{"id":44365,"date":"2019-05-20T15:14:05","date_gmt":"2019-05-20T18:14:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/?p=44365"},"modified":"2021-04-01T12:31:26","modified_gmt":"2021-04-01T15:31:26","slug":"mikey-weinstein-fearing-lawsuit-failure-stages-book-stunt","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2019\/05\/20\/mikey-weinstein-fearing-lawsuit-failure-stages-book-stunt\/","title":{"rendered":"Mikey Weinstein, Fearing Lawsuit Failure, Stages Book Stunt"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Michael “Mikey” Weinstein announced that his MRFF — which is currently suing to have a Bible removed from a POW\/MIA display at the Manchester VA<\/a> — had staged a stunt in which a “client” placed a stack of texts on the POW\/MIA table of varying faith traditions.<\/p>\n

The VA said it would not “tolerate”<\/a> organizations messing with the displays and would remove the other books, which mirrored their other forceful statement<\/a> protecting the display.<\/p>\n

Importantly, having other faith texts placed on the display is not the “relief sought” in the current lawsuit. The suit seeks only the removal<\/em> of the Bible.<\/p>\n

James L. Chamberlain, the token plaintiff and vehicle for Weinstein’s vitriol, issued a statement<\/a> that appeared to complain the Bible was secured [formatting original]:<\/p>\n

We have a beautiful Bible, LOCKED in a plexiglass box, with no way of knowing its contents.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Apparently, because the Bible was secured in a locked container, Weinstein’s minions were unable to remove it, so they stacked books on the table instead — then took photos, then sent those photos out in a press release.<\/p>\n

In other words, they validated the very reason the Bible was secured to begin with.<\/p>\n

Presumably, if Weinstein thought his lawsuit would prevail and the Bible would be removed, he would have the patience to let the case run its course.\u00a0 That would certainly appear to grant him the moral high ground.\u00a0 Instead, his group “vandalized” the display of another private organization.\u00a0 Weinstein\u00a0can’t even amend his current lawsuit with this latest information to strengthen it.<\/p>\n

What Weinstein should<\/em> have done (and will consider now,\u00a0since he’s reading this), was apply for permission to erect a display just like the POW\/MIA group did.\u00a0 Then he could amend his lawsuit to note he’d tried to put up one that was more “inclusive” but was denied — if they’d even denied it.<\/p>\n

Instead, Mikey threw a tantrum worthy of a three-year old.<\/p>\n

Why bother filing the\u00a0lawsuit if you’re not going to let it run its course\u00a0— unless your objective is publicity and not justice? (For the record, Weinstein appears to be contradicting his research assistant Chris Rodda and says the MRFF is “sponsoring” the lawsuit, not filing<\/em> it.\u00a0 Given the MRFF’s history of only using pro bono lawyers, its unclear what, precisely, they’re “sponsoring.”)<\/p>\n

If your legal\u00a0case is so weak you feel the need\u00a0to stage publicity stunts, you’re clearly not doing well. Sadly, the MRFF “clients” who are acting on the MRFF’s behalf won’t likely see any of the money Mikey Weinstein will bring in as a result of the publicity.<\/p>\n

Instead, it will just fund Mikey’s paycheck.<\/p>\n

Regarding the Skype screenshot<\/a> above, everybody likely has the same question:\u00a0 Does Mikey have a portrait of himself on his shelf?<\/p>\n

Also at GOPUSA<\/a> and the New American<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

ADVERTISEMENT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n