Alex Jones has returned to Twitter.

[Ȃ̷̛́͌̚͝r̵c̸̛̒͐̅̇]

After 5 years he has returned into the platform of Elon Musk and was praised by Andrew Tate on lifting the 5 year ban.

US is slowly becoming more in of waking up before the presidential election in 2024 which may be in favor of the Orange Man.

[Tito Shivan]

Chunk Norris ☯님이 먼저 게시:

Face it, the fascists don't care about following the law.

Stop the count!

[Dom]

videomike_Ultimate_Plushie님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Hence I said Alex Jones is only the cherry on top of the cake. There are crimes, that's what populism causes. If you incite people enough, rhetorically or otherwise, eventually they end up doing something irrational.

You say my side has done everything we claim Alex did... I don't remember the other side (or my side as you like to refer to it if that's the definition you go with) downplaying mass shootings, dehumanizing the victims of mass shootings and exposing them to harassment and threats.

Now, with that kept in mind - if Rittenhouse is the closest example you can come up with making comparisons to Alex Jones then the only thing I can say is gimme a break. Also, even though Rittenhouse pleaded not guilty, there are still legitimate questions to be asked about whether he was acting in a smart manner, whether he should've been there and so on.

As for finding employment, I don't think so. Rittenhouse was very supported by GOP folks. Even though some people like to pretend as if every single business in the country is democrats, that's not quite accurate...

I only claimed multiple news Outlets lied about Kyle and slandered his name worse than Alex ever did with the sandy hook families. I made no mentioned of those groups being allied to you, I only implied they are on an an opposite political "side," to Alex Jones. what they did was everything Alex did but worse, and no amount of your personal moral judgement changes what the civil charge itself is and was, slander. Which do you think has more a direct provable effect on someone's life: The young men who himself was slandered and whose personal being was dragged through the mud in major and pubicly traded commercial practice across air waves, or the cult following internet personality making a broad conspiracy theory about the motives a large spread out group of multiple people who he rarely mentioned by name? Tell me, who was more neglectful, the single man and his small team whose brand was at the time built on being exaggeration and zelous, or the AAA publicly traded professionals who outright denied doing basic research onto the events in question and knowingly balked at immediately provable facts?

Frankly, I cant say one way or the other off the top of my head to the confidence I find worthy of saying I'm certain on, but like it or not what those companies did was at very least as bad as if not worse than anything Alex ever did. No amount of trying to use the titles of someone not even involved in the case as your moral bludgening tool will change that.

I cannot say what the outcome would be if Kyle Rittenhouse were to sue whatever entity or source he thinks defamed him. I'm not claiming to have such (legal) expertise because I don't. Maybe he would win the case if he was indeed defamed. But if he doesn't raise a legal case, then nothing will happen and nothing should happen. The Sandy Hook victims did raise the issue, and that's a factor which may differentiate these two scenarios from each other.

Despite my lack of legal expertise, there is something that I can point out for certain. In Rittenhouse's situation, there would be a lot of examples on the "edge" that would need to be dealt with. If the media outlet reported that he killed someone, well, that's not exactly a lie. A truth cannot ever be defamation, by law. And that's yet another differentiating factor. In Alex Jones' case, it isn't on the edge. It's blatant, and it is way off any charts.

Even though I try to understand where you're coming from and what is the point you're trying to deliver here, I think your comparisons are not valid.

Also no person nor any entity, has been properly demonstrated or proven to defame anyone until they are sued and actually found out to do so. Innocent until proven guilty.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

videomike_Ultimate_Plushie님이 먼저 게시:

I only claimed multiple news Outlets lied about Kyle and slandered his name worse than Alex ever did with the sandy hook families. I made no mentioned of those groups being allied to you, I only implied they are on an an opposite political "side," to Alex Jones. what they did was everything Alex did but worse, and no amount of your personal moral judgement changes what the civil charge itself is and was, slander. Which do you think has more a direct provable effect on someone's life: The young men who himself was slandered and whose personal being was dragged through the mud in major and pubicly traded commercial practice across air waves, or the cult following internet personality making a broad conspiracy theory about the motives a large spread out group of multiple people who he rarely mentioned by name? Tell me, who was more neglectful, the single man and his small team whose brand was at the time built on being exaggeration and zelous, or the AAA publicly traded professionals who outright denied doing basic research onto the events in question and knowingly balked at immediately provable facts?

Frankly, I cant say one way or the other off the top of my head to the confidence I find worthy of saying I'm certain on, but like it or not what those companies did was at very least as bad as if not worse than anything Alex ever did. No amount of trying to use the titles of someone not even involved in the case as your moral bludgening tool will change that.

I cannot say what the outcome would be if Kyle Rittenhouse were to sue whatever entity or source he thinks defamed him. I'm not claiming to have such (legal) expertise because I don't. Maybe he would win the case if he was indeed defamed. But if he doesn't raise a legal case, then nothing will happen and nothing should happen. The Sandy Hook victims did raise the issue, and that's a factor which may differentiate these two scenarios from each other.

Despite my lack of legal expertise, there is something that I can point out for certain. In Rittenhouse's situation, there would be a lot of examples on the "edge" that would need to be dealt with. If the media outlet reported that he killed someone, well, that's not exactly a lie. A truth cannot ever be defamation, by law. And that's yet another differentiating factor. In Alex Jones' case, it isn't on the edge. It's blatant, and it is way off any charts.

Even though I try to understand where you're coming from and what is the point you're trying to deliver here, I think your comparisons are not valid.

Also no person nor any entity, has been properly demonstrated or proven to defame anyone until they are sued and actually found out to do so. Innocent until proven guilty.

If Alex Jones claims were so outlandish then the prosecution/judges wouldn't have been terrified of allowing Alex Jones to defend himself with videos he thinks would have proved his innocence.

Like the sus videos that led him to those conclusions or the videos of him apologizing for these opinions years later but before any hint of lawsuits.

[Computer]

Gamer님이 먼저 게시:

remember when obama swooped in near the end of the campaigning and won the election,
wouldn't be surprised if someone did that again.

Called it

Michelle Obama Favorite To Replace Joe Biden if He Drops Out
https://www.newsweek.com/michelle-obama-favorite-replace-joe-biden-if-he-drops-out-1871626

[crunchyfrog]

Gamer님이 먼저 게시:

Gamer님이 먼저 게시:

remember when obama swooped in near the end of the campaigning and won the election,
wouldn't be surprised if someone did that again.

Called it

Michelle Obama Favorite To Replace Joe Biden if He Drops Out
https://www.newsweek.com/michelle-obama-favorite-replace-joe-biden-if-he-drops-out-1871626

Not much of a call frankly.
About as obvious as calling going to a restaurant and ordering a steak then it turning up a prediction.

[crunchyfrog]

Dan Tucker님이 먼저 게시:

I love Alex Jones he's my hero

https://youtu.be/kw8pz6OhPPM?si=NyouHJYSK48T_YU6

https://youtu.be/x9D8_zHVtSI?si=jNeUbfuFrZ6UpcDn

https://youtu.be/na4GYyJwYjQ?si=jN7YstNn212k2h67

https://youtu.be/9JRLCBb7qK8?si=eLMuWbXeo5Q-4Cdk

Jokes aside, he's horrible,

Not only has he demonstrably caused a life of hell for those poor parents of the Sandy Hook shootings, but is also doing dishonest tricks to try and get out of paying them their compensation.

He's despicable,.