I would be amazed if the attorneys for this individual ever actually sent me anything. The contrast between our accounts makes the whole idea absurd. This person is a public figure with a large platform, which means the legal burden is on them to prove actual malice. That requires showing I knowingly lied, which is impossible when everything I cited came directly from documented reporting that anyone can verify.
What stands out is that at no point did they identify a single false statement. Instead, they skipped straight to calling me a liar, a maggot, and threatening perpetual lawsuits backed by millions. The law does not allow endless litigation, no matter how much money someone thinks they have. Waving around a supposed war chest online is not the same as proving damages in court.
My post was live for only minutes before they claimed their brand was hurt, yet mainstream outlets have been reporting on them for years. If their brand survived all of that coverage, it is not collapsing because I referenced the public record. The truth is they cannot name a single falsehood, which is why the response was insults and threats instead of facts.
I am not intimidated and I am not afraid. I will be publishing a Substack article with solid citations. If a short post here was too much, then a fully documented piece will be even harder for them to dismiss. And the doctor who lost his license in two states will be included as well.
So good luck with those millions. They will not change the fact that quoting sources is not defamation, and empty threats are not a lawsuit.
