Knowledge Fight - #279: Formulaic Objections

Episode Date: April 3, 2019

Today, Dan and Jordan discuss the recent deposition that Alex Jones had to give in his Sandy Hook lawsuit. Does Alex admit he still thinks there's something fishy about Sandy Hook? Does Alex's lawyer pick a fight with opposing council as a distraction? Does Alex accidentally reveal that he doesn't even care enough to know basic details about the shooting he's being sued for lying about? The answer to all these questions is yes.

Andy and Kansas, you're on the air, thanks for holding. Hello, Alex. I'm a first-time caller. I'm a huge fan. I love your work. I love you. Hey, everybody. Welcome back to Knowledge Fight. I'm Dan. I'm Jordan. We're a couple dudes like to sit around, drink novelty beverages, and talk a little bit about Alex Jones. Oh, indeed we are, Dan.

Jordan. Dan! Jordan. How are we on MoveWatch 2019? We are good. MoveWatchOn.org. By the grace of God and all of the patience and support of our fine listeners. We have made it through and I am in a new studio, it's one bedroom,

but it is a studio for us to record in. Of sorts. Yeah, absolutely. I appreciate everyone giving us this little bit of time off in quotes. Yeah. In order to get this done. But yeah, it's nice. You know, I used Movers for the first time.

Yeah. That was super interesting as an experience. I recommend it highly to everybody out there who is considering it. Yeah. If you've run out of friends with cars and trucks, great option. It seems like there, it seems like their real skill has been to move your heart. Oh yeah. Absolutely.

I found myself moved and moved. Yeah. I recommend two guys in a van very highly wonderful stuff. I was infinitely disappointed when I found out there. They had more employees than two guys. Yeah. It's a whole, it's a whole thing. Three dudes showed up.

Inferior. But I got that third dude free. That is that whole thing is a lie. I got that third dude. Gratis. It was very nice. You got a bonus third dude. Yeah.

So this is, this podcast where I know a lot about Alex Jones. Oh, and I only know what you tell me about Alex Jones. Man, it has been a wild time for us to take off. My favorite part of every time we've taken like a week or so off is that nothing, nothing ever happens. We've taken a week off one time. I think we've taken a week off before. I don't think so. Maybe, but I don't think so.

Probably like a Christmas thing. I don't even think that. But usually nothing important happens at all during the time that we're off. If we skip an episode, no, no news happens. Right. And so I assume that having kept my, my eye out of the public sphere, nothing important has happened with Alex Jones in the, in the intervening week. No man, everything happened.

Yeah. Yeah. Of course it did. Of course it did. There was a lot of stuff that I think is probably in our best interest just to leave alone and ignore a lot of the things that have happened like him spinning conspiracy theories out of the suicides of survivors of mass shootings and things like that. Yeah, I don't want to talk about that. No. And I think it's best to leave alone.

I don't think it's a topic that is becoming to cover in any way. And then some stuff is just kind of like, I wish we could have covered it, but who cares? Like Alex getting yelled at at the chicken restaurant. That was fun. Or Alex and Owen Troyer going to a Beto rally, like in getting acting like assholes. Yeah. All those things are really is Alex hijacking people's social media presence by going into the spaces that they're in and forcing them to make videos of him. That is free promotion.

To some extent, even if they're making fun of him and and all that, he's still getting in their social media. Alex is on a one man crusade to barrel through any other sensational propaganda or platform that he can get. Yeah. He's on a one man mission to show up in everybody's feed somehow. Yeah. And so a lot of the stuff, I think that some of it we may touch on as it develops into other things, perhaps. But for now, we have one thing that has happened in this time that we've been away that we must cover. Rapaport hung up the picture.

That is, you know what, I'm getting different reports from different sources on that. I'm not entirely sure. And I don't want to judge him too much because I've moved into this apartment. I haven't hung up my pictures yet. Well, we haven't been talking about you for two years and not hanging up a picture. But it's still glass houses, stones, all that sort of stuff. If we're at four months and I don't see anything hung up around here, it's going to be merciless. Yeah.

That would be a real shame. It is the freezing port is actually. Oh boy. I'm going to have to get dentures and start becoming a medical truther. What we have to talk about today, Jordan, is that Alex Jones was forced to sit down and give a three hour deposition in his Sandy Hook defamation lawsuit. And some really insane things happened and some some not so insane things happened, but we learn a bit. And I think that the media largely speaking is getting a number of the wrong messages. I have never before seen that happen.

Right. And we'll discuss that as we go along. But before we get to that, before we get to that, it would be great. And I would enjoy to get back to business by giving a shout out to a couple of new folks who signed up and are sporting the show. So first Alice, thank you so much, you are now a policy walk. I'm a policy walk. Thank you very much. Alex Next psychic vampire.

Thank you so much. You are now a policy walk. I'm a policy walk. Thank you psychic vampire. Thank you, psychic vampire. Next, Adam, thank you so much. You were now policy walk. I'm a policy walk.

Thank you Adam. Next, William. Thank you so much. You are now policy walk. I'm a policy walk. Thank you so much. Psychic William. And finally need to give a shout out to somebody who came through on a level.

Unparalleled in recent times, perhaps, sent in a donation and really helped us out in this last week, especially with the move. There was so many unexpected things that popped up in terms of household expenses. And out of nowhere, this person came through and unrequested, just out of the graciousness of their own heart, really helped us out and we appreciate it. And as such, I must say, Keith S. the third, you are now a raptor princess. I'm a policy walk. Four stars.

Go home to your mother and tell her you're brilliant. Someone, someone, Sotomize sent me a bucket of poop. Daddy shark. Bop, bop, bop, bop, bop, bop. Jar Jar Binks has a Caribbean black accent. He's a loser little, little kitty baby. I don't want to hate black people. I renounce Jesus Christ.

I know how to read. I am out of control. I've never really seen a lot of white racism in my life. I really haven't. I bet you money. There are few living black people that have been abused by white people as much as I have been abused by black people. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, both those guys were complete bastards, complete studs.

Welcome to McDonald. May I help you? I'm Eddie Sanders. Thank you so much, Keith. Well, I always forget how dark Raptor Princess gets. Yeah. Thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

And you helped us out on a level you can only imagine. Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. So if you're out there listening and you'd like to support the show, think you enjoy what we do. You can do that by going to our website, KnowledgeFight.com, clicking that button that says support the show.

We would appreciate it. Please do. We would be very grateful. Now, down to business. Jordan, are you ready for an out of context drop into the race? It's not a show. It is a deposition. I've been waiting for this for so long.

Okay. I've been losing my mind. I talked to the FBI hostage rescue team on the thing in Las Vegas. Okay. That's the. He's giving a deposition. Uh-huh. He's killing.

First off, he's bragging about talking to the hostage rescue team about the Las Vegas shooting and the prosecutor straight up last at him. The prosecutor says, okay. Okay, Alex. Okay. All right, buddy. All right. You keep a belief in that.

That's fantastic. Um, so here, here's where we're going to start. And I would like you to remember that what we hear in this next clip, this first clip that we're starting off on, it applies to everything that we hear for the rest of this episode. We raise your right hand. You do your solemnly swear the testimony about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and the truth.

I do. Thank you. He is sworn in. This is, this is all, this is all legally actionable from here on out. Well, here's the interesting thing. Um, before we get going, there's an important point I need to make about what we're going to listen to and the fact that Alex is sworn in. This is a deposition that Alex is being made to sit and answer questions about regarding

his civil suit, which accuses him of defaming the families of Sandy Hook victims. The fact that this is a civil case is very important. Although we just heard him be sworn in here at the beginning of the episode and he is under oath. Perjury is a very different thing in civil cases than it is in criminal cases. In civil cases, there's no formal penalty for lying in a deposition, which Alex absolutely does multiple times in this three hour session that he sits for. Punishing him for perjury in a civil case would require winning the case and then after

the fact having your lawyer file new criminal charges for the perjury charge. The best the prosecution could really hope for within this case is to demonstrate that Alex is being evasive or outright deceitful and then show evidence to illustrate that during the actual trial and cross-examination. Even then, the only consequence would be the court viewing Alex as an unreliable witness, which would be the result of him just answering any question with or without the proof of civil perjury being in play. Alex knows this.

His lawyers know this. So they really know that there's no real stakes here. The only benefit of something like this comes from the public seeing it, which is why I'm very glad that this deposition got posted online by the law firm. There's a great deal of value for our purposes in seeing Alex stammer and try to pretend he knows anything about what he's talking about, but ultimately there's very little legal value in this, I suspect. Again, I'm not a lawyer, but from everything I've been able to tell, the civil consequences

for perjury are not very real. That is a huge mass of disappointment and I am shocked and appalled that America's civil justice system would work this way. As somebody who has recently been, never mind me, somebody who has been recently, fuck off. I kept finding websites where you could ask lawyers questions and stuff like that. One of the things that kept coming up was the idea of like... Where to hide your guns? No, lawyers don't have any ideas about that.

The idea that this is like a huge blind spot of the legal system, especially the civil legal system. Alex kind of knows that he doesn't have to give a fuck. He can sort of sleepwalk through this and it's not like they can throw him in prison for perjury or anything like that. It would require so much... And he can't be held in contempt or anything like that. I think you could in the actual trial, but not in the deposition.

I think that he knows that this is who cares. Before we fully jump in, I need to give a little bit of a shake of the finger also to the general media as I alluded to a minute ago. For the listeners, he is actually shaking his finger. Finger wag. Yeah. In the wake of this deposition being posted, I saw a large number of headlines that were being circulated that had to do with Alex saying that he had a psychosis that made him

believe that things were conspiracies. And it's my duty to say that this is intentionally misreporting the story. Alex does use the word psychosis in the conversation about his journey as a conspiracy theorist, but if you listen to the context, it's very clear that he's speaking metaphorically and loosely about his mind state vis-à-vis his distrust of media sources. The entire quote unquote psychosis narrative boils down to this clip that we're about to hear, which is a little over like a minute long. And it comes from literally the last few minutes of the three hour deposition.

So here is what everybody is making headlines out of. And I would argue that that is a great disservice, first of all, to the other stuff that's in this and the fact that they're kind of playing fast and loose. And it just helps him. We've allowed the government and institutions to be so corrupt that people lost any compass of what's real. And I, you know, I myself have almost had like a pool of psychosis back in the past where I basically thought everything was staged.

You know, I've now learned a lot of times things aren't staged. So, you know, I think as a pundit and someone giving opinion that, you know, my opinions have been wrong, but they were never wrong consciously to hurt people. And so I think it's part of that process of me growing up in Rockwell, Texas, and watching the police steal drugs and then conduct anti-drug programs at the school. I think that shook my opinion of police in general. And I was very anti-law enforcement until I grew up and learned more things and now I'm pretty much pro police.

So it's, it's, it's, it's, it's been a process. You said post things about saying that there's a psychosis. I'm going to say, well, I'm just saying that the trauma of the media and the corporations lying so much, then everything begins, you don't trust anything anymore, kind of like a child whose parents lied to them over and over again. Well, pretty soon they don't know what reality is. So, so, so, so long before these lawsuits, I said that in the past I thought everything was a conspiracy and I would kind of get into that mass group thing of the communities

that were out there saying that. So now I see that it's more in the middle and so that's where I stand. Now he's lying, but at the same time that is the most sensible thing that he says almost in the entirety of this deposition. I was, I was actually about to ask, is it just that we've listened to so much, so much Alex Jones, that what he says makes sense to me because I'm like, like I have a universal babble fish in my ear. I don't think so.

Because that made sense. No, it doesn't make sense. It frustrates me. No. And people are dunking on him for that? Well, they're dunking on him because he used the word psychosis. So then everybody, all the headlines are, it makes he has a psychosis. No, oh, that's so disappointing.

I'm really bummed out by that narrative now. He uses the word psychosis, but if you listen to what he's saying in context, what he's describing is a learned behavior. He's describing a learned pattern of behavior that he got into where I distrust the media. They're saying X, I think X must be fake. And as I got older and I started to learn more, I realized that default position is not a good way to operate. Now he is lying about how he operates, but that perception is not like, that's not descriptive

of a mental psychosis or anything like that. It fits into the pre-packaged narrative because you're like, oh, look, Alex himself is finally admitting that he's crazy, but that was actually a lucid statement about how he's looking back on it and sees it as something of like... In his own perception, he's grown when he hasn't actually. And we've spoken many times about our very maybe irresponsible suspicions that Alex has something going on with him on a neurological level. So I don't balk at this whole thing for that reason.

I just have seen Alex operate for so long and know that reporting that snippet of his conversation as quote Alex says he has a psychosis is literally playing into Alex's hands and serves to validate his narratives about media persecution against him. All this is to say that I'm pretty disappointed with that coverage, especially considering there's a whole lot of stuff in here that would have made great headlines. You could even make clickbait out of it. I'm probably going to try throughout this to make clickbait out of the... Why not?

Let's do it. Yeah, let's all tweet. Let's introduce a game into this proceedings. Now let's get down to it in a linear fashion because that comes from the end of the thing, but I needed to get that out of the way. Right, right, right. Because it's sort of stuck in my craw. So the narrative more could be the media watch the first five minutes and we're like...

And then skip to the end. Possible. Yeah. I've done that sometimes with Project Camelot videos. Absolutely no judgment. Speaking of which, Mark Richards, part 10 is on YouTube now. It is. It will be coming soon.

Oh boy. So get ready for that. So now we jump in here and I want to first before anything, I think that this prosecutor did a very admirable job. He did the best he could, but ultimately in a situation like this, there isn't really a win. But he comes as close as anyone can and I do admire that on some level. Here he reads some of Alex's statements and then Alex does his first big lie of the deposition.

Allow me to read it again for you, Mr. Jones. Plaintiffs claim that I started the controversy and or conspiracy theory about Sandy Hook being a hoax. This is not true. Correct? Yes. The next sentence says, before I ever publicly commented on any issues relating to Sandy Hook, I learned that others with whom I have no affiliation or relationship had already

posted articles. Excuse me, Mr. Jones, do you like to flip the page? Relationship had already posted articles online making this claim and questioning the events as reported. I read that sentence correctly. Yes. So there were a variety of articles in YouTube videos questioning the events that started getting popular in the time period after the shooting.

I assume you saw some of those? Yes. How long is this? Are we talking days, weeks, months? I don't want to answer it correctly. I don't remember the exact times. So I really can't state that time, but I think a month longer. We know from going back and listening to December three days, three days, Alex.

Well, I mean, to get to the point where he's saying it's absolutely a globalist plan and shit like that a couple of days, but it would these conjecture and the speculation was immediate. On the 14th of December, he was he was out there on his show and like, oh, this stinks. That sort of thing. So that is the idea that he's trying to say like, well, all of these, all these YouTube videos started coming up and then a month later, I started to be like, well, maybe something's up, but that's his way of trying to dodge responsibility, which is going to be a consistent trend.

No. In a civil with Alex, come on. So in this next clip, he's talking more about that, that idea that it took him a while to get to this Sandy Hook is fake kind of idea. And actually, I think from our looking back on it, some of his perceptions of what he did is accurate. Okay. Which is an interesting.

All right. So I believe that there's a base of accuracy in what he's about to say about what he did after Sandy Hook. He's just forgotten the other stuff, which is what this lawsuit is about. Right. It might be strategic forgetting. But here's what he has to say. No, I started commenting on Sandy Hook that they would use it to go out for guns.

The media always hyped up school shootings and was causing copycat events. The mainstream media were basically psychic vampires promoting mass shootings so they could blame gun owners and try to take the second amendment away, which they pushed to repeal the second amendment. So for the first month or so, and again, I can't go back to exact numbers. It's like almost seven years ago. But we've gone back and looked at some of it, trying to find at least three weeks, four weeks or so.

And then it was such a firestorm, the Internet's like, no, this isn't Prozac. This isn't video games. Like I was saying, I thought like other shootings that happen, this was, you know, some type of staged event or multiple shooters or people in the woods and things like that. So it was a whole range of theories. So the part that's real is he did focus on the gun. Yeah. Oh yeah.

Pretty aggressive. 100%. Yeah. So there's like within minutes. Well, and his narratives did shift towards that. And he did skip away a little bit from like the aggressive poking at Sandy Hook. So I could see how he could look back on that period of his life and be like, I was mostly just talking about gun shit.

Right. It's, it's, it's an interesting like, it's an interesting line because I can't, I can't dispute that. But it is, it's ludicrous to say like, I didn't also do the other stuff. Well, but, but isn't, isn't what he, I suppose the weird way that I would like view his memory of how things go is that that's what he thinks actually happened. Because he doesn't remember or understand the parts of himself that just pop out and then pop it, you know, just like, and they're going to come after and take our guns and

they're going to kill everybody and the government and the police are coming to you. Oh, the whole thing was faked and staged and those guys are actors. And that's why they come after guns. Like he just doesn't remember the little aside part. I think that, I think there's a good chance of that. I think that could explain most of his misperceptions. It's almost like a verbal tick. He just doesn't know how not to say something incredibly horrific.

Yeah, perhaps. I think, I think that, that's probably a good theory. And I would say that what is not a good theory is Alex's defense, maybe not, wouldn't maybe describe it as a theory, but throughout this entire proceeding in this deposition, Alex has two, his two lawyers there, Mr. Barnes and Mr. Enoch, Mr. Barnes, Robert Barnes, Mr. Barnes and Enoch, that's their firm. No, no, no, they're two different firms. But Barnes is the one who's supposed to be defending Alex in the deposition.

Yes. So he's the one who can make sort of objections. Objection. Yeah. And he does a lot. Of course. But Mr. Enoch is there and he's not supposed to talk because it's not a two lawyer deposition. And he keeps talking and that becomes a big problem.

Why does he keep talking? Because he's trying to lead Alex. He's trying to like say things and they're like, this is your defense, Alex, remember. Alex can't. So he's, he's coaching a tennis player. It's a, it's a violation. He seems to, for Alex seems to be forgetting like how to stonewall a little bit. And that's when Enoch jumps in and is like, dude, dude.

Yeah. But what it all boils down to is the defense that's being presented at the beginnings of it in this clip right here. Mr. Jones, this is a video where you made comments on issues relating to Sandy Hook and you put forward a theory that it could be staged about the government to take away our guns. Correct? What an objection. See, but this is a video of watching the different pieces that we have.

Correct. Okay. So it's not, so it's, it's a different thing. Is there any way to get like the whole, you own the whole video and it's been put to produce with Mr. Zappadu? I get that. Okay. For his purposes.

So he's just, if he wants to go watch an entire four hour video, I'm not going to have time for that now. Actually, Connecticut false balloon full video has been produced and it's been in the court. And if you want to argue about that and object, you could object at that time it's offered that objections reserved. You don't have to object to that. Mr. Jones, that was a video in which you made statements about Sandy Hook and in which you said, but for theory, it could be staged to take away our guns.

No, that's a, that's a media matters edited, that's a media matters edited derivatives production. Do you want that tape? It's edited. So I like this guy. Yeah. I like him. He's not, he seems fun.

He has a, he has a couple of real good lines throughout the course of this. There was, there are a couple of points where I actually like Blurt laughed like they were like, good, good one. But so Barnes was the one who was making that objection. So it's still appropriate within the context of the deposition, but it's too, it's to lay the groundwork and establish and set up the beginnings of this. These tapes are edited and just to be clear, because his voice wasn't, wasn't, I couldn't hear Barnes's voice terribly well, but what he was asking is show the entire tape because

what you're showing is an edited down version. And so their defense is that if you watch the entire tape, it's going to exonerate him. Right. You're taking this out of context. Alex can't possibly comment on it. Not knowing the context. The strategy of course being that nobody is going to watch the entire fucking thing.

So either in the court, everybody watches the entire episode, or he's going to claim that whatever it is he said, you missed the, you could watch three hours and 59 minutes of it. Right. So in four hours, you took it all out of context. This is the sort of last refuge of someone who knows that they are fucked. Yeah. And also the rationale for me doing this podcast, let's not take him out of context.

Let's fucking do it, man. So you'll see that come up over and over and over again. This idea of falling back on the idea that the tape is edited and somehow, and Alex says that it's a media matters edited, which we'll get back to in a little bit. But in this, in this next clip, the prosecutor tries to get Alex to admit that he was the first person to call Sandy Hook a false flag. And then Alex pulls out his normal defense. The truth is, Mr. Jones, you were the first person in the world to make the false flag

theory about Sandy Hook, and you did it before the bodies were even cold. That's the truth. No. Not true. Objection. We know that to be true. No, you can object to form. Yeah, that's, that's the rule 199, Mr. Jones, you said in your affidavit that before you

commented on any issues relating to Sandy Hook, you saw other things that other people were doing. That affidavit has false statements, doesn't it? Nope. So we didn't just see you commenting on issues relating to Sandy Hook. That was callers calling it up and it's heavily edited. It's heavily edited. Heavily edited.

Yeah. That will be his, you can just throw that back in the face no matter what. Yeah. Those clips are edited. And it's exact, I mean, you nailed it exactly. It's like, there's no way to proceed forward because you can't in a rational, reasonable world force everybody to watch all of this. And so, yeah, you're screwed.

I mean, that does seem like the real strategy though there is to call his bluff, you know. Yeah. Just fucking. Yeah. Okay. Fine. Let's do it. I will play every goddamn.

We're going to have a six year long trial. What is it? What is it? Is it? Is it? It's not a jury trial. Is it? No, I think it's for a judge.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So fucking judge, you got homework. Let's move on. Everybody listen to our podcast. Yeah. That might be unfair.

So in terms of the editing clips together, we heard earlier, Alex said that that's a media matters. Yeah. Media matters made the derivatives together and put out that clip. In this next clip, the prosecutor explains where he got that video. And Alex is a little bit like, huh? Mr. Jones, I have a very simple question for you. That video you just saw of you talking, were you talking about Sandy Hook?

The edited pieces were. The pieces that I edited and put together of you speaking. I believe media matters. Yeah, I edit them. I edit them. I edited those pieces together and put them in front of you. Was that you on the camera? That's, I saw media matters video of that before.

That's what you, you're saying, you, you edited that? Yeah. It's not a. But you did edit it. It's not an important deal. I did. Yeah. So I'm not here to answer questions.

Three second clips together. Those clips. Why don't you just play it unedited? That's. Mr. Jones, I'm not here to answer your question. You understand you're here because people accuse you of four hours and it's there to ask you questions. You're going to do that for me today?

Yes, I'm answering your question. So in that video, yes or no, you were commenting about Sandy Hook and the edited video is coming up. You jerk. What a dick. I love the shockers. Whoa, whoa, whoa. You edited like 30 second clips together.

How the shit do you do that? I pay people for that. You looking for a job? Well, it kind of throws him off a little bit because he can't play media matters now. Because I did that. I edited the videos. Why didn't you use the full clips? Same exact problem.

Yeah. Not good. You have a four hour deposition window. What are we going to do? Watch a show and a half of yours while you provide commentary about how awesome you are over it. God, it'll be so boring. I look at it.

Look at how great I look right here. The long stretches of nothing. It was this 2012. I looked thinner then. Oh, it was nice. I was yoked. Is there any directors here? No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,

no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, bring up 2013 or so, let's say just a few months after the shoot. By that point, you had gone from theory to just straight up telling your audience, Sandy Hook was staged and the evidence is overlapped. Correct. What a stage. What is staged me? Yeah. Oh, that's good. So I like that. After that, I at the risk of like keeping way too much of this in the lawyer is like, I don't care what it means. I'm not answering your questions. I'm talking about what you said. It's, it's, it's an insane situation. So there's a clip that the prosecutor plays where Alex says that Sandy Hook was fake. And instead of saying that it was edited, he has a different critique of this clip, which is just as sad. Mr. Jones, I'm going to show you a clip from April 16, 2013.

That's you on the video, right? Yes, that's me on the short video. Yeah, it's a short video. I understand. I am enjoying how dismissive this lawyer is. Alex, his, his whole demeanor has this feel of like, dude, you are not my first you. Let's get over yourself. This is, I've been doing this for a long time, you idiot. I also think that it's an interesting dynamic where he also knows the same stuff that I was talking about. Alex knowing they're not being consequence really for lying. 00:31:29,660 --> 00:31:48,660 So all that he can really do is try and illustrate a couple of points. And I think he, he has two angles of attack that we'll get to as this goes along that I think are really smart and they're really good approaches to demonstrate about Alex because you don't really need to demonstrate that he's lying about what he said about Sandy Hook. 00:31:48,660 --> 00:31:52,660 No, of course, you can prove that case on the merits like that. You've already played a literal clip of him saying it.

You don't need him for that. But what you can use him as a tool for are other things that are also important. And without explaining too much ahead of time, we'll get to that in a moment. So in this next clip, the prosecuting attorney plays a clip of Alex talking about how Sandy Hook literally didn't happen. You know, so that's good. That's great. Yeah. Mr. Jones, hold on a second. I'm going to play you a clip from December 29, 2014. You go ahead and play that for me. But it took me about a year with Sandy Hook to come to grips with the fact that the whole thing was fake. I mean, even I couldn't believe it. I knew they jumped on it, used the crisis, typed it up, then I did deep research. And my gosh, it just pretty much didn't happen. That's you saying you did deep research, correct? The same objections to form and that these are highly edited at certain points. So the audio has been altered on all these. Yeah, can you stop with speaking of objections?

I know exactly what you're doing. And you need to say objection form, objection leading, assert a privilege, or stay quiet. You do not need to be making suggestive objections about the contents of the evidence and what its form is. You don't need to be doing that, Mr. Barnes. If I try to do that, I'm just saying that these are videos that are highly edited. Mr. Barnes, I don't. That's a great opinion. I don't understand why your opinion is relevant to this questioning right now. You wouldn't be doing this in a courtroom. Don't do it in my deposition. Oh yeah, in a courtroom, it wouldn't come in because it wouldn't be admissible. Then that is why you're a rule of complete. Mr. Barnes, that's why your objection is preserved as to the form of that evidence. You don't have to raise an objection. The only reason you would be doing it is to possibly influence the witness. Let's stop talking. Can you have a standing stipulation that when I object to form, that includes an objection to the rule of complete?

Absolutely. Although, and we'll put on the record, every objection to every piece of evidence is preserved under the Texas rules, which is part of rule 199. I was objecting in a way that Mr. Barnes was not trying to cross the line. So at that point, this stenographer comes in and is like, hey, you guys are making this really hard to type up. You guys arguing like this is ridiculous. Excuse me, children. Children. You know, it's an interesting dynamic too, because after she says that, they are like, all right, let's get back on track. That's the first time that the prosecutor is like, look, he has a tone of like, shut up. Yeah, absolutely.

Just shut up. Yeah, you can hear me. He even says very clearly in there that it's obvious that you're talking objections are trying to lead Alex down the road that you want him to go down. And that's not appropriate. That's not how this deposition is going. And it is how it's going. Yeah, you can't. You're not supposed to be. If you're, you're not supposed to be able to say like, hey, hey, hey, hey, tell him this. Right, right. Tell him this. Yeah. Yeah, you do it.

So this is the one of the first instances where the prosecutor tries to get into some of these ideas about the specific narratives that Alex pushed. And one of them is the idea that Alex was talking about how they, the teachers and the police had the kids walking in circles at the school. And there's a fundamental problem with the narrative that Alex is pushing. And it's spelled out in this clip and we'll discuss it on the other end. No doubt there's a dangerous situation. Shoot her on campus. Is it dangerous when there's somebody shooting at the school? Yes. Okay.

And so you would think if proper procedures were followed and you're keeping them safe, this looks pretty weird, doesn't it? If they're not being run away from the building, right? Yes. But Mr. Jones, when you said this to your audience, you knew that wasn't the school. You knew that. Right? No. Okay. Are you saying that's part of his broadcast?

Yes. It says InfoWars right there on the bottom. Okay. So that's part of the same broadcast. Yes. Do you see what it says InfoWars? As long as you're representing that the video that you're showing him now of people walking across was part of the same broadcast. Okay.

First of all, there's only going to be one lawyer defending this deposition, Mr. Enoch. And you've already chosen it. No, Mr. Enoch. There will be one lawyer speaking on the record. There is one lawyer defending the deposition. I'm not being tag-teamed by the two of you. And so I would appreciate it if you kept your mouth shut for this deposition. Let Mr. Barnes defend the deposition.

Spoiler alert. That does not happen. That does not happen. He gets double-teamed. In the bottom corner of the screen is a large InfoWars logo. This was broadcast on InfoWars. So Mr. Jones, my question to you is, when you broadcast this to your audience and you told them this, you knew that wasn't the school. Correct.

Please answer my question. And it's a simple question I'll stay for. If you represented the video of the school that you're showing at the firehouse, was part of the same broadcast in which he made his statement? Yes. Mr. Enoch, we just watched it. Do you really think I edited his words over a different video? Well, I think it doesn't matter. Mr. Enoch, I would appreciate it if you kept quiet the remainder of this deposition.

Let Mr. Barnes defend the deposition. Mr. Jones, you knew that wasn't the school. Correct. I did not know that. This is so edited. It looks like two different shows together. Can you play it again? So they do.

They allow them to play it again. But the issue is that it's three clips from different episodes. And the third clip involves footage from the firehouse where there were people walking around and yelling about. And Alex is saying that it's the school. And so what it appears that Enoch is trying to clarify is the video and the audio from the same episode. Right. And it is. It absolutely is.

Of course it is. But in this next clip, he tries to take that little kernel of what he has introduced and twist it into something to attack the prosecution. And it's pretty fucked up. Then we saw a second clip from your Megyn Kelly interview. Right. Which again was highly edited. Sure. Totally.

And I edited a piece of it into here. Correct. That was from the Megyn Kelly. Right. Time out. Time out. You just told me that everything you showed him was from one video. No, Mr. Menoch.

I told you that wasn't on this video. No audio from the same video. You are not entitled to misrepresent the witness. I'm off to the deposition and say three different dates of video and say this was the same video. Were these all the clips that you showed in the same video? Yes or no? No. And we've said that repeatedly from the moment I've asked them.

They were from three different dates. I read the three different dates to you, Mr. Menoch. So your indignation can calm down. And you need to be quiet in this deposition. Mr. Barnes, can you please instruct your counsel to be quiet? You are defending this deposition. Actually, I've got a question on the floor. We're not taking a break.

So, you know... This is like listening to a... This is an exasperated man who's just... Who's like... He knows what he's doing. This is his job. He's a professional. This is what he does.

And he is deposing a fucking lying piece of shit. Who has Tweedledee and Tweedledum for lawyers. Right. Who maybe not even are lawyers. That's the way this prosecutor sounds to me. He's looking at these guys' talk and he's like... Can I see your credentials real quick? For real?

I'm guessing that he's probably dealt with them in the past. I'm guessing that he has some sort of awareness of... These guys aren't on the up and up. They have some shady tendencies and they're coming out here. Because that's sort of changing what you're clarifying about. Yeah. There is no point when they try to represent the idea that all of those clips came from the same episode. Of course not.

That is absolutely not... It would be pointless. Right. That's not what they're suggesting at all and they were very clear about that. And so for Enoch to come in and be like, Hey, it's manipulative that you're playing from different episodes when you said they were the same. Yeah. Is just a desperation tactic to try and give Alex some sort of cover to make similar arguments as the deposition goes on.

His only defense is that these clips are edited because otherwise he has to take ownership for the things that he was saying. Because these aren't things that he's saying as like someone else says that this is the case and we're reporting on it. He is reporting it. Yep. And so that's a problem. So now to the firehouse issue. The reason in that last clip is a problem that Alex is saying that this is the school. Like he's representing to his audience that it's the school.

Is that in this next clip, the prosecution brings up prior evidence that indicates that at the point that Alex told his audience that it was the school. Yeah. He had to have known it wasn't the school. Oh, no. Well, that clip right there, that was just two things. Something you said, something Mr. Doose said. Yeah, context. Ambulances, hold on.

Ambulances parked down the road. They didn't even go to the school. Then a year later, you showed your audience a video of building an ambulance to it and you told them it was the school. I talked four hours a day. And I can't remember what I talked about sometimes a week ago. Sandy Hook has been in the aggregate less than one tenth of one percent of what I cover. And I understand that you've been living this and pouring over it constantly. I've, I have done almost no preparation for this.

It's very, it gives me a headache. And I just, you're just showing me a bunch of edited tapes. What question are you answering? You're asking me about a bunch of edit. How does someone answer? What question were you answering? If you put a bunch of pages in a blender right now, blended all up. You asked me what's in the blender.

I can't answer you a question with a bunch of blended words. I'm asking you if there's ambulances next to the building. No, it's not the school. Correct? No, that's not what I know. Okay. All right. Well.

You remember how after making a murderer, those two defense lawyers went on a tour and everybody was huge fans of them? I am going to follow this prosecutor around and just like hold up signs and be like, Oh, shoot. Yeah. Walking into the building. I intentionally didn't learn his name. Lest he become a hero of some sort.

I didn't, I wanted to resist that Beto impulse or whatever. He's not a, he's not, he's a civil prosecutor. Yeah. So he's not, I don't know his career at all. So he's probably not a state prosecutor. No idea. Probably not.

He's not one of the enemy. Yeah. I would assume so. Yeah. I can comment in no way about who this guy is. Okay. So they talk a little bit more about that firehouse video and how Alex was reporting on it as there are being kids walking around in a circle with their hands up.

So the prosecution plays a video of the firehouse from a helicopter. And he has a damning question to ask Alex. I want to play you a piece of video footage from the helicopter footage. Let's take a look at that really quick. Can we play the December 14th, 2012 helicopter firehouse footage? Mr. Jones, there's no elementary age children in this line of people walking, is there? No. It's another clip we're talking about.

Yeah. See, here's where they're walking in the circles. None of those people have their hands up, do they? But there is footage that I've seen that shows that. So you're conflating two different things. Really? Because you were talking about it in the footage on your show. You're saying there's actually a different piece of video footage from children with

their hands up being led in circles. From my memory, it's a live show. So the people in there are just throwing stuff up. Nice. Many times it's not accurate. Nicely done. So the video clip you were showing wasn't even objectiveness to your report, correct? I'm not sure about what video this is.

It's so edited, but I wrongly have said in the past, off of news reports that I was relying on, that the children were going around with their hands up at the school when it was the firehouse. That's one of the main anomalies that would not be true. And that would not change my mind about all the things. So in that clip what we have is Alex being confronted with, like, you reported this and it's absolutely not true at all based on this sort of stuff. And he's like, well, yeah, I was wrong about that, but it's not my fault.

I love that. That is the, like, oh, well, no, I mean, it wasn't this clip. It was, you know, it was a live broadcast. No, no, no, no, no. He's saying his broadcast is live and that the producers just play stuff and then he responds to it. That's the live thing that he's talking about. Oh, okay.

No, no, no, no, no. I thought he was trying to pull, like, yeah, I was in the FBI, but everybody I trained with is dead. So you can't, don't look into it. It was a live broadcast where it was happening. It's in the ether now. He'll never be able to find it. He'll never be found again.

Yeah. No, no, I think he's referring to Infowars itself. It's a live show. I talk for, you know, I talk for a while, you know, just, you know, all this. I think he's blaming his producers, frankly. Well, I mean, I would, I would do that. But he looks pretty bad, I think, in terms of this kernel, this piece, this quote unquote anomaly that he reported on the idea of the kids walking around in a circle with their

hands up, which he's now kind of head to cave on. Pretty quick. Yeah. Well, almost immediately. And so now there's another narrative that they bring up and that is the idea that Alex was trying to pitch the story that the school was closed. And so the idea that the shooting happened, it couldn't possibly happen. The school had been closed for a long time before that.

It was a dilapidated school. There was mold everywhere. Wait, really? Yeah. I'd never heard that one. That was one of the lesser conspiracy theories about this. The, the, that school has been dead for 15 years. Yeah.

Defense. Oh boy. It's a haunted. Yeah. That happened 25 years ago. Yeah. That one was one of the ones that was like, wow, you guys are swinging for the fences with this.

That's very demonstrably. That's, that's bad. So the prosecution asks about that. And Alex's response is really interesting to me. Let's talk about the school itself. I want to show you two comments that you made on July 7th, 2015, in April 22nd, 2017. Keep that schools closed. We have the emails from city council back and forth and the school talking about it

being shut down a year before. And the school was closed until that year. And the videos, it's all rotting and falling apart. Nobody's even in it. First thing, you admit now there are no emails between city council and the school in which Sandy Hook was being shut down. That's not a real thing. This is almost seven years old.

But I do believe that we wouldn't, I mean, sometimes we're wrong about things, but there's always some news we're covering or a witness or something. So I can't answer that because of just memory. Mr. Jones, you said it was seven years ago? Six years ago, what it was? You just, that clip we just played you was April 22nd, 2017. Oops. That was a year before you were sued, right?

It's like three seconds long. Right. But it's not seven years ago, is it, Mr. Jones? You were saying that a year before you were sued? I can't answer this. It's not in context. I don't know what you're showing. Of course.

The date isn't in context? Yeah. So he goes on to the, the idea of their, like the emails and stuff, like that's just, it's absurd. Yeah. But then the prosecution goes on to show a video of the school after the shooting and there are parts of it that they had to cut out or that are redacted because it's like people's blood all over the walls and stuff.

But the rest of it shows in normal school, you know, just any, any elementary school. And so the prosecutor is like, does this look like a school that was shut down? Does this look like a school that is condemned? And he's like, it looks like it's a disrepair. Just stick to your guns. Stick to your fucking guns. It looks like it's broken down. I want to look for a synod.

Yeah. So there are these narratives that have been brought up that Alex did push and he can't stand the scrutiny of it. So he has to fall back consistently on either, you know what, a, you know, it's someone else's fault or there's videos out of context. I can't comment on this. Once that's not good enough. And the only thing that remains is that first one, the idea that it's someone else's fault.

Once that is your only remaining avenue of self-defense, you're going to get pushed on it. And eventually you're going to have to discuss where did you get that information from? Yeah, that's going to be trouble. And in this next clip, we find out that it is all pretty much Wolfgang Helbig. Oh, I thought it was going to be Rob Dews fault. Like he was going to have a usual suspects moments where Alex Jones just turns and points directly to him. There's your man right there. Nope.

Turns out it was Wolfgang Helbig. And I'm not going to try to pin you down on here. Let's just be straight up and upfront about it. You didn't know one way or the other, right? Whether the school was open, you had some doubts. You didn't know one way or the other. You couldn't confirm it one way or the other. So investigators who were accredited school safety folks that I thought were credible experts were the ones and professors and others that were good standing were the ones that were really doing these investigations.

And then I was, in some cases, taking what they said incorrectly. And I'm admitted to that. And with no cooperation, you just take what they said and you trust in these guys, right? I'd seen one of the guys I'd called National Television before. We were Columbine students as a national safety expert and sounded pretty credible. Mr. Holbeck, right? Yes. And he's sent you something in the neighborhood of 10, 4,000 emails?

That's a lot. Yeah. And looking at those emails. What? Taking a look at them. You wouldn't agree with me that that man is a raving lunatic? He seemed very credible and put together earlier on. I can't remember the exact numbers he seemed to get agitated about four years ago.

I would like for the court to recognize that he is a raving lunatic. This is not defamation. That's a fair assessment. There's a really interesting trend to where this prosecutor seems to be trying to get Alex to admit that Wolfgang Helbig is crazy. He gets close. He gets close. I'll say I admire the gumption. That's like a side bet for the prosecutor.

He's like, all right, I'm going to do this deposition first, but you guys got to give me five bucks if I get him to say that this Wolfgang guy is fucking crazy. He gets him as far as kooky, I think. And then he sent a lot of emails. So I think that that's going to set the stage for a lot of the rest of Alex's defense to come. There's going to still be a lot of this video is edited, and then it's Wolfgang's fault. I should have not listened to him as even too far for it to go, but it's kind of like, it was him. He seemed credible. He was on MSNBC or whatever.

That sort of shit. So now we get into this next clip. The first angle that I think is the good attack on Alex. And I admire this about this prosecutor and his approach. And that is to demonstrate that Alex has no idea what he's talking about. Because if you can do that, you erode the idea that he knows anything. It doesn't even have to be about Sandy Hook. Granted, you're in a Sandy Hook deposition, so it's best to use those topics to your full advantage.

And it's one thing to do with these narratives that he can just say, like, hey, Wolfgang held big told me this, and that's why I reported it. It's much more robust when you bring in a piece of information that he should know about and he doesn't. And in this first clip, the prosecutor talks about first responders to the school, and Alex is put on his heels a little bit. Mr. Jones, before we went on a break, we were talking about the issue of whether there were EMTs allowed into the building. And I provided you with a couple of copies of some police reports. I put in front of you an exhibit to the statement of Lieutenant Van Gailey.

Correct? You've had a chance to read that? Van Gailey. I did read most of it. I didn't get to the second one. Okay. Well, let's look at exhibit two. Another theme of this is that Alex is a really slow reader. I did read most of it. I didn't get to number two.

They were on break. They could have just kept going for him to read. I think he said, I'm done. I'm done. I'm good. There's a couple other times where they have him read while the camera is still on. They haven't read out loud? No, no, no, no. But it looks pained, nonetheless. But anyway, so here we get to this exhibit. You have exhibit two in your hand? I'm on two.

Let's go to page five. I can't count that high. Is that after three? You see the highlighted portion? Yes. I'm going to read that and you're going to follow along with me, okay? Don't use your finger. Are you saying two is five?

At first glance, it did not appear there were any casualties. To the left of the room, as you walk in, there was a bathroom in the corner. There was a massive pile up of bodies in this room. At this time, I did not know it was a bathroom, and I wondered how the suspect had the time to kill that many people and stack them in the corner of the room. Sergeant Carrillo stated he was an EMT or maybe a paramedic, and then he had to check to see if anyone in the pile might have survived.

It may have survived. I agreed as the bodies were stacked two and three high, and that some of the children at the bottom were able to cram it first. May have escaped bullets. He began to check for life signs, wounds, and attempt to find a pulse. The victims on the top of the pile redacted, and many of the bodies had injuries that were obviously fatal. It appeared as though as if the teachers in the room

immediately upon hearing gunshots began to pack children into the bathroom. The children that were sitting on the floor of the bathroom were packed in like sardines. One little girl was sitting, crouched in between the toilet seat in the back corner of the room. I thought she may have had the best chance for survival. As Sergeant Carrillo got to the last bodies, it was clear that no one had survived.

You've never heard of Sergeant Carrillo, have you? I have. And you didn't know what he did in the building that day? Yes, I did. Weak. You didn't know what he did in the building? I haven't. Correct, Mr.

Again, over seven years, I don't remember a lot of this. Okay, so either you didn't know what he did in the building, or you did know what he did in the building. One of those two things has to be true, right? I think I do know now. Sure. It's just, there's so much, it all becomes a big piece. So we can agree that when 2017,

when you raised the question why were no paramedics led in the building, you either did know what Sergeant Carrillo did, or you didn't know what Sergeant Carrillo did. One of those two things has to be true, obviously, right? Objection. The tape was still edited. I don't think that worked. Okay, Mr.

What? So what preceded this was a clip of Alex saying that no EMTs were led into the building. Yeah. He's like, he's falling back on the only defense he has. Right. That clip of me was too editable. Right. When in reality, that approach is really good,

because what it does is it demonstrates a piece of information that was available as of sometime in 2013, when Alex should have had access to that information if he cared. Either you don't know or you're lying. No, it introduces the two possibilities that encompass all possible realities for us. And that is he either knew about this stuff or he didn't. If he did know about it, then he intentionally lied about it.

If he didn't know about it, then it's clear that he didn't look into anything. Exactly. So that sort of thing is putting him in his position where he has to make that sort of choice about how he wants to represent what he does. And he can't make that choice. Can Alex see his lawyers?

I think so, yeah. The visual of this is just a one-shot on Alex. Right. So I don't know. I think he probably can. I'm just saying, it feels like he and his lawyer should have, instead of doing the whole objection thing, because that's not going to do any good,

you should have come up with like a hand signal or maybe some kind of, you know, like brush the shoulder three times, and then you fall back and say that it was edited. Because every time he says object, what he's really saying is Alex say that it was edited. Right, right. Obfuscate. Obfuscate.

Hey, get it, get it. Right, whatever, yeah, whatever the opposite of telling him to round third is what they would be doing all the time, like cut off, cut off, no, no, no, no, no. So that's the first instance of this. And then in this next clip, he discusses, Alex's reporting about the idea that the birth certificates

and death certificates of all these kids were put under strict wraps. Yeah. No one could get access to them. And this, this again is another instance of the other really good approach. And that is trying to discuss what info wars process is, because that's something that seems like, well, you know, how did you get to these bad things you reported by illustrating that they do no due diligence at all about anything that they're doing.

Not once. It's a very good attack. The two attacks of you don't know what you're talking about and you never check anything are very, very salient points. And I admire that being the approach. So in the, in that last clip, we heard the first one, which is you don't know what you're talking about. And in this next clip, we hear you didn't do anything.

You didn't do the basic steps you would need to report something. You didn't even read the evidence that I presented against you. Right. I want to ask you about death certificates. Can I want to play you a clip? Something new and Mr. Dew said February 12, 2015 and November 18, 2016. Can you please ceiling death certificates for me? Yes, they're ceiling death certificates and everything.

They made it a felony to release birth certificates or death certificates. What kind of country is that where you can't release birth certificate and death certificate? What did you do to confirm that? Again, these are highly edited splice tapes. The audio has been altered. I don't even know what context this is in. It's in the context of Sandy Hook death certificates are sealed and you said that, what did you do to confirm it, Mr. Jones?

Objection is the form of mis-safety. How much? You don't have to do speaking objections, Mr. Jones. One of the worst deficits I've ever witnessed. That's fine. You can make your objections. Go make all the objections you want, but make them in accordance with the Texas rules,

which you agreed to be bound with before you started this conversation. There's a little bit. There's a little more of this clip, but I really love that you can make all the objections you want. Fair enough. Mr. Jones, ceiling death certificates, the fact that they were sealed, something you and Mr. Dew both said, how did you confirm that?

I don't want to answer these things incorrectly. So my memory is, I remember that they were saying it was the most sealed case ever and that it was in the news that there were all these lawsuits about it sealing things and that the records and the redacted police reports and this report you give me is almost all blacked out. This is what people were talking about. And so I can't accurately answer off of edited tapes.

I've never seen anything like that. So I'm trying to answer your questions. You ever try to order death certificates? You're $20. Anybody can get any one of them. As I've told you, when we went off, news reports and other people that were investigating, we did not ourselves investigate Sandy Hook.

Thank you, Mr. Jones. Thank you, Mr. Jones, is an indication of I just got exactly what I wanted. Of course. Because when Alex says at the end there, we were going off what other people said, we didn't report on this. Well, nailed it. Let's go.

Tag it up. You're presenting as if you were reporting on it and you did nothing. No. You did nothing. Has he ever tried to get a death certificate though? He didn't answer that question. I think the long pause is the answer.

I think we need to subpoena his actual response there. He has a shameful secret about ordering death certificates or he's never done it. That's what the long pause tells me. It would be weird if he pleaded the fifth on that one. Definitely. So not knowing about the accounts of the first responders is a great illustration of showing that Alex doesn't know shit.

Right. This next instance of it is beyond the pale. This is something that I... Mr. Jones, how many flavors are at Baskin Robbins? I actually might not be able to answer that. Long times they've been in a Baskin Robbins. No, this is a piece of elementary information and the idea that Alex is confused about this

is really troubling. Mr. Jones, I'm going to hand you a copy of what I have marked as exhibit four. Have you ever seen that before? I don't remember. You're not sure if you've seen this before? No. Okay.

You'll see up at the top it has a time stamp, 12, 14, 12. Yes. You know that's the date of Sandy Hook, right? I don't know. You don't know that? What is that today? It is. Ooh.

That's not good. That's real bad. I'm starting to feel this prosecutor get a little cocky. I'm starting to feel him get a little bit of swagger in his questioning. I would be... I feel like he might be a little more concerned. Because I don't think that's Alex obfuscating.

The idea that he doesn't know shit and he hook happened on. Oh, of course he doesn't know what date. That seems sincere to me. Oh, it's absolutely. Is that the date? Absolutely has no idea what date it is. If you're being sued by these people...

It would behoove you to know what date you're being sued of. Even just from a strategic position, it seems like the right thing to brush up a little bit on this. How do you defend yourself? Well, when you got Enoch as your lawyer, you don't need to learn anything. Enoch is going to take care of it for you. Right.

So that was in the context of another narrative that Alex has put out. That line of questioning. The picture that he was talking about, that the prosecution was talking about, had to do with Alex's story that he would tell about there being porta-potties delivered immediately.

Which is an indication to him that it's a media event. They had them ready to go. Of course, of course. And all this. So in this next clip, the prosecutor lays out when porta-potties actually showed up. And in doing so,

I think he accidentally reveals that Alex had been sued. I think he accidentally reveals that Alex doesn't know what date the shooting happened on, and he doesn't know what time of day it happened on. I don't think he knows anything about this. And if there's police cars sitting at the front of Sandy Hook with their dash cams on,

it'd be a pretty simple matter to just go in the video and scroll through and see when various stuff arrives. That's something you can do, right? I would imagine. Yeah. Infowars didn't do that, did they? Because if... I can't say that. I don't know what we did over Sandy.

Okay. Well, if Infowars did do that, they would have come across this picture of porta-potties showing up at 1.30 p.m., right? That's what that time is right there. Are you familiar with military time? Mm-hmm. Okay, and that's 1.30, right? Mm-hmm.

Right, so that's not an hour after the shooting, is it, Mr. Jones? Correct. It's pretty darn soon after. Is it? Is it maybe more like four hours after? Yeah, and I was going off of what I believed to be, and then he was a accredited national school safety person

who'd been on national television programs as an expert. I was going off of what Hal Big and others were saying. You did no confirmation whatsoever of Mr. Hal Big's statements about the porta-potty. I don't believe these videos were released for a long time. If they were, if those videos were released in 2013, it certainly would have been reckless to say the porta-potty has arrived in an hour in 2017

when Mr. Jones. Objective report. I just, I don't know how to respond to the fact that... Yeah, you are correct. How do we know more aren't arriving later than there's other porta-potty? I'm not saying that. You just show me one still off something

and tell me what's, tell me the answer questions. Yeah, so one thing you could do is go back into the dash cam video and scroll through and find out if something didn't arrive earlier. That's something you could do, right? Objectiveness report. It's not hidden information, right? Objectiveness report.

Keep on, buddy. Correct? I guess correct. I guess, I guess that's true. Sure, I mean, yeah, if you're going to do the research or whatever it is. And you know, there's the underlying message that's being sent by all of these statements,

and that is the like, if this video was out in 2013, it would be irresponsible to do what you did. You know what that means? That means this video was out in 2013. Oh, yeah. Because he doesn't need to bring that piece of information into the deposition. He can just get these, these pieces

and then in cross-examination in the actual trial if that needs to come up. Right. Well, we will demonstrate now that this video was released in 2013. It serves no purpose to bring it up here. Is this maybe Alex's best defense, the fact that he knows absolutely nothing?

No, I don't think so. Because ignorance, I don't think, is good. I don't know. Well, because you can't... Is it a legal standard of defamation that you're knowingly doing it? You have to be knowingly doing it. And it's kind of clear from the deposition

that either Alex is an incredible liar or he is what he appears to be, which is a guy who just says nonsense out of his mouth as it comes. I think that the standard is knowing at the time of saying it. You know, you have to know that what you're saying is inaccurate at the time of saying it.

And I think that's why it's important that he brings up that idea about the Firehouse Def. Well, the Firehouse thing, you previously had reported that there were no ambulances at the school and now you're saying that this video with the ambulance is the school. You know that that's not the school. So you knew at some point

that you were making a false statement. So there is that at least implied there. So whatever Alex does or doesn't know now is kind of immaterial because he could have forgotten a lot of this stuff. He clearly doesn't give a shit. No, absolutely not. Which is even more upsetting on some level.

The level of not caring about the stuff that's being discussed is jarring. Yeah. But he knows that he can say these videos are edited. He can fall back on that to some extent. And then when he needs to, just blame Wolfgang Halbig because he is a villain. Obviously.

Of course. And everyone's going to be like, yeah, of course. Maybe you shouldn't listen to him. Yeah. Of course you've got all that information from him. We all knew that. Yeah.

You're not revealing anything. But it does introduce an interesting question. And that is that if he's just going to blame Wolfgang Halbig for all of this, what research did he do? Like what he says that he does deep research about all this stuff. And here we get another glimpse. Well, he read over 5,000 emails from Wolfgang.

That's a shit ton of, that's a shit ton to read. And that guy's fucking crazy. What do you mean I didn't do any research? Later in the deposition, he says that he didn't get most of those emails. Staff took care of that. But he does say that he does extensive research and asking this question that the prosecutor does

is another great sort of process, sort of question in terms of like, what do you do, what doesn't for, like how do you get the news that you do? I do a lot of research. I have a question for you. Do you? Yeah, exactly.

Mr. Jones, I've noticed with a lot of these answers you've said, well I'm just going off of what Mr. Halbig said. So what I want to know is when you talked earlier about you did deep research, what was that? What deep research did you do? Well, I mean I did look at the news articles saying they were being very secret about the case. A lot of things were sealed that was unusual.

There were lawsuits involved with that. And I did do research on Bloomberg putting out an email the day before. Things like that saying, get ready. There's going to be a big event. Or just great average people on the ground for mass shootings or whatever. And just the way the media made a spectacle out of it

right away is what really made me question. Because I'd seen that like with WMDs or babies in the incubators that didn't happen. I just saw the media so on it, so ready. And I thought that added credibility to it. I'm glad you brought up the Bloomberg thing. I remember there's a couple episodes where you've talked about this Bloomberg email.

And you said to your audience that there was an email that came out in a lawsuit where Bloomberg told his people get ready in the next 24 hours to capitalize on a mass shooting. That didn't happen. That's not a real email is it? I mean I don't think it's exactly that but there's one similar to that. Yeah, I mean what you said is not real.

Bloomberg never told his people get ready in the next 24 hours to capitalize on a mass shooting. That did not happen. I believe this gun organization did. Okay Mr. Jones. I'm sorry. Okay. That sounds like you.

I believe this gun organization said get ready, get ready to move quick. I don't have it in front of me it's from years ago. It's upon Alex to defend his assertion here because this email doesn't exist. It seems like it. And all he has to go on is I believe his gun rights organization did.

It's a long time ago. I don't remember. I don't have it in front of me. Well we had this email and like most media outlets we destroy any and all research that we do within one week of the story. So we don't hang on to it at all. So you have there the question being introduced.

If you're just blaming how big for all this, what research do you do? Alex rambles a little bit. And the specific that he can come up with is I looked into that email that Bloomberg sent out and they're like, oh yeah, that doesn't exist. Yeah, but I looked into it. Ah, great.

Cool. So then the questioning pivots to the idea that Alex has said that there are, I believe there's a, I don't remember if the actual clip is in this, but the prosecution asks a question of Alex where he, they play a clip and it says basically it's Alex saying that some kids at Sandy Hook are still alive and there are pictures of them at other mass tragedies.

And he's talking specifically about a picture of one of the kids that was a part of a mural that was made in Pakistan after bombing. And it seemed suspicious because everyone was like, this kid died in Pakistan, but he died at Sandy Hook. But the reality was if anybody took the time to get into it. It was the Lindbergh baby. Bingo.

No, the reality was that the people after the aftermath of this attack in Pakistan included a picture of one of the kids at Sandy Hook and other tragedies as a, like we're all in this together healing from whatever. So he's asked, Alex has asked about this clip where he's saying that there's kids that are still alive and their pictures are being used at other tragedies. And he says that it's out of context.

Of course. His words are out of context. Of course. Now, the response that the prosecutor gives is one of my favorite things that I've ever heard in a legal setting, I suppose. This is just great. I want to ask you about photos and children.

So I'm going to play a video clip about something said about photos and children. This is something you said on September 24th, 2014. Can you play photos and children? And then photos of kids that are still alive, they said died. I mean, they think we're so dumb that it's really getting in plain view.

Mr. Jones, you can admit that that statement was absolute nonsense. There are not photos of children who died who are actually still alive. That is an out of context clip. I can't even respond to something like that. You said it though, didn't you? I don't know what it's in context today.

Is there a good context to that, Mr. Jones? People's children who are dead, there's actually photos of children still alive. Can you give us a good context? There's no way, there's no way to respond to something that I don't know what it is. You could have stopped it. There's no way to respond.

That's a good way to sound. Because you got dunked on. You got murdered. That's so awesome. Is there a good context? You're taking me out of context. What context? Give me literally any context that makes you

not look like a monster. Yeah, I don't particularly care what your context is. That's not good. Well, we were updating Othello on air one day and that just happened to be something that Othello might have said in the updated version of Shakespeare's play. Still not a good context. Because I'm sure that play is going to stink.

It's bad writing. Bad revival. Bad writing. So at this point, the questioning goes into the idea that Alex outed Lenny Posner as being the person who was running the honor group that was trying to help take some of the heat off the individual families and was reporting copyright strikes against the Sandy Hook conspiracy videos

because they were using people's property, their pictures of their children and that sort of stuff. Lenny goes over some of that stuff in this American Life episode if you want more context for that from his own perspective. But Alex did apparently out Lenny as the person running it. Up till that point before that, he was running this organization anonymously.

Really? So Alex himself is the one who fucked that up? Apparently so. Holy shit. And according to this clip, which clearly demonstrates this, he gave out his address on air. As time went on, starting in 2015, you learned that a Sandy Hook parent named Leonard Posner was behind a group

called Honor Network. Correct? That was fighting online abuse at Sandy Hook? I did, I think. And when you learned that and when Honor complained to YouTube in 2015, you told your viewers that Honor was run by Mr. Posner, you showed addresses being used by Mr. Posner, and you said he needed to be investigated in Florida.

Didn't you say? Subjection, Mr. Posner. No. Good work, Barnes. That's like a clip here. I'm going to show you something that you and Mr. Dew were talking about on February 12, 2015. He played addresses.

He's been getting all kinds of grief from Mr. Posner. Anything that comes out, social media shutdowns due to Sandy Hook false copyrights. What's interesting is they list the address for the Honor Network in Boca Raton, Florida. You look up the address on that, which says 908 North Dixie Highway.

It is the address for a women's clothing store and a U-Haul room place, U-Haul neighborhood dealing. So here's the 908 North Dixie Highway. There is no suite, but it's got two different buildings listed that address. One is a JJ shop women's clothing store. And you go to the other one saying address U-Haul neighborhood dealing.

Now you go to their about Honor Network. I go to this one right here, guys. You can leave the camera right there. Honor Network, right there. They say they're in Connecticut. Because they're in Newtown, Connecticut. But you go to that address. It's a U-Haul UPS store.

I'm sorry, it's a UPS store. Same address, Main Street, Newtown, Connecticut. It's a UPS store. But you think, you know, if they had this organization, they would have some sort of headquarters where they would be setting up a memorial. We'll just start investigating that. I guess I'm going to have to probably go on up to Newtown.

I'm going to have to probably go investigate Florida as well. If a person were to stake out those addresses, they could wait for Mr. Posner to come pick up the mail, couldn't they? Yeah, she was with one. Good work, Barnes. Sure. I mean, the guy's running an anti-free speech foundation. And you're the one who outed him is doing that, right?

There's nothing on the Honor Network website that said Mr. Posner was running this. You outed him. I believe he was public about that. Do you? You don't think this is a person like that? You don't think that? That he was running a site trying to get people's websites

and things taken down? Correct. That Mr. Posner was running as an anonymous front, the Honor Network, to help make complaints against various sites so that individual parents wouldn't be the subject of retribution. Yeah, that's what I'm asking you. No, I was not aware of that. So what's fascinating about that is Alex is not one to

not take credit for a scoop, generally. He always says that news broke on info wars and stuff like that, but not this time. No, no, no, no. We can break that story. Somebody else. No, no, no, no, no. So random.

No, not Rob Do actually trying to be an investigative reporter and completely shitting the bed. The one time he digs up an address. The one time. It turns out it could be a crime. During the deposition, did Rob Do turn and look at him and say, did I do good, Daddy? He just pulled his shirt collar and steam came out.

Uh-oh. Turned into a cartoon. Alex turns it was right. Listen, go get a switch. Yeah. So like that is the sort of stuff that we haven't encountered and are going over the Sandy Hook times. Like, and so you'd always heard like the idea that they gave out

addresses and stuff like that. But some of the specifics kind of eluded us to a little bit. It's kind of. Well, we didn't cover February in 2015. No. That wasn't part of our 2015 investigation. No, no, because Trump hadn't announced yet. Yeah, we're in 2009.

We're in 2012 and this happens in February 2015. Right. That was, I would never have. Like I'd heard that they gave out addresses, but I didn't know that they literally gave out addresses to get. Yeah. To see the specific of it. Yeah.

Like it's like, oh, well, yeah, I guess they did. Oh, yeah. That's, no, that's, that's crime as fuck. Yeah. Um, and so that, that's, uh, that's, that's tough to see. And then in this next clip, we see something that's even more tough and that is a sort of set up punchline kind of thing where the prosecution in the first clip plays, uh, Alex threatening to go to,

uh, to new town. And then in the next clip that he plays just after it, uh, a demonstration of info wars coming to new town. This is the really damning stuff, I believe, especially presented back to back and with Alex's responses. Mr. Jones, I want to talk a little bit more about that episode on February 12th, 2015. The one we looked at with the maps.

And I want to show you a clip of, uh, your message to the parents that were complaining and ask you some questions. This clip again from February 12th, 2015. Can you play hornets? I just want to tell this network of people something. I'll have to go to Sandy Hook. I'll have to get involved. I mean, you're just starting a hornet statue.

So for complaining, you are going to bring info wars to their hometown. Objection is the form. Good work, Barnes. I have no idea what that three second clip is. Forget the three second clip. For complaining, you are going to bring info wars to their hometown. That is not what I said. Okay.

Well, a couple months later. What are we doing? Matlock right now? I'm going to show you what I'm now marking as exhibit five. A couple months later, in the spring of 2015, you sent this man, a cage fighter, to go badger and yell obscenities at Sandy Hook residents. Right?

No. No? No. You know who that is, right? Yes. That's Mr. Badandi. Yes. I want to play you a clip of Mr. Badandi in Newtown.

This is from June 8th, 2015. Can you play the clip of Badandi? A lot of this is really difficult to hear just because of the levels and stuff. I can't hear anything. It's a guy, Dan Badandi, who worked for Info Wars, and Alex is going to try and pretend didn't work for Info Wars, going and yelling at people around the Sandy Hook Courthouse about it's a cover-up and it's a false flag and all this stuff,

telling them they're going to get theirs. Truth is going to come out. I'm going to skip through a little bit of it just because the sound is so rough. But at the end, he identifies himself and his credentials as Dan Badandi for Info Wars. Of course. And Mr. Jones, those are hardly the only people Mr. Badandi harassed on his multiple trips to Newtown, correct? Correct?

I mean, almost everything you've said is not true. There's no way to respond to it. No, not correct. No, you're out of order. Bad news. Bad news. So yeah, you can see a clear demonstration in those two clips that Alex is saying that like, hey, these people are on my nuts.

So I'm going to go punch back a little bit because you're flagging my videos and stuff like that. And everyone's concerned about the free speech ramifications of copyright law. And so then a couple months later, Dan Badandi with his press credentials for Info Wars.com goes and makes videos where he harasses all these people. Alex plays those videos. It's hard to see or it's hard not to see a connection between intent and action. And it's pretty well laid out.

That's sort of that sort of linear line that the prosecutor is laying out is very clear. If they really cared about copyright and the First Amendment, they would have had Lawrence Lessig go to Newtown, Connecticut and harass people. Sure. That would, yeah, that'd be better. That would be the way to go. Sure. It would be, it would be very weird to find out he was a Sandy Hook truth or that would

be weird. So it's even weirder is at this point in the deposition where we've seen Alex have so many of these narratives about why he believed something was up with Sandy Hook be busted. Like this prosecutor is just coming in and being like, no, that's stupid. You just got that from Wolfgang Elbig. Yeah. And tapes edited. Objections.

Objection form. Right. That you don't need to respond to all of those because otherwise you're going to lose your voice. I really, I really kind of like it. You're going to lose your voice. Good work, Barnes. So what's surprising is that at this point, Alex expresses that he does still believe

that something's up. That something's up. Which is a weird thing for him to be saying in this deposition. Is that good or bad for him? It kind of does lead to an insanity idea. But here, see what you think on the other side of this clip. Let me make sure I have this really clear. You don't believe the official story of Sandy Hook.

You think there was cover up. You think there was manipulation. You think that there was some sinister thing going on. I still, yes, I still think, I think children died. I believe mass shootings happen. Period. Wherever it is you want, press period. And I go back to the point of all gun owners being collectively blamed.

Then it's traumatic. And so people go and they find anomalies. And then I've kind of retrospectively gone back and seen how I did believe that stuff. And then I go back up now and study more actually, drill anomalies. And it's just a school system and government trying to cover it's rear end from liability. And so there definitely has been a very, there's been a cover up of the events. And I think there's a lot of evidence showing there could have been a second shooter. There is the helicopter footage, the man in the woods.

I still have questions about Sandy Hook. But I know people that you know some of the Sandy Hook families. They say, no, it's real. People I think are credible. Like you did with Wolfgang Helbig a couple years ago. Wow, they've sent him fewer emails. So he's pretty sure they're credible now. So we've talked about that guy in the woods on a previous episode from our Sandy Hook discussion.

And it comes back up later. So we can just leave that aside. It is pretty crazy that Alex is still like sticking to some sort of a gun here with the idea that like something is up. I'm not going to say that there's not something up because you don't need to say that. Oh, no, could have stopped. And you can tell from the beginning of this clip that the prosecutor wasn't going to ask that question. He was responding to something Alex said and was like, I need clarification on this. So Alex brought that upon himself.

Yeah. And also I don't believe that anything that he's done vis-à-vis Sandy Hook. I don't think that it's appropriate for the idea of a school trying to cover liability. Like that conspiracy is very small. Like in terms of scope. Yeah, I don't think it merits this kind of attention. It doesn't merit any of the things that Alex did. If that were the truth, like if it were just a situation like he's trying to say now,

like corporate malfeasance, the school district trying not to get sued. Like you have gone way too far for that. What that deserves. I will admit I no longer believe my neighbor killed his wife because of course she is still alive. However, I must say that when the insurance adjuster came, he inflated the cost of his car. There are still some questions. Right. Did he kill his wife?

That's up in the air. If you can't trust him on one thing, how can you trust him on another? Now, I did bungle his entire thing and bring a gross amount of pain into people's lives. Right. Trying to insinuate that their children were actors and they were actors too. No, of course. That's right. Now, thankfully I did that because...

Because there is some... In the process. I discovered... Tax fraud. There's some liability issues being bandied about with the insurance company. God, that's weak. That is just... That is very weak.

And let me tell you what Lisa is doing in the break room. Oh my God. This is bullshit. She's smoking out back. She's slipping out at recesses, smoking behind the building. Crazy. So there are some questions in Newtown. So thank God I made all those mistakes and we learned along the way.

We've uncovered corruption and thank God. The real false flag was my heart. Right. So that's bad. It's unexpected but still kind of like, yeah, all right, you kind of see that coming. Yeah. But in this next clip we get to see on display Alex's delusion about the consequences of his actions because he's directly asked if he thinks that he's wrong to the families

of the victims and the survivors. Can you now admit that you've done an outrageous wrong to these parents? Can you admit that? You know, the mainstream media is who always takes it, makes it a huge issue and then says that I'm saying it and gets me to respond. And it's lawyers like you and people that glom onto this for fame that then try to get the fame and then say that I'm... Enoch, jump in.

What are you doing, man? It's obscene in my view. So that's no. No. I genuinely questioned and I think the government and media that's been caught lying so much has created an atmosphere where people don't know it's true. So you do not believe that you've done an outrageous wrong to these parents? I am not...

No, I'm not an outrageous wrong to the parents. I mean, that's kind of... I like how unflappable the dude is because he's like, is that a no? Like instead of engaging with Alex's bullshit because that's a mistake. Yeah. Okay, so we're going to write that down as a no. You don't think you've done anything wrong? I think it's lawyers like you and the media.

So would you like fries or what are we talking about here? I'm going to put you down and line up as saying no, you didn't wrong them. All right, here are all the families who say you did. All right. All that answer is like indication of like... I still didn't do anything wrong. Right. An unwillingness to engage with the complaints that many, many people are making about him.

So now we jump into more narratives. It's really interesting the way the structure of this went because there were like, there were some narratives upfront and they deteriorate into like some more general conversation. And then we get some more narratives here at this point and then it sort of... It has waves to it a little bit. And I think part of that is because Alex is someone who... You just... He's slipper.

You can't nail him down. Yeah. Like if you went into this deposition expecting like you were going to ask leading questions that were going to exactly the responses you wanted, you're a fool. Oh, yeah. And so I think having a little bit of flexibility is really to this guy's advantage because you can go hit this point, move around a little bit, respond to something he says, elicit the I didn't wrong people.

I still think something's up with it. Right. You could get those things out of him that you never really would have expected you would get out of him. And so maybe there's a win somewhere there, but we get back to narratives now. And Alex has made the claim multiple times that there was a stand down, a police stand down, both at Sandy Hook and at Parkland, all of these shootings. Yeah.

No matter what he just says there's a stand down. There's a stand down. It means nothing. And he's pressed on it and he can't defend his assertion at all. In that clip, you said state police have gone public. Have you ever argued anything about the state police? He's saying it's in reference to the state police going public about there being a stand down.

Right. I told you the most of the stuff I can remember. Do you sit here today, remember anything about the state police that going public? Is there anything that occurs to you today? Long pause. I can't remember. Okay. Okay.

You should remember that. Hold on. I'm thinking of a lie. Give me a sec. I'm thinking of a lie. I'm coming up with a lie. I'm coming up. It's coming.

It's on the tip of my tongue. It's a lie. It's not the mental process. Good lie comment. Nope. I don't remember. That's not the mental process. It's, you know what?

We really should have gotten hand signals. He's just sitting there like, I really should have got to save me. Because I got, you know, like the idea of police going public about a stand down regarding a shooting of elementary school children. Like if you are ever going to say that that's the case publicly, it really is something you should keep in your back pocket forever. You should be unassailable on, you should, oh, and that's the other thing too. We've seen Alex pull out these arcane pieces of information on his show whenever he needs

to. Like little things like John P. Holdren's. Yeah. He always has references. 7-5 be a part D. They're all bad and he hasn't read them. Yeah. He has them at the ready. Right.

He knows that doesn't fly in this deposition. He can't just like rattle off some, some nonsensical thing because it'll be under oath and on the record. Yeah. That'd be trouble. And so he's like, ah, I don't remember. We know that you remember, if you were on your show, you'd remember. Yeah.

It'd be bad, but you'd remember. So the next narrative that gets brought up is the idea that Alex has said that rescue helicopters weren't sent, but should have been and ambulances should have been dispatched. And what do you know this one's bad to talk to you about rescue helicopters mentioned rescue helicopters. It was, it was, it was puzzling to you that rescue helicopters weren't called, correct? Yes. I take it.

You don't know how long it takes for a life star crew from Hartford hospital to be dispatched to travel to Sandy Hook and for the engine to calm down to safely approach the vehicle from Hartford. You don't know how long that takes. No, I don't. And by the same token, you don't know how long it takes for an ambulance crew to be dispatched to loading of patient from Danbury hospital nine miles down the way before. You don't know that.

No, I was, I was going off Halbig and others and that professor's analysis of it. Okay. Okay. It's just Halbig again. Great. Okay. Great. Gotcha.

You're stupid. Alex has had to apologize for things in the last year and things he's been sued about, you know, so he gets into like, he brings up pizza gate and I had to apologize. I'm not sure. Turn into an episode of this is your life. Actually, I don't think he brings up that he had to apologize to James Alphantas. He might have, I can't remember exactly, but he does bring up how like he's used bad sources to misidentify the Parkland shooter.

He brings up Chabani. Yeah. Yeah. Now, in this next clip, Alex might have accidentally reopened. He has Chabani lost it because we, we listened to his apology about it. We know that he apologized and was like, we got this all wrong. Yeah. Now, the way he represents it in this deposition, very different.

You apologized to Chabani though, right? For publishing stories that caught importing migrant rapists. That was a technical thing versus there were rapes in the town, but it wasn't the company itself that brought the rapist in. It was the policies of the Federal Reserve Board member who loves Chabani. I did. You did. Did he just ask if he did?

Yeah. No, he just asked, you did apologize. Oh, okay. I did. Yeah. The Federal Reserve member, which is not an accurate way to describe Hamdi Ulaqai, but that's who he's talking about. He's saying it wasn't the company.

It was the policies of Hamdi Ulaqai that did it. Right. If I were Hamdi, the first thing I would do is that agreement is void. Of course. Whatever agreement we came to is done. You're going back in court because he has them dead to rights. Yeah, absolutely. That lawsuit was another good one that Alex obviously settled because he had to get out

of. That should be reopened based on that statement. Under oath. Under oath. Yeah. That was a bad one to make. That was bad. If I was Barnes here, I would have given a little bit larger and louder.

If I were Enoch, I would have tackled Alex. No. But again, it's something we go back to over and over again. It's like for them, they don't work for info wars. This is billable hours. Billable hours. So it's just getting worse. Or it could be just getting worse.

Like who cares? Who cares? Just cash register sounds. So at this point, they ask about Alex's conjecture about Anderson Cooper's nose disappearing and it being a green screen when reality experts have gone on record and discussed how it's a compression problem with the video files that are uploaded. And so Alex gets into this long thing about how he's an expert on green screens and he knows all about them.

Alex says he's an expert. He knows all about them. Oh boy. It's worth listening to. It's an interesting conversation that the two of them are having where the prosecutor's like, so you know about how to align green screens. You know about the analysis. Well, you know, you got a, you know, there's a wheel and you put it to the right color.

Who cares? It's, it's neither here nor there, but it brings us to probably my favorite thing that this prosecutor does on this episode. And that is he sets Alex up to fall into a fucking huge trap that is, has nothing to do really with Sandy Hook, but it delights me. So in this first clip, the trap is set and it only is involved at all because it has to do with how Alex doesn't know anything about green screens. Okay.

And so it kind of proves that he has no business saying that Anderson Cooper's nose disappeared because of a green screen. So it's still kind of related, but it's so tertiary that I love it. God damn it. This is great. Here's the setup. One of the reasons that you were suspicious about this interview in blue screens is because CNN's got caught using blue screens before, right?

In fact, one of the things you brought up was about CNN getting caught using blue screens in the Gulf War on the, on the satellite feeds. Oh no. Okay. I want to play you a video really quick from something you said in May 13th, 2014 about these blue screens. Just like CNN, I'm going back to our guest, just like CNN back during the first Gulf War was at the broadcast center in Atlanta on top of a roof with a blue screen behind them,

saying they were in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and Israel, different days being hit by nerve gas. And then they went on air for parts of it with the blue screen not even turned on with blue behind it. Now, Mr. Jones, you've seen, there was actually a satellite feed leak, leak, a leak of this that you've seen, right? Okay. God, it is nice to know that he can smell it.

He doesn't know what it is, but he can smell it. Yes. I don't know. I don't know where you're trying to hit me. I don't know where you're trying to hit me. I can't see this one through. Oh yeah. Are you hitting me with the right or the left?

I don't know. But. Yeah, you're right. There isn't an awareness that something's going to go bad, something's about to turn. I don't want to agree to anything you have to say right now because I know it's going to come back in bite way. But he does agree with the, and he has agreed that he saw this leak. Now, here is where Alex falls into the trap that he's willingly put himself in.

Mr. Jones, I'm going to hand to you what I've marked as exhibit eight. I didn't get that far. You recognize this, this, this leak from the Charles Jacob CNN broadcast where he's got the blue screen behind him. You recognize that? Yes. Okay. And this was something that some people recorded off of a satellite.

I believe so. Okay. Long time ago. And you've done some reporting about this on Infowars. You've shown this video and what happened that day. Yes. Okay. And as we see from here, you can see kind of on the left hand side and on the right

hand side of their screen, there's this big blue screen up behind them, right? Because they left it on, I mean, they didn't put anything on it because they were on a satellite kind of practice feedback, right? I don't remember all the particulars, but they admitted they weren't in the location. And then again, it's not like the background turns on, it's the computer overlays it. Right. And actually on this, there's suddenly, there's something up on the screen. Computer takes care of that in post production.

Or does it live? Or does it live? Right. Okay. But that CNN studio, that setup, what I'm going to hand you now is what I've been marked as exhibit 10. I didn't get that far. ABC News and Forrest Sawyer was given access to Ted Turner's secret studio.

He's handed Alex a picture of another newslet network with the same backdrop. Oh, no. Good work, Barnes. Do you think? I don't even know anything about this. I mean, I know they were. You've never seen that picture. No, I believe that CNN and others, especially CBS partners with other groups routinely,

but that's the jacket I don't know. Nice. But you've never done any sort of research as to where these interviews were allegedly done or CNN says they were done. You know, this is so long ago. I think there's even PBS documentaries about this. Yeah. And I'm going to show you an exhibit about that.

Don't break Genn Burns into this. I'm going to hand you now what I'm going to show you as exhibit nine. You've never seen the International Hotel in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Have you? No, I know that's what they said they were broadcasting from. I'm going to show you what I'm going to mark as exhibit 11. I got to that one. You've never seen the photographs of the satellite setups for the major networks at

the International Hotel in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Have you? Nope. I just know Jacob says that they staged a chemical attack. It didn't happen. You know that Jacob admits is what you're saying. You've seen clips of Charles Jacob saying it was. Yeah.

I mean, it came out later that there was a nerve gas in the air and all that, that they staged some of the shots on the blue screen. So you're maintaining that that thing behind them in that shot is a blue screen used for compositing and not just the walls of the International Hotel in Riyadh that was on every broadcast. That's what you're saying? Well, no, if they were saying they were there, I think they were saying they were projecting that behind them.

I get your confusion about the blue thing. Yeah. Thank you. It's a long time ago. It's very nice of you. It's not debated that seeing it in a staged location shot. They didn't stage that shot, did they? That shot was in front of the International Hotel in Riyadh.

That was not a stage shot. Yeah. They put the gas mask on to the whole thing and then they stopped during the break since all big joke. I'm not real concerned of what they did on the broadcast. You said that they were in a secret broadcast center in Atlanta. When they said they were in Riyadh, you were wrong. That was false.

They were actually in Riyadh. You can admit that. I can't say that. In fact, you don't know. When you were saying that they were not in Riyadh, you had no idea. I think you're mixing things together. Do you? Okay, Mr. Jones.

Okay. All right. All right, Mr. Jones. Okay. Yeah, because the thing that's so great about this is that it's such a demonstration of how little work Alex does to confirm or reinforce any of the arguments that he makes. But it's so salient to the Anderson Cooper thing because it's the exact same thing. He said that he was pretending he was on a location when he wasn't.

He was in a studio and they were faking the whole thing, pretending he was in Sandy Hook. The same thing is it's the exact same behavior. It appears to be tertiary, but in reality, it's so connected. It's such a demonstration of the exact same behavior being like, that was a lie before. You were wrong about that. You were wrong about this also. That's the implication. It's good work.

I think the big question I have right now is now that we know for a fact what Alex does in regards to research is zero. We have it pretty much legally proven that he does not work. There's even more of that later as we get through this. What does he do besides talk for three hours? Booze. He drinks a lot. Yeah.

What does he do all day? What does he do? From everything we can tell, I bet he shows up pretty close to when his show starts. Yeah. I would assume. Yeah, because he's been late before. He takes some super male vitality or something like that to get amped up. He does his show.

We've seen so many times when he's shown up for another show later and he's drunk or something like that. Yeah. Or when there's the marathons, he does his show and then he'll pop in at the six o'clock hour or whatever and he's tanked. Yeah. I bet he just starts drinking at like one whenever he gets off air and then whatever happens happens.

Yeah. He's fat Don Draper. Then now his new strategy is going out in public and having people yell at him so Eclipse will go viral on the internet. Look at Alex Jones. I'm still relevant. Right. I'm still relevant.

Which is a good strategy, I guess. What? Yeah. I don't know. It is weird. It would be interesting to have someone follow him for a day. I would love that. Yeah.

But not in like an official capacity. In a legal way. Yeah. Not in like a... I was stopping. Yeah. Please nobody. No.

This is not a call to action. No. No. No. No. No. No. That is where the discretion comes from.

And the guy brings up the idea that Alex said that Las Vegas was a false flag as well. And there is... I call it lost wages. Sure. So this is introduced into the proceedings. This is introduced into the proceedings. The idea that Las Vegas was all faked. Yeah.

And all that stuff. And Alex... Earlier we heard the press cutter laugh at Alex when he said that he had the hostage rescue team tell him about Las Vegas. And when pressed for more details about that, we learned that Alex had to sign a non-disclosure agreement to find out information about Las Vegas. This exchange is ridiculous. I then also had to sign non-disclosures that I can't get into subsequently with other

information. You've signed non-disclosures? Mm-hmm. With who? Can't talk about it. What about... What's the general topic that you can't disclose? Can't talk about it.

So apparently, there is some non-disclosure agreement that you've signed with some unnamed person that is relevant to the allegations that you were making about Vegas? Yes. Okay. You can't... For reasons of that non-disclosure, you can't disclose anything about that today. No, I can't. Was that a government person that you didn't non-disclosure with?

Can't say. Jackson was struck by what was not... Workbards. Was it a corporate entity? The same structure. They're not going to wrap this agreement as a privilege shield, as something bad, and then if I had it, we could get an explanation. Was it a real person or an imaginary person?

Oh, it's real. It's a real person. So there is a contract. If we needed it, we could get it. It exists. Do you own a contract? I already told you it exists. Do you own a contract?

We have a contract, don't we? Well, the... You get it. Yes, we have a contract. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. That could be a problem. What did his lawyer just say to him?

I don't know exactly what he said, but... Because the answer should be, stop, stop. We don't have... It's not real. That could be a problem. Yeah. You'd have to... I assume that's not real, just because, of course, I do, until proven otherwise.

I believe that this is bullshit. You know, if it is not real, then they're going to have to falsify a document if they try and press it, because that could come into court. Yeah. Because they would have to show the NDA in order for the NDA to be enforceable. Yeah. The judge can see it. Yeah.

Yeah, exactly. So that could be a problem. That could be an issue. They might just let it go, because it might also not be super relevant. I'm surprised he threw that one out then. I assumed that Alex would have tried to drop an NDA somewhere else, you know, as a quick get out of jail free card. But I don't think the stakes are high enough in any of these other circumstances.

That's true. The NDA with Wolfgang Halbig, what are you going to do with that? Should have signed one. Wolfgang should have had him signed one, for sure. Yeah, perhaps. But I don't think that would be enforceable, quite frankly. This is one instance where there is the illusion of somebody who would enforce an NDA on Alex. All these other instances are like, you're talking to some dickhole who emailed you a

thousand times. Right. Right. It's ridiculous. Who made you sign the NDA? Shooter. Wait, what? Hold on.

We're going to need to take a break on this one. Hold on. What is going on? So that's one of the sources, and we're never going to get to the bottom of it, because there's an NDA. But then the conversation turns to more general sources that he gets his chatter from. Where does Alex get this chatter? The sense of the streets, that sort of thing.

Hot tubs. We find out that... Full supply stores. It's 4chan and YouTube. Of course. 4chan. Pick that one up first. Yes.

So I'm looking at... That's an anonymous image board, right? Yes. The posters there signed a random number. Right? Yes. Infowars has frequently used 4chan as a source. We've reported on things being reported at 4chan.

As a source, right? That's what a source is, isn't it? Yes. Okay. If somebody's emailing you, you could say, technically, it's a source. Sure. I mean, never even open it. Any piece of information you're going to report secondhand is a source.

You're getting it, man. Yes. There's a source of that information. Yeah. Like somebody draws in the bathroom wall, it could be a source. Yeah. All right. Now, for instance, we talked about misidentifying the Parkland Shooter.

We talked earlier about misidentifying the Parkland Shooter. Last year, Infowars source was 4chan, right? I don't remember that. It was. We corrected it within a day. Well, I mean, I didn't ask anything about correction, right? What I'm asking is, do you or do you not know 4chan was your source? I believe it was one of the places that put it up.

Okay. That's what I told. So that's what I was kind of asking when you, when I say, where do you get your chatter? 4chan's one. Do you have any others for me? What, email? Have people come out on the street? People on the street.

Well, I mean, I'm specifically, we're talking hone in on this idea that there were people on the internet chattering about Sandy Hook. The internet was talking about it. Oh, I would say YouTube. I mean, there were like videos in the first few weeks for like 5 million, 10 million views plus, and they were showing a lot of things that when you looked at it, look pretty compelling. Oh, look compelling. Look compelling.

So your sources of information that you're going to report on as if they are real things are an anonymous message board and a place where anyone can upload whatever videos they want. So now I know what he does all day. Yeah. He uses YouTube videos. Probably. Gotcha.

That might be his research problem solved, but to be fair, that's the research method of a lot of the people who follow him and a lot of people who are very dumb. He's a man of the people. Yeah, certainly. So now this is probably about the where this thing peaks. There's still a little bit after this, but this is the crescendo. The guy, the prosecutor is trying to ask Alex if he understands why another Sandy Hook parent is suing him.

He's trying to get Alex to recognize that there is something that caused this as opposed to it being something that is randomly being done to him. Alex can't really understand what's going on with the line of questioning, and then everything explodes. This goes so crazy. Well, you're asking me about a specific broadcast. I'm saying what broadcast? Right.

I'm first I'm asking you, do you understand Neil Haslund's suing? Yes. Are you telling me that you don't know sitting here right now what broadcast he sued you for? I mean, I'm asking you to give me the specifics so you can get me a comment. No, I'm asking you right now. That's what I want to know a question to. Do you even know what Mr. Haslund sued you for?

He's an individual. So if you couldn't hear that the objection that's being made is not the form objection. This is just scope. Yeah. You're saying that this is outside the scope of what you're allowed to ask him about. That's what I thought. Yeah, yeah. And that is, that's a problem.

Right. There's no 36 notice here. He has no scope. Sure. He has personal knowledge he can answer. Are you instructing him not to answer? Okay. Okay.

Then you can go ahead and answer Mr. John. I don't know what the scope is. I have no idea what the scope is. What you mean is there's something in the order that you think there's a scope? I don't see the scope. The court said you were allowed to ask things consistent with your RFPs. Yeah. Whether Mr. Haslund was defamed is relevant to my case.

You know that. I had the document request are all about Mr. Haslund. I don't even start this with me. I would rather you not because you're not defending this deposition, Mr. Enoch. I've had an extraordinary amount of patience with you speaking during this deposition, but we're not going to do this to you when we defend deposition. You should not represent this lawyer, but you judge me not to be afraid to scope, to limit the RFPs.

Do you agree that he limited that? No, I don't think so. Not to an RFP. No, I don't think so. I don't think the scope of the, no, Mr. Enoch, I don't think the scope of written discovery on request for production was identical to the scope of deposition. And many, many times, Mr. Enoch, the judge said, no, you can't ask that question for a request for production, but you can just ask it in deposition.

So no, I don't agree with you at all. And I would appreciate it if you kept quiet the remainder of the deposition. You are not defending this deposition. Mr. Baxter, I will speak if it's appropriate for you to speak. It is not appropriate for you to speak. Sir, I'm going to ask you to leave my deposition. Go off the record first. I want you to leave.

All right. Don't go off the record. Mr. Enoch, I'm asking you to leave my deposition. You are being obstructive. You are talking. You are not appearing at this deposition. You are not defending it. If you do not agree to be quiet, I'm asking you to leave the deposition.

Are you going to stay and be quiet, or am I going to have to ask you to leave? Then you're going to stay quiet. I am. Mr. Enoch, you leave again. If you keep speaking, I guarantee you I will seek sanctions against you, Mr. Enoch. I hope he did. Oh, I like a good sanction. Nice lawyer fight.

Nice little lawyer fight. And I mean, from everything I can tell, the prosecutor is totally in the right. This guy is supposed to be there. He keeps talking. He has been pretty polite in terms of like, you need to calm down. You need to stop talking. You're not the lawyer who's defending this. And then the RFP is the Request for Production.

It's like all the documents and stuff that were requested. And so the Enoch is trying to present the idea that you're only allowed to ask things that are related to all of that. And the prosecutor is like, no, that is not the case, clearly, based on statements by the court. Yeah, the judge, to do that, you have to request them to produce this document and this document. And the judge will say, they need to do this. They don't need to request this one.

But that doesn't mean that you can't ask about it. Right. Right. And I think that this is them doing the save that they haven't done in other instances. Because I think it's a really, really bad thing to have on the record. The idea that Alex doesn't understand why he's being sued. That is something that is, it paints him in such an inhuman way that like, I don't know how you could have that introduced into the deposition, because then you can introduce

it into court. On the stand asking Alex, like, do you really have no idea why these people are mad at you? It would just, it would turn into like, it would be so ugly. So I think that they ran interference and when they got done after the lawyer fight, the question was dropped and they moved on to another question. So I think they did a good job. I think it achieved exactly the goal that it needed to and was kind of a music along the way.

Yeah. I think you're right that they do know each other. That remark about how when we're defending depositions, we don't tag team you guys. I think he was talking about like, for depositions in this case. Oh, with the, with the Sandy Hook. In this case. Yeah. With the families and stuff like that.

Gotcha. Gotcha. I think, although you might be right to, I'm not entirely sure. So they try to go down another line and that is asking Alex Jones about his businesses. This is a fruitless line to go down in terms of this. I don't have any. Well, he's close to that. It's a fruitless line to go down because the lawyers can just say like objection based

on privacy. Yeah. Because businesses involve other people and disclosing other things might disclose private information about other. So it's, it is outside of what might be appropriate to ask Alex as an individual. Yeah. That doesn't stop Alex from accidentally revealing a little piece of information. Of course he does.

About Info Wars LLC that I found shocking. Oh, no. I want to talk a little bit about Info Wars LLC. Have you ever taken money from Info Wars LLC? Objection. Yeah. Instructions to privacy. Unless it's in the specific role of an instructor, then it will just not exist in the customer

privacy. Wow. Okay. I will take that up another day. I guess. Wow. I mean, I don't at all. Info Wars LLC.

Has it ever had any money? Objection. Same instruction. What is Info Wars LLC? I don't believe it's even an operating company. So it's your allegation it's not an active corporation by the Secretary of State? You know, I'm not the expert on this. So I probably shouldn't answer.

So I don't want to state it wrong. Okay. No, no, no. That's where you stop. You made Info Wars LLC. You created it. You know, I'm not one of the lawyers. I don't want to answer it wrong.

Nobody else is involved. It's nobody else's company, right? Info Wars LLC. What does it do? What has it ever done as a business? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know how fair that is.

I think. I think he's just. I mean, if you asked him without the earlier preamble, I imagine he would at least be able to say we're a media operation. That's free speech systems. Oh, free speech systems LLC is the media operation. Alex, I think. So what is Info Wars LLC?

I think Alex legitimately doesn't know what it is anymore. Is there one? Yeah, it is, but later on he comes back. There's another question about it and he's like, I think it has something to do with like the domains for the website or something like that. Yeah. And the fact that he proffered that sort of information, it leads me to believe that he may have understood what it was when he started it or earlier in the business time.

But now someone else is involved with all that shit. He doesn't. He doesn't bother himself with any of the corporate structure. Yeah. Of things that he may legitimately not know what these businesses. You got to delegate authority. I'm fine with that. I am too, but I think it's wild.

I think it's a terrible idea. Because he also presents himself as being such a self made person. I run all of this and all that stuff. So that existing in the same space as I don't know what Info Wars LLC does. That can only mean to like that kind of a declaration means to me either he legitimately doesn't, which is believable, but weird. Or he knows it's something fucked up. Right.

He doesn't want to talk about it. Right. Right. Right. And I think that's a possibility. It's not as likely, I think, as him not knowing legitimately. I think you're just seeing a person who like is woefully unprepared to be asked any question. Yeah.

I'm amazed. It's pretty good. I'm amazed. He didn't. Did his lawyers even like practice with him? I think they practiced on their own objecting. In mirrors. They went out to dinner together and objected each other.

Okay. That's a request for production of salts, please. Thank you. Thank you. That's the new name for Dave Dobbin Meyer's show request for the production of salt. So in this next clip, we get back to Wolfgang Halbig and that whole situation. And they basically get Alex to admit that he didn't fact check Wolfgang at all really. Right.

And in the same breath, Alex is presenting it as like, he wants it to appear that he tried to, which is weird. So are you saying that he had a resume of such that you did not feel the need to fact check or corroborate his allegations? We did try to fact check it because it was such a wall of secrecy up around it, around a fan cook that Hartford Current, others noted impressed with it and it allowed that darkness for, you know, things not to be checked out. Well, let's take them one by one.

Mr. Halbig said the thing about the porta-potties, right? You know what I'm talking about, porta-potties? Yes. Okay. That wasn't hidden behind a cloak of secrecy. That's in a video that's been published for six, seven years, right? Well, I don't think that that piece of information has been proven one way or the other. I think they did deliver porta-potties pretty quick.

EMTs are in the building, right? That's been public for six or seven years. Most of that report's blacked out. Do you know EMTs are in the building? That's borne out in multiple reports. In the report itself, the police officer says it didn't look normal. Things didn't look right. That was the kind of thing we were reading.

Okay. Not the deposition, not the parts where it proves what I was saying is not true. We weren't reading those. Right, right. Why would you read those? And this report, all that stuff that's blacked out, you know what's not blacked out, the thing that I'm bringing up to you. It seems like it's obvious.

I just saw a lot of blacked out stuff and I thought they'll throw the baby out with the bathwater. This report sucks. Terrible. What's worse, trying and failing to look into Wolfgang Halbig or not looking into a him at all. Well, I think he didn't look into him at all. And then this is just covered.

This is just a cover angle where he's like, well, we would have loved to look into him, but there was so much secrets. And he's like, all right, whatever, dude, you just, you don't want to have to actually say, I didn't give a shit. I didn't look into anything. Yeah. That's more or less what's going on. So in this next clip, we find out in much the same way Alex doesn't know the date of

Sandy Hook. He doesn't know what time it happened. He doesn't know anything about the EMTs who went into the building. He doesn't know how far the closest hospital with a helicopter is. He doesn't understand helicopter rescue dynamics like having to turn off the blades so people can get to the helicopter. He doesn't understand any of that stuff. He doesn't even understand why he's there.

And that leads us to this next clip where he doesn't understand the consequences of his own action. And he doesn't really seem to even give a shit. You know who Lucy Richards is, don't you? No. Even today? You don't sit in here today? You don't know who Lucy Richards is?

I don't. Okay. You don't know that there was a woman, an Info Wars follower, who went to federal prison for stalking and threatening to kill Sandy Hook parents and that she's now barred from ever seeing Info Wars again by court order. I read about a woman and the media alleging that. And you know that happened in Central Florida very shortly after you disclosed Mr. Posner's personal email address and maps to where he picks up his mail.

You know that, right? I do not. Okay. You didn't know where that occurred. No, I did not do what you said. Okay. Wait, what? That's an interesting different denial.

He's asking if you knew about this. No, I didn't do it. This woman is just admit to a different crime. Maybe this is the or he denied another crime. This is the logical conclusion of the rhetoric that he put into the world that this person murdered him, stalked these people and threatened them. He doesn't know her name when brought up or maybe he is lying and does know. I'm not entirely sure.

I could go either way. I'm leaning towards actually not knowing and doesn't seem to give a shit when it's brought up. They're like, oh yeah, she did that pretty soon after you gave out that address and all that stuff. Not connected. Mr. Jones, I would like to ask you a quick question. Do you understand causality?

Objection from form. Thank you very much. Wait, you can't do that Alex. Good work, Alex. So I'm going to skip these next two clips because they're just more puncturing narratives and Alex, one of them is the guy brings up this thing that Alex reported about parents not being able to touch their kids, which was something that was brought up in the making Kelly interview and Alex has talked about on his show a lot.

And so they asked like, where did you get that information from? Is there one human being that you can point to that you got that information from and Alex has nothing. And then there's another. Wolfgang, I'm a day's Mozart. There's another one, another narrative. It's the man who was in SWAT gear in the woods and Alex is like, I saw views in the mainstream news.

And when he's pressed on it more, it comes out that it was just a guy in camo pants. Yeah. And so then the prosecutor's like, do you think it's appropriate to call camo pants SWAT gear? And Alex is like, yeah, I think it's fair to scroll. You're crazy. That's a crazy thing to say. There were so many SWAT officers in my high school in the nineties. Oh my God.

So many young SWAT officers. There's a lot of young SWAT team officers. I assume they were all undercover. It was very trendy for a while to be SWAT. Well, there was that movie. Yeah, that's true. With Colin Farrell. I love Cool J.

Yeah. So I skip along from all of this because I think this is more important here as we sort of round out towards the end. And that is, in this next clip, Alex is insistent on presenting himself as the victim because of course he is. Yeah, well naturally. And this is particularly distasteful. And then he spins a conspiracy theory about why all this is happening to him.

I am not the only person to question Sandy Hook. And I legitimately asked those questions because I had concerns. And I resent the fact that the media and the corporate lawyers and the establishment of the Democratic Party tried to make this my identity, brought it out, constantly repeated it, tricked me into debating it with them so they could say that I was injuring people. And I see the parties that continue to bring this up and drag this down into the mud is the real villains. The conscious villains attempting to destroy the First Amendment in the process.

I do not consider myself to be that villain. I could have done a better job in hindsight. And I would apologize for that. But I've seen the very same corporate media and lawyers continue to say that I'm saying all these things and exaggerating and using it as the First Amendment. I think that's very dangerous and despicable. Mr. Jones, do you think I'm a corporate lawyer? Well, I know full well that when Hillary Clinton lost the election is when I was a lawyer.

And I'm like, hey, I think Sandy Hook happened. And you and others continue in the news. I remember when you first did this lawsuit, you're like, all Jones needs to do is say sorry to parents. And I'm like, I am sorry that this is all but out of context. And I believe your kids died. And that was all ignored. So I've seen the real disingenuousness.

And the fact that this is all just cold-blooded, you know, will fit because Hillary lost the election. So do you think I worked for Hillary Clinton or something? Or George Sose gives me money or something like that? Well, I mean, I know this is what Hillary lost. The light switch went on. I've never been sued. I got sued a bunch.

And then you've got all the corporate media working in working in tandem. And I know you're working with the Connecticut case and doing all that and triangulating all that stuff. So let's not let's not. And there's going to be some other things coming down the road where all that will come out. When were you sued? I think it was early last year.

Yeah. What other things, Alex? You're in a half after Hillary Clinton lost. But they hadn't ever put the final report out. You needed the report. They never would put the report out. You've got to have the report out. The report came out a month before you sued me.

Okay, Mr. Jeff. Wait, what report? The official Sandy Hook report. What incident issued the report? It was put out by the local state and the federal government. So you were going to sit here today and deny that there has been an official Sandy Hook report, books of it, online since December 2013. There have been some redacted reports put out, but it was a big deal to the Connecticut

Supreme Court. It's a hugely litigated situation of this being so suppressed. Okay. I do love, again, that laughing at him. Wait, what? Yeah, that's my favorite moment that's ever been. Because you could see him just being like, yeah, you're rambling on. Let's move this on.

The report came out. Wait, what report? What are you talking about? What are you talking about? You almost got me. I also love that, like, who put out the report? And Alex's response is the state, local, and federal government. All three at the same time?

All three at the same time? Are they working in tandem? Yeah, that's ridiculous. So we get to the issue of profit in this next clip and the idea that Alex is making money off of these Sandy Hook narratives that he's putting out that we've all seen throughout all this. He can't defend in the light of day. And if he has to, the clip is edited, or it's Wolfgang Halbig's fault.

We were just going off what he said. And he tries to obfuscate here about the idea that he's making money off this bullshit. You've made money from every single one of these broadcasts we saw today, right? No, we actually lose money on really controversial stuff. We can actually see it. Oh, so you can produce that to me? Absolutely. We'd love to.

Supplements you sell, too, with these videos, correct? No, advertisements separate from the news. Well, I mean, in these news broadcasts, you advertise the sale of supplements, right? The two don't go together. How do you mean they don't go together? You're talking about the news, and you put the news down, and all of a sudden you're talking about bone broth, and male vitality, and fluoride-free toothpaste, and everything else.

Well, they're talking about W&Ds. Hold on, Mr. John. And then you pick that back down, and you pick up the news, and you start talking about it in the same video, correct? It's like saying the Super Bowl goes to, and the Super Bowl has Budweiser ads on the walls. Yeah, NBC makes money off of its broadcasting, doesn't it? Oops. But technically, that's not how our advertising is separate from what is going on during the

program. We don't do product placement, and so no, the answer is the same as before it was ever sued, lost money. So, I'm excited for him to produce evidence of that at all. But also, the fucking balls, the fucking balls of this, like, the advertising and the content are separate. Completely separate. And then the idea that his analog is like the Super Bowl, and there's ads in product

placement, it's such a bad argument, because exactly what he said, they make money off of it. Well, what you don't realize is that Alex Jones's pill company pays him for each paid ad on his own show. So when he goes to an ad pivot, sure, they're for his own products, but it's a separate company. That actually might make sense and might be a better way of doing it, so you can protect yourself from exactly the situation.

Yeah. That might be a smart move. Stupid, crazy. Stupid, stupid, stupid, and crazy, crazy, crazy. So, we have two more clips left, and the first one, we will witness Alex being an unspeakable level of awful, and it almost flies under the radar because of how awful this is. And then the last clip, we will see why it doesn't really matter, which is kind of a downer, but that's kind of what we do.

All right. So here's the first clip where Alex is incredibly terrible. You would agree with me that some damage happens. You break something, you cause something to be lost, you hurt somebody, whether it's intentional or whether it's a mistake, there's consequences for that. People should be accountable for the people they hurt. Good work, Lawrence. Well, sometimes people claim they've been hurt and they haven't been.

So you have to look at the agenda behind things. You have to balance things about why is the mainstream media alive so much, why have governments not so much to affect the public? It doesn't believe what they're told anymore, and we're going to criminalize questioning. So, that's fucked up. You know, the inverse must be true. What? I don't want to go down that road, but I'm curious.

No, Alex. The inverse must be true. Some people say they've been hurt when they have been. Some people who have been hurt say they haven't been hurt. Right. All of these things are, I guess, true. Yeah. I mean, if he wants to speak in the general, like the entire experience of the entire universe,

yes, there are some people who have cried wolf. One of them is probably Alex. I was going to say, currently right now, he's insisting that he's the victim of all this stuff. Right. Now, the problem is that you're in a deposition about lying about Sandy Hook families that have caused them a tremendous amount of grief. So when you say something like some people have said they've been hurt but haven't, you can't take that outside of the context of why you're in this deposition that is very heavily

implying that some of these people who are the victims and the family members of victims of this horrible tragedy are lying about the pain that they're in. Yeah. That's unspeakably fucked up. I think on some level that indicates a brain state and a position that is worse than him calling these people actors. Yeah. Because if they're actors.

I mean, he might as well have just said that Sandy Hook was fake again. Oh, yeah. Under oath. He might as well have just done it. You might as well just go all out. It's tantamount to that. Earlier when he was saying that, yeah, I still think that there's some fucked up things. He's waffling about what specifically he believes is up.

I mean, that's nothing compared to this sort of thing at the end here. This is the headline. Not his psychosis bullshit. Right. The idea that he's implying that some people are like in some way pretending they're hurt when they're not, only to attack him. Yeah. That's fucked up.

And his earlier statement. People didn't be sued for that. Yeah, probably. No, that's probably an actual moment there. But even his previous like, I still have some questions about Sandy Hook does leave open for him the idea that, well, they either they had what they had coming to him or they were just, you know, casualties of war. And we're still going after the bad guys.

And these people are immaterial. I'm not sure. They're just side, yeah. I'm not sure, but whatever it is, it's bad. That's fucked up. So now here's our last clip and why it doesn't matter. This is how the deposition ends. Same.

The school is closed and was closed for years. That's not questioning. That's a statement of fact, Mr. Jones. Isn't it? Good work, Byron. I was going off what other people were saying and the fact that the records were not forthcoming and the Hartford current headline. Why is there a cover up?

Why are no documents being released? Why is it taking so long? Headline. EMTs weren't allowed in the building. That's not a question, Mr. Jones. That's a statement, correct? Good work, Byron. And again, that was my going off with someone else who I believe to be a credible expert was saying.

Mr. Jones, are you finally prepared to admit that you have indeed caused these families a substantial amount of pain? Are you prepared to admit that? I am not prepared to sign on to whatever you and the mainstream media make up about me. All right, Mr. Jones, that'll have to be it. I'll see you next time. There is no shame. There is no ability to wrestle with the consequences of actions. And so it's almost pointless to attempt to shame, which is why if that was all this was, I would say that this is a failure of a deposition or something like that.

But I think because of the approaches that were made in terms of taking the angle of like the work you do at Info Wars is fundamentally flawed. You never check anything and making him sort of talk about that. I think that's a fantastic approach. Similarly, pointing out things that he clearly doesn't know about but should and introduce the question of if you knew about this, that's a problem. If you don't know about this, that's a problem. Those sorts of things are really salient good ways to approach Alex. So even though we come to the end and it's this like you got the receipts, you got the evidence, he doesn't give a shit. I'm not going to admit I did anything wrong.

I don't care. I didn't cause them any pain or whatever. Like just because that is a fizzle, it doesn't mean that there's not some pieces that are valuable with them. Well, there's no way the attorney went in there thinking that he was going to get a final say. No, of course not. His expectations were of course adjusted appropriately and he got a lot of material good out of it. I would say he probably considers that a job well done. Yeah.

And when I saw... Although he does probably wish he had punched a E-knock. Probably. Yeah. When I saw this deposition come out, like I saw the people posting about the videos like, oh, this is going to be a disaster. Or, you know, before I got into it and started watching it and looked into some things, I thought that there was a criminal penalty for lying in like a civil deposition. You would think... And so when I saw like he had to sit for this, I was like, oh my god, you know, that was the first thought I had.

And then the second thought I had was like, this is probably going to be a dud. The approach is going to be a disaster. It's going to be useless. And to, you know, to actually go through it and see like, it's kind of a mix. And I think it is pretty valuable. It's heartening in some ways. And at the same time, seeing the way that so many people are covering it with the lead of it being the psychosis kind of thing is disheartening. Yeah, that's a bummer.

And so I live in the exact same space I lived in for the last two years of the show, which is like, there's signs of things. I'm like, all right. And then things are like, I think that I feel rusty about doing this show. I think we got through it pretty good. But I think that, you know, we'll get our sea legs back as we as we go along. But this has been fun. Yeah, absolutely. I have missed this.

Yeah, me too. After like after losing after being fired and then us going on vacation and not having any dates booked for this week. It's been literally, I used to work three jobs. I used to work from 8am until 2am. And for the past week, I've had nothing to do with Jordan is trying to say is he's written six novels. I have written a lot of all work and no play makes Jack and Del boy, but I'm not written just full of scratch. Scratches created three new languages, mostly symbol based. Yeah.

For anybody who's curious about what happened with the job, I'll post something here shortly after. Yeah, yeah. But it'll be it'll be up. It won't be on our website. It'll be on a separate thing, but it'll be coming soon. Yeah. Also some really big stuff will be coming soon. We have an announcement.

We got some announcements shortly. Oh, we got some. We got some good stuff to be able to make those announcements today, but we're going to have to hold off. But it is super weird to like have that break and then come back and we're covering material that's so different. You know, it's a deposition. Yeah. Yeah. So the audio is not from his show and you're seeing a completely different Alex, but it's the same person.

You know, it's very it's very weird, but it's a little meta to listen to clips of Alex's show through a clip of a deposition on our show. And then to be rusty and then on top of that, the like unfamiliar. Man, you were rusty. I was fucking gold. Come on. So yeah, we'll be back on Friday with another ride. Absolutely. Okay.

Rusty. That was a rusty ride for sure. Yeah. But until then we have a website. It's knowledgefight.com. We do. We have a Twitter account. It's that knowledge underscore fight.

I have my own now. It's a go to bed Jordan. Go to bed Jordan. That's true. We will be at Facebook. Indeed. We've got it. We'll be at the Facebook on Friday nights at two.

Everybody come on round. We have a group. It's called go home and tell your brother you're brilliant. And then we're on iTunes and such. Indeed we are. You could subscribe, leave a review, et cetera, share all that stuff. I question my decision to intentionally not know the name of this attorney, this prosecuting attorney.

But whatever, I made that decision and I'll stick by it. But I will say that he, whoever he is, probably never killed again. Almost certainly. Now this guy, he's questioning in this deposition. This guy, this Alex Jones guy, he probably technically has killed a guy. 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.