No one said anything you’re rambling about. Go back to your original post and read through to refresh your memory.
No one said anything you’re rambling about. Go back to your original post and read through to refresh your memory.
This will never not be weird as hell. Laughing before a press conference where you then start up the tears on cue? When have you ever seen that?
Are you f'ing serious? Dude is a f'ing wreck - your emotions would be all over the place.
I went to a funeral for a kid who was killed in a car accident. The mom laughed about something and then instantly burst into tears. It wasn't weird. It was normal.I have never seen someone laughing after losing a kid. That's insane. I don't know a single parent that would even be able to muster a smile after losing a kid.
Obviously the murders happened. But this is weird as shit.
That's fine. I've never seen that. You have. I haven't. Every experience I have had, it wasn't remotely like that.I went to a funeral for a kid who was killed in a car accident. The mom laughed about something and then instantly burst into tears. It wasn't weird. It was normal.
I have never seen someone laughing after losing a kid. That's insane. I don't know a single parent that would even be able to muster a smile after losing a kid.
Obviously the murders happened. But this is weird as shit.
I have never seen someone laughing after losing a kid. That's insane. I don't know a single parent that would even be able to muster a smile after losing a kid.
Obviously the murders happened. But this is weird as shit.
What am I arguing? I'm saying this is a weird AF thing to do as a grieving parent which I have never seen occur. It's pretty simple. You think my reaction to finding this being weird is the issue not the guy who was laughing but then as soon as he gets the nod for the cameras, shifts gears immediately?
Why this upsets you all so much is ridiculous. No one got in the way of the big leftist circle jerk in here. It's a relevant thing to post to the topic. Don't like it, don't read it, dude. I didn't @ you.
I'd say my post about Nole was spot on. Saw it a mile away with his rant trying to make the folks he likes victims of some sort of ongoing plot. Using Alex Jones talking points to attack the father of a slain child to say he's "insane" and "weird" is again, a choice I suppose.
I mean, all you can do is laugh and ask, "what tf is wrong with people?"
Did he yell "fire" in a crowded theater? It's astonishing how the Left misunderstands that cliche, which is no longer binding precedent, anyway, though it's not recommended to yell it in the theater unless there really is a fire. With that said, Jones was civilly liable and not criminally prosecuted, so there's a different free speech analysis.If I yell “fire!” in a movie theater, is that free speech?
There are limits to free speech. The astonishing thing is that is now your faction that wants to expand the limits. We literally have a candidate for VP who insists that "hate speech" and "Misinformation" are unprotected by the 1st Amendment. That's astonishing. Let me give an example of what is NOT protected- a bomb threat. Your own example probably would NOT result in charges, unless it caused a public panic (not because it's necessarily 1st Amendment protected, but because the police don't always arrest every idiot who acts out), but it would cause your ass to be ejected from the game.I tell you what, bub. I'll indulge is this ridiculousness. There are clearly limits to free speech, whether you acknowledge them or not. As noted, slander and libel laws are also real.
But regardless of that, go to a football game. Stand on your seat. Yell "HE'S GOT A GUN!" And see if you don't get charged.
Then argue there are no limits to free speech.
The first amendment applies to state action. There are many ways someone can get sued for engaging in “misinformation”. For example, if I do a business deal with you and you lie to me about a critical term in order to get me to do the deal, I can sue you for fraud in the inducement. As you pointed out, the Alex Jones case was a civil case so I’m not sure how this topic came up.There are limits to free speech. The astonishing thing is that is now your faction that wants to expand the limits. We literally have a candidate for VP who insists that "hate speech" and "Misinformation" are unprotected by the 1st Amendment. That's astonishing. Let me give an example of what is NOT protected- a bomb threat. Your own example probably would NOT result in charges, unless it caused a public panic (not because it's necessarily 1st Amendment protected, but because the police don't always arrest every idiot who acts out), but it would cause your ass to be ejected from the game.
So, here's an example of what IS protected - "Misinformation".
Yep. He said that jets would crash into the twin towers in 2001 and they would blame Osama Bin Laden..... and he said it mulitple times early in 2001. Who would believe that guy.Sad thing is, dude actually doesn't believe anything he screams about. In today's world, the loudest voice with the most absurd opinions get the most attention. Unfortunately, there are millions who want to believe in someone and they gravitate to the loud person who says crazy things. I get playing to your base but it'd be hard to live with myself after spreading a conspiracy about a school shooting and students being crisis actors as parents of dead children from that shooting are asking me to stop. Whatever a soul actually is, Alex Jones doesn't have one.
Have you gone back and read half the post you made in the political thread? Dude... You could be sued for billions.If your entire empire is based on lies, it will eventually crumble and no one will feel sorry for you. Jones knew what he was doing, caused further emotional pain, and I believe I once read that some of his listeners began harassing those who lost children in the shooting.
On the Paddock, posters will occasionally talk of karma or evil; of the world not being what it used to be. Alex Jones and his obvious lies are apart of that. The most pathetic part of it might be that so many went along with it. Along the way, an idea rose that if you didn't question literally everything good and bad, you were deemed a sheep and a follower. A shooting wasn't a shooting anymore, it was a false flag and a ruse for a larger, more sinister goal. Meanwhile, his listeners became the sheep, and he their leader.
That trial was so rigged it was joke. The judge told him he wasn't even allowed to say he didn't do what they accused him of.Jones was sued for defamation because he had claimed that the Sandy Hook family members were not really victims but were actors. He didn't defend the case and a default judgment was entered. The vast majority of the award was punitive damages.
Yelling fire in a crowded theater is totally different because it is not defamation.
Did you actually look into the case? The judge found him in contempt because he couldn't provide evidence that he did what the government accused him of. I'm not saying some level of damage was suffered by the families but the court literally put the FBI agent on the stand to identify him by name in order for him to be able to sue. It was such a punitive trial that any lawyer should be offended. They want to treat him worse than the actual killer.The first amendment applies to state action. There are many ways someone can get sued for engaging in “misinformation”. For example, if I do a business deal with you and you lie to me about a critical term in order to get me to do the deal, I can sue you for fraud in the inducement. As you pointed out, the Alex Jones case was a civil case so I’m not sure how this topic came up.
I don’t think you understand the court system. He refused to comply with discovery requests and resulting court orders compelling him to produce documents. The court sanctioned him by entering a default. Why didn’t he participate in discovery as any litigant is required to do?Did you actually look into the case? The judge found him in contempt because he couldn't provide evidence that he did what the government accused him of. I'm not saying some level of damage was suffered by the families but the court literally put the FBI agent on the stand to identify him by name in order for him to be able to sue. It was such a punitive trial that any lawyer should be offended. They want to treat him worse than the actual killer.
You cannot act like a $1B judgment is normal. It's not. That's an activist type judgment.I don’t think you understand the court system. He refused to comply with discovery requests and resulting court orders compelling him to produce documents. The court sanctioned him by entering a default. Why didn’t he participate in discovery as any litigant is required to do?
I’m not sure why I’m even trying to explain that though because if you’re defending Alex Jones you’re not going to listen to any rational explanation.
It’s also not normal for an individual to intentionally spread lies about victims of an awful crime in order to drive traffic to their website and earn millions annually.You cannot act like a $1B judgment is normal. It's not. That's an activist type judgment.
I'm not an AJ fan but it's rich hearing the "Don't you have a heart?" type stuff from the left as they do not bat an eye that their supported party is intentionally importing rapists and murderers that are killing and hurting Americans. Thousands of Americans are losing their kid to evil savagery because a political party craves power through imported demographics.
Dore, you're so FOS and one of the most pompous pricks on this site.
Jones' biggest sin is that he isn't a Democrat. If he was a Democrat, he'd be Joy Reid who says the most outlandish garbage and spreads conspiracy theories on a corporate media network but that's fine because she's on the left.It’s also not normal for an individual to intentionally spread lies about victims of an awful crime in order to drive traffic to their website and earn millions annually.
The judgement was so high because Jones’ behavior was so heinous and despicable. He was intentionally defaming victims in order to make himself rich.
Exactly. He’s trash no matter which political party he belongs to.It’s also not normal for an individual to intentionally spread lies about victims of an awful crime in order to drive traffic to their website and earn millions annually.
The judgement was so high because Jones’ behavior was so heinous and despicable. He was intentionally defaming victims in order to make himself rich.
No, the issue is the magnitude of what he did, not his political affiliation.Jones' biggest sin is that he isn't a Democrat. If he was a Democrat, he'd be Joy Reid who says the most outlandish garbage and spreads conspiracy theories on a corporate media network but that's fine because she's on the left.
The $1B judgment is politically motivated. To argue this isn't the case is pure delusion.
Ok. Sorry I insulted your hero AJ. BTW, it was a jury verdict so I guess the big bad “they” rigged the jury?You cannot act like a $1B judgment is normal. It's not. That's an activist type judgment.
I'm not an AJ fan but it's rich hearing the "Don't you have a heart?" type stuff from the left as they do not bat an eye that their supported party is intentionally importing rapists and murderers that are killing and hurting Americans. Thousands of Americans are losing their kid to evil savagery because a political party craves power through imported demographics.
Dore, you're so FOS and one of the most pompous pricks on this site.
Exactly right. It’s amazing how logic and common sense escapes people.No, the issue is the magnitude of what he did, not his political affiliation.
The people he defamed were victims of something awful. Jones chose to intentionally and repeatedly lie about those victims because he knew he could make lots of money telling these lies.
When the victims repeatedly asked Jones to stop, he ignored them. When some of them were subjected to threats of violence because of his lies, he kept on lying because it was good for his business.
When Jones was sued by the people he was defaming, he then obstinately and repeatedly ignored court orders requiring him to cooperate with discovery.
When someone chooses to do awful and illegal things to make themselves rich, and arrogantly ignore court orders along the way, they open themselves up to heavy punishment.
Jones’ behavior was so far beyond the pale that a devastating financial penalty was worth considering. It was Jones’ actions that brought this upon himself, not any political affiliation.
They raised the minimum IQ to 50 in the Poli thread.What happened to you in the politics thread? From a biligerant, obsessed poster to gone completely. You get thrown out ??
Logic and common sense goes bye bye when you've decided the mistakes and misdeeds of a few rich guys you like is somehow the fault of millions of others in the world.Exactly right. It’s amazing how logic and common sense escapes people.
The problem is, I don't think Walz was referring to contract law when he argued that "misinformation" is not 1st Amendment protected speech. And I don’t really care if a clown like Jones gets hammered in a civil courtroom. I do care that many on the Left wouldn’t want to limit it to civil proceedings and it's bothersome that a VP candidate completely fails to understand the 1st Amendment and actively wants to gut it, not that the USC will abide it.The first amendment applies to state action. There are many ways someone can get sued for engaging in “misinformation”. For example, if I do a business deal with you and you lie to me about a critical term in order to get me to do the deal, I can sue you for fraud in the inducement. As you pointed out, the Alex Jones case was a civil case so I’m not sure how this topic came up.
No. I get it. They asked him to produce documents that showed he did what they accused him of. When he gave them everything and it didn't contain what they wanted they punished him. He gave them litter ali everything they asked for but he didn't do what they accused him of so they punished him for it. I'll bet you wouldn't want to be treated like he was in that court.I don’t think you understand the court system. He refused to comply with discovery requests and resulting court orders compelling him to produce documents. The court sanctioned him by entering a default. Why didn’t he participate in discovery as any litigant is required to do?
I’m not sure why I’m even trying to explain that though because if you’re defending Alex Jones you’re not going to listen to any rational explanation.
So you think the 1st amendment should be abolished I take it.... Bold stance.It’s also not normal for an individual to intentionally spread lies about victims of an awful crime in order to drive traffic to their website and earn millions annually.
The judgement was so high because Jones’ behavior was so heinous and despicable. He was intentionally defaming victims in order to make himself rich.