Knowledge Fight - #759: Chatting With Morgan Stringer

Episode Date: December 21, 2022

Today, while Dan recovers in his Globalist Med Bed, Jordan sits down for a chat with Ace Associate/Attorney Morgan Stringer to break down some of the recent legal matters surrounding Alex and Infowars.

Let me down! OK. I'm take 3, and I'm getting championships. It's time to pray. I have great respect for knowledge fight. Knowledge fight. I'm sick of them posing as if they're the good guys, saying we are the bad guys. Knowledge fight.

Dan and George. Knowledge fight. Need money. Andy and Kansas. Andy and Kansas. Andy and Kansas. Stop it. Andy and Kansas.

Andy and Kansas. Andy and Kansas. It's time to pray. Andy and Kansas. Hello, Alex, I'm a Christian. I'm a huge fan. I love your work. Knowledge fight.

No, no, no, no, no, no, knowledge fight.com. Yeah, bleh, I love you. Hello, everyone. Welcome back to Fight Knowledge. I am Jordan, and unfortunately Dan is not with us today. He is still under the weather with an undisclosed but non-life-threatening illness. Luckily, we have the incredible ace attorney, Morgan Stringer, joining me today. How are you?

I'm good. It's, I guess, my moniker I've gotten is ace associate, but they mean the same thing. So, ace attorney. Oh, ace associate. Isn't ace attorney the video game? I think I may have been thinking Harvey Birdman attorney at law. That could be my, my only reference to law is Harvey Birdman. And then I think there was a dancing baby on Ally McBeal one time.

That is what I've got. I mean, that's a good place to start. So, well, I apologize for getting your appellation wrong, but thank you so much for joining me today. I suppose the first thing that we should talk about, if you don't mind, is an update on Alex's bankruptcy circumstances. What's the most recent information, if you don't mind? So, do you know, you're aware, Jordan, of how you get really mad when the media reports things about Alex, and then it turns out to not really be that thing? Me?

Good heavens, no. I am an even-killed fan of calm and quiet. Yes, I do. That's why I wanted you to start right here, because I assume something is wrong. Yeah. Yeah. Dan is, Dan is a wild crazy one. So, we're missing that tornado with energy.

But so, speaking of that, I have the same thing where I'll, I'll have that same reaction when I see the press get these things wrong about, you know, disinformation figures or pop culture figures. And also, with the law, it really frustrates me how, you know, we do have a lot of good legal reporters. Liz Williamson, for instance, she's done a great job on this, but. Oh, of course. A lot of other people just need to stop. They need to stop. So, yeah, I'm just so frustrated because I see the headline and I see some tweets, you know, that of course have 50,000 likes on them by this point saying, Oh, absolutely.

Alex doesn't have to pay the one and a half billion dollar judgment or he does have to pay that one and a half billion dollar judgment and a judge has, you know, taken away his ability to fight it. And of course, that's not what happened at all. So, I thought I was crazy actually because I was saying, well, you know, this, this outlet is saying this happened and I don't remember that happening. Have I, you know, blacked out somehow and remembered something different? And no, it turns out I was right. So it's a, there's a, there is a consent judgment in place, which means that both Alex and the plaintiffs are agreeing to this. Everyone's in agreement. Okay.

Wow. Okay. First off, that's, that's a monumentous thing that you just said. Yeah. So what happened is the families who have already had their cases heard, they, those cases, they have lifted the stay on that. But the only things that are left are, I guess, the formal entry of judgment in the Texas case, which that case has already been, you know, basically he's already done. And it's just so the judge can enter the judgment. And then in Connecticut, the only two motions left are Norm has a motion of remitted her, which means he wants the judge to reduce the judgment in the Connecticut case.

Because the number is big. I wish I was exaggerating that reasoning. But I mean, when you're looking at a number like 1.5 billion, honestly, I feel like that's a reasonable ask just to be like, this number is bigger than I understand. Yeah. I mean, yes. When you divide it up by 15 people and then you hear, you know, everything that happened and you hear the, you know, testimony in that courtroom, I could see where some people say, oh, that's not even enough. Oh, totally. Totally.

That was one of the things that I was thinking about in whenever the verdict was about to be handed down is, you know, before the Texas trial even happened, I said, I think it should be in the ballpark of 250 million or something along those lines. And it's like, how could a reasonable person, though, get to a number that big? Like, I can't even understand what a million dollars is in my real life, let alone a billion, you know? Yeah. Well, you're kind of right on the money there when you're talking about, you know, people like Robbie Parker, who did get about, I want to say, total amount was 200 million, but including the punitives and everything, how it shakes out. But, but yeah, so that's not what happened. What happened, though, is that the judgment has been lifted onto those cases just for procedural issues to go forward. Norm is also has a motion for a new trial, which everybody knows.

Norm even knows it. Those, his motions are going to get denied. But basically the bankruptcy court is saying, yeah, those judgments can go ahead and be entered and then you can proceed with the appeals process in those cases. Now, the fine tame case and the posner case, those are still stayed. Right, right, right. So, yeah, that's that's what's happening there. It was not a judge saying, oh, Alex has to write a check tomorrow. You know, and that's what I feel like a lot of people got wrong here.

And also, I did want to say this hasn't come up yet. It has kind of come up in the background of the conversations as I've kind of read between the lines as I've listened to the attorneys speaking these hearings with Judge Lopez and the bankruptcy court. But bankruptcy code section five, two, three, a six actually prevents a debtor from being discharged for any debt for the willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity. So actually willful and malicious injuries cannot be discharged in bankruptcy regardless. And OK, I think this is going to be litigated on if this counts. But I would say, you know, the punitive damages which had to be awarded if they were if, you know, the jury's found that his conduct was willful and malicious. I mean, it speaks to itself, right? So I really just think that this these bankruptcies, you know, the personal one and the company one is Alex delaying because what I noticed was when I watched the latest Texas hearing,

I saw Mark essentially saying, OK, well, we're fine to go ahead and schedule Fontaine and Posner because we can proceed against Alex Jones individually. And, you know, I get that low and behold December 2nd. He files for personal bankruptcy. But I think that this is going to end up backfiring on him. I think his strategy here is that he is going to try to, you know, drag these families out. We're going to have to go through the whole bankruptcy process. There's, you know, creditor committee and the personal one. There's, you know, we're going to have to submit plans to repay debt and negotiate all that out between all the creditors and the company one.

So I think what he and then there's the appeals process. And I think what Alex is doing here is he's trying to, number one, buy more time for himself. And number two, where these families down, hoping that they'll settle. Right, right. So essentially, whenever we read any reporting from the news for probably the next year or two, it should just be taken with a grain of salt. That means it's still going on. I mean, really still a struggle. Yeah.

Any kind of, you know, legal reporting, I feel needs, you know, huge asterisk behind it. You know, it's just, I don't understand what's going on with legal reporting. And of course I'm an attorney, so I'm picky about that, but it's still, I just wish people would do that. I think you're running into, you're running into a big problem with legal reporting in so far as the people who read news want something to have happened. And in the law, things are always about to happen. Well, once that motion gets filed, then we'll see you in a couple of weeks. And once that couple of weeks happens, well, we'll file some more motions, you know, like that's kind of the struggle. It is.

And I definitely can see that. Yeah. I mean, there is a lot. It doesn't make for a splashy headline, right? Right. Things ongoing. But there are some things too, that they could have actually reported, like the fact that Alex was popping in and out of his latest hearing. It was virtually virtual on Zoom, and he kept, you know, popping in and out, you know.

Now we're talking. What was he doing popping in and out? I have no idea. I don't know if it was his Zoom being glitchy, but I have no idea. I think he was just, you know, again, it shows his lack of seriousness, you know, in these cases as usual. Of course. And yeah, his attorney actually claimed that he basically did the I need money argument. So we, one of the reasons why I think this is dumb is because now Alex is having to expose his finances, right?

Right. And I think this was one of the dumbest things he could do. When he filed for bankruptcy the first time, I said, I can't believe he did that. So Jones is saying that his, initially was saying his salary is 20,000 every two weeks. Sure. From the company bankruptcy filing. Reasonable. I think most, that's a normal salary for most people.

Most average Joe's pitting on their hard hats, going to work every day. 20,000 every two weeks is regular, right? I don't make a fraction of that much, which, you know, maybe I should be, you know, practicing law more like Norm, which, you know, is a whole other brand. But, yeah, so the judge, the judge though, You should probably buy some woke insurance if you're going to go for Norm. There we go. That would be buy and buy. I could make those house payments in no time.

Exactly. But yeah, so the judge was asked though to force a free speech systems to pay Jones 54,000 every two weeks. And the judge said, okay, well, I want to address this later and you're going to have to submit to me more than just I need money. So, so if I, so if I understand correctly, Alex's bankruptcy lawyer said to a judge, how about pay me almost three times as much every two weeks. And the reason is because I would like three times as much every two weeks. That's what Alex himself was saying. Yes, that that he paid out from free from infowars free speech systems and hit Alex's lawyer also made the argument that if this was denied that Alex will have to find more work. Oh, God.

Yes. Please. Please. I want to see Alex's side gig. I want to see his side gig. If if you could watch info wars broadcast and then get in an Uber with Alex Jones, I think that would be the ultimate in life really. I would I which brings me to a question I wanted to ask you Jordan, what is the funniest job? What is the funniest second job that you think Alex could take?

I mean, the obvious answer would be mime, because to sit to see him on, you know, a street performing mime naturally, he would have to be in the most public of spaces with the only restriction being he can't talk, of course. That one's a good start. I think the other funny side job would be the person who feeds lions and then accidentally falls in in an Indiana Jones movie. That would be the way to go. That would. I mean, he almost was a movie star. So yeah, see, he's it was it's either Star Lord or being eaten by lions in an Indiana Jones movie. I'm fine with both.

Truly. But that's that's you bring up something you have been watching almost all of these hearings, if not all of them and regularly live tweeting these out. Have you been? Has it literally been all of the hearings? I'm I think I may have because I did get a heads up from an attorney saying, this is just a scheduling hearing. You don't have to be here. To which they didn't say it like that. He was very, very nice about it, but he was letting me know.

Basically, this is a meeting to schedule something in the future, you know, just saying it's going to be 10 minutes tops, which I appreciated. But also was just like, oh, man, all these people are aware of me, which is so funny. Oh, man, that is fantastic. And I'm like, oh, God, next week, it's going to be Norm who DMs me, got any advice from me? That's like, that's like the most inverted deep throat that there ever could be. Like there is a secret connection you have between the lawyers, but in the in the parking alley, it's just, hey, we'll see you tomorrow. There is actually, which, you know, I've been with whole seriousness, I have been thanked by it and I can't believe it. They found anything of value as to what, you know, I've said, but basically, yeah.

So I, you know, noted, I've told you, but, you know, we talked about this earlier where I'm not a big fan of a lot of legal reporting. And also, I'm not a fan of a lot of legal analysts and law and crime was covering, you know, the first or they actually covered the Connecticut trial, but I knew they were going to do a shameful job on that. And also, I knew a lot of bad actors were probably going to, you know, talk about the Texas trial and how, oh, poor Alex is being railroaded and I really did not want that to happen. So what I do, because I don't know something is wrong with me was I decided to throw myself into via this and I said, okay, I'm going to watch this entire trial and I'm going to just say what's happening and then give my legal analysis where I think I have some or give, you know, oh, this is what I would do or, you know, this is why I think Mark Bankston is doing X. And here's, you know, where Rinal is probably screwing up and needs to, you know, change tactics and which happened. But not as much as you know, Rinal's tactics were inconsistent and yet mystifying all the same. And that was also a challenge. I was watching, you know, especially with the Connecticut trial just thinking, I can't even get in your head to see what you're trying to do. Oh, with Norm?

Oh, yes. With Norm. Yeah, yeah, yeah. When you were watching the Texas trial, you can see Rinal is a professional who's trying to do a law job, if you will, in my dumb way of saying it. Norm seemed like he was just throwing caution to the wind, dropping smoke bombs and falling asleep all over the place, right? Oh, man, it was like, oh, man, the ending when he did that litigator's prayer, I asked Andrew, Andrew Torres, who I work for him at the farm, but I asked... Yes, Andrew Torres is my personal attorney, according to a Twitter conversation that I consider legally binding. Oh. I don't know that, but he should.

Oh, well, it doesn't apply to me. I can tell you that much. Not yet. Not yet. The night is young. But, yeah, so, Norm, it was just baffling and I asked Andrew, I said, is this a thing? I've never heard this in my life. Please tell me this isn't a thing. And Andrew said, when I told him about it, he said, I have no idea what the fuck that man was talking about.

And also just, you know, it's going south, which I always say, juries are mysterious creatures. You don't want to, you know, get inside their heads too much and psych yourself out because who knows when groups of people come together, you know, what they're going to care about versus what they're not going to care about. That's why I really like the jury questions in Texas. But anyway, so, but you know it's going bad when the jurors were, you know, avoiding eye contact with Norm. And he acknowledged that in his closing, like, oh, some of you are looking away, you know, and it's a soul, man, that was, that was just so rough. And it is a little bit like hearing a man, I can clearly see I have brought all of you shame and you don't want to be associated with me. Now, here's why I am correct. Yeah, but I also think that this strategy was done because there are trustees assigned to bankruptcy cases.

And there's a whole conversation about, oh, well, Alex is just going to get on the stand and lie. And we know how often, you know, perjury isn't prosecuted, especially for a civil case, right? They are for bankruptcy, fraud on a bankruptcy. Yeah, there are people assigned in every bankruptcy case, it's called a trustee. And what they do is they basically kind of, most of the time they're just overseeing to make sure of a bankruptcy court and, you know, it's going along smoothly and everything's working according to procedure. But in these kind of cases. In the trial of Alex Jones, it is not a most of the time scenario. No, it is not at all.

It is not. And because of the types of bankruptcy that he has filed here, you have a little bit more supervision here from the US trustee. And basically what they can do is it's their job, essentially one of their major jobs is to look for fraud and make sure fraud isn't being done. And if they suspect it, they refer it to the Department of Justice, and it gets investigated or oftentimes prosecuted. And a lot of times when that happens, they uncover a bunch of other crimes because chances are if you're lying to the bankruptcy court, you're probably not, you know, up and up on the up and up on your books, right? So yeah, I was going to say, if you're one of these trustees at this point, you have to be like rubbing your hands together with maniacal glee or something like that, right? Like you look at everything Alex has done so far and you go, well, I don't know if I can fall asleep without hitting fraud on the way down. Like it is unreal, right? Yes. And you have to disclose, you know, these different assets, which I think, to me, I was thinking, well, I would be paying especially close attention here because it's going, it might indicate where he has hidden some of his assets.

Sure. And yeah, so you definitely, I was bewildered when he did, I mean, it's another delay tactic and I think he's trying to get these families again to settle and just agree to a lesser amount just so he goes away. But I mean, his behavior has been completely shameful, beyond shameful here. Right. And I would not settle. Why would you settle with him at this point? No, it feels a little bit like he is almost pot committed to this strategy of like string it out as long as I possibly can, and then maybe Hail Mary, they'll get tired. But I mean, at this point, it's hard to imagine that being possible.

Yeah, it's going to, and you know, I know we talked about earlier how it feels like there's a motion to, you know, do another motion later and things like that. Eventually, it comes to an end. Yes. And that, and that's, this is where that's going to, you know, come into play and we'll see where, and also Alex wanted to join the bankruptcies together and have them proceed together. And this way, you know, whatever applied to the personal bankruptcy would apply to the company bankruptcy, both trustees, which I'm not a bankruptcy lawyer, but I used to work for a firm that did some of it. I have never seen a trustee object to joining bankruptcies. And the reason. Yes.

Much less both. So the punchline, the punchline to that, obviously. Yeah, it was because they're not like what the, what you joined them for is so that it can go a lot smoother and easier and both trustees. So it wasn't just the personal bankruptcy trustee, but the one in it for his corporate bankruptcy chimed in and said, yeah, what that guy said, basically, which was, I've never seen two trustees file, you know, emotions like that. But they're essentially saying, no, this is actually going to make it more chaotic because what applies to Alex personally may not apply to the company personally under the law and vice versa. And you're just going to have these, this confusion, which, you know, I'm willing to bet Alex also was hoping what he could work to his advantage because he essentially is at the end of the day, this destructive agent of chaos. Why not do that in a bankruptcy in bankruptcy proceedings as well? And the trustees are, you know, very strongly indicating to the court, absolutely not.

This is not how they should be done. And yeah, the question I think a lot of people have as far as, you know, you, you put a point to that this will end at a certain point. I think the big question for most people is the way that Alex is doing this now, he's clearly stringing it out even more. He's, as you said, you know, he's joining this and the trustees are saying no. At what point does this get stopped for him? Because it's clear to everyone involved, right, that this is not, that nothing is in good faith, right? Oh, absolutely. And I think that this, I think another thing that dreaming to this case was there, I cannot stand grift or lawyers.

I can't stand grifters. I also can't stand right wing weirdos. And you have this, you know, and then also I cover cases that have to do with pop culture. So you have this intersection of all these different aspects for me, right? The interest in this information, the interest in law, the interest in, you know, these weirdo figures. But yeah, this is a very specific Venn diagram that you are dead centering. Yeah, exactly, exactly. And yeah, I think that we have this, we have a situation where I think people have finally said enough is enough.

You know, we saw this with Rudy Giuliani being recommended that he be disbarred. I think bar associations have finally had it of attorneys acting like they can disregard the rules. They can even willfully break the rules. And guess what? Here's how much it's going to cost you and it's going to be less than had you actually participated and engaged in good faith. And I think that there. It's like, it's like when Wall Street receives a fine that's one tenth of what they made off of the crime. And you're like, well, that's, that's just a cut.

You know, you're just taking a tenth off the top. That's fine. And I think this was a big concern with the, with Judge Garagambal, Judge Maya, as we call her. Oh, of course, when she's become an affectionate character these days. Oh, she has. I'm in some, I'm in some policy want communities that are very, very fond of both judges. One has, you know, fun Texas mom energy. The other one has fun New England aunt energy. It's for Judge Bellis.

But what a weird world we live in. I know. It's a, it's a strange world. But so yeah, Judge Gamble was talking about, you know, these kind of principles and how she said that the cap should not apply. And she was going to go ahead and enter judgment for the entire thing because she takes her oath seriously. She took an oath to the Constitution. She took an oath, you know, but to also do what's fair. And she said, this case is unique.

This was a horrible thing that happened here. And this is the only recourse for these families. And I just, I'm so glad that somebody is finally saying, you know, at the end of the day, justice is also about fairness and what is right. And you don't want to incentivize people to say, Oh, well, if I just don't participate in discovery, I can just drag this thing out along. And this is the most, you know, this is the biggest number I'm going to have to write on the check. Yeah, absolutely. I don't want to encourage that. And again, I think people are just tired of these grifter lawyers and things like I've even made, you know, back when I was in law school, I would complain about lawyer jokes, right?

Oh, everybody thinks we're such bad guys. And now that I am an attorney, there aren't enough. We deserve more hate. There aren't enough, there aren't enough evil lawyer jokes. There are. That is my position. You know, other and Mark and I are, you know, not to compare myself to the great Mark Bankston, but you know, I think that we engage with the law in a very similar way. And yeah, I, it's just, okay, well, it, here's the heart of a matter and here's what it is and we should do what's fair and what's right.

And you should not reward people who, you know, consistently break the rules. It's just, I mean, this is basic, basic stuff. When you, when you take a look at, I mean, we, I just brought up a Venn diagram, but when you take a look at what has, I mean, ultimately, strangely enough, brought us all together, you know, Dan and I and Mark and, and all of the lawyers and yourself and everybody is, is the thing that drives us, which is that this shit is unfair. This is wrong. And at the end of the day, all of us, I feel like are just unable to, to not watch that in the same way that everybody looks at us and goes to that. You're insane for recording 700 and blah, blah, blah episodes. I'm sure people look at you and say you're insane for watching all of these hearings or, and I mean, you know, it drove Mark insane to watch all of that info wars. But that's, that's what it is. It's, it's, this is unfair. This is bullshit.

Oh yeah. No, I truly have had that thought of, you know, am I, am I the crazy one? And then I'll see Norm and be like, you know, at least I'm not doing that. Right. But, and I did listen to an episode of Norm's podcast for the opening arguments. Patreon, it was the worst thing I've ever had to do for work, I've got to say. And I used to work at a combination, Quiznos, Baskin Robbins and a gas station in Mississippi. So, you know, take that for what you will. Those, those are the most terrifying words anybody's ever spoken to me. I suppose, I suppose you could change Mississippi to Maine and it would be slightly more terrifying. Yeah, it was very, it was very lynchian, surprisingly.

But if you made it more Southern Gothic. But yeah, I think that this print, these things are what, you know, does draw us. Because, you know, when you talk to Mark, when you talk to people like me, it's what ultimately drove me into law school, I think, is that at the end of the day, I was always the kid who said, you know, when you would say to your parents, that's not fair. And they'd say, well, you know, life's not fair. And I would respond, why isn't it? And nobody knew what to say to that, you know? Like, you don't expect like that, like that's kind of disturbing to hear from a child if I'm being honest. But I probably lost all my serotonin by the time I was 10. So, but it's fine. So, yeah. I got in way more trouble with that question. I think it was a teacher asked it to me. And they said, you know, life is not fair. And I said something along the lines of, well, then why aren't you doing anything about it?

And that got me in real trouble. Oh, yeah. Because it makes you confront that. Like, why am I not doing anything about it? Exactly. Me going to these hearings or what, I'm not acting like that's, you know, you know, substantively changing things. But I have been able to help promote these family stories. I have been able to promote these causes. I didn't think anybody would care, you know, if I was going to live tweet like maybe one day. And if somebody out there found it useful, I was going to continue it. But it turns out a bunch of people have, you know, found value in it. Some people have even found it.

Absolutely. I think we've all appreciated that a great deal. I followed along with your tweets as well, you know. It's, it's, it is, I don't want to say impossible. But it is extremely difficult for me to watch a legal thing happen without like screaming at judge wearing a robe. I just, you know, it's all of a sudden in my head, I'll be like, what, why are you wearing a robe? This is the matrix. This is all a simulation. You know, like that'll, it'll lose, I'll lose my mind. So it's very helpful what you do. No, I think we should have shorts in courtroom. I think that shorts in court need to be the next, the next cause I take up. I don't, I don't know why that got me, but whatever, whatever she was like.

And I saw somebody wearing shorts today and we do not wear shorts in my courtroom. I couldn't understand life for like an hour. This is just a room. What are we doing here? All of society is a lie. Service is a courtroom. There's no justice anywhere. Oh, are the shins going to be the problem when it comes to justice? Is that what's happening? Oh my goodness. Is your being dragged out? Yeah. Well, exactly. That's, that's another reason.

Speaking of, speaking of that, you also, I understand that that is doing a lot of work in that sentence. I mean, speaking of lawyers being trouble, you followed along with Ray Nahl's disciplinary hearing too, right? Yes, to an extent, although it's been, it's been very muddied there, you know. It's been very muddy. Shitball's been muddy. That's odd. Well, it's between him and Norm and, you know, what happened, where? And it's just, yeah, I'm not sure exactly what the, that one I have not been following as closely. But I did find, so for the, for the last Texas trial as well, you know, Ray Nahl has his own attorney, which it's never a good situation when you have a nesting doll of attorneys.

Yeah, an attorney with an attorney has always felt wrong to me. Like, yeah, I don't know why. Yeah, it's, I mean, I would never represent myself. They say a lawyer who represents themselves as a fool for a client. But I, but also Infowars has a new attorney that they debuted at that hearing. His name is actually Chris Martin. It's not the lead singer from Coldplay. But again, there's like seven people in the world. So honestly, like who, you know, who's to say? How do you, how do you take that job now? How do you take that job now? You, you are a person who has taken law jobs, right? At no point in time have you watched the most disgusting display of legal hatred that's ever been gone on and been like, yeah, that's my next gig, right?

What is happening? Yeah, so this Christopher Martin, he is representing Infowars, but they said Renault when he said, he said in the last Texas hearing, Renault said he is still the attorney on the Posner and Fontaine cases. So I'm not sure exactly what's all going on there, but I suspect that there will be some kind of disciplinary action towards probably Norm and Renault at this point, particularly with the sanctions being asked for, you know, for their behavior and all that. Just what I, you know, I've heard, I've heard sanctions and I understand sanctions mean money, right? So sometimes they do. So one of the first things I did working with Andrew is actually got sanctions against another attorney, which I was brand new out of law school. So that was, and he had been practicing law probably longer than I've been alive, but. So you got your first taste of blood on day one. Yeah, essentially. And I've been hooked ever since.

You've been a vampire ever since. But yes. You're blamed. The lawyers are vampires and you're a vampire that hunts vampires. This makes perfect sense to me. I understand everything now. Yeah. And I don't necessarily enjoy like, I don't want to go, I'm not saying that every attorney is like this and every attorney is bad or that I even like pursuing, but there are particular attorneys who are truly just being absolutely wild. And you need to say. Oh, of course, you're talking to me hyperbolic speeches by stock and trade. So nobody's nobody's too concerned. Well, I'm always, you know, I've been labeled a firebrand in the in the past, which, you know, some people say that's a bad thing. And I always take it as a compliment. It means I'm passionate and good label care about my clients. But yeah, so he is again. Yeah, Judge Maya even pointed this out and said, you are the 16th lawyer to enter an appearance in this case.

I thought she was exaggerating. No, he is the 16th lawyer. And he does he at that hearing did not know if he was going to be joining Renault on that on the Posner and Fontaine cases. And so I was like, so what does that mean? Is that is there a possible 17th lawyer that might enter into this thing? And Judge Maya even said when he when he said, yes, I'm aware I'm like the 16th lawyer on this. She said, well, you know what they say about being the third or fourth lawyer on a case. Right. Like, you know, again, like, why would you do this to yourself? You know what they say about being the 16th lawyer on the case, though, is we've got a great baseball team and we're really going to take it to the other associates this year. So, you know, there's two ways to go on this. Yeah, it reminds me of, you know, a scene from a rest of development where they talk about, you know, an open merit opening up a marriage and to buy a sister never works, but it might work for us. And so I'm imagining the lawyer saying this did work for them. But maybe I can do it. Right. Right. When you're watching this, this lawyer talk to the judge, can you see a sense of dread or is I like, I couldn't go into that situation without feeling like there's a sort of Damocles literally hanging over my head, right?

I'm the 16th lawyer. I'm like, Henry the eighth ninth wife, it's not going to go well, you know, Exactly. I was, you know, I think even the plaintiff's attorneys, Bankston and Bill and West ball and for our and all of them were even shocked at, you know, them bringing in a 16th lawyer now, you know, who and I mean, honestly, I'm kind of shocked Alex hasn't asked me at this point. I would do a better job. I know everything about these cases because I've been to every hearing, you know, because, you know, all the it's funny whenever he'll have a, you know, lawyer that's like, oh, well, you know, I need to get caught up on everything. And it's like, wow, I'm caught up and I'm not even doing this for a living, you know, which I mean, my show, I know your case better than you do. And I have proof. Yeah, which my show again, like, sort of how, you know, maybe you might see that as a bit deranged. But I mean, I found it useful and also my night owl. So I do my day job at night and, you know, I and I just thought this was important. And I knew that people were going to screw it up when they talked about this. And I think that this is a case that is really setting valuable precedent. I think that there are ways that we can tackle disinformation in the legal world. And I actually think this is a really good way to do it. Because these, you know, these people who aren't public figures are now being, you know, dragged up, dragged through the mud by these bad actors. And, you know, it's about time somebody stood up and do something and say, this is enough. You know, it's a horrible process. And I would understand why somebody would choose not to pursue that.

Because I mean, you've seen how long this is going and how he's doing the bankruptcy shenanigans and everything. But, you know, but eventually somebody's got to stand up to a bully, which is what info wars is and what a lot of these disinformation outlets are. They're bullies. They're trying to, you know, cause people to be harassed. They're trying to make money off of people's hatred and anger and divisions. It's, you know, somebody ought to, somebody ought to do something about that as I say. Well, we've said it, we've said it time and time again that one of the things that we despise the most about a lot of the coverage of the trials regarding the Sandy Hook families is just that that simple sentence of like the families are looking for $500 million or something. The families are requesting $500 million or something like that. And it is just such a simple signal that is just wrong, which is they're, they're not requesting money at all. They're stopping this guy. You need him stopped and I need him stopped and they're doing that. And money is how it happens. That's like, that's like saying, you know, money is the sword in this situation, not something that they're requesting from him. Yeah. And, and that is, that is an interesting way actually to frame it in that, you know, it's not about the money. And, you know, there's been people that have said things like, Oh, well, you know, they've sued this person and that person and now they're suing Alex. I've seen comments that people have made about, Oh, this is too far. Oh, this is greedy. And the thing about it is, yeah, you're going to ask because you're probably not going to get what you ask for also. You're always going to ask about that. You don't go into a negotiation starting with, I'll give you money. That's not how that works.

Exactly. And, and with, with this case, yeah, you are absolutely going to start off high. And the fact is like, it's not these, it shouldn't be these families are requesting money. It should lead with how despicable his behavior has been and that he needs to be held to account. That's what's happening. And it's like you said, a count of money is the way do we get to accountability? You know, there was this discussion of, Oh, well, you know, and Norm even kind of hinted at this and his argument. Well, no amount of money could compensate for, you know, the pain. And it's like, yes, man, but you know what, that's what we have. We can't stop space and time and make Alex go undo the damage he did. And I don't think he would if he was presented with that option, honestly. I don't think he would 300 years ago, we'd put you in the stocks and throw things at you, but we don't do that anymore. So you owe us money. Exactly. That's that's the justice that we have. And yes, it is kind of weird and nebulous when you start asking people, okay, a sign of dollar value to, you know, pain and suffering because again, those are abstract concepts and you're asking someone to put a concrete number on that. And yeah, it does get it does get very weird and fuzzy and, you know, it can get very philosophical and even esoteric there, but that's what we have. And so this idea that these families are just out there trying to get money is absolutely ridiculous. When really the story leading should be this is what this man did to them. This is the suffering that he caused and he knew he was causing it and he did all of this so he could sell dick pills. It's, yeah, and so he could perpetuate his weird worldview.

Yeah, yeah. And you're, you're absolutely right as far as the direction things are going when you when you talk about how these people, somebody needs to stand up to this bullying, you know, for the past 20 years, there's been nothing but positive reinforcement from Fox News and right wing media in general in regards to like just bully people, bullying. That's what people want. They want that aggressive kind of attack on people all the time. And this may be one of the few times that any of us have seen possible serious consequences brought against them. I think it might be the first time Alex is experiencing serious consequences and I think that we're seeing, you know, a repeat in what happens, right, that that y'all have covered, you know, whenever his dad would get him out of trouble, right. I think that this is a large case of that I saw that one of the trusts that apparently paid his bankruptcy lawyer, I believe for his personal one, I have reason to believe that his dad has an interest in that so. And yeah, so again, I mean, ironically, one of the most damning things that was said at the trial, though, came from his dad, which I appreciate on on a on a Shakespearean level almost this man has gotten him out of trouble over and over and over again and yet with one sentence, put a nail in the coffin. Fantastic. Oh, yes. When he said, I, I got up, I think I got up and cheered when he said in that deposition tape, we tried to, you know, see what Alex was saying on that day, we try to emulate spikes. The moment he said that. Yeah, it's absolute. That is a moment, you know, the trial moment with with Mark will will live on forever as as one of the great law moments. But that moment whenever Alex's dad, I mean, it was, it was borderline, you know, you can't handle the truth levels of too honest. I mean, honestly, you, I, I don't know how if I was doing a case like that, and that was to my advantage. I think I would have somehow done a backflip in the court and I cannot do a backflip.

I would have somehow figured it out. I would have merrily rettened all over that place. I would not be able to control myself. That's, that's really, that's really interesting because that brings me to the next question I have written down. Have you ever done a backflip in court? No, I feel like it would be frowned upon, you know, as I do, I have done Hail Marys, though, that have always worked. And, you know, one of my favorite ways to win is, you know, when a judge will say the equivalent of you're being wild right now, Stringer, but you got a point. So, but, but yeah, I'm, I, I'm so thankful that I got to be, you know, even the small part that I got to play here. I've really enjoyed being able to, you know, elevate these family stories and talk about them and, you know, their testimony, because that's something also I thought that was really important to do is to talk about the testimony of these families, talk about what they went through. What the harm was done. I think in that context, again, the story isn't that they're asking for money. The story is good God. Like this is the most evil, one of the most evil cases I've ever seen. Truly, it is, especially when you compare, you know, how these families have made positive, you know, have contributed good in the world when they have every reason to say fuck off to everybody, every reason. And yet they still manage to, you know, be positive and try to bring light and try to be a better force in the world for good. And then when you compare that with, you know, the greed and awfulness and hatred of Alex, it's, you know, it's honestly astonishing. No, it's almost comically a pull of good and evil.

It is. It's so stark that it makes you question yourself because real life is never this simple, you know. It is. And I think that you find that a lot in litigation, you know, as I say, the truth is somewhere in the middle, right? I mean, sometimes you'll have, you know, it'll very often be a case where both sides are making good points. I mean, that's why you're litigating, otherwise somebody would have usually settled. But if they completely, you know, right, right, right, right. If it were, if it were easy, we wouldn't fucking be here. That's number one. Yeah. Exactly. And so I, yeah, I feel like you so rarely get those kinds of situations. And I do feel like this case is going to set a precedent, you know, I think norm is right in that aspect and that liars are going to be taken to account. People who break the rules and refuse to participate, they're going to be held to account and people are going to point to this case. And, you know, I know that the facts of this case are really unique here. So, but I'm hoping that this isn't a one off. And I'm hoping that, you know, this, this can build into something where we are taking these people who perpetuate this amount of harm into the world to account. You know, you should not be able to lie about people in the most horrendous of ways and make money from it. I feel like that's very simple and yet everyone seems to think.

What's so crazy about it is that you have to say it. That's, that should not, the you should not be able to do that. That shouldn't exist as a sentence in English, right? It's too obvious. I mean, for it is, but when you say it like that, then I feel like people understand more what this is really about. This is about someone taking, you know, the most personal aspect of someone's life. Especially, you know, grieving and, you know, the death of a loved one and the death of a child, which is, you know, absolutely unimaginable to me and profiting from it. And it's, I think that concept of itself is just so gross. And I think, and, you know, I, I feel like maybe, I don't know if you and Dan felt in this situation, but sometimes being worried about the jury being redpilled. Or, yeah, yeah, we're going along with Alex's case. There was, there were plenty of times where, you know, when, when the jury has questions, every time the jury comes back with questions, there's, I think the, the natural instinct to try and overanalyze why they would ask this particular question and see if that gives an insight into what they may be thinking, you know. And, and so there were a few questions in the Texas trial that maybe think there were at least one or two people who I was not stoked about being on the jury, if that makes sense. Yeah, that happened to me too. And that's when I had to remember they might be trying because, you know, they're also not allowed to talk to each other.

So they may be trying to illustrate a point for other jurors or to clarify for themselves. And I think the guy that was asking is if Daria was a lizard person was just having fun. Sure. But, you know, you say that. I say that, but then again, you never, you know, you never know it's, you know, but I think that, you know, because we are so close and we see, you know, we do see these radicalized people in Alex's audience and even, you know, outside of Alex's audience and the concern, of course, is, oh my gosh, everybody around me is like completely radicalized. And then anybody else is just not paying attention. And that's a huge problem. And we need to fix it. And I feel like this really gave restored a lot of my hope in a lot of ways, where people said, No, this is disgusting and wrong. I don't have to know everything about Alex Jones to know that. And that I mean, and almost more importantly, they don't know everything about Alex Jones. Like, to me, part of the jury's verdict and the way that it made me restore my, you know, similarly, I had restored faith in humanity is, is that without the constant pressure of the of Alex's media or or Fox News or whomever coloring the the way you think about things in a in a neutral setting, every human being can come to the conclusion that Alex is an asshole. That's what was so beautiful about it.

Yes, he is legally an asshole. It's yeah, if. Oh, no, complete continue. Yeah, so I was I was going to say and it just that that really helped with and I think that a similar thing happened with the midterms. I think that it's, you know, an understated argument for somebody to go, Hey, look at this fucking weirdo, you know, you know, I feel like that was actually an effective argument against people like Blake Masters and these weirdos. And, you know, the fact that where I was like, Oh, man, everybody's just fucking pilled of the gills. And it's like, yeah, a third of the country might is and that's definitely something to watch and something to be worried about. But most of the country is like, these people suck. And what the fuck are they even talking about half the time, like, you know, one thing that bummed me out was it took. Listen, Herschel Walker still almost one. Yeah, it took the single least qualified, most hypocritical political candidate in the history of the I think the world to lose a Republican race in Georgia. Yeah, that did that. I mean, that still is like I said, that's still concerning. But at least, you know, all is not lost. You know what I mean with this jury, it's, you know, all is not lost because at least these people, you know, are really thinking about the issues. I did love how Judge Bellos was so thankful to the jury, though, she kept calling them a very conscientious jury, and noting how much they were on time and everything and people were asking me, you know, are judges usually like that of juries.

I'm like, and on time one, because you'd be shocked. One guy's been like, oops, I was supposed to be here today. Yeah, and so it's. Sure. Sure. I mean, you think of, I think most people would think of courtrooms because they do their best to avoid them as places of almost supreme solemnity. So it makes sense to them to think, oh, well, the jury's always on time. They're always on time in the movies, you know, but in real life, it's jury duty, you know, I'll show up when I show up. That kind of vibe, right? It can be. Yeah, it can be. So, yeah, but I think that Judge Bellos really hit that nail in the head because they were like, I saw that there were jurors that were engaged. They were, you know, I could see where people were taking notes. And of course, you know, it's very funny that this happened in the Connecticut case too, as well as the Texas case where one juror is trying to take notes on something Alex is saying in a tape on the InfoWars broadcast. And they just give up because it's impossible to follow. And that really, you know, and, and I felt like a lot that a lot of people were worried that they would come. They wouldn't grasp the importance of this if they wouldn't grasp the issues or they'd say, ah, yeah, he did some bad stuff. But I mean, you know, he shouldn't be, you know, solely held responsible or he shouldn't be that responsible for it. I was really worried about that. But I think in both cases now we've seen where the jury has really, really thought about these issues and they're not, you know, and I think also they don't like the argument that Renal and Norm have put forward because also it treats them like they're stupid.

I've also never seen cases where you got to play to the jury that that the defendant called you dumb. Again, a golden moment. That was pretty. Why do you think we're all blue collar here? What the what the fuck is that about? Excuse me, sir. Yeah, or that the jury is, you know, rigged or Daria saying that she believes that it's a simulation to an extent. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, man, when when she when she said that to the most basic jury question, like which I think was a question that was messing with her on the degree of, you know, are you a lizard person? And they're like, do you think that, you know, this trial is staged? And when she was like, yeah, to an extent, I was just like, oh, man, that was Daria. Daria gave some of the great. She's going to go on unsung, I think, in the history books for how absolutely insane she was in that trial. There were so many moments where she agreed to something that you were you looked at her dead in the eyes and just thought if I were bleeding out, she would laugh like she has got nothing. Or would refuse to answer the most basic questions, you know, like a 12, like a 12 year old who's getting detention, like, uh, I'm not answering it.

Or, you know, it's not answering was the was the main goal of everybody at Info Wars, it felt like it did feel like that. I mean, and I think that's also by design, right? You, you know, with the Brittany Paz situation, I think it was very much by design. Hey, only let her know these things. Even if she asks about X, Y and Z, let's not tell her, right? Right, right. I think they're very much was that. I've also never seen a random criminal defense attorney serve as a corporate representative. I mean, I've seen things in these cases. I, I don't think I, I don't think to an extent we'll probably see again. I'm proud to say that we are the reason that Brittany Paz was brought in as a corporate representative. Because of, well, I guess this, I guess my life tweeting and coming on now has officially made me part of a knowledge fight cottage industry.

Yeah, see, there you go. You're, you're a bottom feeder, just like us. Welcome to the club. Excuse me, knowledge first, but oh, man, that was, um, and again, I, and that's something that also I don't know. I'm like, if the plaintiff's attorneys are aware of me, you know, and I'm pretty sure Norm name searches himself on Twitter. I believe that 100%. So I'm like, does Norm know about me, which I don't necessarily want that happening, but if he does, then who cares? But yeah, I don't care about his opinion. I know he knows about me. Oh yeah, great job, Norm.

I believe that was, yeah, because you were talking about the great job he did to which I quipped at you. I remember the, the great job, Norm. I wanted to give him a sticker. Absolutely fantastic. Can I, can I ask you, we're, we're almost at an hour and I don't want to keep you too long. So first off, can I ask you where can people find you? Obviously you're a part of the excellent opening arguments podcast. Yes. And I've also just launched a sub stack and hope to be writing on that pretty soon.

I'm in the middle of a move. So it's been kind of, it's been kind of difficult to track everything here. Naturally. No, I understand. But yes, I've done that to sort of like accompany my appearances where I host pop law on opening arguments where I talk about, you know, pop culture and law. And I also talk about disinformation and debunked disinformation about cases and such. And hopefully I'll be having some more of my own ventures pretty soon, but you can also follow me on Twitter. You can just find me, just look up ace associate Morgan Stringer at Mo String. That's M O S T R I N G.

I have to spell it because of my southern, my very thick southern accent, which I'm sure you've noticed. Yeah. Don't, don't, don't look up ace attorney. That one's on me. That was a huge mistake. No, it wasn't. It wasn't. Ace attorney.

I feel like kind of rings better, but it sounds good. You can steal it. It's all yours. So, so yes, before, before we go, I do want to ask you, people, one of the questions that people ask us all the time after, you know, six years of this, this nonsense is, how do you feel like it's affected you as a person in the way you think about things? And I was wondering the same for you, because when you immerse yourself in this kind of space, the way that we have done, it does change you. So I was wondering what kind of feelings that, or what kind of feeling of change do you have? Oh, that's a, yeah, that's, that's a good question. So I, you know, not to be.

Thank you. Not to be. No, it is. You've been asking very good questions, but this is a very, very thoughtful one. I, I would actually say not to be corny about it. But I would say it actually has, I feel like made me a better lawyer and a better communicator with how I talk about the law with people, because that's something I've actually even discovered I have a real passion for is telling people about what's going on in these types of cases and providing some sort of analysis with that. I mean, I don't know necessarily what that means, but also it's changed me in the fact that I was, you know, very despondent about the state of the legal profession. And, you know, thinking of, you know, it seems like all these, there's just so many grifters in the legal profession, and it feels like the only way to get ahead is to be one of these despicable people.

And here I am refusing, but, you know, there's no, I felt like there, there was like no advantage of this profession unless you were one of those types. Honestly, I started to feel that way, but I was, you know, trying to, you know, I was steadfast in that I wouldn't sink to those levels. And I still am and hopefully always will be God willing. I, yeah, I feel like I have gotten hope again, and that there are good attorneys, that there are attorneys who care about the principles of this profession, and there are judges who care about what's fair and justice and doing the right thing, and holding people to account, and there are jury people who made up the juries, you know, as we talked about people who say, No, this is wrong. And also that punish that we are now punishing attorneys who break the rules and are grifters. And I feel like that has changed and made me a lot more hopeful about this profession, that I'm actually seeing consequences now for the bad actions. Whereas it felt like before, they seem to be the ones taking advantage while everybody else was behind.

So I feel like my faith in the legal depression, the legal depression. The legal depression. The legal depression. I was about to say that is one of the most inspiring speeches I've ever heard until you ended it with legal depression. I mean, if Bill Pullman made a flub in Independence Day, we're not remembering that speech, right? The aliens kill us all, you know. Oh my God. I know, I know, I would.

I was like, wow, I'm sounding good, and right as I had that thought, my ADHD brain just goes, illegal depression. We're all depressed. Help us, Jordan. You were crushing it. You were right and high on the tsunami of good feelings. Yeah, but the legal profession. I mean, we also do struggle with depression in this industry, and I'm sure that that is contributing. There's a reason the words are similar.

I mean, right, but I feel like my faith in the profession has been restored. And the fact that people are interested in hearing about what the families are saying and what this isn't just about, oh, Alex comes in and it explodes on the stand. And then we all make memes and laugh and then forget about how evil he is, right? Which I mean, we can all have fun. I mean, that's fine at the end of the day. You know, when he does his weird highway man DJ stuff and throws hatchets while he's drinking in the office on Christmas Eve, right? But at the end of the day. Fantastic.

I mean, it is. If the bankruptcy goes away, I won't, you know, we'll see, but I hope I can get one of those hatchets, you know, as a gift. That's all I ask for. I do also want the Hellcat, but that might be a big ask. That's, I don't know. I think he had to sell that on account of it was too little. It wasn't manly enough for him. I think it was his rationale there.

Oh, yeah. It's it's gotta be a real man. But yeah. Yeah, that is that is one of the things that we respect the most about you and the people that we've kind of surrounded ourselves with is the need to put the families first. To put the harm first. And we can all have our fun after that, but not to forget that the reason we're here is because of this. Do you know? Yes, exactly.

It's to remember. Okay. Well, you know, yeah, he he says funny stuff on the stand and we can all make fun of him and mock him, of course. But you know, but that yeah, but that we don't lead off with that, right? That we instead say, oh, this is the harm that he has done. To, you know, society, to these families, to, you know, these, the people who know these families, you know, it's again, how trauma just kind of recycles itself and gets passed down and things. You know, that's something I also think about is the degree of harm that really this has caused. It's unimaginable.

So when you think about it that way, you know, it doesn't make the money seem as overwhelming and large. I mean, you almost do get in that situation where you're like, man, is it, you know, is this even enough? But, you know, time will tell with that. But I'm we'll see where it goes. Well, I mean, you, you, you think about the, is this enough? And what one of the powerful things that they kept bringing up was how many people were touched, you know. Yes. How many people saw this information?

How many people were influenced by this information? And, you know, you think, oh, 1.5 billion is, is a lot. But if you just had all of those people who were taken in, give a dollar, we'd be at $3 billion or whatever. Do you know what it's like? Relatively speaking, the harm he's caused is so huge that because we're so unused to money being that big, it's hard to wrap our minds around. It is. Yeah. It's also the same difficulty with wrapping your head around the amount of damages that he has caused.

So I think in there, there's, you know, there's, there's the equivalence, but we'll, we'll see what happens on the appeal for the Texas case. On if that punitive damage cap applies, we'll get to see Norm lose. I don't expect him to win these motions. I say that now. I don't expect Norm to win anything for the rest of his life. It was. I don't expect him to win a raffle for the rest of his life. It was bizarre because again, it's, oh, I, I, again, I mean, it was kind of like a twisted puzzle.

I felt like an FBI agent doing string on the board, trying to be like, is he doing this on purpose? Or is this like, there's got to be a reason just making myself mad as I'm watching all these hearings. But, you know, it's, we'll see where that goes there. And I don't know if Norm's going to be handling the appeals or what, but I mean, I suspect he will be, but all that's left for there. I mean, I, I maintain that the, the luckiest man alive is Ray Nall just because Norm exists. For all the things that Norm has done, whenever, whenever Ray Nall found out the next morning after Mark had dramatically revealed the texts, right? The next morning before they, they, the jury had gone to deliberation. I remember Ray Nall just going to talk to the judge and just being like, um, we would like to have that not have happened.

Uh, can we get an extension on the 10 days or something? And he just, he just said, I want to do over. And it's like, that's, that's unreal. But then, you know, now Norm is like, how about you just make us pay five bucks? Me? Yeah, like I got it in my wallet right now. And it's like, you're not in the position to be an asshole. And there, there is this.

How are you negotiating with us? I really do think that the only way you could win on, or, you know, there's no way you can get out with a win, right? As much as one of the moments from a Connecticut trial that cracked me up was, um, I can't remember exactly what, what it was at the moment. But Judge Bellis and he were having a discussion about objections and such. And then, um, you know, Judge Bellis said, well, I'm assuming there will be an appeal to which Norm said, what if we win? To which Judge Bellis repeated herself and said, I'm assuming there's going to be an appeal. You know, this is outside the presence of a jury and everything, but it just cracked me up. How she was just like, oh, buddy.

Um, yeah, so. That is fantastic. I've, I've enjoyed, you know, of little moments like that. And I've certainly had my fun there. But, you know, when Alex's lawyers say things like, he'll, he'll need a second job if he doesn't make millions of dollars, you know, who among us. So, yeah, that's been fun too. So I, I've enjoyed those moments. And another moment that, um, had me absolutely cracking up in the last Texas hearing was Renault was there and Judge Maya wanted him to get his poster board, you know, that he had his little props.

I think you'll remember. Oh yeah, we couldn't, we wanted that so bad. We wanted that so bad. I still, I'm dreaming of getting that. Well, Judge Maya said basically, can you please take these out of here? We have them like in the back, essentially. And, you know, over these years and Mark, uh, said that he would, I think he said he would give Renault a hundred bucks for him. And I died laughing.

I just, I, I'm so glad I was not in the courtroom in person that day because I would have. Oh my God, I would have had to have one of Alex's coughing fits to cover up my laughing. It's fantastic. I think that is a great story to end on. Morgan, thank you so much for coming on. This was fantastic. It's been, uh, we've wanted to have you on for a while. We appreciate the work that you're, you're doing, you know, watching all of these hearings.

And we're just so grateful. So thank you very much. And if you want to tell people one more time where they can find you. All right. Well, easiest way is to find me on the hell site, Twitter, um, ace associate Morgan Stringer and the ad is at most string. M O S T R I N G. And you can also find me on the opening arguments podcast occasionally talking about pop culture and law. And I'll hopefully have some new projects out pretty soon here.

Awesome. Thank you so much. And, uh, I hope we will talk to you again soon. Andy in Kansas. You're on the air. Thanks for holding. Well, Alex, I'm a first time caller. I'm a huge fan.

I love your work.