- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Alex Jones Sues The Onion and Sandy Hook Families Over ‘Rigged’ Auction of Infowars
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:05 pm to SoWhat
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:05 pm to SoWhat
quote:
You just spoke to silencing him them lawfare.
Oh shite, we're back on the "civil lawsuits can be lawfare" bus. The definition has changed (again)
I don't know if I have time for this today
3
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I don't know if I have time for this today
Is this the one day a month you're working from the office?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:10 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
Is this the one day a month you're working from the office?
You mean basically every day M-F unless I'm in court?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:13 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
You do realize this us pure opinion, based on what others are saying, right?
Because objectively youre wrong. There is no amount to account for the damage this dipshit caused those peoples reputations.
These MAGA bitches are still claiming the parents are in the wrong.
There it is. This seems to be the heart of your problems. You aren't taking the elections very well. Maybe you should take a break from the internet and relax rather than lash out like some emotional pre-teen girl.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Oh shite, we're back on the "civil lawsuits can be lawfare" bus
Are you insinuating that a civil lawsuit with a pliable judge can't be weaponized? Surely you aren't that naive.
A billion dollar settlement over harassment? He could've killed the kids himself and got a much smaller civil penalty.
There is nothing wrong with lawsuits. But this entire case, from the ridiculous monetary award to the rigged bankruptcy "auction" should be concerning to any rational observer.
The entire point was to put a media outlet out of business, which should not be the goal of a court. It should be to reward the victims with a fair payout for their suffering. Jones didn't kill those kids, but they are treating him like he did.
An award of a few million total would've been more than sufficient, and they would've already been paid and this would be over.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Oh shite, we're back on the "civil lawsuits can be lawfare" bus. The definition has changed (again)
I don't know if I have time for this today
Yeah don't worry about it, Jean E Carroll suit and award was completely legit. As you were..
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:15 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I suppose this depends on the perspective.
Well assessing damages in impossible amounts seems counterproductive.
How's he ever going to pay if you put him out of business?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:17 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
How's he ever going to pay if you put him out of business?
Exactly. They wanted him out of business. They didn't care about actually getting the parents money.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:17 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
RogerTheShrubber
Should anyone that has stated that the holocaust is fake, be subjected to pay $37 million per family member of the individuals that died in the holocaust?
Should anyone that defames President Trump as a terrorist and a "threat to democracy" be subjected to a penalty of $37 million to the Trump family?
We can play this game of picking and choosing what "should happen" that is based solely on your individual soft feelings vs. the rational and proportional judgement.
Or maybe, just admit you're an over emotional bitch who is seething from November 6th so you can't form a rational thought for the next couple months.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:18 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Are you insinuating that a civil lawsuit with a pliable judge can't be weaponized?
Then literally any court case is "lawfare" by that definition.
quote:
A billion dollar settlement over harassment?
I'm sure this would have been overturned and recalculated had he not filed bankruptcy.
quote:
The entire point was to put a media outlet out of business, which should not be the goal of a court. I
Shall I go bump all of the Nick Sandman threads?
Was his lawsuit "lawfare"?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:18 pm to BugAC
It’s pathetic. These liberals do not have one single good point as to why Jones should be punished for his thoughts on Sandy Hook. They are certifiably insane.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:19 pm to SoWhat
quote:
Yeah don't worry about it, Jean E Carroll suit and award was completely legit
If civil suits are now lawfare, can we discus the awards Trump got from Stormy Daniels as lawfare?
Hell, you can even use the "silencing political opposition" angle
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:20 pm to ShinerHorns
quote:
These liberals do not have one single good point as to why Jones should be punished for his thoughts on Sandy Hook.
He should have been held liable for clear misrepresentation. The damages were clearly excessive.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He should have been held liable for clear misrepresentation. The damages were clearly excessive.
What should the damages be for anyone that denies the holocaust?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
f civil suits are now lawfare,
Are you implying that lawfare does not exist? Even after what has transpired over the last year?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:24 pm to BugAC
quote:
What should the damages be for anyone that denies the holocaust?
You're going to have a standing problem.
Which individual would be harmed by that in order to bring the suit?
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:24 pm to wackatimesthree
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:26 pm to BugAC
quote:
Are you implying that lawfare does not exist?
Not specifically. I'm saying the definition just changed (again).
It seems to be a malleable term that is the typical "when the out-group does x, it's illegitimate by default, but when the in-group does it, it's legitimate by default" scenario.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Shall I go bump all of the Nick Sandman threads?
Was his lawsuit "lawfare"?
Are we basing our definitions on the comments of anonymous posters now?
Did any business get bankrupted over the Nick Sandman lawsuit? No they did not.
As far as I can tell Sandman was settled privately and the amounts were never revealed. That tells me that he received an amount commensurate to his suffering and that the networks could afford to pay. No judge was involved.
Had any judge awarded him a $1 billion, I would disagree with that as well.
You spend too much time arguing over the definition of "lawfare" while missing that it is actually a thing.
I personally consider "lawfare" to be a weaponizing of the justice system to use the legal process itself to punish political enemies. But there can be other definitions.
Certainly all lawsuits are not "lawfare" and many lawsuits, even involving political rivals, are legitimate.
Posted on 11/20/24 at 1:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Which individual would be harmed by that in order to bring the suit?
Families of the victims of the holocaust.
Page 11 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News