Speaker 1: Come on, Well, that's how you start a podcast. That's
Speaker 1: how professionals start their professional podcasts. That's their real big
Speaker 1: boy jobs. That's right, Hey, everybody, welcome back to Knowledge
Speaker 1: Fight the Bastards. I'm Jordan's that I am allegedly Robert Evans,
Speaker 1: but I'm I'm very tired right now and making myself
Speaker 1: some coffee to get perked up. What do we? What
Speaker 1: do we? What do we? What do we? What? What
Speaker 1: are we? What are we? Man? The big questions are
Speaker 1: what we're going to deal with today. That's how you
Speaker 1: fucking cast a pod. Welcome to listen. Man. At the
Speaker 1: quantum level, we don't even know where our fucking electrons are. Man,
Speaker 1: what are you see? That's that Jordan's that's the title
Speaker 1: of a whole podcast right there. Can I recommend to
Speaker 1: you Reset Wars. It's gonna blow your mind. It's the
Speaker 1: most important work someone's ever done. So, speaking of blown minds,
Speaker 1: I think Alex's mind has been mind has been blown
Speaker 1: lately by the idea that there are consequences occasionally for
Speaker 1: saying things that is true. It can happen, it had
Speaker 1: it appears to be in the process of happening. He
Speaker 1: seems to be in the finding out portion of the
Speaker 1: fucking around. Um, and I guess that's what we're talking
Speaker 1: about today, is it not, Dan, Yeah, definitely, And I
Speaker 1: would say in terms of that he got more than
Speaker 1: his share of fucking around. He certainly did. The ratio
Speaker 1: of finding out to fucking around is quite low. It's astonishing, really. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean we're yet to see what the damages are
Speaker 1: in the cases that he's lost, but I mean it
Speaker 1: could be a huge blow of finding house. But still,
Speaker 1: like there's a lot of sucking around that didn't end
Speaker 1: up getting figured out. It's hard not to argue that
Speaker 1: he really could believe for a long stretch of time
Speaker 1: that he could funk around without ever having to find out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and he could probably convince himself that he was a charmed,
Speaker 1: lucky person who like is untouchable because basically nothing ever
Speaker 1: and he and he was. That's a reasonable conclusion to
Speaker 1: come to until it really wasn't. Well. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: really safe to be like Hillary Clinton is a demon
Speaker 1: and sorrows and stuff because they are public figures and
Speaker 1: they're never going to take the time to respond to
Speaker 1: anything you say. And who among us has not insisted
Speaker 1: that Hillary Clinton is a demon in some form or another.
Speaker 1: I think two or three of us, probably he who
Speaker 1: has said that's in so uh Robert him talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about the lawsuits today. Yay, Um, this is
Speaker 1: exciting to this is very exciting because this is so
Speaker 1: rarely I guess, I mean, there's You can view this
Speaker 1: in two ways. One of them is that this is
Speaker 1: a rare case of a bastard actually getting their come upance,
Speaker 1: and it it continues to be beautiful to watch unfold.
Speaker 1: The less optimistic is to actually think about the raw
Speaker 1: amount of human effort that was necessary for Alex to
Speaker 1: kind of start to pay the price for the things
Speaker 1: he's been doing, like because we're pretty early in the
Speaker 1: finding out period, although we are we are starting to
Speaker 1: hit the fun part of that. It's yeah, And I
Speaker 1: think the other thing that's kind of like sour grapes
Speaker 1: about it is that, like, you know, he's gonna find out,
Speaker 1: but it's not like he's going to learn his lessons
Speaker 1: and everybody who listened to him and believed that he
Speaker 1: was saying something meaningful isn't going to find out along
Speaker 1: with him. No, it's kind of the disappointing down to earth.
Speaker 1: And at the same time, though, I mean, there's it's inarguable.
Speaker 1: I mean you just had Gareth and uh Dave on
Speaker 1: from the Dollar. Yeah, and I'm fairly certain that he
Speaker 1: said on your show, like there's something very satisfying about
Speaker 1: seeing a career grifter finally get his come up and
Speaker 1: and it's it's impossible to argue that. Yeah, you know
Speaker 1: it is. It is nice when it happens this exactly
Speaker 1: the one time that it's happened. Right, there's that catch
Speaker 1: me if you can kind of like that spirit that
Speaker 1: we love of of like, oh, he's gonna get away
Speaker 1: with it. But then also at a certain point you
Speaker 1: go too far, and yeah, so here we go. Alex
Speaker 1: is getting sued in multiple cases stemming from his coverage
Speaker 1: of Sandy Hook in both Texas and Connecticut. He recently
Speaker 1: settled a case where he was being sued over statements
Speaker 1: he made about Brennan Gilmore and the Unite the Right rally.
Speaker 1: He's also facing still facing a case where he's being
Speaker 1: sued for misidentifying a person named Marcel Fontaine as the
Speaker 1: Parkland shooter. He's lost all the Sandy Hook cases by default, judgment,
Speaker 1: and at this point it's just a matter of the
Speaker 1: jury deciding how much he owes and damages. It's just
Speaker 1: a money thing. The Texas cases go to trial on April,
Speaker 1: and if I recall correctly, the Connecticut ones are set
Speaker 1: for I think it's just one case in Connecticut. It
Speaker 1: set for this summer. Yeah, I'm not sure when Fontane
Speaker 1: goes to trial, but Alex is absolutely going to lose
Speaker 1: that case. He definitely did the thing and he is
Speaker 1: not taking any of it seriously, which is fun like
Speaker 1: a default judgment. That's like, I mean, it's slightly more
Speaker 1: common than football games being called on account of unicorns, right, Like,
Speaker 1: it doesn't happen fairly. Yeah, yeah, it's it's super rare,
Speaker 1: except for in cases where people Bills lost all those
Speaker 1: Super Bowls. There's too many unicorns on the field one
Speaker 1: one year. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think there were three
Speaker 1: in a row. One was unicorns, one was trolls. Yeah.
Speaker 1: That Tom Brady got elevated to the quarterback of the
Speaker 1: Patriots because Doug Flutie was ward by a unicorn. It
Speaker 1: was brutal, dangerous. Got on the business had word for unicorns,
Speaker 1: we wouldn't have to deal with that asshole. So yeah,
Speaker 1: Kid Daniels, the guy who wrote the initial story that
Speaker 1: identified Fontane as the shooter, sat for a deposition, and
Speaker 1: at many points he testified things that will read very
Speaker 1: similarly to a confession in a courtroom setting, So that
Speaker 1: one is fun that one's screwed. For Alex, there's no hope.
Speaker 1: There's not much more you can say other than if
Speaker 1: somebody murdered a guy and you said in your deposition,
Speaker 1: probably murdered that guy, and Alex told me to exactly,
Speaker 1: it's not gonna go well after that. This is what
Speaker 1: most lawyers would call inadvised. Yes. Yeah, I think one
Speaker 1: of the main misconceptions about the cases against Alex is
Speaker 1: that they're just about him asking questions about the Sandy
Speaker 1: Hook shooting, and that is just not the case. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of things that need to be unpacked, and
Speaker 1: the first is that the only reason that this case
Speaker 1: is able to be taken to court is because Owen
Speaker 1: Shroyer made video was uh, you know, one of them
Speaker 1: was claiming that it was not possible for Neil Hesslin
Speaker 1: to have held his son after the shooting, and Alex
Speaker 1: covered Owen's video on his own show, and they did
Speaker 1: this in ten. This was in response to Mr Hesslyn
Speaker 1: appearing in an interview with Megan Kelly discussing the conspiracy
Speaker 1: theories about his son's death, which obviously angered Info Wars
Speaker 1: in concert. In concert with this, Erika Lafferty, whose mother
Speaker 1: was the principle of the school and died in the
Speaker 1: shooting UH she made a public comment that Trump needed
Speaker 1: to publicly distance himself from Alex, someone who had traumatized
Speaker 1: her and many other families. In response to both these things,
Speaker 1: Owen made videos attacking Hesslin and Lafferty, which Alex reaired
Speaker 1: other things that Alex had said in for example, those
Speaker 1: would be outside the statute of limitations, but this re
Speaker 1: airing of the claims made them fair game. It was
Speaker 1: a huge strategic error on Alex and Owen's part, But
Speaker 1: they have just gotten away with everything up to this point.
Speaker 1: Like we talked about the funk around all the time.
Speaker 1: Why wouldn't it work. The idea of the strategy is
Speaker 1: almost anathema to them, so making a strategic error is
Speaker 1: as something they feel is impossible to do. You know.
Speaker 1: The second thing that's important to my clear is that
Speaker 1: Alex and For's were not just asking questions. They were
Speaker 1: promoting Wolfgang how Big, who is actively harassing the family
Speaker 1: members of the victims of the shooting. They were helping
Speaker 1: how Big raise money to fund his activities. They were
Speaker 1: painting victims family members like Lenny Posner as enemies of
Speaker 1: the First Amendment and publicly airing the address where he
Speaker 1: received his mail. They sent Dan Badandhi, a reporter whose
Speaker 1: only talent is yelling and causing a scene, to Newtown
Speaker 1: along with Wolfgang how Big, where they harassed people affected
Speaker 1: by the shooting. Oh yeah, this is okay. When you
Speaker 1: put it all together like that, it sounds like they were,
Speaker 1: you know, ghoulishly harassing the parents murdered children. But yeah,
Speaker 1: when you're taking into account, Dan, is the content I
Speaker 1: have taken to account? No, I think we've we've been
Speaker 1: so uh taking into account the content not not not Well,
Speaker 1: maybe we can talk about this on the next episode
Speaker 1: of my new show. Robert Evans tracks down people who
Speaker 1: have losts loved ones and recent tragedies and heckles them
Speaker 1: from the street corner as an interesting show. It's an
Speaker 1: interesting show. I am surprised the company is paying for it.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you I think it didn't mind the room,
Speaker 1: The pitch didn't sound good. I'm gonna be honest, there's
Speaker 1: a there's a small chance you would be able to
Speaker 1: pull this off a satire that was the original pitch
Speaker 1: for h Jon Benjamin's dog Bites. Man. I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: it would be funny to like, well, I don't know,
Speaker 1: funny maybe the wrong word, but like as a bit
Speaker 1: to make your thing be like create an Alex Jones
Speaker 1: conspiracy theory, but about like tuberculosis. But you didn't lose
Speaker 1: your mom to TV. There's no such thing. Jokes on you.
Speaker 1: I saw it in the words, there's absolutely no way
Speaker 1: you're going to get out of this without Multiple times
Speaker 1: Jordan has come up with like fake, dumb conspiracy ideas
Speaker 1: and then lo and behold it is impossible. He says, yeah, okay.
Speaker 1: So I think that there's just like this key distinction
Speaker 1: that needs to be made between what actually is going
Speaker 1: on and what they did and the whole idea that
Speaker 1: we were just asking questions, because I think that that
Speaker 1: suckers a lot of people in who would be critical
Speaker 1: of Alex and in for his actions if they understood
Speaker 1: the fuller picture of what they were engaged in. So
Speaker 1: basically we have a number of episodes. Uh, it's a
Speaker 1: series we called Formulaic Objections because in the first one,
Speaker 1: Alex's lawyer keeps saying objection form, so they came up
Speaker 1: with the name that way. But we have a bunch
Speaker 1: of those, and those are long form deconstructions of the
Speaker 1: depositions themselves. But I brought some clips from these depositions
Speaker 1: that I thought would be particularly interesting or relevant, uh,
Speaker 1: to enjoy, to be to be upfront. Uh, this is
Speaker 1: a very condensed version because we have roughly I think
Speaker 1: six Formulaic Objections and a total of at least twenty
Speaker 1: to twenty four hours between those episodes. Probably if if
Speaker 1: you're like, oh, they weren't they weren't as granular as
Speaker 1: they could have been, You're goddamn right, we weren't. The
Speaker 1: the depositions themselves are like six hours long long. UM,
Speaker 1: so yeah, I I am gonna jump in. Are you
Speaker 1: Are you prepared? I am? I am. Well, that maybe
Speaker 1: putting it a little strong, but yes. So one of
Speaker 1: the things that happens throughout the depositions that Alex is
Speaker 1: in is he has claims that he's made repeated to him,
Speaker 1: And the question, obviously is where did this come from?
Speaker 1: Can you back this claim up? And for someone like Alex,
Speaker 1: he everything he says is right. He's totally always right.
Speaker 1: He studies, he researches things, So this shouldn't be a
Speaker 1: real problem for him in a setting where it's like
Speaker 1: you finally have your opportunity to prove things under oath. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is your moment, bro, Yeah, exactly. And consistently he
Speaker 1: has no idea and nothing like he just has nothing,
Speaker 1: never heard of Sandy Hook. So in this first clip
Speaker 1: I have here, it has to do with a claim
Speaker 1: that Alex made that Bloomberg had sent out an email
Speaker 1: just before the Sandy Hook shooting, I think even the
Speaker 1: night before he says to all of his people to
Speaker 1: get ready because something big is going to happen and
Speaker 1: they need to get their gun control agenda squared away.
Speaker 1: So here is a question about his source, like on
Speaker 1: that email. Let's talk about that Bloomberg email that comes
Speaker 1: up this idea that there was an email sent the
Speaker 1: day before Sandy Hook saying get ready next twenty four
Speaker 1: hour is there's gonna be a big event that email
Speaker 1: You've been asked for that email and you say you
Speaker 1: don't have it right, we were. We were covering reports
Speaker 1: of the email that was sent out to the activiscripts
Speaker 1: that have been on the news. Where were you covering it?
Speaker 1: What do you mean were you're covering it? Um? We
Speaker 1: were covering the reports of them activating their their their
Speaker 1: anti gun rights organization. Okay, well, see here's the thing,
Speaker 1: Mr Jones. At first, I thought there must be some
Speaker 1: email coincidentally sent on the day before Sandy Hook that
Speaker 1: Bloomberger as people sent that you must be willfully misinterpreting
Speaker 1: or something like that. But the problem is, nobody who's
Speaker 1: looked at this has been able to find any evidence
Speaker 1: that such an email has ever existed. And I want
Speaker 1: to know if you can excuse it. Well, I'm just
Speaker 1: not taking your person that's the case. Well, I'm asking
Speaker 1: That's why I've asked you questions and discovery and you
Speaker 1: haven't been able to produce that email to me, have you? Well,
Speaker 1: you guys are asking it. We have an email in
Speaker 1: our emails. I was reporting on other news reports about
Speaker 1: and alert they put out to their group, right, could
Speaker 1: you find those reports if I identify your source? Um? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean you can hold back a source if you
Speaker 1: want to. But I remember being online, I can try
Speaker 1: to go find that again. What do you mean you
Speaker 1: can hold back a source if you want to do
Speaker 1: What does that mean? I mean? I mean if I
Speaker 1: have a conventional source on something, I don't allow to
Speaker 1: hold back the conventional source for their protection. But that's
Speaker 1: not what's happened on this case. I remember the news
Speaker 1: articles about it that we reported on, So you can
Speaker 1: find those, right, I should be able to. Okay, So
Speaker 1: this was in his twenty nineteen deposition. Let's remember this
Speaker 1: is three years ago. He has had plenty of time
Speaker 1: to find this email. Yes, And so here is him
Speaker 1: in the December one deposition being asked about this again.
Speaker 1: Do you remember we talked in that last deposition about
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg email. We're Bloomberg send an email out to
Speaker 1: his people, said ready in the next twenty four hours,
Speaker 1: there's gonna be a big event. You remember that that
Speaker 1: was a new story. Yuh yeah. And then we talked
Speaker 1: about it for a while because you had brought that
Speaker 1: up to me. You were like, look, I don't have
Speaker 1: the email itself. That was something I was reporting on.
Speaker 1: I had, there was a story about it, and I
Speaker 1: was reporting on it. You remember that, and then you
Speaker 1: remember you told me you could find it for me, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I believe I shaid that, and then you never gave it.
Speaker 1: Be honest with you, you don't really inhabit much. In
Speaker 1: my mind, you don't have much respect for any of
Speaker 1: this process, do you know? I don't think you have
Speaker 1: respect for America. Okay, that's that's an interesting that's an
Speaker 1: interesting move, Cotton. Let's see how that place for it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, you gotta you gotta last out a little
Speaker 1: bit when you have been over years unable to produce
Speaker 1: the nonsense source that you have for for this claim.
Speaker 1: And I think that that's characteristic of a lot of
Speaker 1: the ways that they you know, obviously, the the questioning
Speaker 1: is like where did this stuff come from? Where where
Speaker 1: we're what were you working off of? And it's just
Speaker 1: there's an inability to even like pretend that his reporting
Speaker 1: is based on anything, right, Robert, do you have a
Speaker 1: favorite show or like a favorite episode of a favorite
Speaker 1: show that you can rewatch over and over and over. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, for sure a bunch of them. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So for me, it's Cowboy Bebop and there's this episode
Speaker 1: speak like a child. That's almost like dialogue less, you know,
Speaker 1: And it's just this great soundtrack and I can watch
Speaker 1: it over and over and over again, and I feel
Speaker 1: that way for the first time about a deposition, like
Speaker 1: I can watch Alex get dismantled by Mark Bankston over
Speaker 1: and over and over again without ever getting bored. It's
Speaker 1: you just don't get moments like these. You don't terrible
Speaker 1: people where it's just uh, like all it's almost like
Speaker 1: he's it's almost like cosmic judgment. It's like it's like
Speaker 1: seeing somebody before an omnipotent judgment that's just like, no,
Speaker 1: this is wrong, and this is wrong and this is
Speaker 1: what you did right. And he just hast like he's
Speaker 1: in front of fucking a Nubis with yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's something else. It's pretty good. It's pretty good.
Speaker 1: Check out this fucking feather. It wakes a million pounds
Speaker 1: and it is still not heavy enough. You piece of ship.
Speaker 1: So what you you noticed there? How Alex, when you
Speaker 1: sort of backed into a corner, lashes out and he's like,
Speaker 1: you don't care about that America. Um. He does lit
Speaker 1: a bit in these deposition settings, and when confronted about
Speaker 1: some of these ideas about Sandy Hook. One of the
Speaker 1: things he does in these depositions, I think it is
Speaker 1: probably terribly advised, really bad decision, is to sort of
Speaker 1: imply that he still thinks Sandy Hook was fake. Again bold.
Speaker 1: Second of all, you, Mr Jones, you understand this jury
Speaker 1: is going to watch the video of you saying unequivocally
Speaker 1: not I see how people could think this, but unequivocally
Speaker 1: saying Sandy Hook completely Oh no, Mr Jones, you don't
Speaker 1: get to interrupt me. You understand that, sir. You're here
Speaker 1: to ask questions from this jury, and I want you
Speaker 1: to listen to the questions. You know, this jury is
Speaker 1: gonna watch videos of you saying multiple times, over and
Speaker 1: over again, Sandy Hook is completely fake, completely synthetic. It
Speaker 1: is not real, right, And you're gonna sit here in
Speaker 1: this chair and say, oh, actually what I said. Actually
Speaker 1: what I said is I could see how some other
Speaker 1: people could think it was fake. You know, the jury
Speaker 1: is gonna see those videos, and you know they're gonna
Speaker 1: hear your words. Do you think that they should take
Speaker 1: you seriously whatsoever? When they can see you saying the
Speaker 1: things you said you didn't say? I know I know
Speaker 1: that the jury is gonna say I always heard that
Speaker 1: people are innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven
Speaker 1: how guilty they choose, and that the system is actually
Speaker 1: scared for me to put on evidence the truth is down.
Speaker 1: I have still have real questions about Sandy Hook and
Speaker 1: a lot of the anomalies and what's going on, and
Speaker 1: the CIA visiting Adam landsa before it happened in the
Speaker 1: FBI that was in the mainstream news, and just all
Speaker 1: the bizarreness that went on. The public still has real questions,
Speaker 1: just like to do about Jesse Smollett or the Roe v.
Speaker 1: Wade babying that never actually died, or w M D's
Speaker 1: in Iraq, or just the Gulf of Tonkin or Operation
Speaker 1: Northwoods or Bubba Wallace or or you know, so many
Speaker 1: of these things that have happened. Most of these hate
Speaker 1: crimes and type things end up being false flags. So
Speaker 1: I still when I look at events, question and say
Speaker 1: could this could this be stays and we look for
Speaker 1: telltell signs. So yeah, his mind always retreats back to
Speaker 1: like hate crimes are fake. Yeah that is that is
Speaker 1: kind of a safe harbor for him. Yeah, yeah, that
Speaker 1: that that It is interesting to see him kind of
Speaker 1: go back to what he considers base, you know, like
Speaker 1: a kid playing Tag or something, but with you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: like you have racism. You know know what else is like
Speaker 1: the game Tag but with racism. No, that's not a
Speaker 1: good way to lead. Well, it's time for ads anyway.
Speaker 1: So here's some fucking ads. We're back. Here's some fucking ads.
Speaker 1: Hey listen, Dick wads. Buy some ship or die. Yeah, hey,
Speaker 1: motherfucker's get a bed, Buy a fucking mattress. You already
Speaker 1: got a mattress. I don't give a ship. Put it somewhere,
Speaker 1: put it on the fucking floor and use it as
Speaker 1: a chair. God damn it, you cowards. Do you have
Speaker 1: the mattress? I bet it didn't come in as small
Speaker 1: of the boxes. This one just get really abusive, Like
Speaker 1: what is it Dick's last resort where the way staff
Speaker 1: gets to curset you or whatever. Yeah, I think there's
Speaker 1: a but I think every town has their version of that.
Speaker 1: We had a couple of friends. Some places it's just
Speaker 1: waff house kid rock. That's a boxing ring. So here's
Speaker 1: another club of Alex retreating to basically just saying like
Speaker 1: Sandy Hook is probably actually fake. Can you know, just
Speaker 1: admit that for the jury that you said, then they're
Speaker 1: going to see the videos. They should investigate Sandy Hook themselves.
Speaker 1: They should look into it themselves and see why people
Speaker 1: ask questions. You hope they don't know. I really hope
Speaker 1: they That's not going to play well in a courtroom.
Speaker 1: I don't think. I don't think. Yeah, I don't think
Speaker 1: that's gonna I don't think that's gonna fly. Dan. I
Speaker 1: just don't think that's gonna do great for him. All right,
Speaker 1: your honor, I recognize that you have already found me
Speaker 1: guilty in a oddly specific circumstance that happens once a
Speaker 1: hundred years. However, have you considered that maybe all of
Speaker 1: you are wrong and I've been right the whole time. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I was in the room when he said that, and
Speaker 1: I almost gasped. It's very hard to like hold in
Speaker 1: my like, oh, that's a bad idea. That's why I
Speaker 1: was not invited. Yeah. So this next clip is actually
Speaker 1: a little bit longer because like some of these deposition
Speaker 1: clips obviously are like questions and answers, and so they
Speaker 1: they can they can be a bit bit longer. But
Speaker 1: I think that this is something that's that's kind of
Speaker 1: relevant and it's worth it, and this is this isn't
Speaker 1: uh Mark the attorney asking Alex about uh an email
Speaker 1: that Wolfgang how Big sent to a family member of
Speaker 1: one of the victims at Sandy Hook and Alex's response
Speaker 1: to it, and then I'm gonna go ahead and read
Speaker 1: this email to you. It says Nick and Laura Phelps
Speaker 1: did a great job acting in Newtown on Newtown, Connecticut
Speaker 1: on December. I visited their home today at nineteen four
Speaker 1: Westover Reserve Boulevard, Windmere, Florida, three four seven eight six,
Speaker 1: And thanks to Lieutenant Van Gaily telling me during my
Speaker 1: wellness check of Nick and Laura Phelps that they no
Speaker 1: longer live in Newtown, Connecticut and that they are now,
Speaker 1: and they are now Richard and Jennifer Sexton. Guess what?
Speaker 1: He is totally right? And can you believe it that
Speaker 1: my Newtown Police Department guided me in the right direction.
Speaker 1: They have a beautiful home with a three car garage.
Speaker 1: They were not home today, but the good news was
Speaker 1: that the three adult female moms with their children standing
Speaker 1: outside their homes observed me and wanted to know what
Speaker 1: I was doing it was spring break. It is spring
Speaker 1: break for Orange County, Florida school show showed them this
Speaker 1: picture and I told them that I did not want
Speaker 1: to go to the wrong house to surprise Nick and
Speaker 1: Laura from Newtown, Connecticut a k a. Richard and Jennifer
Speaker 1: Sexton today. I took a few minutes for them to
Speaker 1: look at the pictures, and then when they asked why
Speaker 1: I wanted to speak to them, I told them that
Speaker 1: I had been in Newtown and wanted to surprise them
Speaker 1: since they now live in Florida. They asked for my name,
Speaker 1: which I gave them as Wolfgang how big. They told
Speaker 1: me how I would know them, knew them? And I
Speaker 1: told them that they had. They have been on the
Speaker 1: national news, so I wanted to meet them again. Our
Speaker 1: conversation was all about Newtown, Connecticut, so she said, do
Speaker 1: you mind if I text her? I said absolutely not
Speaker 1: waited about ten minutes, only to learn that they did
Speaker 1: not know me, which surprised me. They verified the pictures
Speaker 1: and why would she text them about Newtown, Connecticut and
Speaker 1: that someone from there wanted to visit if they had
Speaker 1: If they were not Nick and Laura Phelps, now Richard
Speaker 1: and Jennifer Sexton. At first, I did not want to
Speaker 1: enter since it is a gated community, but several people
Speaker 1: told me just go on in there. There is no
Speaker 1: security guard at the gates. If there is CCTV, they
Speaker 1: will see me being told to go in, and that
Speaker 1: is the only reason or I would not have entered. Now,
Speaker 1: who says law enforcement does not know what they are doing?
Speaker 1: Thank you Newtown Connect to get police. Can you turned
Speaker 1: the document over? First of all, I read an email, Yes, okay,
Speaker 1: And then on the back you see there's a picture
Speaker 1: here right, Yes, And at the top it says Sandy
Speaker 1: Hook hoax actors. Correct, yes, and it has arrows pointing
Speaker 1: to the phelps right, and that the bottom it says
Speaker 1: playing the part of grief stricken parents. Correct. Yes, there's
Speaker 1: a horrible email, isn't it. I've never seen this female
Speaker 1: and it's um. Yes, I don't like this email. And
Speaker 1: again this is someone else, wolf king how Big after
Speaker 1: I had already clearly knew that he cracked up. And
Speaker 1: so that's that's that's not my work. The next question
Speaker 1: that's asked is about how Alex did a video after
Speaker 1: this repeating Wolf Gang how bigs claims um so yeah,
Speaker 1: that's some of the reality of what the like people
Speaker 1: who are being promoted by Alex, and Alex was helping
Speaker 1: them raise money for their activities. These were the things
Speaker 1: that wolf Gang how Big was doing. Yeah, and it's
Speaker 1: tough to it's tough to listen into not which because
Speaker 1: it's so long, but at the same time, like it
Speaker 1: is part of it is part of the length of it.
Speaker 1: That is the torture as well of like, no, there's
Speaker 1: no way you can continue going on, and everything he
Speaker 1: does is just another fucking shovelful of dirt in the
Speaker 1: grave of misery. And it's just a fucking awful Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it's it's literally like when you actually peel
Speaker 1: back and think about what's going on here, a crank
Speaker 1: is stalking people whose children were killed. Um. Hey, but
Speaker 1: at least he's getting paid for it. Alex is paying
Speaker 1: him because all he cares about is that it it
Speaker 1: fills their time, you know, and maybe we'll get him
Speaker 1: talked about on the news, which which which brings in traffic. Well,
Speaker 1: at very least if Alex isn't paying him, he's promoting
Speaker 1: the organization that takes donations. The Wolfgang is running, so
Speaker 1: you know, indirect pay. Yeah, it's just disgusting. Um so.
Speaker 1: But Alex at least has the kind of base intelligence
Speaker 1: of being able to be like that suck, are you okay? Now?
Speaker 1: Even I when listening to that, like you almost want
Speaker 1: him to say even I, you know, like at least
Speaker 1: an admittance of like, listen, I don't believe ship, but
Speaker 1: this is bad. You would expect me to be thrilled
Speaker 1: by exactly You would expect me to say, this is great.
Speaker 1: Um so. One of the reasons that Alex ended up
Speaker 1: getting the default judgment was because he kept sending incompetent
Speaker 1: and unprepared people to be the corporate representative for the company.
Speaker 1: He sent rob Do twice and he couldn't answer any
Speaker 1: of the questions. And then he sent Daria Carpova, who's
Speaker 1: one of his off air talents at info Wars, and
Speaker 1: she was actually asked about this exact same email that
Speaker 1: we just heard, and in contrast to Alex's response, here's
Speaker 1: what she thought of it. An email to them, creep
Speaker 1: you out you personally, Jack Form, I'm creeping me out
Speaker 1: the way you're reading it. Yes, I don't creep you out.
Speaker 1: To have Wolfgang hobbis showing up these people's houses and
Speaker 1: describing their three car garage and all that stuff, accusing
Speaker 1: them of being people that they are not actually are.
Speaker 1: That doesn't that doesn't have any you know, have any
Speaker 1: strong feelings one we or another on that fraction form correct? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Are you asking my personal opinion? Yeah, your personal opinion?
Speaker 1: Um strikes me as a passion man who's doing an
Speaker 1: investigation something he believes in his own hardened wants to
Speaker 1: get to the bottom of. She's terrifying. She scares to
Speaker 1: me so much. I've listened to that clip. How many
Speaker 1: times have you played that for? Like four? I don't know.
Speaker 1: In the yeah, yeah, that's it, She's terrifying. It's it's
Speaker 1: a bizarre to be able to hear those words almost
Speaker 1: like isn't that email wolf getting is almost like relishing
Speaker 1: the telling of like I was in their space, it's
Speaker 1: it's sick, yeah, And to hear like the response from
Speaker 1: Alex is the socially appropriate response, and then from Daria
Speaker 1: it's the yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean trying to rationalize
Speaker 1: super creep doom if if if if you've ever seen
Speaker 1: a horror movie one of those found footage horror movies
Speaker 1: where somebody has like that personal camera and they just
Speaker 1: continue looking at somebody while they're asleep, and you're aware
Speaker 1: that nobody else knows about this, and this is a
Speaker 1: first person look that is terrifying. And you can see
Speaker 1: Daria being like, well, I mean it's just a good
Speaker 1: idea to keep an eye on them while they're asleep, right,
Speaker 1: you know, you don't want them to have what if
Speaker 1: they have sleep apnea, you might you might be in trouble.
Speaker 1: And that's why you need to constantly videotape strangers kids
Speaker 1: while they sleep, because what if they get hurt? Said, Look,
Speaker 1: you're joking about that, but I do support not you
Speaker 1: know what, that's not even a good start that we
Speaker 1: don't we don't we don't need that. We don't need Yeah,
Speaker 1: we don't need that bit um you know watches you
Speaker 1: while you're asleep. Well, yes, actually some of our sponsors.
Speaker 1: But that is why people pay for them. Listen, what's
Speaker 1: good good so um. One of the things that is
Speaker 1: a hallmark of Alex's discussion about his lawsuits is that like,
Speaker 1: he did everything right and he's just getting jammed up
Speaker 1: and it's it's a complete setup and and a fraud. Um,
Speaker 1: and so this, this clip from his deposition is a
Speaker 1: really interesting glimpse into how he seems to not even
Speaker 1: be aware of how he didn't do anything he was
Speaker 1: asked to do. You've repeatedly said that this, this court
Speaker 1: pro says, this lawsuit, what just happened is all a
Speaker 1: sham because you turned everything over and that court still
Speaker 1: default did you anyway? Right? Um? Yes, Owen Troyer, you
Speaker 1: never sent him one deposition, one document request, one thing,
Speaker 1: and he was defaulted along with me. And if that
Speaker 1: isn't fraud, then nothing is okay. Hold on, I may
Speaker 1: have to pull this order for you because do you
Speaker 1: understand that in Mr Neil Hesson's case there was a
Speaker 1: court order requiring Owen Troyer to appear for deposition? Do
Speaker 1: you know that? I know he appeared for a deposition yesterday?
Speaker 1: You asked for it after the default, No surge, Mr Jones.
Speaker 1: Do you understand that there was an order in August
Speaker 1: thirty one, eighteen asking Mr that requiring Owen Stroyer to
Speaker 1: appear for deposition? Did you know that? I don't know
Speaker 1: what you're talking about. Yeah, you didn't know that. You've
Speaker 1: got on your show without even knowing what the discovery was. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so Alex's it's it's when confronted with reality, doesn't even
Speaker 1: know the things he has failed to do. Yeah, h
Speaker 1: it is. It is a constant source of enjoyment for
Speaker 1: for him to be like the alright, Alex, you know
Speaker 1: that this happened, and he's like, this happened like a
Speaker 1: few months ago. I don't remember. I got damn bit
Speaker 1: of it. It's just it's just amazing that a person
Speaker 1: can exist like this. It's fun too to think it's
Speaker 1: some someday we will learn how much money he's spent
Speaker 1: on these lawyers. I do believe that information will get
Speaker 1: out one of these days, because they are they're just
Speaker 1: not doing a thing for him. Not that not that
Speaker 1: they could not, that he would listen, but he he doesn't.
Speaker 1: He's not getting his money's worth. I'll say that much. Well.
Speaker 1: The conversely, I'd like to propose that possibly they're doing
Speaker 1: everything for him in terms of creating a pretense of
Speaker 1: like I had incompetent lawyers, I could have won these
Speaker 1: cases like he has the that to fall back on,
Speaker 1: although better don't repeatedly have the lawyers as guests on
Speaker 1: your show. Well, right, Barnes did have his own show
Speaker 1: for a little and give one of them their own show. Yes. Well,
Speaker 1: one thing that we I don't know if it's in
Speaker 1: a later clip, no, no, no fun Norm pattis forever, um. No.
Speaker 1: One thing later on is Bill will eventually say directly
Speaker 1: to uh was it Owen Troyer. He was like, Hey,
Speaker 1: are you gonna sue your lawyers after this? Because look,
Speaker 1: I'm deposing you, and it's my advice that you sue
Speaker 1: your lawyers after this. I don't think they have adequately
Speaker 1: prepared you for. It's even funnier about that is that
Speaker 1: the reason he's saying it is to remind them that
Speaker 1: should they win a lot of money from their lawyers,
Speaker 1: that money will be going to the city that would
Speaker 1: be considered an assid Yeah, we are going to take
Speaker 1: that as well. Yeah, and just say you know, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think I don't think it's impossible they could
Speaker 1: do a male practice. Yeah they've got it, They've got
Speaker 1: a chance. Yeah. So Um. One of the things that
Speaker 1: has been a hallmark of these cases that UH Infra
Speaker 1: Wars has been subject to is that they don't seem
Speaker 1: to know what they're giving the lawyers in discovery. Um,
Speaker 1: there was the child pornography. That was the stuff they
Speaker 1: emails that they turned over to the Connecticut people. And
Speaker 1: then in this case there was something that is unexplainable
Speaker 1: that they had that they turned over. It's fair to
Speaker 1: say that Leonard Posner and Free speech Systems have had
Speaker 1: an unfriendly relationship over the years. No, I'm not. I
Speaker 1: don't really followed what he does. So about him? So
Speaker 1: you do follow him? Correct? I mean I don't. You
Speaker 1: never refreshed my memory, so I will refresh your memory
Speaker 1: about what you know about. Oh, I'm shave marks? Did
Speaker 1: a five? Have you ever seen that before? No, not
Speaker 1: that I remember. What is it? That's the soul document
Speaker 1: you produced to me just a couple I guess a
Speaker 1: month or two ago in regard to discovery request for
Speaker 1: any documents you have regarding Mr Posner. That's the sole
Speaker 1: document that was in that folder label Posmer. That's it,
Speaker 1: and that you will agree with me. Appears to be
Speaker 1: a very large which could be about a hundred and
Speaker 1: eighty seven page comprehensive background report on Mr Posner. Correct,
Speaker 1: I never ran a background report on Posmer. I've never
Speaker 1: I've never even seen this. I understand that you probably
Speaker 1: never even saw that. Someone emails this and then we
Speaker 1: opened it. I don't know, Mr Jones. You gave it
Speaker 1: to me. What am I supposed to know you about it?
Speaker 1: I don't know you you tell me that. I mean,
Speaker 1: just go through the email. Most of it's not open
Speaker 1: to just send you guys everything. This isn't an email,
Speaker 1: isn't it. I would imagine I'd never run a background
Speaker 1: thing on positive one thing we can agree on because
Speaker 1: you look at the bottom of that document. It says
Speaker 1: f S S t X dot A eight five five
Speaker 1: four four correct. Yeah, that's a bigger members y'all use
Speaker 1: when you give me documents. Right, So, this document right
Speaker 1: here came from infu wars corporate files. I thought you
Speaker 1: said we haven't given you any documents. I've said, whether
Speaker 1: you said we didn't get we were defaults, we gave
Speaker 1: you a nothing. We didn't real respond you gave me
Speaker 1: documents in the Lewis case in responsive to documents. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean, I listen. I I mean, I'm just telling
Speaker 1: you I've never looked at this. That's not what I'm
Speaker 1: asking you, Mr Jones. The news about and Florida doing
Speaker 1: a background thing on him, and so I figure somebody
Speaker 1: might have sent us this. I'm just guessing. I think
Speaker 1: I shouldn't guess. I don't know. Yeah, do you think
Speaker 1: you should be guessing what I just said? You're right,
Speaker 1: I I don't know what this So let's not do
Speaker 1: that anymore. That is upsetting. That's my favorite, My favorite
Speaker 1: part of the deposition really has to just be like,
Speaker 1: you sent this to me. I didn't come to you
Speaker 1: with a eighty seven page background check, Unletty Poor, where
Speaker 1: did this come from? You tell me, man, you tell me.
Speaker 1: It's one of the creepier things that I think you
Speaker 1: find in this these depositions is that info Wars turned
Speaker 1: over this extensive background check on one of the parents
Speaker 1: of one of the kids that died at Sandy Hook,
Speaker 1: and no one seems to know where it came from
Speaker 1: or why it's in their files because it wasn't in
Speaker 1: an email. No, it was in their files. No, it
Speaker 1: was in their files that they sent. Yeah. I can't
Speaker 1: I can't stress enough how wild that is that you
Speaker 1: can be essentially being sued out of oblivion and then
Speaker 1: at the same time be like, we'll just send him everything.
Speaker 1: And I'm not going to check. Nobody was like, hey,
Speaker 1: this h eight seven page background check on Lenny Posits.
Speaker 1: It's got like associates, addresses, and family members not gonna play.
Speaker 1: It's not gonna play. Well, yeah, that is really creepy. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Have you ever done a background report on anybody? Uh,
Speaker 1: Robert enemies that you need to do background checks on?
Speaker 1: I mean I haven't done a background I have done
Speaker 1: background checks on on my enemies, but but not that
Speaker 1: kind of essentially No, No, that sounds tiring. Yeah, your
Speaker 1: biggest background check so far has been kissing your obviously,
Speaker 1: And finally we finally nailed him to the wall. We
Speaker 1: got him. Yeah, this is the it's the end of
Speaker 1: his career. We did it canceled. It only took nineties years.
Speaker 1: I feel like the jury was out until the podcast.
Speaker 1: Thank god, it finally tipped the balance for me. It's like,
Speaker 1: I don't know if this guy is good news, you
Speaker 1: know what. I'm starting to think this guy might have
Speaker 1: some bad qualities. Yea, so I just I mean it's
Speaker 1: something that I don't think is going to be solved
Speaker 1: by this case, no matter what happens. I don't know
Speaker 1: if anyone will ever publicly know why they had that
Speaker 1: background check? Yeah, infurious, Yeah, yeah, because who did it? Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of unanswered questions there. You know, you
Speaker 1: would have to think that it was some sort of
Speaker 1: private investigator, right, probably or some firm. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: a hundred and eighty seven pages. It's not like he
Speaker 1: went to the FBI. Yeah, the online thing, right, he
Speaker 1: didn't just file like for a criminal record, like somebody
Speaker 1: stalked an So somebody a lot of Alex's like bodyguards, ex. Blackwater,
Speaker 1: they have some like shady connection. No, totally, but that
Speaker 1: does mean that there's somebody out there who put this
Speaker 1: background report together and could just be like, hey man,
Speaker 1: I'm the weirdo that did this ship. You know, you'd
Speaker 1: hope there'd be some kind of forensic fingerprint somewhere. But
Speaker 1: or I mean, I don't know, do we know if
Speaker 1: it's accurate? Because like, is it possible somebody just grifted
Speaker 1: Alex fucking Douglas Adams novel about Lenny Posner. That would
Speaker 1: be something let me do it. I think Alex would
Speaker 1: fall for it. Um, but um, that seems like a
Speaker 1: lot of effort. Lenny Posner has never left his towel
Speaker 1: at home though, So there is that. So I've got
Speaker 1: a little bit of Owen Shroyer's deposition to jump to.
Speaker 1: He is involved in the case because he did uhum
Speaker 1: a video where he was hosting the Fourth Hour or
Speaker 1: not the Fourth Hour, it was it was hosting in
Speaker 1: Alex's place on a Sunday show, and someone gave him
Speaker 1: an article, um and and some videos where he just decided, hey,
Speaker 1: we're going to report this as Neil Heslin couldn't have
Speaker 1: held him his child. And one of the things that
Speaker 1: oh And is very clear about is like someone gave
Speaker 1: me this news to cover I didn't. I didn't check
Speaker 1: it or anything. Um. And this is a clip where
Speaker 1: Bill Ogden, the other attorney in the case, UM, has
Speaker 1: to help Owen realize that he is a puppet. I
Speaker 1: don't know who edited that video, right. It could have
Speaker 1: been someone in our house. It could have been someone
Speaker 1: else on the internet that they found, right. You know what,
Speaker 1: you know what we can agree on. Nobody fact checked it.
Speaker 1: Nobody just said, man, that's crazy. When did he say this?
Speaker 1: Google up the interview and watch it. It's twenty minutes.
Speaker 1: I didn't plan on covering the story that day, so
Speaker 1: I had no preconceived notion that I would even have
Speaker 1: to do that. I know, Mr Shroyer, you're here because
Speaker 1: you were a puppet. You would agree with me, right you?
Speaker 1: You don't agree with me that you you know what
Speaker 1: puppet is, correct? The puppet is an object that is
Speaker 1: used to convey a message, but somebody else is actually
Speaker 1: controlling the message. Understand that, right, You were conveying a message, right, True,
Speaker 1: somebody else was controlling that message? True? No, No, who
Speaker 1: who was controlling the message that you were putting out?
Speaker 1: Were you in control? What was the message you're referring
Speaker 1: to that The coroner said he never released the children ever,
Speaker 1: because that's the story you ran with. Who was in
Speaker 1: control of that information? If you weren't, because you already
Speaker 1: said you weren't in control of it, who was? Somebody
Speaker 1: has to be whoever originally posted the video, So someone
Speaker 1: else had control and you were conveying the message. We
Speaker 1: just established that you were the puppet that day. There's
Speaker 1: nothing wrong with that. I'm not trying to be directed.
Speaker 1: It's analogous to where we are now. You agree, I
Speaker 1: think if anybody is being used as a puppet, it
Speaker 1: would be the people who are reporting the stories and
Speaker 1: I'm just showing that information you were reporting the story,
Speaker 1: Mr Lawyer, if I cover So if I just pick
Speaker 1: up anybody's new source and cover it, does that make
Speaker 1: me a puppet? So if you don't fact check it,
Speaker 1: absolutely okay, then I guess then I guess I'm a
Speaker 1: puppet of zero Hedge in this case. No, that's actually
Speaker 1: not true. You're a puppet of I coined Bank. Okay, puppet.
Speaker 1: It's tough to have to look in the mirror like
Speaker 1: that to to uh to see that. Yeah, it is
Speaker 1: fun that we have Bill on the case, just because
Speaker 1: you could definitely see a lot of lawyers being like, well,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna drop the puppet coming. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: not like the puppet conversation adds a ton to the case.
Speaker 1: But Bill is like, listen, I am gonna get you
Speaker 1: to say that you're a fucking puppet if it kills me,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna win. God, that's satisfying. That's just that
Speaker 1: just feels steels good, feels good to have in the world.
Speaker 1: Someone who brands themselves as like the destroyer of Cux.
Speaker 1: There's such they're all such owen. Especially this is less
Speaker 1: the case with really Alex, but like Owen is very
Speaker 1: much cut in that right wing like debate guy personality. Um,
Speaker 1: but none of them actually like debate. All they know
Speaker 1: how to do is have you know, they have media training.
Speaker 1: They understand how things like look on film, and they
Speaker 1: understand how to get sound bites, and they just kind
Speaker 1: of go out to surprise people and get sound bites.
Speaker 1: And Owen can't edit this, he can't cut it apart,
Speaker 1: he can't end the interaction, and he just gets revealed
Speaker 1: as the the hollow man that he truly is. And
Speaker 1: it's it's m yeah, And I think I think that's
Speaker 1: what's so compelling, especially for me, about these like the
Speaker 1: these glimpses, these depositions that you know, you get this
Speaker 1: side of these folks that they aren't in control of. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and it's a disaster. Yeah. Now listening to it gives
Speaker 1: you such a like Thanksgiving dinner feel where you don't
Speaker 1: even want to say anything, You just want to like
Speaker 1: loosen your belts and lean back and be like, oh full,
Speaker 1: that was a delicious meal. I just got to eat there. Now,
Speaker 1: you mentioned that Owen Shroyer's nickname is the cuck Slayer.
Speaker 1: You know, what else slaves Cox? What's up the products
Speaker 1: and services that support this podcast? What? It's fine? It's
Speaker 1: like a kink thing. Ah, we're back and we're talking
Speaker 1: about cux. We have been. Yes, the fun kind that
Speaker 1: everybody enjoys from occasion to occasion, you know, like that
Speaker 1: what type is that? I mean? Like sometimes that kind
Speaker 1: of sense of debasement can be a sexual pleasure that
Speaker 1: many people have, you know, like like in a controlled environment,
Speaker 1: to feel as though one is you know, inferior can
Speaker 1: be a turn on for many people. Okay, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: not that. That's why Elon Musk stays on Twitter. So
Speaker 1: we were talking about Owen Troy. Yes, completely different kind
Speaker 1: of cock disc for sure. So one of the things
Speaker 1: that's that's a lot of fun throughout these depositions is
Speaker 1: you you you get to witness people learning stuff about
Speaker 1: the company they work for and the people around them. Um.
Speaker 1: I think that sometimes this is fairly genuine. Um, as
Speaker 1: is the case in this this clip where Owen gets
Speaker 1: to learn about, uh, some people who might like mass
Speaker 1: shooters Michael Zimmerman. Do you know who he is? Yes?
Speaker 1: Is he? Are you friends with him? I would say
Speaker 1: we're friends, but I mean, we don't hang out or
Speaker 1: talk that often. But do you have a somewhat professional
Speaker 1: and PERI saw him in public, ID go say hello? Sure? Okay? Um,
Speaker 1: he seemed like a good guy. Yeah, And I opposed him.
Speaker 1: He came off very respectful. He was. He was shockingly nice.
Speaker 1: Um for a white nationalist. Would has he ever shared
Speaker 1: any of his opinions or views on mass shootings with you?
Speaker 1: Not that I can recall? Were you aware that? Do you?
Speaker 1: Do you remember the christ Church shooting, New Zealand? Yes,
Speaker 1: christ Church, New Zealand shooting and he's live streamed. Yes, Um,
Speaker 1: Brandon Tarrant was the shooter. He executed a bunch of
Speaker 1: Muslims at a mosque. Something refreshing the details of the
Speaker 1: event for me right now? Um. Do you know whether
Speaker 1: or not anyone who Info worse claimed it was a
Speaker 1: false flag? No? I'm unaware. Okay. Did you know that
Speaker 1: some individuals and info wars liked that shooting? No? Did
Speaker 1: you know? Um? Do you understand that Michael Zimmerman handles
Speaker 1: the I T stuff for in for Worse m H
Speaker 1: attraction for um? I know that he was doing I T.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure if that is still his role. Did
Speaker 1: you know that on March four, two thousand nineteen, Mr
Speaker 1: Zimmerman registered the domain Tarrant Manifesto dot com. No, boy, No?
Speaker 1: Did you know that he registered the website shooter chan
Speaker 1: dot org. Did you know you know who Timothy Thrift is? Yes?
Speaker 1: Do you have a personal relationship with him? Work acquaintance? Okay?
Speaker 1: Did you know that he registered the website st Tarrant
Speaker 1: dot com? Boy a shooter Brandon Tarrant? How do you
Speaker 1: feel about the people that you work with who you
Speaker 1: have somewhat of a personal relationship registering these type of
Speaker 1: websites immediately after a mass shooting that was live stream
Speaker 1: to the world. I'm pretty surprised. I think that's a
Speaker 1: surprising thing. I would be surprising. Yeah, you really don't
Speaker 1: ever want to be asked in court? Are you aware
Speaker 1: that your coworker made the website shooter chant That is
Speaker 1: that is just not a question you want to get
Speaker 1: asked really ever, but especially Yeah, yeah, not a question
Speaker 1: you want to be asked. It makes the argument tougher.
Speaker 1: Um when there's multiple people who are like like making
Speaker 1: websites that are presumably about celebrating a mass shooter too
Speaker 1: to argue that you're not engaged in some form of
Speaker 1: stochastic terrorism. Hey, a bunch of your friends worked at Auschwitz.
Speaker 1: How do you feel about that? Did you know, oh
Speaker 1: that they were, because that maybe that would kind of
Speaker 1: suggest that you're also it's it's a bad it's a
Speaker 1: bad thing to be surprised by. Yeah, actually, maybe it's
Speaker 1: better to be surprised. Yeah if he was like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: of course I knew that, buddy, have an account on it.
Speaker 1: I think what's fun about that, though, is that exemplifies
Speaker 1: one of the things that is uh consistent throughout all
Speaker 1: of the Info Wars depositions is like a weird k
Speaker 1: genus about the wrong thing, you know, like whether or
Speaker 1: not we're friends. Yeah. Yeah, they were like, hey, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know is the sky blue today? Like you
Speaker 1: don't even know the answer to that. Well, yeah, I
Speaker 1: killed those guys, but like is the sky And you're like, no, no,
Speaker 1: you're wrong man, yep yep, um, so the like, Like
Speaker 1: I mentioned earlier, the one of the reasons, the primary reason,
Speaker 1: one of the primary reasons that Alex ended up losing
Speaker 1: these cases by default was sending these people who couldn't
Speaker 1: handle being corporate representatives. When they are sent as corporate representatives,
Speaker 1: they're supposed to testify as the company. So there is
Speaker 1: a responsibility that they have to prepare, get all their
Speaker 1: their business in order and basic understanding of the case. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and they're supposed to. I mean, they're given a list
Speaker 1: of topics that they're supposed to testify on on behalf
Speaker 1: of the company, things like you know, personnel, the who
Speaker 1: worked on this video, what are the sources for this video?
Speaker 1: Those kinds of things, and they have whiffed it every
Speaker 1: single time. It has been a disaster. Um rob Do
Speaker 1: when he was in it was funny because he was
Speaker 1: wearing a tangle hat and he just seemed scared and confused.
Speaker 1: I really, while you're asking me these questions, what I
Speaker 1: would like you to start with is treat me more
Speaker 1: like a fourth grader who doesn't know what business means.
Speaker 1: Could you begin at the like what ease money? See?
Speaker 1: He he was He's a lot of fun. But unfortunately
Speaker 1: there's not a lot of like things you can really
Speaker 1: pull from it that really exemplify his stupidity. Um, it's
Speaker 1: a really it's more of a totality, right that kind
Speaker 1: of exemplifies what he's doing. However, Daria, when she was
Speaker 1: testifying as the corporate representative, I think there's a bit
Speaker 1: more stuff that that sticks out as like, this is
Speaker 1: someone testifying on behalf of the company and this is
Speaker 1: a mess. Yea. So she had brought in a folder
Speaker 1: full of exhibits that she wanted to discuss in the
Speaker 1: course of the deposition, and here is Mark bringing up
Speaker 1: the first one. You recognize that, correct, that's a document
Speaker 1: that you reviewed part of this deposition, right, That is
Speaker 1: the Wikipedia entry for false flag correct. Yes, okay, can
Speaker 1: you tell me why you looked at this document? Oh boy,
Speaker 1: I thought it would be a good idea to bring
Speaker 1: it as a reference to some of the points for
Speaker 1: topic number one. If I could have the list of topics,
Speaker 1: that would help me to identify the exhibits. I understand
Speaker 1: what you're saying. Let's do that. So, yes, she brought
Speaker 1: a bunch of Wikipedia print out. It's good. No, no,
Speaker 1: that's good. That shows like a willingness to engage with no. No, no,
Speaker 1: of course, that's the beauty of it, just like with
Speaker 1: the background report, except for way funnier. It's just it's
Speaker 1: it's very funny because it's like It's it's both like
Speaker 1: incredibly like deeply irresponsible and also like some thing, uh,
Speaker 1: your grandma might do totally like I heard you had
Speaker 1: a big case today, Honey. I was looking at some
Speaker 1: things up online and I just said, Linda, and I
Speaker 1: wanted to support you in your your skits. I really
Speaker 1: wanted to. But it's also like it would it would
Speaker 1: fail a high school paper if you yes. So it's
Speaker 1: a it's a bad look. And uh, it was befuddling.
Speaker 1: Uh you have the print out of Wikipedia for a
Speaker 1: false flag? Why did you bring this to me? Is
Speaker 1: such a is such a consistent question that all of
Speaker 1: the depositions have of Like we you know, we asked
Speaker 1: you for specific things. You could have brought those and
Speaker 1: we could have dealt with that. Instead you brought me
Speaker 1: a Wikipedia page. So let's figure out why this makes
Speaker 1: you even more guilty than you were yesterday. So so
Speaker 1: Daria as the company was supposed to testify about these
Speaker 1: videos that are in the plaintiffs petition, and it was
Speaker 1: pretty clear at the beginning of the deposition that she
Speaker 1: had not actually watched them, um, but then later in
Speaker 1: the deposition she appeared to have watched some of them.
Speaker 1: And so this exchange happens. See, they're talking about an
Speaker 1: April video called Sandy Vampires Exposed. You understand that that
Speaker 1: is the video that Mr Posner and Mrs Delarissa based
Speaker 1: their defamation claim on. Did you know that? Okay? Did
Speaker 1: you know that when preparing for this stepo? Did you
Speaker 1: know that? Yes? Okay? Did you watch that video? I mean,
Speaker 1: unless you've watched it in the last couple of hours,
Speaker 1: you haven't watched it, right for this deposition, I'm familiar
Speaker 1: with the video. Did you watch it in preparing for
Speaker 1: this deposition? Though? Yes? Okay? When did you watch it? Earlier? Today?
Speaker 1: During the break when it became apparent that you hadn't
Speaker 1: watched these videos, you wouldn't try to watch this video.
Speaker 1: You didn't watch the whole thing, though, did you? No? Right,
Speaker 1: so you didn't watch this video? Pieces of this video? Correct?
Speaker 1: How many pieces did you watch? How many minutes total
Speaker 1: did you watch? This video? Did not count? So this
Speaker 1: is the level of respect that the people who are
Speaker 1: the corporate representatives for INFOS are showing the proceedings. It's
Speaker 1: it's bad stuff. Yeah, that's um. I feel like I
Speaker 1: could have done a better job representing INFO wars. I
Speaker 1: want the worst for them. No, your your testimony would
Speaker 1: have been more effective at keeping them from receiving a
Speaker 1: default judgment their own, just because of like my basic
Speaker 1: sense of politeness, in total fairness, just for the sake
Speaker 1: of clarity. This, the Daria deposition, was after the default judgments,
Speaker 1: so this didn't contribute to that. It did bring sanctions.
Speaker 1: It is certainly evidence of why the default judgment happened. Yes,
Speaker 1: and listening to it is a little bit if you've
Speaker 1: ever had that friend who just lies about everything for
Speaker 1: no reason, not necessarily a friend, but like the person
Speaker 1: you knew, like yeah, yeah, totally, and and then just
Speaker 1: to see somebody have to like no longer can dissemble,
Speaker 1: no longer can lie, just eventually has to come down
Speaker 1: and say fine. I watched the video ten minutes ago,
Speaker 1: and I watched about five minutes of it. Is that
Speaker 1: what you wanted to hear? I could have said that
Speaker 1: at the first start, but you have forced me during
Speaker 1: a bathroom break, watched a little bit. I had urine
Speaker 1: blasting out of me whilst I watched this fucking video.
Speaker 1: Pretty grim again. So the last couple of clips that
Speaker 1: I have here from these depositions are is the most
Speaker 1: upsetting thing I think I heard other than Wolfgang how
Speaker 1: bigs emails. Those are deeply, deeply disturbing. Um but U
Speaker 1: Daria when she was giving her deposition, she's asked about
Speaker 1: wolf Gang how Big had sent to info Wars a
Speaker 1: picture of the Sandy Hook choir that sang at the
Speaker 1: Super Bowl, UH that year, and UH. The argument was
Speaker 1: that the kids who were quote unquote killed at Sandy
Speaker 1: Hook were in the choir and it was like rubbing
Speaker 1: it in America's faces because it was a false flag
Speaker 1: and all of this. And so this got sent to
Speaker 1: info Wars, and then someone at info Wars I believe
Speaker 1: it might have been a Don Salazar rope back thank you.
Speaker 1: He thanked wolf Gang for this email. And so this
Speaker 1: this image becomes a little bit of a bizarre jumping
Speaker 1: off point for again Daria testifying on behalf of the company,
Speaker 1: you would if somebody sent you this while you were
Speaker 1: doing reporting, you would thank them for it. I don't know,
Speaker 1: it depends on circumstances. I wasn't there when Nico was
Speaker 1: having this exchange what information he had at that time?
Speaker 1: Why I'm asking you, what if you have this information,
Speaker 1: a picture that says at the top tin Sandy Hooked,
Speaker 1: children found alive and will and then the Super Bowl
Speaker 1: choir from millions of people. Would you look at that
Speaker 1: and go, man, I'm glad then sent me that? Personally,
Speaker 1: I would rather think that those kids were alive then
Speaker 1: then having because the tragedy of kids being murdered for
Speaker 1: no reason, um, the innocence of those children who didn't
Speaker 1: deserve what that that kind of fate. I would hold
Speaker 1: out hope to the last bit of my soul, hoping
Speaker 1: and praying that that picture was that that was something
Speaker 1: that be possible for those kids to be alive. So
Speaker 1: is that how you would you would see that? Robert? No, No, Um,
Speaker 1: that's that's a weird that's a weird call for her
Speaker 1: to make. I mean she must have just that has
Speaker 1: to have been in the moment right now that thinks
Speaker 1: calculated that, like you would not calculate and arrive at
Speaker 1: that as like your your decision. Oh no, totally. I
Speaker 1: mean I remember this clip and the thing that I
Speaker 1: liken it to is like that John Ronson psychopath test
Speaker 1: uh story. You know, it's like a psychopath goes to
Speaker 1: a funeral and meet somebody that they're romantically interested in,
Speaker 1: and so in order to meet them again, they kill
Speaker 1: somebody else because they meet that person at funerals. You know,
Speaker 1: like it's a very logical thought process, so long as
Speaker 1: you have absolutely no empathy or or concept of other
Speaker 1: human beings being valuable. Right, Yeah, how how can something
Speaker 1: this fucked up actually be a good thing? Yeah? Absolutely?
Speaker 1: And you're like, there's no way that a human being
Speaker 1: could react like that. Yeah, And and hearing that, you
Speaker 1: you'd think that, like, well, she's just saying that, and
Speaker 1: it's just gonna be a she kind of sticks on
Speaker 1: that that on that tip and and stands by this.
Speaker 1: It seems so if you think about it from your
Speaker 1: point of view, if you think about it, if the
Speaker 1: parents of my clients saw this picture, you should give
Speaker 1: him a lot of right. They should they should react
Speaker 1: really positively to this, with a lot of hope inside. Right.
Speaker 1: Objection form is that what you're saying. I'm not those parents.
Speaker 1: I'm looking at it as an outsider, and I would
Speaker 1: much rather and I don't know a person with a
Speaker 1: heart would rather think, who would rather believe that the
Speaker 1: kids are dead versus that the kids might be alive?
Speaker 1: I would say it's reasonable for a person with a
Speaker 1: heart to have that sort of optimism as as as
Speaker 1: I'm I'm sure Alex wanted to believe that those kids.
Speaker 1: If there was any possibility kids were not dead, then
Speaker 1: he was going to grab onto it, because that's a
Speaker 1: much better proposition to have in your heart and mind
Speaker 1: than two to realize that they were so Alex Jones,
Speaker 1: according to how the company used things in terms of
Speaker 1: your Sandy Hook coverage, Alex Jones said the kids didn't
Speaker 1: really die and they were really alive, in part because
Speaker 1: he has such a big heart and a lot of
Speaker 1: hope and optimism for he's a dreamer objection form. He's
Speaker 1: not the only one, some have said, Alex Jess. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I found that to be with the most disturbing thing
Speaker 1: in the at least as an idea in the in
Speaker 1: the depositions that um saying that the kids weren't dead
Speaker 1: and that they were being paraded out to sing at
Speaker 1: the Super Bowl is an expression of love and optimism. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's the stret pretty bleak. I mean, wouldn't you really
Speaker 1: hope that Nagasaki was a false flag? Right? Like, don't
Speaker 1: you want to believe that no one would really drop
Speaker 1: a nuclear bomb on a city, And so I think
Speaker 1: that's why it's a good idea to just deny that
Speaker 1: anybody died. Yeah, why would you want to believe cancers real? Really? Yeah?
Speaker 1: If it's anyone with heart, medical science is lying about
Speaker 1: cancer in order to keep us in fear. It is
Speaker 1: a pretty fascinating the thoughts that had to have occurred
Speaker 1: in her head to wind up saying those things. Um,
Speaker 1: it would be amazing to be inside that little brain,
Speaker 1: just just watching those connections pop together. Could you not?
Speaker 1: Could you not see yourself being like held underwater by
Speaker 1: Daria and her being like, listen, I can't believe how
Speaker 1: good it is that I'm strangling you and drowning you
Speaker 1: to death right now because of how nice I am
Speaker 1: as a person. Leaving Jordan's fantasies aside, Sure, I think
Speaker 1: is that a fantasy? Well? I did make a CUK
Speaker 1: reference earlier, You did? You did? There is an element
Speaker 1: to it too that's added. That is that you know
Speaker 1: someone had these thoughts, decided this was gonna be the
Speaker 1: angle we're taking, doubled down on it. And that also
Speaker 1: happens to be someone who's higher up at info Wars
Speaker 1: and they chose to be their corporate representative testifying for
Speaker 1: the company. It's not like this is the first time
Speaker 1: she's had some kind of a messed up, weird done
Speaker 1: thought like it's it's it's wild. The glimpse that you
Speaker 1: get through these depositions is just such a harrowing picture
Speaker 1: of people who are so disrespectful to the very idea
Speaker 1: that they did something wrong or the organization did something wrong.
Speaker 1: And I think that they're really valuable glimpse into that.
Speaker 1: Uh And what we're gonna see in the near future
Speaker 1: is very likely some some interesting developments over the course
Speaker 1: of the the cases as they come to fruition. I
Speaker 1: think we'll we'll see uh so even and some more
Speaker 1: information come out, I would assume, Wow, well, boys, rob Man,
Speaker 1: I really feel like we've all transitioned. It's lovely to
Speaker 1: have you in the position where you're not usually in.
Speaker 1: You know, when you finish your script, usually your guest
Speaker 1: is like, Jesus fucking Christ, did you know that we're
Speaker 1: on a show called Behind the Bastards? And this guy's
Speaker 1: a real bad dude. One of my favorite things to
Speaker 1: do to relax is to watch videos of people attempting
Speaker 1: and to cut down trees and generally fucking up in
Speaker 1: a major way. And usually these videos are like That's
Speaker 1: why sometimes a great notion is my favorite novel. I
Speaker 1: don't understand that joke Ken Ken Kesey. Never mind, okay, um,
Speaker 1: I've only read uh uh oh wait, no, that's not
Speaker 1: kid Casey. He's just in it. Never mind. I was
Speaker 1: thinking of Tom Wolf. Um. But I like watching these
Speaker 1: because you'll see like somebody making this chain of decisions
Speaker 1: where Okay, I have this very tall tree, it's like
Speaker 1: two ft tall, and it's right in front of my house.
Speaker 1: I don't want to pay for someone. I'm gonna remove
Speaker 1: it on my own. I'm gonna winch myself up on
Speaker 1: top of it. I'm gonna have my kids hold onto
Speaker 1: ropes to try to pull it to the right side,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna cut the area above me that my
Speaker 1: like line is attached to. And then everything goes wrong
Speaker 1: and they wind up like impaling themselves under chainsaw and
Speaker 1: I'm going to deep fry a frozen turkey at the
Speaker 1: same time. At the same time, it's it's like that,
Speaker 1: it's just like this string of Wow, none of you,
Speaker 1: you didn't think through what the next step of this
Speaker 1: was going to be, because you just kind of figured
Speaker 1: it would go away because none of this, none of
Speaker 1: this feels in any way calculated. Um, it's too incompetent
Speaker 1: for that, and it's going too badly for to them
Speaker 1: for that. It's just like they weren't aware. It's like
Speaker 1: why watching someone learn about gravity as they fall off
Speaker 1: a mount. Well, I mean, the the incompetence is the
Speaker 1: manifestation of it. But there is a strategy, and that
Speaker 1: strategy is coming to an end. Now. The strategy is
Speaker 1: the kicking the can down the road appealing. Yeah, And
Speaker 1: so there was like a legal strategy that clearly was
Speaker 1: being employed. I even saw it with Alex in the
Speaker 1: Connecticut deposition recently, where he pretended he was sick and
Speaker 1: couldn't go. Um, it's just an attempt to delay the inevitable.
Speaker 1: And I really don't. I mean that that gravity analogy
Speaker 1: is good except for there's this other part where it's like, sure,
Speaker 1: this is their first time learning about gravity because they've
Speaker 1: been jumping off a thousand foot buildings for years and
Speaker 1: having no consequences for it, you know, on their listeners. Totally, totally,
Speaker 1: so They've got this such a comfortable landing every time
Speaker 1: they fall so hard that they're like, why am I
Speaker 1: bouncing and bleeding on the sidewalk right now? I've been bouncing.
Speaker 1: I've been flying the whole time, you know. Yep, yep.
Speaker 1: Podcast over, everyone go home, you guys, your plug doubles.
Speaker 1: While we all sit and think about well what I
Speaker 1: actually first, Dan, what do you think is gonna happen next?
Speaker 1: Are they gonna Are they gonna lose all their money? Um? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm fairly confident it's gonna He's gonna lose a lot.
Speaker 1: I think it's gonna be like it couldn't be like
Speaker 1: a lot of times you get these things where it's like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: the bad guy lost a case, and then it's like,
Speaker 1: oh and they get a slap on the wrist, fine,
Speaker 1: like the Sacklers, where it's like, well, that's not gonna
Speaker 1: hurt them in any way. But this doesn't feel like that.
Speaker 1: I think that Alex isn't in great financial straits to
Speaker 1: begin with, Like I think he's uh in for wars,
Speaker 1: is fairly precariously balanced on a ledge um And then
Speaker 1: uh yeah, I think I think these gonna get hit
Speaker 1: with a pretty I mean, you have cases in Texas, Connecticut,
Speaker 1: the Fontane case still being active. Uh, there's there is
Speaker 1: a number of blows he's going to take and he's
Speaker 1: already you know, squeezed his audience pretty hard in terms
Speaker 1: of what he's able to to make. Uh. That way,
Speaker 1: I think I think I wouldn't be too surprised if
Speaker 1: he's um asking to do a podcast on a network soon,
Speaker 1: and we'll be happy to have him. I think there's
Speaker 1: no doubt that the goal is to bankrupt him so
Speaker 1: he can never do the show again. Whether or not
Speaker 1: they succeed in that goal is uh, you know, up
Speaker 1: in the air. But that is that does seem to
Speaker 1: be like, here's what we're gonna shoot for, and if
Speaker 1: we negotiate down from there, it's gonna be fucking close.
Speaker 1: You know. If I think of the sentence that would
Speaker 1: be just for him. He'd be hooked up to a
Speaker 1: little buzzer that could deliver like a shock that didn't hurt,
Speaker 1: but like stopped him from whatever he was doing, and
Speaker 1: then he would be forced to host a daily podcast
Speaker 1: on the show ninety Day Fiance, where if he ever
Speaker 1: attempted to say anything that wasn't directly about the show,
Speaker 1: he'd get a little buzz. So if he had to
Speaker 1: just actually watch it doesn't matter what reality show. But
Speaker 1: every day he has to watch and comment on that
Speaker 1: show without talking about anything else, without getting into politics.
Speaker 1: Is he allowed to be racist about contestants and put
Speaker 1: on the show, because then he could do it. No,
Speaker 1: we're gonna say no racist counter for you. I've got
Speaker 1: a counter for you, all right. Two words, wicker Man,
Speaker 1: three additional words. Not the bees, Not the bees, Not
Speaker 1: the bees. I always, I always kind of fantasized about
Speaker 1: like a fitting punishment. I would I would agree to
Speaker 1: this if the price was right. Um, but Alex continues
Speaker 1: doing his show, but he has to do it with
Speaker 1: me sitting at the desk of Alex. Alex nerve to
Speaker 1: get me to throw a flag on that play? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: thanks to submit to me being like no no, no, no,
Speaker 1: no no no no no no no. And that would
Speaker 1: make Info Wars the first show to last more than
Speaker 1: twenty four hours a day. Yeah. Probably we would have
Speaker 1: to go into leap time so you could properly do
Speaker 1: your job. Uh well, now you guys want to plug
Speaker 1: your plug doubles before we were Oh, that's right, we
Speaker 1: were going to do that. We do. It's dot com
Speaker 1: on Twitter. We are on Twitter. It's knowledge under score
Speaker 1: fight and I go to bed Jordan's as is my want.
Speaker 1: For the second episode of a Behind the Bastards. I
Speaker 1: will admit that I did write a book. It's at
Speaker 1: the quiet part loud dot com. You can find it.
Speaker 1: It's free. Yeah, um, and you can find me nowhere
Speaker 1: because I exist only in the theory a plane where
Speaker 1: thoughts and feelings and audio clips of Alex Jones being deposed. Right,
Speaker 1: there's Amataba Buddha, and then there's you, just serenely hovering
Speaker 1: over the knowledge. All right. Damn hey, America and to
Speaker 1: a lesser extent, Canada. Um, this is Robert and Dan
Speaker 1: from a knowledge fight. We have exercised Jordan for his
Speaker 1: sins um, so we we just had we recorded this.
Speaker 1: I think we say the date in episode one a
Speaker 1: while ago. Right, that's just the way Bastards works. It's
Speaker 1: you know, there's a backlog um that Dan graciously helped
Speaker 1: me extend. But some ship has happened in the ensuing weeks.
Speaker 1: It felt like this was something that was ever green
Speaker 1: and you could just have it to sit on a shelf.
Speaker 1: First of it is, yeah, but just talking about Alex
Speaker 1: Jones and his his dumb troubles. But it turns out curveballs. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so let's let's get into those curveballs, because I mean,
Speaker 1: obviously everything you've said about him is still accurate. It's
Speaker 1: just that some new ship has happened visa VI, particularly
Speaker 1: the court cases. They changed the landscape a little since
Speaker 1: this uh, this episode has to particularly do with the
Speaker 1: legal stuff. Um, it is a little embarrassing just to
Speaker 1: look back. I remember that. I think I think we
Speaker 1: said that Jordan and I were about to fly out
Speaker 1: to Austin for the trial right before we recorded the episode,
Speaker 1: and the tragic which means you have not had good
Speaker 1: barbecue in a very long time. That is true, Chicago
Speaker 1: has good food, but and some good barbecue maybe yeah, um,
Speaker 1: but yeah we um. I think it was like the
Speaker 1: day after or two days after we recorded it, Alex
Speaker 1: had his his whole bankruptcy thing that ended up postponing
Speaker 1: the trial and so we never ended up going. And
Speaker 1: since then everything has just been a complete chaotic mess
Speaker 1: with the case. So we could be honestly, we could
Speaker 1: do a whole another episode about what's happened in the
Speaker 1: case since we recorded this episode. Well, I'm sure we
Speaker 1: will at some point, but we'll let it all shake out.
Speaker 1: So yeah, as of mid April, this is this is
Speaker 1: fairly accurate. Well cool, anything else, No, I just wanted
Speaker 1: to put that caveat because otherwise I just would feel
Speaker 1: so self conscious. Yeah, it's okay. I feel self conscious
Speaker 1: all the time, um about things that I say and
Speaker 1: then other things happened. But it's it's it's you know
Speaker 1: how you can't be expected to predict the legal proceedings
Speaker 1: of Alexander and Rick Jones because they're they They do
Speaker 1: not proceed the way any reasonable person would want them
Speaker 1: to write. If you if you're just try, if you're
Speaker 1: assuming alex is a rational actor taking steps in his
Speaker 1: own self interest, you'll be constantly surprised by how he
Speaker 1: handles his court cases. Yeah, he has a a warped
Speaker 1: sense of his own self interests that just game theory
Speaker 1: refuses to calculate. All right, Well, we're gonna return you
Speaker 1: to your previously scheduled episode already in progress, and we
Speaker 1: are also going to unlock the shadow dimension where we've
Speaker 1: thrown joy. While we record this um for him. A
Speaker 1: thousand years has passed of of unbelievable torment. Anyway, okay.
Speaker 1: Behind the Bastards is a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more from cool Zone Media, visit our website cool
Speaker 1: zone media dot com, or check us out on the
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts.