Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta - Polysubstance enthusiast, "Lawtuber" turned Dabbleverse streamer, swinger, "whitebread ass nigga", snuffs animals for fun, visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold who lost his license to practice law. Wife's bod worth $50. The normies even know.

[ChromaQuack]

Is Rekieta's wife's "Darlin" and "sweetheart" her "stalker child"?

It's called being passive aggressive, cupcake.

 

[Potatoherder]

Nick didn't cover the first day of the Alex Murdaugh trial. Tomorrow is the big interview with Kyle so he'll probably want to make sure he is all rested up for that. Wednesday is going to his first day at the earliest?

 

[Captain Manning]

When Drex started showing up, things could get weird. But they would get weird around Drex. I didn't get the impression then that Nick considered Drex a role model and I thought it could well be that he brought him on as a sort of entertaining weirdo. There was a certain amount of criticism that developed around the whole question of why Nick would have been long-term buddies with a guy like Drex.

Yeah, even back when Nick was super popular, there were quite a few people in this thread that said they were gonna miss a show whenever Drex came on preach his MGTOW shit. He wasn't universally liked, and those that expressed such an opinion then, while expressing criticism of Nick now, can claim positional consistency. For example, I made a post in this thread back in 2020 saying I didn't really care much for any of Drex's show appearances. My opinion hasn't changed any. Is it any wonder my opinion wouldn't be any different concerning Nick?

(The one major exception to that is that time Null and Emspex were on with Drex back in 2019. That show was fucking hilarious.)

It wasn't a huge deal at the time, because Drex was an occasional guest. Not every streamer hits it out of the park every time with every episode.

Unfortunately, Rekieta seems to be morphing into Drex which means the whole show will lose appeal.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

It's fucking wild how they are frothing mad at Cynthia literally all the time. I don't watch Nick anymore, but even in the clips I see here, I've picked up multiple not-so-subtle references to Cynthia from Nick, none positive.

The double standards are also insane. Cynthia making mild criticisms of people's parenting styles is way over the line. But someone posted a screenshot where some bitch on Locals was literally posting how she hoped Cynthia's children killed themselves. This prompted Rekieta to make a meme about how Cynthia talked about other people's children while not wanting people to talk about hers. I can't even understand how Nick's alcohol-rotten brain can think that calling someone a "fake Mormon" is "harassment" but saying that someone should be raped (as his mod CGoody did) or that they'd be happy to see their children dead is perfectly fine.

Nick didn't cover the first day of the Alex Murdaugh trial. Tomorrow is the big interview with Kyle so he'll probably want to make sure he is all rested up for that. Wednesday is going to his first day at the earliest?

What is the point of even doing these trial streams if you're only there a half or a third of the time? The last one he barely streamed it, and he also missed a big chunk of the Brooks trial.

Nobody is going to get invested if you're "unable" or just can't be bothered to cover significant portions of the trial. It's like a streaming service where random episodes were missing from every season of ever series.

 

[Not Who You Think]

He was always openly a money grubber and never even got mad about being called a grifter or a crypto-Jew or whatever.

And then Nick says this:

Reminder: Nick is not about money or pandering. That's a principled man right there.

It seems a lot of people were under the impression that Nick was being tongue-in-cheek whenever he claimed to be a money-grubbing grifter. Nick was one of the "good ones", and not getting mad was because it's all irony and jokes. How convenient.

If everything someone says is a lie then even their own narration of their "degeneracy" shouldn't be taken at face value.

You may find this interesting. Null shared this insight with Metokur in September regarding pedophiles (minor edit on my part):

Spoiler: Warning: discussion involves child rape and fecophilia/coprophilia

If you didn't watch it, the idea is that when a degenerate of a certain caliber (pedophile) tells you who they are, believe them. Null goes on to talk about sick degenerates that get off on telling the truth around the 2:18:00 mark. An interesting watch if you can stomach it.

In any case, the main objective isn't deception on the face of it. The objective is confusion. Confusion can create doubt where convenient. If the degenerate themselves is confused, then it makes it all the better for their own conscience.

A more aggressively narcissistic approach would be: "It's a joke until it's not a joke, and then the joke's on you for believing it was". It's a subtle way of shifting the blame from the deceiver to the deceived in an attempt to make the deception seem justified. This mental slight of hand is strikingly effective on people unfamiliar with sophistry (and even some who are).

Another perspective: It's not about whether or not you trust someone, it's about what you trust them to do. If you don't know them well enough to do that, reserve judgement until you do before making a meaningful decision.

For example, I could say that I trust Nick to say what he thinks is in his best interest at the time (like most hypocrites). I trust Nick to try and lawyer his way out of accountability by redefining terms and selective presentation of evidence that favors him to counter evidence to the contrary (which is, curiously enough, also provided by him). I do this because Nick has demonstrated this behavior.

 

[feral cat #6385]

And then Nick says this:

View attachment 4322288

Reminder: Nick is not about money or pandering. That's a principled man right there.

It seems a lot of people were under the impression that Nick was being tongue-in-cheek whenever he claimed to be a money-grubbing grifter. Nick was one of the "good ones", and not getting mad was because it's all irony and jokes. How convenient.



You may find this interesting. Null shared this insight with Metokur in September regarding pedophiles (minor edit on my part):

Spoiler: Warning: discussion involves child rape and fecophilia/coprophilia

View attachment 4322608

If you didn't watch it, the idea is that when a degenerate of a certain caliber (pedophile) tells you who they are, believe them. Null goes on to talk about sick degenerates that get off on telling the truth around the 2:18:00 mark. An interesting watch if you can stomach it.

In any case, the main objective isn't deception on the face of it. The objective is confusion. Confusion can create doubt where convenient. If the degenerate themselves is confused, then it makes it all the better for their own conscience.

A more aggressively narcissistic approach would be: "It's a joke until it's not a joke, and then the joke's on you for believing it was". It's a subtle way of shifting the blame from the deceiver to the deceived in an attempt to make the deception seem justified. This mental slight of hand is strikingly effective on people unfamiliar with sophistry (and even some who are).

Another perspective: It's not about whether or not you trust someone, it's about what you trust them to do. If you don't know them well enough to do that, reserve judgement until you do before making a meaningful decision.

For example, I could say that I trust Nick to say what he thinks is in his best interest at the time (like most hypocrites). I trust Nick to try and lawyer his way out of accountability by redefining terms and selective presentation of evidence that favors him to counter evidence to the contrary (which is, curiously enough, also provided by him). I do this because Nick has demonstrated this behavior.

Rackets needs to fuck himself with his baldo then choke to death on it.

 

[Pelican Bones]

It seems pretty straightforward to me: Nick found, then cultivated, an audience that would give him money by telling them that he believed what they believe. Now that he doesn't need (or thinks he doesn't need) that audience anymore he told them "lol fuck off incel". The old audience is just now realizing that they supported and gave money to someone that was actually a grifter.

Anyone that continues to support Nick (literally a lawyer) after this gets what they deserve. Trying to parse or pick apart his past words really isn't necessary. He's already told you what he is.

 

[Pomniman]

Is Rekieta's wife's "Darlin" and "sweetheart" her "stalker child"?

Someone should shop fatrick's face on her and make an edit where Cuckeita is getting balldoed by lady fatricks at Hooligans.

 

[Strix454]

The old audience is just now realizing that they supported and gave money to someone that was actually a grifter.

The problem with it is that I don't see what the grift is. I mean did he really plot and scheme for years to gather up a stable of old rando worn-out women that he can get lewds from? The whole turn toward degeneracy has (at best) been a wash in terms of money. I don't see any growth prospects in doing the content he is doing and appeal to the audience he wants.
If it was actually a grift with some sort of rational goals to it, it would make more sense. But I don't see any. If he wants money, there are ways for him to get more money. If it was about women or sex, there are better women and better ways to get that.

-------------------------------------
Willard : They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.

Kurtz : Are my methods unsound?

Willard : I don't see any method at all, sir.

 

[Niggs Monaghan]

Someone should shop fatrick's face on her and make an edit where Cuckeita is getting balldoed by lady fatricks at Hooligans.

"No, darlin', YOU are the one who gets balldoed."

 

[feral cat #6385]

The problem with it is that I don't see what the grift is. I mean did he really plot and scheme for years to gather up a stable of old rando worn-out women that he can get lewds from? The whole turn toward degeneracy has (at best) been a wash in terms of money. I don't see any growth prospects in doing the content he is doing and appeal to the audience he wants.
If it was actually a grift with some sort of rational goals to it, it would make more sense. But I don't see any. If he wants money, there are ways for him to get more money. If it was about women or sex, there are better women and better ways to get that.

-------------------------------------
Willard : They told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.

Kurtz : Are my methods unsound?

Willard : I don't see any method at all, sir.

Some men have oddly specific life goals. Nick's was to be a whoremaster for geriatric slatterns.

 

[Swole McPole]

Anyone that continues to support Nick (literally a lawyer) after this gets what they deserve. Trying to parse or pick apart his past words really isn't necessary. He's already told you what he is.

This has always been utterly mystifying to me. I mean, I've never understood why anyone would send money to some loser making YouTube videos anyway. Entertain me, don't entertain me, I don't care -- I'm not sending you money.

But it's especially bizzare to me in the case of YouTube lawyers. You're a lawyer. You should be making shedloads of money from practicing law. Do you know what a billable hour costs these days? If you're not sufficiently competent at the law to be making mountains of money from your practice, why in God's name should I listen to what you have to say on the subject?

I'm quite fond of Attorney Tom. He has an entertaining YouTube channel, but he also seems to have an ongoing practice, specializing in catastrophic accident damage. His grift seems to be that he makes YouTube videos as a way to publicize his practice. That's fine. There's no e-begging involved, though I'm sure there are some morons out there who want to send Tom money.

The alternative is LegalEagle. I'm sure he must have gone to law school. I'm equally sure he's never actually practiced law. He's like an actor, playing a lawyer -- all dressed up in a suit with a green screen of legal tomes as his backdrop. He makes videos for an audience of tards with no knowledge of the law at all, and he built his audience by pandering to the political leanings of his midwit audience. He seems to make plenty of money at it, but he's the last person I'd go to for legal commentary. The small amount of his channel that I've watched, he came across like a first year law student, writing essays that he thought would pander to his Marxist law prof.

Why anybody would send this guy their hard earned money is an utter mystery to me.
And I always felt the same way about Rekeita? You want money? Getting money is easy. You're a lawyer -- practice the fucking law. What's that you say? You're a shit lawyer and you can't earn a living at it? It's a damn sight easier than creative writing.

Being a YouTube beggar might be humiliating, but I suppose it's easier than sitting around, waiting for your parents to die so you can inherit their estate.

 

[Not Who You Think]

Trying to parse or pick apart his past words really isn't necessary. He's already told you what he is.

That is possible. Still gonna do it though.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm quite fond of Attorney Tom. He has an entertaining YouTube channel, but he also seems to have an ongoing practice, specializing in catastrophic accident damage. His grift seems to be that he makes YouTube videos as a way to publicize his practice. That's fine. There's no e-begging involved, though I'm sure there are some morons out there who want to send Tom money.

It's not actually typical for someone to be good at both practicing and explaining the law. People usually specialize in one or the other. There are people who are absolutely great at motion practice, but so autistic face to face they're practically inarticulate. In fact, that's absurdly common for people who mostly practice on paper.

The majority of people who are good people people and connect with juries (where explaining the law is actually important) are shit at the autistic minutiae of motion practice. These people are often rainmakers who bring in business from their social connections and who can wow a jury (often with complete bullshit). The best can even baffle the judge. Think Johnny Cochran.

You're a lawyer -- practice the fucking law. What's that you say? You're a shit lawyer and you can't earn a living at it? It's a damn sight easier than creative writing.

And unless you want to live in Bughive City in some BigLaw firm, you're not getting that money. Small town lawyers do not make that much.

Also as pointed out, Rekieta apparently sucks at motion practice.

 

[HodgePodgeRogerDodger]

Haven’t watched Rekieta for a bit. Has he finally admitted to having AIDS?

 

[Lord of Kiwis]

She's already a proper alog. I just hope she migrates here and continues after she gets yeeted. After all, basically everything from Locals gets dumped here anyways. She can keep commenting.

Once again, I can't help but like Cynthia. Bitch seems based AF.


You still don't get it, do you?

Watch.

I mean I understand he’ll do it anyway (they always do) I just don’t get why the audience just watches and doesn’t react.

 

[Swole McPole]

It's not actually typical for someone to be good at both practicing and explaining the law. People usually specialize in one or the other. There are people who are absolutely great at motion practice, but so autistic face to face they're practically inarticulate. In fact, that's absurdly common for people who mostly practice on paper.

The majority of people who are good people people and connect with juries (where explaining the law is actually important) are shit at the autistic minutiae of motion practice. These people are often rainmakers who bring in business from their social connections and who can wow a jury (often with complete bullshit). The best can even baffle the judge. Think Johnny Cochran.

And unless you want to live in Bughive City in some BigLaw firm, you're not getting that money. Small town lawyers do not make that much.

Also as pointed out, Rekieta apparently sucks at motion practice.

What you say might be true of people who do motion practice but there are no shortage of competent advocates out there. Selling a story to a judge/jury is the core of what they do. I would have thought those skills would be absolutely transferrable to other mediums.

Sure, not everyone is going to be good at everything. You wouldn't expect them to be. Yet the small town lawyers with small practices will tend to be generalists who do a little bit of everything.

And I know how much small town provincial lawyers make. I've been married to one for forty years. They aren't starving. They'll do things that they love all the time, not to earn an extra few quid, but simply because they love to do it -- whether that be free legal clinics for battered wives, volunteering in their local parks or playing in local orchestras. They don't expect to be paid for these things -- because they make a decent upper-middle class salary.

 

[Captain Manning]

The alternative is LegalEagle. I'm sure he must have gone to law school. I'm equally sure he's never actually practiced law. He's like an actor, playing a lawyer -- all dressed up in a suit with a green screen of legal tomes as his backdrop. He makes videos for an audience of tards with no knowledge of the law at all, and he built his audience by pandering to the political leanings of his midwit audience. He seems to make plenty of money at it, but he's the last person I'd go to for legal commentary. The small amount of his channel that I've watched, he came across like a first year law student, writing essays that he thought would pander to his Marxist law prof.

Dude...



(this last part means some of his writing is in F.3d).

I'm not a huge fan of Legal Eagle's content either, or his politics, and I would never recommend him as a surrogate for Rekieta's old content, but I'm pretty sure he destroys Nick on just about every lawyer-related metric than is objectively quantifiable between the two. Youtube subs. Work experience. Money earned. Litigation record. Etc. Fair is fair.

Nick was successful because he catered to an audience with different (and less "safe") politics, and broke things down for them. Not because he was a better lawyer than LE or anybody else.

I mean I understand he’ll do it anyway (they always do) I just don’t get why the audience just watches and doesn’t react.

It's a cult.

 

[Yandex Captcha Solver]

Here's a large dump from the weekend, primarily from yesterday. This will be non-linear for some parts sorted into categories again. Spergery is hard to separate when 3 different conversations are going at the same time. Hopefully the process has been getting cleaner since my first dumps. Enjoy!
Cynthia Loves the Farms
Someone sent Cynthia a screenshot of @Swole McPole's post regarding Cynthia having the largest set of figurative balls on Locals. Couldn't agree more. This causes seething in the threads and seems to speared off yesterday's spergfest.

Spoiler: Cynthia Reads the Farms

Nick Wakes up Late and Starts Sperging as Well at Cynthia
Nick wakes up late. Starts sperging about Cynthia, because why not? Going with the completely normal and not "harassment" meme at Cynthia. He acts like she dug up his grandparents from the grave and fucked them while he was forced to watch.

Spoiler: Nick seethes at Cynthia

Chat is full of Pedoguards/Pedophiles
We see the classic, it's okay to fuck teenagers when your 50 because they are women. Age of consent laws, failing to mention that almost all states have a limit on the difference for age of consent for sexual partners. Hebephilia is just fine per chat, only two people that spoke up were Cynthia and Elissa. This of course includes Nick disregarding Cynthia's claims.

Spoiler: Pedophiles

Nick Will Ban You for Harassment or Spamming
Nick tells Cynthia and pray2god that he will ban them for spamming and/or harassment. The only harassment I've seen is by chat to Cynthia, a lot of which is coming from Nick. Spamming memes of Cynthia is fine because she is a "cunt" according to chat. But if you spam an image at Nick that is a no go.

Spoiler: Nick Acts Like a Typical Lolbertarian

A Beautiful Copy Pasta is Born
From Nick's little outrage about banning Cynthia. This was born.

I'll tell you this one time, you husk of a human, it is a violation of locals TOS to engage in harassment of another user. You're on the thinnest ice possible. You have been absolutely disgusting over the past week, literally subhuman.

You have no rope left. I'm done addressing you. You've burned any credit with me you ever had and this is likely the last text from me that will ever be directed at you.

Chat seethes at the initial appearance of the pasta. Thinking this is a legitimate complaint at Nick vs making fun of him. Chat suddenly stops bringing it up after Nick tells them he wrote it.

Spoiler: Copy Pasta

Cynthia Leaves the Chat Forever? Nick admits he watches @chudbere's Stream
Cynthia leaves the chat after spergery against her all day. Nick addresses her directly asking her what she would do to make changes. She says if you watch Claire's stream, she will leave, forever. He admits that he's watched it (he doesn't watch criticism videos or read the farms btw). She takes a while to pack up but about 2 hours later she was no longer in chat. This was about 4am Nick's time. I haven't seen her throughout the day. So pour one out to Cynthia, hopefully she will return. I didn't see her while writing this post. Chat still seething about her hours and hours after she left of course (they also don't talk about her when she isn't there btw).

Spoiler: Balldo Crusher Leaves Chat

Mandy Admit her Photos are a Decade Old
By pressure created by Cynthia reading about the speculation on the farms that Mandy's photos are over a decade old. She admits it. Discussion around cat-fishing appears. Mandy admits she is also a jew.

Spoiler: Mandy the Catfisher

Everyone is Cynthia
Just some general schizophrenia from chat. Everyone that disagrees with chat's consensus is Cynthia. She has 10 alt accounts.

Spoiler: Chat is Skitzo

Nick gets Swinger Recommendations on Instagram
Makes one big thunk, also swinging isn't in everyone's comfort suite.

Spoiler: Definitely Monotonous

Sally Writing "Nick Was Here" on Herself was JUST A JOKE, Sally Posts Nipples, and Sex Chat
It was just a joke guys! Stop taking it like Sally is a crazy bitch. iTs AlSo NoT a ShArPiE

Spoiler: Just a Joke

Sally posted a photo that she "thought" her hair covered her nipples. Of course, Nick doesn't realize this, as he was focused on her elbows.

Spoiler: Sally's Nipples NSFW

Sally and Mandy start taking showers together in chat. This is definitely not for attention.

Spoiler: Adult Chatroom

Criticism about Nick Simping for Mandy
Someone speaks up about Nick simping for Mandy's drawings during a locals hottub stream. Where he criticized anybody not liking every single drawing.

Spoiler: Balldo Guards

 

[Cherenkovblue]

Anyone that continues to support Nick (literally a lawyer) after this gets what they deserve. Trying to parse or pick apart his past words really isn't necessary. He's already told you what he is.

Kinda like what Null said about believing self-confessed pedophiles: if a grifter confesses his grifting to you... BELIEVE HIM.