation of when certain things will be introduced?

AT: We have many exciting features on our product roadmap. Our core focus right now is providing as much value as possible to our people. Mobile apps are our top priority and we expect these to be ready in a month or two, but many users are enjoying our mobile website until that time. We are also working on an API to start building our developer community. Third-party developers have been treated terribly over the last decade by social giants. We welcome these developers with open arms who believe in and want to fight for free speech on the internet with us. Beyond this we are letting our community shape the product by crowdsourcing feedback on a dedicated Gab account and building based on user demand and need.

You can sign up to join here, and follow both Charlie Nash and Andrew Torba on their official Gab accounts.

Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington or like his page at Facebook.


Activist Post

Obey = Slavery, Disobey = Freedom

By David Icke

Obey = Slavery, Disobey = Freedom – The David Icke weekly videocast trailer. David talks about censorship and explains how the war on freedom of speech is unfolding. Many activists don’t even realize that they’re participating in their own censorship. Additionally, Icke discusses the ways people are diverging from the establishment.


Comedian warns PC culture poses massive threat to free speech

Reading from his book, “When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops,” Carlin touches back on a topic covered in his previous work, “Brain Droppings,” and warns political correctness poses a massive threat to free speech.

“Political correctness is America’s newest form of intolerance, and it is especially pernicious because it comes disguised as tolerance. It presents itself as fairness, yet attempts to restrict and control people’s language with strict codes and rigid rules. I’m not sure that’s the way to fight discrimination. I’m not sure silencing people or forcing them to alter their speech is the best method for solving problems that go much deeper than speech.”