• sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      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.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 hours ago

        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”

        • sensiblepuffin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          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.

          • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            59 minutes ago

            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