That makes more sense. So then I’m back to which privilege would apply after the lawyer sent the link out (per that 10 day rule). Probably none. That rule wouldn’t help. The lawyer accidentally served non-privileged responsive documents to the other side. Whoops.
I would like this judge.
I would be very careful not to screw up in front of her, but I like her.
Which is why I really questioned the defense attorney asking for 8 bucks in damages.
Jones is a Republican and therefore gets a free pass to to whatever he wants. It’s the way things are now days. Grovel and accept your new overlords.
I wonder what Jones’ fanbase thinks his profit margins on the crap he sells. But it is hard to believe anybody would send this asshole money to begin with.
Some goofball on Facebook is claiming some of the texts were images of child porn. That’s gotta be too good to be true, right?
Given that Alex Jones himself has commented about the kiddy porn on his phone I’m gonna say . . . Alex Jones assures me he never lies so there is kiddy porn on his phone.
When lawyers found that the electronic metadata included 12 images of child pornography, an apoplectic Jones returned this weekend to his microphone.
“You’re trying to set me up with child porn, I’ll get your ass,” Jones said, going on in the broadcast to pound on a photo of a lawyer for the families named Chris Mattei.
Referring to footage of the Friday and Saturday broadcasts, Judge Bellis noted that Jones’ child-porn tirade went on for 20 solid minutes.
https://www.courthousenews.com/alex-jones-sanctioned-after-calling-child-porn-a-set-up/
That article is from three years ago, and it sounds like someone emailed him the images. Does anyone have any update on that?
edit: never mind, wrong link. I was reading this article, which says that
but the NBC link goes back to the 2019 case, so I think this reporter just fucked up.
Damn it! I’m so used to new news drowning out old news that I didn’t check the date.
Not that the date at the top of the page wasn’t confusing too.
To be fair, there appear to be a lot of reporters and commentators getting confused on that subject. I think probably someone resurfaced that NBC article from 3 years ago, and a second group jumped on it not noting the date, and a third group read the second group’s articles, and here we are.
I’m not expecting this to be a big factor in the J6 Committee, mostly because I have such a low opinion of Alex Jones that I can’t see anyone communicating any damaging data with that fucking clown. I’m prepared to be gleeful if I’m wrong, and there’s a lot of communications with Trump confidantes that hits the fan.
“In the land of the blind clowns, the one eyed man fucking clown is king.”
IOW, given what we know of the conspirators it wouldn’t be a smart bet to think they wouldn’t have been CCing Jones on things.
Does anyone besides me have to stop to think which fat blow-hard supporter of Trump is the subject of THIS particular scandal? I especially confuse Jones with Bannon because of their similar size, shape, and grizzled appearance plus the fact that they are both constantly lying into a microphone at high volume to benefit their hero DJT. Oh, and that they are both attention whores who talk up a big game, make outrageous claims, act defiant, and then get slapped down once in court.
After defense counsel screwed up with passing the data, the notion that they could just ask for everything to be ignored/destroyed and pass a “corrected link” is wrong. The rule is that to rescind access to anything they must specify exactly what, and why it’s privileged - and if a specific claim of privilege is disputed by plaintiff’s counsel, the judge can rule on it. So I don’t think defense’s failure to correct their mistake within 10 days was really a further mistake. There was just nothing they could do at that point. The stuff that they revealed that really mattered to the case was not privileged, so they had no basis to rescind access to it. In fact, this was material they should have revealed in discovery long before. Hence the waffling in front of the judge yesterday about medical records, in the forlorn hope that the judge might ignore the actual rules and rescind access to everything they had mistakenly passed just because it included medical records. (Plaintiff’s counsel had already destroyed the medical records which obviously should not have been revealed and were irrelevant.)
Who is it that you think has too much dignity and good sense to communicate with Jones? Giuliani? Bannon? Trump?
The piece I’m wondering about is this: someone was the liaison between Trump and the Three Percenters and the Oathkeepers. Roger Stone and Alex Jones are both likely candidates for this role, as both had strong ties to Trump and to the militias. If it was Jones, there’s a chance his cell phone contains a crucial puzzle piece that’s been missing so far.
This is also something I’ve wondered about. It looks like the attorneys may have committed malpractice, or even criminal acts, by not releasing these records earlier. If that’s the case, then they probably didn’t want to draw any attention to their fuckup, and certainly didn’t want to claim that their lack of release was deliberate, as they would have had to do if they responded to the plaintiff’s communication. They may have been silent because anything else would have dug their hole deeper.
It’s a good example of the adage, “Never commit more than one crime at a time”. Can you imagine using your phone to organize a coup attempt, when you know you’re in the middle of a trial where they opposing side is trying to subpoena your phone records?
Apparently Alex really was stupid enough to think he’d get away with this.
Exactly so. Clearly they could not specifically revoke access to the stuff that mattered because (a) it was not privileged, and (b) that would simply draw attention to it. Perhaps there was some remote chance that plaintiff’s counsel would not scrutinize the 300GB data dump (which did include irrelevant medical records) carefully enough to find the stuff that mattered. Unlikely with so much at stake, but I think that was their only hope at that point.
Apparently never heard of burner phones.