Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#471

Post by loeg »

jancsika wrote: post #455
hbn wrote: post #188

Jones seems like a nut, but the way he's being taken to the cleaners and sued for comical amounts of money are just absurd. I'm not being hyperbolic saying people would be less mad at him if he had done the shooting himself. And it's especially rich in a time where the most popular podcast genre is women commenting on brutal murder cases as they're fresh and being investigated, and throwing out their pet theories abo…

> Jones seems like a nut, but the way he's being taken to the cleaners and sued for comical amounts of money are just absurd. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is the Jones/Sandy Hook case-- like the Fox/Dominion case-- was an outlier because there is nearly never that amount of evidence to be able to pass the high bar for defamation. So I think it's the other way around-- Jones was comically brazen in the claim…

Jones was also completely hostile to the courts and legal process. That will get you a larger punishment than someone who did the same actions but respected the court.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#472

Post by Nathanba »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #443
roenxi wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that is terrible, I don't know if you can argue it is terrible to the tune of what they've done to Jones. Every major media outlet has some instances of, effectively, targeted harassment in their history. Whether the public endorses that harassment is more a question of how effective the reporters are than anything else. It makes sense that Jones would lose the case, but the scale of the judgements was eye wate…

He's been ignoring the courts. I don't know what you want them to do? I guess they could put him in prison, but I'm guessing that would be considered harsh too. Again, for the 2nd time, its not what he's done, it's that he's ignoring everyone telling him to stop, including the government. I don't know what you expect the punishment for that to be. If it were you or I we would have had our asses dragged into prison a…

[flagged]

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#473

Post by dublin »

kiba wrote: post #199
logicchains wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you’re a deliberate liar who provably lies to profit and harm others, you can and should be punished. The first amendment absolutely gives you the right to lie, and the right to profit from that lying if you're not explicitly committing fraud or defaming anyone. You may disagree with it, but that's what the law is.

Defamation is basically lying about someone to damage their reputation. So I don't think that the first amendment gives you the right to lie? Also, doctors and lawyers are subjected to discipline by their respective guild. So even if it's your right to say bullshit, you might lose your job and license. Arguably, there's no to little consequence of being a nobody and lying about something like autism and vaccine. It's…

Yeah, that self-policing guild discipline by doctors and lawyers has really worked out well, hasn't it?

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#474

Post by pdpi »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #414
pdpi wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Put simply, the internet is wrong. FUAC's offer was all cash. The Onion offered less cash, but offered other incentives (AIUI, a share of whatever revenue they make from Infowars in the future). Saying that The Onion's bid was lower requires you to put a dollar value on those other incentives. The fact that the two creditors (read: victims' families) that would benefit from those incentives were willing to sacrifice…

The idea that Global Tetrahedron would generate revenue from InfoWars is a farce. Jones is InfoWars. Any market value assigned to InfoWars without Jones explicitly involvement is a farce. Even a non bankruptcy sale of InfoWars would require him to participate in the business for an extended period of time. Even then, it'd just be some investor bankrolling Jones.

That might or might not be true. If Infowars is _that_ worthless without Jones, then _any_ offer is a farce and the whole auction is pointless.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#475

Post by Nathanba »

jancsika wrote: post #455
hbn wrote: post #188

Jones seems like a nut, but the way he's being taken to the cleaners and sued for comical amounts of money are just absurd. I'm not being hyperbolic saying people would be less mad at him if he had done the shooting himself. And it's especially rich in a time where the most popular podcast genre is women commenting on brutal murder cases as they're fresh and being investigated, and throwing out their pet theories abo…

> Jones seems like a nut, but the way he's being taken to the cleaners and sued for comical amounts of money are just absurd. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is the Jones/Sandy Hook case-- like the Fox/Dominion case-- was an outlier because there is nearly never that amount of evidence to be able to pass the high bar for defamation. So I think it's the other way around-- Jones was comically brazen in the claim…

I watched some of his videos at the time and to me it seemed mostly like the exact same content that he always does. Very much not brazen claims of facts, just musing and speculating that it's all fake and the parents are smiling so they might be actors. That's it. And the entire time he was emphasizing that he doesn't know for sure and it's all theory.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#476

Post by zer8k »

latexr wrote: post #439
pookha wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're stretching it. In the US the government can't arrest for causing offense to someone specifically because of the 1st amendment...You can get sued for libel (very high bar and it's notoriously difficult in the US) but you're not going to be rounded up and put into a corrections facility for being offensive. This is the perfect illustration of the first amendment in the US vs the UK. In the UK a violent Maoist (r…

> for being offensive. The Sandy Hook parents received death threats for years because of him. That’s not “being offensive”, it’s tormenting people and putting their lives in peril. https://archive.ph/20221013141353/https://www.nytimes.com/20...

[flagged]

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#477

Post by judge2020 »

Nathanba wrote: post #472
bcrosby95 wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's been ignoring the courts. I don't know what you want them to do? I guess they could put him in prison, but I'm guessing that would be considered harsh too. Again, for the 2nd time, its not what he's done, it's that he's ignoring everyone telling him to stop, including the government. I don't know what you expect the punishment for that to be. If it were you or I we would have had our asses dragged into prison a…

[flagged]

There are countless documents showing his contempt of court, failure to produce discovery, etc.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#478

Post by mrguyorama »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #190
yapyap wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem with vigilanate justice is not that it doesn’t work, it’s very effective. The problem is that the vigilante might not have the right version of justice

A worked example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Years_of_Lead_(Italy)

A better example in the US is the thousands of innocent black men who have been hanged from a tree because "everyone knows they did it"

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#479

Post by mportela »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #346
ternnoburn wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking the man's source of income is absolutely a way to get paid. He can work a day job like anyone else.

No, it's not. He will not be paying that. He might have paid a smaller yet still large amount, but he's certainly not going to work in McDonalds to pay off $1 billion dollars. He has the same legal rights as anyone else to not be a debt slave.

It's called garnishment [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnishment

Post reply on HN