Gotta love it when Nicole decides to do a little lecture.  In another post, she directs some stuff right at me.


And today, she has once again announced that she is going to sue. . . somebody.


Harassment, defamation and stalking are criminal and civil suits.

To begin with, this is a nonsensical sentence. It sounds like something Joe would write.

click image to link to source

There’s the basic difference for you. Any individual can file a civil suit against any other individual.  Nicole thinks I did a bad thing to her. Nicole can file a lawsuit against me if she wishes.

Of course, she then has to prove her case in court, and I’ll get back to that in a minute.

Criminal cases aren’t “suits.”  Criminal cases aren’t filed by individuals. Criminal cases involve stuff that is considered bad for society as a whole, and are filed by the state.  If Nicole thinks she’s being harmed, and wants a criminal case filed, she has to go convince the police and ultimately the district attorney that she’s right.

But let’s go back to her basic complaint. She says she is a victim of “harassment, defamation and stalking.”

click image to link to source

The only part of that definition that Nicole could possibly stretch and try to make fit here is “merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone fearful or anxious.”  And that would be tough to prove. She makes public statements, and in this case, directed a question right at me by name. I respond.  That is not “harassment.”

Driving down a public road in front of her property one time without making a move to stop (the only reason anyone stopped is because we would have had to hit Joe to continue) is not “harassment.”


I have never “stalked” the Nauglers. I have never even laid eyes on Nicole. I have met Joe once and he initiated that contact, not me.

I don’t know anyone who has stalked the Nauglers.  I’ve never seen a credible example of stalking given. She just blathers about it, using the word as though she knows what it actually is.

But let’s turn to the other thing: defamation.

click image to link to source

There are two basic prongs to defamation, with some additional side issues.  Before we go further, let’s differentiate between slander and libel. Slander is spoken, libel is written. Nobody has ever slandered the Nauglers that I know anything about.

But back to the two prongs.  Defamatory statements must be (1) false, and  (2) they have to be damaging. And you can’t just trot into court and say,
“Gee, this statement is false and it hurt my little feels.”  You have to prove that the statement is false and you have to prove that the false statement directly damaged you.

Here’s an example.  If I were to write on Facebook:  “My neighbor is a drug dealer and I don’t think drug dealers should be employed as police officers,”and as a result of that statement, my neighbor lost his job, I would be guilty of libel.  My neighbor is not a drug dealer at all.

But he’d have to prove that (1) I wrote it, and (2) his loss of his job was a direct result of what I said (an unlikely scenario, admittedly).

When I started blogging, this concerned me a bit. I wanted to be certain that I understood the law and didn’t run afoul of it. So I asked around, looked around and found out.

Nicole wrote in the first screen shot about opinion.  She’s more or less right in what she wrote although she glosses over a lot of it.

click image to link to source

There are several things to note here.  First is that an opinion, if based on factual information and that doesn’t  “allege dishonorable motives on the part of the target of the comment” is protected speech.

On this blog, I offer my opinions, my conclusions. They are all based entirely on what Nicole writes.  I don’t really have any other source of information (with the exception of things like the Runaway Horse video).

Let’s take Shitgate as an example.  Here’s my original post about the topic of the bucket-shitting.

Nicole, please tell me what was false about that?  Name one single statement of fact that I made that wasn’t true.  This is an example of me expressing my opinions based on factual material (her own pictures and information).  I didn’t “allege dishonorable motives” on the part of Nicole. I have no idea what their motives were to shit in buckets.  I didn’t say that I thought they were shitting in buckets in order to purposely contaminate the watershed and spread disease.

This is typical of what I do.  It’s quite clear if you read the piece what is a statement of fact (“there is no hole”) and what is my opinion (“But I suspect the pathogen came from the non-existent sanitation that these people live with.”)

This is protected speech. I expressed opinions based on factual data and alleged no nefarious motives to the Nauglers.

But wait. There is more.

Nicole and Joe Naugler are “limited public figures.”


In some cases, a limited public figure isn’t necessarily required to have purposely become such. When the Boston Marathon bombing happened, there was a Saudi student who was either a bystander or participant in the race who was interviewed on TV, and I think actually questioned by the police.  Glenn Beck made some very derogatory comments about the guy, inferring that he was involved in the bombing and the guy decided to sue his sorry ass.

Beck insisted that he was protected because the guy was a “limited public figure”  (due to his willingness to be interviewed by the media) and therefore the student would have to prove malice on Beck’s part, not just that the information was entirely false.

The court, in this case, ruled against Beck and ultimately, Beck settled with young man.

In this particular case, just being interviewed by the press did not make the student a “limited public figure.” He claimed no expertise about the matter. He was simply there.

Contrast this with Nicole and Joe, who quite clearly (“This is going viral”) thrust themselves into the public limelight for the sole purpose of influencing the outcome.

Here’s a list of examples of public figures, limited public figures and private individuals, so you get the idea.

The “limited” part of this involves the scope of the public figure’s “publicness.”  Donald Trump is the President-elect of the United States, and as such, is fair game for almost anything.  He is the epitome of the word “public figure.”

The anti-choice activist who gives an interview to the media is a “limited public figure.” His activism about the abortion issue is the only thing he’s considered a public figure about.  Other things about his private life are not included; for instance, what his wife does for a living – provided she’s an accountant and not a public official who is trying to overturn Roe.

The problem that the Nauglers have is that they have made, by their own actions (“This is going viral”), everything about their lives public.

Now, this does not mean that they can be libeled at will.

What it means is that the bar to prove libel is raised a bit. In an ordinary libel suit, the plaintiff has to prove that the information is false and also that it is damaging.

In the Nauglers’ case, they have to prove that it is false, damaging, and that the person who wrote it knew that it was false and just did it anyway.

There’s one other issue here and that concerns exactly what an opinion is.

Nicole is correct that you cannot just preface a defamatory statement with “In my opinion” and then have it considered an opinion.  She doesn’t give the full thing, though.

Here’s an example, going back to my neighbor.

Let’s assume that somebody bought the house across the road and moved in and we were talking to him and I said, “I think that the neighbor there is an alcoholic.”

I said, “I think. . .”

I also slandered him.

The reason for this is that I offered no reason for why I think that the neighbor is an alcoholic. The new neighbor would very likely think that I had some sort of inside knowledge as to why I thought that  (I’ve lived here for eight years and known the neighbor all that time) and therefore maybe I knew what I was talking about.  In this case, not offering evidence is sort of like saying “this is such common public knowledge that everyone knows it and there is no question about it being true.”

But suppose I said, “The neighbor over there always has a beer in his hand when he mows the grass.  I think he’s an alcoholic.”

That is protected opinion.  It’s a stupid opinion, of course, but that is exactly why it is protected.  Anyone can take the evidence I offer (he drinks a beer on nice summer afternoons) and conclude that such evidence does not make the guy an alcoholic.

Opinions are fine and they are protected provided you offer reasons for them.  But just tacking on “in my opinion” isn’t enough.

This is very basic stuff and it can get much more complicated, of course.  Lawyers have to earn their money somehow.  But that’s the overall idea.

Okay, this is long enough, I think. I am going to go on from here and talk about Nicole’s question to me above (about the daughter’s reading skills). That issue, though, needed this stuff as background.








50 thoughts on “Defamation”

  1. Is saying “I see a dog tethered outdoors without any indication of shelter on a day that never breaks above freezing” a libelous statement and/or “I think (or believe) a dog tethered outdoors without shelter on a day that doesn’t get above freezing” an opinion?

    Just asking… 😉


  2. I distinctly remember numerous threats of litigation. Like many others that were mentioned, I’ve been compiling a complete anthology of batshit crazy comments. A few mentioned 2016 as being the year that things were gonna happen. Well, they need to shit or get off the bucket because the sand in that hourglass is about to run out.

    The following is an excerpt from a Psychology Today article. I couldn’t help but find it very applicable.

    “Most people who threaten baseless or frivolous lawsuits do not follow through. They are simply frustrated, vindictive, and cannot think of a way to vent their discomfort besides threatening you. If this was the caveman days, they would probably challenge you to a fight around the fire pit. If this was the 17th Century, they would probably challenge you to a duel. But today, neither of those things are options. Hence, the lawsuit. A lawsuit is a 21st century, American equivalent of a duel––fighting with papers instead of swords, risking money instead of blood.

    Keep in mind that people who routinely threaten baseless lawsuits are often just adult versions of playground bullies. They are mad at you, and instead of taking their anger out in a healthy, mature way, or working things out like considerate adults, they want to scare you by making you believe they have the weight of the legal system behind them. They want you to lay awake at night and worry. It gives them a sense of power. Keep this in mind, and do not let a threat worry you inordinately. Treat the threat the same way you would treat a child’s anger tantrum––stay calm, try to muster some sympathy for this obviously ill-adjusted person, let it blow over, and continue on with your life.”

    Here’s the entire article.

    Joe and Nicole, do whatever you think you need to. I’ve offered to sit down and speak to you numerous times.

    You might want to read some of the advice folks have been offering. It isn’t about you giving up your cherished social media. Nobody really cares if you enjoy living like post-hurricane Haitian refugees. It’s about you stopping with your insinuations, accusations, and pathetic attempts to intimidate others. Your own defamatory and slanderous comments. Your own libelous posts and writings.

    Here’s a holiday “gift” for you. (for your upcoming lawsuit) Joe, in my book, you are a failed man, husband, and father. I know that you find that extremely offensive and incendiary. But there are some folks that aren’t too concerned with your feelings after seeing what you’ve done to your family and this community. Many of us find it insupportable. We get to say that if we are willing to.

    I am.


  3. If the Nicole robbed a bank and had enough money to retain counsel to sue any or all of the trolls, some of the first questions an attorney asks her would include:

    >”What have you done to mitigate the situation.” Her truthful answer would be, “I bitched about it on the internet.” So, nothing, she has done nothing to protect herself. She has gone out of her way to bait people, to push buttons, to get comments. She has in fact ENCOURAGED trolls.

    >”What are your damages?” “I’m mad and have hurt feels.”
    >”No, what financial damages have you suffered?” “I don’t work much because I’m on the internet fighting.” Her choice, so no damages. There is no way she can prove that her business has been damaged, especially considering she boasts that it is booming and the trolls have had no impact on her. “My children are fearful.” Okay, so has contacted the kids? They are fearful because of people drive on the road? They are fearful because YOU have made them so, Nicole. No cookies for you on that one either.

    Let’s say this attorney is a snake, and just wants to keep the retainer and make a few bucks so he takes her case knowing there isn’t a hope in hell of winning but he’s billing her by the 10th of an hour and she’s long winded, so whatever. After the suit is filed (Nicole gets to pay the filing fee of $150-400, and process service on each defendant) there will be some back and forth of documents between counsel. Every tick of the clock is $ in her attorneys pocket. Then comes the Discovery phase, this is the fun part for the trolls. They get to require Nicole to answer specific questions, show proof of her answers and if she lies, use it against her in court. Trolls get to make her produce things like forensic evaluations of all her electronic devices, her taxes and proof of income for the last 10 years, all the CPS documents…. every shred of paper about every complaint to every agency there is going back to when they were in Maine. The defendant trolls will get access to documents Nicole has never seen before. Lots and lots of them.

    After all that she will need to prove that statements made about her were false…. PROVE it. An environmental testing of the soil on her property could be ordered to PROVE that any comments of contamination were false… How’s she going to prove things said were intentionally false? Or said with malice? Well, she can’t.

    So to all Nicole’s blustering, I say – BRING IT ON, TOOTS!


  4. Is saying “I see a dog tethered outdoors without any indication of shelter on a day that never breaks above freezing” a libelous statement and/or “I think (or believe) a dog tethered outdoors without shelter on a day that doesn’t get above freezing” an opinion?

    That is a statement of fact if it’s in a photo. 🙂


  5. Her comments are extremely laughable. Seriously laughable. And once again, she is a liar. CPS still had an active and ongoing case. I can say this because I have had to call them in regards to issues I have had directly with Nicole.

    I made my police report, the police, who thought it was credible enough to report, instantly told me to call CHFS in breck county and to inform my employer. I did all of those things. Word travels fast in small communities through. Breck county CHFS has an active case.

    I encourage anyone who has seen, heard or been privy to anything regarding this family to make that call too. Not to harass, but because that is what should be done.


  6. How about that ‘frozen pond’ picture? Might that be a dog tethered to a post or tree down near the pond, middle left? Not saying it is, but ‘real eyes’ say it might be. Wonder where Beauty is tethered? Not saying she is, but ‘real eyes’wonder.
    No opinion, just some questions.


  7. But Al,

    2016 was a big year for the Nauglers where much litigation was accomplished concerning them. They have been to court abundantly in 2016. They accomplished getting an order against them for their wayward livestock. In a long and drawn out process the court had to tell them that their human composting was just raw sewage all over the joint and the court had to tell two adults, parents of 11 children, that they had to use an appropriate facility to do their business in. So they got a porta potty.


  8. Putinontheritz, thank you. I have been concerned about her comment that they are having problems keeping warm. I did take a screenshot it’s been bugging me though. Maybe I’ll call tomorrow. Kids shouldn’t be cold don’t give a shit about the parents.


  9. Just recently I have spoken with my personal Attorney. He has assured me that her video’s she has made, naming people and accusing with no proof of anything can actually be used against her if she ever did file anything. Nicole would be finding herself in more trouble very quickly with a counter claim.
    There is a whole different set of KRS Laws concerning Video Evidence. After what she did and the things she said in her Video’s naming people and accusing….well that can be basically won hands down without even too much of an agreement in court.

    Sally, Al & HMM good reading….great stuff.


  10. Ah. The feared fantasy lawsuit.

    Nicole, you’re so funny. Really. Better entertainment than Giveaway Movie Tickets that were not given away…oops, I meant to say ‘more entertainment than 11 – 12 movie tickets’.


  11. There is so much counter evidence against her. It is almost ridiculous. She cries to be left alone, yet she stalks, threatens and defames people right and left. If there are really that many packets that have been sent out, it means that there are definitely people watching. Not just internet people. She just can’t put down the damn shovel. She is burying herself with every key stroke. I just don’t understand. “Mama bear” is just two words that are synonymous with “wind bag” or “bull shit” or “keyboard bully” or “douche canoe”

    Take your pick
    They all work.


  12. Great reads as always; blog posts and comments alike.

    I might be mistaken but it seems like I’ve seen a couple of new posters, with hands-on experience with Nicole.


  13. Yup a dog tethered and no shelter to get in out of the weather. Unless it is an invisible dog house.

    Most states have laws about shelter for animals. It has been cold there as evidence by her photo the pond is freezing. Too cold for a dog to be tethered with out shelter. If the dog was not tethered it could move around and find a spot to hunker down and stay warm. A tethered dog can not get out of the rain or snow with out any type of shelter.

    WTH does animal control not come down on their asses? If she does not vaccinate her kids you know she is not getting rabies shots as required by law for her dogs.

    Maybe Ma’s spewing about all the legal shit in 2017 is a heads up that they will be having some more court dates. Hey Jojo loves those court dates cause he gets a date with Ma at Hardee’s. Watch for it cause Jojo is going to get in trouble so he can go to court in 2017 gotta get the Hardee’s some way.

    Nicole you are your own worst enemy.


  14. Nicole C. Naugler states that her porch faces the sunset. Funnily enough, that is also the direction that provides her with a direct line of sight to the neighbor’s home. The one with a well-insulated house made of bricks, water suitable for cooking, bathing and flushing toilets, where they have reliable electricity provided by the utility company rather than relying on a noisy generator (which is totally reliant upon purchasing fuel that is pumped via electricity), hell they even have a pool!

    So she can multi-task. Stare at the neighbor’s home with fury and envy while pretending to be looking at the sunset. Goodness knows there are enough photos taken from Nicole’s property with the mean ole statist neighbors’ home visible. The old man with the working chainsaw who cut up the tree that was on “her” section of the road because Joe couldn’t be bothered to even do that much for his wife.


  15. “WTH does animal control not come down on their asses?”

    Because no one has called the officials yet to let them know the dog is tethered outside in the cold with no shelter. Easily remedied tomorrow, along with photo evidence.

    Have a nice Wednesday, NN.


  16. @Just another troll: thank you. I will be doing the same thing. If a few people report the tethered dog with no shelter Nicole will be forced to actually take care of her animals. Animal control frowns on lack of shelter, particularly in bad weather. We voluntarily invite our vet and AC to out kennel yearly to do an inspection to make sure we not only meet requirements, but exceed them.


  17. If Nicole was an entirely private individual with a public blog or facebook page, I wouldn’t be reading this blog because that would feel a bit like harassment. Taking a private person’s life and hyperfocusing makes me feel squicky (and is part of why I don’t read FJ anymore, especially about people who aren’t trying to be famous). Then we have a BUT as big as Joe’s: Nicole tried to make her family go viral, and even categorized her page as an entertainer. She made herself a public figure. A blog like this is commentary since it’s about a person who made the willful choice to seek publicity.

    About defamation. If you make a statement you believe to be true, that is a defense against defamation. Doesn’t mean you’ll win, but it doesn’t mean the other side will either. If Nicole tells Jane Doe that Joe told her about a fantasy he had about a couple minor girl in town, even if Nicole made that up, and Jane told people that Joe was fantasizing about some underaged girls, and he lost his job (ha! as if he’d get one) as a landscaper for the local elementary school, he can allege that her false statement caused him economic harm and he’d be right. But Jane believed that statement because her source of the information was Nicole. Try to find the judge or jury who’d find against Jane.

    Nicole is giving the ammo, and we’re stating out thoughts based on what she says. She can suck a BOD.

    Nicole doesn’t have a pot to piss in, metaphorically speaking and literally.


  18. Dog being outside with no shelter is bad enough. Tethered or untethered. And you’re right, we don’t know for sure if the dog is tethered or not.

    If I blow the picture up, it sure looks like I’m seeing what looks like a rope hanging off the weird stump thing. Started thinking to myself, why would anyone tie a dog up right next to a pond? Seems like an odd choice.

    But then I thought, maybe an ultra lazy fuck would choose that location because they wouldn’t have to remember to give the dog water. Can just drink from the pond, right? The water dish that never runs dry. (unless it freezes)

    Dog is clearly lying down. And you know, this dog might be really different, but I can’t imagine my dogs laying down near our pond in the winter. Not saying it’s not possible, just saying I’d find it really surprising. If my dogs were loose on that place, they’d be standing on the steps of the cabin waving their tails in hopes of being let in, or curled up under the cabin in close proximity to the wood stove above.

    Wonder where the horse is, and if it has any way to get out of the elements?


  19. HMM, her feelings have value based on how much she feels like assigning that day, like Trump. They’re worth eleventeen million dollars, and were damaged about halfway. That’s her damage!

    Reality check for Nicole: You really have to show how you were financially harmed, and how you tried to mitigate that. If your salon’s patronage went down, you have to prove that that was us and not your own behavior, and that you tried to minimize the loss.

    Listen up, Sweet Cheeks. Even though your comments aren’t aimed at me, I was named a defendant in a defamation suit with several other people out in Tennessee. The statements we all made were true, or true to the best of our knowledge. His reputation was already destroyed because of his criminal history and shit he did to land him in the national news, including his CPS case. (If Sally wants to know specifics, I’m willing to provide more information including a copy of my ID, even though that would make me uncomfortable because of YOU, NicNaug, just to prove how dead-serious I am.) Thankfully a few of the other defendants had business insurances to cover the attorneys who repped us. The discovery we were able to do didn’t have to stay related to him talking about us. Since it’s a question of reputation, our attorneys would ask anything under the sun, and you can bet your crusty ass we did, and it’s aaaaaaaalllllllllll able to be released publicly, and if the person in the hot seat lies, they’re in suck big fucking trouble that even the asshole we were dealing with told the truth, even though it made him look worse. He couldn’t afford to risk more jail. Lying ruins your own defamation case. And since he caused the damage to his reputation and was the driving force, we not only won, we got an award for tens of thousands AND HIS ATTORNEY WAS ULTIMATELY DISBARRED, and in a domino effect, her husband was kicked off the bench. Attorneys who take cases for the point of abusing others for dipshits like you risk their licenses. No money will ever get paid, but our group sees those penalties as enough.

    Good fucking luck finding an attorney to go after some people online who are commenting about you based on what you’re saying. Good luck proving damages were caused by people online instead of your own behavior. Good luck finding an attorney willing to risk their hard-earned license pro-bono for you. The attorney-world is already down one idiot. Good luck finding another.


  20. @Angela: “Yes the dog is outside with no shelter, but you don’t know if it’s tethered or not.”

    Considering the track record of Nicole and Joe’s shitty care for animals, I would wager the dog is tethered without a shelter. Oh yes, and because they have been in trouble for letting their animals wander. It doesn’t matter though, because the job of Animal Control is to investigate complaints. AC is an evil government body (according to the Naugler world) that has to respond to public complaints and concerns. Given the Naugler history, it is reasonable to wonder if the dog is tethered without shelter.
    I would rather be wrong, than know I did nothing and have that dog just chained to a tree without shelter.


  21. @Lalaloopsey ‘Good Eyes’

    Oh my god! That IS their dog. Tethered and out in the cold.
    That would last a hot minute in these parts before that dog was removed by authorities. I.just.don’t.get.Breck County

    Please locals, if you see this, report it. Maybe, just maybe, something will be done before the dog freezes to death.


  22. ‘not a blessed local’, didn’t she says she got a bigger wood stove so they don’t have to attend the fire as often? My guess is that they may have given/sold the old one to the new parents, and got a newer, bigger one for the rest of the family.


  23. @JingleBells: I wish I could say I disagree with your guess that the dog is tied up near the pond for access to water. Alas, after shouting “Oh, GROSS!” to the empty air I found it to be all too possible, even though the situation itself is untenable. A frozen, contaminated pond for a water dish…Horrible.


  24. I have dogs who wouldn’t use a shelter if they were out in a snowstorm and dogs who are the biggest weather wimps and I can barely drag outside to go to the bathroom as they’re addicted to being curled up on the hearth rug in front of the fireplace insert. I have horses who do essentially the same thing.

    Driving rain and I’m late getting home from work? Where are they? In the lovely dry run-in shed with plenty of protection from the elements? No, of course not. They’re standing in the middle of the field with their butts to the wind, heads down and with sleet building up on their backs. Double guilt points if one of them is shivering a bit.

    However, I always make certain that any animal that is going to be outside for more than 20 minutes (dogs are NOT helpful when you’re vacuuming) has some sort of shelter available. Regardless of whether they use it or not. That’s the difference though. It’s available and in good repair. Ditto for providing water. I have 100 gallon water troughs and every day in this weather I’m busting up any ice that may have formed and adding 10 – 20 gallons of WARM water then stirring it a bit. To each one.

    I hope that Beauty is provided with tepid water, good quality hay, a solidly constructed shelter and a turn-out paddock. Isn’t it about time for her to get trimmed?


  25. I just read this.

    “We would like to use geothermal heating when we build in a year or two, but it can be costly to install. It usually pays for itself rather quickly.”

    How laughable.

    First off, my family installed one of these when we built our home two years ago. Cost about ten thousand dollars. (by the way, that’s a bargain, we were lucky to have a well guy in the family who did a lot of drilling on the cheap) Yes, we like it. Yes, it’s good for the planet. Yes, it saves money. A little money.

    When we researched this, the conventional wisdom was that the average home owner saves $400-$1500 per year in total heating and air conditioning costs. If you don’t use air conditioning, (we don’t), you’re going to save less.

    We have a fairly big house, and we save about $500 per year. If we were huge air conditioning people we’d probably save closer to $1000 per year. It would take us about twenty years of savings for the heatpump system to “pay for itself.” If we were big AC users, it would only take ten years. Geothermal is good for the planet and it’s good for the resale value of your home. It won’t, however, be the Godsend of freedom from bills that Nicole seems to think it is.

    The other thing to keep in mind about geothermal, is that if temps go below 40 degrees, you will need a back up heat source if you want your house to be 70 degrees. Under 40 degree weather, geothermal will only get you to 60 degrees or so inside, and you need some help to get the final ten degree bump for comfort. Obviously, it costs a lot less to heat your house from 60 to 70 in cold weather than it does to heat it from 30 to 70… the heatpump still saves you money. But yeah, you do need another heat source if you’re in a place where it gets colder sometimes. Hopefully, you only have to run your back up about ten percent of the time. We have a traditional forced air gas furnace to pick up the slack.

    The really funny part of Nicole’s endorsement of geothermal is that is seems she doesn’t realize that it requires a circulation pump. How does she expect to run the pump without electricity? Will Joe leap up and turn on the generator every time the thermostat calls for heat? Oh wait, since the thermostat is also electric, how will it do that? (rolling eyes over here, the woman just doesn’t think things through) Most of these systems also require access to a water tap.

    In a “tiny house” situation I’d be very surprised if it would save them $200 per year. By the time they added electricity to their house and a back up furnace it just wouldn’t be worth it. Would take 50 years or more to “pay for itself” and the damned Nauglers have a hard time staying put for five years before the local villagers drive them out with torches due to their constant asshattery and poor decisions.

    What those idiots need to do is insulate their shack. That would help like nothing else and they’d use a lot less wood. I would suggest an outdoor wood boiler would be the most bang for their buck to heat a tiny place. Outdoor furnaces can take big hunks of wood and ugly waste wood, and since they’re outdoors, you have less chance of burning your house down. I have a neighbor who has a small place who says he only loads his outdoor furnace once a day. He claims he picks up most of his wood for free on craigslist and gets loads of free broken shipping pallets. Wood boilers are nice, they eat anything and the mess stays outside. Since you’re heating with hot water, it’s cleaner and more comfortable. But again….to do this you need electricity and water.

    Cracks me up everytime I read the slugline of this page. You can’t outnaugler the Nauglers.


  26. What is up with Nickers here? Between her various facebook pages she’s been fussing and fuming about CPS, evil people who report her, and how her privacy is violated.

    As a normal person, if you want to keep it private, keep it off the internet. Hardly rocket surgery (are there rocket anathesiologists?).


  27. In regards to Icky Nicky’s statement regarding her dog living outside in the freezing cold without shelter because they have a working farm, I have to laugh. Her working farm, the one that she has contaminated with human waste, cans, nails, neglected tools, etc., is a figment of her imagination. I suppose she forgets that her garden hasn’t produced enough to feed her kids for a week let alone enough to can, ferment, dry, or freeze for future use. The goats, well, hell, where’s the goat farm. She has a few chickens that she doesn’t know if they are rooster or hens and a horse and maybe a pig…that does not make a working farm. When she says working farm is she saying it’s a farm that others can come for the weekend and have a blast milking the little goat or ride a horse around the shitshack? Or is she saying that have a farm they work so they have the dog by the pond all freezing and shit so he can herd the imaginary cattle and protect those animals that are within his reach from the big bad coyotes? The only thing breeding on the shitstead are the humans and much to her dismay, you cannot farm humans.


  28. Regarding her recent post rationalising the neglect of her dogs: all of the comments INCLUDING THE DOGS IN THE ARTICLE SHE SHARED have the option of shelter.
    Honestly, this woman is so damn irritating.


  29. Here is the author of the article Nicole shared talking about her very own Great Pyr:
    “…if he gets chilly, he has the brains to head for shelter.”


  30. And of course, in true form, Nicole has to post something to come back at all the comments on this blog over here, that she never reads, right? to explain why her dog is outdoors. There are people commenting that outdoor pets are fine but they DO need some sort of shelter. I wonder what kinds of explanation she come back with on that.

    I get it. Many, many animals live outdoors. Mine don’t but that’s on me. But animals tethered outdoors have no chance of maintaining shelter unless it is provided for them. They can’t seek out refuge in the trees or under buildings if they are tied up out of reach.

    Get a grip Nicole. Give your dog (and that horse) they shelter it needs or find them homes that will.


  31. “If Nicole was an entirely private individual with a public blog or facebook page, I wouldn’t be reading this blog because that would feel a bit like harassment. Taking a private person’s life and hyperfocusing makes me feel squicky (and is part of why I don’t read FJ anymore, especially about people who aren’t trying to be famous). Then we have a BUT as big as Joe’s: Nicole tried to make her family go viral, and even categorized her page as an entertainer. She made herself a public figure. A blog like this is commentary since it’s about a person who made the willful choice to seek publicity.”


    The minute they said the words, “This is going viral,” and put it on the web, they opened themselves up to criticism. It’s their own personal Reynolds Pamphlet.

    You ever see somebody ruin they own life?


  32. HMM could you imagine having Nicole, Joe, and Jacob deposed in a filmed deposition? The questions that could be asked! It would be like Christmas to the “trolls” second only to the discovery.


  33. Its sad the dog doesn’t have shelter. My dogs are crazy. They will lay in their water dish. (When its not frozen). They roll in the snow, belly crawl in it. I FIGHT to bring them in. I can guarantee you, my location is colder than hers.


  34. Please tell me someone local reported the dog being tethered outside in the cold without a shelter!! If true, this is horrific. In these parts, neglect of children and neglect of animals seem to go hand in hand, and the people I know who are guilty of such crimes are, of course, pro-life. Yeah right! The incongruity is appalling. Their arrogance is maddening.

    Can people from out of state report such things based on pictures alone?


  35. Well folks it looks like Nicole has been reading here again. She wants us all to know that her dog likes being tethered out in the snow without shelter. Just an FYI, you can check out her post on BLH to check out the link. Yes I know some dogs enjoy the snow but at least give them a dog house and build a fucking fence instead of tethering your dog. How the hell is it supposed to protect your livestock if it’s chained to a fucking tree?!


  36. OH Nicole, you are so predictable. You posted a link to an article about outdoor animals on a real farm and homestead. You obviously didn’t read it as usual. If you had, the author made a point very early in the article that all of their animals, from barn cats to dogs to horses had proper shelter. If your dog is tethered to that tree, he does not have a shelter of any sort, much less a proper one.
    We own working malamutes. Big, furry, 100 lb plus beasts. We live in the Interior of Alaska where it is not uncommon in the winter to have weeks of 40 below or colder. We’ve also had a couple of very rainy summers. (Of course you already know where I live and work because you have stalked and doxxed me. Funny thing is, I am not intimidated, nor do I care.) Our dogs are tethered to prevent indiscriminate breeding and fighting because, just like people, some of our dogs don’t like each other.
    You know what Nicole? Every damn dog has a clean, well maintained house with fresh clean straw in it. Now, many of them choose not to use their houses most of the time. But when it’s raining sideways or blizzard-like, they will crawl inside, circle around, fluff up their bedding and lay down contentedly.
    In the summer they have 24 hr access to fresh, clean water – not scummy, parasitic pond filth. In the winter they are given food and water (always warm) twice a day or more depending on if we are on the trail. We monitor their hydration and weight carefully. It is a sad thing for me to know my dogs, who eat high performance kibble, salmon and wild game scraps consume more protein and eat better than your children.
    So Nicole, once again you are full of shit and neglecting your animals. If your dog is tethered, and I am guessing he is because of your previous legal issues with roaming animals, he needs a shelter. But, Animal Control will help you to understand that when they visit.
    Have a Blessed Day.


  37. I had to post this before she deletes it. I actually think she hasn’t seen it yet or it wouldn’t still be there.

    ” I agree. I’m not going on Sally’s words. Just yours, here in this video. You say Sally is insane because she doubts a victim of sexual assault. Have you not denied the claims your stepson made re: sexual assault by his father? Either you believe in supporting victims speaking out, or you don’t.”
    Like · Reply · 4 · Yesterday at 1:34am


  38. Hi Nicole
    I’m putting this on here so it wont get deleted and you can refer back to it if you need to.
    My name is Debra Whitehouse
    You went on my personal page today and right clicked on some personal photos and shared them on your mirror page for BLTATM trying to intimidate me.
    That little girls picture you put up has a pretty impressive resume of La Familia.
    So here is what you are going to do
    You are going to apologize to me and everyone else you have done this to on your page.
    I want it up by noon time tomorrow that should give you plenty of time to confer with your advisers about how best to handle it.
    This ends with me

    (Sally if this is too much I understand, i’ll find another way to do it)


  39. We have big animals and little animals. We do not have guard dogs. We have one silly little lap dog who lives better than a lot of people including Nauglers.

    Our big animals are out in the pasture. They have no shelter except for a copse of trees (which we call the “picnic area”). We bring them into the paddock where there is a run-in shed (sort of like the Naugler Shitshack) when it’s really bad out. They may or may not get under the shelter.

    Most of the time they are out in the open and don’t seem to mind very much.

    I know that some working dogs are like that. Certain breeds are just bred to be happy in that sort of weather. They have good thick coats and don’t really understand what all the fuss is about.

    But a tethered dog is not making a choice. I hate tethering.


  40. Guys, drop this. Nobody is going to do anything about the dog tethered outside. They just aren’t.


  41. You say Sally is insane because she doubts a victim of sexual assault.

    Sigh. Cathy Harris doesn’t claim to be a “victim of sexual assault.” Cathy Harris claims that almost every adult male she has ever met in her entire life raped her at one time or another. Her stories are quite clearly and obviously, at least in part, pure fabrication on her part. She uses this victimhood thing to beg for money and has done so for years.

    It’s not nearly as simple as Nicole makes it sound.

    And it really is sort of amazing that she does not believe Joe’s son, yet expects me to believe Cathy. Joe’s son’s story is far more credible.


  42. El Macho,
    Can I ask what led to this? Did you leave a truth-filled comment on one of Nic’s pages that she didn’t like? I see the pictures are gone. I hope the harassment from Nic and her cronies ends now for you!


  43. I’m snarky, i think thats what got her ass chaffed. But when you post pictures of peoples kids to somehow say they can reach out and hurt you and your kid if they want, you have to realize there are people that will take that deadly seriously and will act.

    I don’t expect she will comply with my cease and desist letter ( :

    But I don’t really care, its out of my hands at this point.


  44. ElMacho…I saw the photos on the fake BLTATM page that were taken from Debra Whitehouse’s FB page, and Debra’s original comments. I could not find the comment by Debra that you posted, nor the pictures again. Deleted??? If the statement you posted is true, I think somebody may have stepped in deep do-do. Shit’s about to get real.


  45. no wonder Beck settled!

    Well, I’m reading that (I love reading court records – they can be so enlightening and in this case, hilarious).

    When your President and Chief Content Officer is named Joel Cheatwood and the head of your investigatory documentary unit is named Joe Weasel, you’ve probably got problems. And no, I am not making that up. It’s real, and I know they can’t help their names, but it’s just funny.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.