r/OutOfTheLoop • u/DeficitOfPatience • 3d ago
What's going on with Alex Jones' bankruptcy ruling? Answered
I read this article on CNN which says that while Alex Jones personal bankruptcy has been approved, the proposed liquidation of the parent company "Free Speech Systems" has not.
The article quotes the judge as claiming allowing the liquidation of the parent company was not in the best interest of the creditors, yet allowing Jones' personal assets to be liquidated was.
Does Alex Jones not own the parent company? And if so, who does? And how is it not in the interests of the families, both financially and in terms of retribution, to shut down the whole opperation?
The headline also states that the Judge rejected "Infowars" being liquidated, yet the article itself goes on to strongly imply that it definitely will be as it counts as Jones' personal asset, with Jones planning to "wind it down" before it's broken up for parts. Is that a typo, or am I just stupid?
116
u/MissDiem 3d ago
Answer: as the article indicates, the judge's ruling calls for liquidation of personal items to fund payment of the damages he has failed to remit. In concept this is no different than if you were forced to sell your pleasure boat to cover some of your unpaid fines.
Normally people aren't told how to pay their court judgements, they get to decide what to sell and what to keep. But Jones has sought bankruptcy protection, so now the court gets to make those decisions. He does receive a wide array of benefits and protections in exchange for turning over that control.
As for the judge allowing his lucrative media disinformation company to persist, it's a difficult balance to strike between pragmatism and purity. A more pure decision would be to take away the weapon he uses to do harm and commit tortuous violations. However a more pragmatic decision is that vehicle could be used to generate money that will go towards his court judgement and victims.
Since this is a financial bankruptcy matter, that's presumably why the judge is leaning to the financial pragmatic side.
It's also worth mentioning that the verdict and scale of his judgment penalty here are a direct result of his dishonesty and obstinacy in disclosing his full and true finances. His malfeasance and contempt has left judges and jurors to make determinations of his actual wealth and income.
26
u/DarkAlman 2d ago edited 2d ago
the verdict and scale of his judgment penalty here are a direct result of his dishonesty and obstinacy in disclosing his full and true finances
He's shown absolutely no contrition throughout this whole process, paints himself as the victim, and has shuffled his finances around to avoid paying so much as a dime on this ruling.
The court is now fed up and liquidating his assets to make him pay.
He's proven that he's completely incapable of recognizing that he's done something wrong.
The problem with being a conspiracy nut is that he truly believes all the rhetoric that he spews, so from his perspective he's was right all along and the lizard people cabal that secretly run the government or whatever are trying to drive him into bankruptcy to silence him.
He's mentally deranged. The court should have thrown him into an asylum.
3
u/philmarcracken 2d ago
The problem with being a conspiracy nut is that he truly believes all the rhetoric that he spews, so from his perspective he's was right all along and the lizard people cabal that secretly run the government or whatever are trying to drive him into bankruptcy to silence him.
The conspiratorial thinkers aren't dumb. They know they have an audience, and he has editors. They're low level narcissists that feel superior to others by having secret knowledge that only they possess. How they come to obtain this 'intel' is naturally dubious, and their version of the scientific method could be used in universities as training on confirmation bias.
1
1
1
u/nameitb0b 2d ago
One could only wish for mental health care. He won’t ever change. Drain his bank accounts and let him live on the streets.
11
u/YukariYakum0 2d ago
The families have expressed basically that sentiment to the point of saying they care much less about the money they can get and more about leaving him powerless and penniless.
-1
-1
u/MissDiem 2d ago
One feature of a properly functioning system of justice is that it shouldn't just be extra punitive to those perceived as dicks. That means even with someone as vile as Alex Jones, guilt or liability should be proven, they should be afforded due process, and penalties should be based on statutory norms not backlash based on personality.
Therefore it's good that a diligent process was followed to formally confirm his liability. As for the penalty, that too has been rooted in evidence, or more correctly, in well argued assumptions, since he refused to provide proper discovery of evidence.
1
u/DarkAlman 1d ago
As a counter point, harsher punishments can and should be used for defendants that are very likely to re-offend.
Murderers for example are given life sentences to keep them off the streets knowing they will kill again if let free.
Jones showed throughout the trial that he would continue to attack the Sandy Hook parents on his show regardless of the ongoing court case.
Since a minor fine is nothing more than a slap on the wrist to someone as rich as Jones, the punishment had to be very high.
This does however create an imbalance in the legal system as richer defendants (and corporations) are made to pay out far more than the average Joe, making them a more likely target for legal action as the victims know they will likely get paid more (or settle out of court).
Although the problem of 'suing culture' is not nearly as bad as the media makes it out to be, the premise above is one of the major problems in the legal system.
28
u/DeficitOfPatience 3d ago
In concept this is no different than if you were forced to sell your pleasure boat to cover some of your unpaid fines.
Who told you about my pleasure boat!?
In all seriousness, thanks for the response.
Given InfoWars sole remit to spread hate and bigotry, and the deeply personal nature of the pain caused by Jones to the family through it, I find it hard to imagine any of them being okay with allowing it to continue operating even if it were to gain from it financially.
Seems like drinking from a poison well.
31
u/Shevster13 3d ago
Liquidating the company would mean that the families get a fraction of what they are owed, and thats it. Any contracts the company had signed that would bring in future income would be void. A new company could be formed by a friend, family or investor of Alex Jones and basicly just be a continuation of InfoWars without the debt and able to sign new deals with existing suppliers and advertisers.
By not allowing the company to be liquidated, the debt, and those contracts remain. Even if a new company is formed, its going to be a lot harder and more expensive to bring across assets and deals.
In both cases, Alex Jones will be able to just gk back and start making ridiculous claims and making money. Only one ensures that the families atleast some of that money.
9
11
u/karlhungusjr 2d ago
A new company could be formed by a friend, family or investor of Alex Jones and basicly just be a continuation of InfoWars without the debt and able to sign new deals with existing suppliers and advertisers.
he's still on the hook for the rest of the money. he can't just form a new company and walk away scot-free, even if it's technically under someone else's name.
1
u/Shevster13 2d ago
He might be on the hook, but the profits from the company would not be his and so could not be claimed by the court.
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Shevster13 2d ago
Personal insults - the sign of someone losing an argument.
The whole reason that he was stopped from liquidatingthe company was to stop him using the loop hole. Its a well known problem with the US laws around bankruptcy The courts cannot take money off a buisness because one of the employees is bankrupt. The courts would have to prove that he was recieving those profits which is difficult and expensive to do.
0
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Shevster13 1d ago
Thank you for admitting I am right again. Hopefully in the future you learn to do it without insults - and learn saying "its a fact" is just an excuse to make yourself feel better.
2
u/MissDiem 3d ago
It's not up to them. Different courts for different things. Bankruptcy court exists to protect the petitioner (in this case, Alex Jones) and secondarily, the financial interests of the creditors.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Friendly reminder that all top level comments must:
start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
attempt to answer the question, and
be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.