498
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

He is trying to. I don't think he will succeed.

[-] djsoren19@yiffit.net 31 points 1 week ago

Pretty sure this is the first step to that succeeding, so I wouldn't be so sure.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

This is the first step to failing twice.

FUAC might get another chance to bid, but so will the Onion. And the Onion will outbid FUAC, because they have up to $965 million available if necessary.

The Onion is buying it to kill it. They won't want to recklessly spend a good chunk of their valued worth just to cut off the head of a hydra. Even if it's better for the family's true intentions of silencing Jones.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago

The Sandy Hook families have agreed to reduce the amount they are owed in the settlement in order to make up the difference between The Onion and the highest bidder. This allows other creditors to end up getting paid more despite The Onion's bid being less because the families are taking less of a cut.

So it's not The Onion paying more money, it's the families taking less, and the families aren't doing this for the money.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Nobody wants to spend much money on it. That's why the Onion will win the auction, they can use $965 million of Alex Jones's own debt, courtesy the Sandy Hook families, to pay for it.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Not kill it, but invert the messages it sends.

[-] Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Please explain why you don't think he will succeed. This seems like exactly what the fascists would do.

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The Sandy Hook plaintiffs are owed $975 million. They are supporting the Onion's bid by pledging as much of that as necessary to beat the opposing bid (remember, they have rights to most of the auction proceeds).

An analogy: you put something on eBay, and then decide you want to keep the item for yourself. You can easily outbid anyone else, because in the end you are (mostly) paying yourself. The only question is how much eBay's tiny cut will be.

Well, Sandy Hook plaintiffs are basically putting Infowars on eBay but determined to win the auction. The winner of the auction is a foregone conclusion, so the only question is what small cut some other folks are going to get.

[-] Pandantic@midwest.social 2 points 1 week ago

Then the question is, why weren’t they just given full contol of the infowars business in the first place if that’s what they really wanted?

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Because there remains an unanswered question: what small cut some other folks are going to get.

The only way to answer that is with an auction. Just like in the above analogy, the only way to determine your eBay fees is to actually have an eBay auction.

And they did have an auction, but the presiding judge didn't like the auction rules. They can change the rules and thus change the cut, but the winners won't change.

[-] ZMonster@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Honestly this is straight out of the Infowars playbook. AJ has been fleecing racist morons with his pals for decades.

this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
498 points (99.0% liked)

News

23616 readers
3301 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS