"but you know mine, so what you do to me is libel"

That isn't how libel works. Technically I'm addressing a user named " @Paul Higgins " whom I believe is Jimmy Yerian. :D

...and if you feel you have a libel case against me, feel free to contact an attorney and discuss the matter. I'll welcome letting a jury decide if you're an apologist for a pedophile AND that you blamed the victim along with her father.

Fair warning, you can expect a long, very involved and insanely expensive counter-suit up here in NH. ;-)

@Paul Higgins Friendly suggestion. Bring copies of your "prayer request" post and "blame the victim" comment to your first meeting. Your attorney won't be sastisfied with your "summary" of what you claim you said or what you meant.

Your attorney is going to want to read what MY attorney will have you reading out loud to the jury, your fat backside planted firmly in the witness stand sputtering away.

"Well I do have a libel case against you."

Only when you file one and not before, Jimmy.

"ANd you most certainly do not know how libel cases work."

A batchelor's in English isn't a law degree, Jimbo. Don't flatter yourself.

"Discovery would be wonderful. We would get to know all about you and your behavior on this entire site."

My "behavior on this entire site" is irrelevant to YOUR claim and YOUR case. Did I say you're an apologist for a pedophile? Sure. I'm saying it right now. Did I say you blamed the victim. Yes, and I'm repeating that.

Discovery isn't a carte blanche for irrelevancies and my guys will be slamming your guy with one objection after another.

Don't presume you can bluff me with threats to my anonymity, Jimmy.

"How it establishes a pattern of libel, a pattern of hate, etc."

Fallacy of circular reasoning. You stink at law as you do at logic. Libel is what you're trying to prove. That isn't part of the discovery process, dummy.

Whoops! Jimmy "the fighther" just got a busted nose in Round 1. :D

"And I didn't defend a pedophile and I didn't blame the victim."

That's what the trial will decide, not the discovery.

You simply saying that isn't going to be enough. Your own posts/ comments damn you. Especially when you're forced to explain every sentence.

"I never said".... isn't going to work there.

"Yeah, yeah, your counter suit would be wonderful. Would be thrown out."

Jimmy Expert Attorney Licensed To Practice in Ohio and New Hampshire. Yeah, no. You're even missing the point of that counter-suit which is VERY amusing. :D

"In the end, I would win. And we all get to see who you really are."

How strange you're not leaping at the chance, eh?

"You're nothing, and you know you are."

Jimmy the Mind reader... :P

@Jimmy akaPaul Higgins Your fantasy verdicts are like your tough guy fantasies. Empty claims from an empty head. Example: You STILL haven't quoted @Mathathias Maccabeus supposedly calling you "a pedophile". Facts trump falsehoods, Jimmy.

Go watch some more daytime re-runs of "The People's Court".;-)

I'm not Matty, @Jimmy akaPaul Higgins Your reply is just noise... endless empty ad hominems because you can't deliver the goods. Quote @Mathathias Maccabeus word for word where he supposedly called you a pedophile. Link the post where he made the comment. You can't and you won't because he didn't call you a pedophile..

That's how you lose a case, Jimmy. Protip: for a guy who's so infatuated with the discovery phase, consider having to read that last comment out loud. You just lost every woman juror before the trial even started. :D

Protip: poking fun at you AFTER or WHILE I'm disproving you isn't an ad hominem attack which is a substute for a factual rebuttal. :D And you still haven't supplied a quote from @Mathathias Maccabeus That's why your comment IS an ad hominem AND noise.

Better let your debating coach look at those bruises, slugger.