Alex Jones' defense attorneys in bold legal gambit: only a moron would believe Jones

[abiG]

Can anyone please be specific. Which statements? Be sure to use his words and not another link with claims of what he said.

I am not sure what the people who are so worked up think he said (I have seen the claims), let alone what he said that was not protected by the first amendment.

Thanks in advance for any help. The TS could not answer this question. He had four tries, I believe.

 

[HOLA]

Can anyone please be specific. Which statements? Be sure to use his words and not another link with claims of what he said.

I am not sure what the people who are so worked up think he said (I have seen the claims), let alone what he said that was not protected by the first amendment.

Thanks in advance for any help. The TS could not answer this question. He had four tries, I believe.

The ones about it being fake?

Do you need video of it coming out of his own mouth cuz everybody is fake news?

"Sandy Hook is a synthetic, completely fake, with actors, in my view, manufactured...it took me a bout a year with Sandy Hook to come to grips with the fact that the whole thing was fake...I did deep research and my Gosh, it just pretty much didn't happen."

 

[abiG]

The ones about it being fake?

Do you need video of it coming out of his own mouth cuz everybody is fake news?

"Sandy Hook is a synthetic, completely fake, with actors, in my view, manufactured...it took me a bout a year with Sandy Hook to come to grips with the fact that the whole thing was fake...I did deep research and my Gosh, it just pretty much didn't happen."

Thank-you.

Now what part of that speech is not protected in America?

 

[HOLA]

Thank-you.

Now what part of that speech is not protected in America?

We'll find out I guess.

 

[Ruprecht]

We'll find out I guess.

Because of how pro-defendant your anti-defamation laws are, apparently it's more likely to revolve around Owen Shoyer's claim (broadcast by Infowars and therefore Jones' responsibility) that the father speaking about holding his son's body was lying, and whether or not the Sandy Hook parents are "Public Figures" because of their media appearances.

In 2017, a reporter on Jones’s show claimed that one of the Sandy Hook parents was lying when he said he held his son and saw a bullet hole in his son’s head, since the slain students were identified via photographs. In fact, the coroner released the victims’ bodies to their families for funeral purposes, so the parent’s claim was true.

 

[unimackpass]

Only in America would a guy like Alex fucking Jones have any ground to stand on.

Same as WWE? This is where it gets confusing. I thought people listened to him for the thrill of fake drama like wwe but then there's some people believing wwe is real even while knowing it's fake? Dang, this stuff makes my head hurt.
Now that a real fighter like Honda has gone wwe it tips the scales toward actual lizard people walking amongst us.
Lawyers going to have a hard time with this.

 

[abiG]

Because of how pro-defendant your anti-defamation laws are, apparently it's more likely to revolve around Owen Shoyer's claim (broadcast by Infowars and therefore Jones' responsibility) that the father speaking about holding his son's body was lying, and whether or not the Sandy Hook parents are "Public Figures" because of their media appearances.

I am not a legal expert, but does this open the door to prosecute every single MSM outlet that reported the lies about Iraq that sent us to war?

 

[Ruprecht]

Same as WWE? This is where it gets confusing. I thought people listened to him for the thrill of fake drama like wwe but then there's some people believing wwe is real even while knowing it's fake? Dang, this stuff makes my head hurt.
Now that a real fighter like Honda has gone wwe it tips the scales toward actual lizard people walking amongst us.
Lawyers got going to have a hard time with this.

Yeah, it's unfortunate that Jones' has brought the entire field of "Performance Artists" into disrepute.
Next thing you know people might hold Trump accountable for something he's said!

 

[Ruprecht]

I am not a legal expert, but does this open the door to prosecute every single MSM outlet that reported the lies about Iraq that sent us to war?

No.

 

[abiG]

No.

But, you just said:
(broadcast by Infowars and therefore Jones' responsibility)

 

[Ruprecht]

But, you just said:
(broadcast by Infowars and therefore Jones' responsibility)

Yes, because Owen Shroyer is an employee (listed as "Staff", whether or not he gets paid), broadcast his statement on their show and it's therefore Infowars' responsibility.
CNN isn't responsible for the intelligence reports they accurately reported on.
Best of luck to Saddam's corpse suing American Intelligence for defamation.
Stop derailing the thread.

 

[JosephDredd]

I am not a legal expert, but does this open the door to prosecute every single MSM outlet that reported the lies about Iraq that sent us to war?

You mean the MSM that:

-reported the truth as it became available

-has never tried to undermine the veracity of the new evidence by giving air time to people still claiming that there were WMDs in Iraq (unless they were firmly debunking that guest's disproven claims)

-has never had to resort to claiming that their news updates are only for entertainment in order to defend themselves or never had to resort to claiming that only morons would believe them

Oh, yes, the similarities between the two are so striking that I now see how someone could imagine they were on the same level. Wait, no, I don't see that because I'm not a fucking moron.

 

[unimackpass]

Yeah, it's unfortunate that Jones' has brought the entire field of "Performance Artists" into disrepute.
Next thing you know people might hold Trump accountable for something he's said!

Ha, I have to admit that's a good one. "Everyone knows he was a reality tv star."

Lawyers representing Jones have endless material to make their case. The entertainment value of watching piles of absolute bizarre nonsense being played out in the courtroom would be priceless especially considering the level of reality tv and that people actually watch The Simpsons.
Can picture the tattooed up snuff chewing dude telling his gal "Honey I never really did believe that stuff."

 

[abiG]

Yes, because Owen Shoyer is an employee (listed as "Staff", whether or not he gets paid), broadcast his statement on their show and it's therefore Infowars' responsibility.
CNN isn't responsible for the intelligence reports they accurately reported on.
Best of luck to Saddam's corpse suing American Intelligence for defamation.
Stop derailing the thread.

Are you sure you don't mean Wolfgang Walter Halbig? He was the Executive Director of the National Institute for School and Workplace Safety. He was the guy that started his own investigation and was then threatened and silenced.

Jones had him on the show. He was NOT an employee.

And how is that derailing in any way? There are HUGE implications for all journalists/reporters/pundits. You don't see that?

If Jones' speech isn't protected, what speech is? And just my opinion, but lying us into war is about as bad as it gets. And I am as pro first amendment as anyone, but how the fuck that speech is protected is beyond me.

 

[Ruprecht]

Are you sure you don't mean Wolfgang Walter Halbig? He was the Executive Director of the National Institute for School and Workplace Safety. He was the guy that started his own investigation and was then threatened and silenced.

Jones had him on the show. He was NOT an employee.

And how is that derailing in any way? There are HUGE implications for all journalists/reporters/pundits. You don't see that?

If Jones' speech isn't protected, what speech is? And just my opinion, but lying us into war is about as bad as it gets. And I am as pro first amendment as anyone, but how the fuck that speech is protected is beyond me.

No, I mean Owen Shroyer. The article I linked to has the video.

 

[abiG]

No, I mean Owen Shoyer. The article I linked to has the video.

OK, yeah, I saw that as it was posted above. I believe that this employee was repeating the research of Halbig who I mentioned to you and who is NOT an employee.

Your clip goes on to introduce him, but then cuts of his actual points, but Jones goes on about blue screens and the fake crying clips which do seem odd, if nothing else.

 

[LMP]

Alex Jones threads have got to be done of the worse, right up there with the racist ones. The amount of back breaking people will do to defend this man is insane. I'm always in a bit of shock at the lengths people will go. At least we are getting closer to people having to admit everything this guy says is bullshit.

 

[Ruprecht]

OK, yeah, I saw that as it was posted above. I believe that this employee was repeating the research of Halbig who I mentioned to you and who is NOT an employee.

Your clip goes on to introduce him, but then cuts of his actual points, but Jones goes on about blue screens and the fake crying clips which do seem odd, if nothing else.

No, he made no reference to Halbig. If it was "out of context" it was Jones that was responsible for the editing of the clip (the section in the video is what he replayed on his show). Jones himself also made false statements about compression artifacts, calling them clear evidence of a "green screen".
I'm not wasting anymore time with a Sandy Hook "truther", don't derail the thread.

 

[Darkballs]

Thank-you.

Now what part of that speech is not protected in America?

So you have no idea how libel works?

 

[ocfightfan]

Jones disgusts me but this has to turn on whether he directly and specifically slandered Sandy Hook parents or directly incited his audience to violence/harassment. Being an inflammatory asshole playing to nutcases paranoia is not quite good enough. He's a hurtful piece of shit for his denialism and conspiracy mongering, but is his speech actually illegal? I'm not so sure. If we are going to sanction people for bad speech then the lines need to be bright as day and crystal clear, and universal. We can't allow a situation where the decision to shut people down depends on who has the power. It has to be be based on solid and universal principles that respect liberty while punishing behavior that is universally bad.