NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT.
Especially not @jordanschachtel or any of the other bluechecks on both left and right who have been sucking my exhaust for two years and are just desperate to call me a grifter. I am getting an unbelievable view from the inside of how journalism works - or more accurately does not work - in the age of Twitter.
I’ve said it before and I suppose I’ll say it again: I have always, always been lucky in my enemies.
the important bit was discovery. you can be absolutely fucking guaranteed that even if some sham 'discovery' will be allowed, it will be an absolute useless whitewash.
i didn't donate, fortunately, but i did see the begging posts only recently. as my father-in-law is a senior lawyer, i can guarantee that these negotiations aren't just spawned in the last second. they take weeks of back-and-from massaging of every word in the eventual agreement. he would have actively worked on the settlement, while begging for money.
In a matter of weeks, Twitter is supposed to hand over ALL the documents it has about me - including its communications with the federal government. I fully expect the little bird to demand a protective order that will hide those emails and texts and Slack chats and everything else from public view.
*********My lawyers and I believe you have the right to find out what I learn, and we will argue against a protective order if Twitter asks for one. *********
I am trying to raise $200,000.
I’ve set up a GoFundMe page here.
I want Twitter to know I have an army on my side that wants the *****truth *****.
Instead of as a reply to another comment, you mean? I thought of that, but the thread was long and replying to someone else's comment at the top of the comments kept it within likelihood of being read.
All I want to see is the extent of Government communications, requests, demands, suggestions, inferences, threats, promises, deals or any other type of intertwined strategies between the Feds and Social Media. Public square companies cannot be private and act on behalf of the Feds and remain free to use being private as an excuse to censor people and do the Governments dirty work as a workaround. Settlements are not going to divulge this information.
Wow, sounds like some of you on here are just desperate to kick Alex in the bollox. I’ve loved watching this drama unfold from the inside, and to be honest, I would have thought this is a pretty significant admission of guilt on the part of twitter. That’s a big deal, and opens the floodgates for others to start turning on them. I didn’t donate because of the platform that was used, but I don’t think I’d have felt shafted at the outcome of this. ‘Booooo’ to the haters here... !!!
> this is a pretty significant admission of guilt on the part of twitter. That’s a big deal, and opens the floodgates for others to start turning on them
absolutely smashingly wrong. by settling out of court, with - i can absolutely guarantee - no admission of guilt, there will be no legal precedent, and consequently, the next 'target' will have to start from scratch.
I think this reflects that he got a settlement that EVEN HE was surprised with! Blew him away from his moral focus and put him on an island with a lifetime of massages and mai ti's. I'm just jealous I didn't get the windffall
A settlement offer is never (usually never) an admission of guilt. In fact, a good attorney will insist on language in the settlement contract that specifies that the settlement does not imply guilt. A settlement is just one party's way of saying, "it's not worth fighting over." Courts encourage parties to settle, if they can. A settlement avoids spending additional time and money, and avoids the uncertainty of going to trial. E-Rozmiarek
Also, confidentiality clauses that amount to gag orders are now routine. Confidentiality clauses do not simply seek to make secret between the parties the amount and other specific provisions of the settlement which is permissible. Instead, they seek to conceal from the public and the press voluntary disclosures of relevant evidence to other litigants and prohibit a settling plaintiff from further disclosure of the allegations in the pleadings filed in public court. J-Strudevant
I agree! Most Substack-ers are respectful in their comments. If they don’t like the writer, they don’t subscribe. But reading these haters’ comments, I feel like I’m on Twitter again!
Yeah, what would be the Twits' interest in settling and yet allowing their company to be publicly embarrassed and possibly subject to further lawsuits?
(Note I assume it embarrassing to work for Twitter already, I guess by publicly embarrassed I just mean having their mendacity revealed.)
Well it might look sorta bad if he didn't. Then again it already looks sorta bad so maybe he should go for it. That sort of tactic works for big tech afterall
Exactly. If you solicit or accept donations to help you in your lawsuit, and you settle the case for money without getting a court ruling to vindicate your position and help others, you should return every penny or else you are indeed a grifter.
Or maybe he could pay it forward. I don’t give the people I don’t know. It’s that simple. If you really felt that he had a point to prove, pray. God will provide what you need
Or as I thought he didn’t stand a chance even though we all know why he was kicked off. For stating facts that they didn’t want to print. I will not “judge” this situation. I hope that the most ridiculous of the posts are a campaign to make Alex lose his following I can confirm that blue check boy is the one multiple posts are coming from.
Be a nice gesture and prove that wasn’t his intention if he donated those funds to an active case fighting for freedom and he prior posts did say or at least imply the goal wasn’t to settle but to “shine the light” and so it def off putting
You thought you had a stake in his case against Twitter. It doesn’t matter a flying f what his settlement is doofus. You are the one who needs a lesson. People supported him against Twitter to support him. A last bastion of solid investigative reporting truthfully, artfully and with analysis skills that amazed me. I supported him for what Twitter did to him and thus me, trying to silence the facts on Covid and vaccines. Fuck you dumbass. Get off this platform that you don’t subscribe to or even if you do. You embarrass me.
Whose story is buried by his own agreement. I know of no investigative journalist who would do this voluntarily. So there must be a higher value than exposed truth here. Exposed wallet?
These settlements with non-disclosure agreements attached to them actually should be ILLEGAL. This case has a judge assigned to it. It is being adjudicated in a court that is funded by taxpayers, by a judge who is funded by taxpayers. Once this case entered the court system and received a docket number, every aspect of it should have been made public, up to and including any settlement that was reached.
The fact that these non-disclosure agreements are allowed only underscores just how corrupt the U.S. judiciary has become.
The public's interest in this case stems from the fact that many other people use, and have been abused by, Twitter. They have a right to know whether it is worth their time and money to pursue their own lawsuits. By hushing up the settlement, no one is allowed to see whether Berenson recouped much of anything beyond the legal fees. That is precisely what Twitter wants. He is giving them what they want, and so is our corrupt court system.
For example? Other than family court cases involving minors, these provisions are generally used mostly to shield corporations for more lawsuits. If people could see that suing them is worth the time and expense, many people with the exact same complaint would do so.
This may be counterintuitive, but opening the floodgates to litigation is not good for the average person. I am a lawyer in one of the most litigious states in the country and it is a terrible environment for almost everyone except plaintiffs attorneys.
If everyone could see that it was worth their time and expense to sue Twitter for defamation, Twitter would very quickly stop defaming people. That would be a very good thing for society.
So litigation should not be for "the average person"? It should only be for the wealthy? Then the wealthy should be required to pay for the courthouse, judge, guards, etc., out of their own pockets.
I cannot post one word on Twitter. I was never officially banned. But my comments are never seen. I am shadow banned because I speak the truth about the vaccines. Meanwhile those who lie through their teeth are promoted. Twitter being able to conceal the outcome of its court cases only ensures that this behavior will continue.
The judge already ruled on discovery. Thus, our tax dollars were already invested in this court case. That is why we have a right to know the terms of any agreement that was reached.
If they want to keep the terms to themselves, they should stay the heck out of the court and just settle the matter privately.
Our tax dollars fund the government, every aspect of it, including the courts. (Of course that's extremely naive. Corporations also massively bribe all the government agencies which regulate everything.)
What pressure would either party be under to negotiate without the leverage of the legal system?
The judge ruled for discovery. At what point did the parties involved go back to the court and ask the for their case to be removed from the docket, prior or after discovery being part of the court's control. If prior the discovery information is not part of the public's information.
Isn't the idea of settlement to keep the information out of the public sphere? Then a new legal action begins, the contract for settlement. If that contract is broken and the party offended desires to seek a remedy a whole new world of information will come into the public sphere.
No reason for this, except corruption in the court system. The two sides went to court. The court is funded by taxpayers. The court created a record. The record is funded by taxpayers. The court will maintain the record, again, at taxpayer expense.
If the two parties wanted to keep their dispute private, they should not have gone to court in the first place. Berenson signaled his intent to sue before he ever actually filed the suit. Twitter could have met privately with him, and they could have settled the matter out of court. Instead, Twitter chose to use the court system to try to fight the complaint. Twitter now has no right to privacy about this case or how it has been settled. The only reason it's being afforded privacy is because the court allows it, and the plaintiff wants to take his money and run.
Twitter will now rely on the court to enforce its non-disclosure agreement with Berenson. So again, this agreement is not truly private. It depends on the public court for enforcement. Otherwise, Twitter could say, okay Alex, we'll give you $2 million if you will not tell anyone how much we're giving you, and Alex could say, sure thing, then go blab the amount to the whole world. The only reason he can't do that is because Twitter could then run back to the public court and sue Berenson for violating their so-called "private" agreement.
Yeah and you are demonstrating a perfect case of Stockholm Syndrome now by making excuses for an obvious sell out. Alex for Congress, running as a neo- lib Dem. Promise one thing and sellout. Say “well it was everyone else’s fault or responsibility except my own.”
Adults made an informed, grown up decision to contribute to something they wanted to be counted in on. A way to show solidarity. They knew it wasn’t something they’d get back. Geez people, do it because you want to not because you get something out of it. It’s really weird to hear whining. I thought that only came from the crazy ass left.
No they shouldn't -- unless such was stated at the time of the solicitation and contribution. The point was to enable Alex to do righteous damage to Twitter, to fund his suit and to support his work in general. It was a contribution, not a loan!
Im a paralegal in a defense law firm. A settlement is win-win for all, if going to trial would have been a potentially worse outcome for 1 party or the other (or both) & thus the motivation to settle. But again, settlement is always confidential & the parties are prohibited from revealing the particulars. That doesn’t preclude a “leak” but that’s unethical & against the law. Not that there’s much “rule of law” anymore, or it is 2-tiered
more like 3-tiered. depends on how much you 'donated' to the various 'foundations', like the clinton global initiative. the more you 'donate' the better 'justice' you get.
"Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
What are you expecting? This was a direct quote from his post yesterday. It's absurd to expect to learn anything about a settlement with a company like Twitter. They aren't going to allow any discourse of the terms. Ever.
Agree. If not ready to provide any detail about why this happened, publishing merely a notice that "this happened" is obviously going to spark backlash, for the same reason that the Experts' dubious decrees about the latest Science always sparked it.
Also agree. Crowdfunding makes everything so thorny, even if all is above-board. The slightest misstep or awkward communication is magnified when you've taken monetary support.
my point is that when you deal with legal, and they work with other reps, merely hammering out an agreement that every party will be happy with takes an astonishing amount of time. even my small company, stitching together 6-digit contracts can easily take weeks. in a bespoke matter like this, they would not have had boilerplate templates, in which they'd merely have to fill in the blanks. the likelihood of alex acting in good faith, asking for money weeks ago, would appear as slim as pfizer's recent trial outcome in the under-5's being wholly above water.
There will be no discovery, that is why Twitter settled. The fact is that Alex cannot raise enough money to fight Twitter for years. I'm sure Alex was well compensated, but we will never know the amount. Never put too much faith in humans, as we are all fallible. Everyone with a brain knows the govt. is in collusion with big tech. Twitter owns Joe's admin and the DOJ is corrupt as hell. Nobody really needs Twitter and in 5 years they may be gone anyway. I always said Twitter is a sewer and never joined. I think a lot of people get their ego boosted by the number of followers, even though many are bots. Musk is no angel, but he could make it much better.
He did not have to release this statement before settlement. He could have waited till the ink was dry. Take a break. Lawyers cost money and everyone knew what he was fundraising for, lawyer fees. Duh! This rush to judgment crap is why the state of our legal system is in the toilet.
Nope. A two tiered system of justice is what's got the legal system in the toilet. Government using Social Media to censor and propagandize people is not settlement material.
What settlement? This case is not over. The parties can engage in possible settlement talks while the case is proceeding. Don't get your panties in a bunch quite yet.
Who enforces the settlement? The court. I have no problem with people setting. The court should not be enforcing privacy agreements. If you take a civil dispute to a public court you have no right to privacy.
Goals and outcomes are two different concepts. Schachtel's post is pure speculation. Though, it doesn't make your "you look like a grifter" observation invalid. Life is filled with discontinuities and disappointments. Ce la vie.
Give it a rest. You have no idea what you're talking about. Let it play out like it is supposed to, then you can Monday morning quarterback. If you didn't contribute, you have absolutely no skin in the game.
My skin in the game is that I paid for a subscription to Unreported Truths, in return for which I haven't gotten much, because Berenson seems to have spent most of the past 8 months on his publicly funded lawsuit, in our publicly funded courts, with which he will now take an undisclosed sum of money for his own personal use.
yeah i paid for a subscription as well. but thanks for your comment. i assume that when this eventually 'plays out' and nothing comes of it, you'll have the 'we already knew back in june' comment on a template already. isn't that the usual schpiel?
As long as it is allowing you to publicize what the relationship between Twitter and the Feds was, lots of people will be happy. Otherwise, less so. We can wait to find out.
Let's hope it shines a light on the incestuous relationship between the authoritarians of all stripes, whether at Twitter or in DC.
The whole point, in my eyes anyway, was to expose the corruption and collusion. Taking a settlement with a non-disclosure makes for a big, fat nothing burger. So, Thanks for nothing I guess.
But I don't think, according to his words, he'll have much to say:
From his earlier post, "Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
Not a big fan of the blue checks in general, but he does raise an important question about donations. People donated money meant to fund a prolonged battle not to reach a quick settlement.
I didn't see anything from Alex promising how long the battle would last. Let's see what the settlement is rather than focus on how long it took. The donations probably affected the timeline anyway, as the plaintiff having a financial warchest would certianly be an inducement to the other side toward settling.
tbh I don't remember what he wrote. You may be right. I just remember having the impression that he was promising to make sure he accomplished his objectives and that he wouldn't settle in a way that satisfied his private interests without addressing the larger problem he was fighting. I could be wrong. Like most people here, I read far more on Substack than I can possibly remember.
Omg, you think it'd be BETTER for Alex to endure the threat of bankruptcy and the emotional stress of legal conflict over a prolonged time? RespectfulIy I can't think of anything more naive or selfish.
Blowhards?? When someone begs for money and claims they’re doing precedent-setting work to make the world better, but then quietly settles behind closed doors and says it’s none of our beeswax, that doesn’t make us blowhards.
Alex didn't beg for money. He fund-raised for a worthy cause, and the money he raised went to lawyers' fees. Did you make a large donation and now you feel like you didn't get your money's worth? Maybe Alex saw that the best resolution was a settlement. I proudly donated. I don't feel that I sent the money in vain or that Alex was disingenuous.
To settle means Alex got something. I feel so happy for him to be out of this lawsuit and no longer facing the anxiety of never- ending legal bills. Have you ever been in a lawsuit? It is hell.
And moral victories are wins too I suppose. Sorry I am old school. An actual win is a win. Alex didn’t even enter the playing field, just the arena and the forfeited for a few bucks.
Unless you believe Twitter has both agreed to settle AND allow all discovery into their shenanigans to become public (would make no sense) then how in the world could he have possibly delivered on his promise?
It's a legitimate concern. Typically, settlements like this mean that little or no information will be released to the public. We'll see what happens, but it seems unlikely that we're going to learn a lot about Twitter's relationship with the Biden administration, for example...I hope I'm wrong about that.
Per Berenson, "Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
Is he restricted from just talking about the settlement?
He will probably be allowed to talk about it in a general way but won't be able to say how much money he got, and he probably will be restricted from disclosing information learned in discovery. Contrary to popular belief, not all settlements are confidential but you can bet this one will be, although the degree of confidentiality is uncertain at this point.
I don't think Berenson specifically promised that he wouldn't settle (no one can promise that), but he certainly implied that his primary goal was disclosure of how Twitter and the Biden Administration (and CDC) worked hand in glove to censor people like him. I doubt people would have donated to the legal defense fund just so Alex could extract more cash from the defendant.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT."
Notice all Alex says is "None of you know"....nothing about what he is going to tell or IF he is going to reveal anything *substantial*. He’s doing what Alex does best when he’s got nothing to back himself up — he gets pissy and derogatory. Just like with his stance against ivermectin. He couldn’t stay neutral — he had to actually lash out at and insult his subscribers who have reviewed the data on the effectiveness of ivermectin as part of a multi pronged treatment approach. Hundreds of studies showing efficacy. What does Alex do? Picks ONE study with unfavorable findings and shouts from the rooftops that he’s been right all along and his troglodyte subscribers can suck eggs. No careful walk thru of the findings like in his other fine journalism. Only vindictive. (BTW, other more serious writers did do a point by point walk thru of that trial and found it to be severely flawed)
Same here. Not even a promise of a serious and thoughtful follow up. Just a child lashing out at justified criticism. Jordan wouldn’t have room to criticize if Berenson had spoken out first with meaningful information—and let’s admit, Berenson has known for some time what this deal would consist of and had plenty of time to write about it in preparation of release.
My money is on he will hide behind some confidentiality cloak and hope all his subscribers and contributors will forget if he.strings it out long enough.
Beware the man who lashes out with nothing but anger when confronted with serious allegations. Alex provided nothing meaningful by way of explanation to Jordan's criticisms. Let that be the first warning light.
I was an eager subscriber when he proclaimed his intention to follow Big Pharma to the ends of the earth to reveal their crimes against humanity (or some such proclamation). I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts. He runs hot and cold as evidenced by this little missive.
Good luck to those who trusted and contributed to his cause. I truly hope something substantial comes from it. I’m not holding my breath.
"I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts"
I agree w you. To me, was obvious he had made up his mind and wasn’t open to credible new or existing data. Worse, his primary "argument" was to ridicule and excoriate those who believe IVM has potential value with little or no downside. I don’t know how an honest broker couldn’t at least acknowledge that IVM is so benign with *decades* of known side effect history that even if one doesn’t believe it adds value in treatment, there’s at lists little to no harm in trying. Instead his reaction was "you stupid rubes." That’s what made me question how much bias was infecting all of his other reporting.
If you need to be handcuffed to Mr. Berenson before you'll allow yourself to (aaaa-a-aggghhhh!) trust him, what in the name of jesus are you doing, posting here?
while it's true we don't know what's in the settlement, we do know what you've posted, and experienced the garden path you clearly led us down. discovery will basically not happen at this stage, or rather, if it does, it will be a severely neutered form. there is no way they would allow this to happen, while settling.
Not really, no. Doesn't take strong logic to come to the conclusion that Twitter won't be fully disclosing their practices in the settlement. If they were, then what would their motivation be to settle? They are doing this to withhold information that Alex promised to shine a light on.
That is my point: people here are upset because none of us know what's in the settlement, so Alex using "you guys don't know" as an argument doesn't hold a lot of water.
Alex, you set up a GoFundMe account to raise money for your legal battle, yes?
You settled said legal battle.
Unless your settlement includes a HUGE admission of wrongdoing by Twitter for censoring dissident voices (unlikely, since the general idea of settling is companies avoid such damning admissions), you settled for something less than the principle at stake.
And Jordan called you out on it.
You put this out there. You made the story. You made yourself the story.
As long as the settlement doesn't cross this "red line" we're good:
Update on Berenson v Twitter
This would be a very good time to donate to the legal fund
Alex Berenson
Jun 6
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
To be fair — It appeared to me as an ardent follower of your substack that it did appear that you fundraised under the pretense to shine light- so it would be reasonable for those who supported to expect to get some “light” for their donations even that may result in a less beneficial secret NDA settlement for yourself?
I Understand winning a settlement, but it probably is safe to assume it’s quite the payout to include all of your attorney fees that you solicited donations for. I hope you would consider donating those raised funds to other freedom fighting causes or are still on the fight!
In another important legal battle— Feds 4 Medical Freedom just got the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to put the vaccine injunction for federal employees back in place and rehearing the case En Banc. Grassroots efforts with no major donors and there are a lot of other great causes that likely deserve your platform to get the word out!
Why is Jordan your enemy here? If all is fine and good and you will still deliver on your promise, can you not just prove him wrong? Frankly, I really enjoy your snark, but often it comes out in what looks like an uncalled for overreaction and less like intrepid journalism that refuses to compromise.
I don't really care what you think about Jordan. I can form my opinions about him by myself. I DO care about your response to the SUBSTANCE of his criticism. Please set your ego aside for a minute and address these legitimate, adult concerns like a legitimate adult. Saying stuff like “NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT,” just brings up more questions than answers. Not helpful, even with the Caps Lock.
Anyway, I'm here with the popcorn waiting to be convinced things are fine, but I can't say it looks like you're winning here. I really appreciated your Unreported Truths and Pandemia books. I'm not your enemy, but I can't exactly call myself a fan at this point either.
Alex..I have not always agreed with you. ie ivermectin BUT......I hope you take Twitter to the cleaners. I hope you make a shit ton of money. I believe you when you said you would shine the light on them. YOU FOUGHT and didn't quit. Haters are gonna hate. Sorry...but fuck 'em
Thanks 🙏 Toby. There is a reason why I support you. You have not only retained integrity but moved in practical ways to make this about us. Quite the contrast I must say. I am going to donate as a founding member over and above my annual support of you.
See my June 3 comment in response to “Update Berenson v. Twitter” dated June 2. Don’t hate on Alex, this is how these matters proceed. He achieved a great deal by bringing the action in the first instance. Remember, it’s a marathon, not a sprint.
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
So not all hope is lost but it seems that this settlement was already in the works when the above mentioned post was created.
You have been a voice of truth and enlightenment re: Covid-19 and the vax for many, and for that you are a national treasure. I don't like your views on Trump, or Ivermectin. I think you have seen through the Fog of Propaganda on Covid-19 exceedingly well, but you haven't made your way through the fog yet on those issues.
I have never seen anything that indicates you are dishonest, or anything but genuine in your assertions and convictions. So, I believe your earlier mailing where you indicate that you will not settle if you are gagged (unless and until proven wrong).
You are one of the good ones, and we shouldn't rush to assume (as is the norm in today's world).
The stipulated order was carefully drafted to obfuscate that today was the deadline (it gave the original date of June 20, and buried in the next section that discovery had been extended by 10 days). And, it was filed on June 29 -- the day before Twitter was supposed to hand over documents. Likely Alex doesn't have the documents.
The actual meat-and-potatoes of the proposed stipulation extends discovery by 28 days. Courts will nearly always agree to stipulations like this one. I can't foresee a reason that the Court wouldn't here.
Collectively, this reads to me that:
A) Twitter HAS NOT given Alex the documents;
B) Alex has given them an additional 28 days to do so;
C) Twitter has thrown some kind of massive moneybomb at this to get settlement on the table; and
D) The ONLY reason they would do this is because there are DAMNING, and I mean bad, documents in the discovery. And, conveniently, they haven't turned the discovery over to Alex yet and likely never will.
Like I said -- I want to, and I guess I still will, give Alex the benefit of the doubt. But, reading the actual Court document, it is harder to do so.
My Berenson subscription just autorenewed. I wish I had paused until this resolved. I will be turning the autorenew off now, and its only getting turned back on if Alex didn't sell out.
this deserves to be further up. i would throw in i also found it a bit odd that he started talking about elon musk's pending take-over, however, it would make perfect sense for twitter to want to settle as quickly as possible, given the probability of elon walking should terrible information be released under discovery. consequently, the settlement offer would be required to be of significantly high monetary value for berenson to immediately accept, ie, an offer he couldn't refuse.
this all stinks to high heaven.
i hope your auto-renew wasn't annual. i should probably check if mine was auto-renewed; only recently, my disney+ subscription renewed for a year THE DAY before all the Florida stuff broke, and my wife insisted on me cancelling. a bloody day!
The lesson here is that everyone in media these days (and just about everywhere else), including Alex, adopts the primary moral principle to put as much money in their bank account as possible to help fund their early retirement and make them feel higher in the social dominance hierarchy.
But while they engage in that primary pursuit, they adopt certain topical interests and biases that are generally authentic (because faking it would be too difficult to hide) and feed the interests of certain media consumers.
I have said this before but the people of the US lost their moral compass for being principled above what they think they can get away with to improve their wealth and power when Bill Clinton sat there on national TV and told his baldfaced lie that he did not have sex with that woman Ms. Lewinski. In that single act the leader of the free world let it be known that it was okay to lie, cheat and steal as long as you can get away with it.
So today Alex, assuming he took the Twitter cash, can only be criticized as being a normal modern moral person while being lauded as writing good stuff.
Alex, this is not right if you don't at least provide some context. You know exactly what the reason for the donations in this lawsuit was. Like it or not, this will otherwise make you look like a grifter!
Settlements are typically secret are continually negotiated from day one of the filing. Always keep the door open but keep fighting. I believe that Twitter settled because they were going to lose their section 230 if their partnership with the Governments were exposed with docs that Alex subpoenaed eg propaganda machine of totalitarian Government. The dummies don't realize that if Twitter was solely acting alone without Government direction and support, its a slam dunk against Alex. Since Governments are directly working with Twitter to censor, censure, and otherwise curtail content, Twitter is no longer acting independently as a private company, but an arm of the Government propaganda machine. The legal question to be answered would need to be answered is whether Twitter acted in concert with the Government and to what degree. Eg Depositions, discovery for several years. We are all stuck waiting to hear what we can from Alex as he is the aggrieved party. I doubt Alex would settle for less that pious intentions especially after all the money that is needed to litigate. Remember Justice is not free and neither are attorneys. After what they do to all of us? us = people who are banned from Twitter cause the Government doesn't like us. I would totally stick it to Twitter for as much and as far I could get. I would force do quite a few things plus lots of cash = eg litigation is expensive and I would also want a retirement. Its always cheaper for a company to settle than it is to litigate period. You have to determine what your chances of successful litigation are eg business decision (non emotional) Twitter had to decide if the risk of litigating and losing is worth not settling in the short term. My bet is that Twitter recognized that if private company documents were released showing Government collusion would do more damage (not that it isn't severely damaged) to their brand than settling for copious amounts of money and some other piddly stuff and it would push them closer to being liable for the section 230 loss. eg (Alex is blue checked and can never be banned for anything he says; an apology letter or various as sundry of small things).
Alex is blameless in the sense is he is accomplishing what he set out to do. His settlement is not a statement of his desire to not stick it to Twitter. Its a reflection of how desperate Twitter is and probability of a long costly litigation of which Twitter has superior resources and endless cash to throw down. I could be totally wrong. Allow the process to continue and wait.
I didn't read your post, why would anyone but I did read the first sentence. Even if settlements are "typically" secret at this point in time you have no idea of the details of this particular settlement so STFU!
Why would I read your post you simpleton. You're not that smart and as you know zero of the details of the settlement no one is interested in your essay speculation.
Court doesn't get input on whether to accept the settlement or not. This isn't a class action.
Two private parties, private cause of action. They can settle in any way they see fit.
Read my comments above. I want to give Berenson the benefit of a doubt. But, as a lawyer, reading the actual document that got filed last night it got much harder to do so.
Thank you. The rational responses to this news, like yours, seem to be running 1 to 10 if not 1 to 20. I guess it's another sign that everyone has lost their F'n minds.
We don't know what the details are. So there's no value in bashing anyone until we hear.
If this results in a total change in Twitter policies, and numerous people are allowed back on Twitter, then anyone who donated (I didn't) should be very happy.
If it results in only Alex being allowed back on Twitter - especially if any details of the settlement are agreed to be confidential - then anyone who donated should feel like a total sucker.
I have been able to get on Twitter easily starting today for the first time in years! Past attempts always sent me in an endless loop of account verifications.
Complete confidence here that Berenson is an honest broker . He was one of the few who went up against the pharma industrial complex on MRNA jabs and the data proves him right .
The promise by Alex was disclosure and transparency of twitters behavior and the possible collusion with government. If in the end, Alex gets a paycheck and is required under agreement to keep everything he and his attorneys learned under wraps, then we have a ethical/character problem with Alex. However, I cannot discount the positive work he has done. I will give him time for rebuttal. But it certainly does not reflect well on him at this moment. Let's see what hsppens.
Time and again the first reaction to any news is "Ready, Fire, Aim! " Everyone wants to be first with their hot take. Let this play out before you commit to a narrative.
I hate when we fight people on the same team. Jordan is a great reporter but should give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Just like Alex should give Malone the benefit of the doubt. The 3 libs on the SCOTUS always stay united no matter what even when they live in fantasyland. Our side would do much better staying united in this fight.
I agree and am withholding judgment until we learn. Ore. Am trying to imagine the terms of the settlment that would also allow AB to claim he lived up to his June 6 promises.
However, it may be useful to stipulate that AB is, after all the Covid dust settles , a man of the left.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT" - Exactly. Yet, the stated purpose of your suit was to bring Twitter's censorship apparatus into spotlight and you can't/won't release details of the settlement of a suit you fundraised for.
Mr Bluecheck has a point here. He doesn't have to call you a grifter. Your actions are making you look like one.
There's no difference. I'd even say that everyone in this forum condemning Alex and even those who have no doubt what so ever in the purity of his motives exhibit the same lack of rational forethought that you heard from Covidians who said dumb sh!t like "mask it or casket" or "follow the science" or if a person was was especially dim they may have shortened it to just "science".
At this point I'd say to any poster on this forum with a firm opinion either way; nobody knows all of the facts at this point, the intelligent thing to do is wait for more evidence before you pass judgement. You're just not that smart.
I specifically asked "how can *any* of us comment intelligently on the settlement?"
Not comment per se, but comment intelligently, and, intelligently on the settlement in particular.
I don't remember him making an explicit promise not to settle, but I most certainly can be mistaken on that point. In which case criticism of him settling would be legit, but not criticism of the settlement itself...since none of us is privy to its contents.
Would you mind linking to his Substack column(s) in which he made that explicit promise not to settle?
Was the settlement such that you can't talk about the settlement? If that's the case, then you are a “GRIFTER EXTRAORDINAIRE” if you got to make the discovery you mentioned which was so crucial to the whole lawsuit in the first place, then the settlement is acceptable to me. Just shed light on everything you found out in discovery.
Shouldn't we all reserve judgement until the terms of the settlement are known. If he chooses or is forced to keep them secret then he has betrayed our trust. We supported exposing Twitter; justice; and freedom of speech via the Alex Berenson lawsuit. If the settlement doesn't include these items then shame on us for trusting him.
Seems a little grift-y. We donated money and what do we get to see at the end of it all...not a damn thing. Nothing. Case settled, can't share any details. What was it all for?
Alex…not sure what these poster are thinking, but forcing Twitter to settle and get compensated for your loss of readership and income seems to be about all an individual can do…hopefully sets up precedents against Twitter…
How else would you punish a company into better behaviors other than money or legislation…
Pretty sure you never said you were taking Legislative action.
Some confused people on this thread about winning a settlement as punishment and therefore a grifter???
I think I may have donated $20 to Alex, but I never expected to get part of settlement...I imagine there are also actions that Twitter must fulfill as well..
"As we debate the power and political influence of social media companies, this discovery offers a unique opportunity to see how Twitter and the federal government and others may have colluded against my voice. No one else has this chance. No one.
And I am not going to give it up.
Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
If you’re hush hushing the settlement, it makes you look like a grifter. Plain and simple. The stated goal wasn’t a settlement.
the important bit was discovery. you can be absolutely fucking guaranteed that even if some sham 'discovery' will be allowed, it will be an absolute useless whitewash.
i didn't donate, fortunately, but i did see the begging posts only recently. as my father-in-law is a senior lawyer, i can guarantee that these negotiations aren't just spawned in the last second. they take weeks of back-and-from massaging of every word in the eventual agreement. he would have actively worked on the settlement, while begging for money.
absolutely disgusted with him.
I didn't donate, but agree that those that have should be disgusted.
Nope
Go to sports talk forums to make toddler arguments like, "Nope." Maybe someone will reply to you with a butt-emoji.
‼️NOPE‼️
You're another proud r-tard? Ok!
May 11 Email from Alex: "
In a matter of weeks, Twitter is supposed to hand over ALL the documents it has about me - including its communications with the federal government. I fully expect the little bird to demand a protective order that will hide those emails and texts and Slack chats and everything else from public view.
*********My lawyers and I believe you have the right to find out what I learn, and we will argue against a protective order if Twitter asks for one. *********
I am trying to raise $200,000.
I’ve set up a GoFundMe page here.
I want Twitter to know I have an army on my side that wants the *****truth *****.
it would be ironic - that Alex would not be reporting on these "unreported truths"
Money talks..and it silences
Wouldn't be the first time either. His hypocrisy and and blind ideology are why I quit following him long ago.
Wouldn't be the first time either.
Doesn't look good for Alex but I will withhold judgement until the dust settles.
Yep if he practices what he preached he would turn down the NDA and possible pay day!
You may want to post this as a separate comment
Instead of as a reply to another comment, you mean? I thought of that, but the thread was long and replying to someone else's comment at the top of the comments kept it within likelihood of being read.
I suggested both, reply and post as a separate comment, adjusting if necessary
Unless someone clicks "New First".
From the mouth of not-babes.
That’s not a contract,
Literally no one said it was. Why bring it up?
The people in this thread are implying that it is.
I gave up on alex after he came out against ivermectin with no research or knowledge on it. Dude is a turd.
So you post on his substack because you gave up on him. Okay...
it is a very wise habit to keep your enemies in sight....
I'm just here to see the shitshow now y'all know he duped your asses
😄👍
Nobody "begged" for anything and you don't know what the outcome is. It costs nothing to wait and see the result.
All I want to see is the extent of Government communications, requests, demands, suggestions, inferences, threats, promises, deals or any other type of intertwined strategies between the Feds and Social Media. Public square companies cannot be private and act on behalf of the Feds and remain free to use being private as an excuse to censor people and do the Governments dirty work as a workaround. Settlements are not going to divulge this information.
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" --mark twain (supposedly)
I agree with you now please please please by his old books.
Shouldn’t have settled and should have put all that in a book.
Wow, sounds like some of you on here are just desperate to kick Alex in the bollox. I’ve loved watching this drama unfold from the inside, and to be honest, I would have thought this is a pretty significant admission of guilt on the part of twitter. That’s a big deal, and opens the floodgates for others to start turning on them. I didn’t donate because of the platform that was used, but I don’t think I’d have felt shafted at the outcome of this. ‘Booooo’ to the haters here... !!!
> this is a pretty significant admission of guilt on the part of twitter. That’s a big deal, and opens the floodgates for others to start turning on them
absolutely smashingly wrong. by settling out of court, with - i can absolutely guarantee - no admission of guilt, there will be no legal precedent, and consequently, the next 'target' will have to start from scratch.
I think this reflects that he got a settlement that EVEN HE was surprised with! Blew him away from his moral focus and put him on an island with a lifetime of massages and mai ti's. I'm just jealous I didn't get the windffall
A settlement offer is never (usually never) an admission of guilt. In fact, a good attorney will insist on language in the settlement contract that specifies that the settlement does not imply guilt. A settlement is just one party's way of saying, "it's not worth fighting over." Courts encourage parties to settle, if they can. A settlement avoids spending additional time and money, and avoids the uncertainty of going to trial. E-Rozmiarek
Also, confidentiality clauses that amount to gag orders are now routine. Confidentiality clauses do not simply seek to make secret between the parties the amount and other specific provisions of the settlement which is permissible. Instead, they seek to conceal from the public and the press voluntary disclosures of relevant evidence to other litigants and prohibit a settling plaintiff from further disclosure of the allegations in the pleadings filed in public court. J-Strudevant
I agree! Most Substack-ers are respectful in their comments. If they don’t like the writer, they don’t subscribe. But reading these haters’ comments, I feel like I’m on Twitter again!
It's not about liking or not liking the writer. It's about being disappointed. It's a legit notion.
Wondering why you used the term "haters". It's very derogatory. Inciting even. Like Twitter.
Like (sites not letting me do so)
Yeah, what would be the Twits' interest in settling and yet allowing their company to be publicly embarrassed and possibly subject to further lawsuits?
(Note I assume it embarrassing to work for Twitter already, I guess by publicly embarrassed I just mean having their mendacity revealed.)
You know nothing,
That would be an impressive feat. To know knothing. Thanks for the overwhelming input and the spectacular intellectual laurels.
You know nothing.
and apparently - we'll have to wait for a new opportunity to learn something.
Berenson should get some amount of credit for allowing this to even be a topic and openly discussed on his substack.
I agree. He has quite a bit of tolerance for blowback among his own readers.
Well it might look sorta bad if he didn't. Then again it already looks sorta bad so maybe he should go for it. That sort of tactic works for big tech afterall
If he got a good settlement, he should refund everyone their donations, since they weren't needed after all.
I support what Alex is doing. Simple As that
Exactly. If you solicit or accept donations to help you in your lawsuit, and you settle the case for money without getting a court ruling to vindicate your position and help others, you should return every penny or else you are indeed a grifter.
Or maybe he could pay it forward. I don’t give the people I don’t know. It’s that simple. If you really felt that he had a point to prove, pray. God will provide what you need
Or as I thought he didn’t stand a chance even though we all know why he was kicked off. For stating facts that they didn’t want to print. I will not “judge” this situation. I hope that the most ridiculous of the posts are a campaign to make Alex lose his following I can confirm that blue check boy is the one multiple posts are coming from.
Be a nice gesture and prove that wasn’t his intention if he donated those funds to an active case fighting for freedom and he prior posts did say or at least imply the goal wasn’t to settle but to “shine the light” and so it def off putting
No, this is who he is. He can’t understand how the rest of us aren’t like him. That’s his problem.
"we take your money and our experience, and turn that into our money and your experience".
oh wait, that's what they say about goldman sachs.
Why is he an opportunist?
You thought you had a stake in his case against Twitter. It doesn’t matter a flying f what his settlement is doofus. You are the one who needs a lesson. People supported him against Twitter to support him. A last bastion of solid investigative reporting truthfully, artfully and with analysis skills that amazed me. I supported him for what Twitter did to him and thus me, trying to silence the facts on Covid and vaccines. Fuck you dumbass. Get off this platform that you don’t subscribe to or even if you do. You embarrass me.
Take a Motrin it’ll be over in a week
I like your comment
It won't let me hit like but I like!
Whose story is buried by his own agreement. I know of no investigative journalist who would do this voluntarily. So there must be a higher value than exposed truth here. Exposed wallet?
BF is a twitbot like so many others posting on this topic here. Things must not be looking too good for Twitter.
Does that clown pay you guys?
I mean, many of his disciples might be clinically retarded. I'd question the ethics surrounding taking advantage of them if it weren't so poetic.
What is more "retarded" than writing "I mean"?
These settlements with non-disclosure agreements attached to them actually should be ILLEGAL. This case has a judge assigned to it. It is being adjudicated in a court that is funded by taxpayers, by a judge who is funded by taxpayers. Once this case entered the court system and received a docket number, every aspect of it should have been made public, up to and including any settlement that was reached.
The fact that these non-disclosure agreements are allowed only underscores just how corrupt the U.S. judiciary has become.
The public's interest in this case stems from the fact that many other people use, and have been abused by, Twitter. They have a right to know whether it is worth their time and money to pursue their own lawsuits. By hushing up the settlement, no one is allowed to see whether Berenson recouped much of anything beyond the legal fees. That is precisely what Twitter wants. He is giving them what they want, and so is our corrupt court system.
Well said Darby Shaw.
Disagree completely. Confidentiality provisions are entirely necessary in a lot of instances.
For example? Other than family court cases involving minors, these provisions are generally used mostly to shield corporations for more lawsuits. If people could see that suing them is worth the time and expense, many people with the exact same complaint would do so.
This may be counterintuitive, but opening the floodgates to litigation is not good for the average person. I am a lawyer in one of the most litigious states in the country and it is a terrible environment for almost everyone except plaintiffs attorneys.
If everyone could see that it was worth their time and expense to sue Twitter for defamation, Twitter would very quickly stop defaming people. That would be a very good thing for society.
So litigation should not be for "the average person"? It should only be for the wealthy? Then the wealthy should be required to pay for the courthouse, judge, guards, etc., out of their own pockets.
Seems like the other influential substackers like Toby and Darby are unanimous in their disapproval and they should be.
Did you pay to initiate and pursue this lawsuit? Did you lose income by being banned from Twitter? If not, you have no reason to complain.
I cannot post one word on Twitter. I was never officially banned. But my comments are never seen. I am shadow banned because I speak the truth about the vaccines. Meanwhile those who lie through their teeth are promoted. Twitter being able to conceal the outcome of its court cases only ensures that this behavior will continue.
One word to explain this. Attorney’s
Well if they settle without a judge imposing terms why should the details be disclosed? That doesn't make sense.
I'll wait to judge until it's been closed.
The judge already ruled on discovery. Thus, our tax dollars were already invested in this court case. That is why we have a right to know the terms of any agreement that was reached.
If they want to keep the terms to themselves, they should stay the heck out of the court and just settle the matter privately.
Your tax dollars? No. You donated and weren't legally promised anything.
Our tax dollars fund the government, every aspect of it, including the courts. (Of course that's extremely naive. Corporations also massively bribe all the government agencies which regulate everything.)
What pressure would either party be under to negotiate without the leverage of the legal system?
The judge ruled for discovery. At what point did the parties involved go back to the court and ask the for their case to be removed from the docket, prior or after discovery being part of the court's control. If prior the discovery information is not part of the public's information.
Isn't the idea of settlement to keep the information out of the public sphere? Then a new legal action begins, the contract for settlement. If that contract is broken and the party offended desires to seek a remedy a whole new world of information will come into the public sphere.
NOTHING done by the courts should be secret. Justice dies in the dark.
Well, that’s not the way it works re settlement
Correct. Yet another reason our kangaroo courts have lost legitimacy.
No reason for this, except corruption in the court system. The two sides went to court. The court is funded by taxpayers. The court created a record. The record is funded by taxpayers. The court will maintain the record, again, at taxpayer expense.
If the two parties wanted to keep their dispute private, they should not have gone to court in the first place. Berenson signaled his intent to sue before he ever actually filed the suit. Twitter could have met privately with him, and they could have settled the matter out of court. Instead, Twitter chose to use the court system to try to fight the complaint. Twitter now has no right to privacy about this case or how it has been settled. The only reason it's being afforded privacy is because the court allows it, and the plaintiff wants to take his money and run.
🎯
Yes, such a law is needed.
Twitter will now rely on the court to enforce its non-disclosure agreement with Berenson. So again, this agreement is not truly private. It depends on the public court for enforcement. Otherwise, Twitter could say, okay Alex, we'll give you $2 million if you will not tell anyone how much we're giving you, and Alex could say, sure thing, then go blab the amount to the whole world. The only reason he can't do that is because Twitter could then run back to the public court and sue Berenson for violating their so-called "private" agreement.
Yeah and you are demonstrating a perfect case of Stockholm Syndrome now by making excuses for an obvious sell out. Alex for Congress, running as a neo- lib Dem. Promise one thing and sellout. Say “well it was everyone else’s fault or responsibility except my own.”
Will donors who supported his lawsuit get their money back? Doubtful.
Adults made an informed, grown up decision to contribute to something they wanted to be counted in on. A way to show solidarity. They knew it wasn’t something they’d get back. Geez people, do it because you want to not because you get something out of it. It’s really weird to hear whining. I thought that only came from the crazy ass left.
Agree 100%. I don't think anyone had a gun to their head to donate. Take responsibility for your decisions and stop whining.
We don’t want our money back!
Worth every cent!
They should.
No they shouldn't -- unless such was stated at the time of the solicitation and contribution. The point was to enable Alex to do righteous damage to Twitter, to fund his suit and to support his work in general. It was a contribution, not a loan!
Why should they?
Settlements are ALWAYS confidential & the parties are prohibited from discussing or revealing the agreement
Precisely. In a situation like this, the only one that wins is Twitter.
Im a paralegal in a defense law firm. A settlement is win-win for all, if going to trial would have been a potentially worse outcome for 1 party or the other (or both) & thus the motivation to settle. But again, settlement is always confidential & the parties are prohibited from revealing the particulars. That doesn’t preclude a “leak” but that’s unethical & against the law. Not that there’s much “rule of law” anymore, or it is 2-tiered
more like 3-tiered. depends on how much you 'donated' to the various 'foundations', like the clinton global initiative. the more you 'donate' the better 'justice' you get.
Agree. Political party &/or criminality have a lot to do w/ it as well.
It _may_ be win-win for the parties to the case. But it's a huge LOSE for the public, for justice, and for the majesty of the Law.
He should refund anyone who donated.
Berenson I’m sure wins too. You can bet he was awarded money
I sure hope so. Lol
No, they’re not. You can absolutely negotiate a settlement without a confidentiality provision.
True. Getting the little bird to settle without NDAs would have taken a year or more and run up 7 figures in plaintiff legal fees.
Not always, however, in this case yes.
Have to wait for more information and not rush to judgement.
"Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
What are you expecting? This was a direct quote from his post yesterday. It's absurd to expect to learn anything about a settlement with a company like Twitter. They aren't going to allow any discourse of the terms. Ever.
What if he gets restored to Twitter? What if Twitter changes how they handle factual Covid posts? You don't know what you don't know.
Let us know Bubba when Alex is back on Twitter.
Agree. If not ready to provide any detail about why this happened, publishing merely a notice that "this happened" is obviously going to spark backlash, for the same reason that the Experts' dubious decrees about the latest Science always sparked it.
he should NOT have issued begging letters just weeks ago. that's what makes this look really, really bad in my book.
Also agree. Crowdfunding makes everything so thorny, even if all is above-board. The slightest misstep or awkward communication is magnified when you've taken monetary support.
my point is that when you deal with legal, and they work with other reps, merely hammering out an agreement that every party will be happy with takes an astonishing amount of time. even my small company, stitching together 6-digit contracts can easily take weeks. in a bespoke matter like this, they would not have had boilerplate templates, in which they'd merely have to fill in the blanks. the likelihood of alex acting in good faith, asking for money weeks ago, would appear as slim as pfizer's recent trial outcome in the under-5's being wholly above water.
And let's not forget: the attorneys working on the agreement are billing, billing, billing the whole time.
Sure, I could believe all of that too. Just saying that even *if* otherwise legit, the mere existence of crowdfunding is nitroglycerin.
There will be no discovery, that is why Twitter settled. The fact is that Alex cannot raise enough money to fight Twitter for years. I'm sure Alex was well compensated, but we will never know the amount. Never put too much faith in humans, as we are all fallible. Everyone with a brain knows the govt. is in collusion with big tech. Twitter owns Joe's admin and the DOJ is corrupt as hell. Nobody really needs Twitter and in 5 years they may be gone anyway. I always said Twitter is a sewer and never joined. I think a lot of people get their ego boosted by the number of followers, even though many are bots. Musk is no angel, but he could make it much better.
It's mostly "journalists" jerking off each other.
IIRC, the stated promise was "I will not settle".
That's what i remember, too, something along those lines. I don't care enough to look through my email trash, though.
I don't remember that - in particular.
that may be getting that mixed up with Mr. O'Keefe.
Given my laziness in not digging up the primary source, if I'm wrong it will serve me right!
But I certainly recall a lot of bluster about justice being served and it certainly not being about the money or getting back on Twitter.
He did not have to release this statement before settlement. He could have waited till the ink was dry. Take a break. Lawyers cost money and everyone knew what he was fundraising for, lawyer fees. Duh! This rush to judgment crap is why the state of our legal system is in the toilet.
Nope. A two tiered system of justice is what's got the legal system in the toilet. Government using Social Media to censor and propagandize people is not settlement material.
All of this.
Alex spent months making bold promises of discovery, of hauling the truth into daylight.
Now he's collecting hush money.
You are speculating. Hope you aren't buying stock on those impulses.
If Alex were not grubbing for the money, he would refuse the settlement. No?
What settlement? This case is not over. The parties can engage in possible settlement talks while the case is proceeding. Don't get your panties in a bunch quite yet.
90% or more lawsuits settle out of court. Get over it.
Who enforces the settlement? The court. I have no problem with people setting. The court should not be enforcing privacy agreements. If you take a civil dispute to a public court you have no right to privacy.
Goals and outcomes are two different concepts. Schachtel's post is pure speculation. Though, it doesn't make your "you look like a grifter" observation invalid. Life is filled with discontinuities and disappointments. Ce la vie.
Why don't you wait until the settlement has been issued? Making these statements now just makes you look foolish.
Because I was born on a day, and it wasn't yesterday.
Tweet needs a reply from you Alex...?
Give it a rest. You have no idea what you're talking about. Let it play out like it is supposed to, then you can Monday morning quarterback. If you didn't contribute, you have absolutely no skin in the game.
My skin in the game is that I paid for a subscription to Unreported Truths, in return for which I haven't gotten much, because Berenson seems to have spent most of the past 8 months on his publicly funded lawsuit, in our publicly funded courts, with which he will now take an undisclosed sum of money for his own personal use.
yeah i paid for a subscription as well. but thanks for your comment. i assume that when this eventually 'plays out' and nothing comes of it, you'll have the 'we already knew back in june' comment on a template already. isn't that the usual schpiel?
yeah, if the smug twitter blue check is gloating, then we should all feel bad & start whining & crying
unless, i guess, if he doesn't know what he's talking about & alex does
I don't think you're a grifter. Yes, I am scratching my head over this right now. But I'm willing to wait and see what happens.
I think you're a good guy. You've done great and important work.
I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.
me too, this would be the lamest grift ever
Mee too.
This is how I see it too. I’m waiting. And hoping those shouting right now are proven wrong.
As long as it is allowing you to publicize what the relationship between Twitter and the Feds was, lots of people will be happy. Otherwise, less so. We can wait to find out.
Let's hope it shines a light on the incestuous relationship between the authoritarians of all stripes, whether at Twitter or in DC.
The whole point, in my eyes anyway, was to expose the corruption and collusion. Taking a settlement with a non-disclosure makes for a big, fat nothing burger. So, Thanks for nothing I guess.
We have got to stop rushing to judgment in our own echo chambers. Alex I'm willing to read your side of all this when you're ready.
But I don't think, according to his words, he'll have much to say:
From his earlier post, "Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
Bingo! Do people even read any more?
Exactly. The rampant speculation is ridiculous.
Not a big fan of the blue checks in general, but he does raise an important question about donations. People donated money meant to fund a prolonged battle not to reach a quick settlement.
No one was forced to donate. I am willing to wait and see. Alex ignore this Mass Formation Psychosis. God Bless.
I didn't see anything from Alex promising how long the battle would last. Let's see what the settlement is rather than focus on how long it took. The donations probably affected the timeline anyway, as the plaintiff having a financial warchest would certianly be an inducement to the other side toward settling.
He literally wrote that he wouldn’t settle and was doing this just for the discovery phase of the lawsuit.
tbh I don't remember what he wrote. You may be right. I just remember having the impression that he was promising to make sure he accomplished his objectives and that he wouldn't settle in a way that satisfied his private interests without addressing the larger problem he was fighting. I could be wrong. Like most people here, I read far more on Substack than I can possibly remember.
Really?
Omg, you think it'd be BETTER for Alex to endure the threat of bankruptcy and the emotional stress of legal conflict over a prolonged time? RespectfulIy I can't think of anything more naive or selfish.
ALEX IGNORE THESE PEOPLE. Just do NOT respond.
Do NOT LET THEM GET UNDER YOUR SKIN.
Ignore.
And you owe NO ONE an apology for anything.
AMEN!
Alex, step away from the computer (or phone or whatever device you use). Ignore these self-righteous blowhards.
Enjoy the 4th of July with your family.
Blowhards?? When someone begs for money and claims they’re doing precedent-setting work to make the world better, but then quietly settles behind closed doors and says it’s none of our beeswax, that doesn’t make us blowhards.
Alex didn't beg for money. He fund-raised for a worthy cause, and the money he raised went to lawyers' fees. Did you make a large donation and now you feel like you didn't get your money's worth? Maybe Alex saw that the best resolution was a settlement. I proudly donated. I don't feel that I sent the money in vain or that Alex was disingenuous.
So what did you get out of it?
The stated purpose was to expose Twitter’s shadow banning, censorship, etc. A secret hushed settlement accomplishes nothing.
To settle means Alex got something. I feel so happy for him to be out of this lawsuit and no longer facing the anxiety of never- ending legal bills. Have you ever been in a lawsuit? It is hell.
And let's not forget: the attorneys working on the agreement are billing, billing, billing the whole time.
Keep that in mind if you donated.
If Twitter came to thE table to settle, seems like a win, glad I donated to defeat and chip at their ideologue radical agenda.
And moral victories are wins too I suppose. Sorry I am old school. An actual win is a win. Alex didn’t even enter the playing field, just the arena and the forfeited for a few bucks.
No apology needed IF he supplies a substantial delivery on his promise. Otherwise....he deserves the label.
Unless you believe Twitter has both agreed to settle AND allow all discovery into their shenanigans to become public (would make no sense) then how in the world could he have possibly delivered on his promise?
100% agree.
Uh huh.
He promised he would never settle, that the purpose of the lawsuit was to bring everything into the open.
He fundraised off those promises.
Now he breaks them and you think he owes "NO ONE" an apology?
Who are you, his wife?
Yes be ignore-ant!
This just in: Berenson is an evil meanie and steals people's money.
Source: Dude, trust me.
What a clown Schachtel is!
It's a legitimate concern. Typically, settlements like this mean that little or no information will be released to the public. We'll see what happens, but it seems unlikely that we're going to learn a lot about Twitter's relationship with the Biden administration, for example...I hope I'm wrong about that.
Per Berenson, "Now, I can’t say anything more until we actually file the settlement and dismiss the case, and even then I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential."
Is he restricted from just talking about the settlement?
He will probably be allowed to talk about it in a general way but won't be able to say how much money he got, and he probably will be restricted from disclosing information learned in discovery. Contrary to popular belief, not all settlements are confidential but you can bet this one will be, although the degree of confidentiality is uncertain at this point.
I have not followed this closely. Do you know if he promised contributors that he wouldn't settle, that full discovery was his goal?
I don't think Berenson specifically promised that he wouldn't settle (no one can promise that), but he certainly implied that his primary goal was disclosure of how Twitter and the Biden Administration (and CDC) worked hand in glove to censor people like him. I doubt people would have donated to the legal defense fund just so Alex could extract more cash from the defendant.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT."
Notice all Alex says is "None of you know"....nothing about what he is going to tell or IF he is going to reveal anything *substantial*. He’s doing what Alex does best when he’s got nothing to back himself up — he gets pissy and derogatory. Just like with his stance against ivermectin. He couldn’t stay neutral — he had to actually lash out at and insult his subscribers who have reviewed the data on the effectiveness of ivermectin as part of a multi pronged treatment approach. Hundreds of studies showing efficacy. What does Alex do? Picks ONE study with unfavorable findings and shouts from the rooftops that he’s been right all along and his troglodyte subscribers can suck eggs. No careful walk thru of the findings like in his other fine journalism. Only vindictive. (BTW, other more serious writers did do a point by point walk thru of that trial and found it to be severely flawed)
Same here. Not even a promise of a serious and thoughtful follow up. Just a child lashing out at justified criticism. Jordan wouldn’t have room to criticize if Berenson had spoken out first with meaningful information—and let’s admit, Berenson has known for some time what this deal would consist of and had plenty of time to write about it in preparation of release.
My money is on he will hide behind some confidentiality cloak and hope all his subscribers and contributors will forget if he.strings it out long enough.
Beware the man who lashes out with nothing but anger when confronted with serious allegations. Alex provided nothing meaningful by way of explanation to Jordan's criticisms. Let that be the first warning light.
I was an eager subscriber when he proclaimed his intention to follow Big Pharma to the ends of the earth to reveal their crimes against humanity (or some such proclamation). I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts. He runs hot and cold as evidenced by this little missive.
Good luck to those who trusted and contributed to his cause. I truly hope something substantial comes from it. I’m not holding my breath.
"I subsequently unsubscribed when I realized his "reporting" consisted of too many hot takes and caustic remarks, and not enough serious dissection of the facts"
Perfectly said.
Remember how he would only repeat the study abstracts and never interviewed a SINGLE doctor who believed in early treatment?
I agree w you. To me, was obvious he had made up his mind and wasn’t open to credible new or existing data. Worse, his primary "argument" was to ridicule and excoriate those who believe IVM has potential value with little or no downside. I don’t know how an honest broker couldn’t at least acknowledge that IVM is so benign with *decades* of known side effect history that even if one doesn’t believe it adds value in treatment, there’s at lists little to no harm in trying. Instead his reaction was "you stupid rubes." That’s what made me question how much bias was infecting all of his other reporting.
I'm with you on this 👏🏽
Jordan is right. Glad I don't trust anyone, including Alex, so wasn't gifted to support his legal bills.
If you need to be handcuffed to Mr. Berenson before you'll allow yourself to (aaaa-a-aggghhhh!) trust him, what in the name of jesus are you doing, posting here?
while it's true we don't know what's in the settlement, we do know what you've posted, and experienced the garden path you clearly led us down. discovery will basically not happen at this stage, or rather, if it does, it will be a severely neutered form. there is no way they would allow this to happen, while settling.
Jordan has a point though, if you get a settlement in cash will you give back the money to your fundraisers?
Your reporting over the last two years has earned you the benefit of the doubt, at least from me. I won't pass judgement until I hear the whole story.
Let's wait for the data, people! Who do you think you are, Pfizer?
The fact that NONE OF US KNOW WHAT'S IN THE SETTLEMENT is kind of the main sticking point though isn't it?
Not really, no. Doesn't take strong logic to come to the conclusion that Twitter won't be fully disclosing their practices in the settlement. If they were, then what would their motivation be to settle? They are doing this to withhold information that Alex promised to shine a light on.
That is my point: people here are upset because none of us know what's in the settlement, so Alex using "you guys don't know" as an argument doesn't hold a lot of water.
Alex, you set up a GoFundMe account to raise money for your legal battle, yes?
You settled said legal battle.
Unless your settlement includes a HUGE admission of wrongdoing by Twitter for censoring dissident voices (unlikely, since the general idea of settling is companies avoid such damning admissions), you settled for something less than the principle at stake.
And Jordan called you out on it.
You put this out there. You made the story. You made yourself the story.
Own it.
As long as the settlement doesn't cross this "red line" we're good:
Update on Berenson v Twitter
This would be a very good time to donate to the legal fund
Alex Berenson
Jun 6
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
and, there it is. The reason people are upset.
I'm guessing the feds noticed Mr Berenson had discovery for their golden calf which is directly illegal.
To be fair — It appeared to me as an ardent follower of your substack that it did appear that you fundraised under the pretense to shine light- so it would be reasonable for those who supported to expect to get some “light” for their donations even that may result in a less beneficial secret NDA settlement for yourself?
I Understand winning a settlement, but it probably is safe to assume it’s quite the payout to include all of your attorney fees that you solicited donations for. I hope you would consider donating those raised funds to other freedom fighting causes or are still on the fight!
In another important legal battle— Feds 4 Medical Freedom just got the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to put the vaccine injunction for federal employees back in place and rehearing the case En Banc. Grassroots efforts with no major donors and there are a lot of other great causes that likely deserve your platform to get the word out!
Feds4MedFreedom.org
Article on their case:
https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/06/appeals-court-further-delays-enforcement-bidens-vaccine-mandate-feds-until-least-fall/368673/
Why is Jordan your enemy here? If all is fine and good and you will still deliver on your promise, can you not just prove him wrong? Frankly, I really enjoy your snark, but often it comes out in what looks like an uncalled for overreaction and less like intrepid journalism that refuses to compromise.
I don't really care what you think about Jordan. I can form my opinions about him by myself. I DO care about your response to the SUBSTANCE of his criticism. Please set your ego aside for a minute and address these legitimate, adult concerns like a legitimate adult. Saying stuff like “NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT,” just brings up more questions than answers. Not helpful, even with the Caps Lock.
Anyway, I'm here with the popcorn waiting to be convinced things are fine, but I can't say it looks like you're winning here. I really appreciated your Unreported Truths and Pandemia books. I'm not your enemy, but I can't exactly call myself a fan at this point either.
Alex..I have not always agreed with you. ie ivermectin BUT......I hope you take Twitter to the cleaners. I hope you make a shit ton of money. I believe you when you said you would shine the light on them. YOU FOUGHT and didn't quit. Haters are gonna hate. Sorry...but fuck 'em
Well said!
Thanks for your post.
Disappointed in this decision.
We had all wanted--needed--the discovery phase of the suit.
Extra disappointed considering my paid subscription was just renewed.
I guess I'll make a note on next year's calendar to cancel at that time.
Hoping you have a reasonable explanation, Alex.
Quote from Alex… “ I won’t be able to say much about the specifics of the settlement, as those are largely confidential.”
Alex may have won but we, who helped fund this fight to discover, will never know. This may be a win for Alex but a loss for mankind.
This was always published as a fight to get to the truth. A settlement with a confidentiality clause does not get to the truth.
Alex, again… you let us down.
Pharma/DOD/CIA/CCP/PLA made Twitter an offer they couldn't refuse.
Twitter made Berenson an offer he couldn't refuse.
Meanwhile millions are being maimed and killed by dangerous vaccines.
Nailed it
Thanks 🙏 Toby. There is a reason why I support you. You have not only retained integrity but moved in practical ways to make this about us. Quite the contrast I must say. I am going to donate as a founding member over and above my annual support of you.
Thank you so much brother!!! 🙌
Yes I wish that Alex would get back to copying and pasting from the Internet about the vaccine again. Most of his info is about a day late.
See my June 3 comment in response to “Update Berenson v. Twitter” dated June 2. Don’t hate on Alex, this is how these matters proceed. He achieved a great deal by bringing the action in the first instance. Remember, it’s a marathon, not a sprint.
I want to quote from here:
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/update-on-berenson-v-twitter-6ae
"Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."
So not all hope is lost but it seems that this settlement was already in the works when the above mentioned post was created.
Typical liberal say one thing do the other.
You have been a voice of truth and enlightenment re: Covid-19 and the vax for many, and for that you are a national treasure. I don't like your views on Trump, or Ivermectin. I think you have seen through the Fog of Propaganda on Covid-19 exceedingly well, but you haven't made your way through the fog yet on those issues.
I have never seen anything that indicates you are dishonest, or anything but genuine in your assertions and convictions. So, I believe your earlier mailing where you indicate that you will not settle if you are gagged (unless and until proven wrong).
You are one of the good ones, and we shouldn't rush to assume (as is the norm in today's world).
I am revisiting this a bit after digging further.
Putting my lawyer hat on, Twitter's discovery was due TODAY, June 30. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/61630076/berenson-v-twitter-inc/
The stipulated order was carefully drafted to obfuscate that today was the deadline (it gave the original date of June 20, and buried in the next section that discovery had been extended by 10 days). And, it was filed on June 29 -- the day before Twitter was supposed to hand over documents. Likely Alex doesn't have the documents.
The actual meat-and-potatoes of the proposed stipulation extends discovery by 28 days. Courts will nearly always agree to stipulations like this one. I can't foresee a reason that the Court wouldn't here.
Collectively, this reads to me that:
A) Twitter HAS NOT given Alex the documents;
B) Alex has given them an additional 28 days to do so;
C) Twitter has thrown some kind of massive moneybomb at this to get settlement on the table; and
D) The ONLY reason they would do this is because there are DAMNING, and I mean bad, documents in the discovery. And, conveniently, they haven't turned the discovery over to Alex yet and likely never will.
Like I said -- I want to, and I guess I still will, give Alex the benefit of the doubt. But, reading the actual Court document, it is harder to do so.
My Berenson subscription just autorenewed. I wish I had paused until this resolved. I will be turning the autorenew off now, and its only getting turned back on if Alex didn't sell out.
this deserves to be further up. i would throw in i also found it a bit odd that he started talking about elon musk's pending take-over, however, it would make perfect sense for twitter to want to settle as quickly as possible, given the probability of elon walking should terrible information be released under discovery. consequently, the settlement offer would be required to be of significantly high monetary value for berenson to immediately accept, ie, an offer he couldn't refuse.
this all stinks to high heaven.
i hope your auto-renew wasn't annual. i should probably check if mine was auto-renewed; only recently, my disney+ subscription renewed for a year THE DAY before all the Florida stuff broke, and my wife insisted on me cancelling. a bloody day!
Love your well thought out response. I have a deep seated feeling you are correct.
The lesson here is that everyone in media these days (and just about everywhere else), including Alex, adopts the primary moral principle to put as much money in their bank account as possible to help fund their early retirement and make them feel higher in the social dominance hierarchy.
But while they engage in that primary pursuit, they adopt certain topical interests and biases that are generally authentic (because faking it would be too difficult to hide) and feed the interests of certain media consumers.
I have said this before but the people of the US lost their moral compass for being principled above what they think they can get away with to improve their wealth and power when Bill Clinton sat there on national TV and told his baldfaced lie that he did not have sex with that woman Ms. Lewinski. In that single act the leader of the free world let it be known that it was okay to lie, cheat and steal as long as you can get away with it.
So today Alex, assuming he took the Twitter cash, can only be criticized as being a normal modern moral person while being lauded as writing good stuff.
When did we become a world of stunted, emotionally reactive infants?
Alex tried to tell you the truth about COVID, for FREE, while you paid the govt to lie to you.
Redirect your anger, and….CALM DOWN.
I was born this way
😀
He lied to us, and he's blowing his top like a child to cover for it.
Alex, this is not right if you don't at least provide some context. You know exactly what the reason for the donations in this lawsuit was. Like it or not, this will otherwise make you look like a grifter!
Alex.
I trust you. I am glad you got what you needed. If the last two years doesn’t prove you don’t sell out, then I don’t know what would have.
These idiots that are screaming, they will look like asses.
I agree Alex. People need to slow the heck down.
Settlements are typically secret are continually negotiated from day one of the filing. Always keep the door open but keep fighting. I believe that Twitter settled because they were going to lose their section 230 if their partnership with the Governments were exposed with docs that Alex subpoenaed eg propaganda machine of totalitarian Government. The dummies don't realize that if Twitter was solely acting alone without Government direction and support, its a slam dunk against Alex. Since Governments are directly working with Twitter to censor, censure, and otherwise curtail content, Twitter is no longer acting independently as a private company, but an arm of the Government propaganda machine. The legal question to be answered would need to be answered is whether Twitter acted in concert with the Government and to what degree. Eg Depositions, discovery for several years. We are all stuck waiting to hear what we can from Alex as he is the aggrieved party. I doubt Alex would settle for less that pious intentions especially after all the money that is needed to litigate. Remember Justice is not free and neither are attorneys. After what they do to all of us? us = people who are banned from Twitter cause the Government doesn't like us. I would totally stick it to Twitter for as much and as far I could get. I would force do quite a few things plus lots of cash = eg litigation is expensive and I would also want a retirement. Its always cheaper for a company to settle than it is to litigate period. You have to determine what your chances of successful litigation are eg business decision (non emotional) Twitter had to decide if the risk of litigating and losing is worth not settling in the short term. My bet is that Twitter recognized that if private company documents were released showing Government collusion would do more damage (not that it isn't severely damaged) to their brand than settling for copious amounts of money and some other piddly stuff and it would push them closer to being liable for the section 230 loss. eg (Alex is blue checked and can never be banned for anything he says; an apology letter or various as sundry of small things).
Alex is blameless in the sense is he is accomplishing what he set out to do. His settlement is not a statement of his desire to not stick it to Twitter. Its a reflection of how desperate Twitter is and probability of a long costly litigation of which Twitter has superior resources and endless cash to throw down. I could be totally wrong. Allow the process to continue and wait.
I didn't read your post, why would anyone but I did read the first sentence. Even if settlements are "typically" secret at this point in time you have no idea of the details of this particular settlement so STFU!
You are retarded. Read the post before you comment Mr Brilliant or did I assume your gender?
Why would I read your post you simpleton. You're not that smart and as you know zero of the details of the settlement no one is interested in your essay speculation.
I'll make this simple Wait for the Facts.
Just a thought…
Until the settlement is finalized and accepted by the court, it’s not done.
A settlement doesn’t mean Alex “folded”….or that Twitter folded…
Let’s act like adults and get the facts…
All Alex has said is that apparently there is a settlement and he can’t talk about it at this point…. That’s it
Court doesn't get input on whether to accept the settlement or not. This isn't a class action.
Two private parties, private cause of action. They can settle in any way they see fit.
Read my comments above. I want to give Berenson the benefit of a doubt. But, as a lawyer, reading the actual document that got filed last night it got much harder to do so.
Thank you. The rational responses to this news, like yours, seem to be running 1 to 10 if not 1 to 20. I guess it's another sign that everyone has lost their F'n minds.
People want blood. Alex sounded like he just might get it and he may well have
The real issue is what can be put in place to keep future Alexs from being run out of the public square.
We don't know what the details are. So there's no value in bashing anyone until we hear.
If this results in a total change in Twitter policies, and numerous people are allowed back on Twitter, then anyone who donated (I didn't) should be very happy.
If it results in only Alex being allowed back on Twitter - especially if any details of the settlement are agreed to be confidential - then anyone who donated should feel like a total sucker.
I have been able to get on Twitter easily starting today for the first time in years! Past attempts always sent me in an endless loop of account verifications.
Complete confidence here that Berenson is an honest broker . He was one of the few who went up against the pharma industrial complex on MRNA jabs and the data proves him right .
The promise by Alex was disclosure and transparency of twitters behavior and the possible collusion with government. If in the end, Alex gets a paycheck and is required under agreement to keep everything he and his attorneys learned under wraps, then we have a ethical/character problem with Alex. However, I cannot discount the positive work he has done. I will give him time for rebuttal. But it certainly does not reflect well on him at this moment. Let's see what hsppens.
Jumpy, Jumpy, JUMPY!
Wow- LOTS of conclusions being drawn without much evidence.
I thought this group was different, or are those people withholding comment, pending further developments?
Aside from that, I *think* Alex is smarter than many of you are giving him credit for. Plus he has a mischievous side as a provocateur.
You really think he'd post something like this and leave it at that?
Hmmm...
Time and again the first reaction to any news is "Ready, Fire, Aim! " Everyone wants to be first with their hot take. Let this play out before you commit to a narrative.
I hate when we fight people on the same team. Jordan is a great reporter but should give Alex the benefit of the doubt. Just like Alex should give Malone the benefit of the doubt. The 3 libs on the SCOTUS always stay united no matter what even when they live in fantasyland. Our side would do much better staying united in this fight.
I agree and am withholding judgment until we learn. Ore. Am trying to imagine the terms of the settlment that would also allow AB to claim he lived up to his June 6 promises.
However, it may be useful to stipulate that AB is, after all the Covid dust settles , a man of the left.
"NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT TWITTER AND I AGREED TO. NONE OF YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THE SETTLEMENT" - Exactly. Yet, the stated purpose of your suit was to bring Twitter's censorship apparatus into spotlight and you can't/won't release details of the settlement of a suit you fundraised for.
Mr Bluecheck has a point here. He doesn't have to call you a grifter. Your actions are making you look like one.
We trust you Alex.
Who is "we"?
Speak for yourself.
Next up - Twitter receives government bailout to cover settlement? Free, fact checked speech comes with a price tag.
Until and unless we know what's in the settlement, how can *any* of us comment intelligently on the settlement?
How are our critical comments much different from the alphabet legacy media's obsession with being "first" at the expense of being "right"?
There's no difference. I'd even say that everyone in this forum condemning Alex and even those who have no doubt what so ever in the purity of his motives exhibit the same lack of rational forethought that you heard from Covidians who said dumb sh!t like "mask it or casket" or "follow the science" or if a person was was especially dim they may have shortened it to just "science".
At this point I'd say to any poster on this forum with a firm opinion either way; nobody knows all of the facts at this point, the intelligent thing to do is wait for more evidence before you pass judgement. You're just not that smart.
We can comment on it because Alex fundraised on the explicit promise that there would BE NO SETTLEMENT.
I specifically asked "how can *any* of us comment intelligently on the settlement?"
Not comment per se, but comment intelligently, and, intelligently on the settlement in particular.
I don't remember him making an explicit promise not to settle, but I most certainly can be mistaken on that point. In which case criticism of him settling would be legit, but not criticism of the settlement itself...since none of us is privy to its contents.
Would you mind linking to his Substack column(s) in which he made that explicit promise not to settle?
Was the settlement such that you can't talk about the settlement? If that's the case, then you are a “GRIFTER EXTRAORDINAIRE” if you got to make the discovery you mentioned which was so crucial to the whole lawsuit in the first place, then the settlement is acceptable to me. Just shed light on everything you found out in discovery.
STFU
Shouldn't we all reserve judgement until the terms of the settlement are known. If he chooses or is forced to keep them secret then he has betrayed our trust. We supported exposing Twitter; justice; and freedom of speech via the Alex Berenson lawsuit. If the settlement doesn't include these items then shame on us for trusting him.
Seems a little grift-y. We donated money and what do we get to see at the end of it all...not a damn thing. Nothing. Case settled, can't share any details. What was it all for?
🎯
It’s grift-y
Alex, you're a magnet for screwballs.
THIS is the problem with Twitter: unfettered nuttiness. No civil discourse. No intelligent exchange of opinions.
I can't stand the shrieking and that's why I don't have a Twitter account.
Alex…not sure what these poster are thinking, but forcing Twitter to settle and get compensated for your loss of readership and income seems to be about all an individual can do…hopefully sets up precedents against Twitter…
How else would you punish a company into better behaviors other than money or legislation…
Pretty sure you never said you were taking Legislative action.
Some confused people on this thread about winning a settlement as punishment and therefore a grifter???
Settlements don't set precedents by their very nature.
If a large sum is paid out for compensation by Twitter for censoring Alex, they may think again when the censor without cause...
I think I may have donated $20 to Alex, but I never expected to get part of settlement...I imagine there are also actions that Twitter must fulfill as well..
Alex, anyone who has been following you knows not to believe any of that nonsense.
I subscribe to both of these Substacks and this type of "internet battle" is beneath someone.
"As we debate the power and political influence of social media companies, this discovery offers a unique opportunity to see how Twitter and the federal government and others may have colluded against my voice. No one else has this chance. No one.
And I am not going to give it up.
Not for reinstatement, not for money, not for all the viruses in China. I will NOT agree to any settlement that does not preserve my discovery rights about third-party communications AND give me the right to publicize them. There are other things I will (and have) given up, you have to give to get, but this is the reddest of lines."