This abuse of power might have been challenged had the House started impeachment proceedings. As long as the President and GOP are not challenged, this type of abuse can be expected to continue.

Davis assertions appear to be absurd. Federal Court rules prohibit frivolous lawsuits:

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

The GOP appears to be on a fishing trip to find an excuse to stifle free speech. The 501c3 exemption to taxes protects public education.

The absurdity of the claim about their 501c3 status is that some organizations with a lawful exemption to taxes have the exclusive goal of education.

Here is the language related to education, which implicitly means they are Congressional-recognized as having a right to engage in public speech despite their tax exempt status:

501c3 rules: Education Purpose Is Protected, Basis For Tax Exemption

Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes

Rather, it is a reasonable question to apply the following criteria to
the funding to Davis' client  -- it could be a problem if there is no receipt showing how the GOP-White House is allegedly funding this defamation lawsuit.

Counter Suit Against GOP

The question isn't whether the bloggers have violated the law; but to what extent the GOP has interfered with the conditions the bloggers agreed when meeting their legal requirements under 501c3: Educating the public.

Even if the GOP were to withdraw this defamation suit, the original alleged consequences -- interfering with and retaliating for public speech -- must be cured. That original attack is not cured by withdrawing the GOP complaint, but through judicial review in a counter-suit.

The GOP, in effect, has claimed that the bloggers, in engaging in political speech have jeopardized their tax standing. The reverse is true: The GOP, by thwarting a free exchange of ideas, allegedly shows it is not willing to permit a 501c3 entity from fully exercising the Congressionally-recognized rights and obligations of a 501c3 corporation: To engage in educational objectives, which inherently mean engaging in public speech. It's impossible to engage in education unless there is communication, public speech, and Constitutionally protected activity, enforceable through Anti-Slapp and 42 USC 1983.

501c3 Prohibited Transactions

Let's find out how much money is flowing from the White House, GOP, and
Wall Street to punish voters who might reasonably be expected to reject
the GOP agenda; and/or oppose a bailout of the alleged
FISA-violators/war criminals funding illegal activity in violation of
Geneva and FISA.

Davis hasn't adequately discussed the following issues related to his alleged failure to disclose who is funding the defamation lawsuit. Public education is protected. What is prohibited are the "prohibited transactions".

1. Check for the receipts connected with Davis:

(b)  Prohibited transactions

For purposes of this section, the term “prohibited transaction” means any transaction in which an organization subject to the provisions of this section—

(1) lends any part of its income or corpus, without the receipt of adequate security and a reasonable rate of interest, to;

Anti-Slapp Discovery: Where is the receipt for the payment streams for this lawsuit?

Are those who are funding this lawsuit obligated to provide a receipt; or have they, as with the Wall Street bankers, created entities which engage in intimidation, and are outside the law?

2. Check the compensation packages connected with Davis:

Risk to 501c3 status: "(2) pays any compensation, in excess of a reasonable allowance for salaries or other compensation for personal services actually rendered, to;"

Anti-Slapp Discovery: Can Davis provide a reasonable explanation for the salaries of those who are funding this lawsuit?

3. Check the work Davis-connected entities are providing

Risk to 501c3 status: "(3) makes any part of its services available on a preferential basis to;"

Anti-Slapp Discovery: Are the entities behind this funding governed by 501c3, but have preferential services, violating 501c3? It would appear so.

4. Check the Davis-connected securities:

Risk to 501c3 status: "(4) makes any substantial purchase of securities or any other property, for more than adequate consideration in money or money’s worth, from;"

Anti-Slapp Discovery: How many of the Wall street bankers pressing for this bailout are funding this defamation lawsuit to silence those who would support those who oppose a bailout of the reckless bankers funding FISA violations, war crimes, and high crimes by this President?

5. Check the connection between Davis and Wall Street bankers:

Risk to 501c3 status: "(5) sells any substantial part of its securities or other property, for less than an adequate consideration in money or money’s worth, to; or"

Anti-Slapp Discovery: Are the bankers behind the Wall Street bailout concerned that a reasonable public rebuke of their alleged collusion with war crimes funding could ensure these financial institutions are out of business, and cannot enjoy any "FISA immunity"?

6. Check Davis alleged connections with GOP-White House-Wall Street financial diversions during the smokescreen of this bailout:

Risk to 501c3 status: "(6) engages in any other transaction which results in a substantial diversion of its income or corpus to;"

Anti-Slapp Discovery: Do we know how the money is flowing from Wall Street to fund this defamation suit -- an alleged effort to suppress information about alleged GOP-Wall Street to deny voters who might oppose this bailout?

Risk to 501c3 status: "the creator of such organization (if a trust); a person who has made a substantial contribution to such organization; a member of the family (as defined in section 267(c)(4)) of an individual who is the creator of such trust or who has made a substantial contribution to such organization; or a corporation controlled by such creator or person through the ownership, directly or indirectly, of 50 percent or more of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote or 50 percent or more of the total value of shares of all classes of stock of the corporation."