I did not see it but have found some video clips of L. Lin Wood and Piers Morgan going head to head in what appears to be at times a heated exchange.
Did any of you actually catch the whole show? I saw replays on CNN of them talking about how heated Piers Morgan called attorney L Lin Wood naive and surely Morgan did not think what he was saying? With part of it clipped out and then Wood’s southern gentleman voice coming back with “I’m sorry you find me naive” and then slapping Morgan down. Wood was on Morgan’s show to defend his client GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain.
My question is did Morgan do this for ratings as taking on Wood with no holds bar and no fear of a lawsuit, or was it a Brit that had no idea what is going on in our legal system?
I wish I had seen the whole hour, I don’t know if Lin Wood was the guest for the full hour or not, do any of you? If so give us your play by play of who won this “debate”.
I also wonder if Wood has found a new set of clientele, remember Jeff Greene suing some media in Florida for endorsing his opponent and then trashing Greene? It is certain I believe, as some in the news is saying that if we had 24/7 infotainment/news back in the 30’s, 40’s, 50’s and 60’s we would not have had great presidents like Franklin D Roosevelt or John F. Kennedy. So what is the balance on the public or voters right to know, and what is private and/or personal lives? I understand why Newt Gingrich was outed in the late 90’s; because while he was leading the charge for President William Clinton’s impeachment over consensual sex that Clinton did not feel he needed to bare all to the voters, especially when President Clinton was on the way out to retirement. While we were learning that Gingrich had abandoned a wife who was dying with cancer for a mistress he had for years. So it was good-bye to Gingrich the Speaker of the House at the same time.
I can’t find this on the CNN site but you can view it at You Tube here:
The thought of throwing rocks if you live in a class house comes to mind on that.
Wood also addressed the 24/7 infotainment/news craving for all things personal and private and what that appears to be doing to candidates in this day and time.
I think I see Lin Wood carving out that a politician does not have to openly share what is a very private life UNLESS it all checks out before you air it. Should the infotainment/news be allowed to fill the airwaves for 24/7 with rag magazines type gossip?
I am leaning towards Wood going for it. How is that Democratic US Senate Candidate Jeff Greene lawsuit going? The backlash on this is would it give the U. S. Supreme Court Justices a pass on conflict of interest? Or will it affect how the Court might rule on something like this coming before them?
Here is one more video I found, might be a copy because I did not have the chance to watch it before this post.
So tell us your thoughts, remember that anyone who can afford it can bring a lawsuit, but are these “news tidbits” out of line because they could be based on gossip and not facts? I did find the full interview transcript on the CNN site.
We encourage all of you to join other posters to discuss all of the cases we cover. Diamond Girl runs the community part of the site and remember discuss the evidence don’t attack other posters. If you read a post that upsets you just scroll past that comment http://community.rosespeaks.com/ I seldom step on the forums that belongs to the members and is in great hands with Diamond Girl and she will be having a robust discussion there that all of you are invited to join. However, as I do have time I enjoy reading and participating in the discussion.
Visit our Download Section and pick up all of the documents related to any cases we follow; we put up papers throughout the trials, and then leave them up as part of the history of the cases we cover.
I HAVE A LOT OF DOCUMENTS TO PUT UP ON THE STANCIL FORD SHELLEY AND GAITHER B THOMPSON II CRIMINAL CHARGES IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND WILL HAVE THOSE UP TOMORROW FOR ALL OF YOU.
December 4, 2011
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.