following us on social media. i'm steve hilton, we will see you next sunday when the next revolution will be televised. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ mark missus life liberty and levin. we have a great guest. how are you. >> thank you for having me on. you don't do a lot of interviews. >> i do not. >> it's a pleasure to have you. you are niclas sammons lawyer. you brought a lawsuit against the washington post which we will get into great detail. you are like the go to guy when it comes to cases like this. this is unique. you take up the case of the

underdog, richard jewell is a perfect example. name some of the clients you had in the past. >> richard was my first one that got me involved in the first amendment area, in 1996 with the centennial park bombing. since richard, i had occasion to represent interesting and wonderful, delightful people. john and patsy. reporter: mz and their son, i've represented the family for over 20 years. i've represented beth holloway, natalie holloway's mom for over ten years. gary condon for a number of years, herman cain, represented a young girl involved in a kobe bryant case and more recently a man falsely accused of being a pedophile by elon musk. he was the hero of saving the

13 boys in the cave disaster. i've had a variety of clients. i've gotten to know some of them very well. richard was the first in this area. he died 11 years after the fall accusations. i think the stress contributed to his death and i miss him every day. he changed my life and changed my career. mark let's talk about freedom of the press issue. do you stand for freedom of the press or do the people you sue stand for freedom of the press. >> i would say unequivocally i'm a believer in the first amendment. i believe the first amendment has no strength in real value if there is not accountability for wrongdoing. when people on the other side say he's trying to chill speech, i am trying to seek redress for false speech.

false speech has no value and in the sammons case, you are talking about false speech that threatened, attacked and vilified a minor child. if i am accused of killing that kind of speech, i'm happy to take that up, banner and wave it proudly. we don't need that speech. that's not what the first amendment is all about. mark: i mention the first amendment, we hear people throw around the first amendment, freedom of the press, we hear reporters who use it, when our constitution was established, freedom of the press basically meant the federal government was hands-off but there was still power in the state where people could bring defamation suits, correct. >> correct. defamation law, the ability to sue someone for false attacks on your reputation was governed exclusively by state law until 1964.

in 1954, a new york times versus sullivan, the supreme court brought in the first amendment in cases involving public officials, and in those cases, actual malice stands of the first amendment applied but in the remainder of the cases, you were governed by state law. state law generally allows you to recover if the reporting is false and was negligent. now under the new york times standard the public official had to prove you actually knew it was false, subjective or you acted in reckless disregard for the truth. that got expanded by some bright media lawyers into public figures and people of general notoriety a few years later. then it went to where they applied it in rosenblum versus the media to anyone involved in public interest. the supreme court realized

they had gone too far. they dial that back and reversed rosenblum and said it was only applying to a private figure if that person had voluntarily subjected himself or herself into the forefront or vortex of a public controversy to influence the outcome of the controversy. i'm not sure where the actual malice standard came from on public officials, in terms of how its roots in the first amendment. i think justice thomas recently commented in a concurring opinion that he questions the constitutional validity of that rule. i think he is right. i certainly don't believe the media needs breathing room under the first amendment, to rush out and adopt a social medium mob attack on a 16-year-old child. the first amendment does not require that to be a viable

protective to our citizens. >> we had freedom of the press long before those times. >> we did in the media seem to do okay. >> radio, tv was developed, all forms of communication, national newspapers were developed, so the media broadly speaking, really had a revolution in communication, even prior to the new york times versus sullivan. i would ask you this question, are we better off when we basically have reporters that claim immunity? immunity from the law, where they can basically say anything, call people names, run reports and do a little retraction later, maybe or maybe not? do you claim that freedom of the press? is that really a healthy way for a nation to communicate people to people, group to group. >> look around you. look at what's happened.

look at the deterioration in the media in the last several years. the last couple decades, i've watched it since the richard jewell case. it's horribly unhealthy. there is nothing valuable to our public discourse for people to just simply go out and tell rumors, lies, make accusations with no sources, to be able to use the media and the first amendment to in effect, advance his or her or some corporations own agenda. that's what happened to nichols. a lot of agendas at work. the only people who didn't have an agenda was niclas sammon. he was on a field trip to the national mall to participate in the right to life march. it's gotten to be a situation where it started off, when you got to the internet, mark, and you have this new development review could sit in the privacy of your home, with a

few strokes of the keyboard with anonymity, you can send out statements to the world that could ruin her reputation in seconds. if you track that into how it's evolved to social media, where you have all of these people on twitter and facebook and their anonymous, and they deteriorate the level of discussion were now it's just gotten worse and worse and worse. now the news media tracks it, because now you go look at most of your articles and you're going to see sources say, people close to, nobody's identified. it used to be the media was very careful in using any type of confidential source. they had to have it back in the woodward and bernstein days. the washington post required to sources to verify any information attributed to deep

throat. those days are gone. now the media is simply become like the internet users in the social media users because they put out a lot of information without any attribution to real sources who are identified, who can be accountable for lies. mark: i want to ask about your client niclas sammon in a moment, but first i want to ask you about this thing we call the media, cnn, ultimately owned by time warner. >> maybe at&t now, big corporations. >> nbc, msnbc, comcast. >> big corporation. mark: what kind of influence does that have on newsrooms. >> take a look at what kind of coverage we have at nbc and msnbc and cnn. there's no objectivity, there is no fairness, it's just like

they've become an extension of political parties out trying to influence the public, instead of informing the public. it used to be the standard was get at first but get it right. they've thrown out get it right. now i don't think they even worry about getting at first because they know they can't. i use the example, that if you look back at what happened to niclas, you had the media all over president trump. they had the buzzfeed report that said the president had directly told michael cohen to lie to congress about the trump hotel in russia, and then friday night, muller comes out and says that story is inaccurate, is not true. the media went to bed friday night with two black eyes and they woke up saturday morning on the 19th of january and they came out swinging again,

this time they were swinging at a young boy because he was wearing a make america great again cap and they took him out and tried to punch him and beat him and attack him like a schoolyard bully. the reason i make that point is that they did not bother to look into the allegations in the statements being made on social media. they just joined the social media mob. that's why i make the reference that they have become an extension of political parties and the social media mob and that's beyond the wild wild west. there is no real legal accountability yet. we don't know how to control from a legal perspective the type of conduct and the type of speech we are seeing on the social media websites, but it needs to be done. it's going have to be accountability, mark, and if we don't get accountability, deterioration will continue.

mark: when we come back i want to ask about your client niclas sammon, how is he doing. i want to ask you about your fight with the washington post who, if anyone's next, what your plans are, what your arguments are, and what is the reaction of some of the targets, your potential targets of your litigation. ladies and jonah, don't forget, almost every weeknight you can watch me on levintv, just go to blaze tv.com/mark to sign up. give us a call 844 levintv. we'll be right back. after walking six miles at an amusement park...

bill's back needed a vacation from his vacation. so he stepped on the dr. scholl's kiosk. it recommends our best custom fit orthotic to relieve foot, knee, or lower back pain. so you can move more. dr. scholl's. born to move. (coughing) need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites and filters by cabin class,

wi-fi and more. so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. kayak. search one and done. the company who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100% online. now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a few years old or dinosaur old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds.

when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car and say hello to the new way... at carvana. [ sighing ] ♪ oh my momma she gave me

♪ these feathered breaths ♪ ♪ oh my momma check in from afar with remote access. and have professional monitoring backing you up with xfinity home. demo in an xfinity store, call, or go online today. let me ask you a question. you have sued the washington post. that's a major corporation. the owned by the wealthiest man on the face of the earth, amazon obviously, he's a liberal, can't stand the president so he bought a newspaper that's gone broke. you have sued them for a total of $250 million and they issued some kind of, it wasn't even an apology explanation. >> it was an excuse. mark: tell me about that.

>> so there's no misconceptions, it was not a correction, it was not a retraction and there was no apology. if you look at what the washington post actually did, mark, they almost patted themselves on the back in trying to say well here's what we reported and it turned out later we were wrong and we said that so palace on the back, our reporting was accurate. that's really what they said. they almost want to take the position that it's okay if they lie about you and publish the lies accurately, as long as eventually when it involves and the truth comes out that they tell the truth at that point in time. the problem is they have the journalistic responsibility, the ethical responsibility to not simply republish allies, they had a duty to investigate first before they put out those statements about this young boy, before they

repeated the accusations of nathan phillips who was an activist with an agenda. they had a responsibility to do an investigation so they never would have published the lies in the first place. that's where they failed. they did not say one word about their own failures. they did not mention one word, even attempting to say they had thoroughly or even attempted to investigate. they had no acknowledgment of their wrongdoing. they are not a newspaper that is going to acknowledge that it should be held accountable, they are not going to stand up and do the right thing. the only way that we are going to get justice for the washington post being held accountable is in front of a jury in covington kentucky. then we will find accountability. we won't get it voluntarily from the post. the media is incapable and the mainstream media is incapable of standing up and acknowledging their mistakes,

committing to the idea that they will do better. they are not going to do better because they can't acknowledge how badly they are reporting. mark: why do you think all the surrogates out there, former professors, former federal prosecutors, former whatever they are, lawyers on tv who know nothing about the first amendment or the constitution, as far as i'm concerned. they keep defending this kind of protection for the first amendment. we just discussed that's not true historically, that's number one, number two these are major corporations. not just newsrooms and it has an effect. cnn did a hell of a number on your client, niclas sammon, and i'm just wondering, they're not the only one. >> the list is long. what happens next? >> cnn was probably more

vicious in its direct attacks on niclas and cnn goes into millions of individuals homes, broadcast into their homes, they really went after niclas with the idea that 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 he was part of a group that was threatening the black hebrew israelites, that he thought there would be a lynching. now, you've seen the tape. if you took the time to look at the full context of what happened the day, niclas sammon did absolutely nothing wrong. he was the only adult in the room, but 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 were after him, i said they woke up on saturday morning and started throwing punches. the cnn folks were online on twitter at 7:00 a.m., retreating the one minute began the piece that had been put out by at 2025. we will find out who that entity was behind that, eventually. they are 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 could 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 the dollar figure in the cnn case may be higher than it was. mark: so suing cnn monday? >> tuesday at the latest but

monday is the present plan. i have some young, smart lawyers that are working hard. when we file our complaint, we have investigated it because we want to get it right. maybe cnn can learn from that. >> you are suing cnn monday or tuesday. >> yes. mark: for how much? >> i suspect the way they went after him so viciously that the claim for his damage will be higher than it was against the washington post. we can discuss why that figure, 200 million punitive damages designed to punish and to deter demonic change conduct. >> don't ever do this again. >> there awarded to get cnn but we'll see if it's the same as it was against the washington post. the compensatory damage to his reputation, that number expect to be higher. >> again you will be accused.

[inaudible] i just want to reiterate what you've said, we want to go back to a time where you do your research and your investigation, report the news, if you make a mistake that's one thing. what cnn did to your client, from my observation, was a campaign to destroy his reputation. it was over and over and they brought in gas to talk about your client and made rot in experts, all operating off the same false narrative that cnn and others promoted. >> 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. it was not just to attack niclas. niclas was collateral damage. the war that cnn is waging is against the president of the united states. >> i want to get

too that as soon as we get back. we'll be right back. i do. if you ride, you get it. geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more.

they're america's bpursuing life-changing cures. in a country that fosters innovation here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that.

♪ ♪ it's taking over ♪ there's no escape ♪ you better get moving ♪ ready or not ♪ it's about to go down here it comes now ♪

♪ get ready ♪ oh oh oh oh ♪ oh oh oh oh ♪ get ready ♪ moving ♪ ready or not ♪ get ready ♪ oh oh oh oh oh ♪ hey live from america's news headquarters, president trump providing his border wall battle. he's expected to ask congress for an additional $8.6 billion to build a barrier when he unveiled his budget request for the fiscal year tomorrow. this comes as the senate prepares to vote on a

resolution to overturn his emergency declaration on the border. a standoff on the wall led to a partial government shutdown, the longest in u.s. history. the daughter of george borman has died, 42-year-old rita foreman was found dead in her houston home. according to the entertainment website, tmz is not suspected. [inaudible] they compiled a 5 - 1 record before retiring in 2001. now back to life, liberty and levin. >> we were saying, you will be accused, and have been of chilling freedom of the press, freedom of the speech by bringing these big cases and demanding more from all this money, see if you agree with me. i would like your input. my attitude is this.

we have a system, a justice system. the justice system isn't suspended by the first amendment, it is enforced by the bill of rights. you are not attacking, are you? freedom of press or freedom of speech. you said you are attacking liars. >> false speech. >> and let the chips fall where they may. these are powerful corporations on these newsrooms and they should be immune from being held responsible for doing utterly irresponsible things. is that about right. >> your dead on the money, literally the money. this is not about a concern on the part of the media conglomerates about the first amendment. this is a concern about how they make money. they use the first amendment, that's how they make money. they want to defend by hiding

behind the first amendment to protect their money, but at the end of the day it's not mom-and-pop, it's universal. these are big companies with vast financial resources and with money comes the ability to influence and if you get enough influence, what you get? you get power. this isn't about the first amendment from their standpoint at all. that's just what they use. it's really about their ability to get power by influencing the people that they are sending these messages to. some people say $250 million is just ridiculously high. some people, many people have said it was too low. i picked a figure that i want to put out there to let everyone know it's serious, it's bad and it's serious. i might be too high or too low. i've never had any media person come on television and say would didn't super enough,

he sued for too little. i know at the end of the day the jury is going to have to make the decision based on the evidence. i've got to prove my case. i don't just sue cnn and they write me a check. i wish it work that way but it doesn't. i have to go prove my case. remember the same big corporations that are going to be fighting me and niclas, they have unlimited resources. they give their lawyers unlimited budgets, go get them under the guise of we've got to protect the first amendment when they're really just trying to protect their pocketbook to protect their influence to protect their power. >> do some of them have insurance. >> they do have insurance and the good thing for them is that insurance is cheap. you can buy huge policy limits for very little because there are very few successful cases. they've got that protection on top of the first amendment

protections they try to assert so if i want to punish, if the jury wants to tell them to stop it and don't ever do this again to another child and the only way were going to get your attention is to put a dollar figure that were to take out of your pocket to teach you that lesson, what does that have to be? >> do you think jeff will be bothered by $200 million? that's walking around money for him. mark: i can't think of another way under our system to hold irresponsible people accountable. it doesn't violate the first amendment, it doesn't violate freedom of the press, it improves it. >> it is the heart and soul of our justice system. there is a supreme court case that says, and it's very true, that the right of an individual to seek redress for

false attacks on his or her reputation is every bit as valuable as any of the rights granted to us under the constitution. that is a powerful statement. >> it's true. >> what do we ultimately do in our lives other than to build a reputation. your life's accomplishments and when you're gone, what do people remember you by, your reputation. they could come along now with a false theory of lies, destroy your life's work because we've fallen into this horrible idea that were guilty by accusation. due process has been thrown out the window. if the accusation is made, your revocation is destroyed, your lifework is destroyed, what about niclas. he hasn't even started. he will now go through his

journey to build his life's accomplishments, not on his own path, not on the journey that he would've taken, but the journey that has now been imposed on him by the false attacks made against him. i don't know what kind a dollar figure you put on him. it will impact his children and his children's children. mark: well said. we'll be right back. (vo) parents have a way of imagining the worst... ...especially when your easily distracted teenager has the car. at subaru, we're taking on distracted driving [ping] with sensors that alert you when your eyes are off the road. the all-new subaru forester. the safest forester ever.

need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites and lets you filter by take-off time, layovers and more, so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. ♪ kayak. search one and done.

it's a revolution in sleep. the sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999... senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. so you can come out swinging, maintain your inner focus, and wake up rested and ready for anything. only at a sleep number store, save $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, free premium delivery and setup. ends march 17th.

can really get you going. but mania, such as unusual changes in your mood, activity or energy levels, can leave you on... shaky ground. help take control by asking your healthcare provider about vraylar. vraylar treats acute mania of bipolar i disorder. vraylar significantly reduces overall manic symptoms,

and was proven in adults with mixed episodes who have both mania and depression. vraylar should not be used in elderly patients with dementia, due to increased risk of death or stroke. call your doctor about fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may mean a life-threatening reaction or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. side effects may not appear for several weeks. high cholesterol and weight gain; high blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death; decreased white blood cells, which can be fatal; dizziness upon standing; falls; seizures; impaired judgement; heat sensitivity; and trouble swallowing may occur. you're more than just your bipolar i. ask about vraylar. in my view you are the premier litigator in this area. that says something. these are not easy cases. if you want to make a ton of money you know there's oil companies, insurance companies come you take on the media and you don't take on the media because your anti- first amendment, you take on the

media because there's victims. now, one of the defenses will likely be this was just opinion, this isn't news so the standard is really low or nonexistent. >> protected opinion. >> we've discussed it a million times. the supreme court is already responded forming in a case where the supreme court made it clear there is no wholesale exemption for expression claiming to be opinion. opinion, something that is not capable of being proven true or false does get protection, but when you start putting in an article something that says that niclas salmon was a racist or a bigot and you're describing conduct saying that he mocked or blocked or approached or stuck it to bill mark, stuck his face in the

elder man's face, now you to describing conduct. it either happened or didn't happen. if the basis of your so-called opinion are false or incomplete, that is actionable. the defenses smoke in years. it's not going to be a major defense in any of these cases. that's my opinion because the attacks on niclas were attacks describing conduct that never occurred. >> look, i don't know how you turn the page, i'm not sure they have editorial pages, opinion pages, some may but now just all blurred together. new stories are as much opinion as they are news. >> you been doing this a while now. >> 23 years. mark: do you see a decline in the professionalism of the

media from 20 years ago. >> it's vivid, it's remarkable. when i started in 1977, we didn't have the internet, i guess it was not yet a gleam in al gore's eyes. we didn't even have cnn. ted turner had not started doing cable. all that has developed during my lifetime of law practice over 42 years. what should have been and i'm sure it was intended to be a benefit to society has turned into our worst nightmare where literally no one is safe from a false attack. you can live an impeccable life as an adult, we are talking niclas as a child but what if he wants to, and he does aspire to be a lawyer, i may have to talk to him about

that, what if he decides one day or someone else decides this young man has lived a life of such stature and integrity and scholar that he gets the supreme court. then look what happened. look at brett kavanaugh. i watched that. i have the same feelings. here we go again. because now, to just reach back in the bowels and dig past and everything on the internet is permanent, don't be fooled, it's all still there, and the people who want to oppose. [inaudible] bill dig out the stuck garbage, misconstrue it and throw it back at him again. that's the kind of damage that is potentially there for this young man on top of having to always look over his shoulder because somebody might take up some of these hollywood

liberties on their suggestions that he be punched in the face or go headfirst into a wood chipper. what are these people thinking. this is a 16-year-old kid. richard was 43 years old. he was a hero and they destroyed his life accomplishment. when he decided not cut and run, but to go and put his life at risk to save people, they took richard but he had at least gotten to age 33. now niclas is starting off from 16 on under that type of cloud, that tank that never goes away. it's there forever. if you're going to recognize that the internet is permanent, then you have to take greater cautions to make sure the record you are creating is accurate. all we want from our media all we should expect from our media is news and truth and

accuracy. i don't see anything by the coverage by the washington post or cnn, nbc abc, you don't have enough time for me to it go through the list. accuracy is now the bottom of the list, everything else is more important than accuracy. that's the type of coverage i have witnessed deteriorate to the point where we are now attacking children. and asking children questions like they did on nbc. do you think you did anything wrong niclas? there is more of y'all than there were of them. incredible shaming to try to shame this young boy. they have no shame in the media these days. mark: when we come back, i will ask about the types of people you will depose. i think people will be interested in that. don't forget almost every weeknight you can watch levintv, named after, go to blaze tv.com/mark or give us a call at 844 levintv.

we'll be right back. can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ready to treat differently with a pill? otezla. show more of you. ready to treat di♪ do youy ♪ with a pill?love me? ♪ ♪ i can really move ♪ ♪ do you love me? ♪ i'm in the groove ♪ now do you love me? ♪ do you love me ♪ now that i can dance?

♪ watch me now! ♪ work, work, ah work it out baby ♪ applebee's 3 course meal starting at $11.99. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast.

niclas' counsel, then what, you had ongoing litigation with the washington post. you announced you will sue

cnn, give us a feel for how you do discovery, the types of people you will depose, types of information you try to seek, i think the audience might be interested. >> the first stage will be for documents, e-mails, internal messaging, i think the washington post has an internal message system called slack notes. we want to see those timothy with people were talking about amongst themselves at the moment. once we get this discovery of the written documents, then we will take oral depositions, put some of the under oath, question them, cross-examine them, some of the reporters, any reporter whose names on there will certainly be subject to a deposition. then you move up the food chain to the editors. where did the buck stop. who signed off on this. who didn't say first did you investigate it, where is your source, where have you tested

the veracity, someone on the editorial level has a responsibility to ask those questions. we will start from the bottom come the documents, moved to reporters, moved the editors and then to the extent others are identified and if relevant we will move to them. it's a monumental task but we are up for it. mark: the point is you have to prove your case. >> yes, and let me tell you, i found in my experience of the media defendants fight tooth and nail to prevent you from getting discovery. they do not want you to know the truth of how they made the sausage. >> is it the same with cnn. >> absolutely. >> when you go back and look at their videotapes and look for any edits. >> it would imply that we see parts of an interview, we know that one of the cnn correspondence interviewed nathan phillips that link, interestingly she did not give all of the information that

she obtained during those interview interviews. so you look at it and say did their pick and choose when they were interviewing some of these people they claim they saw and heard them out yelling build the wall, things we know are not true. what other information did they get to cnn that they didn't for which may have actually told them and shown them that what they were reporting is not accurate was certainly questionable. >> here's what we are looking at. the one thing we know is that niclas salmon was innocent. he did nothing wrong. we know the story they published an promoted was false. we are going to work back and figure out how you could take one clear incident and put out such a false narrative about it. how did it go wrong? we will track back to the origin and find out the truth. mark: i watched jim acosta and i saw the media circle the

wagons to protect him and the president of the united states said you've been under trauma, you're interrupting my press conference, i have a bunch of people from cnn with 200 reporters here, you are out. you because of your conduct. i saw the media circle the wagons to protect him. i personally did not think that was a first amendment issues since cnn was still free to have correspondence at the white house and not just report that this gentleman was disrupting the press conference. are you getting the sense that the media are going to circle the wagon around the washington post but not really poor freedom of press but freedom of their corporations to do as they wish two i don't just have the sense, i know it. i haven't had a request for an interview from cnn or nbc or

ab abc, nobody wants to talk about this fiasco, they don't want to talk about their mistakes or what they did to this young boy. they're not interested in it now. all they're interested in is circling the wagon as they always do. historically it's the same type of deal, they circle the wagon they get their talking points out there, every lawyer and every defendant will write me the same type of letter and make the same type of defense, and it's a mentality that is designed to protect, but it's an arrogant mentality. they really do think they are above the law and they are free under the first amendment to say whatever they please. they do not want accountability and they will circle the wagons and they will fight as hard as they can with all their money because if you ever get to the point of making them accountable for their wrongdoing, guess what,

the wrongdoing stops. we'll be right back. k needed a vacation from his vacation. so he stepped on the dr. scholl's kiosk. it recommends our best custom fit orthotic to relieve foot, knee, or lower back pain. so you can move more. dr. scholl's. born to move. ... happy birthday!

let's blow out the candles together! ok, let's huff and puff. like you do sometimes, grandpa? well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. so my doctor said... symbicort can help you breathe better- starting within 5 minutes. it doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema.

it should not be taken more than twice a day. it may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggies! ask your doctor if symbicort is right for you. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. if you can't afford your medication, do i use a toothpaste that whitens my teeth? or one that's good for my teeth? now i don't have to choose. from crest 3d white. the whitening therapy collection. now with charcoal or coconut oil. it gently whitens. plus, it has a fortifying formula to protect your enamel. crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life.

mark: lin wood, what is your closing statement to the american people about all this came. >> i like the american people to take a view of this from 30000 feet. this was a simple event involving a 16 -year-old boy. no punches were thrown, no blood was shed, there was an encounter and maybe people around with cameras videoing it and the media got it totally wrong. they converted the truth into falsity. they didn't because the full story advanced their agenda and if the media can't get this type

of simple story right, if they can't keep their agenda out of a story like this, were talking substantive, serious issues, you can not trust anything you're being told by the mainstream media. it is that simple. don't just be skeptical but perhaps go elsewhere to find the truth. mark: and you feel your litigation will help? >> well, i do. i do, mark. i believe that as i have said before if they can get away with this against a 16 -year-old boy, a minor, then we are all at risk if they want to convert them into a public figure we will all be public figures. no one's reputation will be sa safe, that is not the sky is falling civilization as we know it will cease to exist but that's the simple fact. if they can do it to nichols, they can do it to anyone. there's got to be accountability

and it has to be brought to an end. there has to be change. mark: lin wood, attorney for niclas, and a pleasure to thank you very much. pleasure was mine the five go get them. alright ladies and gentlemen. see you next time on "life, liberty and levin". ♪ >> he asked if i wanted to go swimming, i didn't think that was appropriate, i turned. i was by myself, i was running, he caught me again a