Is it news—or is it a well-timed swing of the political hammer?
Funny how certain blogs suddenly find their investigative spirit the moment early voting begins. Not last month. Not after the election. Right now—when voters are paying attention and impressions are fragile. That kind of timing might be coincidence… in the same way a thunderstorm just happens to roll in right as you forget your umbrella.
What are we looking at here? A fact-driven piece meant to inform the public? Or a carefully stitched narrative designed to nudge voters in a very specific direction? Because there’s a difference between shining a light and aiming a spotlight. One reveals. The other performs.
We had no intention of talking about the petitioner again, but that has now changed because her friend’s blog chose to rehash the story and the petitioner shared it with her own page Frisco Residents Who Cares Facebook page with her commentary. If they want to talk about it then they should expect others to.
BACKGROUND:
Recently I received a letter from the petitioner’s attorney saying that if we agreed to a few items the petitioner would agree to resolve the issue without filing a lawsuit. We responded to Ryan D. Martin of Clark Hill on April 9 via email. We heard nothing since then until The Chihuahua’s Blog Post appeared rehashing the whole issue that had so offended the petitioner.
Side Note: Clark Hill is the firm that David Ovard is a Litigator for. If that name sounds familiar it should, he and his wife are good friends with Mayor Jeff Cheney and his wife Dana Cheney. Ovard was credited for being the reason the Frisco PGA came to Frisco. He is very connected to Frisco’s inner circle and many developers.
Rule 408 Communication – From Ryan D. Martin of Clark Hill
The letter starts off, that the petitioner is ready to move forward with a lawsuit since I have still not removed the content in question.
FACT: If there is an open action by the petitioner or threat of a lawsuit, I cannot remove content as it is my legal obligation is to preserve evidence in anticipation of the litigation. Deleting or altering the content could raise issues of spoilation.
FACT: As we stated in our deposition, if the petitioner would like us to remove some offensive 3rd party comments not made by us or a specific post for a valid reason all she had to do was email me and ask. However, she did not do that she chose to go the route of court preceding’s.
The letter continues that the petitioner may be willing to resolve the issue if we agreed to a few requests. The request made in this letter is as follows:
1. Permanent removal of all Blog posts on FCW’s internet website, all posts on FCW’s Facebook pages, all NextDoor posts, all Reddit posts and all comments related to the foregoing regarding Petitioner. Without limitation to the foregoing, the Blog posts on FCW’s internet website to be removed include:
a. Heit’end Controls
b. Heit-end Victim Card
c. Heit’end Stupidity
d. The Finale of Tea Time
e. When Hurt Feelings File Petitions
f. Denton Co. Republicans Targeted
g. Noskin Law Firm, PLLC – Press Release
h. Unsigned, Sealed … Creepy
2. Rename all Facebook pages and any other social media platform groups that utilize or reference the “Frisco Residents Who Care” name or moniker; and
3. Payment of Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) to “Petitioner”.
Our Response:
In a good-faith effort to resolve this matter, I am willing to consider the following limited accommodation, contingent upon a full and final resolution. I agreed to the removal of certain blog posts that I directly control on my website and any associated comments on those blogs posts. Along with limited edits or redactions where appropriate, without any admission of liability.
I stated I was willing to fully remove Heit’end Controls, Heit’end Victim Card, and Heit’end Stupidity. Why would I agree to that? Because I really don’t care, the petitioner is not that important to me.
As for the other requests:
“The Finale of Tea Time” – I am willing to remove references to your client, provided she removes public accusations she has made, or accusations by others on her page (FRWC) against third parties such as Sangita Datta and Kelly Karthik.
“When Hurt Feelings File Petitions” – I decline. The underlying material stems from your client’s own Rule 202 filing, which made the matter public.
“Denton Co. Republicans Targeted” – This was only posted briefly; I reserve the right to republish should this litigation continue.
Note: After the recent Chihuahua’s blog post – I reposted portions of it.
“Noskin Law Firm, PLLC – Press Release” – I decline. This relates to public filings that stem from your client’s own Rule 202 filing, which made the matter public. I reserve my first amendment right to respond.
“Unsigned, Sealed … Creepy” – I decline. I have already limited identification by using initials; I will not remove the document image.
2. “Frisco Residents Who Care” Name
I deny your demand to rename Frisco Residents Who Cares Freedom Chatter and any social media platforms. Your client has not demonstrated any legally enforceable trademark or exclusive right to the phrase “Frisco Residents Who Care.” As such, there is no legal basis for this demand.
3. Monetary Demand: For $50,000 is rejected.
Mr. Martin I am a single dad of a disabled son who drives for Uber. I sometimes barely get by. I don’t have $50,000 and I am not paying anyone to exercise my Freedom of Speech. There has been no showing of damages to support such a figure. If litigation proceeds, I will assert my rights under the TCPA, including seeking dismissal and recovery of my previous attorney’s fees, costs, and sanctions as permitted under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.009.
In response to my email, I heard nothing! The claims that I did not try to resolve this with the petitioner are completely untrue and false.
Goal of The Chihuahua’s Blog
Before even diving into the blog ask yourself if he got this information over a month or two ago from the courts, why is he just now publishing it? His first blog attacked the Colberg’s and now he is going after everyone else. It is to change your vote to Cabal Candidates aka Frisco Insiders so they can maintain control of this city?
The end goal of Bobblehead Bill is to call in to question anyone they can to diminish their credibility. Bill Woodard supports Mark Hill and Laura Rummel so his report is clearly biased as you break it down. Now look at those who shared it to their mass following – who do they support?
Should we publish pictures of all those who liked his Revenge Tour Blog? If we did, you would see the names of everyone who supports Mark Hill, John Keating and/or Laura Rummel for Council and Sree and Dynette for Frisco ISD. Want Proof?
Step by Step Review of The Chihuahuas Rumor Mill Blog Post
Claim 1: Last year we wrote numerous (at least 8) lengthy blog posts either specifically about the petitioner and the Frisco Residents Who Cares Facebook page.
Fact: We wrote 3 articles about the Petitioner called Heit’end Controls, Heit’end Victim Card, and Heit’end Stupidity.
The others were about another topic and the underlying material stemmed from the petitioners’ own Rule 202 filing or because she made a public statement on an issue.
The petitioner is a public person so if she comments on something she cannot expect to be exempt from being questioned. As we said in the previous blog, that means that out of the 267+blogs we have posted less than .02% of our time has been spent on her.
Question: If the petitioner feels so defamed and harassed, why would she let her friend rehash it in a blog? Why are the petitioner and her friends continuing to give it life and legs?
FRWC Facebook Pages
The Chihuahua mentions several Facebook pages with a similar moniker to the petitioners.
Frisco Residents Who Argue – has nothing to do with me
Frisco Residents Who Are Really, Really Good Looking – has nothing to do with me
Frisco Resident Who Actually Care – has nothing to do with me
Frisco Residents Who Care For The Uncensored – has nothing to do with me
Frisco Residents Who Care Freedom Chatter – After several people got deleted and removed from the petitioner’s group of 20K people simply for being conservative I started the Freedom Chatter and turned it over to admins. I do not have any daily input on the page and just set it up so residents had somewhere to go and communicate.
FACT: None of these pages have anything to do with Frisco Chronicles Whistleblower
3RD Party Comments
Next the Chihuahua addresses 3rd party comments such as:
“Groomer, Racist, Fascist” – 3rd Party Blog Comment made on one of our blogs by Flaming Moderate on April 6th 2025
“Biggest Chunk of Excerment and Sad Pathetic Piece of Trash”
(1) She is the biggest chunk of human excrement in the City of Frisco”;
(2) “Frisco’s useless idiot”;
(3) “Petitioner is a damn idiot”;
(4) “She is a sad pathetic piece of trash”;
(5) “She is a damn idiot. She’s a left winged, socialist, Trump derangement syndrome, idiot.”
These comments are on a Facebook Page called What’s on your mind Collin and Denton County which is administered by Mark Eisenmann. The statements were also written by Mark Eisemann.
The Chihuahua states these comments have been left up till this day. He is correct due to ongoing litigation I must preserve evidence. As for the other comments, I have no control over that page, I have no control over those comments, so the petitioner should talk to the person who does.
The Court Case
The Chihuahua gives his summary of the court proceedings based on his interpretation of court records. We have addressed this in other blogs and the press release by our Attorney at the time which is posted on our website.
Yes, I use plural pronouns and created a persona – that is not a crime. Last I heard democrats love pronouns. I guess it is okay for them to use pronouns, but I can’t.
No, I don’t recall who sent me the Tammy Tapes and what software I used to take out the voice. I tried several different ones until I figured it out.
As for the material I obtained from FRWC Facebook page run by the petitioner, I don’t remember who sent them to me and one of them I accessed using a fake screen name for a day.
Court Hearing Attendance
The Chihuahua lists out several names of people who attended the court hearing.
The names mentioned include Shannon Greer, Vijay Karthik, Kelly Karthik, Patrick Wamhoff, Jackie Wakin, and Steve Noskin (outside of representation) have nothing to do with Frisco Chronicles. Why would the Chihuahua name them? Because they are all connected to current people running for a position on council or the ISD board, either by marriage or support of a candidate. The Chihuahua’s goal was to discredit them in order to hurt those running for a seat so Frisco Insiders can maintain control.
Publishing a list of people who simply attended a hearing and then implying they support a particular side crossed from reporting into speculation—and that’s where it gets risky. Showing up in a courtroom doesn’t equal endorsement; people attend for all kinds of reasons—curiosity, professional interest, civic awareness, even coincidence. When a blog blurs that line, it invites readers to draw conclusions that aren’t supported by facts, effectively assigning motives and affiliations to private individuals without their consent.
I have said since I started my blog that the Frisco Insiders attack anyone who speaks out against them at city council or online. They try to reduce the opposition by disparaging them and tearing them down. This blog proves just that by inviting readers to draw conclusions that aren’t supported by facts, effectively assigning motives and affiliations to private individuals without their consent. Their goal? To damage reputations, chill public participation, and create an environment where people think twice before observing or engaging in civic processes for fear of being labeled or targeted. In a system that depends on transparency and public access, turning attendance into implied allegiance doesn’t just mislead—it discourages the very openness it claims to value.
Next up the Chihuahua names Brian Livingston (current council) and Dan Stricklin (former council member) and states I said in the deposition that they provided information to FWB. This question was asked late into the 6-hour day during the deposition, and I was tired and confused by how they asked the questions. If you have never been deposed, you would not understand.
Brian Livingston has never provided information to Frisco Chronicles other than responding to my request for comments on articles via email. Dan Stricklin is a fan but that is it!
Why would the Chihuahua post a former councilman’s criminal record from 20+ years ago? What does it have to do with Frisco Chronicles, the court case or the blog he is writing? Nothing! It was soley to damage his reputation!
This also proves my point that the current Frisco Insiders & Leaders attack and try to intimidate anyone that speaks out or supports another view. The end goal for them is to always damage reputations, chill public participation, and create an environment where people think twice before observing or engaging.
This started with Mark Piland when he first ran for office and the city council voted to release his HR File days before the final vote in an election. They have continued to attack others in the same way. It is about control of the status quo.
Testimony of Chris Fields and Brian Livingston
We reached out to Shannon Greer for comment, and this is her response, “From the day this blog was created I have been accused of being the Whistleblower. At one point, the mayor even called my boss claiming that I write a blog and that I come to citizens input act inappropriate and file a lot of PIRs, etc. Why would he call my boss? Probably because I am vocal about the city having the need for an animal shelter and issues that I disagree with and they want me to shut up and go away.
As for the statements that I bragged about being the Frisco Chronicles Whistleblower, yes one time at a dinner with Brian and Chris, held downtown at the local Taco Joint after several drinks I jokingly said it was me. We were talking about Frisco Chronicles, and I expressed my frustration with the constant accusations and said I should just take credit for it and jokingly said It’s me, I am the whistleblower. We all laughed and I said I was kidding and that was it.
Between our entire group of friends we have all guessed who it could be. I have always said I thought it was more than one person, but I have never said anything about a fall guy. I learned the identity of the Whistleblower after the deposition was completed when he called me. Why, Bill Woodard even mentions that I support the same political candidates as Wamhoff and the Karthik’s is beyond me and has nothing to do with Frisco Chronicles or related to his blog post. As for Fields and Livingston’s testimony, I have no idea what they testified to as I was not there. Any future questions of my involvement can go through my attorney.”
Dropping More Names
The Chihuahua continues in his blog by saying during discovery, “WHICH IS STILL BEING VETTED” has indicated that other residents maybe involved and drops a list of names.
That’s a line most responsible journalists are very careful not to cross. Listing names while admitting the information is “still being vetted” flips the burden of proof on its head—once a name is published, the damage is already done, even if the claim later turns out to be wrong. Without confirmation, it moves from reporting facts to broadcasting suspicion, which can unfairly harm reputations and expose those individuals to public backlash for something that hasn’t been established. At best, it’s reckless; at worst, it suggests an intent to cast as wide a shadow as possible and let implications do the work that evidence hasn’t yet done.
Bill Woodard should be ashamed of himself and the fact that he dropped these names shows this is not about journalism, it is about REVENGE and CHANGING YOUR VOTE in this election. Proof? The post has been shared 16 times, and one of those that shared it is own First Lady of Frisco Dana Cheney. Yep, she dropped it to her mass followers, why? Does the first lady think it is okay to share NON-VETTED INFO? This smells of a large conspiracy to write an article that calls into question anyone associated to candidates they don’t support so that they look guilty by affiliation with the end goal to help their candidates like Mark Hill, John Keating, Laura Rummel, Sree and Dynette for ISD Board. It is the Frisco Cabal Insider Playbook!
FACT: NONE OF THESE PEOPLE OUTED BY BILL WOODARD ON HIS REVENGE TOUR ARE INVOLVED WITH FRISCO CHRONICLES INCLUDING:
Dan Stricklin, Shannon Greer, Patrick Wamhoff, Jackie Wakin, Kelly Karthik, Vijay Karthik, Stephanie or Jared Elad, Mark Eisenmann, Steve Noskin (outside of being my lawyer), Star Patriots, a PAC run by Steve Noskin, Julie Harville, Michelle Milholland, Sarah Rouse, J. Aidan Grey, Melanie Jones, Kellie Morris. Carrie De Moor, Ram Mehta, Muni Janagarajan, Casey or Angela Waits.
Any statement, accusation or implication that they are connected to Frisco Chronicles is FALSE and a part of the Bill Woodard Revenge Tour Playbook to discredit Frisco Leaders, Candidates and Residents who are not afraid to speak out and do the right thing.
Violent Criminal Record
The Chihuahua then goes on to question my name and layout my criminal record from 20+ years ago. My legal name is Hal Craig Douglass. Sometimes I go by Hal, sometimes I go by Craig. IS THAT A CRIME?
When creating the page, I created a “persona” as I said in my deposition such as Sybil-Watkins Douglass. I did so in order to protect myself when filing for the PIR’s to maintain my anonymity.
Writers, performers, and commentators have been using personas for centuries. It serves real purposes: creative freedom, protection, satire, and sometimes just better storytelling. In journalism and political writing, pseudonyms are often used to separate the message from the messenger—or to avoid backlash.
As for the domestic violence charges in my past, both my wife (now my ex-wife) and I were in the wrong and we both took classes through the court and pleaded nolo contendere which means we did not admit guilt. We have a great relationship today and have raised two kids together. To bring up my records 20+ years later and call me a Violent Criminal is libel and defamatory. What happened then has nothing to do with today or my blog in any way.
IN CLOSING
Lastly, I have not talked about the fact that the petitioners’ filings have cost me thousands of dollars for attorneys. The petitioner took the route of the Rule 202 hearing because if she had sued me in court, I would have filed an Anti-Slap suit in return.
It is not a crime for someone to support my site, or a go fund me for legal funds. The petitioner in this case posed a GFM for Karmelo Anthony to 20k people – but that was no problem? It is not a crime to be a fan of the truth which scares the hell out of sitting council and former council members. I am probably the most hated person in Frisco for telling the truth. That’s okay!
Every article I have written is based on PIRs, we have shown the documents, and if they have come into question, we have corrected them. I stand behind my blog 100%.
The end goal of Bobblehead Bill is to call in to question anyone so they can to diminish their credibility. The fact is Bill supports Mark Hill and Laura Rummel and so do those who shared and liked the post. Should we publish pictures of all those who liked his Revenge Tour Blog? If we did you see names that constantly attack anyone who speaks out on social media against Cheneyville and The Frisco Way. Should we do the same to them that they try to do to those of us who tell the truth or stand up for truth?
Don’t fall for the playbook – go and vote to change Frisco for the better.
For Legal Purposes I must post this Disclaimer: This blog includes satire, parody, and comic relief. It contains summarized accounts created solely for humor and commentary. Any resemblance to real events is either coincidental or intentionally satirical. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
0 Comments