| Nunes Sued NBC for Maddow
Report on Russia Package Summary
Judgment now 2d Cir Affirms
by
Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book
Substack SDNY
COURTHOUSE,
Nov 6 – Then Congressman Devin
Nunes sued NBC after Rachel
Maddow reported on March 18,
2021 that he had gotten a
package from Russian agent
Andriy Derkach and had not
turned it over to the FBI. On October
8, 2024 a proceeding was held
before U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New
York Judge P. Kevin Castel.
Inner City Press was there, thread On October 16,
Nunes' counsel asked for a
discovery conference,
including on "the instruction
that was given to Ms. Maddow
not to answer further
questions related to her
personal political views; an
instruction made only after
extensive questioning on the
topic had been conducted."
E-mail between counsel on
Patreon here. On October 23
Nunes' counsel sent in another
letter reiterating his demand
to Maddow's personal devices."
Letter on Patreon here. On November 4,
Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn
ordered "discovery shall be
reopened for the limited
purpose of conducting a search
of Ms. Maddow's personal
devices." 5-page Order on
Patreon here. On November 5,
docketed were portions of
Maddow's deposition, still
with some redactions, but
including the admission about
use of personal devices, and
declining to answer on
political views - 10 pages of
deposition on Patreon here. On February 12,
2025 NBC replied, including
that "attacks the credibility
of testimony from Rachel
Maddow and Cory Gnazzo. But
such attacks have no place at
summary judgment and as a
matter of law cannot
manufacture a factual
dispute. “On a motion
for summary judgment, the
court is not to weigh the
evidence, or assess the
credibility of witnesses.â€
Full 20 page memo on Patreon here. Docketed on
August 4, "CLERK'S JUDGMENT
re: [162] Memorandum &
Opinion in favor of
NBCUniversal Media LLC against
Devin G. Nunes. It is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
That for the reasons stated in
the Court's Opinion and Order
dated August 1, 2025, NBCU's
motion for summary judgment is
GRANTED. Accordingly, the case
is closed. (Signed by Clerk of
Court Tammi M Hellwig on
8/4/2025) (Attachments: # (1)
Appeal Package)" On November 6,
2026, this: "We have
considered Nunes’ remaining
arguments and find them
unpersuasive. For the reasons
stated above, the judgment of
the district court is
AFFIRMED" - full 7 page 2d
Circuit order on Patreon here More / extra on X
for Subscribers here
and Substack here The case is Nunes
v. NBCUniversal Media, LLC,
1:22-cv-1633 (Castel /
Netburn)
*** Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron. 
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013 Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis. Copyright 2006-2025 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com |
Friday, November 13, 2026
Nunes Sued NBC for Maddow Report on Russia Package Summary Judgment now 2d Cir Affirms
After Ouster from EDNY Hot Line of RCFP Is Not So Hot As Amicus Brief Bandwidth Cited
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Nov 6 – When I was
escorted out of federal court in Brooklyn after my press
passes to cover the US v Huawei and US v Clase trials were
confiscated,
I reached out to media freedom and protection groups for
help.
Nearly everyone I asked directed me to the
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. So working
now from the Brooklyn Public Library across Cadman Plaza
from the court, I looked through the RCFP website. Right
at the top of the front page was a red button: LEGAL
HOTLINE. I filled out their form, noting that I was
now missing testimony in both trials.
It was not until the following day
that I heard back from the RCFP hotline. It was a lawyer
calling me, and I thought it could mean they would sue the
Eastern District of New York District Executive's Office,
which had confiscated my press pass and had me
frog-marched out.
Or they could sue the DOJ spokesman
who had put in the call to the District Executive's
office, targeting me for tweeting on a cell phone when
many others in the same courtroom, including right next to
this spokesman, were using their phones.
But no.
The RCFP lawyer said, among other
things - she made it clear they are not my lawyers, so
this is not covered by any attorney client privilege, they
would not take a suddenly banned journalist as their
client - that selective prosecution was hard to prove.
Well, I know that. I said, I am not
asking for legal advice - I'm asking for some action, some
advocacy. Something.
But it was not to be.
Certainly, no journalist has a vested
right to assistance from the Reporters Committee for
Freedom of the Press. (I've come to wonder in what sense
the group belongs to reporters, or is their Committee.
Which reporters?)
As it became clear, again, that no
help would be forthcoming, I'm sure my tone rose. I did
not swear, but I did ask what the other
journalist-protection work they were doing that made doing
anything for me impossible.
I said, and have now verified, that
the majority of RCFP's appearances, at least in the
Southern District of New York (I can no longer access the
free PACER terminal in the EDNY Clerk's Office) are as amici
in cases with multiple other lawyers, most often pro bono
projects of major white shoe law firms. Is RCFP so needed
there?
The lawyer who a day late returned
my message to the hotline - I will not give her name here
- had as it turned out appeared in two cases in SDNY. The
first was when she was at a large DC law firm,
representing Coventry Capital US LLC in a lawsuit over the
sale of life insurance policies. (That case, after 500
plus filings, reached a confidential settlement, as such
cases most often do).
The second was more public
interest-y, against the Department of Homeland Security.
But in that case there were at least three other law
firms, and four non-profits, suing DHS. Was RCFP so needed
there, that they cannot represent an independent
journalist contacting their hotline right after being
escorted out of a courthouse, with press passes
confiscated?
I told her I had filled out the paperwork to join something called ProJourn, thinking that it might be more for smaller, more independent media. But when I asked them for help appealing the sealing of 90 cases in EDNY, they responded in five minutes that they could not help. And this time ProJourn, as such, did not respond at all.
This conversation is not being productive,
she told me. I told her, as I told the EDNY official
who directed my ouster, that I would be writing an article
about it all, in this case a sort of litmus test of how
the elite or corporate First Amendment industry works.
And now, thirty six hours later (I've spent
28 of them working to try to get my ouster reversed) with
no indication that RCFP has done or will do a single
thing, even a single phone call, about my ouster, I am
writing this first article.
Perhaps I have misread the situation,
and RCFP will do something. Nothing would make me happier,
as a reporter ostensibly with a committee for freedom of
the press. If RCFP acts - with a letter to the Chief Judge
and/or US Attorney whose spokesman started all this, or,
more productive and needed, a public interest lawsuit
- with pleasure I would update and add to this
article. But at week's end, days after contacting the Hot
Line and 36 hours after a belated call back, this is where
things stand: I'm still out.
Another, smaller group did call the EDNY,
and I hope will be doing more. But still in this field,
all roads seemingly lead to RCFP. Should they?
Asking for a friend. Journalists ask questions. And there
are mine. Watch this site.
As Pinnacle Tries to Buy Southstar Bank in TX Fair Finance Watch Files CRA Challenge
| As Pinnacle
Tries to Buy Southstar Bank in
TX Fair Finance Watch
Files CRA Challenge
by
Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book
Substack SOUTH
BRONX/SDNY,
Nov 6 – Pinnacle Bank proposes
to buy Southstar Bank in
Texas. But both have disparate
lending records. Fair
Finance Watch, after the
Federal Reserve refused to act
to ensure public access to
Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
data, has commented to
the Fed on the 2025 HMDA data
of both: Dear Chairman
Warsh, Secretary
McDonough
This is a
first timely comment in
opposition to the application
by Pinnacle Bancorp, Inc.,
Omaha, Nebraska; to merge with
Southern Bancshares, Inc.,
Houston, Texas, and thereby
indirectly acquire Southstar
Bank, S.S.B., Moulton,
Texas. Fair
Finance Watch has reviewed
Pinnacle's lending record in
three states in 2025, the most
recent year for which HMDA
data is available, not taking
into account in Pinnacle's CRA
performance evaluations.
The record is troublingly
disparate: In the
state of Nebraska in 2025
Pinnacle made 2250 loans to
whites - and only EIGHT loans
to African Americans. In the
state of Colorado in 2025
Pinnacle's Bank of Colorado
made 1035 loans to whites -
and only FOUR loans to African
Americans. And in the
state of Texas in 2025
Pinnacle made 86 loans to
whites, with only eight
denials - and only ONE loan to
an African American, while
denying another. The target
SouthStar Bank in Texas in
2025 made 84 loans to whites
and only three to African
Americans. So
why would this proposed merger
be approved? It should not be.
Watch this site. Your
support means a lot. As
little as $5 a month helps
keep us going and grants you
access to exclusive bonus
material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback: Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com Mail:
Box 130222,
Chinatown Station, NY NY 10013 Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis. Copyright 2006-2025 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or
other permission, e-contact Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com |
Butcher with Explicit Child Images Gets Sweetheart Deal from EDNY Prosecutors Whose Spox Bans Press
OUTSIDE EDNY COURT, Nov 6 – A butcher
found with explicit images and videos of children on his
phone was given a lenient deal by DOJ prosecutors in the
Eastern District of New York, Inner City Press found by
attending a restitution proceeding not mentioned in the
day's EDNY calendar.
The next day, the spokesman for the
EDNY US Attorney, John Marzulli, got Inner City Press
escorted out of the courthouse. But while Marzulli and his
office may hinder the coverage, Inner City Press will not
allow the coverage to be stopped.
Being discussed on November 3 was how much
the defendant, who already got a reduced 18 month prison
sentence and no press release at all from the US
Attorney's press office, unlike numerous other such cases,
should pay in restitution.
Judge Ramon E. Reyes, to his credit,
expressed concern at the lack of comparables presented by
the prosecutors. He mentioned a Lily and a Sloan -
presumably pseudonyms of victims.
Now, with Inner City Press out of
the courthouse after DOJ Marzulli's targeting, the
restitution has been finalized.
It is only $32,000, with a sealed appendix.
Why are Marzulli and those who
worked with him covering up this CSAM on the cheap, and
blocking the access of Inner City Press which reported on
it and often seeks to unseal? We will have more, much
more, on this.
This case is USA v. Ringel, 26-CR-0044
(RER)
More about the case / defendant, and Jeffrey Epstein analogy on X for Subscribers here and Substack here
Charged With Diverting $10M to Non US Crypto Exchanges Yau Asks Probation Nov 18
| Charged
With Diverting
$10M to Non US
Crypto
Exchanges Yau
Asks Probation
Nov 18
by
Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book
Substack SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Nov 6 – For a scheme to rob
$10 million from banks and
move it to foreign
cryptocurrency exchanges, Fei
Jiang and two others were
indicted and presented on
November 16, 2023. Fei Jiang
was ordered free on $50,000
bond in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern
District of New York
Magistrates Court. Inner City
Press was there, the only
media in the SDNY Mag
Court. Magistrate
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger
said that if Pre-Trial
Services does not find Jiang's
resident appropriate, his
release may be revisited. The AUSA added
that his GPS should include an
exclusion for area airports
including Atlantic City and
Teterboro. The other
defendants are Naifeng Xu
(presented in Oklahoma) and
Zhong Shi Gao, freed on bond
in SDNY. On November 20,
Naifeng Xu was in the SDNY Mag
court, and so again was Inner
City Press. He too was
released on bond. Jump cut to
January 15, 2025, when the
trial date was pushed back to
September 8: "Defendants Fei
Jiang, Tommy Lin and Henry Yau
arraigned on Superseding
Indictment S8 23 CR 572 (CM)
defendants plead NOT guilty.
Court sets motion schedule for
defendant Henry Yau:
Defendant's motions are to be
filed by March 14, 2025;
Government's response due
April 4, 2025; and defendant's
reply by April 17, 2025 The
trial of this case, previously
scheduled for May 12, 2025, is
adjourned to September 8,
2025, at 9:30 a.m. The case is
adjourned to May 1, 2025, at
2:00 p.m., for a status
conference." On March 14
co-defendant Lin pled guilty
before Magistrate Judge Sarah
Netburn, with sentencing
control date set at June 12. On June 12, Lin
got time served: "Sentencing
held on 6/12/2025 for Tommy
Lin. The defendant is hereby
sentenced to Time Served.
Defendant shall pay
restitution in the amount of
$20,000.00, to the victim
named in Schedule A, of the
Restitution Order." On January 14,
2026 co-defendant Fei Jiang
pled guilty to counts S10-1
and S10-2, with sentencing set
for April 30 at 4 pm. On February 5,
Zhong Shi Goa pled guilty,
with sentencing on May 5. On March 4,
another: "before
Judge Colleen McMahon: Change
of Plea Hearing as to Daniel
Chieh held on 3/4/2026.
Defendant withdraws his
previously entered plea of not
guilty to Count S4-3
(contained in S4 superseding
indictment) and now pleads
guilty to Count S4-3. The
Court accepts defendants
plea.The matter is adjourned
to June 1, 2026, at 12:00
p.m., for sentencing. Bail
continued." And on March 26:
"Change of Plea Hearing as to
(S11 23-Cr-572-5) Henry Yau
held on 3/26/2026. He now
pleads guilty to Count S11-1.
The Court accepts defendant's
plea. The matter is adjourned
to September 15, 2026, at
12:00 p.m., for sentencing.
Bail conditions continued." On May 13, a five
year sentencing in the case:
"Fei Jiang (3) Count
1sss,2sss. Defendant is
sentenced to a total term of
imprisonment of SIXTY (60)
MONTHS. (36 months on Count
S10-1, to be followed by a
consecutive 24 months on Count
S10-2.) The Court recommends
that BOP evaluate defendant's
serious medical conditions and
recommends that he be
incarcerated in the BOP
medical facility, in Devons,
Massachusetts. Defendant is
ordered to pay restitution in
the total amount of
$12,497,277.28, pursuant 18
U.S.C. § 3663, to the victims
of the offenses charged in
Counts One and Two. (The names
and specific amounts owed to
each victim are set forth in
Schedule A.) On September 8,
co-defendant Chieh wrote in
asking for seven years, saying
10 is not supported. On October 2, Gao
was sentenced to six years in
prison, to start on January
25, 2027. On November 6
co-defendant Yau asked for
probation on November 18,
saying with redactions that
his former law enforcement
colleagues have shunned him. The case is USA
v. Gao, at el., 1:23-cr-572
(McMahon)
*** Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com Mail: Box 130222 NY NY 10013 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis. Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com |