In April, Devin Nunes’s wildly self-destructive defamation suit against journalist Ryan Lizza and Hearst Magazines came to an ignominious end with a federal judge ruling that his family did indeed employ undocumented laborers on its dairy farm. The former congressman’s family spent a couple weeks chasing Lizza around rural Iowa to stop him nosing around their business, only to get dragged into the case and forced to throw open their books in discovery. And now Nunes looks to be working that same magic for his new employer, Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG), with a pair of defamation suits against The Guardian and the Washington Post filed in state court in Sarasota County, Florida.

TMTG is in the midst of trying to take itself public via a SPAC known as Digital World Acquisition Corp (DWAC). But the deal appears to be seriously in jeopardy, with the SEC, FINRA, and the Justice Department investigating DWAC. There are also reports that DWAC’s recently ousted CEO Patrick Orlando, who met with Trump before DWAC’s founding, made it clear from the jump that taking TMTG public was the entire reason for founding the SPAC, a gross violation of SEC rules.

In March, The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reported that TMTG is under investigation for possible money laundering in relation to an $8 million loan from a company whose main business appears to be processing payments for webcam pornography in the former Soviet Union. In a truly bizarre complaint, Nunes sued The Guardian in his personal capacity, claiming that “Defendants published and republished egregious statements online and via social media (Twitter) that falsely accused or implied that Nunes engaged in or aided and abetted money laundering.”

Nunes is only mentioned in the article twice: once to say that he is the CEO of TMTG, and once noting his denial that he or anyone else at the company had reservations about the source of the loan. Nevertheless, the complaint insists “Defendants’ false criminal charges exposed Nunes to hatred, ridicule, contempt, distrust, and disgrace, and injured his business, reputation and occupation.”

After weeks of bickering over whose proposal to cut Texans’ property taxes is better, House Speaker Dade Phelan sent a clear message to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, his Senate counterpart, on Tuesday: Take our pitch or leave the special session with nothing.

That message came when the House abruptly adjourned Tuesday after swiftly passing bills on property tax relief and migrant smuggling — the sole items that Gov. Greg Abbott demanded from a special session that began Monday night.

The adjournment means the chamber can’t meet for the rest of the special session, leaving the Senate to accept the version of the bills the House passed or not pass any bill this session.

That bold legislative gambit appeared to be an effort to force the Senate to accept two House bills — one that would increase the minimum sentence for someone convicted of smuggling people and operating a stash house to at least 10 years under state law, and another that would use $12.3 billion in state funds to reduce school property taxes across the state.

After weeks of bickering over whose proposal to cut Texans’ property taxes is better, House Speaker Dade Phelan sent a clear message to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, his Senate counterpart, on Tuesday: Take our pitch or leave the special session with nothing.

That message came when the House abruptly adjourned Tuesday after swiftly passing bills on property tax relief and migrant smuggling — the sole items that Gov. Greg Abbott demanded from a special session that began Monday night.

The adjournment means the chamber can’t meet for the rest of the special session, leaving the Senate to accept the version of the bills the House passed or not pass any bill this session.

That bold legislative gambit appeared to be an effort to force the Senate to accept two House bills — one that would increase the minimum sentence for someone convicted of smuggling people and operating a stash house to at least 10 years under state law, and another that would use $12.3 billion in state funds to reduce school property taxes across the state.

Both President Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy are dealing with twitchy flanks on the left and right, respectively, about the debt ceiling deal they cut in recent days.....

But in a stark contrast, Biden on Monday declined to even say who had gotten the better deal; he has merely called it a “bipartisan deal” and “good news for the American people.”

And he said there was a reason for that.

“Look, one of the things that I hear some of you guys saying is, ‘Why doesn’t Biden say what a good deal it is?’” Biden said on the South Lawn of the White House. “Why would Biden say what a good deal it is before the vote? You think that’s going to help me get it passed? No. That’s why you guys don’t bargain very well......

But there are downstream effects. Even if the Biden and McCarthy tactics are just acknowledging our current reality, their respective approaches can’t help but reinforce and bolster it. The House Freedom Caucus has amassed a great deal of influence in the congressional GOP because it has shown a willingness to stand in the way of things, including electing McCarthy as speaker. Whether this deal is a win for either side is up for debate, but it shows that everyone involved is now effectively catering to it — including, remarkably, Democrats.

Furthermore, Karl Rove and the Republican Party knew this, and so they nurtured and crucially assisted Nader’s campaigns, both in 2000 and in 2004. On 27 October 2000, the AP’s Laura Meckler headlined “GOP Group To Air Pro-Nader TV Ads.” She opened: “Hoping to boost Ralph Nader in states where he is threatening to hurt Al Gore, a Republican group is launching TV ads featuring Nader attacking the vice president [Mr. Gore]. ... ‘Al Gore is suffering from election year delusion if he thinks his record on the environment is anything to be proud of,’ Nader says [in the commercial]. An announcer interjects: ‘What’s Al Gore’s real record?’ Nader says: ‘Eight years of principles betrayed and promises broken.’” Meckler’s report continued: “A spokeswoman for the Green Party nominee said that his campaign had no control over what other organizations do with Nader’s speeches.” Bush’s people - the group sponsoring this particular ad happened to be the Republican Leadership Council - knew exactly what they were doing, even though the liberal suckers who voted so carelessly for Ralph Nader obviously did not. Anyone who drives a car the way those liberal fools voted, faces charges of criminal negligence, at the very least. But this time, the entire nation crashed as a result; not merely a single car.....

On July 9th, the San Francisco Chronicle headlined “GOP Doners Funding Nader: Bush Supporters Give Independent’s Bid a Financial Lift,” and reported that the Nader campaign “has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party,” according to “an analysis of federal records.” Perhaps these contributors were Ambassador Egan’s other friends. Mr. Egan’s wife was now listed among the Nader contributors. Another listed was “Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year.” Furthermore, Ari Berman reported 7 October 2004 at the Nation, under “Swift Boat Veterans for Nader,” that some major right-wing funders of a Republican smear campaign against Senator John Kerry’s Vietnam service contributed also $13,500 to the Nader campaign, and that “the Republican Party of Michigan gathered ninety percent of Nader’s signatures in their state” (90%!) to place Nader on the ballot so Bush could win that swing state’s 17 electoral votes. Clearly, the word had gone out to Bush’s big contributors: Help Ralphie boy! In fact, on 15 September 2005, John DiStaso of the Manchester Union-Leader, reported that, “A year ago, as the Presidential general election campaign raged in battleground state New Hampshire, consumer advocate Ralph Nader found his way onto the ballot, with the help of veteran Republican strategist David Carney and the Carney-owned Norway Hill Associates consulting firm.”

It was obvious, based upon the 2000 election results, that a dollar contributed to Nader in the 2004 contest would probably be a more effective way to achieve a Bush win against Kerry in the U.S. Presidential election than were perhaps even ten dollars contributed to Bush. This was a way of peeling crucial votes off from Bush’s real opponent - votes that otherwise would have gone to the Democrat. That’s why the smartest Republican money in the 2004 Presidential election was actually going to Nader, even more so than to Bush himself: these indirect Bush contributions provided by far the biggest bang for the right-wing buck.