Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 14, 2019 - Depositions & Trials

01:58:47

PART 1: Alex Jones / Sandy Hook Video Deposition

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I do.
	Thank you.
	Mr. Jones.
	When do you want me to go on the record?
	Oh, yeah, let's do that now, actually.
	Mr. Barnes, why don't you do that for me?
	Thank you.
	This is Robert Barnes.
	I'm General Counsel for InfoWars and Mr. Jones, in this context, Free Speech Systems LLC. Here, representing him, I have a motion for pro hoc pending, and the agreement is that I can represent and defend Mr. Jones here with the acknowledgement that I am bound by the Texas rules of civil procedure, the Texas ethical and professional rules, and the Texas sanctions rules, and will be bound by the court.
	Thank you, Mr. Martin.
	Oh, you're doing the microphone?
	Yeah, I think it's going to work out.
	Mr. Jones.
	Mr. Jones?
	Mr. Jones?
	I want to go back to when this all started.
	And, In fairness to you, one of the things that you've tried to make clear is that you're not the one who started the theory that Sandy Hook was a false flag, correct?
	Yes.
	That was borne out by InfoWars Archives and that you've been able to rely on in court, correct?
	I don't exactly understand what you're saying.
	Okay, let me help you with that.
	I'm going to be showing you what I'm now marking as Exhibit 1. There's a double-sided document.
	Mr. Jones, that is a July 27, 2018 affidavit, which you executed, correct?
	Yes.
	I want to go through this affidavit with you in the highlighted part, sentence by sentence.
	Do you see the pale orange part, which I'm now going to read to you?
	Plaintiffs claim that I started the controversy and or conspiracy about Sandy Hook being a hoax.
	This is not true.
	I read that correctly?
	I need to read the full page, please.
	Please take a moment to read it.
	Let me just read this.
	Thanks.
	Okay, so reading the orange part, do you want to be reading?
	I actually just read it to you and wanted to know if I had read it correctly.
	Okay.
	Allow me to read it again for you, Mr. Jones.
	Plaintiffs claim that I started the controversy and or conspiracy theory about Sandy Hook being a hoax.
	This is not true.
	I read that correctly?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	The next sentence says, before I ever publicly commented on any issues relating to Sandy Hook, I learned that others with whom I have no affiliation or relationship had already posted articles.
	Excuse me, Mr. Jones, if you'd like to flip the page.
	Relationship had already posted articles online making this claim and questioning the events as reported.
	I read that sentence correctly?
	Yes.
	So there were a variety of articles and YouTube videos questioning the events that started getting popular in the time period after the shooting.
	I assume you saw some of those?
	Yes.
	How long is this are we talking?
	Are we talking days, weeks, months?
	I don't know.
	I don't want to answer incorrectly.
	I don't remember the exact times.
	So I really can't state that time, but I think a month or longer?
	Sure.
	Okay.
	I remember there was about a month after the shooting, there was a relatively popular YouTube video went viral.
	Do you recall this video?
	There were a lot of 2 million, 10 million.
	There was a bunch of videos and it was a firestorm of On the internet about it.
	Okay, and it was then which you had saw that that you started covering it, started commenting on Sandy Hook.
	Objection is to define Sandy Hook.
	Thank you.
	You can go ahead and answer Mr. Jones.
	No, I started commenting on Sandy Hook that they would use it to go after our guns and that the media always hyped up school shootings and was causing copycat events and that the mainstream media were basically psychic vampires promoting mass shootings so they could blame gun owners and try to take the Second Amendment away, which they pushed to repeal the Second Amendment.
	So, for the first month or so, and again, I can't go back to exact numbers, it was like almost seven years ago, but we've gone back and looked at some of it, trying to find, at least three weeks, four weeks or so, and then it was such a firestorm on the internet, it's like, no, this isn't Prozac, this isn't video games, like I was saying, I thought, like other shootings that happened.
	You know, some type of staged event or multiple shooters or people in the woods and things like that.
	So there was a whole range of theories and a big internet debate going on that I then reported on and gave analysis to my opinions.
	Correct.
	Okay.
	And I think that's what was weeks after, I can't give the exact number, I immediately when it happened you know said oh look another person in a black trench coat you know loner on psychotropics that came out shoot him up video games and I remember being criticized by the video game industry saying don't you blame video games.
	What I'm curious about Mr. Jones can you flip the page back over again and look at the beginning of the yellow sentence?
	So, when you say, before I ever publicly commented on any issues relating to Sandy Hook, you saw other stuff going on, right?
	You mean whether it was staged or not.
	I mean, in other words, you made some comments about Sandy Hook when it first happened.
	But in terms about it being a false flag or staged or some sort of hopes event, right, that came later.
	You're not the one who started that.
	Objection is to four.
	I know that I didn't start it.
	And I think it's a boilerplate any time there's a big public event like Jussie Smollett or Babies and Incubators in Iraq.
	A lot of people question whether it's real.
	I think President Trump questioned right after he got elected and was first in office whether the attacks on the Jewish cemeteries were being staged.
	It turned out they were.
	So I mean, again, going from memory, I remember looking at it as Your standard horrible tragedy of psychotropic drugs, a kid into a cult type stuff like Columbine, shoot about video games.
	I remember that's where I was going because that's where all the other shootings basically came from.
	And so I can't specifically, I'm going from the best of my memory.
	Mr. Jones, I want to show you some video clips of some things you were saying as news broke of Sandy Hook and in a video that day that you titled, Connecticut School Massacre Looks Like False Flag Says Witnesses.
	Can you play the clip, Day of Sandy Hook?
	But get ahold of your cousin when she settles down and get her to talk to us for any other information.
	We need to know, were there any drills that day or the day before?
	Does she have anything about other shooters or was it that she never saw the shooters?
	Well, I had to ask them if it was supposed to be, too, because they have a lot of security in that school.
	You have to ring the doorbell in order to get me to the school.
	Yeah, of course, which is another sign of nuts, you know.
	It's one of these federal model schools.
	You've heard me say, look for a big mass shooting at schools.
	You've heard me.
	We've got to find the club's last two months.
	I've probably said it 20 times.
	So don't ever think the globalists that have hijacked this country wouldn't stage something like this.
	They kill little kids all day, every day.
	And it's not our government.
	It's the globalists.
	And that is an inside job right there.
	Either way, you cut it.
	I bet money That woman was a super liberal.
	I bet money.
	That's what I said.
	I said, I bet he's in his 20s, a big video gamer, a trendy.
	Well, notice it didn't happen the last few years, and now that Obama's coming in with gun control, magically these shootings are popping up.
	People got to find the clips the last two months.
	I said, they are launching attacks.
	They're getting ready.
	I can see them warming up with Obama.
	They've got a bigger majority in the Congress now and the Senate.
	They are going to come after our guns, look for mass shootings.
	Mr. Jones, this is a video where you made comments on issues relating to Sandy Hook and you put forward a theory that it could be staged by the government to take away our guns, correct?
	What an objection.
	It seems like this is a video from watching it that's different pieces put together.
	Correct.
	Okay, so it's not from, so different things are out of contact.
	Is there any way to get like the whole...
	You own the whole video and it's been produced with Mr. Zip Safadu.
	Okay, but for his purposes, so he's just...
	If he wants to go watch an entire four-hour video, I'm not going to have time for that now.
	The market has not been produced since video.
	Actually, Connecticut full video has been produced, and it's been in the court.
	If you want to argue about that and object, you can object at that at the time it's offered.
	That objection's preserved.
	You don't have to object to form to that.
	Mr. Jones, that was a video in which you made statements about Sandy Hook and in which you said, put forth the theory, it could be staged to take away our guns.
	That's a Media Matters edited derivative production.
	Is that you on that tape?
	It's edited.
	And that's you talking about, don't think this couldn't be staged.
	Our government kills little kids all the time.
	That's you saying those words.
	With smart bombs and things.
	Yes, that's edited out of context.
	The truth is, Mr. Jones, you were the first person in the world to make the false flag theory about Sandy Hook, and you did it before the bodies were even cold.
	That's the truth.
	No, it's not true.
	Objection is to form and to the definition.
	Are we going to have set definitions of the words?
	No, you can object to form.
	Yeah, that's rule 199. Just object to form.
	That's fine.
	Mr. Jones, you said in your affidavit that before you commented on any issues relating to Sandy Hook, you saw other things that other people were doing.
	That affidavit has false statements, doesn't it?
	Nope.
	So we didn't just see you commenting on issues relating to Sandy Hook?
	That was callers calling it up and it's heavily edited.
	You're gonna tell me you watched that video and you weren't commenting on Sandy Hook.
	I told you five minutes ago before you played it that as a boilerplate of any big public event, whether it's Jussie Smollett or whether it's babies having their brains bashed out in incubators or WMDs, that I upfront questioned it because things from Operation Northwoods and hundreds of declassified real staged events where our government admits that it staged events.
	That I always say that we need to investigate the news reportage of this and see what's true because there's a long history of governments and corporations and legal groups engaging in fraud.
	And I said that before you played the clip.
	Objection, non-responsive.
	Mr. Jones, I have a very simple question for you.
	That video you just saw of you talking, were you talking about Sandy Hook?
	The edited pieces were.
	The pieces that I edited and put together of you speaking...
	I believe Media Matters.
	Yeah, I edited them.
	I edited them.
	When I edited those pieces together and put them in front of you, was that you on the camera?
	I saw Media Matters video of that before.
	You're saying you edited that?
	Yeah, I did.
	But you did edit it.
	It's not an important deal, I did.
	Yes, I'm not here to answer questions.
	Three second clips together.
	Those clips were edited together by me two weeks ago.
	Oh, okay.
	Why didn't you just play it unedited?
	Mr. Jones, I'm not here to answer your questions.
	You understand you're here because people have sued you and you have four hours in which they're to ask you questions.
	Are you going to do that for me today?
	Yes, I'm answering your questions.
	So in that video, yes or no, you were commenting about Sandy Hook.
	In the edited video, I was commenting on Sandy Hook.
	You'll agree over the years you've seen various anomalies relating to Sandy Hook.
	I've seen reported anomalies.
	A lot of those anomalies are in videos.
	Things like the helicopter video of people being detained in the woods.
	You know what I'm talking about?
	Yes.
	Okay, there's the Anderson Cooper interview with Ms. De La Rosa.
	You know what I'm talking about there?
	I know who Anderson Cooper is.
	You know what the blue screen video is?
	Yes.
	The nose disappears?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	You know that there's some videos of some interviews that were just kind of strange, right?
	Those are something you've seen?
	Yes.
	There's been discussion on Infowars about the interior videos taken of the school itself, right?
	Yes.
	There's been discussion on Infowars about dash cam video footage at Sandy Hook.
	Remember Mr. Du talking about videos of the officers eating their lunches on top of their cars?
	I don't remember that.
	But if Mr. Du talks about dash cam footage, you have no reason to believe he's lying, do you?
	I'm not familiar with what you're talking about.
	Okay.
	And InfoWars has also discussed, questioned the official story from time to time, correct?
	Including the official report about Sandy Hook that was released.
	There's some weird things in there that have been questioned on InfoWars.
	The one that came out like five plus years later?
	I think in December of 2013, so about a year later.
	State police report?
	State police report.
	You're familiar with what I'm talking about?
	That's so long ago.
	Six years ago, I just...
	But I mean, there's anomalies all over the place is what I'm saying.
	You've seen...
	There have been a lot of people asking a lot of questions that isn't illegal yet in this country.
	Right.
	Recently, your lawyer said in a legal document There is no dispute that the Sandy Hook tragedy was real with tragic loss of life.
	You stand by that?
	I'm sorry, you're talking so fast.
	Sure, sure.
	Let me slow down a little bit for you, Mr. Jones.
	Recently, your lawyer said, in a legal document, there is no dispute that the Sandy Hook tragedy was real with tragic loss of life.
	You stand by that.
	That's what you admit is true now.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	But in the past, before you had all the information, in the past, you didn't know exactly what happened at Sandy Hook.
	You've questioned it.
	Oh, certainly in the past, in the last seven years?
	Sure.
	Yes.
	And in fact, over the course of covering Sandy Hook, over the past six or so years, you've always entertained serious doubts about what really happened that day.
	I'm sorry, I don't understand.
	Sure, over the course of Sandy Hook, you've questioned the official story.
	You've had serious doubts that the official story was true.
	I've always, from the beginning, had questions about any big public event that's hyped up, because so many times parts of it are being covered up, or things are being staged, or they're not letting a good crisis go to waste, and sometimes things are completely made up, like the babies in the incubators, which is admitted.
	The PR firm, they said the baby's brains were all bashed out and then it launched all those wars.
	I've heard you say that.
	No, it's admitted.
	And the WMDs, and then the WMDs were lied to, and that launched and it killed millions of people.
	Objection, non-responsive.
	Well, I'm trying to answer your question.
	Do you know what question you're answering?
	Well, we were asking the question of, like, I'm not sure you say you've always questioned it.
	And I'm saying, no, I questioned it up front, the public questioned it, and Then, as I had time to go over, a lot of the anomalies turned out to not be accurate, and I believe school shootings happened.
	Correct.
	So, I think a shorter way is, you had doubts, you had questions, until you didn't.
	At some point, I mean, things change, I understand that.
	But there have been points at which you question the official narrative, you've had serious doubts about some of these things.
	Yes.
	And these anomalies that have come out, these things have raised serious doubts.
	You've had serious doubts about the anomalies, too.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	By the spring of 2013 or so, let's say just a few months after the shooting, by that point you had gone from theory to just straight up telling your audience Sandy Hook was staged and the evidence is overwhelming.
	Objection has deformed.
	Correct?
	What does staged mean?
	I'm just asking you what you were telling your audience.
	I'm not answering your questions, Mr. Johns.
	You're going to tell me what staged means when you said it.
	So what I'm asking you is a few months after the shooting, you had gone from theory to straight up telling your audience, Sandy Hook was staged and the evidence was overwhelming.
	True or false?
	But I'm asking you to define what you mean by staged.
	I'm not asking for a definition of staged.
	I don't care what staged means.
	I'm asking, did you say it?
	I don't have it in front of me, but I did say that I saw a lot of anomalies that I thought that certainly large parts of the way it was being handled, I mean, you know, the Supreme Court of that state came out and said they covered up some of the reports on what happened at the incident.
	And I think a lot of that's been borne out, that when you see a cover-up going on, you're not sure what's happening inside of it.
	And later we just learned it was a cover-up of, I think, some of the negligence there in the town and with the school.
	I don't think the teacher that tried to save the kids was negligent, but I think that person was a hero.
	Sad they got sued.
	But I do, you know, clearly think that there was some cover-up, but it wasn't in that it was all the whole thing staged.
	But that the way the media handled it was synthetic, and the way it was used against gun owners was synthetic.
	All right, Mr. Jones.
	Objection, not responsive.
	Can you play the clip overwhelming for me, please?
	Mr. Jones, I'm going to show you a clip from April 16, 2013. He saw on stage Fast and Furious.
	Folks, they staged Aurora.
	They staged Sandy Hook.
	The evidence is just overwhelming.
	And that's why I'm so desperate and freaked out.
	This is not fun, you know, getting up here telling you this.
	Somebody's got to tell you the truth.
	Somebody's got to stand against these people.
	That's you on the video, right?
	Yes, that's me on the short video.
	Yeah, it's a short video, I understand.
	By the end of 2014, you had personally done intensive research and you concluded Sandy Hook was all fake.
	Objection is to form.
	Are you asking him to repeat a quote?
	No, I'm asking him by the end of 2014, you had personally done intensive research and you concluded it was all fake, correct?
	Still objection is to form.
	The specific areas I was talking about being fake, not in a totality.
	Okay.
	Can you play the clip for me, Didn't Happen?
	Mr. Jones, hold on one second.
	I'm going to play you a clip from December 29th, 2014. You go ahead and play that for me.
	But it took me about a year with Sandy Hook to come to grips with the fact that the whole thing was fake.
	I mean, even I couldn't believe it.
	I knew they jumped on it, used the crisis, typed it up, but then I did deep research, and my gosh, it just pretty much didn't happen.
	That's you saying you did deep research, correct?
	Same objections to form and that these are...
	Also, the audio's been altered on all these.
	Yeah, can you stop with speaking objections?
	I know exactly what you're doing and you need to say objection form, objection leading, assert a privilege, or stay quiet.
	You do not need to be making suggestive objections about the content of the evidence and what its form is.
	You don't need to be doing that, Mr. Barnes.
	I'm not trying to do that.
	These are videos that are highly...
	Mr. Barnes?
	I don't...
	That's a great opinion.
	I don't understand why your opinion is relevant to this questioning right now.
	You wouldn't be doing this in a courtroom.
	Don't do it in my deposition.
	In a courtroom, it wouldn't come in because it wouldn't be admissible.
	Then that is why you're...
	Mr. Barnes, that's why your objection is preserved as to the form of that evidence.
	You don't have to raise an objection.
	The only reason you would be doing it is to possibly influence the witness.
	Can we have a standing stipulation that when I object to form, That includes an objection to the rule of completeness.
	Absolutely.
	And we'll also put on the record, every objection to every piece of evidence is preserved under the Texas rules, which is part of Rule 199. I was objecting in a way that that was included.
	Excuse me, Counsel.
	You were speaking over one another.
	You're making the record very mild.
	I'm sorry.
	So we have a standing stipulation that when I object to form that includes an objection on rule of completeness grounds to any evidence Thank you, Mr. Barnes.
	Over the next few years, Mr. Jones, you did dozens and dozens of videos with that same message about Sandy Hook being staged, correct?
	No.
	Well, I want to do talk about some of the claims you've made over the years.
	The first thing I want to talk to you about is circles.
	And I want to show you a video clip of something you said on November 18, 2016, April 22, 2017, and June 13, 2017. Can you play me the video clip, Going in Circles?
	And the kids are going in circles in and out of the building with their hands up.
	But then what do you do when they've got the kids going in circles in and out of the building with their hands up?
	I've watched the footage.
	And early on that day we watched footage of kids going in circles in and out of the building.
	You'd be running them away from the building.
	Leave it up.
	Oh, can you give me the last frame, please?
	You'd be running...
	All right.
	Mr. Jones, when you said you'd be running them away from the building, what did you mean by that?
	The police should be getting the children away from the building.
	Right.
	Okay, so the police should be...
	Hold on, scratch that.
	No doubt there's a dangerous situation, shooter on campus.
	Is it dangerous when there's somebody shooting at the school?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And so you would think if proper procedures would be followed and you're keeping them safe, this looks pretty weird, doesn't it, if they're not being run away from the building, right?
	Yes.
	But Mr. Jones, when you said this to your audience, You knew that wasn't the school.
	You knew that.
	Right?
	Are you saying that's part of his broadcast?
	Yes, it says InfoWars right there on the bottom.
	Okay, so that's part of the same broadcast.
	Yes, you see where it says in force?
	As long as you're representing that the video that you're showing him now with the people walking across was part of the same broadcast.
	First of all, there's only going to be one lawyer defending this deposition, Mr. Enoch.
	And you've already chosen it.
	No, Mr. Enoch, there will be one lawyer speaking on the record.
	There is one lawyer defending the deposition.
	I am not being tag-teamed by the two of you.
	And so I would appreciate it if you kept your mouth shut for this deposition.
	Let Mr. Barnes defend the deposition.
	For the record, in the bottom corner of the screen is a large InfoWars logo.
	This was broadcast on InfoWars.
	So, Mr. Jones, my question to you is, when you broadcast this to your audience and you told them this, you knew that wasn't the school, correct?
	Mark, will you please answer my question?
	And it's a simple question, I'll stay apart.
	If you represent that the video of the school that you're showing at the firehouse was part of the same broadcast in which he made his statements...
	Yes!
	Mr. Enoch, we just watched it.
	Do you really think I edited his words over a different video?
	What I think doesn't matter.
	Thank you for answering this question.
	Mr. Enoch, I would appreciate it if you kept quiet the remainder of this deposition and let Mr. Barnes defend the deposition.
	Mr. Jones, you knew that wasn't the school.
	Objection.
	Correct?
	I did not know that.
	This is so edited.
	It looks like two different shows together.
	Can you play it again?
	It's so edited.
	I've never...
	Can you play at least the last part there where he's in the video?
	Well, please play the whole thing.
	Play the whole video again for him.
	These are three different clips, and I'll remind you, Mr. Jones, these are from November 18, 2016, April 22, 2017, and June 13, 2017. You just told him it was the same broadcast.
	And this one right here is the same broadcast, Mr. Jones.
	This is November 18, 2016. The kids are going in circles in and out of the building with their hands up.
	But then what do you do when they've got the kids going in circles in and out of the building with their hands up?
	I've watched the footage.
	And early on that day, we watched footage of kids going in circles in and out of the building.
	You'd be running them away from the building.
	Let's see if we can help you understand this.
	Hold on, Mr. Jones.
	Let's see if we can help you understand this.
	You understand this first video where it says Sandy Hook vampires exposed.
	See that?
	Yes, that's about the media.
	Correct.
	That's April 22, 2017. That's an InfoWars video.
	It's blurred.
	I can't see that.
	In other words, you know there was an InfoWars video with that title.
	Correct?
	I believe so.
	Okay.
	And then we saw a second clip from your Megyn Kelly interview, right?
	Which again was highly edited.
	Sure.
	Totally.
	And I edited a piece of it in here.
	Correct?
	That was from the Megyn Kelly review.
	Wait a minute.
	Time out.
	Time out.
	We need to take a break.
	You just told me that everything you showed him was from one video.
	No, Mr. Meenock.
	I told you what was on the screen and the audio were from the same video.
	If you want to take a fair deposition, you're entitled to do that.
	You are not entitled to misrepresent the witness Three different dates in deposition and say three different dates of video and say this was the same video.
	Were these all the clips that you showed in the same video, yes or no?
	No.
	And we've said that repeatedly from the moment I've asked him.
	They were from three different dates.
	I read the three different dates to you, Mr. Enoch, so your indignation can calm down.
	And you need to be quiet in this deposition.
	Mr. Barnes, can you please instruct your counsel to be quiet?
	You are defending this deposition.
	Actually, I've got a question on the floor.
	We're not taking a break.
	You're entitled to do depositions the way you want, but you're saying it's creating a lot of maybe unnecessary confusion.
	And hey, I'm walking through it with them right now.
	We're going to clear up all that confusion.
	That's what we're going to do.
	Mr. Jones, we've talked about this one.
	This is a Sandy Hook vampire is exposed.
	We've talked about the second clip being from the Megyn Kelly interview.
	Correct?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Now there's a third clip that starts at the end where it shows the video that we were talking about.
	And you remember there was something you did called Final Statement on Sandy Hook in November of 2016. Mr. Enoch?
	Maybe you don't intend to do it, Mark, but you're stating something that's not correct.
	You just said one is from the Megyn Kelly interview.
	You gave us three dates.
	None of them are the Megyn Kelly date.
	I'm sorry if I've given you a wrong date, but it's June 13th, 2017?
	That is not the Megyn Kelly broadcast.
	Okay, if I've misstated the date, that's my opinion.
	You can object to that.
	You can do whatever you want.
	You do agree that's the Megyn Kelly broadcast we were watching?
	That interview in the middle is from Megyn Kelly.
	I saw part of that.
	That's just so fast.
	We'll keep it slow.
	I watch court TV and stuff.
	Nobody plays edited tapes.
	This video here that we're looking at was something from Final Statement on Sandy Hook.
	You remember doing a video called Final Statement?
	I do remember that.
	And this video here is where you showed this footage and you made some comments about kids going in circles, right?
	Objection is to form.
	If that's from it, I remember making comments.
	Okay.
	Mr. Jones, do you see that ambulance right there?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	I want to play you a couple clips.
	Can you play me?
	I want to play you something from July 5th, 2015. Can you play me the clip called Ambulances?
	These are two things that you and Mr. do.
	The ambulances came an hour and a half later and parked down the road.
	Why were the ambulances not even at the school?
	They were stuck at the firehouse.
	Mr. Jones, if you saw ambulances parked next to that building, you knew it wasn't the school, didn't you?
	No, I didn't.
	And later I corrected before I was ever sued that no, that was one of the things that had been said that wasn't true, was that they were at the firehouse.
	Then there was other footage too from the school.
	So it's all edited, so it's hard to respond to this.
	I want to respond to your questions.
	It's so edited, like two, three second clips, sandwiched in with others, and it looks like more than three broadcasts.
	Well that clip right there, that was just two things.
	Something you said, something Mr. Dew said.
	Out of context.
	Hold on.
	Ambulances were parked down the road.
	They didn't even go to the school.
	Then a year later, you showed your audience a video of a building with an ambulance to it and you told them it was the school.
	I talk four hours a day and I can't remember what I talked about sometimes a week ago.
	Sandy Hook has been in the aggregate less than one-tenth of one percent of what I cover and I understand that you've been living this and pouring over it constantly.
	I have done almost no preparation for this.
	It gives me a headache.
	You're just showing me a bunch of edited tapes.
	What question are you answering?
	You're asking me about a bunch of edited...
	How does someone answer Mr. Johnson, what question were you answering?
	If you put a bunch of pages in a blender with writing on them and blended it all up, and you ask me what's in the blender, I can't answer you a question with a bunch of blended words.
	Mr. Johnson, I'm asking you if there's ambulances next to the building, you know it's not the school, correct?
	No, that's not what I knew.
	Okay.
	I want to play you a piece of video footage from the helicopter footage.
	Let's take a look at that really quick.
	Can we play the December 14, 2012 helicopter firehouse footage?
	Mr. Jones, there's no elementary-age children in this line of people walking, is there?
	No, it's another clip we're talking about.
	Yeah, see here's where they're walking in the circles?
	None of those people have their hands up, do they?
	But there is footage that I've seen that shows that, so you're conflating two different things.
	Really?
	Because you were talking about it in the footage on your show.
	You're saying there's actually a different piece of video footage with children with their hands up being led in circles in and out of the screen.
	From my memory, it's a live show, so the people in there are just throwing stuff up, and many times it's not accurate.
	Sure.
	So the video clip you were showing wasn't even of the school.
	Objection as to form.
	Correct?
	I'm not sure about what video this is, it's so edited, but I wrongly have said in the past off of news reports that I was relying on that the children were going around with their hands up at the school when it was the firehouse.
	And that's one of the main anomalies that turned out to not be true and the reason I changed my mind about a lot of things.
	Sure.
	After 2017, right?
	Well, I've gone back when I've been asked about anomalies.
	And I've repeated those anomalies and those tapes get edited.
	It's why I do not do interviews now and talk about the anomalies because those are edited.
	Right.
	Let's talk about the school itself.
	I want to show you two comments that you made on July 7, 2015 and April 22, 2017.
	Keep playing.
	School is closed.
	We have the emails from city council back and forth and the school talking about it being shut down a year before.
	And the school was closed until that year.
	And the videos, it's all rotting and falling apart.
	Nobody's even in it.
	First thing, you admit now there are no emails between city council and the school in which Sandy Hook was being shut down.
	That's not a real thing.
	Objection is to form.
	This is almost seven years old, but I do believe that we wouldn't...
	I mean, sometimes we're wrong about things, but there's always some news we're covering or a witness or something, so I can't answer that because of just memory.
	Mr. Jones, you said it was seven years ago?
	Six years ago, whatever it was.
	That clip we just played you was April 22, 2017. That was a year before you were sued, right?
	It's like three seconds long.
	Right, but it's not seven years ago, is it, Mr. Jones?
	You were saying that a year before you were sued?
	I can't answer this.
	It's not in context.
	I don't know what you're showing me.
	Of course.
	So objection, non-responsive.
	When you said in the videos it's all rotting and falling apart, we talked earlier, you'd seen the interior videos of Sandy Hook.
	That's something you'd seen before.
	There's photos of things on the news like the mold and the rotting doors.
	And you said in the videos it's falling apart.
	You just said that on that video.
	Objections as to form.
	I saw the edited video.
	I don't know what it's for.
	I don't know the context.
	Sure, but you said in this video, in the videos, the school's rotting and all falling apart and nobody's even in it.
	Objections.
	Objections as to form.
	I have no idea what the context of this is.
	So wait, there's a context in which saying in the videos the school was all rotting and falling apart and nobody's even nodding in it.
	Why are the videos all three seconds long?
	Because I'm focusing in on specific issues, Mr. Jones, and I want to know this claim you made that there is a video of the school where it's rotting and falling apart.
	That's all I care about right now.
	You saw such a video?
	Objection is to four.
	I have seen, from memory, news reports showing photos and images.
	My memory fails, but I do remember seeing photos and I guess put to video of the school big in disrepair and the reports.
	Let's play for you really quick.
	I want to show you this video, the interior video of Sandy Hook that was taken that day.
	I want to show you a clip from that.
	And I want you to note that every time they're going to go, there's a couple times they're going to go in the hallway, and there's part of the hallway they go in, it has to say redacted, because that's where Ms. Hopspring and Ms. Sherlock's blood is all over that hallway.
	But I want you to take a look at the hallways and the classrooms for me as we watch this video.
	Can you play interior of Sandy Hook?
	Mr. Jones, that school is not rotting, falling apart, or abandoned, is it?
	Objection is to form, and I assume that includes any authentication disputes that I have about whether something is...
	Under the Texas rules, every bit of evidence that is offered in the deposition is not, there's no waiver of any objection, Mr. Bronson.
	That video is not, that school is not rotting and falling apart, it's not abandoned, is it, Mr. Jones?
	I've never seen that video.
	I'm not sure.
	I'm perfectly confident you haven't.
	Absolutely, I know that.
	But what I'm asking you is, seeing it right now, what I just showed you, regardless of what school it was or if I just went and took it over at Eastside Elementary, that school that you just saw on the screen is not rotting, is not falling apart, and does not look to be abandoned, does it?
	It looks dilapidated.
	Okay, Mr. Jentz.
	You've seen Mr. Zipp's affidavit, correct?
	Mr. Zipp.
	Mr. Zipp.
	Fred Zipp, plaintiff's expert, who's sitting with us in the room today.
	You've seen his affidavit in this case?
	No.
	Okay, so you didn't know that there were 180 news articles from 2009 to 2011 about Sandy Hook School with photos of the children doing things from multiple sources.
	That's not something you've ever known.
	I didn't know that number.
	I mean, I've seen photos and things showing mold and the place dirty and messed up.
	That's what we're talking about.
	No, I'm asking you that the school was open during those years, right?
	During 2009 to 2011, there's plenty of evidence the school was open, right?
	There's been controversy, like on Google, showing the deliveries and things like that.
	I mean, that was controversies we covered.
	Okay, so based on what you knew at the time, you entertained serious doubts about whether the school was open.
	Objections.
	In other words, let me pull that back, Mr. Johnson.
	I had serious doubts about Jesse Smollett.
	Sure.
	Okay.
	That's what I mean.
	I was the first person.
	That's the question.
	Sure.
	And I'm not going to try to pin you down on here.
	Let's just be straight up and upfront about it.
	You didn't know one way or the other.
	Whether the school was open, you had some doubts.
	You didn't know one way or the other.
	You couldn't confirm it one way.
	I know that investigators who were accredited school safety folks who I thought were credible experts were the ones and professors and others that were in good standing were the ones that were really doing these investigations and then I was in some cases taking what they said incorrectly.
	And I've admitted to that.
	And with no cooperation.
	You just take what they said and you trusted these guys, right?
	Well, I mean, I've seen one of the guys on national television before, or Columbine, as a national safety expert, and he sounded pretty credible.
	Mr. Holbeck, right?
	Yes.
	And he's sent you something in the neighborhood of 4,000 emails?
	That's a lot.
	Yeah.
	And looking at those emails, taking a look at them, you wouldn't agree with me that that man is a raving lunatic?
	He seemed very credible and put together earlier on, I can't remember the exact numbers, he seemed to get agitated about four years ago, three years ago.
	Let's talk a little bit about EMTs, Emergency Medical Technicians.
	And I want to show you a clip of something that you said.
	And this, to address Mr. Enoch, is I think where this got messed up.
	There's a clip you did on June 13, 27, right before the Megyn Kelly interview.
	In other words, the Megyn Kelly interview was coming out.
	And let's just up front about it.
	It was edited, and you didn't think that was fair, right?
	And it was pretty heavily edited.
	I think they call it deceptively jump cut.
	I mean, your videos are worse, but you've reached a new level.
	Yeah, I get that.
	Let's take a look at something you said right before the Megyn Kelly interview.
	This is on June 13, 2017. Can you play the clip called EMTs?
	Why didn't they let paramedics and EMTs in the building?
	Twenty-seven children were declared dead in eight minutes.
	How did you determine that?
	Objection is deformed.
	I was reading someone else's report.
	Okay, hold on.
	Bring up the last frame again.
	Mr. Jones, I'm going to lean up here so I can kind of point a little bit.
	Do you see here where it says what Alex Jones really believes about Sandy Hook?
	Yes, I do.
	Do you see where it says among his questions?
	Do you see that?
	Yes.
	Do you see it says in closing, Jones says?
	I believe that's where I'm saying I think Sandy Hook happened.
	Right.
	What I'm asking you is, when it's talking his questions, that's zero hedge reporting on your questions.
	And when it says, in closing, Jones says, that's zero hedge reporting on what you said.
	And now, in some sort of inception, this is you reporting on zero hedge reporting on what you said.
	Can you make it bigger?
	I can't read that.
	I cannot make that bigger, Mr. Jones, but I'm asking you...
	May I approach it, Your Honor?
	You can approach it.
	Yeah, go ahead and approach it.
	My eyes aren't bad, but my God, I can't even see any of this.
	There's no way to like blow it up, maybe?
	I don't think I can blow that up.
	I can't read it.
	My heart goes out of the parents who lost children.
	Okay, that's great.
	That's what I'm asking you, Mr. Jones.
	His.
	Do you see the word his?
	Who does his refer to?
	Okay, you can take a seat, Mr. Jones.
	So how did you come to the conclusion that they never let paramedics or EMTs into the building?
	I went off of the professors and all the so-called experts.
	Okay.
	Then they wouldn't release a bunch of the reports.
	There were a bunch of lawsuits about the secrecy, which added to all of the...
	And then as more of the stuff got released, then it proved the official story.
	When do you think that the police reports on Sandy Hook were released?
	When do you think that happened?
	I know there was one report...
	You know, I don't have all the dates, so I don't want to be inaccurate.
	I believe one took over five years.
	Okay.
	Well, let me show you one that didn't take five years, okay?
	We're going to talk about one of those.
	And I want to mark for you right now as Exhibit 2. Well, we're actually going to do the videos after in sequence.
	Let's do it that way.
	I think that's going to be a lot easier.
	Mr. Jones, I have handed you a State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety Investigation report.
	You see that at the top?
	Mm-hmm.
	Okay, and you see kind of in the middle there, place of interview, Newtown Police Department.
	Right in the middle of the interview report?
	I need to read this.
	In fact, you know what?
	Let's be fair to you about this.
	This is a long report, right?
	I mean, it's five, six pages.
	Let's let you read the whole thing, don't you think?
	That'd be fair?
	Sure.
	Okay, in fact, let's go off the record.
	We'll take a little break.
	You can sit there and read that.
	Does that sound good?
	Well, I may need to take a break.
	I'm going to go to the bathroom and stuff.
	Sure, you can go to the bathroom.
	I'm not going to stop you from that, Mr. Jones.
	Your bodily functions are your own.
	Let's go ahead and go off the record.
	We're off the record at 12:58 p.m.
	We are back on the record at 12:58 p.m.
	Mr. Jones, before we went on a break, we were talking about the issue of whether there were EMTs allowed into the building, and I provided you with a couple of copies of some police reports.
	I've put in front of you Exhibit 2, the statement of Lieutenant Van Gailey, correct?
	You've had a chance to read that?
	Van Gailey.
	I did read most of it.
	I didn't get to the second one.
	Okay.
	Well, let's look at Exhibit 2. You have Exhibit 2 in your hand?
	I'm on 2. Let's go to page 5. Do you see the highlighted portion?
	Yes.
	I'm gonna read that and you're gonna follow along with me, okay?
	I then walked into a room with Sergeant Cario.
	At first glance, it did not appear there were any casualties.
	To the left of the room, as you walk in, there was a bathroom in the corner.
	There was a massive pileup of bodies in this room.
	At this time, I did not know it was a bathroom, and I wondered how the suspect had the time to kill that many people and stack them in the corner of the room.
	Sergeant Cario stated he was an EMT or maybe a paramedic and then he had to check to see if anyone in the pile may have survived.
	I agreed as the bodies were stacked two and three high and that some of the children at the bottom who were able to cram in first may have escaped bullets.
	He began to check for life signs, wounds, and attempt to find a pulse.
	The victims on the top of the pile redacted, and many of the bodies had injuries that were obviously fatal.
	It appeared as if the teachers in the room, immediately upon hearing gunshots, began to pack children into the bathroom.
	The children that were sitting on the floor of the bathroom were packed in like sardines.
	One little girl was sitting crouched in between the toilet seat in the back corner of the room.
	I thought she may have had the best chance for survival.
	As Sergeant Cario got to the last bodies, it was clear that no one had survived.
	You've never heard of Sergeant Cario, have you?
	I haven't.
	And you didn't know what he did in the building that day?
	Objection is the form of the task.
	You can answer.
	You didn't know what he did in the building that day?
	Correct, Mr. Jones?
	It's, again, over seven years.
	I don't remember a lot of this.
	Okay, so either you didn't know what he did in the building, or you did know what he did in the building.
	One of those two things has to be true, right?
	I think I do know now.
	Sure.
	It's just there's so much, and it all becomes a big haze.
	So we can agree that in 2017, when you raised the question, why were no paramedics led in the building, you either did know what Sergeant Cario did, or you didn't know what Sergeant Cario did.
	One of those two things has to be true, obviously, right?
	Objection.
	The tape is still edited, I don't leave no word.
	Okay, Mr. Jones.
	Let's look at Exhibit 3. You want to pull Exhibit 3 for me?
	Can you go to the final page?
	Just flip it onto the back.
	Onto the back.
	Do you see at the very bottom of the page, very bottom left corner, it says Sergeant William F. Cario?
	Okay.
	I'm going to read the highlighted part to you.
	Paramedic Matt Casavecchia approached me.
	I have known Casavecchia for many years and recognized him as the head of EMS for Danbury Hospital.
	Casavecchia asked how long it would be until he could get into the building.
	I told him the building was not yet secured, that all the injured were out, and that numerous dead persons remained in the school.
	Casavecchia said, you know I've got to get into that building.
	I realized at some point those victims presumed dead would have to be officially pronounced dead.
	We also needed to impact the fewest number of EMS personnel that we needed to preserve the integrity of the scene.
	Looking around, I recognized two other senior paramedics that I believe had the experience and training to handle the situation tactically.
	I told Casavecchia I would bring myself, paramedic Bernie Meehan, paramedic John Reed into the front of the school, which was secured by that point.
	They were told to bring minimal equipment.
	As we walked to the school, I tried to prepare them for what they were about to see.
	I told them the number of the victims and the nature of the wounds.
	I told Casavecchia, this will be the worst day of your life.
	You have never heard of Matt Casavecchia, Bernie Meehan, or John Reed, have you Mr. Jones?
	I mean, I just read their names.
	Prior to me putting that sheet of paper in front of you, you've never heard of those gentlemen, have you?
	I can't say that.
	Just too much, too much information.
	In fact, it's possible when you said that paramedics weren't let into the building, you knew those three gentlemen and you knew they had been in the building.
	That's possible.
	Sure.
	I wouldn't consciously do that.
	If those reports that right there, if those reports were available and online and had been discussed by InfoWars as early as 2013, if that's something that was public, you would agree with me that saying no paramedics went into the building is reckless, correct?
	No, I would not.
	I just don't know what you're talking about.
	I'll have a three-second video in this.
	You're not going to dispute with me that you've repeatedly said on your television show or your web broadcast that paramedics weren't allowed in the building.
	You've said that over and over and over, right, Mr. Jones?
	Right?
	It's edited the way what you've shown me so I can't comment.
	I'm not talking about what was on the video.
	I'm not talking about that.
	Ignore what you just saw on the video.
	I'm asking you, me and you right now, you've said repeatedly on your web show paramedics weren't allowed inside of Sandy Hook.
	You've said that.
	I'm not going to deny that.
	I have covered other people's reports saying that.
	Okay.
	And you did nothing to confirm those reports.
	Literally nothing.
	I went out and covered news that was being covered.
	How did you confirm the reports that you were given that paramedics weren't allowed in the building?
	We generally go through the reports and then we look at what they link to and I don't have all the dates but one report took over five years another three years another a year and so it's all I mean again this has not been a large part of what I've covered.
	Sandy Hook has been a very but not even one-tenth of one percent of what we covered and I know that That you think that that's the case, but that's not the case.
	Objection to the non-responsive portion.
	Hearing that your murdered child received no medical attention, that's obviously distressing.
	Right, Mr. Jones?
	Let's do it this way.
	Withdraw the question.
	Can you imagine me a universe where hearing that your murdered child received no medical attention is not distressing?
	Objections to the floor.
	I think there were even lawsuits by the parents saying things weren't done right.
	That's a terrible thing.
	That's not my question, though, is it, Mr. Jones?
	Is it?
	That's not my question.
	So my question is, if you heard your murdered child received no medical care, that's distressing.
	It is distressing.
	That's why I was distressed just in general hearing those reports.
	Wait, when you say you were distressed hearing those reports, what reports are you talking about?
	What reports?
	Was it seven years ago?
	You know this is the one day you were to come down here and testify about Sandy Hook.
	And are you going to tell me you haven't done anything to try to figure out what happened in those seven years?
	Objection is deformed.
	Is that what you're saying?
	You walked in here totally unprepared?
	Just winging it today?
	Objection is deformed.
	I don't know how to respond to that.
	Do you have the respect enough for these parents in this lawsuit to actually go back and try to find out what happened?
	Did you do that?
	Objection is deformed.
	I covered it when it first happened, and you can look at six shows a week, three, four hours a day, and then find spots and edit them and things.
	It's the media's claim that my life is about Sandy Hook and that it's not even one of the major issues I've ever covered.
	And so you're asking me to do the impossible, to go back through a whole compendium and then give some quantifiable statement to you off three-second edited videos.
	It's like...
	It's square pegs and round holes.
	Objection to the non-responsive portion.
	I want to ask you about death certificates.
	I want to play you a clip of something you and Mr. Du said, February 12, 2015 and November 18, 2016. Can you play sealant death certificates for me?
	Yes, there's sealant death certificates and everything.
	They made it a felony to release birth certificates or death certificate information.
	What kind of country is that where you can't release birth certificate and death certificate information?
	What did you do to confirm that?
	Again, these are highly edited splice tapes.
	The audio has been altered.
	I don't even know what context this is in.
	It's in the context of Sandy Hook death certificates are sealed, and you said that.
	What did you do to confirm it, Mr. Jones?
	Objection is to form it.
	Mistakes the evidence.
	You don't have to do speaking objections, Mr. Barnes.
	It's one of the worst depositions I've ever witnessed.
	That's fine.
	You can make your objections.
	Go make all the objections you want, but make them in accordance with the Texas rules, which you agreed to be bound with before you started this deposition.
	Mr. Jones.
	Sealing to death certificates.
	The fact that they were sealed.
	Something you and Mr. Du both said.
	How did you confirm that?
	Objection as to the form.
	I don't want to...
	Answer these things incorrectly so my memory is I remember that they were saying it was the most sealed case ever and that it was in the news that there were all these lawsuits about unsealing things and that the records and the redacted police reports and this report you give me is almost all blacked out.
	This is what people were talking about.
	And so I can't accurately answer off of edited tapes.
	I've never seen anything like that.
	So I'm trying to answer your questions.
	You ever try to order a death certificate?
	They're $20.
	Anybody can get any one of them.
	Did you ever try?
	As I've told you, when we went off news reports and other people that were investigating, we did not ourselves investigate Sandy Hook.
	Thank you, Mr. Jones.
	I want to talk to you about something you said about porta-potties.
	You know what I'm talking about when I talk about porta-potties, right?
	Porta-potties showed up to Sandy Hook.
	Port-a-potties.
	Yeah, you know what I'm talking about when I say that allegation.
	When you talked about on your show, port-a-potties showing up to Sandy Hook.
	You remember talking about port-a-potties?
	I do remember talking about it.
	Okay.
	And you remember how your point was, they showed up within an hour for a big media event, showed that it was clearly something's going on because they showed up way too quick.
	Objectionist to form.
	Correct?
	I don't know what other people have reported.
	Okay.
	Let me play you a clip of something that you said on July 7th, 2015 and April 22nd, 2017. Can you play port-a-potties for me?
	They had port-a-potties being delivered within an hour and a half.
	And they had port-a-potties being delivered an hour after it happened before the big media event.
	That's consistent with what we were just talking about, right?
	Port-a-potties showing up with an hour before the big media event?
	Correct, Mr. Jones?
	Yes, I mean, I did talk about that.
	It's another edited tape.
	I don't know the context.
	Sure.
	Mr. Jones, I'm going to hand you a copy of what I have marked as exhibit four.
	You ever seen that before?
	I don't remember.
	You're not sure if you've seen this before?
	No.
	Okay.
	You'll see up at the top, it has a timestamp, 12-14-12.
	Yes.
	You know that's the date of Sandy Hook, right?
	I don't know.
	You don't know that?
	Is that the date?
	It is.
	Okay.
	It is, Mr. Jones.
	We had talked earlier about the dash cam videos in the official report, and if there's police cars sitting at the front of Sandy Hook with their dash cams on, it'd be a pretty simple matter to just go in the video and scroll through and see when various stuffs arrives.
	That's something you can do, right?
	I would imagine, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Infowars didn't do that, did they?
	I can't say that.
	I don't know what we did.
	Okay.
	Well, if InfoWars did do that, they would have come across this picture of Porta Potty showing up at 1.30 p.m., right?
	That's what that time is right there?
	Are you familiar with military time?
	Mm-hmm.
	Okay, and that's 1.30, right?
	Mm-hmm.
	Right, so that's not an hour after the shooting, is it, Mr. Jones?
	Correct?
	It's pretty darn soon after.
	Is it?
	Is it maybe more like four hours after?
	Again, I was going off of what I believed to be and that he was accredited national school safety person who'd been on national television programs as an expert.
	I was going off of what Halbig and others were saying.
	You did no confirmation whatsoever of Mr. Halbig's statements about the porta potty.
	I don't believe these videos were released for a long time.
	If they were, If those videos were released in 2013, it certainly would have been reckless to say the porta-potties arrived at an hour in 2017, wouldn't it, Mr. Jones?
	Objection, Mr. Foy?
	I don't know how to respond to the fact that How do we know more aren't arriving later and that there's other porta-potties to be delivered?
	I'm not saying that's what happened.
	You just show me one still off something and tell me to answer questions.
	Yeah, so one thing you could do is go back into the dashcam video and scroll through and find out if something didn't arrive earlier.
	That's something you could do, right?
	Objection is to form.
	It's not hidden information, right?
	Objection is to form.
	Correct?
	I guess correct.
	Okay, thank you Mr. Jones.
	Mr. Jones, I've noticed with a lot of these answers you've said, well I'm just going off what Mr. Halbig said.
	So what I want to know is when you talked earlier about you did deep research, what was that?
	What deep research did you do?
	Well, I mean, I did look at the news articles saying they were being very secretive about the case, and a lot of things were sealed that was unusual.
	There were lawsuits involved with that, and I did do research on Bloomberg putting out an email the day before, things like that saying, get ready, there's going to be a big event, or just great to have people on the ground for mass shootings or whatever.
	And just the way the media made a spectacle out of it right away is what really made me question.
	Because I'd seen that like with WMDs or babies in the incubators, it didn't happen.
	I just saw the media so on it, so ready, and I thought that added credibility to it.
	Okay.
	I'm glad you brought up the Bloomberg thing.
	I remember there's a couple episodes where you've talked about this Bloomberg email.
	And you said to your audience that there was an email that came out in a lawsuit Where Bloomberg told his people, get ready in the next 24 hours to capitalize on a mass shooting.
	That didn't happen.
	That's not a real email, is it?
	I don't think it's exactly that, but there's one similar to that.
	Yeah, I mean, what you said is not real.
	Bloomberg never told his people, get ready in the next 24 hours to capitalize on a mass shooting.
	That did not happen.
	I believe his gun organization did.
	I believe his anti-gun organization said get ready, get ready to move quick.
	I don't have it in front of me, it's from years ago.
	I want to ask you about photos of the children.
	So I'm going to play a video clip about something you said about photos of the children.
	This is something you said on September 25th, 2014. Can you play photos of children?
	And then photos of kids that are still alive they said died.
	I mean, they think we're so dumb that it's really hidden in plain view.
	Mr. Jones, you can admit that that statement was absolutely nonsense.
	There are not photos of children who died who are actually still alive.
	That is an out-of-context clip.
	I can't even respond to something like that.
	You said it, though, didn't you?
	I don't know what it's in context to.
	Is there a good context to that, Mr. Jones?
	That people's children who are dead, there's actually photos of them still alive?
	Can you give me the good context?
	There's no way to respond to something.
	I don't know what it is.
	I know what it is.
	It's a video of you saying that there are photos of children who died who are still alive, and I'm asking you, that's absolute nonsense, isn't it, Mr. Jones?
	Objection is to form.
	No, it's not.
	I don't know the context of that video.
	Okay.
	There have been cases where the Associated Press, major groups, ran pictures of Sandy Hook children in Pakistan after a mass bombing and in the lineup of parents about their dead kids.
	I believe the bombing happened in Pakistan.
	Bizarrely, they've got a Sandy Hook kid in there admitted, and then we've seen other cases.
	It's very bizarre, and that's where people call in and ask, and then I respond.
	I don't know if that's even that clip, because it's a couple seconds long.
	Yeah, well clearly it's not the kid in Pakistan, because that's not a kid who's still alive, right?
	When Noah Posner's picture appeared in Pakistan, that's not Noah Posner still alive, right?
	I wasn't saying that Noah Posner's still alive.
	Okay.
	It was widely reported during your divorce that your attorney said to the judge that you're playing a character, that you're a performance artist.
	So I want to ask you, I want to know, when you were making these claims about Sandy Hook, were you being a journalist or was this all performance art?
	Objection is to form.
	When I say things on air, I believe it.
	When I'm being a radio talk show host, that was my ex-wife trying to enter into evidence like 10 years ago, me in a Joker outfit, doing a satire piece about chemicals in the water, and she was trying to say that I was crazy and was really the Joker.
	And we said, no, when Jack Nicholson plays the Joker, Your Honor, he's not really the Joker, he's playing a part.
	And then the media ran with it saying that I said that what I regularly do on air is entertainment.
	So it's very clear when I'm being serious on air and it's very clear if I'm wearing a gore mask and reenacting Star Trek as a joke that I'm not literally believing that gore is a real lizard creature.
	I was making fun of the media in that case for saying that You know, so then I believe the government's run by lizards.
	That's David Eichen on me.
	Sure.
	And so I wore a lizard mask.
	They also tried to introduce that.
	And we explained that, no, you're on...
	The judge agreed.
	Yes, we understand satire versus reality.
	So, no, I was...
	I believe what I say on air.
	And now when I cover what somebody else is covering, or I war game and look at both sides of something, that doesn't mean that I believe even both sides of what I'm covering.
	It means I'm looking at the different angles.
	And then that's taken out of context.
	Well, what I'm getting at is this stuff we're looking at today.
	Kids going in circles, schools closed, emails, EMTs not in the building, porta-potties.
	These aren't comedy skits.
	This is journalism.
	Yes.
	Well, this is punditry.
	Because I wear a journalist hat, punditry hat, satire hat.
	Just reading news, just being a newsreader, I do that as well.
	So I do a lot of things.
	But when I was covering Sandy Hook, I was genuinely trying to get at the truth of it.
	At Infowars, it was known from the very start That parents were being harassed by believers in the Sandy Hook conspiracy.
	You agree to that, right?
	No.
	Well, you would also at least agree that because of the potential for that harassment, you would agree with me that InfoWars needed to treat Sandy Hook allegations with extreme caution, given it was a traumatic event.
	You'd agree with that?
	I mean, I think it's the American birthright and it's important when you have big events Whether they're wars or WMDs or mass shootings that, I mean, I think the right to question is an absolute right.
	Just like the Jesse Smollett situation.
	I took a risk saying I thought that was fake.
	And I was the first person to question it and I was proven right.
	So I just really, I questioned Jussie Smollett from a position of looking at the facts, and if I'd have been proven wrong, then I would have apologized for it.
	I mean, that's what I do.
	Okay, but with Sandy Hook, not Jussie Smollett.
	Sandy Hook, you agree with me?
	You were under an obligation, InfoWars, you needed to treat this with extreme caution.
	Objection.
	Agreed or not agreed?
	Objection is to forehand.
	Well, I mean, we always cover things from a perspective of caution.
	We were covering other people's reports and also questioning the historical fact that, you know, things like Operation Northwood's government plan to stage mass shootings in the U.S. Kennedy said no to the plan, but the chairman of the Joint Chiefs had green-lined it.
	And so because of things like that, we are forced to then question these events and I think that's, you know, it's just part of the process in this country.
	Okay, so that's part of the process and to be fair to you, Infowars didn't know from the very start that Sandy Hook parents are being harassed?
	No, we did not know from the very start.
	I want to play something.
	I want to play a clip from an Infowars episode on January 18, 2013. Okay?
	Can you play the clip, Extreme Caution?
	A lot of people on YouTube have handled it in a rather insensitive way.
	Of course, we've had reports about them harassing some of the people who were involved.
	And basically, it doesn't do us any favors.
	So, we need to treat it, obviously, with extreme caution because it's a very traumatic event.
	That clip is Mr. Paul Watson, who is your chief reporter at InfoWars, right?
	He is now.
	And he frequently warned you about what you were saying about Sandy Hook.
	We had discussions about it, yes.
	We're not running a cult.
	It was different views.
	Right.
	And for instance, one of the gentlemen in the room with us right now, Rob Dew, Mr. Watson disagreed with Mr. Dew.
	He said Mr. Dew's wrong and you need to stop this Mr. Jones.
	That's what Mr. Watson told you?
	Objections to form.
	Correct?
	There were external and internal debates as you just saw.
	We've looked it up.
	I think it's 97% of my reporting is saying that it happened even going back.
	I don't do this anymore because people can edit stuff.
	But we would go on air and say real shootings happen, black trench coat, on the drugs, all the regular things we see in mass shootings.
	And then we would have the other side of that because the internet didn't believe it happened.
	Let me put it this way.
	Mr. Watson was right.
	Mr. Do was wrong.
	Correct?
	Objections to form.
	It's not in context.
	I can't answer that.
	I want to play you some comments you made about Mr. Watson.
	I'm going to show you something you said about Mr. Watson on February 12, 2015. And on April 20th, 2018, day after you were sued.
	Can you play the clip for me?
	Joan's comments on Mr. Watson.
	Paul Watson thinks the official story of Sandy Hook is true.
	He's my chief reporter.
	Yeah, because Paul Watson was, like, threatening to quit.
	And I wasn't even saying it didn't happen.
	I was just devil's advocate.
	He said, it's all bull, Alex, him, dude.
	So your chief reporter was right when he was warning you not to say it was phony or there were crisis actors?
	He was not the chief reporter then.
	When did he become chief reporter?
	About five years ago.
	About five years ago.
	2014?
	I'd have to look it up.
	Okay.
	So at the time you were saying that clip in 2015, when you said, he's my chief reporter, that's when he became your chief reporter?
	And I said, his instincts are right.
	So you played, finally, one clip where I'm saying it happened instead of editing clips.
	Well, no, I was actually talking about the one before.
	In February 12, 2015, you called him your chief reporter.
	I think I said by then he was.
	Yeah, okay.
	Over the years, there's been some tension between you and the parents after they started complaining about what you were doing, correct?
	Objection is to form.
	What's your basis on that one?
	Legal objection, not a speaking objection.
	What's your legal basis for that one?
	Okay, explain the legal.
	It's time, date, context, definitions.
	Those aren't legal objections, Mr. Barnes.
	Yes, they are, because if the form of the objection is misleading or leading in the nature in which...
	I'm allowed to lead the witness.
	He's adverse to me.
	You are, but if I say, if I don't give you context of time...
	Okay, no, it's fine.
	It's not an objection.
	I understand.
	I don't need a basis.
	I don't know how to ask questions.
	I mean, come on.
	Okay.
	It will be easier for you and for everybody if it was, here's the exact date.
	Got a rule of evidence for me, maybe?
	Oh, sure.
	It gives specificity as to both date and time so the person can answer the question meaningfully.
	When you say...
	So is that 403?
	That could be...
	That's not formed.
	That's not...
	You don't have to object to that.
	It's preserved, Mr. Barnes.
	Let's talk about this question.
	Over the years, there started to develop tension between you and the Sandy Hook parents after they started complaining about what you were doing, correct?
	No.
	Okay, no tension.
	You will admit, I mean, you've done mocking imitations of Sandy Hook parents crying, correct?
	No.
	I want to play you a video clip, too, from September 24th, 2014 and November 11th, 2016. Will you play the video clip called Crying?
	And then you've got parents laughing and then they walk over to the camera and go...
	Not just one, but a bunch of parents doing this.
	Then we see footage of one of the reported fathers of the victims, Robbie Parker, doing classic acting training where he's laughing and joking and they say, hey, we're live.
	And he goes, oh...
	And maybe that's real.
	I'm sure it is.
	You realize now You were mocking the difficult emotional reactions of people who provably lost their children.
	No, I was not mocking.
	I was showing what people were questioning.
	It was not to mock the parents.
	It was showing why people were questioning.
	It's you that is projecting mocking onto it.
	I was showing what he did.
	When you did this stuff about the crying and your imitations, this was all in service of an argument that some of these parents were actors, right?
	Objection is to form.
	No.
	Can you play me?
	I want to play you a clip from March 14, 2014. Can you play me the clip called Actors?
	I've looked at it and undoubtedly there's a cover-up, there's actors, they're manipulating, they've been caught lying, and they were pre-planning before it and rolled out with it.
	We've got people clearly coming up and laughing and then doing the fake crying.
	We've clearly got people where it's actors playing different parts of different people.
	Who were the actors playing the different...
	What were the different people where the same actor were playing the different parts?
	I'd have to see the context.
	But that was something you believed that was true.
	Of an edited tape?
	I don't know what the context is.
	Well, I mean, look, Mr. Jones, we can see you say actors enough time that you and I can both admit, you can just admit right now, there have been multiple, repeated times where you have accused some of the parents of being actors.
	Right?
	No, I've covered the internet talking about how people look like actors.
	This is edited, I can't comment on it.
	Okay.
	So let me understand this, Mr. Jones.
	Unless we play you a full four-hour InfoWars clip, you just can't answer questions today, can you?
	It's not a four-hour clip.
	These were maybe minute-long clips?
	Yeah.
	Not five-second, two-second editing?
	Well, you've told your audience there, we've clearly got people where it's actors playing different parts of different people.
	So you were pretty certain, weren't you?
	I have, because of all the stage things we've seen, there have been points in my mind where I've gone back and forth in the earlier years.
	You're really thinking maybe the whole thing has been staged.
	And then later I realized it was just mainly media hyping it and then trying to choreograph and turning it into a political situation after the case.
	Okay.
	Well, regardless of whatever that was, this thing we just saw you say about actors, the mocking imitations of crying, this is exactly the stuff that Paul Joseph Watson was warning you about, correct?
	No, he was saying that some of the people that were out there putting stuff out, like Fetcher and others and that, were not good.
	Yeah, he was really opposed to the crisis actor angle, correct?
	Objection is to the forum.
	If I get Paul Watson here to testify, he's going to tell me he never believed in the crisis actor thing and thought it was a bad idea to talk about crisis actors.
	That's what he's going to say, isn't he?
	Yeah, because he legitimately is his own person, and we don't tell people what to say or what to do.
	I respect him, and we have different points of view.
	We've had debates about Sandy Hook on air.
	You have different views about journalistic ethics, too.
	Well, I mean, when there's a big internet debate that's going on, and then we cover that debate, and I give my opinion on it, that's what happens.
	As time went on, Starting into 2015, you learned that a Sandy Hook parent named Leonard Posner was behind a group called Honor Network.
	Correct?
	That was fighting online abuse of Sandy Hook victims?
	I did, I think.
	And when you learned that, And when Honor complained to YouTube in 2015, you told your viewers that Honor was run by Mr. Posner, you showed addresses being used by Mr. Posner, and you said he needed to be investigated in Florida.
	Didn't you say that?
	Objection is too formal.
	No.
	Okay, let's play a clip here.
	I'm going to show you something that you and Mr. Du were talking about on February 12, 2015. Can you play addresses for me?
	He's been getting all kinds of grief from Mr. Posner.
	Anything that comes out, social media shut down due to Sandy Hook false copyrights.
	What's interesting is they list the address for the Honor Network in Boca Raton, Florida.
	You look up the address on that, which says 908 North Dixie Highway.
	It is the address for a women's clothing store.
	And a UPS, a U-Haul rental place.
	U-Haul neighborhood dealer.
	So here's the 908 North Dixie Highway.
	There is no suite, but it's got two different buildings listed that address.
	One is a JJ shop, women's clothing store, and you go to the other one, same address, U-Haul neighborhood dealer.
	Now you go to their About Honor network.
	Go to this one right here, guys.
	You can leave the camera right there.
	Honor Network right there.
	They say they're in Connecticut.
	Says they're in Newtown, Connecticut, but you go to that address.
	It's a U-Haul.
	UPS store.
	I'm sorry, it's a UPS store.
	Same address, Main Street, Newtown, Connecticut.
	It's a UPS store.
	But you think, you know, if they had this organization, they would have some sort of headquarters where they would be setting up a memorial.
	Well, we'll just start investigating that, and I guess I'm going to have to probably go on up to Newtown.
	I'm going to have to probably go investigate Florida as well.
	If a person were to stake out those addresses, they could wait for Mr. Posner to come pick up his mail, couldn't they?
	Objection is to form.
	True.
	I mean, the guy's running an anti-free speech foundation.
	And you're the one who outed him as doing that, right?
	There's nothing on the Honor Network website that said Mr. Posner was running it.
	You outed him.
	I believe he was public about that.
	Do you?
	You don't think that Infowars is the first one to break that in an article?
	You don't think that?
	That he was running a site trying to get people's websites and things taken down?
	Correct.
	That Mr. Posner was running as an anonymous front, the Honor Network, to help make complaints against various sites so that individual parents wouldn't be the subject of retribution.
	Yeah, that's what I'm asking you if you knew me.
	No, I was not aware of that.
	I believe I'm from memory due was covering a news article about how the, but then that's been conflated by you guys sitting into people's houses or putting out their addresses to go after them and we never did that.
	So if Infowars, if it happened that Infowars went and searched and dug through records for private business filings, And used DMCA reports that it had gotten to suss out that Mr. Posner was the head of honor and then reported it to its audience, that wouldn't be a good thing if that happened, right?
	Objection as to four.
	Well, I don't have any knowledge of what you're talking about.
	That wouldn't happen, hypothetically.
	If hypothetically Infowars went to some links to unmask a person who was running a charity that was trying to stop people from being abused and then disclosed that to its audience with maps, that wouldn't be a good thing.
	That's, from my memory, not what happens.
	I can't comment on hypotheticals.
	So if I was to say to you, if somebody was to come along and strike your hand with a hammer, would it hurt?
	You can't answer that question.
	I'm not striking anybody with hammers.
	If I asked you, if I gave you a big bowl of chili, might it affect your memory?
	You can't answer that.
	That's hypothetical.
	Correct?
	You're just not going to answer those kind of questions.
	I'll take it.
	That's no.
	Let's move on.
	I'll take it.
	That wasn't a question.
	Is that a question?
	Is it?
	That's a comment.
	That's not a question.
	This is becoming one of the most harassing objects.
	This is for TV and for PR, not for a legitimate suit.
	That's what this is.
	That's all this is.
	You want to put it on TV. This is just a show, and it's a bad show at that.
	It's a show of how not to be a lawyer in deposition of a case show.
	I mean, if you want to be fair, and you want to ask real questions, go ahead.
	But don't make comments, and then try to reinterpret those comments as a question, and then try to put words in the mouth of the witness.
	I mean, first year law student should do that.
	What was your objection?
	The objection was to your comment saying that there was an answer, and my point was, you didn't ask a question, so there couldn't have been an answer, and I was objecting for the record purposes that no answer had been given to a question that had not been asked.
	Do you maybe want to take a break so we can have a few breaths?
	Yes, maybe so.
	Yeah, you might need to do that.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Maybe you can go back and read how to ask people questions.
	We're off record at 134 p.m.
	We're back on the record at 148 p.m.
	Mr. Jones, I want to talk a little bit more about that episode on February 12, 2015, the one we had looked at with the maps.
	And I want to show you a clip of your message to the parents that were complaining and ask you some questions.
	This clip again from February 12, 2015.
	Can you play Hornets?
	I just want to tell this network of people something.
	I'll have to go to Sandy Hook.
	I'll have to get involved.
	I mean, you're just stirring up a hornet's nest here.
	So, for complaining, you were going to bring InfoWars to their hometown.
	Objection is deformed.
	I have no idea what that three-second clip was.
	Well, forget the three-second clip.
	For complaining, you were going to bring InfoWars to their hometown.
	That is not what I said.
	Okay.
	Well, a couple months later...
	Hold on, Mr. Jones.
	I'm going to hand you what I am now marking as Exhibit 5. A couple months later, in the spring of 2015, you sent this man, a cage fighter, to go badger and yell obscenities at Sandy Hook Residence, right?
	No.
	No?
	You know who that is, right?
	Yes.
	Okay, that's Mr. Badondi.
	Yes.
	I want to play you a clip of Mr. Badondi in Newtown.
	This is from June 8, 2015.
	Can you play the clip of Badandi?
	What's this next video?
	I don't know what he has.
	The criminal race will block no path down on a walkway.
	It is.
	He ain't gonna block us.
	He's a tricky throwing piece of shit, motherfucker.
	He's going to run an awful operation.
	They hacked communication with the helicopter, the light on the stand.
	That's perjury, sir.
	You know what perjury is?
	You've got nothing behind you, speak to him.
	I'm coming to jail, criminal!
	You're going to jail, criminal!
	I'm coming to retirement!
	And you, sir, are defendant criminals.
	How do you feel about that?
	You know, this guy here is somebody out of Central Kasten up behind you.
	This is the exact person that they would hire to represent criminals, folks.
	The Sandy Hook truth is coming out, you people go to jail.
	You can smile all you want, you're going to jail for fraud.
	Plain and simple.
	All right, yo, guys.
	Credentials.
	Dan Badani, Infowars.com, the number one alternative news source in the world.
	Yo, why are you running?
	Why are you running here?
	What do you have to say about defending criminals?
	You're a bunch of fraud, a bunch of criminals.
	Enjoy your federal reserve notes now, scumbags.
	As he has people, folks, they're talking up standing up.
	Damn, it was an inside job.
	And Mr. Jones, those are hardly the only people Mr. Brent Badandi harassed on his multiple trips to Newtown, correct?
	Objection is to form.
	Correct?
	I mean, almost everything you've said is not true.
	No, not correct.
	Okay.
	That was Mr. Badandi calling people who were involved in Sandy Hook, crooked, corrupt, piece of shit motherfuckers, right?
	That's what we just saw?
	Objection is to form.
	That's what we saw in the video, Mr. Jones, correct?
	I didn't quite hear all of it.
	Okay.
	I want to show you something you said after Mr. Badandi went to Sandy Hook.
	About the school itself.
	And I want to show you a clip from July 7th, 2015. You play stalk the school.
	If they did kill kids, they knew it was coming.
	Stalked the school with kids, killed them, and then had the media there.
	And that probably didn't even happen.
	I mean, no wonder we get so many death threats and so much heat and so much other stuff I'm not going to get into behind the scenes when we touch Sandy Hook.
	Because, folks, it's as phony as a $3 bill.
	First, Mr. Jones, you see the headline at the top of that screen?
	FBI says no one killed at Sandy Hook?
	Yes.
	You're familiar, that's an article that InfoWars published at one time.
	Yes, the FBI said no deaths that year in Sandy Hook on their website.
	Is that what they said?
	I'm going from memory and you pull it up.
	So you say that headline's true?
	The FBI later amended it and said that it was an error.
	Oh, they amended it?
	Yes, ma'am.
	That happened?
	Mm-hmm.
	Okay.
	Let's move on to 2016. And in the 2016 election, you found yourself having to discuss Sandy Hook because Hillary Clinton actually brought you up specifically in a campaign speech, didn't she?
	Yes.
	And that she wanted to put light on you, in other words.
	That was part of her campaign strategy?
	Yes.
	Now, after the campaign was over...
	In November 2016, you directly addressed the parents in a video called Your Final Statement and accused some of them of being actors, right?
	No.
	I'm going to show you the very end of your clip, your message to the parents, on November 11th, 2016, in the final statement on Sandy Hook.
	Can you play the video clip titled Soap Opera?
	And so, if children were lost in Sandy Hook, my heart goes out to each and every one of those parents and the people that say they're parents that I see on the news.
	The only problem is, I've watched a lot of soap operas.
	And I've seen actors before.
	And I know when I'm watching a movie, I don't want to watch something real.
	Let's look at Sandy Hook.
	That was not the extreme caution that your chief reporter, Mr. Watson, had been urging.
	Correct.
	Objections to form.
	Correct?
	I mean, if people have been coached to put up certain political anti-gun statements, I have a right to say that they're putting out political talking points.
	I know when I'm watching a movie, and I know when I'm watching something real.
	I've seen soap operas before.
	This is an accusation about actors, correct?
	No, not specifically.
	I'm talking about how it's being politically turned into something synthetic to go after the guns, and I think that's why you don't play the whole clip.
	And then, at the end of the clip, you point into the camera, say, let's look into Sandy Hook, and then there's a title card that says, Infowars, you are the resistance.
	The you in you are the resistance, that's your audience, correct?
	That's the tagline on everything.
	So it wasn't a specific Sandy Hook message.
	But I'm asking you, the meaning of that tagline, you are the resistance.
	You means your audience.
	It means, yes.
	Or it just means the American people.
	Am I part of the resistance?
	Well, for the Democrats.
	Sorry, did I... Well, that's a Democrat tagline they took from me.
	You are the resistance.
	Okay.
	You're not a Democrat?
	I don't know where you're getting that from.
	I'm just saying that's a main line.
	Democrats use that.
	Okay.
	Mr. Jones, we've talked a little bit about these Sandy Hook investigators.
	One of them, Mr. Halbig.
	One of them, like Mr. Fetzer.
	These are people who've been investigating.
	Mr. Halbig's been a considerable source of information for you.
	You'll admit that, right?
	Yes.
	Now, these Sandy Hook investigators, these people are so crazy that you had to realize at some point that what they're saying isn't true and that Sandy Hook wasn't fake, right?
	Objection isn't for them.
	I found out some of what they were saying was not accurate.
	Okay, let me play a clip for you.
	something you said just a little while ago on January 19th, 2019.
	Can you play kooky?
	Within a few years, the Sandy Hook investigators, some of them were so kooky and so aggressive that I began to realize that some of what they had found wasn't true so that I couldn't some of them were so kooky and so aggressive that I began to realize that some of what When did you finally realize that these crazy people were crazy?
	Objection is to form.
	Thank you.
	I can't answer exactly because it's so many years, but three years ago I found that some of what they said was inaccurate.
	Okay, so essentially then I think what you're getting at is you haven't been saying Sandy Hook is fake for years.
	I have been more on the side going back about three or four years ago than it did happen.
	And then that triggered more of the ire of those folks as they got more, I think, extreme.
	That's what I'm saying.
	This is all cherry-picked here.
	Well, I'm just trying to understand, Mr. Jones.
	At some point, you learned that those people were crazy.
	You couldn't believe what they were saying.
	You couldn't say it was synthetic or completely fake anymore.
	When did you stop saying it?
	I don't know.
	It was probably four years ago I told Badandi not to say he worked with Infowars because he didn't.
	And he's a professional wrestler, not a cage fighter.
	I mean, I remember that.
	That's a date we could find when we sent him emails and said, you don't work here.
	Stop saying our name.
	Don't do that in our name.
	Because I saw that stuff.
	And I was like, I remember seeing it in the paper.
	And I was like, Badandi doesn't work here.
	I mean, he did stuff four years before that.
	And then, you know.
	Objection, non-responsive.
	I mean, I'm really answering your question.
	No, Mr. Jones, I'm asking you about Mr. Halbig, these sources that you had, not your employees.
	I'm talking about these investigators, right?
	These investigators, at some point, we just saw a clip, you realized that they were kooky, couldn't say it was synthetic anymore.
	When do you think it's the last time you, like, that ended?
	When did you stop calling it fake?
	Objection is too full.
	I mean, I can't accurately say that.
	Okay, let's try to hold on for a second.
	Let me take you back to April 20th, 2018. I want to play you a clip on April 20th, 2018. I believe it was a day or two after you were first sued.
	Can you play the clip not doing it?
	And they go, oh my gosh, why are you doing that?
	You hurt me.
	And they're like, no, no, we're sorry.
	You hurt me.
	And like five years later, you hurt me.
	Stop hurting me.
	And we're like, we're not bringing you up.
	They're talking about us.
	We think your child died.
	We're sorry.
	We're sorry.
	We didn't kill them, but we're sorry.
	You will stop doing it.
	You will stop doing it.
	And you're like, but I'm not doing it.
	When you say you're not doing it, is this meaning that you haven't been saying Sandy Hook was fake for several years?
	No, what it means is the media currently and then says Jones is saying it, Jones is sending people and then never showing me saying don't go investigate it, I believe mass shootings happened and I'm sorry and some of the anomalies we were told were wrong and I've said it, I've probably been saying that four years.
	And then the media, the corporate media, wants to use it to bring back up gun control or anti-free speech stuff, whatever it is.
	And so it continues to do that over and over again.
	Right.
	You end up in the crosshairs because they want to generate clicks.
	Right?
	I'm not sure how all that works, but I can tell you, Sandy Hook is not my identity.
	I covered it less than one-tenth of one percent.
	Until Hillary gave her alt-right speech, and then there were thousands of articles, you know, saying Jones is doing this, Jones is sending people there, and it kind of restarted a big resurgence.
	Had people on the street saying, how dare you not, you know, not say it happened.
	We don't think it happened.
	It's a big thing.
	There's like spray painted on the walls of, you know, here in Austin on the side of the highway that, you know, Sandy Hook was staged.
	That's a big thing on the internet.
	And so And so the media, Hillary, made this huge thing.
	She said Pepe the Frog was a white supremacist and that made Pepe the Frog the white supremacist because she had a lot of power at that point in the news.
	And so I've been trying to say particularly, hey, it's not my identity and I believe it happened and I'm sorry for any pain you've had, but I'm not going to be Sandy Hook man and then take what everybody else did as if what people said and done is all me and then I'm kind of like the sin eater and it's all put on me when that's not my identity.
	I mean, this idea, I know they have shows like Homeland and things, where supposedly Alex Jones, he does all these things.
	That's not a real person.
	That's an actor.
	And then kind of the media fantasizes that they're fighting this big boogeyman that's on Homeland, and that's not who I am.
	Remember what my question was?
	What was my question?
	I mean, I just answered your question.
	I mean, I asked your question again.
	There's no yes or no answer to something like that.
	Well, I mean, you don't even know what the question was because you were just talking.
	You're just ranting like you do on your show, right?
	No, I was being honest with you about the situation.
	All right, well, let's walk through it, Mr. Jones.
	We know you started making videos calling it fake in 2013, right?
	No doubt there.
	Objection is deformed.
	Right?
	Objection is deformed.
	I can't comment on edited videos.
	I'm not asking you about edited videos, Mr. Jones.
	I'm asking you.
	In 2013, you made videos calling it fake, correct?
	Objection is too foreign.
	I think asking if it was fake, yes.
	You weren't asking.
	You were saying it was fake and the evidence is overwhelming, right?
	I mean, we have a right in this country to question things.
	I'm not saying what you didn't have a right to do.
	I'm just asking you what you did.
	You made videos in 2013 saying it was fake, right?
	I think saying...
	Because I remember making the statements that it looks fake to me, but we're not 100%.
	Okay, and then in 2014, 2015, you were making videos calling it synthetic, completely fake, manufactured, phony as a $3 bill.
	That was happening all through 2014, 2015, right?
	Objectionist to form.
	I mean, there's transcripts of that, right?
	I'm not denying that I've questioned Sandy Hook.
	Okay.
	That's all I'm asking.
	Then in 2016, we know it became an issue because of the campaign.
	We saw a video called Your Final Statement.
	We've looked at that.
	And we've seen you say really false things about Sandy Hook all through 2017 in these videos too, right?
	Objection is before.
	Edited videos.
	I can't respond to it.
	Okay.
	But you just say, for instance, if you say that there are porta-potties showing up with an hour in 2017. That's not true, right?
	We don't know that.
	Exactly, right?
	You don't know that.
	But you said they did.
	That's what the reports were from people we believe were credible.
	Okay.
	But in 2017, you're still calling it fake.
	Objection as to forum.
	No, the media would get me to respond and say, well, what are the anomalies?
	And then I would say, like Megyn Kelly, I said, I believe it happened.
	She goes, but what are the anomalies?
	And then they edited it together to have me saying it didn't happen.
	That's just incredibly deceptive.
	Okay.
	I want to show you something you said on October 26, 2017. And this is a video called Three Dollar Bill.
	Can you play that?
	And I'd forgotten in the documents, the CIA visited Lanza and reportedly recruited him about a year before the shooting.
	I mean, they bulldozed the house to get rid of it.
	I don't know what really happened with Sandy Hook, folks.
	We've looked at all sides.
	We played devil's advocate from both sides.
	But, I mean, it's as phony as a $3 bill with the CNN doing fake newscasts with blue screens.
	I mean, Nancy Grace got caught doing it, Anderson Cooper.
	I mean, that is just crazy.
	That's the kind of stuff that I read on InfoWords.com that I don't even get to.
	That video, that was made October 26, 2017. That's just a couple months before you were sued, wasn't it?
	I would guess the date's right.
	And that was almost five years after the parents had told you how distressing what you were doing was to them, right?
	I say right there, I don't know what happened at Sandy Hook.
	You said it's phony as a $3 bill.
	I'm talking about Nancy Grace where she says she's on location and they've got trucks and see the same trucks driving behind her and the guest.
	That's what I mean is the media creating a synthetic thing around it to then script the outcome of what they want.
	You take it out of context.
	Oh really?
	Okay, that's what phony as a $3 bill means.
	That's how you've used that term over the years?
	That clip is long enough where I can tell what I'm talking about.
	Nancy Grace video.
	Where she's sitting there at a roundabout.
	And she says the other person is...
	I'm familiar, Mr. Jones.
	You have Ashley Banfield sitting in a chair.
	They're both in the same parking lot.
	As a result of the satellite feed, you see the same cars going behind them.
	And it shows they're actually in the same location, even though they're trying to do it like a satellite feed, right?
	Yeah.
	Right.
	And then, obviously, they didn't have a guest to put on.
	They put those two people together.
	To you, that's an anomaly, right?
	That's one of the anomalies that caused you to have doubts.
	They lied and said they were on location.
	Yeah, sure, they lied.
	Yeah, they said, hey, she's over here, I'm over here, and they're actually in the same place.
	Yeah.
	That's, that's, they were, they were pulling over it.
	They pulled it.
	Shannon mentioned it's got attacks from the Atlanta rooftop.
	We'll talk about that.
	Put a pin in that, Mr. Jones.
	We'll talk about that.
	I definitely want to get back and talk about that.
	But in terms of what you were saying in that video, you said we've looked at both sides, we tried to come out at all angles, but folks, it's phoniest $3 bill.
	That's what you said.
	Talking about the media coverage, yes, in context.
	Oh, is that?
	You were talking about the media coverage?
	Yeah, in the clip.
	I mean, that's what I'm talking about.
	Nancy Grace.
	And Anderson Cooper, right?
	Yes.
	Blue screen.
	Where you say it's fake.
	Wasn't there.
	Didn't happen.
	They weren't on location.
	That's what you said?
	Objection is to form.
	No, generally someone is on location.
	It doesn't mean...
	That the person being interviewed is even part of it.
	It means that they'll say, hey, you're going to be standing here, you're going to be talking to Anderson Cooper, and then I've talked to people that work at that level of television, they routinely do that.
	CNN's famous for it.
	They'll even run audio in the back, they'll have the video.
	I hear you.
	Another one happened a few months ago at CNN. You hear the crickets and the cars, and all of a sudden the tape stops, and they have to start it back up, and they're supposedly on location in Gaza.
	I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's not important.
	What I'm asking you is about Anderson Cooper.
	With terms of Anderson Cooper, you said that Anderson Cooper wasn't at Sandy Hook.
	He was not there.
	Objection is to form.
	Right?
	You said that?
	Objection is to form.
	I don't know how to respond.
	Yes, I believe that he faked being on location once.
	That doesn't mean that the people involved aren't the parents or that it didn't happen.
	It means CNN's famous for faking locations.
	Okay.
	I want to show you a clip of something you said in 2015.
	And this is a clip that's become kind of famous.
	And so I want to get your input on what you said on 2015, January 13th.
	And let me show you a clip called Hoax.
	But then you learn the school had been closed and reopened and you got video of the kids going in circles in and out of the building and they don't call the rescue choppers for two hours and then they tear the building down and seal it and they get caught using blue screens and an email by Bloomberg comes out in a lawsuit where he's telling his people get ready in the next 24 hours to capitalize on a shooting.
	Yeah, so Sandy Hook is a synthetic, completely fake, with actors In my view, manufactured.
	I couldn't believe it at first.
	I knew they had actors there, clearly, but I thought they killed some real kids.
	And it just shows how bold they are that they clearly used actors.
	I mean, they even ended up using photos of kids killed in mass shootings here in a fake mass shooting in Turkey.
	So, yeah, or Pakistan.
	The sky is now the limit.
	I appreciate your call.
	Mr. Jones, can you now admit that these statements were reckless?
	No, I mean, I think at that point in my life and whatever the context was that I was saying, I think basically the whole thing is fake.
	I mean, that's my right to do that.
	I legitimately have believed that Sandy Hook was probably completely staged different periods of my life.
	Like, I believe Jesse Smollett was staged or the WMDs were staged.
	I'm on record on hundreds of these events when I think they're staged.
	I've learned sometimes I'm wrong.
	And so, no, I stand by The fact that I genuinely believe that.
	And one of my best reporters, Paul, thought that was wrong.
	And so that shows that we have real debates, real discussions.
	And what people believe, as long as I think they really believe it, is what we debate and discuss.
	That's like, listen to any talk radio show there is.
	Everything, every last word of factual claim in those statements are things that you repeated with no confirmation from people you now admit are crazy, right?
	Well, I don't want to call people crazy and get sued by somebody else.
	I have found that some of what they said in the reports they put out were not accurate.
	Well, you certainly have no problem calling them kooky, right?
	You said it on air to millions of people.
	Yeah, I mean, I think it's...
	These people are kooky and everything you said and that was based on what they told you and with no confirmation.
	I wouldn't say everything.
	There was a lot of different sources, a lot of different things.
	And there was a cover-up on the files and the reports and Lanza and his background.
	And so when you've got a cover-up, you're not sure exactly what's going on the extent of it.
	Let me make sure I have this really clear.
	You don't believe the official story is Sandy Hook.
	You think there was cover-up?
	You think there was manipulation?
	You think that there is some sinister thing going on?
	I still think children died.
	I believe mass shootings happened.
	They just had one in Brazil.
	A tragedy.
	And I believe it's a crisis.
	And I go back to the point of all gun owners being collectively blamed then.
	It's traumatic and so people go and they find anomalies and I've kind of retrospectively gone back and seen how I did believe that stuff.
	And then I go back and I've now studied more actually the real anomalies and it's just the school system and government trying to cover its rear end from liability and so there definitely has been a very There's been a cover-up of the events, and I think there's a lot of evidence showing there could have been a second shooter.
	There is the helicopter footage of the man in the woods.
	I still have questions about Sandy Hook, but I know people that know some of the Sandy Hook families.
	They say, no, it's real.
	People I think are credible.
	And so over the years, I've Especially as it became a huge issue, had time to really retrospectively think about it, and as the whole thing matured, had a chance to believe that children died and it's a tragedy, but there are still real anomalies in the attempt to basically keep it blacked out, that generally when you see that in government, something's being covered up.
	And after you were sued, you said there was a police stand down in Sandy Hook, right?
	I said that about Parkland too.
	I think there was a very slow response on both.
	Now if you're a parent, just imagine me for a moment that you lost one of your children.
	One of your children was murdered.
	And you think you know who did it.
	And there's been a justice system that worked out that said this is who did it.
	And then someone who thinks that they have information comes to you and says, Mr. Jones, The person who killed your son, information about him is being covered up.
	There's a government conspiracy.
	They're manipulating.
	There's a police stand-down.
	Those things would be upsetting to you, wouldn't they?
	Objection is to form.
	I think the whole thing's upsetting and everybody's upset by it.
	And people see anomalies and citizens have rights to ask questions.
	Right, so if there was a police stand-down, that'd be upsetting, right?
	I mean, come on.
	If the police chose not to react, that's upsetting, isn't it?
	Well, there was in Columbine, there was at Parkland that they've ruled.
	In Florida, there was a police stand-down.
	I was the first to report that because we had students call in.
	And CNN said they were actors.
	I'm not asking if a police stand-down happened at Parkland.
	I'm not asking if one happened at Sandy Hook.
	I'm saying that if children are being attacked and the police, anywhere, stand down, that's upsetting.
	Yes.
	Now, by the same token, if the police didn't stand down, but somebody was told, a parent, a victim was told that the police did stand down falsely, that's also upsetting.
	I believe there's been lawsuits by the families about a lack of response.
	Is that my question?
	Is that in any way my question, Mr. Jones?
	Well, I don't understand your question.
	My question is, is if somebody was to lie to you, your children were killed, and then somebody came to you and lied to you and said the police stood down, that'd be distressing.
	Objections to form?
	I don't know of anyone.
	If people believe there was a standout, then it's not a lie.
	If somebody came to you about your murdered child and said your murdered child wasn't actually murdered, he was stolen by aliens and lied to you about that, that's upsetting, right?
	Yeah.
	Can you now admit that you've done an outrageous wrong to these parents?
	Can you admit that?
	You know, the mainstream media is who always takes it and makes it a huge issue and then says that I'm saying it and gets me to respond.
	And it's lawyers like you and people that glom on to this for fame that then try to get the fame and then say that I'm the person that's promoting it.
	And it's obscene in my view.
	So that's no?
	No.
	I genuinely questioned And I think the government and media that's been caught lying so much has created an atmosphere where people don't know it's true.
	So you do not believe that you've done an outrageous wrong to these parents?
	I have not.
	No, I've not done an outrageous wrong to the parents.
	Okay.
	In that clip, you said state police have gone public.
	Have you ever argued anything about the state police?
	I told you most of the stuff I can't even remember.
	Do you, sitting here today, remember anything about the state police going public?
	Is there anything that occurs to you today?
	I can't remember.
	Okay.
	Wanna talk to you about rescue helicopters?
	You mentioned rescue helicopters a lot.
	It was puzzling to you that rescue helicopters weren't called, correct?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	I take it you don't know how long it takes for a Lifestar crew from Hartford Hospital to be dispatched, travel to Sandy Hook, and for the engine to calm down to safely approach the vehicle from Hartford.
	You don't know how long that takes.
	No, I don't.
	And by the same token, you don't know how long it takes for an ambulance crew to be dispatched to loading of the patient from Danbury Hospital nine miles down Y84. You don't know that?
	No, I was going off Halbig and others, that professor's analysis of it.
	Okay.
	Look, I think we've agreed before that Sandy Hook was real.
	It's not staged, not phony.
	You were wrong about that.
	I want to be clear.
	I believe children died.
	I believe there was a mass shooting.
	I still think that there was a man in the woods, in camo.
	There were other reports.
	I saw the video.
	And I believe that you don't normally have every person, never has happened before, every person in a shooting die.
	And just a lot of experts I've talked to including retired FBI agents and other people and people high up in the Central Intelligence Agency have told me that there is a cover-up of Sandy Hook.
	Okay.
	Have there ever been any Infowars employees who have been terminated or formally disciplined for allowing false Sandy Hook information to reach the air?
	Objection on two grounds.
	One is to form and secondly Mr. Jones is only here at his personal capacity.
	He's not here as representative of free speech.
	I'm not asking to bind him.
	He has personal knowledge.
	If he has it, he can tell.
	Dan Madani was not working for us when he went to Sandy Hook.
	I told him not to, and then I told him stop using InfoWars repeatedly.
	Until I had to tell him that I'm going to go public on air and say he's a bad person if he didn't stop using my name.
	So you're going to tell me that after that episode in Newtown happened, Mr. Dew didn't communicate with Mr. Badandi and ask him to cover Sandy Hook some more?
	I haven't reviewed all the things that went on with other reporters.
	I know I said to him, stop doing it.
	Years before that I said, don't go in our capacity.
	To any of these places.
	And I'm just going off memory about that because we told him we did not want him covering Sandy Hook.
	And the last thing he covered for us was the Boston bombing.
	Who is we when you say we told him not to cover Sandy Hook?
	I mean, I told him.
	Okay.
	He lives up there.
	How did you tell him?
	Over the telephone, I believe it had emails.
	Okay.
	You use email to communicate with employees and people like Mr. Redondi?
	I remember saying in a meeting, I don't remember how many years ago, I said, listen, it's funny, he's a professional wrestler, he likes to clown around.
	I don't want to be a bunch of clowns.
	We're not the Howard Stern shows.
	Tell him to stop doing stuff in our name.
	And basically he just wouldn't stop.
	You've repeatedly said the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by the government, right?
	I believe criminal elements of our government were involved in 9-11.
	Regarding Columbine, you said Columbine we know was a false flag.
	I'd say 100% false flag, a globalist operation.
	By false flag, they knew it was coming, they let it happen.
	Okay.
	The Oklahoma City bombing, you said, was a false flag.
	We've never had one so open and shut.
	100%.
	I can name the names.
	And that Tim McVeigh is an innocent patsy.
	He was set up.
	Hours after James Holmes shot up the Aurora movie theater, you said that was 100% a false flag mind control event.
	He told the jailers that.
	He was in a DARPA mind control program like Theodore Kaczynski the Unabomber.
	The shooting of Gabrielle Giffords you called a staged mind control operation.
	Say that again?
	The shooting of Gabrielle Giffords.
	You called, quote, a staged mind control operation.
	I believe we looked at those possibilities.
	The Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida.
	You told your audience you were nearly certain it was a false flag to start a civil war.
	Right?
	That's out of context.
	I said I believe the shooting happened, but that the way it was being hyped, that the police stood down, we talked to the students, and it was later confirmed.
	I want to show you the context so we can make sure we're not taking it out of context.
	I'm going to hand you the affidavit of Fred Zip.
	I would like you to turn the document onto its back and flip one page to page 25. You see that tweet right there?
	There's a tweet at the top of the page, right?
	A tweet is a message distributed to InfoWars thousands, hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers, correct?
	Yes.
	That tweet reads, probability Florida attack false flag for civil war 90%, correct?
	Yes.
	The remainder of that tweet says, Alex Jones calculates the probability of the Florida school shooting being a false flag of the deep state to create resentment towards conservatives, gun overs, and sow the seeds of civil war.
	Correct?
	That's a tweet.
	That's the context of that message, correct?
	I didn't put this out, but they took a derivative of what I said on air and put it out.
	InfoWars published that.
	Well, the video that it links to is in the context.
	I'm asking you that tweet.
	InfoWars published that tweet.
	I believe so.
	Thank you, Mr. Jones.
	The November 2017 church shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas.
	You put forth the theory that it was, quote, part of the Antifa revolution against Christians and conservatives or an ISIS op.
	Correct?
	I was giving possible things and it turned out that he...
	In November 2017, the same month, there was a horrific mass shooting at the Las Vegas Music Festival.
	You remember that, correct?
	And you said, quote, Vegas is as phony as a $3 bill or as Obama's birth certificate, correct?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	So, it really wasn't a surprise that you said the exact same thing about Sandy Hook that you've said about all of these other shootings, correct?
	Yeah, well I talked to the FBI hostage rescue team on the thing in Las Vegas.
	Okay.
	Let's talk a little bit about Pizzagate.
	You told your audience First, let's start off.
	Pizzagate is the allegation that there was a pedophile sex dungeon in a Washington, D.C. pizzeria with connections to Hillary Clinton and the DNC, right?
	That's what Pizzagate is.
	Objectionist.
	Does that mean they ask it again?
	No, you can answer, Mr. Jones.
	Say it again.
	Pizzagate is the allegation that there was a pedophile sex dungeon being operated out of the basement of a pizzeria in Washington, D.C. with connections to Hillary Clinton and the DNC. Nope.
	Tell me what Pizzagate was.
	Pizzagate came out of the John Podesta emails, head of Hillary's campaign, talking about Aleister Crowley rituals.
	And then the media diverted onto 4chan and covered a pizza place that the DNC went to and that was going on and created the disinfo about these dungeons and basements and everything to then distract on to that away from the serious stuff and the FBI manual that they use You know, things like cheese peach, I mean, child pornography, and those are code words used for pedophilia.
	And so that was basically a diversion story, kind of a Karl Rove type trick, where we've got a big story, but you slip this info into it, so then everybody then covers that.
	You told your audience something's going on in that pizzeria, right?
	I mean, I... I mean, I did point out there was a lot of really bizarre art and that Tony Podesta did not hide the fact in the Washington Post 2007 and a big rap about his deviant art that he likes art that most people would be arrested for.
	You said something's being covered up in that restaurant, right?
	I don't remember saying that specifically.
	You said you have to go investigate it for yourself.
	Didn't you say that?
	I don't think that's the exact quote.
	So if Mr. Zipp reported that in that affidavit in front of you, he would be wrong.
	I mean, I don't know Zipp.
	I mean, I don't know Mr. Zipp.
	Well, Mr. Zipp, who's sitting with us, he's a former editor of the Austin Statesman, he's a UT journalism professor.
	He prepared that affidavit.
	If he messed up and misquoted you, that's a problem, isn't it?
	I mean, I've got a chance to read this.
	I'm just asking you...
	Well, let me read it.
	Let me read it then.
	I'm not actually referring him to a specific page now, but I can.
	Let's do that.
	I don't believe that's going to be in his Hessling affidavit.
	Let's talk about the plaintiff's petition then.
	Have you seen these statements in the plaintiff's petition?
	About Pizzagate?
	I'm confused.
	I'm telling you right now that there's a different affidavit that I'm not going to ask you about, about Pizzagate.
	But I am going to ask you about plaintiff's petition, the lawsuit that was served on it.
	Okay, can I see it?
	I'm not even interested in reading you right now.
	I'm just wanting to know, do you remember Pizzagate being a subject that came up?
	Is that something you've looked into in the past couple months?
	I have been very clear the last two years that I believe that there was no illegal activity going on at that pizza place, and I've told people that on record.
	So I don't know if you're looking for clips to put out on the news of me saying something about that, but I'm just...
	Well, what I'm really getting at, Mr. Jones, is that after you told people to go investigate it, somebody did and then opened fire there, right?
	That happened.
	No, there's no evidence that person did that.
	The directives I gave them.
	Okay.
	You made similar allegations on InfoWars.
	There were videos about an Austin pizza place, Eastside Pies.
	Similar allegations made on InfoWars, right?
	I've not made those allegations.
	You apologized for them though, didn't you?
	I think a reporter went and pointed out the same symbol or something.
	Did you apologize?
	I don't remember.
	You apologized to Chobani though, right, for publishing stories that they were caught importing migrant rapists?
	That was a technical thing versus, there were rapes in the town, but it wasn't the company itself that brought the rapist in.
	It was the policies of the fellow reserve board member who owns Chobani.
	You apologized.
	I did.
	You also just recently apologized for false reporting on the murder of DNC staffer's suffrage.
	Objections to form.
	That was on reporting of another reporter.
	Last year, Infowars had to apologize for misidentifying an innocent young man as the Parkland High School shooter.
	I think we did.

▲