Transcript/378: Formulaic Objections Part 2

Warning: Bot Generated Content
This transcript was automatically generated by transcription software and likely contains many mistakes and misattributions. Please check the audio for definitive quotes, attribution, and context.

Alex Jones (00:00:04.000)

Red Alert. Red alert. Red alert. Red Alert knowledge five Damn, Jordan I'm sweating knowledge party.com It's time to pray. And I have great respect for knowledge like knowledge. I'm sick of them posing as if they're the good guys showing me or the bad couch knowledge by Dan and Jordan knowledge five need money Andy and Andy you're stopping Andy and Ken handy in Kansas. Bray Andy in Kansas, surely your place rolling. Huge fan. I love your world. Knowledge by knowledge fight.com.

Dan (00:00:59.000)

Hey, everybody, welcome back to knowledge fight. I'm Dan. Jordan. We're couple dudes like to sit around right now with the beverages and talk a little bit about Alex Jones.

Jordan (00:01:06.000)

Indeed, we

Dan (00:01:07.000)

are damn damn Damn, Jordan,

Jordan (00:01:10.000)

let me ask you a quick question. What's the end of the year? We're gonna be doing all kinds of recast of lists. All I want to know, Dan, is there anything in 2019? That has surprised you know, exactly right. Yeah. I think the thing is, everything is so incredibly surprising. Nothing is surprising. Yeah. You know, you're like, I can't believe they would just do that. And then you're like, Yeah, I

Dan (00:01:33.000)

can't. My brain has been burned out to novelty. Yeah. To such a great extent that I could try a nice dish.

Jordan (00:01:41.000)

That's crazy. All right. Cool.

Dan (00:01:45.000)

Yeah, I guess okay. I'm a little surprised that I'm not enjoying Luigis Mansion as much as

Jordan (00:01:51.000)

I was actually thinking about asking you for a follow up on that earlier. Because I thought that might be the

Dan (00:01:56.000)

case. He doesn't have some of the same charm. Maybe I was 18. When I played the first one, and I'm 35

Jordan (00:02:03.000)

Nostalgia can kill.

Dan (00:02:07.000)

I'm trying to play it slowly. So it lasts, you know, yeah. And I come back to it. And I don't even know what I'm doing. Oh, no, no fighting ghosts and stuff. Right? I guess that's a little surprising. Is there anything in the wrong direction?

Jordan (00:02:18.000)

Is there any kind of like quest structure to it? Or is it like a platform

Dan (00:02:21.000)

to save your friends who are stuck in paintings of blue? Right, King blue, of course. But you just run around each level of this hotel? And you find a ghost boss? Oh, I don't know, man. I don't know. But anyway, this podcast where I don't have a lot of surprises this year. But I do know a lot about Alex Jones.

Jordan (00:02:43.000)

And I don't I know a lot about not having any surprises. And I don't know anything about Alex Jones. Good stuff. So there we are. So

Dan (00:02:50.000)

Jordan, today what we're going to be doing is we're going to be going over some depositions that dropped at the end of last week at the end of November, all three of the Musketeers. Yeah, Rob do Sure. Paul Joseph Watson, Alex Jones wrote again, all gave depositions in the ongoing Sandy Hook lawsuit. And there's some interesting stuff in this. Yeah. And low key I think Rob dues might be the most interesting of the Okay. All right, is I could that's the surprise. And there we go. Rob do is finally done. One thing. That's interesting. All right. That's the surprise of turning it. Right, Rob, dude, his deposition was more interesting to me than Alex. So we'll get down to business and talk a little bit about that. But before we do gotta take a little moment, say thank you, folks who've signed up and are supporting the show. It's a good idea. So first of all, Caleb, thank you so much. You're now a policy wonk.

Alex Jones (00:03:43.000)

I'm a policy wonk.

Dan (00:03:44.000)

Thank you. Next, Matthew, thank you so much. You are now a policy wonk.

Alex Jones (00:03:48.000)

I'm a policy wonk.

Dan (00:03:49.000)

Thank you, Matthew. Matthew, next, Christopher, thank you so much. You are now a policy wonk.

Alex Jones (00:03:53.000)

I'm a policy wonk,

Jordan (00:03:54.000)

thank you very much.

Dan (00:03:55.000)

Good evening, can spear se OOP author. Next, Josiah, thank you so much. You are now a policy wonk.

Alex Jones (00:04:01.000)

I'm a policy wonk.

Jordan (00:04:02.000)

Thank you, Josiah. Elliot, thank

Dan (00:04:05.000)

you so much. Sure. Now, if I was a walk, I'm a policy wonk.

Jordan (00:04:08.000)

Thank you, Elliot. And then my favorite character on the magician's eyes. The Magicians Great show.

Dan (00:04:13.000)

Great. You want to wear pastic show. All right. Is it all close up magic?

Jordan (00:04:18.000)

No, it's all real man. It's a terrible show. But I love it. Okay. Okay.

Dan (00:04:22.000)

I like magic. I love it. Whenever I'd be out at bars doing shows and stuff and someone walk up on the street while I'm smoking a cigarette and want to do magic trick. I like it. Yeah, my favorite. Second only to this next last person who is signed up on an elevated level. like to say thank you so much, Rachel, you are now a technocrat.

Alex Jones (00:04:41.000)

I'm a policy wonk. Crikey made that's fantastic. And you self Abreu. How's your 401k doing bro? We gotta go full tilt buggy on this Watson. All right. Let's just get down to business. We ain't making that money off that heroin. Why you pimp so good. My neck is freakishly large. I declare info war on you.

Dan (00:05:00.000)

Thank you so much, Rachel. Yes, thank

Jordan (00:05:01.000)

you very much, Rachel.

Dan (00:05:02.000)

If you're all out there thinking, listening thinking, I like the show like sport with these gems do you can do that by going to our website knowledge like.com clicking the button on that it says, butcher, we'd appreciate it'd be really helpful. So I was kind of struggling with trying to figure out exactly how we should do this episode. Because it's three depositions, you know, and it seems like the structure would be weird. Like, should we take intermissions? Should we do it as separate episodes? Yeah, I figure we could do is a classic three act structure. Okay. Well, all right, third act is much longer. Okay.

Jordan (00:05:32.000)

All right. It's just like, Marvel territory, we're, our third act is going to have some issues,

Dan (00:05:39.000)

we will have third act problems, you're gonna have first tech problems, back problems. But each each of these depositions is really interesting to me in very different ways. And so there'll be there'll be a different vibe to each of them. You can predict what Alex is, is.

Jordan (00:05:55.000)

He doesn't remember anything or understand anything or nothing had anything to do with him. I say,

Dan (00:06:00.000)

I am not me. Yeah, exactly. But the other two have a very bizarre kind of almost through line through them. Okay. Paul, Joseph Watson's got something interesting going on Rob, who's got something far more interesting. So let's start with the Paul Joseph Watson. Okay. He sits down and I will say that I don't I of course, I'm very clear on this. I don't like Paul Joseph Watson.

Jordan (00:06:28.000)

No, me neither. I find his voice insufferable and is positions a nonsensical bordering on evil.

Dan (00:06:35.000)

Now, that said, I think he comes off like much more of a human. Okay, this deposition. All right, because I think that he has some sort of a brand to protect a little bit. Yeah. And he doesn't want to.

Jordan (00:06:47.000)

He has a random attack. So he comes off human. Well, there. Yeah,

Dan (00:06:50.000)

there's two elements, right? Because there's one and that he does have a history of telling Alex to stop doing the Sandy Hook shit. Yes, that's true. He does have that in his that, that that arrow is in his quiver that you can pull out and be like, I tried Look, dude, whatever. So he has that. And then second, he knows that he doesn't want to look like he's a fucking idiot. Yeah, he doesn't want to come off as like, like Alex was. obfuscates everything. I have no idea what my name

Jordan (00:07:21.000)

is. Right, right.

Dan (00:07:22.000)

I don't think Paul wants to look like that. And so it creates an interesting dynamic where and I think a lot of people took these headlines to write about this and they're like, he's turned on Alex.

Jordan (00:07:34.000)

Yeah, sure. Sure. Sure.

Dan (00:07:36.000)

I think there's a little bit of an appearance of that, but he is still trying to defend our Yeah, in as much as he can while still being like my hands are clean. I don't know you guys do what you're gonna do with him.

Jordan (00:07:45.000)

He's got a tough tightrope to walk. Yeah, I would say it seems like a mid level mafioso.

Dan (00:07:50.000)

I don't know. It's not to express any pity or anything. But it is a tough law. Yeah, no, fuck him. So we start here, the towards the beginning of the deposition, where we learn that Paul has never actually even been employed by info.

Mark Bankston (00:08:06.000)

Can you list for me every job position you have held? Without Jones Infowars or free speech systems LLC.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:08:15.000)

I'm not an employee and have never been an employee. So I haven't had an official job position.

Mark Bankston (00:08:22.000)

How would you describe your employment relationship or your working relationship with Mr. Jobs?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:08:27.000)

Contractor?

Dan (00:08:30.000)

This is interesting. Paul's been there for 20 years.

Jordan (00:08:33.000)

Yeah, I you know, what is Alex gonna pay insurance benefits of 401k? Hell no,

Dan (00:08:40.000)

I would certainly hope so. For one. I find that very difficult to believe. Yeah. I think it makes I mean, he's under oath. He's, he's testifying, I would assume that if there were very easily attainable records that he is employed has been a stupid thing to say. But hey, yes, yes. He's just an I guess, like it is pro wrestling shit, right? It's just it's like Alex's Vince McMahon with all these independent contractors masquerading as employees.

Jordan (00:09:10.000)

I think it must be partially his kind of decision as well. You can't you can't be an independent contractor with somebody for 20 years and not at least have a conversation of like, Hey, I you know, maybe we should deal with actual labor laws today.

Dan (00:09:28.000)

Well, I mean, he's in the UK, but that might make things a little difficult. That's true. That might Yeah, I don't think that would be an impediment. I have no idea. Yeah. And the level of responsibility he's had over the years at Infowars. Exact editor at large title and like he writes the bulk of the material. Yeah. Like, yeah, he would have every negotiating chip available to him. 100% To be an employee should he want to be Yeah, so yeah, maybe maybe there is like a mutually advantageous reason for that? Yeah, I'm not entirely sure what it is. But I thought that was pretty strange.

Jordan (00:10:05.000)

I mean, I guess among thieves, the idea is like, hey, we can't take each other down. You know, that kind of thing. Like, if you go down, I am not going down with you. And and that goes both directions. Like Paula can say something so fucking crazy that Alex would be able to distance himself. Hey, you've never actually worked here, man. I was just, which is stupid. But yeah,

Dan (00:10:27.000)

so as we know, from listening back to the episodes of Infowars, from that stretch of time after the shooting at Sandy Hook, we know that Paul Joseph Watson did interview Professor James Tracy was a proponent of the crisis actors theory and did push back right, a little Yeah, it was it was muddy, it was a little bit mixed. In my opinion, there was a little bit too much leniency given to him. But at the same time, Paul did say I don't agree with these ideas, right. So to again, like I said, the thinnest of praise possible, right? does have that to be like I did say, I don't believe this, right. So they play a little clip of that. And this is really important, because what this does, in terms of the questioning, is to explicitly lay out that as early as like February 2013, people at Infowars, were aware that the parents and the family members were being harassed. Yes.

Mark Bankston (00:11:25.000)

This being a month after Sandy Hook. You were aware at this time, that the parents were being harassed by believers in the Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy. Correct. Okay,

Dan (00:11:38.000)

so that is damage that's demonstrated.

Jordan (00:11:41.000)

Yeah, that's not good. No, it's not good for the outlook of Alex in this scenario, and

Dan (00:11:45.000)

in the clip that is played of Paul interviewing Tracy, even back then there's audio of Paul bringing up to James Tracy. Yeah, that people are being harassed to there's a large awareness of this. Oh, yeah. So also, uh, back in the early days, Leonard Posner's sent an email to Info Wars telling them, Hey, these people are harassing us. And they need to be reeled in. I used to be a fan of your show. But I think now I realized that a lot of these behaviors are being encouraged. Now, the response to that email from Infowars, was apparently written by Paul Joseph Watson. Later in Alex's deposition, there'll be some maybe insinuations that Alex wrote it with him chair, but it's unclear there. But in this deposition, it's clear that Paul wrote it himself.

Mark Bankston (00:12:36.000)

And now let's chalk it up to your response. Do you? Do you remember writing this response? Does this bring back that memory? Now that

Paul Joseph Watson (00:12:46.000)

is presented to me, yes. I didn't recall it. Okay, when you initially broil but yes,

Mark Bankston (00:12:52.000)

sure. Now, do you know, did you do this on your own? Or was this a collaborative effort among other people at Infowars? Do you remember that?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:13:00.000)

Now this would have been me personally.

Dan (00:13:03.000)

Okay. So

Jordan (00:13:05.000)

He almost said, Now nobody else knows how to read there. Yeah, everyone. Literally see sounded defeated. Just hunt and peck with the rest of yeah, just like Jesus Christ. Of course, I wrote it by myself.

Dan (00:13:18.000)

So now this is interesting here for one reason, and that is that this would give Alex a little bit of plausible deniability share, because the interview with James Tracy was done by Paul, maybe Alex, I'd say he never heard it. He didn't know about the talk about the harassing of the parents. Sure. Sure. Sure. And this. Paul was just like, I was the one who got that email. I wrote back to the guy, maybe Alex can pretend he never saw that. Yeah. And see if Alex screws that up later, naturally. So one of the things that the lawyers seem to want to press on is like, Guys, do you really think that what you did was okay. Do you think that would Infowars engaged in was all right?

Jordan (00:13:56.000)

It's not great that in a court of law, you have to ask people if they actually have morality at

Dan (00:14:01.000)

all. Do you have no decency? Yeah, exactly. So Paul has asked that and he tries to wiggle out of giving a yes or no answer, but then it kind of just has to be like, Nah,

Mark Bankston (00:14:09.000)

yeah. But in terms of what you think is decent and right, in terms of covering the story. You think Infowars always adhere to what is decent and right, covering the story?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:14:22.000)

Well, it's just a subjective term. From from my personal perspective, decent and Ryan, I would not have covered it in that way.

Dan (00:14:36.000)

So that is pretty that I think, is where you could say like he's throwing Alex under the bus. Yeah, that would be the only one but to be fair to Paul, like, what position is he in? He gave me as no reason to go to bat and be like, Everything was just fine. Yeah, I mean, I clearly told them to cut it out back then. Now I with the gift of hindsight, realizing how wrong we were it It was decent,

Jordan (00:15:00.000)

edify man. See, that's a huge missed opportunity there for me because I think I would want that question to then be broadened of just like, do you think anything you've done there is decent and right.

Dan (00:15:13.000)

I think I think if you're talking to Paul Joseph Watson, and he's being this sort of fair, yeah, yeah, you don't want to jeopardize it.

Jordan (00:15:22.000)

I don't know. I want to shoot the shit with him see what's going on?

Dan (00:15:26.000)

I would say that the lawyers would be wise to not turn this adversarial, fair. And even the Paul is being candid enough with his answer. That's true that like, Why Why fight with this British guy when we might be able to get some piece of information out of it. I do

Jordan (00:15:42.000)

appreciate Paul more when he's not able to edit his annoying voice together. Back to Back nightmarish. hellscape

Dan (00:15:50.000)

Yeah, it does make him seem more human. Yeah. So the big piece here, I think one of the big revelations is in discovery, Alex sent over all of these emails from Infowars. And the lawyers have gone through them, right. And one of the emails they found was an email that Paul sent to Buckley and Anthony Gucci RT, were apparently in managerial roles.

Jordan (00:16:15.000)

Can I get you to drop some tunes at my next party?

Dan (00:16:19.000)

Oh, that is not the that might be another email. That's a different email. But that's not this one. All right, fine. So in this email, Paul is telling them what he has told Alex, he has texted Alex a message, and he's sending it to them in order to have it on the record, or whatever. Okay. And so the lawyer sets this up here.

Mark Bankston (00:16:41.000)

Mr. Watson, I'd like to show you another document now. And I would like to show you an email that you sent in 25th. On December 17.

Dan (00:16:52.000)

So we got to 2015, December 17, the email that was sent to these dudes, and here is what's in the email. And I think that this is where we get into like a real interesting, see saw kind of situation of like, is this a good email? Okay, we'll see.

Mark Bankston (00:17:14.000)

I want to read what you said to Alex. This Sandy Hook stuff is killing us. It's promoted by the most batshit crazy people like ribs, and Fetzer, who all hate us anyway. Plus, it makes us look really bad to align with people who harass the parents of dead kids. It's going to hurt us with drudge and bringing bigger names into the show. Plus the event happened three years ago. Why even risk our reputation for it? My first question is, let's first talk about who Jeff Lorenz is, you know who he is? Yeah. Okay. Jeff RINs is a notoriously unreliable conspiracy theorist and rabid anti Semite, correct.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:18:09.000)

I'm not I don't know enough about him to call him a rabid anti Semite. But I would say he was a conspiracy theorist. Yeah.

Dan (00:18:16.000)

Yeah. That's that's kind of a consistent thread throughout this is like they keep they keep asking about these, like Jim Fetzer, like, you know, this guy is a deeply anti semitic. Why I don't know

Jordan (00:18:29.000)

what what is anti semitism at the end of the day? Yeah.

Dan (00:18:33.000)

So the reason I think that that email is a seesaw is because on the one hand, you have Paul saying, We got to cut this shit out, right, which is good, because the end result of that would be stopping the behavior. Yes. On the other side of the seesaw, it doesn't seem to come from a place of concern, or this is wrong, right. It seems like well, Drudge won't like us so much. Right. And we won't be able to get big guests because we're engaging in this kind of bullshit. Right? Right. Right. So I don't know how I feel about that.

Jordan (00:19:01.000)

I mean, it would be like Fox News canceling Tucker Carlson Carlson show because all of the advertisers dropped out. Right You know, it's like, you guys let this white suit clear white nationalist white supremacist run on your network unabated for however long and the only reason you're stopping him is because of appearances and money. Yeah, mock you.

Dan (00:19:21.000)

Yeah, there is that that sort of sense of like doing the right thing for the wrong reason. And I I still applaud like his ability to speak this. Yeah. Yeah. Like at least it's some you know that there is some voice there. That's like, we shouldn't be doing Yeah, I use wish it came from a place of like the right reason to not want to do this. Yeah. Because it does imply that like, if these things weren't a concern, I wouldn't have a problem with this. Yeah.

Jordan (00:19:48.000)

May be the case. This is probably the best we're gonna get from the psychopaths. So

Dan (00:19:54.000)

probably, you know, although it does also introduce another strange dynamic and that is the that is have a voice that's there. Because you don't really think about that the possibility that at Infowars, there is some dissent and they still do what they do. Yeah, that's even scarier.

Jordan (00:20:10.000)

See? That's that is a good question, because we've talked a bunch about how it's like, shouldn't there be somebody there going, Alex, don't fucking do this. And it's clear there are people there saying, Alex don't do maybe not all the time. And No, probably not all the time, but he just can't control himself. Yeah, I don't think that like just going based off this. I genuinely think Alex would listen to him and at the same time, not be able to control himself on the air. Yeah. And wind up just saying that dumb shit. I

Dan (00:20:40.000)

think that's one of the problems with his sort of improvisational style. Yeah. You know, like, yeah, it will lead you to some places where you're like, just not doing not doing it. Yeah. So in the email, Paul, Joseph Watson says that Jeff rants and Jim Fetzer are batshit crazy right. Now that I know about rabid anti Semites though they're batshit crazy. batshit crazy. Now, this opens up the possibility for this lawyer to put Paul in a little bit of a trap, that he doesn't seem to be thrilled to be checkmate.

Mark Bankston (00:21:14.000)

Tell me how you came to the conclusion that these two gentlemen that Infowars was relying on? Were batshit

Jordan (00:21:21.000)

crazy. That's a good question.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:21:26.000)

Because they were pushing the notion that nobody died at Sandy Hook, which I thought was not credible and was supported by no evidence. So therefore, was a crazy conclusion to make.

Mark Bankston (00:21:38.000)

So by that same logic, Alex Jones equally batshit crazy.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:21:47.000)

I wouldn't describe him as batshit crazy.

Mark Bankston (00:21:51.000)

What kind of crazy?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:21:54.000)

I wouldn't describe it as him commenting on the controversy of the conspiracy theories that were swirling about Sandy Hook and the time,

Dan (00:22:03.000)

that's going to be also a sort of refrain, like we were covering what was yeah, that is kind of, I think, when you consider their actual behaviors, that facade isn't very strong. Now, it doesn't seem like a really great legal argument. But I do I love that. I love that. It's like, okay, why are they crazy? X behavior? Yeah, Alex does x also.

Jordan (00:22:30.000)

I do like that this is in an echoey room, because I don't know if anything has ever run more hollow than his. I think he's just covering the controversy, like you can thank you prefer that. Yeah,

Dan (00:22:43.000)

he's calling in jolly old London. So they push on this question of like, why is this behavior in them crazy and not Alex? And I don't know, if PJ dubs is convinced me that there's a difference.

Mark Bankston (00:22:59.000)

Okay. So if Jeff rinse or Jim Fetzer starts pushing allegations, that the children aren't real, that the parents are fake, and that the crime is all fake, and it's all an act, they're batshit. Crazy. But if Jones says literally the exact same words on his telephones web broadcast, he's just doing a good job as a journalist.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:23:21.000)

Well, to kind of combine this with your previous question, I would say the description of them as batshit crazy would also involve things that they've said in the past unrelated to Sandy Hook, maybe about UFO was or alien abduction or holograms on 911, which I think was facts as big thing for a while. So, you know, they had they had a previous of engaging in very obscure conspiracy theories, which would contribute to that description of batshit crazy.

Mark Bankston (00:24:00.000)

Do you think that their history of doing that is any different than Alex Jones? Buck, but what do I say? What do I say? That No, but again,

Paul Joseph Watson (00:24:13.000)

I have the right to engage in that speech under the First Amendment.

Mark Bankston (00:24:18.000)

I'm not at this point. I'm not asking you who had the right to do what we'll figure that out. What I'm asking you is Alex Jones and his crazy conspiracies about shadow interdimensional governments and fish hybrids. Things like this isn't no different than qualitatively no difference in how they covered conspiracy theories, correct.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:24:45.000)

That's your view. I don't I wouldn't necessarily agree with it.

Mark Bankston (00:24:50.000)

Alright, so in your view, people like rinse and Fetzer are bad. But Mr. Jones, not in the same way

Paul Joseph Watson (00:25:02.000)

I would say not in the same way because I would say Alex was covering the controversy.

Dan (00:25:08.000)

Share about it. Yeah. So you get the get the same share about it. Yeah. All right. So I think that what you have there is absolutely evidence of I don't have a good answer for this. Yeah.

Jordan (00:25:21.000)

He thought he was he thought he was so smart when he gave that first answer of like, well, because they said that Sandy Hook was crazy. And then that he got this follow up question. He's like, Shit, I should have said that. Everything else they said was fucking crazy. I feel

Dan (00:25:36.000)

like if I'm working for Alex Jones, or maybe not working for him, or working for him as a decade's long contract, or whatever the case is, yeah, and I'm getting deposed. I might come up with a reason why Alex isn't the same as the other people who lie about Sandy. Yeah, I feel like that's just something you probably could expect might come up. It doesn't seem like there's any preparation here.

Jordan (00:26:00.000)

You know, this reminds me because I was just thinking the exact same thing. I was just thinking that their brand of crazy cannot survive in an under oath situation with somebody who is prepared to fuck them up, essentially, more or less, but it is such that psychopath of like, no matter what, I'm the smartest guy in the room, you know, I don't need to prepare. I don't need to do it and wing it. I'm gonna outsmart this dude. No big deal. Yeah, like, that's what I get the feel.

Dan (00:26:28.000)

I'm not sure if Paul is 100% on that tip, because I think he is still being agreeable. And I do see some indications that he might have checked his emails that he had written. Sure. Past. Yeah, that kind of thing to know what might come up. Yeah. But the fact that there's no good answer for so like, Why is this person different than other conspiracy theorists? For like, you've worked for him for 20 years? Yeah. That indicates to me a lack of care or concern about it, like defending yourself or like, he just feels like, it's it's a tacit admission that you're not any different? Yeah.

Jordan (00:27:04.000)

Well, I I think I'm surprised that he doesn't have a stock answer, because it feels like that would come up in a normal conversation. Any

Dan (00:27:12.000)

interview? Yeah. Anything? Yeah.

Jordan (00:27:17.000)

You would have a stock answer, you know, yeah. You wouldn't

Dan (00:27:19.000)

even have conversation, you'd have 100 times. Very weird. So in this next clip, I'm gonna skip this one, because it's just the lawyer pointing out that Paul was right about Sandy Hook. And Alex didn't listen to it. Yeah. And that I mean, it's true. Yeah, fair point. So this next couple that's coming up, the lawyers asking Paul about an email exchange that he had with Buckley, who again, is a manager person at Infowars. And House DJ right and Alex's cousin. Right. So Paul has received an email from Quantcast, the website ranking group, and this email was to inform him that Infowars had seen a large surge in traffic recently. And as a matter of policy that meant Quantcast was going to put a temporary hold on ranking Infowars in their charts. They build. They build in these protocols, so people can easily mess with their website rankings, the automated traffic, it's just a standard procedure thing.

Jordan (00:28:11.000)

Yeah, it's more effective than our fucking voting machines.

Dan (00:28:15.000)

So Paul sends this email to Buckley. He forwards it on who replies to him and that's where this clip starts.

Mark Bankston (00:28:22.000)

When you sent this email, Buckley made a joke, and I want to read it to you okay. Said, but no, surely it's a conspiracy theory that they are trying to suppress our popularity. So that lizard people then returned to the ascension pad at Sandy Hook and feast on sacrificed crisis actors. Buckley here is making a joke about the craziness of those theories, isn't it?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:28:54.000)

You'd have to, you'd have to ask Bulkeley my comms smooth.

Mark Bankston (00:28:59.000)

When you get an email in your day to day business. That's talking about lizard people going to the ascension pad at Sandy Hook and feasting on sacrifice crisis actors. What did you take that to meet?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:29:12.000)

But obviously, I would presume that it's dark humor,

Dan (00:29:15.000)

dark humor. So this is a very important line of attack that I think the lawyers are going on here. And I think it signals a really good strategy. See, what this email tends to demonstrate is that people behind the scenes at Infowars had an awareness that the things that they were saying publicly about Sandy Hook were not true. This email joke, it offers a glimpse into the way that the tragedy was being discussed internally by people like Buckley, who is someone who, like I said, is in a managerial role and is related directly to Alex Yeah, he's obviously joking about this thing with Quantcast being conspiracy against them. And the use of crisis actors at Sandy Hook as the outrageous example in the joke that tends to imply that he considers it an instance of something that is markable. Yeah. One of the reasons that this is such an excellent line of approach is because the lawyers are able to combine private information they founded discovery with public statements. And sometimes when you do that you find something damning, like as discussed in this next clip,

Mark Bankston (00:30:12.000)

were you aware that Mr. Jones just a few hours earlier, had been on Infowars accusing the parents have been actors?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:30:23.000)

I don't think I joked about crisis actors in that email. Wasn't that Bulkley that use the term crisis actors?

Mark Bankston (00:30:33.000)

Okay, Let's rephrase the question. Were you aware that in that email exchange, you were having a Buckley, where he joked to you about crisis actors and in the outlandish nature of crisis actors, that that same time a few hours earlier, Mr. Jones was on his show, accusing the parents being actors, were you aware

Paul Joseph Watson (00:30:52.000)

of election? How do you feel about that, Mr. Watson? I feel that he was completely inaccurate in making that claim.

Mark Bankston (00:31:06.000)

Not something you're proud of at Infowars? Correct.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:31:10.000)

It's not something that I've said. So

Dan (00:31:13.000)

this is also the problem with this sincerity that Paul is kind of throwing out. Yeah, he allows himself to be put in situations where there is no other answer, then. Yeah, that's, yeah, yeah. Because what they've just laid out is that on the same day, a manager at Infowars, who's related to Alex was privately mocking Sandy Hook conspiracies, while simultaneously, Alex was promoting them on his show. This goes a really long way towards building the case that these people knew that what they were saying wasn't true. Earlier in the deposition, it was established that at least Paul was completely aware as early as the beginning of 2013, that the families of the victims are being harassed by people who believe these theories, which implies that the argument that they didn't know the consequences of their coverage, probably not true. And here you have a little glimpse of the behind the scenes vibe that really seems to suggest that the people at Infowars were aware that the information they were airing was worth mocking, which is to say not true. The pieces that come together out of this look really, really bad. Considering that this is not even close to all the information the plaintiffs are working with. It really seems like Alex is probably in some serious trouble. And this is all said and done. Oh, yeah. And Paul, I honestly think is probably play the playing this almost exactly like he should. Yeah, I don't think he has any liability in this Info Wars goes away. He's still a star. He can he can he can maneuver his way around this. Yeah, a little bit.

Jordan (00:32:33.000)

There aren't even any contracts to rip up. He's an independent contractor, and this will state man.

Dan (00:32:37.000)

Now. Here's what's interesting. So I know that it came out. We've discussed this and we'll play a clip of it. I like saying this later, but Robert Barnes is not in these depositions, right? You can tell because no one's yelling objection ever. Yeah. So he is no longer Alex's lawyer. Alex confirms in this sworn testimony that he doesn't work at Infowars in any capacity. He is no longer involved with them at all.

Mark Bankston (00:33:07.000)

But what about Paul? Mr. Watson? Can you tell me what you did to prepare for your deposition today?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:33:16.000)

I spoke to Robert bonds and why Jeffrey's?

Mark Bankston (00:33:20.000)

Okay, did you review any documents? No. When did you speak with your counsel?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:33:30.000)

On Sunday evening, my time and this afternoon today?

Dan (00:33:38.000)

So Wade Jeffries is Alex's lawyer. He is that now the person who you'll hear saying objection during Alex's? Yeah, not nearly as much as Barnes right. But he's probably a better lawyer. These Depositions are happening at about the same time. These were over the course of two days. Yeah, at the end of November 26, and 27th, I believe. And so Barnes is still somehow in the mix for Paul, but not for Info Wars, which I find interesting. I don't know what it means. It may mean nothing. But it could mean something. Here's my write. It is a very interesting, Quirk.

Jordan (00:34:14.000)

Here's my pitch for you. All right. This is a personal thing that happened between Jones and barn 100% I believe and not only that is a show thing that happened between we have i Here's what I'm gonna go. No, here's what I'm gonna go. Oh, no, here's my here's my pitch. But uh, you know, my pitch. I think he took our advice

Dan (00:34:35.000)

down, you think you realize the Barnes was trying to take over?

Jordan (00:34:40.000)

That's my theory. That is my theory. I think we sow discord amongst the lawyers.

Dan (00:34:46.000)

I don't think I don't I don't think there's any likelihood that that's true, but I do. I will go as far with you as to say, I would believe it's something person.

Jordan (00:34:56.000)

Oh 100%. That seems very believed I would buy that more than more than any any kind of business issue, then either that or he couldn't afford barns anymore that

Dan (00:35:04.000)

could be, even though he was working for almost pro bono, for exposure. So Paul, he's kind of making a stock defense of all these behaviors and all of this stuff, right, sort of predicated on free speech, you know, like we have, you know, just the First Amendment and all this. And so they asked him, you have any education in the field? Oh, no, when it comes

Mark Bankston (00:35:31.000)

to what is or is not allowed under the First Amendment? You really don't have any qualifications to say?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:35:40.000)

No, but my a lot of what I do is related to free speech. So although I don't have any academic qualifications, I would like to consider I have a reasonably good grasp of it.

Dan (00:35:53.000)

But see, that to me is not the answer you'd give if he like, I've studied it extensively, not in a formal setting. But you know, I'm aware of these various support preme court rulings, yeah, the limitations the you know, that there's not nuance to that. There's just sort of like, I work in sort of the this fringe area where we yell about free speech a bunch, so I'm kind of intimately involved in it. I like to say things that anger people, yeah, so I know about free speech. Yeah, I that's not a good answer.

Jordan (00:36:22.000)

It's it seems like he's really taken the idea of free speech is whatever I kind of personally define it as to heart. Yeah. So far as he doesn't have to know what it is legally.

Dan (00:36:33.000)

I don't have much of a different perception after listening to this. But I don't know. I don't know. I would be interested to know. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Paul hadn't at least done some reading on the subject. But I don't hear I don't hear it from the the answer. Well, it almost

Jordan (00:36:50.000)

it's almost more, it almost makes more sense to not look into it. So that your liability Yeah. So that your dumb arguments about what free speech is can never be clouded by your incidental knowledge that it actually, you know,

Dan (00:37:04.000)

yeah. So another thing that's a big defense is that Alex isn't a journalist. Right? That is going to be something that you hear a bit, and it's something that Paul makes a point of, like, this is just opinion, all Alex is doing is opinion, if you

Mark Bankston (00:37:20.000)

have somebody with a track record of being batshit, crazy and unreliable, who would violate the sense of journalistic integrity to promote what they are saying as fact? Correct?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:37:34.000)

Yes, if you were a journalistic middle of the road, nonpartisan non commentary outlet,

Mark Bankston (00:37:40.000)

which is, so Alex Jones is allowed to do that. Other Other people who claim to be journalists can't But Alex Jones can do that that's funded under their own

Paul Joseph Watson (00:37:51.000)

journalistic ethic ethics, they wouldn't. Alex Jones would, because he's an opinion commentator.

Mark Bankston (00:38:01.000)

And he has no journalistic ethics, correct?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:38:04.000)

Well, he's not journalists. So no, he's not he doesn't abide by those ethics, because he's not a journalist.

Dan (00:38:11.000)

So this opens up a pretty interesting Vista. Because once you're doing that, once you're like, yeah, he's just this is all just opinion stuff. Now it becomes pretty important to nail down what's an opinion? Yeah. What's the difference between opinion and fact? And this is something that is going to be a little bit of a muddy problem for both Paul and Alex, when they're in depositions. Neither of them seems to really understand the different crystalline fascia. Yeah, the difference between opinion and fact. Here is Paul trying to walk that line, I just don't.

Mark Bankston (00:38:52.000)

Because we've been talking today a little bit about Infowars having opinions versus assertions of fact, what's the difference between a fact and an opinion?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:39:04.000)

An opinion is your viewpoint. We live in a world where facts are very subjective. And fortunately, one side has a set of facts which they agree on. And the other side has a set of facts which they agree on. So it's a very vague concept in 2019. I mean, you you can have an opinion on facts that skews one way or the other. So it's very difficult territory.

Mark Bankston (00:39:31.000)

So that's all I would say on Well, you'd agree there. There's certain things like if I was to say, This person is beautiful, right, that's subjective that can't be proven ascertainable, true or false. It's totally subjective. You'd agree with that. Yeah. Yeah. But something Mike, the Sandy Hook school was not an operating school. That can be proven, true or false. Correct.

Jordan (00:40:03.000)

fuction What do I say? Fuck.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:40:06.000)

That can be proven, but it's an based on whether you believe the proof that's presented. I mean,

Jordan (00:40:10.000)

Ah, Jesus. I see that should be on humanity's gravestone that exact thing. Yeah, that is exactly why we're all dead. Well,

Dan (00:40:21.000)

I mean, it's, I guess if you have to say something, and you can't just be like, yeah, statement. Yeah, you're fair, that is about as good as you're gonna do in those sort of under pressure moments. That's that's a fistful. That's really sad.

Jordan (00:40:36.000)

You might as well have said, well, it depends about your opinion on that. Yeah. Like, what is it, then facts don't exist. So

Dan (00:40:42.000)

that is basically the underlying crops there. I mean, when you say one side has their facts, the other side, right, there are facts. And they're at odds, you know, like, yes, that is a denial of reality. And that is grim, that, that makes it tough to imagine, because then everything is the domain of opinion. Yeah, there's no responsibility for anything, there's no, there's no reason to get anything, right. Just fucking do whatever you want to do. And that's sad. That's makes me really bummed.

Jordan (00:41:12.000)

I mean, that is really fucking dark. And that he would say, it's like, it's like Lindsey Graham coming out and being like, I'm not trying to be a fair juror over here, where you're like, Oh, this is the darkest timeline that you're just saying that. Yeah, you know, oh, we're thought so because they're just opinion folk, right over at Infowars. And also all reality is opinion. Right? They should be held

Dan (00:41:33.000)

to a lower standard than people who are foolish enough to believe facts exists?

Jordan (00:41:38.000)

Well, that's your opinion.

Dan (00:41:42.000)

So Paul expresses that, that they should be held to a lower standard.

Mark Bankston (00:41:46.000)

When Infowars does something like that takes evidence and makes a judgment? Does it have any responsibility to be accurate?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:41:57.000)

In the context of opinion, commentary. I mean, you could say there's a, you know, you should strive to be accurate. But in terms of banana journalistic ethics, I think it's a different ballgame in terms of the level at which people are held based on whether they are opinion, commentary or down the line journalism.

Mark Bankston (00:42:22.000)

Okay, so you should be held to a lower standard than perhaps other media organizations. Not sure.

Dan (00:42:29.000)

Yeah, that's, that's not good. Oh, shoot for the stars, you

Jordan (00:42:34.000)

should really strive to tell true things. Yeah. But you know, if you lie all the time. Yeah.

Dan (00:42:43.000)

That's brutal. And one of the confounding things that just seems to be completely lost on all of these three people being deposed is how is the audience supposed to determine what is opinion and what is being presented as fact, if opinion is presented as fact, right? What is the what is the differentiation between? This is just something that man,

Jordan (00:43:07.000)

well, they need to use their discernment

Dan (00:43:11.000)

whenever you state opinions. And then you say it's in the white paper? Yes. Or it's all been proven, right? It came out in court document, right. Whenever you use those things to reinforce your opinion, right? Engaging in fact,

Jordan (00:43:25.000)

well, your drive to say that things were in the white papers, if they were, if they weren't in the white papers, you shouldn't be held to that standard. It's

Dan (00:43:35.000)

just, it's just instinct to say white paper. It does change his opinion to fat. Oh, yeah. So that doesn't get resolved at all really? And the to like, I don't really think that Paul's testimony is really all that damning, except for the part where you get into that Buckley email. Yeah, I was gonna say the joke is what he has it. Yeah. And also, there's a bit of a conversation that Buckley attached a meme to the email joke back. Yeah. And it's like a 4chan meme that has maybe some offensive connotations. I wouldn't call him a rabid anti Semite, which, which leads to like Paul being like, I didn't I don't know about this meme. I'm not sure I believe all right. All right, buddy. So I think that like difference between public and private, especially with like, the email being on the same day as Alex engaged in some of this, I think that that is a grim picture.

Jordan (00:44:36.000)

Yeah. Is a peddler of jokes. The you have to have awareness Yeah, in order to find the crux find the leverage in order to elicit the actual joke part. Yeah. So if you don't have awareness, you don't have a job. If you have a job, chances are and then

Dan (00:44:53.000)

the second thing is that email that he sent that to Buckley and Anthony Gucci already that was bad Just on a text message that he had sent Alex Yeah, that implies at least some sort of internal conversation about this not being a good thing to do. So this interview ends this deposition ends with the lawyer asking Paul to name something that Alex didn't think was a false flag. Oh, no, he, oh, hell yes. He lists off a bunch of things that Alex did the lawyer. Yeah, it's like, yeah, Las Vegas. Aurora. Yeah. Or no, not Las Vegas. Yeah, we had no, he does think that was fake.

Jordan (00:45:31.000)

I thought he was a false flag. Oh, yes. Oh, that's right. That's right. There we go. That's all Steve.

Dan (00:45:37.000)

Right. So he lists off the US like Columbine, Oklahoma City. All of these were false flags. Right. What is something that Alex thought was not a false? Let's find out.

Mark Bankston (00:45:48.000)

Can you give me an example of a US mass casualty event, like a mass shooting and bombing are the light that Mr. Jones

Jordan (00:45:58.000)

didn't say?

Paul Joseph Watson (00:46:07.000)

I would say the most recent ones post Las Vegas massacre. Maybe the Dayton Ohio shooting. There'll be El Paso shooting. I don't know for sure. But I think after the last Vegas one, he was

Jordan (00:46:24.000)

wonder why.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:46:27.000)

more reticent to call them false flags.

Mark Bankston (00:46:30.000)

After I sued him, right.

Paul Joseph Watson (00:46:33.000)

I don't know when you sued him.

Jordan (00:46:36.000)

Yeah, you do, buddy, as you

Dan (00:46:38.000)

quite astutely pointed out, Alex, both of those.

Jordan (00:46:44.000)

So Paul is asked

Dan (00:46:46.000)

What does he think is real? What did happen? What isn't just a government false flag? He long pause comes up with two things that Alex categorically thinks are false flags, dubbed by an Tifa or whatever.

Jordan (00:46:58.000)

I mean, literally on his show recently, he said it is either a false flag or radical Islam or whatever. Right? And wasn't that wasn't that it? There are two types of terrorists or something perhaps or Yeah,

Dan (00:47:11.000)

yeah, it's, I don't think I I struggle with like how much Paul just doesn't care what Alex does. And that's fair, because there's a possibility that he doesn't know what Alex thinks about Dayton or the El Paso shooting.

Jordan (00:47:24.000)

Well, what are you gonna watch the show? There's no way he's watching the fucking show. No, there's

Dan (00:47:28.000)

there's a very high likelihood, then again, he's the editor of the website, you would think? Yeah, I don't know. It's tough for me to believe that he doesn't know what Alex's positions on these things are. Unless there's just such a not caring at all about just like, trash in trash out. Yes. I can filter it through. Whatever. I'll fix the grammar.

Jordan (00:47:50.000)

Yeah, I imagine that's the only way to deal with Alex's boss to be honest. Yeah,

Dan (00:47:54.000)

I don't know. So I don't I don't I I'm interested to see where some of that goes. But I've seen some indications from that deposition that there are some really, what would you call it? Just some good lines of questioning? Yeah, I think there's some positive indications that they're on to some some potentially, like really troubling thing.

Jordan (00:48:18.000)

Oh, yeah. No, like, like I said, that joke, I would say, probably most, but not that. I know. But like, that's something that would be easy to, to miss or to discount. Ah, but the fact that he was like, this is a joke is my this is a crux point right here. I fucking nail him down on this. Yeah. That's That's smart chip.

Dan (00:48:39.000)

i But I think that you could, if you're Alex, you could say like, yeah, Buckley's a weird, dude. I didn't. I didn't, you know, whatever I saying I don't agree with it. You could you could,

Jordan (00:48:51.000)

maybe I'm just inflating the importance of it, because it's the only thing I really understand.

Dan (00:48:57.000)

And that's why I'm saying, you know, like that joke, especially on the same day as a presentation, that tends to imply that there's a difference between the public and the private. Yeah, and I'm not sure if it proves it, but I do think that it's enough to get put into your mind like, it seems. It seems irresponsible. Yeah. But we'll see.

Jordan (00:49:18.000)

I want if I had this power, it would just be like we've reached the end of the deposition. As far as the Sandy Hook stuff goes, now I'm going to lightning round you like climate change? realer? No? Go?

Dan (00:49:31.000)

I think that's an abuse of being under oath.

Jordan (00:49:33.000)

Yeah, I understand that. Your opinion on that is one thing, but my facts on it are nonsense. I don't know. Yeah.

Dan (00:49:40.000)

So now we're gonna move on to Robert to do let's do it. Sure. If that's I don't know if he ever goes by Robert. But Rob do? Yes. Jordan. What I never expected is that robbed whose deposition would be the one that I find the most compelling. So both Alex and Paul Joseph Watson's Depositions are interviews but to In the lawyers, and Alex and Paul Joseph Watson as people respectively, they're there to answer questions themselves about their own knowledge and experience. Conversely, Rob do is deposed officially as a designated corporate representative for Infowars umbrella company free speech systems. Now,

Jordan (00:50:19.000)

that was a bad idea.

Dan (00:50:21.000)

Rob does not seem to understand what this means I of course he doesn't, which I find fascinating. It's clear based on the lawyers questioning that they provided free speech systems with a list of videos for which they needed to provide information about sourcing and how they were produced. Each of these videos which are being said to be defamatory, contained information that was relevant to the case to you know, you want to know where it came from. Yeah. In order to sort out how these videos were made. The lawyers requested free speech systems to designate a representative to speak for the company, but more importantly, to prepare the compile the information they were requested.

Jordan (00:50:59.000)

So we settled on what did they draw straws.

Unknown Speaker (00:51:04.000)

Rob, Rob,

Jordan (00:51:06.000)

okay. That's the swing for the fences right there.

Dan (00:51:09.000)

It was robbed whose responsibility to speak to the people who produce these videos and wrote the articles and to sort out where they got the information from. This is important to sort out because, you know, if there aren't any sources, it could be believable that these people didn't foresters making stuff up. Rob do he's not prepared at all. His deposition is a profound disrespect to this entire process. But the reason I think it's interesting is that it does not read at all like blustery disrespect. This is not rob dude standing, defiant making a mockery of the entire lawsuit. It's a man who seems to real does not realize why he's there at the deposition. He seems to not know what appearing as a corporate representative means he doesn't realize that he's there to speak for the company.

Jordan (00:51:54.000)

Robbed you. Can I call you Mr. Magoo from the rest of this deposition, Rob

Dan (00:51:57.000)

Magoo. Yeah, his body language and facial responses to questioning read, like discomfort and confusion. He's not there to Stonewall on behalf of free speech systems, he thought he was there to appear as Robidoux in a capacity where answers like I don't recall can be used to dodge any questions asked, because he's there as a corporate representative, that question that answer is not acceptable. A company cannot not recall something, it can either know something or it cannot. So in his capacity as a corporate representative Rob do has a responsibility to prepare and know what free speech systems knows. When he's asked what the source for video number one is. He can't not recall, he has to either provide the source or say the company doesn't know what the source was. When he's asked if a particular employee worked on Sandy Hook material. He can't say I don't recall. And he has to say that they did. They didn't or that free speech systems doesn't know if they did. Because of his lack of preparation and seeming lack of understanding of his role, Rob dudes being forced into a position where he really can't do anything other than physically embody the complete incompetence of Infowars

Jordan (00:53:08.000)

that might be their only defense like, Hey, guys,

Dan (00:53:12.000)

it's not a good defense.

Jordan (00:53:13.000)

We're a shitty run business. That's what we've got. Right? The

Dan (00:53:17.000)

defense then you take the L Yeah, exactly. You you're going to lose that right. Like if you're just shitty and incompetent, you're still responsible.

Jordan (00:53:25.000)

This This supports my my theory that Alex is just trying to spend all of the money he has left before the judge. You think it's a Brewster's million I really think it because why else would you appoint Rob do as your corporate

Dan (00:53:37.000)

rapper nobody else that's possible he's been there forever get an intern he's been there forever he has a you know he has an experience as the quote unquote news director for the station. Oh bunny. Oh boy. He's had like executive managerial roles. Sure. He's been there as long as just about anybody Yeah, Paul's too smart to do this. He's not who else would you get like who's still there?

Jordan (00:54:03.000)

Jerome Corsi? Yeah, but you have him as your corporate representative for this law. You

Dan (00:54:10.000)

don't want Steve pathetic? Man is gonna get you in more trouble.

Jordan (00:54:15.000)

What are the sources for you? Me? CVB

Dan (00:54:19.000)

Rogers go into prison. Who do you have? During mcbreen? Who are you going to send?

Jordan (00:54:27.000)

I don't know. I and also you can't send an intern

Dan (00:54:30.000)

there anymore. Otherwise he would probably be Oh, he doesn't work. No, he left. Right. So like I don't think Alex has anybody else other than Rob that you could probably trust to not like what oh, it's Shroyer you're gonna send Owen Shroyer the cook Slayer?

Dan (00:54:50.000)

I don't think so. I legitimately do think he may not have any other options. No, I think you might be right. David Knight may be pi soon. I bet he wouldn't do it. Yeah. I feel like I don't know. I'd love to see a deposition with him. Did he didn't get deposed? If he did, it's not, not in these, the release that we got.

Jordan (00:55:09.000)

It's very, it would be very funny to me if they even the lawyers for them were like, God, he's too boring. He's just too boring to depose. Yeah. Well, thanks, yell on his information. I just can't sit there and listen to him for two hours.

Dan (00:55:22.000)

Yeah, be helpful. So, look, it wasn't a surprise what topics were going to be discussed in Rob's deposition, or what capacity Rob was appearing in. And yet, this is how he shows up. It's disrespectful. But it's not macho disrespect. It's disrespect. Born out of a person not being equipped to have the conversation that they're legally required to have. Yeah, I find Rob dues. This deposition far more fascinating than Alex Paul Joseph Watson's because of that dynamic.

Jordan (00:55:52.000)

It feels like he might as well have like, sent Brendan Dassey in there.

Dan (00:55:57.000)

Yeah, send anybody? Yeah. I don't know. Send the tank. The other reason that I find,

Jordan (00:56:08.000)

Excuse me, could you please establish your ownership? Your opinion of some people that I'm owned by some things? I don't know why that's my voice for a tech weird. Yeah.

Dan (00:56:18.000)

The other reason that I find Rob's interview and deposition more interesting is because in addition to being there in a formal capacity as a representative of free speech systems, this is supposed to be about the sourcing. This is supposed to be about where did you get this information from? And that's always something that I would love for these people to be forced to answer. Oh, yeah. Because the answer is always going to be either made it up or

Jordan (00:56:46.000)

veered right wing websites, or Larina.

Dan (00:56:50.000)

Some completely new uncredible person like a Fetzer or Wolfgang Halbig absolute it's always going to be exactly what you know, it is, but they pretend it's not right. It's always going to be some flimsy bullshit. And so

Jordan (00:57:06.000)

these robbed you give any source? Oh, see, okay. All right,

Dan (00:57:10.000)

the situations where, like, you know, how whenever I talk about, like, when Alex sits down, and he's like, I'm going to prove chemtrails. Yeah, that gets me excited to teach a class because then I'm like, Okay, you will actually give me things to go and find, right. I always get pumped about that. And the same way, I always get really excited when there is the prospect of they're going to have to answer these things. Yeah, it's because by all accounts, this should be their big day. Yeah. Like they are the truth tellers. They're the ones who are right about everything. And the globalist media can't stand it for sure. Here is a formal court setting where Rob do is tasked with laying out the sources that they have for this, of course, for the coverage that they had. And it's just such a

Jordan (00:57:58.000)

dud, they also have tons of exonerating witnesses for Trump. I don't know if you knew that, sure. They've got them all. And the other thing too,

Dan (00:58:04.000)

is like, if Rob is like not going to give you any of the sources, he should pretend that they're privileged sources. Yeah, or something like that. We refuse to give up our sources. And there's none of

Jordan (00:58:17.000)

you would have to have some sort of journalistic ethics, or be held to a higher standard. There is none

Dan (00:58:23.000)

of that posturing and bravado. So anyway, here, we start Rob's deposition, and he says something that is ultimately the least true thing possible.

Bill Ogden (00:58:34.000)

Which of the four topics listed at the bottom of page one and top of page two of exhibit one are you prepared to discuss today,

Rob Dew (00:58:41.000)

I'm prepared to discuss a sourcing and research for the videos described in plain tissue and be internal editorial discussions regarding free speech systems coverage of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting,

Dan (00:58:57.000)

he is not. Oh, good. So a lot of this interview and deposition is here. The lawyer asking about various people and whether or not they still work at Info Wars, because Rob has this sort of, I guess, maybe it is a thing where if they don't still work there, he wouldn't be able to really ask them what they did or talk to them because he's a corporate representative. Right? And so, like, they don't press on people who don't work there anymore. Like Jakari Jackson doesn't work there anymore. So there's no line of questioning about them. But people like Darren mcbreen or Daria, like they asked, like, did they have anything to do? Yeah, research for sure. And Rob is just constantly like, I don't recall and then they have to remind him does free speech systems? No. I don't know. I'm waiting for him to try and plead the fifth. It's just constant over and over and over again, someone is brought up and then just I don't I don't know.

Jordan (01:00:01.000)

I don't know why I'm here, guys.

Dan (01:00:03.000)

So a lot of these clips are just titled Rob is not prepared for this. So I don't know how to set this up. But Rob is prepared for this. Okay.

Bill Ogden (01:00:12.000)

What did you do to prepare for your desk? deposition testimony today regarding sourcing and research for the videos described in plaintiff's petition?

Rob Dew (01:00:24.000)

Not much other than speak with my attorney.

Jordan (01:00:28.000)

What you

Bill Ogden (01:00:31.000)

look at any documents,

Rob Dew (01:00:35.000)

I looked at this document. It in terms of preparing for this?

Dan (01:00:43.000)

Yikes, that document that he's referring to is the list of videos that are supposed to be discussed. So that's the only thing he did to review.

Jordan (01:00:52.000)

All right. So let me let me throw this out there for sure. All right. Now, when you say a woman is beautiful, that is an opinion, it's subjective, right? When you say I'm prepared to speak about a and b. And then you say that you're not essentially, then it's an objective fact that you are not prepared?

Dan (01:01:14.000)

You know, it's subjective, whether you feel prepared. That's fair. So they have to keep reminding him that he's there as a corporate representative. Yeah. And he's unprepared for that as well.

Bill Ogden (01:01:27.000)

Did you ask him if he's done research for Sandy Hook?

Rob Dew (01:01:32.000)

No, I didn't ask him that.

Bill Ogden (01:01:33.000)

So you don't know whether or not he's done research for Sandy Hook?

Rob Dew (01:01:44.000)

I can't remember any videos he was involved with making?

Bill Ogden (01:01:47.000)

Right That wasn't my question, though. Because I'm not asking you personally, I'm asking you as the corporate representative, and you were tasked with preparing yourself to discuss topic a, as it applies to the entire company. So my question is, are you prepared to discuss the research that Darren mcbreen was involved with regarding Sandy Hook?

Rob Dew (01:02:10.000)

I would say no,

Dan (01:02:12.000)

that happens. Oh,

Jordan (01:02:14.000)

I gotcha.

Dan (01:02:18.000)

So in this next clip, they try and explain to rob like, what he is there for.

Jordan (01:02:22.000)

And then and they teach him the alphabet, like what's going on here? Doesn't seem

Dan (01:02:27.000)

to really grasp it. I think he does, eventually. But it takes a while.

Bill Ogden (01:02:32.000)

And let me clear it up. This free speech systems know whether or not Marcus Morales has done research on Sandy Hook regarding the videos and plaintiffs petition.

Jordan (01:03:01.000)

The answer is no involved in any of

Bill Ogden (01:03:03.000)

that. I didn't ask whether or not you thought I asked whether or not free speech systems knows whether or not Marcus mirallas has done any research for the pertaining to the videos in plaintiffs petition.

Rob Dew (01:03:20.000)

I can't answer that.

Bill Ogden (01:03:22.000)

And that's because you don't know. On behalf of the company,

Rob Dew (01:03:27.000)

we're going back to the best of my knowledge. I do not know.

Bill Ogden (01:03:30.000)

You understand that when you were tasked as the corporate representative on that topic, that you've had a duty to prepare yourself to discuss that topic? Do you? I don't I didn't understand that. Okay. Nobody's explained that to you, prior to right now. Right, right. Do you were under the impression that you were just coming here sit down and testify as to what you know, personally? And that's it?

Rob Dew (01:03:54.000)

No, that's not what I understood. I understood that I was a corporate representative. But I did not know I was supposed to go talk to workers.

Bill Ogden (01:04:02.000)

What did you think you were supposed to do? No,

Dan (01:04:10.000)

I might have ended this interview, right? Like, you can get the sense of like, we're here to have a conversation about this sourcing stuff you have not prepared in any way you don't understand your role as a corporate representative here. Why are we proceeding? Why would just be like, Get out of here? Yeah, it doesn't go to your work, and then we will reschedule this. Yeah. Instead, they keep going to embarrass him. I

Jordan (01:04:34.000)

assume. I don't

Dan (01:04:34.000)

know if it's to embarrass him. But I think that, like they keep trying to be like, Okay, is there something that we you do know, sourcing? Oh, like, try and get some information? Yeah. And so they talk about,

Jordan (01:04:50.000)

oh, this is the book report at the front of the class. The teachers like did you do the book report and you're like, No, and they're like, Okay, then sit down.

Dan (01:04:58.000)

That's it. You should Robert Yeah, but instead, you know, we're just trying to soldier on just try and find something that you do know the source of that we can work with.

Bill Ogden (01:05:08.000)

Do you believe sitting here right now that you're prepared to discuss the sourcing and research that went into why people think Sandy Hook is a hoax?

Rob Dew (01:05:17.000)

Yes, I did, because I edited the video. Okay, who was the source? I don't know, that was probably an anonymous person.

Dan (01:05:25.000)

That's not a good answer. Do you say that you're prepared to talk about the sourcing of the video that you edited? And it's probably some random person. Yeah, probably as a problem. Yeah, some random person has another problem. It's an issue. Yeah. So that's not good. This is this.

Jordan (01:05:43.000)

This is where we get into trouble with the law, the law and people who feel like stuff they want to be true is true.

Dan (01:05:51.000)

I feel prepared. Well, that's a fact. I

Jordan (01:05:53.000)

feel so prepared for this. All right, ask me a question.

Dan (01:05:57.000)

What's an opinion?

Jordan (01:05:58.000)

I have no fucking clue. I am so prepared for this next question.

Dan (01:06:02.000)

What's a fact?

Jordan (01:06:03.000)

I have no clue. Next question.

Dan (01:06:05.000)

You were so prepared.

Jordan (01:06:06.000)

I know.

Dan (01:06:08.000)

So the piece of information in the some random person probably brought out leads to talking about the Anderson Cooper knows disappearing green screen, or Alex believed. And the lawyer gets a little bit peeved about the idea that the FBI as forensic experts that have testified that this is not a green screen, right? This is a compression error in the video that just happened and robbed who doesn't trust that. And so I think that you could understand a person getting a little bit frustrated. It's like you'll believe random people, but you don't believe the FBI. Yes. And he gets a little aggro

Bill Ogden (01:06:48.000)

mistake or not mistake. Anderson Cooper was buying the blues was in front of a blue screen.

Rob Dew (01:06:59.000)

The only reason I would say it's not 100% Because somebody asked him if he was there. And he denied being at the, at the funeral. You know, that's not true. No, there's video of it. There's video of a guy asking him during a taping of a show. He said, Hey, were you at the funeral? And he goes, No, it wasn't

Bill Ogden (01:07:16.000)

right. He wasn't at inside the funeral. You understand that? You've been a corporate representative for free speech systems and other lawsuits. In Texas. Correct. And I'm involved with those Correct? I'm sure you are you under your understand that an expert who has decades of service in the FBI and video forensics determined that that was not a blue screen that was simply video compression.

Rob Dew (01:07:44.000)

I've heard people say stuff. You know, the FBI also said they they put up photos to guys who supposedly bombed the Boston Marathon and said they didn't know who they were when they interviewed him. So the FBI lies

Bill Ogden (01:07:57.000)

a lot. So you don't trust the FBI?

Rob Dew (01:08:01.000)

I don't really trust much in the government. Okay, that comes out of the government.

Bill Ogden (01:08:05.000)

Do you trust anonymous sources on 4chan?

Rob Dew (01:08:08.000)

I don't know if I've ever used an anonymous source of unfortunate

Bill Ogden (01:08:11.000)

Do you know that's where the picture of Marcel Fontaine was, was found, then used?

Rob Dew (01:08:18.000)

Are you doing? Who's Marcel Fontaine,

Bill Ogden (01:08:21.000)

you don't understand. You don't know who Marcel Fontaine is. He's the he's the poor individual that lives in Massachusetts that Infowars randomly put up his picture saying he was he was responsible for the Florida Parkland mass shooting.

Rob Dew (01:08:35.000)

So we're talking about a different case now. Okay. Well, I didn't put that up. But what from my understanding?

Bill Ogden (01:08:43.000)

I'm not asking you whether you put it up. I'm asking if free speech systems is okay, trusting an anonymous source. It's that it's completely unverifiable. And using that information, but not trusting the FBI. Is that what you're telling testifying to? What do I say?

Jordan (01:09:04.000)

Barnes I still don't understand the core concept of a corporate representative.

Rob Dew (01:09:14.000)

What I'm testifying to is that it's been our experience that the FBI has lied many times to cover up cover their own ass.

Bill Ogden (01:09:25.000)

And to tell your uncle that yeah,

Dan (01:09:29.000)

it's already established that robbed whose uncle is a former FBI Yeah, Alex turned into a source to cast aspersions about Sandy Hook. That long pause there I think is really like indicative. When I said that it's not a Bravo like macho kind of Yeah. Desperate disrespect. There is a look on his face of like, like, I know you're joking. Like shit, what do I say? But there is a feeling of like, what? What Oh, no. Does make total sense, why would we trust? Not? Yeah, personally, I'm here for the company that did use anonymous information from 4chan. And yet I'm saying the FBI is experts are full of shit. Yeah, that is a tough line to walk in the same way that Paul is trapped with, Hey, why are these people insane? Yeah, and Alex is totally fine. It is like, yeah, you know what? I really don't have a good answer for this.

Jordan (01:10:27.000)

He said he talked to his attorney. So his attorney must not know that he was the corporate representative. Right. Otherwise, the attorney because it seems like the only advice that his attorney could have possibly given him is say you don't know over and over and over again. It might

Dan (01:10:42.000)

have like been a thing where he talked to Barnes and Barnes is no longer their lawyer. Right. And he was not doing a good job. Maybe like,

Jordan (01:10:50.000)

tell him that the FBI has a bunch of liars? I'm Robert bar, billable hour. All right. Touching.

Dan (01:10:57.000)

I don't know what Yeah, I have no idea. It does seem like they've had a change in lawyer. Yeah. And so possibly, there's a miscommunication. Possibly somebody didn't get the right. info where it needed to be. But yeah, it seems absurd to me that no one was like, when I when you appear, right? It or, Hey, he could have been talking to his lawyer and the lawyer be like, you know, you're appearing as a court representative. You bet I do. That's totally fair. And the lawyer students, he knows what that entails. He doesn't. It's possible.

Jordan (01:11:31.000)

Hey, Rob, do you think you're prepared for this? You bet. Okay, then you get on in there, buddy. Go get

Dan (01:11:37.000)

a big guy. So Rob claims that they were respectful to the victims and the family members.

Jordan (01:11:44.000)

All right. So he was unprepared for this interview.

Dan (01:11:48.000)

This is one of these like, you know, just a slow motion volleyball hit that Rob is doing that just like immediately cuts to normal speed and someone on the other side spikes? Yeah, that kind of, oh, this is not good.

Rob Dew (01:12:03.000)

And I believe kids were shot and killed in the beginning. Okay, and if you look at our articles we always talk about the victims. We were never disparaging towards the parents. Bullshit,

Bill Ogden (01:12:18.000)

do you? You've seen the video of Mr. Jones mocking Robbie Parker's father by mocking him crying as a grieving father. Surely.

Rob Dew (01:12:26.000)

Robbie Parker's father. I don't know if I've ever seen a video Robbie. Robbie Parker,

Bill Ogden (01:12:29.000)

excuse me. You've seen the video of Mr. Jones mocking Robbie Parker, about crying over his dead son, right.

Rob Dew (01:12:40.000)

I don't know if I've seen that video. You're a corporate representative.

Bill Ogden (01:12:43.000)

So you're not prepared to talk about that video that's listed in plaintiffs petition that you had a duty to prepare for today?

Rob Dew (01:12:50.000)

I'm not prepared to talk about that video of Robbie Parker crying overs?

Bill Ogden (01:12:54.000)

Oh, no. of Mr. Jones mocking Robbie Parker crying over his son.

Dan (01:12:59.000)

I'm not kidding. I wouldn't be either.

Jordan (01:13:02.000)

Oh, man. Yeah. Oh, man.

Dan (01:13:04.000)

That's tough. Like when you're trying to present like we were always very respectful. What about this time Alex's mocking guy whose son just don't ever seen it? Okay.

Jordan (01:13:13.000)

Is this even legal? I didn't even do this. I feel like he can't.

Dan (01:13:19.000)

I don't know the law. Well, no rule

Jordan (01:13:20.000)

that's like, by law, you're supposed to like, is there

Dan (01:13:24.000)

a contempt of it something contempt for? Yeah, I mean, I don't know, in the legal definition. But I find this to be full, like I said, but the way I would describe it is a rank disrespect. Yeah. Like and not like with the middle finger. But with just like, I don't even care enough to do what I used to do. Yeah, it's fucked up. So one of the other big things that Infowars did, in their Sandy Hook coverage that is particularly disrespectful, is that they put on screen and posted the address that Lenny Posner used to pick up his mail. Yeah, there's a Pio box that he was using. That was, I believe, the address of the honor network, which was the foundation that he put together to try to get, like pictures of the children, like when conspiracy theorists would use their pictures of your kids. Yeah, those videos, DMCA struck. Yeah, I

Jordan (01:14:23.000)

know that story. He was he made that a fucking heroic effort. Yeah.

Dan (01:14:27.000)

So Alex was pissed off about this because some videos of fringe weirdos that he associates with were being taken down, right, and it's an attack on free speech. Sure. So they got into the honor network and posted Lenny Posner's PO Box address right on on air, which some people could say is Robert RASSMAN, probably not a safe thing to do and incitement to violence. So they discussed that a little bit it and Rob makes pretty pretty fucked up claim

Bill Ogden (01:15:05.000)

the videos that the honor network had taken down. Were those true

Rob Dew (01:15:10.000)

sitting here today in light of this see the video to know whether standing here today whether I think it was true, but I think a lot of it he pulled down just because they were given him carte blanche to pull out whatever he wanted. And

Bill Ogden (01:15:32.000)

and you're just making that up. You have no evidence of that correct.

Rob Dew (01:15:38.000)

I'd have no evidence.

Bill Ogden (01:15:40.000)

And I just wanted to make sure again, we're sitting here as you make up information and spread it because I make up information.

Dan (01:15:45.000)

Okay, okay. Okay. Okay. It sucks. I made to be in that situation where you are just making stuff up. And yeah, so I'd be like, just to be clear, you're making that up. Wow.

Jordan (01:15:57.000)

I mean, they don't have evidence per se.

Dan (01:15:59.000)

You just have to answer we're like, yeah, yeah. Fonts petulant. It's very childish shit. And I think that's what happens when people who do stuff like Infowars does are cornered. Yeah. Like, you can't really have any other response then like sort of indignant disappointment. Yeah, like, it's just, it's, it's, it's sad. No, it's

Jordan (01:16:22.000)

It's a stone wall, like, what are you? Okay, you corner him? And he just says, Fine. You think I make stuff up all the time, and he's never going to actually believe that you made it up. It's never

Dan (01:16:33.000)

going to be satisfied. No. And that's what I was getting at at the beginning of like, why this is a more compelling. deposition is because presumably, this would be where Infowars is supposed to shine. Yeah. If they were what they pretend to be the sourcing? deposition. Absolutely. Six hours long. It would be exhausting. Alex is 100% Correct. On every on the record ever share. It's in the white paper. It's not it just I don't know shit. I just, you know, whatever. Yeah, let him Posner was just he had carte blanche to take everything down. And like, what? Why would you base that on anything?

Jordan (01:17:11.000)

I mean, I feel like it's true. Yeah.

Dan (01:17:13.000)

So Rob, is also like, unprepared because he doesn't have access to all the videos they wanted to go over, right?

Jordan (01:17:23.000)

Because Can I stress this one more time? You are the corporate representative. Free Speech says

Dan (01:17:29.000)

Jordan, here's the thing. YouTube took down their YouTube channel. So all those videos are gone. Right?

Jordan (01:17:39.000)

The Internet ate them. I don't know,

Dan (01:17:41.000)

dog internet eight homework. So Rob claims that one of the videos that he was supposed to prepare all the sourcing for and stuff like that he can't find it. And then his lawyer, oh, my God, he is just not putting up with her hubs. Bullshit.

Bill Ogden (01:17:58.000)

You don't have this video is your testimony. And by you, you mean free speech systems?

Rob Dew (01:18:04.000)

I didn't have it in any of the searches that I made.

Bill Ogden (01:18:07.000)

Okay, where do you search?

Rob Dew (01:18:12.000)

Actually, some of these I actually went on the internet, see if people had reposted them and I didn't find anything at the time, because that's usually how we find stuff that got erased. People repost our stuff.

Bill Ogden (01:18:28.000)

How long did you spend looking for the sources? Video or researcher? For Sandy Hook false narratives versus the reality

Rob Dew (01:18:37.000)

for that particular video? Maybe 15 minutes?

Bill Ogden (01:18:43.000)

Are you aware? In this case you produce this video to me you're not prepared to discuss it.

Rob Dew (01:18:59.000)

The problem is, I think I discussed this in the last deposition. We don't have video the titles that you're using, or you're referring to YouTube titles. And those aren't always what the video file is named when it gets uploaded. Mr. Do

Bill Ogden (01:19:15.000)

you gave me this video. Free Speech systems produced this to me not YouTube.

Rob Dew (01:19:22.000)

I understand that. So

Bill Ogden (01:19:25.000)

you have it in your possession? Correct. What is possession? I don't know if how on earth could free speech systems produce a video to me and it not be in your possession? There was only one copy. You had it and then you slowly ated it which is the destruction of evidence or two. You never had it yet somehow magically produced it to me. Which one of those is probably more accurate or three? You're just not prepared to discuss it.

Rob Dew (01:19:57.000)

I'm not prepared to discuss

Dan (01:19:59.000)

Oh, It was three I think that's probably Yeah, I

Jordan (01:20:01.000)

would choose that one. Yeah.

Dan (01:20:05.000)

Look, man, we don't have this video. You gave it to me.

Jordan (01:20:08.000)

Excuse me, sir. I would like to amend that back to magic. Can we? Yeah. Is Magic admissible in the court of law?

Dan (01:20:15.000)

I mean, that is so disrespectful that is that is just like, manifestly I don't care. Yeah, I was told I was supposed to do all this stuff. I'm not taking this seriously at all. Absolutely. It's It's It's horrible. I mean, it's horrifying. It's maybe not the right word. But it's It's shocking.

Jordan (01:20:32.000)

It really is it this is the first time I've been surprised and 2019 right now. It's deposition right here.

Dan (01:20:39.000)

So the subject of damn donde comes up. And as we know, the Kraken is released from time to time. Sure. And one of the things I find particularly interesting about their angle on but donde is, there's a unified front that seems to be pushing the idea that Danfa donde went around and was yelling at people at Sandy Hook. And then that was it. Yeah, Alex was like, I don't want anything to do with you. You're fired. Sure fire to get out of here. You never worked here in the first place. Stop using that microphone screen that says Infowars. Right. Cut it

Jordan (01:21:10.000)

out. How do we how do we do on that one? How's our do gonna fight that battle?

Dan (01:21:15.000)

Rob tries to maintain that illusion. Sure. And then the lawyer brings up an email, but they found it discovered.

Bill Ogden (01:21:22.000)

And shortly after that video, he was fired because of what he was doing to those people.

Rob Dew (01:21:27.000)

He wasn't. He was doing contract workforce. And we would either accept or not accept his report. And

Bill Ogden (01:21:33.000)

after that, you stopped accepting all reports and stopped responding to him, according to your deposition testimony. Last time we spoke.

Rob Dew (01:21:42.000)

I'd have to look at the dates for everything. But yes, that sounds right. Okay.

Bill Ogden (01:21:45.000)

So it's weird that we were produced in this case, for the first time an email that you're involved with. It has Dan but Dondi being fired for how he was acting at a Donald Trump rally in 2016. Fun fact, right.

Dan (01:22:00.000)

Fun fact, that is. Bad, they really should have went through the discovery stuff. This is banana is really screwed by this. Like, we just sent everything over. We didn't review anything. Because they the like, plaintiff lawyers are going to look through all that stuff to find these things like, hey, you know, you said you fired Dan Bidadi because of this abusive behavior and all that stuff. And that's a great story. But it turns out, it was because he was acting like an idiot at a Trump rally in 2016. You didn't want to be associated with him. Right? So fun fact, that

Jordan (01:22:36.000)

is a fun fact. Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Oh, as a representative,

Dan (01:22:41.000)

you personally are on that email.

Jordan (01:22:44.000)

I don't I don't I don't recall. And I reject Oh, whoa, did the FBI send that email?

Dan (01:22:52.000)

So they get to talking about this video that Alex put out, which is called Sandy Hook vampires exposed? Right. And Rob says he can discuss the sources of that because he worked on it. Then the lawyer brings up something unfortunate that do you

Jordan (01:23:06.000)

think vampires are real? Yes.

Dan (01:23:09.000)

Opinion. April

Bill Ogden (01:23:10.000)

22 2017. After the final statement, that was our last video. Is Sandy Hook vampires exposed? Do you remember that video? I do remember that. But who researched the information for that video?

Rob Dew (01:23:25.000)

Say, myself and

Rob Dew (01:23:27.000)

Alex did what were your sources?

Rob Dew (01:23:31.000)

Believe A Megan Kelly interview

Bill Ogden (01:23:34.000)

any others?

Rob Dew (01:23:37.000)

And then I believe previous videos that we produced.

Bill Ogden (01:23:40.000)

Are you aware that on April 22 2017 That Megyn Kelly interview hadn't even happened yet,

Rob Dew (01:23:46.000)

though? It hadn't happened yet?

Bill Ogden (01:23:48.000)

Okay. Fair to say that we're not prepared to discuss this video.

Dan (01:23:53.000)

Yeah, I think that's that. That's a fun fact. Man. Yeah, the source for that video was the Megyn Kelly interview,

Jordan (01:24:01.000)

which happened afterwards. Can I go back and revise my answer to time travels real? Would that one help?

Dan (01:24:10.000)

So I think this is a like a pretty understatement. But Rob do did not do his job as a corporate representative.

Jordan (01:24:17.000)

That is I can only assume the reason that the interview kept going was just because the lawyer really wanted to expose how fucking shameless it doesn't

Dan (01:24:29.000)

feel vindictive. It felt like the questioning doesn't like veer too far into like, I'm going to humiliate

Jordan (01:24:36.000)

you that's what I that's what I'm saying. I'm not I mean, yeah, I think the reason that I'm saying that is simply because they can't me,

Dan (01:24:42.000)

I humiliate i They're shamed. I think if it were me in there, I probably would try and set more traps. Like I would do all sorts of crazy. Do you believe in climate change? That's your angle that you would go on it but yeah, and I don't think that they resort to too much of that. No, but But like I said,

Jordan (01:25:00.000)

it seems like they're dangerously. Patient.

Dan (01:25:05.000)

Yeah. But I would say from the last deposition to this one, I see not a market improvement, because I think that'd be condescending for me to say, Yeah, but I see far more what they're trying to get at. Yeah, in this. And I think that it's far more problematic for Alex. Yeah. Like, I think it's much more troubling. And I think probably a large part of that is based on the discovery. And yeah, moving on, being able to match up these private communications along with public statements. Yeah. And I think that they're doing from all indications I can get I think they're doing a good job on like, Rob, do

Jordan (01:25:43.000)

I come on

Bill Ogden (01:25:45.000)

your review any emails prepared for today? That's correct. Do you think you should have

Rob Dew (01:25:52.000)

was relying on the advice of my attorney

Bill Ogden (01:25:54.000)

with how this deposition has gone so far? Do you think he prepared enough?

Dan (01:26:00.000)

To make an answer? I wouldn't either. What do you

Jordan (01:26:06.000)

rob really rarely, rarely. I'm not going to answer that. But what do you think that

Dan (01:26:11.000)

that's about where it like the lawyers being a little bit petty, possibly, but I still think it's a fair questions like, do you think that you should have done more?

Jordan (01:26:18.000)

I? Actually, I genuinely, I genuinely think that's a great question, because that is indicative of the entire ethos

Dan (01:26:25.000)

of info. Also, you also wonder too, like, it's not a question that's meant just a prod like, there's no chance that he might actually think he did exactly what he was supposed to do. I genuinely think he does. He might. So like I said, in the Paul Joseph Watson one, there's a, an attempt to sort out the difference between opinion fact, the presentation of it on the show. Yeah. And it comes back up here with Rob, where it's the discussion is broached of how are people supposed to tell what's reporting? And what's opinion? As a journalist?

Bill Ogden (01:26:57.000)

Don't you have the duty to be right and not burst?

Mark Bankston (01:27:10.000)

Well, and

Rob Dew (01:27:10.000)

we're not always wearing journalistic hat. Sometimes we're commenting on something.

Bill Ogden (01:27:14.000)

So when you're commenting on something, you just make it up. And it doesn't matter.

Rob Dew (01:27:17.000)

You can say your opinion,

Bill Ogden (01:27:19.000)

in any way, is that differentiated on air? Does Mr. Jones say, here? I'm just going to make stuff up here. You should trust me because we're truth in journalism. Does he do that?

Rob Dew (01:27:36.000)

I think he doesn't play devil's advocate as much anymore. And because of this, this is like, where we're at today,

Dan (01:27:42.000)

because I got sued it like,

Jordan (01:27:45.000)

do you guys not want to answer my question? Or do you not understand what questions are?

Dan (01:27:51.000)

I say? No, I think that that question is being asked incredibly clearly. How are you supposed to tell the difference between opinion presented as fact? And fact? Whatever?

Jordan (01:28:03.000)

Okay. It just gave me a very clear question. And I'm going to respond with a time based question, which has nothing to do

Dan (01:28:10.000)

it's completely impossible to answer for them. Yeah. That's why I think that that is a dangerous thing for them to for Infowars. To even give a bad hand. Yeah. Yeah. Even acknowledging that yeah, because it is every single thing is presented as 100% truth. You can't like you can't as he says it, you can't listen to Alex Jones for any extended period of time without coming away with the impression that he first of all is wrong. And second, he is absolutely making statements of facts, not opinion. Yeah. Whatever ways he can couch it, I don't know, based on the law, where where the line is or what side he's on. But as a consumer of it, and a listener to the show. I have no problem saying that they blur that line, perhaps intentionally. And it's super unclear. Because Can you imagine if Alex is just like, yeah, all this stuff is just my feeling. Yeah, that's just my like, what I think about this, I'm not saying that it's based on when I say that it's all in the white papers, and everything I say is proven right. That's just my opinion. I believe that everything has been proven. I'm not saying to you that it has been proven. What is your show, then?

Jordan (01:29:31.000)

Well, I mean, my opinion is me saying that everything has been proven to you is a statement of opinion. Ah, we will never solve this because I am a circle.

Dan (01:29:45.000)

So this deposition with Rob do and with a lawyer asking if Rob is proud of what Infowars has

Jordan (01:29:54.000)

weighed now, is that a personal question or is that a question for him as the representative of free speech system? I

Dan (01:29:59.000)

think it might be be personal. So he asks that And Rob's answer, I think might low key mean that he might be way more of a fucked up bad dude than we think? Because this answer is borderline sociopathic.

Bill Ogden (01:30:16.000)

My last question is sitting here today, on behalf of the company. Are you proud of the work that you did that free speech systems did on Sandy Hook Elementary School and the shooting that happened in December 2012?

Rob Dew (01:30:30.000)

I think our reporting stopped what was going to be a lot of anti gun legislation coming down.

Bill Ogden (01:30:36.000)

You didn't answer my question. My question was, are you proud of the information that you spread about Sandy Hook? From 2012 to 2017? As a company is that what you want to be remembered for?

Rob Dew (01:31:01.000)

I don't think we're going to be remembered for

Bill Ogden (01:31:03.000)

what do you think you're going to be remembered for?

Jordan (01:31:07.000)

That's what you want. Okay, you want a little?

Dan (01:31:12.000)

I think that when you're being asked, Are you proud of this? You should not have like, if you don't want to show ass. There's there's some sort of an answer you could give. That's not yes or no. Yeah. You know, mistakes were made. I

Jordan (01:31:26.000)

think we did some things. Well, I think we did other Are you going to say Are you proud of every mistake that you've ever made? Yeah.

Dan (01:31:33.000)

Hey, look, Jim Fetzer or you probably don't want to broach that. Now you don't. You don't speak as Wolfgang Halbig was presented by other people as a completely credible source. You know, sometimes you believe people who aren't you shouldn't believe you could do whatever you want. His answer being I believe that there was a lot of gun legislation that we stopped. Yeah. By lying about Sandy. Yeah. So So excuse that's an ends justify the means extraordinary. Mr.

Jordan (01:32:03.000)

Do? Are you saying that you spread false information in order to achieve a political result? Do you know we have a word for the that?

Dan (01:32:11.000)

I mean, it does seem to imply that he doesn't have qualms with, like putting out false information if it's expedient to his goals. Yeah. And that to me, under oath. Yeah, speaking for the company. Sure. is not good. Now. Now. Yeah. I gasped. I went, he said, Hey, we stopped gun legislation.

Jordan (01:32:32.000)

Honestly, I don't know if gurbles would have said he was proud of the misinformation that he's written.

Dan (01:32:38.000)

Well, I mean, also got to consider like, these gun paranoia, fears that they've had over the decades. Like, they didn't need to fake something like this. They didn't have to engage in this to stop that legislation. The like, tons of money from the NRA,

Jordan (01:32:54.000)

my Ag Report and all that shit. Yeah.

Dan (01:32:57.000)

It's like the, like, gun. Advocacy groups do enough to make sure that a lot of that legislation doesn't pass. You don't need people like Alex doing this sort of shit.

Jordan (01:33:11.000)

Right? Okay. So they've spent allusion they've spent millions and millions of dollars on lobbying directly to congressmen and essentially have purchased their votes. Did the NRA ever completely lie about a mass shooting they might have? They might have.

Dan (01:33:29.000)

So Rob's deposition is like this real spectacle of incompetence and disrespect that I find really interesting, and I find it to be like, like real low point for like these depositions in particular because they had such potential the sources we're gonna find out information and then it's just rob do with a backwards beanie on just being like, I don't know anything. You're speaking as the company. The company doesn't know anything.

Jordan (01:34:00.000)

Who cares? That's, that's so fucked up. Yeah. And not least of which, just because if anybody had ever given me, like, we're going to depose you, here are the stuff here's the stuff you need to know. I would have done the shit out of my homework. So nervous. Yeah. So fuckin I they're going to depose me. I'm under oath. I better get my facts. Right. And these people are just like, and I'll wing it. Yeah, that's so fucked up.

Dan (01:34:29.000)

We had Paul Joseph Watson is the opener. Yeah. Rob do is the feature

Jordan (01:34:33.000)

right. Which is the best spot as as we've clearly seen, yeah.

Dan (01:34:36.000)

And as is tradition, we got our headliner and that is of course Alex Jones being under oath deposed again. Yeah, so we had like the Paul probably was about an hour long deposition. Rob do is about an hour 40 Alex is almost three hours of him under oath. And a large part of the beginning of it is discussing like What means did people communicate with each other internally at Info Wars? Right, which is, you know, to try and be like, do we have all of these internal communications emails? All this? Did y'all use Slack? That kind of thing? Right? Right. And Alex is very wishy washy about all this. I don't know if people use what slack? Yeah, god damn it. So he in this first clip, he claims that he's never texted with anybody about Sandy Hook.

Mark Bankston (01:35:28.000)

So you're saying you never received text messages relating to Sandy Hook? Is your testimony the same that you've never sent a text message relating to Sandy Hook?

Alex Jones (01:35:41.000)

I mean, I've like said like to, like, talk to a lawyer like meeting about it or something. But I know I don't sit there and talk about Sandy Hook. It's not my identity. I'm very rarely talk about Sandy Hook period.

Mark Bankston (01:35:53.000)

Okay. So your testimony is you've never sent a text message relating to send you to a fellow employee or a source or somebody outside the company.

Alex Jones (01:36:01.000)

No, other than I mean, I've think I've talked about meetings with lawyers. about it. That's it.

Dan (01:36:08.000)

Okay. That seems to be in direct contradiction to Paul Joseph Watson's email that he sent to Buckley and Anthony Gucci already, which was a like on the record version of a text that he sent to Alex.

Jordan (01:36:21.000)

Yeah. I was literally waiting for him to be like, and here's the text you provided us, but

Dan (01:36:27.000)

I don't think he needs to. I don't I don't think that the lawyers need to bring fat out. You just need like, here's Alex be

Jordan (01:36:34.000)

duplicitous. It's not there. Yeah, here's, yeah.

Dan (01:36:37.000)

So one of the angles that I thought was really interesting at the beginning of this conversation with Alex is getting into. Have you ever disciplined anybody at Infowars?

Jordan (01:36:47.000)

Cuz I know an employee. We just talked to him who could use a little disability, my friend.

Dan (01:36:52.000)

Alex seems to think that the question is all about whether someone has put out false information intentionally. Right. And then been discipline. Yeah. Whereas the question is really more just like, have you disciplined? anyone for anything? Yeah, like make mistake? Yeah. being hasty. Any of those are thrown axes. Adam,

Mark Bankston (01:37:12.000)

let's talk about request for production number three, on page four. This request, sought all documents reflecting disciplinary action, taken against any employee of free speech systems LLC, for publication of false information, or for breach of journalistic ethics. Between December 4 14th 2012 and April 18th 2018, your response is none Correct? Yes. Okay.

Dan (01:37:45.000)

None. In six years. Apparently, none. No one has been disciplined. There are this stuff.

Jordan (01:37:53.000)

I mean, it does really feel like their defense is we're a shittily run business.

Dan (01:37:58.000)

Yeah, I still, that's all I can I still don't think that doesn't get you off the hook for Of course not. No,

Jordan (01:38:04.000)

that's what I'm saying. I think I think they know they're gonna lose, because of course they are. I think they have to Yeah, and and I think they just are like, fucking let's, let's push this back. As long as possible. Let's write this out.

Dan (01:38:19.000)

Let me reframe this. It's not necessarily that they think they're going to lose, but they I get the sense that they think it's more likely outcome than they might have previously. Yeah,

Dan (01:38:31.000)

fair. And I Yeah, it's not surrender. It's not giving up or anything like that. But it's fucking like, it's weird. This this hinge of we're all opinion. Yeah, kind of thing is not what you'd want to do if you're Infowars. Oh, you don't want to testify and put on oath. that, hey, we're not talking facts here.

Jordan (01:38:54.000)

We're not talking facts. I mean, yeah. But by their own definition of facts, nobody is going to care or listen to them. Because they're just going to say, No, that's you what you think, sure, like facts are not going to convince anyone of anything?

Dan (01:39:07.000)

Maybe. So before we get to some more talk about disciplining employees, we get to this idea of what is an opinion and what is fact? And oh my gosh, see if Alex knows the difference?

Mark Bankston (01:39:21.000)

Okay, what would you think Sandy Hook is not an operating school? You think that's an opinion?

Alex Jones (01:39:26.000)

I don't know the context we're speaking about.

Mark Bankston (01:39:28.000)

I'm just saying right now, if I told you I said to you, Mr. Jones, Sandy Hook wasn't an operating school.

Alex Jones (01:39:35.000)

I believe it was torn down.

Mark Bankston (01:39:37.000)

Now what I'm asking,

Alex Jones (01:39:37.000)

I'm confused.

Mark Bankston (01:39:38.000)

I see that. I'm asking you if I said to you, right now. I'm gonna say it to you right now. Mr. Jones. Sandy Hook wasn't an operating school. Did I just make a statement or did I just make an opinion?

Alex Jones (01:39:55.000)

That's your opinion.

Mark Bankston (01:39:57.000)

Okay. So Those sorts of statements can be set on Infowars without fact checking.

Alex Jones (01:40:05.000)

I don't know the context.

Dan (01:40:07.000)

So the reason that he's trying to nail this down is because it's trying to get the sense of like, if you're an employee for Infowars, and you want to just say something on air, is there any kind of, I believe prior constraint is the term of any kind of like, how would you go about making a claim like Sandy Hook wasn't open on air? And it turns out, well, they said it? Well, it's an opinion like that. And that is not an opinion, that is something that is either that has a truth value attached to it. It's either true or false. And that, that, I think, is one of the clear things that comes out to me in the course of all of these depositions is a staunch refusal to understand or accept that there is a difference between a fact and an opinion? Yeah, I don't think that these be I think that there's a strategic reason for it. But I also think that there's a possibility that they, like sincerely don't quite grasp that

Jordan (01:41:05.000)

I genuinely believe that they don't, I really, I really don't think they do. And if we're going by, if I'm going by that, like, they're the weakest link in this propaganda chain, I think they're low enough on the totem pole, where they're convinced that there is no difference, you know, like, higher up in the in the upper echelons of journalists at Fox News who are or opinion people at Fox News, they have to be aware that they're not telling the truth. But these guys genuinely don't believe there is a truth. Yeah. And I don't believe there's a fact

Dan (01:41:39.000)

it's really hard for me to tell because it is, it seems possible that there is an inability or an unwillingness to understand the difference. Yeah, on their part. And it's possible, but I can't really necessarily believe that, because I also think that it's exactly the last refuge, you would hide him. Yeah, it is where you would go, if you're like, well, everything is indefensible, and my behavior is clearly shown to be fucked up. Yeah, I was, you know, hey, look, there's just opinions. Right is real, right? It does seem like exactly where you would try and hide out.

Jordan (01:42:14.000)

That's true. So I You're not wrong. I mean, obviously, they can't combat it with any kind of facts. So

Dan (01:42:21.000)

because there is a functional use to it, I find it hard to believe that it's just like, inability to recognize reality. Yeah. If it didn't serve a purpose, then I'd be like, That's fascinating. Because it does, it's, but that's

Jordan (01:42:36.000)

something that I hear so often from a lot of people is that baseline belief? And I don't know, I think it's a combination of, you know, purposeful ignorance along with a, a willingness, or what is it? constant bombardment of this as as true? Right? You know, like they somebody repeated it often enough. And I don't want to really engage with the fact that repetition isn't reality. So I'm gonna say that it's true. Yeah. Like, that's kind of their operating system, I think

Dan (01:43:13.000)

could be. So we get back to these employees who have not been disciplined at all. And we get some examples.

Mark Bankston (01:43:21.000)

Let's say an editor publishes an accusation that someone is a criminal. And in doing so, they relied on a source whose identity, they cannot verify. They have no idea who it is. It's a totally anonymous message they got and then it turns out that that reporting was false. Is that okay? No, it's not. Okay. You would take disciplinary action if that happened? Yes. No, what kind of disciplinary action would you take?

Alex Jones (01:43:51.000)

I would generally just try to something like that until I let them go.

Mark Bankston (01:43:54.000)

Okay. Now, when Kitt Daniels ran an article, accusing an innocent young man of being the Parkland mass murderer, based on anonymous sources, which he could not verify, you didn't fire him Did you?

Alex Jones (01:44:14.000)

That that individuals name was not put out. And it was from another site, and it was pulled down. And then the individual reported themselves and their name into the record. And but Kitt didn't not do that on purpose. And it was all it was, it was on 1000s of publications.

Mark Bankston (01:44:36.000)

He intentionally on purpose reported an accusation of a crime based on an anonymous source whose identity he could not verify. Correct?

Alex Jones (01:44:45.000)

No, it was a it was a Yeah, it appeared to match the information that was also on other sites but it wasn't checked and I thought we took it down. What sites are

Mark Bankston (01:44:55.000)

you talking about?

Alex Jones (01:44:57.000)

It was a long list of sites. It was all over the internet. Before Kitt

Mark Bankston (01:45:00.000)

Daniels published it.

Alex Jones (01:45:03.000)

That's your belief. That's why That's why remember, that's my knowledge.

Mark Bankston (01:45:06.000)

All right, Daniels testified that he just found it on 4chan and saw it in a tweet by an anonymous Twitter account.

Alex Jones (01:45:12.000)

I don't remember that. So

Mark Bankston (01:45:13.000)

if that was true, though, if he just relied on to anonymous sources whose identity he could not verify. That's a fireable offense, isn't it?

Alex Jones (01:45:25.000)

Not on Yes, yes, I believe there was more. But yes, that's not good. Ooh,

Jordan (01:45:29.000)

that's not good. I, I cannot believe that he is not clever enough to sense that a hypothetical question is going to lead to a literal, that is insane to me that he's answering that question, honestly.

Unknown Speaker (01:45:44.000)

The guy yeah,

Jordan (01:45:45.000)

don't don't answer that. Answer a hypothetical. It's not like he's gonna ask you a hypothetical question that's going to exonerate you

Dan (01:45:54.000)

know, probably not. So he asked that one. And then, you know, there's another example,

Mark Bankston (01:45:59.000)

you didn't take disciplinary action against any employee involved in the false reporting on the Chobani yogurt company that you publicly apologized for?

Alex Jones (01:46:06.000)

Right? That was a publicity stunt by Chobani. Yogurt. There was no money. There was all there were migrant workers being brought in there were rapes in the area. But technically, the company itself wasn't doing it. It was the owner and the Federal Reserve Board member.

Mark Bankston (01:46:29.000)

What didn't David Knight tell you explicitly that there were no rapes? That that was false?

Alex Jones (01:46:34.000)

I don't remember what you're talking about.

Dan (01:46:36.000)

Okay. How many?

Jordan (01:46:37.000)

What the fuck did he just? Did he just committed other crimes?

Dan (01:46:42.000)

I'm not entirely sure. It does seem like under oath. He just said that on to the kayo. was involved. Yeah. Bring it to my group where Yes, yep. Yeah, I wonder if that is a violation of it has to be it seems like it would be there's

Jordan (01:46:59.000)

no way that it's like, oh, you can't say it publicly. However, in a deposition in another lawsuit, it would be totally fine. And when it's released on the Internet, we won't consider that public. Ah, yeah, that's insane. Yeah.

Dan (01:47:11.000)

And so you got that really fucked up answer and then also a demonstration that no when the whole Chobani thing happened? No, it was published but again, Alex is presenting it is because it was a publicity.

Jordan (01:47:21.000)

Yeah, that's bananas. I don't haven't started to think that that public apology was genuine.

Dan (01:47:27.000)

Seems like it was so there's even more things that he didn't have any disciplinary actions about when your Reporter

Mark Bankston (01:47:34.000)

Oh, and Shroyer tried to falsely connect the Austin pizza restaurant East Side pies to a pedophile ring? You didn't take any disciplinary action? Correct? I don't know what you're talking about. You've never taken any disciplinary action against any employee for any of the false things said about Sandy Hook on Infowars. Correct. What do I say?

Alex Jones (01:48:06.000)

I don't I don't understand. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Really.

Jordan (01:48:17.000)

I want to hang that on the wall. I'm

Dan (01:48:19.000)

fair. It's pretty clear. What I'm getting at is that you create an environment where everybody is not at all punished for putting out bullshit.

Jordan (01:48:28.000)

And in fact, they are actively encouraged to do so. Seems like that's the pattern that's demonstrated. How do you not know what I'm getting at? I am very clearly leaving.

Dan (01:48:39.000)

That's that's why the relay is so like, Come on, man. Yeah, it's like you know exactly what's going on. I would hope so. So then the topic of Danfa, donde comes up. And of course Alex wants to downplay his relationship with the Kraken.

Mark Bankston (01:48:54.000)

Okay, that's Mr. Madani. Yes, thank you, Mr. Jones. That's the man that Infowars sent to Newtown. To report on sandy hook in 2014. Correct.

Alex Jones (01:49:10.000)

Well, he he lived up there. Do you want to cover it?

Mark Bankston (01:49:15.000)

He lives in the Boston area. So Infowars sent him to Sandy Hook to cover it in 2014. Right.

Alex Jones (01:49:24.000)

Not exactly got his own separate radio show from us.

Mark Bankston (01:49:28.000)

Okay, but he did reporting for Info Wars in 2014. In Sandhya

Alex Jones (01:49:32.000)

we had him on was a guest but he wasn't working for him.

Mark Bankston (01:49:35.000)

Okay, he wasn't your reporter.

Alex Jones (01:49:39.000)

Not technically, your diary. As your recording. I don't remember that. I might have

Dan (01:49:43.000)

okay. He certainly has that was certainly heard him describe Dan Bidadi as an employee says you hired him said he sends him places right? So

Jordan (01:49:52.000)

that is an opinion opinion.

Dan (01:49:55.000)

So he Alex tries to play the same game that like a ROB Dude does and that is that our sense of decency was offended by what dampa donde was up to. So we told him to fuck off bullshit liar.

Mark Bankston (01:50:08.000)

What did you think of Mr. MacDonald's work in Newtown in 2014?

Alex Jones (01:50:16.000)

I did not follow a lot of

Mark Bankston (01:50:17.000)

it. Okay. When you did find out about it, what was your reaction? What did you do?

Alex Jones (01:50:27.000)

I don't remember the specifics.

Mark Bankston (01:50:29.000)

Okay. When you testified back in March, didn't you say that you had seen what he did and had a reaction to it?

Alex Jones (01:50:35.000)

Are you talking about this report? I'm just talking about this report.

Mark Bankston (01:50:38.000)

I'm just talking about his work in Newtown. What do you think about his work in Newtown in 2014? I don't remember the

Alex Jones (01:50:43.000)

exact year but I remember telling him you're not you're you're not reporting for us and stop using the mind flag. And I told him and stop. Don't come on the show. I mean, I don't like your demeanor, and you don't represent us. I do remember that. I'm not sure the year.

Dan (01:50:56.000)

Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I don't like your demeanor. Yeah. Kraken.

Jordan (01:51:01.000)

And the guy who I specifically praised for his

Dan (01:51:05.000)

demeanor, I might as well have created a statue, because He disrupted Boston, bombing related press conferences. I didn't like the way he was carrying themselves. This is unreal. Yeah. It's so ridiculous. I

Jordan (01:51:18.000)

don't understand why there. Why is Alex doing both are trying to do both the I don't recall and answer the question thing,

Dan (01:51:27.000)

because I think it's hubris. I think he's right. I think that sometimes he feels like I can handle this. Right. Yeah, it feels that way. A little bit. No,

Jordan (01:51:39.000)

because nothing he says is really well. And

Dan (01:51:40.000)

like, Rob, he's not prepared. He hasn't. He hasn't really sorted out. Like there is a part of like, I don't understand what you're getting at that is kind of accuracy to like, I don't think you understand some of the lines of questioning and what their purpose. Right, right. Like there's the you didn't discipline any of your employees for all of these clear instances of being lazy, being sloppy, being irresponsible. There's a point to that line of questioning in the same way with Dan, but donde like bringing him up. There's a reason that we're going down this road where they're

Jordan (01:52:14.000)

depositions in the Humpty olukai case,

Dan (01:52:17.000)

I don't think it proceeded to that point. I think he's settled before I was gonna say I'm not entirely sure. And I don't know if any became public. Yeah. Because it

Jordan (01:52:26.000)

kind of feels to me, like, the advice that they must be operating under is like, this is going to settle. So don't worry too much about. Yeah, we're gonna settle this the same way that we did with the other laws, you know, what bars, it's just gonna cost you money Supreme Court. Yeah. And they also said that I will die before I give into this. Yeah.

Dan (01:52:50.000)

I will not be taken down by yogurt never. So Aleksa. Again, another line of questioning that seems very consistent is that I don't believe that the lawyers think that Alex has any sources really, outside of Wolfgang Halbig and Jim Fetzer. Yeah, they seem to be pretty clear that like any any question kind of traces back to them a little bit. Yeah. And so Alex really wants you to know that Jim Fetzer wasn't a source. Sure.

Mark Bankston (01:53:21.000)

In addition to Wolfgang Halbig, one of your other sources for your Sandy Hook reporting was Jim Fetzer, right. Not not one of

Alex Jones (01:53:35.000)

mine. Remember, a long time ago

Mark Bankston (01:53:37.000)

that really you didn't testify to that in March that Mr. Fetzer is he was one of the people questioning in one of your sources for Sandy Hook coverage, correct?

Alex Jones (01:53:47.000)

I don't I don't remember what I mean, I remember. I don't think he was on my show.

Mark Bankston (01:53:52.000)

Didn't you testify that Mr. Watson was telling you that Mr. Fetzer was bad. You shouldn't be relying on him.

Alex Jones (01:54:03.000)

I remember Paul saying he didn't like Fetzer. I do remember that.

Mark Bankston (01:54:07.000)

Mr. Fetzer is a retired professor in a rabid anti Semite. Right. I don't know that. You didn't know. Mr. Fetzer was a rabid anti Semite. No, I don't I don't know that. You didn't know that. Mr. Fetzer thinks the Jews did Sandy Hook. No, I don't know that just like he thinks the Jews did. 911. No. Oh, oh.

Dan (01:54:29.000)

Alex should really know more about the worlds that he dwells in. It seems like it would be helpful to him. This is bananas. So in the ROB do deposition Rob didn't know the name of the guy that they fingered as the Parkland shooter, which is crazy because they're engaged in in all of this and this attention, this negative attention these lawsuits. You would think that this would be something that like, Okay, we got to cover our bases on this. Yeah, don't even recognize the guy's name. Now Alex doesn't know somebody's name.

Mark Bankston (01:54:59.000)

You remember The end of the 2016 election. There was some media coverage about how you would set on your show that Trump had called you and thank you for your help in the election. Some of those mainstream media sources were, you know, kind of trying to pile on you about that. You remember that? Yes. Two days after that happened, a woman named Erica Lafferty. First let's back up. Do you know who Erica Lafferty is? No. Okay. She's the daughter of Don hotspring. She's currently suing you. You don't know who she is. Okay, she's been talking about I knew for worse, though. You didn't know that? I don't know. Okay. And you didn't know that she currently is the named plaintiff in a suit against you in Connecticut. Called Lafferty versus Jones. You didn't know that. Oh, I've

Alex Jones (01:55:47.000)

seen that name. Yeah.

Dan (01:55:48.000)

Okay. Oh, I've seen that name. That's crazy. That that's how you I don't even understand how you can be that level of because it doesn't feel like that's not a genuine answer.

Jordan (01:56:01.000)

No, I genuinely believe he has no idea who Yeah, she even if

Dan (01:56:05.000)

you watch it there, it seems like I don't know. Who's that? Yeah. Who's that? Oh, I don't I don't

Jordan (01:56:09.000)

know. When he's when he's lying or trying to find a way to lie, but not lying. He pauses for about 45 to 80 minutes. There is

Dan (01:56:17.000)

a there is a strange and it just goes to the larger picture of like what I see as like just blatant disrespect going on. By these people who work at free speech system,

Jordan (01:56:29.000)

they must they must genuinely never have thought to they would actually be deposed. I may or may have they have to believe would

Dan (01:56:36.000)

explain the lack of preparation. Yeah, lack of lawyer Lee advice? Yeah, it's possible, or they just thought like the bull put these out? Yeah, I guess we'll just be able to, you know, keep this under wraps. Wow. So this is insane. The lawyer plays a video of Alex's from 2016. And in it Alex is discussing some of the evidence and some of the reasons why. You know, there's suspicions around Sandy Hook, and this is one of them. But the

Alex Jones (01:57:05.000)

biggest piece of evidence the smoking gun, if he would have a cover up of whatever really happened is the Wayback Machine, the Internet Archive. We see Sandy hooks Newtown website, K through 12. Having zero traffic 2008 910 1112. And then all of a sudden, it just explodes. It's impossible to have zero traffic to a K through 12. entire school system. And the word is that school system was shut down for those years. That's what the record show. They tell us. It was open.

Dan (01:57:42.000)

So you might have some questions about how that evidence works. And Alex doesn't he seems very confused when question.

Mark Bankston (01:57:49.000)

So you said in the video, we see Sandy hooks website having zero traffic according to this, do you So according to you, internet Wayback Machine. Do you believe that that shows internet traffic. So what you believe

Alex Jones (01:58:06.000)

what it shows is, what's being archived there and then there's also that it's a group of not just this but I have to go back to that was years ago.

Mark Bankston (01:58:17.000)

Internet Wayback Machine does not show internet traffic at a school correct.

Alex Jones (01:58:23.000)

It shows new material and traffic on our website is posted.

Mark Bankston (01:58:25.000)

Okay, you you're gonna stick by you think it shows traffic, internet traffic? That's what it's measuring.

Alex Jones (01:58:34.000)

I guess the term would be that we'll traffic and posting inactivity

Mark Bankston (01:58:40.000)

Have you ever read the Wayback Machine FAQ Frequently Asked Questions ever figured out what it is?

Dan (01:58:46.000)

That is not with the Wayback Machine. So you have this like this the smoking gun as Alex called it on this 2016 video that is a completely misunderstood misrepresented piece of information. And what makes it all the more troubling is,

Mark Bankston (01:59:06.000)

you say there's things showing that there's no traffic coming to the school. What are you talking about?

Alex Jones (01:59:10.000)

I'd have to pull that up. This was years ago. Well, I

Mark Bankston (01:59:12.000)

think you can pull it up pretty easily because it comes from Jim fencers book right. You can just open up Jim Fetzer his book. Nobody ever read Jim pesters book. Mr. Jones, I'm going to caution you again. Please wait till I answer your question. Because as you can see, it's very frustrating for this man. And he's not here affiliated with any party. He's a private person who's paid to provide a service, just coming here to try to write all this down. So we have a good record. So let's try to behave in the deposition finished. Let me finish my questions. You didn't check any other Connecticut school district websites, did you because they all look like this. I don't. I don't remember. Well, let's say hypothetically, if you had gone and you had seen that every other Connecticut school district website looks just like this is pretty irresponsible to go on the internet. I mean, go on your website. I call this the smoking gun, wouldn't

Alex Jones (01:59:59.000)

it I was predominantly talking about the other information, but I have to go back and get that.

Jordan (02:00:06.000)

The I I'm I'm glad he finally understood what a hypothetical question. He finally understood. I will not I was waiting for him to answer it and be like, Ah, yes, you're right. That would be wrong. Like, did you do that? Oh, right. hypotheticals are leading to reality.

Dan (02:00:26.000)

Yeah, I mean, the problem with that is like, yes or no, you're wrong. Yeah. If you go and see that all the Connecticut school districts have this same pattern on the Wayback Machine. If you did look that up, then you're willfully lying. If you're not then you clearly just took this piece of information, presumably from Jim Fetzer, as it's a piece of his book. And Alex doesn't not want that to be the perception because Jim Fetzer just lost that big lawsuit. Over the years. Yeah. And it seems if he put out that book back then, and it's, you know, still now he's losing a lawsuit for it, it tends to, it tends to look like Alex could be heading for a similar path.

Jordan (02:01:12.000)

I believe Alex has never read his book. I believe that I

Dan (02:01:15.000)

would just never read a book.

Jordan (02:01:16.000)

I believe that he has been given several quotes from that exact book. It's possible to say, though,

Dan (02:01:22.000)

yeah, or the same information. Like let's say he read a blog that was based on Yeah, yeah, I could see that that makes more sense. Or one of his employees read the book and was like, Oh, here's a piece. Right. Oh, let's run with it. Let's give you a cliff notes. Yeah. Which is why it's important for the ROB do interview to have actually had some substance to trace down what's the process, but nope. So in that same clip from the 2016. Video, Alex is saying that the records show that the school was closed, and he gets asked about that.

Mark Bankston (02:01:54.000)

Right after that. the Wayback Machine discussion. You said the word is that school was shut down for those years. That's what the record show that was your argument, correct?

Alex Jones (02:02:05.000)

I'm specifically talking about the other articles that we're talking about? Yes.

Mark Bankston (02:02:08.000)

That's what I'm asking you about right now. Those records, what are you talking about?

Alex Jones (02:02:11.000)

I'd have to go pull them up.

Mark Bankston (02:02:13.000)

You haven't done that? No, no, no, not recently. You've been under lawsuit now for over a year on Sandy Hook related cases, multiple cases, and you haven't done anything to go try to find what your sources for these claims are having.

Alex Jones (02:02:32.000)

A lot of work.

Jordan (02:02:36.000)

That is that is that an opinion or effect

Dan (02:02:38.000)

on compelling response?

Jordan (02:02:42.000)

I did all I have done all the work.

Dan (02:02:44.000)

So Alex, like I said, he just really doesn't want the perception to be that he's getting his information just from Fetzer and Halbig, because that looks really bad. Yeah. So he keeps claiming that he can produce other evidence, but then somehow hasn't. So if

Mark Bankston (02:02:58.000)

I wanted to know when you say the record, show that the school was closed down, and you could produce those records.

Alex Jones (02:03:04.000)

I could show what I was talking about that point.

Mark Bankston (02:03:08.000)

Or you could produce whatever you were relying on as your source right.

Alex Jones (02:03:12.000)

Now that you've specified, you haven't

Mark Bankston (02:03:15.000)

done that, though, have you?

Unknown Speaker (02:03:17.000)

I'm not I don't have a law degree.

Mark Bankston (02:03:19.000)

Sure. Hey. When you if you were asked the question produced to me, your source or records, or information that you relied on to say the school was closed? That's something you could do?

Alex Jones (02:03:35.000)

Yes. I don't know. That would be what you're looking for.

Mark Bankston (02:03:40.000)

I mean, look, if you had records, or some sort of information, some sort of source showing the school in America's most horrifying school shooting was actually closed. Price save that somewhere, right.

Alex Jones (02:03:57.000)

Well, I specifically mentioned I can remember what people were pulling out what was going on?

Mark Bankston (02:04:04.000)

I'm asking you, if you would have saved that stuff.

Alex Jones (02:04:13.000)

What do I say? r&d? I don't have the specifics or I'm

Mark Bankston (02:04:19.000)

not asking what you have in front of you. I'm asking you when you add information that the school shooting that is the most famous in American history actually occurred in a school that was closed down? There wasn't an operating school? Did you save that information?

Alex Jones (02:04:36.000)

You know, I don't remember a long time ago, almost seven years ago, okay.

Dan (02:04:40.000)

Okay. So it's generally run

Jordan (02:04:42.000)

businesses is different and it

Dan (02:04:44.000)

was a long time ago, man, I had the this game changing information. And I did that a long time ago where you can. So this narrative is bunk in and I think that in this course of this conversation, they've pretty well laid out like you were full of shit on there. As in his only response is like, well, I guess I could find your information, but I haven't yet but so the other one another one is the Anderson Cooper knows thing. And he kind of talked about that on the last deposition, so it doesn't come back up. And another one is Alex has this dumb narrative about a CNN interview that took place, and it was two people that were out in a remote location. And you can see the same car paths behind both of them. And Alex is saying that this is meant to be faking the news. And it's meant to, you know, it's supposed to be like, Oh, they're pretending they're in different places. But you can tell they're in the same place because the media is all lies. Sure. That and that had nothing to do with Sandy Hook. No, but it had to do with media lying. Yeah, it was actually people waiting for the I believe it was the jury verdict in the Jodi Arias murder trial. So But Alex says, like, they're pretending they're in different places, but it's clear, they're in the same place. Ergo, CNN lies, and this gets dismantled. So fucking quickly.

Mark Bankston (02:06:03.000)

Do you remember that bus going behind them?

Alex Jones (02:06:06.000)

I remember the story was that they were the same location.

Mark Bankston (02:06:09.000)

Yeah. Explain what you think's going on here.

Alex Jones (02:06:13.000)

Hello, I'm not saying they're staging Sandy Hook. I'm saying it's as they were staging that they were

Mark Bankston (02:06:18.000)

at different locations, where they staging that they were in different locations. That's what I believe the report was, Do you see how at the top of the picture here, you have little boxes that say where they are? Are they in different places? Or do they both say Phoenix?

Alex Jones (02:06:39.000)

Sure, but that could be there a different remote?

Mark Bankston (02:06:41.000)

Sure. But they're only 40 yards away from each other. Right? I don't know. You don't remember what they're covering here? Know,

Dan (02:06:54.000)

he has no awareness of the details of these pieces of his narrative. It's so tragic to look at. But it's so obvious. I mean, if you listen to him enough with a critical eye, you know that these are the only kinds of answers he could ever offer. Yeah, if pushed on it, like why do you think that they're presenting themselves as being in separate places? Yeah, it's a like, they're waiting outside a courthouse, one person stationed over here, the other is over here. And they're having a conversation while they wait for the jury to come out. Like that's not suspicious. They didn't present it as anything other than that, you are presenting it as something other than that.

Jordan (02:07:33.000)

This this gets to the like, when people ask is if you would you actually sit down and talk with Alex. It's like, this is what you get if you if he thinks he's telling you the

Dan (02:07:45.000)

truth. And if he is under oath. Imagine how bad it would be if Yeah, yeah. So after this point, I think you get to the only point of the interview where the lawyer gets a little bit like pointing the finger at rikes and because he starts comparing Alex to Nancy Grace, and shows that he is the same thing as her I you know, hey, you know, I don't mind the lawyer getting a little personal and being like you should visit what you do is shit. Yeah. But

Jordan (02:08:17.000)

that's a statement of fact. That is not an

Mark Bankston (02:08:20.000)

opinion and that you and Nancy Grace are basically two peas in a pod. You do basically the same thing.

Alex Jones (02:08:27.000)

I don't follow Nancy Grace enough to know what your definition of her or I are.

Mark Bankston (02:08:31.000)

Well, I'll just tell you Nancy Grace does really really reckless tragedy porn. And you do the same thing with the conspiracy twist Don't you

Alex Jones (02:08:40.000)

know I questioned a system known for continually lying. That says the babies were trying to incubators that ever existed in the EU and there's WMDs in Iraq when there's not and then all these and then the big guys who stand down so we've been lied to so much. Just like most Americans, I questioned official stories. It's it's not illegal.

Mark Bankston (02:09:00.000)

What question did you ask in that video that we just watched? What was the question?

Alex Jones (02:09:05.000)

I was talking about some of the questions people have

Mark Bankston (02:09:08.000)

I'm not I don't what what was the question? What question I heard a lot of statements. Can you tell me what the question was?

Alex Jones (02:09:17.000)

I was putting out some of the reasons people question things.

Mark Bankston (02:09:22.000)

You were putting out assertions that were false.

Dan (02:09:25.000)

I like this approach because it's not getting bogged down in the like, what about Yeah, what about the babies and the incubators? Yeah, it's just letting that roll off his back. It has been what was the question in that video? What was the What are you questioning that

Jordan (02:09:41.000)

was perfect because the entire the whole baby's he's he's doing his classic laundry list of things hoping that you'll get caught on one. Yeah. And then he can be like, Ah, now we're in a now we're in my arena. Yeah.

Dan (02:09:53.000)

And I believe it was in the ROB do one that he brings up also the babies and incubators thing. Sure. And he's like the Whereas like, you know, in that case, if one of the people in like let's say Saddam's army, they're the people who are being lied about. In that case, if one of them wanted to sue the media, they should be able to write.

Jordan (02:10:19.000)

Oh,

Dan (02:10:21.000)

it's these little unexamined pieces of their flippant self defense. Yeah, you can see how easily they can be tweaked. And Alex accidentally does that to himself. Because throughout this entire interview in deposition, Alex keeps bringing up questioning Epstein's death. And it leads to at the end of this Alex stepping in a big old puddle of mud. But we'll get to that as it goes, you son of a bitch, because he thinks that that is going to be his big like, course Vega. Yeah, well, you know, you say I can't question things. But what about it just much like Rob do and the the babies and incubators? It turns on him very quick. Yeah, this

Jordan (02:11:00.000)

is very clear that Alex and Rob do exist in a world where they think they're smarter than everybody and they don't have to prepare and that none of this is going to be a big deal. I can take care of this. You're absolutely right. PJ dubs comes out of this looking like, it looks great. I am out of my class here. So I'm going to be as honest as I need to be while still controlling what I can. I'm going to get this in, get this out. It's an hour long deposition. The

Dan (02:11:25.000)

reason that he can't do that is because there are pieces of evidence that he was not in with this. He's exculpatory. Yeah. And so he can, he can take a little bit of an external like, wow, look, man, right. I tried to say don't do this. I can't control what goes on at Infowars. Yes, I still worked for them afterwards. But I'm an independent, KY. What I could, yeah. And that argument. I mean, it kind of works.

Jordan (02:11:49.000)

I mean, he's, he's a shitbag for so many other reasons. But this one will take off of his

Dan (02:11:55.000)

list. Yeah, it's a low priority. Yeah. So in this case, now, Alex is being asked about that video that they just played about all the Sandy Hook stuff. And the lawyer asks, Is any of that true?

Mark Bankston (02:12:10.000)

Literally, every single assertion you made in that video is false. Correct? Not one thing you said an industry?

Alex Jones (02:12:16.000)

I don't I don't I'm not no.

Mark Bankston (02:12:21.000)

I'm not understanding your answer. Are you claiming there are things you've said in that video that are true.

Alex Jones (02:12:30.000)

But after watch the video again, there's also a full video that's only an excerpt.

Jordan (02:12:33.000)

Nice, nice labor.

Dan (02:12:37.000)

So wave. One of Alex's other big narratives about why people you should be suspicious about Sandy Hook is that Bloomberg sent out an email the night before to get ready for something big. Sure. And this apparently probably is not true.

Mark Bankston (02:12:53.000)

Let's talk about that Bloomberg email that comes up this idea that there was an email sent the day before Sandy Hook, saying, Get ready next 24 hours, there's gonna be a big event. That email you've been asked for that email, and you say you don't have it. Right.

Alex Jones (02:13:07.000)

We were we were covering reports of the email that was sent out to the activist groups that have been in the news,

Mark Bankston (02:13:12.000)

where were you covering it? What do you mean, when you're covering it?

Alex Jones (02:13:16.000)

We were covering the reports of the activists activating their their their anti gun rights organization.

Mark Bankston (02:13:23.000)

Okay. Well, see, here's the thing, Mr. Jones, at first, I thought there must be some email, coincidentally sent on the day before Sandy Hook that bloom burgers people sent that you must be willfully misinterpreting or something like that. But the problem is, nobody who's looked at this has been able to find any evidence that such an email has ever existed. And I want to know if you can explain that.

Alex Jones (02:13:46.000)

Well, I'm just not taking your source. And if that's the case,

Mark Bankston (02:13:49.000)

well, I'm asked, that's why I've asked you questions in discovery. And you haven't been able to produce that email to me, have you?

Alex Jones (02:13:55.000)

Well, you guys are asking if we have an email in our emails. I was reporting on other news reports about an alert they put out

Mark Bankston (02:14:02.000)

to their group, right? Could you find those reports? If you needed to? Could you identify your source?

Paul Joseph Watson (02:14:09.000)

See what you're doing there?

Alex Jones (02:14:10.000)

Well, I mean, a you can hold back a source if you want to, but I remember being online, I can try to go find that again.

Mark Bankston (02:14:16.000)

What do you mean, you can hold back a source fuel and say, what does that mean? I mean,

Alex Jones (02:14:19.000)

I mean, if I have a confidential source of something, I don't want to hold that confidential source for their protection. But that's not what's happened. In this case. I remember the news articles about As we reported on,

Mark Bankston (02:14:28.000)

so you could find those right? Shouldn't be able to okay, why

Dan (02:14:32.000)

haven't you because it can't. But the great thing there is that that's really one of the I think that's the only time it really comes up the idea of holding back information holding back a source. And Alex is doing it specifically to say that's not the case here. Yeah. That's the only time when that trigger it looks like it's going to be pulled.

Jordan (02:14:51.000)

I am amazed. Yeah.

Dan (02:14:55.000)

I mean, I'm amazed a clear message that you get is just like, Okay, can you produce this Why haven't you produced this? Well, I can prove all my claims, but I have to watch that video again, man. Yeah, it's all just

Jordan (02:15:08.000)

don't worry. Everything I've asked you to produce in discovery. You just sent me a treasure trove of emails that you didn't even read. And then you didn't even bother to look into other shit that I asked you for.

Dan (02:15:20.000)

Then you've gone out a million dollar bounty you got censured? And then who? Man So now Alex is asked if he is ashamed of his Robbie Parker impression. Here we go.

Mark Bankston (02:15:36.000)

This bit about Robbie Parker, the whole fake crying bit. The that? I'm curious? Do you feel any shame about that? Or are you totally fine with seeing video of yourself do that?

Alex Jones (02:15:51.000)

I don't think I did it quite the way you did.

Dan (02:15:52.000)

That is an interesting response, I find that his first instinct is to protect his abilities as an impressionist,

Jordan (02:16:01.000)

instinctively, the first thing he thought was, well, well, well, you're doing a shitty me. Come on. Don't do a shitty version of me. That's weird. You only want my image to be at the highest quality. Wow.

Dan (02:16:16.000)

So suffice it to say the answer is not really. Yeah. Well, the then they play a video of Alex and Rob do talking about all these anomalies in the Sandy Hook case? Sure. They're, they're saying these things all as if they're like, definitely like, well, the school wasn't open, you know, all of these things, not as

Jordan (02:16:36.000)

asserting them as fact, or statements.

Dan (02:16:39.000)

Yeah. And so when they come back from that, again, the question comes up of Do you know the difference between an opinion and a fact, I want

Mark Bankston (02:16:49.000)

to ask you about the things that you and Mr. Do said in that video. And we can agree. There was a list of factual claims made in that video, correct?

Alex Jones (02:16:59.000)

No, I was giving my opinion.

Mark Bankston (02:17:00.000)

When you say porta potties were delivered an hour after it happened. That's not a factual assertion to you.

Alex Jones (02:17:06.000)

I believe they weren't delivered soon thereafter.

Mark Bankston (02:17:07.000)

That's not what I'm asking you. Mr. Trump's masking? Is that a factual assertion?

Alex Jones (02:17:11.000)

Is my opinion. Okay.

Dan (02:17:13.000)

That's not that's not an opinion. I that is an assertion. That's. So

Jordan (02:17:20.000)

he call it time of death.

Dan (02:17:23.000)

So Alex keeps trying to use this excuse. And the reason why I had a little bit of sort of fumbling around answer to your like, he's saying these added statements effect is because Alex's defense is, I was just explaining why people were suspicious about Sandy Hook. Right? So that's his way of getting around. Like, these are things that I'm saying is like, I'm just explaining why people were suspicious. But if you really break that down, the way you would do that responsibly is say, here's something that's not true. This is why people were suspicious about Yeah, there is a lie going around that let's say porta potties word delivered, blah, blah, blah, right? Instead, he's listing off all of these assertions of factual things and being like, that's why people had suspicions, right. The way that's presented, retains the truth of these statements that he's making, or the presentation of truth to them. So it's still even though he's saying like, this is why people were suspicious x, y, z. That's still at least in some fashion, presenting X, Y and Z,

Jordan (02:18:31.000)

right? Here's why it's wet outside of my apartment. Somebody let go. There's somebody opened the fire hydrant, right? That is a statement of fact, that's not why people think it's wet. Or that's not why people are concerned that it's wet. It's just why it's what

Dan (02:18:45.000)

right if you're doing this as a like, this is why people believe this. And you're doing it responsibly, and not in a way that is to lend credence and credibility to these things. You would be doing a debunking show, and Alex is not doing that he's decidedly not doing so he tries to explain that like his excuse here, and it's just so thin

Mark Bankston (02:19:07.000)

started the video talking about the wrong name was being given this producer that they gave the wrong name of the shooter. You remember, that's what he said. Right? So Lanza had his older brother's ID on him. Why does that support a conspiracy of Sandy Hook? Why is that weird?

Alex Jones (02:19:21.000)

I think Rob was explaining why people had questions. There was a lot of anomalies.

Mark Bankston (02:19:25.000)

That's what I'm asking. Why is it weird? Why does that make you question Sandy Hook? That Adam Lanza had his brother's ID on him. Well, that was robbed loose. Okay. Why? Why is that you're sitting there agreeing with it, right? Why are y'all questioning it?

Alex Jones (02:19:37.000)

We were pointing out why people questioned

Mark Bankston (02:19:39.000)

it. Okay. When they said, Rob said they're pulling guns out of cars. Lanza had a shotgun in his trunk. Why does that support a question about whether Sandy Hook happened?

Alex Jones (02:19:49.000)

It also says memory serves as long time ago like they said the AR 15 was in the car to chow was that inside of it was inside the Bushmaster.

Mark Bankston (02:19:57.000)

Okay. And you understand the AR 15 was not in the car I guess it was almost seven years ago. Okay, actually, this wasn't seven years ago. Mr. Jones, this is April 2017.

Alex Jones (02:20:06.000)

No, no, I'm just saying going back to the time it all gets.

Dan (02:20:09.000)

Okay. That's so weak. So such a weak defense for this, man. So the thing is that Alex, like I said, I keep coming back to this because I think the sense that I get is that Alex is really trying to protect from the perception being that he's just repeating stuff from Fetzer. Yeah. And yeah, and how big we have our own individual sources that

Jordan (02:20:32.000)

we've researched. Yeah, not just I am repeating to cover anybody. Yeah.

Dan (02:20:37.000)

I think that that is really important for him. And I think that's what he's doing here.

Mark Bankston (02:20:42.000)

Same deal with kids going to run in circles with their hands up around the school. That is false. That is not the truth.

Alex Jones (02:20:49.000)

I'd have to review it again.

Mark Bankston (02:20:56.000)

All these things you were saying? As fact, you were saying them just a couple months before you were sued? All right.

Alex Jones (02:21:05.000)

I believe I said in the tape. I believe there's any Oh, Kevin, that's what people were questioning is what I'm

Mark Bankston (02:21:08.000)

saying, right? And all these things that this entire list all comes from Fetzer and hope it doesn't it.

Alex Jones (02:21:14.000)

I don't know about Fetzer. But it just came from people questioning.

Dan (02:21:18.000)

It's important to him somehow to disassociate himself, particularly from Fetzer. And I think it's because he lost the lawsuit.

Jordan (02:21:27.000)

So it's not because he's a rabid anti Semite. I don't know about.

Dan (02:21:32.000)

Yeah. So they get to this. This claim that about porta potties at the school? Yeah. And Alex is a bit wishy washy.

Mark Bankston (02:21:42.000)

The next one that says, Why were porta potties sandwiches, fruit drinks and chips brought and set up for people at the crime scene to eat inside the school. That's another thing you got from whole big right? I believe so. Okay. You want to take a wild guess right now, whether that's true or not?

Alex Jones (02:22:02.000)

I don't remember the local I remember seeing there's the stuff setup.

Mark Bankston (02:22:06.000)

You think people ate food inside their school at the crime scene? That's what you

Alex Jones (02:22:10.000)

think. Well, I don't know about that specific event about the porta potties and food. I don't know about the inside of the school.

Mark Bankston (02:22:16.000)

Okay. So that's another thing that you just relied on from all big and just put on your show without checking.

Alex Jones (02:22:21.000)

You're saying is from holiday? I'm not.

Mark Bankston (02:22:24.000)

I thought you just agreed it was from home? Well,

Alex Jones (02:22:25.000)

I mean, I'm thinking I'm hoping did say so those things. Okay. Okay.

Dan (02:22:29.000)

You just said earlier probably got a big man. Great.

Jordan (02:22:34.000)

It's a win this case, if they don't get taken down. By this case, it's gonna have to be on some bullshit technicality thing where the judge is like, clearly you did all of the wrong things that is but according to the law, this is a it's on a Tuesday, and you said tubal Cain. Like, that's the only way that they

Dan (02:22:55.000)

were hoping for some sovereign citizen miracle, right?

Jordan (02:22:59.000)

It has to be some kind of like, I think in this deposition, he's waiting for him to stand up. So he can sit in his chair and be like, No, I'm deposing you. Like, what are you

Dan (02:23:06.000)

doing with the system? I'm trying? Yeah, exactly. So Alex also wants to fall back into this place where he's like, Well, look, I mean, there was a lot of questions, because there was a ton of secrecy around the case. And they didn't even put out a report until last year, or whatever, you know, like, he's like, how am I supposed to know there's no official information out, although I would just not believe the official information. Anyway.

Jordan (02:23:30.000)

Alex, let me let me can you take a wild guess as to whether or not that's true? It's

Mark Bankston (02:23:35.000)

not that part about why didn't they let paramedics and EMTs into the building after 27 children were declared dead? That's not true, either. Isn't? That's false?

Alex Jones (02:23:48.000)

I remember being reported that they were there's a long way.

Mark Bankston (02:23:52.000)

I'm asking you if it's true or not, Mr. Jim.

Alex Jones (02:23:55.000)

Idle don't have the specifics in front of me.

Mark Bankston (02:23:57.000)

You did in March, right. You read to different EMTs, who went into the building? Perform services in the building? You read those reports? Correct.

Alex Jones (02:24:05.000)

We had remember, they kept a lot of that secret. For years. It was the longest time anything was ever kept secret. And that was wall. So what contributed to a lot of the questions in the community and around the country was the level of secrecy or a lot lawsuit. I don't remember all the specifics. But there was a lot of stuff kept secret for years and years. Didn't without official crime report for very long, long years and years. And I remember all the specifics of a lot of that I have to go back online and refresh my memory get exactly right.

Mark Bankston (02:24:31.000)

All right. Let's unpack all of that. Because first of all, when you read those reports in your deposition, you acknowledge that paramedics were went into the building Correct. Start there. You showed

Alex Jones (02:24:43.000)

me documents that recently come out showing that

Mark Bankston (02:24:47.000)

recently come out. When do you think those documents came on?

Alex Jones (02:24:52.000)

I just know that there was big controversy about most of the case being kept secret.

Mark Bankston (02:24:56.000)

Didn't we cover in your testimony last time that those doctors Throughout in 2013, right after the incident, and that's something we covered. I don't remember specifically. Okay, if those documents were out in 2013. And here you are in 2017 talking about there being no paramedics in the building. It's a pretty bad error, isn't it? Mr. Jones?

Alex Jones (02:25:26.000)

I mean, if that is the case, the New York Times knowing a lot about WMDs in Iraq and kill millions, wherever the sanctions I would never do that on purpose.

Mark Bankston (02:25:32.000)

Absolutely. New York Times messed up bad. Some people needed to get fired, didn't they? Ooh,

Dan (02:25:36.000)

instantly deflated, that. You see that super long pause. And it's like, well,

Alex Jones (02:25:42.000)

what about New York?

Dan (02:25:43.000)

Yeah, absolutely. Fuck them up to Yeah, exactly. It's Oh, yeah. Oh,

Jordan (02:25:49.000)

no, I thought you were a globalist and you're trying to defend all the globalist stuff.

Dan (02:25:53.000)

That is something that does come up to is the like, Alex, who's going like you and the establishment lawyers, like, do you think I wouldn't sue the mainstream media? I had the opportunity to do think I wouldn't take that case. Yeah. Do you think I am the establishment? Yeah, I am not. Like, yeah, but it's, it's sad. It's it's clear that Alex is still even in this case, under oath. And here in this deposition, it's clear that he still kind of at least, somewhat thinks that this is part of a conspiracy. Yes, absolutely. It's very, it's very tragic.

Jordan (02:26:30.000)

I'm just trying to figure out exactly how many other offenses he's committing in this deposition like the comedy one, he's, he's fucked on that one.

Dan (02:26:39.000)

Maybe like, there's no way that you can? I don't know. I can't I don't know enough internal detail there, but it doesn't look good. So earlier, we talked about Paul's deposition. And in it, Paul said that he wrote that email back to Lenny Posner himself. Now because Paul said that there's plausible deniability for Alex to pretend that he didn't know that family members were being harassed as early as 2013. Alex completely blows that

Jordan (02:27:12.000)

Alex, we've got a clear path to the endzone for you just run that ball right on in there. Every of all 11 defensive

Dan (02:27:19.000)

numbers. It's a clear path to the endzone but it helps him Yeah. And he destroys that right here.

Mark Bankston (02:27:24.000)

And then you and Mr. Watson together composed a response, correct? I don't remember that. Okay. You don't remember saying that you and Mr. Watson were did this together.

Alex Jones (02:27:41.000)

I remember talking to watch him about it. And I remember inviting the guy on the show to there's

Dan (02:27:47.000)

so although there's differing, slightly differing takes on who wrote the email, the fact that Alex is clear that he had a conversation with Paul about it and invited or wanted to invite Posner on the show indicates that he was clearly aware of all of that. Back then. Yeah. So in that email,

Jordan (02:28:08.000)

I have a quick question. Yeah. Do you think he knows the difference between a criminal trial

Dan (02:28:13.000)

and a civil trial? Not the finer points? Because

Jordan (02:28:17.000)

it really does feel like he's trying to pull this like, I don't know. I don't recall. I don't know. See? You guys can't get me on anything. You can't force me to testify against myself. See,

Dan (02:28:29.000)

I don't know if like there's, there's an appearance of playing dumb. And I think that some of that is, is playing dumb. And I think some of it is just being dumb. Maybe a belief that on their own, they can't prove what we did. Or like they can't prove exactly how we arrived at the conclusions we arrived. Right? So let's just keep that vague. Even if we lose, we'll lose a ton of money. But we'll be able to keep on with the Griff share or something. Yeah, I think it's more just defensiveness than anything else. Almost instinctive reflexive? Yeah. If you're someone like Alex, you never want to give up your sources, because it will only reveal that you have no idea what you're talking about. Yeah, I think that's when there's the dump Dominus and be like, Oh, I could find that. I just, I've been busy. I don't know any of that. I think it's because on some level, Alex knows. You dig too deep into whatever his sourcing was for any of this. You're going to find Fetzer. You're going to find how big Yeah, and it's just not going to look good. And it's going to demonstrate that he never did any kind of work to corroborate anything. It's just gonna it's gonna look real bad.

Jordan (02:29:41.000)

I do like his disciplinary policy at Infowars anything go? Because I do enjoy that.

Dan (02:29:47.000)

Yeah, it's like an Outback Steakhouse. So, in the email that Paul said he was saying that we do not encourage and condone the actor theory, we are just we've distanced ourselves Hold on. So they asked Alex about that. And this is

Jordan (02:30:03.000)

we got a clear path to the endzone for you Alex all it's a yes or no answer. No, no,

Mark Bankston (02:30:07.000)

no, this pathway is blocked. Mr. Watson writes back, sir, we have not promoted the quote unquote, actors thing. In fact, we have actively distanced ourselves from it over the next six years, that's not true, is it? You didn't You didn't distance yourself from the actors thing. You actively embrace the actors.

Alex Jones (02:30:28.000)

That's Paul saying this and no, I didn't, I didn't do. I didn't get to the actor stuff. People brought it up. And I said, that's what people had questions. You

Mark Bankston (02:30:37.000)

produced a video to me, entitled, crisis actors used at Sandy Hook. And it has an exclamation point, not a question mark. With that video, you admit to me you endorse this crisis actors thing.

Alex Jones (02:30:50.000)

A lot of the videos that we gave you were were videos that we were in, but that we did not produce how to say this Pacific's

Mark Bankston (02:30:58.000)

Okay, so if Infowars produced a video and uploaded it to YouTube, and it was titled crisis actors used at Sandy Hook, that would contradict what Mr. Jones I mean, what Mr. Watson is saying. But

Alex Jones (02:31:09.000)

yes, I mean, I need to see that. But

Dan (02:31:11.000)

who do you why did you say yes, there? I have no idea, though. Because if they're asking this question with a specific of an exclamation point, instead of a question, Mark, you got to know that they have that. You got to know that they have evidence, it's on the list. They already told you that they have you just admitted the doors, the crisis actor theory,

Jordan (02:31:33.000)

here's what I would have gone with, I would have gone with that was a type of

Unknown Speaker (02:31:37.000)

fake a heart attack. Do something

Bill Ogden (02:31:41.000)

get out of there?

Jordan (02:31:44.000)

So that is an interesting question. Could he could he could they have just been like, can we stop real quick?

Dan (02:31:50.000)

He does at a certain point. Yeah, he does take a break. Just because like, I don't think it's because of a question. That is bad. Yeah. But I think, yeah, he could have called for a break.

Jordan (02:32:01.000)

Yeah. Or can they reschedule?

Dan (02:32:04.000)

Maybe I mean, I, maybe they have been in it. They've been their handlers for a sec could be like, we don't know how many times this could have been put off or not? Yeah, I don't know. I feel like there's a reason why you would proceed with the ROB do deposition in spite of him being completely unprepared. That's fair. Whereas I think a normal thing to do would be like, do the work you need to do and come back in a week. Yeah. But I don't know, I have no idea how these things work. That's the only

Jordan (02:32:31.000)

thing that I mean, if I was there, and I got two of those hypothetical questions, and I got them wrong, I would have been like, Hey, we're gonna break for the next. I don't know, two to three weeks while I actually read up on all the shit, you're asking me because I'm gonna lose this conversation.

Dan (02:32:46.000)

It's not looking good. And it gets worse, because as we talked about earlier, Alex posted the address of the mailbox that Mr. Posner you right. And that's an opinion, bad. But my opinion is that it's bad, right? And what makes it worse is providing surrounding context to it. And which they do here. And it does appear that Alex was mad at Mr. Posner, and the YouTube strikes on on on people who were using pictures of their dead children.

Mark Bankston (02:33:20.000)

Well, you didn't like this foundation, Mr. Posner was running. He didn't like the specifics of that. You said on your show you didn't like it? Right.

Alex Jones (02:33:29.000)

What did I specifically say? Call them bullies?

Mark Bankston (02:33:31.000)

Didn't you remember that? Or that specifically, you said you're gonna fight back.

Alex Jones (02:33:37.000)

You remember that? Well, I remember all of those those guys. But some of them like saying I said, Nobody died in in Parkland, Florida. And St. John's is saying no one died again. And then give me a platform and we were able to show the videos are on platform. And YouTube put us back up to the strikes off, because I didn't say nobody died at Parkland.

Mark Bankston (02:33:57.000)

You said the Sandy Hook parents were stirring up a hornet's nest right by coming after you

Alex Jones (02:34:02.000)

remember the specifics of that or what was pitifully was happening but

Mark Bankston (02:34:06.000)

you told the Sandy Hook parents you're not gonna mess with didn't you?

Alex Jones (02:34:11.000)

Remember those specifics?

Mark Bankston (02:34:13.000)

On your show? You showed maps and addresses used by a parent who complained because in your mind, he was running an anti free speech Foundation, right?

Alex Jones (02:34:23.000)

I did not show that footage.

Mark Bankston (02:34:26.000)

What do you mean you didn't show it? Aren't you that you run Infowars right.

Alex Jones (02:34:31.000)

You Hall empty parking lot to debunk a thing that the guy has using a false address. We said that's normal to use an address when you're a public figure. I remember like when you said that I remember going in front of find it and we found like this is a saying a parking lot in a U haul. We're not selling this guy's houses.

Mark Bankston (02:34:49.000)

Yeah, Tory picks up his mail, u haul store. Post Office Box.

Alex Jones (02:34:53.000)

You got you said we were sending people their houses and stuff that wasn't true. I'm not. I'm certainly never said that. But that's what they were saying. That's what the media was saying. All I'm asking never sent anybody their houses never done that ever said, people need to harass them. That's not true.

Mark Bankston (02:35:06.000)

All I'm asking you. All I'm asking you, Mr. Jones, you showed maps and addresses used by parents who complained against you. That's what you did.

Alex Jones (02:35:17.000)

Right? That was not the intent of that.

Mark Bankston (02:35:19.000)

I'm not asking you what your intent was. I'm asking you to happen. You showed maps and addresses used by a sandy hook parent who complained against you. That happened.

Alex Jones (02:35:31.000)

We we showed where his foundation was supposedly set, people were saying it was fake. And we said, That's not real. But

Dan (02:35:41.000)

that argument is so thin the idea that he had people who were saying that this is a fake Foundation, and he put up the address of it and showed a Google map to the location of it as a way of debunking that it was a fake foundation is saying ludicrous.

Jordan (02:35:59.000)

This is a this is a conversation with an eight year old who stole a cookie. Like every single like, I'll try, I'll throw out anything to avoid saying yes, I stole that cookie. But what's

Dan (02:36:09.000)

so crazy about it? What's so weird, in my mind is that Alex is presenting this thing that he did is not a bad thing. It was actually trying to help Mr. Posner,

Jordan (02:36:22.000)

but also he didn't do it. Unless you convince him. He did do. Yeah, sure. Play me the video. No, I didn't do that. Now, granted,

Dan (02:36:29.000)

before that I was sitting there stirring up a hornet's nest. And I'm not someone to mess with. Sure. But I was trying to help.

Jordan (02:36:36.000)

That's why I'm not somebody to mess with. I'm so helpful. Yeah, that's what it is. Don't mess with me. I'm trying to help you. I

Dan (02:36:44.000)

find this hard to swallow. So now the topic comes up of when was Bidadi fired? Oh, and he was fired before Sandy Hook, sir. In this clip, Alex plays dumb.

Mark Bankston (02:36:56.000)

Well, the truth of the matter is, you didn't have a problem with Sandy Hook. You had a problem with him embarrassing you at a Trump rally.

Alex Jones (02:37:02.000)

One thing you're out about that duty, I guess spend time in Berlin is more. It's just it's insisted, because it's like, I'm I remember a lot of it. I remember what happened. I think if I go dig even deeper, I can. I can not get specifics. And I remember telling them try to find out the specifics.

Mark Bankston (02:37:16.000)

You've now this is your second deposition. In the Sandy Hook case. You got more going up and up in Connecticut. You've had discovery in Connecticut. You've had discovery three times in Texas. And you're telling me you think you need to go burrow in and figure out what happened.

Alex Jones (02:37:32.000)

What Oh, now that I get these kinds of questions, I don't think you're asking me these exact questions. Last time,

Mark Bankston (02:37:36.000)

I was very much asking you about Mr. McDonough. And when he was terminated in the last deposition, wasn't I Mr. Jones?

Alex Jones (02:37:41.000)

I remember this video was you showing me this?

Mark Bankston (02:37:43.000)

I did not show you this video. That's not what I asked him. I asked you.

Alex Jones (02:37:47.000)

I went I guess try to get invoices or something. I guess you're saying actually,

Mark Bankston (02:37:51.000)

Mr. Jones, your document production in this case shows you did that in May 2018. Right after you were sued. The truth of the matter, Mr. Jones is you knew immediately after being sued that Danby donde was going to be a liability for you, didn't you?

Rob Dew (02:38:10.000)

Barnes

Dan (02:38:13.000)

No, no. Well, that's, that's, that's real damning to me. Yeah, that

Jordan (02:38:21.000)

I believe he is under oath. Your Honor.

Dan (02:38:23.000)

That's it. You hear stuff like that. And it's just, yeah. So the the lawyer wants to really nail down these, how all of Alex's sources are really just Fetzer and Hall Hey, yeah. And so this is really interesting. In a video, Alex is saying that, you know, like retired policemen and school investigators, and they've all been threatened. He's like, creating the perception that there's tons of people who are who are being threatened about Sandy Hook. Yeah. And this is this is just great.

Mark Bankston (02:38:57.000)

Mr. Jones, before we break, I asked you about your statement about what state police officers were threatened. You told me Mr. How big and maybe somebody else? Correct. Okay. Then you said that school investigation experts were threatened, who were the who was that?

Alex Jones (02:39:17.000)

Wasn't just how, like, I remember there was some other groups and people asking questions and some other professors. Other than fencers, I was really going off with fencer said.

Mark Bankston (02:39:26.000)

Okay. You then you said that in addition to those two groups, that some school safety experts had been threatened to was that

Alex Jones (02:39:36.000)

it was all about housing.

Mark Bankston (02:39:37.000)

Right? I mean, all of these are talking about how big

Jordan (02:39:43.000)

your nine, you're nine years old? Shut the fuck up. You just answered Yes. By saying no. The way you said though, is a yes. No. That's that's you. Yeah, that's bad. You just said yes. That's a yes.

Dan (02:40:00.000)

Maybe one of the other professors was James Tracy too. So I mean, like there could be two professors. But all of these other descriptions like retired state policeman and school investigator are being presented as two different people. They are both Wolfgang Halbig. Yeah. All of these, like trying to create a chorus of folks. We've just got two dudes.

Jordan (02:40:20.000)

I would like this demographer to make sure that the record shows while he did say no, please put a parenthesis. Yes. Right

Dan (02:40:29.000)

next to it. This is deflated. Wow. So Alex has asked about his narrative surrounding ambulances at the school. Yeah. And don't believe it. I don't think he comes off looking knowledgeable.

Mark Bankston (02:40:42.000)

You said in that video, ambulances came an hour and a half later. That's not true. Right. I don't have a timeline from Are you going to claim in this lawsuit that those ambulances came an hour and a half later? I'm gonna have to check that. While I asked you to check it. Did you ask you in discovery to check it? Did you?

Alex Jones (02:41:04.000)

Want from memory? I believe there's conflicting reports.

Mark Bankston (02:41:06.000)

I'm not asking what your memory was. I'm asking if you checked

Unknown Speaker (02:41:09.000)

it. Like I did check it.

Mark Bankston (02:41:12.000)

What were the results of you checking it? I don't have that in front of me. And whatever it was, you didn't give it to me either. Right? And discovered? Correct. Oh, I thought that was rhetorical. Oh, I don't ask rhetorical questions. Mr. Jones, I won't testimony. Oh, I don't have that in front of me. I can't speak accurately.

Dan (02:41:38.000)

That's just nothing. That is that is tragic.

Jordan (02:41:43.000)

In in Wisconsin, judge just ruled that, you know, the 200,000 people could be purged from the voter rolls because they have to respond within 30 Days to a change of address form. And the judge in his ruling literally is like 30 days, I don't understand you can get it done in 30 days, that's plenty of time. And that is how people are going to lose the right to vote. Alex can get away with this shit. That's unacceptable, why it's unreal.

Dan (02:42:12.000)

Maybe it's the end of the road for him get being able to get away.

Jordan (02:42:14.000)

I hope so. Because this is the I mean, just this deposition alone should be enough to be guilty. I would be

Dan (02:42:21.000)

so fascinated to find out what like someone who likes Alex and believes him. How would they interpret these answers? How would they interpret, like his clear inability to answer any direct question when anything he should be saying would be completely exculpatory? Yeah, anything that he presents, the way he presents himself on the show, I have all this. It's all proven. Got all the documents yet? If he had any of these documents, if he had anything proven, this is the context where in bringing that out yet would be like, Oh, okay, well, you are completely well within your right to do this. And in fact, oh, my God, what's this? Yeah, you aren't? You're correct.

Jordan (02:43:04.000)

Here's, here's the thing, if Anderson Cooper did a three hour deposition, where he answered every question confidently, and clearly he had evidence backing up, but there was one question where he's like, oh, man, I just don't have that one in front of me. One of Alex Jones as listeners, or Alex himself would have grabbed that clip and been like, See, he's a lying piece of shit. But you can see it, it's all alive. See, and I miss ISIS. But if somebody can watch this deposition, and not come away with being like, Oh, that guy did everything you say he did. It's insane. It's

Dan (02:43:37.000)

it's, it's weird. I just don't I don't know how it would be interpreted like, yeah, I would be very fascinated to know, like, what is the what is the logical explanation for why he is behaving like that? Yeah, other than flippant disregard? Because that's not really a good because if you if you consider, like, worst case scenario, he's going to lose tons and tons of money, and possibly become financially unviable as a business, right best case scenario. He gets away with everything and everything is good. Why wouldn't you tend towards behaviors that would lead towards the better outcome? Acting like this is only going to make it more likely that the bad outcome happens? Yeah, he's not acting in his own best interests. And that implies to me, he can't act in his best

Jordan (02:44:30.000)

if there is no best case scenario for him. Best case scenario for him is he loses and gets to say he still won somehow. Sure, you know,

Dan (02:44:38.000)

so now the lawyer plays the video of Alex talking to a caller and saying I didn't believe it at first, but Sandy Hook was totally fake. There were no kids killed there and all of that.

Jordan (02:44:49.000)

And when I don't recall that, I'll have to check the video again. Well,

Dan (02:44:53.000)

when pressed on it, his explanation of what his show is, is very bizarre illuminating,

Alex Jones (02:44:58.000)

and I do legitimately, looking at all that stuff?

Mark Bankston (02:45:04.000)

We've gone back and forth on all of this. Yeah. You said false things. And then you said things that were true, right?

Alex Jones (02:45:12.000)

No, I have had opinions and I've had different views on things.

Mark Bankston (02:45:14.000)

Okay, but let's just go and use your word opinion. Even though we all vote, we all know that's not an opinion. Your opinion is false. Kids died at Sandy Hook.

Alex Jones (02:45:24.000)

Right? And I didn't kill them.

Mark Bankston (02:45:27.000)

Do you see me anywhere in this deposition saying you killed children? Mr.

Alex Jones (02:45:30.000)

Remington? Did you think your teacher didn't kill him?

Mark Bankston (02:45:33.000)

You think you're here because you killed children. That's the act of what it is like,

Alex Jones (02:45:36.000)

I'm Adam Lanza, or something. And it's all just

Mark Bankston (02:45:40.000)

how much I'm just asking you, you're a journalist, you feel like you're responsible for the things you report.

Alex Jones (02:45:45.000)

If I put out a journalistic report and said this is fact then that would be that. But when I'm on the show, talking about how I feel, I'm allowed to have my feelings and to say at that point, I even say, I've gone all over the map. I'm there talking about my emotions.

Mark Bankston (02:46:00.000)

This isn't journalism. Absolutely not.

Alex Jones (02:46:02.000)

It's it's me talking about my feelings.

Dan (02:46:06.000)

So apparently, Infowars is Alex talking about his feelings in less directly presented as fact, which again, might be opinion.

Jordan (02:46:18.000)

So

Dan (02:46:20.000)

seek Now earlier in his child custody case, when his lawyer said that he's playing a character, like you admitted your character? Yeah. And that, to me is super compelling, because it's his lawyer. And also, it's in the context of like a family case. And it's all very messy. This is Alex directly under oath, saying, My show is mostly me talking about my feelings. Yep. Yep.

Jordan (02:46:43.000)

My show is the closest that I can get to therapy as a toxic male. That's what I've got. This

Dan (02:46:52.000)

is not the area I would like the things to go in wearing. Now. We look at the show as what does this say about his field? Yeah, exactly. That's not the interpretive direction. I want the show to go. But it's gonna be hard for me not to think about that. Like a lot of this could just be a manifestation of what you feel right. But it's presented as being backed by the white papers, right? Your years of history. It's documented. Yeah. Good. That's not good. That's just jointed, nonsensical thing.

Jordan (02:47:24.000)

I don't know. The thing about the deposition, especially here is I don't know whether or not he believes anything he's saying. That's true. I just, I can't because there's so much of him here. That is

Dan (02:47:39.000)

wriggling. Yeah, that is funny. There's plenty that could just be desperation, ya

Jordan (02:47:43.000)

know, and he even tried in one of the clips that you played earlier, I noticed that he was trying that, like, apologize to authority kind of way of getting out of something like, yeah, you know what, you're right. We made some mistakes. I'm sorry about that. We'll work to fix that in the future, as though he was talking to his boss, you know, instead of gonna continue

Dan (02:48:06.000)

from the establishment. Exactly.

Jordan (02:48:08.000)

It really does feel like he thinks he's talking to somebody who can make it all go away if they just decide to leave him

Dan (02:48:14.000)

alone or to like him. Yeah, exactly. That's weird. That's wild. So Alex wants to talk about Epstein. And that's interesting, because it's a deposition about a sandy hook case. They say

Jordan (02:48:27.000)

this, I believe it whatever he says, Now, I believe he believes.

Dan (02:48:32.000)

Now what's strange is Alex should have known that something was up because the lawyer does want to talk about it.

Jordan (02:48:44.000)

Still doesn't get the hypothetical question leading

Dan (02:48:47.000)

to bringing up Epstein was like, I promise you, we'll get to that. Well, no. And now, if I were Alex, I'd be like, Let's never

Jordan (02:48:55.000)

never speak to you. No, actually, I've changed my mind. There's really a point that this lawyer is going to make he just doesn't get that. No, he doesn't get that he thinks they're having a conversation, not the lawyer spent hours and weeks preparing for this exact interview.

Mark Bankston (02:49:11.000)

Yep. Just talking about everything from it. I don't want to talk about that. I think maybe I'm gonna take a guess here. But I think one of the things that you and I agree on, is that large segments of the ruling class of this country, and indeed the world are psychopaths and criminals. Yes, I agree with that. And, in fact, because of that, when these really really strange happenings with Epstein, when Epstein killed himself in his cell, allegedly, when you're supposed to be under watch by federal officials, that looks suspicious, to say the least.

Alex Jones (02:49:49.000)

Correct? Yes. In fact,

Mark Bankston (02:49:50.000)

I think a lot of people in this country think it's most likely true that there was foul play that Epstein was killed. A lot of people think that right and Epstein is a massive public figure. He's been in the news a ton, right? Yes. Partially because of something called the Lolita Express, right? Yes. And we in this country gets talked about public figures. Would you agree? Yes.

Dan (02:50:15.000)

Two things. One, Alex should be terrified.

Jordan (02:50:18.000)

i Right now, my hackles are raised up. Like I said something bad coming around this quarter.

Dan (02:50:24.000)

Yeah. Alex should not be like

Jordan (02:50:28.000)

hair on my arm and standing.

Dan (02:50:30.000)

The second thing is you can tell how much differently Alex responds. Oh, yeah. These are direct. Yes. No quick answer. You're on my team. Yes. Yeah, yes. Yeah. Wait, you're talking shit about the elites? I mean, yeah, willing to testify. They're bad. He doesn't realize that the entire use of bringing up Epstein is to use it as a case study about why it's okay to say whatever you want about Jeffrey Epstein. But it's not for someone else.

Mark Bankston (02:50:58.000)

Let's say that there is a security guard at that federal penitentiary. And his name is Bob Smith. If you wanted to get on TV and say, Bob Smith killed Jeff Epstein. And you were wrong? Should you be held responsible for that? private citizen like Bob Smith had no involvement in trying to get on the news?

Alex Jones (02:51:20.000)

Is it okay, I mean, I mean, if there were issues and anomalies, and I questioned whether it was whether whether Bob was involved or not, then

Mark Bankston (02:51:28.000)

now I'm what I'm asking. Mr. Jones, is you just flat out say Bob Smith killed Jeff Epstein. Is that okay? If you're wrong? Or does Bob Smith, do you have some responsibility to Bob Smith to make that right?

Alex Jones (02:51:39.000)

Not if I did it out of out of you know, believing it was true.

Dan (02:51:43.000)

That is a weird line. But he Alex is pretty far off the beaten path there in terms of his understanding of what is appropriate with private and public figures. One of the things that they try to lay out is that by implying in and saying directly that no one died there, what you're doing is accusing all of these people of gigantic crimes, not only because they're involved in some elaborate hoax, but because let's say if you're a parent and your child is didn't die, you have filed false police reports. Yeah. Like there's all sorts of implied crimes, there are a host of them. Yeah. So by behaving in this way, you are making criminal accusations against people whether or not you directly say it. Yeah. And Alex tries to play the game of like, I didn't say these people's names, like what you said, No one died. My clients son did die. Because you said no one died. You are talking about them.

Jordan (02:52:46.000)

I would like to ask you to explain that. Because I you made it.

Dan (02:52:54.000)

So because it's clear that this lawyers taken Alex down a road that's going to fully demonstrate private versus public figures. Alex just starts rambling. Yeah. And then probably one of my bigger laughs of the of the whole proceedings

Alex Jones (02:53:11.000)

that I've learned though, some stuffs real, even if it's unbelievable that somebody would go kill all those kids. That's just that's it's unbelievable, but it really happened. And so I would not ever do that. No one I know would do that. So it's it's hard to believe that. And so people get denial. That's well known. And under that,

Mark Bankston (02:53:30.000)

you know, a question you're answering.

Alex Jones (02:53:33.000)

You want me elaborate? Question about? That? That's a big question. And that's what the whole thing is about. That's what that's what it comes down to with New York Times versus Sullivan. And all nine year, nine yards. And I've never intentionally gone out and tried to hurt people by questioning big public events. But we need to question public events. That's what it is to be an American. And if we don't, we're in North Korea.

Mark Bankston (02:53:58.000)

I asked you, sir, would you be responsible to Bob Smith?

Alex Jones (02:54:02.000)

And I told you that it would be the it would be the specifics, that there was reporting and information and questions about it. And Bob was the only one that could have had access. And then I questioned it. It turned out Bob was innocent. If I wasn't doing it intentionally to go hurt, Bob. No, then I'm cool.

Dan (02:54:25.000)

Turns out, that's probably not the case with private citizens. If I especially if you're relying on people like Jim Fetzer, right, Roger Helbig pointing the finger at Bob Smith for no reason.

Jordan (02:54:37.000)

Okay, so that's, that's insane. That's God. You know what question your love that that's my favorite. That's my favorite line of this entire day. Yeah, because I've always I've always wanted to ask him that. Just like it's exactly

Dan (02:54:55.000)

what what you're talking about cuts through all the shit you Yep. So one of Alex's big defenses is basically that he believes that the family members are public figures, right. He believes that just by virtue of them being the victims and family members of a tragedy, yeah, they have entered the arena, right or whatever, through no

Jordan (02:55:19.000)

fault of their own, the massive amount of media attention upon them has thus raise them into public figures opening them up to

Dan (02:55:27.000)

now, it's interesting, because literally, courts have ruled the opposite, right? Well, there's that and Alex doesn't respond well, to that being brought up.

Mark Bankston (02:55:37.000)

Okay. But what I'm trying to get to you, Mr. Jones, is do you agree that there's a difference between an internationally recognized famous person and a person who spent millions, if not billions, trying to influence our country like Jeff Epstein, and a private citizen, just minding their own business? There's a difference between those two people, right? There is a difference. There is a difference in journalistic ethics and how you have to treat those two people isn't there? I think there is. And at the end of the day with a private person, you would agree with me that Infowars needs to take appropriate steps to make sure it isn't reporting false things about private people,

Alex Jones (02:56:15.000)

most of what we do is punditry and opinion. And when parents and others become public figures and go out with a political mission to to to restrict gun ownership, then they've stepped into the arena of politics.

Mark Bankston (02:56:32.000)

You know, courts disagree with you on that, though, right.

Alex Jones (02:56:34.000)

I don't know your interpretation, of course. Well, you

Mark Bankston (02:56:36.000)

are involved in a lawsuit with Leonard Posner, Veronique Dela Rosa, you're familiar with that lawsuit? I know about it. You know, the Texas Court of Appeals came back and told you they're not public figures, correct?

Alex Jones (02:56:47.000)

No, that that's a Democrat court.

Mark Bankston (02:56:55.000)

Sure, there'll be delighted to hear that. That's a Democrat court. Yeah, yeah. Now,

Jordan (02:57:03.000)

all right. So essentially, he believes that no law can be made, unless it's made by people who agree with him. Yeah. And he doesn't. He doesn't have to follow any law. Any law that a Democrat judge says is real?

Dan (02:57:18.000)

Yeah, it seems that way. Gotcha. Well, because they're all demon globalists,

Jordan (02:57:22.000)

right. Yeah. I mean, that is the logical. That is the logical extension. If he actually believes that they're all out to get him into conspiracy, then yeah,

Dan (02:57:30.000)

yeah. So they take a break, and they come back. And there's just a couple of minutes left here, where we get, you get an update on Barnes? Sure. You get the dismount. Right. And then we also get first, Alex, needing to clarify something about his sources. And if they don't exist, I find this to be weird.

Alex Jones (02:57:52.000)

I really need to clarify something because I don't think you understood what I said at least I'm probably mumbled through it. Okay, to clarify my earlier testimony, you kept asking about sources and where the sources are. We have articles and things, most of it is links. And so I've given you to my knowledge, everything we've got, we'll do another search. But not everything has links to other sources that are online. And then over time, those links die. And it's very hard to find that stuff. So anything that we haven't given you is outside of my office and not in my office, when you say a source, that would just be newspapers and archives and TV reports that are outside of my office, on the internet, your sources for things that I'm thinking about from memory that need to go out and find. So I must have misunderstood what you meant by sources,

Mark Bankston (02:58:42.000)

I'm sure. You'd agree it's not general practice. It's not part of your operating protocols, to save, corroborating information, underline Infowars as news broadcasts.

Alex Jones (02:58:57.000)

We save some of it, but then over time, it gets you over time with like piles of articles, news folders with information. Yeah, but it tends to get thrown away. But most of what we have is his article with links. And then unnatural people can know what we're talking about. And the links go to outside websites, and outside TV stations and networks. And so when I heard about you keep that as my sources of info where I got something where I thought something I need to go back to those original articles that you've been given, but then follow the links through that are on there.

Dan (02:59:30.000)

Oh, links. Oh, it's links.

Jordan (02:59:32.000)

i He's so unused to the concept of a follow up question, Jordan. That explains everything. He genuinely thought that he came up with a brilliant response. Yeah, he really did. Its links. He really thought that okay. Look, you're a newbie to my whole version of journalists. All right. So when I have a source now this a lot of other journalistic outlets don't do this. When I have a source. I'll do what's called a hyperlink. I You know what, I'm just gonna call it a link hyperlink might be a little hard for you to understand. Right? So I'll make one of the words like a little blue, right? Then you click on it. And that's my source. Right? Crazy. Now the internet never heard as such, it's made of fire, and who knows what's gonna get burned? So when you click on the link, sometimes it's not there anymore. I'm sorry. This all makes sense. Please do not follow up with any other questions.

Dan (03:00:23.000)

That's I'm flabbergasted by this level of needing to clarify that I really think he, he seems to be thinking like a, you know, it's a great defense. Sometimes some of these links are deadly. They're gone. You've already talked about the Wayback Machine.

Jordan (03:00:40.000)

Okay. Now I understand that, but that's only for traffic on school websites dad, for

Dan (03:00:45.000)

God didn't you know that forgot, that's all it was. So here, we get to this update on barns, who, as we know, may or may not still be poles lawyer, certainly not Alex's.

Mark Bankston (03:00:55.000)

I understand. Mr. Barnes. Robert Barnes is no longer representing No. Is he still employed by the company? No. So he's not general counsel. And in no. Okay. While he was there, did he have any managerial responsibilities?

Mark Bankston (03:01:12.000)

No. Did he have any director positions at the company? No. Did he at one point serve as general counsel?

Alex Jones (03:01:22.000)

That's the name you call it he was trying to manage?

Mark Bankston (03:01:26.000)

What does that mean? He's trying to manage something? He was he was trying to

Alex Jones (03:01:29.000)

get the cases organized.

Mark Bankston (03:01:30.000)

Okay. So he's practicing law. Yes. Thank you.

Dan (03:01:33.000)

I wonder if that line of questioning has anything to do with like a suspicion that he was doing more? Yeah, there? I don't know. i It could just be sort of standard question. stuff. But based on how frequently Barnes was appearing on Infowars, how Alex said he was going to give him a show. Yeah. It does seem to like the fact that that line of questioning, was he a director at Infowars is in a managerial role that makes me think that they might have a different suspicion. But I might be overreaching fairness.

Jordan (03:02:05.000)

I don't know. First, the first thing that I thought was, what they're asking for is, you didn't disclose something? Like there's some communication between you and barns or between barns and somebody that you guys didn't disclose or wonder. That's, that's the only thing I can think of and there and your argument that you didn't disclose it is because he wasn't an employee or a manager director.

Dan (03:02:29.000)

I want. I wonder if that's the case. But it could be just nothing. Yeah, it could just be. Is Barnes still around normal? Last question. Yeah, it just read a little weird to me. So here's the last clip. And it's Alex being asked if he's sorry. Spoiler alert. He's not the whole and his big dismount.

Mark Bankston (03:02:49.000)

But I want to ask you now looking back on this, are you sorry,

Alex Jones (03:02:54.000)

you know, I did all this from a good place in my heart. And I'm and I'm really sad, the establishment has lied so much, and then so much that, that the public doesn't believe that they're totally Well, there's been a real loss of confidence in the system. Wow. Everything I've done has been from a place of really trying to get people to think and trying to find out the truth. And I've certainly been wrong about things. And you know, and, but it came from a place of really trying to do my best job. And so I'm overall proud of it the public to be skeptical, and get people to think for themselves. And

Mark Bankston (03:03:28.000)

let me get this straight. These videos we just watched today. You're proud of those videos.

Alex Jones (03:03:34.000)

I'm proud of the compendium of my work, not small clips taken out of context. And I'm a good person. And I've pioneered exposing Epstein 13 years ago, so they fly around aircraft for the Clintons and kidnap children. And the trip, right? Everybody comes up shakes, my hand apologizes, and often now the Liberals do they go, we're sorry. And we were wrong about you and

Mark Bankston (03:03:55.000)

a bunch of other stuff. So so in some ways, you're a victim.

Alex Jones (03:03:58.000)

Well, let's just say Tom is running out for the establishment. Epstein didn't kill himself.

Mark Bankston (03:04:03.000)

All right, Mr. Jones, thank you for your time today. Until next time,

Dan (03:04:07.000)

yeah, they're laughing

Jordan (03:04:08.000)

at him. Well, boy. That's so when when Epstein didn't kill himself right away. He's gonna go out on a meme. Yeah. Well, that's his plan.

Dan (03:04:18.000)

When that tweet went around, no, people did not believe that. Alex ended his deposition saying Epstein didn't kill himself. Wow. But he did. That's good stuff. Wow. Good stuff. Good. Strong stuff from everybody at Infowars. Really? This? You know it. I wanted to, you know, do a present day episode for today because I wanted to find out if you did that surgery. Yeah, that in studio, of course.

Jordan (03:04:46.000)

Yeah. People ripping computer chips out of there.

Dan (03:04:51.000)

I want to update on that. But sometimes things happen. You get thrown a curveball. You got to watch seven hours of testimony from the is a these obfuscating Weirdos this is

Jordan (03:05:04.000)

I can't I can't hang with him being like, you know it's really sad that the mainstream media isn't trusted enough anymore that my brand of the fucking with people yeah

Jordan (03:05:18.000)

is like it's almost like him being like well it's your fault that I even have a job made me do this you you guys made this space because sometimes you get things wrong where now I can lie and make a shit ton of money.

Dan (03:05:32.000)

This is your fault you should have been accurate he is Yeah, he is manifesting that that's insane. Yeah, it's a very,

Jordan (03:05:39.000)

and Alex you're not a good person. Your ship person

Dan (03:05:43.000)

I think what is so interesting to me is how all of these three are so different. Yeah, in theme. Wow. I mean, it's all about Sandy Hook. But the feeling is so very different. Like Paul covering his ass kind of 100% being slightly agreeable, agreeable, slightly candid. Yeah. Rob do being completely underwater not knowing what he's doing. No, just

Jordan (03:06:09.000)

I can't believe that. That's I genuinely can't believe it's legal. Yeah, I really can't believe that what he did is

Dan (03:06:15.000)

illegal. And then Alex being Alex Yeah, but also just the feeling that I get watching this deposition as opposed to the last one is it feels like Alex is closer to the wall. Yeah, like it feels like the room is closing a little bit. His his ability to dodge things is greatly diminished. Without barns they're just yelling objection all the time. It kind of the flow of the questioning is much different. The lawyer not having to deal with barns antics makes him way more effective. Oh, yeah. And the way that like, repeatedly Alex would do those things like the babies and the incubators and the way it's just like, say whatever you need to say, I'm gonna proceed, like not allowing him to do those pivots and dodges like, you could see what happens then?

Jordan (03:07:09.000)

Yeah, no, it's, it's a patient with a child. He's like, okay, have your little tantrum. Yeah, then we're gonna kill him right back here. I'm not going to engage with you. I'm not going to do man. That really bums me out. That that's true. Why? Because that suggests then that barns did Alex a good job.

Dan (03:07:35.000)

I mean, he was serviceable. Yeah, all of being like a complete asshole being an accessory. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. So yeah, we'll be back on Wednesday. But this has been a lot of depositions. Yeah.

Jordan (03:07:49.000)

This has been some serious deposition talk. Oh, boy. But until then, we have a website we do. It's knowledge. by.com. We are on Twitter. We are on Twitter. It's at knowledge underscore flight net, go to bed Jordan on Facebook. We are on Facebook. And if you want to download the show, you can go to iTunes, you can go to wherever you listen to podcasts. You can leave a review, you know, you do the whole thing. Sure. It'd be nice.

Dan (03:08:11.000)

We'll be back but until then, I'm Neo. I'm Leo amnesiacs. Clark. I am the juiciest Ice Cube.

Andy In Kansas (03:08:17.000)

Andy in Kansas, you're on the air. Thanks for holding. So Alex, I'm a first time caller. I'm a huge fan. I love your work.