all 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 51 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Aw man, that’s some bullshit

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 45 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Not allowed to shoot CEOs, not allowed to buy your enemy’s company in a fair sale. What happened to the American dream

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Only boomers and some Gen-x believed it. The rest of us grew up with the Internet and an ever-increasing feeling of betrayal and hopelessness.

    Edit: Modified the language around Gen-X per the reply below.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Please don't lump Gen-Xers in with boomers. Why do you think Gen-X got its name? Disillusionment, detachment, loss of identity and purpose. Gen-X didn't know what was wrong, but they knew enough to know they were left out. Even boomers aren't to blame -- they just have more people in the ownership class right now. If we divide along age and generational lines, the capitalists benefit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    You're right, I should not have lumped them in with boomers. That was a last minute and before submission to address the Marjorie's/Karen's of the world. Please accept my apologies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago
    [–] 28 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago

    I thought they'd already bought it, I didn't know it was still in question. What a bummer. This was going to be hilarious.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago* (10 children)

    Wait a second. A judge blocked the Onion from buying the site at auction because... he thinks it should have sold for more? My brother in Christ, do you understand what an auction is?!

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Specifically, he thought the trustee should have allowed the other LLC (which is totally not affiliated with him yet only exists to shelter his supplement business) more time to counteroffer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    But that makes no sense. It's an auction. There's a time limit. It's not an acquisition. You're being forced to sell something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    You know what else makes no sense? Letting someone bid on his former property using money he owes to the people selling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

    Why does that make no sense? He has debts to pay, can't cover them, and so his assets are sold at auction to pay them off. Same thing happens to people every day via civil forfeiture.

    Edit: clearly people cannot read. The Onion should have been sold the website for the winning bid that they submitted at an auction. End of story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    okay, but he's trying to buy the thing he says he can't afford with money he claims he doesn't have, which is (allegedly) why he he can't pay the debts he owes. you're creating a false equivalence. no one gets this treatment. this is magical rich white guy thinking, and the court is going "oh what's that? you're rich and white? sure! you take all the time you need to get the money together to buy back your propaganda machine. meanwhile these parents of kids who would have started college this year… um… i guess they can go get fucked. fuckin' poors"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Holy shit is no one reading the words I'm saying. In no sane universe should Alex Jones get to buy the site back. I'm saying in an auction, the Onion submitted the winning bid and should have gotten the site sold to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    because that's the opposite of what you said? you were replying to someone saying that by saying what they were saying wasn't reasonable and this situation the court has created seems fine

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago
    [–] 16 points 2 years ago
    [–] 11 points 2 years ago
    [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    Does the judge think that shitpile is gonna be worth much now? Like, unless they can force Alex to appear there and do skits, it's just a fucking website without it's, for lack of a better word, talent.

    Keep at it, Onion, the funny outcome was just delayed, not averted!

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    This is why I don't hype myself up over such stories.

    There's always a rugpull.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    No justice, no peace! Give them Infowars!

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    not cool bro. not cool.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Boo this judge

  • source
  • [+] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago)