All Episodes
Jan. 18, 2023 - Knowledge Fight
01:48:13
#768: Formulaic Objections Part 14

Today, Dan and Jordan discuss an early deposition in the Texas case against Alex Jones. This installment features a complicated and confusing appearance by Rob Jacobson, the Infowars resident documentary filmmaker who was mocked for warning against covering Sandy Hook. Tickets for our March 2 show in Milwaukee are on sale at 10 AM Central

Participants
Main voices
d
dan friesen
49:29
j
jordan holmes
22:31
m
mark bankston
14:12
r
rob jacobson
14:10
Appearances
m
mark enoch
03:40
Clips
a
alex jones
00:13
s
steve quayle
00:02
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
unidentified
Knowledge Fight.
alex jones
I'm sick of them posing as if they're the good guys, saying we are the bad guys.
dan friesen
Knowledge Fight.
unidentified
Dan and Jordan, knowledge.
I love your word.
Knowledge fight.
KnowledgeFight.com.
I love you.
dan friesen
Hey, everybody.
Welcome back to KnowledgeFight.
I'm Dan.
jordan holmes
I'm Jordan.
dan friesen
We're a couple dudes like to sit around, worship at the altar of Selene, and talk a little bit about Alex Jones.
jordan holmes
Oh, indeed.
We are Dan.
dan friesen
Jordan.
jordan holmes
Dan.
dan friesen
Jordan.
jordan holmes
Quick question for you.
dan friesen
What's up?
jordan holmes
What's your bright spot today, buddy?
dan friesen
My bright spot today is actually a very recent bright spot, and that is right before we started recording.
I started reciting the lyrics.
jordan holmes
Okay, all right.
Okay, all right.
dan friesen
To Will Smith's Welcome to Miami.
jordan holmes
Son of a bitch.
dan friesen
And you were freaking out.
You freaked out a little bit.
Your response was pretty, pretty...
jordan holmes
It makes me feel deeply uncomfortable.
dan friesen
Well, and I realized that maybe there's something that people don't know about me, and that is that I know all the lyrics to a number of Will.
That is true.
Uh-huh.
jordan holmes
You have demonstrated that on multiple occasions.
unidentified
Yep.
jordan holmes
And I want the audience to know, regardless of drunk or sober...
dan friesen
True.
True.
Wild Wild West in particular, that one I go...
Anytime.
jordan holmes
Right now.
dan friesen
Without a beat.
jordan holmes
Nope.
dan friesen
Wild Wild West.
Jim West.
Desperado.
Rough Rider.
No, you don't want nada.
None of this.
Six gun in this.
Brother running this.
Buffalo soldier.
Look, it's like I told you.
unidentified
All right.
dan friesen
Okay.
Any games that let's in distress should be out of that dress once you meet Jim West.
jordan holmes
Roughnecks.
dan friesen
Go check the law and abide.
Watch your step.
Get a hole in your side.
Swallow your pride.
Don't let your lip react.
jordan holmes
This is a problem with not having a boss.
unidentified
Okay.
Autonomous.
dan friesen
From the start of this.
Running the game.
James West.
jordan holmes
Tame in the West.
dan friesen
Remember the name.
I could go for hours.
And the Men in Black theme song.
Maybe not Men in Black 2. I think you did a song on that soundtrack.
jordan holmes
Did you do the soundtrack for that?
Was it just Here Comes the Men in Black again?
dan friesen
You know what?
Ironically, I don't think I know all the words to Big Willie Style.
jordan holmes
That's not surprising.
dan friesen
Or Getting Jiggy With It.
I guess Big Willie Style was the name of the album.
jordan holmes
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
That's fine.
Getting Jiggy With It, as I like to say.
Not that good of a song.
I'm going to throw that out there.
dan friesen
On your mark.
jordan holmes
Not memorable.
dan friesen
You know I go psycho with my new joint hit.
Just can't quit.
Gotta get jiggy with it.
Ooh, that's it.
Honey, honey, come ride.
DKNY.
unidentified
We're like two seconds away from you saying that we have four clips today.
jordan holmes
It's going to be a short show.
dan friesen
Ah, boy.
That was just my bright spot.
I like annoying you with stuff like that.
So anyway, what's your bright spot?
jordan holmes
My bright spot is something that I, I mean, obviously one good turn deserves another, my friend.
So my bright spot is the Australian Open!
Tennis!
dan friesen
Tennis!
All right.
So what are the highlights of this year's Open?
jordan holmes
Well, it's going to be a tough one.
First off, Kyrgios had to drop out with a knee injury.
Oh, no.
Sucks.
This was his best shot to win his own Australian Open.
That would have been amazing.
That would have been cool.
Not going to happen.
Rafa's coming in off a bad stretch.
He's lost six of his last eight.
dan friesen
Oh, no.
jordan holmes
And he won his first round match, but you don't know if that means anything.
dan friesen
How's Sampras looking?
jordan holmes
Oh, Sampras is looking great.
He's about 70 years old now and his arm hair has established a colony on other people's arms.
dan friesen
My money's on Agassi.
jordan holmes
Agassi's good.
His skull is now actually visible.
He used to glue a wig on his head.
dan friesen
Sure.
jordan holmes
Then he got rid of that and he was bald and now it's all come back to haunt him and his exposed skull is there for us.
dan friesen
I don't have any other old tennis references except for maybe like John McEnroe.
jordan holmes
John McEnroe.
Still doing great.
dan friesen
Yeah.
Number three seed.
jordan holmes
He's lost three of his feet to diabetes.
That's how bad it is.
He got two foot transplant.
dan friesen
So you said Rafa's not in it?
jordan holmes
No, Rafa is in it.
dan friesen
Oh, sorry.
jordan holmes
Kyrgios has dropped out.
dan friesen
Kyrgios has dropped out.
jordan holmes
And this is...
Djokovic is back this year.
dan friesen
Because the vaccine...
jordan holmes
Because they just got rid of him.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
COVID is still an issue.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
Vaccine's still very important.
But I mean, come on.
It was a year ago.
Whatever.
dan friesen
Yeah, so Djokovic won't get as much press this year, perhaps.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
Well, I'm excited for you to enjoy that.
jordan holmes
It'll be great.
dan friesen
I hope you have a great time watching people go bong.
jordan holmes
Oh, old man Andy Murray.
dan friesen
Andy Murray.
jordan holmes
He won against young man Berrettini.
dan friesen
Whoa, Berrettini!
jordan holmes
Berrettini!
Hot Italian playing tennis.
dan friesen
You gotta love it.
Wait, so who's your favorite to win?
jordan holmes
Who's my favorite to win?
Who's most likely to win?
Probably Djokovic or Medvedev.
dan friesen
The Russian president?
jordan holmes
No.
Former Russian president.
Thank you.
No, Dmitry Medvedev is a very, very good tennis player.
dan friesen
Did you say Andy Murray?
jordan holmes
Andy Murray.
Old man Andy Murray.
dan friesen
Wait, who was the young guy?
jordan holmes
Matteo Berrettini.
dan friesen
Matteo Berrettini.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
For some reason, I thought, like, was Andy Murray married to somebody famous?
jordan holmes
Yeah.
Andy Murray's the Scottish tennis player.
He's knighted.
dan friesen
No, but was he married to somebody famous?
jordan holmes
I don't know who anyone is married to.
That is the one thing about pop culture I have never known about anyone.
Every time somebody's like, you know who he's married to?
I'm like, that's amazing, and I don't remember.
dan friesen
I don't know if it's him or I'm thinking of some other person, but I feel like he might have been married to some pop star.
Some pop idol?
Anyway...
Enjoy, Jordan.
jordan holmes
Yes, thanks.
dan friesen
So today we have four clips.
jordan holmes
Okay.
dan friesen
Just kidding.
unidentified
Right.
dan friesen
So, Jordan, we have an episode to do today, and we are going to be having another deposition.
jordan holmes
Ooh!
dan friesen
So we're going to be talking about the deposition in the Lewis case.
jordan holmes
Okay.
dan friesen
The Texas case with Rob Jacobson.
jordan holmes
All right.
dan friesen
Interesting character, Rob Jacobson.
jordan holmes
He's a cat, that's for sure.
dan friesen
He is a fella who worked at InfoWars.
From 2004 to 2017.
He was there a long, long time.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And was responsible for such hits as Endgame.
jordan holmes
Great.
dan friesen
The Obama Deception.
jordan holmes
Top of the marks.
dan friesen
Well, that was kind of more of his bread and butter.
It was a bit more of the video production and the documentary side of stuff.
And he sent leaving Infowars by being fired.
He filed an EEOC complaint against Infowars alleging anti-Semitic treatment that he endured on...
From other employees and from Alex.
jordan holmes
I mean, that's not a hard jump to make.
dan friesen
No.
Notably, he has alleged, and I certainly believe this is true, that Rob Dew and Owen Schroyer would refer to him as the resident Jew, and among other things that were made a hostile work environment.
jordan holmes
Owen tracks.
dan friesen
So since he's left, he has also taken on a bit of an anti-Alex posture.
Let's say.
He appears in various documentaries that will be made on...
CNN, I guess?
jordan holmes
Yeah, yeah.
dan friesen
I don't know.
He's one of the people you go to whenever you want to have interviews with past Alex employees.
He's willing to talk to those folks, whereas maybe a Jakari Jackson isn't going to show up for the interview.
jordan holmes
Doesn't want that part of his life to be analyzed.
dan friesen
And I think that there is a part of it that Rob feels a desire for some penance.
And I can understand that on some level, but I also...
Find it uncompelling in many ways.
So we're gonna go through this deposition, but it's challenging a little bit because of that dynamic that I do feel like he is probably, in many ways, sincerely guilty about what he was involved in.
jordan holmes
Sure.
dan friesen
To the extent that it relates to Sandy Hook.
Now, I don't see a ton of examination of...
The larger catalog of his work that he did.
jordan holmes
Sure, sure, sure.
dan friesen
And how very similar it is to the coverage of Sandy Hook.
And how he does not seem to have necessarily a problem with his endgame.
jordan holmes
That's a problem.
dan friesen
So that's tough for me.
And we'll wrestle with it as we go along.
Before we do, let's say hello to some new wonks.
jordan holmes
Ooh, that's a great idea.
dan friesen
So first, all right, and here it is, guys, in all its fine glory.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
I'm a policy wonk.
Thank you very much!
dan friesen
Next, Napoleon Bonifarte.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
I'm a policy wonk.
Thank you very much!
dan friesen
Next, the former Chicagoan who likes rants about jewel and skilling.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
I'm a policy wonk.
Thank you very much.
dan friesen
That's not a real former Chicagoan, because they would want rants about the jewels.
Next.
jordan holmes
Where's Danny Callis when you need him?
dan friesen
My guinea pigs sing when Jordan laughs, but they no longer run from Alex Jones' voice, so your show is one for two in fostering healthy rodent behaviors.
Four stars.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
unidentified
I'm a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
Thank you very much.
dan friesen
Thank you.
Next.
Married moms need abortions, too.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
unidentified
I'm a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
Thank you very much!
dan friesen
Next, Trudy the Tasmanian Tiny Titty Baby.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
I'm a policy wonk.
Thank you very much!
dan friesen
And Robert Evans sent me Love Becca from New Zealand.
Thank you so much.
You are now a policy wonk.
unidentified
I'm a policy wonk.
jordan holmes
Thank you very much!
unidentified
Thank you!
dan friesen
Now, the first couple clips are a bit long.
And the reason for that is there is chaos at the beginning of this deposition.
Mark Bankston is taking the deposition, and he begins trying to just say, please introduce yourself.
Good luck.
And then Alex's lawyer, Enoch, he comes in and gets out of line.
It's very hard to present this in small chunks, so I have about a five-minute clip here, and I think it needs to be presented as a whole thing in order to really get the feeling of this and how...
There's an ickiness to it.
jordan holmes
Oh, boy.
dan friesen
And a discomfort.
And you can see it in Rob's face, too.
jordan holmes
Can I ask a quick question?
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
Alex is lawyer, and does Rob also have a lawyer?
dan friesen
Rob does not have a lawyer.
jordan holmes
Rob doesn't have a lawyer.
dan friesen
He is unrepresented.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
The judge has signed off on this deposition taking place, and that Mark can ask questions on behalf of the plaintiffs.
But he is not representing Rob, and Rob has no lawyer there.
jordan holmes
Okay.
dan friesen
On behalf of free speech systems and all those other entities, Enoch is there defending the deposition.
jordan holmes
Gotcha.
dan friesen
But according to Mark, and I think he makes a decent case, he has no right necessarily to take discovery from Rob Jacobson.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
The cross-examination has not necessarily been signed off on.
jordan holmes
If I understand what you're saying correctly, Mark can ask questions, but Enoch cannot ask questions.
dan friesen
Well, he can be there to object, and the drama and the chaos here at the beginning largely comes down to the fact that Rob Jacobson signed an NDA when he worked at InfoWars.
jordan holmes
Gotcha, okay.
dan friesen
And so, on behalf of Free Speech Systems and Alex Jones, Enoch can say things like, I don't think you should answer that based on the NDA or something like that.
He can exist in that space, but then it's kind of an open question and a little bit unclear.
Well, at least Mark believes one thing and Enoch believes the other in terms of whether or not Alex's lawyer has the ability to question the witness.
And so that is a problem.
Their disagreement is a mess.
mark bankston
Good afternoon, Mr. Jacobson.
Can you introduce yourself for our record?
rob jacobson
I am Robert Jacobson.
mark enoch
Mark, I'd like to ask a couple questions and make a comment real quickly.
mark bankston
I don't think you've been given any orders from the court to do any discovery, so no, Mr. Enoch, you're not asking this witness any questions.
mark enoch
Mr. Jacobson...
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch?
Mr. Enoch, please point me to the order in which you've been allowed to do any discovery or take any questions of any witness.
Point me to it, Mr. Enoch.
mark enoch
Please do not interrupt.
mark bankston
Right now, point me to it.
mark enoch
Please do not interrupt.
mark bankston
Then you're not going to...
Mr. Enoch, stop talking to the witness.
mark enoch
Mr. Jacobson.
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch, this deposition will be suspended, and I will sink sanctions if you speak one more time to this witness.
mark enoch
Mr. Jacobson, have you been served?
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch, we're going off the record.
We're done.
mark enoch
No, we're not going off the record.
mark bankston
Deposition is suspended.
You have no ability to take any testimony, Mr. Enoch.
None.
Zero.
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, I suggest instead of getting emotional about it, you let me ask the questions that I ask.
mark bankston
No, we're not going to let you have any questions, Mr. Enoch.
mark enoch
Please don't interrupt me again.
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch, you have no right to answer questions.
Before you ask a single question to that witness again, direct me to what authority you think you have the ability to...
mark enoch
Did you serve a subpoena on this witness?
mark bankston
I served notice of deposition on this witness.
mark enoch
Sir, if you didn't serve a subpoena, he's under an NDA and a confidentiality agreement.
He is not excused from that.
You did not provide him with an order of this court.
He cannot testify today.
You should have served him with a subpoena and you did not.
mark bankston
You want to take this up with the judge?
mark enoch
No, sir.
That's what I want to talk with this witness about.
mark bankston
You're not going to talk to him about it.
You don't have the ability to do discovery.
I'm going to ask this witness questions.
If you instruct him not to answer and try to prevent this deposition from happening, I will take it up to the court.
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, you are the one preventing me from asking any questions.
unidentified
I am.
mark enoch
Yes!
jordan holmes
Duh!
mark enoch
Do what you need to do, sir.
I want to make sure this witness knows of his obligations under the non-disclosure agreement and confidentiality agreements that he signed.
Are you going to...
mark bankston
You sent him a letter.
Telling him what his confidentiality agreements are, telling him to observe them.
You have already had these communications with this witness.
You have no reason to ask this witness any questions today.
The court has not granted your client any discovery whatsoever, and you will stop interfering with this deposition.
You have no reason to be asking this client about confidentiality when you have already informed him of his obligations.
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, I'm going to ask the question, and if you instruct him not to answer...
mark bankston
I don't represent this witness.
mark enoch
Mr. Jacobson, did you receive a letter from me in December or so advising of my client's insistence that you maintain confidentiality under your agreements that you reached with Alex Jones and with Free Speech?
rob jacobson
I don't recall.
mark enoch
Do you still have those confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements?
rob jacobson
I don't recall.
Since whatever happened to me at work...
My files have been scattered around.
I'd also like to add that that NDA was forced upon me after employment with Alex for over eight years, on the record.
mark enoch
Sir, you can...
I'm not arguing with you whether...
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch, objection.
You've already done what you said you were going to do.
Don't start having conversations with the witness.
Don't do it.
Don't influence his testimony, Mr. Enoch.
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, please stop interrupting me.
mark bankston
Well, then I will put...
First, before you ask your question, I object and my objection is to the form of your question.
mark enoch
Very well.
Mr. Jacobson, are you familiar with the requirements and the documents that you signed that you maintain confidentiality unless you are subpoenaed or ordered by a court?
rob jacobson
I'm familiar with the action that was forced upon me after being employed by him with language in that NDA which includes things like the known universe and stuff.
It's garbage.
No, no, I am not aware of any...
I know that it was forced upon me.
I was employed by Alex for over eight years, and they forced it upon me.
I was a...
So, I don't know where it is, I don't know what the language is, and I don't recall anything.
mark enoch
I'd like to mark as an exhibit, please, madam, if you could.
mark bankston
Object to any exhibits being offered by you?
Mr. Enough, what are you doing?
unidentified
Good question.
mark bankston
Let's just talk.
What do you think you're doing?
You're not questioning this witness anymore.
This is not your deposition.
You have no ability to do discovery.
I've had extraordinary patience with allowing you to ask the questions of the witness to ascertain whether he knows there's a confidentiality agreement.
I will also be asking him about that same confidentiality agreement.
Now that that's been done, you have no reason to be questioning.
The only reason you're doing it is to influence this witness.
That's literally the only reason you're doing it.
I consider what you're doing highly improper, and I am asking you once again.
Knock this off, Mr. Enoch.
What are you doing?
mark enoch
Mr. Jacobson, do you recognize exhibit number one?
rob jacobson
I don't have any recall of this exhibit.
mark enoch
Would you look at your signature on the last page and please identify that?
mark bankston
We need to go off the record and call the court right now.
Mr. Enoch?
rob jacobson
Mr. Jacobson, I want you to notice the date.
When was my employment started?
unidentified
Sir, I don't have any representation here.
rob jacobson
When was my employment started?
When was the first day I started working?
mark bankston
Mr. Jacobson, let's stop for a second.
When was the first day I started?
We're going off the record right now.
We're calling the court.
unidentified
Very well.
dan friesen
Ooh.
So, yeah.
jordan holmes
That's how we start!
dan friesen
It's an ugly little bit of business there at the beginning.
Yeah.
This is not like any of the other ones I've seen.
jordan holmes
Right, right, right, right.
dan friesen
For sure.
jordan holmes
So, Enoch is his strategy.
He's coming in and he's thinking, here's what I'm going to do.
Before Mark can say a word, I'm going to interject.
I am going to talk over him, try and bully him, push him.
dan friesen
Yeah, there is a feeling of trying to influence the testimony by way of veiled intimidation.
jordan holmes
Yeah, absolutely.
That's not hard.
dan friesen
And, yeah, you can see for sure that Rob is getting agitated.
But I don't think that he's...
I wouldn't describe it as like a breaking down or anything.
jordan holmes
No, no, no.
dan friesen
He is holding his own to whatever extent you can, really.
But also, I mean, he's not represented, and so he is going to...
You know, possibly yell back.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I mean, fuck you!
dan friesen
And there's not really much you can do.
I mean, Mark isn't his lawyer.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
Can't really control the situation.
jordan holmes
No.
dan friesen
Enoch is clearly out of pocket and just in business for himself here.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
And so it's a mess.
jordan holmes
I mean, from what I understand, here's what I'm understanding is going on, right?
Mark and Rob are there.
To do a job.
And Enoch is there to stop that job from occurring.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And it's predicated on the idea that there wasn't a subpoena.
Right.
And that, like, if there had been a subpoena, then he would be free from his NDA.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
And because there was only a court order, that isn't enough.
Or whatever.
unidentified
Right, right, right.
dan friesen
And then Rob's feeling about it is...
It's two-pronged.
The first is that the NDA was forced upon him after years of working there and that's not appropriate.
And then the second thing that he brings up in this next clip that we're going to hear as the fight continues is that he has an understanding of the NDA that has to do with business secrets, business practices.
It doesn't cover other things.
Actually, I don't think that's in this next clip.
I think that's a little bit later.
jordan holmes
But if I understand the reality of the dynamics here, there are two people there, and then there's a lawyer who's just being an asshole to somebody.
dan friesen
Yeah, trying to protect the business.
jordan holmes
But that's like, if I was outside and Enoch came up to me and asked me that shit, I don't have to answer a goddamn word that Enoch...
Like, I could say, go fuck yourself, and that's fine.
dan friesen
And conceivably, it's the same thing for Rob with him.
jordan holmes
He can't say, go fuck yourself to Mark, but he can say, go fuck yourself to Enoch.
Well, I mean, he could, but it's supposed to be a deposition or whatever.
dan friesen
The two of them clearly have...
At least a mutual respect.
Like, Rob and Mark are...
Adults.
jordan holmes
Somewhat.
dan friesen
Conceivably on the same page, too.
In terms of, like, I have questions, you are willing to answer those questions.
jordan holmes
You got it.
dan friesen
Yeah, and in this next clip, they come back from that pause.
Right.
What ends up happening is they try to call the court.
They're unable to get a hold of the people at the court.
And so they realize, well, we've got to go forward with this.
Right.
So let's try and see how we can do that.
jordan holmes
Oh boy.
mark bankston
Well, Mr. Enoch, before I stopped my deposition and you said you were going to ask him one thing about one document and whether he had a signature and now you say you're done.
When I asked...
unidentified
Hold on.
mark enoch
He refused to answer the question.
mark bankston
He sure did.
And when I asked you, okay, you've asked him, are you done?
You completely ignored me, continued to berate this client, I mean this person, and he expressed to you that he was very agitated for you.
Are you now saying you have asked the totality of the questions you intend to ask this witness?
mark enoch
Of course not.
mark bankston
Then we are suspending this deposition.
mark enoch
I don't know what I'm going to ask or if I'm going to ask anything until you're done with your examination, Mr. Bankston.
mark bankston
Well, apparently you did because you started asking questions before I even started my examination, Mr. Enoch.
And you know that's highly improper.
I'm asking you right now.
Do you intend to question this witness today?
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, I am alarmed that this witness is not represented by counsel.
I am concerned that he is not aware of his rights and obligations under legally binding contracts with my client.
I want to make sure he is aware of those to protect himself or to get counsel of his own choosing.
mark bankston
You've been able to...
mark enoch
Excuse me, do not interrupt me again.
Intimidation.
I did not interrupt you.
jordan holmes
You did three fucking times!
mark enoch
Oh, motherfucker!
...interested in getting him to voluntarily disclose information that he's obligated not to do without court order.
You did not serve a subpoena.
You did not...
Tell him of the effect of that under his agreement.
He now knows it.
You may continue your deposition.
mark bankston
Mr. Enoch, let's make this clear for the record.
I do not have his agreement.
When you sent this letter that informed him of that agreement...
mark enoch
You do now.
mark bankston
I asked you at the time.
Didn't I, Mr. Enoch?
When I sent you a letter, said your letter's very unclear.
It could, in fact, cause this witness to think he's not supposed to testify today.
Wouldn't it be best if you disclosed to everybody what that agreement is?
You didn't do that.
You waited until we walked into this room to put it down on the table.
You say you have every right to inform this client of this person, of his obligations, and you are worried that he doesn't understand what those were.
I understand that, which is why you sent that letter, which I think is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
And if you wanted to call this witness, talk to him, or contact him, that's perfectly appropriate.
To ambush him at the moment of his testimony is not appropriate.
And it is not appropriate to start asking questions before I even ask questions.
If you intend to ask more questions today, let me know because we will suspend the deposition so that Mr. Jacobson can get counsel and so that we can take it up with the court to see if your actions today were proper.
Do you want to ask questions today or not, Mr. Enoch?
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, I did not know until my first question to this witness that you had not served him with a subpoena, as I think you were obligated to do to obtain his...
His testimony.
Therefore, I wanted to make sure he was aware of Exhibit 1 that does not allow his voluntary participation in your discovery without a court order or subpoena.
Now, with respect to questions of this witness, I can't answer that now because I haven't heard your questions.
I think I'm entitled to ask questions under the rules.
You think I'm not.
So go ahead and ask your questions.
Let's see if I have questions.
If I do, the rules allow me to make my record.
You can object as you wish, and then we can take it up with the judge.
But we spend a lot of time haggling right now.
We've taken the witness's time.
Ask your questions.
mark bankston
You've taken the witness's time.
mark enoch
Ask the questions.
mark bankston
You've taken my time, Mr. Renak.
That's what you've done.
mark enoch
Ask your questions.
mark bankston
And I can tell you this.
I don't represent this witness.
And when I'm done asking my questions, if he wants to get up and walk out of this room without saying another word to you, I'm not stopping him.
mark enoch
On what basis?
mark bankston
I'm not stopping him.
I have no control over this man, Mr. Enoch.
I have none.
I don't represent him.
mark enoch
You understand the witness under your notices here from day to day, and you understand cross-examination is allowed.
mark bankston
And what do you want me to do to stop him?
What do you want me to do?
mark enoch
Why don't you just ask yourself?
mark bankston
Should I chain him to the chair, Mr. Enoch?
mark enoch
Please start asking your questions.
Let's get on with the deposition.
Will you do that, please?
mark bankston
Yeah, now we'll do that, Mr. Enoch.
mark enoch
We sure will, too.
mark bankston
Oof.
dan friesen
So, I think we've gotten a number of different vibes from Alex Lawyers.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And I think Enoch is maybe one of the worst.
jordan holmes
It is.
dan friesen
This guy's an asshole.
jordan holmes
It is hard to really wrestle with the feeling that I have right now, which is like...
Does a man sometimes need to be slapped in the face?
Not in a violence kind of manner, but in a remind you of who you should be kind of way.
Perhaps...
Pistols at dawn would be in order for this man.
dan friesen
Or El Cabong.
jordan holmes
Yes, absolutely.
Knock him out, right, for a couple hours, and then when he wakes up, you can be like, oh, you fell asleep.
It'll be fine.
dan friesen
This is where, like, you splash some water on your face.
Yes, this really is.
Let's take it out of the realm of violence.
jordan holmes
Hold the fucking phone, sir.
Excuse me.
dan friesen
I just, it's pretty outrageous.
Although, if I were Rob and I were hearing this, I would be like, Okay, now I know that I can just leave.
jordan holmes
I mean, yeah, that's the idea, right?
dan friesen
And that's probably good to be aware of.
Like, I don't have to be subjected to this person's questions.
jordan holmes
Yeah, Mark made sure he knew that part of his rights.
Yeah, that's for sure.
dan friesen
And so, with this all behind us...
This unpleasantness.
We jump into the actual questions.
jordan holmes
Is it behind us?
dan friesen
No, not really.
It hangs over the rest of this.
But, you know, certainly we've gone through a lot already.
jordan holmes
Man, what an asshole.
dan friesen
Yeah.
Total dick.
jordan holmes
Don't interrupt me.
mark bankston
When were you hired by InfoWars?
rob jacobson
I was hired in 2004 by Alex Jones.
mark bankston
Do you know what corporate entity you were hired by?
rob jacobson
At the time, I felt I was hired by Alex Jones, and he was an independent proprietor.
mark bankston
Do you know today what entity your former employer claims you worked for?
rob jacobson
Yes.
mark bankston
What entity is that?
rob jacobson
Free Speech Systems, LLC.
mark bankston
Okay.
When did your employment end?
rob jacobson
My employment ended in May.
1st of 2017.
dan friesen
So keep that time frame in mind.
And just consider all of the stuff InfoWars did between those 13 years.
You know, obviously Sandy Hook is a...
rob jacobson
Sure.
dan friesen
Particularly bad piece of business that they were involved in.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
But if you look at the totality of their coverage of things over that time, I mean, think about all the stuff that went on.
You had the Boston bombing.
You had Anders Breivik.
You had other school shootings, certainly, that Alex denied.
You had the Aurora massacre.
So many things that went on during that time, and he was employed through all of that.
And I think it's important to keep an eye on that and remember that.
And then secondarily, it is important to recognize that he was directly and intimately involved in the creation of the Obama deception and Endgame, along with a bunch of Alex's other bullshit films.
So, like, it's one thing.
To work somewhere.
It's another to work somewhere for 13 years and be engaged in constant horseshit.
So, I mean, just keep that in the back of your mind.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I mean, it does feel like what we have seen from even the most contrite info warrior types is selective responsibility for things that they've perhaps already received consequences for or are regularly pointed out.
dan friesen
I have a tough time agreeing with you universally, but I generally do.
I think there may be some folks who...
And I think maybe some people who work there shorter...
I think Rob is a pretty unique case.
jordan holmes
13 years is a long time and a lot of shit to fuck up.
dan friesen
And one of the earliest employees, really.
In 2004, Alex did not have a robust operation going.
And someone who went along the whole time until he was fired in 2017.
He didn't quit.
He was fired.
I struggle with this, because I want to believe the best in folks, and I do believe that he does have misgivings about what he was involved in.
But I don't necessarily...
And maybe it's a shortcoming of a deposition setting.
jordan holmes
Sure.
dan friesen
Because, like, obviously, it's not in Mark's interest to be like, what do you feel about...
jordan holmes
Do you regret everything you have ever done there?
dan friesen
Yeah, what about in the game?
jordan holmes
Have you figured out that everything you've done has brought misery to this world?
dan friesen
Yeah, and so maybe you can't really get a sense of that from this deposition, but I do feel from some of the questions that we'll get to...
I feel like he wouldn't say the things that he's saying if there was an actual recognition of the nonsense and inappropriate sort of...
material and content that was put out over the course of those 13 years.
This isn't an isolated thing of Sandy Hook that is a problem.
It's a systematic problem of all of the information that comes out in this information war.
unidentified
Right, right, right, right.
I think from...
jordan holmes
Here's what I'm getting is like in terms of the whole, you know, like...
When they talk about their faults or responsibility for Sandy Hook, they're really talking about the symptoms of what happened there, as opposed to realizing that Sandy Hook, what they did to Sandy Hook, was unique only insofar as the way that it has ended up, as opposed to it being any different from how they would have covered any other story like that, you know?
dan friesen
Sure.
It may be...
Maybe by degree a little more ghoulish in some ways.
unidentified
For sure.
jordan holmes
I mean, of course, yeah.
dan friesen
But not really that different than a lot of other coverage that they did.
Yeah.
jordan holmes
It's an event that occurred out of their regular process, not an anomaly.
unidentified
Right.
dan friesen
And if you are somebody who believes the stuff that Alex believes, there's no reason why you wouldn't believe the stuff about Sandy Hook.
Totally.
It's...
If you believe all the narratives about the globalists and how they do false flags all the time in order to achieve their goals, the stuff Alex was saying about Sandy Hook falls in line with that.
It's not as outrageous as it sounds to people who aren't in that way of thinking, in that headspace.
And that's something that I don't really feel like I see any kind of grappling with in this deposition, at least.
jordan holmes
The truth is, people wouldn't have gone along with the belief of Sandy Hook if it weren't for the years before that.
unidentified
Right.
dan friesen
That made it make sense.
jordan holmes
Yeah, if it weren't for the priming to get us to this place.
So, in effect, everybody involved in the lead-up is just as involved in the act itself.
dan friesen
Uh-huh.
jordan holmes
You know?
dan friesen
Yeah.
And Endgame might have been a part of that.
jordan holmes
Yeah, you better believe it!
dan friesen
So anyway, Mark shows Rob the letter that he got sent about the NDA.
mark bankston
Apparently I wanted to show you something I wanted to mark as Exhibit 1, but I believe Mr. Enoch has already hijacked that exhibit, so I am going to mark this as Exhibit 2. Someone hit this man!
Have you ever seen a copy of that before?
Do you remember seeing that?
dan friesen
Yes.
mark bankston
I want to direct you to the second page.
I'm going to read the paragraph that appears on this page to you.
You were reminded that you have important continuing obligations under your confidentiality.
Nondisclosure agreements with my clients.
You are expected to strictly observe those duties and obligations.
Do you feel like you understand what obligations are being referred to here?
rob jacobson
I do.
unidentified
Okay.
mark bankston
Have you abided by those obligations?
rob jacobson
Yes, sir.
In fact, may I add something?
To my understanding of the nondisclosure is not to reveal any company secrets.
I don't think abuse or abusive behavior inside the company constitutes company secrets.
I don't think misbehavior inside the company by an adult who runs the business constitutes company secrets.
In fact, I'm here to try to bring light to the truth of abusive and behavior inside the walls of InfoWars.
And I don't think anything that I say today violates the NDA, which would be constituting of company secrets, their formulas and how they produce the news.
Nothing like that is going to be revealed today.
What will be revealed is abusive behavior and the behavior of Mr. Jones and his staff.
mark enoch
Objection numbers.
dan friesen
I think I can get down with that thinking.
You know, I think that makes sense.
In some ways, he's acting as a whistleblower if he's reporting on abuse within the company.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
You know, misbehavior.
jordan holmes
Well, I mean, if you want to claim that abuse is a company secret, then you have to be like, well, see, that's my management style.
And that, in and of itself, might be a larger problem.
dan friesen
Look, the way I mistreat employees is proprietary.
jordan holmes
Exactly, yeah, yeah.
The specific ways that I harm people.
dan friesen
It's part of the business plan.
jordan holmes
I filed it with my bank 30 years ago, okay?
dan friesen
Yeah, that could be trouble.
But yeah, I can get down with that.
And I think that that is a responsible way.
Like, if Rob were to be giving out business secrets or whatever...
I think that might be inappropriate, but I don't feel that anything that's done within the context of this deposition comes close to something that should be covered by an NDA.
jordan holmes
Well, I mean, illegal business practices are not covered by an NDA.
dan friesen
But he doesn't know any of them.
jordan holmes
Well, I understand.
dan friesen
He doesn't know any illegal business practices.
jordan holmes
Right, right, right.
Well, I mean, you know, half of what they do is...
dan friesen
It's immoral.
But one of the things that I really got a sense of, and we have a clip...
Kind of that really made that clear to me was that I don't think he was that inside with stuff.
jordan holmes
Yeah, that sounds right.
dan friesen
Yeah, I think that Rob might have been a bit on the outside.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And I also don't think that he has a very good sense of the specific coverage that they were doing, even.
jordan holmes
Well, based on the way the other people have talked about him in their depositions, everybody seems like they've kept him at arm's length for one reason or another.
dan friesen
Yeah, probably unfairly, probably cruelly.
jordan holmes
It does seem that way quite a bit, yeah.
dan friesen
You get the sense that maybe there was some bullying, even, that was going on within the walls of the building.
Yeah, totally believable.
So, Mark asks about when he began at Infowars, and, you know, what was, you know, do you believe in that stuff?
How'd you feel when you started?
mark bankston
When you first...
When you joined InfoWars, did you believe in its mission?
rob jacobson
For the most part, yes.
mark bankston
Tell me about the kinds of stories or things that you wanted to be working on when you first came to InfoWars.
rob jacobson
When I first arrived at InfoWars, my understanding of InfoWars and Alex's subject matter was the occult.
Esoteric politics, let's say.
What's going on behind the curtain.
Things that politicians don't tell us and expose in that fashion.
Fringe media off the mainstream, but still honest, was my impression.
mark bankston
Were you passionate about journalism at that time?
rob jacobson
I was passionate about filmmaking.
And I wanted to be a documentary filmmaker, so in that aspect, yes, that does, I believe, fall under a broader umbrella of journalism, so when it comes to documentary films, I was on board.
mark bankston
Did you want to do good journalism?
rob jacobson
I did.
dan friesen
Well, that's nice.
The stuff that he's describing, like the stuff behind the curtain, the esoteric, the power...
How they act secretly.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
That's the stuff that leads to globalist false flag beliefs.
jordan holmes
Yeah, that's the problem there.
dan friesen
It seems very difficult for me to disconnect the way Alex treated those subjects and what it led to.
jordan holmes
Right.
Well, I mean, but that comes back again to, like, it's the entirety that is the problem.
We're dealing with the results of if that problem is left unchecked.
And it's not like this specific event is the only problem.
That is just part of the problem.
And to pretend like it's anything other than that is willful ignorance or a complete misunderstanding of what you've done wrong, if anything.
dan friesen
Yeah.
You know, he's very much into the filmmaking and the documentary stuff and wants to do good journalism vis-a-vis that avenue.
One of the issues that I have, and I don't understand exactly what happened or what was done, but, like, Alex didn't put out a documentary for, like, ten years at this point now.
So, like, what was Rob doing after, like, 2012?
Like, Strategic Relocation, I think, was the last documentary Alex put out, and that's basically just him talking to Joel Skousen about places he could bug out to.
Like, I don't know what documentary work was being done.
I don't know if he was involved in field pieces or, you know, like...
jordan holmes
Maybe he was just a basic video editor at that point.
Like, you know, Bowne would do those reports and maybe he just edited the videos together.
dan friesen
But if he was, then he would be far more intimately involved and aware of the content that was being put out than he's presenting himself as being.
And I don't think that that's necessarily dishonest because the way he answers questions about, like, you know, what did you know about this?
I don't know if he was intimately aware of literally everything.
I don't know what he was doing.
If you're the documentarian in-house at InfoWars and they haven't put out a documentary forever, you're still on the payroll.
jordan holmes
This is another continuing problem.
I don't know what anybody fucking does for a job beyond Owen and Alex.
dan friesen
And Harrison, he's on air.
jordan holmes
And Harrison, yes.
unidentified
Yeah, it's confusing.
jordan holmes
What do any of you do?
dan friesen
Yeah.
So, Mark asks, what is this good journalism to you that you wanted to do?
jordan holmes
Good question.
mark bankston
Mr. Jacobson, what does good journalism mean to you?
rob jacobson
Good journalism means an objective...
Reporting of facts, somebody who can, or if the journalist can remove his emotion and theory as much as possible from reporting what he sees or she sees with their own eyes and ears,
empirical evidence reported to the public with very little bias.
mark bankston
In your mind, what is the relationship between good journalism and corroboration of facts?
rob jacobson
I think good journalism, if you're going to have a corroboration of facts, I believe the more witnesses and points of view of the same action or activity that is being reported on, the better.
For example, just theoretically thinking one person can't see both sides of the cup at once.
So when two people are observing it at the same time, you get a better description of the object in question.
And so the more witnesses that have viewed it, the more impressions we can get after the fact of what has actually happened in the object that we're observing.
mark bankston
In your first few years at InfoWars, were you comfortable with the style of journalism and the stories you were working on?
unidentified
Any time I make a suggestion like that, sir, you can go over and answer.
Okay.
Um...
mark enoch
Let me say one thing.
I may ask you not to answer based on a privilege.
That's your choice.
That's my client trying to protect the privilege.
But when I object, say objection form or leading, you can go ahead and answer.
dan friesen
Okay.
mark bankston
Would you like me to ask that question again?
unidentified
Yes, please.
mark bankston
Okay.
In those first few years at Infowars, were you comfortable with the style of journalism and the stories you were working on?
rob jacobson
I was comfortable with the films I was producing and helping Alex produce.
I found them interesting, and I found that Alex did present enough expert testimony that it held water in my mind.
dan friesen
That's absolutely terrible judgment.
jordan holmes
That's an insane thing to say.
dan friesen
I think that some of the stuff that he's saying makes a lot of sense, like the idea that he can't see both sides of the cup at the same time.
Perspectives on the cup allows you to know what the cup is.
Great.
That's good on paper.
There's one viewpoint in those documentaries that he put out, and that's Alex's.
jordan holmes
It does seem to be the case.
dan friesen
You know, there's not anything unbiased in that.
There is complete...
Misrepresentation of very basic facts.
It's nonsense.
If you really wanted to do the kind of work that you're describing, then your documentary would have had people who were like, this is a load of bullshit.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
Or giving at least some kind of a counter perspective to Alex's utter nonsense.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
Instead of just interviewing Big Jim Tucker in a bar while he smokes cigars and hangs out with Daniel Estelin.
jordan holmes
Right, right, right.
So maybe what he's more thinking is his style of journalism is one person can't see both sides of the cup.
But one person can tell you that the cup is actually a goat, and if you have a thousand people behind that one person convincing you that that cup is a goat, then you're probably going to believe that cup is a goat.
dan friesen
Right.
jordan holmes
That makes sense.
dan friesen
And if you present things with enough quote-unquote experts, people who appear to be experts, like dumbass Big Jim Tucker and Daniel Estelan, then you give the appearance of something that can hold water.
Yep.
Yeah, I think if that's the perspective that you have in like 2018, 2019 about the work that was done on Endgame, then you're missing the forest for the fucking trees.
Yeah!
unidentified
Because...
dan friesen
That was a bad documentary.
jordan holmes
I don't want to denigrate STEM education because I do think it's very, very important.
But a lot of the times I feel like maybe one of the larger problems that we have is just the inability to translate words into concepts and have them make sense.
And maybe that starts young.
That's all I'm saying.
dan friesen
I think that there's a difficulty that I have combining this Seeming being fine with the documentary work.
jordan holmes
Right, right.
That holds water.
dan friesen
And simultaneously being somebody who within InfoWars was saying this coverage of Sandy Hook is bad at the time.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
You know, like being aware of that and still being fine with what you did with Endgame.
That's trouble.
That's very weird for me.
jordan holmes
Well, I mean, you have to stop and say, okay, well, what are the problems that you had with this, specifically, and in what way do those not apply to literally everything you've ever done there?
dan friesen
Right.
So, there's an issue of, like, fact-checking that Alex does.
jordan holmes
Sure, sure, sure.
dan friesen
This seems dumb.
mark bankston
Mr. Jacobson, in terms of InfoWars'consistency or process for corroborating facts, in your mind had that changed between the start of your employment and the end of your employment?
rob jacobson
I feel that from the beginning, when I first started working there, the fact collection was mostly Alex and...
Mostly himself was the researcher.
By the end, Alex did let a lot of others do research for him, and I don't know if these people were specifically qualified or experienced enough to do that kind of work.
dan friesen
Ah, now here's the twist.
Neither was Alex.
jordan holmes
Yeah, there we go.
That's the interesting...
That's the problem I'm having with this explanation.
Wait, wait, wait.
dan friesen
Things weren't sunny in 2005, 2006.
It's not like things were so rigorous and everything was by the book and Alex and his precise fact-checking methodology.
No, he was full of shit and he hired a bunch of other people who were full of shit.
And they carry...
Even less.
jordan holmes
Yeah, well, see, when Alex stopped making up his own bullshit, that's when it all went downhill.
That's when he gave creative control over fantasy reality to other people.
Now God knows what could happen.
dan friesen
Well, like, when Alex says he has the documents...
It makes sense.
When Owen says Alex has the documents, that's bullshit.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
Okay.
unidentified
Great.
jordan holmes
All right.
Okay.
dan friesen
Whatever.
jordan holmes
What do you think?
What is the issue that people...
Oh, man.
dan friesen
So I will say that one of the things I do appreciate, and you can't really take away, is that Rob does own up to and clearly feels bad about being involved in whatever capacity he was with the coverage of Sandy Hook.
jordan holmes
Sure.
dan friesen
And so he talks about that a little bit and what he tried to do at the time.
mark bankston
A few months back, do you remember calling me about this case?
rob jacobson
Yes, sir.
mark bankston
Why'd you do that?
rob jacobson
I was concerned.
I wanted to make sure.
I felt I was part of something just being in that building when all this was going down.
I felt terrible what happened.
Even though I myself...
No, I wasn't directly...
I'm involved in putting this out there directly.
Just being in the building, I feel complicit.
I feel I have to right a wrong that I was involved in.
And even though I was part of that wrong, I want to at least stack a couple of correct decisions up with some of the mistakes that I've made in the past.
mark bankston
When you say that you weren't directly involved in putting...
This out there.
What is this?
rob jacobson
This would be Sandy Hook.
Anything that Infowars put out concerning Sandy Hook, I had absolutely no involvement in.
mark bankston
During your employment, were you exposed to Infowars coverage of Sandy Hook?
rob jacobson
During my employment, I had other assignments to do and I wouldn't much pay attention to the show.
However, when I did and I heard about Sandy Hook, it actually bothered me.
mark bankston
Tell me what you mean by that.
What did you hear that bothered you?
rob jacobson
I heard them making accusations based on extremely narrow cross-sections of information that I...
Did my best to make the writers and the staff aware that what they were doing was speculation based on not enough information.
It bothered me.
That bothered me that I felt they had no concept of journalist ethics.
mark bankston
Did you tell anyone at Infowars your feelings about the Sandy Hook coverage?
rob jacobson
I attempted to make it as clear as possible to the writers that there is something called journalist ethics and how what they were doing was in a direct violation of that.
Anytime I caught wind of the Sandy Hook story on Infowars, now mind you, I would like to add that it's not something I was thinking about all the time considering I had other things to do.
I'd be working on other projects, but when it would come on the screen, I would make it my business to go into the writers and explain to them as clearly as possible that there is journalist ethics.
And I tried to demonstrate what those ethics are and why they are violating them and what the damage could possibly be.
In fact, I remember...
I must have been in that room four to five times at least.
Only to be received with laughter and jokes.
dan friesen
I don't understand what the journalist ethics he's talking about here is, because if it's like taking a small cross-section of information, that's all Infowars does.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I mean...
dan friesen
The principle behind whatever he's describing is exactly the same as 90% of the work that he does.
Now, if this is the case, and he's working on these other projects, and whenever he catches wind that Sandy Hook is being covered, there's some offense that he takes at that.
I don't understand how you...
Let's say you're barely ever watching the show, and sometimes you catch it, and they're talking about Sandy Hook, and you're like, this is fucked up.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
I don't understand why your next step wouldn't be like, maybe I should watch more of the show and see if they're doing this all the time.
Maybe I should see if they're treating other subjects with this much disrespect and lack of care.
Maybe I'm involved in a really awful thing here.
But it seems like, and I think that everybody wants to pretend this, especially everybody who worked at Infowars, that this is...
Like a unique, isolated thing.
It's just an aberration.
jordan holmes
It's crazy that this happened.
dan friesen
It's not connected to anything.
jordan holmes
The only way I can make sense of it is...
It's easy to understand when you fucked up if you received negative consequences or if people make it aware to you that you fucked up.
It's really hard to understand you fucked up if people give you positive consequences for it or encourage you to keep doing it.
So to me, it does make sense in a certain way for him to think that he's done a good job on some stuff because people gave him positive reinforcement for it.
And it's easy for him to understand that this is bad because people have been negative about it.
He's in a deposition, right?
dan friesen
Right, but he didn't do anything wrong.
jordan holmes
I know.
That's the weirdest part about this.
That's the thing I don't understand.
I can't reconcile that.
dan friesen
On all accounts...
He did things right.
His coverage of stuff and his work product didn't involve Sandy Hook.
When he caught wind internally that it was being covered, he told people, this is bad, don't do this.
jordan holmes
I know.
dan friesen
You know, it's not...
He doesn't have...
I get working at InfoWars is bad, and all of it is bad, but...
That's what he has to feel bad about.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
Not the Sandy Hook stuff.
unidentified
I mean...
dan friesen
He doesn't have any business being in this deposition, honestly.
jordan holmes
Yeah, normally I would be like, oh, well, obviously he's lying, but we have evidence that he did say, stop it.
dan friesen
Yeah, and then Adon Salazar bullied him.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I don't understand this at all.
Right.
Just no way to reconcile this in a way that makes sense, and there's no consistency.
It feels like the aberration is him being like, oh, well, this is wrong.
dan friesen
Right.
Well, but...
jordan holmes
That's the weird thing.
dan friesen
It's confusing.
I don't really...
jordan holmes
I don't, yeah.
dan friesen
So anyway, Rob talks about his complaints that he made to Adan Salazar.
rob jacobson
Whenever this subject came up, I would immediately clarify to the writers that there is a journalistic ethics that they're violating.
And what I've pointed out to Adan specifically...
Is that you're taking the word of one witness primarily and a couple of speculative other facts and calling it the truth without actually going down and investigating it ourselves or actually going with our own reporters and corroborating what these people are saying.
I made it aware to Adan that Wolfgang Halbig could have a lot of issues that we're not considering.
That by taking the word of this one man So heavily, with such a great accusation that he's accusing people of, was so irresponsible, so damaging.
I asked him, consider the size of the audience.
And Adan Salazar responded with, and I'm going to quote him, because he said it to me many times, I want to print up a t-shirt that says, Hal Big was right.
I want bumper stickers that say Hal Big was right to a laughing room.
dan friesen
Yeah, there's been other people who have said that.
That story checks out.
jordan holmes
And he's emotional about it.
I don't understand.
What is it about this that is different from the Aurora?
dan friesen
Sure.
Or what about this is different than, like, he's saying relying on Wolfgang Hal Big, maybe he has other problems.
Like, what about thinking about Endgame and relying on Jim Tucker, who works for a Holocaust-denying publication, or maybe has severe alcoholism, even as demonstrated in the fucking film?
jordan holmes
You made it clear.
dan friesen
Or what about relying on Daniel Estelin, who's a lunatic, and citations to people who think they're space gods in his book?
Like, this is the product that he was put out.
That Rob Jacobson, this documentary that he thinks is not like these other things that InfoWars has done.
And it just doesn't make sense to me.
I don't know.
I don't get it.
I don't get it because I don't think he has...
Honestly, as it relates to Sandy Hook, the only thing he has to apologize for, I guess, is that he didn't quit.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
That's all he has to apologize for.
And that has no real relevance.
In a courtroom.
It has no real relevance in a deposition.
As they go through the questions about this stuff that is relevant to Sandy Hook, he doesn't know that much.
The only thing that you could really concretely take away from this, perhaps, is that he's an AV guy, and he can speak with some credibility about the idea of Anderson Cooper's nose on a blue screen.
So there is that that he can offer as my expert...
Witness-ness, but there's other people you could get to do that.
I don't know.
I appreciate on some level that he feels bad about him being connected to this, but I don't know.
It feels like he's asking for forgiveness or penitence for the wrong thing.
It just doesn't make sense.
jordan holmes
It is...
Group of thoughts that I cannot imagine having in your brain simultaneously.
Like, I did wrong, but I didn't do wrong, but also I did do wrong, but also I didn't.
Like, it's wild.
I don't understand how many different possible avenues that he can both excuse his behavior.
Be excused for his behavior, and then still not understand that his behavior is reprehensible, and there's no excuse for it.
You know, like, I don't get it.
dan friesen
Yeah, the behavior that's the problem is being a part of creating, like, foundational texts within the Infowars canon that are relied on to lend credibility to things like the coverage of Sandy Hook.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
There is that to wrestle with, and let's not...
That's not present here at all.
jordan holmes
It's somebody who helped build a church, who helped build this entire church, and then is like, oh man, I'm really sorry for those guys who put that steeple on there.
The church is terrible now, you know?
I just don't, and not even that, I don't even.
dan friesen
It's, I don't know, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
So anyway, Rob explains a problem that he has with InfoWars coverage, and I would say, if you have a problem with this, you gotta go back to page one, baby.
mark bankston
When you were at InfoWars, In general, if a person did something in public that was agitating, was that good for their career at InfoWars or bad for their career at InfoWars?
rob jacobson
It was excellent for their career.
I can point to several examples where it's not reporting at all.
It's pure agitation by many members of the staff.
And I have also been very critical of that.
It's been pure.
In fact, some of it is so agitating.
It's almost to the level of public disruption.
So, including...
Can I go on?
mark bankston
Please.
mark enoch
Objection, non-responsive so far.
mark bankston
Let me ask you another question.
Can you give me an example of some of the things you're talking about when you say agitation?
rob jacobson
Yes.
Miss Millie Weaver, last year or the year before that, I'm not sure when, but it was in the last perhaps 12 months, I believe, because it was after I left.
She showed up at a Hillary Clinton book signing event that was at Book People.
These people were not there to protest.
These people were not there to...
Hillary, this is far after the election.
Nobody was campaigning.
But Miss Millie Weaver decided to show up with a lot of Trump gear, which obviously is going to be, as we follow the news, we know is agitating towards...
In a very political way, you know, so in my opinion, just by looking at that, I noticed that reporters don't show up sponsoring politicians.
So for her to go there and say, and in fact, the name of this video on YouTube is called Journalists Harassed or something.
She identifies herself as a journalist while she shows up wearing political gear directly aiming at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Asking abrasive questions about Hillary Clinton.
Now, that's not journalism.
That's agitation.
And that is a clear-cut case example of them swapping out the words agitation for journalism and vice versa.
dan friesen
But this is fundamental.
Alex's family crest might as well have a bullhorn on it.
That's his whole claim to fame.
He agitates people.
He goes and yells at people and makes a scene.
That's who he is.
jordan holmes
It's not tyranny journalism.
It's tyranny crusher.
unidentified
No.
dan friesen
Most of a large portion of Endgame is him yelling at people in a bullhorn.
jordan holmes
He's going to a place where people are, not protesting or whatever, and he's going.
dan friesen
Yeah, this is the InfoWars model.
Alex paid people to yell Bill Clinton as a rapist.
jordan holmes
That was on TV!
That was the thing!
How is that journalism?
dan friesen
It's in a contest for people to do that.
Again, this is missing the forest for the trees entirely.
You take issue with Millie Weaver doing that, but that is what InfoWars is.
That is the business that you were involved in for 13 years.
jordan holmes
And how could you not know that?
dan friesen
You obviously know that.
jordan holmes
You have to know that.
dan friesen
Maybe you're blocking yourself from being aware of it or showing awareness.
jordan holmes
It's possible.
dan friesen
But that is not in any way different than what they do.
unidentified
Nope.
dan friesen
This is what the business model is.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
Bing.
If you have a problem with it, then...
I don't know what to tell you.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I mean, did he have like four years of reflection and therapy and stuff?
Can he honestly say like, oh, we've all done this?
dan friesen
No, because this is a year after he left or he got fired.
All right.
Maybe at a year of therapy.
jordan holmes
Wow, I mean, I hope so.
That would be nice.
It seems like he's passionate about them fucking up in this case.
dan friesen
Sure.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
I would love to see a larger understanding or reflection on the way that the things that he's complaining about are actually essential pieces of InfoWars.
Not things that are recent.
Not things that have only to do with Sandy Hook.
They are what Alex does.
jordan holmes
These are not bugs.
These are features.
dan friesen
And what his documentaries featured as well.
jordan holmes
Yeah, absolutely.
dan friesen
Not just Infowars outside of his projects and things.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
So, I don't know.
I don't know what to say.
Anyway, he definitely had some complaints internally.
Yes.
Sandy Hook was happening.
The coverage.
And there was another person who did, and that is Paul Joseph Watson.
And so Mark asks about Paul's opinion.
unidentified
Can you tell us who Paul Watson is?
rob jacobson
Paul Watson is sort of Alex's alternate host.
He's basically like Alex's sidekick.
unidentified
Okay.
mark bankston
Were...
Have you ever been aware of Mr. Watson's opinions about the Sandy Hook hoax allegations?
rob jacobson
No.
dan friesen
See, that is one of the reasons that I think he's pretty outside any kind of internal stuff.
jordan holmes
Well, he doesn't really communicate at all with Paul Watson, right?
dan friesen
Yeah, but also Paul made a big deal out of it.
That email, he had Buckley on it.
They were supposed to tell everyone to stop.
Talking about Sandy Hook, conceivably that might have involved an all-hands meeting.
jordan holmes
You would expect.
dan friesen
I don't know.
It seems like if you didn't know that Paul took great issue with this, and you also took great issue with this, that seems to me that everybody is disconnected, and Paul is clearly on the inside, and maybe Rob is over here.
jordan holmes
Well, and I mean, I would assume they didn't necessarily...
I mean, I don't think they...
Really publicized internally that people didn't like it.
dan friesen
They definitely seem to think they did.
jordan holmes
Well, no, I mean, like, in the other...
Like, I don't assume that Rob Dew and Alex were both going around being like, hey, make sure that we don't do this thing after that.
dan friesen
They say that they did.
jordan holmes
Well, they say that they did, but they clearly obviously didn't.
dan friesen
I don't know.
jordan holmes
All right.
dan friesen
I don't know what to believe.
Anyway, like I said, one of the things that Rob's testimony could be good for is the audiovisual aspect.
And so they talk about the blue screen situation.
And I think, unfortunately...
Obviously, Rob affirms Alex's conspiracy here.
jordan holmes
Oh, no.
mark bankston
Would anybody with competent video experience have serious doubts about saying this was blue screen?
rob jacobson
I feel they would.
unidentified
They would be on the fence.
rob jacobson
If they saw this video, they would have questions.
unidentified
Okay.
rob jacobson
Can I go further and explain that?
mark bankston
Actually, let me ask you a question on that, okay?
Your opinion about whether or not it could be fairly asserted that this is clearly blue screen, informing your opinion on whether that could be asserted, can you tell me about any of the things you see in this video or any of your experience that would inform that opinion?
rob jacobson
There's nothing in that video that will clearly indicate to me that that was...
unidentified
Okay.
mark bankston
If a witness, if anyone was to say, I can look at that video, I work with blue screen, it's got all the telltale signs, that's clearly blue screen.
In your opinion, is that person acting responsible?
rob jacobson
No, I don't.
I think that based on what we see on that screen, that could be that Error in the nose could have been caused by a number of different reasons.
And none of them are clear from what we see there without knowing what happened behind the scenes with the operating room controllers and so on and so forth.
That could have been a natural glitch that happens all the time on YouTube.
We see it all the time where pixels smudge.
There is no secret about that.
There must be a million videos or more.
unidentified
We're pixels smudge all the time.
rob jacobson
In order for that...
Should I continue?
mark bankston
If you have more facts that you better...
rob jacobson
The only thing I could tell you about that is the only way that that is possibly green screen is if Anderson Cooper is not standing next to that woman.
dan friesen
Yeah, that is what Alex claims.
jordan holmes
Yeah, that would be...
Yeah.
dan friesen
So, I mean, like, obviously there is a usefulness there in terms of, like...
Now, if you know about green screen, blue screen technology, that is not something you would immediately jump to.
You'd have questions, and there would be a hundred explanations for what you see there.
Blue screen is not definite.
Alex saying it's definite is irresponsible.
But then the only way that's blue screen is if Anderson Cooper wasn't there.
It's like, that's what Alex is saying.
jordan holmes
Yep.
That's kind of the point.
Do they have...
It's like, okay.
So, I'm envisioning now, like, Rob is working in an office, right?
Okay, and sometimes Alex comes and sees him, so he thinks that he's working in an office with Alex, but it's actually, like, entirely across town.
You know, like, he's not even in the same building as those people.
dan friesen
No, because he said he goes to the writer, he's gone to the writer's room, so, like, he's in the facility.
jordan holmes
It's insane to me how far away from...
The reality of the business he seems to be.
dan friesen
Yeah, and you know what?
Here's the other thing.
Maybe I've been in some jobs in my life.
Let me just say this.
jordan holmes
Haven't we all?
dan friesen
And there have been times when I have not done a lot of work, but...
Definitely wanted to look like I was doing a lot of work.
jordan holmes
Sure, that's been there.
dan friesen
And maybe Rob's other assignments were just killing time.
jordan holmes
I mean, has he just been doing nothing for 10 years?
dan friesen
Just hoping Alex doesn't notice.
jordan holmes
Is that really it?
Is he like, if I keep my head down, I think I can just stay here.
dan friesen
I have definitely done that at certain jobs in the past.
So I don't think it's outside the possibility in terms of how...
You know, sometimes you can fly under the radar.
jordan holmes
Sure.
dan friesen
You know, don't bring too much attention to yourself.
jordan holmes
I have in the past asked myself the question, how long can I get away with this for?
Yeah, that's definitely true.
dan friesen
Yeah, my days are numbered here at Groupon.
unidentified
Yeah, might as well just hang out and see what happens.
dan friesen
Can't believe I made it three months longer than I thought I would.
Great.
So, Rob, his awareness of the fact that parents of victims were not happy did not come from anything internal.
Turns out he was watching PBS.
mark bankston
At any time during your time at InfoWars past 2013, were you aware that Clarence had been complaining about this coverage?
rob jacobson
No, not immediately.
I really became aware of it sometime afterwards when I saw, actually, I think a PBS special on what was going on, and it really hit home at that point.
I was like, this is...
dan friesen
He watched a PBS special, and that's how he became aware the parents weren't happy.
And this PBS special also is where he learned that there was harassment going on.
mark bankston
Did you ever become aware that parents were being harassed by believers in the Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy theory?
rob jacobson
Yes, I became aware of that.
mark bankston
When do you think you became aware of that?
rob jacobson
Somewhere around 2014, 2015.
unidentified
Maybe 2015?
rob jacobson
Like I said, when I saw that PBS documentary.
mark bankston
So the PBS documentary you saw, that was when you were employed in Florida?
rob jacobson
I was still employed there.
dan friesen
He was still employed there, saw this, it all became very real to him, and then he still worked there for two more years.
jordan holmes
Then I put my hat on and I said, good morning, Sam.
Good morning, Ralph.
dan friesen
That's weird.
I don't understand that at all.
Really?
jordan holmes
I mean, I feel like...
dan friesen
No, I don't.
jordan holmes
I feel like maybe I am just, I guess, morally inflexible in a way that I thought was far more reasonable, but maybe is just unusual.
Because that seems to me like the moment you find that out...
You can't be like, well, at least it's not my department, and then just go back to work the next day.
dan friesen
You kind of, I think, have to shut down any pretense that you have a moral connection to what you're doing.
jordan holmes
Totally.
dan friesen
It's so cynical to go back to work after saying it became very real to you and becoming aware that parents are being harassed.
jordan holmes
Yep.
dan friesen
And you know what?
I mean, like, he got fired two years later.
He didn't even quit eventually.
Like, he presumably would still be working there under harassing, awful, abusive conditions.
Like, I'm not saying he deserves that or anything.
jordan holmes
Sure, sure.
dan friesen
But had he not been fired, would he still be working there?
Possibly?
jordan holmes
Maybe.
dan friesen
I don't get this.
I don't understand.
jordan holmes
I recognize that concept of like, well, that's the business's fault, not mine.
dan friesen
Right.
I get that.
jordan holmes
But it's not like you're working for Chase Bank as an analyst of insurance or something like that.
Where it's like, yeah, I get it.
The company you work for is evil.
I understand that.
But it's not like a business where you can go talk to the CEO doing evil shit and be like, hey, stop it, and he can tell you to go fuck off.
You're just a cog in that little machine.
This is a different story.
dan friesen
Well, I think that he has obviously marketable skills.
jordan holmes
Sure.
dan friesen
He has talent.
In a way that a lot of other people who work for Infowars don't.
A lot of the writers are not employable anywhere else.
They do shit work.
jordan holmes
Because they're bad writers.
dan friesen
The reporters suck.
They can't work anywhere else.
The people on air don't have the chops to cut it anywhere else.
He has audiovisual skills.
He has a trade, basically, that could be employed somewhere else.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I mean, he could walk into a local TV station.
dan friesen
I'm fairly certain that...
jordan holmes
I'm not saying those jobs are just available for anybody, but you know what I mean.
dan friesen
He could find a job somewhere else much more easily than I think a lot of the other people who are mucked up in Infowars.
jordan holmes
Totally.
dan friesen
I'm not saying it would be the simplest thing ever, but it is a possibility in a way that a lot of other people probably think I'm completely unemployable anywhere else because of this being on my resume.
Maybe not as much for Rob.
I don't think that it's always the simplest thing when people work in places that, you know, like, you have some misgivings about the ethical nature of what you're doing.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
But that's on a different scale a lot of the time from the reality of InfoWars.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And I don't know.
I don't...
I find it to be worse that he knows...
How bad this is.
Yeah!
jordan holmes
That might be the issue.
dan friesen
The fact that he was saying to people while the Sandy Hook coverage was going on that this is bad, that makes it more difficult for me to understand his non-quitting.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
Because it should have war on him more.
Because he does have a moral compass.
He's demonstrated that certain things are beyond a line for him, and it turns out that maybe just the line doesn't matter.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I don't know.
I mean, I guess now we're kind of getting into a more deeper conversation about the diffusion of responsibility, you know, to, like, at what point do you say, well, I can't work on an oil derrick?
Like, it's morally reprehensible.
Because it is.
I mean, that's a true thing.
So what do you say to that, you know?
You have to ask yourself that question.
dan friesen
I get what you're saying, and I think the difference is abstraction.
Yeah, I agree.
The abstractness of the harm that you're causing by working on an oil derrick or something is different than the very clearly traceable line from the dissemination and promotion of Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists and the harm you're seeing brought home in very vivid light in this PBS special.
There is a very clear line.
When the line started, you were aware of how bad it could be.
And when the line ended, you saw, oh, I was right about how bad it could be.
And these are people whose lives are clearly severely negatively impacted by the work that we do at my job.
jordan holmes
Yeah, I suppose that's kind of it.
That's really the line there.
It's just like, hey.
I saw this, you do this, I told you not to do this, that it's wrong, and then you continue doing it, so I can't work here anymore.
dan friesen
Right.
If you are somebody who works at an oil rig, and you have an understanding of harm that's being done to the world and stuff, there is not all that much...
That you can do to remedy that harm in the broad sense outside of, like, quit, stay.
jordan holmes
It's not really going to make a difference in terms of...
dan friesen
Well, and you can make an argument maybe that Rob quitting wouldn't have made that big a difference either towards the damage done.
But, like, in order to make any kind of headway...
You need to change the energy consumption patterns of the world.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
You know, there is a much larger thing that needs to be done to assway your concerns.
With Rob, you can...
I don't know.
jordan holmes
I don't know.
dan friesen
I don't know if it's the same.
jordan holmes
I don't know.
dan friesen
I don't think it's the same.
jordan holmes
It doesn't feel the same.
dan friesen
Nope.
So, it was severe for him when he was concerned about the behavior of the writers.
He does say it is a 10 on the outrageousness scale.
mark bankston
When you were, as you mentioned earlier, communicating your thoughts to people at Infowars about the Sandy Hook coverage.
Can you describe to me on a scale of 1 being not outrageous at all and 10 being extremely outrageous?
On that 1 to 10 scale, what is the level of outrageousness of this conduct that you were trying to impart?
unidentified
I thought it was a 10. Tell me why you thought that.
rob jacobson
I mean, it's one thing to make a mistake.
It's another thing to have somebody come in, and I'm not aware if I was the one and only person or not, but I know I was doing it.
To come in and say, hey, this is wrong, you're making a mistake.
It's one thing, you know, to actually have a mistake and something else to have it pointed out to you, not just once, but over and over and over again.
And to not only hear...
The damage that you're doing to people outside of your zone, but to actually laugh about it, I thought that's a 10. If it's a 10, what are you doing?
dan friesen
I just don't understand why you don't quit.
jordan holmes
If you're saying that that's a 10, then nothing can make you quit, is also what you're saying.
dan friesen
True, because there is no 11. There's no 11. Now, and here's the other thing that is something you should grapple with.
If this is a 10 out of 10 on the outrageousness scale, and...
The people who are doing it are not fired by Alex.
They are congratulated, maybe lauded, maybe given bonuses and shit, which we know has happened!
Maybe that should be a strong indication that this rot goes to the core of the entire business.
Alex incentivizes 10 out of 10 on the outrageousness scale because his sign on his family crest is a bullhorn.
jordan holmes
I mean, that's such a weird...
dan friesen
I don't understand it at all.
jordan holmes
If you plumb into that kind of moral relativity, that's just insane.
At a certain point, that just means like, oh, well, listen, I want him to keep it at a seven of outrageousness.
That's where I think it's supposed to be.
That's good journalism.
Like, that's insane.
dan friesen
Well, I would argue that it's possible to make the argument that a seven is not what you'd call good journalism, but maybe it's something sustainable and like...
You could get along with.
Like a publicity stunt might be a seven.
Like a semi-tasteless publicity stunt.
Like yelling Bill Clinton as a rapist and paying people to do that.
Maybe that's a seven out of ten on the outrageousness scale.
And I could see you staying employed and being like, whatever.
Maybe I'm not a huge fan of that, but we'll do our work.
A ten out of ten.
It's like, you gotta quit, man.
What are you doing?
jordan holmes
I know!
I don't understand this person!
dan friesen
Unless there's like blackmail or a gun to his head or something.
jordan holmes
Make more sense.
dan friesen
Yeah.
I can't make it make more sense.
jordan holmes
You know, I don't know.
It's an abusive relationship, and we can't really judge him for not being able to exit that relationship the way that he wanted.
You know, if you experience that much abuse, and you think that's where you belong or deserve to be placed, perhaps his penance really was enduring the continued abuse.
Fuck if I know the psychology of this man is beyond me.
That's what I'm trying to say.
dan friesen
If that's the case...
I don't even want to get into it!
jordan holmes
I don't even want to get into it!
I don't understand you!
dan friesen
So, in this next clip, Rob discusses that he has guilt.
And that's good.
I guess.
mark bankston
Do you today have any sense of guilt about the coverage about Sandy Hook that came out of InfoWars?
rob jacobson
Yes, as I've mentioned in my statements previously, the reason why I'm here...
It's because a tremendous amount of guilt that I didn't act faster.
Maybe I should have quit.
Maybe I could have caught the story faster or been better at explaining, but yes, I do.
mark bankston
Are you still on friendly terms with Infowars?
rob jacobson
No.
mark bankston
Were you terminated?
rob jacobson
Yes.
dan friesen
So, I don't...
Like I've said already, I don't understand why he has any guilt.
Now, the notion of, like, maybe I should have quit, yeah, but that's about you.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
That's for you to wrestle with.
Has nothing to do with anything else.
The idea that maybe I could have done something better, or maybe I could have, you know, gotten this story, I could have acted more internally.
No, you fucking couldn't.
Paul Joseph Watson is one of the most powerful people within Infowars.
jordan holmes
True.
dan friesen
He was opposed to this, made it clear to Alex, got Alex's cousin, who was a manager at Infowars, Who agreed with him looped in on the same thing and didn't do shit.
There was not anything that could have been done because this is what Alex wanted.
That's true.
This is how things were going to go no matter what.
So, yes, the only thing I think maybe he should feel guilt about, maybe not the only thing, but the primary thing here is that he didn't quit.
And that's about his own well-being.
That is about his own shit.
Yeah.
He owes...
No real apology necessarily.
I don't...
jordan holmes
But that actually I can understand.
I can understand the feeling because if you do believe that this is something of an anomaly...
Right.
I can understand the feeling of someone just being like, oh, well, there's more I could have done.
You know, if one of my friends gets into a car accident and we were supposed to do something and they quit or whatever, maybe I would feel like, oh, I could have done more to keep them from getting in that car.
Like, I can recognize that kind of guilt there.
I can't recognize the feeling of like, well, this is my fault.
dan friesen
It's somewhat misplaced, though.
jordan holmes
It is very misplaced.
The guilt that we're dealing with here is...
Misplaced.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
I feel like everywhere is misplaced.
dan friesen
Well, but here's the thing.
All these other people that we've heard talk about stuff, it's misplaced in the sense of trying to evade responsibility.
Whereas with Rob, there is a feeling of trying to dodge into it.
jordan holmes
It's an overcorrection, yeah.
dan friesen
Yeah, and I don't understand why.
I obviously can't speak for anybody who's involved or anything, but he didn't do things that contributed to making this story worse.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
As far as we know from all available information.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
He did what he could internally to de-incentivize people to do it.
Speaking out, saying it's wrong, what have you.
jordan holmes
But, you know, I mean, that's part of what he's recognizing, though, is like, maybe I could have done more.
I should have done more.
Maybe I could have quit.
I should have quit.
dan friesen
Maybe you should have quit in 2004.
jordan holmes
That's what would have made the most sense.
But we can't relitigate this deposition.
Otherwise, I'd have to start talking shit to Enoch, okay?
dan friesen
True.
jordan holmes
That's where we'd really get into trouble.
dan friesen
Yeah.
Like I said, I'm just confused.
This is a very different deposition in terms of what you can walk away from it from.
Because there isn't a lot of super relevant information that you glean from it.
There is just somebody who is really seeking some kind of forgiveness.
jordan holmes
Absolution.
dan friesen
Yeah.
In a way that doesn't make sense.
jordan holmes
None.
dan friesen
And I hope he finds whatever he needs, and I wish him the best.
I don't want to sit around and shit on him or anything, because I think that certainly the ability to feel guilt, even if misplaced, is a drastic improvement from the other people that we see.
jordan holmes
It'll serve him better than everybody else.
dan friesen
But yeah, it's just very confusing.
Yeah.
So one of the things that is also relevant is that Rob has his EEOC complaint at this time.
unidentified
Right.
dan friesen
And it's still to be seen how it'll play out.
And there is a question about like, you know, if this case does go forward, do you stand to profit from that?
unidentified
Right.
dan friesen
And Rob says no.
And in fact, he stands to lose.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
In as much as like...
jordan holmes
He won't be a primary creditor even if he did.
He would be far less likely to receive any percent of his money, period.
dan friesen
Yeah, so he only stands conceivably to the opposite of benefit from this.
And he makes the point that he's not...
jordan holmes
I mean, one of the remedies for an EEOC complaint is to immediately receive your job back, which I do not believe.
dan friesen
No thank you.
unidentified
No thanks.
dan friesen
But he makes a point, and I think it's fair to make note of, that he's not interested in compensation in terms of his involvement here.
rob jacobson
I'm not doing any of this for compensation.
I'm doing this because Alex is disgracing himself so badly.
And the way he has made the parents suffer, as well as myself, he's still on the air to this day saying things that are arguably true or arguably false.
not true, we don't know.
But we do know that he affects his audience in a way that angers them and mobilizes them And it's unclear if anything he's saying is fact or fiction, opinion or speculation.
jordan holmes
Isn't it?
rob jacobson
But what he does do is mobilize a large amount of people in irrational thinking, because there's no way to tell with whether what Alex is saying on the air is news or not, true or false, speculation or opinion, jokes or not, but he advertises it all as news.
He is the Infowars.
dan friesen
But when was that not the case?
Granted, I agree with him to the extent of if I'm going to try and make this better, I would say that Alex has gotten more outrageous, more unhinged, but not...
Knowing whether he's saying things that are opinion or fact.
Constantly, when we go back to 2003 and we're listening to these episodes, he's like, this has been proven!
He's saying all this complete bullshit, and he's inciting people.
He's making them angry about this existential threat to their life.
This has been his MO the entire time.
It's not a recent thing.
I don't know.
I feel like if there was a sincere belief that this is the problem, then it would always be a problem.
Maybe you're not aware of it earlier on.
Maybe you become aware of it.
But then these complaints should be much more holistic.
jordan holmes
I suppose here's the questions that I would want.
I would want to ask, what was the first time Alex did something that Broke your moral framework.
You know, what was the first time that he's overstepped those boundaries?
And then, why did you decide to...
Stay.
dan friesen
That would be a good question for, like, a grilling.
Maybe not for Mark's purposes.
jordan holmes
Well, not for Mark's purposes, but, I mean, for our purposes of this conversation.
dan friesen
Sure.
jordan holmes
That's what I would like to know before I can be like, oh, here's why.
dan friesen
And I wonder if you'd get an answer.
jordan holmes
I wonder if...
dan friesen
Because the answer should be the documentaries I worked on.
jordan holmes
You know, it is like, I wonder if the answer is something that he would even be able to express.
Not just honestly, but, like, truly.
You know, like, is the answer that he would give something?
That he's created in his own mind as an answer for that question.
And it's not a true answer, even though he may believe it to be.
It's that question.
dan friesen
And I'll grant that there have been other interviews that he's done that I haven't listened to.
So I don't know if he explained some of that stuff in those interviews, but I'm not covering those.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
Here we are.
We're in a deposition.
unidentified
Yeah.
dan friesen
So Mark wraps things up.
And let's Rob go to the hallway.
jordan holmes
How is he not going to be a dick?
mark bankston
That's all I believe I have for you at this time.
mark enoch
I appreciate that.
Go ahead.
I'm sorry.
I didn't mean to end up with you.
mark bankston
Sure.
That's all I have for you in terms of questions.
I have a few things I need to put on the record.
Mark, can you check your email?
Yeah, sure.
They don't need to concern you.
If you would like to be excused while I put this on the record, I can do that.
mark enoch
And I would like to ask questions.
Are you going to prevent me from doing that, Mark?
mark bankston
We're going to talk about that on the record in just a minute.
mark enoch
That's what I'm asking you.
mark bankston
Yeah, so we're going to let Mr. Jacobson go because we're not going to have this discussion in front of a witness.
mark enoch
No, sir.
mark bankston
We're not going to let him leave the building, Mark.
We're going to let Mr. Jacobson go to the bathroom.
And then I am going to put something on the record.
And then if you have some things to say about it, you can say whatever you want on the record.
mark enoch
I just have a simple question.
mark bankston
Then Mr. Jacobson will be in the building.
mark enoch
Are you going to permit me to ask questions, yes or no?
mark bankston
I don't think I can stop you.
I literally don't think I can.
I think I would have to go over there and physically restrain you because you won't abide by rules.
But if Mr. Jacobson is just going to go to the bathroom, now he's going to come back and he's going to sit down in that chair.
And whether he wants to sit around and listen to anything you say is not my choice.
But I'm not releasing him from the building right now.
Mr. Jacobson, would you like to step out of the room maybe for a moment?
You can use the restroom if you need to.
Otherwise, just wait in the front room for us.
dan friesen
So the questioning has come to a close.
Rob goes out in the hallway, and then Mark puts some things into the record.
And one of the things that's important in the things that he's putting into the record are...
Things about Enoch's behavior in the previous depositions.
And this is troubling.
mark bankston
I need to put this on the record, because we are now in our third deposition of this case.
And in the first deposition of Mr. Jones, which Mr. Enoch was not defending, but was merely an observer, his name appeared in all caps, where he's speaking and interjecting into the record 28 times.
During the testimony of Mr. Jones, and that's taking out the times that it appeared for housekeeping matters, like getting the witness water, or talking about the PO at the end of the deposition.
And I don't want to be tag-teamed, and it was ridiculous and improper, but I normally wouldn't call it out on the record.
But I've reviewed the transcript, and I've done this to confirm this, that there were questions on the floor about what a certain building was, and whether it was the school or not.
And as part of his interruption, Mr. Enoch blurted out to the witness that it's the firehouse in the video, a word that had not previously appeared in the deposition.
So, of course, right after that, Mr. Jones says, quote, and I later corrected, you know, that was one of the things that had been said that wasn't true, was that they were at the firehouse.
There was other footage from the school.
At best, this was highly improper conduct, and it's exactly why we don't allow speaking objections in Texas.
At worst, it was an attempt to communicate an idea to the witness, conduct which is absolutely repellent to the idea of justice.
Yet on the following day, the problems continued.
I only have a video, not a transcript, but once again, Mr. Enoch repeatedly interrupted a deposition he was not defending, at which he was simply an observer.
And again, I've watched the video to confirm, and so has my co-counsel to confirm both of ours' memories, that Mr. Dew, the corporate representative, Visibly reacted to a gesture from Mr. Enoch during a difficult question, and Mr. Ogden had to call him out on it.
And you can see Mr. Dew's reaction and where his eyes are in the deposition.
During both depositions, Mr. Enoch was repeatedly asked to leave the deposition.
If he refused to stay quiet, he stayed but continued to interrupt.
I am putting this all on the record right now because this deposition began rather contentiously, and my reaction to it was one of significant disturbance.
dan friesen
So there's a bit of a pattern of behaviors here, of disrupting these depositions in such a way as to give answers to questions.
That's bad.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
What year is...
This one's...
dan friesen
2018, I believe.
jordan holmes
2018.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
Okay.
Ish.
dan friesen
It's pretty early on.
jordan holmes
I just want to remind people, alright?
This happened year one.
And Mark had to deal with this continued type of shit for five fucking years.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
And Mark...
dan friesen
Yeah, this was one of the first depositions that they did.
jordan holmes
I mean, if Mark was a serial killer right now, I'd be like, well, I think it's wrong, but I can understand how you get there.
dan friesen
And it's such an interesting way that these other lawyers that Alex has had have been so frustrating and dickish in different ways.
And Enoch is kind of like...
One of the more lawyerly dickish kinds of vibes.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
He feels like he's trying to use law to be an asshole, whereas some of the other folks have just been like, I don't know.
jordan holmes
You're a dick.
You want to fight?
Yeah, it has been a little bit of childish kind of thing.
This is very much if you were watching a movie and an asshole lawyer was showing up, this is what the asshole lawyer would do.
Every single time, this is the asshole lawyer.
dan friesen
Yeah, whereas Norm is more of the pull your pants down and say the N-word kind of lawyer.
jordan holmes
100%, yeah.
He's Lionel Hutz.
He's evil, but he's also ridiculous.
dan friesen
Yeah.
unidentified
So also, Mark needs to put onto the record the discomfort surrounding what's happening because he is not in a position to defend Rob Jacobson's rights.
mark bankston
I do not feel I am equipped to defend this witness's rights.
I don't represent him.
What is happening is totally inconsistent with the court's order.
We have attempted to contact the court because I believe the court would be wanting to have some sort of input.
On when an order like this only gives me the right to question whether Mr. Enoch should be allowed to question this witness who does not currently have counsel.
I'm very disturbed by this turn of events.
I want this all on the record in case these matters need to be brought to the court in any kind of connection with sanctions.
Right now, I'm going to finish, and I am going to ask Mr. Jacobson to return to the room.
I'm going to tell Mr. Jacobson that I have concluded with my deposition, the deposition that was ordered in the court's order.
And that I have no further need of him to be here.
I do not know what Mr. Enoch's going to do at that point.
I do not know if Mr. Enoch's going to attempt to try to keep the witness here.
I don't know what's going to happen.
I do know that I am extremely concerned about a lawyer who has already exhibited an incredible pattern of astonishing bad conduct in deposition to now take this very unorthodox turn.
That being said, those are my comments on the record.
I will allow Mr. Jacobson to return to the room and allow him to make the decision in his own best interest.
mark enoch
And I do not intend to respond tit for tat, which is what I think is a self-serving diatribe.
And I will respond appropriately when appropriate.
dan friesen
What a dick.
jordan holmes
What a dick.
dan friesen
Yeah.
jordan holmes
Just a real piece of shit.
dan friesen
But that is a pretty valid concern that Mark has about if he's going to be grilled and questioned by his clearly antagonistic former employer's lawyer, Mark can't act as his lawyer.
jordan holmes
No.
dan friesen
And so that is going to be ugly.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
dan friesen
And so Rob comes back in from the hallway.
unidentified
Mr. Jacobson, that's all I have for you today.
mark bankston
Thank you for your time.
mark enoch
Mr. Bankston, if I ask questions, are you going to seek sanctions against me?
unidentified
Mr. Jacobson, are you leaving?
dan friesen
So he just left immediately.
He just gets up.
He comes in, takes off his mic, and then just...
jordan holmes
Fucking come get me!
Why would I give a shit what you have to say?
You subpoena me if you want me to ask questions.
You're the one who introduced the bullshit subpoena thing.
dan friesen
Fuck you!
I am not here to answer your questions.
I don't have to be here.
jordan holmes
I literally don't work for you.
dan friesen
So that's kind of a nice resolution and to the proceedings.
But yeah, as we reach the end of the deposition, I find myself feeling a lot different than I do with our deposition episodes.
jordan holmes
True.
dan friesen
Like I told you on the last one that we did that there was a couple that we had that are conflicting.
They're a little bit strange.
And this is a little bit strange to me because I think that the only thing that he has to be...
I mean, obviously, I think he should own up to how shitty his entire career's work has been at InfoWars, but that's a matter for maybe a different venue.
But the only thing he really has to apologize for is not doing more, which is pointless.
It wouldn't have done anything.
And he did something to his credit while he was there, and then the only other thing he has to feel guilt for is not quitting, and that is something he has to deal with on his own.
jordan holmes
It feels strange.
It is consistent, though, with Topsy-Turvy World insofar as the one thing that Rob Jacobson should feel like he did commendably, which is try and intervene in this situation, is the one situation he feels guilt for.
dan friesen
Not doing more or something?
jordan holmes
And everything else he seems to be fine with.
dan friesen
Yeah, he seems to think that there's a plausible way to claim what, like, Endgame is good journalism or a good documentary.
jordan holmes
I don't know.
dan friesen
He should check out that bibliography for Endgame.
jordan holmes
Yeah, no shit!
Is good journalism putting a Microsoft Encarta as just your pure reference?
dan friesen
It helps.
It's a good thing.
I feel a little bit even conflicted about the idea that this is, like, we're covering this, but, I mean, it's a deposition.
There's something interesting.
There's an insight into Infowars in some way.
And so, I don't know.
Here's where I'm at.
Here's what I come back to over and over again.
He and Paul Joseph Watson are two people who spoke out against the Sandy Hook coverage demonstrably at the time.
And I think that Paul's reaction makes much more sense.
In his deposition, he was like, yeah, I thought that was shit.
I thought that was really bad.
I told them not to do it.
But he's not bending over backwards to try and pretend that Like, there isn't a larger thing that it's a part of.
jordan holmes
Right.
dan friesen
That's the thing that makes this so different for me.
Like, when I hear Paul's deposition, I'm like, yeah, that all makes sense.
This doesn't.
jordan holmes
I mean, I suppose that's an argument of different expectations for different psychopaths.
I mean, like, Paul just as much is on the hook for not quitting.
dan friesen
But he doesn't care.
jordan holmes
That's the difference.
dan friesen
But that makes sense.
jordan holmes
It only makes sense if you don't care.
It really does.
No, I understand.
dan friesen
I understand.
jordan holmes
And we're grappling with somebody who appears to care, and who appears to not be lying, or at least I can't sense any lies from him.
dan friesen
don't track with somebody who cares.
No.
unidentified
And that's the part that is really, really tough to understand.
dan friesen
Yes.
unidentified
And I guess, you know, people act differently in different circumstances.
dan friesen
Sure.
unidentified
I don't know what other pressures existed in his life or whatever.
jordan holmes
Oh, what a strange animal is man.
Yeah.
dan friesen
I...
I don't know.
jordan holmes
I don't know, man.
I don't know.
dan friesen
I wonder how things would be different if he didn't get fired in 2017.
I wonder how things would be different if they got sued for Endgame.
I wonder how different these things would play out in slightly different circumstances.
Yeah, I don't know.
jordan holmes
I just don't.
No.
dan friesen
I've not been as confused by deposition as I have this one, perhaps.
jordan holmes
Yeah.
Yeah, because I don't know if there's much to take away from it other than this person is uniquely situated inside of this company at this time.
dan friesen
For 13 years!
jordan holmes
For 13 years.
And look at how weird this shit is.
dan friesen
He was there for 13 years, doesn't seem to understand that his fundamental complaints about stuff apply to the entirety of the time he was there.
jordan holmes
Man, what is he thinking?
It hurts my brain to try and put myself in a space where what he's done can be reconciled with what he's saying.
dan friesen
That's, yeah, that's the difficulty.
jordan holmes
It hurts my brain to try and fit cognitive dissonance in there that is so expansive as to encompass a man's entire career.
dan friesen
Yeah.
Well, I guess we'll continue to wrestle with that.
jordan holmes
Someday, somehow, perhaps we will discover the truth.
dan friesen
But I still, on whatever level, I appreciate that he...
I appreciate, first of all, that he internally stood up about this at the time.
I commend that.
And I think it takes a certain amount of courage to come out in the way that he has.
While someone like Enoch is trying to intimidate you with this NDA, I guess I wish...
And you can't always get what you want, as Dr. House once said.
jordan holmes
He said that multiple times.
dan friesen
So many times.
But I would wish that the diagnosis was more comprehensive.
Yeah.
Because I think that he could conceivably have a wealth of information about how these same problems that he has about the Sandy Hook stuff and about Millie Weaver and all this applies to the...
Fundamental business model in the way Infowars operates.
But I don't...
jordan holmes
I mean, I don't really know quite how to react to somebody who is clearly contrite or at least giving off every appearance of such and experiencing remorse for that.
But it's not an incident.
It's not a thing that they did.
It is their entire career.
So how exactly do you say that, oh, well, we're on a redemption arc or anything along those lines when it's like...
dan friesen
There isn't a redemption.
jordan holmes
No, there isn't.
dan friesen
The incident doesn't involve you.
jordan holmes
Exactly.
dan friesen
It only involves you in as much as you worked there and you didn't stop working there.
jordan holmes
And the redemption that you want is impossible to get because you didn't...
Do it, and the redemption you need is something that you're not looking for.
What are you doing, man?
dan friesen
It's confusing.
Anyway, we're not going to get answers on this.
jordan holmes
Not today, at least.
dan friesen
We will just end this by saying it is Wednesday, and so the tickets to the second live show should be live at 10 a.m. Central Time.
jordan holmes
Central Time.
dan friesen
And so if you'd like to grab those, please do.
jordan holmes
That'd be nice.
dan friesen
And we'll be back.
But until then, we have a website.
jordan holmes
It's true.
It's knowledgefight.com.
dan friesen
Yep, we're all on Twitter.
jordan holmes
We are on Twitter.
It's at knowledge underscore fight.
dan friesen
Yep, we'll be back.
But until then, I'm Neo.
I'm Leo.
I'm DZX Clark.
I'm also Dan.
And you know what?
unidentified
I like Dan.
steve quayle
And now here comes the sex robots.
alex jones
Andy in Kansas.
unidentified
You're on the air.
Thanks for holding.
Hello, Alex.
jordan holmes
I'm a first-time caller.
unidentified
I'm a huge fan.
I love your work.
Export Selection