Clark Baker Is Misunderstood: Parts 3 & 4 of a Series

I am often amazed by the sheer audacity of Mr. Baker to completely change his statements to fit the situation or to shamelessly mislead. As parts 3 and 4 in a continuing series I will present two examples of such exaggerated behavior in his Federal lawsuit against me.

III. Mr. Baker tries desperately to make the court believe that he is not an AIDS Denialist

Paragraph 7 of Baker’s affidavit he writes:

Since 2008, DeShong and his “colleagues” have alleged that I am an “AIDS dissenter or “AIDS denialist.” …I don’t know how to respond because DeShong’s mischaracterizations have nothing to do with my business operations or income. Neither OMSJ nor the HIV Innocence Group has anything to do with the alleged debate over AIDS.

Mr. Baker’s claim of “I don’t know how to respond” is so disingenuously melodramatic that every time I read it I picture him typing with one hand while clutching his pearls with the other. There is no need for me to go into detail to prove Baker’s assertion that he is not an AIDS denialist and that he is not engaged in the “alleged debate over AIDS.” It is so preposterous it is laughable and so obviously untrue as to completely strip him of any credibility.

I believe part of the reason he is trying to distance himself from being an AIDS denialist is because this lawsuit is not only about shutting me up: It is also about deposing Dr. Robert Gallo. (We have made this fact a major part of my defense.) I know this from personal experience when Mr. Baker himself told me as much on a phone call after I won arbitration. Mr. Baker also told Robert Scott Bell the same thing, just in more detail on The RSB Show July 14, 2011:

1:22:56 CB: Actually Robert Gallo received a subpoena on one of our cases as well last year. As did Sam Broder who is behind the AZT debacle and both of them basically forwarded their subpoenas to the NIH. The NIH stonewalls such subpoenas they don’t listen to state subpoenas. They simply ignore them. And it cost so much time and energy we basically learned in our future subpoenas to them they will be Federal Subpoenas. And Federal Courts don’t let the NIH ignore such things.

This leads me to the second and most egregious part of this post:

IV. Mr. Baker tries to minimize the supposed importance of Gallo’s Egg.

Paragraph 21 of Baker’s affidavit he briefly mentions Gallo’s Egg without naming it:

DeShong claims that I have “a strong interest in discrediting Robert Gallo.” (DeShong 5) In 2008-2009 I conducted a brief investigation of Gallo.

Here is how Mr. Baker originally described this “brief investigation”:

“…I have become involved in the most important criminal racketeering case of my investigative career.”

“The investigation I call Gallo’s Egg took me from America’s “War on Cancer” (1971-1981) to the early history of HIV and AIDS. It reaches from the cities of West Hollywood and San Francisco to the continents of Africa, Asia, and Australia. It led me to the steps of the National Institutes of Health, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and some of America’s most prestigious universities and research centers. It involves hundreds of billions of dollars of misdirected tax-supported funding and some of the most financially successful pharmaceutical companies in the world.”

“I have never written about anything more important. This story changed my life, and if you have the time and patience to understand what I have written, it may change yours as well.”

Such a radical change in Baker’s description of Gallo’s Egg specifically for this lawsuit can only be seen as perfunctory. (Wait, no, that’s not the right word. I know it begins with “per” and ends with “ry” but I’m not sure what the legal word is at the moment.)

But the absurd hypocrisy does not end there. Throughout his website Mr. Baker repeatedly provides hyperlinks to Gallo’s Egg from the main page as well as sub-pages.

On the page entitled Winning Criminal HIV Cases, the very first sentence links to Gallo’s Egg:

Shortly after I completed my first pharmaceutical corruption investigation in 2008

On the Due Diligence page he writes (in third person, no less):

In 2008, Mr. Baker investigated their allegations and corroborated many of Ms. Farber’s findings.  His investigation resulted in Farber’s libel lawsuit against AIDSTruth cohort Richard Jefferys.  That case is still pending.

The phrase “investigated their allegations” links to Gallo’s Egg on Mr. Baker’s Ex Liberal in Hollywood site. By the way, the case of Farber V Jefferys is not “still pending”. Farber lost that suit in November of 2011, almost three years ago.

It is important to note that Mr. Baker attributes a lawsuit filed by Celia Farber in New York Supreme Court completely to his “brief investigation of Gallo”.

You cannot have it both ways, Mr. Baker. Either Gallo’s Egg is:

“…the most important criminal racketeering case of my investigative career.” And you “have never written about anything more important.” And it was the sole reason for “Farber’s libel lawsuit against AIDSTruth cohort Richard Jefferys.”

OR

“…a brief investigation of Gallo.

I guess in Mr. Baker’s world you can have it both ways. And if someone calls you out on it, sue them.

Donations Accepted for Baker V DeShong

If you would like to make a donation and help me beat Mr. Baker in Circuit Court, please click this link.

Thank you.

Bobby Russell Case Perfect for Office of Medical and Scientific Justice: OMSJ Refuses to Take Case: UPDATE

UPDATE of Sept 27, 2014 at bottom of post: Mr. Baker weighs in claiming he has helped Mr. Russell and “spent thousands”. Unfortunately that contradicts what Mr. Russell himself wrote to me several days before. Who is being truthful?

NOTE: Many people from ReThinking AIDS have visited this site because of this post. I hope you all look over this site with an open mind and see how Mr. Baker is not being forthcoming with the information he is sharing with you about OMSJ and the HIV Innocence Group.

2nd NOTE: Sept 25 I removed the link to Mr. Russell’s Go Fund Me page so that Mr. Baker will not be able to falsely claim that said link makes my site commercial.

Original Post

The case of Bobby Russell is about a man allegedly misdiagnosed as HIV+ because no doctor read the negative confirmatory test. As a result, Mr. Russell took ARV’s for close to a decade. The case was high profile back in the fall of 2013 and was covered extensively by the general media. Mr. Russell’s website is here. His site contains numerous links to interviews and articles.

The HIV/AIDS Dissidents also ran with the story including podcasts on How Positive Are You (HPAY) with Elizabeth Ely and Russell’s attorney (who is no longer on the case), a HPAY podcast interview with Mr. Russell himself as well as two articles at Clark Baker’s OMSJ.org site. It seemed as if Mr. Russell would be the next poster boy for AIDS Dissidence.

But then the publicity went away until the ReThinking AIDS facebook page posted a recent interview with Mr. Russell and David Crowe at The Progressive Radio Network. The interview highlights the fact that Mr. Russell only has 20 days left to come up with $12,000 to continue the case due to a summary judgement based on Statute of Limitations. Mr. Russell has set up a Go Fund Me Page to help reach that goal.

I do not know much about the specifics nor the merits of this case. I do, however, find it strange that Mr. Russell does not have an attorney for a suit like this. If there were legal grounds, attorneys would be lining up for such a lucrative suit.

The most incredibly strange aspect of this case is that Clark Baker and his Office of Medical and Scientific Justice are not part of this suit. The plight of Mr. Russell seems to perfectly fulfill the OMSJ Mission Statement:

  • To protect and defend the victims and witnesses of medical and scientific corruption

Clark Baker should have the resources to handle this case with no problem. This is how he describes OMSJ in his second affidavit, paragraph 9, in his Federal suit against me while discussing the case of Sgt. David Gutierrez:

“I offered OMSJ’s pro bono services from my team of experts who include chemists, an HIV test patent holder, licensed medical doctors, and attorneys experienced in HIV criminal defense.”

From that statement by Mr. Baker himself, it would seem he not only has the resources to handle the case, but the case fits perfectly with Mr. Baker’s own agenda when he created OMSJ. Why in the world would Mr. Baker refuse to help? Mr. Russell told me it is due to money:

I have asked them and they seem to think they did not have the funds to do anything or help me so I am on my own here I guess and if I cannot raise the money, then I guess its over.

It may not be a money issue. Perhaps Mr. Baker told that to Mr. Russell simply because the case is not winnable. Or perhaps it is indeed a money issue. If Mr. Baker were not wasting so much money on a lawsuit that he has lost in arbitration and was dismissed in Federal Court and he has appealed to the 5th Circuit, perhaps there would be money to fulfill the Mission of OMSJ. My attorneys are currently seeking costs from Mr. Baker of $98,000.

This comment from David Crowe at RA facebook confirms that this case is perfectly suited for OMSJ:

  • David Crowe Damian Laster, I agree with you, but as a practical matter it’s difficult enough to get a case like Bobby’s into court. We have to chip away at it unless we can put together the perfect storm (hard nosed lawyer willing to work for no money up front … who gets the AIDS lie, plaintiff with no other confounding issues … and a few other things).

In Mr. Crowe’s comment, he mentions a “lawyer willing to work for no money up front…” This seems like a great investment for Mr. Baker. All Mr. Russell needs is $12,000. That may seem like a lot of money to you and me, but from this Guide Star report on the finances of OMSJ, 12 Grand is nothing. OMSJ received donations of over $421K in 2012 alone.

So where do the donations come from? Mr. Baker has never revealed that. So anyone who has donated to Mr. Baker’s “cause” at OMSJ or HIV Innocence Group should ask themselves where their hard earned money has gone.

Something else that has come out of my investigation into the noble cause of Mr. Russell is just how much influence the every day Dissident has on “the cause”. It is obvious that they are not screaming for help from Mr. Baker, the only person within the AIDS Dissident movement who is really situated to make a legal difference. Where is the outrage? Where are the demands to actually do something?

I believe the answer is obvious: There are not enough AIDS ReThinkers to make a difference. (RA wants you to believe there over 6,200 supposed members of RA facebook, but that is falsely inflated.) You can see that is true just from the Go Fund Me Page set up by Mr. Russell. That page has received $215 out of a needed $20 Grand by all of FOUR people. And NONE of those four is from Clark Baker!

This is an injustice and not from the medical establishment. As this article demonstrates, there is not a case here:

“We are pleased that the Court has granted summary judgment to the University’s physicians. While this legal ruling was based on statute of limitations, we feel equally strong that the underlying allegations of misdiagnosis had no merit. The court record includes evidence that Mr. Russell has had 5 subsequent Western Blot tests that were positive for HIV after the very first Western Blot test was negative.”

If there truly were over 6 thousand AIDS ReThinkers, then it would be no problem to fund Mr. Russell’s lawsuit; less than $2 per person. But the number of members at the ReThinking AIDS facebook page is really irrelevant. The real issue here is why The Office of Medical and Scientific Justice has turned its back on a person that fits the Mission Statement of OMSJ like a glove: Perhaps it is because it is a glove in the vain of OJ Simpson.

UPDATE: Mr. Baker commented at the RA facebook page discussing this very post. As I wrote above, Mr. Baker’s new revelation completely contradicts what Mr. Russell wrote to me several days ago. Either Baker is trying to save face due to the popularity of this post, or Mr. Russell was not being honest in an attempt to gather more donations. I will provide the facts and leave it up to the reader to decide.

 

  • Clark Baker We spent thousands to assist Mr. Russell. The biggest obstacle we face is cases like this is what they call the “medical standard of care” – i.e., the doctor/hospital is not at fault “if everybody” does it wrong. What’s even more perverse is that doctors who understand the science and unreliability of tests deviate from doing it wrong risk medical board complaints and the loss of their license. This is how the corruption and incompetence is enforced. Mr. Russell’s doctor was not not just another doctor – she’s the elected president of the American Medical Association (AMA). These are tough cases. As for the story above by “HIVInnocenceGroupTruth”, that hate blog is managed by Todd DeShong – an unaccomplished 50-year-old alcoholic gay activist (lives with his mother) who is groomed and managed by Gallo, Kalichman, Moore, and the AIDSTruthers. DeShong is particularly attractive to these goons because he is judgment-proof (no assets). Gallo’s goons pay for his legal defense to attack/harass/defame me/OMSJ. We’re slowly peeling their onion with a lawsuit, but it takes time and money. If you want to help, a recurring monthly donation of $5 or more will be applied to our case. http://www.omsj.org/get-involved/donate

And here is Mr. Russell’s response when I asked him a direct question about the involvement of OMSJ. Here is the question and response in full.

  • Conversation started September 20
  • 9/20, 9:42am

    My facebook name redacted for privacy issues.
    I have seen your request for donations at ReThinking AIDS. Is it not possible for OMSJ to fund this appeal? Or couldn’t Mr. Baker and his team handle it pro-bono? I thought that was what OMSJ was all about.
  • Sunday
  • Bobby W. Russell

    I have asked them and they seem to think they did not have the funds to do anything or help me so I am on my own here I guess and if I cannot raise the money, then I guess its over. I will refried you as I had thought you might have been an ad. I am sorry but will send a friend request back t o you.

Mr. Baker claims he “spent thousands” (I assume U.S. dollars, but who knows with Mr. Baker: He may have meant hours.) However, Mr. Russell clearly says that OMSJ “did not have the funds to do anything”.  Using the word “funds” when asked about Russell’s request for monetary donations is unambiguous that Mr. Baker has not contributed any money at all. Once again I have presented facts.

It is also quite humorous to make note of another part of Mr. Baker’s comment. He claims that this blog is a “hate blog” with the purpose to “attack/harass/defame me/OMSJ.”  Why is that humorous? Because Mr. Baker seems to not even realize the irony of his hypocrisy. While claiming that I am attacking and harassing and defaming Mr. Baker and OMSJ, he does so by attacking and harassing and defaming me in the process. His exact quote:

“Todd DeShong – an unaccomplished 50-year-old alcoholic gay activist (lives with his mother)…” with “no assets”.

To me that is some funny sh*t! Of course I am used to it. In the past Baker has also said that I live in my mother’s basement, that I clean bed pans in a hospital and that I make less than minimum wage. The truth is, anyone who resorts to such a characterization of their critic shows their own immaturity and childishness. It also shows how desperate and scared Mr. Baker is. If I am so “unaccomplished”, why bother with me at all, much less spend over $100,000 (and counting) trying shut me up? I think we all know the answer to that.

 

Clark Baker Is A Limited Public Figure: Part 2 of a Series

This is the second post in a series detailing examples of extreme duplicity in documents, affidavits and declarations provided to the court by Clark Baker in our Federal lawsuit. The first post in the series is here.

Post #2

On page 15 of the Original Complaint Baker filed against me in Federal court, he opened the door to being considered a Limited Public Figure (LPF). I am not sure why he introduced the possibility of being a LPF especially after seeing how detrimental it was for Celia Farber in her suit against Richard Jefferys. (That suit was especially humiliating for Baker when the judge singled out his affidavit for ridicule.) We were already planning to argue that Baker is a LPF and we provided solid proof to support this designation. However, it is Baker’s response that completely destroys his credibility in an embarrassing way.

We provided the court with several examples that support Baker being a Limited Public Figure:

• National news articles about his organization and cases
• Press Releases generated by Mr. Baker for self- promotion and publicity
• Print interviews with Mr. Baker
• Television interviews with Mr. Baker
• Nationally Syndicated Radio interviews

Probably the most important were the nationally syndicated radio interviews with Gary Null, Robert Scott Bell and Rima Truth. (Not only did we supply them to show Baker to be a LPF, we also quoted from them to prove that Mr. Baker is using my case as a pretense to depose Dr. Gallo.)

Baker desperately tried to downplay his publicity via the radio shows in such a way that should be truly damaging to his credibility with the court. In paragraph 51 of his affidavit Baker writes:

“…the Robert Scott Bell Show of 14 July 2011 received less than 400 hits on YouTube,
while the Dr. Rima Truth Reports Show and the Gary Null Show received a total of
53 and 64 hits, respectively – worldwide.”

To say the above statement is misleading would be a gross misrepresentation. If those shows were only posted to some random fan’s YouTube channel then it would be accurate. But YouTube is not the original source. All those shows are first broadcast nationally. Gary Null specifically has been on the radio for 35 years and is the most prolific of the three broadcasters. This article from 2005 puts Null’s internet audience at 2.5 Million:

Null’s internet listenership went from zero listeners in January to an astonishing 2.5 million in March (reported by Kino Communications). Null’s VoiceAmerica health program airs every day from Noon to 1 pm at http://www.voice.voiceamerica.com/ and is growing at a rate of 100,000 listeners per week. That is the fastest growing radio audience in the world.

This from the same article describes Mr. Null’s popularity pre-internet:

Null had the largest audience in all non-commercial radio for nearly 27 years at WBAI (99.5 FM) and had the #1 Health show on WABC. Those same listeners are now tuning into him on VoiceAmerica.

As I stated above, the youtube video Mr. Baker states received a total of 64 hits was from a random fans channel. Mr. Null has his own extensive youtube channel. Mr. Baker’s statement that “the Gary Null Show received 64 hits worldwide” is humiliating in its duplicity. It should also be noted that Mr. Baker tacitly admits that he has a “worldwide” audience, even though he probably does not realize he made such an egregious admission to the court.

Robert Scott Bell is also widely syndicated via NaturalNews Radio and Genesis Communications Network. Bell’s show is on the internet and AM/FM stations. It is 2 hours Monday through Friday as well as Sunday. So again, Mr. Baker seems to be intentionally misleading the court with such a transparently duplicitous argument that he should be humiliated and embarrassed.

The Erroneous Affidavit & Contradictory Documentation of a Desperate Plaintiff: Part 1 of a Series

Preface: Clark Baker has an issue with the truth; it eludes him. Nowhere is that more evident than in the documents he has provided in his Federal lawsuit against me. Personally I find that to be ironic and perversely funny considering part of the suit accuses me of defamation for calling Mr. Baker a liar. (NOTE: I have learned “liar” is potentially a legally actionable word and I have not used that word in conjunction with Mr. Baker since this lawsuit began and I am not using that word to describe Mr. Baker now.) I will, however, provide many instances in this post and future posts that will highlight Mr. Baker’s conclusory errors and I will use Mr. Baker’s own documentation to do so.

A major bonus to this heinous lawsuit is that I have become privy to a flood of documents that give me a crystal clear picture of Mr. Baker on many levels. I will be sharing that insight with the readers and this will be the first in a series of posts that should prove to be quite fun as well as educational regarding the character of Mr. Baker.

Blogs & Conspiracies

Throughout much of this lawsuit Mr. Baker is trying to convince the judge there is a huge conspiracy against him by Big Pharma and major scientists. Mr. Baker wants desperately to convince himself the judge that his work is so important that he is perceived as a threat to the income and credibility of those out to get him. Strangest of all, Mr. Baker claims they are using me of all people to accomplish this nefarious task and save the “HIV Complex”. Mr. Baker raises this conspiracy notion several times in his 38 page affidavit with the hopes that the court will find this credible and allows him to get to the discovery phase. Unfortunately, Mr. Baker draws some creative conclusions and provides documentation that clearly prove his conclusions are erroneous.

One glaring example is in Mr. Baker’s second affidavit. He tries to tie myself and Seth Kalichman together by making the completely erroneous claim that Dr. Kalichman and I started our blogs within hours of each other. In paragraph 3 and 4 Baker explicitly states that Kalichman and I started blogs on the very same day: Kalichman with Denying AIDS & Other Oddities and me with Dissidents4Dumbees.

Paragraph 3: On 30 December 2008 at 1232 AM, University of Connecticut social psychology Prof. Seth Kalichman Ph.D created a blog he calls “Denying AIDS and Other Oddities”. His first post was a cynical tribute following the death of mother and author Christine Maggiore. (ATTACHMENT 1)

Paragraph 4: Later that same day, J. Todd DeShong (DeShong) created a blog he called Dissidents4Dumbees and posted similar false claims about Maggiore…(ATTACHMENT 2)

Perhaps Baker’s “proof” of this conspiracy is flimsy because he is not as adroit an investigator as he thinks. Attachments 1 and 2 supplied by Baker to establish the date the blogs were created (and suspiciously within hours of each other…cue ominous music) actually and very clearly refute Baker’s statements.

Both attachments display the archives of each blog. Attachment 1 clearly shows Kalichman had written three posts before the Maggiore post with the first post 8 days before her death. So, not only was Baker wrong about the date the blog was created but he was also wrong about it being the very first post.

Attachment 2 regarding Dissidents4Dumbees actually proves that I wrote 18 posts before the Maggiore post. It also shows that my first post was in October about two months before Ms. Maggiore died.

Because of the egregious and obvious error I wonder why Baker chose to claim that both of our first posts were about Ms. Maggiore’s death. It can only be because of the way Baker characterized the posts. He called Seth’s post “cynical” and said that I had “posted similar false claims about Maggiore.” Aside from collusion, Baker is clearly trying to establish that we are both bad people for writing such things about a woman who had just died as well as opportunists to seize on this tragedy. It actually proves the opposite and is one more peek into the lack of soul of Baker himself.

First of all the post at Kalichman’s site was not written by him as Baker claims. There were actually two posts, both by the LA Times. One was an article immediately after her death written factually as a newspaper would when a person in the public eye dies. I believe it is called an obituary. The second was an editorial about 5 days later. I also would not characterize it as “cynical” but that is my opinion.

What I really take issue with, however, is Baker’s attempt to impugn my integrity. The post I wrote was very respectful. I wrote many very nice things about Ms. Maggiore as well as respectfully noting our difference on the subject of HIV. But I guess it would not play into this strange narrative Mr. Baker is weaving to allow me even a smidgen of humanity.

I cannot say that Baker specifically knew that the statements he made to the court were not accurate, but it definitely shows that he is sloppy and not detailed in his work as you would expect a private investigator with over 25 years’ experience to be.

OMSJ Appeal of Sgt David Gutierrez: The Case Against HIV False Positives Due to Vaccinations

Clark Baker, along with his stable of AIDS Denialist “experts” Rodney Richards and Nancy Banks, are trying to make a military court believe that Sgt David Gutierrez is not HIV positive. The bulk of their reasoning hinges on the tired and exaggerated AIDS Denialist trope of false positives caused by cross reactive antibodies due to vaccinations.  From Baker’s Press Release of August 2014:

OMSJ expert Nancy Banks, M.D., a board certified gynecologist and sexually transmitted disease specialist, further challenged the medical evidence used to convict Gutierrez. “Even if standard FDA-proved tests had been used,” she stated, “the tests are subject to false positives for a variety of reasons, and particularly for vaccinations.”

And:

Although he was healthy and never assigned to hostile combat zones, Gutierrez cooperated with the military’s experimental vaccination program and received more than 40 vaccinations – for such diseases as anthrax, hepatitis, tuberculosis, and pneumonia, 17 of which he received in 2007 at roughly the same time he submitted to the initial HIV tests.

NOTE: There is no “Military Experimental Vaccination Program”.  You have to love Mr. Baker’s use of hyperbole and scare tactics.  But I digress.

However, Sgt David Gutierrez supplied an affidavit in his Appeal Request which clearly contradicts Baker’s Press Release. (I will summarize the pertinent information from Gutierrez’s Affidavit. I have the affidavit because Baker included it as part of Baker’s lawsuit against me. Why? That is a post for a later date.)

·         First, Gutierrez says that he received 49 vaccinations over his 20 year enlistment.

·         Second, Gutierrez says that he received an influenza vaccine in November of 2006.

·         Third, Gutierrez says 5 months later, on April 25, 2007, he received vaccines for typhoid and anthrax and had an HIV test on that same day.

Nowhere in Gutierrez’s affidavit does he say that he received 17 vaccinations “roughly the same time he submitted to the initial HIV tests.”  Let’s give more points to Baker for sheer vagueness.

None of these vaccines could be causing a false positive due to cross reactions. The typhoid and anthrax vaccines definitely could not because they were administered the same day as his blood was drawn for the HIV Test. The human body does not respond to the vaccines, produce antibodies and circulate those antibodies all in the same day. That is ludicrous. (Also, Gutierrez does not specify if the blood was drawn before the vaccines were administered or vice versa.) HERE is a good source about white blood cells and how antibodies are produced after a vaccination.

This response from your immune system, generated by the B lymphocytes, is known as the primary response. It takes several days to build to maximum intensity, and the antibody concentration in the blood peaks at about 14 days.

Your body continues making antibodies and memory B cells for a couple of weeks after vaccination. Over time, the antibodies will gradually disappear, but the memory B cells will remain dormant in your body for many years.

Clearly the influenza vaccination from November 2006, 5 months prior to the HIV test, would not cause a false positive, either. The antibodies do not persist for that long. It is widely known and accepted that the influenza vaccine can cause false positives under the right conditions. Most notably, the HIV test must come soon after the vaccination. A person will test as positive on the ELISA but the WB is indeterminate. (That’s how we know the test is a “false positive”.) This report from the New England Journal of Medicine shows that a man tested HIV false positive 11 days after a flu vaccine, but was negative when tested one month later. Therefore it would be statistically unlikely that Sgt Gutierrez would test false positive 5 months after his influenza vaccine.

This is just one more example of Mr. Baker not presenting the facts accurately and the second example from the press release. It was in this post in August where I highlighted the deceptive nature of the same press release. In that post I showed how Mr. Baker made a comment by the attorney for Sgt Gutierrez, Kevin McDermott, seem as if the appeal strategy was centered on questioning the science of HIV:

“This one case has the potential to remap the entire landscape of HIV testing and prosecution in the United States military,” said Gutierrez attorney Kevin B. McDermott, “and to halt this national injustice.”

But the full quote shows the deceptive nature of Mr. Baker’s truncated, out of context quote. (No where could I find Mr. McDermott say “halt this national injustice”. Could Mr. Baker be taking poetic license?)

The attorney for David Gutierrez said Monday his case could potentially remap HIV testing and prosecution in the U.S. military. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is expected to hear arguments this year. Attorney Kevin McDermott says existing case law reflects attitudes from the mid-1990s, and the hope is that the case will get the military up to speed on current issues with HIV.

And this longer article further proves that Mr. McDermott is not relying on challenging the science of HIV as Mr. Baker implies in his duplicitous press release:

Defense attorney Kevin McDermott said the military’s case was based on old attitudes about AIDS and the virus that causes it “and how infectious it was and how much of a death sentence it was at that particular time.” The virus isn’t as easily transmitted through heterosexual sex as once thought, he said, and people can now live a long time with it.
“Really what this case is hoping to do is to get the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and every other military panel up to speed with what is going on with HIV today and to perhaps change those attitudes and mores,” McDermott said.

Who knows what Mr. Baker’s intention is with his strange press release? But this case is high profile enough that once the dust settles, we should know the facts and how this played out. Hopefully Baker will not be able to bury the transcript in this military case.

Clark Baker Is Following My Blog & Stealing My Ideas

NOTE: A few hours after posting this, I got a comment from a friend suggesting I sounded “bitter”. I was surprised because nothing could be further from the truth. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I just find it creepy being imitated by someone like Clark Baker. I find myself continuously amazed that every time I think he has sunk to the lowest depths possible, he sinks lower. Baker makes me laugh…but I have a weird sense of humor.

Original Post

On September 1, 2014 I wrote this post about the hypocrisy of Clark Baker and his PSYCHO website. He has now outdone himself in the hypocrite-douche-of-the-year category and it only took him 9 days to do it.

The PSYCHO post told the story of how sore-loser Clark Baker lost the website James Murtagh MD dot com and put up an identical site called James Murtagh MD PSYCHO dot com. I even provided the WHOIS database information proving the site was put up by Baby Baker. On September 10, 2014, a mere 9 days after I wrote a post detailing the facts of the PSYCHO website and who created and owns it, the site was gone and has been replaced by James Murtagh MD TRUTH dot com. Does any of that URL address look familiar? Perhaps the word TRUTH?

Yep, just like my very own website, the one Baker is suing me over and wasting literally 100’s of thousands of dollars to do it (and losing at every turn), he is stealing the word that has cost him all that $$. The really sad part is that Baker does not see the irony in his use of the word TRUTH.

This time Baker is trying to cover his tracks. When I go to the WHOIS database, I found that the site is owned by Perfect Privacy, LLC. He is being a coward as usual. However, he is also displaying what a terrible, sloppy Private Investigator he is as well. I know Baker is behind this site from his facebook page:

September 11

This is just sad and pathetic and is further evidence of a mental pathology that needs to be studied and perhaps medicated. If Baker would just make an appointment with Dr. Seth Kalichman…

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.