If you recall, current Breitbartian and former person-who-appeared-frequently-on-CNN Dana Loesch and her husband Chris Loesch were behind the silly “Twitter gulag” conspiracies that suggested LGF’s Charles Johnson was secretly controlling Twitter and suspending the accounts of those who disagreed with him. Despite the absurdity of the claims, the Loeschs did a stellar job exploiting the situation for self-promotion, as has been their m.o. Naturally, as they were ranting about how oppressed they were by evil liberals, they appealed quite frequently to the conservative idea that liberals hate free speech.

But if they really cared even a tiny amount for free speech, how can you explain their recent behavior? Last week, a conservative Missouri Prosecutor, Rocky Kingree, criticized Loesch for using the talking points of Missouri Lt. Governor Peter Kinder to attack Kinder’s Republican primary candidate Brad Lager. To be sure, Kingree didn’t prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Loesch was using material from Kinder, but the case he made was pretty strong when you consider that another conservative radio host Mark Reardon used the exact same material on the same day and stated that it was provided by the Kinder campaign.

And other people who would know seemed to agree with Kingree’s analysis. In response to Kingree’s question “Is Dana Loesch in the tank for Peter Kinder?,” St. Louis Tea Party blogger Darin Morley responded by saying a better question is “Why is Dana Loesch in the tank for Peter Kinder?”

Is @DLoesch in the tank for @PeterKinder? wp.me/p2Bct2-4 | That question should start w “Why” #tcot #stltpc

— Reboot Congress (@dsm012) July 15, 2012

The fact that political campaigns provide info to people in the media is hardly news, but rather than simply saying (as Reardon did) that Kinder’s campaign had made the initial suggestions or even just calmly denying the charges, the Loeschs freaked out and tried to get Kingree debarred. Here’s Dana Loesch reacting to Kingree asking if Chris Loesch’s studio had received money from Kinder (as it had in a previous Loesch scandal):

@RockyKingree Seriously? Zero. Do I need to look into filing a formal complaint against you for this?

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 15, 2012

And then they got really nutty:

@RockyKingree So as an elected county official, shouldn’t you know better than to smear private citizens on Twitter?

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 15, 2012

@RockyKingree You struck a nerve? A politician abusing their office by attacking a private citizen over a story on their friend?

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 15, 2012

“When lawyers enter . practice of law in MO, they obligate themselves to uphold the law and to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct”

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 16, 2012

No @RockyKingree you are a liar. Prove your accusations. Prove anyone is bought. Defamation isn’t protected speech.

— Chris Loesch (@ChrisLoesch) July 15, 2012

@ChrisLoesch Sorry Chris not lying here——> thegatewaypundit.com/2011/06/gov-ri… Shows Dana at Kinder Funder. How can you call me liar about that? #clown

— Rocky Kingree (@RockyKingree) July 15, 2012

@DLoesch as a Former elected DA, I would look at his State’s ethics rules.DA have the most restrictions on speech because of office.

— johncsnyder3 (@johncsnyder3) July 16, 2012

Missouri Rules for Professional Conduct: 1.usa.gov/NCdetbh/t @johncsnyder3

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 16, 2012

Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel for Missouri: mochiefcounsel.org

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 16, 2012

Yep, that’s right, Loesch urged her followers to contact the Missouri Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, which prosecutes, “cases where a lawyer’s misconduct poses a threat to the public or to the integrity of the legal profession, and maintaining current records of disciplinary information for lawyers licensed to practice law in Missouri” because a lawyer criticized her.

Now to be fair, Kingree did claim that Loeschs cultish army were like “Hitler cult followers” which is pretty obnoxious. But not quite as obnoxious as trying to have someone lose their law license just because you disagree with them, while simultaneously pretending to be an advocate of “free speech.”

And as some bonus material, here are a couple other “howlers” from the Loeschs this week. Dana Loesch attacked the National Review and claimed that Breitbart.com never used “unsigned editorials:”

We Breitbart editors don’t need a mass, no name editorial. We’ll write a million of them and put our names all over every one. @NRO

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) July 18, 2012

But of course, the “P.J. Salvatore” account at Breitbart is explicitly an unsigned account for the Breitbart Editorial Staff, and one that was mysteriously frequently used to bash CNN while Loesch was working there:

And both Dana and Chris Loesch attacked President Obama’s comment “You didn’t build that” line using the standard dishonest edits from conservatives. But even using the distorted conservative interpretation of the line, one would have to conclude that the Loeschs “didn’t build that.” Chris Loesch begged for government money in order to secure millions of dollars for his business Shock City Studios. Funny how they keep leaving that out while attacking the President’s comments.