Saturday, October 15, 2022

Sandy Hook: Follow the Money

Editor's note: Some background information into the events related to Sandy Hook are required reading to understand better what is going on with the Jones operation. This is what happens to investigators if they question any future events: You will be taken to task in this case for almost $1 billion (fake amount/s) and you will be destroyed. If you don't go along with the official narrative you will be hit with a massive lawsuit. This goes with the reporting and investigation of the global Covid fake pandemic (based on a real bioweapon that was released) and related injections. If you don't shut the f*ck up you are going to be hit with a massive lawsuit. If you want "free speech" it will cost you big time.
 
Alex Jones' Second Fake Trial
 
James Fetzer - Truth Is Irrelevant to Alex Jones' Show Trial
________

Source: Gateway Pundit

Robert Barnes Interview – Stunning Claims in Alex Jones Case (Video)

By Jim Hoft | September 27, 2022 | 220 Comments

Robert Barnes is a Los Angeles lawyer. TGP has reported on Robert the "giant slayer" over the years. As part of Alex Jones' legal team, Robert Barnes has embraced the view that the Sandy Hook lawsuits brought against Jones are part of a conspiracy to cripple the First Amendment.

In a recent interview with David Freiheit (Viva Frei), Barnes provides the best explanations of what's really going on. This discussion starts at the 1:35:00 minute mark of this video and lasts 12 minutes. Below are key interview comments made by attorney Barnes, some are flat-out stunning.


Barnes says the real grifters of Sandy Hook are Elizabeth Williamson of The New York Times and attorney Chris Mattei who represents the families. Williamson has made a career out of Sandy Hook with nearly 40 articles just this year. Chasing this story for a decade has put her on TV, on radio, in books, and so on. Hundreds of articles have also been published by the NYT since the 2012 incident. This defamation trial is being held in Connecticut Superior Court by Judge Barbara Bellis.

1:35:45 – Barnes explains: Alex Jones almost never denied Sandy Hook happened. (On his show) he answered two callers' questions. It wasn't tied to any advertising at all, at any time. Why is Jones not allowed to explain this (in court)? None of his financial success had anything to do with Sandy Hook.

The main evidence of this is two things. Over 99% of everything InfoWars published and broadcast actually said that Sandy Hook happened. Their Sandy Hook coverage was less than 1% of all coverage during the time frame. Those are critical facts that tell you if he made money or not. If you imputed value to it, this would be 1/1000th of 1%. The plaintiff’s have all his financial information, the dates he made those statements, and you could tie it in (as profiting). So why haven't they?
1:36:54Because if you review this info, and I have, he didn't make money. Sandy Hook was a net loser for Jones. They can't show any connection that Jones made money off of it. In fact, when you look at the details, challenging Sandy Hook cost him money, and it cost him supporters. Why are these facts not coming out? Because Judge Bellis said Jones CAN NOT tell the jury how little he covered Sandy Hook. He CAN NOT tell the jury how he didn’t make money off Sandy Hook. He CAN NOT tell the jury how it cost him, more than it helped him. He CAN NOT tell the jury how 99% of InfoWars coverage said Sandy Hook happened.

1:38:20They have to build a lie for the jury to buy, in order to get a big check, for things that don't even relate to compensatory damages. The Plaintiffs are allowed to present all the evidence that suggest he’s rich and famous off of Sandy Hook. But Jones is not allowed to explain he's in bankruptcy, didn't make money off Sandy Hook, and hardly ever covered it. Why is he not allowed (to say this in front of the jury) – because the truth would lead to a low verdict.

Please go to Gateway Pundit to read more.
________

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Looking into our circumstances...