ATM9000 said:

---

BlueTaze said:

---

I'm talking about the size. No justification whatsoever for this monetary judgement. If you got it, let's hear it......?

---

Let's turn the tables. You are rendering damages on a defendant as part of a jury. You have to go by facts presented to you when doing so. The plaintiffs have presented facts as they see them to back their damages claims. The defendants do nothing of relevance to defend themselves.

What do you do?

This is what's happened here. Jones' team had loads of time to work within the system to limit damages or even completely clear their liability in this case. But… they didn't. Jones played games, went through I think 7 or 8 legal teams and refused to participate in discovery. Clock ran out and he was guilty by default. Then in he sentencing phase, it was the same thing.

On paper, I agree with you, the judgement seems steep… but it was based on a jury's conclusion with what they had to work with. I don't see how anybody can really argue anything but this is a classic case of **** around and find out.

---

When the USFL sued the NFL, the outcomes was that the USFL suffered damages due to the NFLs action. The judgment was for $1. Alex Jones gets hit for $1B.

Both Alex Jones and the USFL are out of business.

I assume both of these were at the judge's discretion. Don't tell me the government doesnt pick winners and losers

Quote:

---

When the USFL sued the NFL, the outcomes was that the USFL suffered damages due to the NFLs action. The judgment was for $1. Alex Jones gets hit for $1B.

Both Alex Jones and the USFL are out of business.

I assume both of these were at the judge's discretion. Don't tell me the government doesnt pick winners and losers

---

You assume incorrectly. Neither was the judge's discretion, both were jury verdicts.

Additionally, the jury did not find the USFL suffered damages due to the NFL's monopolistic practices. To the contrary, they found the NFL did not cause the damages the USFL claimed, but the USFL's own mismanagement was the cause of its damages. Hence, the $1 award. (Tripled to $3).

Of course, that has nothing to do with Alex Jones nor the undisputable fact the government routinely picks winners and loser.

BlueTaze said:

---

I'm talking about the size. No justification whatsoever for this monetary judgement. If you got it, let's hear it......?

---

So how does this supposed tyrannical, string pulling government force the jury to come up with such a large judgement? Exactly what is their role in any of this?

The fact is, Jones was sued by a lot of people. The overall judgement is so high because it is the sum of a series of much smaller judgements to many individuals. Those in turn are high because just about any jury is going to come down hard on a snake oil salesman unapologetically ****ting on murdered children and their families to help peddle his crap. They're going to come down even harder when he acts like an ass and doesn't take them or the lawsuits against him seriously.

93MarineHorn said:

---

Elder_LarryII said:

---

Still don't get how his crazy ramblings were illegal , he hurt peoples feelings ? Lol

---

He stepped over the line and slandered people who had their children murdered. It was absolutely despicable.

---

Don't disagree that his actions were despicable. Sseeking to profit from the death of their loved ones is too!

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

The cynical side of me says he did this on purpose, knowing he'd lose anyway and that the amount he could conceivably pay would be capped by his ability to pay it. In other words, intentionally making himself the victim for his viewers.

I think there's a lot more truth to this than people want to admit. If there was some really damning stuff in emails and documents that he didn't want to turn over, it could seriously harm his brand. The bankruptcy is meaningless to Alex Jones. The value is not in the studio and FF&E; the value is in Alex Jones himself, and bankruptcy can't confiscate that. He'll be liquidated, and manage to find enough supporters to front him the cash to start over and keep doing what he does.

Jeeper79 said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

The cynical side of me says he did this on purpose, knowing he'd lose anyway and that the amount he could conceivably pay would be capped by his ability to pay it. In other words, intentionally making himself the victim for his viewers.

---

The even more cynical view on this one is he's got loads of quiet money and backers that instructed him to keep his mouth shut and they'll work it out for Alex rather than have all their dirty laundry and names aired in a public forum for everybody to know.

There's no doubt the lack of defense was absolutely a tactic and not just pure incompetence.

Tango.Mike said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

Between this thread based on feelings for a complete dirtbag who (it seems) thought he was bigger than the law (in the trial) and the "I'd proudly dodge any draft these days" thread, it seems a lot of F16 "conservatives" are just like the liberals they mock. Emotional, make decisions based on feelings rather than logic, care more about looking tough and mocking the other side than the law, and willing to flip for the slightest chance at personal comfort

---

Not sure if that directed at me, but I'm not emotional about this

It just doesn't seem right'

i don't listen to Alex aside from clips that cross my path. His shows don't really interest me


an eleventy billion judgement for an individual just seems ludicrous. Even while putting up no defense

Dunno if he was planning on a more favorable court outlook or slapping the lawsuit away.....or as others have said is this a means to limit the collection ability and what they might recover in bankruptcy liquidation

I dunno

I just feel we are in the realm of the absurd with this sum.

pacecar02 said:

---

Tango.Mike said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

Between this thread based on feelings for a complete dirtbag who (it seems) thought he was bigger than the law (in the trial) and the "I'd proudly dodge any draft these days" thread, it seems a lot of F16 "conservatives" are just like the liberals they mock. Emotional, make decisions based on feelings rather than logic, care more about looking tough and mocking the other side than the law, and willing to flip for the slightest chance at personal comfort

---

Not sure if that directed at me, but I'm not emotional about this

It just doesn't seem right'

i don't listen to Alex aside from clips that cross my path. His shows don't really interest me


an eleventy billion judgement for an individual just seems ludicrous. Even while putting up no defense

Dunno if he was planning on a more favorable court outlook or slapping the lawsuit away.....or as others have said is this a means to limit the collection ability and what they might recover in bankruptcy liquidation

I dunno

I just feel we are in the realm of the absurd with this sum.

---

You aren't emotional about it… yet you ended this post with something that you personally 'feel'.

I'm not saying you are wrong to 'feel' that way either… but it reinforces my point which is Alex put no defense up so yeah… you are absolutely right in that the decision probably was based on more feelings than facts because only one side actually presented facts in both phases on this. And yet again why the amount isn't very interesting in my opinion… because when you boil this down neither the trial process nor damages phase presented anything close to a 2-sided argument. One side presented while the other obfuscated and obstructed.

ATM9000 said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

The cynical side of me says he did this on purpose, knowing he'd lose anyway and that the amount he could conceivably pay would be capped by his ability to pay it. In other words, intentionally making himself the victim for his viewers.

---

The even more cynical view on this one is he's got loads of quiet money and backers that instructed him to keep his mouth shut and they'll work it out for Alex rather than have all their dirty laundry and names aired in a public forum for everybody to know.

There's no doubt the lack of defense was absolutely a tactic and not just pure incompetence.

---

Also wonder if they knew by putting a defense forward he'd have to admit he made it up, just like basically everything else he says, because he knows there are idiots out there who will believe it. And admitting that would mean the end of his business model.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

ATM9000 said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

The cynical side of me says he did this on purpose, knowing he'd lose anyway and that the amount he could conceivably pay would be capped by his ability to pay it. In other words, intentionally making himself the victim for his viewers.

---

The even more cynical view on this one is he's got loads of quiet money and backers that instructed him to keep his mouth shut and they'll work it out for Alex rather than have all their dirty laundry and names aired in a public forum for everybody to know.

There's no doubt the lack of defense was absolutely a tactic and not just pure incompetence.

---

Also wonder if they knew by putting a defense forward he'd have to admit he made it up, just like basically everything else he says, because he knows there are idiots out there who will believe it. And admitting that would mean the end of his business model.

---

I simply have a hard time believing even most of his listeners actually believe what he says or that he makes much money on selling supplements with names like DNA Force or Alpha Brain or whatever but who knows I guess.

There's always a subset of people who are ready and willing to be happily grifted… so there will always be grifters and snake oil salesmen… I doubt him admitting something out of the case would have ruined his reputation with his followers or his business model. Alex is hard to not pay attention to and equal parts not that smart so he was kind of born to do what he does and lead a fringe of true believers in some capacity somewhere.

He's not a conservative.

I'm not even sure he's a conspiracy theorist - because I'm not sure he believes any of it. I think he might just be a very intelligent sociopath who plays to the lowest common denominator in one big act.


That said, he also seems smart enough that he essentially has gotten away with it. Liberals are busy taking a victory lap, meanwhile:

- he hasn't paid one penny to anyone
- he has "spent" 96% of the wealth these folks think they are in line to take
- there is a lot of evidence that dollars he spent will still benefit his future standard of living, I.e. he used the 3 years of legal stalling to protect it via a series of moves
- he's not really silenced at all, and can easily build a new platform to hold onto his followers, but protect the earnings by putting it in others' names


Frankly, I'm having a difficult time seeing what anyone has "won" from him. He's probably picked up more following to monetize from the additional attention and victimhood.

Tango.Mike said:

---

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

Between this thread based on feelings for a complete dirtbag who (it seems) thought he was bigger than the law (in the trial) and the "I'd proudly dodge any draft these days" thread, it seems a lot of F16 "conservatives" are just like the liberals they mock.

Emotional, make decisions based on feelings rather than logic, care more about looking tough and mocking the other side than the law, and willing to flip for the slightest chance at personal comfort

---

The defenses I've seen in this thread alone are truly bizarre. Mental gymnastics of the highest order.

"Alex didn't kill those kids" ... no one said he did

"these parents are just greedy" -- Alex Jones had every chance to defend himself in court and chose not to, and had a default entered against him. He finally did so during the damages phase. He showed no remorse. Mind you, these parents experienced the worst thing imaginable and Jones made their lives an even worse hell by spreading malicious lies about them and the harassment some of them received forced them to move several times. How can anyone in the right mind NOT think these equate to significant damages?

"they are trying to shut down free speech." no they aren't. Free speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism. And defamation is a common cause of action. They won their case in court and are entitled to their damages award. If that means forcing him to liquidate his assets then so be it, that's just how it goes. Suck it up Buttercup.

I absolutely despise Alex Jones, but it would make things a whole lot better if he just admitted he was wrong and apologized for all the pain he caused these families. It's up to them whether they want to forgive him but it's at least the right thing to do.

But he hasn't done that and won't. Instead he plays victim and cries crocodile tears. He got rich off their pain and deserves no sympathy.

What do you consider to be "much" money?

He had $165 million in sales from September 2015 to the end of 2018.

Not exactly chump changes.

Im Gipper said:

---

What do you consider to be "much" money?

He had $165 million in sales from September 2015 to the end of 2018.

Not exactly chump changes.

---

I'll put it another way: I'm not convinced supplement sales is where he gets most of his money from or even if it is actually core to what he does and not an affront to cover contributions much larger to him. It's the only way I can make sense of how much he thumbed his nose at the process knowing how disliked he has to know he is, how vile most people find what he did (particularly in the state of Connecticut) and how bad the worst case scenario could be to his company.

Never underestimate the hubris of an idiot who mistakes celebrity for righteousness. He spent years having his nuts fluffed by his listeners and smelling his own farts, and I'm certain he was confident that a jury would return something far smaller and he would just fight it in court until it was a manageable amount because he doesn't see anything wrong with what he did and vastly overestimated his popularity and support.

peacedude said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

peacedude said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Faustus said:

---

If you take Jones' theory that the parents were all crisis actors then you can say it's basically the government/Deep State bringing the civil suits rather than actual parents.

You can say it on the show anyway.

---

That is certainly the kind of circular logic he and his followers would subscribe to...

---

Jones won his 1st Amendment case. Just thought you should know.

---

This was never about the first amendment. That's why he's liquidating everything he has to pay off all the lawsuits he lost. Just thought you should know.

---

What monies does he owe, now? It was always about defamation, which was just thrown out.

They won the court battle. 1+1 = 2.

ETA: Now they're talking about being in business for 3-4 more months. Tucker was awesome today, saying he'd also be a donor to keep the operation alive.

---

Oh look... Turns out he didn't win **** and Infowars is going on the chopping block to get auctioned off in November. Womp womp!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna172586

Remember when conservatives believed whatever Jones would say, and defend him when accused? I do.

https://www.infowars.com/show/

Think I may buy a really patriotic tshirt from Alex.

Opalka said:

---

Remember when conservatives believed whatever Jones would say, and defend him when accused? I do.

---

I did not believe the blowhard like a plethora of others. Try again.

He is and will be a fat mouthed loon. Same as the Democrats.

I hope he stays around and just keeps turning off more and more folks to the corrupted, cancer ridden form of whatever right wing nonsense he peddles. That may be our best chance to get back to true conservatism. He draws flies to him like the steaming pile of diarrhea that he is.

AgDev01 said:

---

This board loves to throw out the phrases play stupid games and FAFO, well that is exactly what he did. The judgment was so high because he flouted the legal process every step of the way.

Why do you feel compelled to defend him when he didn't even care to defend himself?

---

Imagine expecting consistency from the, "It's (D)ifferent," crowd.

But I read Jones won the defamation case. Was that not true?????? lol

Opalka said:

---

Remember when conservatives believed whatever Jones would say, and defend him when accused? I do.

---

Remember when the Democrats represented the middle class working voters and didn't *elect a woman that had to suck a lot of D to get to the top? I do.

Oh joy: leftists celebrating again a miscarriage of justice because team sports trump principles. Must be another day that ends in "y."

(And yet again: I'd be fine with Jones paying a proportional libel penalty following an above-the-board trial - as would befit "Justice"… but the way he was treated should concern everyone on BOTH sides of the aisle.)

93MarineHorn said:

---

Elder_LarryII said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Elder_LarryII said:

---

Still don't get how his crazy ramblings were illegal , he hurt peoples feelings ? Lol

---

He stepped over the line and slandered people who had their children murdered. It was absolutely despicable.

---

Over whose line exactly ? Who makes that decision

---

He accused the families of perpetuating a hoax and that they were "crisis actors" regarding the Sandy Hook shooting. It's defamation. Do you disagree?

---

Joe Biden said I (the unvaccinated) was/were guilty of killing people for being unvaccinated when do I get to sue Joe Biden for perpetuating the "covid vaccine is working" myth? Is this not defamation?

Something like The winter of death……… something something.

Lol if Elon buys it

I have the opportunity to do the funniest possible thing

Should I? https://t.co/rZjr0nAU07

— Elon Musk (Parody) (@ElonMuskAOC) September 25, 2024

So is Elon saying he will buy it and give it back to Jones?

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

So is Elon saying he will buy it and give it back to Jones?

---

Parody account

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

Oh joy: leftists celebrating again a miscarriage of justice because team sports trump principles. Must be another day that ends in "y."

(And yet again: I'd be fine with Jones paying a proportional libel penalty following an above-the-board trial - as would befit "Justice"… but the way he was treated should concern everyone on BOTH sides of the aisle.)

---

How was he "mistreated"? He got his day in court and chose not to show up. He decided to lose and put his fortunes in the hands of a jury that he also decided to piss off.