Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 15, 2022 - Depositions & Trials

04:50:36

Watch Live: Alex Jones Defamation Trial: Sandy Hook 'Hoax' Lawsuit - Connecticut Trial Day Three

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good morning, thank you.
	good morning everyone seated all right for the record we are on day three of the trial and the Jones related matters.
	If council could please identify themselves for the record.
	Good morning, Your Honor.
	Chris Maddy on behalf of the plaintiffs, joined by Alan Sterling and Josh Kostoff right now.
	I'm Norm Pattis on behalf of the defendants, and I've got Jonathan Roots here with me today.
	He's not counsel, but a paralegal.
	Good morning.
	All right, so we do have the jury.
	They were here this and early.
	We already brought them down.
	We could get started, or we could – I know we had planned on dealing with the FSS PQPR issue.
	I'm just wondering if we need to do that now, if we could let them go later for a break.
	I think we can do that later.
	Do you agree, Attorney Mattis?
	I do.
	Okay.
	I mean, this way they can have a longer morning break, maybe, and we can have a little bit shorter or something along those lines.
	Does that work?
	Yes.
	And then, Attorney Matti, one thing I did want to ask you before I forget, I didn't see the amended complaint, right?
	We have not yet filed.
	Okay.
	I just thought I missed it.
	All right.
	When will that get filed, do you think?
	Your Honor, when we left yesterday, we were discussing the email that I was going to be offering between Robert Heath and Adon Salazar.
	Counsel raised the objection that he would like an instruction that is not being offered for the truth.
	We are offering it for the purpose of showing notice to free speech systems.
	As to Mr. Halbig showing the effect on the listener.
	Do you have agreed upon language?
	We don't have agreed upon language.
	We agree on everything but notice.
	In my view, the impact on the listener, what the listener did in response, is permissible.
	Notice gives it more credit than a peer-said document, if you were.
	And just to give the court a sense of the email, what we're talking about here is shortly after they have Halbig on for the first time, some of the emails Adan Salazar says, have you been into Halbig's credentials?
	He says, what do you mean?
	It seems like this guy has credentials out the wazoo.
	When you say he says, just- Salazar, the Infowars employee.
	It looks like he has credentials out the wazoo.
	Your information is far too vague to follow up on.
	The gentleman then sends a response email with a lengthy description of all the concerns he has about Halving's credibility.
	And I would say this notice issue is important because notice is an exception to the hearsay rule.
	And so if a statement is made putting a party on notice of an issue and we can show that the party received it, that would be outside the hearsay rule anyway.
	So that's the email.
	And if you'd like, Your Honor, I can have Mr. Shadri pull it up for you.
	So tell me what you're proposing that I say.
	what exception am I looking at I think number one your honor if you find that this this communication to Why don't we pull it up if you don't mind?
	Sure.
	Do you have the exhibit?
	and then directly to the 116 yeah I think I'm going to have it on there.
	Senator Eathley, where am I looking for the exception?
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I'm sorry yes Yeah, the exhibit's up there.
	there this exhibit 116 why don't you start at the bottom and when you're right here and I can give you the site Yes.
	Okay, so this is from Jenkins vs.
	Reichert, 125, Kahn 258, Pinsight 264. Notice is a long-recognized non-hersake That the day before the accident he had told the foreman that the stone should be removed before someone was injured was not hearsay and was admissible as tending to impute to the defendant's notice of the situation and its potential dangers.
	Here, obviously, it's exactly the same thing, except we're not talking about a rock.
	We're talking about Mr. Helbig.
	It's altogether different, Judge.
	A rock was material in the Jenkins case to the accident, and whether the person had notice previous to the accident that was being litigated was the issue.
	There is no hearsay code exception in Connecticut that says notice is an exception to the hearsay rule.
	If that were the case, Anything that anyone said that placed somebody on notice of anything potentially could come in for substantive purposes.
	My view is the plaintiffs overreach here.
	They can get everything they want without the notice language because what they can say is provided information.
	It's not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted and you did nothing.
	You blew it off.
	And without the danger of bolstering that they were provided notices of facts that are reliable.
	I remind the court that each and every of the 23 exceptions that we have to hearsay in Connecticut are resound.
	That's why I couldn't find it.
	They resound in a finding of reasonableness, and there isn't one.
	So where a proposal is that it be offered for the impact on the listener?
	And the listener here is Mr. Or even the company in general.
	I'm simply objecting to notice this unnecessarily bolstering.
	All right, so I can tell the jury, so I understand that position.
	I don't read it quite that way, but I'll instruct the jury that it's offered for and should be considered only for the impact on the listener of Mr. Salazar and free speech systems.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Any other housekeeping matters?
	Yeah, maybe we approach briefly.
	Um, yeah.
	Maybe we approach briefly.
	Um, yeah.
	We did mention agreement I mentioned in the committee that I saw you on the floor that I asked permission to speak to young kids.
	But it's about six.
	On their seats.
	Yeah, so.
	And then we bring five people in.
	Just how long.
	Okay.
	Please find that you need whatever seats you need for your clients and staff.
	Just make sure you tell Ron.
	Okay, thank you.
	He'll take care of that.
	Um, I got something else.
	I can't remember.
	Sorry, it'll come to me.
	All right, so I think we're ready for this panel then.
	Yes, sir.
	I remember the tech people are giving it to try to get this TV turn out.
	Okay.
	Or a tech people.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	That's not a problem.
	Yes, sir. sir.
	Thank you.
	Your Honor, just for the record, so is 116 now full of so is 116 now full of service?
	We have to do it, I think, when the jury comes out.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	oh good that was quick
	yes oh good
	May I speak to Attorney Sterling while the jury comes up?
	Certainly no.
	Not enough.
	Guess not.
	Good morning.
	Welcome back.
	Good morning.
	Welcome.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	Thank you, sir, for that.
	I appreciate that.
	Very nice of you.
	I'm sitting here thinking I hope my sons would know to do the same.
	Very, very young.
	Very nice.
	All right, so council will stipulate that the entire panel has returned.
	I do.
	All right, and I did not receive any written notes from Mr. Faro, so that's good news, but that is the procedure we will continue to follow.
	I'll try to remember to address it every morning, that if you were unable to avoid If there were any issues that arose with you or with respect to a fellow juror and you have a concern, you just simply follow that procedure with the written note and we'll deal with it.
	Okay?
	Thank you very much.
	Whenever you're ready, turn it in.
	Yes, please.
	we recall Ms. Paz, Your Honor.
	Good morning.
	And you remain under those opposites.
	So make yourself comfortable.
	You didn't bring your own order today.
	So you have the picture there.
	You may help yourself.
	Thank you.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Ms. Paz.
	Good morning ladies and gentlemen.
	Good morning, Your Honor.
	Ms. Paz, what I'd like to do this morning is just review some of the information that we covered yesterday.
	Sure.
	The videos and the articles that you and I discussed yesterday.
	You'll recall that by the end of the day, we had gotten up to about March of 2014, All right.
	And we covered, leading up to March of 2014, Mr. Jones' broadcast on the day of the Sandy Hook shooting.
	Yes.
	Connecticut school massacre looks like false flag, saying witnesses.
	Yes, I remember.
	We covered another video a couple days later, creepy Illuminati message in Batman movie, hints at Sandy Hook school.
	Yes.
	Call that?
	Yes.
	We talked about the blooper reel that Mr. Jones published on December 17th about the Sandy Hook shooting.
	You recall that?
	Yes.
	We talked about the video he published on the 19th, five days after the shooting, called Sandy Hook Did you call that?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Then we went to the article that they followed up on the Gotham piece called Lower Part of Gotham, Renamed Sandy Hook in Dark Knight Film, correct?
	Yes.
	And you acknowledged to the jury that even as of this day, Infowars has no idea whether that's true, correct?
	Whether what's true, whether it was renamed?
	Whether Sandy Hook appeared in the Dark Knight movie.
	Oh, right.
	I don't know.
	You acknowledge that.
	Right.
	Then we talked about James Tracy coming on in the beginning of January to say that the parents were crisis actors.
	Do you recall that?
	Amongst other things, yes.
	Okay.
	And we show the email from Adan Salazar trying to register for the crisis actors.
	That takes us also to Mr. Jones' statement about Robbie Parker, in which he said that Mr. Parker had been given a card and told what to say, correct?
	Right, that's what he says on the video.
	You acknowledge that you had reviewed that video and you never saw anybody give Mr. Parker a card, correct?
	Right, I didn't see a card in the video.
	And then we get to the end of January, January 27th, and Mr. Jones runs his video, Why People Think Sandy Hook is a Hoax, correct?
	Yes.
	And he showed a clip I don't remember if there was a podium there, but I do recall that he had given a statement to the media on a particular day, and he was referencing that statement, yes.
	If I said podium, I'd talk because I meant microphone.
	Yes, yes.
	And he showed that snippet, just a couple of seconds of Mr. Parker approaching the microphone, correct?
	Yes.
	And he had slowed it down in slow-mo, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	He claimed that Mr. Parker was laughing and then got himself geared up to cry, right?
	Thank you.
	Right, in so many words.
	I don't think that's the exact words he used, but in so many words, yes.
	That's the gist.
	The gist of it, yes.
	And you acknowledge that Free Speech Systems only played that little clip, correct?
	Correct.
	It didn't play the entire interview, or statement, I should say.
	And you acknowledge that you yourself have never watched the entire statement.
	No, it was not amongst the material that I was provided, and I didn't search it out.
	And from that, we conclude, obviously, that Infowars never aired the entire statement of Mr. Parker, correct?
	Objection, Judge.
	Calls for speculation.
	Well, I think, you know, I... I don't believe they did, and it wasn't amongst the material that I was provided, so I don't have any information to suggest that they did.
	Right.
	And then you recall that just two days after January 27th, when they aired Why People Think Sandy Hook is a Hoax, Mr. Posner, who lost his son Noah, sent in an email to InfoWars that was responded to by Paul Watson, correct?
	Yes, we did talk about that email.
	And he said...
	That he thinks that Alex Jones...
	Well, first he said that there's all this anger being directed at the parents who are being accused of being actors, right?
	Yes, I believe that's very close to what he said.
	And he asked Mr. Jones to stop, correct?
	I believe that's what was in the email, if I recall.
	And then we saw...
	The numbers, the Google Analytics numbers, do you remember that?
	Yes.
	The Google Analytics numbers showing substantial increases in audience size from January, sorry, from December to January, correct?
	There were increases in the audience size, yes.
	Right.
	And even though Mr. Posner sent that email and InfoWars was aware of it, going forward into March of 2013, Mr. Jones had on Steve Pchenik, correct?
	He did have him on after that, yes.
	Dr. Steve Pchenik, Sandy Hook was a total false flag.
	That's Exhibit 7, the video we talked about, right?
	That's what he said, yes.
	Mr. Jones was so excited to talk about that that he had him on a few days later and titled the video, Crisis Actors Used at Sandy Hook Special Report.
	We want to strike the comment about Mr. Jones being so excited, Judge.
	Argumentative.
	Overruled.
	I don't know if he was excited, but he did air him a couple of days later.
	Then we saw, in April, Mr. Jones aired a video called Obama Gun Grab PSYOP, right?
	Yes.
	And this PSYOP is a term that refers to psychological operation, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	And what Mr. Jones has said at times over the years is that this was, in describing why Sandy Hook was staged, that it was a psychological operation in order to provide a pretext for disarming the American public, correct?
	He's used that term many times in connection with many different things, but I believe that's what he means by it.
	With respect to Sandy Hook, that's what he means?
	I think so, yes.
	Then we watched the video of April 2016, Shadow Government Strikes Again at the Boston Marathon, correct?
	Yes, I do remember us talking about that, yes.
	Right, he says, folks, they staged Aurora, they staged Sandy Hook, the evidence is overwhelming.
	Remember that?
	I do remember that, yes.
	We talked about how in November of 2013, InfoWars received the report of the state's attorney's office about its investigation into the circumstances of the shooting, correct?
	Yes, Mr. Dewar received a VA email.
	I think you testified that you're not sure whether Mr. Jones reviewed that report, correct?
	I don't know whether he read it, correct?
	Because you never asked him that, yes?
	I didn't ask him, no.
	And even though you asked to see Mr. Jones' deposition in this case, it was never given to you, correct?
	Right, I've never seen the deposition, so he may have been asked in the deposition.
	You have no idea.
	I don't know.
	Given the...
	The nature of the false claims Mr. Jones was making about the Sandy Hook shooting throughout 2013, this idea that a massive hoax was being perpetrated upon the American people, would you have expected Mr. Jones to want to read the report about the shooting itself?
	Objection, Judge.
	Relevance?
	Sustained.
	So anything about your interactions with Mr. Jones in preparing for this case that Rejection relevance?
	I'm going to allow it.
	I don't have an opinion on that.
	Okay.
	You read it, right?
	I did read it, yes.
	It was amongst the material, so I read it.
	You remember one of the claims that Mr. Jones made during the videos we saw was that no EMTs had been allowed at the school, correct?
	Yes.
	I think you indicated that That the report clearly established that there were EMTs in the school, correct?
	That was the finding in the report, yes.
	And that was Special Agent, I'm sorry, Bill Aldenberg's testimony, correct?
	Yes, we talked about this yesterday.
	I don't recall seeing a portion of his testimony, but I'll take your representation.
	Thank you.
	And thank you for reminding me about that, because you said that you had watched some clips of the first day of the trial.
	I did see a couple of clips, yes.
	Can you let us know...
	Where you found those clips?
	I think they were on YouTube.
	Okay.
	Do you know which channel?
	I don't.
	I'm sorry.
	I don't recall which channel it was.
	Was it the Law and Crime Network?
	I don't remember.
	I'm sorry.
	It's okay.
	When you were watching the videos, did you see a scrolling comment section?
	I don't remember seeing a comment section.
	Alright.
	So, you acknowledge that Wolfgang Halbig came on in March, correct?
	Yes.
	That the only The first check anybody at InfoWars did into Mr. Halving was to go to a website that he himself created, correct?
	Yes, I believe that's accurate, yes.
	All right.
	And the first time he appeared on the Alex Jones show was on March 14, 2014, correct?
	I think that's the date, yes.
	And this was the video that Alex Jones entitled, Sandy Hook, False Narratives vs.
	Three Owls, right?
	I believe that's the title, yes.
	That sounds familiar.
	And you remember the clips we saw yesterday where Halbig and Mr. Jones referred to Sandy Hook as an illusion?
	I don't remember whether that word was used.
	Sorry, I don't have my notes in front of me.
	That's okay.
	You recall where Mr. Haliband raised the issue of trauma helicopters not being called?
	Correct?
	He did, yes.
	And this is when I asked you whether you were aware that Danbury Hospital was just 10 minutes from Sandy Hook.
	I recall that.
	And I objected on hearsay grounds effects, not an evidence, Judge.
	And I think you overruled it.
	She said, I don't know.
	I think that...
	I can't recall...
	Do you have a question?
	Right.
	In preparing for your testimony here about the claim that no trauma helicopters were called, you didn't inform yourself as to whether the Danbury Hospital was just 10 minutes from the same time, correct?
	Correct.
	You're aware, of course, that ambulances did transport two children to Danbury Hospital in hopes of saving them, correct?
	I believe that was in the report, yes.
	But they weren't able to save them, were they?
	That was in the report, right.
	You recall the claim in the video Sandy Hook false narratives versus reality where Mr. Jones says we have the video of the same kids walking in circles around the building, right?
	He's made that claim in a few videos, yes.
	Many times, correct?
	Yes.
	Okay, we'll see some of that today.
	Sure.
	And you recall Mr. Jones saying in that video that there were multiple actors involved, correct?
	He did use the plural of actors.
	Multiple actors playing different parts, yes?
	I believe that's what he said.
	Do you remember Mr. Jones saying in that video, "It's a total hoax.
	Any way you slice it.
	I believe so, yes.
	So then we were getting to this email that I wanted to ask you about.
	And we ended the day before I did that.
	And so what I'd like to do is pull that up now.
	This is the exhibit And so, if you'd like to...
	Alright, so Exhibit 116 was admitted by the Board into evidence for its impact on the listener, Mr. Salazar, and Mr. Salazar's employer of free speech systems.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	So, let's go to the bottom so that we can just see the date in that first email there.
	You know what, let's get the from, too, even though it's not on the page, and then we'll come back to this.
	Right at the bottom there.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Perfect.
	Okay.
	Do you have this email before you, Ms. Posner?
	Yes.
	All right.
	You see that this email was sent on March 14th, 2014, right?
	Yes, that's what it says.
	To writers at infowars.com.
	Yes?
	Right.
	That was one of our general email boxes.
	Correct.
	It's the same email inbox that Mr. Posner had written to you pointing about what was happening.
	Yes?
	Yes, I think it was the same one.
	Dear Sir or Madam, you would be well advised to check Wolfgang Halbig's credentials.
	Best wishes, Robert Heath.
	Did I read that correctly?
	Yes.
	And he said this on the very same day that Mr. Jones published this interview, Sandy Hook, False Nervous Versus Reality.
	Yes?
	Yes, it looks like it's the same day.
	All right.
	And if you go up in the email, Adan Salazar Responds, doesn't he?
	He does, according to the email chain.
	He responds later that night.
	Adan Salazar is the same guy who did the Batman articles, yes?
	Yes.
	And he says, Robert, thanks, but what on earth do you mean?
	The guy seemingly has credentials up the wazoo.
	Your email is much too vague to follow up on.
	Thanks, Adan.
	That's what it says, yes.
	Now, Mr. Jones had just put Wolfgang Halbig up in front of an audience of millions to claim that Sandy Hook never happened and that it was an illusion, correct?
	That parts of it were illusions and fake and obviously there were claims made as to specific parts, I guess, about Sandy Hook.
	So yes, he had just done that earlier that day.
	Right.
	We can agree that the part Alex Jones and Wolfgang Halbig claimed were fake was that the shooting ever happened at all.
	Yes?
	That the shooting never happened or that it was a government set up.
	Because he says sometimes, some of the people, Halbig says it never happens, then sometimes they say something to the effect of it happened, but the government made it happen.
	So they've said a variety of things over a period of time.
	Let's break this down real quick.
	Sure.
	When Mr. Jones says you have multiple actors playing the parts of multiple people, he's saying that the parents are actors.
	You're not going to disagree on that, are you?
	I think we talked about this yesterday, and you asked me...
	I just want you to answer my question.
	Sure.
	She is answering it.
	No, it was a yes or no.
	Thank you.
	We can agree that Mr. Jones has said many, many times...
	That the parents were actors, correct?
	He never specified who he means by actors.
	We talked about that yesterday.
	Right.
	Well, he says you got parents coming up and doing the fake acting and then the crying, correct?
	Right.
	He was specifically referring to Mr. Parker.
	But aside from Mr. Parker...
	Can I just focus you on my question?
	Because we can agree...
	- Judge, maybe we approach objection to the form of it.
	- No, I don't think we need to approach.
	- I think we do.
	- I think we can.
	- She needs to answer the questions.
	I don't want to answer the questions.
	Okay, I'm just telling you now.
	I'm gonna jump in.
	Okay.
	- We can agree locution.
	I object to it.
	It may be that I'm used to seeing Mr. Matti as a former federal prosecutor.
	That's implicit vouching.
	Whether he believes something or not is not for the jury.
	and I believe that is implicit vouching and is improper and I guess that you not use that interpretive expression anymore.
	I heard you can leave that out, but I just want to make one comment because I'll look up next to that.
	I think the caffeine helps you remember to stand up.
	I did, didn't I?
	Did I forget one?
	I was so pleased.
	I'll have to keep you caffeine.
	My wife said to me last night, you apologized to me, so you've had a therapeutic experience in our marriage.
	Thank you.
	Responds?
	When Mr. Jones says you have multiple actors playing the parts of multiple people, that's multiple, isn't it?
	It's plural, yes.
	It's plural.
	And when he says, you have a bunch of parents coming up and doing the fake crying, he's saying a bunch, correct?
	He said a bunch, yes.
	He said, in fact, it was in the video where he says, not just one, but a bunch, correct?
	I believe he said a bunch, yes.
	Thank you.
	So getting back to my question then, Ms. Boz.
	When Free Speech Systems receives this email after having put Wolfgang Hauwiga on their platform to millions of people making these claims, checking his credentials, Adan Salazar says he's not even going to follow up on it, correct?
	He said the first email is too vague to follow up on.
	That's what it says.
	So, based on that first email, he's not going to follow up on his credentials, right?
	It says, your email is too vague to follow up on.
	That's what it says.
	Okay.
	Well, you talked to John Salazar, right?
	I did, yes.
	He didn't follow up on it, did he?
	I don't think he did, no.
	Okay.
	And then, Mr. Heath is so concerned about Mr. Halbig that he sends a follow-up email to Mr. Salazar, does he?
	He does, yes.
	Let's look it up.
	Actually, you know what?
	Don't go all-- Let's look at...
	Yeah, yeah, okay.
	So pull up those first three paragraphs, please.
	I can find no trace of him in connection with his current activities on Sandy Hook.
	For example, I cannot find him on the list that exists of expert witnesses, of which he has categorically stated he was one concerning Columbine.
	I cannot find any reference to him prior to 2012 as a school safety expert or a school principal as a comparison.
	All the teachers or head teacher principals I know I can easily find prior to 2012. The same for a sample of professionals I know.
	You see that?
	Yes, that's what it says.
	And one of the...
	You can pull that down.
	One of the things that Halbig had claimed on his website was that he had investigated the Columbine shooting, correct?
	He did claim that, yes.
	Did Adan Salazar do anything at all to further investigate Halbig's credentials after he received that email?
	When I spoke to him, he didn't indicate that he had ever followed up with that email.
	So free speech system's position here is that no matter what warning they received about Halvik on that particular date, they did nothing further to look in his background, correct?
	Did free speech?
	each no all right now let's get to do you remember yesterday one of the claims that Alex Williams made in that video we saw was that there was an email that Mike Bloomberg sent out two days before
	I do recall that, yes.
	You recall that.
	And you recall testifying that Mr. Jones was saying Mike Bloomberg, former mayor of New York City, had sent out an email two days before And the significance of that was it showed that San Diego was staged, correct?
	That was the purpose.
	That Mike Bloomberg knew this fake event was going to happen, but he accidentally sent out this email that he really intended to send after the fake event, right?
	I think he said false started or something to that effect, but I think that was the intent behind it, yes.
	Alex Jones has talked about his email many times.
	He has, yes.
	Sometimes he says one day before, sometimes it was two days before.
	He has mentioned it a few times.
	And the point is always the same.
	And the point is that the one way Alex Jones' viewers should know that Cindy was fake is because Mike Bloomberg sent out this email anticipating that it would happen, right?
	I believe that was the purpose of him highlighting it, yes.
	And then I said to you, there is no email.
	And you said, oh no, I think I've seen the email, right?
	Right, and you asked me to look for it.
	And I asked you to look for it.
	Yes.
	Because I said I'd love to see it.
	And you did go back and you looked, right?
	I did, yes.
	So I want you to listen to my question very carefully here.
	After looking for it, you would acknowledge That there is not and there never was an email from Mike Bloomberg that went out the day before the shooting, correct?
	The day before, no.
	You would acknowledge that there is not and never was an email that went out from Mike Bloomberg two days before the shooting, correct?
	Two days before, no.
	You would acknowledge that you've never seen the email itself, correct?
	The email itself, no.
	Right.
	But what you had Mr. Pattis send us last night was an article, yes?
	Right.
	Okay.
	Your Honor, is there any objection here?
	No.
	This has not been previously marked, Your Honor.
	All right, so let's mark it now, please.
	Your Honor, I know the plaintiffs have added a couple of exhibits.
	If they could just tell me what the next number is.
	474. 474. Thank you.
	All right.
	May I proceed, Your Honor?
	You may.
	All right.
	Now, this is an article that InfoWars ran on March 13, 2013, right?
	Yes.
	Four months after City Hook.
	Yes?
	Yes.
	And if we go to the second paragraph, you can just pull up the text there.
	It says, an article published today in Politiker.
	What's that?
	I'm not sure what Politiker is.
	That's okay.
	You don't know, right?
	I'm not sure.
	Confirmed what the world already knows, that gun grabbers like Bloomberg, Obama, and Feinstein anticipated that more shootings would occur and plan to exploit them.
	That's what it says.
	That's what it says.
	Next paragraph says, Mayor Bloomberg ready to team to propagandize shootings in the wake of the Aurora Massacre.
	Which quickly focused on holding candidates Obama and Romney accountable on guns and launching the demand-a-plan celebrity-driven media campaign, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	All right, let's go to the next part.
	And now this is quoting-- this is after Aurora, how Mayor Bloomberg planned to make the next massacre count, right?
	Yes.
	And it's quoting the Politicker article, right?
	Right.
	It's quoting, if you, up a little bit, it's the name of the person who wrote the article and then this is a block quote purportedly from that article.
	So what Infowars is doing here is saying somebody else published a story about what Mike Bloomberg did after the Aurora shooting.
	Correct.
	And this is just the text from that article, yes?
	Correct.
	Okay.
	Now, what we can see here is that there was some article about some email that Mike Bloomberg sent out in August of 2012, yes?
	Correct.
	About the Aurora shooting, right?
	Correct.
	That's what you were referencing earlier when you said you thought you had seen something.
	Correct.
	That email, if it exists, has nothing to do with San Diego, correct?
	No, it was after Aurora.
	It was after Aurora.
	Correct.
	Four months before.
	And I take it that You have no idea.
	Or do you?
	I don't know.
	Do you have any idea whether when Mr. Jones was telling his audience that Mike Bloomberg had sent out an email a day before showing that Sandy Hook was fake, that he was referring to this?
	I did ask him about this.
	I recall a conversation and his position was that he didn't He said the time period and he didn't remember when the exact time period was.
	I'm just asking whether he told you that he had been referring to this.
	Right, he said he remembered seeing the article and he was referring to this article.
	That's what he told you?
	Right.
	But you haven't read his deposition, right?
	I didn't read the deposition.
	So you don't know what he said when I asked about it?
	I don't.
	But no matter what he said to you or what he said to me, there was no email sent that Mike Bloomberg ever sent about Sandy Hook before the Sandy Hook show, correct?
	If this is an email, he sent it after Aurora, not after or before Sandy Hook.
	I don't think it had anything to do with Sandy Hook.
	You haven't seen the email either.
	I only saw this block quote.
	All right.
	May I just have a moment on your own?
	And so, Ms. Paz, I just want to make sure when you testified yesterday that you had seen an email, you now acknowledge that that wasn't accurate, right?
	I said I didn't think whether I saw an email or an article.
	So I know we talked about how I wasn't sure whether it was which it was, but this is what I was referring to.
	So no, I didn't see an actual article.
	This is what I saw.
	You mean you didn't see an email?
	Oh yes, I'm sorry.
	I didn't see an actual email.
	Thank you.
	Yes.
	Every time the jury sees a video from now on where Mr. Jones is saying, Bloomberg jumped the gun and sent out an email before he was supposed to, and that's how you should know if this event was fake, the jury should remember this is what we're talking about.
	Objection.
	Improper argumentative.
	All right.
	So on May 9, 2014, InfoWars ran another video revealed the Sandy Hook truth exposed, correct?
	I'm sorry, what was the title?
	Revealed, Sandy Hook Truth Exposed, yes?
	I don't recall that specific title, but I'll take your word for it.
	If you could show me something.
	Great.
	Thank you.
	Ms. Paulds, we're going to bring up for you the stipulation we showed you earlier.
	Just one moment.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	2:45.
	I don't mind if I'm taking a little of that.
	Okay.
	I forgot to be sure.
	Thanks.
	Thanks.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Which date was it?
	I'm sorry.
	Sure.
	This is, if you look at your exhibit there, May 9th, 2014, Revealed, Sandy Hope Truth Exposed.
	See that?
	Yes, I see that.
	Can I publish that video?
	Yes.
	And then on May 13th, a few days later, Mr. Jones and Wolfgang Halbig back on.
	Yes?
	Yes, I believe so.
	Yes.
	And Mr. Jones titled that video, Bombshell, Sandy Hook Massacre Was a DHS Illusion, says School Safety Expert.
	Yes, I see that.
	All right.
	Why don't we play clip 15A. Now this is a full exhibit, Your Honor.
	It means 15 or 17?
	15. Excuse me.
	I'm sorry.
	Thank you.
	17A.
	That is also for a degree.
	Can I see you for a moment, please?
	Thank you.
	17A.
	Thank you.
	17A. 17A. 17A. 17A.
	There is There is a war It's happening now.
	It will decide the fate of humanity.
	The time that you've signed has come.
	We are the businessmen.
	We are the end of the war.
	So here's the headlines.
	school board shuts down conspiracy theorists.
	Now they've shot footage of this and Wolfgang's making a documentary, but he said he'll send us the raw footage.
	As soon as it gets here, make copies on memory stick or whatever, we will get a special report out.
	This needs to be seen of them being shut down the school board, then trying to go to United Way and others that famously suck up the Oklahoma City money, the 9/11 money from themselves given to anti-gun groups.
	That's how this whole scam works.
	United Way, Red Cross, I mean, they're just vicious organizations.
	A lot of good people work for them and do good work.
	But back when I first covered this like 15 years ago, nobody believed me.
	They're well-known scamsters, basically Democratic Party operations.
	But the bottom line here is that then the police blocked him from going in a public building that by law he's supposed to be allowed into.
	So Wolfgang joins us to cover what's happened to him currently.
	And now he's being blocked from investigating.
	He's been visited repeatedly by a quote law enforcement telling him you better back off.
	They're acting scared to death, folks.
	Okay?
	They're acting scared to death about this big production they put on.
	And the good news is the majority of people I see across the board and I meet do not believe any other stuff anymore.
	Now we'll get back into after he recaps what just happened.
	We will get back into his biggest questions concerning him.
	But Wolfgang, thanks for coming on.
	Thank you, Alex.
	I really appreciate it.
	Ms. Paz.
	Yes.
	Let's start from the beginning there.
	he said, school board shuts down conspiracy theorists.
	Do you remember that?
	I saw that, yes.
	He was talking about the fact that Mr. Halby came to Newtown, yes?
	He did, yes.
	And when he came to Newtown, he went to the United Way offices.
	He did, make a stop there.
	It's a charity, yes?
	It is, yes.
	And the police had to be called, correct?
	Objection to the forum.
	Had to be called, judge, argumentative.
	Not fact, not in evidence.
	I know the police were called by the employees there.
	And they had to come.
	Did the police come?
	Yes.
	Yes, they did come.
	Multiple police officers, yes?
	I don't know how many, but there was more than one.
	Okay.
	And they came because the employees were concerned about their subjection.
	Where does this come from?
	Do you know?
	I don't know why they were called.
	Mr. Halbert was trying to enter the building, correct?
	I think he was trying to get in there, yes.
	I mean, you've seen the video.
	I did see the video footage, yes.
	You know that he was confronting the police officer who wasn't letting him in the building, correct?
	He was saying that he wanted to question the employees there.
	And you know on that same trip, Wolfgang Halbig went to the Newtown Firehouse, correct?
	I believe he did, yes.
	And he confronted firemen who were just there doing their job, right?
	I think so.
	And Mr. Jones had him on the show after all that, yes?
	Yes.
	And then you heard Mr. Jones say they're getting scared of this production they put on, right?
	That's what he says in the video.
	And he's talking about Sandy Hook.
	I'm not sure what he's referring to.
	All right, so let's just...
	The free speech system's testimony to this jury is that after all the videos you've seen, when Mr. Jones says they're getting scared of this total production they put on, that you're not willing to say to this jury what he's talking about?
	He doesn't say what he's talking about.
	I didn't specifically ask him, so I don't want to speculate about it.
	Free speech systems, which is owned completely by Alex Jones, who you met with several times, would only be speculating about what Mr. Jones meant when he said they're scared of this total production.
	Objection, Judge.
	In fact, it would constitute legal speculation.
	This is argumentative.
	Overruled.
	He doesn't say.
	He didn't say to me.
	I didn't ask him specifically.
	I'm not in his mind.
	I don't know.
	Let me put it this way.
	How about this?
	Mr. Jones repeatedly refers to this as a scripted event, correct?
	Refers to Sandy Hook as a scripted event?
	He said that before, yes.
	Yes.
	He has repeatedly referred to the families as actors, correct?
	He's referred to actors, plural, yes.
	He's now referring to something, you won't say what, as a production, correct?
	He uses the word production, yes.
	You've seen videos where he says he knows when he's watching a movie, and he knows when he's watching something real, correct?
	He has said that, yes.
	Okay.
	So let's look at the next clip.
	And this will be 17...
	E, please.
	E is in Edwards, sir.
	Yes.
	Thank you.
	I can tell you children did not die Teachers did not die on December 14, 2012. It just could not have happened.
	And it's in New York.
	or it's just my opinion, it's what they say.
	I mean, their own words actually show that it could not have happened. - Is that Robbie Parker?
	Yes, I believe that's the statement he gave, a clip of it.
	Right, that's not the statement he gave.
	That's a slow-motion video clip of Robbie Parker, correct?
	It's a clip of the statement he gave in slow motion.
	Yes.
	Ms. Pazza, I didn't know that we were going to have to argue about what we're both...
	Objection, Judge.
	Ms. Pazza, when you say it's a clip of his statement, you don't see Robin Parker saying anything in the video, correct?
	I'm sorry.
	I'm confused by the question.
	I mean, this is video footage of his statement.
	So, yes, I agree with you.
	There's no words in the video.
	So, I'm sorry.
	I guess I'm confused by your question.
	The only question I asked you was, that's Robbie Parker, right?
	Yes.
	And then you said to me, that's a clip of his statement.
	So, I asked you, is that Robbie Parker?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Now, let me ask my next question.
	This is a slowed down video of Robbie Parker approaching the microphone.
	Yes?
	Yes.
	Objection, Judge.
	It's not a video.
	If we're going to play it this way, it's still.
	All the rules.
	Did you answer yes?
	Yes, I answered.
	And somebody at InfoWars decided to put this up on the screen right as Mr. Halbig was saying, nobody died there, correct?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	In other words, this just doesn't magically happen where Alex Jones is doing an interview.
	Somebody is deciding, at Infowars, that right as Mr. Howbig is saying nobody died there, they're going to show this slow-mo video of Robbie Parker, correct?
	That's an answer, Judge.
	Overruled.
	Yes.
	Who was it?
	Who decided to play this particular clip?
	Yeah.
	Generally, or this particular, I don't know this particular clip.
	I mean, I could speak in generalities as to how the process works, but I don't know about this particular clip.
	Okay, but it was cued up and ready to go, yes?
	Right.
	It would have had to been pulled in advance.
	Okay, let's play 17F, please.
	You got parents laughing like, ha ha ha, watch this!
	Method acting like, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh!
	I mean, it's just ridiculous!
	You got coroners who start laughing, and I don't mean uncomfortably, I mean like laughing And you better get ready for more of it, folks.
	Now let's go to his three minutes to the school board there in Connecticut.
	So at the very beginning of that clip, You can take that down.
	You saw Mr. Jones saying you got parents going and then he mockingly laughs and then he says look at this and he mockingly cries.
	Correct?
	He did cry or pretend to cry.
	- Pam, is that your question? - Yes. - Thank you.
	And then he said it's as phony as a $3 bill, correct?
	he does say that yes and this video of mr. Jones mocking the parents was clipped and put up on YouTube correct You mean that whole video was put up on YouTube?
	Let's start with the whole video.
	It was, right?
	Oh yes, all of the videos were uploaded to YouTube.
	Right.
	And Facebook, yes?
	I believe so, yes.
	And Twitter, correct?
	I believe so.
	Thank you.
	Remember yesterday, Ms. Paz, I asked you some questions about Google Analytics.
	Yes.
	And let's just start here.
	By the way, did you do anything last night?
	Remember you testified yesterday that InfoWars does not use Yes or no?
	Yes, based on my conversations, right.
	In fact, I think the court had to ask you to answer that yes or no, and you said Infowars does not use Google Analytics, correct?
	Right, based on my conversations with the employees, yes.
	Wait a second.
	Yesterday you testified that the only conversation you had about Google Analytics was with a gentleman named Blake Roddy, correct?
	I did have a conversation with Blake Roddy, yes.
	You just testified that it was based on your conversation with employees.
	are there any others I don't know if Alex said that to me so I'm not sure I Okay.
	I'm not sure.
	So your sworn testimony is that the only employee that you can testify that you spoke to about Google Analytics was Blake Wright.
	That's the one that I recall, yes.
	And so that's the only one that you're going to testify to that you spoke to about it, correct?
	Yes, I had a long conversation with him about it.
	And Blake Roddy was very clear with you that InfoWars does not use Google Analytics, correct?
	That was what was conveyed to me.
	Thank you.
	And that's what you conveyed here?
	Yes.
	Now, let's start with what is Google Analytics?
	I can't really get into the science of it.
	I'm not that technologically savvy, but basically it's an analysis of the number of visits to the unique pages.
	So Infowars is comprised, any website is comprised of a number of pages.
	Each article has its own unique URL and then it will Keep track of, so to speak, how long people are on the page for bounce rates, how many visits to a page, etc., and then rank them.
	Let's see if you can break that down a little bit further.
	I appreciate that explanation.
	Google Analytics, let's start with this, is a software program, yes?
	Sure, run by Google.
	Right.
	If you're a business, you can get the Google Analytics program for your website, yes?
	I believe so, yes.
	And what that program does is it allows you to track, and let's just walk through some of these things, it allows you to track the number of visitors to your website.
	Right.
	It allows you to track when they come to your website, correct?
	Yes.
	How long they stay on your website?
	How long they stay on each page, yes.
	Right.
	How long they stay on each page, correct?
	Right.
	What they click on?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	It allows you to track whether when somebody comes to the website they end up also going to the store, correct?
	Yes, there's a way to track that.
	And it tracks, if they go to the store, how much time they spend at the store, yes?
	Yes.
	It can tell you which products they view when they go to the store, yes?
	Yes.
	It can track whether they buy something, correct?
	Yes.
	It can track how much they spent, correct?
	Yes.
	This is the type of data that is very valuable to a business that you need, correct?
	Yes.
	Because it allows you to track Basically how your company's doing, right?
	Sure.
	Are you reaching people?
	Are they coming, right?
	Are they staying?
	Are they staying?
	Yes.
	What's bringing them there?
	Yes.
	Correct?
	How much money you're making off them, right?
	Sure.
	And so any company that wants to really be able to assess how well they're doing and why, this program can be very powerful.
	Could be, yes.
	But it also could be very, very revealing to a jury that wanted to understand how that business is working, correct?
	I mean, it provides a lot of information.
	Right.
	Yes.
	And it would be very, very revealing to a group of plaintiffs that really wanted to understand I mean, what happens with the content and how it results in translating into funds and stuff like that.
	Sure, yeah.
	It has a lot of information there.
	When you came in here and testified yesterday that InfoWars didn't use Google AdWords.
	By the way, Blake Roddy.
	Let's just talk about Blake Roddy.
	Sure.
	Blake Roddy currently runs the e-commerce side of business.
	Yes.
	So, I went through this a little bit in opening, but the different platforms that Infowars uses to sell stuff is Infowarsstore.com, Infowarsshop.com.
	They have an Amazon store.
	They have an eBay store.
	I think so, yes.
	They have an InfoWars Life page where they sell stuff.
	Yes.
	Yes?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	They have a website, Free World Outlet, where they sell stuff, correct?
	That doesn't sound familiar, but I'll accept your representation that it does.
	No, no, no.
	I don't know.
	I'm not sure.
	Okay, you don't assume.
	I don't know.
	It doesn't sound familiar.
	So you don't know if Free Speech Systems also runs an online retail platform called Free World Outlet?
	I don't know.
	Free Speech Systems doesn't know that.
	Right.
	Okay.
	But Blake Roddy supervises all that, yes?
	I believe that's his current role, yes.
	And that's a very important role within the company, yes?
	Sure.
	And he reports directly to Alex Jones, correct?
	Everyone in the company reports to Alex, so yes.
	And you're aware that Timothy Fruget used to be his boss, Blake Roddy's boss, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	Because Timothy Fruget used to have that same job.
	Before he left, yes, in 2019. Right, all the way through 2019. Right.
	Starting back, I don't think you could tell us yesterday, but...
	I can't remember when he started.
	Before 2012. It was, right, it was before Sandy Hook.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Now, you're aware that there's been an issue in this case.
	About, let me put it this way, you're aware that the plaintiffs in this case have sought that Google Analytics data, correct?
	It was in the discovery request.
	Yeah, I'm aware.
	Yes.
	And you're aware that the data, the Google Analytics data, all the stuff that we're talking about from 2012 onward, that data was not produced, correct?
	Objection, Judge.
	Assumes that it was available to InfoWars that they had it.
	I think we should probably settle this.
	Thank you.
	The question I asked you was that data was not produced.
	There was an objection.
	I think you testified yesterday that since 2012, InfoWars has had the melanoma, they just don't use it, right?
	That's what was convenient to me, so yes.
	And because they had it, and it was on their website, they had access to the data if they wanted to, and they just didn't use it, correct?
	I believe that's what we talked about, yes.
	And you're aware that the data hasn't been produced here, correct?
	I don't know if it's been produced or not.
	I don't know what's in production.
	I have seen Google Analytics and associated with this case.
	But nothing in the production that you've seen ever suggested to you that Infowars actually uses the data, right?
	All I saw was there was a lengthy Google Analytics page.
	It didn't say anything about what, if anything, we did with that material.
	Let me just ask my question again.
	Nothing you've seen in the production suggested to you that InfoWars ever used Google Analytics, correct?
	Nothing that I had reviewed?
	No.
	So nothing that you saw contradicted what Mr. Rodney told you, that they just didn't use it, right?
	I didn't have any reason to doubt it, correct?
	Now, the one exhibit that the jury has seen related to the Google Analytics are those charts beginning in 2009 that we've seen where we show the page views, the sessions, the users.
	And I showed you that yesterday.
	I think I've seen that in the production.
	Right.
	So, yes.
	But even after you saw that, you testified, yeah, but they don't use it.
	Fair?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	So why don't we pull up exhibit 123 just for the witness.
	It's not full yet.
	123, did you say?
	Yes.
	I think that is a bold.
	Thank you.
	Do you have a poll?
	Do you have a poll?
	No, I do not.
	I don't think it is.
	Okay.
	Ms. Paz, I'm going to ask you about this.
	Sure.
	This is an email from Tim Fouget, correct?
	That is what it looks like, yes.
	Dated July 10th, 2014. That's what it looks like, yes.
	Two months after the video we just saw Halibut and Mr. Jones, yes?
	Approximately two months later, yeah.
	And Mr. Fruget is sending an email to a rep for a lending company, correct?
	Are you referring to the email address?
	No, no, no.
	I'm referring...
	Do you have the body of the email for you?
	Yes.
	May I just read it?
	just read it?
	Yes, please.
	Sure.
	See that?
	Yes, it seems to be talking about advertising and such.
	I'll offer it, Your Honor.
	No objection, Judge.
	I didn't hear you turning back.
	I'm sorry, Judge, no objection.
	Thank you.
	Let's pull this up for you.
	All right.
	Now, let's first, hold on a second.
	I'm sorry.
	Let's go to the bottom first, okay?
	All right.
	Now this is an email from a guy named James Garvey, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yeah.
	At selflender.com.
	Yes?
	That's what it says.
	And it's sent to an email, advertised at infowars.com, right?
	Yes, one of the other general email boxes.
	Anybody who wants to advertise with InfoWars.com, they can send us email and say, hey, what do you charge us to advertise with you?
	Right.
	Okay.
	And this guy, Mr. Garvey, says, I'm the co-founder of SelfLender.com, a website that helps U.S. consumers build credit by creating a small amount of debt.
	And then paying it off, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	We believe that your U.S. consumers would be a great fit for the target demographic, right?
	That's what it says.
	It's a company that basically puts people into debt, right?
	I don't know anything about this company.
	Okay.
	Let's go up to the next one.
	And you'll see here that somebody responding from the Advertise at InfoWars.com address says, James, the website seems very interesting.
	Could be a good fit for our audience.
	And he asks him about what his monthly budget might be.
	Correct?
	That's what it looks like.
	It looks like it's from Tim.
	Right.
	I think we'll find out it is.
	Oh, he signed it.
	Yes, he signed his name.
	Got it.
	Okay.
	Let's go up to the next one.
	Mr. Harvey says, thanks for getting back to me.
	And he talks about the types of ads that they'd like to run.
	He says he's got a test budget for about $5,000.
	That's what it says.
	So the idea here is that this lending company that asks people to take on a small amount of debt in order to build their credit is going to advertise to the InfoWars audience, correct?
	Sure.
	Because they think the InfoWars demographics would be a good target for them.
	That's what it says.
	Okay, let's go up to Tim's email.
	Yeah.
	So he says, sorry for the delay.
	Unfortunately, we do not have a current media kit at this time, but I can give you some info about everything.
	And I just want you to look at the attachments.
	Do you see those?
	Yes.
	And you see he attached his GCN affiliates.
	And you know GCN stands for Genesis Communications Network?
	Yes.
	That's all the radio stations that Mr. Jones goes out to, yeah?
	Correct.
	And then it says InfoWars Audience Demographics, and there's a JPEG. That's what it says, yes.
	And then there's an attachment that says Google Analytics from InfoWars, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Let's go back to the email.
	And he says, first of all, he kind of recites what their audience numbers are, right?
	In the first paragraph, 790,000 likes on the Facebook page.
	They're going to charge them $1,000 for a Facebook post, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	If you go to the second paragraph, he says, over the last 90 days, we have received 99.8 million page views with 14.6 million unique users.
	And you know, those are the same types of categories of data that we saw in the Google Analytics spreadsheet yesterday, right?
	Page views and unique users, yes, are some of the columns that are on the Google Analytics.
	And this says, I have attached a screenshot of our audience demographics from Alexa and Google Analytics.
	Do you see that?
	From Alexa and Google Analytics, yes.
	Right.
	And if we go down to the attachment, let's just scroll through.
	And first you'll see, as we saw in the attachments, you'll see all the radio affiliates.
	That's these, right?
	I see that, yes.
	Yeah.
	And then we'll go down a little bit more.
	And we see the audience demographic information here, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Okay.
	And then let's go down to the last page.
	And you'll see here, am I correct, Ms. Paz, that this is Google Analytics data, isn't it?
	It looks like the top of that Google Analytics page.
	Right.
	And if you see on the top right-hand corner, it shows a date range, March 31st, 2014 to June 29th, 2014. I see that, yes.
	Okay.
	And by the way, that happens to overlap with the two appearances that Halbig made.
	Right?
	He was on right before that...
	In earlier March.
	Right, and he was on in May.
	And then he was on again, yes.
	Thank you.
	And you see here all the different data that Tim Fruget is using to give to this potential advertiser, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Is it still your testimony, Ms. Paz, that InfoWars doesn't use Google Analytics?
	I hadn't seen this before, but like I said, it can only really convey what's been conveyed to me.
	You've seen it now?
	I have seen it, yes.
	Is it still your testimony that Infowars doesn't use Google Analytics?
	I don't know at this point what they do or don't do with it.
	Well, let me see if we can help out here.
	Let's go to Exit 126, not in evidence.
	Just pull it up please from this pause.
	Do you see that Miss Paz?
	Yes.
	This is an email from Tim Fuget again, this time to Dominic Buckley Hammond, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Buckley Hammond is Alex Jones' cousin, yes?
	He is a relative, yes.
	Also an employer's employee?
	He was at one point, yes.
	Pretty senior in the organization?
	I mean, I can't say what his position was, but he was very trusted by Alex because they were relatives, so I could put it that way.
	Okay, so I'll offer it, Your Honor.
	No objection, Judge.
	All right, let's pull up 126. Just pull up, yeah, exactly.
	Okay.
	This is an email dated August 20th, 2014, correct?
	Yes.
	From Tim Fruget, who again at this time was the manager of the online store.
	At that time, yes.
	To Buckley Hammond, trusted Alex Jones employee and cousin.
	Sure.
	With attachments, correct?
	That's what it looks like.
	He's giving him...
	It appears to be sales information for August and Google Analytics for August, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Can we go down to the attachments please?
	So they got sales by day here, right?
	Yes.
	Looks like on this month...
	By the way, do you know what sales platform this is?
	We talked about how we had four.
	Do you know which sales platform this is?
	I'm not sure.
	Okay.
	Sorry.
	But it looks like it's ranging from somewhere south of 40 grand to close to 120 grand a day.
	Yeah?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	So we go down to the next page.
	Some more Google Analytics that he's sending Buckley.
	That's what it looks like.
	It looks like the same screenshot of the top of the Google Analytics as in the last one.
	Having seen this, would you like to revise your testimony that InfoWars doesn't use Google Analytics?
	Like I said, I can only really convey what's been conveyed to me, and that's what was conveyed to me.
	Blake Roddy conveyed to you that they did not, right?
	Right.
	Let's go to Exhibit 128 and 129. Have I not yet in?
	Correct.
	Any objection?
	I thought we agreed they would be.
	Oh, there is no objection.
	You had not agreed to see it yet.
	Correct.
	Okay.
	Off on your honor.
	They haven't been formally offered yet.
	So would it.
	Thank you.
	Here we are again.
	Now, this is Tim Fruget again on September 22nd, 2014, correct?
	Yes.
	And he's emailing Lydia Hernandez, correct?
	That's what it looks like.
	Lydia Hernandez is InfoWars longtime internal accountant, correct?
	Well, objection to the form.
	May I speak to Attorney Mandy for a moment?
	At the time this email was sent, Lydia Hernandez was InfoWars' top internal accountant.
	Correct.
	I'm not sure what her position was, so I'm not sure.
	I know Lydia used to work there, I just, I'm not sure what her position was.
	I just can't recall what her position was.
	I just can't, I just don't recall as I sit here.
	If you could show me something.
	I would, but I'm not going to do that right now.
	Okay.
	You don't dispute that Lydia Hernandez, you don't dispute, because at this point you don't have reason to know that Lydia Hernandez was the top accountant.
	Great.
	I don't have reason to dispute it.
	Tim Friget is sending her, and we can just see Google Analytics, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Let's go to the next one, 129. Do you have it?
	Yes, it was admitted along with one time.
	Same thing here.
	Same day.
	Another email.
	Analytics, right?
	For Prison Planet TV, right?
	That's what it says.
	And an audience overview.
	Yes?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Your Honor, would this be a good time for our morning break?
	I think so.
	All right, so Mr. Ferraro will collect your notepads.
	we will take a 15-minute morning recess and our course will continue to obey the rules of juror conduct may be excused judge to find my witness so
	so so
	okay did we approach judge okay
	no no no worries okay it's mark
	it's this
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I'm sorry.
	Next time we go.
	Sorry, I had to call.
	No, no, no, no.
	Sorry.
	Absolutely not.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Okay, there we go.
	Council will stipulate that the entire panel is present?
	Yes.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	Please be seated and on every row, which we may continue.
	Ms. Powell, before the break, we have been walking through a series of exhibits in which Tim Fruget, Buckley Hammond, Lydia Hernandez, and others are referring to Google Analytics, correct?
	I do recall those exhibits, yes.
	I'd like you to pull up the front pages, please, of each of those exhibits.
	See them here before you.
	These are each of the exhibits we were going through earlier.
	Yes.
	And I want to ask you, are you prepared to say, now having reviewed these, that in fact I could really only say what was conveyed to me in my conversation.
	I do understand that these emails show that they have talked about Google Analytics in the past.
	That's a yes or a no?
	Shall I have you answer the question?
	No, no.
	I understand the question.
	I don't know is my answer.
	So even after having reviewed these, Free Speech Systems is still telling this jury that it just doesn't know whether they use Google Analytics?
	That's correct.
	Okay.
	You remember this email from Tim Fruget to the lending guy?
	Okay.
	I recall our conversation about that, yes.
	No, I see whether you remember the email.
	Oh, you mean had I seen it before today, or...?
	20 minutes ago, and I showed you that email, you remember that, yes?
	Tim Fruget is sending Google Analytics to a guy who wants to advertise on their website, correct?
	That's what the exhibit says, yes.
	And Tim Fruget is telling him all of the ways in which Google Analytics tracks their audience so that he can assess whether he wants to pay the five grand for a Facebook ad or whatever, correct?
	That's what the purpose of the email appears to be, yes.
	So at least it was important enough to Tim Fruget, correct?
	When he was doing business.
	Yes?
	It's a compound, Judge.
	I don't understand what's going on.
	I'll withdraw it.
	When Tim Fruget was trying to sell advertising space, it was important enough to him to send Google Analytics to the lending guy.
	Objection, Judge.
	Contents of another mind important enough to him.
	The document speaks for itself.
	I can't say why he wrote this email or what he was thinking.
	Your free speech systems...
	This is your business director.
	Free Speech Systems can't say why its business director would have sent Google Analytics to a guy who wants to send them advertising money?
	Objection, Judge.
	Indeed it can't.
	Overruled.
	I can't speak to what's in Mr. Frugier's mind.
	I didn't speak to him about this particular email. - The last date here, Exhibit 128, is September 22nd, 2014.
	You'd agree with me?
	Yes, I see that.
	And on September 24, 2014, InfoWars And the title of that article was FBI Says Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, correct?
	I'm sorry.
	FBI Says Nobody Killed at Sandy Hook, correct?
	Is that the 25th or the 24th?
	No, it's not.
	I don't recall the date.
	date.
	And I appreciate you only wrote that.
	I don't recall the date, but I do recall the article you're talking about.
	I'm going to pull it up.
	Okay.
	Is it number 67 already in evidence?
	Yes.
	That is a full exhibit, you're all right.
	Thank you.
	Can you pull it up, please, Pateka?
	Let's just pull up, yeah, the top part.
	Okay.
	I see it.
	You see it?
	Yes.
	FBI says no one killed at Sandy Hook, correct?
	Yes.
	This is by Adan Salazar?
	Yes.
	What's the date?
	It says September 24th, 2014. Okay.
	Two days after the last email, you saw the Royal Olympics, correct?
	I believe that was dated the 22nd, so yes.
	Right.
	And you have an ad there for DNA Force Plus, correct?
	Yes.
	I see that, yes.
	And in this article, Adan Salazar reports, by the way, this article you know was posted to Facebook, correct?
	I believe it was, yes.
	Okay.
	This article was posted to Twitter, correct?
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Prisonplanet.com?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And in 2014, the jury will recall was the year that InfoWars had 2.2 billion impressions on social media platforms, correct?
	I don't recall the number, but I'll accept that that's what it was.
	You don't recall yesterday when I had the chart up here?
	Right.
	I just don't recall the exact number, but I don't dispute that's what it was.
	- Right.
	And let's just, real clear here, let me ask you this question, yes or no.
	This article reporting that the FBI said no one had been killed at Sandy Hook, according to its statistics, was false.
	Yes?
	Correct.
	It's not right.
	That's right.
	Not right meaning not true, correct?
	Right.
	FBI never said that.
	But what Adan Salazar was saying to his audience was that there were these statistics that the FBI put out.
	And that according to Adan Salazar, those statistics said that nobody had been killed at Sandy Hook, correct?
	That's what the article says, yes.
	And in fact, the FBI does report crime statistics every year, correct?
	Yes.
	And in fact, the FBI statistics that Adan Salazar was referencing did report the murders at Sandy Hook, correct?
	I believe they did.
	Yes, thank you.
	And let's scroll down here.
	This is a screenshot of the stats, right?
	Uh-huh.
	Yes, this is the screenshot that Adan took of the table and he used that as the source of the article.
	Right.
	And he referred to Table 8, right?
	Yes.
	And Adan Salazar knew that the FBI reported The murders at Sandy Hook in a different table in the same chart, correct?
	Objection.
	I'm asking about what another potential witness knew.
	Relevance?
	Speculation?
	What he knew or didn't?
	Do I know that he knew that?
	Based on my conversation with him, I don't think that that's true, so no.
	You spoke with Don Salazar.
	I did, yes.
	You asked him specifically about this article.
	I did, yes.
	He knew that you were preparing to He knew I was going to be deposed, yes.
	I mean, Don Salazar himself was deposed, wasn't he?
	He was, yes.
	He knew there was going to be a trial in this case.
	Yes.
	And he said to you, first of all, he acknowledged he was wrong, yes?
	He did, yes.
	But he said to you, but I didn't know it at the time.
	Right?
	Right.
	Would you like me to say what he said to me?
	No.
	But yes.
	He said to you, in substance, I didn't realize it at the time.
	That's what he said to me.
	And he knew that you would tell this jury that.
	Right?
	He knew I would be deposed in this manner and possibly have to testify in court.
	And that's what you told him?
	That Adan Salazar didn't realize it at the time?
	That's what he conveyed to me and that was...
	That's Free Speech Systems sworn testimony here.
	That's what was conveyed to me in my conversation, so yes.
	And the explanation that Free Speech Systems is offering this jury is that Adan Salazar just missed it.
	He didn't scroll down far enough to see that actually the FBI did report the murders.
	Objection to Foreman.
	All ruled.
	That's what he said to me in our conversation.
	So let's just accept for just a moment that Adan Salazar, who published the creepy Illuminati article, who tried to get registered who published the creepy Illuminati article, who tried to get registered at CrisisActors.org, who's now writing a false article about FBI says nobody killed a Let's just accept that that guy was telling the truth for a moment.
	Even if we accept that, you acknowledge that if Adon Salazar had just scrolled down a little bit further in the page, he would have seen that that was false, correct?
	Right.
	At the bottom of the page, there's an asterisk there that would have indicated to him to go check another chart.
	Right.
	The other explanation, though, if we don't give Adon Salazar the benefit of the doubt, is that he darn well knew what the statistics said on the page that he looked at and published this anyway.
	Question, argumentative.
	Overruled.
	I don't know because I can only convey what he said to me.
	Well, let's look at what happened with this.
	Now, on September 24th, the same day this article ran, InfoWars ran a broadcast highlighting a Don's article.
	Sandy Hook Death's Alex Jones had Wolfgang Halbig, correct?
	I don't recall the date.
	If we could pull up the video.
	Sure, yeah.
	Why don't you do that?
	Why don't you pull up that list?
	And while we're doing that, Ms. Paz, just to be clear to the jury, Mr. Halbig had absolutely nothing to do with this article, correct?
	Oh, I don't believe he did, no.
	Not yet.
	Okay.
	Okay, do you see a listing there, Ms. Paz?
	September 25th, FBI says no, we killed at Sandy Hook massacre featuring Wolfgang Halbig.
	September 25th.
	Sandy Hook death missing from FBI report September 25th.
	Is that the one we're talking about?
	No.
	FBI says nobody killed at Sandy Hook.
	Masker featuring Wolfgang Hallett.
	Okay.
	Is that on chart B? Okay.
	I see it on chart B. Yes.
	Thank you.
	Yes.
	All right.
	So Adan Salazar writes this article on the 24th.
	They have a broadcast about it on the 24th.
	The next day, Alex Jones comes in to talk about it, right?
	He does mention it, yes.
	All right.
	So, why don't we play 19A. This is the full exhibit, Your Honor.
	Thank you.
	Well, according to FBI crime statistics according to FBI crime statistics at FBI.gov, no one died in 2012 in Sandy Hooket. no one died in 2012 It shows no homicides in that town.
	And that story by Adan Salazar is online at Infowars.com.
	I'll put that on screen, show some screenshots of those statistics for TV viewers.
	Again, radio listeners can go there and pull that up for themselves.
	But Wolfgang W. Halving.
	Okay, thank you.
	So that's the introduction, right?
	Yes.
	And obviously, Hal has been on the show a couple times.
	Alex Jones knows he's going to say St. Hook was fake, an illusion, right?
	I'm sure he would have said, knew he was going to say more of the same.
	Yeah.
	And so here we have, this is 2014 now.
	This is nearly two years after the shooting, right?
	Almost in September, so close to two years.
	Almost two years.
	But now they have this new...
	The thing about the FBI, so they bring on Halbick, right?
	I don't know if that was the reason why they brought him on that particular day.
	Okay.
	Well, why else would they have brought him on when they titled the video?
	The FBI says nobody killed in Sandy Hook Massacre featuring Wolfgang Halbick.
	I don't know.
	I didn't ask Alex that specific question related to this video, so I'm not sure.
	So Free Speech Systems, having seen the article, having seen the title of the video, having now seen the intro to the video, is still not prepared to say that that's why they were having Wolfgang on.
	I'm just not sure.
	I don't want to guess.
	So let's go to 19D, please.
	Same broadcast.
	Sandy Hook was loaded with toxic, it was a toxic waste dump.
	Alex, it's a toxic waste dump.
	Who would send their children to that kind of school?
	And that school, based on the photographs by the crime scene technicians or the kinetic state police, it is the filthiest, the most deplorable school that I as a principal have ever seen.
	It was all used as a cutout.
	It had been closed until So here's Wolfgang Howling telling the audience of millions that Sandy Hook Elementary School was a toxic waste, right?
	That's what he said.
	That's what he said, yes.
	And Alex Jones says it was a total cutout, right?
	That's already used, yes.
	Right, and a cutout is basically a set, right?
	Something set up as a stage to be a set, correct?
	That's what I think he means by that, yes.
	Going back to what we heard earlier about this total production they were putting on, they needed a set for it, right?
	I would assume...
	I didn't ask him this specific question, so I don't know for sure, but...
	I mean, that's something that you would have been expected to do.
	You know that you were supposed to be prepared to testify about all these videos, right?
	Right.
	I watched all the videos.
	Right.
	And you knew that you were going to be here testifying about these videos and that Alex Jones was featured in pretty much every single one, right?
	Almost everyone, yes.
	Right.
	And so...
	But your testimony to the jury is that you just didn't ask him about this one?
	I don't know what's in his mind at the time.
	So...
	But you'd agree with me, though.
	At least when it comes to the word...
	As to the form, Judge.
	Withdraw.
	When it comes to the word cutout, your testimony is...
	He's talking about a set, right?
	Like a stage.
	That's what I took it to mean based on what he said.
	And he says that it was closed until right before.
	He does say that.
	Okay.
	He said that a couple of times.
	So the idea here is there's this fake set.
	They pop everybody down there.
	To create this hoax, the illusion of a tragedy, right?
	Are you asking if that's what he means by that?
	That's what's happening here, correct?
	That's what he said.
	Now, he says the school was closed until right before, after Halbig says it was a toxic waste dump.
	And did...
	Let me see this.
	You're aware that...
	Oh, then I think he said something like, how could the parents send their children to that school, right?
	He said that a few times.
	And the idea is, of course, that they would if it was a toxic person, right?
	I think that's what he meant by it.
	Dawn Hawksprung was the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School, correct?
	Yes.
	You're aware that she, testimony, that she and Mary Sherlock died in the lobby when they confronted the issue, correct?
	I think that was in the report, but yes.
	And Alex Jones, at the time you said this, Was he aware at the time that he said the school was closed?
	Yes ma'am.
	I don't know.
	Have you seen Don Hawksprung's Twitter account?
	I have not, no.
	Are you aware whether throughout the fall of 2012, Ms. Hawksprung was posting pictures of what was happening in the daily activities of the school?
	I have not seen the Twitter account, so no.
	You haven't seen her pictures about the book fair?
	I haven't seen anything on her social media, so no.
	About the Veterans Day breakfast they hosted?
	Jackson Judge asked an answer, and added it at this point.
	He hadn't seen the Twitter account.
	Sustained.
	If you recall, on the very first day, the very first day that Alex Johnson covered standing up, the day of the shooting, He was talking about drills, right?
	He said this could be a drill.
	Do you recall that?
	Yes.
	And he referred in that video to a Twitter photo he had seen from earlier in the year of kids doing a fire drill.
	Do you recall that?
	In the first video?
	Yes, you watched it.
	Well, we watched it here.
	We watched clips.
	But you watched the whole thing, correct?
	The first video?
	Correct.
	The video.
	Connecticut School Master Looks Like False Flag Witnesses Say.
	You watched that video, yes?
	Is that the video that I didn't see?
	That might have been the video that I didn't see.
	You hadn't seen it before you were deposed.
	They never gave it to you, right?
	Correct.
	Then you were deposed and you saw it, correct?
	You mean, did I see it after I was deposed?
	You saw it when you were deposed?
	I played it for you at your deposition, didn't I? I don't remember.
	I know you played a bunch of things for me.
	I don't know if it was that particular video.
	I don't remember.
	Okay, so you don't recall, as you sit here right now, that on the very first day, Alex Jones acknowledged That he had seen a photo of the kids doing a fire drill.
	You don't recall that?
	I don't remember.
	And at the time, he was trying to suggest that this is a drill, right?
	On Wednesday?
	Yes, I do remember that.
	But here he is two years later saying the school was closed until right before it happened, right?
	That's what he says, yes.
	And you've not seen Don Hawksprone's Twitter photo from earlier in the fall of the children doing a fire drill, correct?
	I have not, no.
	But it's hard to keep track of lies, isn't it?
	Objection.
	Argumentative.
	So let's go on to the next quote.
	I think that was 19-D we just saw.
	Let's go on to 19-E. Actually, I'm sorry.
	What were you?
	Is it free speech system's position today that the school was closed?
	No.
	Go ahead.
	You know, I don't want this to ever happen, but I wish it was real instead of fake.
	That's a hundred times more scary than me.
	You know what?
	I agree with you right there.
	I wish it was real.
	I wish I would just go away.
	It's affected my entire family.
	It's affected my lifestyle.
	They wish it was real, right?
	Are you asking whether he said that?
	He says that yes.
	He being Alex Jones.
	Alex said that yes let's go to 19 G please I just need help I I need the voices.
	I need help.
	And now with the FBI data showing that there are no murders in Newtown?
	I mean, come on.
	This is common sense.
	Incredible, we're gonna come back and talk about how folks can support you.
	And I do wanna send some reporters up there with you as part of an investigation soon.
	Wolfgang is our guest, shadyhopejustice.com supporting.
	He has a lot of courage and a sterling record.
	He's putting it all on the line to expose what we all know is pure bull.
	By the way, our flagship product that's so hard to get.
	We haven't been out of it for 12 months.
	A small portion of it has gotten in and will sell out in the next day or so.
	Did it?
	Go ahead, sir.
	...quicker, but if you want to get DNA for us and other InfoWarsLife.com products, InfoWarsLife.com, and your purchase helps fund this whole operation that takes a lot of money from an independent operation, we're not taxpayer funded. So you saw that clip, right?
	Yes.
	Wolfgang pleads, I need your help, right?
	I think he says that, yes.
	And Alex Jones offers help.
	He says, I'm going to send some reporters up there with you, right?
	Yes, he says, I have to send some reporters up there.
	And you know that he had actually already done that.
	Because earlier that year, do you remember the video we saw where it started out and Jones said, you know, conspiracy theorists shut down at the Newtown Boravet?
	Yes, we had sent Dan Badandi up there.
	Right.
	Dan Badandi went up there for that one.
	Correct.
	As an InfoWars quote reporter, correct?
	Yes.
	And that was the time Wolfgang Halbert tried to get into the United Way and the police compartment, right?
	Right, that was the same day.
	Dan Badandi was with him, yes?
	Yes.
	And then, after telling Wolfgang Halbig that he was going to send reporters up there with him, he plugged Wolfgang Halbig's website, Sandy Hook Justice, right?
	Yes, I think every time he's on, he puts the website up.
	Sometimes they'll just put the link in the bottom so that the viewers can see it, right?
	Correct.
	Sometimes Alex Jones will save the website, SandyHookJustice.com, correct?
	Yes.
	Sometimes they actually put up a screenshot of the website itself.
	Yes.
	And on that website, Sandy Hook Justice, Wolfgang Halbig's website, is entirely devoted to Halbig's claims that the shooting was fake and illusion, correct?
	Yes.
	And Halbig also had a link on that website to help him raise money, didn't he?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And Alex Jones encouraged his audience to support Wolfgang Halbig financially, correct?
	If they wanted, yes.
	Let's go to, is that G?
	Oh, and then right after he plugs the website, he gives his own store a little plug, right? - Okay.
	He does that after all of the segments.
	Right.
	So, yes.
	Right.
	DNA Force Plus on this one?
	Yes.
	And this video, obviously, would have been uploaded to Infowars.com after, right?
	Sure.
	Would have been clipped up and titled, yes?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And when it was...
	Viewers could click on it for a store and go buy a product, right?
	Right.
	And that's the type of thing Google Analytics would tell you, right?
	Whether they clicked from that particular video?
	Yes, you would be able to tell if you clicked from, say, Adan Salazar's article and then they went to the store and then subsequently purchased from the store.
	You'd be able to tell that.
	Right.
	And if they purchased DNA Force, it looks like it's about on sale for $129.95, yes?
	At the time of that airing, yes.
	I don't know what it goes for now.
	I don't know.
	At that time.
	Yeah, they still sell it.
	I think so, yes.
	Alright.
	So let's play 19-I.
	CNN admits they did fake scut attacks on themselves back in 1991, 1990.
	Would they stage this?
	I don't know.
	Do penguins live in Antarctica?
	Wolfgang W. Halberg is our guest, former state police officer in the Northrop Customs Department, and then over the last decade, he's created one of the biggest, most successful school safety training groups.
	And he's just gone and investigated, and it's as funny as a $3 bill.
	And they've been, but man, Wolfgang, you dropped a bombshell of your scores of points, your 16 questions.
	If you've got a school of 100 kids, and then nobody can find them, and you've got parents laughing, and they walk over to the camera and go, and not just one, but a bunch of parents doing this, 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.
	And so the preponderance, I mean, I thought they had some scripting early on to exacerbate and milk the crisis, as Rahm Emanuel said.
	But when you really look at it, where are the lawsuits?
	There would be incredible lawsuits and payouts, but there haven't been any filed, nothing.
	I've never seen this.
	This is incredible.
	That's not the first time we've seen Alex Jones mockingly cry about what happened to these families, is it?
	I think we talked about another video earlier, yes.
	And it's not the last time you did it either, is it?
	I don't remember if he does it again, so I'm not sure, but...
	And there he's talking about not just one, but a bunch of parents doing this, right?
	He says that in the video, yes.
	Sure does.
	He also says, "You got a hundred kids and nobody can find them." He said that in the video, yes.
	Right?
	And when he's telling his audience that they rolled in all these kids for the big production, but of course, because they were actors, nobody can find them now, right?
	I don't really know what he's referring to there.
	And when he refers to the pictures of children who were killed who are still alive, he's telling his audience that the children they say died are still alive.
	They were actors, isn't he?
	I don't know what he's saying there.
	I know what he said.
	You saw the video?
	Yes.
	He said you have pictures of children who died who are still alive.
	Correct?
	He said that.
	And that happens because the children were faking it themselves.
	Objective and argumentative, Judge.
	The video speaks for itself.
	I don't know what he's referring to there.
	He doesn't say.
	Are you able to use your powers of deduction, Ms. Paz, to tell this jury what free speech systems now knows, which is that he was referring to the children themselves as being actors?
	Objection.
	Abstained.
	Is Ben Wheeler an actor?
	Objection.
	Overhold.
	Is Ben Wheeler an actor?
	Yes.
	No, Free Speech Systems doesn't contend that he is.
	Is Abiel Richmond an actor?
	No.
	Is Dylan Hockley an actor?
	No.
	Is Daniel Barden an actor?
	No.
	Is Emily Parker an actor?
	No.
	Is Bill Aldenberg an actor?
	No.
	Let's go to 19J, please.
	Thank you.
	I just need help.
	I need the voices.
	I need help.
	And now with the FBI data showing that there are no murders in Newtown?
	I mean, come on.
	This is common sense.
	Incredible.
	We're going to come back and talk about how folks can support you.
	And I do want to send some reporters out there with you.
	I think we have the cell this way.
	That was you.
	I meant 19J.
	Thank you.
	I'm sorry.
	Well, that's what tyrants always do.
	They push a little too far You can watch the Alex Jones Show live as it happens at infowars.com slash show.
	We'll find links on more content there and a free 15-day trial for President Biden's TV.
	More than 60 movies and documentaries all in one place at infowars.com slash show.
	I'm here right now.
	It's an exciting development in the area of research concerning supplemental iodine.
	It's nothing less than phenomenal.
	That was September 25th.
	That's what we just saw, right?
	I believe that was the date, yes.
	The article, FBI says no one killed at Sandy Hook, was the 24th, correct?
	Yes.
	The first broadcast was the 24th, that same day.
	So we looked at it earlier.
	Okay.
	Then Alvin comes out on the 25th.
	Yes.
	That's what we just saw.
	Yes.
	Can we pull up Exhibit 133, please?
	133 is not a full exhibit problem.
	I disagree, Jay.
	It is agreed to, Judge.
	So will it.
	This is an email sent three days later by Wolfgang Halbig to Nico Acosta, correct?
	Correct.
	That's what it says, yes.
	Nico Acosta was the producer for The Alex Jones Show, yes?
	Yes.
	Can you read what Wolfgang writes to Nico?
	You want me to read the whole thing?
	I do.
	Sure.
	Nico, please thank Alex again for his great work in helping our cause in funding our legal bill.
	We are receiving donations because of him.
	Please ask him if he would donate at least a dollar as well as you to be on our Sandy Hook justice team.
	Thanks again, Wolfgang.
	How much money did Wolfgang Halbert get as a result of Alex Jones encouraging his audience to support?
	I don't know.
	Off.
	Now, let's talk about this one.
	Can we pull up exhibit 131?
	134, please.
	This is not yet in evidence, but it's agreed to, Your Honor.
	It is agreed to, Your Honor.
	Sorry, it's been...
	It was admitted day one.
	Oh, it was?
	Yes.
	Thank you very much.
	Now, this is an email from Tim Frugier, business director for InfoWorks, correct?
	Correct.
	At that time, yes.
	Yes, at that time.
	October 14th, 2014, correct?
	That's what it says.
	Three weeks after the article ran and the videos ran that we just saw, right?
	Yes.
	And it's to Adan Salazar, the author of that false article, correct?
	Yes, it's to Adan, yes.
	And it has some attachments.
	The attachments are titled Alexa Unique Visits, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Okay.
	Now Alexa, I think we talked about yesterday, is another web-based program that allows you to kind of see where your rankings are as a website, correct?
	I believe that's correct, yes.
	We saw those rankings yesterday in one of the media kits where Alex Jones was on top and then there were other media outlets below him, correct?
	Right, I remember that one.
	Right, right.
	And none of those other media outlets that we saw yesterday, they never said Sandy Hill was fake, did they?
	Which media outlets?
	What do you mean?
	Remember we saw Rush Limbaugh?
	Oh, okay.
	I don't believe there's been any allegations that they had said such things.
	And then the second attachment is what?
	It says Google Analytics dot JPEG. So let's go down to the second page.
	All right.
	Journal, remember this from opening.
	Do you see there a chart?
	I see it.
	And this chart is Google Analytics, correct?
	I don't know if it's Google or Alexa or one of them, but it looks like Analytics.
	Okay.
	And what you see here is a chart with dates along the bottom, correct?
	Yes, I see that date range from September 22nd through October 13th.
	And if you look at this line here, and I know I'm a little bit far away, but I want everybody to see it.
	Maybe it's easier if I go over there.
	May I, Your Honor?
	Can I go over there?
	So let's see here.
	You have September 22nd, right?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	It's broken up in a week, so you have September 22nd to September 29th, yes?
	One week period, yes.
	Okay, and there are, let's see, one line, two line, three line, four lines.
	So it looks like each line represents about two days, yeah?
	Sure.
	Okay, so if we come to the second line, this would be September 24th, right?
	Or thereabouts.
	- For thereabouts. - For thereabouts.
	The third line might be September 26th, or thereabouts. - Or thereabouts. - Fourth line, September 28th, somewhere in there.
	Yes?
	- Sure. - And what we're seeing here are a chart showing unique visitors.
	Yes, that's what it says.
	And unique visitors are bumping along here in September around, let's say, just shy of 500,000 a day.
	Yes?
	About 500,000 a day.
	Sure, approximately.
	And right around between September 21 and September 25 when this article was published, It looks like more than one and a half.
	I'll say that.
	It's not quite two, but it's not one and a half, so probably more than one and a half.
	Yes.
	You're not going to argue with me that there's a spike?
	It looks like a spike, yes.
	And that spike, you would say, goes from somewhere south of 500,000 to somewhere between one and a half to two million unique visitors, correct?
	Somewhere above one and a half and less than two, sure.
	Let's go to the next chart, please.
	Now, this one...
	No, no, I'm sorry, Pratini, did you have the...
	I want to do the next spike.
	All right.
	Now, this one is measuring page views.
	Yes?
	Yes, I do.
	Same idea.
	You got the dates on the bottom.
	Yes, I see that.
	All right.
	And what you're seeing here is bumping along, let's say, somewhere between Yes, so somewhere above one and a half, but less than two.
	I see that.
	And then it spikes up to about three days.
	You can agree?
	About three, yeah.
	That's per day page views, yes?
	That's what we're measuring, page views per day.
	Page views, right.
	Well, in that two-day-ish period.
	Right.
	Over the past 28 days, So now you see, same idea, but we're talking about visits, right?
	Yes.
	Bumping along here, let's say between, I don't know, 400,000 and 700,000, let's say, visits per day.
	Yes, I see that.
	Spikes up to over 2 million when the articles are published and when the videos come out.
	Yes?
	In that period, right.
	Right.
	I see that.
	All right.
	Now, let's do You remember there were multiple attachments here?
	I saw that, yes.
	Alright, let's stay on that one right there.
	Okay.
	Now, similar idea here, obviously you recognize this to be Google Analytics, right?
	Yes, I do.
	Alright, and you see here, again, dates along the horizontal axis, axis beginning September 15th, right?
	Yes.
	Alright, and Google Analytics, you testified earlier, measures things like web performance, Mid-September, the week between September 15th and September 22nd, you're at about, oh, one to one and a half million, right?
	Page views here we're talking about.
	See that?
	Yeah, so on September 15th, it spikes up a little bit above one and a half.
	I don't know, maybe.
	Oh, thank you.
	Yeah, yeah, okay.
	So we're just focusing on this first week, right?
	Right.
	There's a little bit of a spike on September 15th, isn't there?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	And then it's kind of cruising along below 1.5 million until September 22nd, right?
	Right, it hovers around 1.5 million and drops off.
	Okay, let's pull back from the chart here.
	Just focus on my questions.
	Sure.
	Then here again, in the next week, between September 22nd and September 29th, you'd agree with me that Paige...
	Objection to the forum.
	It's fine.
	Am I correct that page views jumps up to just under 3 million over the two days when this article was published and the videos were broadcast?
	Yes, I do see the spike that you're pointing to just under 3 million page views.
	And this period covers, let's say, I don't know, September 13th to about October Yeah, give or take.
	Doesn't say the exact dates, but...
	And what Google Analytics is telling you here in this chart is that 33.4% of all page views during this month were new visitors, correct?
	The green slice of the pie?
	That's right.
	See, green means new visitor, right?
	Yes.
	Blue means returning visitor.
	Yes.
	And for this month, 33.4% of the people visiting were new, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Let's go to the next chart, please.
	Is that it for that one?
	Okay.
	Okay, great.
	Now, Ms. Potts, have you seen all that now?
	By the way, why did Tim Frugier send all those analytics to Adnan Salazar, who wrote that order?
	Text me the form, Judge.
	I don't know.
	I didn't ask about it.
	Having seen that, and now coupling that with all the other emails we saw during the preceding few months about Google Analytics, will Free Speech Systems now tell this jury that yes, it did in fact use Google Analytics?
	I'm sorry, I have just the same answer.
	or I don't know.
	Let's pull up.
	Let's pull up.
	Is it 135, please?
	Is it agreed to, Your Honor?
	I think it's already in.
	It is.
	135 is not in yet.
	Agreed.
	All right.
	Now, here we are again, October 9th.
	What was the date of the last one?
	I'll tell you.
	The email we just saw that Tim Fruget sent to Adan Salazar was October 14th.
	This is October 9th, just a few days earlier.
	Yeah?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Okay, it's Tim Fruget again?
	Yes.
	Sending a Google Analytics Facebook example to a guy named Rob R. Who's that?
	I'm not sure.
	I'm not sure as I sit here.
	I'm sorry.
	You can tell from the email address, he's an Infowars employee.
	Yes, yes.
	All right.
	And let's bring up that analytics Facebook example.
	All right.
	Let's pull up now.
	You see here, this is September 23rd, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Am I correct, ma'am?
	I know Free Speech Systems' testimony here over and over again is that it doesn't know whether it used Google Analytics, but do you know whether Google Analytics was available to InfoWars to also track its performance on social media?
	I don't.
	I'm sorry.
	Let's pull up this, just the high charging with all colors.
	Okay.
	I'm sorry.
	Should have said we could date as well.
	Now, can you remind the jury when that article, FBI says nobody killed a Sandy Buck, was published?
	Is that a question to me?
	It is.
	I believe it's September 24th.
	Right.
	So this is the day before, right?
	That's what it looks like.
	And what it shows here are the top channels through which people are arriving to Infowars.com, correct?
	Oh, how they're getting to the website, yes.
	How they're getting to the website.
	Direct search, organic search, yes.
	That's what it looks like.
	Right.
	And so what you see here is...
	Direct visitors, what that means is people just type in infowords.com because they want to go there.
	Right.
	Organic search means people are searching for infowords.com and it sends them there.
	Or it's coming up on search terms.
	Say they search Alex Jones or they search a particular topic and they're coming up on the Google search results organically.
	Organically.
	Right.
	So it would include search terms, not necessarily just Infowars.
	Right.
	So if somebody's searching on Google, quote, FBI says nobody killed a Sandy Hook, they're coming to Infowars.
	That's an organic search, right?
	Right.
	And so the direct, on September 23rd, I'm going to come this way, because I'm the truth way.
	The direct, and you have the screen in front of you, right?
	On the day before they publish this article is 39.3% of all visitors are coming direct.
	They know they want to go to infowars.com, type it in, go, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	25% are searching for something on Google, infowars.com comes up, they click on it, they come.
	Yes?
	Right.
	24.2% are clicking on a link on social media, correct?
	That's what that says, yes.
	And then they're coming to InfoWars.com through that link.
	Right.
	Okay.
	10% are being referred from another website.
	That means that, because you know that InfoWars.com at this time was paying to advertise itself on other websites, right?
	Right.
	And so they do that to get more visitors to their site, so another website had referred them there, right?
	Right.
	And then there's...
	Okay.
	And then it looks like there's two other categories that are not depicted here.
	One is email, right?
	Yes.
	You know that InfoWars had a daily email newsletter that would go out?
	Yes, it has a newsletter.
	Okay.
	And so people can click on...
	And that newsletter contains links to all the stories that InfoWars runs out there.
	Right.
	Okay.
	So, you know, you get an email in your inbox.
	Good morning.
	Here's the latest stories from InfoWars, right?
	Right.
	Alright, now let's go down the page a little bit.
	And whereas the pie chart shows the percentages, this shows the numbers, yes?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Okay, and so on September 23rd, the day before the article runs, they had a total of 543,000 sessions, yes?
	Yes.
	31% of those were new.
	New sessions, yes.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Great.
	So let's go down to the next step.
	Here we are on September 24th, right?
	Yes.
	This is the day the article runs, yes?
	Yes.
	And just to remind the jury, this is in an email sent three weeks after your grant, right?
	This chart is in the email?
	Yes.
	I believe that's the date, yes, in early October.
	Three weeks after the article runs, Tim Fuget with Numbers for these dates, right?
	That's what it looks like.
	On the day the article runs...
	Do you remember on the chart before...
	Let's go back up just for a minute.
	The pie chart, yeah.
	On September 23rd, you remember that social media was 24.2% of traffic to InfoWars.com, right?
	I see that, yes.
	Let's go to the next one.
	On the 24th, social media more than doubles as a source for traffic to employers.com, right?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	It goes from 24% to 54% of all traffic coming to Infowars.com is being sent from social media, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	This is the year Alex Jones had 2.2 billion impressions on social media, correct?
	I don't recall the number, but I know we talked about that yesterday.
	Right.
	Yes.
	And whereas before, on the day before, the direct traffic...
	Is now in half, right?
	Right, that's what it says.
	- Right.
	And so what we're seeing here, according to Infowars Google Analytics, Is it on Salazar's false article taking off on social media and resulting in traffic to hit boards.com?
	Objection, Judge.
	Argumentative.
	Overfold.
	That's what we're seeing.
	I don't know what caused the spike, but as we said earlier, his article would have been posted to all of our social media outlets.
	So, I mean, it's...
	Could it have been?
	Yes, it could have been.
	Well...
	I don't know if I'm looking at this what they're clicking on from social media.
	But you do know...
	That the email we just showed had Tim Fruget sending a Don Salazar, the author of the article, similar data about performance over the weekend, correct?
	I saw the email, yes.
	And now we're seeing just a few days before Tim Fruget putting this together for the exact same week, correct?
	For the same two-day period, yes.
	And you know that over this same time period, Because of all this increased social media traffic coming to InfoWars, its revenue spiked as well, correct?
	I'd have to see the numbers, but...
	I'll show you that in a minute.
	Sure.
	So on the day the article was published, social media accounts for more than half of all referrals to InfoWars.com, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	- Yes. - All right, let's go down to the next part of this.
	Okay, now again, thank you.
	You've read my mind.
	September 23rd, you'll recall that the total of sessions the day before the article was published was 543,000, right?
	Yes, see that.
	Let's go to September 24th.
	I want to see the sessions down a little further.
	Thank you.
	Okay.
	It goes from 540-some thousand To one million sessions on the day it's published, correct?
	I see that, yes.
	583,000, more than half of it, now coming from social media, correct?
	I see that, yes.
	Let's go to September 25th.
	Yeah, you had it.
	There you go.
	The pie chart.
	I'm sorry.
	All right, September 25th.
	September 25th is the day Alex Jones has Wolfgang Halbig on the show.
	We saw that, right?
	Right.
	To talk about the article.
	Remember the title?
	Right.
	He talks about other things too, but including the article, yes.
	He talks about the cutout, right?
	Yes.
	He talks about...
	There's a mock crying, correct?
	Yeah, he talks about a few things.
	He talks about a hundred kids that no longer can be found, right?
	He said that in the video, yes.
	He talks about photos of kids who they say died and were still alive.
	He talks about all that, yes?
	He said that in the video, yes.
	This is the day he did that.
	I think that's the same day, yes.
	Right.
	And now on this day, we saw on the day before, the day the article was published, social media went From about 24% to over 50%, right?
	Of the referral traffic.
	Yes.
	Now it's up to how much?
	80, is that an 86.3?
	That looks like 66.3.
	Okay, 66.3.
	That's what it looks like to me.
	Sorry.
	It's hard to tell on the screen.
	66.3.
	Okay, 66.3.
	Spikes again, right?
	That's what it looks like.
	Okay.
	And now, direct traffic to InfoWars.com, people who actually know they want to go there, is only a 20%, yes?
	Yes.
	So everybody, all these extra people that are coming to InfoWars.com are getting there from social media, yes?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And when they get there, they're seeing ads, right?
	When they get where?
	To the article?
	Oh, yes.
	We actually saw an ad right next to the article for DNA Force Plus.
	They're on all the articles.
	Every article has an ad.
	Right now, I'm only asking you about one.
	Sure.
	That article, there was an ad.
	And there was a 33% sale on DNA Force, right?
	I think that's what it said.
	All right.
	Now, here, let's go down to the numbers now, TJ. On September 24th, it was just over a million.
	Sessions in the day, right?
	I recall that, yes.
	Now it's at 1.7 million, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	With 1.1 million coming from social.
	That's what it says.
	Dwarfing all the other sources of referrals, correct?
	It is the largest source.
	Okay, let's pull that out.
	Let's go ahead.
	Is there more for the 26th?
	Now, still going, right?
	Now, the 26th is a little bit down.
	It had been 66% on the day of the video broadcast.
	Now we're one day on.
	Social media is still way above where it was before the article was written, but it's starting to have a little bit down to 53% of all sources to the Infowars.com, right?
	Right, I see that.
	It's down from 66 to 53. 53, yes, I see that.
	Let's go down to the numbers, please.
	And the day before, you had seen 1.7 million total sessions.
	It's down to 950,000, right?
	Yes.
	And the day earlier, on the day of the broadcast, social media as a source of referrals had been at about a million, and now it's just over half a million, yes?
	Yes.
	Okay, so now it's coming down, right?
	Yes.
	So what we're seeing now is the backside of that spike we saw in the other charts, correct?
	That's what it looks like.
	All right.
	Let's go down to the next, if there is an X. Okay, 27. And we're seeing that same phenomenon here.
	Now we're two days after the video broadcast, right?
	Yes.
	Social media is starting to come down again as a source for referral, yes?
	Slightly, yes.
	Right.
	What had it been?
	50?
	Yeah, it was like 52% or something to that effect.
	So that article is still doing okay, right?
	Objection.
	Speculative.
	I think we said earlier, I'm not really sure how they were getting there from social.
	So it's from social.
	It depends on how many posts there were that day and what posts they were clicking on that day.
	So I can't say for sure which posts they were clicking on.
	You're not going to testify here under oath, are you, that the article published on September 24th, 2014, and the video on September 24th, 2015, and September 25th, 2014, you're not going to tell this jury that that article and those videos are the reasons for these fights, are you?
	You're not going to tell them that?
	I would be speculating.
	I don't know for sure.
	I mean, you have all this evidence in front of you, but you still have speculation.
	Objection.
	So on September 27th, it's going down.
	Now direct referrals are creeping back up, right?
	I see that, yes.
	Let's go down to the 28th.
	And now you have direct, which is now blue.
	Direct now comprises the plurality, right?
	34.8% of all referrals are now back to being direct, yes?
	I see that, yes.
	And social media, close behind, but now not the top.
	I see that.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Now what I want to do, Ms. Paz, is I want to bring up...
	Now you testified yesterday, and you've heard the testimony of David Jones and Timothy Fruchet, that the business model here is maximize audience to the website and then send them to the store that the business model here is maximize audience to the website and then send them That's the business model.
	Right.
	All right.
	So what I'm going to do now...
	Do we have that to fit?
	One moment, you're on.
	Two, seven, eight.
	Correct.
	Can we bring up exhibit 278 for Ms. Paz, please?
	This is not a photo of you.
	That's right, just for Ms. Paz.
	Ms. Paz.
	May I have a moment, please?
	Take it on.
	I'm ready.
	Thank you.
	One of the things that you were asked to prepare on was... revenue to InfoWars, correct?
	Yes, I believe that was one of the topics.
	And you testified yesterday that between 2012 and the moment you were testifying yesterday, InfoWars had made hundreds of millions of dollars, correct?
	I said I couldn't subscribe to a number because I would just have to see the numbers, but yes, it's millions and millions of dollars.
	No, no, no.
	Yesterday, you agreed that Infowars during that time period had made hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars, although you didn't know the precise number, correct?
	Right, I don't know the number.
	I don't know the precise number.
	But that's what you testified to.
	I just want to make it very, very clear.
	Because just now, a moment ago, you tried to say that you had testified that they had made millions and millions.
	But what you said yesterday was that Infowars had made hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars between 2012 and the date of your testimony.
	I don't remember, but I'll accept what you're saying.
	I mean, I know that they've made millions and millions of dollars.
	I just don't want to say how much because I just don't recall.
	call I wanted to refresh my recollection of how much.
	You're the corporate representative for Free Speed Systems, correct?
	Yes.
	You're required to prepare yourself to testify about the revenue that Free Speed Systems received, correct?
	Yes, I was asked.
	I am not asking you for a precise number.
	Let's start here.
	Are you able to testify as Free Speech Systems' corporate representative that between the years 2012 and yesterday, Free Speech Systems has made more than $100 million?
	I think that's fair.
	Are you able to testify that it's made more than $200 million?
	I don't know.
	I would like to see the numbers.
	Are you able to testify that it's made more than a billion dollars?
	Judge, badgering at this point.
	Overruled.
	I don't think it's made a billion dollars, so no, it hasn't.
	Okay.
	So, your testimony right now as you're testifying to this jury is that you can testify under oath that Free Speech Systems has made somewhere between a hundred million dollars and a billion dollars between 2012 and yesterday, correct?
	No, I think what I said was I don't know what the number is.
	I'm asking you a different question now.
	Okay.
	You just testified that, yes, you can tell this jury InfoWars has made over $100 million, but you're not willing to tell them that it's made a billion dollars.
	So now I'm focusing on this range, that at least you're willing to testify to this range.
	And the range that I've just heard you testify to is, You can tell this jury that Free Speech Systems has made over a hundred million dollars since 2012, and between a billion dollars, but that's as specific as you can get, right?
	Without seeing documents, yes.
	Okay.
	So, let's look at...
	You have to use it, right?
	Yes.
	Now, Infowars produced some sales revenue in this case, correct?
	I believe it has, yes.
	And one of the platforms that you testified at earlier that Free Speech Systems makes money over is Infowarsshop.com.
	One of the ways, yes.
	And Infowarsshop.com was, in 2014, was the principal online store, the main online store for Free Speech Systems, right?
	I think that's fair, yes.
	In 2015, they transferred over to Infowarsstore.com.
	Right.
	But before 2015, it was Infowarsshop.com.
	Yes.
	And Free Speech Systems produced sales revenue for 2014, occurring over Infowarsshop.com, correct?
	I believe we did, yes.
	And that's what you see before you, yes?
	I think that's what this is, yes.
	I'll offer it, Your Honor.
	No objection, Judge.
	Please pull up, well just pull up the main exhibits as you can see.
	And actually this, there were some exhibits, I'm sorry, some sales reports that were produced year by year, but Infowarsshop.com some sales reports that were produced year by year, but Infowarsshop.com was produced for all the years that it had data for, according to Infowars, Right.
	And so what we're seeing here, this is row one, right?
	According to this sheet, on May 25th, 2010, that's the first date for which InfoWars provided data, correct?
	That's what this says, yes.
	We'll deal with the rest of it later.
	why don't we go down to September 2014 here we go I'm gonna start with you on September 20 Well, let's just look at the few days before, starting September 19th, okay?
	On September 19th, you'd agree with me that InfoWars reported 60,000 in daily sales, yes?
	Just on this website, yes?
	That's what it says, yes.
	On the next day, it was 43,000 just on this website, yes?
	Yes.
	On September 21st, it was $45,000.
	That's what it says, yes.
	On September 22nd, it was $62,000.
	Yes.
	On September 23rd, it was $56,000.
	Yes.
	On September 24th, this is the date the article is published, yes.
	The 24th, yes.
	It's $48,000, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	The article then, and you recall that on September 24th is when the social media was still a minority percentage of the overall traffic, right?
	I do remember that, yes.
	On September 24th, the revenue over this platform goes from $48,000 to $232,000 in the day, right?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	That's like a 500% increase?
	My math is terrible, so I don't know the percentage.
	Okay.
	And the next day, and this is the next day we saw data, social media on the 25th and on the 26th had jumped to first place as referral source for revenue, right?
	I'm sorry, referral source for website traffic.
	I recall that, yes.
	Right.
	It's heading off a little bit, but it goes from 232,000 to 128,000, right?
	Yes, that's what it says.
	Still twice, more than twice what it was on September 23rd, right?
	It is more, yes.
	And then it starts to drop off again, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Okay.
	Attorney, I didn't approach in the lunch hour or so when it's...
	Your Honor, this would be a perfect time.
	All right.
	Okay.
	You may.
	It's possible.
	Now, having seen all those analytics, is it still free speech distance testimony to this jury that just doesn't know if he uses them?
	It uses what?
	Google Analytics?
	Yes, sir.
	Same answer, yes.
	Thank you.
	All right, so we'll take the lunch recess.
	We'll be back.
	If you could get back by 5 or 2 so that we can...
	We'll probably start at 2 p.m.
	Ron, we know the routine now.
	We'll collect your notepads.
	We'll keep them secure.
	I don't want to just keep saying the same thing over and over again, but if you are going to leave the building to enjoy the nice weather, just make sure you steer clear of the witnesses and the lawyers and the media, right?
	And I hope you all have a nice lunch.
	I am going to stay on the record to address something with council so have a nice lunch.
	Can I look at something on the screen right now?
	I'll see you on the sidebar.
	I'm sorry.
	But then I saw your back, and I couldn't see what you were doing when you were doing it.
	And I don't want...
	I just can't see that volume.
	You were trying to make a block in the screen right now.
	And I just don't want anyone in there.
	I just want to give them more space, that's all right.
	Yeah, understood.
	I forgot that.
	Well, you did ask, and I said yes.
	Can I get an advisory committee?
	No, no, I'm not.
	easy to have.
	In your terms, I'll just have some more responses.
	About what?
	About the court where things are.
	So if we're going to use a screen with a witness, like a big screen that's an injury, it's important to show you about that.
	I hate my own screen.
	I'm not sure what you're saying.
	Just not there because it's too, it's a big screen.
	Where should we put the screen?
	working wall of grace if you can't listen to your it's good I don't want a little bit screen around here one of you guys talk about it for We'll figure it out.
	Just, I think Ron was concerned that the screen was a washer in the team.
	Okay.
	Awesome.
	Well, so we'll talk about what we could be.
	Can you guys talk about that?
	Because I know where they had a screen for Ron.
	It was a washer in the defense system.
	Well, Judge, you don't want to question me on that side of the screening of that.
	You don't want us in that form.
	I don't, because I cannot have the witnesses.
	I just understand.
	Try to work out.
	She was lucky in that case, just so you know.
	She was lucky in that case, just so you know.
	She was lucky in that case.
	Wow, wow.
	I thought it was just well ahead of the potential.
	You cannot.
	You can't speak.
	I can't speak.
	We can't make the class.
	Yes, sir.
	We're going to turn it into a little while.
	So let me talk a long-- OK.
	I would take a few minutes off.
	I think it's all good.
	Can you put your hand on it?
	I can work with them.
	It's not here because I want to be on the left.
	But yours, when yours...
	It's really hard.
	It makes a lot of noise when you touch it.
	And the other thing...
	What if we turn off?
	We can speak.
	You can hear us.
	The question is, can you just turn off the table?
	I concur.
	I've never had a case with a hot mic that, hey, well, I don't have a client sitting there.
	you know okay let me see how I can fix that okay All right, so we will take the lunch recess.
	All rise, please.
	Four can I'll stand during lunch and recess.
	Thank you, sir.
	So Chris, yes.
	Commitment.
	There you go, Your Honor.
	I'm ready.
	So are we ready for the panel?
	Are we ready, Council?
	Yes, sir.
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Peace.
	Thank you.
	All right, good afternoon.
	Welcome back.
	Hope everyone have a nice lunch.
	Thank you.
	Good afternoon.
	Thank you.
	Now we'll distribute your notebooks.
	I'll count to ten at the same time.
	The council will stipulate that our entire panel has returned.
	Yes.
	All right, please be seated everyone.
	Get yourselves settled in.
	Let's have a moment.
	Yes.
	All right.
	whenever you're ready and this positive stand thank you this cause
	when you left for lunch we had just finished showing you a series of Google Analytics graphs all covering the three-day period between September 24th the date the article FBI says no we kill the Sandy Hook and through the September 25th when the broadcaster was
	Mr. Halbig, was titled, FBI Says Nobody Killed at Sandy Hook Massacre Featuring World Game Halbig, correct?
	Yes, I recall that.
	So that's September of 2014. The end of 2014, Free Speech Systems posted on its website a documentary called, We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook, correct?
	Yes, I don't recall the exact date, but yes.
	And that documentary set forth the same false claim that Mr. Jones had been making these years, that Sandy Hook was a fake state event, correct?
	I think that was the sum and substance of the documentary, yes.
	And then on December 28, 2014, Mr. Jones published a video titled "America: The False Democracy." Do you recall that?
	Yes, again, I just don't recall the date, but yes, I recall a video with that title.
	Okay, all right.
	And this has been marked, Your Honor, and admitted as Exhibit 22, America, the False Democracy, identified as a video published by InfoWars on December 28. Let's
	talk to Kevin.
	Kevin, go ahead.
	You're on the air.
	Hi, I'm calling about Danny Hook.
	Basically, my take on it is I live 50 miles from Newtown, and the whole thing is pretty much the next step in reality TV. Because with other false flags, like 9-11 or Oklahoma City, or the Boston bombing, The whole thing is a giant hoax.
	And the problem is, how do you deal with a total hoax?
	I mean, just, how do you even convince the public something's a total hoax?
	Very hard, because, you know, any time I talk about this issue with people, you know, you get criticized, black-called, ridiculed, called every name of the book, or they respond with the magic words.
	They were saying on TV, there's no statement more proof-positive of somebody who's been brainwashed by that stuff.
	Well, I would tell people the same thing.
	Go out and prove the official story.
	And I knew the millisecond that happened with that now fake picture of the kids being one out of the school, that there's nothing that's going to sell this agenda like dead elementary school kids.
	The general public doesn't know the school was actually closed the year before.
	They don't know that Shield will all demolish the building.
	They don't know that they have the kids going in circles in and out of the building as a photo op.
	Blue screen, green screens, they got caught using.
	I mean, the whole thing.
	But remember, this is the same White House that's been caught running the fake bin Laden that's come out and been faked.
	It's the same White House that got caught running all these other fake events over and over again.
	And it's the same White House that says, I never said that you could keep your doctor when he did say you could keep your doctor.
	People just instinctively know I think you testified
	I just testified yesterday that from the day of shooting until today, Respeute Systems has not done any investigation of the circumstances surrounding that itself. Respeute Systems has not done any investigation of the circumstances Independent investigation?
	No, that's correct.
	Right, so when Alex Jones says to his audience, I've done deep research, that's a lie, correct?
	It's not accurate.
	That's correct.
	Now, at the beginning of that video, the first thing Alex Jones says, he kind of cuts off the collar and he says, "No, I know.
	I've had investigators on.
	The state police have gone public." The investigator he's talking about is Wolfgang Hallig, right?
	Right.
	Now he says investigators, correct?
	He does.
	Right.
	But he's just referring to Wolfgang Hallig.
	I think that's who he's referring to, yes.
	And when he says the state police have gone public, he's talking about Wolfgang Hallig, right?
	I'm not sure, because obviously Mr. Halbig's not Connecticut State Police, so...
	Right.
	But who else would he be talking about?
	I don't know, and I didn't ask him that specific question.
	Because one of the things that Wolfgang Halbig told InfoWars was that he had, in a previous career, been a state trooper, right?
	He did say that, yes.
	But Free Speech Systems today just doesn't know whether he's talking about Halbig.
	Right.
	He says this bit again about the school being closed the year before.
	We know that's not true, right?
	Right.
	He says that, by the way, he says that the kids were going around the school in circles for a photo op, right?
	Yes, he said that a couple of times.
	Not true.
	Right.
	And this is over a year after the state's attorney's report about the shooting itself had come out and delivered it in force, correct?
	Well, correct.
	Employees at InfoWars had been given a copyright.
	And I don't know if Alex read it, but...
	You said that yesterday.
	Right.
	And one of the reasons you don't know if you read it is because you didn't ask him about it, right?
	I did not.
	And you haven't read his deposition, even though you asked for it.
	Right.
	- Right, I didn't read the dub out. - You heard him say, talked about the Bloomberg I didn't read the dub out. - You heard him say, talked about He did.
	You know there was no email about Sandy Hook from Bloomberg, right?
	We're writing Sandy Hook right.
	He said, synthetic, completely fake, with actors, manufactured.
	Yes?
	I think he used those words, yes.
	Two months later, we're now in 2015, February 2015.
	Actually, no, hold on a second.
	Hold on a second.
	That was December 28th.
	That's what we just saw, right?
	December 28th?
	I believe so.
	Let's pull up exhibit 143. This is agreed Now, this is an email dated December 21st, 2014, right?
	See that?
	Yes, I do see that.
	And it's from Wolfgang Halbig, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Now, you've seen this email before, correct?
	We can pull up the body of it if you'd like.
	Could we?
	Yes, please.
	Yes, I have seen it.
	And you've seen this because this email was sent to Free Speech Systems, correct?
	Yes.
	Amongst other people, yes.
	Amongst other people.
	Free Speed Systems got it, yes?
	Right.
	Okay.
	And who is Michelle here?
	I think it is a relative of one of the victims of Sandy Hook.
	It's not just a relative, it's the mother of a young girl who was murdered there, correct?
	That's what it says.
	Would you please read it aloud?
	Michelle, how could you and your husband, as responsible parents, even allow your precious child, Josephine, to attend that filthy and deplorable-looking school on December 14, 2012?
	This school has, you must have known, It is and was a toxic waste dump as reported by environmental consultants who requested more money from the City of Newtown leaders before demolishing the school and transported all of the high levels of lead paint, high levels of asbestos, and especially the high levels of PCBs in the groundwater at Sandy Hook out of state.
	Josephine, your child, should have expected more from you before that tragic day as a parent.
	You are supposed to protect her from serious lifelong health risks when you sent her to that school every day.
	Free Speech Systems gets this email from Wolfgang Halbig just days before Alex Jones goes on the show and refers to Wolfgang Halbig.
	That the public should rely upon in believing that this was a hoax, correct?
	You mean whether it was sent before?
	It was sent, yes.
	Right.
	This is Wolfgang Halbig sending an email to the mother of a murdered child two years after the shooting, in fact just a week after the two year anniversary of the shooting, blaming her for sending her child to a toxic waste dump of a school, correct?
	That's what the email says.
	And when Free Speech Systems got this, surely it said, we can no longer associate ourselves with this guy Wolfgang Halbig.
	This is even too much for us.
	They said that, right?
	I don't know if and when or at all who read this.
	May I have my question for that, please?
	May I have my question for you?
	May I have my question?
	May I have my question for you?
	And when Free Speech Systems got this, surely it said, we can no longer associate ourselves with this guy Wolfgang County.
	This is even too much for us.
	They said that, right?
	I don't know if and when or at all who read this.
	I claim that it's responsive, Judge.
	I don't think we're on the record yet.
	I'm sorry.
	What's that?
	I claim that it's responsive, Judge.
	No foundation.
	It's not responsive.
	Ann, can you answer the question I asked you?
	Did they say that?
	I don't know.
	Well, that's not true, Ms. Pops, is it?
	Why?
	Because you know that in 2015, Wolfgang Halbig continued to appear as a guest on the Alex Jones show, correct?
	I'm sorry, I interpreted your question to mean were there any discussions with people internally about whether he should be back on the show?
	Now, let's just get one thing very, very clear here.
	After receiving this email, Free Speech Systems continued to embrace this relationship with Wolfgang Halbert, correct?
	He continued to appear, yes.
	Not only did he continue to appear, Free Speech Systems continued to be in touch with Wolfgang Halbig all the way through 2020, correct?
	What do you mean, in touch with him?
	You familiar with an email that Rob Dew sent to Wolfgang Halbig in 2020, two years after this lawsuit was filed?
	I don't recall.
	I don't recall.
	Can you pull it off to the witness, please?
	This is Exeter 204, Your Honor.
	Not yet admitted.
	No objection to it.
	Sure.
	This lawsuit was filed in 2018, correct?
	Yes.
	We just saw an email sent to Free Speech Systems in 2014 in which Wolfgang Halbig was harassing the mother of a murdered child, correct?
	Yes.
	Let's pull up the header of that.
	This is Wolfgang Halbig in November of 2020 sending an e-mail To Rob Dew, correct?
	That's what it says.
	Rob Dew, one of Mr. Jones' longest, most trusted advisors, correct?
	Sure.
	The news director for InfoWars, correct?
	That's what he is, yes.
	But he doesn't send it to his InfoWars account.
	He sends it to his personal account.
	How did Wolfgang Halbig have Rob Dew's personal email account?
	I don't know.
	The subject is depot names, right?
	That's what it says.
	You know, depo's short for depositions, right?
	I do know that.
	Let's go down.
	and he's suggesting to Rob do the different depositions they should take in this case, correct?
	I'm sorry, I'm just reading it.
	Okay.
	That's what it looks like.
	And this isn't the only time that Rob Dew and Wolfgang Halbig were talking about this case, after it was filed, right?
	I don't recall if there was.
	So when Free Speech Systems gets that email from Wolfgang Halbig harassing the mother of a San Diego student in December of 2014, it continued its relationship with him for the next six years at least, correct?
	I don't think I would agree with six years, no.
	Okay.
	Did you just see 20-20 on that email though?
	I didn't see a response from Rob.
	Okay.
	Okay, so that's why there wasn't a response.
	I don't know whether they were communicating.
	And it was to his personal account.
	Did you talk to Rob Doe?
	I did talk to Rob Doe.
	Did he tell you about this email?
	He did not.
	I've not seen that email.
	Okay.
	Well, give me one second here.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	So let's go to February of 2015.
	February of 2015, you're aware that Alex Jones published a broadcast entitled Free Speech, right?
	Okay.
	I don't recall the date, but I do recall a title.
	Free Speech, okay.
	Yes.
	Your Honor, this is agreed to and is admitted as a broadcast Mr. Jones published on the You're familiar with Leonard Posner, correct?
	Yes.
	We saw an email that he sent in January of 2013 asking Alex to stop, right?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And Mr. Posner at some point made a complaint to YouTube about Alex Jones, right?
	He did, yes.
	Because Alex Jones showed a picture of his son Noah on his broadcast, correct?
	I believe so, yes.
	And it was a picture that Mr. Posner had taken of his son, correct?
	I don't know who took it, but I know it was a picture of Noah.
	And the claim that Mr. Posner made against Mr. Jones was that he was using a picture of his son without his permission, correct?
	Right, a copyright claim.
	Copyright.
	Correct.
	And that resulted in YouTube issuing a strike against Mr. Jones' YouTube channel, correct?
	Right.
	Mr. Jones responded by going on air and showing his audience Mr. Posner's business address, correct?
	The business address for honor, yes.
	Mr. Posner started an organization called The Honor Network.
	Right.
	H-O-N-R. H-O-N-R. Right.
	Mr. Jones went on the air and showed his audience.
	The address and location of Mr. Posner's business, the Honor Network, correct?
	I believe so, yes.
	Let's play Exhibit 24A. There is an attempt to shut down a large venue that we reach, let's be conservative, I'm a fan, YouTube, and hundreds of other platforms, Bossy, Roku, Global Shortwave, the list goes on and on.
	But YouTube is 10% of that.
	And we get 5, 6, 7, 8 million views a week just on our one channel, altogether more than 10 million views a week.
	So see, I'm being very conservative when I say 20 million listeners or viewers a week because So this is
	Mr. Jones complaining to his audience about the fact that a YouTube strike against his YouTube channel could result in his channel being closed off to him, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And what that would mean is that all that audience that he's reaching through YouTube, he might not have a chance to redirect to his store, correct?
	Well, he's not getting views.
	Right.
	And if people aren't clicking on YouTube then, then he doesn't have a way to get them into the store, right?
	That's a problem.
	It's one of the platforms by which people couldn't see the videos and then subsequently go to the store.
	And that's why Mr. Jones felt the need to retaliate against Mr. Posner.
	Correct?
	Objection.
	Who calls for speculation about the continent?
	I don't know if I would use the word retaliate.
	I know that he complained about...
	What would you use?
	Well, I know that he appealed the strike decision, which is his right, and then...
	I'm sorry, Ms. Posner, I asked you about the retaliation against Mr. Posner, right?
	So, the question...
	The fact that Mr. Jones could lose business as a result of this is why he retaliated against Mr. Posner.
	Yes or no?
	No, I wouldn't use the word retaliate.
	Okay.
	Any other reason you can think of that Mr. Jones would have showed Mr. Posner's business address and location on a show?
	I don't want to speculate as to his reasons.
	I didn't ask him.
	Okay.
	Let's go to 24F, please.
	Wait, did I, I'm sorry.
	Was that 24A we just played?
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	Let's go to 24D, please.
	Let's go to the About page on the Alex Jones channel.
	One of many channels we have.
	And by the way, they're all linked together.
	So they take one down, they take them all down.
	Paul Watson's with 37 million.
	Another with 47 million.
	Another with 100 million.
	Another with 475 million.
	And these videos continue to grow.
	So there's about a million subscribers, 950,000 plus subscribers on this one channel.
	474 million.
	And let's see how many videos.
	Let's back out on that.
	It should show you the number of videos that we have on the channel.
	That used to, I guess they're removing that stuff.
	There are thousands of videos on that channel.
	Of those thousands of videos on that channel, how many were about Sidibo?
	Oh, I don't know by looking at this video.
	I mean, the reality is Free Speech Systems has no idea how many videos have published about Sandy Hook, correct?
	I know how many videos I watched related to Sandy Hook, but is that an exhaustive list?
	Is that your question?
	I don't know.
	My question was, Free Speech Systems has no idea how many videos have published about Sandy Hook, correct?
	I can't say how many there are, no.
	Okay, let's go to 24F, please.
	Why did they call rescue helicopters?
	Why were they ambulance?
	Let's just identify these guys here.
	On the left, with the gray beard, that's David Knight, right?
	Yes.
	He hosted a show on InfoWars.com.
	He was an employee of InfoWars, right?
	At one point, yes.
	Right.
	On the left, I'm sorry, the younger gentleman with the beard, that's Rob Dew.
	Yes, that's Rob Dew.
	That's the guy who Halvik sent that email that we just saw, right?
	Right.
	Okay.
	Go ahead, you can play it.
	Why did they call rescue helicopters?
	Exactly.
	No, no, no.
	Yeah.
	Why were the ambulances not even at the school?
	They were stuck at the firehounds.
	Why did they destroy, why did they classify the investigation?
	They've never done that with any previous shootings.
	Why did they knock down the school industry?
	Why did Mayor Bloomberg alert his people to get ready the day before for a big push?
	They made it a felony to release birth certificates or death certificates.
	What kind of country is that where you can't release birth certificates?
	You know that's false, right?
	Which part?
	That it became a felony to release birth certificates or death certificates.
	Right.
	That's false.
	- Right. - What kind of country is that where you can't release birth certificate and death certificate information?
	I mean, if there's, you know, what have you got to hide, as they like to say to us?
	You know, what are you, why are you so concerned about privacy?
	What have you got to hide?
	But it's only if you're going after one of their...
	I think it looks like an operation.
	It looks like something went on there.
	A trail to hide.
	Let's go to 24...
	Was that 24G? Or F? Let's go to 24G. Well, I've got an article here from a guy, I think was our last caller, Michael.
	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 U-Haul rental Listed that address.
	One is a JJ shop, women's clothing store, and you go to the other one, same address, U-Haul Neighborhood Dealing.
	Now you go to their About Honor Network.
	I can go to this one right here, guys.
	You can leave the camera right there.
	Honor Network right there.
	It lists their- 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.
	So let's pause.
	Before this show, just to state the obvious, somebody decided to print out these addresses for the honor network, correct?
	In preparation for the show, yes.
	They were pre-printed.
	And...
	Over the desk, there's an overhead camera, right?
	Right.
	And so somebody knew to film that camera down right on the address.
	In fact, Rod Doucet, you keep that camera on, guys, and just showed them the address, right?
	Right, he told them to keep the camera on it.
	And all Mr. Posner had done was say to you two, hey, InfoWars is using my murdered child's image without my permission.
	That's what he did, right?
	That's what he did, yes.
	And then they put his business address On the air to millions of their followers, correct?
	Right.
	That's what's happening in the video.
	Let's go to 24H, please.
	But Brenton, finish up your point about Sandy Hook.
	Sir.
	Yeah, it's my opinion.
	They can't stand the slaves talking to each other.
	And we talk to each other over the internet.
	They can't control the narrative.
	And Sandy Hook is a blatant example of how they are manufacturing reality and all people have to do is just go, look at the evidence.
	It's overwhelming.
	And once people come to that same conclusion that I did, it's all over.
	It is ridiculous.
	I mean, it looks like a school play.
	It's so badly done.
	And but maybe that's what reality looks like.
	Maybe reality looks utterly fake.
	Of course, in my experience, it looks real.
	Reality is crisp and real.
	You know it when you see it.
	and this comes off like a bad school play.
	It's just a bad school play.
	That's what he said, right?
	That it comes off as a bad school play.
	play that's what he said yes few months later in 2015 free speech systems published yet another broadcast new bombshell Sandy Hook information inbound right Yes, again, I don't recall the date, but I do recall that title.
	You do recall that from the spring into the summer of 2015, Wolfgang Halbig was coming up to Connecticut repeatedly, correct?
	Yes, I recall he was here for maybe the FOIA hearings and maybe another school board meeting.
	Right, and just be clear, Wolfgang Halbig is flying up from Florida, correct?
	Yes, he lives in Florida.
	Using money from the funds that Mr. Halbig, I'm sorry, that Mr. Jones helped to support, correct?
	I don't know what funds he was using.
	And each time Wolfgang Halbig came up here, Infowars sent Dan Badandi up here to film him, correct?
	Most of the times.
	I don't know if all of the times, but most of the times.
	And what Mr. Halbig was doing up here, among other things, was attending hearings at the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission about documents that he was seeking, correct?
	Right.
	He had filed FOIA requests, and so he was following up on his FOIA requests.
	And InfoWars used this as an opportunity to continue broadcasting its lies about tenure, correct?
	We were broadcasting the FOIA hearings.
	Yes.
	Ms. Busby Systems didn't broadcast the FOIA hearings themselves, did they?
	Not the whole hearing, no.
	Clips from the hearing.
	So let's talk, let's, this is a full exhibit.
	Your Honor, this is exhibit 25. Agreed.
	And let's Tell us why Anderson Cooper's nose disappears.
	Watch the blue screen.
	Just tell us why the people are walking in circles in and out of the building and appears to be staged.
	Tell us why they said they didn't catch somebody in the woods when they did.
	Tell us why the school was closed before and then after.
	Why they've sealed it all.
	Why they've now torn it down.
	Tell us why Bloomberg sent out an email to his people the day before saying get ready to launch an operation, capitalize on the mass shooting.
	Tell us why he didn't launch the emergency helicopters.
	Tell us why the ambulance was parked for an hour down the road.
	Tell us why this appears to be as funny as the $3 bill.
	This is him introducing Wolfgang Howard, right?
	I don't know.
	I'm not sure what comes after this.
	I don't recall.
	These are the same false claims we've seen before, yes?
	Yes, many of them are in Mr. Halbig's 16 points.
	Right.
	The one he mentions here, tell us why there was a man in the woods.
	You know that in the report, the gentleman was actually identified as a parent who had come to help make gingerbread houses, correct?
	Yes, I think that they pulled somebody out of the woods, but it did turn out to be a parent.
	A parent?
	Right.
	Who had been there to come make gingerbread houses in advance of Christmas, correct?
	I don't recall his purpose, but I do recall it was a parent that was called out of the place.
	Let's go to 25E, please.
	Which is this?
	When you got somebody laughing, smiling, you want to...
	25E.
	Okay.
	Good night.
	When you've got somebody laughing, smiling, going, watch this, and then walking over and going, and then starting crying for the cameras.
	I mean, what about the blue screen and Anderson Cooper's nose disappear?
	Absolutely.
	The blue screen, it's everywhere, whether it's at the firehouse, whether it's Anderson Cooper, absolutely.
	They use that as a technology.
	It's like a movie set.
	So, obviously, Mr. Jones mocking the grieving parents again to start, right?
	You mean the crying?
	Yeah.
	Right.
	That's what I mean.
	Well, specifically Mr. Parker.
	But yes, that's what he was referring to.
	Right.
	There he didn't say a bunch of parents, right?
	Right.
	But you know, because this is a shtick he's been doing for years, right?
	He has said a bunch in the past.
	He has used plural in the past.
	And he talks about this green screen.
	Yes.
	And this is, again, getting back to our mind of the jury, because I don't think we talked about it today.
	This interview that Anderson Cooper, CNN anchor, did truly following a shooting with one of the parents, Veronique De La Rosa, right?
	Right.
	And what Alex Jones wanted his audience to believe is that there was some blue screen, like you might see in a TV studio, behind them, made to look like the new town square, but in fact, Anderson Cooper wasn't in the town square, right?
	Right, I'm not sure if it was blue or green, but right.
	So his contention was Anderson Cooper wasn't there and there was a green screen that made it appear that he was there.
	And Wolfgang Halbig, do you know if Wolfgang Halbig knows anything about blue or green screens?
	I don't.
	I've never spoken to him.
	But then we see him go off and say, oh yeah, they were using it all over the place, like a movie set, right?
	That's what he says.
	And that sounds similar to what Mr. Jones was saying earlier today, where he said they were scared about this total production they were putting up, right?
	Sounds similar.
	Okay.
	So let's go to 25F, please.
	And I'm asking you right now, and I'm asking all your listeners, doggone it, support InfoWars.
	Become part of the Warriors.
	We need this show.
	We need the truth.
	If you find it in your heart to donate a few dollars to our legal funds, let me tell you, we have them.
	We have the lawsuits filed, we are closed, but we can't do it without people helping me.
	I'm too old for this, but I do need help.
	But the big thing is, support info more, because if we don't have your voice, nobody's gonna hear the truth.
	Well, folks need to donate.
	Folks need to donate, right?
	You can, right.
	That's what he said.
	Let's go to 25H, please.
	And one more thing, with my own personal investigation with this, is you find out who Robbie Parker works for and you start really going down the rabbit hole.
	Robbie Parker was a solicitor for the CHIP program.
	Are you going to tell us what the CHIP program was?
	The CHIP program is you register your kids into a database Robbie Parker is a physician assistant in neonatal intensive care.
	That's his job.
	Did you know that?
	I don't know.
	But this gentleman had apparently done some investigation into Robbie Parker, right?
	I don't know what he did, but that's what he said.
	And you know that many, many times over the years, Mr. Jones was saying Sandy Hook was fake.
	He would say to his audience, this needs to be investigated, correct?
	Something to that effect, yes.
	This needs to be looked into, correct?
	Sure.
	Let's look into Sandy Hook, correct?
	Sure.
	And he would do that after he showed the slow-mo of Robbie Parker approaching the microphone the night after his child died, correct?
	He's done it with various other things, but including that, yes.
	Two months later, we're now on May 29th, 2015.
	InfoWars publishes another video.
	Sandy Hook, The Lies Keep Growing.
	Right?
	I do recall that title.
	I don't know the date.
	Okay.
	Well, it's been admitted as identified by that date as exhibit number So just to step this up to the jury, in addition to the Alex Jones show, InfoWars would run another live broadcast after the Alex Jones show called The Nightly News, right?
	Yes.
	Sometimes Rob Du would host it and sometimes David Knight would host it.
	Yes.
	Those are the two gentlemen we saw earlier.
	Right.
	Let's play 26 takes.
	He's gotten very angry about this.
	He has been on this like a bulldog.
	And now after 19 months, at the end of April, he was able to finally get his first FOIA hearing.
	We're going to talk to him live after this interview.
	But Dan Badandi went for the first FOIA hearing and talked to Wolfgang Halbig after that.
	Dan Badandi, InfoWars.com.
	We're in Hartford, Connecticut with Wolfgang Halbig.
	How are you doing, sir?
	Good.
	Thanks for coming all the way up here and taking a look at what's happening today.
	It is.
	You know what?
	That is the classic word in Connecticut.
	It's unbelievable how they play with the law.
	They manipulate it.
	They play with it.
	And people laugh about it.
	These witnesses from Connecticut, they think it's funny.
	I don't think it's funny.
	That's a filthy, deplorable looking school.
	It's a toxic waste dump.
	And they ought to be ashamed of themselves.
	This is Dan Bedani here on the left, right?
	Uh, yes, that's him.
	You see he's holding a microphone with the InfoWars logo on it?
	I see that, yes.
	And he was sent by InfoWars to this hearing to create this content that InfoWars then aired, correct?
	To record footage at the hearing, yes.
	Including this, correct?
	Right.
	Which David Knight then aired to InfoWars.
	Right.
	Right, okay.
	If Dan Vidani hadn't gone up there, Right.
	I can't remember his name, but he was our cameraman.
	Right.
	And if Infant Wars doesn't send Dan Badani up there, Wolf King Halbig's face isn't going out to millions and millions of viewers, correct?
	I mean, at least live at the hearing.
	I mean, I don't know if he would have called in after that or what.
	I mean, I don't want to speculate as to what would have happened, but there wouldn't have been live footage from it.
	Is Free Speech Systems aware of any other camera crew, media organization, or anything of any type that was offering Wolfgang Halbig interviews up in Connecticut?
	At the hearings?
	What started the hearings?
	No, there was nobody else at the hearings.
	Okay.
	Let's go to, still on the same exhibit, 26B. We just gotta stop.
	I want to thank you for your time, Wolf, and I want to thank you from patriot to patriot for your great hard work.
	And folks, again, you ask the real questions, you get ignored completely.
	It's unreal, it really is.
	Truth is definitely stranger than fiction.
	this is Tampa 94 info was calm let's go to 26 seats For all of recorded history, civilizations around the world praise the health benefits of silver.
	At InfoMore's life, our mission is to bring you the highest quality, purest, cleanest, effective colloidal silver on the market today.
	So this is an ad that ran right after this segment was happening, right?
	That's what it appears to be, yes.
	So in colloidal silver?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	We had multiple hearings up here, correct?
	Yes.
	And each one, InfoWars sent to Abadani.
	Yes?
	Right.
	Right.
	I don't know if he came to all of them, but certainly most of them.
	Before we get to the next hearing, though, I'd like to show you exhibit number 11.
	You're aware, Ms. Paz, that at one point, one of the things that Mr. Halvik sent to InfoWars to support his claim that the children who were murdered at Sandy Hook were still alive was a photograph, correct?
	He had emailed a photograph, yes.
	It was a photograph of Newtown children performing at the Super Bowl, correct?
	Yes.
	The Newtown Chobings Choir went to sing at the Super Bowl.
	Yes?
	Yes.
	So Halbig sends in an email to Infowars of a picture.
	Let's pull that up.
	This is agreed to, Judge.
	This is 145.
	That is a full exhibit.
	Agreed.
	And we see here at the bottom Wolfgang Halvingsons to Nico.
	Again, Nico was Mr. Jones' producer of the Alex Jones Show.
	Nico, the picture of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Choir is one of the keys.
	Other pictures are great for discussion.
	These are about the CT crime pictures.
	The same day, Nico gets back to him.
	The same day, Got the Super Bowl picture.
	Thank you for sending.
	We will be calling you on Skype at 1 p.m.
	Eastern.
	How long will you be available for the interview today?
	And Wolfgang Halbig says, as long as you and Alex can put up with me, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And Mr. Halbig explained that what the Super Bowl picture showed was that some of the children who had actually been sent to the Super Bowl to sing I heard him say that, yes.
	So that's a claim they share, isn't it?
	I don't know if they're referring to the same thing, but...
	You don't know which picture Mr. Jones saw.
	Correct.
	I don't know what he saw or is referring to.
	Actually, they're going to get any picture because Free Speech Systems acknowledges that the children were murdered on December 14, 2012. Correct?
	Free speech does admit that, yes.
	this is May 2015 I'm sorry March 2015 That's what it says, yes.
	The email we saw that Halby got sent to Michelle.
	Mother of Josephine was in early 2015. I think it was in December 2014. I think that's what it was.
	So December 2014, InfoWars receives an email that Halibut had sent to a mother who lost a child that we saw.
	In March 2015, he claims that the children who were murdered were actually at the Super Bowl.
	And then just a few days later, March 6th, InfoWars receives yet another email from somebody warning them about Wolfgang Halibut, correct?
	This is Exhibit 146, already in evidence, Your Honor.
	Yes, Your Honor, it's a full exhibit.
	Agreed.
	You've seen this email before, right?
	I'm sorry, can you zoom in on it a little bit?
	Thank you.
	Yes, let's bring up the first portion.
	It's from a gentleman named R. Darren Brumfield, right?
	Yes, I see that.
	And I have seen this, yes.
	March 5, 2015. And Mr. Brunfeld says, Madam or Sir, I'm in my final semester of law school.
	I listened to the Wolfgang Halbig video, and some significant alarm bells went off.
	I also wrote on the YouTube page, but I copy and paste here.
	And he says, "Okay, just so I get this straight, "starting at 31:30, he," referring to Halbig, "filed his lawsuit in Seminole County in Florida.
	Not federal court in Florida, but in state court.
	There's a legal requirement called standing.
	He does not have any standing to sue in Seminole County.
	He was not a party in the shooting in any fashion.
	And what Mr. Brunfeld is saying is that the claims that Mr. Halbig was making about some lawsuit he was filing seemed to this gentleman, who was a law student, to be ridiculous, correct?
	He looks to me like he's providing his opinions as if he did file this lawsuit there, it doesn't belong there, it's not the proper forum.
	Right.
	And the bottom paragraph says, this man seems to be grasping and stretching.
	No judge in their right mind would do such a thing as he describes, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Okay, and so fair to say that what this gentleman is doing is calling into question Wolfgang Howden's credibility, correct?
	He's calling into question some things about the lawsuit that he said he filed.
	That's what that means to me.
	And then if we go up to the top portion, Nico sends this email to Rob Dew, right?
	Yes, it was forwarded.
	Some comments on Halving's last interview from a lawsuit, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	After receiving this, Infant Wars continued to have Halving on the show and continued to air his false claims, correct?
	He appeared after this, yes.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Thank you, Tony. Tony.
	Thank you.
	On March 10th, so that was dated March 6th, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	On March 10th, this will be Exhibit 147, Halbig sends Free Speech Systems another email that he sends to yet another Sandy Hook Aaron, correct?
	You see this here?
	Wolfgang Halbig sending an email to Scarlett.
	Do you see that?
	I see it, yes.
	Scarlett is...
	Scarlett Lewis, correct?
	Yes.
	The mother of Jessie Lewis, who was murdered at Sandy Hook.
	Right.
	The subject that he chooses to put in is, how could you as a mother...
	Stop and buy your special brand of coffee on December 14, 2012, when you heard as a mom that shots have been fired at the Sandy Hook School.
	That's what it says, Yas.
	And then he says, Scarlett, it is just a matter of time, and all that money you have has to be returned.
	How could you even stop to buy your coffee?
	And you bought coffee for two other people.
	What kind of mother does that?
	Especially when you on the news tell everyone how you ran across the fire department parking lot.
	If you did, you would have spilled the coffee.
	Do some serious soul searching, because the scam is up.
	That's what he wrote, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And he sent this to InfoWars, correct?
	Amongst other people, yes.
	Right.
	InfoWars was the only recipient who continued to have Mr. Halving on the air to an audience of millions, correct?
	I don't think anybody else had him on the air, but...
	Right.
	This is all within a matter of a couple of weeks in March, correct?
	Yeah, it's a very short time period.
	And then in May 2015, they published that video we just saw, Sandy Hook, The Lies Keep Wrong, correct? - Alright.
	I believe so, yes.
	I believe that's the date.
	And then in June 2015, they sent Dan Badandi back up to cover the next hearing in Connecticut, correct?
	Right.
	He came up to cover another hearing.
	I just don't recall the date.
	Okay.
	Well, let's show you exhibit number 153.
	That is a full exhibit.
	Thank you.
	Agreed.
	Pull up that first part there.
	This is Dan Badandi to Rob Du, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	June 3rd, 2015, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And let's go down to the email.
	Okay.
	And you'll see that what Dambadanti is sending Rob, you've seen this email before, right?
	I think so, yes.
	What Dan Badandi is sending to Rob do is his video footage that he and his cameraman had captured while they were up in Newtown, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Okay.
	And he did.
	He sent InfoWars that raw footage, didn't he?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	All right.
	This is exhibit 27.
	It is admitted.
	Thank you.
	Yes, it's a full exhibit.
	Read.
	I'm sorry, one moment.
	I'm sorry, one moment. one moment.
	Wow, retirement, huh? - Okay. - Okay.
	That person that Dan Magandhi is following behind, that's the chief of the Newtown Police Department, correct?
	I believe that's true, yes.
	This is 2015, but Chief Kehoe was the Chief of Newtown Police Department on the day of the shooting, correct?
	Correct.
	He responded to the scene of the shooting, did he not?
	I believe he did, yes.
	Tony?
	Retirement, huh?
	We need to take the afternoon recess now.
	Yes, Your Honor.
	Okay, so we will take a 15-minute recess.
	We'll be back in session right at 2.15.
	Ron will take care of your notebooks and just keep obeying the rules of juror conduct.
	All right.
	All right, Ms. Pott, you can take the stand.
	I just want to add one anomaly in the exit of this one moment, please.
	Yes, no problem.
	Okay, you are ready, too.
	I'm ready.
	Yes, all set?
	Yes, yes, come on.
	Yes, yes, yes, yes. yes.
	Yes, yes. yes.
	Yes, yes.
	Be seated.
	You may inquire whenever you're ready.
	Thank you, Your Honor.
	Ms. Paz, before the break, I apologize that I didn't realize we were getting into our break.
	I already started playing a video.
	And so let's just reorient the jury with the video that we were watching.
	This is video footage that Dan Badani and the Fort Worth cameraman shot on June 3rd, 2015. Dan Badani, correct?
	Right.
	When they were attending a Freedom of Information Commission hearing To address Mr. Halvey's request for documents.
	Right.
	Correct?
	Yes.
	And as we were breaking, Dan Badani was following the former chief of the Newtown Police Department, who had been called there as a witness, out of the room.
	Correct?
	Right.
	We're gonna start that video from the beginning and we're gonna watch it all the way through
	Wow, retiring huh?
	You guys trying to remember what I'm saying huh?
	Retirement, huh?
	Trust them now, we know you guys have first fund.
	Please come on.
	- No, no, just speak to us.
	- Retirement for retirement.
	Good time for retirement. - Retirement for retirement. - Just speak to us. - See you in the slide, folks, right here.
	Right there for retirement.
	Yeah.
	Retirement, huh?
	How are you guys going to feel like a lot of the Nazis are talking about?
	Are you seeing a lot of folks right there?
	He's blocking out the path on the stairs.
	What's this guy doing right here?
	He's from Creole.
	Creole.
	I'm just going to have a pat down the floor plate.
	And this paint is going to block us.
	I'm going to go to 30 feet.
	What do you think?
	I'm going to be a girl piece of shit.
	We're retiring, huh?
	How's your retirement going there?
	Are you trying to come up standing up?
	We know you have communication with the helicopter.
	I'm a pilot myself.
	You know the information is better to come out.
	You know that, right?
	You people are in jail, you white eyes and hands.
	Will!
	Want to get that check on me?
	Retirement?
	Why?
	Wow.
	That's great.
	I hope you enjoy that retirement.
	Sir, are you trying to remove the fact that Sandy Hook was covered?
	Sir, are you watching around?
	Police Chief of Sandy Hook dead in Newtown Connecticut.
	He's covering up the whole operation.
	They had communication with the helicopter.
	The line on the stand.
	Oh, that's prejudice.
	You know what prejudice is?
	You got nothing to hide, just speak to us, sir.
	Yes, you got nothing to hide, just speak to us.
	Take a moment to speak with us.
	Sorry, you know you're lying right here, right?
	Who's holding the wire straight on that thing?
	You've got nothing behind you speaking to her.
	Who's from a jail?
	Truth is out there!
	We're going to jail, criminal!
	I'm going to the climate!
	And you, sir, if you're defending criminals, how do you feel about that?
	You know, this guy here is somebody out of Central Caste, and I'm telling you, this is the exact person that they would hide to represent criminals, folks.
	If you're saying you hope truth is coming out of you, you can go to jail.
	You can smile all you want and go in the jail to throw it.
	Plain and separate.
	Alright, we're going to have credentials.
	The number one alternative news source in the world.
	Why are you running out of here?
	What do you have to say about the company from us?
	What's your name?
	So you know you're lying.
	The chief lying on the scan, you can't get past, you're just going to get lying.
	You can't get rid of people.
	But you can answer one of the things you want to say.
	Why would you think it's much?
	The truth will be revealed.
	it always is my man So...
	Why did you deny the helicopter pilot being here twice under subpoena?
	Do I know the authority to dismiss him from the state?
	But that's all the people there, folks.
	You know he dismissed the helicopter pilot twice under subpoena.
	And that's against the law, folks.
	This guy's walking on the way in the stairs.
	By make no mistake of ours, you will be going to jail.
	You're a bunch of frauds, a bunch of criminals.
	Enjoy your fellow reserve notes now, scumbags.
	Well, she has people, folks, that hold up Sandy Hawk.
	- Say it open to this. - What we just saw was InfoWars reporter Dan Badani and InfoWars cameraman doing that, correct?
	Yes.
	And InfoWars streamed this live, correct?
	You mean recorded it live or put it on the platforms live?
	I mean they streamed this live as it was happening, correct?
	I'm not sure whether it was live-streamed.
	I know that portions of this were played on the video segment that we saw earlier, but I'm not really sure if it was live-streamed.
	You haven't read Mr. Jones's deposition about that happening.
	Right.
	And I think we talked about- Free speech systems, corporate representative, having watched this, It's testifying that there is a possibility that we may have aired this live to our hundreds of millions of audience members, correct?
	I don't know either way.
	I can't say.
	Attacking the police chief of Newtown, calling him a fraud, correct?
	He says that on the video, yes.
	And forgive me, a crooked, corrupt, piece of shit motherfucker.
	He did say that, yes.
	And he said, you're live on the air, Infowars.com, right?
	He said that, yes.
	The world's number one alternative news site, right?
	He said that, yes.
	Nice little advertisement, correct?
	I mean, I don't know if it was intended to be an advertisement, but he said it, yes.
	And Dan Badandi, former professional wrestler, correct?
	I believe he was, yes.
	This is exactly the type of stuff That Mr. Jones liked using Mr. Badandi, correct?
	I'm sorry, what are you referring to?
	Mr. Badandi was so valuable to Mr. Jones because he was willing to engage in this type of near-violent confrontation with people, correct?
	I don't know if I would term it violent, but I'm aware he has used certain terms in connection with Mr. Badandi and adjectives.
	Describing Mr. Badandi.
	Right.
	He's described him as a wild man, correct?
	Yes.
	He's described him as the Kraken, right?
	I believe he said, release the Kraken.
	Release the Kraken.
	Correct.
	Yes, I've seen him say that.
	Right.
	In fact, let's play that.
	What is a Kraken?
	I think it's referring to mythology.
	Right.
	It's a mythological monster, correct?
	That's my understanding.
	Let's play Exhibit 11, already in evidence.
	as comments made by Mr. Jones two years earlier about Dan Badani. - Do you know what we privately say about Badani when we say him on a mission?
	Release the Kraken.
	Mr. Johnson and Mr. Bedali on a mission here, didn't he?
	He was sent there to record that, yes.
	And he released Mr. Badali to come up here and do exactly what And when InfoWars, when Rob Dew, let's be real specific about this.
	When Rob Dew saw this video, he invited Badandi back on for an interview to give him the whole rundown on it, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	InfoWars aired that footage, right?
	The footage of the interview?
	No, no, no.
	The footage we just saw.
	Oh yes, as I said earlier, there were clips that were added, erred rather, in one of the broadcasts.
	Clips of Mr. Badandi harassing those people, correct?
	Some of those clips, plus some of the clips from the FOIA hearing.
	So, some of the clips.
	And what Mr. Halbig and what Mr. Badandi were doing up there is exactly what Mr. Jones has been encouraging his audience to do.
	Investigate, right?
	Objection argumentative.
	I'm sorry, what was the question?
	This is exactly the type of investigation that Mr. Jones encourages his audience to do when he talks about Sandy Jones.
	You mean is he encouraging people to be followed?
	I don't know that.
	that I don't know so what later happened that was June 3rd Just to remind everybody, that was June 3rd, right?
	I believe so, yes.
	July 7th, 2015, two and a half years out from San Diego.
	I mean, that is correct.
	They re-aired footage about this hearing, correct?
	And they entitled it, Retired FBI Agent Investigates San Diego.
	Remember that one?
	I do remember that one, yes.
	Actually, I'm sorry.
	That's only part of the title.
	And I think you'll remember this.
	It's Retired FBI Agent Investigates Sandy Hook.
	Mega Massive Cover.
	Yes.
	And that was one of Mr. Jones' titles.
	He titled that one.
	We know that.
	I think he did.
	So let's play Exhibit 28A, please.
	That is a full exhibit, Your Honor.
	Agreed.
	No emergency helicopters were sent.
	The ambulances came an hour and a half later and parked down the road.
	DHS an hour and a half later with a timestamp put up signs saying sign in here.
	They had porta potties being delivered within an hour and a half.
	It looked like a carnival.
	Looked like a big ER stunt.
	Came out at Bloomberg a day before sent an email out to his gun control groups at all 50 states We have the emails from city council back and forth at a school talking about it being shut down a year before.
	We have the school then being demolished and the records being sealed.
	We have videos that look They had a weird anti-terrorism unit from the state nearby with men in the woods, which were on video from helicopter.
	Then they said that didn't exist.
	And so we'll recap some of the history of this.
	But now, your uncle John And then I heard you talking about it yesterday.
	I knew that we sent our reporter Dan Madandi there for days to cover the city council hearings about it.
	The fact that they're sealing everything.
	And then you just said, oh yes, and that's why I'm trying to get my uncle to tell me more.
	Because he's been in John Gotti hearings and been involved in huge cases.
	A pretty prominent FBI agent before he retired.
	And his work But the headline here is, Retired FBI Agent Investigating Sandy Hook.
	I mean, that was just amazing to me that so much goes on around here that I miss some of what's happening.
	Next time a former Navy SEAL FBI agent, I don't care if it's your uncle, is investigating something like this.
	We want to hear about it.
	I want to try to get him on.
	I know he's going to get heat probably.
	And they'll probably try to threaten him.
	But really kudos to him.
	I mean, he told me that he went and investigated him because other insiders said he'd go look at this.
	I guess people currently in the FBI aren't allowed to.
	But man, the fix is in.
	And so Rob Duke, tell us about your uncle.
	Tell us about all this.
	I wish we'd gotten more than a two minute interview with him.
	With Badandi.
	Badandi did a great job.
	I just wish I had known about this.
	I would have gone up there.
	How would have tried to get me to go?
	I just been trying to watch the TV network and the new website and everything else.
	But I mean, this is just so big. - Do you see the picture that they're showing there?
	Yes.
	That's Badandi, right?
	Yes.
	He's wearing the same shirt that we just saw in the video we just saw, right?
	Yes.
	You heard Mr. Jones say Badandi had done a great job, right?
	That's what he said.
	Right.
	And I just want to, there were a couple of maybe new ones in there that we were talking about, or that he was saying.
	Did you hear there where Mr. Jones said...
	We got the records and the emails showing that the school had been closed between the town officials showing that the school had been closed the year before, right?
	Yes, I heard him talk about emails relating to the school being closed, yes.
	I don't know what he's referring to.
	That's a lie.
	I've never seen any such thing.
	Right, right.
	You had every opportunity to ask Mr. Jones about that.
	He had every opportunity to tell you, right?
	About what he was referring to?
	About the records and emails that he was claiming to his audience of millions exist, and that proved that the school was closed the year before.
	I didn't ask him about that specific claim.
	I did ask him about the claim about the school being closed.
	But I didn't ask him about emails and such relating to the school being closed.
	Wait a second.
	You asked him about the school being closed?
	I asked him what basis he had for saying the school was closed.
	Okay.
	And he didn't tell you about the emails and the school records going back and forth between town officials?
	That's not what I got from him, no.
	Right.
	Certainly, those emails and records would be shocking to see, right?
	If there were any.
	Yes.
	We heard another claim in there that might be new to the jury, and that is men in the woods.
	Men in the woods.
	Did you hear that?
	I heard him say that, yes.
	And at some point in the afternoon of December 14, 2012, there was helicopter footage showing people in the woods, correct?
	Right, yes.
	Many hours after the shooting had taken place, correct?
	I'm not sure the exact time.
	You don't know that it was in the afternoon?
	I don't know the exact time.
	Okay.
	But the shooting was in the morning and it was some hours later.
	And the state police report makes clear that those were reporters that had gotten a little too close to the school, correct?
	I don't know if they were reporters.
	I know that they were talking about a man in camouflage a couple of times being pulled out of the woods.
	But I don't recall whether it was ultimately a reporter or not.
	Did you ask Mr. Jones about that?
	About?
	His claim that there were men in the woods?
	Yes, I did.
	Do you want me to continue?
	I asked him about the man in the woods and his claim was I saw footage of them taking a person out of the woods.
	He saw footage of them taking a person out of the woods?
	That's what he saw?
	Exactly.
	You've never seen that footage yet?
	I saw the same aerial footage that they had viewed.
	Which, to be clear, does not show anybody being taken out of the woods, correct?
	I don't think that it shows anybody being pulled out of the woods.
	There's some helicopter footage of people running around in the woods.
	But other than that, correct?
	I don't know who they were.
	Alright, fair enough.
	Freeview Systems has no idea who they were.
	Correct.
	So let's pull up that, I'm sorry, let's pull up that picture again.
	That was Rob Du, I'm sorry, Dan Badandi.
	And a gentleman whose hand is shaking.
	If you stopped it, that's okay.
	If we can get it with you, that's great.
	In any event, you also heard from most of that clip we just saw, Alex Jones repeatedly Praising the decorated career of an FBI agent who was purportedly now investigating Sandy Hook, correct?
	Rob Dew's uncle, yes.
	Rob Dew's uncle.
	And he said, this is Rob Dew's uncle, FBI agent is now investigating Sandy Hook.
	There he is.
	This is the gentleman that they were claiming is Rob Dew's uncle, correct?
	Right, on the left hand side.
	The older gentleman.
	Yes.
	Let's see if I can remember.
	Rob Dew's uncle, retired FBI agent, right?
	That's what he said, yes.
	Investigated John Gotti, right?
	This is like a major mob figure.
	I think that's what he said, yes.
	Right.
	And just generally extolling just how significant this gentleman was as an FBI agent, correct?
	That's what he said.
	Now, have you read Rob Dew's deposition?
	Which one?
	The deposition he gave here in Connecticut.
	I think I did.
	Right.
	And so you recall that I asked Rob Dew what he actually...
	And you saw Rob Dew sitting right next to Alex Jones as you were saying all that, right?
	Yes.
	And I asked Rob Dew to tell me about his uncle's career, right?
	And Rob Dew said he could have been a janitor for all I know, correct?
	I believe he said something to that effect.
	They weren't close.
	I asked him about that as well in my conversation.
	They weren't very close.
	But the sworn testimony he gave when he was under oath and not at the studio was that as far as he knew, his uncle might have been a janitor for the FBI, right?
	I think that's what he said.
	In 2016, November 2016, actually, you know what, I'm sorry, I think there was one more clip I wanted to play there.
	Yeah, 2018, please.
	Nobody acts like, it's 101, they're covering it up.
	And because nobody acts like that if they're on the line.
	It's like if a cop pulls you over and you're busy cramming stuff under the seat.
	Right, saying, don't worry, hold on, I'm looking for my license or whatever.
	You know, nobody has the proper paperwork.
	Nobody can deliver it.
	They deliver videos without timestamps from police squad cars.
	There's videos without timestamps that they give to them saying these are the copies from the squad car.
	Yet you go online and you can see squad car video from the same squad car and it's got time code on it.
	So how did they give him video without time code and he's viewing it at the police station?
	This is mega massive cover up.
	It's crazy.
	What Rob Du is talking about there is actually Wolfgang Halbig's claim that the city of Newtown had withheld documents from him, correct?
	Right, one of his claims was that- Sorry, I just want to make sure, in response to my question, you agree that what Rob Dew was talking about there was Wolfgang Halbig's claim that the city of Newtown had withheld documents from him.
	He did claim that, yes.
	And you're aware that the State of Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission concluded in 2015 that the city of Newtown had complied with all of its obligations and provided Mr. Halbig with all documents that it had that he had requested, correct?
	Yes.
	So let's go to November.
	Before we do that.
	Mega massive, retired FBI agent investigates Sandy Hook.
	Mega massive cover up.
	That's what we just saw.
	That was July 7th, 2015, right?
	Yes.
	Let's pull up Exhibit 156.
	It's a full exhibit in the room.
	Yes, it's a full exhibit.
	It's the day after that airs.
	We pull up the...
	I think we can just start at the top on this one.
	Okay, this is an email from Rob Du to Dan Badani, right?
	Yes.
	OK, let's go down.
	And now I think I do need to see the first email.
	Thanks, sorry.
	Let's go down to the first one, yeah.
	Okay.
	Dan says, when you get a chance, send me the Ustream account info.
	The hearing starts at 2 p.m.
	Eastern, right?
	So I figured we could stream at a quarter of whenever you want us to.
	That's what Dan Badani says to him, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	All right.
	Let's go back up.
	Great.
	And here we have Rob Du sending to Dan Badani The login information for the Alex Jones channel, live channel, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And Rob Du is giving Dambadandi instructions, correct?
	Instructions on how to get on the Ustream app.
	Right.
	Let's go to Exhibit 157.
	It's also full of exhibit.
	Green.
	Thank you.
	So you can see, chronologically here, we're now two months later.
	This is September of 2015, right?
	See this?
	Yes, I see it.
	This is an email from Louis S. to Travis Knight, Rob Dew, and Darren, right?
	Yes.
	Louis, you know as Louis Sertouki, correct?
	Yes.
	He's a social media manager for Infowars, yes?
	I believe so, yes.
	Still employed there?
	I think he is, yes.
	Darren McBreen.
	That's Darren, longtime employee of InfoWars, right?
	Right.
	You met with him, right?
	I don't know if I met with Darren.
	No.
	Let's go down to the email.
	I'll pull it out a little bit so we can just see the list here.
	The subject is video files for Facebook upload, correct?
	Yes, that's what it says.
	So what's happening here is Mr. Surtuki sent Rob, Dew, Travis and I and Darren a request.
	Can I get these videos for future strategic Facebook uploads, right?
	That's what it says.
	And if you go down to the very bottom...
	See the last one?
	Why people think Sandy Hook is a hoax.
	Yes, I see it.
	That's the January 27th, 2013 video that they published, that Mr. Jones published, correct?
	I think it's the same one, yes.
	And the reason Mr. Sertiki wanted that was so that he could strategically upload this video to Facebook, correct?
	Well, that's what the email says.
	It was a list of videos he wanted to upload to Facebook.
	Nearly three years after the shooting.
	That's what the email says.
	Let's go back out of that.
	I'm sorry, and now we can go to the top one.
	Okay.
	And Darren just asked Rob Du, any luck finding these?
	That's the question, right?
	That's that email?
	Yes.
	All right.
	Let's go to exhibit number 158.
	Full exhibit.
	Agreed.
	This is September 2015, and this is an email from Buckley Hammond.
	We remember that's Alex Jones' cousin, yes?
	Yes.
	And to a gentleman named CoreyJones at Glock.us, correct?
	Yes.
	And copying Joe Biggs.
	Joe Biggs at this time was an InfoWars employee as well, correct?
	At that time, yes.
	And what's happening here is that Buckley is saying, hello, Corey.
	Right?
	Yes.
	And he's saying, I have to apologize.
	I drafted an email with all the metrics data in it, and then it sat in my drafts.
	I thought I had sent it.
	Thanks for your patience.
	We are eager to continue our discussions.
	Please find the relevant metrics information attached in the zip file.
	There's a text file that has a legend that describes the various charts and spreadsheets.
	Please pass this on to your analytics guys and anyone else who cares to analyze it, Buckley, right?
	Yes.
	And then if you go back to the top, Joe Biggs looks like he's forwarding the attachment to Mr. Jones, correct?
	That is Corey Jones.
	Yes, that's what it looks like.
	And Glock, Glock is a firearms manufacturer, correct?
	Yes.
	And they were an advertiser with InfoWars, yes?
	I believe so, yes.
	So what Buckley is doing here is sending somebody at Glock information related to their advertising relationship on InfoWars, yes?
	That's what it sounds like from the email.
	Now let's go to...
	Exhibit number 160.
	That's a full exhibit.
	Agreed.
	You see here an email from Paul Watson.
	Now that name is going to be familiar because that's the individual who sent the response to Len Posner on July 29, 2013. Right?
	Do you remember that?
	I do remember that, yes.
	And you testified yesterday that Paul Joseph Watson was opposed to the lies that Mr. Jones was telling about Sandy Hook, correct?
	He did not think that we should talk about Sandy Hook anymore.
	And now here we are, three years after the shooting, almost to the day, yes?
	Very close, yes.
	And he's sending an email with the subject Sandy Hook.
	That's what it says, yes.
	All right.
	And let's go down to the body of the email.
	He's sending it to, sorry if I said this, he's sending it to Buckley, Alex Jones's cousin, correct?
	Yes.
	And Anthony Gucciardi, correct?
	Yes.
	Anthony's an InfoWars employee and also...
	Objection.
	Is there an objection to the question?
	Yes, it suits the fact found in evidence.
	Okay, but I'm going to need to speak about it.
	So I asked her if he was an employee up in fours, and I believe she said yes.
	I think he is.
	I don't know if he's a current employee, but at the time he was an employee.
	Okay.
	Thank you.
	And Paul Watson says, sent this to Alex, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Alex Jones, right?
	That's presumably what it means.
	And he says, this Sandy Hook stuff is killing us.
	It's promoted by the most batshit crazy people like Rents and Fetzer who all hate us anyway.
	Plus it makes us look really bad to align with people who harass the parents of dead kids.
	It's gonna hurt us with drudge and bringing in bigger names into the show.
	Plus the event happened three years ago.
	Why even risk our reputation for it?
	That's what it says.
	And that's what Mr. Watson is saying he sent to Alex, correct?
	He said he sent it to Alex, yes.
	And James Fetzer is a guy who wrote a book, Nobody Died at San Diego, right?
	He did, yes.
	And in fact, Infowars promoted his book on its website, correct?
	I think they may have posted something to it on the website, yes.
	Right.
	Same way that we're promoting Halby's website, correct?
	Similarly, yes.
	And you'll recall an email that Rob Dew sent to James Betzer saying, let us know if you get a bump in downloads of your book, right?
	I don't remember an email.
	All right.
	Let's go to number 164.
	This is now moving into 2060, okay?
	2060. Agreed.
	Anyway, did you ask Alex Jones about that email that we just showed?
	I didn't.
	I talked to Mr. Watson about it.
	it no I didn't ask Alex about it but you asked mr. Watson about it I did speak to Mr. Watson via Zoom, and I asked him about his email.
	Why did you ask Mr. Watson about it, but not Alex Jones?
	It was really hard to talk to Alex about every single topic.
	So is your answer to my question that it was just too difficult to ask him?
	It was.
	Just given time restraints and things like that So let's go to in 2016 this is 164 This is an email from Info wars life at gmail.com right and That's what it looks like, yes.
	InfoWarsLife is another online store owned by Free Speed Systems, yes?
	Yes.
	And Tim Fruget also had oversight of that store.
	I believe so, yes.
	And so here he's sending himself an email.
	Concerning week-over-week e-commerce dashboard, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	And the attachment he's sending is analytics, all website data, all-in-one e-commerce dashboard, correct?
	That's what the PDF is named, yes.
	And this is being pulled, you can see here on the bottom, www.google.com slash analytics.
	Do you see that?
	Yes, it says this is a report email from Google Analytics.
	So you recall earlier this morning, we were looking at all those emails, including the Google Analytics about the article, FBI says nobody died at Sandy Hook.
	And now two years later, we're still seeing Google Analytics, right?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Okay.
	And if we pull out-- I'm sorry, are there attachments?
	There must be, right?
	Yeah.
	Let's take a look at some of these.
	This is for the week of...
	Oh, and you can see right there on the very upper left-hand corner.
	What does that say, Ms. Potts?
	Google Analytics.
	Right.
	And if you exit out of that...
	This is for the week June 20th, 2016 to June 26th, 2016, right?
	That's what it says.
	And here we're seeing unique purchases and new users, right?
	Yes.
	And we're seeing transactions by medium on the left side.
	Yes, I see it.
	You're welcome.
	And Magento here, that is the software provider for the new store that Alex Jones launched, we talked about earlier in 2015, Infowarsstore.com, right?
	I'm not sure.
	I don't know what Magento is.
	Let me see if I can refresh your recollection.
	Does it refresh your recollection that Infowarshop.com?
	Yes.
	You know that one?
	Yes.
	That one had software that it ran on called 3D Cart.
	Does that ring a bell?
	Oh, yes.
	Okay.
	And then when they launched Infowarsstore.com on that website, they used software called Magento, right?
	Okay.
	And those two stores they have running at the same time, just different websites, different retail stores, all InfoWars, right?
	Right, right.
	Same thing with InfoWars Life.
	Right.
	So this is some of the data that Tim Fruget was sending himself about the performance of the different, of InfoWars Life, yes?
	That's what it looks like.
	Okay.
	Now has your testimony changed having seen that at all?
	Has Free Speed Systems testimony changed having seen that about whether it uses Google Analytics?
	Or, excuse me, used?
	No.
	Okay.
	Let's go to exhibit number 167.
	This is in.
	Thank you.
	Yes, it's a full exhibit.
	All right.
	This is from Adan Salazar.
	Right?
	Yes.
	Just to remind everybody, Adan Salazar.
	Did the creepy Illuminati Batman articles.
	He did the FBI Says Nobody Died at Sandy Hook article, right?
	Right.
	And he's sending this email to Rob Du.
	Let's pull up just the header there.
	November 17th, 2016, correct?
	Yes.
	And he says, here's just a few of the more than a dozen articles I've done on the taboo topic.
	That's what he says.
	And the taboo topic here, of course, is Sandy Hook.
	Yes, that's the subject.
	And the reason he was sending this to Rob Dew is because Alex Jones was getting ready to broadcast a video about Sandy Hook the very next day, correct?
	I don't know if that was the reason behind this email.
	I didn't ask about this specific email.
	You know that on November 18th, 2016, the day after this email, Alex Jones published a video that he titled, Alex Jones, Final Statement on Sandy Hook.
	Yes.
	I don't recall the exact date, but yes, I watched that video and I recall the title.
	And so Free Speech Systems doesn't know whether Adan Salazar was sending some of his work to Rob Dew for use in preparing for that video, right?
	I don't know.
	No, I didn't ask about this email.
	Let's just make sure.
	We can pull that down.
	May I have just one moment here?
	Your Honor, I'm going to show Ms. Paz exhibit 255.
	This is the chart of videos, Ms. Paz, that you referenced before.
	245?
	245. Okay, sure.
	Yeah, 245. That is not a full statement.
	Right, we're not going to display it.
	This is just for Ms. Paz.
	Ms. Paz, do you see that, in fact, on November 18, 2016, InfoWars did publish a video that it titled Alex Jones's Final Statement on San Diego.
	Yes, I see the date, November 18th, 2016. Yes.
	And we are now just about four years on from the shooting, yes?
	Almost.
	The day before this, Adan had sent those links to Mr. Du of just some of more than a dozen articles he had written on the taboo topic, yes?
	That's what the email said, yes.
	Okay, and then the next day, Yes, according to the videos.
	Let's pull up Exhibit 168. This is an evidentiary.
	That is a full exhibit.
	Agreed.
	Let's pull up the header there.
	This is from Paul Watson to Buckley Hammond, correct?
	Yes.
	So this is Quantcast ranking, correct?
	That's what it says, yes.
	Quantcast is another software program that Infowars used to target its customers with ads after they had left the store, right?
	One of, yes.
	Right, so somebody comes to the store, let's say they don't buy anything, but Infowars wants to see where they go next, right?
	Right, it's like retargeting.
	Right, exactly.
	Let's say they go to Infowarsstore.com, they put a little DNA Force Plus in the cart, but then they leave and they don't buy.
	They might go next to ESPN.com.
	What Quantcast does is it allows Infowars to know that they went to ESPN.com.
	I think it'll put an ad on the next site that they're on so that the next site they're on, they'll show an ad for the thing that they had looked at on Infowars.
	There you go.
	Exactly right.
	Yes.
	They come to Infowarsstore.com and they leave and Infowars goes, let's get them back here, we're going to serve them an ad, right?
	That's the idea.
	Right, on another website.
	And that's what Quantcast allows them to do.
	Yes.
	Okay, so now let's go down to the email itself.
	By the way, have you reviewed any Quantcast data?
	I don't recall.
	I don't think so.
	I don't recall.
	So, let's pull up the whole first part.
	Yep, right there's mine.
	This is...
	Sorry, pull out, because I just want to make sure we reorient everybody here.
	So the last email on the chain is an email from Paul Watson to Buckley that says, sure, please send it again, right?
	Yes.
	And what he's responding to is this second email here, go ahead, yep, perfect, that Buckley Hammond had sent him, right?
	Yes.
	And he says, but no, surely it's a conspiracy theory.
	That they are trying to suppress our popularity so that the lizard people can return to the ascension pad at Sandy Hook and feast on sacrificed crisis actors.
	That's what he says, right?
	That's what it says.
	And then he has some sort of image here, correct?
	cartoon-type picture.
	Yes?
	Yeah.
	And on the very day that Buckley Hammond sends Paul Watson that email talking about sacrificing crisis actors at Sandy Hook, Alex Jones publishes his final statement correct?
	yes I believe that's the date this is 35 D for media was the mr.
	Now to be clear, corporate media wants to misrepresent what I said, so this is not for them.
	But I'm going to do my best to lay out I've got more than 20 news articles and video clips to go over.
	Number one, the day before this tragic event happened, an email was sent out by Bloomberg's anti-gun group saying, prepare for a big event.
	But the biggest piece of evidence, the smoking Now, Ms. Potts, you know what the Wayback Machine is, right?
	It's purportedly an internet website that tracks internet traffic on whatever site you're trying to look at.
	Well, let me see if I can help you here.
	The Wayback Machine doesn't measure internet traffic.
	What it does, correct me if I'm wrong, is it's a crawler that crawls across the internet, and when it comes across a website that's been changed since the last time it was there, it archives that page, right?
	That's what it is.
	Honestly, I'm not really sure how it works, to be honest, so I can't really testify to how it works, but...
	Well, Ms. Paz, this is the smoking gun.
	Objection, Judge.
	No foundation for further questions on this.
	Mr. Gatti's testified on his own expertise.
	Mr. Jones said this is the smoking gun, right?
	This is what he's relied on for that particular claim, yes.
	Right, and so you're here at Free Speech Systems, presumably to explain to this jury how it is that this Wayback Machine is some sort of smoking gun to establish that the same lie Jones had been telling for years was in fact true, right?
	I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.
	Alright, maybe we can just make this real quick.
	Ms. Paz, you know that this website here that he's saying was the Sandy Hook Elementary School website?
	Yes.
	You know that that wasn't the website, right?
	Yes, I know that that's not the right website.
	Right.
	Yes.
	So although Free Speech Systems can't today say anything about how the Wayback Machine works, What you are prepared to tell this jury is that the smoking gun Alex Jones was describing, that is that there was no traffic to the Newtown School website, he wasn't even using the school's website, right?
	it wasn't the right website correct let's keep playing 12 entire school system And the word is, that school system was shut down for those years.
	That's what the records show.
	They tell us.
	The records, this is what we were talking about earlier, the records and emails between town officials, right?
	I remember, yes.
	Right.
	The ones that you've never seen.
	Right.
	and the ones that don't exist, correct? - Okay, I'm not seeing them when they don't exist. - Is it Free Speech Systems' position that there are records and emails establishing that Sandy Hook Elementary School I'm not seeing them when they don't exist. - Is it Free Is it Free Speech Systems' position that there are records and emails establishing that Sandy Hook Elementary School was closed?
	Is that your position here with them?
	No.
	Let's keep playing.
	It was over.
	I don't know if the moon landings were faked, but I don't put anything past these anti-guys.
	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.
	Emergency helicopters weren't called.
	All right.
	Now, we've heard this claim many times, correct?
	Yes.
	Kids going in circles, right?
	Yes.
	You wouldn't expect them to be going into the school.
	You'd expect them to be running away, right?
	That's what he says, yes.
	And he's showing this building here, right, to his audience.
	Yes.
	And he's telling his audience that this is the school that the kids are walking around in, in a drill, right?
	I think that's what his claim is, yes.
	Right.
	this isn't the school correct no that's the firehouse that's the firehouse yes right in fact let's pull up the the aerial photograph that we used with you all over yesterday Let's pull up $399.
	If you do it side by side, that would be really great.
	And while we're doing that, Ms. Paz, you know that the aerial photographs of the school were actually included in the state's attorney's report, right?
	I believe there were photos of the area in that report.
	That info works happening?
	Right, the ones that were emailed to Mr. Dew, yes.
	Right.
	Great.
	And so what you have here, you recognize this photo because this is a photo from the state's attorney's report, I've seen that photo, yes.
	This is the school.
	That is the school.
	This is the firehouse.
	Right?
	Oh, yes.
	I see it all the way in the corner there, yeah.
	This is the firehouse.
	That's a close-up of the firehouse.
	InfoWars knew darn well that this video that it was putting out to its millions of viewers in Alex Jones' final statement on Sandy Hook was the firehouse, not the school.
	Overruled.
	I'm sorry, the question is whether Alex knew that that was the firehouse and not the school when he said that?
	Is that the question?
	No.
	I was asking first about InfoWars.
	Because you don't know whether Alex Jones ever looked at any aerial photographs, correct?
	Correct.
	I don't know if he ever read the report.
	You don't know if you ever read the report.
	Right.
	You haven't read his deposition.
	Right.
	What we know for sure is that this photograph was in the report, correct?
	Yes, I've seen it.
	InfoWars had it, correct?
	Yes.
	Do you know that Rob Dew testified that he reviewed the report?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	And then in 2016, four years later, they're showing their audience of millions and millions that kids were going in circles around the school, except they're showing the firehouse.
	And InfoWars well knew that, correct?
	I don't know if Alex knew that when he aired it.
	Do you want to just answer my question, yes or no?
	I didn't ask you about Alex.
	Okay.
	Free speech knew it.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Let's keep playing, please, and you can back out of this.
	Instead, porta-potties were prepared for the press within hours of the event.
	I saw the helicopters that did respond, the police helicopters, saying that there were men or a man in the woods in camouflage.
	The media later said that was a conspiracy theory.
	So early on, I'm like, well, I saw local news of the guy in the woods and they took him in custody.
	Now they're saying it never happened.
	So that shows there's some kind of a cover up happening.
	And then I saw Anderson Cooper.
	I've been in TV for 27 years.
	I know a blue screen.
	Then I saw clearly that they were using footage on the green screen loop because it would show flowers and other things during other broadcasts that were moving and then basically cutting the same piece of footage.
	Then I saw CNN do fake satellite interviews with reporters clearly with the same traffic and the same cars right behind them conducting the interview face to face.
	Then we see footage of one of them.
	Can you just, is there any way to just go back a couple seconds to learn that article?
	All right.
	See this, Ms. Paz?
	Yes.
	Now, what Alex Jones was saying when he showed this was that one of the reasons we know this was a big media event production was because CNN had two people pretending to be in different locations and that they are actually both in Newtown, correct?
	Is your question whether he's claiming that these two reporters, these female reporters, were also with Anderson Cooper for the other interview?
	No.
	Is that your question?
	I don't understand your question then.
	Okay.
	I'll replace it for you.
	You heard what Alex Jones just said.
	Yes.
	What he was saying is that CNN faked where it was, that they were actually in the same location, right?
	You see this headline, CNN anchors fake a satellite interview in the same parking lot, right?
	Yes.
	And he's talking about, Sandy Hook, is he saying this, correct?
	He's talking about CNN and how they have done this type of thing in the past.
	Back it up.
	We'll play it again, okay?
	I'd ask you just listen carefully.
	Same cars right behind them, conducting the interview face-to-face.
	Then we see footage of one of the reported fathers of the victim, Bobby Parker.
	Just pause it.
	Are you able to rehearse it back?
	Right behind them, conducting the interview on Facebook.
	And then basically cutting the same piece of footage.
	Then I saw CNN do fake satellite interviews With reporters clearly with the same traffic and the same cars right behind them, conducting the interview face to face.
	Okay, stop right there.
	Now, Mr. Jones is describing to his audience, in everything we've just seen, all of the reasons his audience should believe that this was fake, right?
	Yes, I think that's the purpose of the whole segment he's doing here.
	And what he's saying is that...
	One of the reasons it was fake is because CNN had two reporters that were claiming to be in different locations, but were in fact in the same location, correct?
	Right.
	That CNN has done this type of thing.
	This is one other example.
	Okay.
	I didn't hear those words.
	Did you?
	No, but that's what the purpose was to me as I understood it.
	This is your own personal interpretation you're putting on it here?
	That's what I saw there.
	That's what I think that he means by that.
	Okay.
	But he didn't tell his audience that what he was showing here was something from May 9, 2013, an event in Cleveland, did he?
	You know that that's what this article is, right?
	I don't know what that article is, but he doesn't really say anything about that, except that these two people look like they're in the same place, and they're saying they're in different places.
	He doesn't say anything else other than that.
	Do you know?
	I mean, this is an Inforer's article, right?
	That's what it says.
	Okay.
	And you can just hang on a second.
	Do you know that this article is actually reporting on some kidnapping in Cleveland and not Sandy Hook?
	Do you know that?
	I don't know what it's reporting on.
	Okay.
	Why don't we get out of the side-by-side?
	Sure, that'd be great.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	That's great.
	Which one is your circle?
	Same one.
	But if they were using footage on the green screen loop, because it would show flowers and other things during other broadcasts that were moving and then basically cutting to the same piece of footage.
	Then I saw CNN do fake satellite interviews with reporters clearly with the same traffic and the same cars.
	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 I'm not getting ready to come to the microphone so we'll listen to her.
	Okay.
	My name is Robbie Parker.
	My family is one of the family's best.
	Lost a child yesterday.
	They were standing at a elementary school shooting series back there.
	But you add it to all the other things that were happening.
	And all the other fake news the media has been caught in.
	And CNN back in 1991, openly faking scud missile attacks on Saudi Arabia and Israel when they were back in Atlanta.
	Satellite feeds caught them admitting that it was all fake.
	We'd be crazy not to question this because bare minimum, they were faking some of the shots and some of the coverage.
	I'll know what something that might have been a resource to put out the lightsaber.
	So to be clear, we point out clear chroma key, also known as blue screen or green screen, being used and were demonized. also known as blue screen or green screen, being used Saw that last bit at the end of those two reporters in front of a structure with some glue behind them?
	Yes.
	What Alex Jones was saying there is one of the reasons you should believe that this interview is fake Is because back in the 1990s, CNN had faked being on location, correct?
	Correct.
	And even that was a lie, wasn't it?
	I don't know anything about that.
	Let me show you...
	Exhibit number 295. This is not in evidence.
	And as it's coming up, you'll recall that what Mr. Jones said is that CNN had faked its location pretending to be in Saudi Arabia when it was in fact in Atlanta, correct?
	Right, that was the claim.
	Do you see the picture in front of you, ma'am?
	I do.
	Okay, and you were presented with this at your deposition, correct?
	I don't remember.
	Possibly.
	I don't know if it was six months ago.
	I don't know what it is, Jen.
	that's not what indicating objection here say which just describe what that shows objections not an evidence I'm an anti-doubt not an evidence Charlie's a foundation here it looks like a parking lot with a building in the background And what do you see on that building?
	Looks like there's some writing on the top, but I'm not sure what it is.
	Can you detect the language that that writing is?
	Does that look like Arabic to you?
	It doesn't look like English.
	Does it look like Arabic?
	I'm not an expert in Arabic, so I don't know.
	Do you see blue panels?
	Can I get it back up?
	Do you see blue panels there?
	Yes, I see the blue panels.
	Does that appear to be the same color blue that was in the video that Alex Jones was just showing?
	Objection, objection, foundation.
	I don't know if it's the same building or not.
	Let's pull up 296.
	What about here?
	What do you think?
	Does that appear to be the same building in 296 just for a different angle?
	Possibly.
	I see blue in the background and what may be some columns or something of a building.
	You also see a whole bunch of satellite dishes, correct?
	That's what it looks like, yes.
	Okay.
	Are you aware that Was that in his last deposition?
	Are you aware of it?
	I don't.
	I'm not no let's play the next clip here miss miss Paz if you had been given Alex Jones's deposition as you asked you would have been able to answer that question right Well, sure.
	If I had reviewed it, I would know what he said.
	That's why you wanted it, so you could prepare yourself to testify, right?
	Of course.
	But they never said it to you.
	I didn't receive that.
	Let's go to the next clip in Alex Jones' final statement on Sandy Hook.
	By the way, Ms. Potts, let's be clear.
	This wasn't Alex Jones's final statement on Sandy Hook, right?
	No, he's talked about it after this.
	Let's go to the next clip.
	Alex Jones, the second clip here.
	As Pam Holtz ended in Swiss cheese.
	There has been a, excuse me, that's of some nature at San...
	Sorry, you remember you said a problem?
	That's alright.
	Hold on a second.
	Let me make sure.
	Attorney Maddie, when you're done, can you just tell me what exhibit we're looking at once we get it back up?
	Yes, this is exhibit 35. And this will be 35E. That was my mistake.
	I didn't say that there.
	Okay, 35.
	Thank you.
	And why should anybody fear an investigation if they have nothing to hide?
	In fact, isn't that in Shakespeare's Hamlet?
	Methinks you protest too much.
	So, here's my statement for the media when they call up, saying, where do you stand on this?
	Where I've always stood.
	When there were other mass shootings, I would simply point out that they're very rare, statistically, and why should we all give up our rights?
	Because some other bad person does something.
	A guy with a car runs over 50 people.
	Do we ban driving cars?
	It's the same thing.
	And there have been other instances of shootings that are very suspicious.
	Aurora is one.
	Just look into that.
	But this particular case, they are so scared of investigation.
	So everything they do basically ends up blowing up in their face.
	So you guys are doing what you want now.
	I'm gonna start reinvestigating Sandy Hook and everything else that happened with him.
	I'm Alex Joe signing off from FullWars.com.
	If you're watching this transmission, think for yourself.
	I know it's a thought crime.
	And then ask yourself, what is it so strange about Sandy Hook and that tragedy?
	But I will say this, finally, my heart does go out to all parents that lose children, whether it's the stabbings, or whether it's the car wrecks, or whether it's stranglings, or whether it's the blunt force trauma, or murder, firearms, whatever the case is, I'm a parent and my heart goes out to all parents that have lost children in these tragic events.
	And so, if children were lost in San Diego, my heart goes out The only problem is, I've watched a lot of soap rockers.
	And I've seen actors before.
	And I know when I'm watching a movie, I don't know when I'm watching something real.
	Let's hold him to Sandy up.
	This is four years after the shooting, right?
	Just about, yes.
	And he's still telling his audience, let's look into Sandy Cut, right?
	That's what he said on the video.
	And he says it right after.
	He tells his audience that his heart goes out to the people he sees on the news who say their parents.
	The only thing is, he's seen soap operas That's what he said, yes.
	That's what needed to be looked into, right?
	That's what he said.
	Attorney Maddy, any time in the next 15 minutes?
	This is just fine.
	Alright, so we will end for the day.
	It was another long day.
	I'm not going to go and recite all the rules of juror conduct.
	I know that you'll abide by them and the instructions I've given you.
	Ron will collect your notebooks.
	I know you'll all be on time again tomorrow because we do like to start right at 10, so you'll get me on time for Ron to bring you down.
	I hope everyone has safe travels home, and we will see you tomorrow.

▲