Skip to comments.BREAKING: Devin Nunes To Take Swift Legal Action Against CNN For ‘Demonstrably False’ Story
Posted on 11/23/2019 6:12:56 AM PST by McGruff
click here to read article
The Barney channel would be better than the constant bullsh!t propaganda from CNN or MSNBC.
It seems drama queen bolton doesnt have a bombshell.. He forgot his twitter password . rofl. wH didnt block him
yes,and conservatives of all ages must get involved in government at all levels - municipalities, school boards, county, state, national - get involved - don’t just sit around and bitch!!
The article says “Vienna”
‘About time they started fighting back. President Trump and Elise Stefanik have shown that growing cajones is contagious. ‘
Right on! Same sentiment here.
Hopefully Nick Sandmann bankrupts those lying stooges so all Nunes gets is satisfaction.
And get CNN out of airports.
Oh noes that would kill the ratings they have left ,LOL
nunes district is from the san joaquin valley- fresno tulare-clovis california area conservative agricultural area
Oh ok. My bad!
What bugs me is the oft repeated phrase: digging up dirt. To me that implies a moral scandal or shenanigans. If Biden has committed crimes in Ukraine, it isnt digging up dirt but rather seeking justice. This Ukraine thing looks to have been a sweet little piggy bank for certain rats: Biden, Lurch, Pelosi, who knows who else, and it all needs to come out.
With that other law suit going against them I hope they’ll be reduced to paper and quill; hiring street venders to yell out their stories.
Apologize for the spelling errors. Using the phone and on the move
Long past time that GOPs were taking a stand.
Nunes can file in a San Diego court if he chooses. His lawyers will decide.
I mistakenly thought his district included part of San Diego, thanks.
I wasn’t referring tp you when I talk about “bitching” but rather we as a group, as conservatives, sit back bitch instead of taking action, becoming involved, becoming a transformational force for good.
Partisan Media Shills update.
My dear friend.
I have married, fathered wonderful children, served 20+ years in the military, fought in wars, participated in humanitarian campaigns on four continents, worked in my church, and served in my local community.
I have no idea about what you mean with regard to me taking a "sit back" approach to anything. Being a keyboard warrior does not count, and I do not count it as so.
Perhaps - but " that little NYT v. Sullivan thingy just might run into the fact that - per Antonin Scalia but in contradistinction to the Sullivan decision - the First Amendment - the entire BoR - left the right to sue for libel untouched. By design.
The BoR was forced on the Federalists, who believed that the Ninth Amendment - "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people - was implicit in the Constitution as written. And that since the rights of the people were in Common Law (and thus nowhere comprehensively enumerated), it was a fools errand to enumerate them all in a bill of rights.
The Federalists who passed the BoR had much bigger fish to fry than trying to modify the rights of the people; they were desperate to supplant the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution, and they needed to reassure the public that no rights were weakened by the Constitution. The upshot is that the First Amendment was crafted to preserve traditional freedom of the press and traditional limitations to the freedom of the press. The goal was to avoid controversy, and the Ninth Amendment and the wording of the First Amendment were tailored not to change the right to sue for libel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.