Crossover Groypers and J6 - AF's Charlottesville?

[gaystoner]

I posted this in the news thread because I didn't realize we had this one.


Also, he told a story the other day about having to go to a deposition and argue about whether he had committed hate speech or incited violence. Of course, in his telling Nick outsmarts the lawyer because he's such a brilliant genius that he's basically a lawyer.
View attachment 3497717
He says he is involved in 2 other legal matters as well. I wonder if this is either related to Jan 6 or a fake story to throw people off of wondering if he's a fed

one of them involves Jaden...Defamation or something.

 

[Tard Whisperer]

The January 6 Committee just released witness testimony, including Nick's deposition: https://january6th.house.gov/news/press-releases/release-select-committee-materials

Nick's file is attached. It is 50 pages of him invoking the 5th amendment.


The section questioning him about FBI involvement is interesting:


At the end they confront Nick and his lawyer about not producing any of the records they have requested:

 

[nothing2]

Patrick Casey is a fucktard for actually answering every question instead of doing what Nick did.

 

[gaystoner]

Patrick Casey is a fucktard for actually answering every question instead of doing what Nick did.

Why? If Casey did nothing wrong then cooperating does nothing but not protect a group of people who have done nothing for him. Fuentes actively encouraged people to go into the capitol while financially benefiting from the same thing.

 

[Climaxing Sunset]

I sometimes forget that there’s some actual Groypers rotting in prison almost two years after this event

With the new info dropped, I’m not shocked even at the slightest that the Mexican snake would sell his fanboys out. Even if I think Gaypers are retarded, they don’t deserve to be arbitrarily put in prison without trial

 

[nothing2]

Why? If Casey did nothing wrong then cooperating does nothing but not protect a group of people who have done nothing for him. Fuentes actively encouraged people to go into the capitol while financially benefiting from the same thing.

Even if you did nothing wrong, you should never answer questions unless you have to. They can make you contradict yourself and then get you charged for that. In this case it wasn't law enforcement asking the questions, but law enforcement is definitely monitoring all this shit and everyone involved should take no risks.

 

[HeyU]

The January 6 Committee just released witness testimony, including Nick's deposition: https://january6th.house.gov/news/press-releases/release-select-committee-materials

Nick's file is attached. It is 50 pages of him invoking the 5th amendment.
View attachment 4127838View attachment 4127841

The section questioning him about FBI involvement is interesting:
View attachment 4127829View attachment 4127832View attachment 4127835

At the end they confront Nick and his lawyer about not producing any of the records they have requested:
View attachment 4127883View attachment 4127886
View attachment 4127895View attachment 4127904

Risky advice from his lawyers. Pleading the Fifth might make them want to further investigate him on criminal charges. I know somebody who this happened to (not re: Jan. 6, but something else that started as a lawsuit and ended in criminal charges after he plead the Fifth the entire time). Most likely not and I get why he did it but yeah.

 

[AskeDead]

patrick was pretty amenable at first but when they started asking about specific dates and what not he just shut down lmfao. i read through 3 or 4 of these and they were all mostly just the 5th amendment. even charlie kirk was shutting that down.

 

[Can't Stand Ya]

patrick was pretty amenable at first but when they started asking about specific dates and what not he just shut down lmfao.

That was funny. He was perfectly happy to talk to Congress about internet memes and some deep lore about Identity Evropa, but once the topic turned to Jan. 6 he clammed up.

 

[AskeDead]

That was funny. He was perfectly happy to talk to Congress about internet memes and some deep lore about Identity Evropa, but once the topic turned to Jan. 6 he clammed up.

alex jones was the worst. man was so nervous he couldn't spell his name lmfao

 

[Hannibalistique]

Risky advice from his lawyers. Pleading the Fifth might make them want to further investigate him on criminal charges. I know somebody who this happened to (not re: Jan. 6, but something else that started as a lawsuit and ended in criminal charges after he plead the Fifth the entire time). Most likely not and I get why he did it but yeah.

Are there really people who haven't seen this?:

Never, ever, under any circumstance, talk if you can avoid it.

 

[HeyU]

Are there really people who haven't seen this?:

Never, ever, under any circumstance, talk if you can avoid it.

Where did I say anything about the police? I said pleading the Fifth in a deposition can be risky, depending on the situation. My friend’s attorney told him to plead the Fifth and it ended up triggering an investigation that got him a criminal charge and conviction. He never talked to police about anything and that has nothing to do with this. Another answer that’s like the Fifth is “I don’t recall,” (even if you totally do and they know you do) because they can’t prove what’s in your head. You see a lot of people involved in depositions and lawsuits who answer that way.

As far as police are concerned, you’re never obligated to answer any question they have. That’s separate from a civil deposition, in which case you are obligated to answer them in some form.

 

[Hannibalistique]

Where did I say anything about the police? I said pleading the Fifth in a deposition can be risky, depending on the situation. My friend’s attorney told him to plead the Fifth and it ended up triggering an investigation that got him a criminal charge and conviction. He never talked to police about anything and that has nothing to do with this. Another answer that’s like the Fifth is “I don’t recall,” (even if you totally do and they know you do) because they can’t prove what’s in your head. You see a lot of people involved in depositions and lawsuits who answer that way.

As far as police are concerned, you’re never obligated to answer any question they have. That’s separate from a civil deposition, in which case you are obligated to answer them in some form.

The video title might be misleading, you should still watch it.

It's partially about how what you say can always be used against you in court, with various examples. It doesn't just apply to police.

edit: It's the same in the court of public opinion, how many times have we seen people fuck up because they decide they absolutely have to sperg out publicly with journos, instead of letting professionals handle it?

Never talk if you don't need to.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

The video title might be misleading, you should still watch it.

It's partially about how what you say can always be used against you in court, with various examples. It doesn't just apply to police.

edit: It's the same in the court of public opinion, how many times have we seen people fuck up because they decide they absolutely have to sperg out publicly with journos, instead of letting professionals handle it?

Never talk if you don't need to.

1. "Don't snitch" builds shithole societies. People must work with law enforcement if we want to solve crimes or hold people accountable. So I understand the notion that "anything said can and will be used against you" but at the same time if everyone STFUs then that leads to negative outcomes.

2. You can't simple plead the 5th to ALL questions. There are rules. "Mr. Fuentes, What is your source of income?" By pleading the 5th, Nick is implying that his income source is illegal because "the testimony must be self-incriminating."

https://www.mololamken.com/knowledg... can only invoke,assertions of fact or belief.

"But taking the Fifth can have severe consequences nonetheless. In a civil case or a civil enforcement action, the judge or jury can draw an adverse inference to support liability when the defendant invokes the Fifth Amendment." Pleading the 5th can backfire if Nick faces a trial and wants to answer some of these questions to build a counter-narrative. Like @HeyU said, Nick should have said. "I don't recall."

3. Like @HeyU said, if you come off as an asshole then they could double down and continue digging deeper to fuck you. There is power in being likable and appearing honest of genuine.

 

[Hannibalistique]

1. "Don't snitch" builds shithole societies. People must work with law enforcement if we want to solve crimes or hold people accountable. So I understand the notion that "anything said can and will be used against you" but at the same time if everyone STFUs then that leads to negative outcomes.

If you watched the video you would have seen that the last half is from an experienced police officer (who has done over 1000 interrogations) explaining why talking does not help.

2. You can't simple plead the 5th to ALL questions. There are rules. "Mr. Fuentes, What is your source of income?" By pleading the 5th, Nick is implying that his income source is illegal because "the testimony must be self-incriminating."

If you watched the video you would see that he has specific examples for why you shouldn't talk even if you're innocent and speak 100% truthfully about something completely innocent like that.

He even uses almost this exact scenario.

3. Like @HeyU said, if you come off as an asshole then they could double down and continue digging deeper to fuck you. There is power in being likable and appearing honest of genuine.

Again, if you watched the video you would see the police officer explain why this is false.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

If you watched the video you would have seen that the last half is from an experienced police officer (who has done over 1000 interrogations) explaining why talking does not help.

I did watch it. He's talking about situations like the Ahmaud Arbery. In that situation, they shouldn't have talked. But even then, the original police acquitted them of wrong doing before the leftist mob demanded punishment.

If you watched the video you would see that he has specific examples for why you shouldn't talk even if you're innocent and speak 100% truthfully about something completely innocent like that.

He even uses almost this exact scenario.


Again, if you watched the video you would see the police officer explain why this is false.

Don't agree. That guy is a law professor. I don't think he's a top 1% trial attorney. Like @HeyU said, he is talking about police stops. That's different from federal investigates and trials. If pleading the 5th was a valid strategy then everyone would always plead it and every court case would be like the Dave Chappelle skit but that's not what we see.

 

[Hannibalistique]

I did watch it.

Fair enough, I just felt like you were bringing up topics talked about in the video without addressing the claims in the video.

He's talking about situations like the Ahmaud Arbery. In that situation, they shouldn't have talked. But even then, the original police acquitted them of wrong doing before the leftist mob demanded punishment.

Well, on the income scenario you mentioned he specifically talked about someone not being interrogated by the police.

Don't agree. That guy is a law professor. I don't think he's a top 1% trial attorney.

Yes, that's why I said his points were relevant outside of criminal cases with the police.

Like @HeyU said, he is talking about police stops. That's different from federal investigates and trials. If pleading the 5th was a valid strategy then everyone would always plead it and every court case would be like the Dave Chappelle skit but that's not what we see.

You see it with almost everyone who have very, very expensive lawyers, and when they give information to the police it's always _through_ their lawyers, or at the very least they're just repeating well-rehearsed lines directly from their lawyers.

And in this specific case it really seems to have worked as well, the gay mexican has come away basically scot free without any known incrimination of his "friends".

 

[BoxerShorts47]

You see it with almost everyone who have very, very expensive lawyers, and when they give information to the police it's always _through_ their lawyers, or at the very least they're just repeating well-rehearsed lines directly from their lawyers.

Nick didn't do this. He pleaded 5 to everything.

And in this specific case it really seems to have worked as well, the gay mexican has come away basically scot free without any known incrimination of his "friends".

Optimistic. I'm surprised Nick hasn't been indicted given that he told people to enter the Capital. Maybe he did get away scot free.

 

[Hannibalistique]

Nick didn't do this. He pleaded 5 to everything.

No, if you read the transcripts he gets his lawyer to explain he didn't talk with the FBI.

Optimistic. I'm surprised Nick hasn't been indicted given that he told people to enter the Capital. Maybe he did get away scot free.

I'm mostly surprised that the dimwit managed to suppress his ego enough to shut his mouth for once.

 

[Tard Whisperer]

In what world would answering the questions posed by Adam Kinzinger about January 6 help any right winger? The January 6 committee has 1 agenda, to portray Trump as a criminal and right wingers as terrorists. There is no answer that any of these people could give that would not be used to incriminate however possible.