Alex Jones

[billvon 3,070]

Starting a new thread to try to capture the large amount of material from other threads:

In today's news, the wife of Alex Jones said "I was unaware" that Jones had sent nude pictures of her to Roger Stone.  Nothing like finding that out from a reporter's question after the picture in question had been sent to the United States House of Representatives as part of a criminal investigation.

[JerryBaumchen 1,436]

48 minutes ago, billvon said:

Starting a new thread to try to capture the large amount of material from other threads:

In today's news, the wife of Alex Jones said "I was unaware" that Jones had sent nude pictures of her to Roger Stone.  Nothing like finding that out from a reporter's question after the picture in question had been sent to the United States House of Representatives as part of a criminal investigation.

Hi Bill,

Re:  sent nude pictures of her

Nothing says love like having respect for your spouse.

Jerry Baumchen

[jakee 1,563]

[kallend 2,106]

A Connecticut jury ordered Infowars founder Alex Jones to pay $965 million in damages to the families of eight victims of the Sandy Hook shooting for the suffering caused by years of lies that the massacre was a hoax.

[Phil1111 1,149]

As of a week ago he had begun restating lies about Sandy Hook on his shows. Its too bad that other sources of lies, misinformation, trolling, etc. Can't result in similar outcomes. Perhaps if FOX, Truth Social, etc. start getting hit with substantial damage awards. There would be a little crack of bright light for truth, facts and righteousness.

[wmw999 2,534]

8 minutes ago, kallend said:

A Connecticut jury ordered Infowars founder Alex Jones to pay $965 million in damages to the families of eight victims of the Sandy Hook shooting for the suffering caused by years of lies that the massacre was a hoax.

And how long will it be appealed for?

I read an interesting article recently (well, interesting because I agree with it...), saying that most people who gravitate towards conspiracy theories do so because, frankly, they're not all that good at deduction.

Wendy P.

[Phil1111 1,149]

18 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

...I read an interesting article recently (well, interesting because I agree with it...), saying that most people who gravitate towards conspiracy theories do so because, frankly, they're not all that good at deduction.

Wendy P.

As we have seen proven again and again in these very forums lately.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

21 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And how long will it be appealed for?

I read an interesting article recently (well, interesting because I agree with it...), saying that most people who gravitate towards conspiracy theories do so because, frankly, they're not all that good at deduction.

Wendy P.

#1 - Please stop calling them 'theories'. They are conspiracy fantasies. There's nothing approaching the level of proof that a theory requires in those idiotic claims.

#2 - While I agree that there's a lot of stupidity involved in them, lots of 'not terribly smart' people don't fall for them.
One distinguishing characteristic is that the people seem to think they are a lot smarter than they really are. Dunning-Krueger poster children.
Another is that they really, really, REALLY want to know something that nobody else does. So they either invent a load of crap, or they latch onto one.

[jakee 1,563]

18 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Another is that they really, really, REALLY want to know something that nobody else does. So they either invent a load of crap, or they latch onto one.

There is a lot of that. People want so desperately to not be one of 'the sheep' and to be able to see clearly where others can't. So it's the height of irony that they always just end up reposting random Youtube videos without a clue about the veracity of the claims or how to independently fact check them, instead just taking the word of whichever talking head is making them feel special that day.

[billvon 3,070]

9 minutes ago, Slim King said:

I don't watch Alex Jones

. . . but will no doubt post all about him.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

55 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And how long will it be appealed for?

I read an interesting article recently (well, interesting because I agree with it...), saying that most people who gravitate towards conspiracy theories do so because, frankly, they're not all that good at deduction.

Wendy P.

I don't believe it is appealable. He was convicted by summary judgement due to his team not participating in the proceedings.

[lippy 918]

5 hours ago, jakee said:

So it's the height of irony that they always just end up reposting random Youtube videos without a clue

Not always....Sometimes they post links to thegatewaypundit.com or rumble.com.

[JoeWeber 2,825]

6 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

I don't believe it is appealable. He was convicted by summary judgement due to his team not participating in the proceedings.

Did he not plead guilty? Summary judgement, to my limited knowledge, is a decision made as a matter of law.

[gowlerk 2,249]

11 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Did he not plead guilty? Summary judgement, to my limited knowledge, is a decision made as a matter of law.

He was neither convicted nor did he plead guilty, unfortunately. He got sued and lost the tort case.

Edited October 13, 2022 by gowlerk

[JoeWeber 2,825]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

He was neither convicted nor did he plead guilty, unfortunately. He got sued and lost the tort case.

Ken, please elucidate. To my understanding, a fact finding always precedes a judgement.

[gowlerk 2,249]

1 minute ago, JoeWeber said:

Ken, please elucidate. To my understanding, a fact finding always precedes a judgement.

The finding was of liability, not guilt. There is no conviction in a civil case.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

12 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Did he not plead guilty? Summary judgement, to my limited knowledge, is a decision made as a matter of law.

Summary Judgement was not the correct term...it was through default judgement. He basically did not participate in the discovery process. Stalling for more than 2 years.

 

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/15/1055864452/alex-jones-found-liable-for-defamation-in-sandy-hook-hoax-case

[jakee 1,563]

He’s also spent all of that time burying money like a squirrel hoarding nuts for winter. Even if he can’t appeal the award it’s a question of how long it takes for the forensic accountants to find it.

True to form, while claiming bankruptcy he flew from Texas to the court hearing in a private jet and rented a mansion for the week.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

35 minutes ago, jakee said:

He’s also spent all of that time burying money like a squirrel hoarding nuts for winter. Even if he can’t appeal the award it’s a question of how long it takes for the forensic accountants to find it.

True to form, while claiming bankruptcy he flew from Texas to the court hearing in a private jet and rented a mansion for the week.

Should note that these amounts cannot be discharged through personal bankruptcy.

[jakee 1,563]

10 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Should note that these amounts cannot be discharged through personal bankruptcy.

Right, but you also can’t declare bankruptcy if you have lots and lots of money that is obviously yours. It’s the hiding it bit rather than the bankruptcy bit that’s relevant to the Sandy Hook families. 
 

Though if his accountants were as incompetent as his lawyers it might not be such a big deal.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 minutes ago, jakee said:

Right, but you also can’t declare bankruptcy if you have lots and lots of money that is obviously yours. It’s the hiding it bit rather than the bankruptcy bit that’s relevant to the Sandy Hook families. 
 

Though if his accountants were as incompetent as his lawyers it might not be such a big deal.

It also means these judgments will follow him for the rest of his life. Even if he could hide all his money today, he is going to have to never make money again.

[jakee 1,563]

42 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

It also means these judgments will follow him for the rest of his life. Even if he could hide all his money today, he is going to have to never make money again.

Well that is a happy thought at least. Can they take business assets from him too - things like trademarks, copyrights, domain names and websites etc?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 minutes ago, jakee said:

Well that is a happy thought at least. Can they take business assets from him too - things like trademarks, copyrights, domain names and websites etc?

Don't know, but they can take any money that is derived from them. Generally you wouldn't want to take away his ability to make money, you want to be able to garnish the money he makes.

[jakee 1,563]

Ah, it would have been nice to see Infowars become a hub for gun control information.

[ryoder 1,590]

Devin "LegalEagle" Stone breaks down what led up to the $965M verdict. I did not realize that was only the compensatory damages for this lawsuit. The punitive damages are still to come.