• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Dog Weissman

Banned
Sep 12, 2020
734
For further information and schadenfreude I recommend the podcast Knowledge Fight; a podcast about Alex Jones where this will almost certainly be discussed and analyzed by professional Info Wars debunkers.
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
What happened to the subpoena from that lawyer who wanted to disclose the academic reports of the dead students? That was one of the grossest things I had read in a long time.
 

Achtung

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,042
Hell yea... leave him with nothing...... take every current and future dime this evil windbag earns.
 

sph3re

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
8,441
He could have just allowed himself to become a funny meme man with the gay frogs instead of going way too far into this stuff
The gay frogs thing was after Sandy Hook, BTW. We--generally, not everybody--jumped on the whole "haha gay frogs" meme even after he was accusing parents of being paid actors.
 

HStallion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
62,364
So can he be jailed at some point for basically refusing to follow through on his end of things?
 

Doskoi Panda

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,084
Why did he do this to himself
Maybe he figured he could wait it out til Trump is reinstated, then use his connections to fanagle some kind of reprieve. Lmao.

For real, though, I've been speculating about this. Personally I imagine that the requested documents - particularly the internal company communications - if publicized, might have been even more damaging for him than the threat of bankruptcy. Allow me to explain.

Infowars (Alex Jones' self made platform) and its content is a filtering system designed to weed out the reasonable, not unlike how 'Nigerian prince' scams are actually designed to appear immediately unconvincing to all but their intended marks. Those people who are gullible or undiscerning enough to pass through filters like Jones' nonsensical, hate-filled videos and podcast, and still come back for more... those are the people who are eventually compelled by Alex and friends to visit their shitty storefront, a place to buy brain pills and colloidal silver. And the people who make it that far, by design, are the least likely to notice that they're being grifted, much less that that very grift is THE ENTIRE POINT. It's a source of livelihood for Alex, and a grift that keeps on grifting, as long as he can stay in character. Even if faced with the threat of total bankruptcy, Alex could eventually find new avenues through which to keep the grift going, especially in today's world.

Unfortunately for Alex, his intended marks (and as such, the audience he has cultivated) are those with a predilection for anger, and a desire for violent retribution that he has seen fit to stoke for years.

What happens if internal communications and Infowars documents reveal that Alex and crew have been knowingly misleading and grifting their audience? An audience that largely sees him and his crew as some of the only media personalities they should trust? An audience that has been thoroughly riled up, an audience convinced that they're being lied to by everyone, and that the apparatus that enables those lies to proliferate must be destroyed?

What happens if it's revealed, straight from the horse's mouth, that Alex has always been complicit in lying to them, in exchange for money and power? That to him, they're just rubes who bought him his house, and pay for his office space. Think Alex is prepared to navigate the fallout? I bet nothing in the world scares him more than the thought of being thoroughly exposed. Losing his income, and gaining a number of dissidents that he himself trained to embrace their anger, all at the same time.

Not that he can't always try to explain away everything that happens to him, every lost court case and every debt owed to the court, as part of the globalist conspiracy to prop up Big Evil... even after candidly admitting to a court, and to the world, that his Infowars personality is a character he plays a few years back, he managed to explain that away well enough, far as his audience was concerned.

Company documents and communications with revealing details, on the other hand? Nothing short of a contempt-of-court worthy performance would enable him to play his character convincingly during court proceedings. You can't just scream and wave your arms and invoke disparate concepts and scare-words in court! Have fun playing self-produced evidence off as a conspiracy online for the rest of your life, when all it takes is a few unconvinced and deeply unstable people to make your life significantly less comfortable thereafter.

And in any event, the contents of those requested documents certainly wouldn't play well in court, even if nobody else ever saw them. Not as long as the rest of us are living in a world where Sandy Hook factually fucking happened. The narrative that Alex produced in Sandy Hook's wake had intent behind it, and if the courts had their opportunity to explore that intent...

...Instead, Alex can now just play off his refusal to produce documents as if the trials were full on shams, conspiracies against him which he refused to entertain, and that'll play well with at least some of his audience. Even if Infowars were shuttered tomorrow, we've all seen how these sorts of grifters can continue to get by and continue spreading their bullshit. I'm sure Alex is literally banking on it.
 

captive

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,061
Houston
can someone help me understand how the sandy hook victims have been able to sue him, successfully. But like i see all the time people saying we can't sue Tucker Carlson, or Google for their part in spreading or helping to spread lies on vaccines?

like generally the response is it would violate the 1st amendment. particularly because its the government facilitating and handing out punishment?
 

ElectricBlanketFire

What year is this?
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,943
can someone help me understand how the sandy hook victims have been able to sue him, successfully. But like i see all the time people saying we can't sue Tucker Carlson, or Google for their part in spreading or helping to spread lies on vaccines?

like generally the response is it would violate the 1st amendment. particularly because its the government facilitating and handing out punishment?

This is a good question and I'm interested in the responses.
 
Oct 30, 2017
15,278
can someone help me understand how the sandy hook victims have been able to sue him, successfully. But like i see all the time people saying we can't sue Tucker Carlson, or Google for their part in spreading or helping to spread lies on vaccines?

like generally the response is it would violate the 1st amendment. particularly because its the government facilitating and handing out punishment?
The parents sued him for defamation because he claimed Sandy Hook was a "hoax" and that the parents' dead children were "crisis actors." This resulted in the families receiving immense harassment.

When they sued him, he was ordered to turn over documentation related to Infowars and anything else Jones had involvement in that referenced Sandy Hook. Based off the default judgment that the judge levied, it means that he and his attorney refused to turn over all available discovery within a certain amount of time (re: years) and so the judge said, "you lose by default because you refused to honor the court's requests"

He didn't even argue the case, he just refused to cooperate to the extent the court wanted him to. It's not that the family won the defamation as much as it is Jones disqualified himself by being an arrogant uncooperative asshole.
 

captive

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,061
Houston
The parents sued him for defamation because he claimed Sandy Hook was a "hoax" and that the parents' dead children were "crisis actors." This resulted in the families receiving immense harassment.

When they sued him, he was ordered to turn over documentation related to Infowars and anything else Jones had involvement in that referenced Sandy Hook. Based off the default judgment that the judge levied, it means that he and his attorney refused to turn over all available discovery within a certain amount of time (re: years) and so the judge said, "you lose by default because you refused to honor the court's requests"

He didn't even argue the case, he just refused to cooperate to the extent the court wanted him to. It's not that the family won the defamation as much as it is Jones disqualified himself by being an arrogant uncooperative asshole.
lol nice. thanks for the explanation.
 

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,969
Good. Let's hope he loses a lot more. There are so many people in other countries who try the same formula. Jones' and Trump's way of lies and nonsense have become a business and political model for a lot of right winged cancerous fucks around the world.
Make an example out of him. And many other nutcases.
 

PeskyToaster

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,318
Why the fuck did he get years to supply documents? Because white?

Just simply googling shows that discovery can take at minimum a hundred days in a simple case to over 400 days in a more complex one. Lots of back and forth between lawyers and minimum times to respond. The discovery process may seem like it would favor him because he could try to outlast the plaintiffs who have to retain lawyers and you know, live their lives, but I think it would also reveal a ton of damaging information onto the public record so it's really not in his favor at all. This is why a lot of people and companies getting sued settle. Look at what was revealed when Apple and Epic went to trial, some crazy stuff and many companies were trying to get all sorts of it redacted. They also brought the lawsuit in August of 2020 and it was argued in May of 2021 and decided in Sept. Turns out these things take time. I guess it's more about being able to afford the lawyers than anything.

It's not a criminal trial so it's not like he'd be going to jail and the sixth amendment right to a speedy trial is for criminal defendants.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid
Member
Oct 25, 2017
50,134
can someone help me understand how the sandy hook victims have been able to sue him, successfully. But like i see all the time people saying we can't sue Tucker Carlson, or Google for their part in spreading or helping to spread lies on vaccines?

like generally the response is it would violate the 1st amendment. particularly because its the government facilitating and handing out punishment?
The First Amendment is really broad and hate speech is considered protected in the US according to the Supreme Court. It's just not a great avenue to pursue.

The case that I always recall in these situations is the one where burning a cross on a family's lawn was considered a valid expression of free speech.

 

Takuhi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,308
can someone help me understand how the sandy hook victims have been able to sue him, successfully. But like i see all the time people saying we can't sue Tucker Carlson, or Google for their part in spreading or helping to spread lies on vaccines?

like generally the response is it would violate the 1st amendment. particularly because its the government facilitating and handing out punishment?

To add the other replies, Alex Jones didn't just lose on some technicality. He was a public figure attacking non-public figures by name, and those people suffered harm from it, giving them cause to sue him for defamation. It's still not a slam dunk case in the US by any means, but it's a case that can be pursued.

Trying to sue Google or Tucker Carlson over vaccine misinformation is a completely different animal; first of all, you need someone who can show that they were harmed as a direct result of actions taken by them, which is almost impossible to prove. And beyond that, Google doesn't have a legal responsibility to police its content, and Tucker has a billion-dollar legal department reviewing his scripts to make sure they aren't saying anything actionable; they're just "inviting discussion" or "parody."
 

SoleSurvivor

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,025
giphy.gif
 

Deleted member 2279

User-requested account closure
Member
Oct 25, 2017
215
in a just world he would be incarcerated but i hope at the least he spends his remaining years impoverished and irrelevant
 

Parch

Member
Nov 6, 2017
7,980
I hope this is a lesson learned and a deterrent for lots of others who fabricate lies and conspiracy theories. They think they can say whatever ever BS they want and hide behind their "free speech" beliefs. No. No you can't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.