Defund George Zimmerman's lawyer Larry Klayman and his tax free alt-right hate group
Defund George Zimmerman's lawyer Larry Klayman and his tax free alt-right hate group
Larry Klayman is the lawyer who sought $100 million damages for self-appointed community watcher George Zimmerman who shot and killed Trayvon Martin after instructed to stand down by 911 police dispatchers in 2012. Zimmerman left his car and followed Martin while on the phone with police who told him to break off the pursuit.
Klayman sought $100 Million in damages from the family of Trayvon Martin, dragging them through the court system for defamation, a signature tactic in the world of Larry Klayman.
Klayman is also an associate of the Las Vegas rancher Cliven Bundy that staged an armed militia confrontation against federal park rangers in 2014. According to Bundy, Negroes are better off as slaves picking cotton, in comments quoted by the New York Times.
Now he is suing over these two tweets:
Tweet from U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren:
My heart goes out to @SybrinaFulton (Trayvon's mother)
and Trayvon's family and friends. He should still be with us today. We need to end gun violence and racism. And we need to build a world where all of our children—especially young Black boys—can grow up safe and free.
Tweet from U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg:
Trayvon Martin would have been 25 today. How many 25th birthdays have been stolen from us by white supremacy, gun violence, prejudice, and fear?
Frivolous lawsuits target critics
"Stunt litigation" by right wing extremists can be used effectively to drive the news cycle and build Internet chatter to raise millions in tax-deductible donations through dubious 501(c) non-profits.
Critics and those that question these practices can simply be sued and embroiled in years of litigation that will eventually be found by federal judges to be frivolous and vexatious.
Such so-called parasitic lawsuits clog the courts with defamation and slander actions against those people critical of Freedom Watch, Inc., an allegedly right-wing extremists group that appears largely focused on settling old scores and grievances with the Democratic Party under the watchful eye of Chairman and Chief Counsel Larry E. Klayman, an attorney licensed in the State of Florida and the District of Columbia.
Mr. Klayman, simultaneously files lawsuits and orchestrates so-called "Citizen Grand Jury" witch hunts on social media.
Citizen Grand Juries
Freedom Watch sponsors so-called Citizen Grand Juries officiated by "special prosecutor" Larry Klayman, who one time said he should become the Attorney General of the United States.
This self-appointed "special prosecutor" conducts "criminal proceedings" with expert witnesses to indict political figures, government civil servants and federal investigators. The news cycle can then pick up these scandalous charges and create headlines that "so-and-so has been indicted".
These "Citizen Grand Juries" claim to issue "criminal indictments" against many Democratic partisan political opponents. In reality they are nothing more than stunts to confuse the public about criminal charges filed against public servants to grab social media headlines and chatter.
Klayman's embarrassing history
The District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) suspended Mr. Klayman's right to practice law for 90 days, which has been honored by several other courts and bar associations (privileges suspended in the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania and the U.S. District Court serving Dallas, Texas (to name a few)).
Mr. Klayman has sued the judges in the D.C. Circuit and the D.C. Bar for their decisions to suspend his law privileges.
In one lawsuit against his former employer, Mr. Klayman has received a $2.3 million judgment against him, upheld by the D.C. Circuit (Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch). That lawsuit lasted for over 14 years.
A federal judge in another case pointed out that Klayman had sued Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch at least 11 times.
The courts of the United States are riddled with lawsuits that often are dismissed as meritless and frivolous filed by Klayman and Freedom Watch. In many cases the presiding judge cites unnecessary frivolous tactics designed to prolong litigation.
Non-profit tax exempt donations
Freedom Watch maintains a 501(c) non-profit designation with the Internal Revenue Service (I.R.S.) to receive tax free donations from the public ( EIN: 52-1948015 ). It is almost impossible to know where Freedom Watch begins and Mr. Klayman ends as they are so intertwined.
I.R.S. 501(c) regulations prohibit partisan political activities by such tax-exempt organizations. This has created concern amongst many in the public about the activities of Freedom Watch.
Freedom Watch operates with an I.R.S. with a 501(c) "civil rights" code that defines such groups as those working for the passage and enforcement of laws or other social measures that will more effectively protect the rights of specific groups.
I.R.S. 501(c) civil liberties organizations are defined as those protecting the rights of people guaranteed by the Constitution and promoting the passage of laws or other social measures that extend individual rights. This does not appear to be the mission of Freedom Watch.
Parasitic lawsuits and so-called "stunt litigation" does not further these lofty objectives created by the I.R.S.
Examples of partisan bias
"Freedom Watch announced its return to its Citizens Grand Jury for today, .. The Citizens Grand Jury prosecutor (Klayman) will be seeking the indictment of Dr. Anthony Fauci," stated in Tulsa Today.
"Founder of Freedom Watch, shares his thoughts on what he believes is the Democrats’ Socialist Agenda of Power, Control and Destruction," stated at pro-right extremists web-site.
Take action NOW!
This petition seeks an investigation by the I.R.S. into the operations and activities of Freedom Watch, Inc. and Larry Klayman to verify that these stunts are in the public interest and deserve non-profit status.
* * * * *
Florida Bar violations
Larry Elliot Klayman, 2929 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W., No. 35, Washington, D.C., publicly reprimanded following an August 29 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1977) Klayman agreed to submit to mediation through The Florida Bar’s Grievance Mediation Program after a former client filed a complaint alleging that he had failed to provide services in a criminal case for which he was paid a $25,000 retainer. After entering into a mediation agreement, Klayman failed to repay the money in full within the specified time. (Case No. SC11-247).
Racist remarks to federal judges
“Two different judges who had permitted Mr. Klayman to appear pro hac vice have since permanently barred him from appearing before them ever again. A judge sitting on the Southern District of New York sanctioned Mr. Klayman and permanently revoked his pro hac vice admission after Mr. Klayman questioned the judge’s impartiality due to the judge’s race and the political affiliation of the president who appointed him. Macdraw, Inc. v. CIT Grp. Equip. Fin., Inc., 994 F. Supp. 447, 455 (S.D.N.Y. 1997), aff’d 138 F.3d 33 (2d Cir. 1998) (describing Mr. Klayman’s conduct towards the judge as “insulting and smack[ing] of intimidation”). And after sanctioning Mr. Klayman for “fail[ing] to comply with local rules and for unreasonably and vexatiously multiplying the proceedings,” a judge in the Central District of California “permanently and prospectively barr[ed] Mr. Klayman from appearing before him” in the future. Baldwin Hardware Corp. v. FrankSu Enter. Corp., 78 F.3d 550, 555, 561 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (internal quotation marks omitted) (affirming district court’s actions).”
Some of the recent failed lawsuits:
Freedom Watch, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 368 F. Supp. 3d 30 (D.C. Cir.)
Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc., No. 19-7105 (D.C. Cir. 2021)
Klayman v. Infowars, LLC et al. 9:2020cv80614 (Western Texas federal court)
Klayman vs. Barack Hussein Obama et al, 9:16-cv-80087-DMM (Southern Florida federal court)
Klayman v. Infowars, LLC, 20-cv-80614-RKA, (Southern Florida federal court)
In above case, Judge said, "The Complaint, however, is a shotgun pleading. It is, in the words of the Eleventh Circuit, “replete with conclusory, vague, and immaterial facts not obviously connected to any particular cause of action.” Weiland v. Palm Beach Cty. Sheriff’s Office, 792 F.3d 1313, 1322 (11th Cir. 2015)
Klayman v. Fitton, 1:19-cv-20544-JEM (Southern Florida federal court)
Klayman vs. ALM Media, 21-CV-80839-MARRA (Southern Florida federal court)
Klayman v. Fitton, l:20-cv-135 (LMB/IDD), (Eastern Virginia federal court)
In Cliven Bundy vs. U.S.A., No. 16-72275, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals it was affirmed Klayman could not practice law in a Las Vegas federal court
Moore v. Cohen, S.D.N.Y., No. 19-cv-4977, 7/13/21 (Southern District of New York), "Judge" Roy Moore (Klayman client) lost to comedian Sacha Baron Cohen.