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

The Onion to Take over InfoWars

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 297 posts

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#141

Post by pie_flavor »

cogman10 wrote: post #136
pie_flavor wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context is that Jones blew up the court process every chance he got, setting a new record for contempt fining. The most important piece was refusing to comply with discovery (his lawyer was so bad-behaved here he ended up with a disciplinary suspension). As a result Jones received a default judgement, i.e. the plaintiffs win by default and he doesn't get to argue his case. This also means the plaintiffs get every…

Just a few (minor) corrections > his lawyer was so bad-behaved here he ended up with a disciplinary suspension Jones had multiple lawyers throughout the process. That was in fact a big part of the problem that ended up getting him defaulted. Free speech systems (his company) do a depo with one set of lawyers that didn't comply comply with the judges orders, they'd go in unprepared and give the "I'm so sorry I'm brand…

Re pt 3, says here he entirely declined to put on a defense during that part. https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/plaintiffs-attorne...

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#142

Post by cogman10 »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #122
austin-cheney wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absurdly large and deliberately so. First of all this was a class action suit representing 22 plaintiffs. Secondly, the number was large to punish the defendant for continuously disrespecting the count with bad repeated behavior. Third, there was no defense because the defendant failed to work with the court resulting in a summary judgment.

>deliberately so I’m not entertained that the court is playing an unrealistic and hyberbolic game. I know, I’m a weirdo that wants to see realism and pragmatism in the court systems even if the defendant is a real asshole.

> I’m not entertained that the court is playing an unrealistic and hyberbolic game.

They did not. Jones was given years and dozens of opportunities to comply. He defaulted in 2 cases because he failed to comply in both cases. He was also defaulted after being warned he'd be defaulted. The cases literally started in 2018 and resolved in 2022. The reason they dragged out for so long is primarily due to Jones not complying with court orders. Constantly having to retake depositions where the same incomplete and non-compliant answers were given.

And he appealed (and lost) the appeal for the default.

Multiple judges saw his default and concluded "This was a reasonable way to handle an unreasonable litigant".

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#143

Post by afavour »

z2 wrote: post #121
guzfip wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A digital platform where, every day, visitors sacrifice themselves at altars of delusion and misery, their minds fully disintegrating on contact. Zuckerberg already did it.

No joke, I use Facebook every year or so to access the marketplace and at the time my feed was roughly half rage-bait, and the other half being what I can only describe as AI-generated almost-pornography. Both had thousands of what looked like genuinely real interactions per post, mostly from developing country users.

I'm loathe to defend Facebook but most people's experience is not yours. The algorithm pushes content you're most likely to engage with, in your case it has nothing to go on so probably pushes whatever causes the most reaction in general.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#144

Post by declan_roberts »

noirscape wrote: post #71
mikeodds wrote: post #25

Maybe I’m out of touch, but doesn’t a $1.4b dollar settlement for this seem rather… large?

Besides Jones and his lawyer absolutely botching his defense and basically giving up the case (and pissing off the courts as I understand it, which is a bad fucking idea and usually also leads to larger fines), the $1.4 billion is just what Jones managed to rack it up to before entering bankruptcy proceedings, which froze his debt collectors out for a bit. Alongside the class action, Jones was iirc also facing severa…

Jones lawyers were so bad that part of me believes they intentionally sabotaged him. His lawyers (or an assistant on the team) sent an image of his cell phone data to the prosecuting attorneys on accident, which means 2 years of his text messages were used against him. His lawyers could have taken it back but failed. It's insane how this trial went down.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#146

Post by declan_roberts »

cogman10 wrote: post #142
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>deliberately so I’m not entertained that the court is playing an unrealistic and hyberbolic game. I know, I’m a weirdo that wants to see realism and pragmatism in the court systems even if the defendant is a real asshole.

> I’m not entertained that the court is playing an unrealistic and hyberbolic game. They did not. Jones was given years and dozens of opportunities to comply. He defaulted in 2 cases because he failed to comply in both cases. He was also defaulted after being warned he'd be defaulted. The cases literally started in 2018 and resolved in 2022. The reason they dragged out for so long is primarily due to Jones not comply…

His lawyers were terrible. Nobody arguing otherwise on that point. Jones wasn't personally directing the legal strategy, he was doing the same thing you'd do.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#147

Post by actionfromafar »

afavour wrote: post #143
z2 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No joke, I use Facebook every year or so to access the marketplace and at the time my feed was roughly half rage-bait, and the other half being what I can only describe as AI-generated almost-pornography. Both had thousands of what looked like genuinely real interactions per post, mostly from developing country users.

I'm loathe to defend Facebook but most people's experience is not yours. The algorithm pushes content you're most likely to engage with, in your case it has nothing to go on so probably pushes whatever causes the most reaction in general.

Not sure that is defending.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#148

Post by declan_roberts »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #131
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>deliberately so I’m not entertained that the court is playing an unrealistic and hyberbolic game. I know, I’m a weirdo that wants to see realism and pragmatism in the court systems even if the defendant is a real asshole.

What do you feel would be an outcome to this situation that aligns to the realism and pragmatism you believe the court system should have? All of the threads related to this topic have had a pile of folks going "the amount was too much!" but hardly any of them say what they think an appropriate punishment would look like...

The "punishment" keeps appearing in this thread and I think that is what explains the eye popping settlement.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#149

Post by declan_roberts »

Zak wrote: post #82
mikeodds wrote: post #25

Maybe I’m out of touch, but doesn’t a $1.4b dollar settlement for this seem rather… large?

Yes, at first. If it was a typical defamation case based on a single incident or short pattern of conduct, and if Jones behaved like a typical defendant, hiring a competent lawyer and mostly complying with court orders, the judgment would have been a few million dollars. That's not what happened. Instead, Jones repeatedly failed to comply with court orders and attempted to delay the trial. He lied under oath, broadca…

If he did something criminal then there's a code of law that provides a remedy to that. As far as I know that's not what happened here.

Because what he did wasn't criminal, many people wanted a maximal civil settlement in substitution.

Re: The Onion to Take over InfoWars

#150

Post by cogman10 »

pie_flavor wrote: post #141
cogman10 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a few (minor) corrections > his lawyer was so bad-behaved here he ended up with a disciplinary suspension Jones had multiple lawyers throughout the process. That was in fact a big part of the problem that ended up getting him defaulted. Free speech systems (his company) do a depo with one set of lawyers that didn't comply comply with the judges orders, they'd go in unprepared and give the "I'm so sorry I'm brand…

Re pt 3, says here he entirely declined to put on a defense during that part. https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/plaintiffs-attorne...

I guess I find that a bit misleading.

His lawyers in CT didn't call witnesses but they did cross examine the plaintiffs witnesses. In the TX case they did have AJ take the stand for his own defense, the "Perry Mason" moment was during the cross examination which I'm sure he didn't want to repeat in CT.

That said, his CT lawyer was REALLY bad, far worse than his TX lawyer who famously gave away a copy of his phone by mistake.

Post reply on HN