Adam M Swartz, Allen Humphris, Ashley Ann Humphris, Ashley Ann LaMonica, Ashley Mitchel White Jacobs & Associates, attorney Angela Owens, Brittany Retzlaff, Edward LaMonica, Edward LaMonica White Jacobs & Associates, Gavin McInnes, Hailey Kemp, Nicholas Siatka, Proud Boys, Texas attorney Jason Lee Van Dyke, The Proud Boys, The Swartz Law Firm, Thomas Retzlaff Hanszen-Laporte Law Firm, Trent Allen Hackney, Trent Hackney Tucker Albin, Tucker Albin and Associates Inc, White Jacobs & Associates, William Allen Humphris Jr, WJA
Good day, eh. Well today’s topic is all about Nazis and white supremacists and people who have the look of a pedophile – and the corporations that hire them. Edward LaMonica and his ex-wife Ashley Ann (LaMonica) Mitchell are the owners of a so-called “credit repair” company based out of Plano, Texas. Ed and Ashley – along with their good friend, business partner, and brother-in-law Allen Humphris – are HUGE SUPPORTERS of white supremacists & Nazis – 100% VERIFIED!!
Doing business with Nazis is bad for business – and we plan to make sure business goes very, very badly for some folks – 100% VERIFIED!!
FUN FACT: Good friend, brother, and business partner Allen Humphris also runs debt collection company Tucker Albin & Associates – the company that has Trent Hackney on its payroll!!
William Allen Humphris, Jr. (DOB: Nov 13, 1979) is a criminal, a drug user, and a con artist who was recently busted by the government for running a debt collection scam and fined over $500,000. So is it any surprise that he would get into business with Edward LaMonica and his alleged “ex-wife” Ashley Ann LaMonica (aka Ashley Mitchell) (Ashley is a well-known deadbeat who has been sued multiple times for not paying her bills!!).
BONUS FUN FACT: Ashley also used to known as Ashley Ann Humphris (DOB: April 13, 1981). She is the sister of Allen Humphris!
So how do we know that Ed and Ashley are BIG SUPPORTERS of Nazis? Well it is because they have had a well known Nazi / white supremacist on their payroll for MANY, MANY YEARS!!
But Edward LaMonica, Ashley Mitchell (aka Ashley LaMonica / Ashley Humphris), and Allen Humphris are not the only supporters of Nazis and white supremacists at White, Jacobs & Associates – there are more!!
(Guess who these people are and WIN A NEW CAR!!! – Don’t worry, we will dox them below for you later.)
You can check everything out below.
Since today’s article post is all about Nazis, we figured that we should start off by showing our patriotism.
Americans commemorate D-Day by calling people they disagree with Nazis
Thursday, June 6, America observed the 75th anniversary of D-Day. Some spent the day with local World War II veterans. Others visited military cemeteries to honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice. But all Americans held fast to the central tenet of the day and our nation as a whole: calling people we disagree with Nazis.
The tradition first began in Berlin, at the Reichstag in 1933. Legend has it that when President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler Chancellor of Germany, a member of parliament remarked, “Are you kidding me? That guy is literally a Nazi.” Since then, the term has morphed to include liberals, conservatives, and the civilians who work at CIF.
Local veteran and Benghazi fetish role player Rob Jackson enjoyed his D-Day immensely. Jackson is bedridden, having become morbidly obese after the Marine Corps administratively separated him for going UA to avoid an Afghan deployment. This doesn’t stop him from wearing a red USMC piss cutter decorated with badges from wars fought before he was born or celebrating D-Day.
“I spent June 6th like any other day: woke up at 11, ate some Cheetos, and then spent 14 hours correcting uniform discrepancies on Facebook,” Jackson said. “I came across a fellow veteran who voted for Hillary, and I told that Nazi turd exactly what he’s done to my beloved Corps.”
Harvard sophomore Theo Humboldt (preferred pronouns: he, him, his) of Antwerp, Michigan, had been planning his D-Day for months.
“My cis-het white male grandfather participated in the colonial violence of June 6th,” Humboldt said. “And, I just found out he voted for Trump. I finally got to tell him off yesterday. He’s, like, literally a Nazi.”
We have a special mystery guest author posting an article today that seems quite fitting in today’s anxiety and anger driven world. We have no idea who this person is, but he (or she) seems quite talented and informed.
SPEAKING OF TALENTED AND INFORMED – should you be in need of any kind of entertainment or media related legal advice, we would urge you to get in contact with your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files attorney Sue Basko!
Susan Basko is lawyer in the bars of California, Illinois and is an Attorney and Counsellor of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. She is also an avid writer and owns several popular blogs. She has produced and directed and done tech work on hundreds of television shows, videos, and events. She is a lawyer who is an avid writer, with a technical background in television directing, producing, video editing, lighting, audio, music studio recording and mixing. She has a special interest in protest and social justice, and in the use of new media technology as part of social change.
So please enjoy the words of
Ms Basko, er, our Guest Author.
America Is Addicted to Outrage. Is There a Cure?
A healthy society reserves anger for special occasions. Today taking offense has become a reflex.
Outrage has become the signature emotion of American public life.
People are so used to it—the noise, the flying spittle—that they were pleasantly surprised when Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas declined to be incensed. He is the former Navy SEAL who lost an eye in Afghanistan and was mocked—more stupidly than viciously—for his eye patch by a performer on “Saturday Night Live.” The insult called for outrage, in the usual tit-for-tat. But instead Mr. Crenshaw took it in good humor. He went on “SNL” to accept the performer’s apology. Not everything needs to be treated as an outrage, he said—a grown-up in a moment of grace.
People have been mad as hell for much of the 21st century, starting roughly with the stalemated Bush-Gore election in 2000, followed quickly by 9/11. Fundamentals have been changing fundamentally: marriage, sexual identity, racial politics, geopolitics. Outrage flourishes also because of the rise of social media—the endless electronic brawl—and because it plays so well on our screens. Cable news draws pictures in crayon, in bold primary colors that turn politics into cartoons. On the left, “stay woke” means “stay outraged.” Trumpians want to “lock her up” or “build a wall.” Outrage is reductive, easy to understand. It is an idiom of childhood—a throwback even to the terrible twos.
The various tribes have broken off negotiations with all differing points of view. They excuse themselves from self-doubt and abandon the idea of anything so weak as compromise or, God forbid, ambivalence: No other perspective could possibly be valid. Americans have lost tolerance for the 51%-to-49% judgment call, even though that’s about the margin of their disagreement on almost everything. People give themselves over to the pleasures of self-righteousness and self-importance that come with being wronged when you know you’re in the right. Among the civic emotions, outrage is a beast of the prime; to harness outrage is to discover fire.
A healthy society reserves its outrage for special occasions: Pearl Harbor, say, or the church bombing in Birmingham, Ala., that killed four girls. But in the 21st century, special occasions—mass shootings and other random eruptions of the id—occur regularly. They have turned outrage into a ragged, all-purpose national reflex, with side effects of disgust and despair.
Outrage often emerges when an anecdote about a particular drama becomes generalized into a hashtag, as when that masterpiece of unshaven phallocratic beastliness Harvey Weinstein was dragged before the public gaze, and, in an instant, the #MeToo movement arose, drawing forth the squalid secrets of other famous men. After many a summer dies the swine. But the greatest casualty of outrage may be judgment itself. It’s dangerous when indignation abstracts itself, as when charges of sexual misconduct become generalized in phrases like “toxic masculinity,” which may condemn all men regardless of facts. They are guilty one way or another. If you cannot convict a man of rape, then you may get him for “mansplaining.”
Pretty soon absolutely everything becomes an outrage. Anything that isn’t an outrage is Jeb Bush. Complex interactions of outrage from both parties’ bases conjured up the presidency of Donald Trump, who is the mighty Wurlitzer of the art form.
Outrage seems strenuous enough, but in truth it is a lazy habit—spontaneous, fatuous and naive. Organizing a lynch mob is easier—with a surer, immediate and dramatic reward—than conducting a fair trial, which requires the brains and patience of an adult. (The inner terror of Trumpians is that Robert Mueller is a grown-up with brains and patience.) Outrage presents itself as an assertion of conscience, but in practice it mostly bypasses conscience and judgment, and goes straight to self-righteous rage, by way of self-pity.
Outrage may be justified, of course, and redress long overdue. Just as a dose of morphine may be appropriate to help a patient in extreme pain, so with outrage. But like morphine, outrage is widely abused—and addictive. It may wind up becoming frivolous or fraudulent, as in all those “triggers” and “microaggressions.”
Is outrage now an American entitlement, and a permanent state of mind? Black Americans are more entitled to outrage than most, their grievances embedded in history. Are Asian-Americans entitled to be outraged? Some are making that case in their lawsuit over Harvard’s admissions practices—an argument that, in turn, collides with the counterclaims of African-American outrage. Are gay people entitled to be outraged? Are women entitled to be outraged? Who isn’t entitled to be outraged? (White men?)
There is something sinister and corrupt—Maoist—in the habit of assigning people to categories. That was the besetting sin of the 20th century; it was the way of genocide. As people are again consigned to shallow, mutually exclusive categories in this century, it is as if we learned nothing.
A society that goes on in this way will exhaust itself. Sometimes, the outrage is a Newtonian response to the truly outrageous; outrage may have its vision of social justice. But, like so much else today, it has gotten to be a racket. The coin of anger is debased. Indignation has become a meme—not an authentic political or moral reaction to facts in a serious world, but rather a reflex, a kind of irresponsible playacting, or worse, a mania. When everyone is outraged, then real grievances lose their meaning, and the endless indulgence of outrage becomes, objectively, immoral.
COLORADO SUPREME COURT VS. JASON VAN DYKE….
This sucks for Van Dyke. But then again, he is a Nazi – so nobody cares.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Case No 19SA121 - People v Jason Lee Van Dyke - Petition for Immediate Suspension from Practice of Law
June 13, 2019 Update:
Van Dyke has until June 24, 2019, to file his response.
Of course, Van Dyke says that none of this is his fault. Specifically, in an email to the BV Files, Van Dyke wrote that he did not commit the offense. He said he pleaded no contest in the case, which played out in Denton County Criminal Court Judge Coby Waddill’s courtroom.
I entered into the plea agreement because the district attorney’s office was not acting in good faith, because I did not want more transcripts and trial records to end up on Thomas Retzlaff’s website, and because the ongoing reporting on this matter had basically eliminated any chance I had of receiving a fair trial in the case.
Right…. so it is all Retzlaff’s fault that Van Dyke got arrested for filing a false police report, threatened a witness to make him disappear, told a Denton City Councilwoman that he was going to harm her and her family (and doxed them on a white supremacist website!), and later send out a bunch of death threats to the state bar prosecutor, an FBI agent, and news reporters.
We have no idea what website Retzlaff might have. But it is certainly not this website! Our website – YOUR website – is run by Lane Lipton, Lora Lusher, Neal Rauhauser, Jennifer D’Alessandro, Joseph (“Jo Jo”) Camp, and Jane Does 1 – 5. This is according to James McGibney (who we don’t like), who has stated this several times in affidavits and court pleadings. CHECK IT OUT!!
Claims made by McGibney attorney Jay Leiderman in the federal court litigation.
And then we have the claims made by McGibney attorney John Morgan in the Texas state court litigation.
And here we have claims made by attorney John Morgan in a federal lawsuit he filed against Texas State Judge Layne Walker on behalf of his client Philip Klein.
If not even the super smart, super-brain trust of Van Dyke, McGibney, Morgan, Klein, or Leiderman can figure out who exactly runs this here website, how can any of you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters???
In any event, Van Dyke is mad because people complain about his behavior as a lawyer.
I will warn you: I have sued everyone who has ever filed a formal grievance against me with the State Bar. If you file some sort of groundless grievance with the State Bar I will make your life a living hell unlike anything you could imagine.
—Email from Jason Lee Van Dyke to Les Holtzman, November 2013.
As you can see from Van Dyke’s attempt at appealing his state bar suspension in the federal court, he still refuses to take any responsibility for his actions and still wishes to blame everyone else but himself for his predicament. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***
ECF 2 - Van Dyke's response to order to show cause (no exhibits)
This proceeding is the culmination of a lengthy history between Respondent and Retzlaff beginning in March of 2017 where Respondent, by his own admission, made false and defamatory statements concerning Respondent to Stephen Tyler, District Attorney of Victoria County, Texas, which resulted in the rescission of job offer that had been made to Respondent on or around March 1, 2017.
Either Retzlaff, a person closely affiliated with Retzlaff, or a group of persons closely affiliated with Retzlaff, made similar false and defamatory allegations to [Karlseng, LeBlanc & Rich L.L.C.] beginning on or around March 25, 2018. He/they also began harassing Respondent’s supervisors at KLR, which resulted in the termination of Respondent’s employment with KLR on the evening of March 27, 2018.
As an attorney licensed in three states and the District of Columbia, and as an Assistant District Attorney employed by Victoria County, Texas, Jason Lee Van Dyke is not just a Public Figure, but he is a PUBLIC OFFICIAL!
So now we get to the question, How Hateful Can Comment About a Public Figure Be Without Losing Constitutional Protection? The answer: There is no visible limit. The right to criticize public figures harshly – even cruelly and unfairly – is one the framers of the First Amendment used with relish. For example, in the presidential election of 1800, one political opponent wrote in the “blogs” of his day that incumbent president John Adams was “old, querulous, bald, blind, crippled, [and] toothless.” An operative hired by Thomas Jefferson, who was challenging Adams for the presidency, added:
In retort, the Adams camp called Jefferson “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father.” Jefferson’s and Adams’ comments were both probably “designed to inflict as much emotional distress and anguish” upon each other as possible – just as Van Dyke in these lawsuits and court pleadings specifically accuse Retzlaff of doing. This is not actionable. Here is why: “Public figures” are not limited to those who, like Jefferson and Adams, hold public office. See Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46, 48 (1988).
In California (like Texas), to classify a person as a public figure, the person must have achieved such pervasive fame or notoriety that he becomes a public figure for all purposes and in all contexts. Someone who voluntarily seeks to influence resolution of public issues may also be considered a public figure in California.
But in addition to being a public figure, Van Dyke could also be classified as a limited purpose public figure, which is a person who voluntarily injects himself or is drawn into a particular public controversy, due to his leadership role with the Proud Boys white supremacist group. It is not necessary to show that he actually achieves prominence in public debate; his attempts to thrust himself in front of the public is sufficient. Copp v. Paxton, 52 Cal.Rptr.2d 831, 844 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996).
But even if Van Dyke himself is not a public figure or a limited purpose public figure, his claims are still doomed.
In its first major free-speech decision of the 21st century, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the protection of free speech even further in Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S.Ct. 1207 (2011). In Snyder, the court held for the first time that the target of the offensive speech did not have to be a public figure for the speech to be protected. Id. at 1228 (dissent by Alito, J.).
Snyder involved Rev. Fred Phelps, whose Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, believes God hates and punishes the United States for tolerating homosexuality, particularly in the military. Id. at 1213. The church frequently communicates its views by picketing, often at military funerals.
Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder was killed in Iraq in the line of duty. Snyder’s funeral was at the Catholic church in the Snyders’ hometown of Westminster, Maryland. At the funeral, Phelps and his family members carried signs that read “Fag Troops,” “God Hates Fags” “Fags Doom Nations” “America is Doomed” “Pope in Hell” and “Priests Rape Boys.” Id. and at 1216.
The Snyder court vacated the damages award to the dead soldier’s father for intentional infliction of emotional distress, holding that Phelps’ speech was protected by the First Amendment – even though the Snyders were not public figures and had never sought publicity. The Snyder court found Phelps’ speech to be on “matters of public concern” – speech that “occupies the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values, and is entitled to special protection.” Id. at 1215 [citation omitted].
It is impossible to conclude that a court constrained by Snyder’s precepts could find that any of Retzlaff’s alleged speech is anything other than constitutionally protected comment on Van Dyke’s controversial leadership role in the Proud Boys, his actions and fitness to be an attorney licensed in several jurisdictions, and his employment as a public official with the Victoria County, Texas, District Attorney’s Office.
Additionally, we would like to point out that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has recently GREATLY expanded anti-SLAPP protection by raising the bar for parties seeking to defeat an anti-SLAPP motion in a U.S. District Court in the case Makaeff v. Trump University, LLC, 736 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2013). An important part of that appeal was the 9th Court’s reaffirmation of its previous decision in United States ex rel. Newsham v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Co., (9th Cir. 1999) 190 F.3d 963, which allowed the application of state anti-SLAPP statutes in federal court!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Van Dyke v Retzlaff - Amicus brief filed by Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press & 39 media groups
Of course, in keeping with the fact that Van Dyke is a drug addict and/or mental basket case, Van Dyke sees things entirely differently. CHECK IT OUT!!
Where to find a Nazi / Proud Boy when you need one?
This order from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals was just filed.
AND THIS WILL NEVER NOT BE FUNNY….
Van Dyke, who is licensed to practice law by Colorado, Georgia, Texas, and the District of Columbia is facing discipline in each of these jurisdictions – all thanks to Some Random Person We’ve Never Heard Of Before.
In March 2012, William Allen Humphris, Jr. (aka “Allen Humphris”) started a credit repair company called White, Jacobs & Associates.
Anybody who knows Allen Humphris knows that he is a criminal, a liar, a thief, a person with a major drug and alcohol problem, and is someone who simply cannot be trusted.
But you do not have to believe us, or the fact that, due to one of your Admins of the BV Files having unfettered access to LexisNexis’ Accurint for Law Enforcement database, we know all about his arrests, financial transactions, criminal indictments, governmental fines, and lawsuits.
All one has to do is read several of the complaints that have been filed over the years with the Dallas Better Business Bureau to know the truth that this is a company you cannot trust and should not do business with. CHECK IT OUT!!
- Never delivered on their promise and misled me to do something that made our credit worse.
- Paid a fee to have my credit repaired. A lot of promises with very little results. I feel like I was scammed.
- White, Jacobs and Associates makes promises and cannot keep the promises made. They take your money and do not deliver.
- White Jacobs did not fulfill their end of the agreement, left my out to dry and stopped responding.
- I was told they would remove an account off of my credit reports if I paid an initial $1,000 down. Months has went by and no results. I was scammed.
Who else is involved in running this scam company? HIS SISTER!!!
PRO TIP: If your company has to use a lot of bots to post FAKE REVIEWS on Yelp and elsewhere, it means your company is a SCAM!
Scroll to the bottom to see the “not recommended” reviews and you will discovery PAGES worth of FAKE REVIEWS.
When Ashley married Edward LaMonica, he, too, decided to become a part of this business. He liked it so much that, after he and Ashley divorced on January 7, 2016, he decided to formally get a piece of the action two years later.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Cert of Merger - White Jacobs & Assoc - 7-5-2018
FUN FACT: Jason Lee Van Dyke is the attorney who put together this sales agreement between Humphris and LaMonica that was signed on May 18, 2018.
Here is where all the hard earned money of the victims goes to.
So what do you get for the apx. $200 monthly service fee?
And besides our Nazi / Proud Boy Jason Van Dyke, what other attorneys are associated with this “business”? CHECK IT OUT!!
The fact that Swartz claims membership with the Jewish Anti-Defamation League is quite ironic and funny considering his close personal and business relationship with Van Dyke.
During the War, they had a term for people like Swartz: Kapo.
So who else is acting as a paymaster to Nazis? Why Hailey Kemp – that’s who!
Hailey, who is the daughter of Nicholas Siatka (who is co-owner of Tucker Albin & Associates – and is another paymaster to Nazis), hired Van Dyke to represent her in a lawsuit just a few months ago. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Kemp v Nat'l Credit Sys - Petition - Case # 04-SC-18-259
FUN FACT: Hailey wants to be a nurse at The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center. But after all of her friends on social media find out about her close ties to white supremacists, that might not work out so well.
Van Dyke is the attorney who has represented Tucker Albin & Assoc. in numerous lawsuits for many, many years. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***P's orig petition - case # DC-13-09162 - TAA Inc v Holtzman
In this lawsuit, filed August 13, 2013, in Dallas County, Texas, Van Dyke and his employer, Allen Humphris of Tucker Albin & Assoc., are seeking to enforce some kind of non-compete / confidentiality agreement in a lawsuit against a former employee named Leslie Holtzman. As expected, Van Dyke started up his usual BULLSHIT litigation tactics.
I was threatened by their attorney Jason Van Dyke personally stating he would build and pay for a website with the sole purpose of keeping me from working ever again ..
— January 7, 2014, statement of Leslie Holtzman
(Kinda like your own BV Files does to McGibney, Klein, Morgan, Van Dyke and many others, eh?)
When Mr. Holtzman said he was going to file a complaint with the State Bar of Texas over Van Dyke’s conduct, he received this email in response:
So, how did all of this work out for Van Dyke?
Yep. This is what happens when you come across a person who simply cannot be intimidated, and who has the time, MONEY, and resources to crush you like a bug.
So why is Van Dyke screwed? CHECK IT OUT!!
Be sure to govern yourselves accordingly as additional updates will be posted throughout the week. This is to include some super cool shit that we expect to see filed in the Texas LOLsuit in Fort Worth on Monday!
So. How was your week?