💀 Horrorcow Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta / "u/Early-Leopard-8351" - Polysubstance abusing puppy snuffing cuckold who dosed his child, "Lawtube pope" turned zesty Dabbleverse streamer. Swinger visitor of 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Seethed at his ex-BF Aaron on REDDIT. Wife's gunted and toed bod worth $50. Drives like a Jeet.

[The Wokest]

WTF is a preample?

preamble with a B
think of it as an appetizer, a prefix something like that.
latin word was praeambulus
Like snorting coke is the preamble for doing swinger cuck shit in Rekieta's house
Or like having a limp dick is the preamble for asking the dude fucking your wife for Viagra

 

[ThisHill2DieOn]

That's fair. Those people should be mocked. Kurt's commentary about the mandatory reporter was retarded.

I'm talking about Andrew's current stream. People in this thread are shitting on him and the others on the stream for doing a law focused stream where they discuss the legal merits of various aspects of the case.

Because they’re talking retarded shit. Would you take a financial advisor seriously if they told you, if you want to be a millionaire, you just have to buy a winning mega millions lotto ticket?

“Hey, doc! I have stage 4 lung cancer!What should I do?”
“Well, you should have never started smoking.”

Their analysis is useless and a waste of time. Arguing that they don’t like this law, so it shouldn’t exist - that’s not a legal argument. You don’t have to like the laws, but those are the laws and you’re not going to wish them out into the corn field. Arguing that that there’s no probable cause on a warrant they haven’t seen is pointless. They have no idea how valid or invalid it is and to treat as if it fits their desired outcome is childish idiocy.

Keep in mind, these chucklefuck niglets are touting themselves as bigwig, super serious lawyers while spouting some intensely retarded faggot shit.

 

[TherapyMan]

Are lawyers creatures incapable of discussing anything other than the law all the time?

Some lawyers might pretend that this is the case to distract from the fact that they are linked to and previously endorsed a child-abusing drug addict with a lackadaisical approach to storing firearms around children.

 

[zimzam88]

Here is Sean (PotentiallyCriminal)'s take on the probable cause, affidavit and mandatory reporter from last night. He clearly believes that there was more evidence that they were acting on to get the warrant and not just solely based on the "evil alawg swatting Pastor" report. Edited to remove some Aaron and PPP.

3:40:00 into the 26 May 2024 Kino Casino stream

2:43

 

[Kiwi Yuga]

Let me take your question and flip it around.

Why are we constrained to judging Rekieta only based on the law? Or, for that matter, why are they? Are lawyers creatures incapable of discussing anything other than the law all the time?

KF is not a legal discussion website. Not exclusively anyways. The legal aspect of all this, as to the criminal case, was split off and is in the Lolcow & Lolcow LLP subforum now. There's also a Monty lawsuit thread too. Somebody like Andrew might not even realize that.

This is Nick's main lolcow thread. We can absolutely make moral arguments here, and Andrew can't do a goddamned thing about it.

Nick got caught with 25+ grams of coke. No legal argument is gonna change that fact.

Plus, obviously, there are plenty of other aspects of Nick to discuss here. I think the Kino Casino proved that the other night.

We are under no constrains at all in how we discuss Rekieta. This thread isn't a lawtube stream. I just don't think it is particularly fair criticism to shit on lawyers who made a career discussing legal topics for discussing the legal aspects of the case. The legal arguments being discussed aren't particularly persuasive and they lack a lot of information such as the actual search warrant affidavit, but speculating about these things is the biggest reason people follow people like Legal Mindset in the first place. Wanting them to go into dramatics about how terrible of a person Nick is, is silly.

 

[break these cuffs]

People need to seriously start baking:

- corrupt state funded by SOROS goes after Nick for speaking the TRUTH
- they are walking into the trap laid by the white hats (Rekieta, Dick, and Barnes (BOOM))
- it turns out it was just apple juice and baking powder, no drugs or alcohol
- Aaron is an undercover white hat, he has been on it since the hot tub stream, helping build the narrative
- the STORM is coming
- all the corrupt Minnesota officials will be arrested after the GREAT AWAKENING
- second amendment will be FULLY restored
- BOOM
- YES to the constitution and founding fathers, NO to judge Fischer's alcoholic pussy juice
- Ralph will come back from the exile
- Nick will be bigger than ever
- balldo of justice will not be lubed
- Rittenhouse will visit the sodomy barn with Nick

PATRIOTS ARE IN THE CONTROL TRUST THE GUNT​

>mfw the kandiyohi county commandos try to black bag me and force me to tell them my secret balldo techniques



The won't catch me outside my castle slipping like American Patriot Nicholas R. Rekieta.

 

[The Omni Cuckold]

That's fair. Those people should be mocked. Kurt's commentary about the mandatory reporter was retarded.

I'm talking about Andrew's current stream. People in this thread are shitting on him and the others on the stream for doing a law focused stream where they discuss the legal merits of various aspects of the case.

You asked "Why do you all expect the lawyers to moralfag about this?"

There are a couple issues.

1. Andrew is kinda bringing morality into it by shitting on Randazza for his comments.

2. Andrew is acting like a defense attorney, which is fine, but there is too much presumption in talking about Nick that is isn't mountains of evidence on video to support things and very possible interviews and / or interactions with the children. It is unlikely no one from the church or homeschool community keeps up with the streams. It is reasonable to assume that someone those communities may have seen the widely shared clip of Nick yelling at his 6 year old while visibly intoxicated. It's evidence like that which can lead to reasonable questions to the children with answers that would triggered this forced entry into Nick's house. The nose powder on stream can also be used as some in lawtube have reluctantly admitted. To lean so heavily into the search warrant is unconstitutional argument that some in lawtube are doing is ridiculous.

3. I stated before but there are two legal issues for Nick right now. One is winning the drug / firearms charges and the second is with CPS and the children. But no reasonable person would believe that is actually a "win" and Nick is exonerated. It is not a moralfag thing to care about the second issue of Nick losing his kids right now. If the drug and firearm charges are dropped it is not likely Nick will immediately get his kids back unless Minnesota CPS is for some reason much more lax than other states with which I am familiar. Also it's not like other evidence that can get thrown out with a bad search warrant. Any statement the kids make are still statements that can be investigated and create issues for Nick that need to get resolved whether or not they are allowed to be used to charge Nick with a crime. The status of the children is still a legal issue that Nick needs to resolve. It's understandable that some lawtubers don't want to touch it but to handwave this just so they can explain how Nick can still "win" is retarded.

 

[Malaika]

As if I didn't hate libertarians enough already.

Yeah, Legal Mindsets spergery about the subject is very hypocritical. He keeps lambasting people for making emotional arguments but a lot of his arguments and assumptions are clearly rooted in emotion as well.

That's fair. Those people should be mocked. Kurt's commentary about the mandatory reporter was retarded.

I'm talking about Andrew's current stream. People in this thread are shitting on him and the others on the stream for doing a law focused stream where they discuss the legal merits of various aspects of the case.

Except the majority wasn't discussing the legal merits of the case. It's not a discussion if only one view is presented. The only person to push back on this was Nate, and sadly he didn't stay for very long.

 

[Male Idiot]

He‘s busy sniping back at people leaving mean comments on months old instagram posts.

A true and honest lawyer always has his priorities right!

Perhaps he'll get his law career back on track, offering his services to nignogs for a hit of cocaine.

I mean he loves nignogs, so this may have been his master plan all along!

 

[FattyBomba]

Why are all these lawfags pretending that at any point in time in their lives having guns and drugs at the same time isn't an automatic trumped up federal felony? Weed is basically legal everywhere and it's still a federal felony to be in possession of guns and weed at the same time. You also can't even legally buy a gun from an FFL if you admit to simply USING weed on the 4473 form.

 

[gang weeder]

Nick tortures and bludgeons animals to death. He has a gun and can put down pest animals humanly. Neighbors to close? He has a trap (the one he drowns critters in) he could use an air rifle coupled with the trap. Instead he gets enjoyment and brags about causing these animals to suffer. This was all before the drug arc so he doesn't have that excuse.

Nick has no empathy and is beyond all redemption. I don't care if he's sober.

Sure and lots of people will agree with you. He will never be able to go back to before all this, he will always have a certain amount of people a-logging him and making jabs about all this stuff, forever. But if he genuinely cleaned himself up and did better, there would also be a large audience that would reward him for that. That's all I'm saying.

But I think that's the least likely outcome and it's a pure theory exercise. To fix the mess he's in would require extraordinary levels of self discipline and good character. Nick obviously just doesn't have those traits in him. People with extraordinary character don't end up in his situation to begin with.

 

[yydszmiteg2]

If Barnes legit tried to make some of these arguments I've lost a ton of respect for him.
The only ones I agree with are the 2A ones.
Fucking lolbertarians make me sick.
You're not "only affecting yourself" when you have five fucking kids you're responsible for.

When you have kids a decent person should make those kids their priority until they are 18.
If you can't do that don't have kids.
When you become a parent you are not only responsible for yourself anymore.
These fucking people make me sick.

This right here is why I'm only a libertarian on a top level scale. I'm staunchly conservative in my personal/local community values. Too many fucking degenerates act like there is no difference between having a junkie 100 miles away vs next door. Total "How does this affect you" fag death.

 

[Fslur]

Reminds me of nicks take on the Clairebere hack

https://youtu.be/xm_3izsHgHo

Be aware nick of how evil the internet can be.

Rekieta is pretty evil offline. Bringing illicit substances around his kids, around other people’s kids having sex parties in the house. But yes Rekieta your issue was some woman laughed at you online about the shit you shared openly.

That shouldn’t have bothered him so much but it did, Claire really got to him. I bet he has an online enemies list too.

 

[Kiwi Yuga]

1. Andrew is kinda bringing morality into it by shitting on Randazza for his comments.

2. Andrew is acting like a defense attorney, which is fine, but there is too much presumption in talking about Nick that is isn't mountains of evidence on video to support things and very possible interviews and / or interactions with the children. It is unlikely no one from the church or homeschool community keeps up with the streams. It is reasonable to assume that someone those communities may have seen the widely shared clip of Nick yelling at his 6 year old while visibly intoxicated. It's evidence like that which can lead to reasonable questions to the children with answers that would triggered this forced entry into Nick's house. The nose powder on stream can also be used as some in lawtube have reluctantly admitted. To lean so heavily into the search warrant is unconstitutional argument that some in lawtube are doing is ridiculous.

3. I stated before but there are two legal issues for Nick right now. One is winning the drug / firearms charges and the second is with CPS and the children. But no reasonable person would believe that is actually a "win" and Nick is exonerated. It is not a moralfag thing to care about the second issue of Nick losing his kids right now. If the drug and firearm charges are dropped it is not likely Nick will immediately get his kids back unless Minnesota CPS is for some reason much more lax than other states with which I am familiar. Also it's not like other evidence that can get thrown out with a bad search warrant. Any statement the kids make are still statements that can be investigated and create issues for Nick that need to get resolved whether or not they are allowed to be used to charge Nick with a crime. The status of the children is still a legal issue that Nick needs to resolve. It's understandable that some lawtubers don't want to touch it but to handwave this just so they can explain how Nick can still "win" is retarded.

I agree with all of these criticisms of the analysis they are doing.

 

[TherapyMan]

Except the majority wasn't discussing the legal merits of the case. It's not a discussion if only one view is presented.

The entire lawtube space right now is having its "This Is How Hillary / Trump Can Still Win" moment with regard to Nick Rekieta's criminal case.

 

[Bob's Fuckass Head]

I think some pushback is needed on one aspect of the consensus of this thread: Why do you all expect the lawyers to moralfag about this? Analyzing the legal aspects of cases like this, including any potential defenses even if they are far fetched, is the entire reason lawtube came into existence. It is the only reason any of us should be paying attention to them. Wanting them to do kino casino style streams on this topic is retarded.

I wouldn't take issue with lolbert takes and government conspiracy theorizing if these people had the spine to call a spade a spade first. Acknowledge Nick's problems, failings and fuckups because they are too long-running and public to meaningfully deny. Once you've done that, you can go into all the wild legal defense theories you want. The problem is, as others have said, they're combining legal defenses and moral defenses. Worse, they're doing it with the calculated expectation of financial gain. To the woodchipper with them.

 

[FederalInvestigation]

I figured out why the Steeltoe guy is so fucking offputting to me. He is a bad haircut from being Dax Herrera. His phony stories, shitty (ex) wife, lies about how great a cocksman he is, fake voice and phony self-deprecation and stupid lolbert politics.

That nigga Dax, bruv.

 

[REGENDarySumanai]

I'm glad that there's an absolute shitshow to follow when I have nothing to do at school.

 

[Drive-By Comment]

far fetched

Sure, but when it gets to sovereign citizen far fetched... In my ideal world far fetched. After the revolution far fetched...

 

[GotMail_2000]

A true and honest lawyer always has his priorities right!

Perhaps he'll get his law career back on track, offering his services to nignogs for a hit of cocaine.

I mean he loves nignogs, so this may have been his master plan all along!

Nignogs were ALWAYS his friends

White people were NEVER his friends!