921–930 of 1001 posts
The amount of folks here supporting Alex Jones is completely shocking to me. He built a business out of attacking and re-victimizing parents whose children were murdered. He's scum of the earth. That business was taken away from him, and folks think that's too much? What the actual fuck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You can only do something nonstandard if all creditors agree. As far as this NYT story goes, they all did agree. It's AJ's lawyer who intervened.
Even if they all did agree, which I don't believe, someone might want to buy the business for a fair price using real cash. That counts for more than fantasy debt that is going away anyway. These processes exist for legitimate reasons no matter how you feel about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what would be the consequences of not honoring these, "instructions"? Oh, nothing?
There are absolutely social, political, and economic consequences. Those in the political class don’t exist in a separate bubble from each other. There are natural consequences for breaking from the party line, especially on the right, which demands complete fealty. Natural consequences might be that the judge and their family no longer get to go to the yacht extravagant social gatherings, their kids may no longer ha…
Real or hypothetical? Still don't see any evidence. FYI it is this kind of posting that goes nowhere, that helped re-elect Trump. People are tired of it and the gaslighting. Hope this helps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bankruptcy is not a punishment, neither is having to pay damages. His business wasn't about the exercise of first amendment rights, it was about selling supplements and whatnot.
Default judgments are a punishment. Your right to sell things derives from the first amendment.
Commerce is constitutionally regulated in another way, by article I of the US constitution having a commerce clause allowing regulation, which, for example, is the basis of drug prohibition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d agree re bankruptcy but can you discern between your use of damages (which you say is not a punishment) and fines (which you say are a punishment?
One is payed to the state, the other to another person, as in one regulates the relation to the state, the other the relation to another person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this some kind of joke I'm not getting? Prison and fines are punishments, having to pay damages is not. When you can't afford to pay your debts, bankruptcy is not a punishment, it's a process to clear out the debts so both debtor and creditors can move on. Punishment regulates the relation between a person and the state and is a part of criminal law, paying damages is part of civil law.
The Sandy Hook families have literally been awarded punitive damages. Their point is literally punishment. That is why punitive damages exist in civil law. It's what the word punitive means.
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?
I am also confused on why it took a whole month for them to reject the sale when it seems to have been accepted for weeks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is exactly what he built his business on - attacking people with bald face lies and using the generated outrage to sell snake oil.
> He built a business out of attacking and re-victimizing *parents whose children were murdered.* He's scum of the earth. > attacking *people* with bald face lies and using the generated outrage to sell snake oil. You made a specific claim, were refuted because that specific claim is clearly false, and now you've made a general claim while presenting it as if it's the same as the specific claim. This is not intellect…
I think it's intellectually dishonest to suggest Jones faced consequences because of one bad action. I have stronger words for it honestly but I'm trying to stick to the rules of this forum.
This whole thread only shows me it's time for me to leave HN. You're welcome to it.