logo
Alex Jones accused of trying to shield assets as Sandy Hook families seek payment on $1B judgment

Alex Jones accused of trying to shield assets as Sandy Hook families seek payment on $1B judgment

The trustee overseeing Infowars host Alex Jones' personal bankruptcy case is accusing the far-right conspiracy theorist of trying to shield more than $5 million from creditors, including relatives of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut.
Three new lawsuits filed by the trustee on Friday alleging fraudulent asset transfers are the latest developments in Jones' long-running bankruptcy case, which has been pending in federal court in Houston for more than two years. In financial statements filed in bankruptcy court last year, Jones listed his net worth at $8.4 million.
The Sandy Hook families won nearly $1.5 billion in judgments in 2022 in lawsuits filed in Connecticut and Texas accusing Jones of defamation and emotional distress for saying the school shooting that killed 20 first graders and six educators was a hoax. Victims' relatives testified in court about being terrorized by Jones' supporters.
Attempts to liquidate Jones' Infowars broadcasting and product-selling platforms and give the proceeds to the families and other creditors have been hindered by a failed auction and legal wrangling. Jones, meanwhile, continues to appeal the Sandy Hook judgments.
Here's what to know about the status of Jones' bankruptcy case:
Trustee sues Jones alleging improper money and property transfers
The trustee, Christopher Murray, alleges that Jones tried to shield the money through a complex series of money and property transfers among family members, various trusts and limited liability companies. Other named defendants include Jones' wife, Erika; his father, David Jones; and companies and trusts.
Murray alleges that a trust run by Jones and his father fraudulently transferred nearly $1.5 million to various other Jones-associated entities in the months leading up to the bankruptcy. Jones is also accused of fraudulently transferring $1.5 million to his wife, more than $800,000 in cash and property to his father and trying to hide ownership of two condominiums in Austin, Texas, with a combined value of more than $1.5 million.
Murray is trying to recoup that money and property for creditors.
Jones' bankruptcy lawyers did not return email messages seeking comment.
In an email to The Associated Press, Erika Wulff Jones called the lawsuits 'pure harassment' and said she already had sat for a deposition. She said 'the accounting has been done,' but did not elaborate.
A lawyer for David Jones did not immediately return an email seeking comment.
Jones railed against the new allegations on his show on Saturday. He has repeatedly said Democratic activists and the Justice Department are behind the Sandy Hook defamation lawsuits and bankruptcy proceedings, and claimed they were now 'trying to get' to him by suing his father, who he says is seriously ill.
The fraud allegations are similar to those in a lawsuit in a Texas state court filed by Sandy Hook families. Jones also denied those claims. That lawsuit was put on hold because of the bankruptcy.
Sandy Hook families still haven't received money from Jones
Jones says the fact that the Sandy Hook families haven't received any money from him yet should be expected because he is appealing the $1.5 billion in judgments.
Infowars' assets continue to be tied up in the legal processes. Those assets, and some of Jones' personal assets, are being held by Murray for eventual distribution to creditors.
An effort to sell Infowars' assets was derailed when U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez rejected the results of a November auction in which The Onion satirical news outlet was named the winning bidder over only one other proposal by a company affiliated with Jones. The Onion had planned to turn the Infowars platforms into parody sites.
Lopez had several concerns about the auction, including a lack of transparency and murky details about the actual value of The Onion's bid and whether it was better than the other offer. The judge rejected holding another auction and said the families could pursue liquidation of Jones' assets in the state courts where the defamation judgments were awarded.
In a financial statement last year, Infowars' parent company, Free Speech Systems, listed $18 million in assets, including merchandise and studio equipment.
What's next
Lawyers for the Sandy Hook families said they will soon move their effort to sell Infowars' assets to a Texas state court in Austin, where they expect a receiver to be appointed to take possession of the platform's possessions and sell them to provide money to creditors. A court schedule has not been set.
'The families we represent are as determined as ever to enforce the jury's verdict, and he will never outrun it,' Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families in the Connecticut lawsuit, said Tuesday.
Jones' appeals, meanwhile, continue in the courts. He said he plans to appeal the Connecticut lawsuit judgment to the U.S. Supreme Court, after the Connecticut Supreme Court declined to hear his challenge. A lower state appeals court upheld all but $150 million of the original $1.4 billion judgment. The $49 million judgment in the Texas lawsuit is before a state appeals court.
He said in 2022 that he believes the shootings were '100% real.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The market is as hopeful as it's been in ages. The winners and losers might surprise you
The market is as hopeful as it's been in ages. The winners and losers might surprise you

CNBC

timean hour ago

  • CNBC

The market is as hopeful as it's been in ages. The winners and losers might surprise you

When the tyranny of the "Magnificent Seven" ended, I always figured the money would go to the rest of tech. I also didn't think that there would be anything left of the Mag 7 to invest in. They would all be obliterated as part of a source-of-funds move. Club name Nvidia would be grounded by China fears, both DeepSeek and restrictions by President Donald Trump. It was too good to be true, when Nvidia was in the high $80s a share, that it could find its way to new highs. Microsoft , another portfolio member, would falter because Copilot would falter. How in heck could Microsoft's stock retain its leadership thanks to Azure growth picking up by just a few percentage point? The answer to this conundrum is something I have started to come to terms with that calls into question the entire world of stock picking: I am beginning to think the nature of buying the right stocks has shifted from some hedge-fund playbook to a retail-majority fascination that is disrupting everything coupled with a level of hopefulness about individual stocks not seen in ages. I think that much of it stems from a belief that Trump, like him or not, may turn out to be fabulous for the stock market because he is putting in regulators that are pro-business and against a fundamental belief that business itself of any size — including small business — is evil. I know this view cuts across a variety of lines, but it is based on the charts themselves, a comprehensive examination of more than a thousand charts to understand this incredibly complex market. So let's break it down by pattern and see if my view can hold up to scrutiny. First, the clear winner in this market, bar none, is the financials. That covers insurers. It includes regional banks. But it really involves the majors, including the likes of JPMorgan , Goldman Sachs , Morgan Stanley , Wells Fargo and Citigroup , as well as names like asset management giant BlackRock , which is newly anointed after struggling for some time. We own Goldman, Wells and BlackRock for the Club. I can't emphasize enough how important this move financials is. It encompasses a multitude of thoughts, a cornucopia of positives the likes of which we haven't seen in ages, and they revolve around what could be an extended trend involving multiple expansion from the current range of roughly 14 to 15 times earnings to something closer to the market's 22 multiple. How is that possible? A few reasons: We are beginning to believe that deep in the heart of the Biden administration was a core group of administrators in the agencies who were from the Bernie Sanders/Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wing of the party. That's the part of the party that many traditional Democrats feel has hijacked the apparatus and may have been responsible for some of the backlash that led to the disaffection of typical middle-of-the-road bankers who might have been enthusiastic Democratic supporters but went for Trump or didn't vote at all. Those agency administrators — including those in the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department, but also the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and all of the others that interfaced with businesses — simply had a dislike for Corporate America that mimicked that of former President Joe Biden. As someone who followed Biden's career and knew him fairly well at one point, I was shocked how anti-business he had become. The core group who ran the country in the last two years may have been as antithetical to the positives of business as any that our history has recorded, maybe even in the first years of Franklin D. Roosevelt administration, maybe worse. The insult to business found its leader in former FTC chief Lina Khan, a 36-year-old populist firebrand who was an anathema to business and tried to check its every move. She reminded me of a modern-day Mary Lease. But she was almost outdone by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which, at its core, despised the banks it regulated and truly viewed them as the oil behind the kleptocratic machine that drove an ever-widening wedge between the rich and the poor. Without the incredibly fast dismantling of what amounted to a nihilist fifth column within the government, we are seeing nothing more than a wholesale revision of a group of stocks that has been shackled ever since the 2008 financial crisis when the multiples were far higher than they are now. With the anti-business wing of the Democrats now crushed, we are left with a nexus of banks that will be able to print money the following ways: Facilitating a merger wave that will be among the most powerful in history after it had been on hold because of Khan's strident policies. Mergers and acquisitions involves a small handful of people at these banks so their profit margins will be immense. A more forgiving "stress test" from the Federal Reserve with an easy curve that will allow much more money to be put to work lending. We just saw the beginnings of this Friday evening , and more reform could be on the way. An initial public offering market that will be intense, and I expect many private equity-owned companies that have been kept on those firms' balance sheets will be offloaded on the public. A wave of foreign buyers because of a weak dollar, a la the period between 1987 to 1989. A dramatic shift of disrupters who will IPO even as they pretended they did not want to. They can't help themselves. There's too much stock-based compensation for younger employees to stay private. A dramatic cost reduction accomplished by cutting the number of younger associates who specialized in meeting ever-increasing regulations and documentation who did nothing but repeat the same document writing over and over. Now that can be done by artificial intelligence. This new regime can last a couple of years and, on net, will produce equity shrinkage before the secondary offerings overwhelm the market. It is breathtaking in its power because it is producing stock-chart breakouts the likes of which I have never seen before. That includes credit card issuers like Club name Capital One and American Express , along with the money centers and investment banks. Second set of winners: the data centers and all of its accoutrements. This move is tectonic in nature because we have never seen an industrial revolution like this before. Some want to compare it to the internet bubble. I view it as a space race among a host of companies that must spend money to stay in the new game of generative AI, which can change the way we do everything from banking and self-driving to robots and the construction of buildings and ships. That's Meta Platforms , Amazon , Alphabet , Microsoft, Oracle and Tesla for those who are counting. We own Meta, Amazon and Microsoft for the Club. At the heart of this technological revolution is the physical data center itself. It's based around semiconductors, not software, and that's a huge change. If you look at the software companies, especially enterprise software, you see stalled stocks like ServiceNow , Workday , MongoDB , Salesforce , Accenture and Adobe . These are truly struggling stocks this year that now feel like they are all going against each other. There are some surprising names on that list. Contrast those charts with the performance of names like Club name Eaton , Carrier , Johnson Controls and Emerson Electric for the grid; or GE Vernova , Quanta Services and really anything involving natural gas or nuclear power; or CoreWeave and Nebius , as well as Vertiv , Cummins and Arm Holdings . These moves are insanely powerful. The money coming out of enterprise software is making a beeline to the much smaller semi cohort like Analog Devices , KLA Corp , Lam Research , Texas instruments , Advanced Micro Devices and Micron . The amount of money coming into the exchange-traded funds that agglomerate these segments is spectacular. Oh, and let me say it again for emphasis: Nvidia. There is a small and puzzling group of contract manufacturers — Flex , Celestica and Jabil — with stock moves that defy logic. I don't have a line on it yet, but it is a fascinating move. And then there are the companies that have figured out how to minimize their tariffs and are ready to roll come July 9, the day that Trump's 90-day pause is set to expire. Then there are the losers, and they are so hideous I wouldn't even deign to think of them as a possibility in a fund: drugs, foods, consumer packaged goods, retailers save the dollar stores, fast food (as opposed to fast casual), and oil and gas. These are plain out sources of funds and can't be trusted to hold no matter how big their yields might become. Take a look at Conagra and Campbell's if you disagree. What's it all mean? This is a market where the discourse is radically at odds with what we talk about all day. We are so stuck on Fed talk — should they cut? — that we are part of the hideous misdirection play that is going on in the professional discourse of the moment. These buyers and the stocks they buy don't care about any of what "we" talk about, and I have to redouble my efforts to try to blunt what I see as a radical mistake in coverage that is geared toward hedge funds and not the dominant chord of individual investors. Oh and remember, I am not even talking about the youthful traders who congregate around stocks like Coinbase , Robinhood and Michael Saylor's bitcoin-focused Strategy . While that cohort can't be ignored, they are more obvious. They are part of a confused, momentum-oriented new investor class that is led by those who will drive Palantir to $200 a share, an excellent speculative stock by the way. And it is going to $200. Now, I am schooled in the value of the Fed talk myself. But I am trying to pull the wires from my own brainwashing, which is never easy. I need to go back to the 1990s, when what mattered was stock picking — not the S & P 500 and earnings; not sales and companies that did something meaningful; not companies that catered to the enterprise software mob of code-writers who might be obviated by AI; or those who do nothing but trade the S & P and a bunch of stupid ETFs. Will it be difficult to upend the Fed-geared reportage that every single outlet finds to be the holy grail of business journalism? No. Because those who follow it and believe in it don't know jack about individual stocks anyway. Learning about them is a time-consuming anathema. Plus, they don't know their game is atavistic anyway. They don't see themselves as an obstacle to new world performance. Business journalism has gotten away from learning new stories — too difficult and time consuming and not the province of young researchers anyway. They console themselves that they follow Magnificent Seven drizzle and can speak about Tesla with the best of them. In order to help the waning tide of viewers to stay with us, the new manifesto is to learn the "great unwashed" of stock stories that are under $100 billion in market cap that are truly terrific. There are investors who want to own Nvidia or the next Nvidia, and by golly, we better help find them, or we might as well cut the cord, too. (See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer's Charitable Trust.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust's portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.

NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani says ‘I don't think we should have billionaires'
NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani says ‘I don't think we should have billionaires'

USA Today

time2 hours ago

  • USA Today

NYC mayoral candidate Mamdani says ‘I don't think we should have billionaires'

The progressive candidate's comments come days after his presumptive victory in the Democratic primary over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Zohran Mamdani, the winner of the Democratic primary to be mayor of New York City, told NBC News' 'Meet the Press' on June 29 that he doesn't believe billionaires should exist. Mamdani, a self-identified democratic socialist, was asked directly whether 'billionaires have a right to exist' and he responded: 'I don't think we should have billionaires because frankly it is so much money in a moment of such inequality.' The political upstart's comments come days after his shocking Democratic primary victory over former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Mamdani campaigned on a radical vision of remaking a city seen by many as the mecca of the world's rich and powerful. 'Ultimately what we need more of is equality across the city and across the state and country,' Mamdani told Meet the Press. 'I look forward to working with everyone including billionaires to make a city that is fair for all of us.' His comments on the richest of the rich come as some of his closest allies, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, travel across the U.S. on their 'fighting oligarchy' tour. The New York state Assembly member's platform excited progressives with plans that included promises to freeze rents in regulated apartments and make buses free. He also supports a 2% tax on residents earning above $1 million annually and raising the corporate tax rate to 11.5%. But he wouldn't have the authority to raise taxes as mayor. Mamdani, 33, has not stated a plan to take money from billionaires. The young left-wing candidate's ascendancy spooked rich, politically-active donors. A Super PAC backing Cuomo spent $24 million, much of it raised from Trump donors such as hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and real estate executive Steven Roth, along with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Cuomo is expected to remain on the ballot for mayor in November, USA TODAY previously reported. Current Mayor Eric Adams will also run against Mamdani as an independent.

Globalism is dead, Zohran Mamdani too extreme and other commentary
Globalism is dead, Zohran Mamdani too extreme and other commentary

New York Post

time3 hours ago

  • New York Post

Globalism is dead, Zohran Mamdani too extreme and other commentary

Conservative: Globalism Is Dead The effect of President Trump's policies on trade, immigration and the stock market shows a 'three-dimensional collapse of the narrative atop which we built our economy over the past generation,' argues Oren Cass at Commonplace. Contra the tariff-panic crowd, 'consumer sentiment is up and inflation is down,' while 'the stock market is up.' Plus, 'the dollar is down' which means cheaper goods. 'With aggressive immigration enforcement, the United States has ceased releasing illegal migrants into the country entirely,' and 'one million people in the country illegally may already have departed.' Advertisement 'And as the State Street index shows, a basic S&P 500 fund has been outperforming the private equity industry over every timeframe.' The globalist conventional wisdom is dead. 'We are seeing now that a different course has always been available.' From the right: A Sane Step in Visa Vetting 'Checking the social media accounts of visa applicants for hostility toward America is an obvious step in safeguarding America's security and values,' proclaims the Washington Examiner's editorial board. Advertisement The State Department will do a ''comprehensive and thorough vetting' of all student and exchange visitor applications, including a review of applicants' social media profiles.' Smart: 'The revolutionary fervor and deep anti-American activism that ripped apart university campuses last year requires a closer examination of the views of foreign students.' 'A US visa is a privilege, not a right. No one is entitled to access to our universities or job markets.' This 'visa vetting overhaul, with its sharp focus on social media scrutiny, is a bold and necessary move.' Advertisement Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Energy beat: NY's Looming Energy Crisis 'For all Gov. Hochul's talk about 'affordability', it seems electricity prices have not received that memo,' snarks the Empire Center's Zilvinas Silenas. Per the US Energy Information Administration, 'New York households on average pay the sixth-highest price for electricity' in the nation. Meanwhile, the state 'is slowly losing the capability to make energy' just as officials are electrifying 'everything — heating, cooking and transportation — all of which will require much more electricity.' Advertisement Plus, 'the development of energy-intensive industries' requires the production of additional electricity 'which New York likely cannot supply on its current trajectory.' To make New York more competitive, state pols 'need to remove all hurdles to cheap, plentiful energy' which 'will help with affordability, too.' Democrat: Zohran Too Extreme 'Today's Democratic activists must keep extremist, unpopular positions out of our party's platform and serious conversations,' warns William M. Daley at The Wall Street Journal. Daley — Clinton-era Commerce Department secretary and White House chief of staff under President Barack Obama — sees Zohran Mamdani's platform as 'equally outlandish and radical' as President Trump's. Mamdani's Democratic Socialists of America 'seeks to 'defund the police' by cutting 'budgets annually towards zero,' to 'disarm law enforcement officers,' to 'close local jails,' and to 'free all people from involuntary confinement,'' along with a slew of other radical economic and social proposals. 'Mainstream Democrats must loudly disavow these views.' Just as the GOP is now dominated by Trump's ideas, Democratic 'party leaders risk a similar fate if they shrug off Mr. Mamdani's victory.' It's 'a wake-up call. Will my party answer it?' Foreign desk: A Middle East Reset Advertisement As the Abraham Accords 'come up on their five-year anniversary at the end of the summer, the transformation they represent is only starting to become clear,' cheers Commentary's Seth Mandel. On CNBC recently, Trump envoy Steve Witkoff teased news regarding 'some pretty big announcements on countries that are now coming into the Abraham Peace Accords.' Obvious candidates are Syria and Lebanon: With the Accords serving as 'a new regional structure,' if they 'want to make it in the new Middle East, they cannot rely on Iran and Russia. They must navigate the increased influence of the US and Israel.' Indeed: Accords membership is 'becoming a sort of security umbrella.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store