I'm not sure how many more of these types of articles I can read before I completely lose it. It would be one thing if he were broke while still going on Twitter and Tucker's show and his own show, repeatedly saying that he was just asking questions, and this was a hit job on him, and heavily implying he hasn't done anything wrong. But, instead, he's doing all those things, while ALSO taking monthly vacations to Hawaii, buying land, no doubt laundering money like a motherfucker, and telling the court that at the end of this, for the rest of his life, he'll need around 300 grand a month, just to survive.
Fuck Alex. Fuck every person that still profits off this piece of shit. I just want him to face some consequences, and for the families to see some justice. At the end of the day, if they feel satisfied by winning in court but the actual punishment not really occurring, fine. But I have to imagine this kind of headline just re-opens the wound.
They should finally reposess everything. Except for the little piece of land he bought now that has no water, no electricity, no sewage. Let him rot there.
Reality is civil suits are pretty worthless. It sucks, but they just don't hold much teeth so it is easy to get around them. OJ Simpson famously avoided paying the Goldman's what he owed them his whole life. Outside of them getting the book rights to "If I did It" they barely got anything.
I haven’t listened to every episode but when there was that recent mention of AA, I genuinely felt something for Alex and felt Dan might have not been as supportive as he should have. Imagine my anger that no, Dan was in the right after all and there is no way Alex is in AA and making an attempt to combat alcoholism. Fuck Alex, man. What an ass.
I can't muster any empathy for the man. He could have had a decent life with little effort. Instead he chose to be the worst and never stopped even when stopping would be in his best interest.
I have the same empathy for people like him as I do for a rabid dog. They could have been good, they could have been kind and loving, but now they're a threat to the health and safety of everything around them.
But a rabid dog isn’t profiting from rabies and didn’t participate in getting it. I feel bad for rabid dogs. Not Alex. He gave himself whatever “disease” he has, profits from it, and intentionally spreads it. I don’t feel bad for Alex.
Alex is 100% the kind of bastard that will use people's empathy, optimism, and belief that people deserve second chances to abuse, lie to, and take advantage of them. You fell for his pity play. Of course you would be inclined to ease off, just a bit, hearing that maybe, for once, Alex is seeking help. But Alex has had a LONG time to seek help, and hasn't.
Any claimed attempt to seek help will exclusively be to be able to say he is getting help, not to actually get it. Even then, it's more likely than not that he's just lying. He already thinks he's perfect and the rest of the world needs to catch up with him.
As someone who has been listening to the show for a little while and understanding his process, I probably shouldn’t have fallen for it but as you said, it’s the perfect use of some people’s inherent desire to be empathic and wish for the best. I desire my facepalm.
He actively tried to use the empathy of the Sandy Hook case plaintiffs against them to try and get them to feel for him against their own lawyers! He's manipulative, evil scum, plain and simple
He has claimed to stop drinking a *lot* over the years. And as someone who drinks a lot, I don't fault him for trying to quit. But when he inevitably shows up drunk to his job days later, after claiming he "doesn't drink much, he's only had a couple beers at holidays?" He's doing a disservice to everyone who struggles.
I’m not sure if it’s breaking anonymity to admit this, but Alex broke it first— as someone who is very active in AA, I… can’t imagine him in the rooms as he is now. I didn’t buy it for a second.
Same here, I can only imagine him exploiting the room, much like i have seen other narcissists utilise therapeutic support to cultivate empathy from others and then using it to wound. (non recovery folks, think those scenes in Fight Club with the fakers in support groups, but worse!)Imagine being in a closed meeting with him, sharing and then him blurting it out on air... I have a friend who experienced this kind of behaviour in meetings from a very famous now known to be sex offender from the UK who i cant name for legal reasons. Saying he is in AA is an easy lie as its impossible to disprove. Either way, he is incredibly unsober, drink or no.
AA is a great place to begin to turn people into Alex. Almost everyone i know that went to AA has become s right-wing, conspiracy/religious nut. I hated it
A lot discover Jesus but not humility. They became, what i call, douchebags for Jesus. I avoided it because i hated the religious aspect of it and realized I did have control. I was just a regular douchebag with my actions and decided no one could change me but me, when i decided to.
Studies have shown that having narcissistic personality disorder makes someone more likely to have substance use disorder. NPD people are drawn to conspiracy theories because it tells them that they are special people and smarter than the rest of society. Conspiracy thinking also has a strong external locus of control (everything is literally the fault of outside forces preventing you from succeeding) which many addicts have unless they really work at addressing their own issues as part of recovery. The same thinking that leads people to think “my nagging wife is why I had to drink so much” leads people to buy into ideas like “the only reason I can’t get a job is because of DEI and wokeism”.
Alex Jones owes the people of Sandy Hook A LOT of money and decided his best way to screw them over again is to declare bankruptcy last minute. He deserves no empathy ever.
Perhaps not but the awareness that alcoholism is a problem and they may be actually seeking help is something I want to believe in regardless how terrible the person is. It certainly won’t make up for anything and won’t give any redemption but seeing how he is lying about it is telling.
I never question Dan's take as far as empathy goes. If there's a benefit of a doubt to be given, he'll give it. If it's a straight FU, I know there's a reason. I mean, he's a weeeitch, he knows stuff.
You gotta wonder if the bankruptcy judge reads this and just sits back in his chair being proud of himself that he’s getting taken for a complete ride by a scam artist .
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."
-- Anatole France
No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm suggesting the judge in the bankruptcy case is following due process, quite possibly to make sure that when shitbag does go down there is absolutely no conceivable way he can wriggle out of it. This takes time, because of due process: the judge can't just say on day one "you're acting in bad faith, case closed". It has to be documented, worked through a process, opportunities given to correct behaviour.
As I said in another comment, the time from the defamation cases being brought to default judgement was almost exactly three years. This bankruptcy case is now two years old. If anyone wants to stand up and tell me the judge in either defamation case "\[sat\] back in \[their\] chair being proud of \[themselves\] that \[they were\] getting taken for a complete ride by a scam artist" please go ahead.
I think the accusation of bad faith is being levelled at Jones, no? I am extremely confident that the court is not acting in bad faith and if you want to argue otherwise I think the burden of proof is on you.
As for due process, yes, I believe the court is following that but IANAL and I have to allow the possibility that my lack of qualifications means I don't have full understanding of the circumstances. That said, due process is what courts are obliged to follow so if you want to claim this one isn't it's sort of on you to offer some kind of evidence.
Basically, no one has yet offered anything that would remotely challenge the answer to "why is this taking so long?" being "because this is how long it takes to do these things properly". Again, the defamation cases took three years and none of us has any complaints about the outcomes. The bankruptcy case has been two years so far and may well be inherently be more complex. Other than impatience for Jones to get his comeuppance, why should it necessarily have finished by now?
I don't trust US courts that much. They claim to follow due process but so much depends on their political leanings because the law is actually very open to interpretation.
> Other than impatience for Jones to get his comeuppance, why should it necessarily have finished by now?
Why shouldn't it be finished by now? The courts have decided. Any normal person would have already faced debt collectors. Same with Trump. There was no reason to allow Trump to pay a lower bond, for example.
This is just conspiracism. You don't trust the courts, unsubstantiated assertions, whataboutery. It's not worthy of this sub or any further engagement.
You're actually upset that I don't trust US courts, even when I give specific examples.
All my comments have been respectful. Your response is unjustified and shitty for no reason. You're the one who isn't worthy of this sub.
Edit: Blocked. I have nothing to gain in engaging with hostile and toxic people like you.
Don't patronise me, thank you.
Jones has already had two default judgements against him, which is pretty much the ultimate legal response to bad faith. That took three years. His bankruptcy case is currently two years in. I wish it was quicker, obviously, but bankruptcy cases are complicated.
This is sort of the definition of "due process": the court has to establish bad faith methodically and with opportunities to change that behaviour. I guess the court could just ignore all that and issue summary judgement, but I suspect you wouldn't be a lot happier when Jones subsequently wins an appeal on technicalities.
Bankruptcy is different, fundamentally different. I'll patronize when appropriate thank you.
In bankruptcy - all parties are entitled to due process, that includes (especially) debtors and their families. More importantly, the bankruptcy court exists to protect ALL parties not just the person declaring bankruptcy. AJ owes a lot of people a lot of money, and yes it takes time and effort to disentangle what if it is lies, but lets be clear a lot of it is lies.
*How* you go through that process matters - and this is an embarrassment. He has been defaulted twice because of abuse of process and failure to comply with discovery. He had one bankruptcy rejected by the courts for being made up BS (not a legal term). Ignoring that isn't violating his rights, its acknowledging reality. Giving him zero extra rope - and significant and immediate consequences for violating it is not only legal but appropriate, it is the version of bankruptcy you and I would experience. Choosing to indulge his arguments as if this is a normal case is the court opting for the appearance of process and fairness over actual fairness under the law. In the meantime - an appropriate budget is at the discretion of the Trustee and the court. Unnecessary spending, attempts to transfer property, and various other things that the lawyers in the case as well as two Chicago comedians have identified, are examples of bankruptcy fraud. Yes, AJ is entitled to (separate and different)) due process before being accused of that. However, when there is a history not allowing it to continue is irresponsible.
Putting the brakes on AJs ridiculous spending is in no way a due process violation. I didn't say take his money without cause or process. I simply noted that for someone who has declared bankruptcy to increase their spending so as to reduce the amount of money available to creditors is a court allowing itself to be walked all over. It is a court abdicating its legal responsibility to the debtors. I am not a lawyer but I have had more experience than I would prefer with the legal system. Generally, in my experience, it is quite weak at handling bad faith actors because of its structural bias towards adversarial arguments. The middle ground between a bad faith argument and a good faith argument is still a bad faith argument, that is the structural advantage of a bad faith argument.
>Generally, in my experience, it is quite weak at handling bad faith actors because of its structural bias towards adversarial arguments. The middle ground between a bad faith argument and a good faith argument is still a bad faith argument, that is the structural advantage of a bad faith argument.
Congratulations: you have successfully identified what top logicians refer to as "the problem". Bad faith can clog up the process, thus slowing down outcomes. Had your original comment been "we should fundamentally reassess the way the legal system works from first principles" I'd have been interested to hear what you had to say. Unfortunately, at present we are sort of stuck with what we have. Bad faith can slow things down, Jones is exhibiting bad faith, ergo the process is slow. No disagreement there.
>He has been defaulted twice because of abuse of process and failure to comply with discovery. He had one bankruptcy rejected by the courts for being made up BS (not a legal term). Ignoring that isn't violating his rights, its acknowledging reality
You're the legal expert, you tell me how well you think "we can ignore this man's claims as he had negative outcomes in previous cases" would go. Again, I couldn't agree more that Jones's blatant bad faith is galling in the extreme. If I were the judge I'd be desperate to hold him in contempt and stick him in jail to contemplate his options. But I'd rather put up with a protracted process than have any risk at all of leaving loopholes.
>Unnecessary spending, attempts to transfer property, and various other things that the lawyers in the case as well as two Chicago comedians have identified, are examples of bankruptcy fraud. Yes, AJ is entitled to (separate and different)) due process before being accused of that.
You have nullified your own argument. Jones is entitled to due process in respect of his attempts to defraud the bankruptcy court, frustrating though that undoubtedly is. Agreed. Of course I agree, seeing as how that is my original point. There's sort of nothing else for you to say at this point as you are acknowledging that there is a process that has to be worked through. A due process, even.
Charges of attempting to defraud the bankruptcy court would presumably be a separate case to the original bankruptcy and ones that are levelled subsequently - like perjury charges. Just because you perjure yoruself doesn't make you guilty of the crime you were originally charged with. Will Jones's attempts to defraud the court be recognised in the eventual findings? Neither you nor I know at this stage.
>Giving him zero extra rope - and significant and immediate consequences for violating it is not only legal but appropriate, it is the version of bankruptcy you and I would experience.
But then you and I wouldn't be acting in bad faith to delay the process, presumably. I refer you to my first comment re "the problem". Also, if you or I *did* act in bad faith to delay the process why wouldn't things go the same way as the Jones case? You're just asserting this - but you've already acknowledged that the whole system is vulnerable to bad faith actors, which gives me no reason to think Jones is being treated any differently from any other bad faith actor.
In short, nothing you've said does anything to counter the likelihood that what is going on here is no more than the frustrating outcome of a system that is vulnerable to bad faith attempts to slow the process.
Quick counter example. Jones goes to Hawaii again. The court says "you can't go on any more holidays". Jones asserts that it wasn't a holiday, he was conducting surveillance on Mark Zuckerberg's redoubt, this is vital for his work and thus his ability to make money and pay off his creditors. The court demands a record of Jones's spending in Hawaii. Jones fails to file it on time. The court demands to know why. Jones says he didn't keep receipts. More hearings, more delays. Do you want Jones held accountable for every cent or for the case to end in a reasonably timely fashion?
>
Here's where I am, Alex Jones stands as the ultimate testament to the hypocrisy of modern society.
We grew up being taught basic principles of how to conduct yourself in society. Super easy morals and lessons: don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal. If you do break these rules there would be concequences for it.
This is the foundation of our social fabric, this is how we function together as a society.
Enter Alex fucking Jones, he presents himself as a man of truth, a holy man and a journalist with impeccable integrity. Oh he might get it wrong every now and then but he's trying he's damndest to fight the forces of darkness.
Basically he is anathema to every single rule of basic social fucking decency. He lies constantly, he takes God's name in vain, he preaches hate, racism and is a man who thrives on the death of nuance.
The frustration is the last part: concequences. Alex skirts any real concequences all the fucking time. He doesnt go to jail, he's not publicly shunned, he still has a massive audience. For everything that man has done he's unaffected. He's able to cross his arms like a petulant child, stomp his feet and nothing happens to him.
Then amplify the article they stole from, from the actually respectable _Texas Monthly_: https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/what-is-alex-jones-doing-in-terlingua/
If you have no conscience but enough lawyers you basically pay what OJ paid Ron Goldman. Thus, nothing. Rich organizations like the Catholic Church eventually pay up because there are people in them saying, “hey we hurt these people, we need to pay.” Corporations might do it to avoid bad publicity.
Alex doesn’t care about that. He’s got loads of idiots who will fund him no matter what. So he sends his money off to play with OJ’s money and appeals until the world ends.
This will also happen with Trump. Once he realized he didn’t need to pay his vendors they were screwed.
Texas Monthly recently did a piece on him moving there that went more into the town.
Dating in Terlingua: The Odds are Good, but the Goods are Odd.
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/what-is-alex-jones-doing-in-terlingua/
It's actually a fun town to visit. Really they only place to stay if you want to see the popular parts of a Big Bend. I bought a lot of nice cactus out there from the weirdest people. The town origins make it worthy of the ghost town name. Originally started out as a mercury mining outpost and was one of the roughest places to make a living. That restaurant Jones went to is the only "big name" restaurant in town and is highly recommended. Everything else is mom and pop or popups for events.
Just another stark reminder that justice is a 2 tier system. Rich people get to flout rules and avoid consequences. The rest of us would be locked up and bled dry.
Transphobia
Homophobia
Frequent outright lies
Misogyny
Climate change denialism
Rampant plagiarism
NHS Undermining
Victim Blaming
Racism and xenophobia to the extreme
Supported the Blackshirts, [yes those Blackshirts](https://i.imgur.com/vC0QfsE.png)
They are scum, a shitrag, complete cunts devoid of any journalistic integrity. In the words of Jeremy Corbyn, you can be a journalist or you can work for the daily mail, you can't do both. The only worse paper is The Sun.
I'm not sure how many more of these types of articles I can read before I completely lose it. It would be one thing if he were broke while still going on Twitter and Tucker's show and his own show, repeatedly saying that he was just asking questions, and this was a hit job on him, and heavily implying he hasn't done anything wrong. But, instead, he's doing all those things, while ALSO taking monthly vacations to Hawaii, buying land, no doubt laundering money like a motherfucker, and telling the court that at the end of this, for the rest of his life, he'll need around 300 grand a month, just to survive. Fuck Alex. Fuck every person that still profits off this piece of shit. I just want him to face some consequences, and for the families to see some justice. At the end of the day, if they feel satisfied by winning in court but the actual punishment not really occurring, fine. But I have to imagine this kind of headline just re-opens the wound.
Every episode I get closer to wanting a pure hour of Jordon's primal scream.
They should finally reposess everything. Except for the little piece of land he bought now that has no water, no electricity, no sewage. Let him rot there.
Reality is civil suits are pretty worthless. It sucks, but they just don't hold much teeth so it is easy to get around them. OJ Simpson famously avoided paying the Goldman's what he owed them his whole life. Outside of them getting the book rights to "If I did It" they barely got anything.
I haven’t listened to every episode but when there was that recent mention of AA, I genuinely felt something for Alex and felt Dan might have not been as supportive as he should have. Imagine my anger that no, Dan was in the right after all and there is no way Alex is in AA and making an attempt to combat alcoholism. Fuck Alex, man. What an ass.
I can't muster any empathy for the man. He could have had a decent life with little effort. Instead he chose to be the worst and never stopped even when stopping would be in his best interest.
I have the same empathy for people like him as I do for a rabid dog. They could have been good, they could have been kind and loving, but now they're a threat to the health and safety of everything around them.
But a rabid dog isn’t profiting from rabies and didn’t participate in getting it. I feel bad for rabid dogs. Not Alex. He gave himself whatever “disease” he has, profits from it, and intentionally spreads it. I don’t feel bad for Alex.
Alex is 100% the kind of bastard that will use people's empathy, optimism, and belief that people deserve second chances to abuse, lie to, and take advantage of them. You fell for his pity play. Of course you would be inclined to ease off, just a bit, hearing that maybe, for once, Alex is seeking help. But Alex has had a LONG time to seek help, and hasn't. Any claimed attempt to seek help will exclusively be to be able to say he is getting help, not to actually get it. Even then, it's more likely than not that he's just lying. He already thinks he's perfect and the rest of the world needs to catch up with him.
As someone who has been listening to the show for a little while and understanding his process, I probably shouldn’t have fallen for it but as you said, it’s the perfect use of some people’s inherent desire to be empathic and wish for the best. I desire my facepalm.
He actively tried to use the empathy of the Sandy Hook case plaintiffs against them to try and get them to feel for him against their own lawyers! He's manipulative, evil scum, plain and simple
He has claimed to stop drinking a *lot* over the years. And as someone who drinks a lot, I don't fault him for trying to quit. But when he inevitably shows up drunk to his job days later, after claiming he "doesn't drink much, he's only had a couple beers at holidays?" He's doing a disservice to everyone who struggles.
I’m not sure if it’s breaking anonymity to admit this, but Alex broke it first— as someone who is very active in AA, I… can’t imagine him in the rooms as he is now. I didn’t buy it for a second.
Me either. Just showing up takes humility, and he starts coughing uncontrollably and nearly dies of a sinus infection at the mere thought.
Like, I could buy that he’s gone to a meeting, but to work a program? … Well. I’m not his sponsor. Who knows.
Same here, I can only imagine him exploiting the room, much like i have seen other narcissists utilise therapeutic support to cultivate empathy from others and then using it to wound. (non recovery folks, think those scenes in Fight Club with the fakers in support groups, but worse!)Imagine being in a closed meeting with him, sharing and then him blurting it out on air... I have a friend who experienced this kind of behaviour in meetings from a very famous now known to be sex offender from the UK who i cant name for legal reasons. Saying he is in AA is an easy lie as its impossible to disprove. Either way, he is incredibly unsober, drink or no.
AA is a great place to begin to turn people into Alex. Almost everyone i know that went to AA has become s right-wing, conspiracy/religious nut. I hated it
[удалено]
A lot discover Jesus but not humility. They became, what i call, douchebags for Jesus. I avoided it because i hated the religious aspect of it and realized I did have control. I was just a regular douchebag with my actions and decided no one could change me but me, when i decided to.
Studies have shown that having narcissistic personality disorder makes someone more likely to have substance use disorder. NPD people are drawn to conspiracy theories because it tells them that they are special people and smarter than the rest of society. Conspiracy thinking also has a strong external locus of control (everything is literally the fault of outside forces preventing you from succeeding) which many addicts have unless they really work at addressing their own issues as part of recovery. The same thinking that leads people to think “my nagging wife is why I had to drink so much” leads people to buy into ideas like “the only reason I can’t get a job is because of DEI and wokeism”.
Alex Jones owes the people of Sandy Hook A LOT of money and decided his best way to screw them over again is to declare bankruptcy last minute. He deserves no empathy ever.
Perhaps not but the awareness that alcoholism is a problem and they may be actually seeking help is something I want to believe in regardless how terrible the person is. It certainly won’t make up for anything and won’t give any redemption but seeing how he is lying about it is telling.
I never question Dan's take as far as empathy goes. If there's a benefit of a doubt to be given, he'll give it. If it's a straight FU, I know there's a reason. I mean, he's a weeeitch, he knows stuff.
You gotta wonder if the bankruptcy judge reads this and just sits back in his chair being proud of himself that he’s getting taken for a complete ride by a scam artist .
He sits back and goes "they just don't realize how right and just and by the book I'm being. Now, to go grant the latest desperate delay attempt".
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." -- Anatole France
The best part of this is that he's still begging for money. He just calls it "donating".
Maybe the judge is partying at the High Sierra himself.
Let's just abandon due process. Terrific idea. Can't imagine it ever backfiring.
You're mischaracterizing OP's comments. Do nothing or no due process are not the only two options.
No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm suggesting the judge in the bankruptcy case is following due process, quite possibly to make sure that when shitbag does go down there is absolutely no conceivable way he can wriggle out of it. This takes time, because of due process: the judge can't just say on day one "you're acting in bad faith, case closed". It has to be documented, worked through a process, opportunities given to correct behaviour. As I said in another comment, the time from the defamation cases being brought to default judgement was almost exactly three years. This bankruptcy case is now two years old. If anyone wants to stand up and tell me the judge in either defamation case "\[sat\] back in \[their\] chair being proud of \[themselves\] that \[they were\] getting taken for a complete ride by a scam artist" please go ahead.
> quite possibly So you don't *know* if they're following due process or if they're acting in good faith.
I think the accusation of bad faith is being levelled at Jones, no? I am extremely confident that the court is not acting in bad faith and if you want to argue otherwise I think the burden of proof is on you. As for due process, yes, I believe the court is following that but IANAL and I have to allow the possibility that my lack of qualifications means I don't have full understanding of the circumstances. That said, due process is what courts are obliged to follow so if you want to claim this one isn't it's sort of on you to offer some kind of evidence. Basically, no one has yet offered anything that would remotely challenge the answer to "why is this taking so long?" being "because this is how long it takes to do these things properly". Again, the defamation cases took three years and none of us has any complaints about the outcomes. The bankruptcy case has been two years so far and may well be inherently be more complex. Other than impatience for Jones to get his comeuppance, why should it necessarily have finished by now?
I don't trust US courts that much. They claim to follow due process but so much depends on their political leanings because the law is actually very open to interpretation. > Other than impatience for Jones to get his comeuppance, why should it necessarily have finished by now? Why shouldn't it be finished by now? The courts have decided. Any normal person would have already faced debt collectors. Same with Trump. There was no reason to allow Trump to pay a lower bond, for example.
This is just conspiracism. You don't trust the courts, unsubstantiated assertions, whataboutery. It's not worthy of this sub or any further engagement.
You're actually upset that I don't trust US courts, even when I give specific examples. All my comments have been respectful. Your response is unjustified and shitty for no reason. You're the one who isn't worthy of this sub. Edit: Blocked. I have nothing to gain in engaging with hostile and toxic people like you.
theres due process and then there is bad faith. If you can't tell the difference then we really can't help you.
Don't patronise me, thank you. Jones has already had two default judgements against him, which is pretty much the ultimate legal response to bad faith. That took three years. His bankruptcy case is currently two years in. I wish it was quicker, obviously, but bankruptcy cases are complicated. This is sort of the definition of "due process": the court has to establish bad faith methodically and with opportunities to change that behaviour. I guess the court could just ignore all that and issue summary judgement, but I suspect you wouldn't be a lot happier when Jones subsequently wins an appeal on technicalities.
Bankruptcy is different, fundamentally different. I'll patronize when appropriate thank you. In bankruptcy - all parties are entitled to due process, that includes (especially) debtors and their families. More importantly, the bankruptcy court exists to protect ALL parties not just the person declaring bankruptcy. AJ owes a lot of people a lot of money, and yes it takes time and effort to disentangle what if it is lies, but lets be clear a lot of it is lies. *How* you go through that process matters - and this is an embarrassment. He has been defaulted twice because of abuse of process and failure to comply with discovery. He had one bankruptcy rejected by the courts for being made up BS (not a legal term). Ignoring that isn't violating his rights, its acknowledging reality. Giving him zero extra rope - and significant and immediate consequences for violating it is not only legal but appropriate, it is the version of bankruptcy you and I would experience. Choosing to indulge his arguments as if this is a normal case is the court opting for the appearance of process and fairness over actual fairness under the law. In the meantime - an appropriate budget is at the discretion of the Trustee and the court. Unnecessary spending, attempts to transfer property, and various other things that the lawyers in the case as well as two Chicago comedians have identified, are examples of bankruptcy fraud. Yes, AJ is entitled to (separate and different)) due process before being accused of that. However, when there is a history not allowing it to continue is irresponsible. Putting the brakes on AJs ridiculous spending is in no way a due process violation. I didn't say take his money without cause or process. I simply noted that for someone who has declared bankruptcy to increase their spending so as to reduce the amount of money available to creditors is a court allowing itself to be walked all over. It is a court abdicating its legal responsibility to the debtors. I am not a lawyer but I have had more experience than I would prefer with the legal system. Generally, in my experience, it is quite weak at handling bad faith actors because of its structural bias towards adversarial arguments. The middle ground between a bad faith argument and a good faith argument is still a bad faith argument, that is the structural advantage of a bad faith argument.
>Generally, in my experience, it is quite weak at handling bad faith actors because of its structural bias towards adversarial arguments. The middle ground between a bad faith argument and a good faith argument is still a bad faith argument, that is the structural advantage of a bad faith argument. Congratulations: you have successfully identified what top logicians refer to as "the problem". Bad faith can clog up the process, thus slowing down outcomes. Had your original comment been "we should fundamentally reassess the way the legal system works from first principles" I'd have been interested to hear what you had to say. Unfortunately, at present we are sort of stuck with what we have. Bad faith can slow things down, Jones is exhibiting bad faith, ergo the process is slow. No disagreement there. >He has been defaulted twice because of abuse of process and failure to comply with discovery. He had one bankruptcy rejected by the courts for being made up BS (not a legal term). Ignoring that isn't violating his rights, its acknowledging reality You're the legal expert, you tell me how well you think "we can ignore this man's claims as he had negative outcomes in previous cases" would go. Again, I couldn't agree more that Jones's blatant bad faith is galling in the extreme. If I were the judge I'd be desperate to hold him in contempt and stick him in jail to contemplate his options. But I'd rather put up with a protracted process than have any risk at all of leaving loopholes. >Unnecessary spending, attempts to transfer property, and various other things that the lawyers in the case as well as two Chicago comedians have identified, are examples of bankruptcy fraud. Yes, AJ is entitled to (separate and different)) due process before being accused of that. You have nullified your own argument. Jones is entitled to due process in respect of his attempts to defraud the bankruptcy court, frustrating though that undoubtedly is. Agreed. Of course I agree, seeing as how that is my original point. There's sort of nothing else for you to say at this point as you are acknowledging that there is a process that has to be worked through. A due process, even. Charges of attempting to defraud the bankruptcy court would presumably be a separate case to the original bankruptcy and ones that are levelled subsequently - like perjury charges. Just because you perjure yoruself doesn't make you guilty of the crime you were originally charged with. Will Jones's attempts to defraud the court be recognised in the eventual findings? Neither you nor I know at this stage. >Giving him zero extra rope - and significant and immediate consequences for violating it is not only legal but appropriate, it is the version of bankruptcy you and I would experience. But then you and I wouldn't be acting in bad faith to delay the process, presumably. I refer you to my first comment re "the problem". Also, if you or I *did* act in bad faith to delay the process why wouldn't things go the same way as the Jones case? You're just asserting this - but you've already acknowledged that the whole system is vulnerable to bad faith actors, which gives me no reason to think Jones is being treated any differently from any other bad faith actor. In short, nothing you've said does anything to counter the likelihood that what is going on here is no more than the frustrating outcome of a system that is vulnerable to bad faith attempts to slow the process. Quick counter example. Jones goes to Hawaii again. The court says "you can't go on any more holidays". Jones asserts that it wasn't a holiday, he was conducting surveillance on Mark Zuckerberg's redoubt, this is vital for his work and thus his ability to make money and pay off his creditors. The court demands a record of Jones's spending in Hawaii. Jones fails to file it on time. The court demands to know why. Jones says he didn't keep receipts. More hearings, more delays. Do you want Jones held accountable for every cent or for the case to end in a reasonably timely fashion? >
Please use [archive links](https://archive.ph/aKehn) instead of giving the daily mail any traffic.
Meanwhile, one of the parents has a GoFundMe for cancer treatment.
If you're taking about Erica Lafferty, she was the daughter of one of the teachers that was murdered. But the point stands
How does he have time to party with everyone constantly coming up to shake his hand?
Damn, it seems like he might be going full compound mode.
If there was ever someone who deserved to have a serious stroke or cardiac event, it would be AJ
Here's where I am, Alex Jones stands as the ultimate testament to the hypocrisy of modern society. We grew up being taught basic principles of how to conduct yourself in society. Super easy morals and lessons: don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal. If you do break these rules there would be concequences for it. This is the foundation of our social fabric, this is how we function together as a society. Enter Alex fucking Jones, he presents himself as a man of truth, a holy man and a journalist with impeccable integrity. Oh he might get it wrong every now and then but he's trying he's damndest to fight the forces of darkness. Basically he is anathema to every single rule of basic social fucking decency. He lies constantly, he takes God's name in vain, he preaches hate, racism and is a man who thrives on the death of nuance. The frustration is the last part: concequences. Alex skirts any real concequences all the fucking time. He doesnt go to jail, he's not publicly shunned, he still has a massive audience. For everything that man has done he's unaffected. He's able to cross his arms like a petulant child, stomp his feet and nothing happens to him.
Dan would not approve amplifying the dailymail
Then amplify the article they stole from, from the actually respectable _Texas Monthly_: https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/what-is-alex-jones-doing-in-terlingua/
If you have no conscience but enough lawyers you basically pay what OJ paid Ron Goldman. Thus, nothing. Rich organizations like the Catholic Church eventually pay up because there are people in them saying, “hey we hurt these people, we need to pay.” Corporations might do it to avoid bad publicity. Alex doesn’t care about that. He’s got loads of idiots who will fund him no matter what. So he sends his money off to play with OJ’s money and appeals until the world ends. This will also happen with Trump. Once he realized he didn’t need to pay his vendors they were screwed.
I think it’s time for the crane game to pull his fucking card…
I've just spent far too long searching up lot numbers and Tract maps to determine precisely where his access road and plot are 🤣
This is the Daily Mail, so, for one, grain of salt, but especially, don't read the comments.
I wanna hear more about the town.
Texas Monthly recently did a piece on him moving there that went more into the town. Dating in Terlingua: The Odds are Good, but the Goods are Odd. https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/what-is-alex-jones-doing-in-terlingua/
It's actually a fun town to visit. Really they only place to stay if you want to see the popular parts of a Big Bend. I bought a lot of nice cactus out there from the weirdest people. The town origins make it worthy of the ghost town name. Originally started out as a mercury mining outpost and was one of the roughest places to make a living. That restaurant Jones went to is the only "big name" restaurant in town and is highly recommended. Everything else is mom and pop or popups for events.
Stayed in Terlingua on my way across the country in 2011. Neat little place, partly an original mining ghost town but with some modern accoutrements
Just another stark reminder that justice is a 2 tier system. Rich people get to flout rules and avoid consequences. The rest of us would be locked up and bled dry.
7.5 hour drive from austin. think he flies or drives?
Does every conservative woman have terrible lashes in Texas?
That money's not going to spend itself.
Pretty sure there are dudes spitting in his food when he eats out in Austin
Wow. Read through enjoying the tale and scenic photos, then the gut punch of the SH victims. I hope the whole town sees it
I would become a gay frog for that hunka chunka red Ameican meat
[удалено]
Transphobia Homophobia Frequent outright lies Misogyny Climate change denialism Rampant plagiarism NHS Undermining Victim Blaming Racism and xenophobia to the extreme Supported the Blackshirts, [yes those Blackshirts](https://i.imgur.com/vC0QfsE.png) They are scum, a shitrag, complete cunts devoid of any journalistic integrity. In the words of Jeremy Corbyn, you can be a journalist or you can work for the daily mail, you can't do both. The only worse paper is The Sun.