Social Alex Jones' Infowars has filed for bankruptcy

[TheRealHNIC]

Well then you can't believe anything and that makes you a nihilist. Believing Jones and anything he says is, by your account, unknowable, nor is anything anyone says legally verifiable.

You didn't answer the question...

 

[cooks1]

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. As is 'truth' and 'lies'. I think the official story is a lie. How might I legally express this point of view?

You can legally express that point of view by saying you don't believe the official story. If that's all Alex had done, he wouldn't be in the trouble he's in. You could make your point of view more credible by proving elements of the 'official story' false.

But the minute you come up with your own story, you are more exposed. Because if your story is proven to be false, and you maligned others falsely in the telling of it, you can be on the hook. That's what Alex did. And that's essentially what the MSM media did to Nick Sandmann. The main differences are the MSM lied about fewer people in that case, and did not hang onto the lie as long as Alex Jones did. They realized they were in trouble and they took steps.

'Proof' may be in the eye of the beholder. That's what juries are for. But truth and lies are not in the eye of the beholder. It's either a truth or a lie. The truth may or may not be provable. The lie may or may not be provable. But that does not make them any less true or false.

 

[12ga.]

I hate bankruptcy laws in this country. Total shit show when people with money can exploit our laws to benefit them when their victims are rightfully owed civil damages. Bankruptcy and tax laws drive me insane.

Golden rule. Those with the gold make the rules. Wasnt always that way. In my day, Used to be students could discharge debt instead of chaining them to life to debt. But now only rich people can declare bankruptcy.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. As is 'truth' and 'lies'. I think the official story is a lie. How might I legally express this point of view?

Proof is not in the eye of the beholder. There are facts and there is speculation. You want to put 2 and 2 together and make 6. Go ahead and believe that all you like but it won't make it proof.

 

[Damien Karras]

You didn't answer the question...

There cannot be an answer to anything that is unknowable. Your rejection of truth literally means no proof or evidence could satisfy the requirements of those conditions.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

You didn't answer the question...

You are legally expressing your view. Start slandering and libeling and you'll find yourself in Jones' situation.

 

[TheRealHNIC]

You can legally express that point of view by saying you don't believe the official story. If that's all Alex had done, he wouldn't be in the trouble he's in. You could make your point of view more credible by proving elements of the 'official story' false.

But the minute you come up with your own story, you are more exposed. Because if your story is proven to be false, and you maligned others falsely in the telling of it, you can be on the hook. That's what Alex did. And that's essentially what the MSM media did to Nick Sandmann. The main differences are the MSM lied about fewer people in that case, and did not hang onto the lie as long as Alex Jones did. They realized they were in trouble and they took steps.

'Proof' may be in the eye of the beholder. That's what juries are for. But truth and lies are not in the eye of the beholder. It's either a truth or a lie. The truth may or may not be provable. The lie may or may not be provable. But that does not make them any less true or false.

So if Im reading this properly if I want to provide an alternative view or theory about something I have to first prove it in a court in front of a jury?

 

[TheRealHNIC]

There cannot be an answer to anything that is unknowable. Your rejection of truth literally means no proof or evidence could satisfy the requirements of those conditions.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion but ok.

 

[TheRealHNIC]

Proof is not in the eye of the beholder.

Yes it is. Its been proven so, in my opinion.

 

[MIKOM]

It took several years for these type of things to sink in for me also.

Early onset dementia is quite slow to begin with I hear.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

So if Im reading this properly if I want to provide an alternative view or theory about something I have to first prove it in a court in front of a jury?

Just don't lie or claim your theories are real without proof and you'll be OK.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Yes it is. Its been proven so, in my opinion.

Your opinion carries zero weight. If that's all you have it's not proof.

 

[eighterumg5]

InfoWars' Alex Jones Is a 'Performance Artist,' His Lawyer Says in Divorce Hearing

Alex Jones’s Attorneys Argue That No Reasonable Person Would Believe What He Says

Infowars’ Alex Jones Claims He’s a Fake ‘Character’ on Air – to Win Custody of Kids

 

[AndroidRage]

"Far-right website Infowars and two other companies owned by radio host Alex Jones have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in light of several defamation lawsuits. The filings were made in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.

Chapter 11 bankruptcy procedures put a hold on pending civil litigation while letting a business keep running as it prepares a turnaround plan.

Court documents seen by CBS News show that the companies that filed were Infowars, IWHealth aka Infowars Health, and Prison Planet TV.

Infowars says in the filing that it has assets of $0 to $50,000 and liabilities of $1,000,001 to $10 million."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alex-j...-filing-defamation-suits-sandy-hook-massacre/

Quite the turnaround from some stats that came out in court a few years ago, unless of course Alex isn't quite being honest...

"Despite his pleas for money, Infowars’ store ― where Jones sells an amalgamation of dietary supplements and survival gear ― made $165 million in sales from September 2015 to the end of 2018, according to court filings related to a lawsuit Jones recently lost over his lies about the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre."

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/infowars-store-alex-jones_n_61d71d8fe4b0bcd2195c6562?v7

He is likely only doing this to weasel out of paying the parents of Sandy Hook. Guy is a major POS.

 

[TheRealHNIC]

Your opinion carries zero weight. If that's all you have it's not proof.

Proof is in the eye of the beholder. Prove me wrong...

 

[cooks1]

So if Im reading this properly if I want to provide an alternative view or theory about something I have to first prove it in a court in front of a jury?

Obviously you are not reading this properly. I don't know how the fuck you came to that conclusion.

You don't have to prove anything first. Write or say whatever you want. You just better be damn sure that if it's about a person, company, or group, it can't be proven false afterwards.

Nothing stopped Alex Jones from saying exactly what he wanted. But in the course of doing that, he committed outrageous ongoing libel and slander. So now he is getting anal prison raped sans lube.

 

[Strychnine]

Jones is being persecuted. The judgements against him are default judgements by corrupt judges who are making politically motivated decisions.

"When it came to web analytics, the Jones defendants produced documents that “fall short procedurally and substantively,” Bellis said. With the deadline for written discovery past, the Jones defendants failed to produced data from platforms such as Alexa or the analytics from YouTube.

While Wolman argued Jones did not use web analytics to run his business, Bellis pointed to an email attached to one of the Sandy Hook families’ briefs that showed employees of Jones relying on analytics to made decisions on how they should engage with their social media audience."

Alex Jones loses court battle over defamation of Sandy Hook families | Courthouse News Service

When the judge says present ALL of your evidence, they're not saying that as a suggestion.

 

[fingercuffs]

So if Im reading this properly if I want to provide an alternative view or theory about something I have to first prove it in a court in front of a jury?

DO you believe the Sandy Hook mass shooting tragedy happened?

 

[cooks1]

Just don't lie or claim your theories are real without proof and you'll be OK.

Actually it's even easier than that. He can say whatever the fuck he wants about anyone or anything. He doesn't even have to prove it's true. Though most places would at least try to make sure they have some proof first. If someone wants to sue him for defamation, they have to prove it's false. When they can-that's when you get in trouble.

If Alex had just said, 'it's all bullshit, it's a government conspiracy', he probably would have been fine just due to the vagueness. But he said these kids did not die. That they were actors. He said the parents of the kids that died were paid actors. Very specific statements that were terribly damaging and easily proven false.

 

[TheRealHNIC]

Obviously you are not reading this properly. I don't know how the fuck you came to that conclusion.

You don't have to prove anything first. Write or say whatever you want. You just better be damn sure that if it's about a person, company, or group, it can't be proven false afterwards.

Nothing stopped Alex Jones from saying exactly what he wanted. But in the course of doing that, he committed outrageous ongoing libel and slander. So now he is getting anal prison raped sans lube.

Who decides if something is proven false? Who is charge of whats true and whats false?