|
Thorgot posted:There's a new Alex Jones adjacent article in the NYT about Gottlieb and his defamation cases, especially the one they won against Giuliani. He did the same with Chobani yogurt.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 14:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Gotta actually work to do vacation I guess he more accurately coast to coasts
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
madmatt112 posted:The AJ trial moment of glory will be top 10 “moments (unrelated to my direct family)” of all time, possibly top 5. It was surreal to watch it happen live. Honestly, the entirety of both trials was surreal to watch live because they were such incredible trainwrecks. Some of the worst lawyering I have ever witnessed. Fresh graduates do not gently caress up the fundamentals like Reynal and Pattis did repeatedly. My favorite moment of the trial to illustrate this is Scarlett Lewis’ monologue vs Alex. Reynal doesn’t do poo poo to object to Lewis monologuing and lecturing Alex. As soon as Alex gets the slightest off script, Bankston objects immediately. Alex even makes a quip like: ‘Oh so she gets to monologue but I can’t speak. Huh, fair trial.’ Then to watch the HBO documentary and find out Reynal is a true believer too. The Trump and Guilliani trials are similar clown shows too so maybe these really are the best attorneys that will represent the far right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2024 19:32
|
|
|
Bankston threw out a guess that Reynal didn't want to look the badguy by objecting, even though he agrees that Reynal should have objected. Also, Reynal was something like the tenth lawyer to take on Jones' case. The only one that Ogden and Bankston expressed any respect for was named Drew or Doug or something like that. I wish that they'd shown off Enoch being an absolute shithead during the depositions. I'd have chucked a stapler at his head had I been in the room.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 01:12
|
|
|
It's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Objections claiming that a grieving mother is non-responsive when she's on her fifth sentence talking about what it was like to bury her child make the jury hate you, because you're cutting off a grieving mother. Reynal let it go, Alex got pissed because he felt like he should be able to do the same ("So she's allowed to talk and I'm not?"), told Norm to make sure it didn't happen again in the second trail, and Norm came off like a monster for cutting off grieving mothers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 01:16
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:It's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Objections claiming that a grieving mother is non-responsive when she's on her fifth sentence talking about what it was like to bury her child make the jury hate you, because you're cutting off a grieving mother. Reynal let it go, Alex got pissed because he felt like he should be able to do the same ("So she's allowed to talk and I'm not?"), told Norm to make sure it didn't happen again in the second trail, and Norm came off like a monster for cutting off grieving mothers. To add to this, a lot of times there's not a ton of point in objecting to questions that are simply about the form of the question or anything that can easily just be fixed by asking a different way because you do just look like a dick and you're not actually accomplishing anything, like you're not keeping anything out Everything she said in her monologue could have been gotten at by asking her parts of it A good example is when Bankston did object to Alex monologuing and Reynal just immediately fixed it by saying "Do you want to apologize to Ms. Lewis here today" (which Bankston could maybe object to again as leading but this could also just be fixed by asking "Is there anything you want to say to Ms. Lewis today" etc.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 01:26
|
|
|
Man this movie is brutal. Really lays bare how much companies like facebook and youtube have hosed society up. People like Alex have always existed, but capitalism has given them a megaphone like never before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 01:59
|
|
|
Can't believe they got Wolfgang and Reynal in this. Or that lady that argued with pozner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 02:18
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:oh jesus please do not let alex jones’s next career move be asmr streaming on twitch I can't listen to Knowledge Fight anymore because his speech has become so garbled and phlegmy, it's disgusting. CLEAR YOUR loving THROAT MAN Sir Tonk posted:Man this movie is brutal. Really lays bare how much companies like facebook and youtube have hosed society up. People like Alex have always existed, but capitalism has given them a megaphone like never before. a recent Qanon Anonymous had this guy on who had a great line about social media https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/696775/the-politics-of-fear-by-arthur-goldwag/ quote:It wasn't so long ago that brick sized transistor radios seemed like miracles of miniaturization. he also said he had no doubt the author of the Turner Diaries would have a Jones sized audience if he existed today
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 02:22
|
|
|
Pennsylvanian posted:Bankston threw out a guess that Reynal didn't want to look the badguy by objecting, even though he agrees that Reynal should have objected. It was Brad Reeves*. He was a totally naive but otherwise okay baby lawyer who worked for Alex for the hottest second before bouncing. Probably because of moral issues, but that’s on assumption rather than specific information beyond Alex being Alex and the lawyers still respecting him. If you listen to the Formulaic Objections episodes, he’s Alex’s lawyer whose voice cracks like the teenager on The Simpsons when he objects. *I remember the name clearly but could be wrong about the spelling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 03:48
|
|
|
Reeves chimed in saying that Daria was "doing the best she can" during a deposition where she was markedly not doing the best she could. Also a later lawyer tried to throw him under the bus by claiming that he withheld documentation during discovery.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 03:51
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:Reeves chimed in saying that Daria was "doing the best she can" during a deposition where she was markedly not doing the best she could. Yes, Brittany Paz. And Bankston left the room, called Brad Reeves and confirmed she was lying as part of the same deposition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 04:10
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:Reeves chimed in saying that Daria was "doing the best she can" during a deposition where she was markedly not doing the best she could. Working for insane narcissists seems impossibly unrewarding unless you’re a true believer. Even when they pay you on time they just villainize you later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 04:38
|
|
|
Durf posted:I can't listen to Knowledge Fight anymore because his speech has become so garbled and phlegmy, it's disgusting. CLEAR YOUR loving THROAT MAN Welp, that’s what you get for corporatizing your knowledge-well and prioritizing commerce and advertising instead of truthful information Most goons probably lived thru the best internet, lots of freedom + relatively low commerce + no loving algorithms to keep you glued (sorry engaged) to the screen
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 04:49
|
|
|
Comfy Fleece Sweater posted:Welp, that’s what you get for corporatizing your knowledge-well and prioritizing commerce and advertising instead of truthful information The gently caress are you talking about? Go back and read the archives from the early 2000s. This place became a haven because of the paywall and it was STILL the origin of half the internet's worst stories. The internet has always been awful. We just got used to goatse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 06:21
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:The gently caress are you talking about? Something awful is not the entirety of the internet. The whole internet is at least twice as big as SA even with archives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 08:53
|
|
|
Guys who built internet culture: “man, this sucks. Whoever did this is an rear end in a top hat”
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 09:20
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:The internet has always been awful. We just got used to goatse. Mods, please replace “the internet makes you stupid” with this, tia
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 09:54
|
|
|
Froghammer posted:It's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. Objections claiming that a grieving mother is non-responsive when she's on her fifth sentence talking about what it was like to bury her child make the jury hate you, because you're cutting off a grieving mother. Reynal let it go, Alex got pissed because he felt like he should be able to do the same ("So she's allowed to talk and I'm not?"), told Norm to make sure it didn't happen again in the second trail, and Norm came off like a monster for cutting off grieving mothers. I know it's cliché to say this but in all honesty you kind of have to be emotionless or even sociopathic to practice at least this kind of law effectively. You have to be able to put aside your personal emotions when walking into a courtroom and do things like cut off grieving mothers when that's actually what you should do procedurally. Whoever hired or is considering hiring you doesn't really care about "oh they were mean", they care about the case being well-fought and them getting the best chance in the courtroom, and believe it or not this holds true even for cases that the lawyer in question technically lost. A retired lawyer who teaches a course here says he got plenty of repeat business from clients that he initially lost cases for, because they recognized he did a very good job in those cases and knew what he was doing, and ultimately some cases are just "losers" but a good lawyer can still minimize penalties. Where things mainly go sideways for clients like Alex and others in the right-wing sphere is that they have horrible attitudes and egos and don't listen to anything their lawyers say. This is also very common in divorces that reach the "we need lawyers" stage (and it applies for both men and women as clients), to the point where divorce lawyers recognize red flags like "wait they're a year or longer into legal proceedings, are hiring me out of the blue now and don't have cash flow issues, that means this client is a pain in the rear end who's burned bridges on their previous counsel" and make decisions based on that. That's really the main thing that impacts the quality of legal representation they're reduced to, if people like Alex and Trump followed their lawyer's instructions even slightly more than they currently do they'd have access to some top-tier shark lawyers and could easily have much lower judgments against them. Then again, someone who's able to listen to advice wouldn't have gotten themselves into the predicaments they respectively did (e.g. Alex Jones probably wouldn't have gone to court if he'd just stopped talking about Sandy Hook within a week or two of it happening and didn't get into the grieving family's faces).
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 13:11
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:Working for insane narcissists seems impossibly unrewarding unless you’re a true believer. Even when they pay you on time they just villainize you later. Nah there's no up side to working with narcissists. If you're normal you're going to eventually become their enemy when reality pisses them off and they need a target. If you're a true believer, narcissists are really good at figuring out interpersonal power dynamics so they'll just have contempt for you at best and more likely assign zero value at all to you as a person then treat you as a disposable tool for their personal goals. If you come back (or are never able to leave like, say, their child) then you become a different kind of value-less tool, an emotional punching bag for their frustrations whenever they need a pick-me-up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 13:48
|
|
|
univbee posted:I know it's cliché to say this but in all honesty you kind of have to be emotionless or even sociopathic to practice at least this kind of law effectively. You have to be able to put aside your personal emotions when walking into a courtroom and do things like cut off grieving mothers when that's actually what you should do procedurally. It's not about what they care about, it's what the jury cares about. Cutting people off in ways that are going to just get immediately fixed by the other lawyer and that don't keep any incriminating testimony out at all could just make you look like a dick which actually could matter when the jury is solely there to determine how much poo poo your client is going to eat Absolutely you should still object to things that could be kept out like hearsay or speculation or whatever though, but I think not cutting the grieving mother off is a perfectly valid tactic
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 17:08
|
|
|
Durf posted:I can't listen to Knowledge Fight anymore because his speech has become so garbled and phlegmy, it's disgusting. CLEAR YOUR loving THROAT MAN turns out "the turner diaries" despite being legendary, are just as poorly written as modern day chud books. which means yeah, dude was just one mass communication device away from being alex jones
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 17:30
|
|
|
Mulaney Power Move posted:Yes. yeah. the sad thing is alot of "wild life refuge" are basicaly that. obviously not all, but a decent amount are just weird lovely "zoos" run by bored rich psychos like joe who basicaly dont care for the animals at all and treat the workers worse, then when complaints come out or the state gets involved, they cry about big state opression and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 17:33
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah. the sad thing is alot of "wild life refuge" are basicaly that. obviously not all, but a decent amount are just weird lovely "zoos" run by bored rich psychos like joe who basicaly dont care for the animals at all and treat the workers worse, then when complaints come out or the state gets involved, they cry about big state opression and poo poo. from car dealerships to ranchers. the biggest problems in the country come from comfortable people with too much money and time. people who use their privilege to scream about how oppressed they are
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
Is there a name or term for the current trend of plucking headlines that can be twisted to suit ones narrative while trusting that others will never look into the article the headline was lifted from? Alex's whole model of riffing off stackies seems to predate Twitter, but matches perfectly with how the Internet currently operates on a sliver thin facade of fabricated reality, completely devoid of depth or substance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:38
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah. the sad thing is alot of "wild life refuge" are basicaly that. obviously not all, but a decent amount are just weird lovely "zoos" run by bored rich psychos like joe who basicaly dont care for the animals at all and treat the workers worse, then when complaints come out or the state gets involved, they cry about big state opression and poo poo. I'd bet money the good ones are held together by a single passionate person powered by bloody mindedness and righteous venom. As soon as the lynchpin quits everything starts falling apart.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:46
|
|
|
Pennsylvanian posted:I wish that they'd shown off Enoch being an absolute shithead during the depositions. I'd have chucked a stapler at his head had I been in the room. I think it was Formulaic Objections 15 that had the first Rob Dew deposition, in which Enoch is being a complete rear end in a top hat (as he was in the Rob Jacobson depo) and Barnes didn't stop him despite Barnes being the active defence lawyer in the situation, not Enoch. Later on, Barnes starts whining that Mark is making faces and giggling despite not being the active lawyer on the other side. I still can't decide if Enoch was a bigger rear end in a top hat or if Barnes was a bigger whiner at that moment. Bill was correct by responding with, "Really? Now?!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 21:00
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:that's most businesses run by the idle rich. Oh i dont disgree. I just mean in general. i own exotic animals and while i am not a great owner, i at least know not to torture them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 21:46
|
|
|
Scam Likely posted:Is there a name or term for the current trend of plucking headlines that can be twisted to suit ones narrative while trusting that others will never look into the article the headline was lifted from?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:25
|
|
|
Was talking about the case with a friend who also listens to KF, and I wasn't aware that a bunch of Sandy Hoaxers tried to sue Bankston: https://www.reddit.com/r/KnowledgeFight/comments/16fa7ol/by_popular_demand_here_are_the_pleadings_from_the/ Reddit thread where he answers questions about it in the comment section. It didn't go well for the nutbags trying to sue him. quote:I contacted Mr. Bankston, whom I had never met and never even heard of, asking if he would talk to me. He responded, “Never contact me again, you weirdo, LOL.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:11
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:Oh i dont disgree. I just mean in general. i own exotic animals and while i am not a great owner, i at least know not to torture them. How many drifters have you butchered to feed your tarantulas?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:29
|
|
|
quote:I contacted Mr. Bankston, whom I had never met and never even heard of, asking if he would talk to me. He responded, “Never contact me again, you weirdo, LOL.” What a chad
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:36
|
|
|
How much leeway do civil lawyers have in turning down clients? I vaguely remember that criminal-defence lawyers are supposed to have ‘taxi rank’ ethics where you take the client that’s next in line and do your best job to defend them no matter how odious you find them personally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:50
|
|
|
quote:asking if he would talk to me Should’ve asked F. Andino Reynal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 03:07
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:How much leeway do civil lawyers have in turning down clients? I vaguely remember that criminal-defence lawyers are supposed to have ‘taxi rank’ ethics where you take the client that’s next in line and do your best job to defend them no matter how odious you find them personally. I think a judge can technically drag any lawyer in and say “This person is your client now” but that doesn’t happen much. I’m not a lawyer so this is all tv knowledge though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 03:39
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:How much leeway do civil lawyers have in turning down clients? I vaguely remember that criminal-defence lawyers are supposed to have ‘taxi rank’ ethics where you take the client that’s next in line and do your best job to defend them no matter how odious you find them personally. As you say, a civil lawyer can pretty much say no to whoever they want
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 04:06
|
|
|
Outrail posted:How many drifters have you butchered to feed your tarantulas? I don’t own tarantulas, but several.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 04:11
|
|
|
Scam Likely posted:Is there a name or term for the current trend of plucking headlines that can be twisted to suit ones narrative while trusting that others will never look into the article the headline was lifted from? If you’re a researcher you call it The Woozle Effect and if you’re a journalist it’s circular reporting but people have been saying poo poo for a while.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 05:24
|
|
|
Thanks, that's exactly what I was after. The Woozle effect is a perfect description of right wing media and AJ specifically. The Winnie the Pooh comic is so fitting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 13:06 |
|
|
Scam Likely posted:Thanks, that's exactly what I was after. The Woozle effect is a perfect description of right wing media and AJ specifically. The Winnie the Pooh comic is so fitting. I appreciate any excuse to work a Winnie the Pooh into a serious academic conversation. Years ago in another life I tried to get people to call certain languages "jagulars" because they're "very good droppers", but somehow that didn't catch on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 16:00
|
|