Let's say CH sued to get his full posting privileges restored.
Language-use can be so entertaining. "To get his full posting privileges restored" sounds so much better, doesn't it, than "threatened to sue to be able to continue his manifest sexual fixation on, harassment of, sexual innuendo about, threats to reveal private information about, a female poster suffering from PTSD who, he knew, was freaking out (that was most of the fun of it for him, I imagine) and had begged and begged him to leave her alone, and whose husband, who was witnessing the effects, had done the same"?
CH is scum. (IMO!) He's has a filthily dishonest mind (IMO!), he's a slanderer and a bully and because he's a lawyer with not much to do and can, he threatens individuals and companies with expensive nuisance lawsuits; and because here there are willing enablers like you to give him moral support instead of discouraging his disgusting habits, he can slander and harass at little social cost. How nice for him! There are always types who are perversely attracted to that sort of individual.
IMO CH has fortunately been so thoroughly exposed as a lying slimeball that his slandering-and-threatening proclivities will have to be reigned in from now on. And his revolting history here is most satisfyingly and thoroughly documented. Neither your nor his obfuscating word-choices 'disappear' it.
Speaking of slimeball, do I have it right that CH is now referring to his slander of me and "sadistic porn" as "a play on words"?
LOL! Perfect CH, for you CH-partisans. "A play on words." The man is a living corrupt lawyer-joke and you buy the package and try to sell it, too.
All the above is IMO, of course!! |
