- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Imagine an Internet autist doing ten times better a job of presenting evidence than two whole teams of fucking lawyers with 100+ years of experience between them.Not my video, Credit to some fuck named Minister of Kinks on Discord. They used super resolution algorithms to make the drone footage bareable to watch and thought it could be fun to unleash it here. I really wish I was good at after effects.
View attachment 2725658
Nick takes a lot of shit for stuff he never even did, like supposedly "predicting" cases when I have literally heard him dozens of fucking times specifically disclaiming that he was some Nostradamus who could predict shit, that juries are completely unpredictable, and that he was just interpreting the law as he saw it.Never mind that he has made the disclaimer many times that you're not meant to take anyone on the panel, especially Nick himself, as considering himself better than the lawyers in court. They are just using what legal knowledge they have to interpret and explain what's going on, and they could very well be very wrong.
The only things I've seen him actually predict were no-brainer 12(b)(6) motions and the like, from absolutely frivolous litigants. He never even predicted the Mignogna case, just stated the actual legal standard for a Texas SLAPP motion, which incidentally he was completely right about and if the appeals court comes back the other way, they literally will have changed the law, including one of their own cases on that very SLAPP statute.
I mean criticize him for being an asshole, or a grifter, or a rage-fueled drunkard, or any of that other shit but this "he's wrong about every case he's predicted" shit is absolute bullshit, because he never even has predicted shit.
I might have missed something because I haven't watched him lately, as his increasingly political bent to cater to his retarded boomer audience is increasingly off-putting, but he's been pretty consistent in disclaiming any kind of predictive power.
White knight mode off.