251–260 of 360 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_s...
In that section of the Wikipedia article, his name is not mentioned once... what is your point?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/us/politics/sandy-hook-ho...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you saying stochastic terrorism should be legal?
It's a made up concept of very recent vintage, invented to win an election. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=%... I don't think stochastic terrorism should be legal or illegal, I think it's a useless concept we were doing fine without.
1) Alex Jones was famous long before his Sandy Hook crap.
2) I don't know how you could call him "conservative" when, during the Bush years, he was a vocal anti war person who claimed that 9/11 was an inside job that was being used as a pretext for war.
3) Anti authoritarian, maybe?
4) Actually there are chemicals in the water that are disrupting hormones (turning the frogs "gay"): https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/ind...
5) He recanted the Sandy Hook claims as early as 2019.
Alex Jones is absolutely nuts. There should be punishment for what he has done to these Sandy Hook families.
That said: I hope people are just as happy when Kyle Rittenhouse receives a few 10s of millions of dollars from every news agency which slandered him (knowingly) as well. Otherwise this does feel like weaponizing the courts, which is concerning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> gpm: The law is explicit in this case that the attorney client privilege is waived by the attorney not asserting it within 10 days > Please cite what you are referring to. So you're misunderstand a number of things here. First, to specifically clear up one explicit part of the law here for you, this is a state case not federal under Texas rules. The specific one here is Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 193.3 […
That clears up what you're referring to, but we're talking past each other here. I'm not saying the information that he needed to disclose was protected, I'm saying the rest of the information on the phone that was leaked that wasn't relevant to the case was protected and can/should not be used in another investigation.
No, you're just stubbornly wrong at this point.
>I'm saying the rest of the information on the phone that was leaked that wasn't relevant to the case was protected and can/should not be used in another investigation.
No, it's not. I cited the law on it. They have waived any privilege over any of that, it's not protected at all anymore it's free and clear for the plaintiff's attorneys, and in turn they can be subpoena'd by any other investigative effort same as any other 3rd party. Jones and his attorneys completely and utterly blew it. That's the law. Maybe you think the time limit in Texas should be two weeks or two months or there shouldn't be one, but that's not the rules and it is literally the job of lawyers to know and follow the rules in the courts they practice in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People should be able to monetize lies. What? No. > And people should be able to say things about people or companies that might cause a crazy person to do something crazy. Yeah sure, but that's not the issue here. > If the parents of Sandy Hook were harassed then the issue here is surely the harassers? False dilemma. > The reason I worry about this is because if I believe someone is doing something evil does that…
Thanks for the detailed reply. I'm kind of shocked that so many people agree with this so it's really helpful to better understand peoples perspectives on this. I think part of the issue here is probably that we hold different views in regards to freedom of speech, and my mine are admittedly quite extreme. I disagree with libel laws, for example. I don't believe anyone has a right to a reputation, but I do think they…
Defamation is actually very hard to prove. News organizations have been hit for defamation before but they typically don’t report in a way that they make factual claims they can’t prove. That’s why you often see news call politicians lies “incorrect statements” rather than lies.
Now, Jones elected to not comply with discovery and, as a result, defaulted on his lawsuit. Therefore we don’t know if he would have been found liable for defamation had he made a good faith effort to comply with the court. But we do know that the Sandy Hook conspiracy theories were lies, and we have good reason to believe Alex knew or suspected that based on his own statements and evidence produced during the depositions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is an important point. Many of us here live in cities, but in rural America there is a stunning amount of people who really believe that Joe Biden lost the 2020 election and that there was a massive, coordinated campaign of voter fraud. In many dominantly red states, this is not considered a fringe conspiracy theory but more or less generally accepted as fact.
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ah ok... so if I say something, and someone else does something because they think they should, I am responsible for it If you deliberately keep spreading a lie to profit from it, you should be held responsible IMO.
> Karupan - If you deliberately keep spreading a lie to profit from it, you should be held responsible IMO. By that definition, this should apply to Santa Claus story tellers and the Church? Can I sue them for poisoning the life of my kids? They are teaching kids that lying is ok, after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you divide it by 20 before multiplying by 365, which is a charitable read to say the least, it would still be an insane amount of money.
Keep in mind this is Revenue for a 50-75 person company. Some of his employees will be payed quite well. If they make 100k, the actual employee costs might be closer to 150k after all the government dues. So his employee costs alone could be around 10 million. And if his pills really are sourced from the top manufacturer, then his claim of 20% profit margin of "food" might be correct too.
I also think it's unreasonable to say that in a 50 person company that sells junk and makes YouTube videos that the median salary would be 100k. And even if it was, 50 * 150k is $7.5 million, not "around 10 million". The difference is significant considering we're talking about a $2m fine.
Actually, no, the jury verdict on punitive damages is $45.2 million, but that is certain to be reduced before Jones is ordered to pay (there seems to be some dispute over whether a portion of the compensatory damages award is economic or not, and depending on the answer on that, the cap under Texas statutory punitive damages caps would seem to be somewhere between $750k and $1m; even if the plaintiffs succeed in thei…
Sure, the judge gets final say but they rarely change these things unless the jury awards something ridiculous like a billion dollars for a broken bone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind this is Revenue for a 50-75 person company. Some of his employees will be payed quite well. If they make 100k, the actual employee costs might be closer to 150k after all the government dues. So his employee costs alone could be around 10 million. And if his pills really are sourced from the top manufacturer, then his claim of 20% profit margin of "food" might be correct too.
What's the source for the amount of employees? I couldn't find anything about that, let alone specifically 50 or 75. I also think it's unreasonable to say that in a 50 person company that sells junk and makes YouTube videos that the median salary would be 100k. And even if it was, 50 * 150k is $7.5 million, not "around 10 million". The difference is significant considering we're talking about a $2m fine.