So he stopped suing COWS? From 2018: Devin Nunes’s Family Farm Is Hiding a Politically Explosive Secret Rep. Devin Nunes is head of the House Intelligence Committee and one of President Trump’s biggest defenders. For years, he’s spun himself as a straight talker whose no-BS values are rooted in his family’s California dairy farm. So why did his parents and brother cover their tracks after quietly moving the farm to Iowa? Are they hiding something politically explosive? On the ground in Iowa, Esquire searched for the truth—and discovered a lot of paranoia and hypocrisy. https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a23471864/devin-nunes-family-farm-iowa-california/ From 2021: 10 defamation lawsuits Judge Wants to Know Who’s Bankrolling Nunes Family Farm’s Libel Suit excerpt: Roberts is interested in discovering the extent to which Nunes might be involved in his family’s case against journalist Ryan Lizza and Hearst, the parent company of Esquire magazine, which in 2018 published Nustar Farms’ “politically explosive secret.” The suit is being argued by an attorney, Steven Biss, who has worked for Nunes in nearly all of the 10 defamation lawsuits the congressman has filed over the past three years. The Nunes have never denied receiving financial support for their suit, the judge noted in his decision. “These circumstances may not ultimately turn out to be ‘untoward,’” Roberts wrote, “but they are certainly unusual.” https://www.thedailybeast.com/devin-nunes-family-ordered-by-judge-to-disclose-whos-paying-for-nustar-farms-iowa-defamation-lawsuit From 2023: Bad moos for Devin Nunes’ defamation lawsuit: Judge finds it ‘substantially, objectively true’ that family farm ‘knowingly’ hired undocumented immigrants https://lawandcrime.com/lawsuit/bad-moos-for-devin-nunes-defamation-lawsuit-judge-finds-it-substantially-objectively-true-that-family-farm-knowingly-hired-undocumented-immigrants/
Farron Balanced
/ farronbalanced
*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.
Former Republican lawmaker turned CEO of Trump media. For some reason, Devin Nunes suffered a crushing legal blow recently when a Trump appointed judge Carl Nichols, the same guy who let Steve Bannon not go to jail for a year and a half. But even Carl Nichols was not moved by Devin Nunes lawsuit, defamation lawsuit against the Washington Post. And this week decided to throw the whole thing out. So here's a little backstory on what Devin Nunes has done. As we all know, Devin Nunes loves to sue people, right? He sued the Twitter cow, he sued a bunch of other media outlets. He's lost every case. And I think the last one he had standing was this lawsuit against the Washington Post, right? The biggest fish of them all. And he was suing the Washington Post over a report from 2017 that said that Devin Nunes is the one who came out and said that Trump Tower had been wire tapped by the Obama administration.
And the Washington Post, very quickly after that story was published, issued a correction saying, no, sorry, it was not Devin Nunes who said that it was somebody else. So they attributed it to Devin Nunes. Then they said, oh crap, we got it wrong. Here is the correction, which for the record is what media outlets are supposed to do when they screw up. And when they do that, by the way, you do not get to sue them for defamation. But Nunes said, screw it. I'm gonna do it anyway. I've got Carl Nichols, a Trump appointed judge. He's been so good for conservatives. It's a slam dunk, right? Nope. Here's what Nichols said in his decision, even in March, 2017, there was significant doubt about certain of nun's claims concerning surveillance of the Trump campaign. Although Nunes had not claimed Facelessly, that the Obama administration wiretap Trump Tower, he did suggest Facelessly that he had received his information from a whistleblower and that the Trump White House was not aware of it.
So Nunes is the one, according to the judge, like you're saying, things that are totally baseless, and you're trying to hold the Washington Post accountable for baseless accusations. Like, no, you can't. You're not gonna do that. And he also, of course said you can't prove any actual malice because they did issue the retraction and correction. Which again, technically when you file a lawsuit against a media outlet, like if they something defamatory, if they say something defamatory about you, you don't immediately just get to file a lawsuit. What you first have to do in almost all of the instances, with very few exceptions, is you get your lawyer to send them a letter explaining
To them that this is false information, and they have to be given the opportunity to retract and correct it in the same manner with which the original story was published. So if I say something that's false about somebody in a video here and 200,000 people watch it, I can't just get on Twitter and issue a correction and have 10 people like it. Okay? My YouTube following is much larger than my Twitter following. So that would not count as a proper retraction and correction. But the Washington Post didn't even need a letter from Nunes lawyers to do that. They just did it because they caught their mistake. And at that point, Nunes had no grounds to sue anyway. The fact that, again, this has been stewing in the courts for years now is insane. I mean, I imagine the Washington Post is about to come back and hit Devin Nunes for their legal fees 'cause it got dragged out for so many years. But what I love about this is that Devin Nunes cannot succeed anywhere he goes, whether it's in filing lawsuits, or whether it's in being the CEO of a media company whose stock is going down the toilet. Devin Nunes destroys everything he touches, basically. So that's the moral of the story here. If Devin Nunes does something or gets put in charge of something, you can pretty much guarantee it's gonna go straight to hell pretty quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.