#685: Formulaic Objections Part 7
Today, Dan and Jordan return to their acclaimed series of deposition-related episodes, as they break down two depositions featuring a person brought in to be Infowars' corporate representative. Deposition videos
May 25, 2022 - Knowledge Fight
03:02:55
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| It's time to pray. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I have great respect for knowledge fight. | |
| Knowledge fight. | ||
| I'm sick of them posing as if they're the good guys saying we are the bad guys. | ||
| Knowledge fight. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Dan and George. | |
| Knowledge fight. | ||
| I need money. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Andy in Kansas. | |
| Andy in Kansas. | ||
| Stop it. | ||
| Andy in Kansas. | ||
| Andy in Kansas. | ||
| It's time to pray. | ||
| Andy in Kansas. | ||
| You're on the air. | ||
| Thanks for holding us. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello, Allie. | |
| I'm a big fan. | ||
| I'm a huge fan. | ||
| I love your world. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Knowledge Fight. | |
| KnowledgeFight.com. | ||
| I love you. | ||
| Hey, everybody. | ||
| Welcome back to Knowledge Fight. | ||
| I'm Dan. | ||
| I'm Jordan. | ||
| We're a couple dudes like to sit around, worship at the altar of Selene, and talk a little bit about Alex Jones. | ||
| Oh, indeed we are, Dan. | ||
| Jordan. | ||
| Quick question for you. | ||
| What's up? | ||
| What's your bright spot today, buddy? | ||
| My bright spot, Jordan, we talked about this a little bit off pod. | ||
| Oh! | ||
| But I have not mentioned it on the show, and I haven't given you an update on it. | ||
| No. | ||
| So, about maybe a couple weeks ago, I was having a frozen pizza. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| And I was putting crushed red pepper on it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| And I was thinking to myself, this is good. | ||
| Right. | ||
| But it could be better. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| And I was like, I wonder if... | ||
| Other crushed peppers exist. | ||
| Like, I wonder if you can get a shaker of habanero flakes, for instance. | ||
| And so I googled it, and I found them, and they're great. | ||
| It really is a solution to the problem that red pepper flakes have, which is like, this is good, but not quite enough. | ||
| Right. | ||
| You can plus it. | ||
| You can turn anything into flakes, really. | ||
| And I got these also, the Trinidad scorpion flakes. | ||
| Ooh, that's dangerous. | ||
| I've not opened these up yet to try. | ||
| I don't want you to while I'm here. | ||
| I feel like it would burn my eyes. | ||
| I don't know if I could eat those dry. | ||
| I probably could, but it wouldn't be worth it. | ||
| Just grab a handful and just chomp on them like sesame seeds. | ||
| I mean, I definitely will break into this a little bit later. | ||
| I mean, maybe not today, but... | ||
| Maybe not tomorrow, but someday and soon. | ||
| Yeah, I'm excited. | ||
| You're going to regret it. | ||
| So what about you? | ||
| What's your bright spot? | ||
| My bright spot is Friday is going to be the first episode of this thing that I'm doing. | ||
| I was going to call it a show, but it's not. | ||
| On Fridays at 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. | ||
| You have a thing. | ||
| I am going to watch The Magicians, an episode of The Magicians with a friend. | ||
| On Twitch, and I hope people join us. | ||
| And then we're going to talk about mental illness. | ||
| You know you can't play the show on Twitch, right? | ||
| I know. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I know. | ||
| You're going to run into a number of terms of service that you may be unaware of. | ||
| I just don't think it's going to be a problem, and here's my plan. | ||
| Figure it out as I go along. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| This is from the production company that brought you watch me play Final Fantasy VII for no reason. | ||
| I predict you'll be banned in a month. | ||
| Way sooner. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| But anyways, I'm excited to do it. | ||
| It'll be fun. | ||
| I think we're going to be back to social distancing soon, so this will be a great way to meet people and have friends. | ||
| It does seem like we're not going in the right direction. | ||
| Heard some bad news about Chicago. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep, yep. | |
| So Jordan, speaking of bad news for Chicago. | ||
| Yeah, baby. | ||
| The boys are back in town. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| We're sitting here in the same studio. | ||
| Together, once again, though the city has bad news COVID-wise, we had good news in that we were in the clear. | ||
| We're back in studio together, and it's good news. | ||
| Indeed. | ||
| And the boys are back in town. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| The deposition boys. | ||
| So, by popular demand, today we have another formulaic objections episode. | ||
| All right. | ||
| We're like the Sheehan brothers. | ||
| This is depo men. | ||
| Come on, like repo men? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Yeah, like Charlie Sheehan and Emilio Estevez. | ||
| They're brothers, right? | ||
| Charlie Sheehan. | ||
| Charlie Sheehan. | ||
| You said Sheehan. | ||
| I just don't talk right. | ||
| No, you said the wrong name. | ||
| I said the wrong name. | ||
| All right. | ||
| All right. | ||
| That's where I was confused. | ||
| All right. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Yeah, so in one of the least predictable turns of events outside of our show being successful is that one of our most popular things that we do is we talk about depositions in the world of Alex Jones. | ||
| And today we have a couple of depositions to go over. | ||
| They have to do with Infowars and free speech systems having another chance at having a corporate representative come testify. | ||
| We're finally going to get it. | ||
| So these are two depositions that their hired gun... | ||
| Two depositions! | ||
| Two shots for the corporate representative! | ||
| Well, one of them is in the Sandy Hook case and one is in the Marcel Fontaine case. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Gotcha. | |
| And so, yeah, I mean... | ||
| Look, I don't want to give it away, but 0 for 2. 0 for 2, yeah. | ||
| I mean, yeah, of course it's going to be 0 for 2, but come on. | ||
| Yeah, this is nuts. | ||
| Because we're not 0 for 2, we're 0 for 5 at least. | ||
| Right, right. | ||
| 0 for 3 if you just talk about the stuff that has to do with this phase of the trial. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Because that just has Daria in that. | ||
| Well, actually... | ||
| I mean, who knows? | ||
| You expanded out to the Connecticut cases, too, and you're probably... | ||
| Yeah, I don't even want to know. | ||
| So, we'll get down to business on this, but first, Jordan, let's take a little moment to say hello to some new wonks. | ||
| Oh, that's a great idea. | ||
| So first, I have a cat, and then in parentheses, Reginald Bubbles' cousin, cousins, who has asthma. | ||
| We should start a club. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You're now a policy wonk. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| Thank you very much! | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Next, Robert from Bloomfield, who was tricked into that Gillette commercial that one time. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You're now a policy wonk. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| Thank you very much! | ||
| Next, in Canada, it's pronounced a little drakey. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You are now a policy wonk. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| Thank you very much! | ||
| Talking about Jimmy Brooks. | ||
| Yeah, that was good. | ||
| Next, pinch my nipple and call me a policy wonk. | ||
| Pinch. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You're now a policy wonk. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| It was the delivery. | ||
| Sure. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. | |
| Obviously. | ||
| That was the pinch had like asterisk. | ||
| Yeah, yeah. | ||
| I felt it. | ||
| I figured that was the tone. | ||
| No, you delivered it well. | ||
| I could feel you pulling as you pinched. | ||
| It was heartfelt. | ||
| Part of the inspiration was that the person who sent that name prefaced it by saying, I'm embarrassed to be... | ||
| Using this name, so I had to put a little English on it. | ||
| Absolutely, yeah, yeah. | ||
| Next, the other angry, sweaty, fat guy. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You are now a policy wonk. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| Thank you very much! | ||
| And finally, we got a technocrat in the mix, Jordan. | ||
| So, Adventures in Hell World podcast is doing this so we can hear Dan say he's not after Alex says, I'll be better tomorrow. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| You are now a technocrat. | ||
| I'm a policy wonk. | ||
| I have risen above. | ||
| My enemies. | ||
| I might quit tomorrow, actually. | ||
| I'm just gonna take a little breaky now. | ||
| A little breaky for me. | ||
| And then we're going to come back. | ||
| And I'm gonna start the show over. | ||
| But I'm the devil! | ||
| I gotta be taken over here! | ||
|
unidentified
|
Fuck you! | |
| Fuck you! | ||
| I got plenty of words for you, but at the end of the day, fuck you and your New World Order, and fuck the horse you rode in on, and all your shit! | ||
| Maybe today should be my last broadcast. | ||
| Maybe I'll just be gone a month, maybe five years. | ||
| Maybe I'll walk out of here tomorrow and you never see me again. | ||
| That's really what I want to do. | ||
| I never want to come back here again. | ||
| I apologize to the crew and the listeners yesterday that I was legitimately having breakdowns on air. | ||
| I'll be better tomorrow. | ||
| Aha! | ||
| Joke's on you. | ||
| There is no Alex to be better tomorrow or not. | ||
|
unidentified
|
One good turn deserves another, podcast. | |
| So, Jordan, we will delve into these deposition waters, but I would like to tease you with an out-of-context drop here. | ||
| There were people who supervised specific departments, yes. | ||
| And these people supervised quite a few people, didn't they? | ||
| I don't know who they supervised. | ||
| That's troubling. | ||
| That's troubling. | ||
| That is troubling. | ||
| I don't know who they supervise. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, that's part of the things you should know. | |
| That is upsetting. | ||
| Then in what way are they supervisors? | ||
| There's a number of things that when I was listening to these and watching these, there's little things that I'm learning about the experience of being in a room with a lawyer. | ||
| And there's certain things that you don't really want to hear. | ||
| One of them is... | ||
| That's troubling. | ||
| Yeah, that's not good. | ||
| No. | ||
| That's not gonna go well in the future. | ||
| It means the conversation that you're having is off the rails. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| And the second thing that I noticed is, like, if somebody, a lawyer, is asking you a question, and then they say thank you after your answer... | ||
| Not good. | ||
| Take it back. | ||
| Take it back. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No, no, no. | |
| Not good. | ||
| Whatever it is that you just said, I take it back. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That means they got what they wanted. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| I'll take that. | ||
| I'll take that question again, please. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I never knew to be afraid of that, but now. | ||
| Now, holy shit. | ||
| No, thank yous. | ||
| Only want to hear, hey, from lawyers. | ||
| Gotcha. | ||
| So, on February 14th and 15th, the newly appointed corporate representative for Free Speech Systems sat for depositions in the Sandy Hook case and the Marcel Fontaine case, respectively. | ||
| Having made embarrassing fumbles with Rob Dew and Daria Karpova, and having been sanctioned for how ill-prepared they'd been to fulfill their job, the company had contracted somebody from the outside of the team to take on the job. | ||
| That person was Brittany Paz, a lawyer who's worked with Norm Pattis in the past. | ||
| She had a nearly impossible task in front of her, getting up to speed on the topics that she was expected to be able to discuss, but at the end of the day, she did accept the job. | ||
| That was impossible. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And was paid $30,000 for it and became responsible for being a competent corporate representative. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| That's what she took on her plate. | ||
| She could have not done that given the impossible nature of the job. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| And since she's a professional, she brought in like a J-Store cutout of what a false flag is. | ||
| Oh, yes. | ||
| Yeah, that would have been funny. | ||
| She jumped up the level. | ||
| That would have been pretty funny. | ||
| She got a pacer case for a false flag. | ||
| No, no. | ||
| She, I think, would look down upon the printing out of Wikipedia articles and similar behavior. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So after that disaster that was Daria's deposition, the judge in the Sandy Hook case had dealt with just about enough bullshit. | ||
| Right, right, right, right. | ||
| This really was an act of generosity on the part of the court. | ||
| This is the judge from that hearing. | ||
| Quote, I think where I'm struggling is actually, I actually believe we're most likely to end up in a situation where I'm going to be telling the jury, we gave the defendants all these opportunities to answer these questions and you may decide from the answers they gave or did not give that had they answered, those answers would hurt their case. | ||
| Or some language to that effect. | ||
| I just don't know that we're there today on these issues after one shameful corporate rep deposition on damages. | ||
| And so, you know, I would really like to have one corporate deposition where the witness actually prepares. | ||
| I feel this is exactly where Bill was, where we could have just been right there being like, body, body, no, no, no, no, no, no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You can lower this limbo bar to the ground, man. | |
| They are digging below it. | ||
| Well, but it's, I think it's a good thing. | ||
| I don't think that the court is being like, well, you know, maybe we'll give them a chance and they'll comply this time. | ||
| It's more like, all right. | ||
| You're probably going to fuck this up. | ||
| Let's be super clear about what you need to do. | ||
| Give you one last chance. | ||
| If you can't comply, then... | ||
| I understand. | ||
| I understand. | ||
| We're just at the stage where you can no longer take these events as individual events, and they must be taken in totality. | ||
| And if you've already failed at 16 different attempts to do different things, then fuck off. | ||
| But what are you going to do? | ||
| So, after that point in this hearing, the judge goes on to delineate what preparing for these topics actually means. | ||
| And we're going to periodically refer back to this as we go through Ms. Paz's deposition. | ||
| And I assume that's because she nails it every time? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, you bet. | |
| And she's correct. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So the first deposition covers the Sandy Hook case and is being conducted by Mark Bankston. | ||
| Naturally, these are long videos and a lot of the information in them delves into areas that we've been over before, so I'm going to try to trim a bit out and primarily focus on what we can learn from these documents. | ||
| It's important to remember how much Alex whines on his show by not being allowed a chance to defend himself because this exists as definitive evidence that he's full of shit. | ||
| Daria to testify as a corporate rep and she showed up with printed out Wikipedia articles having no idea about the subject she was supposed to discuss and she ended up kind of supporting Sandy Hook conspiracy theories under oath. | ||
| Out of an abundance of grace, the court is giving him another chance to actually participate, and this is what... | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hurrah! | |
| Well done, everybody! | ||
| So we start here. | ||
| We're going to start with the deposition from the 14th, February 14th, covering the Sandy Hook cases. | ||
| And the first thing we're going to establish here at the beginning is how long did you have to prepare for this? | ||
| I was given the call on the way here. | ||
| It might as well be, to some extent. | ||
| When were you selected to act as Free Speech Systems corporate representative? | ||
| I think that I was officially hired the last week in February. | ||
| I'm sorry, excuse me, the last week in January, first week in February. | ||
| So January 31st, February 1st-ish that week. | ||
| It's been about two weeks. | ||
| When you say officially, and let me back up, you understand there was a designation filed. | ||
| Designating you as the corporate representative, and I think that was last week, maybe Wednesday. | ||
| Are you aware of that? | ||
| I don't know when it was filed. | ||
| As far as an official selection, that was done well before that. | ||
| I wouldn't say well before that, but it was done before that if it was filed last week. | ||
| Right, so a few weeks before that, at least. | ||
| Not a few weeks. | ||
| I've only been the corporate rep for two weeks. | ||
| I think as of today it's been two weeks. | ||
| Okay, you've had two weeks. | ||
| Okay, yeah, that makes sense, because you said January 31st, February 1st. | ||
| I think that was a Monday, January 31st, so... | ||
| That probably was the day when everything got finalized. | ||
| So this is going to be a bit important, not because of the difference in dates between her official and unofficial selection, but because of how much material she was expected to be conversant about and the window of time that she had from her selection to the date of this deposition. | ||
| In the hearing after Daria's deposition, the judge asked Alex's counsel, quote, Do you know who will be designated or if there will be more than one person designated to respond to these topics? | ||
| The response was, I will have the answer for that by the end of today, and I'm relatively certain it will be more than one person. | ||
| That would have been a good idea, and for whatever reason, Alex and Free Speech Systems decided not to designate more than one person. | ||
| They chose to leave this one person, Brittany Paz, to be responsible for answering to all the questions in both of these cases, which honestly isn't fair. | ||
| I don't have a ton of pity for Ms. Paz, but it would also be dishonest to not recognize that her inability to do her job in these depositions was part of an intentional choice that Alex made. | ||
| If there's tens of thousands of pages of material to become familiar with, having one person do that is an act of sabotage. | ||
| Especially when the opportunity was readily available to split the workload up between multiple representatives, sending one person with two weeks prep time is not an act of cooperation. | ||
| That's no good. | ||
| I am going to pay you $30,000 to try and get away with the bare minimum of what you can do. | ||
| Well, no, because the judge has clearly said what the bare minimum is. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And doing the bare minimum would take a lot of work. | ||
| Well, I'm hoping for it, but at the very least I hired a lawyer this time, so people will think I tried. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| I think it's more like, here's $30,000, get, like, enough to say something. | ||
| It does feel like that. | ||
| And then just sit there while you have the worst time of your life. | ||
| It really does feel like they gave her 30 grand to kind of, like, sell it, you know? | ||
| Like, do what you can. | ||
| It's not going to be pleasant. | ||
| It's not going to be enjoyable. | ||
| You're going to be sitting in this room and you're going to feel like an asshole. | ||
| How much work is it for 30 grand, though? | ||
| Like, really feel it. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I don't think I would do it. | ||
| I'm not sitting in a deposition for 100 grand. | ||
| Considering that these were two all day... | ||
| I mean, unless I'm stealing 100 grand, in which case... | ||
| Well, yeah. | ||
| These were two all day, like, super uncomfortable sessions. | ||
| So, I don't know. | ||
| Maybe I just have a higher price on being miserable for eight hours straight. | ||
| Or maybe I just have the fresh memory of being in that room with Daria. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. | |
| I bet the second deposition for her was way worse than the first one. | ||
| Well, we'll see. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So, here is them talking about this sort of dynamic, about, like, you can't really do everything. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Like, you can't look at all. | ||
| It's impossible. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah, yeah. | ||
| To prepare for this deposition, did you review every document produced in this litigation? | ||
| Every single document? | ||
| No, I didn't review every single document. | ||
| I don't think it's possible to review every single document. | ||
| Well, I certainly would agree that it's not possible for one person to do it within the time period of this deposition, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| It would take multiple people to do that. | ||
| I think for the purposes of this deposition, if you'd like to go through the universe of documents that I did review, I'm happy to do that. | ||
| That's not what I'm asking you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Wanted to prepare itself for this deposition by reviewing every document produced in this litigation. | ||
| One person in two weeks could not do that. | ||
| One person in two weeks could not do that, no. | ||
| And the company did not undertake steps to make sure that multiple people reviewed all of those documents, correct? | ||
| I was the only person that was retained to do that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So already you kind of have this, like, being against the judge's wishes. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Because the goal was to have a corporate representative who could speak on all of the matters that were relevant, all of the discovery material that was handed over, and so she can't. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And she feels it's impossible to. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Unless you had multiple people. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| And Alex and Infowars chose not to have multiple people. | ||
| So they chose not to follow. | ||
| Correct. | ||
| You nailed it. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So you already have, basically, like, this is going to be fucked. | ||
| Then why can't we all just say, okay, then? | ||
| Like, all right, cool. | ||
| We're done. | ||
| Well, wouldn't that be nice? | ||
| Well, because there's so much weirdness that has to come. | ||
| I know, but I mean, think about the... | ||
| The just expedience of him being like, well, you only... | ||
| Here, here's how it works. | ||
| The judge gave you a job. | ||
| This was on that. | ||
| You didn't do it. | ||
| The end. | ||
| Here's a couple reasons why I'm glad that's not the case. | ||
| One, there's a lot of weird stuff. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Two, we wouldn't have an episode to do if they just shut down depositions like that. | ||
| I understand we benefit. | ||
| Three, it would deprive a lot of our listeners of the joy of these deposition episodes. | ||
| Again, understood. | ||
| Four, second day deposition. | ||
| What ends up happening, I can't even begin to explain to you. | ||
| How bizarre the subject matter gets and how revealing it is in an accidental way. | ||
| It does not seem like, oh, this is the direction this is going. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| I understand. | ||
| Just from a qui bono perspective, I feel like people are going to assume that we're behind all of this because there's no other explanation. | ||
| I can see where that would be coming from. | ||
| Unfortunately or fortunately, it is coincidence. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| There's an expectation that she'd look over all of these materials in preparation, and it turns out she couldn't find a certain video, and it's weird because Daria did. | ||
| One of the things you're asked to do is to prepare for all the videos that are mentioned in plaintiff's petitions, correct? | ||
| Yes, so I did try to locate all of the videos that are mentioned in the petition. | ||
| Okay, were you able to do that? | ||
| Not all of them. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| I don't think some of them are available just due to the deplatforming. | ||
| So I don't know that we have a couple of them. | ||
| It's interesting because I got all of them. | ||
| One of them that I know that I couldn't find was the video specifically relating to the addresses and the map of the honor, the location of the honor company. | ||
| That was one of the ones I couldn't find. | ||
| Were you aware that the last corporate representative, Daria Karpova, she was shown that video? | ||
| She was shown the video or you showed her the video? | ||
| I didn't show it to her. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know. | |
| In terms of preparation, you don't know what Ms. Karpova did to prepare? | ||
| I read her deposition. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Well, let me make sure I get an answer to the question. | ||
| Do you think that that means you know what she did to prepare? | ||
| I don't think she did very much to prepare, to be honest. | ||
| I don't think she did either, but I do think Brad Reeves showed her some videos. | ||
| Do you know about that? | ||
| I don't know what Brad Reeves showed her, no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Shots fired! | ||
| I don't think that she did much. | ||
| I agree. | ||
| Fair enough. | ||
| We're all in agreement here. | ||
| This is a good start. | ||
| Miss Paz, you're starting to win me over right out of the gate. | ||
| I mean, it's... | ||
| Talking shit on the past couple of rooms. | ||
| It's great to experience a moment of shared reality with somebody on that side. | ||
| It has the appearance of, like, a little bit of frankness. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| You know, that's pretty unexpected and rare. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| It's nice. | ||
| It doesn't last. | ||
| I didn't think so. | ||
| So, in this next clip, there... | ||
| There's a bit of a conversation about what efforts were made to retain evidence, potential evidence in this case. | ||
| And it's quite an elongated attempt at getting some answers out here. | ||
| It's longer than it should be, huh? | ||
| Yeah, and so here is an answer to a question that was particularly, this is not good. | ||
| Can you tell me... | ||
| Can you at least tell me everything Free Speech Systems did to preserve evidence? | ||
| If you can't tell me when they did it, can you tell me what they did? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| To my knowledge, I think that there were efforts undertaken to produce all of the emails that were given. | ||
| There were certain search term parameters that were given to the company to search the emails. | ||
| There were certain parameters done to try to access the videos such that... | ||
| We could access the videos. | ||
| And I believe I testified earlier that there was a third-party company that was helping with that, although I'm not sure what the name is. | ||
| I think Attorney Block could probably get that information for you. | ||
| I think that as far as social media goes, I think that the testimony previously has been that that information can be accessed through Twitter. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Um... | |
| Do you also want to know about the finances of the company and the documents related to the finances, or are we just now in the universe of emails, articles? | ||
| And videos. | ||
| Well, let's deal with that first answer first, because what I heard you talking about is there were efforts to make to search for the emails. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And efforts made to access the videos. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And these sound to me like things that were done to attempt to locate documents for production in the lawsuit, right? | ||
| What I didn't hear is about any efforts to preserve documents before that happened. | ||
| In other words, you understand if I'm going to go search for documents to produce them, it's important that I preserve those documents before that happens. | ||
| You understand what I'm saying? | ||
| Well, I do understand what you're saying, and I don't think that there's been any deletion of any of that information. | ||
| So, I mean, once they were required to be produced and we did the search through the databases, I don't have any reason to believe any of that information was deleted. | ||
| So this is a really bad look right out of the gate. | ||
| You have this section at the beginning of the deposition where Mark is trying to get information about efforts that were made by free speech systems to preserve evidence, and the answers don't seem to really pertain to the question that's being asked. | ||
| Here's what the judge said specifically about the responsibility that the corporate representative would have regarding matters involving preservation of evidence. | ||
| Quote, if she shows up again, or I'm sure we'll get a new one, a new corporate representative, because that's the way this works, and that person says, I don't know, then they will have disregarded the orders I'm making today. | ||
| Your client will have violated the orders that I'm making today. | ||
| I don't want, I don't know, I'm guessing, I think, maybe, or I infer to be a part of the answer at all. | ||
| So if the answer is, we destroy everything as fast as we can, then I want them to come out and say that. | ||
| And if their answer is, we don't care where it comes from, so we don't ever create a record, they don't need to say that in that way. | ||
| Alex's lawyer responded with just one word, understood. | ||
| Already, Ms. Paz has stepped in it, and it's shown that the direct orders of the judge are not being followed, whether through negligence and, like, unawareness on her part, or as a result of Alex's hostility to the process. | ||
| Either way, this is the first of the subjects they were given clear instructions on specifically what not to do, and they decided to do that exact thing. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| So she didn't say, like, oh, well, immediately after a hard drive contains materials that we have decided could hurt us, we pour a bunch of... | ||
| We've burned down all of our servers. | ||
| We've got holes in the ground where we've buried things that you'll never need to know about. | ||
| She didn't say any of that. | ||
| She just said, I think we did all right. | ||
| She didn't, and she didn't really talk about any specific things that were done to preserve the evidence. | ||
| Right. | ||
| As opposed to, like, we searched our inboxes. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| She couldn't, I mean, yeah, but you don't want to just say they didn't. | ||
| That's a real bummer. | ||
| Yeah, I don't know what the stakes are for her to just say that if that's the case. | ||
| I mean, she's gonna walk away with this fine. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah, she should just be straight up. | ||
| She's a lawyer! | ||
| Come on, fuck it! | ||
| Yeah, what's the worst that can happen? | ||
| You lose your association with Norm Pattis? | ||
| Oh my god, I don't have that Norm gig anymore. | ||
| All those racist open mics I won't be able to do. | ||
| Yeah, that's brutal. | ||
| Yeah, you're right. | ||
| I've been there. | ||
| So, there's a lot of back and forth and questioning throughout about who she talked to from the company and such. | ||
| And a lot of people she didn't try to get in touch with. | ||
| Maybe a poor decision on her part because she was supposed to. | ||
| Why would I need to talk to Alex? | ||
| Well, she did talk to Alex. | ||
| And that might have been a problem because she seems to have believed him in that stuff. | ||
| I'm telling you, this guy might be right about Sandy. | ||
| One person that I found her answer to be very bizarre about is Kurt Nimmo. | ||
| He was a senior writer, a managerial editor during some of the relevant periods for the case. | ||
| And whether or not she tried to contact him is a super bizarre thread that goes throughout both depositions. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What? | |
| Here's what she says on the first deposition. | ||
| So, Curt Nimmo, you understand he's... | ||
| Tell me who he is. | ||
| Well, I know who he was because he's no longer employed by the company, but I think that in a relevant time period, I believe 20, maybe 18 and prior, he was the head writer at InfoWars. | ||
| Did you talk to him? | ||
| I was not able to locate him. | ||
| He's not a current employee, but I did make efforts to try to find out his current information, but we were not able to talk to him. | ||
| What do you mean you tried to find out and make efforts? | ||
| I wasn't able to reach out to him. | ||
| He was deposed in Lafferty. | ||
| Everybody has his information. | ||
| Okay, but I tried to reach out to him. | ||
| Wait, hold on. | ||
| Let's make sure I understand this. | ||
| Because I thought you just said that you couldn't find his information. | ||
| I think what I said was I tried to reach out to him. | ||
| Okay, because we're going to maybe need to stop at a break and go look at what was said on the court reporter here, because I thought what you were saying is you were unable to locate his contact information. | ||
| I don't know that I was unable to locate it. | ||
| I think that we tried to reach out to him by phone. | ||
| Okay, so if I go talk to Kurt Nimmo, he's going to have a phone record of an InfoWars number or your number calling him. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| How do you not know? | ||
| If your testimony is truthful today, that would be the case, right? | ||
| I didn't... | ||
| I wasn't able to get in contact with him. | ||
| I'm not... | ||
| That's not what I'm asking you. | ||
| I'm asking, did you call him? | ||
| I called a lot of people. | ||
| I think... | ||
|
unidentified
|
But your testimony would be... | |
| I didn't speak to him, though, no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Your testimony is that either you or somebody at Infowars called him for this deposition. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| I know we tried to get his contact information. | ||
| I asked Melinda for his contact information. | ||
| She didn't have it. | ||
| I don't know whether I called him and left a voicemail and he didn't pick up. | ||
| I know I haven't talked to him, so I'm not honestly sure. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good work. | |
| Okay, so I just want to make sure when you say you're not honestly sure, you're sure you haven't talked to him. | ||
| I am sure I haven't talked to him. | ||
| What you're not sure of is if you've tried to talk to him. | ||
| I know I asked for his contact information, but I'm not sure if I actually called. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So this is weird. | ||
| What is happening? | ||
| It's splitting hairs in a really, really strange way. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Considering that she just straight up says that she didn't contact a number of people, it seems like you could just throw Kurt Nimmo on that pile. | ||
| But so I'm going to jump ahead, actually, to the second day's deposition and see how this Kurt Nimmo discussion goes on that day and see if you see any dissimilarities. | ||
| He's off the grid, man! | ||
| I don't know where he is! | ||
| I can't remember if you spoke with Nimmo or not. | ||
| I did not speak to Mr. Nimmo. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Any particular reason? | ||
| I don't know that I had his information readily available, and I don't know that I had the time to talk to him. | ||
| I spoke to a lot of people. | ||
| Did you ask for it? | ||
| For Mr. Nimmo's phone number? | ||
| Yes, I did ask Melinda for it, and I don't know that she was able to find it. | ||
| So now there's a... | ||
| I don't think I even got his number. | ||
| It's very weird. | ||
| I really feel like I've learned so much about depositions through all of this. | ||
| And just the concept of just, like, they don't even get the idea of answering a question that you can then answer with a follow-up question and still be right, you know? | ||
| Like, I think I called him. | ||
| And then they go, well, if I check his phone records, did you call him? | ||
| They're like, I mean, maybe I called. | ||
| He could have been called in the future. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| Also, I think, like, I don't want to assume what someone would or would not remember, but, you know, you've only been involved in this for two weeks. | ||
| Two weeks! | ||
| It's not a very long time to try to remember what efforts have been and have not been made and where things stand. | ||
| How many people could you possibly have called? | ||
| Right. | ||
| And Kurt Nimmo is somebody who's, like, a particularly relevant member of the Infowars team for the time that he was there. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So, like, it seems to me like it wouldn't be that confusing. | ||
| What happened? | ||
| And that's why I'm confused by these answers that seem a little bit different over the two depositions. | ||
| Well, I mean, I think we can assume that what's important is when she initially answered the question, she said, I know who Kurt Nemo was. | ||
| So we can assume that she's murdered Kurt Nemo. | ||
| I think it's Nemo. | ||
| He's not a captain. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nemo. | |
| He doesn't pilot the Nautilus. | ||
| All right, fine. | ||
| So, this next clip, Paz has a bit of an answer that is troubling about Alex's phones. | ||
| She directly contradicts Alex's own testimony. | ||
| That's not good! | ||
| About Alex's own phones. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's not good! | |
| No. | ||
| Don't do that! | ||
| Do you believe Mr. Jones has produced all of his text messages relating to Sandy Hook that he had in his possession after the anticipation of litigation? | ||
| And here's the problem with that, is that I don't know... | ||
| What he has on his phone, because I don't know what, if anything, would have been on the phone at that time period. | ||
| And the only reason why I say that is, I know that he's got new phones, so he doesn't have access to anything that's on prior phones. | ||
| And he saw the wires, so he's got burners. | ||
| Or he wouldn't have anything that's for prior phones. | ||
| I'm sure that if he... | ||
| Well, actually, I don't want to say that because I'm not sure. | ||
| But in any event, like I said, I don't know when he would have gotten a new phone such that he would have access to those messages. | ||
| You read Mr. Jones' November 2019 deposition? | ||
| I read the March 2019 deposition. | ||
| I don't think I got to the November one. | ||
| Okay, because see, Mr. Jones testified something totally opposite of what you just said, which is that he got new phones, but they have the same SIM card and off of cloud storage, and he doesn't lose text messages. | ||
| Do you have any reason to dispute that? | ||
| No. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oops. | |
| Oops. | ||
| I guess I made that thing up. | ||
| I guess I made that excuse up a minute ago. | ||
| And the reason is because the context of this is surrounding Mark having a text message. | ||
| That Alex should have on his phone that involves Sandy Hook and was not produced. | ||
| Because Elizabeth Williamson from the New York Times had reached out to Mark that she had a text exchange with Alex that included the word Sandy Hook and it was not produced in Discovery. | ||
| And this leads to suspicion that all the texts were not necessarily turned over. | ||
| And so that's kind of... | ||
| The area where she's trying to wiggle around. | ||
| Well, I mean, she literally avoided saying what she was about to say was, I'm sure if he could have returned over all of his text messages, he would have. | ||
| And then she stopped herself and said, well, I'm not sure he would. | ||
| Well, it would be generous to assume that... | ||
| It's only inability that's stopping him. | ||
| I mean, she said it. | ||
| True, true. | ||
| It doesn't get more obvious than that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| I think he would probably lie to you if he could. | ||
| That's my honest opinion. | ||
| Well, I mean, if I were in a deposition, I would... | ||
| Or if I was at, like, a high-stakes gambling table, I would bet every time on Alex Langton. | ||
| Oh, 100%. | ||
| Everything. | ||
| So, another big chunk, a big thing of what this deposition gets into in the early stages is... | ||
| What awareness did the company have of the plaintiffs? | ||
| Right. | ||
| And I just enjoyed this. | ||
| Can you summarize for me what the company knows about Neil Heslin? | ||
| Could you be more specific? | ||
| No. | ||
| No. | ||
| This happens a number of times. | ||
| There are a number of instances where she asks for them to be more specific, and both Mark and Bill are like, no. | ||
| I will not be more specific. | ||
| Can you explain to me what the company knows about... | ||
| Suspiciously, everything. | ||
| I don't know why. | ||
| I just got here two weeks ago and I find out they know everything about this guy? | ||
| That's fucked up, right? | ||
| We have their DNA on file. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We got their DNA! | |
| What is wrong with us? | ||
| We've cloned them. | ||
| Next question. | ||
| Could you be more specific? | ||
| Paz appears to be unaware of what the company knows, and specific about Neil Hessler. | ||
| The company may have produced documents, or my attorneys may have produced documents. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| Okay, you don't know what the company may have or may not have produced about Neil Hessler? | ||
| Before or after the litigation? | ||
| Both. | ||
| So before the litigation, I don't think that the company had much, if at all, information about Neil Hessler. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| What about after? | ||
| After, I am aware that there was some information about some legal issues that he may or may not have had in Connecticut. | ||
| You mean after the lawsuit was filed, somebody went and found out about that? | ||
| I believe so. | ||
| Prior to this lawsuit, in terms of its Sandy Hook coverage, has the company ever done any research on Neil Hussman? | ||
| I don't believe so. | ||
| So here we come to strike two in terms of this deposition ignoring the direct instructions given by the judge. | ||
| From the hearing... | ||
| Quote, the company's knowledge of the plaintiffs. | ||
| Clearly, the representative who was sent did not even try to determine what the company knew, since she had no knowledge of documents that were provided by the company she was there representing and the discovery in these cases. | ||
| So I consider it to be the minimum effort for the corporate representative to review every document produced by the company in this litigation prior to their deposition. | ||
| When Daria did her deposition, she had no awareness of documents that Free Speech Systems had And so as part of Alex getting another chance to provide a corporate rep, they were going to be required to review all the documents that involved this subject. | ||
| As is painfully obvious from this exchange, Ms. Paz did not do that. | ||
| This is clear, specifically as it relates to Mr. Heslin, because just as one example we have from prior depositions, the company produced an email that David Knight sent to himself with the subject line, quote, Connecticut Carey releases the troubled past of Neil Heslin from before the lawsuit. | ||
| There was also that email that David Knight sent himself with the subject line, quote, Neil Hessland, father of Sandy Hook victim, faces criminal charges, which he sent to himself one night at three in the morning before the lawsuits. | ||
| We already have a concrete demonstration that two of the judges'specific demands have not been respected, and we are not very far into this thing. | ||
| It is just clear. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know. | |
| It's... | ||
| I mean, here's the thing that bums me out, right? | ||
| If I'm a lawyer... | ||
| And I'm hired by Alex Jones, and I have been even slightly aware of what's going on. | ||
| The first thing I would have done is read none of the documents and read all of the previous depositions to figure out where it is I should avoid lying in tandem. | ||
| Do you know what I mean? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Like, you know, there's so many lies going on, you gotta know what lies you're trying to back up! | ||
| You might wanna read Daria's precautionary tales. | ||
| Totally! | ||
| Every part of it. | ||
| But you can discount a lot of the actual factual stuff. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, of course. | |
| Just make sure you're sort of in sync with what Alex said. | ||
| Kind of. | ||
| And then learn from the mistakes of the people who came before you. | ||
| And bring everything with you. | ||
| I'm talking all the other depositions, and so if they ask me a question, like... | ||
| Do you mean, like, in this thing? | ||
| I'd be like, hold on. | ||
| Let's take the next half hour while I find this. | ||
| You know? | ||
| Like, that's how you do it. | ||
| Sure, sure. | ||
| Grind it to a horrible halt. | ||
| So another issue is whether or not the company had knowledge about Scarlett Lewis, another of the plaintiffs. | ||
| Of course. | ||
| And so there was an email that was Wolfgang Halbig harassing Ms. Lewis. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And part of it had to do with, like, why, if you were so worried, did you stop to get coffee? | ||
| You know, like that kind of thing. | ||
| And so Mark brings up the coffee. | ||
| And this is sort of Ms. Paz trying to respond. | ||
| I don't get the sense that she really knows what is being referred to here. | ||
| Do you know about Scarlett Lewis and the coffee? | ||
| Do you understand what I mean when I talk about Scarlett Lewis and the coffee? | ||
| I believe that I read somewhere that there was something... | ||
| About Ms. Lewis or someone connected to Ms. Lewis going to get coffee for some people that were on scene of the shooting that day. | ||
| Alright, so that's some knowledge that somebody gave the company about Ms. Lewis, right? | ||
| Or at least that it thinks that it has about Ms. Lewis, right? | ||
| I think that that was in the news cycle around that time. | ||
| Whose news cycle? | ||
| Maybe it could be the email where Wolfgang Habig was harassing Ms. Lewis? | ||
| Could it maybe do that? | ||
| Like I said, I don't know that anybody had ever read that email. | ||
| Did you check? | ||
| Did I check about that specific email? | ||
| No. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That's not good. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| Yeah, I mean, it's pretty easy to confuse harassing emails with a news cycle. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| You know? | ||
| Yeah, you know, we've been through this with Daria and with, oh my god, we've been through this so many times. | ||
| It's true. | ||
| It's true. | ||
| And each time you look at it and you see what amounts to a pair of sharks murdering what's left over of Chum, right? | ||
| This time it's supposed to be a lawyer. | ||
| True. | ||
| It's supposed to be somebody on equal footing. | ||
| Well, she's not there as a legal... | ||
| True. | ||
| She's not there to practice law, very clearly, for legal purposes. | ||
| Well, true, but I mean, at least argumentative-wise, you would think. | ||
| Sure, and I do think that because of that, she does... | ||
| I mean, she holds her position a little bit better in a number of instances than someone like Daria or Rob Du would. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| But yeah, I think it's very different for that reason, that she has a familiarity with the law. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And then second, because she's not part of Infowars. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| She is an outside agent who's being, like, I'm a hired gun here. | ||
| And I don't know why you wouldn't just... | ||
| Be like, I don't know. | ||
| So honest. | ||
| Yeah, what? | ||
| So absurdly honest. | ||
| It still feels like she's trying to make stuff up in order to explain away things. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why? | |
| In a way that serves no one's purpose. | ||
| Nobody's happy because of this. | ||
| It's not helping him, it's not helping you, and it's not helping us. | ||
| No, and they talk a bit about what she's being compensated, and it is a flat rate, according to her. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| She worked extra time than she expected, and she's like, She's not billing for extra hours. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| There's no implication that there's some kind of a bonus that could be achieved. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| No, it's a gig. | ||
| It seems very bizarre to me that she's acting this way. | ||
| God, I mean, just scorched earth. | ||
| So honest that it would astonish people. | ||
| That's the only way that you would do it. | ||
| There is literally no reason why she would not get as familiar as she can with these subjects and then everything that she did and just be like, I don't know. | ||
| I have no idea. | ||
| I was not able to prepare on this. | ||
| I mean, legit, just be like, straighten the eyes. | ||
| This whole deck is stacked against you and me. | ||
| We're all fucked here. | ||
| Let's do what we can do, and then let's get out of here. | ||
| I mean, Mark and Bill both at various points express something of the... | ||
| I empathize with the position that you're in. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| This is not something that anybody could do. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| But I'm sick of this shit. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| Sorry you're here today. | ||
| They have a big energy of me on the phone with someone from Xfinity. | ||
| You know, like... | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I'm not mad at you. | ||
| It's not you. | ||
| It could be a scarecrow sitting where you are. | ||
| I'm so sorry. | ||
| But I'm coming for that fucking scarecrow, okay? | ||
| I'm so sorry that you are talking to me right now, because I hate your company. | ||
| You didn't personally hurt me. | ||
| I don't even know you, but guess what? | ||
| Your company sucks, and I have to let you know about it. | ||
| I've got to really tear you apart. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| So there is a bit of that. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So more discussion comes up about Scarlett Lewis, and this is really, I found this fascinating. | ||
| There's a wanting to get on the record whether or not the company believes these plaintiffs to be gun control advocates. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Because that's a lot of the justification that Alex has for treating them the way he did. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right, right. | |
| Because they're gun control activists, they're in the public eye or whatever his argument is. | ||
| Yes, of course. | ||
| And they've entered the political realm. | ||
| Of course, yes. | ||
| And so, Ms. Lewis has a charity. | ||
| And this exchange is truly bizarre. | ||
| Does the company contend Ms. Lewis as a gun regulation advocate? | ||
| I think Ms. Lewis operates a non-profit organization. | ||
| I believe I did read some material in the discovery materials that she operates a non-profit for school safety. | ||
| Does it have anything to do with guns? | ||
| I guess that depends on... | ||
| What school safety means. | ||
| And you don't know, do you? | ||
| You don't know what the Jesse Lewis Choose Love movement does or advocates, do you? | ||
| I don't know what she says it advocates for, but I know that there are different interpretations as to what school safety means. | ||
| Okay, I just want to put this really clear, because you seem to be trying to insinuate that there is a potential interpretation of Ms. Lewis' charity, that it is gun regulation related. | ||
| In some way. | ||
| Is that accurate? | ||
| I don't know, but what I'm saying is she operates a non-profit. | ||
| That non-profit has a goal and a stated directive. | ||
| And however anyone wants to interpret that is a matter of opinion. | ||
| But she operates a non-profit charity. | ||
| I get that. | ||
| So we have a setup here where Ms. Paws is trying to paint this like, well, it's an opinion. | ||
| You know, whatever. | ||
| You're welcome to make up your own ideas. | ||
| A school safety thing? | ||
| What is that about other than guns? | ||
| There's literally no way to find out what a charity spends its money on and is trying to do. | ||
| They have some regulations about that. | ||
| Oh, do they? | ||
| Oh. | ||
| But you don't even have to go that far because in this next clip, Ms. Paz learns in real time what this charity is about and then has to pivot. | ||
| It's fascinating. | ||
| What is wrong with you? | ||
| Watch the move that happens here. | ||
| I mean, personally, am I sitting here today saying that she's a gun control advocate? | ||
| No, but what I'm saying is I think that the hosts and writers at Infowar, in their opinion, could interpret that as being gun control advocacy. | ||
| Do they? | ||
| Individually, as individual writers and individual hosts, I can't testify as to what they think. | ||
| All right, let's just testify then to what the company thinks. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Is she a gun control advocate? | ||
| Does the company contend that? | ||
| Before you answer that, you understand I'm going to trial. | ||
| I need to discover what the company is or is not going to argue about these plaintiffs, what knowledge it has, what its contentions are. | ||
| I think it's fair, don't you think, that if the company is going to contend Scarlett Lewis as a gun advocate, I get to know that, right? | ||
| I think it is a reasonable interpretation of the non-profit. | ||
| That she could be a gun control advocate. | ||
| And if a host or a writer wanted to argue that from that angle, I think it's a reasonable interpretation of that activity. | ||
| Of the activity of her charity? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Teaching emotional intelligence to children in schools? | ||
| If that's what it does. | ||
| Okay, so first of all, let's start here. | ||
| You have no idea what Ms. Scarlett Lewis's charity does, right? | ||
| I have not done any independent research on her charity. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So in terms of asking... | ||
| What the company contends Miss Scarlett Lewis does with her charity, in terms of what its advocacy is, the company has no information, right? | ||
| I know what she says it does. | ||
| Okay, what does the company know that Miss Lewis says it does? | ||
| What she says it does is advocate for safe space for children to express themselves emotionally. | ||
| Okay, how could that be gun control advocacy? | ||
| Like I said, it depends on the opinion of the person. | ||
| And you were the one who said it could be. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It could be. | |
| So tell me how. | ||
| How? | ||
| How can school safety be construed as gun control advocacy? | ||
| Teaching children emotional things. | ||
| If that's in fact what it does, I don't know. | ||
| You're the one who just told me that you said that that's what she did? | ||
| What I told you, that is what she says her company does. | ||
| I don't know whether that is an actual statement of fact. | ||
| There might be something surreptitious. | ||
| She might not be telling the truth about what her charity is. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I haven't done anything. | ||
| Okay, got you. | ||
| Now I get it. | ||
| I'm sorry. | ||
| I was having trouble because I was thinking that the company's knowledge about what Ms. Lewis does, you were taking Ms. Lewis at her word, but because the company can't verify that and has done nothing to verify that, you can't say. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| Got you. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Amazing. | ||
| Weird thing to agree to at the end, the way that's presented. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Because you can't confirm this and you've done nothing to try. | ||
| You've decided to be suspicious. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Yep, you got it! | ||
| That's our company, baby! | ||
| I think that that clip does a really good job of illustrating this kind of amateurish improv that Miss Paws is having to engage in order to make it through the deposition. | ||
| She has no idea what Miss Lewis's charity is about, but she thinks it has to do with school safety in a way that you could imply that it's secretly about gun control. | ||
| It's something that people could have different opinions on, depending on your interpretation. | ||
| And then, after going a ways down that road, she learns that it's actually a charity about fostering emotional intelligence in young students, and she's forced to stick with that premise that she's already established, and now she's left with an unfortunate and uncomfortable decision. | ||
| She can either admit that she had no idea what she was talking about and was making up assessments that she made earlier, or she has to stick to her guns and imply that this charity that's about teaching the core values of kindness and forgiveness is secretly a gun control front that Ms. Lewis is being dishonest about. | ||
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You can hear Mark kind of laughing periodically in this, and it's because of things like this. | |
| It feels like, even at this point, he's pretty sure this deposition isn't going to be productive. | ||
| I mean... | ||
| On the other hand, I feel like I could really have fucking nailed this one. | ||
| It's just been like, listen, okay, you teach kids emotional intelligence. | ||
| They grow up to be emotionally intelligent people. | ||
| Why are they buying guns? | ||
| If everybody's emotionally intelligent, nobody's buying guns. | ||
| Do you get it, man? | ||
| I think that would be hard in a situation where you have follow-up questions. | ||
| But if you're Alex being a demagogue, that would be awesome. | ||
| That would be a perfect explanation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All day. | |
| All day, man. | ||
| I could rattle those off. | ||
| What, are you trying to create a perfect world where no one's a threat to each other? | ||
| Then why would I buy guns? | ||
| That's insane! | ||
| What's the Second Amendment for if nobody's trying to kill each other? | ||
| This is the long con gun grab. | ||
| Absolutely, the ultimate gun grab. | ||
| The not need for guns. | ||
| So in this next loop, they shift over to Leonard Posner, and on behalf of the company, Ms. Pos expresses that they believe that he was doing anti-First Amendment work. | ||
| There we go. | ||
| How does the company today feel about the fact that it was disclosing this kind of information about a Sandy Hook parent to the public, to millions of people? | ||
| How does it feel about that? | ||
| I think that Mr. Posner is an activist in many ways. | ||
| I think that his company is engaged in political speech, and I think his company is a public company that could be commented on publicly. | ||
| What politics is, what do you mean politically? | ||
| What's the ideology of Mr. Foster? | ||
| Of Mr. Of Honor? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| The company's position is that he's engaged in anti-First Amendment activity. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| That's one of the instances where, like, if I heard that thank you, I'd be like, uh-oh. | ||
| I just said something that's useful. | ||
| The company's position is that he's engaged in anti-First Amendment activity, and you said thank you. | ||
| I don't think that's good. | ||
| No, I think that probably is going to look bad. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I mean, yeah, part of my goal if I was doing this would be to be played or quoted the least in the trial, you know? | ||
| Like, I want to be... | ||
| My name should be mentioned the fewest number of times. | ||
| That's my goal. | ||
| Yeah, your goal is to make it so like, alright, maybe we'll go back to the Daria deposition. | ||
| That might have been more useful. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. | |
| Let's bring Daria back in here. | ||
| That would be my goal. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| So there was a news report that InfoWars covered, and it had to do with the shooting in Pakistan. | ||
| And there were children who were killed, and there was a memorial that included a picture of Mr. Posner's son. | ||
| And some other victims of shootings, along with pictures of the victims of this shooting. | ||
| And this was reported by Infowars as this kid has died again, mysteriously. | ||
| Of course it was. | ||
| And so there's a conversation about whether or not Alex would have known that covering that that way would have been offensive in the past. | ||
| You'd think the answer would be a very resounding yes, of course, obviously. | ||
| Maybe not. | ||
| The emails that we were referring to earlier on about Mr. Posner communicating his displeasure with the coverage were not responded to by Mr. Jones. | ||
| They were responded to by other people. | ||
| I don't know what Mr. Jones knew or didn't know about Mr. Posner's communication of displeasure at this point in time. | ||
| Because you didn't read his deposition right where he talked about it. | ||
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But assuming that, I will also say that this... | |
| This is not altogether uncommon where you source another article and publish the article. | ||
| I don't know that necessarily this is an adoption by Mr. Jones of what the content of the article is. | ||
| Actually, I was about to say, well, you know it is because you watched the video, but you didn't watch the video. | ||
| No, that was the video. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| This video? | ||
| I'm sorry. | ||
| Yes, I didn't watch this video. | ||
| Okay, because Mr. Jones says in this video... | ||
| That either the Pakistan thing is fake or the Sandy Hook thing is fake. | ||
| One of these has to be fake. | ||
| Do you know he said that? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I didn't watch that video. | ||
| And here we have yet another instance of a very clear and direct refusal of Alex's team to follow the judge's instructions in preparing for the deposition. | ||
| from the judge at that hearing. | ||
| "They should watch every video in the weeks leading up to the deposition. | ||
| They should identify for themselves, for the company, every statement they believe in those videos has a source, and they should make efforts to determine what that source was, and they should be able to intelligently answer as to the sources and efforts they've taken On a very basic level, this is... | ||
| Just a failure. | ||
| And Miss Paws didn't watch the video they're talking about. | ||
| And you can see how this makes her unable to answer questions about its content, let alone further questions about its sourcing. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| There's nowhere to go. | ||
| Yeah, that list of things from the judge is now taking on more of like a, I want a pony, and I want world peace, and I want... | ||
| Yeah, none of that shit's happening. | ||
| Well, but you're talking about it as like... | ||
| Impossible asks. | ||
| Like world peace and a pony. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Getting anybody from Infowars to tell the truth. | ||
| Well, but that's because of who you're asking. | ||
| Right. | ||
| You know. | ||
| Right. | ||
| It's like, the request isn't some kind of a, like, idealistic, impossible to deliver. | ||
| In any other case, this is the sort of requirement that would be there. | ||
| Right, and it'd be reasonable. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah, but I mean, at this point, you're asking the wind for information, man. | ||
| InfoWars is a force of nature towards this court. | ||
| I understand that, but framing it as like... | ||
| The request is for world peace implies that you or I or anybody else who's in this position being sued would be unable to find a way to comply with the court. | ||
| Whereas in reality, it's just like, it's not. | ||
| It's like... | ||
| Requiring a chocolate bar from someone who staunchly refuses to admit that chocolate exists. | ||
| He's never had a chocolate bar. | ||
| There's no such thing as chocolate. | ||
| You're not going to get that candy bar. | ||
| What are you talking about? | ||
| There's no chocolate. | ||
| Right. | ||
| It's a very, very attainable request that the court is making of Alex. | ||
| But at this point, it just feels like it's impossible because they are making it impossible. | ||
| They are. | ||
| By their noncompliance. | ||
| Force of nature. | ||
| So there is the whole thing about, you know, Leonard Posner's son's image traces back to and has to do with... | ||
| The copyright strikes that he was filing on these conspiracy videos in order to get them strikes on YouTube, get them taken down. | ||
| And that's why the company thinks he's an advocate for the end of the First Amendment or whatever. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So in one of these videos, Alex has a copyright claim. | ||
| And this is something that is asked of Ms. Paws. | ||
| What's going on here? | ||
| It says he showed a copyright claim document on camera. | ||
| Do you know what that refers to? | ||
| I think it probably refers to Mr. Posner's attempts to get videos removed. | ||
| Do you know that, or is that just kind of something you're thinking might be true right now? | ||
| I think that that's what's true. | ||
| But have you done anything to figure that out? | ||
| No. | ||
| So that document... | ||
| Actually, can you go ahead and flip the page again for me now? | ||
| On the first page? | ||
| Yeah, now we're going to the one that says 924. | ||
| So it's keep going. | ||
| It'd be the next page. | ||
| Do you see the Bates number 924? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And on this page, on segment four, it also talks about showed copyright claim document on camera? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| If this is the complaint or some sort of complaint from Mr. Posner, you haven't done anything to locate it or figure out what it is. | ||
| No, but what this means to me is that during this segment, he showed the actual document. | ||
| On his document camera. | ||
| On his document camera. | ||
| On his desk camera. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| He did. | ||
| And that's just like the thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Exactly. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Yes, correct. | ||
| And that's because this is another infringement of the judge's direct orders. | ||
| From the hearing. | ||
| Quote, they need to be able to speak about everything Alex Jones said in any of those videos about every piece of paper he holds up, every piece of paper he shows on that desk camera. | ||
| So specifically, things that were shown on the desk camera. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| So clearly this requirement has not been satisfied. | ||
| Ironically, I was listening to this and I was thinking... | ||
| I think I would be one of the few people in the world who could actually do a decent job as the corporate representative. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, totally. | |
| Totally. | ||
| Yeah, yeah. | ||
| They should have paid you way more than 30 grand and you would have crushed it. | ||
| Ironically, I think I could answer most of the questions that are being asked. | ||
| The fucking heel-turn moment of Mark sitting at a deposition desk and you walking in as the corporate representative. | ||
| You should have a fucking world championship belt on that subject. | ||
| McMahon and Austin hugging in the ring at WrestleMania. | ||
| Oh, the end of an era. | ||
| Yeah, I know. | ||
| I don't know why she's not lying about the things that would make her look... | ||
| It's a reasonable lie. | ||
| Did you look into this? | ||
| Listen, it was on my list of things to look into, but there were a million things to look into. | ||
| You know it and I know it. | ||
| It wasn't possible for me to look into this. | ||
| Instead, she's just like, nope, didn't give a fuck about this one. | ||
| Next. | ||
| Yeah, functionally, I'm not sure there's that much difference. | ||
| No, no, but it is different. | ||
| So one of the things that I think is fascinating and will plague everyone who has any familiarity with this case until the day they die is the fact that there was that ridiculously in-depth, gigantic background check of Leonard Posner in the documents that were handed over by Alex and his company. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep. | |
| And no one seems to know. | ||
| We have another person to ask, what the fuck, man? | ||
| Yep. | ||
| Can you summarize any other information the company has about Mr. Posner? | ||
| Has as we sit here today? | ||
| I have seen a background check that was produced in the production. | ||
| Okay, tell me about that. | ||
| Where did that come from? | ||
| You know, interestingly enough, I cannot determine where that came from. | ||
| That's less interesting than you might think. | ||
| True, true. | ||
| All right, Mark. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| It is less interesting. | ||
| Everyone has no idea where it came from. | ||
| No one knows where this came from. | ||
| It's suspicious in the uniformity of no one knowing anything about this. | ||
| This is not a mystery. | ||
| No, it is. | ||
| You can just... | ||
| Jordan, it is an unsolved mystery. | ||
| It is not! | ||
| Yep. | ||
| When you understood that that background report exists, what did you do to find out where it came from? | ||
| So, I have spoken to Mr. Jones. | ||
| I've spoken to Mr. Dew. | ||
| I've tried to go through the production material and the emails to find out if it was produced in an email. | ||
| I don't see it connected to an email. | ||
| Mr. Jones is not aware of where it came from. | ||
| Mr. Dew is not aware of where it came from. | ||
| I can speculate, but I don't want to do that because I don't honestly know where it came from. | ||
| I do know it is amongst the materials in the production, but I can't testify as to when or how it came to be there. | ||
| Well, somebody put it in there, right? | ||
| I don't know how it came to be there. | ||
| Well, I know that. | ||
| I know you don't know that. | ||
| But somebody put it in there, right? | ||
| It had to have gotten there somehow. | ||
| Yeah, exactly. | ||
| I don't want this conversation that happens in, like, the front office of a medical room to just be like, well, you know, these things happen. | ||
| What are you gonna do? | ||
| You leave scissors inside somebody. | ||
| You know, you win some, you lose some. | ||
| Scissors have to get into a body somehow. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No! | |
| This is a massive background check! | ||
| Yeah, it's... | ||
| I mean, there is an answer to the question, and it's very frustrating that... | ||
| It's entirely possible that no one does know. | ||
| It's within our grasp, though. | ||
| It is a knowable thing. | ||
| It seems like it should be. | ||
| Yeah, I guess one of the ways that it could be figured out, I don't know if this is even possible or if you'd need a court order or something, but obviously the background check would have had to have been run by somebody. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| You might have some record of who did it. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| By that. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Maybe, I don't know. | ||
| But yeah, at this point... | ||
| It's absurd. | ||
| No answers. | ||
| It is absurd. | ||
| You can't have a background check like that and then just have 15 depositions where everybody's like, nope, no idea. | ||
| Never heard of it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| What? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Bizarre. | ||
| So another thing that's bizarre is this clip. | ||
| Now, you understand there's a protective order in this case? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And I haven't seen a signed protective order acknowledgement from you. | ||
| Have you done that? | ||
| I've not been prior to one, but I'm happy to do it. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| But, in other words, before being exposed to my client's confidential information, you didn't sign a protective order? | ||
| No, I haven't signed anything. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That's really fucked up. | ||
| That's not good. | ||
| No. | ||
| That's not good. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| There's a protective order in the case. | ||
| For a good reason. | ||
| And you're supposed to have signed entry into that protective order before you're given access to anything. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I had to sign one before me and Mark could talk about anything. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That had to do with anything with this case. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And I did. | ||
| Signed one. | ||
| And that's why I couldn't talk about or didn't want to even risk any possible questions coming up or any conversation that might come up. | ||
| We didn't talk about me going to be at the deposition for a couple months afterwards. | ||
| There was no public conversation of any of this stuff because I was signed on to this protective order. | ||
| What you should have considered was just not signing it. | ||
| It seems like such a massive... | ||
| Failure of... | ||
| Seems really important. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| You could have just not done it, apparently. | ||
| I mean, I'm... | ||
| There are no rules! | ||
| I mean, I think that this is a good rule, and I'm happy to be bound by it, even if other people aren't. | ||
| But, like, I feel like the fact that it exists, and they have this person who has made it all the way to the... | ||
| Sitting in the deposition without having signed this... | ||
| It's troubling, and maybe... | ||
| In a case where the honor system is not one that can be relied upon, I would say is the least... | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So this clip is just weird. | ||
| I don't really know how to set it up. | ||
| Just weird. | ||
| Do you see a video on here that starts with Professor Claims? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay, and then I see you've taken some notes over to the side, right? | ||
| Yes, like I said, this is just my basic bullet point clip of what that video is about, and then I have more in-depth notes later on. | ||
| Okay, and so one of the notes that you've taken on that video. | ||
| First, can you tell me the date on that video? | ||
| 1-10-2013. | ||
| Okay, and then you have some notes in there about Owen Troyer? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Can you tell me what that means? | |
| It might have been Owen was either in that video or did the interview. | ||
| Or something to that effect. | ||
| Or maybe was the source for the information or something? | ||
| No, I don't think it would have been the source. | ||
| It would have been the person who was doing the video. | ||
| But I could be mistaken on that. | ||
| Can I check my more in-depth notes? | ||
| Yeah, well, I mean... | ||
| On that video, it's... | ||
| Let's see. | ||
| Yeah, so for that video... | ||
| I have the reporter as Owen Schreuer. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And his source was James Tracy and his website and various other sources. | ||
| I'm a little concerned about that answer. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Because Owen Schreuer didn't start working at InfoWars until 2016. | ||
| Did you know that? | ||
| I did. | ||
| So you know what? | ||
| It might be a typo on my part. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| She mixed up Paul Joseph Watson and Owen Schreuer. | ||
| Right, right, right, right. | ||
| I'm looking down at these notes you've written, and it appears that this is Dick Butt. | ||
| It appears that you have drawn Dick Butt. | ||
| Is this Owen Troyer that you're talking about? | ||
| Owen Troyer did not get hired as Dick Butt until a couple years after this. | ||
| Yeah, that is troubling. | ||
| Wild. | ||
| It shows at least an illustration that... | ||
| Alright, some of the information that you may have that you're providing is inaccurate. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep. | |
| Completely, you're just off script. | ||
| This is out of control. | ||
| There's never going to be any clarity. | ||
| Nobody's just going to come out and be honest. | ||
| Well, I don't think that this is a moment of dishonesty. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| This is like, even if you are telling the truth or trying as hard as you can... | ||
| There is reason, at least, to believe that there are instances of you have just got it wrong. | ||
| Completely wrong. | ||
| So, bleh. | ||
| Here we go. | ||
| Anyway, in this next clip we talk about our old friend, someone we haven't heard much about in a while, Leanne McAdoo. | ||
| This claim that they bulldozed the house and got rid of it, that's not a claim that was just made in that video. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| I'm sure that it was made in other videos. | ||
| So I've watched other videos that have contained this particular claim of the house being bulldozed. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Would you like to talk about that? | ||
| Yeah, where does that come from? | ||
| This house being bulldozed? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| You mean where did Alex Jones get the belief that the house was bulldozed? | ||
| Right. | ||
| I believe that there were property records that had indicated that the house was bulldozed. | ||
| Have you seen those? | ||
| I have not seen the documents, no. | ||
| Have you tried to locate them? | ||
| No. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| I don't think they were amongst the documents that the company has. | ||
| Alright, do you understand the story that was... | ||
| Okay, so this video covers a story by Leanne McAdoo. | ||
| Do you understand that story? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| You know who Leanne McAdoo is? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| She's somebody whose work is featured in this video. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Did you talk to her? | ||
| No, I didn't. | ||
| So this is about Adam Lanza's house, just for context. | ||
| And we have now come upon another admission of failure to follow basic instructions. | ||
| Ms. Paz is admitting that she is aware that the claim that they're discussing relies on reporting done by Leanne McAdoo, but that she didn't try to contact Leanne. | ||
| From the judge's directions, quote, They need to search for every person quoted in each video. | ||
| And by that, I mean they need to search every single thing Infowars or Free Speech Systems or Alex Jones has in their possession on paper, in email, on a text, on any other communication system, or in the mind of any employee or former employee or guest of the show. | ||
| Anything and everything. | ||
| While Paz was a little bit wishy-washy about whether or not she called or tried to call Kurt Nimmo, here it's pretty direct that she didn't even try to contact Leanne, and thus she didn't make the simplest effort, an attempt at trying to figure out what the reporting relied on, which was then used as the basis for Alex to report on what he did, and it's impossible to untangle the sourcing because he didn't try. | ||
| Amazing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mm-hmm. | |
| Just that moment of pure comedy, you know, just that... | ||
| So, did you try and reach out to her? | ||
| Nope! | ||
| Just the bright, cheery tone of voice that came with a, nope, didn't even try! | ||
| Fuck that noise! | ||
| That might be also a part of her growing annoyance. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| There's a dynamic that as this goes on, both of them get a bit more annoyed with each other. | ||
| Right, right, because there's no way for this to go well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nope. | |
| She doesn't have enough information to do a good job. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nope. | |
| She doesn't have any information. | ||
| She's working... | ||
| As a sort of, you know, part-time employee or temporary employee for someone who has a vested interest in not doing a good job. | ||
| Absolutely! | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So it's... | ||
| Oh, man. | ||
| It's chaotic. | ||
| Brutal. | ||
| And dumb. | ||
| So here's another violation of the judge's orders. | ||
| Oh, wait. | ||
| Actually, do you know what employees were involved in creating that video? | ||
| Unless it's on that list that we've previously marked. | ||
| Do you want to... | ||
| Yeah, let's take out that list. | ||
| Yeah, take out that list. | ||
|
unidentified
|
tell me if it is her So, this is Exhibit 6, October 26, 2017. | |
| No, that's not one of the dates that's on here. | ||
| So, in other words, you won't be able to tell me what employees were involved in creating this video. | ||
| No, these dates go from 2013 through 2015. | ||
| Correct. | ||
| So, once again, from the judge. | ||
| Quote, they need to be prepared to identify and describe the role of every employee involved with every video. | ||
| So, yeah, we whiffed on that one, too. | ||
| And, like, I'm just including some examples that are pretty transparent and obvious of the, like, times that the judge's direct instructions weren't followed. | ||
| There are so many more of them that it would just get repetitive. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| And it's not cherry-picking, really, either. | ||
| It's not like there are a hundred examples of her being prepared and, like, I can talk about this. | ||
| And then I just chose the one that was no good. | ||
| Oh, yeah. | ||
| This is just a rank inability to do the thing that you're there to do in sort of opposition to the direct orders that the judge gave that established why this was happening in the first place. | ||
| Right, right, right, right. | ||
| It's a bummer. | ||
| Yeah, they set up a pitching machine to the judge's balls. | ||
| That might as well be what we're talking about here. | ||
| But it does allow for those opportunities for things to be said that could be pretty troubling. | ||
| You know, it's the company's position that Leonard Posner was opposed to the First Amendment. | ||
| Gotta say it. | ||
| Or in past depositions, things like Daria saying on behalf of the company that Wolfgang Halbig sounds like a committed reporter. | ||
| Sounds like he knows what he's up to. | ||
| Who's just trying to get to the bottom of the story. | ||
| He's a good guy who loves what he does. | ||
| Or saying that Dan Badandi's a good reporter. | ||
| What's wrong with saying Dan Badandi's a great reporter? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So there are those things. | ||
| And I think that this next clip is actually another of those. | ||
| And it's Ms. Paz trying to argue that when Owen got on air and said the things that he did that were defamatory towards Mr. Heslin, that he wasn't relying on Jim Fetzer, who was the underlying information source of the claims. | ||
| He was relying on Zero Hedge. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Because they had published the article that Mr. Fetzer's information was in. | ||
| And then this is crystallized. | ||
| I would say that the reliability of Mr. Schroyer is not on Mr. Fetzer. | ||
| It's on the reporting of Zero Hedge. | ||
| You understand what I'm saying? | ||
| I do. | ||
| Zero Hedge, in publishing the article, would have vetted the claim. | ||
| Would they? | ||
| How do you know that? | ||
| Because Infowars' entire premise is just commentating. | ||
| Like I said, it's like a citizen blogger, commentator, pundit, whatever. | ||
| So we're not doing independent analysis or independent journalism. | ||
| I'm not investigating these things. | ||
| Investigative reporters. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh boy. | |
| So we're pulling other articles from the internet. | ||
| Those people are writing their articles. | ||
| We've seen those sources have been reliable in the past and we are relying on those people to vet their own sources. | ||
| If they don't vet their own sources, that's on them. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| Not InfoWars' hands clean for anything they put on the show that they didn't themselves write, is what you're saying. | ||
| That's the position. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That's... | ||
| I don't know how that's gonna play. | ||
| I like the little pause after he repeated back to her what she just said to him in a way that she finally understood what she just said, and she went, yep. | ||
| That's the company's position. | ||
| That's what they say, I guess. | ||
| That is a probably troubling level of refusal to take responsibility for anything. | ||
| It probably won't look that great. | ||
| We can do whatever we want as long as we didn't write it. | ||
| That's just such a classic, well, it sounds bad when you say it. | ||
| Well. | ||
| Sure, if you put it like that, it sounds like we're a bunch of morons. | ||
| Well, when you take off all my bells and whistles. | ||
| So, get into some of the specific claims of Wolfgang Halbig's stuff that was re-reported by Alex. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And one of those is that there was no traffic to the website, the Sandy Hook School website. | ||
| And therefore, it must have been closed. | ||
| Of course. | ||
| And now, the reason that this is where we're jumping to here, and I think the reason that this is thematic, is that this is potentially something that isn't them being a pundit. | ||
| Right. | ||
| This is something that... | ||
| Conceivably could be presented as... | ||
| Investigative journalism. | ||
| Is it or is it not? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well... | |
| First question that we see is why does the Sandy Hook Elementary School website have zero traffic for four years? | ||
| You see that? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Alright, you know where that comes from. | ||
| Yes, I believe that the source for that particular contention was the Wayback Machine. | ||
| How did the Wayback Machine write it? | ||
| So you're... | ||
| First of all, are you saying Infowars went and figured this out, went to the Wayback Machine and came up with this theory on its own? | ||
| Oh, you mean where is this source, the original source for this belief? | ||
| I'm not sure, but I know that we have amongst our documents a printout from the Wayback Machine, so at the very least, if it wasn't originated here, it was checked into, because we have the Wayback Machine. | ||
| I believe he even put that on... | ||
| If it wasn't in this video, it might have been in another video. | ||
| He did like a screenshot, like a desk cam to the Wayback Machine. | ||
| Desk cam of this Wayback Machine stuff. | ||
| Where does that come from? | ||
| Where did he get that? | ||
| You mean where did he get the idea to go there? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I don't think he... | ||
| He didn't go there. | ||
| I'm sorry? | ||
| He didn't go there. | ||
| That picture, I know where that picture's from. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Okay, so I'm trying to figure out if you know where that picture's from. | ||
| All I can testify is to the document that I saw from the Wayback Machine. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That's a chapter in Jim Feather's book. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Did you know that? | |
| I did not know that. | ||
| He wrote a book called Nobody Died at Sandy Hook. | ||
| You know that? | ||
| I know he wrote a book, yes. | ||
| Yeah, and the whole Wayback Machine thing that is totally false and not real comes from Jim Fetzer. | ||
| You didn't know that? | ||
| I didn't know that. | ||
| I didn't go to the Wayback Machine myself to check. | ||
| Well, yeah, I mean, you wouldn't know. | ||
| How would you even go there? | ||
| I mean, what would you look up? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I didn't go to check it out myself. | ||
| All I saw was the document from the Wayback Machine. | ||
| That's all I saw. | ||
| You just saw that there was something from the Wayback Machine, which is shown in the video. | ||
| They show a picture of it. | ||
| And you did nothing to follow up to figure out where that came from. | ||
| Aside from looking at the document that was produced as the source, no. | ||
| Okay, and so you didn't ask anybody about this claim? | ||
| About the Wayback Machine? | ||
| I asked Alex Jones, and Alex Jones' contention is that he saw it on the Wayback Machine. | ||
| So this is an instance where there's some sort of gray area. | ||
| Like, is this something that you're claiming is original reporting? | ||
| Although you already said that you don't do that. | ||
| You're not doing any journalism. | ||
| You're just doing commentary and what have you. | ||
| Is that this? | ||
| No, of course not. | ||
| It's from Jim Fetzer's book, but she doesn't realize that. | ||
| What a mess. | ||
| No idea about the sourcing of stuff. | ||
| No, it's from the Wayback Machine. | ||
| I like the way that we discussed the Wayback Machine in that clip, as though it was something that is held somewhere. | ||
| It's a robotic oracle. | ||
| It does feel like they're like, well, we consulted the Wayback Machine, and it has given us many... | ||
| We sacrificed three Tamagotchis, and it told us the... | ||
| We have given it a gift of acid-washed jeans, and now we are... | ||
| No, no, no, it's got to be something robotic, because it's a Wayback Machine. | ||
| Sorry, I apologize, I apologize. | ||
| Yeah, that's why it's like Tamagotchis. | ||
| They're like robot animals. | ||
| Sure, I get it. | ||
| I get it now. | ||
| Come on. | ||
| You've correctly sacrificed an animal and a machine at the same time. | ||
| I get it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You win. | |
| You win Scattergories. | ||
| Yes! | ||
| You know I like to argue about Scattergories. | ||
| I do! | ||
| So, this was kind of like odd. | ||
| So, it's not actually original reporting. | ||
| Right. | ||
| But maybe there's some other things that were done by... | ||
| Someone named Adon Salazar that might qualify as original reporting. | ||
| This isn't good. | ||
| No! | ||
| I wouldn't do that. | ||
| An FBI crime stat which says no murders occurred in Newtown in 2012. | ||
| That's a piece of Infowars independent research, right? | ||
| Nobody else researched that. | ||
| Yes, so that was, I did speak to our staff on this particular claim. | ||
| So this is a source that was actually sourced from the FBI.gov website, a screenshot of which was put onto and attached to the article. | ||
| It was written by Adan Salazar. | ||
| I think he was deposed in connection with this article. | ||
| Not here. | ||
| I just wanted to make sure you understand. | ||
| Yeah, you're right. | ||
| It was in Connecticut. | ||
| And so essentially what happened with the article, and it was not reported from another source. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So it was original reporting in the context of Mr. Salazar. | ||
| You're getting it. | ||
| Because it was not found from another source. | ||
| He went to FBI.gov and he saw this and then the problem with the number, it does say zero for Newtown for 2012, but the problem for the article... | ||
| Does it or does it say that for Newtown Police Department? | ||
| If you let me finish. | ||
| What it says is the FBI.gov stats is per town, not per department. | ||
| So per town, Newtown says zero, but if you scroll to the very bottom, like at the end of the list of towns, there's an asterisk that says the state police do not report to the FBI. | ||
| So that is the source of the confusion, so to speak, or the error for that particular stat. | ||
| But it does say, if you scroll down to Newtown, it does say zero, but he didn't scroll all the way down. | ||
| Ooh, so close. | ||
| Honestly, I don't know the answer as to why the state police don't report to the FBI. | ||
| That's the real problem here. | ||
| Every other department individually reports to the FBI their statistics. | ||
| Okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Just to make sure that you're not putting things on the record that are evident. | |
| Sure. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They absolutely 100% do report to the FBI. | |
| There's actually a 500-page report that that chart is generated from, has departments from every department in Connecticut, has for the Connecticut State Police list the 27 children at Sandy Hook has an asterisk saying these are the 27. I just want to make sure you understand. | ||
| Okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
At the bottom of that article, not the article, but at the bottom of the FBI.gov, all that's really in there is the asterisk. | |
| It does not include state police statistics. | ||
| That's all it says. | ||
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So he would have had to go and research the reason why that the state The police did not report for those particular numbers and things like that. | |
| Or he would need to pull up the document referred to on that chart, the UCR. | ||
| You know what the UCR is? | ||
| Right, but what I'm saying is he didn't scroll all the way to the bottom. | ||
| No, but up at the top of the document. | ||
| Oh, okay. | ||
| Where it says that these figures all here come from the UCR. | ||
| Oh, okay. | ||
| He never went and got the UCR. | ||
| No, no. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| All he did was look at the chart, saw the big fat zero, and then... | ||
| And we talked about how this didn't come from anybody else. | ||
| This was independent research done by Infowars on Sandy Hook, right? | ||
| Right. | ||
| That was a report that he did not get from someplace else. | ||
| Apparently, as far as I know, it was something that somebody had seen. | ||
| He might have gotten a tip. | ||
| Yeah, so Salazar might have gotten a tip. | ||
| Oh, boy. | ||
| So, yeah, this is homegrown reporting, and you can hear just like... | ||
| The very basic laziness and sloppiness and desire to reach the decided outcome. | ||
| You know, like, willingness to just, like, I will not take this a step further and figure out what we're reporting. | ||
| I will just, I have the optics that I need. | ||
| I'm going, this is good enough. | ||
| It's just lazy, shitty work. | ||
| Let it never be said that the, oh man, Jordan's career really ended because he didn't scroll all the way to the bottom. | ||
| Well, Adon Salazar's career did not end. | ||
| Well, that's true. | ||
| Adon Salazar's career did not end. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| But seriously, scroll all the way to the bottom. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Read the thing that you're claiming proves a conspiracy. | ||
| I mean, how do you not know everything that happens, period, from that one clip? | ||
| You know? | ||
| I think that... | ||
| She even said it. | ||
| She even said it. | ||
| He looked at it, he saw the big fat zero, and he was done. | ||
| She said every part of their editorial strategy, everything that they do, right there. | ||
| They got what they wanted, they quit, and that's what happened. | ||
| Well, and I think that one thing that maybe we don't take enough time to recognize sometimes is trying to roleplay or imagine in your head what you would do if you actually believed the things they pretend they do. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So if you're a Don Salazar and you actually believe that there's a global cabal of satanic weirdos who are controlling everything and they're trying to kill everybody off and they stage this shooting in order to get people's guns and you've found this. | ||
| You would want to know every single thing about these stats. | ||
| You would want to understand it. | ||
| Because this would be something that you could use that helps prove your case. | ||
| You're way off. | ||
| Because that makes sense to you. | ||
| Here's what makes sense. | ||
| If I get into that headspace, what makes sense to me is I better get a screenshot of this quick. | ||
| Because they're going to take this down. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Get a screenshot of it quick and then continue to learn more. | ||
| No, no, no, no. | ||
| I got my screenshot. | ||
| Right. | ||
| I think the difference that we have is that you're looking at this through a more realistic opportunistic, what these scammy conspiracists are all about. | ||
| And I'm looking at it from a, what if they were sincere? | ||
| Yeah, if it was sincere, absolutely. | ||
| Also, the other thing you learn from this is don't try to bring up pieces of evidence that were misused about Sandy Hook to Mark. | ||
| Because he knows what they're talking about. | ||
| I don't know why it is that they feel like Mark and Bill are coming into this with a very laissez-faire attitude as opposed to, we've literally spent how many years doing this? | ||
| I've memorized these fucking documents at this goddamn point. | ||
| I think that maybe you're so used to talking to people like Alex who's like, I don't know. | ||
| I don't know anything. | ||
| I just said this shit. | ||
| You just assume that everybody doesn't know what they're talking about. | ||
| Yeah, that's probably true. | ||
| And it is not the case. | ||
| Oh, I'm in a different animal, aren't I? | ||
| Oh, boy. | ||
| So, Don Salazar, I think, might be a total creep. | ||
| I'm getting the vibe from things that you learn about this guy, that he might be a, like, number one top-tier... | ||
| Grade A weirdo. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh. | |
| Inside InfoWars. | ||
| Oh boy. | ||
| We don't know... | ||
| Even inside InfoWars. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh boy. | |
| We don't know so much about him generally because he doesn't come on the show or anything. | ||
| He's not a front of camera person. | ||
| But like pretty consistently through these depositions and through things here, it's like he was one of the people who was like really interested in Sandy Hook conspiracies. | ||
| He seems to be... | ||
| Like, right there with some of the more fucked up things. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Connected to some of the more fucked up guests. | ||
| Right, right, right, right. | ||
| He also followed us on Twitter for a while. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Until he realized we knew he followed him up. | ||
| Well, it was a bad idea. | ||
| He followed us on Twitter. | ||
| It was a bad idea. | ||
| And then he unfollowed us. | ||
| But anyway, he was really into doing the Sandy Hook stuff. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| And that comes up here. | ||
| These are very out-of-character articles that we do not usually publish. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So out of character. | |
| So there were a couple here that Adan did that, as I said earlier, Adan was more into this than most of the other people involved in InfoWars. | ||
| And so he did a couple of independent pieces that really were out of the realm of what is usually done. | ||
| By the company. | ||
| So like, for example, he did that Batman article. | ||
| I don't know if you read that one. | ||
| I know about that one. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So he got a tip from somebody on social media and he saw that. | ||
| He's like, oh, okay, wow, that looks pretty cool. | ||
| And he did this dive into, you know, the three Batman movies and then what that area was called in the comics. | ||
| And then he wrote that article. | ||
| So that was independent reporting on his part. | ||
| It's really not the usual. | ||
| A piece that the company would do. | ||
| When Adan got tipped off that the appearance of the name Sandy Hook on the Dark Knight map could suggest predictive programming that suggests foreknowledge of the Sandy Hook attack being staged by globalist Illuminati types, He thought that was cool. | ||
| Does he think it's cool, is that a question? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No, he did, he did think that was cool. | |
| Are you asking me whether he did think that? | ||
| Is it cool? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I mean, it was pretty cool. | |
| Yeah, I mean, that's unfortunate. | ||
| She does explain like, hey, Barley, it's interesting. | ||
| I mean, what do you want me to say? | ||
| It was tubular. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I mean, it was dope, man. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It was boss. | |
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| The kids are saying it's based. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So you got it on Salazar. | ||
| Just fingerprints everywhere with Sandy Hook nonsense and bullshit. | ||
| He did that, the Batman story. | ||
| He's got to. | ||
| But he did more. | ||
| He did even more than that. | ||
| Why wouldn't he? | ||
| He did a similar article about a slasher thriller thing, Sandy Hook 2, which he just found to be interesting just because of the name commonality. | ||
| But as far as the other things sourced in there, I don't know that he thought that was cool, but the name commonality I think he thought was cool. | ||
| Let's take a detour over to the slasher film. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Sandy Hook Lingerie Party Massacre. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| You've read documents about that. | ||
| I believe I read the article and I spoke to Adan about it. | ||
| And he's got emails that he sent to people about it, right? | ||
| He did tell me he reached out to the producer of that video. | ||
| Have you seen those emails? | ||
| Those have been in deposition before. | ||
| Yeah, I don't know if I've read the specific emails. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| But I just don't remember. | ||
| I know they exist, though. | ||
| I'm just trying to remember if you remember Adan saying to that person who ran that horror slasher movie blog, we know this is ridiculous, but we're going to run it anyway. | ||
| Do you remember him saying that to him? | ||
| I don't dispute. | ||
| I don't remember, in all honesty, but he could have very well said that. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| All it is is just an interesting commonality between the names. | ||
| That's all. | ||
| Way to wipe that off. | ||
| Actually, no. | ||
| Mr. Salazar wrote an email to the guy who ran that blog basically accusing him of foreknowledge of the Sandy Hook attack, didn't he? | ||
| Oh, I don't know. | ||
| I didn't read any email like that. | ||
| So you don't remember that you didn't read an email back from the guy at the horror blog telling me, don't ever contact me again, you bunch of weirdos? | ||
| No, I didn't read any email like that. | ||
| When I spoke to Adan, Adan's position was that he received a response back from the producer that he had received a lot of communication about the name of the video following Sandy Hook and that he wanted to be left alone and he thought it was ridiculous. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That's a pretty diplomatic way to present what clearly was a very different sort of exchange that Don had with them. | ||
| Yeah, it does seem like he could have said, he told me to fuck off. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That would have been quicker. | ||
| I said some weird shit to him and he told me to kick rocks. | ||
| He was understandably furious at me because I was an asshole. | ||
| And maybe a little scared. | ||
| Yep, yep, yep, which also understandable. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| So, there was an interview that Alex did, a video that conveniently, much like it's very convenient that Ms. Paz hasn't seen these emails. | ||
| It's so weird! | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| She also has not seen a video that is particularly troubling. | ||
| There's a part on that show where there's a guest on the show, an Independent Media Solidarity member, who says, Lenny, your day is coming, my friend. | ||
| It is coming. | ||
| And Mr. Jones replies, they made a major mistake involving us. | ||
| And then the person says, go after them. | ||
| Alex, crush them. | ||
| And then Alex says, I'm not somebody to mess with. | ||
| You've never seen that, right? | ||
| I've never seen that, no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Alright. | |
| That's a big sigh. | ||
| By the same token, well, you've already told me there's no editorial discussion, so I don't know exactly how to ask this, but were there any kind of discussions in the family about saying that stuff to a Sandy Hook parent? | ||
| The stuff I just quoted. | ||
| What do you mean in the family? | ||
| I'm sorry, let me rephrase that question. | ||
| Were there any discussions inside the company about saying that kind of stuff to a Sandy Hook parent? | ||
| No. | ||
| I mean, it's bad stuff to say. | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| I mean, you know, it's one of the interesting things whenever you hear Alex's words repeated. | ||
| It's like, well, it sounds bad when you say it like that. | ||
| No, it sounds worse when Alex says it. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| He's screaming it. | ||
| His face is all red. | ||
| You don't even know how bad it sounds. | ||
| That sounds bad if you say it in a cold, dispassionate way. | ||
| It's like, oh, I can't imagine somebody saying that. | ||
| Imagine being on the full force back of an attack like that. | ||
| A lot of times, though, when you read somebody's words out of their delivery. | ||
| Yes, absolutely. | ||
| It sounds bad. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| This is very generous to Alex. | ||
| Yeah, so one of the things that becomes a little bit of a problem is that there's an internal numbering and labeling system that InfoWars uses or that Ms. Paz has for her videos that doesn't quite match the one that Mark has. | ||
| And part of this is an issue that has to do with... | ||
| Past lawyers who have given discovery and no one knows what's what and where. | ||
| It's all very disorganized. | ||
| It would be so much better for them if they just kept all their shit in a big bucket. | ||
| It really would. | ||
| It would make more sense for them. | ||
| They could just put it all in a big bucket, and then they'd at least know where it was. | ||
| You'd know where it was. | ||
| It'd be very disorganized. | ||
| But that's why you would pay multiple people to be bucket stewards. | ||
| Exactly! | ||
| Hang on to the bucket. | ||
| The groom of the bucket. | ||
| Keep an eye on the bucket! | ||
| So yeah, they can't even really be confident that they're talking about the same videos at a certain point. | ||
| Yeah, great. | ||
| That one has a video that's April 16th, 2013, entitled Shadow Government Strikes Again. | ||
| You see that? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Alright, did you watch that video? | ||
| Just give me one second. | ||
| Okay, so again, this is another thing where it's the videos that we have, there's a different... | ||
| Date so the date that's in this in the petition is April 16 2013 I have I Have one dated for 1 /2013 that was a Interview with dr. Pachanik It might it might be the same video or it might be a different video. | ||
| I Really don't want answers about fit night I don't. | ||
| But like I said, our internal system is saving them in different ways than you're mentioning them. | ||
| And they're also not full videos. | ||
| Shadow Government Strikes Again may be the title of a clip, but it's not the entire broadcast. | ||
| And so the way we're saving it is not the same. | ||
| I get that, but we don't know, do we? | ||
| I know. | ||
| But if you have the whole show... | ||
| Or if it's in the production. | ||
| I mean, we've produced it. | ||
| Is it the same? | ||
| Do we know? | ||
| I don't know if it's the same because your date is not the same date that I have. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And it also might not be the same date because this is a clip. | ||
| Third base! | ||
| Being cut from the original show. | ||
| Maybe. | ||
| Maybe. | ||
| You don't even know that, do you? | ||
| Miss Paws. | ||
| Do I know what you're referencing here? | ||
| No, no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You don't even know whether this is a full clip or a full episode. | |
| You don't know that. | ||
| Well, this, I don't know, and the reason is because that's not how we maintain our videos. | ||
| Like, how you're referencing them here is not how we save them. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| I mean, so, at the end of the day, we don't know if you've watched this video, right? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I can tell you about the video that I watched at this, that was posted around, uploaded around this time period, and if it's the same video. | ||
| No, because we really need to make sure... | ||
| On the fifth time I'm trying to take this deposition that we're actually talking about what we need to talk about. | ||
| So I don't want you to guess about what video might be this video and let's talk about that. | ||
| I don't want to do that. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So the easiest is we don't know if you watch this video. | ||
| I don't know if it's the same video that you're referencing, no. | ||
| Mark, I'm feeling like you're getting frustrated. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| I mean, this is hours in, too. | ||
| We're at this point. | ||
| And yeah, I mean, how do you deal with the fact that you're now sitting with somebody and you can't even agree that we're talking about the same thing? | ||
| Honestly, I don't even know what I don't know right now, but I don't know it! | ||
| It's impossible to exist in a legal context, because... | ||
| You might be talking about different videos. | ||
| Oh, that's right. | ||
| I was talking about that one episode of Swap Thing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. | |
| Completely different. | ||
| My bad, my bad. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| Let's get back to the deposition. | ||
| Do you remember the episode of Alex's show where he locked someone in a dumpster? | ||
| I'm sorry. | ||
| I'm thinking of a different show. | ||
| Oh, man. | ||
| Do you remember that episode of Alex's show whenever Screech got into all that trouble? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, boy. | |
| Different show. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh. | |
| So, in this next clip, we learn some more people that Miss Paws didn't even try to contact. | ||
| Okay, I had asked you earlier if you had talked to Jakari Jackson, and I know you said no. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Did you try to talk to Jakari Jackson? | ||
| No. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Darren McBreen, that's another person you didn't talk to, right? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Did you try to talk to Darren? | ||
| No. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Mr. Jones, very recently, and we actually, this was in a court hearing, we played this, talked about his archivist. | ||
| Do you know who I'm talking about? | ||
| Mr. Jones, it was a clip we played in. | ||
| It seems like we should know. | ||
| And we actually played it in Mr. Jones' deposition, too, I believe. | ||
| That Mr. Jones says, I have an archivist on staff. | ||
| He does incredible work. | ||
| He should be paid about $100,000 a year. | ||
| Instead, he's only paid $20,000 a year, which is a terrible shame, but I don't understand it because Mr. Jones is the one who pays him. | ||
| But he says the guy is like a bloodhound and can find anything. | ||
| Do you know who he's talking about? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm sorry, I don't know who he's talking to. | |
| I don't know. | ||
| Do you know if an archivist existed? | ||
| I don't have any reason to believe that, but he may be referring to a third-party company, but I've not been able to find anyone at Infowars that has such a job. | ||
| Even Paz thinks that's silly. | ||
| That should have led to a moment where just everybody started laughing, and then it kind of died down. | ||
| And everybody started laughing again because it was suddenly funny all over again. | ||
| Come on. | ||
| Of course he doesn't have a fucking archivist. | ||
| Or maybe he does. | ||
| Or he does, but what am I going to say? | ||
| He's a secret archivist. | ||
| If you think he does have an archivist, and if he does have an archivist, do you think he's going to tell me about that person? | ||
| I didn't even talk to Darren McBreen. | ||
| He seems willing. | ||
| He's available. | ||
| Ja 'Carri Jackson may not want to talk to me. | ||
| And agreed. | ||
| He seems to have not... | ||
| Wanted to be associated with Infowars since he left. | ||
| But Darren McBreen, I think he may... | ||
| He's right still around there. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| Maybe he's not. | ||
| I don't know if he works there, but he's adjacent. | ||
| He might still be. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| His son worked there? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Kellen McBreen? | ||
| It's a family business lying to people. | ||
| Both of their names come up within, like, emails and stuff that has to do with the Sandy Hook case. | ||
| Seems like someone you'd talk to. | ||
| Or try, but... | ||
| I mean, there's a whole family there. | ||
| So, one of the lowlights of the Daria deposition was, of course, her... | ||
| The idea that possibly spreading conspiracies about the children not dying. | ||
| It's about a positive worldview. | ||
| It's about hope. | ||
| It's about bringing hope to the children. | ||
| And so that comes up here. | ||
| And I think that you really, you well got your finger on the pulse of this deposition that Mark is getting a little bit annoyed at this point. | ||
| I think this was the deposition. | ||
| Yeah, that's Ms. Karpova's deposition. | ||
| What I want to ask you about is you have a note written down there. | ||
| And it says, Alex said these kids didn't die because he has a big heart. | ||
| That was the company's testimony from Ms. Karpova, correct? | ||
| That is Ms. Karpova's testimony. | ||
| And that's the company's testimony, right? | ||
| She was a representative at the time of the company, so yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Does the company still stand by that testimony, or does the company think maybe it should change that testimony? | |
| I think what I said earlier was that a vast majority of Mr. Jones's Opinions as broadcast were that I don't know if kids died. | ||
| I'm not sure. | ||
| I don't know enough to inform that opinion, but this may be a false flag operation. | ||
| Maybe the government was involved, that kind of thing. | ||
| I don't know what she's referencing here. | ||
| I think what she's saying and what the context of that is is that if he said kids didn't die, this is the reason why he said it. | ||
| That's what I took that to mean. | ||
| And he did say that, right? | ||
| He did say kids didn't die. | ||
| Multiple times. | ||
| I don't know about multiple times, but I do know of at least one time that he said kids didn't die. | ||
| But on the whole, more times than not, he said he didn't know whether kids died. | ||
| I mean, good for him, right? | ||
| I know, right? | ||
| That's our floor. | ||
| You know what I mean? | ||
| Let me ask you this question. | ||
| Is it the company's position that its non-defamatory statements cancel out its defamatory statements? | ||
| The company's position is that that is an opinion. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Ah, okay. | |
| It's not the court's position, so that's a good thing. | ||
| Is it the company's position that two negatives equal a positive? | ||
| Is the company of policy a Mitch Hedberg joke? | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| What are you talking about? | ||
| Yikes. | ||
| Okay, listen. | ||
| So he said it once. | ||
| He said it once, no big deal, but most of the time he didn't say it. | ||
| He said it once, but he also said the opposite twice. | ||
| Yeah, see? | ||
| That's twice as good. | ||
| Yeah, so we're going to sue you. | ||
| So you're dead. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That's a little snippy on Mark's part, I'll admit, but I think if you watch this entire thing, it's merited. | ||
| Mark earned it, absolutely. | ||
| So we have one last clip from this deposition, and I just think that this is a really good illustration of how little awareness there is of some of the players and some of the things that are important in the InfoWars sphere. | ||
| You know what GCN is? | ||
| I'm sorry? | ||
| GCN? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mm-hmm. | |
| You know what that is? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And so, can you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what GCN is? | ||
| What do they do? | ||
| Um... | ||
| You know, I don't want to misstate it, so I'm not... | ||
| I'd rather... | ||
| So, no. | ||
| I don't... | ||
| I'm not that educated on it to verbalize it that way. | ||
| Are you able to verbalize it at all? | ||
| Like, do you have any even rough idea what GCN is? | ||
| I just don't want to misstate what it is because I'm not 100% sure. | ||
| I mean, like, I want to know what your understanding is, even if it's wrong. | ||
| Do you understand that? | ||
| Like, what do you understand GCN to be? | ||
| I just, like I said, I'm not sure, so I'd rather, I don't know. | ||
| Do you know what it has to do with? | ||
| What's this associated with? | ||
| Is it associated with videos? | ||
| I thought it was associated with IT, but I could be wrong, which is why I didn't want to say in the first place, because I'm not 100% sure. | ||
| IT meaning the management of technology inside of InfoWars? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Okay, that's definitely not what GCN is. | ||
| Do you know who Ted Anderson is? | ||
| No. | ||
| Okay, Ted Anderson runs GCN. | ||
| GCN is where all of InfoWars Radio is, well maybe not all of it, but a very large substantial component of InfoWars Radio is through GCN. | ||
| Do you know that? | ||
| No. | ||
| Okay, Genesis and Ted Anderson are co-defendants in Lafferty. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Did you know that? | ||
| I'm not sure. | ||
| That's deeply troubling. | ||
| Oh, boy. | ||
| Partially because also understanding the existence of GCN is probably necessary, given that one of the subjects that she's supposed to be able to talk about is the distribution and reach of Alex's content. | ||
| And, I mean, just anybody who has a cursory understanding of Alex's career and the way his show works have to know who Ted Anderson is, you know, Genesis. | ||
| Like, it's just... | ||
| Yeah, I mean... | ||
| It's a damning portrait. | ||
| At that point, it's just like, just tell me what the three letters stand for. | ||
| Just do it. | ||
| I dare you. | ||
| I fucking dare you. | ||
| Tell me what GCN stands for. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I just... | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I mean, it would be like saying that you have an awareness of Alex's content and not knowing what Bohemian Grove is or something. | ||
| It's like, I doubt you do. | ||
| I just... | ||
| I doubt you know anything. | ||
| It is amazing to me that these things exist. | ||
| These depositions? | ||
| Yeah, just all of this. | ||
| Wait till the next one, bro. | ||
| And then it can continue. | ||
| You'd think that you can only fuck up so bad so many times, but there's just no bottom whenever people just decide that you don't have to have one. | ||
| Like, if you've got enough money, if you've got enough time, if you've got enough everything, there's no bottom. | ||
| Yeah, and if you're immune to shame. | ||
| Yeah! | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Amazing. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| It's incredible. | ||
| If almost all of polite society has already decided they hate you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| You don't have any public opinion to lose. | ||
| Yeah, exactly. | ||
| Yeah, you're free. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So most of the rest of this deposition is about what you'd expect. | ||
| When there's a source for some piece of information, it's said to be from Wolfgang Halbig, and most of the time, there's no new information to provide. | ||
| There's a bunch of claims that Paz didn't try to look into, and people she didn't try to contact, and it gets a bit repetitive at a certain point, but you can get the flavor of it from what we've gone over. | ||
| And you can definitely feel Mark's patience gradually disappear. | ||
| But even with limited patience, Mark is a bit of a teddy bear compared to the energy that Bill comes in with the next day when Brittany is once again set to sit for a deposition, this time in the Marcel Fontaine case. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Uh-oh. | |
| This is not a subjective judgment on my part. | ||
| Bill is abundantly clear about how little patience he has almost immediately. | ||
| I hate you! | ||
| Were you surprised when you got a call from Mr. Pattis to be the corporate representative in this case? | ||
| I wouldn't say I was surprised. | ||
| I knew he had been working on the Mr. Jones case for a couple of years, so I wouldn't say I was surprised. | ||
| When you say working on it, he's been litigating it. | ||
| I believe he litigates the Connecticut cases. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Correct. | |
| So when he said, hey, I need you to go to Texas, did that surprise you? | ||
| Not really. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Have you ever given a deposition prior to yesterday? | |
| No. | ||
| You ever served as a corporate representative? | ||
| No. | ||
| Have you ever gone through a civil jury trial? | ||
| Have I gone through a jury trial? | ||
| No. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So, your background is in criminal law, correct? | ||
| For the most part, yes. | ||
| So, when a civil lawyer calls you and says, I'd like for you to be the corporate representative in these civil matters, things you've never done before, you weren't at all surprised? | ||
| Well, Norm's not only a civil lawyer, but... | ||
| No, I wasn't very surprised. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I didn't say Norm was only a civil lawyer. | |
| You said when a civil lawyer calls you. | ||
| So he's not just a civil lawyer. | ||
| True or false? | ||
| Norm's a civil lawyer. | ||
| He practices civil, I'm criminal. | ||
| Well, there we go. | ||
| So the answer to my question would be yes, and I don't need all the extra. | ||
| You understand that, right? | ||
| Because I sat through yesterday, and unfortunately, Mr. Bankston is far more patient than I'm going to be. | ||
| Okay? | ||
| I'm just putting it out there. | ||
| If I ask a question, answer the one that's on the table. | ||
| You're a lawyer. | ||
| You know what to do. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Or do you not? | ||
| Is there an actual question there? | ||
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Do you know what to do when someone asks you a question in deposition? | |
| Okay. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| There's a bit more. | ||
| Of an adversarial situation. | ||
| Answer this as simply as you can. | ||
| What is your fucking name? | ||
| Just say it at me and don't say other shit! | ||
| What's your name? | ||
| What's your fucking deal? | ||
| What's your fucking deal? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What is wrong with you people? | |
| I think that we have noted a difference in style between Bill and Mark. | ||
| It has come to our attention. | ||
| But it's not really as obvious as when you see them depose the same person. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah, it does live up to this. | ||
| It is a bit confrontational at points. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| They've definitely chosen to go good cop, bad cop instead of the other way around. | ||
| I think it might just be natural. | ||
| Also, like he pointed out, Bill was sitting through most of the previous days. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, he was there. | |
| So he's already... | ||
| Got a good sense of what's going on. | ||
| Oh yeah. | ||
| So we're going to go through this deposition, but there might not be as much relevant material to get through, since at a certain point you begin to notice that a lot of the corporate representative testimony for InfoWars is really a game of trying to look like effort is being put forth, but there's not a lot of new information that's being provided. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| And we were kind of spoiled by having Rob Dew's confused uselessness and Daria's psychopathy in the previous depositions, whereas in contrast, Paz just seems like a person who's... | ||
| Doing a job, you know? | ||
| Yep, she's over her head because that's the job. | ||
| Her job is to be in over her head. | ||
| And another reason why I don't feel like there's nearly as much meat to go over in this is that with Kit Daniels' deposition... | ||
| They essentially lost that case. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Kids started crying and apologized for all this stuff and said that he was responsible and InfoWars was responsible and Alex told him to write these headlines. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| So, like, in terms of a lot of the, you know, trying to tease out details of stuff... | ||
| That really stands as a pretty damning document. | ||
| And whatever, like, I don't know or, you know, that the corporate representative could do is kind of meaningless. | ||
| So... | ||
| But really, Paz knows the job that she's being asked to do is bullshit, and that if Alex was taking this seriously at all, he would not have sent just one person to handle all of this. | ||
| But she's also a lawyer, and she's being paid, so she can bring a veneer of professionalism to not answering questions that it's not quite as entertaining as reps of the past. | ||
| But that being said, this falls apart a couple hours in. | ||
| Good. | ||
| And holy shit. | ||
| How is it possible? | ||
| I mean... | ||
| It is possible. | ||
| I know in her world, it does make sense. | ||
| And you wouldn't be surprised. | ||
| Oh, Norm Pattis called me up. | ||
| To give a thing I've never done before and a place I don't know in a law I don't understand for a company I've never heard of. | ||
| Not surprising at all. | ||
| That's Norm to a T, baby. | ||
| Yeah, he's a chaotic lawyer. | ||
| I mean, that does seem... | ||
| You know, it's like, to Bill, that would seem surprising, but she's a friend of Norm Pattis! | ||
| Hey, have you ever heard of a no-nonsense lawyer? | ||
| What about all nonsense? | ||
| He's the opposite. | ||
| All nonsense. | ||
| I'm going to throw a pie in the courtroom. | ||
| So we start off here with Bill trying to check in on whether or not Ms. Paz feels like she's prepared. | ||
| She's doing a great job. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Do you feel sitting here right now that you're adequately prepared to discuss the topics that were in the deposition notice? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Did you think walking into yesterday that you were prepared? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| I didn't ask as much as you could be. | ||
| I asked if you were prepared, fully prepared. | ||
| Like I said, as much as I could be, yes. | ||
| I don't think there's anybody else who could have testified any better as to those topics. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Did I ask that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| Did I ask you if you thought there was anyone else that could be better prepared? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| Okay. | ||
| Why'd you say it? | ||
| Because it's true. | ||
| Right. | ||
| But I like hot dogs. | ||
| Is true. | ||
| But I'm not going to blurt it out randomly in a deposition, am I? | ||
| It wasn't random. | ||
| It wasn't. | ||
| Which is why I'm asking you why you said it. | ||
| And I just told you. | ||
| Because it's true? | ||
| No, because it's relevant to your question. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| This is not going well. | ||
| Nope. | ||
| Nope. | ||
| We're in the teacher's office. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| You're in trouble. | ||
| But I think that Bill has identified, by being in the deposition with Mark, a pattern of adding extra information in to things that aren't relevant. | ||
| And I think the goal here is to curb that behavior a little bit. | ||
| Try to push back on it to make it very clear from the beginning that, like... | ||
| I'm not going to... | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Hey, listen. | ||
| Let's nip this in the bud. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Real quick. | ||
| Wasting time. | ||
| How many... | ||
| We've been doing this for years. | ||
| We've given a lot of latitude to everybody. | ||
| How about you and me just cut the bullshit and let's get this done? | ||
| Right. | ||
| And you have clearly chosen to not do that. | ||
| Many of the things that you seem to be saying are equivalent to I like hot dogs. | ||
| And let's move forward. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So, we get to talking about whether or not there's guidelines in place for the vetting of information. | ||
| And here is what Ms. Paz has to say. | ||
| What did you do to prepare to discuss the company's policies regarding the factual vetting of information that InfoWars disseminates? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| So I've spoken to, as we testified to yesterday, I've spoken to a number of other people in connection with the policies and procedures. | ||
| So I spoke to Melinda. | ||
| I spoke to Daria. | ||
| I spoke to Rob Dew. | ||
| I spoke to Alex Jones, a bunch of other people, and generally speaking, as far as the vetting procedures for sourcing and articles. | ||
| The company's position is that it does not engage in journalism, so it requires the vetting be done by the sources that it's citing. | ||
| So, this is the setup here. | ||
| Right. | ||
| There is no policy. | ||
| Right. | ||
| We don't have any obligation to fact-check things, because that's the source's job to do. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| Because we're not journalism. | ||
| Despite yesterday having told you that we did journalism. | ||
| Well, I mean, no, because they don't, except for when Adan does all of these weird things about Sandy Hook. | ||
| Completely weird. | ||
| I guess it's kind of a, you know, it's a toss-up. | ||
| Unfortunately, she's said here that they don't do journalism, and then we bring in an exhibit. | ||
| The front page of Exhibit 1, can you read who that's to? | ||
| It says Infowars staff. | ||
| Okay, in the subject line. | ||
| Can you read it for me? | ||
| It says, new editorial policy for all reporters, journalists, and writers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I swear, so after reporters, what was that word you said? | |
| It says journalists. | ||
| And you told us that you have seen this prior to today, correct? | ||
| This particular email? | ||
| Exhibit 1. Well, Exhibit 1 is two things, so I want to know what part of it you are asking about. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, okay. | |
| Did you see the first page before today? | ||
| No. | ||
| Don't you think you probably should have? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| Especially if you spoke to the person that wrote it, who implemented the policies, correct? | ||
| I did speak to Kit Jones, so yes. | ||
| Daniels, correct? | ||
| Mr. Daniels, he withheld this information about sending this out, a specific policy that was implemented post the filing of these lawsuits? | ||
| I don't know that he withheld it. | ||
| But you didn't know about it, right? | ||
| I didn't see this, no. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| You wish you would have? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| That's tough. | ||
| You know, you never like to run into a brick wall like that. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| We're not journalists. | ||
| Well, here is Kit Daniels, the managing editor of the site, managerial role, supervisory person sending out an email with new policies for reporters, journalists. | ||
| Yep, yep. | ||
| Yeah, I think that kind of paints things in a certain light. | ||
| After all of the damning material and all of the hilarious material, I think the one thing that sticks with me so much is just that moment when Owen was like, well, tip of the cap to you. | ||
| That just seems so appropriate in so many moments that nobody ever said. | ||
| She should have just been like, well, you got me. | ||
| Moving on. | ||
| I guess I'm a puppet. | ||
| I guess I'm a puppet. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| To Owen's credit, the ability to just be like, I'll take the L on this one. | ||
| I'll take the L! | ||
| I think it's the younger generation. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, it's okay to take an L! | ||
| You don't have to take nothing but W's! | ||
| Owen's got that bro-y confidence. | ||
| He's played baseball before, I bet. | ||
| You know, you lose more than you win. | ||
| So, other than that email, are there any other policies? | ||
| I bet there's not. | ||
| Other than that policy there, are there any other policies InfoWars has in place to vet information? | ||
| To vet information? | ||
| No. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| So from the inception of InfoWars to February of 2000, actually, I don't know what the date is on that. | ||
| June 2018. | ||
|
unidentified
|
June 2018. | |
| There were no policies for whether or not anybody needed to vet the veracity. | ||
| The veracity? | ||
| No. | ||
| I do believe, based on my conversations with people, that there was a, I don't want to say policy, but there was an understanding that there would be multiple sources used for articles that you wouldn't rely solely on one source. | ||
| But I don't think that that's checking the veracity. | ||
| So there's not... | ||
| Policies in place prior to this. | ||
| And this leads to a conversation about, like, okay, so, you know, but, like, if people do do this, can they get fired? | ||
| Can anybody get fired? | ||
| Bill, veracity, we don't know the meaning of the word. | ||
| Well, sure, and, you know, like, if you do spread all this bad information, you can get fired, right? | ||
| And she says... | ||
| I'm sorry, what? | ||
| She says yes. | ||
| I'm sorry, what? | ||
| And then it comes up that no one has ever been. | ||
| I was gonna say, yeah. | ||
| Why would you say yes so confidently? | ||
| And then something comes up that blew my mind. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And also made me realize that there were policies before this. | ||
| Because there's a fucking handbook. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What? | |
| Yes. | ||
| What? | ||
| When I've spoken to Mr. Jones and Melinda, who does HR. | ||
| They couldn't name for me specific instances where people had been fired, but it is a possibility and it is listed in the handbook as up to termination. | ||
| So it is a possibility. | ||
| What about prior to June 2018? | ||
| This handbook was not made in June 2018. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| When was it made? | ||
| It says effective date 10-12-2012. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So that was when this was last updated. | ||
| I gotcha. | ||
| So it's your position that that employee handbook was updated in June of 2018? | ||
| No. | ||
| I don't believe that this policy was ever incorporated into this employee handbook. | ||
| Was that employee handbook made specifically for Infoworks? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| It says Free Speech Systems on it. | ||
| When I asked Melinda about the handbook, because I did ask to see it, she said it was there. | ||
| It predated her tenure there, so she doesn't know who created it. | ||
| Or when. | ||
| It was updated. | ||
| Or if anybody's read it. | ||
| But it had existed before that. | ||
| You did ask Melinda, though? | ||
| I did talk to Melinda about the handbook, yes. | ||
| Okay, and when she said she didn't know, surely you went and asked Mr. Jones. | ||
| I don't think Mr. Jones would have known. | ||
| He didn't write this. | ||
| He's been at the company the longest, right? | ||
| Well, I mean, it's his company, but he wouldn't have written this. | ||
| So he would know when that was initially implemented. | ||
| I don't know if he knows that. | ||
| Right, because you didn't ask him. | ||
| I didn't ask him about the handbook, no. | ||
| I asked Melinda. | ||
| I can't remember the name of the woman that was there before her. | ||
| Okay, let's break this down. | ||
| You asked someone about the handbook and they said, I don't know, that was before I started here, right? | ||
| Regarding when it was produced? | ||
| Correct. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And who produced it? | ||
| She didn't know who produced it. | ||
| Why it was produced initially? | ||
| I don't know why it's produced, but... | ||
| Right. | ||
| So, yeah, this person says, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. | ||
| And that's where you stop your investigation? | ||
| The person who probably would have known didn't work there anymore, and I didn't know how to reach her. | ||
| You used the word probably, but you don't know, because you didn't ask anybody that was there when it was implemented. | ||
| I couldn't. | ||
| That person, whoever would have been there, is no longer there. | ||
| You don't think the owner of the company knows when he invoked an employee handbook? | ||
| No, I don't. | ||
| Why? | ||
| Because I don't think he would have had anything to do with this. | ||
| Well, I mean, I think her instincts are probably good. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I know! | |
| I really think that her answer is essentially, Bill, you and I both know that if I asked Alice this question, he's going to say, I have no idea. | ||
| You know that, I know that. | ||
| Let's just skip over the part where I ask him questions and he pretends to know what he's talking about. | ||
| Right. | ||
| I agree with you in terms of, like, the conclusion would be the same. | ||
| I think her guess that Alex would have no idea is correct. | ||
| But it's still relevant to point out that you didn't ask. | ||
| No, you gotta ask, in accordance with the rules and such right here. | ||
| Because we live in the real world, but I mean, at the same time... | ||
| And it's what you're tasked to do to prepare for this deposition. | ||
| Totally. | ||
| And at the same time, there is a part of me that understands where she's coming from, where it's just like... | ||
| Why? | ||
| Yeah, what's the point? | ||
| Really? | ||
| Alex doesn't know anything. | ||
| Look deep in my eyes and ask me why I should ask Alex any question and expect an honest response. | ||
| You've asked him more questions than anyone in the world! | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Alex may know stuff, but he functionally knows nothing because he's not going to tell you anything. | ||
| So even if he knows things, you're fishing in a dry well. | ||
| If I told you what Alex told me, do you think that would have any bearing on reality? | ||
| Probably not. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Now, I want to be very clear about something. | ||
| I want to get my hands on a copy of this manual. | ||
| I feel like it's... | ||
| Probably something that I could get a digital version of, but I want a physical copy. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| I don't know if anybody out there has any ability to get me a copy of the employee handbook, but I have, you know, I have mementos, and, like, I have a collection of InfoWars-type stuff. | ||
| That needs to be. | ||
| It has to be in the collection. | ||
| Now that I know that an employee handbook exists, I mean, it's probably just boilerplate bullshit. | ||
| Oh, totally. | ||
| I'm sure. | ||
| It'll be fun to go back and fantasy book when people should have been. | ||
| See, that'll be the fun part of having the handbook, is being able to go through it and be like, ooh, 2014! | ||
| You should have been fucking gone! | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah! | |
| So if anybody knows how to get their hands on one of those, I will compensate. | ||
| Actually, it might be illegal to buy that from somebody. | ||
| I have no idea. | ||
| Anyway, I would like it. | ||
| We'll see what happens. | ||
| So, speaking of law issues, Bill asks at this point if... | ||
| There's been any malfeasance, any things that she doesn't approve of that she's seen on the part of accountants or lawyers. | ||
| And here's what we got on the lawyer front. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| What about any lawyers? | ||
| Do I have concerns about whether lawyers in the case have breached duty to the company? | ||
| Only with regard to anything you came across while preparing for the last two depositions. | ||
| Anything regarding, you mean the financial statements or anything in the entire universe of the case? | ||
| Anything that you came across in preparation for your depositions? | ||
| I did have concerns on behalf of the company regarding the company's prior representation, yes. | ||
| What about it? | ||
| The company's prior lawyers. | ||
| Okay, what about them? | ||
| I think that there are issues that there have been, even though the company has produced material to its attorneys, has not been produced appropriately. | ||
| And has resulted in many, if not all, of the sanctions. | ||
| Would that be in the Texas cases or the Connecticut? | ||
| So, we've got some problems with some past attorneys, and they are maybe responsible for everything that's gone bad here. | ||
| I'm just going to say, I went back and I looked through all their work. | ||
| It's garbage. | ||
| They're terrible. | ||
| They were probably lying about everything. | ||
| Honestly, InfoWars did everything correctly. | ||
| They just didn't produce the documents you guys asked for. | ||
| It's really the lawyer's fault, honestly. | ||
| It seems unlikely. | ||
| It's all their fault. | ||
| It's entirely that every lawyer that InfoWars hired just so happened to be scamming them. | ||
| Including the lawyer that you're friends with. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| Who is still working on the case. | ||
| And the lawyer, Bob Barnes, who was on Alex's show a couple days ago. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Talking about how monkeypox is... | ||
| This is the next pandemic plague. | ||
| Yeah, I think it's that guy's fault. | ||
| Yeah, he and Alex. | ||
| All right, whatever. | ||
| Anyway, here are some indications of who she's talking about in terms of these lawyers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Any lawyers in specifics? | |
| I think that there are specific issues regarding Mr. Randazza, although he doesn't have an appearance in this file, and Brad Reeves. | ||
| And perhaps the... | ||
| I can't remember his name before him. | ||
|
unidentified
|
There's six. | |
| There's a bunch, and I agree with you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay, so Brad Reeves, Mr. Andaza. | |
| I'll just go... | ||
| Mr. Enoch? | ||
| I'm not sure about Mr. Enoch. | ||
| I think he's done a pretty decent job. | ||
| T. Wade Jeffries. | ||
| I'm sorry, I don't know much about him. | ||
| I don't have an opinion about him. | ||
| Burnett? | ||
| Michael Burnett. | ||
| I don't have an opinion about him either. | ||
| Yeah, Bob Barnes? | ||
| Barnes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That was a moment of recognition there. | |
| Oh, Barnes. | ||
| So Barnes is on the bad list. | ||
| Miss Paz, not a fan of Bobby Barnes. | ||
| Just the tone of voice that you said it. | ||
| Barnes. | ||
| Barnes. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| What problems do you have with Barnes? | ||
| I can't say any in specific. | ||
| But it does reach the level where they are apparently talking about suing these past lawyers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Of course. | |
| I went over this a little bit with Mr. Schroyer in his deposition, and I'll ask you the same thing. | ||
| Based on the information that you just testified to, is the company... | ||
| Has the company decided one way or another on legal malpractice as a potential asset? | ||
| We have not made any final decisions on legal malpractice yet. | ||
| As to whether to file or who to file against, we've not made any final decisions on that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Has it been discussed or is it going to be discussed? | ||
| It's being discussed. | ||
| I would ask that should that discussion happen and that go forward, that the plaintiffs in this case as a potential creditor just be made aware because that would be a potential asset to the company. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| So that's interesting. | ||
| You know, it's not like a definitive statement that we are suing these people. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right, right, right. | |
| But the conversations are happening. | ||
| Well, yeah. | ||
| And again, it's important that you don't have that decision, especially not in the deposition when you're like, oh yeah, we're suing him. | ||
| I just want to remind you, you're not going to get to keep any of that money. | ||
| Barnes is going down. | ||
| I mean, we're not suing everybody. | ||
| I don't know who we're suing. | ||
| We're suing, maybe we'll change our minds. | ||
| We'll see what happens after you guys have left us alone for a year. | ||
| So, we have this next clip, and this is maybe the only adorable moment on this episode. | ||
| Because the attorney for Alex's side, Miss Blot, She is, up to this point, been sort of a bit of a non-factor, maybe a little bit of an arguing periodically. | ||
| I was honestly going to ask you, why doesn't she have an attorney in there with her? | ||
| Because I feel like there are plenty of questions she could have just been like, I don't need to answer these. | ||
| That does come up occasionally. | ||
| And also, she's made some objections that you're not supposed to make in the context of a deposition. | ||
| And Bill has had to say, like... | ||
| You can object to form, you know, follow the Texas guidelines or whatever. | ||
| But she's not played a major role until this point when her phone rings. | ||
| Was the company at all aware? | ||
| Did Mr. Randazza inform the company at any moment? | ||
| It's okay. | ||
| I'm stupid. | ||
| Can we go off the record? | ||
| I'm okay. | ||
| Do you need to take that? | ||
| No, I need to. | ||
| Are we off the record? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| Okay, I'm older than you guys. | ||
| I don't know how to make it quit ringing through my phone, so let me just turn it off. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And I sincerely apologize. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Just hold the power button. | |
| Hold the button down. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| No. | ||
| The power button. | ||
| The sleep button. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| Oh, look. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No! | |
| My son just bought this for me. | ||
| Is this the power button? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| Interesting question. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So y'all can all lie at me. | |
| Okay. | ||
| I'm sorry. | ||
| I apologize for my language. | ||
| They get startled by Siri. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know if I can take it. | |
| It's a great little moment. | ||
| I just can't. | ||
| I just can't believe all of this is happening in the same thing. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| You know? | ||
| It's bizarre. | ||
| Like, this is all fun if it happens. | ||
| If this happens in one case, you're like, whoa, what a great moment. | ||
| I'm going to remember that forever. | ||
| This is an everyday. | ||
| This is just kind of like a humanizing, like, oh, shucks, slice of life. | ||
| I do like that she wants to go off the record. | ||
| I don't want the record to know that I don't know how to use my phone. | ||
| The thing that I think is remarkable is that I believe, I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe that that means that Siri has to be on the record, like, cited in the transcript. | ||
| Yes, correct. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| The court transcript of Alex's corporate representative deposition includes a robot. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know how to answer it. | |
| And everybody jumps in to help her. | ||
| Oh my god. | ||
| And then she activates Siri and she's scared and starts swearing. | ||
| Oh my god. | ||
| It just doesn't... | ||
| So we get back to the question and answer portion of this. | ||
| And there are things that have been turned over in Discovery that are mysterious. | ||
| The giant background report obviously won. | ||
| Very mysterious. | ||
| Everybody would like to know where it came from, and nobody does. | ||
| Now, in the case of this Marcel Fontaine case, where the whole thing is essentially that Kit Daniels misidentified the Parkland shooter as Marcel, and he got the picture off 4chan, basically. | ||
| Infowars produced a 4chan post in the course of Discovery, and no one seems to understand why. | ||
| What? | ||
| At the bottom right-hand corner, you see that it's marked Defendants 00006. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Which would mean that it was produced by the defendants, correct? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| Okay. | ||
| Why would the defendants produce this to us? | ||
| I don't know how it came to be in our possession, so I don't know. | ||
| There's a false flag. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Do you know anything about the history of this document? | |
| No, this wasn't produced by us in the sense that this is a post that we made. | ||
| So, no. | ||
| Who made this post that we're looking at? | ||
| It looks like a post by somebody posting on a chat room, so to speak. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| How was it found? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| When was it found? | ||
| I don't know how it came to be in our possession, so I don't know. | ||
|
unidentified
|
When you got this document, did it confuse you a little bit as to why it was in the possession of defendants? | |
| No. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Is this defendants 006, is that the post that was used for Mr. Daniels off of 4chan? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Did you take any steps to figure out what this was? | |
| I didn't talk to Mr. Daniels about this particular document. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| I'm going to represent to you that this is a post from 4chan. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And if it is a post from 4chan and Mr. Daniels pulled the image from 4chan, wouldn't that be something you want to talk about with him? | ||
|
unidentified
|
He... | |
| I don't think it's accurate to say he pulled the image only from 4chan. | ||
| I think his response was he saw the image on 4chan as well as other social media sources. | ||
| So I don't know that this was the post that he saw necessarily. | ||
| Where did Mr. Daniels pull the post that he used in his article? | ||
| As his representation in the production was and his similar comment to me was, he saw it on social media first. | ||
| I think he said Twitter. | ||
| I think that's what it says in the production in the responses. | ||
| And he also saw it on 4chan. | ||
| I don't know whether this was the particular document he saw on 4chan, but when I spoke to him, he said he had seen it not first on 4chan, but on a social media site such as, I believe, Twitter. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So we're not really, you know, what I got out of all that is we're not 100% sure why this exists in InfoWars' files, correct? | |
| That's right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And we didn't really take any steps to figure out what it is, why, when, how it came about, anything, right? | |
| I didn't ask him about this, no. | ||
| You didn't ask anyone? | ||
| No. | ||
| That's weird. | ||
| That is weird. | ||
| Yeah, I mean, considering that, you know, the whole thing is that this image was going around 4chan as a troll thing and then they reported on it, the fact that in their files somehow they got turned over is this post? | ||
| Sure. | ||
| That seems like... | ||
| Pretty clear A to B stuff. | ||
| Hey, listen, no. | ||
| He saw it on Twitter first. | ||
| He saw it on Twitter. | ||
| He didn't see it on 4chan first. | ||
| He wasn't trolling around 4chan. | ||
| I honestly don't understand how that's better. | ||
| I mean, like, a lot of stuff on Twitter is completely anonymous and, you know, unverifiable nonsense. | ||
| So, like, I don't know what they're trying to defend by saying it was on Twitter, not 4chan. | ||
| Yeah, there's less child pornography, I guess. | ||
| I mean, sure, but I don't know if that's relevant to the matter at hand. | ||
| Nope. | ||
| I mean, it is still just like, in terms of pulling information, and it's anonymous in its origins. | ||
| Right. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| It's very weird. | ||
| No, functionally, there's no difference. | ||
| He just got the image from the internet, but socially, the difference between 4chan and Twitter is pretty significant. | ||
| That is true. | ||
| There's a connotation. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| I do think, though, that there's a real shadiness to the idea that this wouldn't be something very important to figure out why that's there or where this came from. | ||
| Well, it seems like for corporate deposition, that seems like central. | ||
| I don't understand how your first move isn't understand what it is that they're going to ask me about. | ||
| True. | ||
| Whether you're acting from a place of good intention or not. | ||
| Or not. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| And it's 0-0-6. | ||
| It's not like you're in evidence 1,144. | ||
| It's number six. | ||
| Just go through the top 100. | ||
| They're probably going to ask you about the top 100. | ||
| Right? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| Maybe that's a faulty assumption. | ||
| Maybe that's too big. | ||
| I know. | ||
| But if it's a case that surrounds a post on 4chan that you reported on. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| Falls apart. | ||
| Really falls apart. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| This is where the disaster... | ||
| This is where the gummy worms stop and the real world begins. | ||
| You bet. | ||
| So they're talking about financial stuff and information about Alex's net worth of the company. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And a document comes up. | ||
| A balance sheet. | ||
| That's not good. | ||
| And it turns out that the plaintiffs... | ||
| Don't have this document. | ||
| Oh, no. | ||
| And that leads to... | ||
| Oh, no. | ||
| Oh, my God. | ||
| This leads to a real problem. | ||
| No. | ||
| What's the base label? | ||
| What's the base number on Exhibit 14? | ||
| This doesn't have a Bates label. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| This was produced to me, and this was at my request that I asked Melinda to produce this to me. | ||
| When did she give it to you? | ||
| Friday. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And did you... | ||
| Did you go over it with anyone after you got it? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Um... | ||
| I went over it with... | ||
| I don't think I spoke to Melinda about it. | ||
| I might have spoken to Bob about it just to ask him to explain it to me. | ||
| But other than that, no. | ||
| Real quick, Bob is not Bob Barnes. | ||
| No, no, no. | ||
| It's Bob Rowe, who's a financial consultant. | ||
| We'll discuss here in a minute. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Gotcha. | |
| You spoke with Bob about it on Friday? | ||
| Friday. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| How long did y 'all talk? | ||
| An hour or so. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That was on the phone? | ||
| No, I saw him in person. | ||
| He was at the office. | ||
| Okay, so you were at the office during all this? | ||
| Yes, I was at the office Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Okay. | ||
| Why did you ask for that document? | ||
| Because I believe it was relative to the topics that I was to testify about today. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Were you under the belief that that document had been produced in this litigation? | ||
| I don't know whether this has been produced. | ||
| These are the numbers for 2020. | ||
| I don't know if it's been produced already. | ||
| Ms. Blott? | ||
| We don't have that. | ||
| I know we don't because this is a revised one that she and I was giving Friday and I believe the revisions took place. | ||
| Can I ask you a question? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Why didn't it come with the other 333 I got last night? | ||
| Because I was concentrating on those for the Fontaine and I ran out of time. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Why didn't you hand it to me this morning? | ||
| Or during the first break, the second break, even the third break? | ||
| This is actually in... | ||
| I'm not asking you, Ms. Potts. | ||
| That's fine. | ||
| I understand you have comments. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You can keep it to yourself for a second. | |
| I didn't do it. | ||
| All right. | ||
| That's my answer. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Do you believe that the information in Exhibit 14 that I just stickered is information plaintiffs are entitled to? | ||
| Yes, I do. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| So, I think Bill's understandably pretty pissed here. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah! | |
| Because there is relevant information that was not produced to them. | ||
| That's against the law. | ||
| Well, it's certainly against decorum. | ||
| There is an amending of the balance sheet for 2020 that apparently has been done now. | ||
| Oh, well, now is a good time for it. | ||
| Just now is the right time. | ||
| And so this information is like... | ||
| Why didn't you give this? | ||
| Yeah, that's a really important piece of information. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What the fuck? | |
| Why would you? | ||
| I didn't have time. | ||
| How? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What? | |
| The lawyer, I didn't have time. | ||
| What? | ||
| I was too busy getting all this other stuff together. | ||
| What? | ||
| What are you talking about? | ||
| I apparently also don't have answers. | ||
| You didn't give a shit! | ||
| Right. | ||
| So they go to break, and they come back. | ||
| And immediately, Ms. Block needs to amend. | ||
| Clarify some... | ||
| Yeah, she's going to need to amend some things. | ||
| I think so. | ||
| Mr. Ogden, I need to clarify my response to a question you posed with respect to the financial document that Ms. Paws has. | ||
| This document was provided... | ||
| On Friday, this immediately past Friday, and in my continuous review of the discovery responses by prior counsel in this case, I did not see where any profit and loss or balance sheet had been produced in response to the interrogatory that used the term financial statement. | ||
| And so I reached out and learned that, no, in fact, it had not been produced by prior counsel because they did not consider it a financial statement. | ||
| Odd? | ||
| Which is contrary to my professional opinion. | ||
| Because of that, I did get the document so that I can supplement that discovery. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| I just want to put on the record for myself and on behalf of my clients that that document... | ||
| Has been sitting in the corporate representative's bag next to her all day without producing it to us. | ||
| They've just been sitting there. | ||
| This is a good time for Paz to have a fourth wall break where she turns to the camera and she's like, oh, we're suing our lawyers. | ||
| And then she goes back and we get back into the show. | ||
| And also a Snickers commercial. | ||
| Yeah, absolutely. | ||
| Hungry white weight. | ||
| So Bill is sick of the bullshit at this point. | ||
| You can kind of tell. | ||
| And Miss Blot decides, hey, I'm going to fucking throw someone under the bus. | ||
| Do it! | ||
| Mic down for this, because at the end, you will hear Mark leave. | ||
| And there's something very... | ||
| There's something kind of sitcom-ish. | ||
| There's a quality to it. | ||
| I want to make something clear. | ||
| When we started this depo, the topics were very clear that... | ||
| That net worth was one of those topics. | ||
| And that document, this witness testified. | ||
| She asked for it to be prepared to discuss that topic. | ||
| And it's been sitting in her bag. | ||
| I wouldn't have a problem if I'd have gotten it this morning or during any of our breaks. | ||
| But the fact that at the very end, after, I don't know, four or five hours of questioning, I asked the witness, we get to that topic, and then all of a sudden it comes out of the... | ||
| Out of the bag, and now it's saying that it's been Bates labeled, and it's on the way. | ||
| You can obviously probably see how it looks from my seat. | ||
| I'm not accusing you one way or the other, but I'm just looking at... | ||
| The aggregate of what's happened in this case with all lawyers. | ||
| And every lawyer has come in and told me they're not that person. | ||
| They are transparent. | ||
| They're going to get on it. | ||
| And every single time they're replaced, the new one comes in and says the same thing. | ||
| Who did you talk to that had a different professional opinion than you on the production of that document? | ||
| So that I know who to name in my motion. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Reads. | |
| I need to make a phone call. | ||
| It's not so much sitcom-ish, I realize, as it is just kind of like, that seems like out of a play. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Or something. | ||
| It's this... | ||
| I mean, he might as well have a fucking bowler on with a little press thing, and he's like, I gotta run to the phone real quick! | ||
| Extra, extra! | ||
| We got news out of the deposition! | ||
| Well, you've got this lawyer who's obviously justifiably full of indignation, and disappointment. | ||
| Who... | ||
| Is it that withheld this information because of a different idea? | ||
| She sells out Brad, the former lawyer, the dad, and then Mark immediately is like, I gotta go call the court. | ||
| Yeah, of course. | ||
| Gets up and leaves. | ||
| Of course. | ||
|
unidentified
|
To go call the court. | |
| This is off the rails. | ||
| Amazing. | ||
| That is so the... | ||
| That is the A Few Good Men moment that Alex believes will happen and how it would really go. | ||
| Who are you? | ||
| Oh, it was Bradley. | ||
| Bradley fucking did that shit. | ||
| Bradley Reeves, go ahead, call the court. | ||
| I'll give you his number. | ||
| I'll give you where he wants to go. | ||
| Bradley ordered the code red. | ||
| So, after this, they get into some discussion of the financial workings of Alex's empire. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| Workings is a word. | ||
| Whoa, some of this information is nuts. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So, here's the basic situation, right? | ||
| So, Alex has free speech systems. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| They have a relationship with another company that, through that company, they sell products. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| So, this other company, PQPR, sells products through free speech systems. | ||
| And also, they haven't been paying PQPR for years. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And now, because of that, owe them like 50-something million dollars. | ||
| Oh man, there's nothing we can do. | ||
| We're broke. | ||
| Sorry. | ||
| Now, it just so happens that we own PQPR. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well! | |
| Who owns PQPR? | ||
| PQPR is owned 20% by Dr. and Mrs. Jones. | ||
| And 80% by PLJRALC. | ||
| Hmm. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hmm. | |
| David Jones. | ||
| What was his wife's name? | ||
| 20% by David Jones and who? | ||
| And his wife. | ||
| I'm sorry. | ||
| Her name is escaping me right now. | ||
| And Mrs. Jones. | ||
| Carol, I think, right? | ||
| Oh, yes. | ||
| That sounds right. | ||
| Carol Jones. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| You could have said any name. | ||
| And then PLJR. | ||
| PLJR owns 80% of PQPR. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And who owns PLJR? | ||
| PLJR is owned 10% by Carol Jones, so Mrs. Jones, Alex's mother. | ||
| I'm sorry, what? | ||
| And 90% by the AEJ Trust 2018. | ||
| AEJ? | ||
| Alex Emmerich Jones, perhaps? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. | |
| So yeah, Alex has a trust set up that owns most of, well, it owns everything that the parents don't own of the company that owns the company that his company owes $50 million to. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| So there's nothing we can do! | ||
| There's nothing we can do! | ||
| We just owe them so much money. | ||
| Frankly, we're shocked we're not already bankrupt, honestly. | ||
| It's amazing that we have any money to run things. | ||
| This is so dumb. | ||
| I mean, it would be more fun as a, like, shell company game if it weren't so fucking obvious. | ||
| Well, yeah, yeah. | ||
| I mean, it's somehow not obvious to people who listen to his show. | ||
| No, that's fair. | ||
| Yeah, it's pretty... | ||
| Pretty shockingly transparent once you are asked under oath who owns these companies. | ||
| Yeah, I mean, that's ridiculous. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So this is just a fucking circle, man, because you ask yourself, okay, what's going on with that trust? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| And here's what's going on with that trust. | ||
| Oh, boy. | ||
| Who is the trustee for this trust? | ||
| The trustee. | ||
| You know, I'm not sure who the trustee is. | ||
| I know who the beneficiaries are. | ||
| Who are the beneficiaries? | ||
| So the beneficiaries of the corpus of the trust are his children. | ||
| So in the trust are whatever money is in there. | ||
| And Alex is a remainder man. | ||
| And then the income going into the trust is paid to... | ||
| Say it. | ||
| Alex. | ||
| Yay! | ||
| What an elaborate way to set this up in order to try and duck. | ||
| I mean, it could not be more of like a shady shit is going on to get a paycheck than that. | ||
| I've never worked for any business that was like, listen, we're going to have to go through three different shell companies to give you a paycheck. | ||
| And let me tell you something, direct debit ain't happening. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You might get paid in cougar ass. | |
| Absolutely! | ||
| This is stolen money that you are going to do in an ape. | ||
| We are bartering your salary these days. | ||
| So it turns out that Alex himself, because of this Byzantine arrangement, actually owns a great deal of PQPR, the company that sells the product to Free Speech Systems, which he owns. | ||
| Oh my god, it's just ridiculous. | ||
| The income is paid to Mr. Jones, but with the caveat, which is what I was trying to say before, that There is another entity, AEJ Holdings, that owns Alex's interest in PQPR. | ||
| So total Alex's interest is like 72%. | ||
| Say that again, A-L. | ||
| A-E-J Holdings, LLC. | ||
| Do you know Alex Jones' middle name? | ||
| I don't. | ||
| I'm so sorry. | ||
| Do you know what it is? | ||
| So that ownership interest, if you divide it amongst his parents and their percentages, he owns a 72% interest. | ||
| So he sold his interest in that to AEJ Holdings, and there's a 25.9 or 29. $25.9 million note on that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Where's that come from? | ||
| What do you mean where does it come from? | ||
| Where's the $29 million note come from? | ||
| Or I guess $29.9 million. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Where's the $30 million note come from? | |
| So I thought I had seen the note. | ||
| It represents the value of Mr. Jones's interest. | ||
| In PQPR. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Such as it were, because it's about 72%. | ||
| And then the money that is paid principal and interest off of that note is paid to Alex Jones. | ||
| So, like, Alex has a situation where, like... | ||
| Presumably, you know, you could look at it and be like, well, he's $50 million in debt to this company, but he's $50 million in debt to himself and his parents. | ||
| Right. | ||
| No, I think it feels like this is like a dumb person's idea of how smart people hide money. | ||
| Do you know what I mean? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| You know, it's like, because it's still like in a movie in his head. | ||
| He's like, ah, see? | ||
| I actually... | ||
| He's Kaiser-associating people before anybody even tries to get to his money because he knew somebody was going to. | ||
| Because he called these companies AEJ? | ||
| Absolutely! | ||
| What is he fucking doing? | ||
| Amazing! | ||
| How am I going to hide this money? | ||
| I know. | ||
| I'll put my initials on it. | ||
| I am not a financial crime expert. | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| And I don't know if I have enough information from these depositions to definitively prove anything. | ||
| Right. | ||
| But I would say... | ||
| The odds are, if anybody were to, like, audit some of this stuff, I think it wouldn't be too hard to uncover something. | ||
| That's my sense of it. | ||
| It feels like something shady is going on here. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Yep, very much so. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| I mean... | ||
| How many companies do you need in a circle jerk before you're like... | ||
| I think I might be the one who's doing something wrong here. | ||
| Well, yeah, and it's mysterious how, like, you know, you have a situation where there's this company that for a long time you've been buying your product through, presumably, and you've never paid them. | ||
| Not once. | ||
| And then you get sued and you're going to owe a shitload of money. | ||
| We're so in debt. | ||
| We can't afford anything. | ||
| And you start paying back that company that, weirdly, you owed $50 million, there wasn't anything securing the loan, and they weren't, like... | ||
| You know, trying to collect on you or anything. | ||
| And you start paying it back when you're getting sued and you're probably going to lose a whole bunch and your company might go bankrupt. | ||
| And then it turns out that you and your parents own that company. | ||
| So weird. | ||
| What is this? | ||
| So weird. | ||
| So weird. | ||
| It is like I would expect him and it probably would have wound up being smarter. | ||
| To have buried millions of dollars in his property somewhere. | ||
| I think he might have tried with a lot of that gold. | ||
| That's true. | ||
| We do know that he had gold and silver buried. | ||
| He might have buried shit. | ||
| He claimed that his ex-wife got the gold and the silver in the divorce. | ||
| Yeah, well, I mean, honestly... | ||
| She got my doubloons. | ||
| If I'm Mark and Bill, I am saying that we also need to dig up his property. | ||
| For at least 20 feet down. | ||
| It's going to add a shovel to the sanctions? | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| I prove that you don't have gold on your property. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| I might be wise. | ||
| So in this next clip, Bill's going to mention that guy, Bob Rowe. | ||
| And we haven't heard a number of the clips that he's been involved in because a lot of that involves details and questions that are pretty hard to cut clips for and to present. | ||
| So here's the bottom line based on Ms. Paz's testimony. | ||
| There's this guy named Bob Rowe. | ||
| who was the person who Alex told her to get financial information from about the company He was working with Alex and Free Speech Systems in a consultant-type role, a financial consultant guy. | ||
| But prior to that, he had been working for PQPR, the company that's basically owned by Alex's family, which Free Speech Systems owes $50 million or whatever. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So this guy and Alex are the primary sources of information as it relates to finances for pause in this deposition, which Bill touches on here, and I think it's weird. | ||
| Just for the benefit of the jury, you would agree that the spiderweb of trusts and secured beneficiaries for different subsidiaries or holding companies is just a way for free speech systems to protect its money from people that file lawsuits against them? | ||
| No, I don't agree. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Why'd they set it up this way? | ||
| I don't know why it was set up this way. | ||
| You definitely don't agree that it was set up to protect the assets of Mr. Jones? | ||
| I don't know why it was set up. | ||
| I don't think it was in relationship to this lawsuit. | ||
| As I testified earlier, the trust and that structure of the companies was in motion prior to the lawsuit. | ||
| And you got that from Robert Rowe? | ||
| Mr. Rowe, Mr. Jones, that's correct. | ||
| Okay, so the individual who worked for one company switched over, worked for another, and secured debt to one another. | ||
| With the sole proprietor being a 72% beneficiary, three parent holding companies down, you trusted him and you trusted Mr. Jones, the sole proprietor of a company that is the subject of a number of defamation lawsuits involving parents who lost children in a school shooting who he, for years, then went on to say that it didn't happen or it did, but there was a government conspiracy and all of this other stuff. | ||
| Those are the two people you trusted, correct? | ||
| Those are the people with the information, so yes. | ||
| You think it's odd that they picked somebody for this topic that has zero financial background? | ||
| I can't answer that. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I wouldn't answer that either. | ||
| Yeah, that would be a wise one not to answer. | ||
| Yeah, I mean, when you lay all the details out there, it does look a little bit suspicious. | ||
| What would surprise her? | ||
| Not much. | ||
| It doesn't appear like much. | ||
| She's unflappable. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Would it surprise you? | ||
| Norm just said, show up in Texas, and you were like, fuck yeah, 30 grand's great. | ||
| Would it surprise you to learn that the person that you are here as a corporate representative for believes that his enemies are demons? | ||
| Nah, that sounds about right. | ||
| Probably not. | ||
| So the question comes up, and I think this is a pretty relevant question that Bill's got, and that is basically... | ||
| Okay, so if we look at these balance sheets here, how the fuck does any bills get paid? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Like, what's going on here? | |
| Based on this balance sheet, how is Mr. Jones covering his bills every month? | ||
| excuse me, how is free speech systems covering their bills every month? | ||
|
unidentified
|
So there So there's income that free speech makes off of the relationship with PQPR via the sales. | |
| PQPR also pays money to free speech for advertising on the website. | ||
| That includes the banners and such. | ||
| And so essentially the way that the business makes money is those two primary ways. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Let's look at the balance sheet that was provided. | ||
| It's Exhibit 15, I believe. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| That one. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So the balance sheet is for all of 2020, correct? | ||
| Do you understand that? | ||
| That's what it says. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And can you tell me where the income is? | ||
| that InfoWars makes from PQPR for advertising. | ||
| I don't know if this is not a specific line item. | ||
| I know that there are There are line items. | ||
| Yes, there's not a real answer. | ||
| Nope. | ||
| I think she goes on to speculate that maybe one of the redacted columns... | ||
| There's one redacted column. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure. | |
| Maybe this is it. | ||
| That's probably it. | ||
| That makes sense. | ||
| Yeah, so I guess the organization exists in such a way that Alex makes money by taking a cut of the things that are sold through his business by PQPR and then PQPR advertising on his show. | ||
| Or on his website, buying the banner ads. | ||
| So he gets advertising money from himself and his parents. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| This is so circular. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep. | |
| Well, I mean, it's just designed specifically to do the one thing that it's doing poorly right now. | ||
| You know? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| That's what it's doing. | ||
| And it's doing such a bad job of it that when she went to ask for more information to clarify things, it only made it more obvious how What they were trying to do is. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I think some of this stuff, it might be fairly easy to hide a little bit better. | ||
| I would hope so. | ||
| Put a trust in, like, one of your weirdo friends' names. | ||
| Totally. | ||
| Give Pachanik a trust. | ||
| Man, if all rich people hide their money this shittily, then it's clearly that they just can afford to own the entire legal system. | ||
| Because I feel like if this is how it works, I could spend a weekend and Bezos would be bankrupt tomorrow. | ||
| Well, but here's the thing. | ||
| You know, like, it's fucked up. | ||
| But quite honestly, I think that setting things up like this, there's nothing illegal about it. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So just recognizing that, like, oh, you have this bizarre maze of entities that you and your parents own that are meant to make transactions. | ||
| More complicated than they need to be. | ||
| That isn't bad or wrong. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| You'd still need to prove some kind of malfeasance on top of it. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| And I think that that is where the confidence comes from. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And I don't know if any specific malfeasance has been demonstrated, but I don't know if it would be too difficult given the... | ||
| You know, the obvious sort of nature of the interconnectedness of these entities. | ||
| Really seems like it's not surprising that she was asked, though she had no prior financial experience. | ||
| I'm saying I don't know of any evidence of a crime, but if there is a crime, I don't think it would be hard to figure out. | ||
| So we'll keep our eyes on that. | ||
| I know who's holding the murder weapon and who has motive and who did the crime. | ||
| So we'll see if we can figure it out. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| So, at this point, another document comes up that hasn't been given to the plaintiffs. | ||
| Four years! | ||
| And they just wrote, this is a mess. | ||
| Schedule C that she reviewed, not the complete tax return. | ||
| That's what the document is. | ||
| The Schedule C of Alex's taxes. | ||
| Is not a finalized Schedule C and has not been filed with the Internal Revenue Service. | ||
| But the witness relied on it for her testimony right now. | ||
| I don't understand where the miscommunication is on my end. | ||
| I don't know why she's testifying that she relied on it and has the same numbers. | ||
| How do you know? | ||
| Have you seen it? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| Okay. | ||
| Why hasn't it been produced? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Why are we not producing it right now at this very second? | |
| Do you want to continue with the deposition? | ||
| Wow. | ||
| What? | ||
| I'm literally giving you a lifeline here to try and just fix it. | ||
| If you have it, hand it over. | ||
| We can cure it now, but if your response is file your motion or would you like to continue, then I will. | ||
| Well, here is my explanation. | ||
| It's an explanation. | ||
| It's not an excuse. | ||
| Since the day I got on this case, I have been working around the clock to verify that the documents you have been provided with are full and complete documents. | ||
| As an example, I realized when I saw the profit and loss in the balance sheet that it had not been produced because of It's not surprising | ||
| that Brad Reeves said something that you think is false, because I guess the implication is Brad Reeves is a liar or has a propensity for lying, and I certainly didn't find that from him. | ||
| Okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, boy. | |
| Oh, boy. | ||
| Yeah, so Mark has called Brad and checked in on this. | ||
| I love that. | ||
| That is the perfect time. | ||
| That is the perfect time. | ||
| He's had that in his back pocket for a while now. | ||
| Maybe an hour, half an hour. | ||
| And he waited for just the right moment for him to just be like, oh, Brad Reeves says you're full of shit, by the way. | ||
| Well, but I think it's probably because it would not have come up in the course of the deposition itself. | ||
| Right. | ||
| She broached that subject again. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| Which she did. | ||
| And now it's great. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| This is a mess. | ||
| That is... | ||
| This is a total mess. | ||
| That straight up fucking Matlock ass down home country lawyer shit. | ||
| This is not an excuse. | ||
| This is an explanation. | ||
| Right. | ||
| I take responsibility for what I do. | ||
| This is a real cock up. | ||
| But it's everybody else's fault. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So they need to shelve... | ||
| Discussion of financial stuff. | ||
| Because they are in a situation where this is not going... | ||
| This is not going to be productive. | ||
| No, we're going into a very non-productive territory, is what I'm feeling. | ||
| So then there's a whole other drama that happens because Miss Paz brings out her notepad. | ||
| Oh no. | ||
| And under Texas rules, Texas law... | ||
| If you're using a notepad to consult with when you're in a deposition, it becomes... | ||
| Evidence. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| So she brought up... | ||
| A notepad. | ||
| That maybe she didn't want as evidence. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And maybe some of it included notes on privileged information... | ||
| Oh my God. | ||
| ...with her lawyer, and it turns out in Texas... | ||
| That does not, your privilege is not protected if it's something that is in a notepad that is used to consult during a deposition. | ||
| And so they have a big argument about this. | ||
| Let's back up. | ||
| Let's back up. | ||
| Does it now surprise you that Norm Pattis asked you to work in a state that you've never worked in before? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Does that surprise you finally? | |
| Yeah, it's... | ||
| They do not see eye to eye on the notepad. | ||
| That is for sure. | ||
| I believe that. | ||
| That is for sure. | ||
| I bet you're regretting Norma. | ||
| So we have two clips left, and they, I think, are just kind of like a good coda, a little wrap-up to this. | ||
| The first one is just a demonstration of how narcissistic Alex is. | ||
| This was a conversation I had with Mr. Jones about using 4chan. | ||
| For material from which to draw. | ||
| And Mr. Jones, as you can see after that, I talked a lot about Pizzagate and operatives on 4chan, and it's Mr. Jones' opinions that 4chan is that people purposefully sometimes post information on there. | ||
| For the purpose of misleading, and he used Pizzagate as an example, but his position was he didn't realize that at the time. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But after Pizzagate, Mr. Jones realized 4chan was not reliable. | |
| Well, not that it wasn't reliable, but that I think he thinks that people are, people associated with certain entities are posting things on there Like a breadcrumb to get him to pick up on bait. | ||
| So I think that was the sum and substance of that part of our conversation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What entities? | |
| The Democratic Party, people in the government, any other people that he thinks are trying to spread misinformation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Yeah, so Alex believes that the globalists are trying to trick him with posts on 4chan in order to get him to cover stuff. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| Yep, she just said that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh my god. | |
| She said that out loud in a deposition for the world to hear. | ||
| I mean... | ||
| Amazing. | ||
| It's an interesting thing to imagine that he thinks. | ||
| Excuse me. | ||
| Because it's outrageously... | ||
| Detached from reality. | ||
| It is the stated position of free speech systems that everyone is out to get us all the time, including the government. | ||
| You're not being fair. | ||
| Everyone. | ||
| Everyone. | ||
| You're not being fair. | ||
| It's Infowars as a company's stated position that Alex Jones believes that the globalists are trying to plant stories on anonymous message boards in order to trick him. | ||
| You're right. | ||
| Apologies. | ||
| I'm the weird one. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So we've been through a lot here. | ||
| We've heard a fair amount of bad stuff. | ||
| It's been a journey. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| It's been a journey. | ||
| So here is a self-review from Miss Paz. | ||
| Oh, about her performance in these two days of deposition. | ||
| She is giving us a review of her performance. | ||
| We're getting a Kit Daniels Paz moment. | ||
| Okay, here we go. | ||
|
unidentified
|
With how this depo's gone, how do you think you did? | |
| I think I did pretty good. | ||
| She did pretty good. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| There's some people who didn't agree. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| So they filed a motion, obviously, for sanctions after this. | ||
| And on April 1st, the order came down from the court. | ||
| And in addition to the other past corporate representative testimonies that were just a disaster, here is what the court said about this one in particular. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Quote, on February 14th and 15th, 2022, defendants presented Brittany Paz as the designee in both the Sandy Hook and Fontaine cases. | ||
| A review of the deposition transcript shows that defendants flagrantly disobeyed the court's order in preparing Ms. Paz. | ||
| As a result, she was unable to give adequate testimony on any of the topics. | ||
| Plaintiffs have now faced five non-appearances at corporate depositions on the issues at the heart of their claims, despite every remedial action taken by the court, including the severe Yeah. | ||
| in cumulative attorney's fees. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So that was the description. | |
| I don't think they thought she did pretty good. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| No, I mean, I think, you know, one for five is the Mendoza line. | ||
| So, O for five, I'm telling you, you're still getting pushed back down. | ||
| That's in baseball, too, by the way. | ||
| Yeah, that's in baseball. | ||
| That's not good. | ||
| One for five in corporate deposition is not the Mendoza line. | ||
| No, no, no, no. | ||
| So, as a result of this, obviously some things happened. | ||
| And so I'm going to read to you here just from the court filing of the findings in response to this. | ||
| Right. | ||
| In addition to, you know, obviously in the context of all the other corporate representative testimonies. | ||
| She got a two. | ||
| Oh, no? | ||
| How'd you get to two? | ||
| So, quote, quote, the court finds that defendants have intentionally thwarted the legitimate discovery process in these cases. | ||
| The egregiousness and repetitiveness of defendants' obstruction exhibits a disregard for and disrespect of the integrity of this court and our judicial system. | ||
| Plaintiffs' discovery effects necessary to properly present their claims for damages has been irreparably prejudiced in virtually all respects. | ||
| Absent severe action from this court, defendants will ultimately profit from their sabotage of the discovery process. | ||
| The court therefore orders that 1. Pursuant to Rule 215b-1, the court disallows any further discovery by defendants. | ||
| Any obligation of the plaintiffs to respond to any pending discovery is terminated. | ||
| So they don't have to respond to any requests or documents or any depositions. | ||
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. | ||
| We all thought summary judgment was out of... | ||
| Whoa, we've never seen this, but now we're literally in a place where it's like, shut up. | ||
| Shut up! | ||
| 2. Pursuant to Rule 215b-2, the court orders that defendants shall pay all of the expenses of discovery and taxable court costs in these lawsuits. | ||
| Plaintiffs shall submit evidence setting forth any court costs, expenses, or attorney's fees relating to discovery or discovery motions, accepting those amounts which were already awarded in any prior order of the court. | ||
| Defendants may object to the amount within seven days after plaintiff's filing. | ||
| So that was a lot of money. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| That's a lot of money. | ||
| Three. | ||
| Pursuant to Rule 215b3, the court orders that designated facts shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action. | ||
| Specifically, the jury will be instructed that any factual dispute relating to the following topics shall be taken as established in favor of the plaintiffs. | ||
| Sourcing and research for the videos described in plaintiffs'petitions. | ||
| Individuals involved in the production of the videos described in plaintiffs'petitions. | ||
| Internal editorial discussions regarding Infowars coverage of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. | ||
| The company's knowledge of the plaintiffs. | ||
| The audience reach of the videos described in plaintiffs'petitions. | ||
| the documents produced by the company in response to plaintiff's discovery requests. | ||
| Efforts made by the company to preserve potential evidence and... | ||
| Right. | ||
| That's everything. | ||
| Pretty much everything that the corporate representative testimony was designed to get, like the deposition was meant to give them an opportunity to testify on behalf of the company, to explain these things, provide evidence. | ||
| And because of their complete failure, I mean, we mentioned some of this a little bit before in a past episode, some of these sanctions that they've been hit with, but because of this, what we just went over, they are now not able to make any claims that contradict the plaintiffs about all of these issues. | ||
| It really does. | ||
| I mean, the summary judgment is fucked. | ||
| That's crazy. | ||
| I can't believe that would ever happen. | ||
| This is essentially saying the plaintiffs are right in everything that they say. | ||
| And the defense has abrogated their ability to defend themselves. | ||
| And so just believe what the plaintiffs tell you. | ||
| Well, it's that you had every opportunity to raise objection to stuff and provide evidence. | ||
| You are not going to be able to grandstand on this bullshit in court when you've refused to cooperate with the process. | ||
| If your intention is to say, oh yeah, sources for these videos, let's say, just for example. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Totally. | |
| You completely stonewall and play these games throughout the entire discovery process, and then you end up in court for the damages lawsuit, and you're like, oh, I've got this source! | ||
| Well, the source is actually, it's not from there. | ||
| Objection, Your Honor. | ||
| Right. | ||
| I mean, like, you don't want, like, Alex... | ||
| Being able to do whatever sort of game he might be wanting to play. | ||
| I mean... | ||
| I think it's... | ||
| Obviously, I agree with you. | ||
| I think it's an extreme kind of thing, but, like... | ||
| No, no, I mean, it's necessary. | ||
| What do you do? | ||
| It's necessary a couple years ago. | ||
| Probably. | ||
| You know, because we never would have... | ||
| Because you just don't think that somebody would take it this far. | ||
| So you didn't do it a couple of years ago, and then you didn't do it last year because you're like, there's no way they can take it this far. | ||
| And now here we are. | ||
| Fuck you. | ||
| I mean, this is a... | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Saying, fuck you. | ||
| Somewhat. | ||
| I think there is some value in giving people the opportunities to really make the case against themselves. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| And I think that that has been done quite well in the course of this. | ||
| I mean, like, in terms of, you know, these things that they're not allowed to, let's say, dispute in court. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| It would be like, you'd say, hey, I don't know if that's right. | ||
| If this hadn't all happened. | ||
| And the people who disagree with that, like people who follow Alex and think he got screwed by the court, they're not going to believe anything anyway. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Nope. | |
| I think it's due diligence to walk through the process of not cooperating and all this to get to the point where the punishment fits the behavior. | ||
| Right, right, right. | ||
| I'm headed back to the news radio references a lot lately, but this is just like... | ||
| That judge saying, you have exhaustively proven that this is a box full of junk. | ||
| Congratulations. | ||
| And it's like, I feel like that's where we are. | ||
| Just like, yes, you have exhaustively proven that you have no idea what we're doing here. | ||
| Congratulations. | ||
| And then they're going to say Tubal Kane and it's all over! | ||
| Look forward to Alex calling Goober as a witness. | ||
| He might. | ||
| Is this your skull? | ||
| Is this your skull? | ||
| Nope. | ||
| So, we come to the end of this, and I think this was a... | ||
| Right? | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I think, for the sake of the chaos and stuff... | ||
| That second deposition, there may be some stuff people would enjoy watching in that. | ||
| And in our links to stuff, I'll link to the YouTube page that has all the depositions on it and stuff. | ||
| I believe that that should be public. | ||
| By the time this comes out. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| The first one is there. | ||
| The first, the Sandy Hook deposition for Miss Paws is there. | ||
| And I believe the other one will be by the time this comes out. | ||
| But yeah. | ||
| I hope you all enjoyed. | ||
| We promised a longer episode. | ||
| You got it? | ||
| Sure did. | ||
| We'll be back, Jordan. | ||
| Indeed we will. | ||
| I'm exhausted. | ||
| Yeah, no kidding. | ||
| But until then, we have a website. | ||
| We do have a website. | ||
| It's knowledgefight.com. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| We'll be back. | ||
| Oh, we are on Twitter. | ||
| We are on Twitter. | ||
| I said I'm exhausted. | ||
| You're exhausted. | ||
| You've done three times as much work as I have, and that's zero. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Wait, hold on. | |
| What? | ||
| Wait, am I? | ||
| No, it's at knowledge underscore fight. | ||
| Go to bed, Jordan. | ||
| Yep, we'll be back. | ||
| But until then, I'm Neo. | ||
| I'm Leo. | ||
| I'm DZX Clark. | ||
| And now here comes the sex robots. | ||
| Andy in Kansas. | ||
| You're on the air. | ||
| Thanks for holding. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello, Alex. | |
| I'm a first-time caller. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm a huge fan. | |
| I love your work. |
Export Selection