Jump to content

Alex Jones

Hornius Emeritus

By Hornius Emeritus
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

ERhine

ERhine 1894

Posted
Posted
Oh, but, see, he's in bankruptcy.  And the bankruptcy court can force that liquidity.
My bold prediction: This judgment will be collected in full by the end of the year.

They probably won’t even have briefed the inevitable appeal at the court of appeals by then.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

elguapo
elguapo
Gil Bang
Gil Bang

oh shit      

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

A large, disgusting receptacle filled with smelly rancid shit.  Also pictured, a porta potty.  

Posted Images

Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26367

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Wasn’t part of the vote on tort reform a constitutional amendment specifically to allow the caps? 

It was. And doctors (with exceptions, but broadly speaking) campaigned  super hard for that, even phonebanked for it, because even though you can find the energy to strenuously gatekeep your own profession,  policing the tiny fraction of bad doctors who made your medmal rates so high was too hard!
So you got rooked into letting rent seekers use your credibility as cover for … well, nothing.
But you got over on the trial lawyers. Or suffering people. Or somebody, right?

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26367

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CTC2 said:

On medical malpractice.  Texans have a long history of voting against their self interest. 

Especially when doctors tell them it’s good for them. But to be clear- I don’t really blame the doctors. They got hoodwinked, too. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27464

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It was. And doctors (with exceptions, but broadly speaking) campaigned  super hard for that, even phonebanked for it, because even though you can find the energy to strenuously gatekeep your own profession,  policing the tiny fraction of bad doctors who made your medmal rates so high was too hard!
So you got rooked into letting rent seekers use your credibility as cover for … well, nothing.
But you got over on the trial lawyers. Or suffering people. Or somebody, right?


 

image.gif.c5f337e504791d686f0dce4f2700ee5a.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26367

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

We’ve discussed this ad nauseum over 3 boards. It’s not true and I’m not getting into it again w you. Have a good night 

Doctors campaigned for the amendment and at the association level still supports the caps. That’s a fact, sorry.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fastbreak

Fastbreak 3962

Posted
Posted
The grifters only have to say they're a Christian and the rubes eat it up. Demonstrate to the rubes that Biden has attended church every Sunday for 40 years and they would claim he’s only doing it for show.

It’s fucking crazy. Trump has been in a church about 5 times in his life (all to fuck mmaples), can’t name a single passage in the Bible, has paid off multiple hookers and porn stars, associated with a convicted child sex trafficker, has a weird sexual obsession with his daughter and yet he is a great holy man.

Socialism!
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tx 3 putt

tx 3 putt 76579

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Fastbreak said:


It’s fucking crazy. Trump has been in a church about 5 times in his life (all to fuck mmaples), can’t name a single passage in the Bible, has paid off multiple hookers and porn stars, associated with a convicted child sex trafficker, has a weird sexual obsession with his daughter and yet he is a great holy man.

Socialism!

 

left off - wanted to abort tiffany trump !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 10989

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Carl Spackler said:

Nah.  There are a couple reasons why I like handling appeals.  First, they tend to involve a much better class of judges.  Second, if I win, I'm a hero.  But if I lose, I can just point to the trial attorney and tell the client that he/she fucked the case up so bad that it wasn't salvageable.     

 

My wife is a trial attorney, and she prefers appeals because she doesn't have to screw with depos, witnesses, juries, etc. When she does appeal her own cases, or when she wins and the other side appeals, (neither of which happens very often) she handles her own appeals. She is 2-0 in front of the SCOTX and 1-0 in front of TX Court of Criminal Appeals.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RabidM

RabidM 2664

Posted
Posted

Man this fucking sucks. The only way to stop these fucking conspiracy theorists is to get at their money and make it more expensive to stay in business than to shut down.  But the law fucking protects them and limits their liability.  If THujone is right and the compensatory will be reduced to $0 then it's only $750k per plaintiff.  That's fucking dog shit. And the Connecticut laws look to be worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17497

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, RabidM said:

Man this fucking sucks. The only way to stop these fucking conspiracy theorists is to get at their money and make it more expensive to stay in business than to shut down.  But the law fucking protects them and limits their liability.  If THujone is right and the compensatory will be reduced to $0 then it's only $750k per plaintiff.  That's fucking dog shit. And the Connecticut laws look to be worse. 

Compensatory damages aren't going to be reduced to 0. That would mean the judge found insufficient evidence of any damages and would be a ruling of non liability in favor of Jones. What I think you mean is that since the family presented no economic damages (i.e., specific monetary costs paid or incurred by the family like medical bills, lost wages, moving costs etc), the Texas punitive cap would reduce the punitive award to 750k per parent. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29838

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Problem is, Alex Jones and his ilk aren’t on broadcast television so the FCC can’t do jack nor shit about him and his brethren.

Fuck, he even got booted from YouTube.

He’d need his larynx removed to stop him.

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scottsins

scottsins 1959

Posted
Posted
For the record.  Stella Liebeck was awarded $200k in actual, compensatory damages, reduced by 20 percent for her own contributory negligence, so $160k.  The jury awarded $2.7M in punitives, based on McD's sales of coffee, about two day's worth, nationwide.
Because the punitive damages, although having a rational basis, so grossly exceeded the compensatory damages, the trial judge reduced it to $480k, or 3x the compensatory award.  In lieu of appeals, the case was settled confidentially for a reported $500k.
In some statutory schemes, like patent infringement and antitrust, for example, a type of punitive damages, for willful or malicious conduct, are provided in the form of "treble damages," meaning 3x the damages compensating the injury.  So that's where that comes from.

The statutory caps on punitive just irk me so much. Proportionality to compensatory SEEMS reasonable, but the entire purpose of punitive, IMO is to shape future behavior of the defendant and other going forward.
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Underdog

Underdog 28482

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, tchookem said:

I hereby promise that if I see this pustule in public, I will give him the "Darryl" chant.
 

 


He may never get the justice he deserves, but I can make a scene when he's out and about in Austin.

 

Might want to arm yourself with a cattle prod or some shit just in case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl Spackler

Carl Spackler 3473

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

My wife is a trial attorney, and she prefers appeals because she doesn't have to screw with depos, witnesses, juries, etc. When she does appeal her own cases, or when she wins and the other side appeals, (neither of which happens very often) she handles her own appeals. She is 2-0 in front of the SCOTX and 1-0 in front of TX Court of Criminal Appeals.

 

Congrats to your wife -- sounds like she's doing very well.  I suggest avoiding arguments with her. 

Yep, no discovery is definitely another plus about appellate work in my estimation.  I pretty much hate discovery at this point.

I split my caseload between appeals and trial court level litigation.  I'd say probably 70-80% of my appeals involved cases handled by other attorneys below.   But I was the handling attorney in some of them. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29483

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Fastbreak said:

I would be for the FCC slapping fines on corps that present entertainment as news. If you can’t say “fuck” on tv, why should you be able to lie under the banner of news. One is 10000000000x more dangerous to the population

 

10 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Problem is, Alex Jones and his ilk aren’t on broadcast television so the FCC can’t do jack nor shit about him and his brethren.

Fuck, he even got booted from YouTube.

He’d need his larynx removed to stop him.

 

6 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There has to be more than a few internet broadcasters that are sitting up and taking notice of this judgement. Not the bozo with 15 followers but those will millions. 

 

Yep, they're getting smarter. Here's a couple of short sections from the article (the whole thing is worth a read) I'm putting in the spoiler:

Quote

 

Other conspiracy theorists are less likely than Mr. Jones to end up in court, in part because they’ve learned from his mistakes. Instead of straightforwardly accusing the families of mass-shooting victims of making it all up, they adopt a naïve, “just asking questions” posture while poking holes in the official narrative. When attacking a foe, they tiptoe right up to the line of defamation, being careful not to do anything that could get them sued or barred from social media. And when they lead harassment campaigns, they pick their targets wisely — often maligning public figures rather than private citizens, which gives them broader speech protections under the First Amendment.

******

Social media companies can help curb the spread of harmful lies by making it harder for fabulists to amass huge audiences. But they have their own limitations, including the simple fact that conspiracy theorists have gotten more sophisticated about evading their rules. If you draw a line at claiming that Bigfoot is real, attention-seeking cranks will simply get their millions of views by positing that Bigfoot might be real and that their audiences would be wise to do their own research to figure out what Bigfoot-related secrets the deep-state cabal is hiding.

To this new, more subtle generation of propagandists and reactionaries, Mr. Jones is an inspiration who ascended the profession’s highest peaks. But he’s also a cautionary tale — of what can happen when you cross too many lines, tell too many easily disprovable lies and refuse to back down.

 

Spoiler

Don’t Expect Alex Jones’s Comeuppance to Stop Lies
His success has inspired a new generation of conspiracy theorists, who have learned how to stay away from legal trouble.

If it hadn’t been so excruciatingly sad, Alex Jones’s defamation trial might have been cathartic.

Mr. Jones, the supplement-slinging conspiracy theorist, was ordered to pay more than $45 million in damages to Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, the parents of a 6-year-old who was murdered in the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. The jury’s verdict came after Mr. Jones was found liable for defaming Mr. Heslin and Ms. Lewis, whom for years he falsely accused of being crisis actors in a “false flag” operation plotted by the government.

To the victims of Mr. Jones’s harassment campaigns, and to those who have followed his career for years, the verdict felt long overdue — a notorious internet villain finally facing real consequences for his actions. The families of the children killed at Sandy Hook, many of whom have waited years to see Mr. Jones pay for his lies, are no doubt relieved.

But before we celebrate Mr. Jones’s comeuppance, we should acknowledge that the verdict against him is unlikely to put much of a dent in the phenomenon he represents: belligerent fabulists building profitable media empires with easily disprovable lies.

Mr. Jones’s megaphone has shrunk in recent years — thanks, in part, to decisions by tech platforms like Facebook and Twitter to bar him from their services. But his reach is still substantial, and he has more influence than you might think.

Court records showed that Mr. Jones’s Infowars store, which sells dubious performance-enhancing supplements and survival gear, made more than $165 million from 2015 to 2018. Despite his deplatforming, Mr. Jones still appears as a guest on popular podcasts and YouTube shows, and millions of Americans still look to him as, if not a reliable chronicler of current events, at least a wacky diversion. (And a wealthy one — an expert witness in the trial estimated the net worth of Mr. Jones and Free Speech Systems, his holding company, at somewhere between $135 million and $270 million.)

In the coming weeks, Mr. Jones — a maestro of martyrdom — will no doubt spin his court defeat into hours of entertaining content, all of which will generate more attention, more subscribers, more money.

But a bigger reason for caution is that, whether or not Mr. Jones remains personally enriched by his lies, his shtick is everywhere these days.

You can see and hear Mr. Jones’s influence on Capitol Hill, where attention-seeking Republican politicians often sound like they’re auditioning for slots on Infowars. When Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, suggests that a mass shooting could have been orchestrated to persuade Republicans to support gun-control measures, as she did in a Facebook post about the July 4 shooting in Highland Park, Ill., she’s playing hits from Mr. Jones’s back catalog. Mr. Jones also played a role in fueling the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, in ways we are still learning about. (The House panel investigating the insurrection has asked for a copy of the text messages from Mr. Jones’s phone that were mistakenly sent to the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in his defamation case.)

You can also see Mr. Jones’s influence in right-wing media. When Tucker Carlson stokes nativist fears on his Fox News show, or when a Newsmax host spins a bizarre conspiracy theory about an effort by Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, to have Justice Brett Kavanaugh of the Supreme Court killed, it’s proof that Infowars’ DNA has entered the conservative bloodstream.

Even outside politics, Mr. Jones’s choleric, wide-eyed style has influenced the way in which a new generation of conspiracy theorists looks for fame online.

These creators don’t all rant about goblins and gay frogs, as Mr. Jones has. But they’re pulling from the same fact-free playbook. Some of them focus on softer subject matter — like the kooky wellness influencers who recently went viral for suggesting that Lyme disease is a “gift” caused by intergalactic space matter, or like Shane Dawson, a popular YouTube creator who has racked up hundreds of millions of views with conspiracy theory documentaries in which he credulously examines claims such as “Chuck E. Cheese reuses uneaten pizza” and “Wildfires are caused by directed energy weapons.”

Certain elements of left-wing and centrist discourse also owe a debt to Mr. Jones. The “Red Scare” podcast, which is popular with an anti-establishment “post-left” crowd, has interviewed Mr. Jones and shares some overlapping interests. Much of the unhinged coverage and analysis of the legal battle between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, which dominated social media this summer, had a Jonesian tinge. Even Joe Rogan, the popular podcast host (who has hosted Mr. Jones on his show and has defended him as “hilarious” and “entertaining”), has borrowed some of the Infowars founder’s connect-the-dots paranoia in arguing, for example, that Covid-19 vaccines can alter your genes.

It would be too simple to blame (or credit) Mr. Jones for inspiring the entire modern cranksphere. But it’s safe to say that many of today’s leading conspiracy theorists have found the same profitable sweet spot of lies and entertainment value. It’s also probable that we’ve become desensitized to conspiracy theories, and many of the outrageous falsehoods that once got Mr. Jones into trouble — such as the allegations about Sandy Hook parents that were at the center of his defamation trial — would sound less shocking if uttered today.

Other conspiracy theorists are less likely than Mr. Jones to end up in court, in part because they’ve learned from his mistakes. Instead of straightforwardly accusing the families of mass-shooting victims of making it all up, they adopt a naïve, “just asking questions” posture while poking holes in the official narrative. When attacking a foe, they tiptoe right up to the line of defamation, being careful not to do anything that could get them sued or barred from social media. And when they lead harassment campaigns, they pick their targets wisely — often maligning public figures rather than private citizens, which gives them broader speech protections under the First Amendment.

That’s not to say there won’t be more lawsuits, or attempts to hold conspiracy theorists accountable. Fox News, for one, is facing a defamation lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems, which claims that the network knowingly made false statements about voter fraud in the 2020 election.

But these cases are the exceptions, not the rule. The truth is that today’s media ecosystem is overflowing with Infowars-style conspiracy theories — from History Channel shows about ancient aliens building the Egyptian pyramids to TikToks made by yoga moms who think Wayfair is selling trafficked children — and it’s not clear that our legal system can, or should even attempt to, stop them.

Social media companies can help curb the spread of harmful lies by making it harder for fabulists to amass huge audiences. But they have their own limitations, including the simple fact that conspiracy theorists have gotten more sophisticated about evading their rules. If you draw a line at claiming that Bigfoot is real, attention-seeking cranks will simply get their millions of views by positing that Bigfoot might be real and that their audiences would be wise to do their own research to figure out what Bigfoot-related secrets the deep-state cabal is hiding.

To this new, more subtle generation of propagandists and reactionaries, Mr. Jones is an inspiration who ascended the profession’s highest peaks. But he’s also a cautionary tale — of what can happen when you cross too many lines, tell too many easily disprovable lies and refuse to back down.

Mr. Jones isn’t done facing the music. Two more lawsuits brought against him by Sandy Hook family members are still pending, and he could end up owing millions more in damages.

But, even if Mr. Jones’s career is ruined, his legacy of brazen, unrepentant dishonesty will live on — strengthened, in some ways, by the knowledge of exactly how far you can push a lie before consequences kick in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31353

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, ERhine said:


They probably won’t even have briefed the inevitable appeal at the court of appeals by then.

I'm kind of thinking he's going to try to dismiss, which would likely be conditioned on payment of this. 

That is, effort to avoid a ~$5M judgment while exposing yourself to bankruptcy fraud and an unfavorable forum to litigate preferences and fraudulent transfers is probably not worth it.

The exposure to the other judgments may be, though.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17174

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, RabidM said:

Man this fucking sucks. The only way to stop these fucking conspiracy theorists is to get at their money and make it more expensive to stay in business than to shut down.  But the law fucking protects them and limits their liability.  If THujone is right and the compensatory will be reduced to $0 then it's only $750k per plaintiff.  That's fucking dog shit. And the Connecticut laws look to be worse. 

 

1 hour ago, RabidM said:

So, is this punitive cap a per defendant cap?  Since there is more than one named defendant on the complaint (his companies), can the punitive judgements be split amongst all the defendants?

It's not a per defendant cap. It's a per claim cap.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RabidM

RabidM 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)

Fuck the world. Those parents are going to get so little for what they went through and will likely go through in the future. Your kid gets murdered and you spend the next decade+ being the victims of a terror campaign by crazy people who hunt you everywhere you fucking go.  FUCKING MOTHER FUCKER

Edited by RabidM
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gaspar

gaspar 102

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Chopper said:

 

It's not a per defendant cap. It's a per claim cap.

In the video of plaintiff’s attorney posted by Gil Bang above (#2231), attorney says the $750k punitive damages cap is per cause of action (3 in this case) and per defendant (2 in this case - presumably AJ + his company), so $750k x 3 x 2 = $4.5M. 

Edited by gaspar
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chopper

Chopper 17174

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, gaspar said:

In the video of plaintiff’s attorney posted by Gil Bang above (#2231), attorney says the $750k punitive damages cap is per cause of action (3 in this case) and per defendant (2 in this case - presumably AJ + his company), so $750k x 3 x 2 = $4.5M. 

Yes and that attorney also has a plan of attack to blow through those caps. He apparently believes Jones made himself vulnerable by pre-filing for bankruptcy. Need a backruptcy attorney to explain but I guess the theory is that the state caps wouldn't necessarily apply in US bankruptcy court. Also fraudulent hiding of assets is involved.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SimonBolivar

SimonBolivar 10949

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

The Knowledge Fight hosts are on with Stelter right now and the chyrons and Stelter’s questions are taunting Jones. “You all have made a career out of skewering Alex Jones.” This might cause Alex’s head to literally explode. 

Was the fat one high or just incredibly sweaty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SizzleChest

SizzleChest 8276

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

The Knowledge Fight hosts are on with Stelter right now and the chyrons and Stelter’s questions are taunting Jones. “You all have made a career out of skewering Alex Jones.” This might cause Alex’s head to literally explode. 

That's what the Vitamin J is for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27514

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

The Knowledge Fight hosts are on with Stelter right now and the chyrons and Stelter’s questions are taunting Jones. “You all have made a career out of skewering Alex Jones.” This might cause Alex’s head to literally explode. 

Was curious, found the clip 

https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2022/08/07/will-the-alex-jones-trials-change-conspiracy-culture.cnn

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31353

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Chopper said:

Yes and that attorney also has a plan of attack to blow through those caps. He apparently believes Jones made himself vulnerable by pre-filing for bankruptcy. Need a backruptcy attorney to explain but I guess the theory is that the state caps wouldn't necessarily apply in US bankruptcy court. Also fraudulent hiding of assets is involved.

I also think the plaintiffs attorneys have an overly optimistic view of what they can do with the punitive caps.

The statute does speak in terms of "cause of action," so that supports the notion of "per claim," i.e. $750k for defamation and another for IIED.  Not sure how strongly it supports "per defendant."

And, an extra-nasty piece of the statute is that it purports to apply even if the law of another state is applied in the case, unless that state's law provides a lower cap.  Lol.  Fuck.

I really can't see how the bankruptcy helps with this.  Even if the case was tried in bankruptcy court, Texas (or Connecticut) law would apply, including the damage caps.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BrickHorn

BrickHorn 18199

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I really can't see how the bankruptcy helps with this.  Even if the case was tried in bankruptcy court, Texas (or Connecticut) law would apply, including the damage caps.

I think Bankston’s theory is that the possibility that the cap would be overturned on appeal has value that can be considered by the bankruptcy court. So maybe they argue there’s a 20% chance that they can prevail on appeal and thus collect the full $45M punitive award, allowing them to collect $9M through bankruptcy.

But I’m way out over my skis here.

tl;dr - the bankruptcy stunt may prove to be an all-time backfire for Jones.

Edited by BrickHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...