For those who don’t get it: If they buy from the Infowars store, those assets can be seized. If they buy from his dad, the assets are protected because his dad wasn’t the one who got sued. It’s a very blatant asset-hiding scheme.
Imagine if the owner of a big brand were going bankrupt and had to sell off all of their assets, (including the holdings for the store.) So instead, they start telling people to buy from their dad’s store, which is virtually identical in every way and the only difference is that the money ends up in your dad’s account instead of yours. It’s intentionally poisoning the asset seizure, by refusing to continue operating as a shop prior to your bankruptcy.