this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
207 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2950 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

A Texas federal bankruptcy judge has ordered an evidentiary hearing to review the auction process that awarded Infowars to satire site The Onion, citing concerns about transparency.

Alex Jones, who owes $1.5 billion to Sandy Hook families, claims the process was “rigged” and expects the site to be returned to him.

Attorneys for Elon Musk’s X Corp. unexpectedly joined the case, with Jones suggesting Musk will play a key role.

Despite the sale proceeding, Jones resumed Infowars broadcasts, while The Onion plans to relaunch the platform as a satire in January. The hearing is set for next week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 45 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So the argument is that it was unfair to sell Infowars to The Onion, because they weren't the highest bidder - rather, the Sandy Hook parents approved of this bid, and not any others that were higher.

BUT... Those Sandy Hook parents also agreed to forfeit a portion of their settlement in exchange for favoritism towards the Onion, making that bid the one that would cover the largest number of settlement dollars, which is the primary goal of auctioning off his assets in the first place.

So good luck arguing against this sale. The Sandy Hook parents have $1.4B worth of settlement dues to work with, and they know that they aren't going to see most of it repaid in their lifetimes. They can keep conditionally forfeiting money until you'd need to pay hundreds of millions to acquire Infowars. If Elon decided to do that anyway, the cash would go straight to the parents, and he'd be opening himself up to massive liabilities the moment Alex Jones inevitably opens his mouth about Sandy Hook conspiracy shit on X.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Texas judge" all bets are off in the new world.

[–] Catma@lemmy.world 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I dont think so in this case. Texas judge was the first one to find him guilty by default. Even Texas Supremem Court slapped down his argument that the suit was not valid. They do not seem to want to play ball with his bullshit.

[–] Homescool@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

That was in the before times . . .

You speak the truetrue.