Quote (JohnnyMcCoy @ Oct 12 2022 08:31pm)

i reject this concept that someone is responsible for stupid actions of stupid people

i am not responsible, if i tell you to jump here in this forum and you end up doing it

free speech also protects complete bullshit opinions (it should at least)

all things considered alex jones brought this on himself, the writing was on the wall for years, how could this guy stay in the US to let this happen to him

should have been gone years ago

Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Oct 13 2022 05:43am)

You didn't answer the question.

If I did that with a huge platform and specifically targeted you, should I be liable?

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Oct 12 2022 07:18pm)

can we sue all the journalists over the false reporting on the jesse smoulette case? you should see the hate when i put a MAGA hat on. just 1 of numerous examples where this can be applied in the future now.
i don't mean to badger you too hard saying such, i don't sit where ppl would expect me to on this subject. the can of worms should be opened already.


he has been going through bankruptcy procedures along with other involved companies. he was not allowed to speak on those issues. strangely, the judge ordered he answer a related question after ordering him not to answer these questions. so AJ had to remind her that she has been blocking him from speaking on the subjects.

my point on damages being. where is the direct correlation of anyone causing damage, to the words Alex Jones have said? i don't recall the prosecution bringing even a "single witness" to state their actions were because they watched Alex Jones.
i skipped some parts of it, so if i'm wrong lmk.

Quote (duffman316 @ Oct 12 2022 08:39pm)

Its a question of harm. I don't believe the false reports around juicy smoliet harmed anyone. Spreading misinformation about the shooting caused people to issue death threats to families that lost their children.

Quote (duffman316 @ Oct 12 2022 11:39pm)

Its a question of harm. I don't believe the false reports around juicy smoliet harmed anyone. Spreading misinformation about the shooting caused people to issue death threats to families that lost their children.

Quote

On January 29, 2019, American actor Jussie Smollett approached the Chicago Police Department and reported a hate crime that he had staged earlier that morning.[2][3] He planned the hate crime with two Nigerian brothers, Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo, who had worked as extras on the set of television drama Empire, in which Smollett was a cast member. During the staged attack, which took place on East Lower North Water Street in Chicago's Streeterville neighborhood, the disguised brothers shouted racial and homophobic slurs while one poured bleach on Smollett and the other placed a noose around his neck. In addition to falsely reporting that he had been attacked by two unknown individuals, Smollett described one of them as a white male.[4][3] He also told police the men shouted "MAGA country" during the attack, a reference to the Trumpist political slogan "Make America Great Again".[5] The brothers later testified that Smollett staged the attack near a surveillance camera so that video of it could be publicized.[6]

Quote

Donald Trump MAGA Hat Attacks, Intolerance: List of Reported Incidents Against People Wearing President's Caps
BY MARIA PEREZ ON 3/11/19 AT 9:55 AM ED

Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Oct 12 2022 07:21pm)

One of the people who stalked the families was charged and part of her sentencing was not being allowed to watch Infowars since she said that was where she got the idea.

You just aren't informed on this case. Which is fine. Lots of people aren't informed on specific things. But please inform yourself before making claims.

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Oct 12 2022 11:42pm)

should i assume you are unable to verify this claim then?

Quote (duffman316 @ Oct 13 2022 06:39am)

Its a question of harm. I don't believe the false reports around juicy smoliet harmed anyone. Spreading misinformation about the shooting caused people to issue death threats to families that lost their children.

Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Oct 13 2022 12:44am)

Right now I can't find anything about infowars since it's all news about the recent verdicts even searching the relavent material. Search engines have turned into click engines after all.

Quote (tagged4nothing @ Oct 13 2022 12:01am)

i won't knock you for that tbh. i tried looking twice and i cannot find it. this does however, leave me with doubts about it's validity if it wasn't brought forward in the trial.
if you are seeking compensation for damages, it's again, up to the plaintiff(s) to prove such damages.

i am not fully against the defamation case, but i have problems with how the case went. exampling again but not limiting, being ordered not to mention that you have a first amendment right of freedom of speech in defamation case. how is that a normal restriction?

Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Oct 13 2022 01:20am)

Because defamation is, by definition, a limitation on your freedom of speech.

Arguing that it's your first amendment right is like arguing that a murder charge for shooting somebody is wrong because you have a second amendment right.

It's irrelevant because the thing you are being accused of is explicitly not allowed under the theory of that right and you aren't allowed to win by confusing the jury about the constitution. You have to win on the merits.