Nunes denies he told Trump about House Intel briefing, threatens to sue WaPo

[riversedge]

Source: daily kos






Saturday February 22, 2020 · 1:19 PM CST


The ever-litigious Devin Nunes, fresh off losing a nuisance suit, tells Fox News he’s going to sue the Washington Post. Moo.

.................

.....................

Trump erroneously believed that Pierson had given the assessment exclusively to Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, people familiar with the matter said. Trump also believed that the information would be helpful to Democrats if it were released publicly, the people said. Schiff was the lead impeachment manager, or prosecutor, during Trump’s Senate trial on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Trump learned about Pierson’s remarks from Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), the committee’s ranking Republican and a staunch Trump ally, said one person familiar with the matter. Trump’s suspicions of the intelligence community have often been fueled by Nunes, who was with the president in California on Wednesday when he announced on Twitter that Grenell would become the acting director, officials said.

www.washingtonpost.com/...

It’s not on Uranus, that’s for sure, Devin.

Read more: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/2/22/1921182/-Nunes-denies-he-told-Trump-about-Intel-meeting-testimony-threatens-to-sue-WaPo?utm_campaign=trending

---

umm.. Devin must have lots of money to constantly pay lawyers!!

Link to tweet

?s=20

[cp]

1. Moo!

[lagomorph777]

22. Hey now, that's just MEAN!

[QED]

2. Another nuisance lawsuit.

Another opportunity to fund raise.

[Owl]

6. It's all he seems to do.

[democratisphere]

3. Nunes implementing drumpf lawsuit so-called fear tactics.

Looking forward to Nunes being indicted once drumpf is gone.

[Midnightwalk]

4. I think the real target is Times v Sullivan

I see a parallel to crazy abortion restricting legislation. The point is to get a case that the conservative supreme court can rule on

Here’s an article that worries me.

And if Locke had her way, it would be easier for Nunes to prevail in his defamation actions. In an October discussion organized by the Heritage Foundation, Locke argued that the Times v. Sullivan ruling had spread a mind-set of immunity in U.S. newsrooms: “For the media, after having been told by their lawyers for so long that basically anything goes, it’s not surprising that journalism today and its standards have seriously eroded and basically anything goes,” said Locke, a defamation attorney who represented the University of Virginia official who successfully sued Rolling Stone magazine, among other noteworthy cases.

In February of this year, however, Justice Clarence Thomas pitched a reconsideration of the actual-malice standard. The ruling in Times v. Sullivan, argued Thomas in a concurring opinion turning down an appeal of a defamation case, came out of history’s left field and didn’t originate in the thinking of the founders or early thought on the First Amendment. “We did not begin meddling in this area until 1964, nearly 175 years after the First Amendment was ratified.

[link;https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/05/did-devin-nunes-just-file-halfway-decent-defamation-suit|]

[mahatmakanejeeves]

21. From just over a year ago:

Tuesday, February 19, 2019:

Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser

Courts & Law

Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser

By Robert Barnes
Reporter covering the U.S. Supreme Court
February 19 at 10:59 AM

Justice Clarence Thomas called Tuesday for reconsidering the Supreme Court's landmark decision making it more difficult for public officials to claim defamation as the court turned down a request from an accuser of Bill Cosby. ... The court declined to take the case of Kathrine McKee, who accused Cosby of raping her more than 40 years ago. She sued after Cosby's attorney leaked a letter that she said distorted her background to "damage her reputation for truthfulness and honesty" and to shame her.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit said McKee had "thrust" herself into the national "#metoo" movement with her allegations. As a public figure, the court said she had to show that comments about her were made with "actual malice" and disregard for the truth, the standard set by the Supreme Court's 1964 decision in New York Times v. Sullivan.

Thomas said he agreed with his colleagues not to accept McKee's "factbound" appeal. ... But he launched a detailed critique of the landmark libel ruling, which he said was a "policy-driven" decision "masquerading as constitutional law." No other justice joined his concurrence.

[The disconnect between President Trump and his administration on freedom of the press]

But President Trump has also expressed support for making it easier to sue for defamation, most often directing criticism at the news media. Over the weekend, he complained about a "Saturday Night Live" skit, and wondered about "retribution." ... Thomas said the court may have intruded into a space in which it was not needed with the New York Times decision. ... "We should not continue to reflexively apply this policy driven approach to the Constitution," Thomas wrote. "Instead, we should carefully examine the original meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. If the Constitution does not require public figures to satisfy an actual-malice standard in state-law defamation suits, then neither should we."

{snip}

Robert Barnes
Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He joined The Post to cover Maryland politics, and he has served in various editing positions, including metropolitan editor and national political editor. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006. Follow https://twitter.com/scotusreporter

Whoops, locked. Earlier that day:

Supreme Court refuses to hear defamation lawsuit against Bill Cosby by one of his accusers

-- -- -- -- --

Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser

Link to tweet

Oh, and who took this case to SCOTUS? None other than Donald Trump's libel lawyer. The president must be very happy with Clarence Thomas today.

Link to tweet

[cstanleytech]

5. Devin needs to MoooOOooooovveee along and stop filing frivolous lawsuits.

[Marie Marie]

7. A Boy Named Sue.

[Drum]

15. Nice

[Eugene]

8. Not only that, he just vowed to escalate his (just dismissed) suit against Fusion GPS.

Nunes' lawyer said this to the Washington Examiner, so I won't post it here. That said, he will not stop until the courts sanction him.

[JohnnyRingo]

9. Will Trump testify in his suit?

There's an unimpeachable witness, at least in one sense. Otherwise, he'll lie his ass of and hopefully get caught.

[cstanleytech]

16. Nunes is literally playing Russian roulette with these lawsuits as the defenses lawyers could

discover stuff Nunes might not want discovered and if its criminal in nature Nunes could be changing his name to Prisoner #xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xx.

[bluestarone]

10. NUNES go

Straight to fucking JAIL!

[Flaleftist]

11. Is he still trying to sue that cow on Twitter?

[bluedeathray]

12. Please Sir

May I have another?

How could this be viewed by any reasonably rational human as anything other than another act in the theater routine that American Politics has become?

I realize it's a personal peeve. When I see legitimate reporters treating these bad actors like they're saying something legitimately within the realm of "real" politics I cringe a little.

[usaf-vet]

13. There was an old adage that went like this. Never get into a pi$$ing match with someone who buys....

ink by the barrel.

A slightly updated version might read as follows:

Never get into a pissing match with someone who buys ink by the barrel or who's published product is spread around the world in seconds to millions of readers.

Nunes is to dumb to listen.

[DeminPennswoods]

18. Or who is the richest guy on the planet

who can afford an army of lawyers to look into every last nook and cranny of your life, hire the experts to get all the information off your phone and other electronic devices and otherwise put you under the microscope.

[paleotn]

14. Go ahead, cowboy. Waste your money.

What a maroon.

[turbinetree]

17. Hey Nunes remember these gem's on your enabling ...................and your smack down..............

And then this smack down...................you call me Lt.Col Vindman...........................

Is it time to take to the streets...............November 3, 2020 cannot get here fast enough................

[KWR65]

19. If Milk dud sues WaPo then WaPo can subpoena Donald Trump for a deposition.

Your move Milk Dud.

[BillyBobBrilliant]

20. I suggest he sends those

notices of legal action to his prospective victims printed on 2-ply extra absorbent toilet paper...One can never have to much TP around.