Trump ally Devin Nunes can sue NBCUniversal for defamation - judge

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: Reuters

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Monday said Devin Nunes, the former California congressman and an ally of former U.S. President Donald Trump, can sue NBCUniversal for defamation over a comment by Rachel Maddow concerning his relationship with a suspected Russian agent.

Without ruling on the merits, U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel in Manhattan said Nunes "plausibly allege[d] actual malice" with respect to a statement from a March 2021 broadcast of MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show."

Maddow was discussing a package addressed to Nunes from Andriy Derkach, a pro-Russia Ukrainian legislator, and said Nunes "refused to hand it over to the FBI, which is what you should do if you get something from somebody who is sanctioned by the U.S. as a Russian agent."

Nunes' complaint, which seeks damages, said MSNBC and Maddow knew the package had been turned over, but instead "set out to inflict maximum pain and suffering on plaintiff in order to harm plaintiff's reputation."

Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-ally-devin-nunes-sue-012154841.html

---

Don't have a cow Devin

[Fullduplexxx]

1. nominated by President George W. Bush

[czarjak]

2. Illegitimately named presidents appoint illegitimate judges. Period. Rulings should be null and void

[onenote]

7. So here's what you want:

In March 2020, Castel found that the SECwas likely to prove that a cryptocurrency issued by the Telegram company qualified as a security and was subject to federal registration requirements and Telegram agreed to pay $18.5 million in civil penalties. You want to give Telegram back their $18.5 million.

In 2019, sentenced a former Honduran congressman (and brother of the then-president of Honduras) to life plus 30 years in a drug trafficking case. You want to set the defendant free.

In 2018, Castel sentenced conman Scott Tucker to more than 16 years for various crimes related to Tucker's payday-lending business. Another guy you'd have set free.

[czarjak]

8. The last two Republican presidents installed by illegitimate means...

(Bush/Trump), Einstein, means illegitimate judges are still making decisions when they shouldn't be. Go rouge though, Bro.

[onenote]

9. And who is going to undo those decisions,

Riddle me that, Brainiac.

[czarjak]

10. Who said anything about undoing the done?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

18. YOU did in your first post in this thread

When you write "null and void", do you not know what "null and void" means? Your readers know what it means. It means undoing rulings.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

29. Ummm, you did.

czarjak (8,073 posts)

2. Illegitimately named presidents appoint illegitimate judges. Period. Rulings should be null and void

[Bernardo de La Paz]

17. "rouge" equals red. Are you serious? If you mean "rogue", are you serious?

[Freethinker65]

3. Discovery could be fun. How long did it take Dev to call the FBI? Did he open it?

Why was it sent to him? Had it happened before? Since?

Is he sure she was talking about the same incident? How can he be so sure?

[kelly1mm]

4. If Rachel knew Nunes had turned it over but said otherwise then I don't see why he

should not be able to sue on the merits? Just because he is a jerk does not mean he does not have a legitimate cause of action if (and that is a BIG if) he can prove the allegations of his complaint.

[KS Toronado]

11. Rachel would never knowingly spread false info.

[kelly1mm]

12. Well that is Nunes allegation and the judge is letting the case proceed (meaning the judge thinks

there is at least a question as to a material fact that allowed the court to deny a motion for summary judgement) so we will see what the court and/or jury decides.

[KS Toronado]

13. Doesn't Nunes have a history of filing these type of lawsuits?

[kelly1mm]

14. Yes. They are usually disposed of at the summary judgement stage. This lawsuit has survived that

challenge and can proceed to the discovery stage. In normal circumstances this would be when settlement negotiations would begin but we will see. Either/both parties may wish to go to trial.

One thing seems clear. At the time the assertion was made by Rachel that Nunes had not turned over the package that was not a true statement. If this was not the case then summary judgement would have been granted. The question is whether that was knowing and deliberate/malicious or not.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

19. He has a history of losing them. . . nt

[KS Toronado]

25. That's what I was thinking!

[BootinUp]

5. The merits of the case will be less helpful for Devin, I predict. nt

[vanlassie]

6. Rachel is well known for being interested in accuracy.

Everyone know this. Nunes is a well known crank.

[Sparky 1]

15. Rachel vs Nunes? No contest. Rachel for the win! np

[multigraincracker]

16. Would this open up FAUX news to

these kinds of charges?

[mahina]

28. Now that is interesting!

[Vinca]

20. But when was it turned over? After the FBI threatened to arrest him?

I think this is great. Rachel will love being able to depose Nunes and any lackeys around him. In the end, it will be tossed like all of Devin's lawsuits. Mooooooo.

[Javaman]

21. sure he can sue all he wants, doesn't mean he will win.

I predict he will be paying out a lot of court fees

[twodogsbarking]

22. He would sue the sun for not shining at night.

[SouthernDem4ever]

23. LOL

[BlueIdaho]

24. Bring on the discovery phase...

Devon will be destroyed and it will all be on the record.

[azureblue]

26. Nunes is

What is called vexatious litigant / abuser of the system. IOW, someone who sues over anything, and PO's the courts. Which means his suits are full of holes and not thought all the way through. Nunes has lost over and over again for bringing these frivolous suits and he will lose this one, too. And yep, he forgets about discovery. He also forgets the the network deals with these types of lawsuits all the time, and they will eat his lunch, then stick him with the legal fees. Millions. Maybe even have him declared a vexatious, which would mean he will not be able to file lawsuits without prior review, again. My bet is somebody will take him aside and tell him you will very much Eff yourself up if you pursue this, and he won't proceed.

[BlueIdaho]

27. Great insight!

Thanks