She gave us Biden.Jeeper79 said:Can you show targeted action that resulted in verifiable pain and suffering? Go for it.Burdizzo said:bobbranco said:Rachel makes fistful of dollars by lying. Try again.Jeeper79 said:What monetary or property damages does someone suffer if they lose a kid that is too young to work? Yet they can still sue for it. Why? For the pain and suffering.Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
He stacked lies about them on top of the loss they were already forced to endure. And why'd he do it? To make money.
Rachel Maddow also encourages legions of asshats to act stupidly. Can I sue her for pain and suffering and encouraging others to act stupidly?
Alex Jones Faces a Day of Reckoning
33,061 Views |
301 Replies |
Last: 20 days ago by HTownAg98
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
Ah that's right, sorry crazy morning. Forgot they were GRIFTERS...some liberal slimeball lawyer probably organized this (I know very little about the case, just guessing).93MarineHorn said:It's a civil case. For ffs!!!El Gallo Blanco said:But illegal? Should we just lock people up for despicable rude behavior? If so round up every liberal protestor right?93MarineHorn said:He stepped over the line and slandered people who had their children murdered. It was absolutely despicable.Elder_LarryII said:
Still don't get how his crazy ramblings were illegal , he hurt peoples feelings ? Lol
Also, Alex Jones was genuinely struggling with addictiond and depression back then...not that it excuses his actions or behavior, but he has very clearly changed and renounced some other things from back then. Hopefully Elon (or some other wealthy non liberals) give him some millions after all is said and done.
Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
I'm not sure about Alex, but Harrison and Owen were just offered jobs. A "former" Marine also just said he'd give them one of his three farms to live on and broadcast from, as well. 50 year lease for $1/yr.
Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
It isn't about utterly destroying politically problematic people w big platforms who question the narrative put forth by the gun control establishment.
It's about right and wrong
It's about right and wrong
That's a distinction without a difference. Primarily because I know Sandmann settled for a nominal amount. And Sandmann was ridiculed such that it was national (maybe international) news for millions. In light of that I think it's a stupid argument trying to correlate the two cases. Not absolutely stupid like Alex Jones level of stupidity but there is no comparison.93MarineHorn said:Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
Did she make a **** ton of money lying about your murdered children and causing unhinged morons to harass you about it? If so then go for it.
Show me on paper where Alex Jones made $1B, if that is how we are going to assess the damage.
Damages should be what the jury decides they are based on the factors of the individual case. Not sure where you're getting that I think it should just be based on how much money he made.
Again, this is a clear example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He knew he was lying and knew it was resulting in his audience harassing the families and chose to continue.
Doesn't change the fact of my statement, which was a response to the implication that the OJ result was the only wrong verdict since the 90sHTownAg98 said:There was no verdict to decide. That was taken care of when the default judgment was entered against Alex Jones. All they jury was tasked with was how much compensation the families should receive.Artorias said:Juries get verdicts wrong ALL. THE. TIME.barbacoa taco said:Elder_LarryII said:TriAg2010 said:Elder_LarryII said:93MarineHorn said:He stepped over the line and slandered people who had their children murdered. It was absolutely despicable.Elder_LarryII said:
Still don't get how his crazy ramblings were illegal , he hurt peoples feelings ? Lol
Over whose line exactly ? Who makes that decision
A jury.
A jury also found oj not guilty
This is dumb. Ok so just because one jury in the 90s got a verdict wrong that's a reason to think this verdict was also wrong? What weird logic.
What specifically did they get wrong in this case? Or are you just making the general point "juries bad" because of the OJ case?
HTH
He said stuff. Expensive reckoning considering speech use to be free.
The Sandy Hook families are being called grifters by many posters on this board because they sued Alex Jones for defamation. Sandmann sued news companies for essentially the same thing. Why is he not a grifter, too?bobbranco said:That's a distinction without a difference. Primarily because I know Sandmann settled for a nominal amount. And Sandmann was ridiculed such that it was national (maybe international) news for millions. In light of that I think it's a stupid argument trying to correlate the two cases. Not absolutely stupid like Alex Jones level of stupidity but there is no comparison.93MarineHorn said:Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
I'm not a lawyer but it seems like the judgement against Jones should include more than just compensation for damages. It should also include the money he made in the process of defaming them. For our system to work as a deterrent you shouldn't be allowed to profit from intentionally defaming someone.
You don't see the difference between multiple national news companies defaming a kid for nothing, versus one idiot saying stupid stuff about a school shooting?93MarineHorn said:The Sandy Hook families are being called grifters by many posters on this board because they sued Alex Jones for defamation. Sandmann sued news companies for essentially the same thing. Why is he not a grifter, too?bobbranco said:That's a distinction without a difference. Primarily because I know Sandmann settled for a nominal amount. And Sandmann was ridiculed such that it was national (maybe international) news for millions. In light of that I think it's a stupid argument trying to correlate the two cases. Not absolutely stupid like Alex Jones level of stupidity but there is no comparison.93MarineHorn said:Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
how many billions did Sandman get?
The feds went after Alex using this lawsuit. We should never celebrate gov abuse of power on anyone. Doesn't matter left or right.
He's not just an idiot. He's an idiot with probably 100's of thousands of followers that watch his program. AJ's defamation of the Sandy Hook families spread worldwide with countless people BELIEVING it. I dare say there were posters on F16 that bought in.Artorias said:You don't see the difference between multiple national news companies defaming a kid for nothing, versus one idiot saying stupid stuff about a school shooting?93MarineHorn said:The Sandy Hook families are being called grifters by many posters on this board because they sued Alex Jones for defamation. Sandmann sued news companies for essentially the same thing. Why is he not a grifter, too?bobbranco said:That's a distinction without a difference. Primarily because I know Sandmann settled for a nominal amount. And Sandmann was ridiculed such that it was national (maybe international) news for millions. In light of that I think it's a stupid argument trying to correlate the two cases. Not absolutely stupid like Alex Jones level of stupidity but there is no comparison.93MarineHorn said:Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
Did she make a **** ton of money lying about your murdered children and causing unhinged morons to harass you about it? If so then go for it.
Show me on paper where Alex Jones made $1B, if that is how we are going to assess the damage.
Damages should be what the jury decides they are based on the factors of the individual case. Not sure where you're getting that I think it should just be based on how much money he made.
Again, this is a clear example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He knew he was lying and knew it was resulting in his audience harassing the families and chose to continue.
Your point was that they both make money by lying. Everyone lies. What is the difference between a white lie and one worth $1B?
Alex Jones didnt inflict pain and suffering by making the gun or pulling the trigger, just a reminder.
J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
Did she make a **** ton of money lying about your murdered children and causing unhinged morons to harass you about it? If so then go for it.
Show me on paper where Alex Jones made $1B, if that is how we are going to assess the damage.
Damages should be what the jury decides they are based on the factors of the individual case. Not sure where you're getting that I think it should just be based on how much money he made.
Again, this is a clear example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He knew he was lying and knew it was resulting in his audience harassing the families and chose to continue.
The good old deep pocket theory. Come to find out Alex Joneses pockets are too shallow.
Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
Did she make a **** ton of money lying about your murdered children and causing unhinged morons to harass you about it? If so then go for it.
Show me on paper where Alex Jones made $1B, if that is how we are going to assess the damage.
Damages should be what the jury decides they are based on the factors of the individual case. Not sure where you're getting that I think it should just be based on how much money he made.
Again, this is a clear example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He knew he was lying and knew it was resulting in his audience harassing the families and chose to continue.
Your point was that they both make money by lying. Everyone lies. What is the difference between a white lie and one worth $1B?
Alex Jones didnt inflict pain and suffering by making the gun or pulling the trigger, just a reminder.
So sue Rachel Maddow then. Nothing is stopping you.
He didn't pull the trigger but he certainly inflicted pain and suffering on the families by blatantly lying about the murder of elementary school children, which he knew was true, solely in an effort to make as much money as possible. Just a reminder of who you're defending.
Exactly.93MarineHorn said:1. : the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation. 2. : a false and defamatory oral statement about a person.Foreverconservative said:93MarineHorn said:He stepped over the line and slandered people who had their children murdered. It was absolutely despicable.Elder_LarryII said:
Still don't get how his crazy ramblings were illegal , he hurt peoples feelings ? Lol
I'm no fan of Alex Jones but you have no clue what slander is
This is the definition and seems to fit this scenario. What did I get wrong?
My daughter has a service animal, and you should hear the nasty things people say to her in public.
I can't imagine losing my child to a mass murderer, then having somebody claim that I was faking it and it didn't really happen, and telling everybody that I'm a liar and was actually profiting from it and deserved no sympathy. That's defamation if I ever saw it - knowing that for the rest of my life, people would look at me like a perpetrator instead of a victim, a criminal instead of a grieving soul. I see ZERO problem with pursuing and winning legal remedy against the person. Mainly I would want them to burn in hell, but I would want the suffering to start on earth.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
If you look back at what was actually said, AJ apparently only briefly suggested it was a conspiracy, then rescinded the viewpoint in pretty short order. He did provide a platform where others who maintained the allegations would continue to make them, but at that point AJ was only interviewing others and asking questions, and not making any allegations himself. Years later, the issue was resurrected by lawyers looking for a payday and notoriety who had cobbled together a class of affected families and with political support of interest groups hostile to semiautomatic rifles and other political activists.
They resurrected a dead but politically and emotionally charged issue in a friendly venue and won and cashed in.
AJ publicly disavowed the conspiracy theories that the shooting was faked years before, on the record. That did not save him from the legal action.
They resurrected a dead but politically and emotionally charged issue in a friendly venue and won and cashed in.
AJ publicly disavowed the conspiracy theories that the shooting was faked years before, on the record. That did not save him from the legal action.
Trump, Chauvin, and Jones: all examples of lefties cheering for injustice because it's emotionally gratifying.
Thats not even first order thinking: it's emotional reasoning.
I'm not sure anyone would defend Jones against paying out $10k - $100k. Most could probably understand paying families treble damages based on the profits of the 1 or 2 shows where Jones made these claims (before walking them back). But the astronomical payout was clearly designed -not for justice- but for destruction.
If our justice system becomes a tool for destruction, it no longer serves justice. Welcome to critical thinking 101.
Thats not even first order thinking: it's emotional reasoning.
I'm not sure anyone would defend Jones against paying out $10k - $100k. Most could probably understand paying families treble damages based on the profits of the 1 or 2 shows where Jones made these claims (before walking them back). But the astronomical payout was clearly designed -not for justice- but for destruction.
If our justice system becomes a tool for destruction, it no longer serves justice. Welcome to critical thinking 101.
J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Burdizzo said:
What monetary or property damages did the families suffer by Alex Jones being an obnoxious, insufferable, asshat?
Does this mean I can sue Rachel Maddow for the same thing?
Did she make a **** ton of money lying about your murdered children and causing unhinged morons to harass you about it? If so then go for it.
Show me on paper where Alex Jones made $1B, if that is how we are going to assess the damage.
Damages should be what the jury decides they are based on the factors of the individual case. Not sure where you're getting that I think it should just be based on how much money he made.
Again, this is a clear example of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. He knew he was lying and knew it was resulting in his audience harassing the families and chose to continue.
Your point was that they both make money by lying. Everyone lies. What is the difference between a white lie and one worth $1B?
Alex Jones didnt inflict pain and suffering by making the gun or pulling the trigger, just a reminder.
So sue Rachel Maddow then. Nothing is stopping you.
He didn't pull the trigger but he certainly inflicted pain and suffering on the families by blatantly lying about the murder of elementary school children, which he knew was true, solely in an effort to make as much money as possible. Just a reminder of who you're defending.
I am not defending a person
I am defending a concept that people should be allowed to say stupid stuff, even stupid stuff that make people cry. Example, Forum 16.
We have an instance where someone fabricated a document that was a blatant lie about a political candidate, and the media ran with it. Few of them have ever acknowledged the falsehood, unlike Alex Jones.
What is the standard for lying?
MouthBQ98 said:
If you look back at what was actually said, AJ apparently only briefly suggested it was a conspiracy, then rescinded the viewpoint in pretty short order. He did provide a platform where others who maintained the allegations would continue to make them, but at that point AJ was only interviewing others and asking questions, and not making any allegations himself. Years later, the issue was resurrected by lawyers looking for a payday and notoriety who had cobbled together a class of affected families and with political support of interest groups hostile to semiautomatic rifles and other political activists.
They resurrected a dead but politically and emotionally charged issue in a friendly venue and won and cashed in.
AJ publicly disavowed the conspiracy theories that the shooting was faked years before, on the record. That did not save him from the legal action.
This is accurate. He made the claim once, rescinded it, but others ran with it. The mainstream media ran his quote over and over for weeks, pushing it as if he were continuously making the claim. They never ran his retraction.
This. Application of our laws are selective. Selective application of law over times == no law and destruction of your civilization/nation/culturepacecar02 said:
he also retracted his statements
Now apply the same to the media outlets that pushed the Russia collusion narrative
There has to be equal application of the law
Yup, if people the people that call him an idiot would look into what AJ has said for the past 25 years and how often he is correct they wouldnt call him an idiot. AJ has outed a lot of evil over the years and the powers used this to take away his platform.BlueTaze said:
The feds went after Alex using this lawsuit. We should never celebrate gov abuse of power on anyone. Doesn't matter left or right.
How do you know he settled for a nominal amount?bobbranco said:That's a distinction without a difference. Primarily because I know Sandmann settled for a nominal amount. And Sandmann was ridiculed such that it was national (maybe international) news for millions. In light of that I think it's a stupid argument trying to correlate the two cases. Not absolutely stupid like Alex Jones level of stupidity but there is no comparison.93MarineHorn said:Alex Jones' programs are followed by tens of thousands of people who believe it's news, sadly. How is that a huge difference?bobbranco said:Sandmann sued news companies. Huge difference. Also, probably settled for pennies on the dollar.93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
The suit against the Wash. Post alone was for $250 million, and he filed a slew of them against media companies.
https://deadline.com/2020/07/nick-sandmann-washington-post-defamation-1202994384/
He asked for $275 million from CNN.
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2020/08/24/kentucky-nick-sandmann-how-much-settlement-amount-cnn-public-covid-19-delay/3428644001/
All I've seen is speculation since the terms of the settlement agreements were confidential.
He didn't get a Billion dollars93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
By this logic, Sandmann is just an incompetent grifter.captkirk said:He didn't get a Billion dollars93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
Bryan Stelter referred to the sum as "nuisance money"
At this point, Sandmann has gotten more than these parents have.captkirk said:He didn't get a Billion dollars93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
I'm Gipper
They're not getting a billion dollars either. Not anywhere close to it.captkirk said:He didn't get a Billion dollars93MarineHorn said:
I'll ask again. Is Nicholas Sandmann a grifter?
If not, what's the difference between his lawsuit and the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit?
Here's what he offered to pay:
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/16/1219848695/alex-jones-sandy-hook-victims-families-settle
They probably should take something along those lines rather than chase this guy forever. However maybe that's what they want to do.Quote:
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is asking the families of the victims in the Dec. 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. to accept a minimum settlement of $5.5 million a year for 10 years (or $55 million in total), with more possible depending on Jones' income. The families who accept the deal would have to give up all legal claims against Jones or any related party.
. . .
According to a recent article in Fortune Magazine, Jones has a net worth of around $14 million. "His personal spending topped $93,000 in July alone, including thousands of dollars on meals and entertainment," the article said. "His assets include a home worth $2.6 million, a $2.2 million ranch, a $1.8 million lake house, a $500,000 rental property, and four vehicles and two boats worth more than $330,000 in total."
. . .
Steltzer has no idea, and its clear he did not know.pacecar02 said:
Bryan Stelter referred to the sum as "nuisance money"
Sandmann's attorney showed the light:
This retweet by @brianstelter may have cost him his job at @CNN. It is called breach of confidentiality agreement. Brian Stelter is a liar. I know how to deal with liars. pic.twitter.com/1VHxby9gim
— Lin Wood (@LLinWood) July 27, 2020
I'm Gipper
Featured Stories
See All
31:49
1d ago
9.6k
The remarkable night Messi came to Aggieland
by Diego Saenz
What to watch for as McMillan & Co. begin summer practice
by Luke Evangelist
3:08
8h ago
2.4k
Five-star cover man Joshua Dobson says A&M 'set the bar'
by Jason Howell
Texas A&M's culture drew 2027 ATH Errol Kerns III to commit
by Jason Howell