Conservatives Warn Alex Jones Show Trial Sets Precedent For Silencing Dissent Against Establishment

Conservatives and legal experts are warning that the ongoing show trial against Alex Jones is meant to set the precedent to shut down any opinions or commentary that counters establishment narratives.

Revolver News founder Darrin J. Beattie, constitutional lawyer Robert Barnes, lawyer Mike Cernovich, Human Events editor Jack Posobiec, and others all warned that the Texas defamation trial against Jones is the first legal salvo against free speech and dissenting views.

“Regime is thirsting for a precedent in Alex Jones case so no one can question official narratives on the internet again,” Beattie tweeted Wednesday.

Regime is thirsting for a precedent in Alex Jones case so no one can question official narratives on the internet again

— Darren J. Beattie 🌐 (@DarrenJBeattie) August 3, 2022

If they can’t Gary Webb you, they’ll Assange you–and if they can’t Assange you, they’ll Alex Jones you

Genuinely free press is incompatible with the Globalist American Empire

— Darren J. Beattie 🌐 (@DarrenJBeattie) August 3, 2022

“Alex Jones precedent means if you don’t accept the Vegas shooting explanation, then FBI agents can sue you because you’re calling them liars by implication,” Cernovich noted. “Conservative media doesn’t seem to care. They aren’t saying a word on the due process violations in Jones case.”

Alex Jones precedent means if you don’t accept the Vegas shooting explanation, then FBI agents can sue you because you’re calling them liars by implication. Conservative media doesn’t seem to care. They aren’t saying a word on the due process violations in Jones case.

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) August 2, 2022

“The Alex Jones show trial is a preview of what the regime intends to do to anyone and everyone who doesn’t conform with The Narratives,” journalist Jordan Schachtel said.

The Alex Jones show trial is a preview of what the regime intends to do to anyone and everyone who doesn’t conform with The Narratives

— Jordan Schachtel @ dossier.substack.com (@JordanSchachtel) August 3, 2022

A juror question from #AlexJones trial today: “can we use lawsuits like these to stop election deniers”? See where this is going yet?

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) July 30, 2022

“Alex Jones case is to use it as precedent to go after those who contest 2020 election & any other government disfavored ‘conspiracy minded’ folks, like everyone who challenged lockdowns, mandates, Covid origins, lies to get us into war,” Barnes pointed out after noting a juror asked the court if the lawsuit against Jones can “stop election deniers” in future cases.

New York Times explicity saying it: goal of #AlexJones case is to use it as precedent to go after those who contest 2020 election & any other government disfavored “conspiracy minded” folks, like everyone who challenged lockdowns, mandates, Covid origins, lies to get us into war. https://t.co/TxBvNJ7IIi

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) August 1, 2022

The precedent they seek in #AlexJones trial goes way beyond him. As they said in opening, they seek to establish precedent to sue those who discuss topics “important to people” that they consider “misinformation”, creating safe spaces they enforce through bankrupting lawsuits.

— Robert Barnes (@barnes_law) July 26, 2022

The left would execute Alex Jones in public if they could find a way to do it. And they’d cheer

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) August 3, 2022

They didn’t ban Alex Jones because of what he got wrong. They banned him because of what he got right.

— Chase Geiser (@realchasegeiser) August 2, 2022

Criminalization of political opposition. pic.twitter.com/feJp8vwAKj

— The Prudentialist (@MrPrudentialist) August 3, 2022

Jan 6 trials, MTG trial, Steve Bannon, Alex Jones, etc we are no different then the most corrupt countries in the world. No branch has failed more then the judicial branch https://t.co/L64pxQXcGA

— Steven Kolln (@stevenkolln) August 2, 2022

Everyone needs to understand that this isn’t about Alex Jones. This is about setting a precedent where you can be personally and financially ruined by a court of law for not parroting official narratives. https://t.co/8Sixnz6TI4

— Matty (@marvin_gardens) August 3, 2022

In fact, the New York Times this week confirmed the alarming hypothesis, admitting that the establishment’s goal is to “send a signal to other conspiracy purveyors about the cost of online lies” using the legal system.

Keep in mind, the NYT didn’t consider the Russia collusion hoax, Jussie Smollett’s hate crime hoax, the Nick Sandmann incident, the Kyle Rittenhouse case, or Hunter Biden’s laptop as “Russian disinformation” to be media-driven lies at all — though all of them demonstrably were at the time.

A verdict in Jones’ Texas defamation show trial is expected later this week.

---

Twitter: @WhiteIsTheFury

Truth Social: @WhiteIsTheFury

Gettr: @WhiteIsTheFury

Gab: @WhiteIsTheFury

Minds: @WhiteIsTheFury