Alex Jones' Day of Reckoning is on its way!

#151
#151
McDad said:
Jones is liable because he owns and employees people to run and moderate the site, i suppose?
Click to expand...

No. Just thought it was relevant to the conversation.

In terms of the case, it’s likely not relevant at all except to the degree the judge changes her behavior because of it, which could go either way. I do think the behavior of his listeners proves the defamatory nature of his content. I also think that their predictable pattern of responses helps establish punitives, if they’re available.

He can argue, as you basically do, that their actions are intervening conduct that caused any of Pozner’s general damages, and I think that’s probably his best argument. Not familiar enough with the nuts and bolts of 1A litigation to have an opinion about whether that’s likely to succeed.
 
#152
#152
Purple Tiger said:
That began under Obama. The economy was already rolling. History, unfortunately, is not on Trump's side as the economy tanks under Republican presidents.
Click to expand...

Lolol thats complete bs. What was it obama said about bringing back jobs and getting the economy going, something like "cant be done, you would need a magic wand". Trump is putting up record numbers and it will get him re-elected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#153
#153
615vols said:
Lolol thats complete bs. What was it obama said about bringing back jobs and getting the economy going, something like "cant be done, you would need a magic wand". Trump is putting up record numbers and it will get him re-elected.
Click to expand...

You will get a better idea on the state of the economy under Trump when he's done. The economy was headed in the right direction when Obama was in office and continues today. It doesn't mean Obama or Trump are responsible for the state of the economy. The US economy can stop on a dime but getting it going again is a long process.
 
#154
#154
RockyTop85 said:
No. Just thought it was relevant to the conversation.

In terms of the case, it’s likely not relevant at all except to the degree the judge changes her behavior because of it, which could go either way. I do think the behavior of his listeners proves the defamatory nature of his content. I also think that their predictable pattern of responses helps establish punitives, if they’re available.

He can argue, as you basically do, that their actions are intervening conduct that caused any of Pozner’s general damages, and I think that’s probably his best argument. Not familiar enough with the nuts and bolts of 1A litigation to have an opinion about whether that’s likely to succeed.
Click to expand...
I could see how a person who owns a discussion forum is tangentially responsible for what content is allowed even by others.
If we were trafficking drugs on VN, or arranging murders for hire, and Freak or his mods turned a blind eye i could assign some degree of guilt to him.

Wasn't there a "Silk Road" website which had tons of illegal transactions on its website at one time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#155
#155
McDad said:
I could see how a person who owns a discussion forum is tangentially responsible for what content is allowed even by others.
If we were trafficking drugs on VN, or arranging murders for hire, and Freak or his mods turned a blind eye i could assign some degree of guilt to him.

Wasn't there a "Silk Road" website which had tons of illegal transactions on its website at one time?
Click to expand...

Are you saying the law can’t draw a distinction between that scenario and this one?
 
#156
#156
RockyTop85 said:
Are you saying the law can’t draw a distinction between that scenario and this one?
Click to expand...
No. I am saying i could understand how a site owner could be found responsible for allowing death threats (in AJ/SH case) or in my hypothetical on VN
 
#157
#157
615vols said:
Lolol thats complete bs. What was it obama said about bringing back jobs and getting the economy going, something like "cant be done, you would need a magic wand". Trump is putting up record numbers and it will get him re-elected.
Click to expand...

According to the Wall Street Journal, this country has not been in a recession for TEN YEARS. If you are having trouble doing the math, that is 2009. The recovery started and the economy grew under Obama. Your "facts" don't fit the truth or the narrative.
 
#158
#158
McDad said:
I could see how a person who owns a discussion forum is tangentially responsible for what content is allowed even by others.
If we were trafficking drugs on VN, or arranging murders for hire, and Freak or his mods turned a blind eye i could assign some degree of guilt to him.

Wasn't there a "Silk Road" website which had tons of illegal transactions on its website at one time?
Click to expand...

There was even a Silk Road with tons of illegal transactions on it, too. ;)
 
#159
#159
McDad said:
No. I am saying i could understand how a site owner could be found responsible for allowing death threats (in AJ/SH case) or in my hypothetical on VN
Click to expand...

I can’t. There’s already a statute establishing that that’s not a viable theory of liability, and there’s not only a difference in culpability but there’s no link between cause and effect.

Where Jones has a plausible defense that the actions of his supporters are intervening acts, too attenuated from his conduct to tie him to any damages, Freak would, IMO, have an pretty rock solid case that the intentional acts of people who get worked up over conversations in which he doesn’t participate.

(General disclaimer: these posts are my personal opinion, not legal advice. Hire your own damn lawyer.)
 
#161
#161
RockyTop85 said:
I can’t. There’s already a statute establishing that that’s not a viable theory of liability, and there’s not only a difference in culpability but there’s no link between cause and effect.

Where Jones has a plausible defense that the actions of his supporters are intervening acts, too attenuated from his conduct to tie him to any damages, Freak would, IMO, have an pretty rock solid case that the intentional acts of people who get worked up over conversations in which he doesn’t participate.

(General disclaimer: these posts are my personal opinion, not legal advice. Hire your own damn lawyer.)
Click to expand...



If we could be sued for our opinions or advice here we would all be tied up in court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#162
#162
Is there a sign up required to post comments over there? Is there a ToS involved and are comments moderated?

Things may have changed over the years, but back in the '90s if you required sign up, had a ToS, set word filters and moderated comments, you could be liable for posted threats of bodily harm if acted out and unreported to authorities.

We only had one person that crossed the line and got forwarded to police because we felt the threats were real and not just of the "waffle house" variety.
 
#163
#163
#166
#166
DancingOutlaw said:
I think 80% of the people that listen to Alex Jones are Democrats that want to screech.
Click to expand...

I’m conservative and listen to many podcasts and radio shows. I read the news everyday. I’ve never listened to or read an article from Alex Jones. He does not represent me or my beliefs. I don’t get the way he’s portrayed as a pundit for the right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#167
#167
Maybe how to respond using the quote function.

But it makes zero sense to go on tour and tell everyone that the economy lost jobs and they aren't coming back then take credit for it when they do when you just admitted there was no way there returning. then again, Obama was the most clueless of all presidents but Dem's loved him because he was black and had a nice smile.
 
#168
#168
Bigun said:
Maybe how to respond using the quote function.

But it makes zero sense to go on tour and tell everyone that the economy lost jobs and they aren't coming back then take credit for it when they do when you just admitted there was no way there returning. then again, Obama was the most clueless of all presidents but Dem's loved him because he was black and had a nice smile.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between lost jobs and an economic recovery. There are tens of thousands of bank jobs that have disappeared in the last 30 years that will never return.

More clueless than W? Under his watch, we invaded a country and spent $2.4 TRILLION so Dick Cheney could make money. The Reps loved him because he was was white and had a nice haircut.
 
#169
#169
Purple Tiger said:
There is a difference between lost jobs and an economic recovery. There are tens of thousands of bank jobs that have disappeared in the last 30 years that will never return.

More clueless than W? Under his watch, we invaded a country and spent $2.4 TRILLION so Dick Cheney could make money. The Reps loved him because he was was white and had a nice haircut.
Click to expand...
I thought Iraq was a threat...or was it all a lie for everyone who believed it?
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq ..."
 
#172
#172
BowlBrother85 said:
No... just no. Unless they are "9/11 truthers", think that the parents of the murdered Sandy Hook Elementary School children are paid actors and have said that Obama is a demon (literally).
Click to expand...
But Obama is a demon
 
#174
#174
Bigun said:
But our Intel even from the 90s said it was there.
Click to expand...

There was no consensus between all the agencies on Iraqi WMDs. I personally never believed in their existence and thought W was trying to be a big boy and finish what his Daddy didn't. We should have killed every Talliban person in Afghanistan and taken out Bin Lama before invading another Middle Eastern country. Iran or Saudi Arabia should have next on that list if we wanted to punish terrorism sponsors.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top