Nunes sues Twitter and three twitter accounts

I know Devin Nunes’ dumb lawsuit has already been mentioned in the stupid GOP idea thread, but I think it deserves it’s own. The account Devin Nunes’ Cow which is named in the lawsuit had around 1000 followers when the lawsuit hit the media and twitter yesterday. Now it has 167,000 and rising.

Talk about Streisand effect!

The lawsuit also whines about “shadow-banning”, which I thought was a claim right wing morons gave up year ago or more.:smack:

And of course the lawsuit includes the juiciest insults Nunes just couldn’t handle, and solid proof that Nunes and/or his aides don’t understand how to turn off email notifications from Twitter.

I am, of course, udderly amoosed.

Ha - just looked at the Nunes’ Cow page. Love the “Twitter conspiracy meeting tonight. Don’t tell Devin”!

More people follow Devin Nunes’ cow account (@DevinCow) than voted for Devin Nunes in 2018.
Screenshots in link - at that time @DevinCow had 180,000 followers, while Nunes received 117,243 votes…

Hey, what’s the problem? Lotsa guys like to fuck their livestock! I know I do!

Thanx & a tip o’ the hat to Repo Man (1982)

Note, the real intent is, at best, to provide red meat to the paleo-conservative crowd - “help, help, I’m being oppressed”. Conservatives love to paint themselves as victims…
Also, there may be the intent to chill criticism with the threat of ruinous and time-consuming lawsuits. This is another time-honored tactic. In this case, the suit is being brought in Virginia, which recently strengthened its anti-SLAPP laws, allowing winning defendants to collect legal fees.
Now, I’m no law-talking guy, but I can’t see this suit going anywhere but straight to dismissal. There’s a long history of precedent allowing parody of public figures, and the bar is really high for defamation. As far as suing Twitter itself, well, if I’m reading things right, carriers have a pretty broad immunity against liability for user-created content.

In other words, propaganda and intimidation is the point.

I get the intent of it, and I’m the last person to think I understand the conservative mindset, but – really? Given the choice between thinking, “Right on, stick it to the libtards,” and “Lord have mercy, Nunes, grow a thicker skin and stop suing someone pretending to be a cow,” the majority of conservatives are gonna pick the former?

This comes across as one of the most ill-considered lawsuits in the history of our nation.

I wonder how long they can milk this?

Uke - It is improper to imply that Nunes has sexual relations with his livestock. Unless they are underage. Then he’s fair game!

It’s at least up there with the $65 million pants.

I say it’s time to update this joke with Nunes as the butt.

The lawsuit won’t go anywhere and Nunes knows it, but you have to spend money to defend yourself, which is why Nunes filed the suit.

“But do they call me Devin the White House Lickspittle? Noooooo…”

Almost two months later, and not a single person has been served:

How many married people, though? What if you’re in a cow-mitted relationship? What if “it’s cow-mplicated” ?

Just to update everyone: Devin Nunes continues to lose these idiotic lawsuits. In the last couple weeks, his complaints against Twitter (the case against the parody accounts, including the cow, was previously dismissed) were dismissed as was one against Esquire magazine and one against Fusion GPS.

But, since he’s a complete douchebag, he continues to file amended complaints in these cases, attempting to further force defendants to pay for attorney’s fees.

Here’s hoping some of these judges slap Nunes around even more.

How can what Nunes is doing be considered anything other than a SLAPP?

From Post #6 in March 2019:

So what about all these cases that are getting thrown out? Does Nunes have to pay the defendants’ costs in some or all of them?

Who pays for the DevinCow and DevinMom suits? They don’t even know who the real defendants are yet, and last I saw, therefore haven’t even been able to serve anyone with the suits.

To be perfectly honest, Senegoid, I haven’t the foggiest. Sorry. It’s been a busy year, and I’ve completely lost track of what’s going on with this.

Well the Esquire lawsuit that was dismissed was filed in Iowa, which does not have anti-SLAPP laws that would allow defendants to recover attorney fees. The defendants tried to argue for it, but the judge found the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure outlaws applying California’s anti-Slapp laws to Iowa (which is a point of law where there is a split among jurisdictions).

I’ll also point out that Nunes’ attorney, Steven Biss, has had a few complaints and requests for sanctions, as well as judicial admonishments, about his filing of lawsuits. For example, in the Fusion lawsuit (which has been dismissed twice now) and in another, non-Nunes case.