Law&Crime Sidebar - Alex Jones Calls Judge in Defamation Trial ‘Soros Operative’

Episode Date: September 15, 2022

While Alex Jones’ corporate representative was testifying in his Connecticut defamation trial on Tuesday, he went on the “Steven Crowder Show” and called one judge a “George Soros operative” with “blue hair.” Jones didn't specify whether he was talking about the Texas or Connecticut case. The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber has the latest.LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Michael Deininger Guest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller

that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. Alex Jones claims that the judge in his case is a George Soros operative. We break down his wild comments he made as his Connecticut trials going on. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm just See, Weber. Okay, so as you know, we've been covering Alex Jones's trial out in Connecticut. The Infowars host, the conspiracy theorist, he's been sued by an FBI agent and family members of those killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting for his comments over the years

that Sandy Hook was fake, that it was a host, that it was staged, that there were crisis actors, and they sued him for defamation, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, unfair trade practices. And you know what? They have already won this case. That's right, because the court entered a default judgment against Jones because he basically refused to comply with discovery obligations during the course of this litigation. So the judge automatically ruled against him. And the task for this six-person jury is to decide how much Jones has to pay up in the amount of damages. And this kind of echoes almost the same trial that we saw and covered in Texas over the summer, where Jones was now ordered to pay almost $50 million

dollars in damages to the parents of a six-year-old boy that was killed in Sandy Hook. And what the plaintiffs are saying is that Jones knew the story was false. His views and engagement were going up. He kept pushing this story. He kept profiting off of it. And that these plaintiffs were targeted, harassed, and threatened by Jones supporters. On top of all of the emotional pain of being told that they didn't experience what they experienced. So this is what the case is in Connecticut. And Jones is already in this kind of

losing position. Now, I should tell you, Jones hasn't showed up in court yet. He hasn't been in Connecticut. And we believe, though, he will testify and take the stand. Now, typically, defendants in these kinds of cases try to maintain a low profile. They try not to make a lot of statements during the course of the case, but not Alex Jones. You see, Jones decided to sit down for an interview with conservative commentator Stephen Crowder. And boy, oh boy, did he have a lot to say. Let's start with his opinion on the case and also the judge. They will sue you in one of three jurisdictions.

As they take over more jurisdictions, they're getting this level of criminal judiciary in. They will sue you in Austin, Texas, Travis County. They will sue you in New York, New York. They will sue you in Washington, D.C. And Austin's famous for indicting Rick Perry when he was governor for vetoing a bill. How do you do that? You don't. I mean, it's in the Constitution, and it's a law that he can veto bills,

but they still, it took him two years to beat it in $2 million. Tom DeLay, totally legally raising money, indicted him criminally. Well, now what they do is they do a default. So they sue you in one of these key jurisdictions they control. If you're dumb enough to live in one of them, but still they'll still just do it in D.C. and make you go there. They'll sue you in the jurisdiction with a judge assigned they control and who's a political operative, this lady's a Soros operative,

admit she has on our own, you know, Facebook, they will then pick the judge, sue you, and then for years say, we want your discovery. And each time say, this isn't it. We want more. We want your bank accounts. We want the emails. We want the text messages. And then when you give them everything, they say you're defaulted. You didn't give us anything. And now they go and have a jury trial on how guilty you are. So you're not innocent until proven guilty. You're not, you're not guilty until proven innocent. You are guilty until proven how guilty. Honestly, I have to tell you, there's so much to break down here. I'm not even sure where to begin. But let's start with the fact that this isn't about Jones being found guilty. Okay, neither the Connecticut case nor the Texas trial

is about guilt. It's about liability. A criminal case is about a guilty verdict. Cases like this are about liability. So yes, he was found liable in Texas. He was found liable in Connecticut for the various claims like I mentioned. And as he claims, he says, he lost. He was automatically found guilty, air quotes, because really he didn't comply. with discovery obligations. He didn't turn over everything that he was supposed to. There's a difference between making legal arguments for why certain material shouldn't be handed over to the other side versus what he did, which is just not handing it over,

which is just not complying because you can't do that. You can't just refuse to do something, especially when the court instructs you to do so. And he claims that he did turn everything over, but that's not true. And he also talks about how they'll sue in specific places. Well, let's just take that back for a second. Litigants can forum shop, right? They can look at beneficial places to sue, but they can find beneficial venues, but they can't just sue anywhere that they want to sue.

There has to be some sort of minimal contacts, minimal connection to that jurisdiction to sue there. You know, Texas is where Jones lives, where Info Wars is operated. Connecticut is obviously where Sandy Hook happened, where the families are from. So he's wrong about that. And also, you just can't pick a judge like he claims. They're usually, it happens at random. A judge is selected or appointed. And I'll tell you what, my colleague Aaron Keller wrote a great piece on this on

law and crime.com that further explains this. But just to move on here, he also claims Alex Jones that the judge is a Soros operative. And I can't say it's entirely clear which judge he's referring to either the judge in the Texas trial, Maya Gamble or the one in Connecticut, Barbara Bellis. But obviously he's referring to this long. standing theory that billionaire George Soros is the mastermind behind this global criminal enterprise. But, you know, I got to ask, why does he think this? He said Soros operative. She admits it on her Facebook. That's the kind of stuff for people

say, well, she doesn't say I'm a Soros operative. What do you mean by that? Because that's the kind of thing the media will take out of context and say, Alex Jones says that she said on her Facebook. She's a Soros operative. And that's not true. Therefore, everything else he said is well, if you go there, she's got purple blue hair and has all these Soros funded packs on the side, and she gets money out of the packs that are funded by Soros, just like the Austin DA is famous for letting people that shoot people out of jail the next day. Right. Like up here in Fort Worth, I mean, I mean, you know there's over a thousand DAs and county

attorneys that Soros literally bankrolled. Yes. And they take, well, Austin is a Soros bastion. Right. And so judges are elected there. They're financed by these PACs that he funds and with a bunch of other money. But, I mean, you can actually go dig that out. Yeah, I know, but she didn't say, I'm a full.

No, you're right. She did not say, you know, that's the kind of stuff. She did not say, I am a Soros operative. You are correct. Right. And you don't know if Soros paid for her blue hair dye. We cannot confirm nor deny, but we'll assume so. So let me ask you this, because I didn't want, I have to be careful, obviously, because.

No, no, you're absolutely right. But I was. That was I firmly by me. It's amazing. It's literally amazing. Now, I'll tell you, the funniest part about this is that Crowder right at the end says, we have to be careful because I know you're going to trial, we have the trial going on,

and Jones says hyperbole. It's funny because in Jones's Texas trial, as the trial was going on, he went on Info Wars and made fun of the jury and the plaintiffs, and there was a segment on his site that had the judge in flames and said that she was working with child sex traffickers. So on the one hand, he really didn't learn his lesson by going on Crowder's show

in the middle of this trial, But because especially like it happened in Texas, they could play this interview when he's on the stand in Connecticut. They could say, you claim to take this trial seriously, like they said in Texas, but yet you're going on his show and saying all these things. On the other hand, you could also say, well, maybe Jones has learned something because he has enough sense to protect himself by saying that he's talking in hyperbole and he's exaggerating and maybe he shouldn't be taken seriously. But then Jones does his own version of a recap of what happened to him in Texas. Let's walk through the show trial. Okay. So we have a two-week trial on damages.

The headlines are Alex Jones found guilty of defamation and personal infliction of arm. Because that's where you get the bigger money. By a judge, you have to read the bottom of the article to say she found me guilty. Then she instructs the jury, I'm guilty. then she instructs my lawyer that he can't really talk or go any of these dozens of places in pre-trial and morning special hearing she has where she turns off the internet feed and doesn't let you see what's happening she kept constantly doing that of the internet streaming of it and then once that happens then she instructs the jury that I'm guilty they asked for 150 million they put this so-called financial expert on who'd been given our actual finances who'd been given in our federally sworn bankruptcy filing about here's what we have here's the real money that's

there didn't look at it we weren't allowed to even cross-examine him or ask him any questions that quote weren't in there evidence the guy who looked like he had a dead mink on his head the guy that looked like thirst and hell the 80th exactly yes exactly and so he gets up there and calls me gingus con and i'm the greatest business whenever and i'm so evil and my company's worth 130 million and i'm worth 260 million and so the jury told reuters later the jury for woman. Well, we didn't think he deserved to be wiped out and gotten rid of for his quote mistake. So we only gave each plaintiff, the man and woman, 10% of his wealth. Well, what they thought they gave him was way more than the wealth I had. Even if it was 47 million or,

and there's different calculations. But the maximum allowable that you'll be paying out. It's 5.6 million. But see, that's the thing is, in other words, does the New York Times know that? Yes. To all of these other outlets reporting on that? No. Do they know that? Yes. They do know that. But they want the headline U.O, whatever it is, 50 million, 60 million, whatever the headline was exactly the exact amount, even though they know that that's not accurate because they want it to be seen as a bigger victory. Exactly. It's lie after lie after lie. Now, I think he might be referring to law and crime and the streaming, but I'm not entirely sure. Anyway, so again, it was the judge who found Jones liable, not guilty, right? And the reason she instructed the jury

about that is because she's supposed to. That's their job. The liability portion of this case has already been decided. She has to tell them what their job is, which is basically just to decide how much they're going to decide in damages. And when he says that his lawyer wasn't allowed to make arguments, of course, when you lose by default judgment, you can't say that you're innocent. You can't say that you didn't defame anyone. You can't say that you didn't intend to do this. That's already been decided. So he can't say that, of course, Of course, his side can't bring that up. He might see it as unfair. He might see it as the system out to get him, but that's not the case at all. He lost for not participating in the litigation, and that's just what happens. You can't then make arguments. And the media, the media is reporting the damages about $49.3 million because that's what the jury award was. It hasn't been decided how much Jones will actually have to pay.

So they're reporting the number. And he's right. There is a cap in Texas on punitive damages. And so that number could be much less. But again, that question is still being litigated. So he can't really hit the media on saying, why are they reporting such a large number? Because that's the number as it is right now. But moving on, we can't forget that he's really on Crowder's show to talk about his book.

Let's listen. You've had a year. I want to get into it. And you kind of tell me what we can and what we can't get into, obviously. But this is your new book, The Great Reset, The War for the World. Yes. And it went to number one and a whole bunch of shows. went to number two on Wall Street Journal and a bunch of others. And that's even with some rigging.

It should have been number one there. And the New York Times talked to Tony Lyons, the head of Skyrus Publishing, and said, it's Alex Jones. We're not even going to list it. So there were books that were like number 19, 15, you name it on the New York Times but seller list that we sold 10, 15, 20 times more books than those. So we should have been number one, but stuff way down their list. We sold dozens of times more. And that's just in the first month of its sale at cash registers and stores. That's how that happens. It doesn't count all the massive amounts they got sold online at Amazon or InfoWords.com. And so it is the number one book, not just fiction, not just nonfiction, all of them more than any textbook, more than any Harry Potter book, the Great Reset and World, number one, showing that freedom and liberty is very, very popular.

People want to understand what Klaus Schwab and the globalists are up to. Last time I was on, we talked a lot about the Great Reset. There's a lot of great, great reset books out there, but this really is in their own words. It's a very easy book to write because it's really their confession of what they're setting up. And so it definitely scares the power structure. That's why they try to suppress me and censor me because the real Alex Jones is popular versus the straw man. They're trying to build. Well, what we can say, and this is according to Mediite, is they say, quote,

according to publishers weekly, Jones's book sold over 30,000 copies within the first week of it's released in August. The Great Reset currently sits at number 17 in the Amazon bestseller category, and number one in their globalization category. Jones claims to have sold many copies on InfoWars.com, but the data for that is private and no evidence has been made public by Jones to show that this book surpassed the Harry Potter book sales and sales. Yeah, so he might be exaggerating a bit.

But I will tell you why this is interesting and how this can play into this case. There is a question of why is Jones about to take the stand in Connecticut? Because he's so limited in his defense. Like I said, he can't say he's innocent. He can't even say that he didn't profit off of San Diego. hook coverage because he was sanctioned by the court on day one of this trial for not turning over a document showing Infowars web traffic traffic. So the judge said, since you didn't turn this over

as a result, you can't say that you didn't profit off of Sandy Hook. He can't make that defense. So if he really can't defend himself, he really can't say anything, what is he going to take the stand for? Why is he doing it? There is an argument that could be made that he's testifying not so much for the jury, but for his base, his supporters, turn the court into a theater. Once again, and get more people to listen to him, get more people to buy his products, to donate. Because you have to think that with this damages award in Texas and what could be an even bigger award in Connecticut, since there's more plaintiffs and there's no cap on punitive damages, he may need the money.

He may need the support. But he has to be very careful when he's on the stand because if he starts saying stuff that he's not supposed to, if he crosses the line, the judge has already warned his attorney that she will hold Jones in contempt of court. And thanks, everybody, for tuning into Sidebar. Please subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcast. We very much appreciate it.

I'm Jesse Weber. We'll speak to you next time. Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.