The lawsuit against Alex Jones by the parents who lost their Children in
the Sandy Hook massacre has demonstrated just how little
Infowars cares about delivering the truth to its own audience.
And they'll tell the most outrageous lies to turn a profit.
At least that's what we're learning from the testimony that we're hearing from
Alex Jones's own staffers and
we're gonna show you those highlights in just a moment.
But before we do, it's really important for
you to understand the context because Alex Jones by default has
already been found guilty of defaming these parents by claiming that
their crisis actors that the Sandy Hook massacre was really a false
flag operation in order to take guns away from law abiding Americans.
Obviously those were all lies.
Obviously that caused a lot of damage to these families who were then targeted,
harassed and threatened by Alex Jones and his audience members.
And so Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, the parents of Jesse Lewis,
a six year old who died at Sandy Hook, are requesting $150 million
in compensatory damages for years of torment and
threats they endured in the aftermath of Jones's lies about them on infowars.
They are suing Jones in the first of three trials in which juries will decide
how much he must pay relatives of 10 people killed in the December 14th,
2012, mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
Now the reason why the trial is happening is because the jury needs to decide how
much money will be awarded to the parents, right?
Again, he's already been found guilty of defamation.
This is a civil suit.
And here's what we know so far.
Testimony so far shows just how little infowars really cares about the truth.
In fact infowars staffers testified that they did not check easily available
facts about Sandy Hook or much else before broadcasting their incendiary assertions.
One good example is one of the hosts who did testify.
His name is Owen Troyer and he admits as much in this next clip.
Let's watch.
>> I was just covering a story that was given to me.
>> It didn't matter, right?
>> No, I didn't say that.
>> Okay.
You were handed the story while you were on air live, right?
>> Yes.
>> You did zero determine it is accurate, right?
>> Correct.
>> You did no vetting of the story at all?
>> Correct.
>> You did nothing to determine if it was a joke or a pair?
>> Right.
>> There are video clips in it you didn't watch them?
>> Right.
>> Before you play them?
>> Right.
>> I mean Faron nothing like getting into an infowar with information that you
haven't even bothered to verify.
>> And his callousness, the body language of him sitting there just mm that's right.
Yeah.
I mean just they still don't care.
>> They don't.
>> Part of the reason is because I, I still don't even think that they have to,
I mean they've filed the bankruptcy.
They're gonna try to shield all the money and
prevent the families from getting what they deserve from this.
But just such I can't even say the word, but just the kind of human beings,
these are and again, like you said, that's just one clip there.
There's so much more coming.
But reading all about this, what is transpiring at this trial?
It is difficult to contain the anger and
the rage that we feel when these people just tell,
yeah, well this is what we did.
Yeah. Families had to move six, seven, eight.
I think one of them had to move nine times because Jones fanatics continued to
find their address and show up at their home and harassed them.
And these are parents who buried their Children at christmas time.
>> Yep. >> I mean burying a child is difficult
enough as it is if you have to take christmas
presents that were already wrapped under a tree and
remove those because that child was just murdered in school.
I mean it's something that's almost too difficult to explain.
I had do something similar with my sister, a child pass.
That is the hardest thing I've had to do in my life ever.
And so many of those families went through it and that's just one
of the reasons why the whole Sandy Hook thing just changed me as a person.
Not in a good way either.
Just so angry at what we've become and
then to watch these people do this in the trial.
Not care, still not care.
10 years later don't care about it.
There's no excuse for being such a disgusting human being.
But that's what they are.
Just the lowest level you can get as a person.
>> The sociopathic nature of the testimony really blows me away.
Because you have to have sociopathic tendencies to feel entirely
comfortable demonizing lying about and targeting parents whose little Children,
young Children as young as five, six years old were slaughtered in a mass shooting.
You have to have like zero emotion, zero soul.
You have to be 100% self interested and obsessed with profit.
And that's really what we're starting to see.
I mean I've always assumed it based on the kind of coverage that they did on
the story and other stories by the way.
But you see it play out during the testimony and
just to fill in some more blanks before we go to more videos.
Scarlett Lewis, who was one of the parents targeted using internal emails and
testimony from infowars staffers, showed how Jones and his top,
I don't know why he calls them lieutenants.
So there are other hosts on the network ignored multiple warnings that
continuing to broadcast Sandy Hook lies would harm the survivors and
land Infowars in legal trouble.
In a videotaped deposition, a former employee, Rob Jacobson,
said he repeatedly delivered these warnings to Infowar staffers,
only to be received with laughter and jokes.
So going back to the point I'm trying to make here about how sociopathic
you need to be in order to carry out these disgusting lies on your programming.
Now, other damning testimony came from another
employee over at Infowars named Daria Karpova.
Dario Karpova, is Infowars' corporate representative and
she advanced the same bogus claims, refusing even to rule out
the possibility that the trial itself was a staged event.
She cast Jones as the victim, worrying over his health and
saying the Sandy Hook lawsuits have cost him millions.
Poor Alex Jones and here's a little taste of more of the cover that she
tried to provide for Alex Jones and his disgusting behavior.
>> Again, Alex Jones was still researching things and with the contradictions
in the media that was only at that time in the mainstream media.
He thought that it was his duty to investigate,
especially when it involves something as tragic as the deaths of
Children that shouldn't be used government operation.
>> Can you look at the title of the april first video for me?
You see you see it on the bench?
Yes.
>> Okay. The title of the video is not, there
are contradictions that raised questions about what happened at Sandy Hook.
The title of that video, if I'm right is crisis actors used at Sandy Hook.
Is that right?
>> Correct.
But oftentimes titles just are meant to grab audience attention and
then later in the video, they get into details just like all of the nation media
does- >> Mask off.
Okay. And, and like the thing that's amazing to
me, Faron is just how stupid these staffers really are, right?
Because she's a corporate representative for Infowars.
And it's like, yeah, I mean it's just Clickbait, you know, it's Clickbait.
Everyone does Clickbait.
Look Clickbait is annoying and it's unfortunate,
necessary evil in media today.
I don't like it, but here's the difference.
Okay.
You might have a title that's attention grabbing,
but you don't get to lie in the context of that title or that headline.
Certainly not in a way that's defamatory to the subject that you're
covering in that piece or in that video.
So if you look at the Johnny Depp, Amber heard trial defamation,
trial, the focus was on the headline of the opinion piece or
the op ed that Amber heard wrote.
Even in a title of something if you're being defamatory,
you could be held legally liable for defamation.
And so she's just not very bright and she's just like, yeah, just Clickbait.
I mean, yeah, we lied and assassinated the characters of these parents for profit.
But doesn't everyone do it.
No, everyone doesn't do that.
>> [CROSSTALK] >> Yeah.
And I love how she's like in mainstream media does it all the time.
No, they don't because they know that if they do,
even Fox news understands if we do this, we're going to be held accountable.
You know, I've gotten letters as so many others who do this to saying
if you don't change this title, we could sue you for defamation.
And it's the simple difference of like saying that somebody said something versus
saying they implied it.
So yeah, you can get sued for a title just as you could lying about something.
So there's a world of difference in a Clickbait, like Alex Jones had
his worst day in court ever versus Alex Jones ate a baby on live tv.
And then you get into the heart of it and say, well he didn't actually eat a baby.
No, you've already made the defamatory claim and
therefore nothing else that you say matters.
Doesn't matter if you say that you're kidding about it.
If somebody doesn't click on it to get the full context,
you have defamed them and it doesn't matter.
And that's what, I don't know, I'm assuming that woman there was younger,
she looks very young and so maybe she's just naive.
Maybe she's not familiar with it.
Maybe she's inexperienced or
maybe she's just as callous as the rest of them and simply doesn't care.
I mean, I didn't see- >> Yeah.
>> Any emotion on her face.
I saw no change in her demeanor.
Just like, yeah, I mean what we did it?
What?
>> I mean they think they're the victims.
It's amazing. >> Yeah.
>> I mean you have the Pozner family moving a dozen times because of
the credible death threats they were getting from members of the Infowars
audience.
But no, they think they're the victims because they have to stand trial for
the defamatory content they produced and broadcasted for years by the way.
So it's not even just, they had one video title that was defamatory.
But the content of the video was actually very clear and accurate.
Know everything that they were doing was incredibly defamatory.
At the heart of the trial is a June 2017 episode of NBC's Sunday Night
with Megyn Kelly in which Ms. Kelly profiled Mr. Jones.
In the broadcast,
Sandy Hook parent Neil Heslin protested Jones's denial of the shooting.
He recalled his last moments with Jesse, his son saying, quote,
I held my son with a bullet hole through his head.
But the Infowars folks decided to deny that that even happened.
Afterwards Jones and Owen Shroyer, the guy you heard from
in the first video aired shows implying that Heslin had lied.
Will there be a clarification from Heslin nor
Megyn Kelly Shroyer said on Infowars, I wouldn't hold your breath.
Nonetheless.
By the way, Shroyer thinks he's the victim,
he was quoted as saying this, I'm very upset that this trial continues.
It has had a tremendous negative impact on my career and livelihood.
Owen good.
You are not fit to do what you're doing for your career.
You're presenting yourself as a truth teller as some sort of journalist and
you're intentionally defaming victims of a mass shooting individuals
who lost their little kids in a mass shooting.
Their Children were slaughtered in that mass shooting.
And you decided to further victimize them with your lies.
You are not fit for this line of work period.
And before I get to you and your thoughts Faron I wanted to
go to one more video because Daria I think says something.
Daria Karpova says something pretty enlightening in this next clip and
it shows you the kind of thought process that takes place in the production process
over at Infowars.
What is truth to them?
Well, let's watch.
>> On May 9th, 2014 did you see that?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
That was an episode called revealed Sandy Hook truth exposed.
>> Yes.
>> Infowars wants its viewers to have faith that they can get the truth from
Infowars, correct?
>> It's up to the we always rely we always we think our audience is smart and
we rely on them to figure out themselves what they think is true and what's not.
But we present our opinion.
>> Well the truth, right?
That's what you're telling your audience to give them is the truth?
>> Sure everybody has their own definition.
Truth.
>> Everyone's got their own definition of truth, right?
Farron?
Truth is subjective, right?
There is no such thing as truth.
It's what you want it to be.
That's the thought process over at Infowars.
>> Yeah.
That is exactly the message that she is sending out there.
That hey, there's no truth.
Truth is whatever you want, truth to be.
And that is obviously it's not even worthwhile for
me to say that's not how the world cuz we know that.
But I will say just watching these people knowing what's happened and
reading all of this.
I just, I hope this trial goes horribly for them.
Like I want this to be the most miserable experience that they have ever had.
I want them to lose everything that they've ever had,
everything that they've gained, every dollar they've ever earned.
I want it all gone.
Like I truly wish nothing but the worst results from this trial for
any one of those Infowars people.
That's what they deserve.
They absolutely deserve that.
And so hopefully that's what the jury will do here.
And I can't imagine anybody on that jury hearing these things and
thinking, no, they've suffered enough.
Hopefully that is not the case.
But then again, you never know.
And that's gone be the case about it. >> You never know.
Right.
And how exactly do they make their profits by slang in all sorts
of weird pills in the content in the context of their deceptive
broadcasts in the context of their defamatory content.
And final video for you all.
Owen Shroyer was specifically asked about the kinds of pills that sold
through Infowars and I really appreciated this interaction.
Let's take a quick look.
>> And then there's leaks the things you sell InstaHard.
That's the pill you guys sell?
>> I'm not too familiar with the product.
It's a new one, but I guess it's a pill.
>> Okay.
Well, I'm sorry.
It is a product that we said.
Yes, fair enough.
Diet force.
Is that for yourself?
>> Yes.
>> Do you have any idea where that stuff sourced from?
Infowars life the pills.
You mean you-.
>> [CROSSTALK] >> Ingredients?
>> Yeah.
>> You don't know.
>> You know, if any of the stuff is approved by the FDA by chance?
>> I don't know.
>> You know, if any of it's been tested to see if it's effective or any good at all?
>> Well, we test their knowledge for ourselves.
>> You mean you take it?
>> Yes.
>> And you're still here.
So it must be okay.
>> Yes. >> It works for me.
>> So he takes InstaHard or doesn't take InstaHard.
Very confusing testimony there.
But not only do they have zero problem with defaming parents whose Children
were slaughtered.
They also have zero problem potentially getting their own viewers sick
by selling them pills that come from who knows where and does, who knows what?
Fair and final words.
>> So you're telling me that InstaHard is not in fact approved by the FDA.
I just can't believe that.
That's such a reputable brand InstaHard.
I had no idea.
But yeah, I would actually really like more clarification.
I wish that lawyer would have gone on like really,
can you tell us your experience with these particular supplements
that you guys are hawking out there to the most ridiculous audience imaginable?
Look, grifters, liars and I think sociopaths do put it.
That's what we're dealing with on this side and I just wish this would open more
people's eyes to what is really happening at that network, but
I don't think it will with that particular audience.
>> Yeah, and it's unfortunate cuz they're being misled possibly getting sick
from the supplements, they're buying from this programming.
It is what it is, but all we can hope for
is that the justice system works in this case.
As I've said, Alex Jones has already been found guilty of defamation.
The question is, what will he have to pay out in damages?
And this is the first of three trials where a jury will determine what he owes.
So we'll find out what the outcome of this particular trial will be by the end of
the week, we're guessing and we'll stay on this story and
fill you in as we learn more.