Music

Good afternoon, Michael Malis here. Let that be your welcome for the next hour. We have with us a very special guest and a very timely guest Robert Barnes, who's an attorney at Barnes law.

And Robert has been very closely working with the Calvert House team. So he has a personal perspective on that situation recording this on Monday, the 15th as closing arguments are happening in that case.

And I know Robert as well, you had a working relationship with Alex Jones and just this morning, briefly, a judge has found in Connecticut.

Basically, I think it was was it a summary judgment found against him on behalf of the Sandy Hook families. Do you have anything to say about that situation, probably move on to the written house case.

Yeah, in the Alex Jones cases, it's really not Alex Jones, it's on trial. It's the judicial system in America that is on trial.

Because he's already been denied his due process rights, not allowed to bring an anti-slap motion in Connecticut.

Can you explain what that is and anti-slap motion.

So the whole point of any slap law is to protect free speech in America and then you can't sue someone based on their speech outside of very limited circumstances.

So he brought motions to dismiss on those grounds in both Texas and Connecticut.

And in Connecticut, the court denied him his right to do so, just stripped it from him.

The Connecticut Supreme Court heard it issued a controversial decision that said it was okay because the grounds for the court issued was his statements outside of court that were critical of the lawyers and critical of the court system.

And then the court issued a double layer violation of free speech and on top of that a violation of due process rights.

And this was after he had produced over a million pages of documents, emails, text, videos, you name it.

After he had sat in other members of Infowars had sat for days and days and days and days of deposition testimony.

And after that happens, we go to the second stage, we're supposed to have discovery.

He's already produced all the discovery that could possibly be relevant in the case, sits for additional days of depositions, produces additional documents and both the court in Austin and the court in Connecticut.

Now I've issued default judgments against him, pretending he hasn't been participating in the proceedings.

I'm a little confused because what is there to have depositions about if the case is about, for my understanding, he said things about these families that were the defamatory libelist wherever the situation is, what is there even to have the discovery about and have depositions about.

Well, that's always extraordinary all along. He produced more documents and more discovery and more set for more depositions of more testimony than any defendant and anti slap history.

A historic look at the New York Times, New York Times sat for very few depositions in the case of Project Veritas and got a complete stay on any additional discovery by the court of appeals pending their appeal.

Whereas he produced a ridiculous amounts of documents and discovery that in my view, we're not really relevant or should have had to have been produced in the first place.

...