In a pre-recorded interview with radio host Mark Levin for Fox News that will air during Sunday’s Life, Liberty & Levin, lawyer Lin Wood, who represents smeared Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann, revealed that they planned to sue CNN for more than $250 million in a defamation suit in the coming days.
Throughout the video clip Fox News released on Saturday, Wood laid out the case against CNN and suggested their “vicious” attack against his client was worse than that of The Washington Post.
“CNN goes into millions of individuals homes. It’s broadcast into their homes. They really went after Nicholas with the idea he was part of a mob that was attacking the Black Hebrew Israelites,” Wood recalled. “Totally false. Saying things like Nicholas was part of a group that was threatening the Black Hebrew Israelites that they thought it was going to be a lynching.”
Wood told Levin to expect their lawsuit against CNN to be filed on Monday, Tuesday at the latest, and suggested they were looking at damages exceeding that of the Post:
Well, I suspect because of the way they went after Nicholas so viciously that the claim for his reputational damage will be higher than it was against the Washington Post. The Post was $50 million for the reputational damage – and we can discuss why that figure – $200 million in punitive damage. Punitive damages are designed to punish and to deter.
(...)
I would think the punitive damages reward against CNN, that we will seek, will be at least the same $200 million as it was against The Washington Post. But the compensatory damage to Nicholas’s reputation, that number I expect to be higher.
Levin reminded Wood that liberal media hacks (such as CNN’s media team) will accuse him and Sandmann of “chilling free speech”. “And I just want to reiterate what you’ve said here, which is, ‘no, no. Actually, that’s what they’re doing,’” Levin continued. “We want to go back to a time where you actually do your research, do your investigation, report the news. You make a mistake, that’s one thing.”
Adding, “What CNN did, from my observation, to your client was a campaign to destroy his reputation. I mean, it was over and over. And they brought in guests to talk about your client. (…) But then they brought in experts to talk about your client. All operating off the same false narrative that CNN and others promoted.”
Wood agreed and noted it was like CNN turned over control of their network “to people who had an agenda and were lying about what happened.” He also described Sandmann as “collateral damage” in CNN’s war against President Trump.
It’s not surprising that CNN was next up to receive a massive lawsuit from Wood on behalf of Sandmann. In their filing against The Washington Post, they said the paper was “competing with CNN and NBC, among others, to claim leadership of a mainstream and social media mob of bullies which attacked, vilified, and threatened Nicholas Sandmann (“Nicholas”), an innocent secondary school child.”
Some of the questions now are: what the detailed allegations against CNN will be, when will NBC be sued for defamation as well, and who are the “others”?
The transcript is below, click "expand" to read:
Fox News Channel’s Life, Liberty & Levin
March 10, 2019MARK LEVIN: Why do think all there surrogates out there, former professors, former federal prosecutors, former whatever they are, lawyers on TV that know nothing about the First Amendment really, almost nothing about the Constitution as far as I’m concerned. They keep defending this kind of reporting as a protection of the First Amendment. We know – we just discussed – that’s not true, historically. Now, that’s number one. Number two, these are major corporations, they’re not just newsrooms, and it has an effect. CNN did a hell of a number on your client Nicholas Sandmann. And I’m just wondering – and they’re not the only ones.
LIN WOOD: Oh yes, the list is long.
LEVIN: So, what happens next?
WOOD: CNN was probably more vicious in its direct attacks on Nicholas than The Washington Post. And CNN goes into millions of individuals homes. It’s broadcast into their homes. They really went after Nicholas with the idea he was part of a mob that was attacking the Black Hebrew Israelites. Yelling racist slurs at the Black Hebrew Israelites. Totally false. Saying things like Nicholas was part of a group that was threatening the Black Hebrew Israelites that they thought it was going to be a lynching.
Now, you’ve seen the tape. If you took the time to look at the full context for what happened that day, Nicholas Sandmann did absolutely nothing wrong. He was, as I’ve said to others, he the only adult in the room.
But you have – you have a situation where CNN couldn’t resist the idea that here’s a guy – a young boy with a Make America Great Again cap on, so they go after him. They went after him – When I said they woke up on Saturday morning and started throwing punches. CNN folks were online on Twitter at 7 a.m. retweeting the one-minute propaganda piece put out by @2020fight. We’ll find out who that person or entity was behind that, eventually.
But they were out there right away going after this young boy and they maintain it for at least two days. Why didn’t they stop and just take an hour and look through the internet and find the truth and then report it? Maybe do that before you report the lies. They didn’t do it. They were vicious. It was false. CNN will be sued next week. And dollar figure in the CNN case may be higher than it was in the Washington Post case.
LEVIN: So, you’re suing CNN Monday?
WOOD: Monday.
LEVIN: Tuesday?
WOOD: Tuesday at the latest, but Monday is the present plan. I got a – some young smart lawyers that are working hard as we speak.
LEVIN: Double checking the footnotes.
WOOD: Double checking. Look, when we file out complaints we’ve investigated it, because we want to get it right. Maybe CNN can learn from that.
LEVIN: You’re suing CNN Monday or Tuesday.
WOOD: Yes.
LEVIN: May I ask for how much?
WOOD: Well, I suspect because of the way they went after Nicholas so viciously that the claim for his reputational damage will be higher than it was against the Washington Post. The Post was $50 million for the reputational damage – and we can discuss why that figure – $200 million in punitive damage.
Punitive damages are designed to punish and to deter.
LEVIN: Change conduct.
WOOD: Don’t ever do this again.
LEVIN: Yes.
WOOD: I would think the punitive damages reward against CNN, that we will seek, will be at least the same $200 million as it was against The Washington Post. But the compensatory damage to Nicholas’s reputation, that number I expect to be higher.
LEVIN: Again, you’ll be accused of “chilling free speech” in the press. And I just want to reiterate what you’ve said here, which is, “no, no. Actually, that’s what they’re doing.” We want to go back to a time where you actually do your research, do your investigation, report the news. You make a mistake, that’s one thing.
What CNN did, from my observation, to your client was a campaign to destroy his reputation. I mean, it was over and over. And they brought in guests to talk about your client.
WOOD: They did.
LEVIN: But then they brought in experts to talk about your client. All operating off the same false narrative that CNN and others promoted.
WOOD: They did and it’s almost like they decided to just turn over their airway to people who had an agenda and were lying about what happened. And it was not just to attack Nicholas. Nicholas was collateral damage. The war that CNN is waging is against the President of the United States.
LEVIN: I want to get to that as soon as we get back. And we’ll be right back.
