Time 1: https://twitter.com/dansolomon/status/1555308565715451904

Time 2: https://twitter.com/averytravistv/status/1555692735906349057

In the first video (which was from before the jury announced what they though were appropriate punitive damages) says "10, 15 times" compensatory damages, $50m is below the upper end of that. The 10x you quote just seems to be the lower end of what he suggested the limit might be.

The second video discusses what the statutory cap is (they think $750k per claim, $4.5m total)/that they don't think it's constitutional. Also that they don't think this will be directly litigated like it usually would, but be adjudicated by the bankruptcy court.

Which makes total sense to me... businesses have huge boom days, and plaintiff lawyers will happily imply you should multiply that figure by 365 days.

Many political fundraisers bring in large fractions of their income on only during a few key days or events.

And if his pills really are sourced from the top manufacturer, then his claim of 20% profit margin of "food" might be correct too.

I also think it's unreasonable to say that in a 50 person company that sells junk and makes YouTube videos that the median salary would be 100k. And even if it was, 50 * 150k is $7.5 million, not "around 10 million". The difference is significant considering we're talking about a $2m fine.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/reminder-wapo-nyt-won-pulitze...

There are 2 attacks that are just not worth bringing up because we all know they are true:

1) [Politician] is lying.

2) [Media Personality] doesn't really believe what they are reporting.

What you say is true, but also not interesting. Anyone who doesn't already know either of those facts doesn't care to know. It is normal.

The only thing that is different about Jones is he is targeting low-class low-intelligence audiences.

The whole point is that there was no conspiracy, and that those two papers were making it up. Like Jones does and for very similar reasons (people love to hear a good conspiracy theory). conspiracy theorising is a fun and routine activity in the press.

Caps on punitive damages have always annoyed me, especially for things like the Exon Valdeze or similar oil spills, where the companies nickel and dime out the compensatory damages over years and then with capped punitive damages it barely impacts their bottom lines.

It's pretty wild that that amount of money was generated by his news machine, it would be very interesting to see where it all came from... Subscriptions? Sponsors? Yeesh, that's a lot of income. Other podcasters are going to still commit the same offences if settlements continue to under-weigh the earnings like that.

You can't generally make that much revenue from content alone unless you are like the top .0001% like Joe Rogan.

The whole Twitter thread has more details but the TLDR is because of the Texas constitution, and the large amount of money at stake, this will almost certainly end up being resolved on appeal in the Texas court system. In particular, to answer the question if the Texas legislature's cap may inhibit the jury's ability to determine the punitive award amount, as the state constitution says they may.

Or, say, if the jury orders $45 million in punitive damages when $0 of the compensatory damages were economic, and there is a statutory limit (that the jury is by law not informed of before deliberating) on punitive damages of $750,000 plus double the economic damages.

The judge issued a default judgement against Jones for persistent refusal to meet discovery obligations. The jury trial was about damages, not liability (“guilt” is not strictly at issue, since it is a civil and not a criminal case.)

Default judgement is a sanction available for that kind of persistent misconduct in civil cases. (And Jones has two more of them in Sandy Hook cases for the same reason, one in the same Texas court, another in Connecticut. The default judgements in both Texas cases refer to the noncompliance in all three cases in their factual background.)

What happened recently and in the news was just the jury determining the size of the punishment.

Nitpick: default judgement. Summary judgement is a different thing.

The right to trial by jury in civil cases with a sufficient amount in controversy is not, unlike some other rights protected against federal infringement by the Bill of Rights, incorporated against the states by the 14th Amendment; since this is a state case, there is no federal Constitutional protection.

Also, even in the federal system, the civil jury trial right doesn't give you the right to to escape liability to refusing to allow a fair jury trial to happen by withholding evidence.

Hard to argue it was "impossible" for him to do something that his legal team actually did.

So it sets an important precedent for Jones (and others), that doing this kind of thing can cost you up to $50 million.

Even though Jones won’t actually have to pay that amount, an important example has been made of him.

Seems more likely to me that, in the long run, this will also occur in the remaining states.

The reality is that Jones was given ample opportunity to comply and blatantly refused to cooperate with lawful court orders. Add to that, some of that information that he claimed under oath didn't exist, was accidentally sent to the plaintiff's attorneys by Jone's attorneys in a subsequent trial thus providing proof that said information was being withheld purposefully.

In other words, this is exactly what justice looks like.

That's a nice story. Here's are the actual default judgement orders in the two Travis County cases. The current case is the Pozner case, where he never provided documentation, not the case where he eventually supplied limited at incomplete documentation.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21074211-alex-jones-...

What is frightening is you seem to be a true believer, how can a public figure so easily debunked enthrall you so easily?