Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
McClatchyDC: How is Devin Nunes paying for his many lawsuits?
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/regional/the-west/article238287238.html
BY KATE IRBY
DECEMBER 14, 2019 08:00 AM
WASHINGTON
Rep. Devin Nunes’ critics have obsessed over how he is paying for the six lawsuits he filed this year, but there are no public records showing how he has paid his Virginia lawyer.
That means Nunes is either paying for the lawsuits out of his own pocket, promising to pay his lawyer a portion of any money they’re awarded in court at a later date, or flouting House Ethics rules that would require him to publicly disclose who is funding the legal work.
Nunes, R-Tulare, has filed lawsuits against Twitter, anonymous social media users known as Devin Nunes’ Cow and Devin Nunes’ Mom, a Republican political strategist, media companies, journalists, progressive watchdog groups, a political research firm that worked for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and a retired farmer in Nunes’ own district.
All but one of those lawsuits — the one filed in California by Nunes’ campaign against retired farmer Paul Buxman, who accused Nunes of being a fake farmer — is still active. Nunes filed most of the cases in Virginia.
All were filed by Virginia attorney Steven Biss, alleging the journalists, media companies and political operatives conspired to defame Nunes or undermine his ability to lead the House Intelligence Committee.
The only lawsuit with a public record indicating payment is the one against Buxman, which Nunes withdrew within weeks of filing it.
Nunes’ third quarter campaign finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission showed he paid a Fresno law firm representing him in that suit about $3,400.
Nunes campaign finance reports with the FEC do not have records of any payments that appear affiliated with Biss.
Nunes has also said he will “definitely” be filing a seventh lawsuit against AT&T, Verizon and House Democrats for releasing records of phone calls that showed Nunes communicated with allies of President Donald Trump who are now central figures in Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. Democrats published the records in a report summarizing evidence they collected at impeachment hearings.
Neither Nunes’ office nor his lawyer responded to requests for comment.
</snip>
BY KATE IRBY
DECEMBER 14, 2019 08:00 AM
WASHINGTON
Rep. Devin Nunes’ critics have obsessed over how he is paying for the six lawsuits he filed this year, but there are no public records showing how he has paid his Virginia lawyer.
That means Nunes is either paying for the lawsuits out of his own pocket, promising to pay his lawyer a portion of any money they’re awarded in court at a later date, or flouting House Ethics rules that would require him to publicly disclose who is funding the legal work.
Nunes, R-Tulare, has filed lawsuits against Twitter, anonymous social media users known as Devin Nunes’ Cow and Devin Nunes’ Mom, a Republican political strategist, media companies, journalists, progressive watchdog groups, a political research firm that worked for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and a retired farmer in Nunes’ own district.
All but one of those lawsuits — the one filed in California by Nunes’ campaign against retired farmer Paul Buxman, who accused Nunes of being a fake farmer — is still active. Nunes filed most of the cases in Virginia.
All were filed by Virginia attorney Steven Biss, alleging the journalists, media companies and political operatives conspired to defame Nunes or undermine his ability to lead the House Intelligence Committee.
The only lawsuit with a public record indicating payment is the one against Buxman, which Nunes withdrew within weeks of filing it.
Nunes’ third quarter campaign finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission showed he paid a Fresno law firm representing him in that suit about $3,400.
Nunes campaign finance reports with the FEC do not have records of any payments that appear affiliated with Biss.
Nunes has also said he will “definitely” be filing a seventh lawsuit against AT&T, Verizon and House Democrats for releasing records of phone calls that showed Nunes communicated with allies of President Donald Trump who are now central figures in Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. Democrats published the records in a report summarizing evidence they collected at impeachment hearings.
Neither Nunes’ office nor his lawyer responded to requests for comment.
</snip>
19 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Does Devin Nunes Oppose Frivolous Lawsuits or Not?
In February 2017, Rep. Tom Rice of South Carolina’s 7th congressional district introduced the Discouraging Frivolous Lawsuits Act. Devin Nunes is listed as one of the 65 co-sponsors of the bill.
Here’s a summary of what the bill would have done if it had been signed into law.
-snip-
In any case, Devin Nunes co-sponsored this bill because he likes getting financial support from polluters and he wanted to sound tough on frivolous law suits for the “tort reform” fanatics. Rep. Rice’s proposed bill went nowhere. It was referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment where it died. The polluters and right-wing legal lobbyists approvingly noted who co-sponsored it, and that’s about all the impact it had.
But Devin Nunes apparently likes frivolous law suits because he just filed one.
Read more: https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/03/19/does-devin-nunes-oppose-frivolous-lawsuits-or-not/
Media Bias: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-monthly/
In February 2017, Rep. Tom Rice of South Carolina’s 7th congressional district introduced the Discouraging Frivolous Lawsuits Act. Devin Nunes is listed as one of the 65 co-sponsors of the bill.
Here’s a summary of what the bill would have done if it had been signed into law.
This bill amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to revise requirements concerning citizen suits. Litigation costs (including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) must be awarded to the prevailing party, thus the bill removes a court’s discretion to award the fees. A prevailing party is defined as the party that prevails on more than half of the claims at issue.
-snip-
In any case, Devin Nunes co-sponsored this bill because he likes getting financial support from polluters and he wanted to sound tough on frivolous law suits for the “tort reform” fanatics. Rep. Rice’s proposed bill went nowhere. It was referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment where it died. The polluters and right-wing legal lobbyists approvingly noted who co-sponsored it, and that’s about all the impact it had.
But Devin Nunes apparently likes frivolous law suits because he just filed one.
Read more: https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/03/19/does-devin-nunes-oppose-frivolous-lawsuits-or-not/
Media Bias: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-monthly/
(DU could really use a butt-kissing emoji
)
