Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
MTP Reggie

CNN Just Hit With A $435 Million Lawsuit For ‘Demonstrably False’

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

MTP Reggie

CNN Just Hit With A $435 Million Lawsuit For 'Demonstrably False' News Story

By David Rufful

December 4, 2019

Analyzing America

 

<More Good News Here>

 

Rep. Devin Nunes filed a defamation lawsuit Tuesday against CNN.

 

The complaint is related to CNN's published article on Nov. 22, which Nunes argues is a "demonstrably false hit piece."

 

It alleged that Nunes, who lives in California, traveled to Vienna in 2018 to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joseph R. Biden.

 

The lawsuit reads, "Devin Nunes did not go to Vienna or anywhere else in Austria in 2018."

 

Nunes says he visited two countries: Libya and Malta on a congressional delegation, or "codel."

 

The lawsuit seeks $435 million in damages. The CNN claimed Nunes met with former Ukrainian chief prosecutor Viktor Shokin.

 

(snip)

 

<More Good News Here>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup
:biglaugh: :biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki

But yet their reporting on Trump or Bush is and was true....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

Great. Start making them spend their money on defending their deliberate lies in court.

 

I hope the MAGA kid wins big, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

Well done Congressman Nunes. :2up: Here's hoping lots more follow your lead.

 

:yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian

He did eat a can of Vienna sausages though...Crucify him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

It's about damned time that somebody started fighting them back for all of the lies that they have been telling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

He did eat a can of Vienna sausages though...Crucify him!

 

Hey, I like Vienna sausages. And also "Fish Steaks" and/or "Kipper Snacks". So, sue me. OR impeach me for that matter.

 

TRUE STORY: HS, 1970s. I got 50c a day "lunch money". At the time "Beach Cliff Fish Steaks" were 35c from the local IGA during lunch. I could come back at eat it with free crackers in the lunchroom.

 

The proceeds from that, with contributions from friends, paid for Cindy G to "accidentally" let her gym trunks fall down in front of us boys during Gym class.

 

Nevermind that I've been "pantsed" myself in the same Gym class. This was the '70s , it was what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin

I expect CNN to argue that they did not report that Nunes went to Vienna and met with Viktor Shokin, the Ukrainian prosecutor. Instead, they will argue that they reported that Joseph Bondy, a lawyer for Lev Parnas, said that Parnas was willing to say that Nunes had gone to Vienna to meet with Viktor Shokin. CNN will argue that they accurately reported what lawyer Bondy said his client was willing to say. If that isn't true, if it is false and defamatory, that's on Bondy and Parnas. Or so they will argue.

 

To me, that doesn't wash. A news channel which repeats the lies of others is still responsible for any lies they repeat. Otherwise, they make themselves the mouthpiece and megaphone of any source who wants their assistance in slander. I realize, of course, that that isn't journalism. Instead, this is...CNN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
E Van der Vliet

Who are these republicans? And where did they come from?

 

 

Oh yeah, that’s right...Trump!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

I expect CNN to argue that they did not report that Nunes went to Vienna and met with Viktor Shokin, the Ukrainian prosecutor. Instead, they will argue that they reported that Joseph Bondy, a lawyer for Lev Parnas, said that Parnas was willing to say that Nunes had gone to Vienna to meet with Viktor Shokin. CNN will argue that they accurately reported what lawyer Bondy said his client was willing to say. If that isn't true, if it is false and defamatory, that's on Bondy and Parnas. Or so they will argue.

 

To me, that doesn't wash. A news channel which repeats the lies of others is still responsible for any lies they repeat. Otherwise, they make themselves the mouthpiece and megaphone of any source who wants their assistance in slander. I realize, of course, that that isn't journalism. Instead, this is...CNN!

 

When has that ever been true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe the Pagan

It's about damned time that somebody started fighting them back for all of the lies that they have been telling.

 

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. Trump has shown the Republican party how to win, and it looks like Nunes is drinking.

 

Unfortunately I doubt the case will go anywhere. CNN will use the same defense as the people who smeared The Covington Catholic High School kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian

It's become blatantly obvious that it's far, far too difficult to sue the media for libel and slander in this country. Its easy to go too far in the other direction, but someting needs to be done to stop the abuse the media gets away with every single day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin
When has that ever been true?
Rolling Stone Magazine reported on a campus gang rape that never happened and had to pay out a hefty sum.

 

It has been three years since Rolling Stone published the faulty story "A Rape on Campus" alleging a student using the name "Jackie" was gang-raped by members of the University of Phi Kappa Psi. Despite the time that has lapsed, the fallout continues. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan overturned a lower court's dismissal of three alumni members of Phi Kappa Psi's lawsuit against the magazine, sending the case back to court. In June, Rolling Stone reached a settlement with the fraternity chapter at University of Virginia, agreeing to pay about $1.65 million. And in April, Rolling Stone settled University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo's libel lawsuit against the magazine.

Rolling Stone could argue, like CNN, that they didn't lie, they just repeated somebody else's lies. They had to pay up anyhow.

Edited by Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin
When has that ever been true?
It was true when the British newspaper Daily Mail reported that Melania Trump "allegedly" worked as an escort. Their coerced apology:

 

 

On August 20, 2016, an article was published in the Daily Mail newspaper titled 'Racy photos, and troubling questions about his wife's past that could derail Trump.' The article discussed whether allegations being made about Melania Trump could negatively affect her husband Donald Trump's presidential bid. Among other things, the article noted that allegations have been made in a book available on Amazon about a modeling agency where Mrs. Trump worked in Milan being 'something like a gentleman's club,' and an article published by Suzy, a Slovenian magazine, alleged that Mrs. Trump's modeling agency in New York, run by Paolo Zampolli, 'operated as an escort agency for wealthy clients.'

The article, which was also published online by the Mailonline/DailyMail.com website under the headline 'Naked photoshoots, and troubling questions about visas that won't go away: The VERY racy past of Donald Trump's Slovenian wife' did not intend to state or suggest that these allegations are true, nor did it intend to state or suggest that Mrs. Trump ever worked as an 'escort' or in the 'sex business.' The point of the article was that these allegations could impact the U.S. presidential election even if they are untrue.

 

To the extent that anything in the Daily Mail's article was interpreted as stating or suggesting that Mrs. Trump worked as an 'escort' or in the 'sex business,' that she had a 'composite or presentation card for the sex business,' or that either of the modeling agencies referenced in the article were engaged in these businesses, it is hereby retracted, and the Daily Mail newspaper regrets any such misinterpretation.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Daily Mail settled for $3 million. They argued that they had not said that Melania Trump had worked as a paid escort. They argued that they had reported that rumors of this might affect Trump's Presidential campaign. They had to pay up anyhow and print a lame apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oki

When has that ever been true?

 

So if Fox News repeated/republished/re aired a story stating that you or a family member where running a child sex ring, and even AFTER you where found innocent, the case went no where etc, you would not be entitled to sue their sorry butts? Especially if there was noting to back the story up in the first place? IE no one in your family even worked at the location, owned the property or had any ties what so ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Rolling Stone Magazine reported on a campus gang rape that never happened and had to pay out a hefty sum.

 

It has been three years since Rolling Stone published the faulty story "A Rape on Campus" alleging a student using the name "Jackie" was gang-raped by members of the University of Phi Kappa Psi. Despite the time that has lapsed, the fallout continues. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan overturned a lower court's dismissal of three alumni members of Phi Kappa Psi's lawsuit against the magazine, sending the case back to court. In June, Rolling Stone reached a settlement with the fraternity chapter at University of Virginia, agreeing to pay about $1.65 million. And in April, Rolling Stone settled University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo's libel lawsuit against the magazine.

Rolling Stone could argue, like CNN, that they didn't lie, they just repeated somebody else's lies. They had to pay up anyhow.

 

CNN will be less likely to fold and settle like RS magazine. Anything’s possible, I suppose. How long was Fox News, particularly Hannity, reporting that Seth Rich as DNC leaker story?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Martin
CNN will be less likely to fold and settle like RS magazine.

 

GEORGIA–Almost six months after a Federal Bureau of Investigation leak identified him as the number-one suspect in last summer’s bombing in Centennial Olympic Park, Richard Jewell remains at the center of controversies over the handling of the investigation. In addition to the settlements he has collected from NBC and CNN and the several lawsuits he has filed, in late December Jewell was the subject of a congressional hearing on the roles of the FBI and media during the investigation. In early December, NBC reached an out of court settlement with Jewell for an amount reported by the Wall Street Journal as more than $500,000. In late January, Jewell’s attorneys announced a second settlement, this time with CNN. The terms of this settlement are also confidential.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

When journos want to report something which the subject of their report does not want reported, the journos assert "the people's right to know." But, when they settle out of court as NBC and CNN did with Richard Jewell, they insist on a non-disclosure agreement.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

CNN will be less likely to fold and settle like RS magazine. Anything's possible, I suppose. How long was Fox News, particularly Hannity, reporting that Seth Rich as DNC leaker story?

 

So what? You asked "When has that ever been true?". Martin answered your question factually. Your opinion as to how CNN will respond is irrelevant to your original question.

 

As I recall the Fox involvement in the Seth Rich issue was pretty much limited to Hannity (which is primarily opinion, not hard news). Now if it has been constant fodder on Special Report you might have a point. I don't recall that it was, and you don't. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

GEORGIA–Almost six months after a Federal Bureau of Investigation leak identified him as the number-one suspect in last summer's bombing in Centennial Olympic Park, Richard Jewell remains at the center of controversies over the handling of the investigation. In addition to the settlements he has collected from NBC and CNN and the several lawsuits he has filed, in late December Jewell was the subject of a congressional hearing on the roles of the FBI and media during the investigation. In early December, NBC reached an out of court settlement with Jewell for an amount reported by the Wall Street Journal as more than $500,000. In late January, Jewell's attorneys announced a second settlement, this time with CNN. The terms of this settlement are also confidential.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

When journos want to report something which the subject of their report does not want reported, the journos assert "the people's right to know." But, when they settle out of court as NBC and CNN did with Richard Jewell, they insist on a non-disclosure agreement.

 

I doubt Nunes will be as easy to deal with as Jewell was . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

So what? You asked "When has that ever been true?". Martin answered your question factually. Your opinion as to how CNN will respond is irrelevant to your original question.

 

As I recall the Fox involvement in the Seth Rich issue was pretty much limited to Hannity (which is primarily opinion, not hard news). Now if it has been constant fodder on Special Report you might have a point. I don't recall that it was, and you don't. . .

 

Martin's comment and my response to it was about TV news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Great. Start making them spend their money on defending their deliberate lies in court.

 

I hope the MAGA kid wins big, as well.

 

I honestly thought that it was HIS suit that was filed, not Nunes.

 

Good on Devin!

 

The propaganda machinery needs to be put out of business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51

Martin's comment and my response to it was about TV news.

 

:yawn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...