As Richard Nixon so elegantly demonstrated, its not the crime but the cover-up that often gets a public figure into trouble. Indeed, in this era of the Internet, it even has a name: the Streisand Effect, which Wikipedia helpfully defines as an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information [that] has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information.

Its named after legendary singer Barbra Streisand because of foolish efforts she took in 2003 to suppress photographs of her massive mansion (theres really no other way to describe it) that sits atop a bluff in Malibu, outside of Los Angeles. Streisand sued a photographer and a website that took the photos as part of a project to document erosion along the California coast a series of 12,000 photos taken as part of the states California Coastal Records Project.

The photos were public documents, but Streisand nevertheless took the matter to court. This led to two results. First, the defendants responded with a motion to dismiss the lawsuit under Californias anti-SLAPP law, which allows a quick dismissal (and collection of a defendants attorneys fees). That motion was successful, and Streisands case was dismissed.

The second result was even more predictable: her lawsuit boomeranged, publicizing the photos in a way that never would have happened if shed simply allowed them to sit, unacknowledged, among 12,000 other photos. Instead, by suggesting she had something to hide, she garnered even more unwanted publicity. As publishers and motion picture producers have long known, the surest way to make a book a bestseller or a movie a phenomenon is trying to censor it.

Which brings us, fittingly, to recent news that U.S. Congressman Devin Nunes equally ill-advised lawsuit over a mocking Twitter account had reached its own, equally-predictable resolution.

Nunes, a Republican from Californias Central Valley, gained fame in the last few years as, first, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee during 2017-2019 when the Republicans still controlled the House. Nunes is a devoted follower of President Trump, and during the first two years of the Trump Administration, undertook some rather ham-handed investigations of matters intended to support the president leading Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, of all people, to liken Nunes to bumbling fictional detective Inspector Clouseau. Once Democrats re-took the House in 2018, Nunes became the ranking minority member of the Intelligence Committee, and emerged as one of the presidents most outspoken defenders when the Committee launched its impeachment inquiry in 2019.

Nunes brush with legal immortality for the wrong reasons began in March, 2019. Nunes and his family have made their money in agriculture. His district is known for its dairy farms, and in reaction to his new-found media presence, someone started a satirical Twitter account under the name Devin Nunes Cow or @DevinCow. That month, Nunes sued the Twitter platform itself in Virginia state court, because Twitter refused to reveal the name of the person or persons behind the account. The lawsuit also sought $250 million in damages.

When Nunes filed his lawsuit, the DevinCow account only had about 1,000 followers barely a heartbeat by Twitter standards. But thanks to his lawsuit, it began to attract followers in droves, and currently has just shy of 750,000. The lawsuit also led to a spate of other satirical accounts to mock Rep. Nunes including Devin Nunes Mom, Devin Nunes Cows Mom, Devin Nunes Lawsuits well, you get the idea.

On June 25, a Virginia judge dismissed Nunes lawsuit, finding that Twitter was protected by the federal Telecommunications Act from such lawsuits. Of course, even without the Telecommunications Act, someone who has become a public figure by doing something like running for office must accept that being ridiculed is part of being a politician. As Harry Truman liked to say, If you cant stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

But Rep. Nunes slogs on. Indeed, when he wasnt defending the president in the impeachment hearings, he spent most of 2019 filing defamation lawsuits. In April, he filed a $150 million lawsuit against the McClatchy news organization. In September, he sued journalist Ryan Lizza and Esquire magazine about a 2018 story recounting how Nunes had secretly moved his familys dairying operation to Iowa. And he rounded out the year in December with a lawsuit seeking $435,350,000 from CNN, because it reported Nunes alleged involvement with Rudy Giulianis associate, Lev Parnas, who was indicted earlier that year (along with his associate, Igor Fruman) for campaign finance violations. Parnas attorney claimed that Nunes was involved with Parnas because Nunes was trying to get dirt on former Vice-president Joe Bidens son, Hunter, from the Ukraine.

Inspector Clouseau lives.

Frank Zotter, Jr., is a Ukiah attorney.

Continue reading here:

Judicial Follies: Unwanted publicity - The Willits News