Sandy Hook Parents of Slain Children Sue Alex Jones for Defamation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little stunned that anyone here would think the texting history was sent by accident, from a lawyer appointed by Holder. I am NOT a fan of Jones, but this is banana republic law and should not happen

I was wondering when the RWNJs would come back and cry about the Dems being the real problem. And I can't even decipher this nonsense.

Let me spell it out for you: There is no way two years of texts were sent to the defense accidentally. I can't stand Jones, but I hate miscarriage of justice and a banana republic more.

I would like you to spell out the “miscarriage of justice”, please.

So you think the attorney deliberately sent the texts to the plaintiff. And? He also mind controlled Alex Jones into choosing him as the lawyer, so he could leak the contents of his texts?

It is unlikely that this dump of data was intentional as he has opened himself up to a boat load of problems because of the personal medical records included which were related to another case. The judge mentioned these and wants them removed before the info is shared with anyone else. Apparently the personal medical records she referred to are related to another Sandy Hook defamation case against Jones in CT. The judge in this case has ordered Reynal and a partner to appear before her to consider sanctions over their unauthorized release of Sandy Hook plaintiffs’ medical records. What an f up.

I assume some law was broken when Alex Jones’ was in possession (through texts) of medical records of other plaintiffs. Is that a criminal offense or another reason these poor families can sue him?

[Anonymous]

Can someone please explain to me why people listen to this man?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a little stunned that anyone here would think the texting history was sent by accident, from a lawyer appointed by Holder. I am NOT a fan of Jones, but this is banana republic law and should not happen

I was wondering when the RWNJs would come back and cry about the Dems being the real problem. And I can't even decipher this nonsense.

Let me spell it out for you: There is no way two years of texts were sent to the defense accidentally. I can't stand Jones, but I hate miscarriage of justice and a banana republic more.

Go find your tinfoil hat. Alex Jones’ lawyer is dim. Alex Jones had 10 lawyers before Andino Reynal. There’s a reason for that. No legit lawyer wanted to be associated with the looney loser a**hat, even if Alex Jones is the darling of right wingers.

Wonder if Paul Pelosi will have that issue?

Oh, you aren't able to articulate your nonsense "banana republic" and "miscarriage of justice" claims but you're able to trot out something irrelevant. Red herring logical fallacy.

You apparently are a fan of Jones - just admit it.

It’s an interesting point. If the attorney did it intentionally, he could lose his license to practice law.

I am not the PP, but I’d like to know if it was Jones or terrible attorneys who tanked the entire trial phase, and handed over what should have been kept from the plaintiffs’ attorney.

It would be interesting to genuinely find out how and why things turned out.

What's not interesting are the Jones apologists that "are just asking questions". This devolves into the conspiracies which the RWNJ are primed to accept rather than more truthful explanations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me why people listen to this man?

He says the things they’d like to, but never will because they’d face consequences. He makes them feel less alone in a world where their views are out of favor with the majority of the population. He insults the people they don’t like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me why people listen to this man?

He says the things they’d like to, but never will because they’d face consequences. He makes them feel less alone in a world where their views are out of favor with the majority of the population. He insults the people they don’t like.

Same reason people believe in QAnon nonsense. They’re gullible and feeling like they’re in on something others aren’t.

[Anonymous]

The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

I believe Jones’ lawyer took the position specifically to bring Jones down. Without actually seeing the headers of the email, I can’t tell you who specifically leaked. But I can tell you (because they told us) that his legal team were the people who did it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

Oh, I guess it’s also positive that Holder appointed a really stupid lawyer. But I doubt it. More likely just a partisan one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

I believe Jones’ lawyer took the position specifically to bring Jones down. Without actually seeing the headers of the email, I can’t tell you who specifically leaked. But I can tell you (because they told us) that his legal team were the people who did it.

What do you base this on? Why would Jones' lawyer plan all of this out with the foreseeable and inevitable hit to his own credibility?

[Anonymous]

Doesn't this leak prove the lawyer was a party to Jones'.perjury and is himself guilty of hiding evidence that was supposed to be turned over? 2hy would the lawyer release.info thatcould have him sanctioned?

[Anonymous]

Why
Sorry small screen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

Oh, I guess it’s also positive that Holder appointed a really stupid lawyer. But I doubt it. More likely just a partisan one.

Jones chose this lawyer. What is this appointed nonsense?

[Anonymous]

At the end of the day, Alex jones was found to have defamed these parents. You can’t just withhold evidence because it makes you look bad. Jones had counsel that he chose and he is a very wealthy man and was not constrained by affordability concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


The poster claiming the leak was intentional still hasn't come back to spell out WHO leaked, and WHY they leaked. Do they believe Jone's lawyer is actually on the plaintiff side? Do they believe a third party sent the information? Do they believe something else?

Spill, PP. Because when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. I want to see whether your theory holds water.

Oh, I guess it’s also positive that Holder appointed a really stupid lawyer. But I doubt it. More likely just a partisan one.

You don’t get appointed lawyers for civil cases, or if you’re loaded. These may have been the only attorneys who were willing to represent him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, Alex jones was found to have defamed these parents. You can’t just withhold evidence because it makes you look bad. Jones had counsel that he chose and he is a very wealthy man and was not constrained by affordability concerns.

That was determined as a matter of default, because Jones and his attorneys were not participating in the defense.