Alex Jones

[Howl]

Da actual fuq, indeed!   No seriously, WHAT THE ACTUAL FUQ?  *Tries to make sense but it just comes out incoherent garble.*

[fraurosena]

Oh, this is going to be good! 

Who's willing to bet there will be some financial ties to Russians?

[Howl]

Oh. My. Goodness.  This is beyond fabulous.  

[Cartmann99]

2 hours ago, Howl said:

Oh. My. Goodness.  This is beyond fabulous.  

 Thank you, Rufus! Thinking about the heartache he and his idiot fans caused the Sandy Hook families makes me furious!

[fransalley]

On 1/11/2019 at 5:21 PM, fraurosena said:

Oh, this is going to be good! 

Who's willing to bet there will be some financial ties to Russians?

On a board I used to participate in, I said something about the people that died at Sandy Hook, and got the response:  "No one died at Sandy Hook.  Show me proof that people died at Sandy Hook."

I WISH I had asked the question, "What proof would you accept?"

Let's see, if "no one died at Sandy Hook", among other things, you'd have to keep the families quiet about the fact that their kids didn't die.  And several of those kids have younger siblings.  Do you know how hard it is for little kids to keep a secret?

Remember Balloon Boy?  That was the kid who allegedly crawled into a balloon that flew away, and the news covered it to death?  It took about two days to exposed that hoax, and one of the things that happened was that the kid himself said, "You said we had to do that for the show."

And people think you can keep twenty families quiet about their kids not dying.  Really???

[GreyhoundFan]

"Roku gave Infowars a platform reaching millions. After hours of outrage, it backed down."

Spoiler

At his parents' home in Clarksville, Md., on Monday night, Daniel Madison and his brother were itching to see “Fyre Fraud,” the new Hulu documentary on the glorious failure of the 2017 music festival. So they set up a Roku player to stream it. But when he turned on the device, he could not believe what he was seeing: Infowars, the far-right conspiracy website founded by Alex Jones, which months earlier had been banned by Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple, was available to stream on Roku for its nearly 24 million registered users.

“We were both shocked when we saw the app in the lineup,” Madison, 40, told The Washington Post on Tuesday. He knew Jones had been booted from most other major platforms for propagating conspiracy theories targeting the families of the Sandy Hook school shooting, which Infowars has called a hoax. “We were pretty grossed out,” he said.

Madison wasn’t the only one disgusted. By Tuesday, the mass discontent on social media, which was first reported by Digiday, bubbled over into a trending hashtag — #boycottroku. Some threatened to walk away from the product altogether. Roku even heard from lawyers representing the families of Sandy Hook victims, who say they continue to be threatened and harassed thanks to the Infowars-spread conspiracy theory that the 2012 massacre that killed 27 people, including 20 children, didn’t happen.

By Tuesday night, Roku announced it, too, was banning Infowars.

Roku became the latest platform to drop Infowars, joining other media companies, including Spotify, Periscope and even YouPorn, to have bid farewell to Jones in the past year. Roku’s change of heart comes during a high period, when the company is projecting to have generated $293 million in U.S. ad revenue last year, according to eMarketer, up 93 percent from 2017.

Jones has yet to publicly respond to Roku’s about-face, but he shared a cryptic post to his Instagram account on Tuesday night. The post, a Saturday tweet from Infowars reporter Owen Shroyer, featured an artistic banner of Jones’s face looking enraged. “Strike me down now and I only become more powerful,” Shroyer wrote.

Roku’s decision came amid waves of complaints on Twitter, including from Madison. Hoping for an explanation after finding Infowars on his Roku — a digital media player that houses services such as Netflix, Hulu, Sling and YouTube — Madison tweeted at Roku Support around 8 p.m. Monday to see if the platform knew the channel was being offered. After receiving an automated reply about 10 minutes later, Madison reached out to Sleeping Giants, a Twitter account with a following of more than 200,000 users aimed at making “bigotry and racism less profitable” by encouraging people to pressure brands that feature questionable content.

Sleeping Giants tweeted at Roku, asking whether it could confirm that it had an Infowars channel. The Twitter account has previously targeted other platforms that featured Jones, in addition to spearheading social-media efforts directed at advertisers of conservative commentators Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham.

“And the rest kind of snowballed from there,” said Madison, who is pursuing his teaching degree.

Amid the social-media avalanche that came from the news on Tuesday morning, Roku initially defended its decision to host Infowars. CNN’s Oliver Darcy reported that Infowars had previously been available on Roku, but that a newly updated app drew attention from more users such as Madison.

“We do not curate or censor based on viewpoint,” Roku said in its initial statement following the Digiday article. “We are not promoting or being paid to distribute Infowars. We do not have any commercial or advertising relationship with Infowars.”

The company added that its policies prohibited content that’s “unlawful, incites illegal activities or violates third-party rights” and that any channel that violated the rules would be removed. “To our knowledge, Infowars is not currently in violation of these content policies,” the company said.

That stance would soon change as Roku users questioned how Infowars got there in the first place.

... < more tweets >

What might have been the final push, however, came from the lawyers representing the families of the Sandy Hook victims who are suing Jones. Last week, a Connecticut judge ruled those families can review Infowars’ internal marketing and financial documents. The families accuse Infowars of profiting from paranoia to sell more products to Jones’s followers, according to the complaint.

“There is no amount of anticipated revenue that could possibly justify Roku’s calculated decision,” attorney Josh Koskoff said in a statement to the media. Mark Bankston, another lawyer for Sandy Hook families, described Roku as “indifferent to the suffering caused by Mr. Jones’s continued onslaught of cruelty and reckless lies.”

At around 8.p.m. Tuesday, the platform officially dropped Infowars.

For now, Infowars, or Jones, can still reach his followers through a handful of mainstream platforms, such as Instagram, Snapchat and Google Play. Jones continues to fight the Sandy Hook lawsuit and decry the ongoing campaign to oust him from Web platforms.

For Madison, Roku’s decision to drop Infowars comes as a relief. He was considering ditching Roku until the company said it would delete Jones’s program. If he had the chance to talk to the Roku executives, he said he would tell them that he is disappointed they would ever think that carrying Infowars and Jones’s views was acceptable.

“I’m glad they deleted it, but they shouldn’t have to have been shamed into it,” Madison said. “It’s not a hard call.”

 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

Quote from article @GreyhoundFan posted:

Quote

Thepost, a Saturday tweet from Infowars reporter Owen Shroyer, featured an artistic banner of Jones’s face looking enraged. “Strike me down now and I only become more powerful,” Shroyer wrote.

So they think Alex Jones is Obi Wan Kenobi? Oh-kay....

Edited January 16, 2019 by WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?
added a word

[47of74]

Another victory for the families

Quote

A Connecticut judge ruled Wednesday that Infowars owner Alex Jones must sit for a deposition by attorneys for the parents of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims who are suing him for defamation.

Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis ruled that Jones must sit for a five-hour deposition by attorneys for the families.

Bellis also ruled that three others critical to Infowars’s operations could be deposed by the families, according to the Hartford Courant. 

Bellis said the families are “entitled to conduct discovery likely to lead to admissible evidence for the purposes of opposing the motions to dismiss,” according to the Courant.

Any lawyer who sits for five hours and asks that fuck stick questions has major respect in my book.

[fransalley]

34 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

Another victory for the families

Any lawyer who sits for five hours and asks that fuck stick questions has major respect in my book.

Not to mention the court reporter who has to take down his testimony, the scopist who has to edit it, and the proofer who has to make sure it's accurate!

[47of74]

Not to mention the court reporter who has to take down his testimony, the scopist who has to edit it, and the proofer who has to make sure it's accurate!

Good point.

I hope the families have a Joe Jamail type questioning Alex who will shut down any bullshit.

I wonder if we’re gonna see a depo like this?

[CTRLZero]

6 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

I wonder if we’re gonna see a depo like this?

A litigation attorney I worked for once leapt up on the conference table during a deposition and shook her fist at opposing counsel.  She was all of 5 feet tall and apparently wanted to make a big impression.   Now she goes after federal benefit fraudsters.  If I were them, I'd be very afraid.  She'd have kicked Alex Jones' sorry ass down the hallway.  (I'm speaking metaphorically, maybe...)  Tempers do tend to flare during these things.  This is another good reminder why I'm happy I'm retired, lol.

[fransalley]

I am a former court reporting student who now proofreads deposition transcripts for civil cases.  In most of them, both lawyers are courteous to the other and it's uncommon that one will lose their cool.  There have been exceptions. :-)

[Howl]

43 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

I hope the families have a Joe Jamail type questioning Alex who will shut down any bullshit.
I wonder if we’re gonna see a depo like this?

Holy crap, that's awesome.  That's some good ol' boy, Texas alpha male conflict. Billionaire Joe "King of Torts" Jamail died in 2005 and was at one time the richest lawyer in America. 

 There are some things at UT Austin named after the Jamails; the huge Jamail Swim Center and and an atrium at the Law School. 

I'm sure Jones will blow some gaskets and be immediately shot down.  Can't imagine how many billable hours his lawyers will need to prep for that deposition.  

Based on my one experience sitting on a jury trial for medical malpractice, can't the contents of a deposition be introduced at trial?

Want to speculate on settlement before trial?  The Sandy Hook parents may want the trial to expose InfoWars and get everything out there

Edited February 14, 2019 by Howl

[CTRLZero]

13 minutes ago, fransalley said:

There have been exceptions.

This particular attorney I worked for was one of those exceptions.  She was always very nice to me, but a raging bully to a lot of those around her.  People would tiptoe past her, or avoid her altogether.  She was very hard working and got results, but was not popular among the staff.  Most of the other attorneys I worked with over 30 some years were very professional. 

3 minutes ago, Howl said:

can't the contents of a deposition be introduced at trial?

Yes, whole depositions can be filed, or excerpts can be incorporated or attached as exhibits to other pleadings (i.e., declarations or affidavits).  @fransalley can probably give more detailed information on how depositions are used.

[fransalley]

50 minutes ago, CTRLZero said:

 

Yes, whole depositions can be filed, or excerpts can be incorporated or attached as exhibits to other pleadings (i.e., declarations or affidavits).  @fransalley can probably give more detailed information on how depositions are used.

Or, maybe not, because my legal knowledge is limited to Law and Order reruns and what I learned in court reporting school.  ?
But here's what I understand:  

When someone is summoned to give a deposition, the lawyers involved will ask them questions about their knowledge of the case at hand.  They have to swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, just as if they were giving testimony in open court.  The depositions are then used to build a case that will be presented at trial.  

Exhibits are presented at depositions.  Some of the ones presented at depositions I proofread are pictures of auto accidents, police reports of accidents, emails sent between parties, text messages, Facebook posts.  (One set of photographs involved a death in an auto accident where the victim was burned to death.  I didn't know until I saw the photos that the autopsy photos were included in what was sent to me.  I skimmed past those REAL fast.)

When the depositions are all gathered together and the lawyers sift through the information, then can then ask Witness A, "So, in your deposition, you said . . ."  and if Witness A and Witness B give conflicting accounts of what happened, then the lawyers can ask questions so that the jury ideally would have the facts to decide who was telling the truth.

In court reporting school, I took down plenty of examples of jury charges, and they usually say something like , "If you find from the evidence that . . ."  and "evidence" does include sworn testimony, exhibits presented, etc.  (I didn't finish school because I could not achieve the speed necessary to advance in my classes.  Court reporters use special machines and a special "language" to take down testimony, and certification speed is usually around 225 words per minute.   I got up to around 120.  I learned later that of those who start CR school, only 10 percent finish.  The reason I am proofing is to pay back my student loans!)

[Howl]

Who attends the deposition?  Is there an officer of the court present to maintain order in case something goes off the rails?

Edited February 14, 2019 by Howl

[47of74]

10 minutes ago, Howl said:

Who attends the deposition?  Is there an officer of the court present to maintain order in case something goes off the rails?

It's mainly just the parties, their attorneys, and a court reporter.  I assume by officer you mean someone like a judge?  Attorneys are in fact considered officers of the court.  If something goes off the rails an attorney can stop the deposition long enough to get an order from the court on how to proceed. 

Courts expect attorneys to be the adults in the room but are willing to step in if needed, as the Delaware Supreme Court said when it got wind of Jamail's behavior.

Quote

Staunch advocacy on behalf of a client is proper and fully consistent with the finest effectuation of skill and professionalism. Indeed, it is a mark of professionalism, not weakness, for a lawyer zealously and firmly to protect and pursue a client's legitimate interests by a professional, courteous, and civil attitude toward all persons involved in the litigation process. A lawyer who engages in the type of behavior exemplified by Mr. Jamail on the record of the Liedtke deposition is not properly representing his client, and the client's cause is not advanced by a lawyer who engages in unprofessional conduct of this nature. It happens that in this case there was no application to the Court, and the parties and the witness do not  appear to have been prejudiced by this misconduct.

Nevertheless, the Court finds this unprofessional behavior to be outrageous and unacceptable. If a Delaware lawyer had engaged in the kind of misconduct committed by Mr. Jamail on this record, that lawyer would have been subject to censure or more serious sanctions. While the specter of disciplinary proceedings should not be used by the parties as a litigation tactic, conduct such as that involved here goes to the heart of the trial court proceedings themselves. As such, it cries out for relief under the trial court's rules, including Ch. Ct. R. 37. Under some circumstances, the use of the trial court's inherent summary contempt powers may be appropriate. See In re Butler, Del. Supr., 609 A.2d 1080, 1082 (1992).

 Although busy and overburdened, Delaware trial courts are "but a phone call away" and would be responsive to the plight of a party and its counsel bearing the brunt of such misconduct. It is not appropriate for this Court to prescribe in the abstract any particular remedy or to provide an exclusive list of remedies under such circumstances. We assume that the trial courts of this State would consider protective orders and the sanctions permitted by the discovery rules. Sanctions could include exclusion of obstreperous counsel from attending the deposition (whether or not he or she has been admitted pro hac vice), ordering the deposition recessed and reconvened promptly in Delaware, or the appointment of a master to preside at the deposition. Costs and counsel fees should follow.

Paramount Commc'ns v. Qvc Network, 637 A.2d 34, 54-55 (Del. 1994)

I would expect the attorneys to be professional in dealing with Alex Jones and would expect if there were any fireworks that he would be the instigator and the families attorneys would be the ones calling for help.

1 hour ago, CTRLZero said:

This particular attorney I worked for was one of those exceptions.  She was always very nice to me, but a raging bully to a lot of those around her.  People would tiptoe past her, or avoid her altogether.  She was very hard working and got results, but was not popular among the staff.  Most of the other attorneys I worked with over 30 some years were very professional.

I mentioned the Texas Style Deposition to some local lawyers I know.  One guy said that there was a lawyer in town that no other lawyers really wanted to deal with because he was sort of a Jamail type guy in dealing with opposing parties and counsel.

[CTRLZero]

In Washington state, the bar association published decisions on attorney misconduct charges.  It makes for interesting reading.  When I was working, there was a case of an attorney who was shaking her finger at another attorney (I think outside of a courtroom), leading to it being bit!  Ouch!  I couldn't find that case, probably archived somewhere, but here is a link to some recent opinions on attorney discipline.  Some are more interesting than others, but give examples of attorney antics. 

Decisions re Attorneys Misbehaving

Edited February 14, 2019 by CTRLZero
I've been retired about 7 years. Some things may have changed.

[fransalley]

In the depos I've proofed, it's usually the two attorneys and the deponent; often, the person who's suing or the one who's being sues will be present.  

It's a pain in the neck when there's more than one lawyer because there's a particular format you have to follow when indicating who's speaking and what they're doing.  I think the most lawyers I ever saw on a case was nine.  Usually it's two, often it's been three or four.  

If the depo is being videotaped, we do have to say who the videographer is.

[Howl]

It's been quite awhile since I was on a jury, but I did just recall that one witness was unable to be at that medical malpractice trial.  That witness's testimony was read aloud, with one defendant attorney sitting in a witness chair reading the witness deposition testimony, and the other defendant attorney was reading the deposing attorney's part. 

[47of74]

Alex Jones got laughed out of a  Lucy's Fried Chicken in Austin, Texas.

Quote

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones appeared to be looking for a fight as he stood in the middle of a Texas restaurant and traded insults with other diners.

But instead of a fight, Jones was laughed out of the establishment, according to the footage posted by the Houston Chronicle. 

The incident took place at a Lucy’s Fried Chicken location in Austin, The Chronicle reported. Jones and his wife had gone out for a second dinner after the latter wasn’t satisfied with the first meal they ate elsewhere.

The crowd of hecklers in the restaurant may well be one of his biggest audiences in months. 

 

[Howl]

Lucy's Fried Chicken

Sheesh, at least they weren't at a Mexican food/TexMex restaurant*, or maybe that was the first restaurant they left.  I'd hope Alex Jones and wife #2  never eat out in peace again, or maybe they should get a copy of the MAGA Snowflake Guide to MAGA-safe eateries.  However, there are very, very few of those in Austin, TX.  

See: 

• Kellyanne Conway Says She Was Assaulted in a Bethesda Tex-Mex Restaurant
• Kirstjen Nielsen Is Confronted by Protesters at Mexican Restaurant: ‘Shame!’

Edited March 28, 2019 by Howl

[47of74]

Just now, Howl said:

Sheesh, at least they weren't at a Mexican food/TexMex restaurant*, or maybe that was the first restaurant they left.  I'd hope Alex Jones and wife #2  never eat out in peace again, or maybe they should get a copy of the MAGA Snowflake Guide to MAGA-safe eateries.  However, there are very, very few of those in Austin, TX.  

See: 

• Kellyanne Conway Says She Was Assaulted in a Bethesda Tex-Mex Restaurant
• Kirstjen Nielsen Is Confronted by Protesters at Mexican Restaurant: ‘Shame!’

And also wife #2 wanted a second dinner, Alex?  Yeah right. 

It was probably more like he wasn't satisfied and wanted the second dinner but didn't want to fess up to that so he blamed the woman.  Typical. 

 

[47of74]

Alex was deposed. Yeah it went as well as expected.

Infowars host Alex Jones was questioned earlier this month for three hours by the lawyer of a Sandy Hook parent who has accused him of perpetuating an abhorrent hoax. It did not go well for Jones.

From the start of the surreal deposition, Jones’ lawyers whined and sparred often with Lewis’ attorney. At one point, Bankston told one of two of Jones’ lawyers, Mark Enoch, that he would “appreciate it if you kept your mouth shut for this deposition.”

Jones’ other lawyer, Robert Barnes, was hired just weeks ago after Jones dropped two other lawyers who had been representing him. At one point, a frustrated Barnes tells Bankston: “This is one of the worst depositions I’ve ever witnessed.”

He was right, though likely not in the way he meant.

Does it make me a bad person to wish Joe Jamail was still around and had been the one taking this deposition?

[Howl]

So Alex is kinda sorta pleading a little bit of insanity because there was so much fake stuff in the media that he wasn't sure if it was staged or a real thing, it made him kinda, you know, crazy. 

And who among us hasn't gone crazy over trying to figure out what's a false-flag operation perpetrated by the Deep State and what's a real event where wee children, high school kids and adults at a concert are gunned down in cold blood?  Yeah, that's right. NOBODY. 

The irony being that he was the one that was calling everything out as false-flag this and false-flag that and staged this and staged that and Deep State this and Deep State that.  Alex Jones and Rush.  Truly evil men, the both of them. 

What a complete f**king asshole; he pisses me off.  I honestly don't know what I'd do if I ever saw him in public.