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

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#871

Post by Retric »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #297
ThrustVectoring wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't have a judgement of ownership in infowars they have a debt and the court is forcing Alex to sell all assets to cover the debt. It's a chapter 7 bankruptcy, the bankruptcy estate already owns the infowars assets. > There are rules around this process for a reason. If you allowed someone who has a debt judgement to just take over a company what is it's true value. Alex could try to value infowars at a tril…

"Cash to minority creditors" doesn't matter. "Cash to the estate" is all that matters. The Onion's offer carried $1.75 million in cash to the creditors. Alex Jones's vitamin company offered $3.5 million in cash.

Onions offer was 1.75 million in cash and one party forgiving the estate enough money for the minority creditors to be better off. Which mathematically requires the offer to be worth more than 3.5 million in cash to his estate.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#872

Post by [deleted] »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #851
weberer wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here's the statement from Jones: https://x.com/realalexjones/status/1866752494317003142

I must ask - does Mr Jones really sound like that - as if loud throat is getting hammered while functioning perfectly fine and loud and fast and at the same time pressing hard voice breaks, or is it some kind of voice modulation? Also, @RealAlexJones says "EXCLUSIVE: Alex Jones Responds Live On Air" → is this about two separate Alex Jones, or the same Mr Jones is talking about himself in the 3rd person?

[deleted]

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#873

Post by abduhl »

throw16180339 wrote: post #792
cogman10 wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is quite wild and frankly just shocking. The hearings in the last 2 days seemed to have Lopez agreeing with the creditors and not Jone's FUAC. Yet, somewhat seemingly out of the blue, he decided to deny the sale. What's even more crazy about this ruling is he's told the trustee to come up with an alternative solution, that doesn't involve a new auction... But like no other guidance. That leaves the Trustee in a we…

Judge Lopez was appointed by Trump, so I'd assume that he's acting under instructions. Why would Trump have appointed a judge who wouldn't do favors for him?

As I understand it, bankruptcy judges are not appointed by the president but rather by the relevant Court of Appeals. And they do not serve for life (because they aren’t Article III judges).

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#874

Post by im3w1l »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #561
im3w1l wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chemicals in the water turning the frogs gay is an actual thing though. E.g. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3280221/ https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1501065112 https://news.berkeley.edu/2010/03/01/frogs/ However https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/frogs-rev... but, > The findings in no way exonerate pollutants like the widely used herbicide atrazine, scientists caution.

I don't see anything in those articles about gay frogs. Trans frogs, sure, but sex and sexual orientation are different.

The correct term is intersex, but whatever. But in addition

> EE2 exposure at all concentrations lowered male sexual arousal, indicated by decreased proportions of advertisement calls and increased proportions of the call type rasping, which characterizes a sexually unaroused state of a male.

So the males also became uninterested in sex with females. Given that I think you must be really nitpicking to find fault with what he said.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#875

Post by thfuran »

Pxtl wrote: post #633
dnissley wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear I haven't seen a single comment that could be charitably characterized as "supporting Alex Jones". I see a lot of comments that are pointing out that the judgment against him seems unreasonable given the damage he did to these families.

Torts are not just about damage, they're also about deterrence. Jones repeatedly demonstrated in the court battle that no deterrence would work on him. His entire business is built on this kind of defamation -- how much proceeds of this kind of business should he be allowed to keep?

About -200% seems fair to me.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#876

Post by owlmirror »

globalnode wrote: post #854
krisoft wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The hearings in the last 2 days seemed to have Lopez agreeing with the creditors and not Jone's FUAC. Yet, somewhat seemingly out of the blue, he decided to deny the sale. This is actualy quite common with judges. Or so i heard from Popehat who is a practicing lawyer. What is going on is that the judge is feeling that one side is making a stronger argument, in their opinion, and they then tend to give more procedur…

So quite often judges make their decisions based on "feels" and then go out of their way to be nice to the other party so they don't appear biased. You can imagine the poor self representing party that has a strong case but is automatically disliked by the judge for not playing the game properly and basically has no chance.

I think you misunderstood. It is not based on "feel" and the greater procedural leeway they provide the party with the perceived or actual weaker argument is not for appearance sake alone. A judge wants both parties to make their best case and if one party fails to do so, they try to help them along to achieve it.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#877

Post by wds »

norlygfyd wrote: post #779
bhouston wrote: post #114

Remember that this was made possible by the intervention of Elon Musk. I suspect he may end up buying the assets himself or someone in this circle.

This was not made possible by the intervention of Musk. If you're referring to the X Corp objection, this has absolutely nothing to do with that.

If you say so.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#878

Post by lesuorac »

slavboj wrote: post #869
dtquad wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Infowars and Alex Jones have some fanatic followers. It should be investigated if the judge has been threatened to come to this conclusion.

You might be surprised to discover that federal judges are extremely not shy about bringing up threats to their safety that involve litigants before them.

Wasn't there some famous case in NY where a business man had to be sanctioned ~10 times before he stopped trying to get death threats against the judges family?

I don't really doubt that judges would bring something up to litigants but I do really doubt the bar would actually do something.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#879

Post by lesuorac »

kypro wrote: post #775
Eextra953 wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shocking to me too. I can't understand how people are 'both sides-ing' this or just supporting him under some free speech argument. Free speech has limits and a court found Jones went too far and that cost him his business.

People have been arguing the same bogus free speech point in the UK recently because people have been arrested for saying things that are anti-immigration and offensive online. People have free speech, but obviously that doesn't mean you are free to say things that could be considered hateful or factually untrue. If you go around tweeting hateful things about the Royal family and the courts find you guilty, don't be…

It's really Alex Jones was alleged to pay people to harass Sandy Hook families at all hours of the day. He then proceeded to lie in court and after it become known refused to continue to participate and had a default judgement entered against him.

If I were to follow you around 24/7 for weeks shouting into a microphone is that not illegal?

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#880

Post by lesuorac »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #859
vizzier wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but Fox Settled the dominion lawsuit for $725M [1]. So this type of harassment means big judgments against you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Voting_Systems_v._Fox...

You can see dominion machines hacked live at DEFCON voting village.

Which wasn't the statements made by employees of Fox News. Perhaps if they had made such a statement they wouldn't have paid out several tons of money.
Post reply on HN