Lin Wood responds to ad hominem attacks in legal docs Liberte v Reid Jan – Feb 2021, Wood: “credible evidence” GA officials Pence Rosenstein Roberts, No retraction demands
“Ad Hominem: This fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone’s argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument. The fallacious attack can also be direct to membership in a group or institution.”…Dept. of Philosophy, Texas State
“in phone conversation in 8/19, Justice John Roberts stated that he would make sure “the mother f#*ker would never be re-elected.” Roberts engaged in phone conversations with Justice Stephen Breyer discussing how to work to get Trump voted out.”...Attorney Lin Wood
“And why is Fox News working so hard to kill this story? I wish I could say more “about Fox’s behind-the-scenes treachery — and someday hopefully I will — but rest assured that Malia Zimmerman’s May 17, 2017 story about Mr. Rich was fully vetted by senior Fox management. I repeatedly encouraged Fox’s attorneys to postpone settlement discussions with Seth Rich’s parents until I obtained the FBI records (my client, Ed Butowsky, was a co-defendant with Fox), but Fox was hellbent on settling the case in October / November. That’s around the time Rupert Murdoch publicly joined forces with Joe Biden. Fox had a very strong defense, yet it rolled over and played dead, settling the lawsuit and then firing Ms. Zimmerman. Sooner or later, the full story will come out, and it will be very ugly for Fox News and the Murdoch family.”...Attorney Ty Clevenger
Used often in Perry Mason episodes and if ever appropriate in a real court case, I would think in the following.
ROSLYN LA LIBERTE,
v JOY REID
US District Court Eastern District NY
And in particular, the ad hominem attacks against Attorney Lin Wood in an attempt to remove his Pro Hac Vice admission in the case.
From the transcript of teleconference proceedings January 11, 2021.
Attorney Reichman for the defense:
MR. REICHMAN: Your Honor — I’m sorry.
There is another matter that we’d like to bring to the
Court’s attention, and it involves Mr. Wood,
plaintiff’s lead counsel. Over the weekend, we have
come across some very disturbing information about the
conduct of Mr. Wood. I’m sure you’re aware that since
the election, Mr. Wood has been actively engaged in attempting to overturn the election results. All of
those cases have been dismissed. There have also been
sanctions and disqualification motions filed.
MR. WOOD: I have not been sanctioned.
MR. REICHMAN: Now Mr. Wood —
THE COURT: One at a time.
MR. REICHMAN: — has taken an even far
darker turn. He is actively and has actively supported
the insurrection against our government and called for
the execution of the Vice President.
MR. WOOD: Oh, nonsense.
MR. REICHMAN: He’s been permanently barred
from Twitter and his recent attempt to submit a post on
Parler calling for the Vice President’s execution was
not permitted. In fact, the posting of his tweet on
Parler was one of the reasons cited by Apple and Google
to ban Parler from their platforms. The right to
appear pro hac vice in this District is a privilege and
not a right, and we believe there are at least three
reasons why that privilege should be revoked by the
Attorney Reichman’s accusations are extensive.
From Attorney Lin Wood’s response February 9, 2021.
“I have also received credible evidence of serious wrongdoing by high-ranking
government officials which I have brought to the attention of the public and to federal law enforcement officials. The evidence of wrongdoing includes evidence of potentially serious crimes perpetrated by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.”
“I exercised my right of free speech and did urge attendees to consider engaging in acts of non-violent freedom of assembly and the right to publicly protest acts and inactions by the Georgia Governor and Secretary of State. I am in
possession of credible evidence supporting criminal acts by these Georgia officials.”
“I am in possession of credible evidence to support my statements about Pence and Rod Rosenstein, as well as information about the death of Seth Rich.”
“I have credible evidence to support the truth of my description of Former Vice President Pence as a traitor.”
“I have turned over whistleblower evidence to the United States Secret Service related to Former Vice-President Mike Pence and other high-ranking government officials. If desired by this Court, I am prepared to file that evidence along with a considerable amount of evidence of election fraud. I am not doing so at this time as I do not believe those issues are relevant to the
present motion which I believe is nothing more than an effort to smear my reputation and interfere with Plaintiff’s Constitutional right to counsel of her choice.”
“I have not received a retraction demand from Justice Roberts or his counsel and he has not made any claim to date that my posts are false and defamatory. Former Vice President Mike Pence or Rod Rosenstein have not sent retraction demands or claims that my posts of and concerning them are false and defamatory.”
What is significant about the above aside from the extensive efforts to discredit Wood?
- Attorney Lin Wood stated in court documents that he has proof and will furnish it upon request.
- Attorney Wood stated he has received no retraction demands.
Truth is often stranger than fiction.