In the ongoing lawsuit filed by the Sandy Hook parents, there have been many accusations that Alex Jones inspired vicious online attacks against the families of the victims, some of which forced them to move multiple times.
The lawyers for Jones have come up with an interesting defense.
And that is that their client should simply not be believed.
Courtesy of Texas Monthly:
His defense, meanwhile, argues that while Jones says that Cooper and De La Rosa faked the interview, and provides evidence for that claim that draws upon Jones’s own authority with video production, Jones didn’t intend to speak factually—and, in fact, no reasonable person would expect that Jones spoke factually on his show.
“There can simply be no statement of fact when Mr. Jones views a video of Anderson Cooper and provides his commentary and opinion with regard to possibilities as to why Mr. Cooper’s nose disappeared on the video, all the while directing the viewers’ attention to the very video about which he opined,” a motion to dismiss the suit filed by Jones’s attorney argues. “No reasonable reader or listener would interpret Mr. Jones’ statements regarding the possibility of a ‘blue-screen’ being used as a verifiably false statement of fact, and even if it is verifiable as false, the entire context in which it was made discloses that the statements are mere opinions ‘masquerading as a fact.’”
That may be the best argument available to Jones in defending the suit, but it also puts him once more in a position where his lawyers are arguing in court that the things he says during his broadcasts aren’t true—and, in fact, that any “reasonable reader or listener” would conclude that Jones, when he makes statements like “the green screen isn’t set right,” isn’t speaking factually. If Jones isn’t to be taken seriously when making statements like that, though, it becomes harder to understand what, exactly, Infowars is supposed to be informing its audience of.
Now the interesting thing about this defense is that it is eerily similar to the one Jones’ lawyers used during his custody battle with his wife last year:
At a recent pretrial hearing, attorney Randall Wilhite told state District Judge Orlinda Naranjo that using his client Alex Jones’ on-air Infowars persona to evaluate Alex Jones as a father would be like judging Jack Nicholson in a custody dispute based on his performance as the Joker in “Batman.”
“He’s playing a character,” Wilhite said of Jones. “He is a performance artist.”
Okay so here is a thing that separates the Left Wing from the Right Wing.
If we had been getting our information from a guy who suddenly stated, more than once, that he was full of shit, we would STOP listening to him.
However, on the Right, Jones is joined by Bill O’Reilly who claimed that he was playing the part of a provocateur and Glenn Beck who called himself a “rodeo clown,” and yet people continued to tune in to both of their shows for years afterward.
It’s like people on the Right do not care if they get their information from confessed liars, just so long as they tell them what they want to hear.