Federal decide dismisses California MP Devin Nunes’ lawsuit in opposition to the Washington Publish
Interestingly, Nunes never denied the Washington Post’s version of events.
A federal judge had dismissed a lawsuit brought against the Washington Post by California MP Devin Nunes.
Nunes, says The Fresno Bee, filed its first lawsuit against the Post in December 2019.
In his complaint, Nunes alleged that the Post slandered him in an article published earlier that month. There a Post reporter alleged that Nunes had informed President Donald Trump of a briefing from the House Intelligence Committee which stated in a report that the Russian government had preferred Trump’s victory over Joe Biden in the November election.
Nunes was quick to claim libel, accusing the Post of working with Congressional Democrats to slander himself and President Trump.
To improve, Nunes asked the court to give him a quarter of a billion dollars in damages and an additional $ 350,000 in punitive damages.
On Christmas Eve, Judge Ahmit P. Mehta of the US District Court for the Columbia District dismissed the lawsuit in full, ruling that Nunes did not provide evidence of defamation.
Wooden mallet on black, reflective surface; Image via pxhere.com, CCO.
According to The Fresno Bee, Mehta’s decision essentially stated that in the course of his lawsuit, Nunes never denied the Washington Post’s core allegation – that Nunes had actually informed President Trump of the House Intelligence Committee’s findings.
Since Nunes did not question the Post’s narrative, Mehta said the California Republican more or less accused the Post of slander by implication.
Even if it did, Mehta said Nunes’ lawsuit did not meet the standard necessary to hold the Post accountable. This is mainly because Nunes is a politician – as a public figure he would have to prove that the Washington Post acted maliciously in order to publish potentially non-factual information about him.
“Even if the court would deal with it [Nunes’s] Claims as simple defamation claims, the Post argues that the [defamation charge] should be dismissed for an independent reason: the complaint does not plausibly claim this [The Washington Post] acted in ‘actual malice,’ ”Mehta wrote. “The court agrees.”
Mehta also denied a motion by Nunes’ attorneys to amend and continue the lawsuit with new charges.
Nunes, notes The Hill, has filed numerous lawsuits against the media and experts. For the past several years, Rep. Nunes has targeted CNN, Esquire and Twitter. In one particularly hilarious case, a federal judge ruled that Nunes could not sue Twitter for posting content from the satirical reports “Devin Nunes ‘Mom” and “Devin Nunes’ Cow”.
Devin Nunes loses lawsuit, accusing the Washington Post of conspiring with House Democrats to defame him
Federal judge dismisses Devin Nunes’ first lawsuit against the Washington Post
The judge dismisses Nunes’ defamation suit against the Washington Post