#681: May 8, 2022 dissects Alex Jones’ bankruptcy claims—$53M from PQPR, $25M trusts—blaming George Soros and the DOJ’s Merrick Garland for orchestrated persecution, including Jose Garza’s Travis County DA role. Attorneys Mark Bankston and Bobby Barnes clash: Bankston calls it a "clown show," citing $35K fines for frivolous motions, while Barnes insists procedural denials prove political targeting. Jones’ 25-year-old "demons at Planned Parenthood" tales and 2,000 Mules election fraud claims are debunked as recycled conspiracy theater, exposing his fear of verdicts over legal merits. The episode reveals how Jones weaponizes victimhood to evade accountability, framing his endless delays as systemic oppression rather than self-inflicted chaos. [Automatically generated summary]
No, like, you know, the world's so dark right now that one of our bright spots is the utter collapse of crypto.
And like, how tough of a world is it where, like, you know, financial collapse is something you're, you know, that's your bright spot to see all the crypto bros go down.
Yeah, no, we, uh, it's been a, it's been a good couple of weeks, but we're all just kind of sitting here twiddling our thumbs.
Um, as soon as this bankruptcy stunt happened, um, and it kind of, you know, I assume everybody knows what we're talking about, but here, but like right on the- Give us an update on that.
Right on the eve of the trial, we're supposed to have the first trial that Jones is supposed to face from the Sandy Hook parents.
Um, he engineers a strange little stunt, uh, and it was a bankruptcy stunt that did not involve himself or the company by which he operates his business under.
Uh, it involved some little paper entities he registered 10 years ago, uh, and he used the stunt to stop the trial because basically when you file a bankruptcy, you get an automatic order from a federal court that basically just says put on the brakes, everybody stop.
Um, and and so we had all they led us right up to that thinking we were going to go to trial, you know, just basically lying through their teeth the whole time.
And then, like, you know, a few days beforehand, nope, we're going to bankruptcy court.
Yeah, and so for me, so right before that was, it was copyright, 100%.
Like, we had a hearing on March 10th and it was to address a whole bunch of issues coming up into pretrial.
And their new attorney, number 11 at the time, right out in front of the courthouse on break, was taunting me about the fact of, oh, yeah, we got something cooking.
So when that happened, I kind of, I don't know anything about bankruptcy law.
There's nothing I can do in a bankruptcy proceeding.
That makes my eyes glaze over.
But of course, when you're representing who I represent and you're suing who I'm suing, the most powerful lawyers in the world come out of the woodwork and say, hey, we'll do this just to do it.
We'll be happy to do it.
So, I've been sitting on the sidelines why, you know, some of the people who've been following this have noticed I haven't been in these hearings that have been going on in these bankruptcy things.
And it's because we have counsel who've stepped up to do that.
No, like when seriously, though, when you have a firm like Aiken Gump who comes to you and is like, it's taken care of.
Don't worry about it.
And for me, it was I had two weeks of my life scheduled out for this.
It's just all of a sudden, you know, look, these guys caused all sorts of inconvenience for everybody else, for all the witnesses who were going to come, for the court who was setting things up.
You got to understand, they were calling a jury pool of 100 people and giving them a questionnaire.
Like wheels were in motion.
But as far as for me, they basically just handed me a big gift.
I think it's probably always been a feeling of like, well, this is an inconvenience and a hassle, but this isn't going to get rid of the trouble for him.
When your listeners may be familiar with bankruptcy from when the Purdue Pharmaceuticals went down with the opium books and the Sackler family based on the banks.
But let me tell you, Jordan, your own personal bankruptcy as a personal consumer when CarMax is chasing you down for that Ford Fiesta is very, very different than your experience when you're the Sacklers and you've killed 100 million people, right?
They were able to engineer what we call a subchapter five bankruptcy is by taking entities which were doing nominal amounts of business, basically throwing them under the bus and then creating non-consensual releases for everybody else.
And that means that the plaintiffs are brought into a room and told them, this is the money you have.
Oh, and nobody's going to look really closely because you have third parties who are funding the bankruptcy.
Like this is this is what you got to understand.
When Purdue goes into bankruptcy, then there are third-party sources of funding that could have been sued who are then giving Purdue the money to settle the bankruptcy under the table, but nobody gets to throw a lens on how much money is there.
When Jones and his attorneys kind of saw how when that went down, they thought, oh, this is a good idea.
Let's try to do one of those.
And what they didn't realize is they had none of the necessary ingredients to make it happen.
They came in there with just a sham.
You just can't write InfoWars on a piece of paper and then hand it over and say, all right, that's the company.
But if they had a business that had been doing even a nominable amount of commerce, they could have probably pulled this off.
But instead, they just had some paper entities and they brought them down there.
And the first thing that happens is the judge looks at them all and goes, none of these people are doing any business.
None of them have any assets.
What are we even doing here?
We're all heading towards a dismissal here, and we're all about to spend a bunch of money, make a bunch of witnesses, put a bunch of people on the stand, and do all this stuff to unravel the Gordian knot of this silliness that they put on this court.
And you're right, they gained some time out of it.
But instead, we just decided, let's just non-suit, dismiss our claims against the entities that don't have any assets.
And so if this, and here's the deal: if this was a legit bankruptcy, those entities would normally be swinging from the chandeliers thinking, oh, great, we're off the hook.
But that was never the point of this bankruptcy to begin with.
Right.
And so from Jones's perspective, even though the attorneys for the entities and the trustee for the entities of these assetless entities are happy, they're like, all right, we're closing down this bankruptcy.
Jones on his show is screaming about how he's been denied the right to his bankruptcy.
Right.
Because now all of a sudden, you're in a very strange position where he took these paper entities, like one of which is named Infowars LLC, pushed it to the side and separated it from itself.
And then the moment that it had a separate and different legal interest than him, then all of a sudden he feels betrayed.
He feels like the goal that he was going after, he can't get.
And so that's what he's screaming on TV about, Reno, on his show about right now.
On Friday, the news came out that the bankruptcy issue was sort of moot and things would be moving forward with the case.
So that's one of the reason why I reached out to you and I wanted to get a bit of an update on it since I certainly don't speak the language of the court.
And you said, hey, how about we talk about Alex's show from May 8th because there's some stuff that you wanted to go over on.
I mean, it's an interesting, informative show, and we try to empower humanity, but I've got a big point that I really am not good at, and that is hyping something up and building it up.
And so I'm just going to leave it at this, dealing with the Disinformation Board and George Soros.
We got information two weeks ago that I mentioned on air, and then days later was even in the Associated Press, but like it was a good thing.
And then we got more information Friday, and now we've gotten part of the documents and we're getting more.
But you talk about racketeering, you talk about illegal, what they're trying to do with InfoWars, and what has come out in the state courts and the bankruptcy court is unbelievable.
One is whenever I hear anybody now on Infowars talk about we have documents, quote unquote, all I can think about is going in and taking the deposition of their corporate representative, Daria Karpova, and she brought a little folder of documents with her.
And those documents were the most hysterical, absurd things I can imagine.
Like, I came with my case today, and it's like, here's a Wikipedia printout of the Reichstag fire to throw that false fight.
Here is a page from Wolfgang Halbig's conspiracy website.
It's like, I don't know what the hell they have in terms of documents, but I know two things.
One, it's going to be really dumb.
And two, they're going to have done a really bad job of reading whatever it is because they simply, this is how it goes every time.
This is all coming down to he doesn't understand how civics, like, as a high school civics thing is what we're dealing with right now is why I think George Soros is involved.
He thinks because the U.S. trustee sent, you made a recommendation from the court about thumbs up, thumbs down on this bankruptcy, like it does and like it's its job to do to enforce the bankruptcy code.
So, because look, I heard him talking about like, oh, Soros is behind all this.
We know the law firms and all this kind of stuff.
And I'm like, this is what I'm interested to hear, right?
Because up until now, it has been kind of generic and it's been kind of thrown.
It's been thrown more at the court really recently than us because he just gets mad at the courts.
And that bothers me.
Because I'll tell you, I'm in two minds with this.
I hear him go off on this stuff about Soros.
On one hand, I'm laughing to myself and I'm thinking, well, actually, that's pretty good if people in my jury pool hear that he's going off about Soros.
You know, that's a wonderful thing for a Travis County jury to hear.
But on the other mind of it is, I keep seeing him say this shit about our judge and saying all sorts of like, like really antagonistic, hostile shit about our judge.
And I, you know, she didn't ask to be like, she's got to go and walk into the courthouse every day when we're having this trial.
Look, man, look, I'm a lawyer who is currently suing somebody and trying to get them held legally responsible for the things they said, like their speech.
But I'm telling you right now, if you are talking about that, that judge should do something to shackle his ability to talk to his audience about the circumstances of his trial and whether he thinks he's getting a fair trial.
The moment you say, oh, well, now he's crossed into crazy town because he's talking about George Soros, now you're doing something that I even believe is really offensive to the First Amendment.
I don't think the responsibility falls on this judge at all to enforce it.
I think it falls on the counsel who is representing Alex Jones right now.
And what I don't think a lot of people understand is they've seen a lot of parade of some really bad lawyers in this case.
But right now, Alex Jones has been picked up by a new guy who's a former U.S. attorney, a United States Justice Department attorney, who was an Eric Holder goon, according to Alex Jones, you know, five, six years ago.
But now he's running the show for Alex in Texas.
And that guy needs to get his house in order.
That guy needs to get a leash on his damn client.
If he wants to come and make a big reputation of himself representing some proto-fascist madman, the least he could do is try to rein in the conspiracy theories about what's going on with our judge.
Soros runs over a thousand DAs and district attorneys, county attorneys now.
George Soros is not even hiding the fact that he runs the Disinformation Bureau and that they have a plan to basically sue tens of thousands of conservative and Christian leaders once the precedent set with rigged juries, with rigged courts, with default operations against Infowars.
And they admit that and have now admitted to court officials in federal court that George Soros is running this and is set to publicly announce he's trying to take me off the air, which we already knew, but that arrogance.
I mean, it takes a lot of arrogance, I would say, to say to ostensibly millions of people, if you don't stop this trial, George Soros personally will sue you.
Well, there's one right from every time I make some aggressive decision about what I'm going to do with the court, because I've been super aggressive in this case.
It always pays off.
And people were second-guessing when I decided to send a letter to the United States bankruptcy court saying that George Soros is controlling all of this.
But see, nobody second-guessing me now that I filed documents with the bankruptcy court saying that George Soros is controlling all of this.
unidentified
And if you fuck around, you're going to have to pace the rest of George Soros.
So I just want to pat myself on the back a little bit.
I mean, like, look, I don't mean to be this facetious about this, but this man is literally, I think, at this point, believing that they're, or not believing, but wanting his audience to believe there is a collusion between the United States Department of Justice, my office, people I know, George Soros, everybody, to threaten the United States bankruptcy judge to make him not have a bankruptcy when it's actually the attorneys for his own company who are like, yay, bankruptcy's over.
You know, the problem I have with this is that this, the most unreasonable thing about this is that somebody would be such a good administrator that they would be capable of doing.
That would be outrageous.
I mean, I would almost want somebody who is capable of pulling to be in power.
I mean, I'm guessing if I'm just going to be trying to charitably figure out where this is coming from, kind of thing.
I would guess that this is some sort of calculation based on the number of DA candidates who receive some sort of donation from some group that in some way has money from Soros.
Like maybe some because this is how usually bullshit on Infowars works, right?
It's like, usually like some blog, like a Breitbart blogger or something, will try to compile the number of people who've gotten a $200 from Progress for America or Americans for Civil Justice or something like that.
And it's like, oh, well, that's tied to Soros money.
So then here's the list of DAs.
And somebody at InfoWars will see that.
And then the story will become George Soros runs these DAs, right?
I bet if I search hard enough, I'll find this document.
He used to get so excited.
The joy in his voice was palpable.
And over the years, he's realized that literally every time it's going to be a rug pull, Lucy's going to pull that fucking football away and down you go.
I think that your theory, Mark, is interesting, that it's like some sort of a misrepresentation of things.
But I think it's even simpler.
I think it's just that Jose Garza is the Travis County DA, and he, when he was running in the last election cycle, did get some donations from the Soros Alliance.
I mean, like, what it seemed to me, too, is that the extremely routine action of a United States trustee for a bankruptcy proceeding, filing a recommendation with the court, yay or nay, that that extremely routine action absolutely fried Jones' circuits.
So I'm going to wait till the lawyers are ready to green light it.
But I already told you part one of it a couple weeks ago.
And the lawyer said, don't get into much detail, just if you want to mention it, mention it.
And I said, the Justice Department called up the federal court and the trustees in our limited bankruptcy and said the head of the Justice Department and the president as policy says you must kick out his bankruptcy.
And this is basically an order.
It is the policy of the U.S. government like I was a foreign country.
Because the executive can only do that with foreign countries.
So I don't know, like, let me break it down as simple as possible what the United States trustee for this region of Texas did so that you can understand what he did.
So you can understand what we're talking about here.
InfoWars LLC and the other entities that are on paper filed a bankruptcy petition for a small business bankruptcy saying, hey, we want to use a bankruptcy for businesses that conduct a little business, but not a ton of business is basically this category.
And then after they did it, the United States filed what's called schedules.
Schedules show what the entities hold, what business they do, what their revenue is, what they actually have.
And the schedules they filed said, we ain't got squat.
We don't have anything.
We have no assets.
Zero.
We got nothing.
We don't do business.
And they've always said we don't do business.
And then the United States trustee files a brief and goes, I'm not sure that this bankruptcy is appropriate for subchapter five because they don't appear to do any business because they said they didn't do any business.
But I mean, I mean, that's the thing here is that it's revealing to me to, I hear what y'all are saying when y'all think that Jones thinks in his mind there's these labyrinthine conspiracies and he's all of this.
I still, to this day, believe that Jones just thinks that anytime he can take something and twist it to make it that he's a persecuted victim of some sort of U.S. government conspiracy, he'll do it.
And I think he knows damn well that this was a stunt where they tried to do a double backflip and landed on their face.
It isn't because when you're a Texas state judge, look, you've got the bailiffs in that building.
That's who protects you.
If you've got credible, actionable intelligence against you, you've got the Texas Rangers to go investigate something bad.
And that's it.
There's nobody coming to protect you.
And in this particular courthouse, because they're kind of in an older courthouse, there is no secure way to enter the building.
And this is, they all know that.
This has all been discussed.
And the more that Jones creates the impression that the entire, not just, look, if he wants to say that I am involved in some sort of Bohemian Grove conspiracy with George Soros, I don't care.
I don't.
Just keep whatever.
But the fact that he keeps directing it at these courts, because what I think I'm hearing him say in these clips is that a U.S. bankruptcy judge is in on this conspiracy.
And like, fuck you.
That's the last person in the world you can actually get in on the conspiracy.
I mean, his conclusion here, though, is that he should be able to reach the other conclusion of that as well, which is when you ask the question, have you ever seen the Justice Department intervene in a bankruptcy trial?
The answer is, that's how much of an asshole you are.
I mean, look, yeah, he kind of has an independent service to that bankruptcy court, which is to act as a neutral third-party observer whose only duty is to the bankruptcy code itself.
Right.
And so he's not like, it's interesting.
He's not like the solicitor general at the Supreme Court, right?
Who is there to argue the government's position policy-wise as to a certain outcome of a decision.
He is there to try to argue what the government's position is as if he was representing the bankruptcy code itself.
And to make recommendations as to whether, I mean, he's almost like a briefing attorney for the court itself.
Hey, we have a lot of expertise in the bankruptcy code.
We're going to try to give our neutral position on what the bankruptcy code says.
There's no doubt that the position that the U.S. trustee took in this case was aggressive for the U.S. trustee's normal position.
And if it hadn't been done on the absolute EVO trial, it might not have even been that dirty.
But to stop all the trials and then basically have a settlement offer that is almost a compelled that everybody has to stop, take a breath, and look at it and see if you're going to accept it.
And the way they do that is trap you in that bankruptcy court for a little while, for a couple of weeks, couple, maybe even a couple months, depending on how much discovery gets to be done.
But the problem here is that they did that and then their planned funding agreement was absolutely ridiculous.
They basically wanted every one of these plaintiffs on all of the cases to walk away with a couple hundred thousand dollars.
And to do that on the assurance that Jones would in the future continue to contribute funds to a bankruptcy settlement over the year, which means basically like you've got to let Jones go out there and be a proto-fascist madman and let him make money so he can give it to you in the future while all at the same time.
Look, here's the problem with all of this.
We know, we know for a fact that there is $25 million that Jones has sitting in a family trust.
Know for a fact that there is PQPR, who it now claims free speech already owes $53 million to and has been collecting all sorts of money, been paying it $11,000 a month for all this damn time.
Like, there is a person who has all of this money and doesn't want to expose it to a federal bankruptcy court, doesn't want to go into proceedings, and wanted to make that offer.
And when that fell apart, everybody knew from the start it was dumb.
But yeah, they got to disrupt their trial.
And then who the hell knows what comes next?
But none of this, absolutely none of this had to do with some sort of nefarious play in the bankruptcy court or even Jones losing.
This was a, hey, will you take this?
Oh, no, I guess we're done.
That's it.
That's the whole damn thing.
And have Jones spending this like it's a you know part of this whole coordinated thing that I don't know.
He's been real apocalyptic recently between this and the Roger Stone thing.
Kit Daniels is already tapping away on it, which is interesting because he used to say, if you can't get an article out in 24 hours, there's no point in writing it.
I've always, ever since you've had that episode, and suddenly it hit me like a lightning bolt while listening to your thing on that, of like saying, no, you can't.
The shooting, by that point, you're talking about following up on a story.
It's like seven days old.
Nobody cares about a seven-day-old shooting.
I'm like, why the hell are you talking about Sandy Hook in 2015 then, 2017?
Like, none, like the excuse that they used for that was so hysterical to me.
But the idea that right now there is somebody in Infowars having to tap out a story about what this big thing, I hope it comes out.
I don't know what I mean.
Like, again, I'm of two minds.
On one hand, I'm hoping it comes out because I know it's silly.
unidentified
On the second, I don't, because people are so funny.
And I am extremely blessed and honored to be with this amazing crew and all the viewers and listeners tonight on Mother's Day in defense of the human family and our attempt to carry out God's will.
He's like, I know y'all probably heard that Alex Jones folk music remix and all of that, where he's doing the folk song and they have complex feelings about that.
Look, I'm telling you, that soundtrack is astonishing.
I mean, I'm a Daft Punk fan, and I just want to take a detour for a second to say that every Daft Punk album is its own thing, but that's a fucking music score.
God damn, that thing is good.
I have, I'll admit, I'll out myself on more than one occasion played that entire soundtrack to tap out a brief or some shit.
That is some excellent, focused mind music.
But then to hear Alex Jones perverting it in that so, oh no, perverting the beauty soundtrack.
Yo, yo, I've watched a lot of Owen Schroer clips over the years, and I've noticed he's really partial to Imagine Dragons, which totally tracks 100% tracks for Owen Schroer.
But with us, Jones, it's weird how you can actually chart the departure of different key crew members by how the soundtrack info is really funny.
I wouldn't be surprised if there's like it will happen from time to time that some either person going into Planned Parenthood or defending Planned Parenthood from counter-protesters from religious fundamentalists will troll them by like throwing up a like Gene Simmons tongue.
But the way that it was described by Jones in this clip is like, I don't know, the pathology of like his interior fantasy mind is an interesting place.
It is a terrifying place, but it is an interesting place.
I've never seen somebody who reveals themselves on their sleeve so much.
It's really hard to tell how much of it is sincere and it is like his perceptual distortions of like the things that he's taking in as stimulus and how much of it is kind of just like storytelling and like lying like he usually does.
I feel like I've always struggled with this idea of first it was does Jones believe what he say?
Does he not believe what he say?
Does he ever what it's the package of this is Jones figured out there's a there's a basic rough approximation and that if you if you can tain in whatever you're talking about about at least about 25% of the truth, you're free to run as wild as you fucking want.
As long as you've got that core nugget of 25% truthfulness, some sort of thing, an anchor that you can anchor all the bullshit onto.
You can fly that kite as fucking far as you want with no accountability.
But the moment you lose that 25% of fucking core truth, you are toast.
And that is Sandy Hook.
That is the lesson he learned.
And unfortunately, that's why just learning that lesson will never stop him.
He has to be forcibly stopped because he learned the lesson that if you go that far into bullshit, if you're that easily toppled as a house of cards, you're going to get into trouble.
I mean, I honestly think one of the big reasons they pulled this bankruptcy shunt and stopped this trial is because they were all just staring around at each other like the moment is finally here and had no fucking idea what they were going to do in that courtroom.
Well, getting back, getting back to our episode, because we're going to do, we have, as you probably know, Mark, already, and I'll spoil this for Jordan.
And he says this, and I think that this is actually kind of a rebuttal of his notion that he's kind of tolerant about people who have different religious ideas than him.
And so you don't want to be turned into these creatures.
You don't want to deny the connection of the infinite because when you deny God's spirit in God's open hand, you then accept by choice all that rejected God.
And that's not a spiritual group you want to be associated with.
Yeah, yeah, if you don't join up with Alex's specific brand of lunatic Christianity, then you accept responsibility for every other problem that's ever happened.
No, I mean, yes, you do walk by, say, a mosque in your city and you claim that all that goes on in there is demonic worship, but that doesn't mean you can't hang out with them.
Look, I don't want to be critical, but I've never heard two guys sitting around talking more revealing themselves as being out of touch with the doors of the infinite, just like Mr. Jones is talking about.
My hang-up with any cult leader is like, you're acting, you're out here acting like I ain't messing around with the infinite and the doors of perception.
Like, the idea of here's like, because this shit actually flows off the tongue from Rogan, right?
Back when Rogan was in his prime and he was really like being an utter freakinaut.
Like, because that's what's so strange about Jones' new televangelism turn is that it seems to combine a bunch of like new age doors of perception BS with a lot of like the high place of the kingdom of heaven.
Like he's basically equating his own religious thing with Joe Rogan doing DMT or some stuff.
unidentified
Like it is really weird to me to hear this shit from Jones.
Before we go into that, when he says the folks are so desperate, is he talking about Mike Myers and the cast of the crew and the producers of that show?
It's interesting because he departed off of this case in a hurry.
He skedaddled really quick once he got into some hot water.
But it's funny because somehow he became back in Jones' graces, despite the fact that Jones' corporate representative testified that they're considering suing Barnes for malpractice along with Mark Randanza.
And it's like, I don't think Barnes knows this.
So maybe I'm telling Tell's out of school.
Nobody go and tell Bob Barnes who can be found at BarnesLLP.com, I'm pretty sure.
But like, don't go tell him that they're threatening to sue him for malpractice while he's being on the show.
And in fact, what's funny is if you look at the InfoWars LLC bankruptcy assets that they claim, one of the few assets that they do claim they have is a potential malpractice claim that, hey, we might get money in the future because we might sue our lawyers for how badly they bungled this case.
And it's funny because so Barnes got the hell out, and I think he thought he was free with me.
But the interesting part is, I got involved in the case where Tucker Carlson's daily caller had done a years-long defamation smear scheme against some Pakistani IT workers in the house, basically trying to frame them for the DNC hack.
And what's so funny about this is, unless you're like a following fan of this show or like a hardcore into following right-wing conspiracy stuff, you don't know who Imre Narwhan is.
You have no idea who that is.
But if you follow like right-wing media, if you've got right-wing Twitter accounts, you've got Dan Bajingo, Ben Shapiro, all that.
He was, I think he was a little careful on that, partially because at that time, the people who were pushing like Regnery Publishing and Salem and Daily Caller and some of the people who were pushing reporting by a guy named Luke Roziak were trying to be a little more of the highbrow high-class Infowars.
And they were a little bit in conflict with each other.
Look, I'm not going to be one who talks shit about that because listen to me on your show.
I never shut the fuck up.
I just talk and talk and talk and talk.
But what's interesting about Barnes is he was so we had a moment where he had been saying a bunch of shit about me on air on InfoWars because I had just taken Jones' deposition.
Jones had unsuccessful, he had failed and he neglected to get that sealed.
And so I published it online way back in 2019.
And everybody was glowing about it at the time.
And Barnes was pissed as hell.
So he got on Jones' show and said a bunch of shit about me.
And a lot of it was really like arguably could put me in danger.
And so I confronted him about it in the courtroom.
I'm like, look, you come in here.
You want to play this big show and have a bunch of fun on InfoWars.
Do what you want.
But take my name out your fucking mouth, man.
Like, I ain't.
George Sherwill say fund the suit.
Like, me and Kyle funded the suit.
Like, this is funny money to us.
This is not a big thing.
Like, take us out of this.
And he was so demure.
And he's such a passive kind of shrinking violet in person until you finally push him long enough and he has a little freak out and he runs out of the courtroom yelling.
But it's weird how his personality, he is so conflict averse, person to person.
He's like this big, he's like the Kool-Aid man on InfoWars.
Like you'd think he's like, like, he's ready to bust through walls and shit.
Are you telling me that Robert Barnes is a coward who hides behind a TV screen in order to say things that he would never have the courage to say to somebody's face?
Yeah, so he doesn't actually immediately want to talk about any of Alex's legal trouble, which you kind of assume is why Alex texted him and was like, I need you to do it.
Marnes, let me interrupt you, which I'm famous for.
Let me interrupt you and start over because I didn't know you bring up this new film.
For those that don't know, tell us where it is, who made it, what it covers, and the fact that Fox is saying they're not going to air it now, even though it's totally documented.
And as you said, the electronic scam was the deep state red herring, which you were proven right about, when you were all over the country for Trump proving it was mules voting multiple times, harvesting the fake ballots, filling them in and entering them.
That's now been proven.
You have been totally vindicated.
We're not putting down other people that wanted to go with the electronic thing and all that B-Shape.
They're not bad people.
Let's just admit they got conned and move on to how they really did it.
If you're wrong, this has started back in Pizzagate.
It's a honeypot.
It's a red herring.
You were wrong, but it's only because the deep state tricks you.
It's only because they set up some shit to get you.
It's not really your fault.
Like, you're still on the right track, and you're going to miss a few times, right?
You're going to miss a thousand times, but for every thousand times, there's a Justice Smollett, and you're right, just because you're a racist, right?
Like, there's all this shit.
Like, you just got fooled.
The idea now that Dominion was a fucking honeypot.
This is the exact same thing that they did with the birth certificate, with Obama's birth certificate.
They're like, the Kenya thing was a misdirection that they put out in order to get us because they knew that we would be racist and take the bait on when the reality is that they were trying to cover up that his dad is Frank Marshall Davis.
That was why we always said you need to do a signature match check, because if you did a signature match check, you'd be able to prove that a lot of these ballots were illegal.
And that's why no state to this day has done a signature match check on these ballots.
Barnes is just lying out of his ass trying to promote these stupid mules.
Different states have different guidelines, but almost all of them have some sort of signature matching as a part of their vote verification, often done by computer software.
According to a 2020 article in the New York Times, 1.4% of all mail-in ballots were rejected in the 2018 election because of signature mismatches.
And the states that they scream about the most about being stolen in the 2020 election, like Michigan and Arizona, they have signature matching requirements in place already.
I really feel like we've got Pachena coming down the pipeline and it's going to go right back to him and be like, listen, Alex, they were watermarked and now we got to double watermark the next ones.
Because I can guarantee you, look, these, these top law firms would have known that it's like whatever you hired for the bankruptcy, these guys, Rubio and Lee, like they're not, they're not believing in a deep state.
They're doing their job.
I mean, I, and when I say their job, I don't, I need to be a little more pejorative about that.
They're a bankruptcy lawyer, so they basically exist to like suck the blood off of dying things.
Like, that's been a bankruptcy lawyer.
What you got to understand is that if Jones's plan or whatever this bankruptcy pen would work, hey, let's give some money to the plaintiffs.
Well, the bankruptcy lawyers who made that happen would get some of that.
They would bleed some of that off.
And that's what they're there to do.
And the moment they don't have that, they got no real interest in that.
And the trustee of the company has always, all he cares about is the piece of paper that says Infowars LC on.
And none of these people care.
None of these people are red-pilled.
They don't care.
And it's not, I don't know.
It's Norm Pattis, but Norm Pattis has been awfully silent ever since he did that stand-up routine that was hilarious stand-up routine.
Well, we have to get back into this, which, Mark, you've already said you don't believe this, but I got to say, Alex has said it twice, so it's probably true.
We've had the Justice Department call and say the Biden administration says you're not allowed to support him.
But they actually called the judge's lawyer, and they called the trustees' lawyers who are retired, the former bankruptcy judge of Austin and Schmidt and said it's policy of the U.S. government, like I'm Russia, that he doesn't have access to courts.
When he's talking about Schmidt, he's talking about somebody very different.
He is talking about a retired U.S. bankruptcy judge who they recruited, who the bankruptcy law firms recruited into being a trustee for Infowars LLC for being.
And I'm not exactly sure what his position is, but that's a guy who is like an insider now to Infowars LLC.
And he's there to make sure everything's kosher and there's no whatever.
And now Jones is on air saying that that guy has gotten a call from what?
Here's the deal: is that all these guys were snookered into a situation of, hey, Jones has a way that he wants to try to make things right with the Sandy Hook parents.
Let's see if we can make it happen and be the heroes and avoid a lot of acrimony and avoid a lot of trial.
They were fed a bull of bill, like a load of bullshit, and they haven't been dealing with it for four years.
So they don't fucking know.
And the moment that everybody started to realize it was bullshit, this whole thing is dead in the water anyway.
So I'd say in some ways, for as much as this process can work, the process worked.
Obviously, it's shitty.
It's not how it should have worked, but it worked.
Everybody's getting off of this.
Jones is in there saying this shit about my that's, that's head spinning.
That he is going to say that my trustee has been called off because it seems like Schmidt would be able to like refute this.
Look, I'll tell you right now he is not in contact with Schmidt.
I know that a hundred percent that Schmidt is not talking with Alex Jones like that.
They have a break is to put it at arm's length right, and it would be inappropriate if they were in communication right right yeah yeah, and so what he just said right, there is.
Uh i'm look, i'm not gonna, there's not.
I just want to make it clear for your listeners.
There is not the chance that there is malfeasis by former judge Schmidt.
That's not a thing that happened.
That what you're hearing right now is an is an outright lie and a complete, complete contradiction of everything that I was arguing earlier.
That Jones feels he needs 25 of the truth to say something, because he absolutely does know.
I'm not even gonna give you like the glib, whatever.
It's about $4.99 and a pack of ribs or whatever.
No no, it's.
Um, it's funny because I'm usually involved in litigation that is kind of expensive.
I do products liability litigation with my firm and we, you know, to get a good products case to trial like a defective product, is going to take a lot of expert testimony, a lot of things.
It's it's really expensive and it can run you almost as much as a quarter million to half a million dollars to get a case to trial like.
That's how much it can cost, that's how much capital you got to be working with and it is and and the thing is is that in Jones's case it's not quite as much.
You don't have as much expert testimony, you don't have as much stuff.
I'm a Texas lawyer, i'm in a Texas court, i'm not traveling all over the country all the goddamn time like there's.
It's a lot cheaper and and and i'm, i'll be, i'll be really upfront because I want, I want the Jones people to know I want them to understand this that this case so far soup to nuts has cost me less than 110 000 to try and that that money has been paid over more than three times by Jones himself.
Like we have already collected enough sanctions on him.
We are now about 270 000 into him.
He has paid for all of this.
unidentified
So this is a George Soros funding this right.
Like not only said, and look, I made the agreements with the parents.
I said look, if anti-slap fees are granted, if this motion is dismissed, is granted, we're paying that, we're paying that all and that could have like that in itself was a risk of loss.
That's a quarter million dollar risk of loss.
Like that's priced into what we're doing.
And when I decided to do this, I was like yeah, we're paying everything up front.
The fact that Jones has already put us in the red.
Yeah, we're just on vacation right, this is just a moment.
We don't really this is not something for the parent.
Like we're gonna do whatever it takes to get the parents their day and at this point that's not a factor of cost.
I appreciate your perspective and I understand that you're intimately involved with the case that you are conducting.
You would think um.
However, I have, look, if what you're saying is true, you're making a lot off this Soros money, because Alex is going to cite a figure in this next clip that will surprise you.
Yeah, if you've made a profit on Alex's sanctions, you're very rich.
How big is it that Soros isn't even trying to hide this?
To me, this is a major rallying point.
Why are they, because I know we have a big show and a great audience and great guests, but why are they so obsessed that we now have evidence that's going to come out soon of over $10 million spent by Soros to do this?
What does he think that's going to look like when all that comes out?
And that they're now openly trying to threaten bankruptcy federal judges.
I mean, these people, I guess they know they control the Justice Department, so why do they care?
I think you're not understanding that Soros is spending that money, not on me, but for other things, maybe.
Like he is, I don't know, like paying for hackers to manufacture an email to Jones saying your sources are bad shit crazy and you're going to get in a shitload of trouble if you don't stop.
Yeah, that's what actually, that's what surprises me is the megalomania of thinking that it would take $10 million to destroy you when you have engineered your own destruction.
Like that is just and paid doesn't take that.
It just takes somebody like, look, me and a couple of members of my firm have decided we'd like to kind of chill out a little bit and devote more of our time to this and to go in after him.
And that's been fun.
It's been rewarding.
It's been nice to see it happen.
But it hasn't been like we didn't need deep state funding to do it.
Like we just needed a little bit of extra time to be willing to say that if like, because look, look, this is the reality of it, is this may end up in a situation where, and the families know this too, that this could be either very rewarding for them.
They could be adequately compensated under the law, or they might not be.
But the goal here is to have the moment of reckoning to have it happen.
Well, yeah, I mean, the goal has been just pure intimidation tactics.
It's the only thing they know.
Just like the intimidation tactics they took with Russia, thought they could shut down Russia's economy, thought they could change Russia's governance simply with these tactics.
It's the same tactics and techniques, but it's the complete, dangerous, partisan, politicized weaponization of the Justice Department.
I mean, they're going to keep accelerating and escalating until they get a rigged outcome.
And the problem they have, if they had confidence in the merits of their case, then they wouldn't be using these shenanigans.
They wouldn't be having the U.S. trustee interfere in a bankruptcy in a highly questionable manner to try to prevent a party from the legal rights and remedies bankruptcy affords, which, by the way, is only an option because the plaintiffs chose to sue entities they knew didn't have any assets.
So that shows the scale of it.
If they had confidence in their case, they wouldn't use these shenanigans.
Because the whole case was premised on a fiction, a fiction based on a sort of Mike Myers-style latest version of a delusional interpretation of Alex Jones.
Okay, so fans of the show will understand this, that the first time that Rob Dew got into a lot of trouble is because he appeared for a deposition for Infowars LLC because we were trying to figure out what the hell it is.
Because it was, at the time of the suit, it was listed on the website as the entity that ran the website and everything.
Like it was the entity, right?
And free speech does the payroll, all this kind of shit.
Rob Dew got his first sanction for not having any clue what the hell InfoWars LLC did or was and claimed that like, no, it's not a thing.
It doesn't do anything.
And then they reciprocally said, no, no, no, look, Rob Dew just doesn't know what he's talking about.
Like, like, it's a thing.
It owns the intellectual property.
It's got the website.
It's got all this stuff.
And it became a morass for like two years.
And that's part of like why Robert Barnes is no longer on the case because he did a bunch of shenanigans with that.
This whole thing about Infowars LLC, they were hiding it from the beginning because they knew that was a card they were going to play later.
So like that in and of itself is kind of dumb.
But the idea that here's Robert Barnes saying that they're scared of the merits of the case.
So they're pulling shenanigans while in the midst of pulling a shenanigan to avoid a trial.
This was a good refuge when your argument was that the default judgments were unfair, that we fucked around for four years and it's unfair.
Now you're not going to have a full trial on the merits.
Like that was a good argument.
To now say that we are getting the U.S. like, here's the thing about Robert Barnes is like, he's not, he's really, really out of his element in a lot of places.
But one thing that Robert Barnes knows 100% is that I did not enlist the U.S. trustee to do a goddamn thing.
I do think, you know, you're saying that Barnes is out of his element a lot of places, but he's in his element when it's public opinion type stuff like this.
And they want to pretend that the Infowars audience is this deluded audience when, in fact, it's one of the most informed audiences in the entire world.
If these cases are not a threat to you, if there's some evidence that's going to come out that's going to protect you, the absolute wise move to take, like honestly, is to take the first verdict.
And if I'll fall on my face and the Infowars doesn't get a big ass verdict against it, then you can probably weather the rest of the cases, no problem.
You don't need to declare bankruptcy.
The idea of declaring bankruptcy is you know that these cases are catastrophic.
You know that.
That's insane to claim otherwise.
And they're still pounding this drum about you didn't want a case on the merits.
Believe me, my level of frustration over everything that's happened to have to get a default in this case because you don't need it.
That's the real shame of it is this case is a punitive case and always has been since the beginning.
And so like the idea that we're scared of an Austin jury, Jesus, after you just stopped a trial at its doorstep, you're going to tell me honest God, especially from the guy who literally ran away from this jurisdiction so I could stop beating him like a red-headed stepchild.
That is basically realizing that is not a politically correct metaphor to use.
You should not beat red-headed stepchild.
That is not an okay thing to do.
I beat him like Robert Barnes, which is how you should absolutely.
Yeah, I do think that there is an interesting thing that kind of works for the presentation of Alex's show, but it's so transparent.
The why won't you debate me?
Kind of.
Why won't you have the case on the merits?
It's like, well, I mean, I know from conversations and following this case and having Mark on the show a number of times, I don't believe for a second that the goal was a default judge.
Like Jones saying in deposition of like, this should be a trial on the merits about what I said.
I'd love that, except I don't have what you said.
You keep destroying all the shit you said, and like you're hiding everything.
So if I don't have that, that's kind of challenging.
That is already challenging, but I was already prepared to do without all of that.
But it's wild.
Everybody knows here that this is only a question of how much.
This is never a question of what you did.
It's like them rattling off about the First Amendment thing, right?
When he talks about that pleading, what he's talking about is at the beginning of trial, you're allowed to ask the court to say that certain matters and certain arguments shouldn't be allowed to be advanced.
And one of those, in this case, is that Alex's conduct was protected by the First Amendment because by law, it wasn't.
He said false facts about these plaintiffs.
He's already got a default judgment against him.
At that point, the First Amendment doesn't protect his conduct.
It's already been found as a matter of law.
Of course, he can't talk about the First Amendment at trial.
He got four years to do a First Amendment argument.
And he actually, even though all of the bull, like he talks about it being a kangaroo court, the reality is that even of all the bullshit he did, he got to go ahead and appeal this all the way up to the Texas Supreme Court.
He got two layers of appeals on a First Amendment argument.
And he fell on a space in both of them.
So to say that, oh, this has something to do with he's being denied.
No, it doesn't.
Stop that shit.
And the idea that they think that they're scared, it's all so dumb.
I mean, at least I don't, you may have more clips, but I don't, I don't, for Barnes anyway, you may have right here.
Barnes anyway just seems to be kind of trying to be in cover his ass mode of like, he knows this is going to go down bad and he knows his name is going to be somewhat tied to it.
And he's going to have to have ways to have built-in excuses about why he was so unsuccessful and why everybody else was.
But for Jones, Jones seems to be in more legit panic mode at this point.
I mean, InfoWars has been denied the right to bring motions to dismiss, the right to bring motions to summary judgment, the right to bring anti-slap motions, and now denied the right for a trial on the merits.
And now they're trying to deny them even bankruptcy law protection.
That's the scale and scope of this politicized, weaponized mechanism to come after InfoWars.
Connecticut gets a little hazy, and I'll explain that in a minute.
But basically, down in Texas, anyway, they had four of them.
And in fact, one of them was so bad that they got fined like $35,000 for bringing a completely frivolous motion on.
And yeah, they definitely had all that chance.
And then the second one was the motions for summary judgment.
Basically, what this is, is once the case has gone through some discovery, you're allowed to bring a motion to have certain issues declared that there's no dispute of fact over those issues.
And that can be anything from like damages to there's a lot of different issues you can bring it on.
They had the ability to bring those motions, and then they just didn't.
Like they missed their deadline.
They had a deadline back in February of this year, and then they didn't do that.
And part of that was back when Brad Reeves was handling the case.
It's a little bit like if you've ever been walking up the stairs and you just, your eyes and your legs missed and you trip going up the stairs and you're like, this is very embarrassing.
And you see, then people see you and you're like, this was somebody else's fault.
There's no way that I just tripped like this.
It was a ghost.
Yeah, absolutely.
No, no, no.
Somebody threw a ball nearby.
And you just can't accept responsibility for looking like an asshole.
A lot of it is, it's just, it's, it's, you get to a point to where, I mean, everything about this case has been so unorthodox.
And when you hear them talking about the things it is, it is.
It's nice to be able to come on here and acknowledge to your audience, not just that, not just that the things that they're being told isn't true or whatever, that like, you know, it's just that this is so far off the rails that it's difficult for lawyers to comprehend.
But at least that's sort of an update in and of itself, though, you know, because that's like we were saying, that's kind of a chapter that has resolved.
So there's an update in as much as that bankruptcy thing is deflated and now, well, it's uncharted waters.
Where you have Robert Duvall sitting on the beach right after the napalm and everything, and he's just sort of feeling kind of wistful, and he just turns to Willard and he's like, someday this war is going to end.
And God, you start to feel that at the end of this.
You start to feel that like you've been living on this thing of it never ends.
It never ends.
There's always something more.
And at some point it will end.
And then you're kind of left in the, there's not going to be a good day noumont for this for my literature fans out there.
There's not going to be a good, it's going to, there's going to be, it's going to be an end and it's going to be a reckoning and then we're, it's all going to be over.
And then there will be what comes after that.
Yeah.
There's going to be five years of coda on this bullshit.
Like it is, this is never leaving my life.
That's the thing I've had to resign myself to, is that I get to do my normal life and I get to do most of that normal stuff.
And then this side little piece of it, I get to devote to the absolutely most insane lawsuit in America.
But I mean, like, that's kind of the essence of getting involved in looking at Alex Jones in a critical way, whether it's through a podcast or legally.