Today, Dan and Jordan sit down for a sneaky snake chat with plaintiff's attorney Mark Bankston, to get a handle on the news of Alex's recent almost $1 billion verdict in the CT case, and what the next steps are likely to be in the various litigations he's facing.
The other day, me and Jordan, after the verdict came out on Thursday, we had the opportunity to sit down and chat with the plaintiff's attorney from the Texas cases, Mark Bankston, about the goings-on, reflect a little bit on the case, and what were the most likely next steps.
And that is a little bonus.
Bowonis.
Bowonis.
That's what it is.
It's a bonus little episode for this weekend for you all to enjoy.
Sneaky snaking.
But here's the thing.
Me and Jordan had meant...
Man, I'm pronouncing things weird all over the place.
Me and Jordan had meant to record an intro like this, what I'm doing here, but we forgot.
Anyway, I just thought it would be weird if the episode started and then just immediately jumped into an interview.
Maybe I'm wrong.
I don't know.
Maybe this is unnecessary.
Anyway, before I get too up in my head, I'll just throw it to the interview.
Well, it's interesting because you walk into that courtroom and nobody knows what's going to happen in this trial, but everybody knows what happens in mine.
So when I walk in there, there's a weird feeling of it.
I had, over the years, gotten a chance to reach out and talk to some of the other plaintiffs in the Lafferty case.
But this was the first time I'm in a room with them all and got to meet them.
And, you know, it's weird because sometimes people, you don't think about it too much.
That in a very technical sense, these cases of ours in Connecticut and in Texas are in competition in a way.
That would normally be the case, right?
But that has, since almost the outset, not been how we've treated it.
These parents were so gracious to me.
And so, I mean, they were expressing their admiration and their thanks for what we did.
And I don't even represent these folks, right?
But we've kind of stopped looking at it that way because, you know, I think we've said it in court many times.
Me and Chris are as cooperative as two plaintiff soldiers across the country could ever be.
And we have helped each other along this way to make sure that these people are not pulling fast ones in either direction.
And so, man, when that trial started, yeah, there was no other place in the world I wanted to be, try to help whatever way I could.
And it was a great experience to be there and to be, I don't know, there was something about that particular courtroom and you have that amount of gravity of people in it, of all these plaintiffs.
It was quite an experience.
But, you know, like a lot of people, midway through the trial when I had to leave and come home, because I actually had to come home for a couple days and then go try another case out in Kansas City.
There can be a lot of defendants who got defaulted or came in there with just a damage hearing.
And it still, it doesn't really matter because it's still, if the jury doesn't think what they did was wrong and they're not going to compensate people for it, right?
And so I think everybody knew that wasn't going to be what was happening because, I mean, I think what these cases show, and I knew from when he testified, is a jury, once this information is put in front of him, it is basically indefensible on its merits.
They're going to fucking hate the guy.
That's just how it's going to be.
And then the question is, right, like, so look, they have all these things going well for them.
They have the first trial with Jones that we had in Austin clearly broke his brain, right?
He came to that trial with the defense lawyer who was going to put on a fairly standard defense.
He went in there and pretended that he had remorse.
They tried to play the script of how you would supposedly defend this, and they got wrecked, and so it broke Alex's brain.
unidentified
So he shows up to the next trial, and he acts like a goddamn madman.
You know, I think it sometimes works in a criminal trial when you have a lawyer who is defending, who is deeply and fundamentally unlikable, like Norm is.
I mean, it's just a powerfully unlikable human being.
But it actually sometimes works in criminal trials.
But in the civil, and no, this book didn't fly.
So you've got all these advantages going on.
You've got Jones, you've got the attorney.
I mean, it's a mess.
But here's the thing that I don't think people are putting enough attention on, is that...
While Chris Matty had himself a really strong case and really favorable conditions in the courtroom, he faced something that is so insanely difficult, which is when you have, when you just have a, when it's just Neil and Scarlett, it's one family, right?
You can get the number up, get it up there to 50 million, and your jury understands that.
But once you start having 15 plaintiffs, you have to get the numbers up so high that your jury's going to get sticker shock, right?
And that's a worry even well below the figure they got.
Yeah, and I mean, look, you know you're going to, if you do it right, like you did, you get critical mass up.
Yeah, that can happen.
But there was a huge danger there of losing the jury in the details of all of these different people and having them get exhausted through the process and having that be dulled in their senses.
And you'll notice that as Chris started going through the different plaintiffs, he was able to create new angles and new ways to tell the story.
I think Koskoff, too, had a great sort of friendliness with the way that he questioned the plaintiffs as well.
There was a...
At times, certainly got objections from Norm, but there was kind of a friendliness to him in contrast to Mehdi kind of having more of a straightforward...
The other person I should probably mention by name just because I'm such, such a big fan of hers is Eleanor Sterling's work arguing legal propositions in that courtroom was so outstanding.
I really have rarely seen a lawyer who was so effective at communicating with a judge than Eleanor is.
And there were so many big rulings that she was able to secure during that trial.
And she did such an amazing job.
They had a really great team.
I mean, that's the thing is both of these parents, both sets have, we're lucky to have really competent representation because they could have gotten stuck with terrible people.
I bet she, I bet she has to feel amazing just because there are so few times, I think, where you can really get into like the nitty gritty of, ah, this isn't point one for point C. Exactly.
And feel like the righteous crusader of fucking, you know, like.
But there is sort of a solidarity, a groupness that we almost operate as one unit.
And it's an interesting way to do it.
And Jerry seemed to really like us for it.
But then when you add up in Connecticut, I thought this different approach of having...
All right, so Chris is able to bring a level of moral righteousness to the courtroom that in a less genuine person would be over the top.
But Chris is so...
Genuine.
That he was able to keep this very strong sense of moral authority in the courtroom.
But that needed to be counterbalanced because they needed to have an emotional angle too.
They needed to have a humanistic relating.
And Josh Kostka pulled that element off of it.
He has such an easy...
Unforced sense of camaraderie with people, that he can pull that off.
And then you have Eleanor, who is basically a strategist at heart.
She is a battlefield general.
And to know how to use the rules to keep her opponent where she wants it.
And so you have this very analytical approach in Eleanor.
And the three of them together just knocked it out of the park.
I'm actually super excited to work with them again in the future.
Because they are some...
They have been doing some great work outside of this, too.
You know, because they did Remington, and that was a long slog, a very uphill climb, and they did it.
And so they're out, you know, celebrating the world right now, getting the accolades, and they deserve every bit of it because, wow, this is really an amazing result.
They're going to have to do a lot of work to do that.
And for me, taking these up on appeal is great.
Now, here's the real kicker of it, right?
Here's the real kicker.
Let's say that by some heaven forbid chance he is successful on appeal against us, for instance, and Texas Court of Appeals or Texas Supreme Court reverses and orders a new trial to go forward.
unidentified
Can you think of anything that would make me happier than going to trial against Alex Jones again?
Just about the, and fundamental errors at the trial, if they think that anything happened there.
It's interesting, though, because most of your objections to this would be off of, like, jury instructions.
And strangely enough, like, Reynaud, every time we had a charge conference, was like, no objection.
Which, I mean, again, that's the whole through line with Reynold.
There were so many opportunities for him to do things that would help this case, and he just sat there and twiddled his thumbs while they were happening.
I think what's ironic about the idea of an appeal is that after all these four trials are done, basically, we're going to find out that once you have the ability to choose a jury of peers, you can weed out certain people.
Any reasonable person will agree that Alex should go fuck himself.
The idea of that you can take it to court still kind of infuriates me whenever it's like, it doesn't matter where you are or who you choose.
As long as you get rid of info warriors, this motherfucker's going down.
I noticed, look, we had some really strong, well-informed jurors on the jury who I think in the next round, for instance, we go try Posner early next year or something like that.
The jury pool's all going to know about this billion-dollar verdict.
It is kind of a situation where this has, you know, we were all worried.
As you said earlier, Dan and I were both worried about the judgment and all of this stuff.
And I think that really might be because we are so close to it that if we had could step back, you know, like if you can go back and listen to episode one, I'm.
We're doing also a sanctions motion for the improper removal and bankruptcy back in April, which was total BS.
Got dismissed really quick.
But that caused us to incur a bunch of expenses.
So we're going to seek all that.
And we're actually going, instead of going after Jones and the company, we're going after the lawyers who did these things and pulled these things off.
This would actually be against Antino for what he did during trial, as well as another one of their lawyers, too, named Eric Taub, who was involved with the representation earlier and made certain representations about InfoWars LLC prior to the bankruptcy.
So we'll be having a hearing on those and then enter the judgment, right?
The Lafferty folks will be having a similar thing happen.
Of course, they're still stretching out because people don't even realize they haven't even had punitive damages yet.
Start digging up gold out of the backyard and all that kind of stuff.
But the problem there is that it even gets more complicated.
Because at the same time, we have a fraudulent transfer suit pending against it, which we can adjudicate during that time on appeal, but we really can't do anything with it until the appeal's over.
So then we get to go after the money that isn't technically in Alex Jones' hands or Free Speech Systems' hands, but that has been transferred over until other entities have been given to other insiders.
Yeah, exactly.
The one that trips everybody's radar on this is PQPR.
Now, what's interesting with that trust is it's got $30 million sitting in it right now.
So, you know, people sometimes have come up to me and said, like, hey, you know, great result, but, you know, are you really going to collect anything?
Alex Jones, really have any money?
And there was a time in my life where I was like, I don't know, and frankly, I don't care.
Like, that's never what this was about.
It's not important for the families either, right?
See, to me, though, look, there already are immediate consequences.
There already are immediate effects that I think are...
Because here's the thing.
Even if you could take all of his money and you could essentially shut down Infowars, that's not going to stop him from being a man.
Like he'll be on the Internet.
Like he'll make videos.
He'll do whatever.
People start getting money.
You're not going to get rid of him that way.
The way you really have to do is to be able to marginalize and neuter his influence on American culture.
That really is kind of the goal of the whole thing.
When these families realize that, man, they start to see that Parkland shooting happen, the same stuff was happening.
They're like, we can't just let this keep going.
The suit itself.
You've got to remember, the suit gets filed in April.
Lafferty's suit follows up a couple months later.
And Jones basically loses his mind over that period of time.
Starts threatening to kill Robert Mueller.
Starts posting just a bunch of stuff that is like an attempt to get the tech giants to come after him.
Just the most racist, transphobic, all sorts of stuff during that summer.
He loses his mind.
The combination of those two events, the lawsuit and all of that, caused the tech giants to deplatform him.
Which I still think was...
Done in the most ridiculous, unarbitrary way that kind of, like, points to their mistakes all through it.
But, like, it got done, right?
And that was the first big effect of the suit.
I really do think that you move past 2019.
At 2018, Jones was basically at the height of his powers.
And he was effectively defanged by the suit itself.
Then the deplatforming reduces the core size of his audience.
And then now...
After the defaults, after all of it, after this constant drumbeat of how he's not taking it seriously, and then the verdicts, he has been heavily marginalized as a figure.
And in a way that, like, I'm not even sure that collecting the money makes that much more of a difference, to tell you the truth.
I mean, I think it will reduce the size of his media operation, but his ultimate reach, I think, will probably be about the same.
I think that the people who are already in and deeply in with Infowars, it's not going to marginalize him with them, but you never would be able to do that, period.
There's a vaster awareness of who he is among normies, perhaps, in a way that's like, oh, this is the guy who lost a billion dollars over Sandy Hook.
And I think that could be helpful in some ways.
But then there's even the logistical things of credit.
Impacts of losing a case like these.
And that's something that will be a problem for him.
And in order to maintain whatever relevance he has and ability to get audience, he has to have his own site like Band.Video that is intensely expensive for him with bandwidth costs.
And the only way to keep getting people...
To go to the site is to offer a platform for weirdos like David Icke and some of these other folks like that guy who dresses up like Uncle Sam and yells at people on the street.
He has that stuff and that's costing him an arm and a leg.
Eventually, he's not going to be able to afford to run this site and other people aren't going to pony up the money for that.
You're left in a position where If that goes away, he has Infowars.
Like if he no longer has a professional studio and he's going out of his fucking room and you look at his video and you see the same thing that you do with any asshole.
Yeah, in our room.
Yeah, absolutely.
I don't think he has the ability to go beyond that because he doesn't have any talent.
But it's always been my sense that among his viewership, the people who are actually buying the supplements is a very, very, very small component of that.
It is a tiny percentage of the audience who are spending a shit ton of money with him.
It does seem like when the FBI says no one died at Sandy Hook, breached into what you might call mainstream, like it spread wider, that did have an effect on spreading his sales.
That is true.
But when he's on Piers Morgan or he goes on Rogan, that doesn't necessarily spike sales.
It broke through into a greater community, but that community was still pretty...
Pretty damn crazy.
True, true.
And I do think that, like, you look at the 2017 period, right after Trump's victory, there were a lot of sort of standard NASCAR dad mega-conservatives who suddenly discovered Alex Jones during that period, and he became a very dangerous thing.
And I mean, it was frustrating to me going through the COVID period and seeing him do all this stuff and realizing you can't stop him.
You never will effectively stop him.
The only way you can is to completely try to marginalize him.
I hope this has done that, and I think it's going to.
It certainly is.
Life is about to get more difficult.
That's for sure.
But I think there's this bigger effect, and I think this is real legit, is that There has now been a signal sent out to media of all stripes that if you start bringing private people, blameless, innocent private people, into your conspiracy lies and start telling false facts about them, either intentionally or explicitly, there's going to be a big damn price tag for that.
And I think it's going to be the effect on other people who are edging close to, I might do some things like Alex Jones.
Could take all of the things that Alex Jones did in regards to this case, in regards to these people, and be like, okay, well, we know yelling fire in a crowded theater is not free speech, so if you do exactly this list of things...
Then you go to jail or your show is gone or something like that.
Because it is like any reasonable jury would come to the conclusion that you owe a billion dollars if you do this shit.
So why not skip the five years of goddamn litigation and just go, you did the exact list of things that every reasonable person thinks costs a billion dollars.
You've said before, even I believe on the show, that there is a point, or maybe it was Bill, that like...
This could have been resolved so easily in earlier times if Alex said, well, I mean, he's done it with other cases before, like with Hamdi Ulukaya, you know, Chobani.
He said he was going to fight that or die, and then he settled like a week later.
unidentified
I'm really sorry about the things I said about Hamdi Ulukaya.
It's so funny that even after he did that, then he gets into my deposition and he starts defaming the guy again.
Of course.
It's wild to me that it's just because of the two jurisdictions, right?
Because of where Chobani is and where Comet Ping Pong is, those areas, both of those venues, if you make an apology before the suit and retract, your damages are cut to almost nothing if you do that.
And so they knew it wouldn't have been worth it to pursue it once he made those apologies.
Yeah, well, I don't believe, for instance, a guy like a Benny Johnson or Charlie Kirk or one of those fuckers, I don't actually think they have strong feelings of defensive outs.
I think they're really in tune with what the people they grift off of are going to want to hear.
And so there is a small contingent who they know they can get engagement from that way.
I see all this stuff about, like, well, this is what happens when you speak out against the regime.
And I'm like, what the fuck are you talking about?
Like, there are so many people who are, like, enemy of, like, I guess, like, modern establishment liberals or whatever.
And if there really was, like, Hillary and Soros were sitting around a room plotting to take them down, like, no, that's not how that would work, right?
Yeah, that's what's so disgusting about it to me is that, like, here's something that's so obviously morally obscene.
Something that's so horrific that even if you just take what, like, take like a, you know, again, like a Charlie Kirk, but he probably wants to imagine Alex Jones, right?
Which when his imagination of what Alex Jones did is still pretty fucking bad, right?
But they will never engage with what he actually did, which is so morally horrific that you can't even wrap your head around it.
And the fact that something that morally obscene has taken this much effort.
Yeah, there's no slippery slope against these people.
If it's this hard to go after literally the worst act of defamation in American fucking history, then like...
Couldn't it be stopped the next time way better than a billion-dollar judgment if somebody just wrote a law that was like, okay, if you defame people multiple times and make a billion dollars off of it, and then you get sued for it instead of trying to settle, you have a default judgment.
What if we just finally accepted a floor for defamation that's criminal?
Let's start here.
This is a crime.
I feel like the problem that everyone is having is they want to talk about the billion-dollar judgment and not the reason that it's a billion dollars is because he committed a real-life crime.
But the thing that we're going to be talking about on the 20th of this month is that because that conduct was criminal and all of the allegations were found by default, that's going to get us around the punitive damage cap.
And so here, yeah, it is definitely going to be our argument in court on the 20th that Jones committed a felony in this act and that he very well could have been prosecuted.
If you had had an enterprising prosecutor.
So that's also, like, even our criminal law recognizes the moral repugnancy of what he did.
There are certain things, but see, there's a big difference between some of those things Alex was saying that he thought were true, that the record shows are not true, right?
I'm filled with this feeling of coming after our first trial.
We knew that was sort of...
I mean, it's the opening act.
There are 20 claimants against him.
And we just took Neal and Scarlett, one family story, and did an opening act.
And it was really nice because you get all of these things that not only was it this resounding referendum on him, but he got embarrassed in that court.
And I think something that some people haven't even really thought about it in this equation is that Lenny Posner and Verity De La Rosa...
Their direct damage from this are probably the most outrageous of anybody involved in this.
And for such a long duration.
That last one he's looking at there is really, really threatening.
And then, look, even with Marcel's case, which didn't have the years-long effect, is still really repugnant.
Very possibly facing a big verdict there as well.
And so you're going to have some more of this.
But the fact is, we followed our suits near each other.
The Lavery people came a couple months after mine.
And then over the course of these four years, even with the procedural differences in the case, we've basically stayed neck and neck.
And so to have it come down to, even after all the appeals, our trials are like a month apart.
To have this one-two punch, it's like this story being told.
It's amazing.
It couldn't have worked out any better.
It really is.
And that kind of brings me back to another point.
I think it's super important that people need to realize and that needs to get said more.
People keep saying these sorts of things of like, oh, Alex Jones could have put on a First Amendment offense, but he chose not to participate and therefore got defaulted.
So, haha, he didn't get to do that.
And that's actually not true.
Is that in the beginnings of the case...
In both states, he was allowed to bring an anti-slap motion that challenges his First Amendment rights and all of that stuff.
And he actually had all of that heard on the merits.
He had appeals up to the Texas Court of Appeals and up to the Texas Supreme Court.
You can go read, like, one of them that really spells it all out really nice is the Posner v.
Jones opinion from the Texas Court of Appeals.
And they go through these issues, all of the First Amendment things that he would want.
He had every chance to do that.
He got a fair shake in court to do that.
It wasn't until he came back from that and still over years didn't participate.
That's when he ended up getting defaulted on the merits of trial.
So he got to try to vindicate his First Amendment rights, and it failed.
Because this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.
You cannot tell false facts about identifiable people.
I think there's some of that, but I also, I really believe, looking back on it, there was this hubris of, what's the worst that could happen if I don't cooperate?
You know, that is one of the questions that I have been fascinated by throughout both trials is, you know, the great, great lengths that have gone to avoid letting him turn it into a political thing or letting him really spew his bullshit unencumbered, you know?
All things considered, the question I have really for humanity is if Alex was allowed to do that, is he grabbing one juror?
Is that what humans have?
Is it you have to withhold some bullshit in order to have a reasonable response?
Or is it just going to overtake at least one person?
Because that, I think, was his and Norm's concept of the whole thing.
We need to get one person Well, I mean, yeah, they're going to red pill the jury.
But even that is revealed in how they talk about the Connecticut Supreme Court.
Like, they were like, we were just one judge away from, you know, it's like, if we could have gotten that one other person over on our side, then we would have flipped this thing.
I mean, that's the thing, too, is the synergy off these cases.
I mean, look, that was some finesse there to make that happen and required Federico not knowing his rules.
But it ended up with a pretty large amount of data in our possession, which at my trial, I only had four.
I mean, look, before I put those text messages in front of Jones.
Because I was in trial all day the previous day, and that was my first day that I could look at these documents.
I had about like four hours to be able to get that stuff together.
So then Chris has a month with these text messages, right?
And he battered him with these.
Man, some of that stuff from Fruget is just brutal.
And so you have these synergies between the case.
You'll notice that in my case, in mine, we played deposition testimony, and half the depositions that we played were from Lafferty.
It's interesting, Chris Maddy made an appearance in my trial, so did Matt Lumenthal, by questioning these witnesses.
And it was these synergies between the cases.
So right after the verdict, I called up Chris and I was like, man, it was nice to have a six-person trial team down there, because I had you and Matt as well down there.
And so it's nice that if it had only been one case, you just don't know how it would have turned out.
But when you have four and they synergize and they're all on the same page, you kind of know how they're all going to turn out.
It is really, really kind of amazing because it was like you had two independent teams coming up with interesting ideas, communicating with each other, and then going back and coming up with more interesting ideas.
It was really fascinating to watch the interplay between you guys.
I mean, like, first, you have to consider that, like, early in the case, and, you know, particularly early, early in the case, Chris and I didn't know each other like we do now.
And Chris and I are two very, very different people, but we have a really strong bond.
Early in the case, though, we didn't really know each other.
And there was nothing that required Chris to say under his protective order with the court that the documents that he gets, that he went to the court and actually asked for a provision in the protective order to allow him to share those documents with me if he got stuff.
He didn't have to do that.
And there would be a lot of people in different cases where they weren't on the same page that wouldn't do that.
And it was always felt like this was a boat that we are sailing together.
That there are certain times, depending on which case something is happening in, somebody's going to be at the wheel of this thing.
But it was absolutely critical to us that we are sailing in the same direction, that we were not doing things that would undermine each other, anything like that.
I'm hoping to get one at that hearing on the 20th.
I mean, it's going to have to kind of come down to whether we're going to actually have to move the bankruptcy court to lift the stay and get that done through the bankruptcy court to get free speech out of there, or whether we just go forward against Jones and say, you know what, screw it, we'll sever it out and just try to get Jones.
They were just like, we love and support you from the wonk.
You know?
And it's just, man, the community that y 'all have fostered and what it is, it means a lot to me.
And I, you know, some of the people have been saying things like, what is Knowledge Fight going to do when Alex Jones is gone?
And I remind them, one, Alex Jones is never going to be truly gone until he's six feet under.
Like, if he keels over, okay, but like, otherwise he's not going to be gone.
And two, there's this big thing coming up where I'm seeing, I don't know, more lower level Alex Joneses, more things of that style that I know it's going to keep him relevant.
And, you know, no matter what we do to this guy, do not leave him alone.
As you see, that's the Bellagio behind me, so I'm going to go hit the tables and see if my luck keeps up, because it seems to be doing pretty well right now.