Nunes' lawsuit against Maddow and MSNBC moves forward

[Doc7505]

Like when the right said that Paul Pelosi was attacked by his lover?

~~~~~~
No, more like

CNN settles defamation suit with Covington teen Nick Sandmann

CNN has agreed to settle a multimillion-dollar defamation suit filed by Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann over the network’s depiction of his 2019 encounter with Native Ame…

nypost.com

**********​

Project Veritas Wins In Defamation Lawsuit Against New York Times

A New York judge criticized The New York Times for blurring lines between news and opinion in its news articles as he considered a defamation claim.

thefederalist.com

 

[Marener]

No, more like

Settling a case isn’t winning one.

Nick Sandmann's media libel lawsuits dismissed by federal judge

A Kentucky federal judge dismissed libel lawsuits set against five media companies in response to a viral video of a Nick Sandmann being confronted by a Native American man.

www.foxnews.com

Paul Pelosi would have a case against everyone who said he was attacked by his lover.

 

[Marener]

And how did that go for him?

They were dismissed.

One wonders who is funding all these lawsuits.

 

[Concerned American]

It's too bad Nunes can't sue Maddow personally. It would be very fitting if he were awarded a big chunk of her $30 million dollar a year salary.

If Alex Jones can be sent to financial ruin for his opinions, why should Maddow be given a pass?

 

[Concerned American]

One wonders who is funding all these lawsuits.

Greedy lawyers? Duh.

 

[Marener]

Greedy lawyers? Duh.

Lawyers don’t work for free. Someone is funding these lawsuits for Nunes. Guaranteed.

 

[Doc7505]

Lawyers aren’t free, moron. There’s a cost to defending lawsuits like these. That’s the point.

Lawyers do work on contingency.

Contingency Lawyers

Contingency lawyers may also create different layers for their fees. Several factors go into determining what the exact contingency fee will be. Learn more

www.legalmatch.com

 

[Donald H]

Greedy lawyers? Duh.

Mind your own business and stfu pissant.
mutha may eye?

 

[Concerned American]

Lawyers don’t work for free. Someone is funding these lawsuits for Nunes. Guaranteed.

Have you ever heard of "contingencies?" A greedy lawyer will take anything that he figures he can win on a contingency. Ask the multi millionaire lawyers who took on big pharma over the oxycontin epidemic.

 

[Concerned American]

Mind your own business and stfu pissant.

LMAO, try again, duck. This is a discussion of US law. You still haven't come to grips with the fact that you are a commie Canadian and you have no standing in this conversation. Take your own advice and STFU. Fucking trolls.

 

[hadit]

They were dismissed.

One wonders who is funding all these lawsuits.

That is my point. If a judge decides a lawsuit is frivolous or without standing, he can make it go away.

 

[bodecea]

Mr. Maddows show is 24/7 hate republicans. The only reason she has a show is the dumb leftists continue to believe her.

She's too smart for you. Fact.

 

[Concerned American]

That is my point. If a judge decides a lawsuit is frivolous or without standing, he can make it go away.

He can also levy penalties from the party who files a frivolous lawsuit. Maybe that should happen more often.

 

[toobfreak]

This is what we need in Western journalism .....people being held accountable for their lives.

Great reading!

Here's a link people can actually READ:

MSN

 

[White 6]

This is what we need in Western journalism .....people being held accountable for their lives.

NBC Must Face Suit by Devin Nunes Alleging Maddow Smeared Him

Former congressman and Donald Trump ally Devin Nunes cleared an early hurdle in a lawsuit accusing MSNBC host Rachel Maddow of smearing him on her show.

www.bloomberg.com

What is the "smear" Maddow is supposed to have made?

 

[toobfreak]

What is the "smear" Maddow is supposed to have made?

You should try reading the link above I just posted.

 

[Resnic]

So much for free speech.

What do you base that on exactly? Or better yet, do you even know what it is you're replying to?

Free speech isn't in any danger, slandering someone is which is already illegal, which is what the case is about.

 

[Concerned American]

What do you base that on exactly? Or better yet, do you even know what it is you're replying to?

Free speech isn't in any danger, slandering someone is which is already illegal, which is what the case is about.

Thank you. Truth and opinion are the only defenses to slander charges.

 

[White 6]

Great reading!

View attachment 732398


Here's a link people can actually READ:

MSN

I got more by using the reader view on my browser, but still did not find what she is supposed to have said about him.

 

[Foxfyre]

So much for free speech.

Free speech is intended to allow people liberty and protect them from government interference or retaliation for what they think, believe, verbally express via word or in writing to in artistic impression. It was never intended to protect them from consequences if they libel or slander others. It was never intended for the press to intentionally tell a lie that is damaging to a person's integrity, credentials, reputation, livelihood, relationships.

Maddow falsely said, without qualification or any evidence whatsoever, that Nunes kept important interference information from his colleagues on the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Unless she can prove that he did that, to say that on national television is absolutely malicious slander.