Devin Nunes Sues for Libel Over "Investigators Examined Trump Media for Possible Money Laundering" Article

This is Nunes' latest libel lawsuit, just filed yesterday in Florida state court; I'm too slammed to write about it in detail, but I thought I'd pass along the Complaint (Nunes v. Guardian News & Media Ltd.). Here's the start of the Statement of Material Facts:

11. On March 15, 2023, Guardian published an online article written by Hugo Lowell, entitled "Federal investigators examined Trump Media for possible money laundering, sources say". [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/15/trump-media-investigated-possible-money-laundering (the "Article")].

12. The Article contains the following false statements and defamatory implications of or concerning Nunes:

● The headline falsely states that "Federal investigators examined Trump Media for possible money laundering";

● The subheading of the Article falsely states that "New York prosecutors expanded criminal inquiry of company last year and examined acceptance of $8m with suspected Russian ties";

● The Article falsely states that "Federal prosecutors in New York involved in the criminal investigation into Donald Trump's social media company last year started examining whether it violated money laundering statutes in connection with the acceptance of $8m with suspected Russian ties";

● The Article falsely states that "The company – Trump Media, which owns Trump's Truth Social platform – initially came under criminal investigation over its preparations for a potential merger with a blank check company called Digital World (DWAC)";

● The Article falsely states that "[t]owards the end of last year, federal prosecutors started examining two loans totaling $8m wired to Trump Media";

● The Article falsely states that there is and/or was a criminal investigation of TMTG and that Federal prosecutors "expanded" the "nature of the criminal investigation";

● The Article falsely states that "[e]ven if Trump Media and its officers face no criminal exposure for the transactions, the optics of borrowing money from potentially unsavory sources through opaque conduits could cloud Trump's image as he seeks to recapture the White House in 2024";

● The Article states that "[t]he extent of the exposure for Trump Media and its officers for money laundering remains unclear. The statutes broadly require prosecutors to show that defendants knew the money was the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity and the transaction was designed to conceal its source. But money laundering prosecutions … can be based on materials that show that the money in question was unlikely to have legitimate origins";

● The Article falsely states that the "Russian connection" was "being examined by prosecutors in the US attorney's office for the southern district of New York";

● The Article falsely states or implies that there was an "investigation" targeted at TMTG by the Justice Department or the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York: "A spokesman for the justice department, the US attorney's office for the southern district of New York and outside counsel for Trump Media declined to comment about the investigation";

● The Article falsely states that "[t]he obscure origins of the $8m loans caused alarm at Trump Media and, in the spring of 2022, Trump Media's then chief financial officer Phillip Juhan weighed returning the money … But the money was never returned, Wilkerson said, in part because losing $8m out of the roughly $12m cash that Trump Media had in its accounts at that time would have placed significant stress on its financial situation";

● The Article falsely states that "Prosecutors appear to have also taken a special interest in the payments because the off-shore Paxum Bank has a history of providing banking services for the pornography and sex worker industries, which makes it higher risk of engaging in money laundering and other illicit financing".

The Guardian Article acknowledges that [Will] Wilkerson and his agents are the source of the false and defamatory charges. On March 17, 2023, Guardian published a second story written by Lowell, in which Guardian republished the false and defamatory Statements and implications in the first Article, and added others. [https://www.theguardian.com/usnews/2023/mar/17/trump-media-executives-worried-over-murky-8m-loan]. The second story included the following additional false and defamatory Statements and implications:

● "months after Trump Media came under criminal investigation for the merger by the US attorney's office for the southern district of New York, federal prosecutors started to examine whether the company violated money-laundering statutes over the payments";

● "The question about who knew about the origins of the $8m that ran the risk of having illegitimate origins because of the Russian connection, and what Trump Media did to ensure that kind of money was not entering the United States has become a key issue arising from the episode"….

(each of the above is a "Guardian Statement" and together the "Guardian Statements").

13. The express meaning and defamatory gist of the Guardian Statements is that Nunes – "Trump Media chief executive Devin Nunes" – committed or aided and abetted serious Federal crimes, including violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (laundering of monetary instruments). The Guardian Statements impute to Nunes unfitness to hold an office of employment, including dishonesty, want of integrity, malfeasance and criminality. The Guardian Statements severely prejudice Nunes in his business and profession as CEO of Sarasota-based Trump Media.

Comments

[CindyF]

The left and their lawfare attorneys have declared war on Trump and conservatives. The right can't take the "high road" or stand on any damn "principles". We have passed that point.

Every red state AG and DA in conservative led states need to start charging as many democrat politicians and their families with any and all crimes they can list.

The article regarding Nunes was just to get the left screaming "Trump is guilty of money laundering" at the top of their lungs.

[ThanksForTheFish]

Try not to trip while you're goosestepping into oblivion.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Haha yeah we should turn the other cheek while Democrat monsters destroy our country amd enslave our children. Haha yeah good call

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Sending Nunes -- with his degree in cow-milking, his family's sketchy business, and his general stupidity and lack of judgment -- to try to deal with us was a bad move, clingers.

[Dr. Ed 2]

A degree in Dairy Management -- if that's what he's got, is not to be sneezed at. It's a combination of a STEM degree and a Management degree -- and those state schools are serious about this. They have too much to lose....

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Some people are impressed by degrees in cow-milking.

Some people follow 'rasslin.

Some people like country music.

Some people prefer to live in can't-keep-up backwaters.

Some people seem to like Hardee's, Slim Jims, and chewing tobacco.

Devin Nunes does nothing to improve the reputation of cow-milking degrees.

[Gandydancer]

Some people are impressed with Bragg.

Pond scum like you, for example.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This New York prosecution may be less substantial than the others that seem destined to follow, but if Trump dodged taxes on the phony legal fees a conviction seems achievable.

[Gandydancer]

"Conviction" requires the crime have taken place at a time within the statute of limitations. Are you really so busy posting here and fondling yourself that you haven't seen that mentioned in connection with this case?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If Trump thought you knew what you are talking about, you’d be part of the churning crew at Trump Litigation: Elite Strike Force.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

It doesn't take a legal expert to realize a journal entry in 2017 can't be committing a crime to effect an election in 2016.

[Brett Bellmore]

I keep saying that's the least stupid thing about this.

The hush money was paid in 2016, because that was when Daniels made her extortionate threat. Cohen pays the hush money himself. THAT is the campaign expenditure, in this theory, and it does happen before the election.

Cohen pays it as Trump's agent, and is compensated for that payment AFTER the election. Essentially we can treat that as a short term loan to the campaign, if we're going along with the idea that the payment was a campaign expenditure.

On Bragg's theory, this payment should have been reported as a campaign expenditure, and was not, and THAT is the federal felony that Bragg is using to convert the misdemeanors to felonies. Where the misdemeanors are supposedly Trump mis-characterizing the payments to Cohen as legal expenses in order to conceal the federal felony of not reporting the campaign expenditure.

The problems I see are:

1. The federal 'felony' is something that the relevant federal prosecutors looked at and didn't think was worth prosecuting, either because they thought it was trivial, or that they couldn't really establish that paying hush money was a campaign expenditure. Remember, the only time they ever pursued charges on this kind of thing was Edwards, and they lost that case.

2. As the felony nature of what ordinarily would be a misdemeanor depends on Trump actually being guilty of the federal felony, in order to convict him of these charges they properly have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he's guilty of the federal violation. Legally, you can't just assume he's guilty, after all.

3. Proving he's guilty of that federal felony is going to be damned difficult, because it's not settled that paying hush money is a campaign expenditure, and that he knew that. But, assume that they can somehow prove both of these.

4. You now have to prove that Trump, personally, directed that the payment be put down as a legal expenditure. Rather than just directing that Cohen be paid, and somebody on Trump's staff assuming that any payment to Trump's lawyer must be for legal services. Remember, Trump doesn't sit down at the kitchen table every evening and do his own accounting. He pays people to do it for him.

5. Then you have the absurd count stacking, where every step in the supposed action is treated as a separate crime. Cohen writing the invoice, Trump paying it, recording both in the ledger... It's like bringing up somebody on felony speeding charges, and filing a separate count for each of the car's four wheels!

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Re Trump's knowledge that the hush money was being fraudulently characterised as "legal fees", the Statement of Facts indicates that Trump and Cohen met to discuss and confirm the arrangements in early February 2017--either of those persons could probably testify as to Trump's knowledge of the arrangements.

Of course, Trump might not, and Cohen is "totally compromised, after pleading guilty to committing federal election crimes for Trump", but the Trump Organization CFO would also have had full knowledge--and may have taken it entirely upon himself to commit those crimes? Let's see what happens at trial, shall we?

[David Nieporent]

The problems I see are:

Are those actually the problems you see? Have you studied New York law and carefully analyzed the elements of the offenses? Like, for instance:

2. As the felony nature of what ordinarily would be a misdemeanor depends on Trump actually being guilty of the federal felony, in order to convict him of these charges they properly have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he’s guilty of the federal violation.

Do you actually have any basis for this claim? Or is just something you made up that you wish were true?

4. You now have to prove that Trump, personally, directed that the payment be put down as a legal expenditure. Rather than just directing that Cohen be paid, and somebody on Trump’s staff assuming that any payment to Trump’s lawyer must be for legal services. Remember, Trump doesn’t sit down at the kitchen table every evening and do his own accounting. He pays people to do it for him.

If only Trump had as many people willing to go to jail for him by perjuring themselves as he did people online willing to carry his water!

[Voize]

Brett, you usually are the first to recognize a false flag operation like this prosecution. Bragg is clearly a "deep MAGA" operative working to undermine legitimate attempts to hold Trump accountable.

[Estragon]

Get your ass to lower Manhattan ASAP! There’s still time to prevent this travesty

[BravoCharlieDelta]

From all reports, the indictment is a clown show.

It's funny. Maybe now that the Democrats have shattered more Muh Sacred Norms we will score some real wins like when Garland got shafted.

[Estragon]

“From all reports”

You know you can read it yourself, right?

[Gandydancer]

Sure.
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2023-04-04/read-donald-trump-indictment-in-full
Clown show, check.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You should file a motion to dismiss today, clinger.

[Nige]

'enslave our children'

It ain't Democrats trying to bring back child labour.

[Estragon]

Shouldn’t you be chained to the courthouse steps in Manhattan right now? You trumpers really are all talk. How many showed for don’s arraignment? Hundreds. Your dark mutterings of “the storm is coming” and “national divorce” ring pretty hollow with these kinds of pathetic showings.

[Gandydancer]

Idiot gestural politics is YOUR specialty,

[Nige]

In terms of gestural politics I don’t think anyone can match getting yourself killed at an FBI HQ because Mar A Lago got searched.

[Estragon]

I’ve got a call for you from some guy named Lavoy holding on line 1

[Nige]

At least he didn't do it *for Trump,* philanderer, welcher, reality show host, fraudster, money launderer, charity thief.

[grb]

When somebody (a reporter) actually took a long look at the Trump Foundation, he discovered it was a fraud from top to bottom. It wasn’t registered properly in the state of New York. Its Board was an empty shell that hadn’t met in decades. The only board “member” not part of Trump’s immediate family was Allen Weisselberg, who testified he hadn’t known he was Foundation treasurer and board member the 10-15 years he was listed. No one told him.

As for its distribution of funds, the Foundation was a total mess. There were multiple instances of Trump raising charitable funds for a specific purpose and then diverting the monies. Six million dollars were pledged for veterans without a single penny going to any related cause. Instead, the Trump campaign was given full use of the funds. Other Foundation money was used to pay fines against Trump businesses, settle Trump Org legal disputes, or buy baubles for Trump facilities.

On at least three occasions Trump used charity funds to buy oil paintings of himself for his golf clubs. In 2013, he used a straw purchaser, billionaire Stewart Rahr, to drive up the painting cost, reimbursed Rahr with Trump Foundation money, bragged about the selling price, then kept the painting for himself. Another 107K of charity money paid for a luxury vacation in Paris. 25K went to the election campaign of the Florida Attorney General looking into Trump University, who then dropped the investigation. 12K of charity funds bought football memorabilia, again for Trump golf clubs.

But perhaps the smallest fraud was the most telling: Trump looted his charity to pay little Don Jr’s Boy Scout fee – all of $7. It probably was more trouble to pay the charge illegally than just pulling out his wallet, but when you take pride in being a criminal, that’s the kind of thing you do.

Trump has spent his entire life getting away with things that would put a poor man in prison. He doesn’t look like much of a victim here, no matter how much his cultists whine.

[Estragon]

Can you imagine being so venal that you didn’t even give a second thought to washing hush payments to women through a corporation just so you could claim a tax write off? There are obvious pitfalls! This is literally nothing if he pays these women out of pocket.

The only way this calculus makes any kind of sense is if you’ve been washing sketchy stuff through your company for so long it’s second nature. Can you imagine the deductions Mazars signed off on over the years?

[Dr. Ed 2]

please excuse me for not getting upset, but Trump wasn't even a non profit corporation, and the stuff I've see with those is far worse.

[Kenneth Almquist]

The Trump Foundation certainly was a non profit corporation.

[Randal]

Dude, your delusions are showing. It is -- or, well, was -- a nonprofit.

Now are you getting upset?

Don't let this career conman keep conning you.

[OtisAH]

Nobody cares whether you’re upset.

[Zarniwoop]

Here’s a link to the final IRS Form 990, claiming 501(c)(3) status for the Donald J. Trump Foundation:

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/133404773/download990pdf_01_2022_prefixes_01-20%2F133404773_201912_990PF_2022012719550384

More can be found in about 0.23 seconds of the googs. FFS Dr. Ed, why do you insist on blathering on about stuff that is so clearly and demonstrably wrong?

[Gandydancer]

" Six million dollars were pledged for veterans without a single penny going to any related cause. "

Lie, Trump-unfriendly Snopes: "In January 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Trump complained of unfair treatment by Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly and announced he would be boycotting the next Republican primary debate and instead host a fundraiser for veterans' charities in Iowa. / The event raised around $5.6 million, with roughly half going to the Trump Foundation, and half going directly to specific veterans charities. The Trump campaign directed the distribution of funds to recipient charities, and Trump himself repeatedly presented checks at campaign rallies and more broadly used the distribution of funds to boost his presidential campaign."

"Trump looted his charity to pay little Don Jr’s Boy Scout fee – all of $7."

Sure he did. At the end of every month he sits down with his checkbook and characterizes every expenditure so that H&R Block will have an easy time of it making out his taxes.

At least in the empty space between your ears this is what happens.

Now, tell me about the Clinton Foundation., just so I can tell that your outrage isn't partisan.

[Sarcastr0]

https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/20/politics/trump-veterans-6-million-not-raised/index.html

[Gandydancer]

It didn’t raise $6M? Gee, I guess that’s why Snopes said it raised “$5.6 million, with roughly… half going directly to specific veterans charities [plus] Trump himself repeatedly presented checks at campaign rallies [to Vet charities].”

The claim we’re dealing with here is not that someone (grb did it — MAYBE Trump did it too) rounded $5.6M up to $6M, but grb’s claim that “Six million dollars were pledged for veterans without a single penny going to any related cause.”

A lefty lied again, right? Can you bring yourself to say it?

[Sarcastr0]

Keep moving those goalposts!

[grb]

Gandydancer : “Sure he did. At the end of every month he sits down with his checkbook and characterizes every expenditure so that H&R Block will have an easy time of it making out his taxes”

Well, here’s precisely what he did : At the exact same time little Don Jr joined the Boy Scouts (requiring a member’s fee), the Trump Foundation gave a donation to the Boy Scouts of $7 – which happened to be exactly what little Don Jr owed…..

Isn’t that the darndest coincidence! This seven dollar “donation” was the smallest payout by the Trump Foundation. What was the largest, you ask?

$264,631. That went towards the “worthy cause” of renovating a fountain outside Trump’s Plaza Hotel in 1989. And thus we bookend the Trump Foundation scam, from largest outlay to smallest – with an embarrassment found at either end. But you asked for something from the Clinton Foundation, right? From Poltifact:

“We’ll focus on the first part of that statement and explore if the Clinton Foundation actually had a hand in making HIV/AIDS drugs more affordable for 9 million people?

The foundation’s work on HIV/AIDS treatment dates back to 2002 with the creation of the Clinton Health Access Initiative. That was a time when some countries were paying $1,000 or more to treat each AIDS patient. The basic goal was to bring in bulk-buying to lower costs. The program consolidated both the supply of raw materials to make the drugs and the bidding to supply the finished product. The result was lower production costs and lower drug prices. Today, the initiative tracks the going price for a menu of treatments and posts them to help health departments around the world as they negotiate with drug companies. In 2014, the World Health Organization reported that by the end of 2013, more than 11.7 million people were on antiretroviral therapy in low- and middle-income countries. While the kinds of drugs have changed, the WHO said “in the past decade the price of individual antiretroviral formulations has decreased considerably.” The treatments used in the early days have fallen from a median cost of about $600 in 2003 to about $100 a decade later. A more advanced drug combination introduced in 2005 saw a similar decline”

Read the entire thing, even though the nine million number is dated. By the time the Clinton Foundation’s program ended, it had gotten affordable AIDs medicine to over twelve million people in Africa, saving thousands upon thousands of lives.

Perhaps not as impressive to Gandydancer as looting a charity to pay Boy Scout fees or buy a oil painting of Trump, but a significant accomplishment nonetheless. And there’s other examples as well – malaria medicine to the Philippines, healthcare clinics in India, etc – but why pile on? Any right-winger STUPID enough to mention the Clinton Foundation & Trump Foundation in the same breath is just too eager for abuse. He deserves our pity, not scorn.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jun/15/hillary-clinton/clinton-clinton-foundation-helped-9-million-lower-/

[Gandydancer]

So sorry that the sarcasm was lost on you, but, no, you do not know that THAT is not what Trump did. You’re making that up. Most likely the Boy Scouts were owed $7 and someone along the line assumed that that was a contribution rather than a fee and had the Trump Foundation pay it.

I see that you leave the fact that you were caught lying about $6 million unaddressed. A bigger deal than a $7 mistake, without a doubt.

As to the Clinton Foundation’s “work” on behalf of HIV/AIDS, none of your numbers, oddly enough, are the Clinton Foundation’s expenditures on anything, merely an attempt by you to give it credit for things it didn’t do. But HERE are some $50 million in actual absurd expenditures: https://nypost.com/2013/08/20/bill-clinton-foundation-has-spent-more-than-50m-on-travel-expenses/ . And then there are all the rake-offs to Chelsea, such as using its resources for her wedding. And what was her salary? That should be in a public document or several. Look it up.

I don’t even like Trump. I recently heard an interview with Ingraham where he was defending increasing H-1B’s which made my blood boil. But you TDS sufferers are far worse than he is.

[grb]

1. That’s your cover story !?! A charity controlling hundreds of millions in funds mistakenly pays a seven dollar fee because they thought it was a donation ?!?!

That’s the most pathetic excuse for an excuse I’ve seen in this forum in a long time. No apologies for missing the “sarcasm” in something so completely ludicrous. How many donations under ten dollars do you think Trump Foundation made in a given decade? In its entire history? Do you think any normal charity – ie, an organization not operated as a slush fund – ever makes a seven dollar “donation”? You’re just embarrassing yourself here.

2. That said, I did have bad info on the vets. Not lying, mind you, because why would I bother? There are dozens of grotesque examples of Trump Foundation abuse so why fabricate anything? My guess is this: There was a big stink about Trump pocketing the vet fundraising. These news stories were followed by a flurry of donations to the causes. I think I hit the wrong spot in the timeline.

3. The Clinton Foundation did get affordable AIDS medicine to over twelve million people in Africa. It saved hundreds of thousands of lives, if not millions. You can’t contest that so you don’t. Any right-type who would compare the Foundations Trump & Clinton is a fool, because it makes Trump look very, very bad.

[David Nieporent]

And then there are all the rake-offs to Chelsea, such as using its resources for her wedding

I'll take "things that never happened" for $2,000, Alex.

[David Nieporent]

What you conveniently left out was that none of that money went to veterans' groups until David Fahrenthold of the Washington Post started asking questions. He couldn't find a single veteran's group that had gotten the money, and that's because Trump hadn't given any of it. He had misused it for himself. And then after Fahrenthold reported it, Trump rushed to give money to those charities, and claimed he hadn't told anyone about it because he was respecting the privacy of those groups (LOL!).

[Dr. Ed 2]

Cindy is right, we can no longer follow the Marquess of Queensberry Rules while the left fights freeform -- memory is that was a Justice Scalia quote.

The left has decided to ignore any scintilla of the concept of "rule of law" and someone else said that "the Constitution is not a suicide pact." We must play by whatever rules the Left wants to play by, as distasteful as doing so may become. It's like nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- or firebombing Tokyo which killed far more people -- we have to deal with the conflict we're given and not the one we'd like to have.

[Estragon]

Again. Shouldn’t you be in Manhattan?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

These guys are all talk. Volokh and Blackman lather them up with the bigotry and the white grievance, they yip and yap for a while, then they go back to complying with the preferences of their betters.

[Gandydancer]

No sensible person would go to Manhattan if he can help it
We should wait for Bragg to come out.
For now.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Trump has no choice. He was arrested. He was in law enforcement custody.

He got snowflake treatment but still wasn’t such a bigmouth and blowhard while under arrest. The tough guy also showed up without a baseball bat. He seemed miserable. Which was great!

[Gandydancer]

Way to deflect, moron. Estragon's comment wasn't directed at Trump, nor was my reply.

And of course Trump had a choice. He was in Florida and didn't have to go to Manhattan any time soon. But he figures this TDS travesty is good for him politically.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Of course he had a choice. Just like you have a choice concerning whether to pay tax on your income this year. Or to drive on the right side of the road. Or to toss dozens of eggs toward your local police station.

Trump did as he was told. He will be doing a lot of that for years to come. He’s like his fellow culture war casualties in that regard.

[Nige]

Whole lot of 'no sensible person would go to Manhattan' takes when almost nobody turned up at Manhattan like Trump wanted and those who did included Nazis.

[OtisAH]

Turnip could have done the whole thing by Zoom. He chose to go to Manhattan. So, he could have avoided going, but went anyway. Welcome to the ever-growing group of people who know Big Baby is not a sensible person.

[Michael P]

Just because you love licking Manhattan boots doesn't mean everyone does.

[Nige]

'we can no longer follow the Marquess of Queensberry Rules'

You do realise you're fooling precisely nobody with this self-serving rationalisation, right? aybe yourself. Hard to believe, but you are actually that dumb.

“the Constitution is not a suicide pact.”

Wasn't that first used in the context of invading Iraq and justifying torture and handwaving away all sorts of inconvenient civil rights?

[David Nieporent]

Wasn’t that first used in the context of invading Iraq and justifying torture and handwaving away all sorts of inconvenient civil rights?

Not unless we invaded Iraq in 1949.

[Nige]

Ah, so they resurrected it for that.

[Randal]

Oh please Cindy, we all know you lack the brainpower to understand your own stupidity so let me help you.

Every time the cops actually shoot someone innocent, what do you say? "Oh, the person should've shown more respect to the police! Just go along with the false arrest, you'll get your day in court."

Nevermind being thrown in jail awaiting your court date, or having to come up with thousands in bail, or not knowing how to navigate the system, such as your overworked public defender pressuring you to plead guilty to something you didn't do.

But you don't care about any of that when it's a person from a segment of society you don't like.

Then Trump gets arrested. Oh no the world is ending! The justice system dared to impugn someone on your side... and treat him as delicately as possible. No handcuffs, no jail, no roughing up.

So, my dear Cindy, what about "respect" for law enforcement and "having your day in court?" How can you be angry about this without being angry about the thousands of innocent people arraigned by our justice system every day who are treated much worse than Trump got?

[Gandydancer]

You have exactly no examples of Cindy defending cops shooting anyone innocent, still less keeping them in jail, dumbass.

But Trump is not guilty of what he is being charged with, and his being arrested wasn't caused by cops, but by a hack partisan prosecutor who is useless in dealing with actual criminals.

[Randal]

How is a hack prosecutor worse than crooked cops?

If I were forced to choose between an encounter with a hack prosecutor or crooked cops, I'll take hack prosecutor every time.

Or are you really attempting to make the exceptionally stupid point that crooked cops are ok because at least sometimes they catch criminals, unlike this prosecutor?

[Nige]

Imagine accusing the left of lawfare under a post about Devin Nunes.

[OtisAH]

The brains of these people are filled with nothing but their grievances. There’s no room to consider anything else about the world that spins around them.

[OtisAH]

I love empty threats! Especially when they come from silly people. Silly people make the best empty threats.

[David Nieporent]

The right can’t take the “high road” or stand on any damn “principles”. We have passed that point.

When did the right ever reach that point?

[ah....Clem]

Another LOLSuit from Devin Nunes. Is he ever going to learn?

Will we ever find out who is paying for his legal representation?

Doesn't Florida have an anti-SLAPP statute?

[Zarniwoop]

Doesn’t Florida have an anti-SLAPP statute?

Apparently not, or Nunes would file his losersuits in some other jurisdiction.

[Gandydancer]

“The Guardian Statements severely prejudice Nunes in his business and profession as CEO of Sarasota-based Trump Media.”

Sarasota is in Florida, you know.

So stop whining.

I’m sure you’d prefer Manhattan, but no one is obliged to be your patsy.

[OtisAH]

mew mew mew

[Voize]

Doesn’t Florida have an anti-SLAPP statute?

Yes.

[shawn_dude]

I want to know what his cow thinks of this lawsuit!

[Kenneth Almquist]

According to the article in The Guardian, the Justice Department has been investigating whether Trump Media violated money laundering laws by taking two loans from lenders who may not be legitimate. The Justice Department had not, according to The Guardian, concluded that any laws were broken.

The article is not about Nunes, but Nunes claims that it libels him because he is the CEO of Trump Media.

Nunes claims that there was no Justice Department investigation, but provides no indication of how he knows that. It's possible that Nunes asked the Justice Department whether Trump Media was under investigation, and the Justice Department told him that it wasn't, but that seems unlikely because the Justice Department doesn't like to talk about investigations. My guess is that Nunes has no knowledge of whether there is an investigation, and decided to lie.

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune published a short piece which appears to describe the Guardian piece, with no independent reporting. Nunes did not sue the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, instead suing the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reporter who wrote the piece. This seems like harassment to me. If Nunes had any thought that he might win this lawsuit, he would have sued the newspaper in the hopes of a substantial payout.

[Gandydancer]

If the reporter has proof that what he wrote is true then he should prevail on that ground.

Why should Nunes assume that if he doesn't believe it?

That is of course not the only falsity Nunes asserts.

[Zarniwoop]

But which alleged falsity is about Nunes?

After reading the original Guardian article, the only mention of Nunes I can find appears to be this:

There appears to have been some awareness at Trump Media that the first $2m was to come through because Trump’s eldest son Don Jr, who joined the board with Trump ally Kash Patel and former Republican turned Trump Media chief executive Devin Nunes, had confirmed to the company’s lawyers to proceed with the transaction.

As I parse that paragraph, it says 2 distinct things:
1) There was alleged awareness at Trump Media because Don Jr. confirmed to lawyers to proceed; and
2) Don Jr. joined the board along with Patel and Trump Media CEO Nunes.

Saying Nunes is CEO is pretty clearly not defamatory, I hope can we agree on that. What else in the Guardian article is actually about Nunes?

C'mon, it's a simple question.

[Zarniwoop]

The article is not about Nunes, but Nunes claims that it libels him because he is the CEO of Trump Media.

This is pretty much the core of why Nunes is going to lose. The first Guardian article doesn’t actually say much about Nunes beyond the fact that he’s CEO. And that’s obviously true – so true that Nunes recites it as fact in the first line of the first paragraph of the complaint. He's trying to bootstrap “I’m CEO” to “they said nasty things about me! Oh noes!”

The only mention of Nunes in the second Guardian article is this (emphasis added):

But in the following weeks, Juhan considered whether to return the money because of its potentially questionable origins, Wilkerson recounted. Whether Juhan consulted with the board – which includes Don Jr, Trump ally Kash Patel and former Republican congressman-turned chief executive Devin Nunes – is unclear.

And that’s … just not defamatory as to Nunes. It’s just not.

[shawn_dude]

I think he'll win, just not the lawsuit. This is just Devin reminding us he's still alive and kicking. It's a brand move.

[Zarniwoop]

I really wonder what the economic model is here. Lawyers aren't cheap, Nunes keeps losing, yet he keeps filing.

So is the entire point of filing lawsuits like this not to win, but to fuel a giant grift machine that preys on low-information, high-credulity GQP voters?

... follow the money.

[Gandydancer]

“I really wonder…”

No, you don’t.

As if Lefty doesn’t engage in lawfare-propaganda-advocacy.
His lawyers aren’t free when he does so either.

[Zarniwoop]

Yawn. "I hate lefties" isn't dick-all of a response.

[Gandydancer]

I hate lefties, but pretending that that's all I said is retarded.

I would hate retarded lefties even more if they weren't all retarded, rendering that superfluous.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You hate lefties.

Your betters will kick the bigoted shit out of you in the culture war, then celebrate your replacement.

The circle of clinger life.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Can you describe how the typical illegal is "your betters"?

[Randal]

Oh man! Since you asked...

Compared to you, a typical illegal is brave, adventurous, America-loving, hard-working, family-first, optimistic, humble, smart, persistent, athletic, tenacious, and funny.

Whereas you are a snivelling lazy whiney turd-bigot.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Statistically speaking I am a net positive to the federal treasury over my lifetime while illegals, and other minorities (especially blacks) are a net negative. In fact, I am the only demographic that is a net positive. Maybe that's why Democrats and Jews hate us so much.

Further, what a hilarious fantasy world you live in where these perfect beings are coming across the border to make our lives better. lmao you delusional moron.

[Randal]

If your metric for a person's value is solely their contribution to the federal fisc, I'm a way better person than you could ever hope to be. So thank you for your wise admiration.

In fact, Democrats generally are the net federal taxpayers, and Republicans are the teat-suckling welfare queens. So keep that in mind as you rate people by their economic productivity.

I'm anti-illegal-immigration, of course. Everybody is. The difference between Democrats and Republicans isn't whether we're anti-illegal-immigration, it's whether we ignorantly blame and stigmatize the immigrants themselves. The immigrants, as people, are great and admirable. It's not their fault they were born in Honduras.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

These bigoted right-wing clingers also want to severely limit all immigration (except, in some cases, with respect to mail-order brides). They not only can't handle the competition (poor education and lack of marketable skills and generally hate anyone who is not white, religious, heterosexual, and a gun nut.

[David Nieporent]

I’m anti-illegal-immigration, of course. Everybody is.

Not everyone. Actual libertarians — not the MAGAs cosplaying as libertarians in the Mises Caucus, I mean — aren't.

[Randal]

You mean like when libertarians become anarchists in the limit?

[Randal]

(I also don't believe your stats for one second. I suspect even if they're based on reality at all, they're skewed in order to reach the desired results, such as by ignoring things like payroll taxes but counting things like federal government wages.)

[Randal]

I just realized you said "statistically speaking." So even you seem to understand that you personally aren't a net positive to society. You're counting yourself as part of a productive demographic. I'm the reason that demographic is productive.

You can thank me later.

[Randal]

I just realized why all you unsuccessful white guys are so despondent and racisty.

White guys are a generally successful demographic “statistically speaking.” Is that because white guys are just intrinsically superior, or is it because white guys get explicit and implicit advantages in society?

If it’s because white guys are intrinsically superior, then as an unsuccessful white guy, it means you’re substandard. Pretty sucky, but not everyone can be like me and Donald Trump, right? At least you’re a member of the superior race, as a consolation prize.

But if it’s because white guys get advantages in society, then you got the exact same advantages that I got… and you still suck. That’s, like, psychologically impossible to accept probably.

So, Charlie, I guess your choices are bigoted white supremacist or soul-crushing despondency. I get it now.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Zarniwoop, the issue raised is what to do about a new high tech industry. The new industry is entrepreneurial lying on the internet.

Trump and Alex Jones—among its progenitors, and so far its leading practitioners—show how it is done. They are trying to prove, and absent much more aggressive criminal enforcement probably will prove, that politically-adjacent lies on the internet can fund a durable and lucrative business model.

To do it risks staggering libel judgments, but these opportunists have invented mechanisms to nullify those. A key insight has been that years-long legal delays buy time to Ponzi up more money to pay past judgments, plus get new cash to continue, and to bank personal profits. What can’t be offset with new fund raising then gets shrugged off via disappearing shell companies and strategic bankruptcies.

Success also depends on hairs-breadth escapes from criminal prosecution, but these pioneers have shown that purported political advocacy and free speech claims have power to chasten prosecutorial zeal. Connivance from corrupt political allies also helps.

Other tactics include never-stop-screaming responses to legal outcomes which would intimidate most hardened criminals, and confident reliance on a combination of Section 230 impunity for internet lies, and a massively gullible victim class from which to harvest endless donations to keep the enterprise going.

Above all, the greatest power exploited to make all this work is legal delay. Money-raising prolonged, is money-raising increased. That suggest why every top leader prosecuted for an actual attempted coup will see charges reduced, and the interval between committing the crime and legal accountability gratuitously prolonged. It may or may not be true that justice delayed is justice denied; the proof is in, however, that to the boldest offenders justice attenuated to airy thinness looks like opportunity.

It’s working, right before our eyes. And for each of the star performers in this new marketplace, hoards of comparably ambitious but lesser-noted grifters come rising from below.

This nation has negligently built a legal and media infrastructure perfectly suited to exploitation by norm-shattering entrepreneurs. They have shown themselves energetic, innovative, and capable to roll the dice on big bets that to deliver accountability would impose a popularity-cost so great that national leaders can be counted on to quail. Before acting to defend effectively the national interest, all our national leaders, including our judges, have been asking themselves, “Wouldn’t it be better to delay?”

The leaders’ adversaries have been bold, and the leaders have been cowards, and there is not much more to it than that. Except that the situation has degenerated so far that the worst among us now accurately judge it a moneymaking opportunity.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

"The Guardian Statements severely prejudice Nunes in his business and profession as CEO of Sarasota-based Trump Media."

To the contrary, given the audience, it would seem they've done him a solid.

[OtisAH]

Right? When’s the last time anyone thought of Devin Nunes without there being news of him filing another LOLsuit?