2/21/20
A federal judge has tossed out a racketeering lawsuit House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes filed last year against the private investigation firm at the heart of the Trump-Russia saga. Alexandria, Virginia-based U.S. District Court Judge Liam O'Grady's two-page order issued Friday made short work of Nunes' suit, which sought $9.9 million in damages from Fusion GPS, its founder Glenn Simpson and a nonprofit watchdog group, Campaign for Accountability.
The judge also signaled that pressing on with the legal battle could result in sanctions against Nunes and his attorney, Steven Biss.
Good. That thin-skinned clown loves SLAPP suits, just like his lord and master.
They work.
He says, in a thread about a SLAPP suit getting thrown out, along with threats to impose sanctions on both plaintiff and his attorney....
No, they do not always work. But when they do, they're a very bad thing.
Court dumps Nunes' suit against Trump dossier firm
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA).
...
In other words, don't you dare file another nuisance lawsuit about this.
It's funny how different publications have different views on the same subject ...
Devin Nunes vows to expand lawsuit against Fusion GPS after judge’s dismissal
Nothing complicated about it. When you read a conservative rag, you'll get a pro-Nunes article.
The 'echo-chamber' effect.
Not quite ... :lol:
OP's article states an interpretation ... "The judge also signaled that pressing on with the legal battle could result in sanctions against Nunes and his attorney"
while my link states an actual fact ... "The judge gave the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee 30 days to file another amended complaint."
Liberal rags are incapable of stating just the facts.
O'Grady said he'd allow a revised version of the suit to be re-filed within 30 days, but he said that should only happen if Nunes can craft a complaint that doesn't violate a federal rule against court filings that are frivolous or unsupported by evidence.
Not quite ... :lol:
OP's article states an interpretation ... "The judge also signaled that pressing on with the legal battle could result in sanctions against Nunes and his attorney"
while my link states an actual fact ... "The judge gave the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee 30 days to file another amended complaint."
Liberal rags are incapable of stating just the facts.
Not quite ... :lol:
OP's article states an interpretation ... "The judge also signaled that pressing on with the legal battle could result in sanctions against Nunes and his attorney"
while my link states an actual fact ... "The judge gave the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee 30 days to file another amended complaint."
Liberal rags are incapable of stating just the facts.
Should the House move forward to establish their authority over even the chief magistrate of the Union with the judiciary?
No one in the history of the United States has ever referred to anyone as "the chief magistrate of the Union with the judiciary".
That is a nonsensical reply.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?