Alex Jones discusses ongoing legal battles against him and InfoWars, highlighting numerous
violations of First Amendment rights and Texas substantive law. He criticizes those who are not
well-informed about the case and encourages support for InfoWars. Jones argues that attempts to
silence InfoWars only make them more popular and powerful. InfoWars emphasizes their need for
continued support, arguing that despite efforts to silence them, they have gained credibility while
their opponents lose it. They use the analogy of the Battle of Bunker Hill to highlight how
resistance can strengthen a movement. The speaker discusses the ongoing legal battle against Alex
Jones and criticizes the courts for making up stories about what exists and doesn't exist. He also
discusses his personal life, financial situation, and the upcoming bankruptcy court proceedings.
Finally, he encourages listeners to continue supporting him in the fight for freedom. "The
Well, I can't say that I personally enjoy the entire establishment trying to bring us down, but deep down it is satisfying to know that we're really given these corrupt globalists A run for their money, and that they fear us, above all others, for igniting brush fires in the minds of men and women everywhere, as Thomas Jefferson talked about, the author of our Declaration of Independence.
Well, this is a Saturday evening emergency special with my good friend and well-known constitutional lawyer, Robert Barnes, who's been here for two weeks covering the show, Trial of the Century, and they got two more coming up.
Wow.
To break it all down is just insane.
We're going to do it here today because people have a lot of questions.
It's been the number one story for the last week in the United States.
It's been in the top 10 stories in Europe and other parts of the world.
Not China threatening war, not Russia winning the Ukraine war, not collapsing borders, not human smuggling, not mass suicides and fentanyl deaths, but the monster Alex Jones who questioned a mass shooting.
And then I have the mayor of Uvalde in my stack actually coming out and saying he thinks there's a cover-up in Uvalde.
Well, I guess he'll be the next person to face a 40-plus million dollar judgment.
You're about to get the exclusive details of what really happened in the show trial, what it means next, what these huge judgments mean, is M4 going to be closing, is it going to be shutting down?
We're going to talk about it all here in the next hour with Robert Barnes and play some of these incredible clips.
The ambulance chasing lawyers.
of the Democratic Party openly bragged in their closing statements, take his megaphone away and everybody else like him.
We have to shut them down and silence this information.
The judge said she is the arbiter of truth, not me.
She said, I'm a liar.
My lawyer's a liar.
Everybody's a liar.
This is an incredible time to be alive and to lay out how this show trial of the century that would make the Nazis blush is Robert Barnes.
I mean, basically, even the Soviets tried to make a show trial at least a good show.
This was a show trial that was so one-sided, so evidently partisan, so made-for-the-movie scripts.
I was talking to Mark Rober the other day, and this is a Hollywood screenwriter, and even he was shocked to hear how it was basically designed, the courtroom was designed like a set.
with three big movie cameras with the judge alternating the what could be said and when it could be said
and how it could be said and who could say it in such a way that had nothing to do
with the rules of evidence, nothing to do with the rules of law in Texas,
nothing to do with constitutional liberties and protection, and everything to do with scripting a case
so that it would have a particular outcome and in particular a future media narrative
that could be spun, and ultimately an actual future movie where the judge has made herself the star.
That is what has happened in this case, and it is a show trial unparalleled and unprecedented
in American or world history.
There have been analogous examples, but nothing as severe, nothing as substantial,
and nothing as literally scripted for a movie as this film, as this case was.
And again, whether we're right or wrong about things, that's up to the public to decide.
When they try to censor and control outlets, they're trying to censor what you can see, what you can watch, and literally mind-control you.
Since I mentioned it, here's Axios.
Do they deserve to be sued in oblivion?
The Evalde mayor says he fears cover-up of deadly school shooting.
The same thing that the head of the state police is saying they've been lied to.
This is incredible.
Robert Barnes continuing with your observations, both watching the trial on TV, being down there, having live coverage of it, why you say it's the most insane show trial ever.
It is because, well first of all, there pretty much wasn't a right that the judge didn't violate.
First Amendment right of freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of the press.
Second Amendment right to speak out in favor of the Second Amendment right to self-defense.
Fourth Amendment right to privacy.
She violated that repeatedly throughout the proceedings.
Not only what went on in the discovery being unduly invasive, but in fact turning over and telling the plaintiff's lawyer he could turn over attorney-client privilege communications Protected by the Fourth Amendment to the January 6th Committee or whomever else.
Fifth Amendment rights to due process of law, denied rights to bring motions to dismiss, anti-slap motions, denied right to bring appeals, summary judgment motions.
Sixth Amendment rights to both counsel and confrontation, infringed by the attorney-client privilege being disclosed, and the right to confront those making accusations against you.
7th Amendment right to trial by jury.
And that means a right to trial by jury on all facts, not just the facts the judge decides can be tried.
And that all of those same analogous federal constitutional provisions have analogs in the state constitution of the state of Texas.
Well that's right, her quote was when Bankston said he's going to give what they call the contents of my phone, it's not, to the January 6th committee.
He said, I will not stand between you and Congress.
Well, the state's supposed to stand up for our rights.
I mean, it's only because of a judge's order that that information is in the possession at all of the plaintiff's counsel, who basically stole it under the law.
That's what he did.
He got information he knew he wasn't entitled to, admitted that openly in court, and yet was allowed to be rewarded for it.
But that wasn't all.
Then you go to Texas substantive law that was routinely and flagrantly violated at every stage of these proceedings.
This includes the right to summary judgment for claims that are brought under these terms that don't have a legal basis.
The right of statutes of limitations.
These claims are mostly all past the statute of limitations.
The right to bring an appeal of a summary judgment motion.
The right under defamation law to challenge Whether or not an apology, correction, or retraction was given, and to mitigate damages.
The right to demand that a punitive damages request be done in a timely manner, which didn't happen here, based on their own testimony of the plaintiffs in court, and what the plaintiffs' lawyers said and admitted in court.
The attempts to get an inflated punitive damages verdict, that is in excess of what Texas statutes allow, or what constitutional due process permits.
And then, after that, violation of pretty much every rule of evidence you can possibly imagine.
The Rule of Evidence Concerning Relevance, The Rule of Evidence Concerning Materiality, The Rules of Evidence Concerning Completeness, The Rules of Evidence Concerning Hearsay, The Rules of Evidence... And for folks that don't know, they wouldn't let us have any of our videos in, even though they were in evidence, and turned over to them and their evidence.
And let's be clear, if I was caught with dead kids in my basement, the defense lawyer that took the job, they'd call him a hero because every man deserves A defense.
But now with Alex Jones, who just questioned a mass shooting, oh no.
Not only that, they excluded your lawyer of choice repeatedly.
They tried to kick me out of the case early on.
They did exclude multiple other lawyers who you had retained to appear.
They didn't allow them to appear in Texas.
Didn't allow them to appear in Connecticut.
So they controlled which lawyer was representing you.
They controlled how the jury selection went forward.
They're not supposed to be allowed to ask, hey, do you commit to a ridiculous verdict before you even sit down?
Yet that's what happened here, and the only jurors that were allowed to participate were the ones that thought there was never been any media bias against Alex Jones or InfoWars ever, and had committed to a $100 million verdict before they were even seated.
So you had violations at every single level of the process.
We had a graduate student get up there, and we're going to walk through all of it because this is historic.
And you did a great job laying out just some of what they did.
people are experts who aren't qualified to speak in the subject matter.
One, the plaintiff's counsel continues to lie to the press and the public.
Two days ago he said that you could get a punitive damages award and the only limit was due process and whether it was 10x the ratio of damages.
That's the U.S.
Supreme Court that has nothing, by the way it's 6x, not 10x.
Is the historical definition under the BMW case by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
So he misstated even what the U.S.
Supreme Court said.
But Texas law has always limited what punitive damages are allowed.
And he lied again yesterday after the verdict trying to let people believe there's these false claims out there that they can enforce part of the $45 million or $13 million or $32 million.
All false.
The Texas law is completely clear.
It's $750,000 per defendant cap total period.
So basically what these verdicts end up being is something like $3.6, $3.7 million for each plaintiff.
And that's it.
And so the idea that it can... Oh, actually, $2.8 million per plaintiff.
So you're talking about $5.7 million collectively between both defendants.
That's all.
It's not a $50 million verdict.
The reason why the judge didn't honor that and respect that right out of the gate is because she wanted the fake news narrative to go around the globe to say, see, this is the death of Alex Jones.
This is the end of Alex Jones.
This is a judgment that nobody could possibly repay.
That's what they wanted.
They wanted the headline, but the headline is a lie about the law, and that's why the plaintiff's lawyer, Mark Bankston, went out and lied to the press about what Texas law represents.
Texas law limits this to $750,000 per plaintiff, per defendant, and that puts a cap and reduces almost all of the punitive damages verdict.
To a small percentage of what the jury issued.
What was more terrifying from my perspective is what you bring up.
They overtly, openly, and explicitly called for the execution of Alex Jones financially in the closing arguments.
That what they've been hiding and lying about, saying, oh this case is just about Sandy Hook, this case is just about some parents, this case really had nothing to do with either, just look at their punitive damages arguments.
See how much in their punitive damages arguments they're talking about Sandy Hook and parents, and how much they're talking about kill Alex Jones, kill Infowars, don't let him ever come back again, don't let him ever be on a platform again.
Because I think they had a political jury that they knew that the facts of the case were not persuasive enough to even a liberal democratic jury to issue a big verdict, even though this was mostly a phyrrhic symbolic verdict.
They needed to appeal to the political prejudices of the jury, an overwhelmingly liberal democratic jury, and say, this is your chance to censor and suppress Alex Jones forever.
Remember one of the jurors during the jury trial said, Can we use this case to go after election deniers too?
That's what they were appealing to.
They had heard those same questions and they said, OK, yeah, maybe our case is kind of crap.
Ignore that.
This is your chance to remove Alex Jones from the game.
I mean, and by the way, that's called the constitutional requirement of colloquium.
New York Times versus Sullivan established this.
Not just the actual malice standard, which they also got rid of in your case, but also the requirement that you make a specific factual claim about a specifically identified individual.
If the same standard was applied to Axios that was applied to you, they could be sued into bankruptcy tomorrow by running a headline that says the mayor of Uvalde questions whether or not there's a school shooting cover-up.
Because to be clear, they didn't limit this case to just one or two specific statements.
They said any statement questioning anything concerning the Sandy Hook official narrative warranted a death penalty.
They gave you a death penalty sanction in the default judgment stage, then gave you another, and they asked for a death penalty sanction from the jury in the punitive damages stage.
A punitive damages state where you were not allowed to present any evidence.
You were barred and gagged.
I mean, I told people the closest analogy to this case is the Chicago 7 case.
And even they got to say at least a little bit in their own defense.
These are some of the big questions people have before we get these video clips.
I'll answer them.
I'm worried about America and my children's future and your children's future.
I know I don't have $2 million in cash sitting around.
I know that we're maxed out.
I'm not about making money.
I'm about fighting the New World Order, but it takes money to do that.
And so I even have crew members ask, are we still going to be on air?
What does it mean that we've declared bankruptcy?
We've declared bankruptcy to put our cards on the table and show there's not all this money, and we can't fight these other show trials and do all of this, and we're on the verge of insolvency.
But yes, InfoWars is continuing on with The War Room, with American Journal, with myself, with Greg Reese, and all the other great producers, from Darren McBreen to John Bound to everybody and the millions of people a day
that we reach.
But that's really up to the listeners and viewers.
If you're asking, if we're going to continue on, we can go for years and years and years
in bankruptcy and appealing these cases and fighting for sure.
But only if you go to m4workstore.com and buy the great products they continue to support.
But the globalists see us as a major light on the hill or a beacon, a lighthouse that they don't want out there for the rest of the people in the nation and in the world.
They know we're having a big effect.
They know we're exposing the Great Reset.
They know that if they can shut us down and demonize us,
they can intimidate everybody else.
So that's why InfoWars is a major rallying point right now for free speech and our message of exposing
the Great Reset and the New World Order.
And that's why your support is absolutely critical.
Yes, we're gonna continue on.
If we get your support, if you spread the word, if you share the articles, if you tell people,
Alex Jones is live, they don't want you to hear it.
InfoWars.com, 11 a.m.
weekdays.
If you do that, we will win.
The people are hungry for the truth right now.
Now, since we mentioned this, I want to play a few clips here because I don't want to just say this like the media does.
They'll say something that won't show proof.
I want to Actually show you some clips of the lawyers in front of the jury, who'd already been told I was guilty more than 20 times by the judge, unprecedented, saying it's about silencing Alex Jones.
These are just some of the quotes.
Take his megaphone away.
He's patient zero.
Get rid of him.
And then Bankston, one of the ambulance chasers, outside, Telling the press about their big master plan to cut up the corpse and share the corpse.
But first, let's hit this because people want to know about this.
Robert.
What needs to come out of this?
How do we, the people, how does Congress, how do the governors, how do the legislatures, how do we counter the total weaponization of the judiciary and what they admit is this pilot project with us?
To use this against everyone, which they've now admitted they're planning.
One is continuing to fight in the court of public opinion, because more and more people need to hear about this, know about this, and understand the outrage of it.
For example, like Tim Pool yesterday had a discussion on it.
Frankly, it was a very under-informed conversation.
People like that need to have a much more informed conversation about what this case is really about.
Yeah, so I mean, he had people on that, honestly, some of them had just read the media, and they had not actually looked at what happened in the case.
And this is, I've run into this repeatedly.
As I've said, you look at people who have looked at this.
Mike Cernovich, Jack Posobiec, Charlie Kirk, and others called it out yesterday.
The people that have studied this case, Michael Malice, others, myself, Viva Frye, and others in the legal community that have looked at this case understand how dangerous and what an outrage it is.
That it is a case that poses an imminent risk, a perilous risk, to core First Amendment freedoms for everybody.
Any illusions about what this case is about are gone based on the closing statements and punitive damages stage of the case made by the plaintiff's lawyers and made by them in the press and made by other members of the press.
You can read press articles today saying this will be the template to take out everybody we don't like.
I mean, the most historical analogous circumstance was in the late 1950s and early 1960s, which led to the New York Times vs. Sullivan, but only because there had been so much public outrage around the country about what was happening, was Southern corrupt sheriffs and Klan-oriented policemen were suing dissidents and press and independents and civil rights participants and protesters into bankruptcy and oblivion.
That's what New York Times vs. Sullivan was really about.
Crazy verdict.
Similar to what took place here on the punitive damages side.
And their goal and objective was to intimidate, terrorize.
This is why it's so important people continue to support InfoWars, because InfoWars can continue to pay its monthly bills as long as InfoWars continues to get support.
That money is not getting diverted to anywhere else.
That money is going for operational, ongoing basis.
Everybody is watching what's going to happen.
Everybody is watching, will InfoWars be off the air?
Because that's what the plaintiff's lawyers were That's what they were predicting yesterday.
They were going to chop up Alex Jones and distribute him for all of their cannibalistic political patrons to consume.
And they, that's what their audience is expecting.
I'm not comparing myself to Michael Jordan, but they're like, They're trying to blow up Bulls Stadium because Michael Jordan and his prime is playing there.
But Michael Jordan, if they burn down the stadium, he just goes and works for the Lakers or for whoever he wants.
The point is, is that they see me as the Michael Jordan of populist, conservative, anti-globalism, and we are.
The listeners are.
This whole family is.
We are Michael Jordan together.
But they still don't get... I was sitting there in like the fifth deposition they have of me for Connecticut, and he goes, what is the most valuable asset of InfoWars?
I said, it's me.
But, like, they think, like, I'm loyal to the audience, I'm loyal to the crew, I'm loyal to this infrastructure, but I can go anywhere and do the show, everybody's gonna come anyways.
That's it. And they believe they can crush me and they can crush you. And I'm not just saying that.
This is a battle of wills, ladies and gentlemen.
That's why now...
I'm quite frankly surprised, because listeners are so used to us being steadfast, so used to us being resilient, that they're like, OK, well Jones has said he's close to oblivion quite a bit.
We're getting a little extra support, but not what we should.
And I think if it becomes evident where we actually do start shutting down, we'll have a lot of support, and then we'll try to reorganize and do something.
Oh, no doubt, because this is what keeps InfoWars alive on a monthly basis, that pays all the salaries, that makes sure that it's broadcast can continue to be made, and continue to be distributed, and continue to be shared.
So as long as the audience holds the line, they cannot breach that line.
They thought they would win, and the British did win the Battle of Bunker Hill, but they lost the ultimate battle of the spirit and the soul because of how people fought back and resisted.
So as long as the people hold the line, as long as they see InfoWars is still there, as long as they hear Alex Jones' voice is still heard, as long as the people are continued to get what they want to get and to distribute it accordingly and have heard and have listened to what they want to have heard and listened to, Then that will break down their ability to crush the populist movement and the American freedom movement.
And what they don't understand is if I was Machiavelli, I'd shut this down and disappear for six months.
The minute I came back anywhere, it would have hundreds of millions of views.
But I don't want to do that because of my crew and everything else.
But they just, they don't even know.
They don't even know how media works.
It's like, it's really bizarre.
They don't even get that as long as we stay on air and don't let them convince us that we've lost and convince us we've been silenced and convince us we're bad or they're the ones that lie on purpose, we make mistakes.
We just got bigger from this!
More people than ever are going to want to know, well, what is this forbidden thing?
It's not fun being nuked, but I tell you, it's a little... Well, I mean, hey, you might as well live in interesting times.
And so it's the willy.
Every great story needs a great crisis, needs a great obstacle, needs a great difficulty.
It's what gives the story its moral weight and moral power and potency.
And that's no different here.
This is the system's attempt to take out populist independent voices by every means possible.
And the reality is they can't because they can't crush the soul and the spirit of working-class ordinary Americans who will hold the line, have held the line, and that is why freedom stays alive is because of ordinary people like the audience holding the line.
And it's an attempt to sort of... I mean, what's extraordinary is they got to see a microscopic up-close view of InfoWars and Alex Jones and they couldn't produce any incriminatory information.
You can imagine what's on some of these people's phones, and what's on some of these people's computer profiles, and what's on some of these people's search engines.
I mean, you can just look at some of the social media of some of the people who follow this Alex Jones hate community.
And go, hmm, these people you don't want around your daughter, these people you don't want to be within a mile of if you can avoid it.
You definitely don't want to be in a dark alley or a bedroom with them, that's for sure.
It's that kind of vibe that you get.
They project their own sins upon those they accuse when in fact Absolutely.
So, let's play a few more clips here.
those people they're criticizing.
And that's what they found.
They got to do the whole review, and at the end of the day,
they couldn't find anything of consequence, and that's why they got stuck talking big.
This is literally 1984, where Winston is torturing him to death, or O'Brien is torturing Winston to death, and he says, it doesn't matter what your eyes see, I'm reality.
And the judge is supposed to be an impartial referee.
Imagine if you went to a football game and you saw the referee, the umpire, wearing the uniform of one of the teams.
And then tell one of the teams, okay, your opponent can have 11 players, you can only have 5.
They can throw a forward pass, you cannot.
They can have certain blockers, you cannot.
And then we'll throw, like I think they counted it up, 110, 115 objections, she sustained from the plaintiffs, and only like 8 or 9 she sustained from your side.
I mean, imagine if all they did was throw flags on one side the entire game.
Everybody would be like, this is a complete crock.
Well, I remember when he asked you, he goes, well, I don't hear you coughing on the air.
He's like, that's why I have a cough button.
I mean, anybody who knows you and has been around you knows that's the case.
I mean, that's the kind of patent absurdity they were trying to make up.
This was about scripting a narrative that was fake.
If any aspect of it was deeply true, they would have allowed all the evidence in, they wouldn't have violated all the rules, they would have allowed a trial by jury.
We're not going to be spending two years going up to the Texas Supreme Court or whatever.
Nobody's going to waste their money doing that.
We're going to this bankruptcy court.
And those claims are going to have to get valued and resolved in that bankruptcy estate.
And when we have a litigable basis to potentially wrap this case up for years and then ultimately collect our entire punitive damage argument?
Yeah, there's going to be a resolution made on to what these claims are valued at.
And that's also going to have to take into account what the Lafferty claims are valued at, and the Posner claims are valued at, and the Fontaine claims are valued at.
And that is why I've been saying that what this is heading towards Is there going to be a large set of plaintiffs who are going to be dividing up the corpse of InfoWars and the bankruptcy estate?
And over the course of that process, that could get very, very dangerous for Mr. Jones, because there is going to be a new level of financial scrutiny.
And if, you know, some lawyer like me can basically find out that he's hiding the keys to the candy store, pull it out in front of him on the stand, I can only imagine what Federal Receipt is going to do.
So yeah, it's going to get interesting from here on out.
I'm being loyal to my crew, I love it, it was a great job.
Like, they keep acting like there's some spoil, as if this is the spoil.
I don't think of myself as that great.
You're great.
I love our guest.
I love our host.
But I mean, it's me, dumbasses!
And that's why I said, oh, he's got to be very careful now that the feds are involved in his finances.
As bad as the feds are, and as bad as bankruptcy is, it's better than these rig courts in Austin that are known to indict Rick Perry and Tom DeLay for no reason.
We're certified in federal court what we have and what we've done, which is game over for you.
Because you won't be able to tell your plaintiffs, I got $270 million when I ain't got $2 million.
It's game over.
So they act like, oh, we're going to run to the bankruptcy here.
Only one justice short of them taking it and throwing this out from the very beginning because the very nature of the suit violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Always has.
Also violates Texas law on the definition of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
So, consequently, they know they lose.
And you can see that reflected in the way he talks about that.
That he's nervous about that court finally stepping up.
If you look at it, when these kind of attempts have been made throughout American history, the Patrick Henry trial, his later speech, give me liberty or give me death, what happened in the 1950s, early 1960s with the South trying to suppress civil rights movements, the Chicago 7 trial at the end of the 60s trying to cover up the corrupt defense establishment, all of those were the despairing cries of a dying empire.
And that's what we're seeing here.
These desperate efforts to completely suppress and censor any independent voice is a sign that they are losing and on the verge of complete collapse.
So they're reaching out and lashing out in this desperate effort to try to stop and prevent the spirit of American freedom from being heard.
And as long as ordinary people continue to carry it, then it cannot be crushed like it hasn't been crushed for more than two centuries.
ahead of the War Room Show they do Sunday live with Owen Schroeder, 6 to 8.
But just in closing, because you do a great job, I'm interrupting constantly, recap this trial and the big takeaways, because I'm very pleased they had a declaration of war and said, we silenced Jones, we silenced them all, we're going to ban American speech.
I mean, this was a horrific announcement and just a Statement of extreme hubris, which I see as weakness.
And as everybody out there continues to hold the line, then Infowars will not only stay alive, but American freedom will stay alive in the process.
And that's what they don't understand.
What the corpse they're trying to cut up is actually just waking up, and that's the fear that they have, and they're about to live and experience that fear as they're unable to get up.
I mean, it's just like, why would the Western powers push for a war in Ukraine that's counterproductive, try to trigger a war with China, as Trump said, that doesn't make any sense, that's a half-ass idea.
Why is any of that taking place?
They're used to using raw power to discipline people who disagree.
The Great Reset is like number 32 or 33 right now on Amazon.
If it goes to number one, it's going to cause shockwaves.
We start shipping in a few weeks.
You can get the book at InfoWareStore.com as well with a signed copy.
If you want to support us, we have Vitamin Mineral Fusion back in stock, Body's Ultimate Turmeric Formula, Diet Force is about to sell out.
You decide whether we stay on air or not.
We have great products.
Get an Alex Jones is Right t-shirt.
Whatever you do, thank you for tuning in on this Saturday evening.
Thank you for caring.
Please share these videos.
Please share this report and tell others to share it and that completes the Shane Reaction.
Tomorrow night, I'll be covering so much here.
And I got a bunch of special guests and so much coming up.
So God bless you all.
Thank you for tuning in.
Now share the live feed of this and share the archive of it at Band.Video or roll over and die, which I know you're not going to do, because I'm not going to do it either.
And I pledge to you all, I'm going to redouble my efforts.
And if there were ever a case of someone being unfairly railroaded by
the court system, just look at these civil lawsuits against Alex Jones.
It's been nothing short of astonishing.
Alex has been denied the right to testify in his own defense.
His legal team has been denied the right to present evidence in his defense.
He's been denied the right to call witnesses in his defense.
He was deemed guilty by the judge verbally in front of the jury dozens of times.
And where did that guilt come from?
Oh, it was a default decision by the judge, not a jury.
Alex did not get a jury trial.
He did not get a trial at all.
He got a default judgment.
Because the judge just simply declared, well, we've decided that you're guilty and you don't get a trial.
And then the judge gagged him and said, you can't talk about this and you can't claim that the trial is unfair.
I mean, think about that.
You're getting railroaded and the judge says, you're not allowed to say you're being railroaded because we don't like what you said years ago about Sandy Hook, even though you apologized for it.
And even though you already said you were wrong in that case, even then, We're going to do all of this to you because of what you said about Sandy Hook.
So now in America, if you say that no children died, but actually according to the media, 20 children died, then you can be sued and ordered to pay potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.
Because of the pain and suffering of the parents.
So that's why I asked the original question.
Well, what if Alex Jones had said nobody died from vaccines?
How many children in America have died from vaccines so far?
I mean, the COVID vaccines since early 2021, let's say.
There is very credible evidence from multiple scientific studies and statistical analyses that the number of total deaths from COVID vaccines in America, that is excess deaths caused by the vaccines, is at least 1 million people.
And we see the excess deaths in the insurance company statistics as well.
According to some insurance companies, excess deaths are up 20% or 25%.
One company reported 40% for a certain time period.
That's a lot of excess deaths.
Globally, the number of people very likely killed by these vaccines at this point, just by a reasonable rough estimate, must exceed 10 million people.
And it's probably much, much higher.
Now, it doesn't ask the question how many children have been killed by these vaccines, but I can assure you it's more than 20.
Probably a number in the low thousands at this point.
We've also seen lots of young athletes dying.
Athletes in their 20s and 30s dying on soccer fields and football fields, baseball mounds and basketball courts just keeling over and dying and doctors dying while out jogging.
And a whole bunch of doctors at that one hospital in Canada died, all within the span of about 10 days, it seems.
A lot of deaths happening from this.
But what if you had said, no one died from vaccines?
What if Alex Jones had said that?
Could he be sued?
Over the pain and suffering of the parents of the dead children?
Well, according to these court cases, Alex Jones could have been sued if he said no one died from vaccines.
And of course, anyone saying that would be incredibly dishonest, because lots of people have died from these vaccines, and lots of children have died.
And people like Fauci, if you ask them, how many children have been killed by these vaccines, they would tell you, zero.
Walensky at the CDC, she would say zero.
Dr. Birx, she would say zero.
Fauci would say zero.
On and on.
If you ask the White House, some spokesperson would say zero.
So, I'm wondering if Alex can be sued for tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars, does this set a precedent where the parents of children killed by vaccines can now sue all these other people, say, well, you caused pain and suffering for me by claiming that my child wasn't killed by a vaccine even though they were?
Because if we're going to start holding people accountable in America for claiming that nobody died from fill-in-the-blank, whatever that may be, like nobody died from vaccines, nobody died from antidepressant drugs, or if somebody were to say nobody died from, you know, swimming pool accidents or automobile accidents or what have you, we're gonna have lawsuits flying left and right all over the country.
But those vaccine-pushing, fraudulent, treasonous, anti-human health authorities that are pushing vaccines, they are mass murderers.
They are carrying out genocide.
They are murdering children to protect the profits of the pharmaceutical industry.
And yet Alex Jones has killed no one.
In fact, Alex Jones sells supplements that have helped healthy mothers conceive and give birth to healthy children.
Alex Jones provides products and solutions that promote health and longevity.
He has no doubt saved the lives of countless thousands of children just through good nutrition and Helping to teach parents to avoid deadly vaccines that cause spontaneous abortions and birth defects.
If anything, Alex Jones should be given credit for all the children that he's helped save over the years.
And that doesn't even count his battles against the abortion industry, by the way, or organ harvesting of children, or Alex's battles against child trafficking and pedophilia, child grooming and genital mutilations.
Alex opposes all of those things very strenuously, very vocally.
But isn't it interesting that the same system that is prosecuting Alex, the same court system, the same radical leftists, the radical left-wing judges and attorneys and district courts and so on, isn't it interesting that in nearly every case, they support murdering children in the womb, don't they?
They support baby murder.
They support infanticide.
They support post-birth abortions.
They support child grooming!
They support genital mutilations of children.
They support chemical castrations of children.
So the system that consumes children and routinely harms them tells you that Alex Jones is guilty?
Even though Alex Jones battles on behalf of children in almost every issue that he covers?
What does that tell you?
Here's what it tells me.
The system wants to silence Alex Jones because he is effective at waking people up to the child mutilations, child trafficking, pedophilia, grooming, abortions, child murder, infanticide, everything that the left stands for.
And so they pretend to care about 20 children that they claim died at Sandy Hook, but they don't care about the 200 million children Imagine if Alex Jones wrote a book entitled Nobody Died From Abortion.
Then I guess the parent of every abortion murdered child could file suit, correct?
Except that in many cases those parents wanted to kill their own children.
But Alex has not authored any such book and never would because he is opposed.
to violence against children. And I encourage you to support InfoWars.com and the InfoWars platform
and all the voices that it supports, all the different experts and people and guests and
analysts that are there, just brilliant people like Robert Barnes, the attorney, and Paul Joseph
Watson, and so many others. It's just amazing. And Gerald Cilenti as one of the hosts from time to
time as well. Support their right to exist. Support their right to question the official narratives.
And that's why I help out and fill in hosts from time to time.
time.
I know that Alex fights against violence against children every single day.
And I see it behind the scenes.
I see it in person.
Alex is almost consumed by the idea of protecting children against the raging murderous Democrats.
So I know the truth.
The truth that no one else is allowed to know because the judges silence the truth.
They've had the most courage out there to publish books that nobody else will publish, and they've become one of the most successful publishing houses in North America, if not the world, at Skyhorse Publishing.
And I just want to salute Tony Lyons because this guy is fearless, and I gotta say it, the credit goes to Tony Lyons and his researchers that we're going to mention here.
It's not ghostwritten, it's my recordings, it's my words, it's my clips.
I sent them, but he had lawyers involved, you name it.
They took it next level.
This is how they're doing it, and how to stop them.
I am just, thank you so much, Tony.
How the hell with your team, because you took my recordings, and 20 hours of recordings, and all the stuff I sent you, and all the meetings we had, and you did this.
You know, this is the most controversial book coming out this year.
There's no question, the most controversial book.
They're going to try to shut it down.
They don't want you to read this book.
They're afraid of the revelations in this book, and they're going to censor it in every conceivable way.
So, the thing to do now is to buy it right now, push it to the top of the list, so that everybody has to carry it.
That they know that this book is there, that it's not going to go away, that you're not going to go away, that you're a patriot, that you're fighting for what's right, and that we don't deserve censorship in this country.
We have fought and died for freedom in this country, and we need to fight to protect freedom in this country.
And that's what your book is about.
It's about combating the Great Reset.
This is a book that people need to read.
If they disagree with it, if people disagree with it, they should make an argument against it.
They shouldn't censor it.
They shouldn't de-platform it.
They shouldn't write hit pieces against you.
They should buy The Great Reset and The War for the World by Alex Jones and they should
decide for themselves, people should decide for themselves what they believe and if they
have better arguments, they should make those arguments.
But this is an important book and I highly recommend it and you know, buying it is an
act of rebellion because like I said, they're going to try to shut it down in every conceivable
This is a book that's already got great blurbs by, you know, Tucker Carlson, Mike Adams, Dr. Mercola, lots of people.
I mean, this is an important book.
You know, it's a book that people have to read and think through, and they have to realize that it's not going to be covered in any mainstream newspaper.
It might not be available in, you know, libraries.
Tucker Carlson, you know, said, uh, why are the most powerful people in the country trying to silence Alex Jones?
Read this book and decide for yourself.
So that's the thing.
Read this book.
Read The Great Reset and decide for yourself whether the things that you, Alex Jones, have
described are really happening and whether we can all get together to fight them, to
fight for freedom.
So this is like a battle cry.
This is a book that people need to read and they need to recognize that a lot of people
are going to come out with hit pieces, with reasons not to read it.
They're going to not address any of the claims in the book.
They're just going to go after you personally, Alex.
They might come after me.
But, you know, the reason that we publish books and the reason that people should read books is to learn something new, is to get out of your own kind of footprints and look at things and really think them through for yourself.