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.

[Maude Snew]

At least get some life insurance so your children have something.

Don't worry, I hear they have sizeable trust funds courtesy of their grandparents coming their way if their parents were to croak on some dumbass swinger cruise or whatever dumb shit it is they do.

 

[feral cat #6385]

" What does the collective in thread think Nick's reputation is worth these days?

About tree fiddy. Nick has destroyed his reputation. He should admit he is an alcoholic and try to pin all the bad decisions he has made the past year on it. Go to rehab and take a break from streaming for the remainder of the year. Maybe hire a PR firm to try to rehab his image. Quietly settle the case with Monty.

Randazza says $40k, Nick says over $100k. Is that a timing issue, Randazza downplaying for some reason, or is Nick exaggerating his costs to milk sympathy?

Nick is an unreliable narrator so Randazza.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

@Spaded Dave
Site is being fucky, so wouldn't insert your comment, but no, that's not the whole amount - watch the whole thing (It's not long). He said it's $20k retainer for him, then 10-15k to file a motion to dismiss (which won't be granted unless the complaint just doesn't include the basic elements of a claim; Nick's was denied). Then discovery/depos at ~$5-7k/day, say 10 days ($70k). Then summary judgment motion another 25-30, maybe $50k. All of that (he ballparked it at $150k, iirc) before you're even in a trial. And that's just him/his fees, presumably. Any experts or other witnesses might not be in his est.

He also made it clear that though he doesn't think "retard" is actionable [I thought it was a paedo accusal? Maybe I'm confusing Nick's frequent errors in prudent judgment, or he modified it to protect nick and make his point about how defamation suits are mostly bad], MN's got terrible anti-SLAPP laws and their only hope was getting another state's SLAPP laws to apply [OOPS]...after that (and grain of salt bc of the audience and bc he's obviously generally anti-def suits, though he has also filed them) he characterized outcome, including damages up to everything you own as purely dependent on the judge. He said it in a way suggesting "whim," though it's obviously not quite how it works.

But though think I think he *might* have been ballparking high for the audience/position, probably not by much.
$1000/hour* adds up fast.

*obviously any staff or other attorneys working for him aren't billed at that number, and I doubt he's the one cross-checking citation format and hustling down to the clerk's office, but they are no doubt billed out at a couple hundred an hour, and those folks bill the fuck out of things. He himself probably wouldn't show up more than a couple hours on a bill, unless you're a needy bitch and pester him.

 

[Captain Manning]

@Spaded Dave
Site is being fucky, so wouldn't insert your comment, but no, that's not the whole amount - watch the whole thing (It's not long). He said it's 10-15k to file a motion to dismiss (which won't be granted unless the complaint just doesn't include the basic elements of a claim; Nick's was denied). Then discovery/depos at ~$5-7k/day, say 10 days ($70k). Then summary judgment motion another 25-30, maybe $50k. All of that (he ballparked it at $150k, iirc) before you're even in a trial. And that's just him/his fees, presumably. Any experts or other witnesses might not be in his est.

I think what Spaded is talking about is that Rekiata is claiming he's at the 100K mark right now, when he should be only at about the 40K mark. The checks shouldn't have been written for the depositions and trial yet. Randazza was giving itemized figures for an entire defamation trial.

I think it hardly matters, because the greater issue is that even 40K is a metric asston of money to defend this. Nick's GSG is only going to cover a fraction of that, and the costs are going to continue to climb.

He also made it clear that though he doesn't think "retard" is actionable [I thought it was a paedo accusal? Maybe I'm confusing Nick's frequent errors in prudent judgment, or he modified it to protect nick and make his point about how defamation suits are mostly bad]

It's also possible Randazza knows his audience. A lot of people in the FSP wouldn't consider pedo a actionable slur. That's common among lolbertarians. They live in their own universe where only their own values carry any weight, and they are not shamed by things other people would be.

 

[Lubby Smith]

This guy has some nerve calling anyone a "retard" or "faggot."
Here's Balldo Man dancing like a retarded faggot, wearing a midieval helmet, at the Minnesota Make-A-Wish Gala in April '22, courtesy of Bob Rekieta's YouTube channel.

Spoiler: local copy

 

[Chibitzen]

Randazza says $40k, Nick says over $100k. Is that a timing issue, Randazza downplaying for some reason, or is Nick exaggerating his costs to milk sympathy?

He should just pay him in paintings. "1 paintings, 2 paintings"...

 

[Balldo's Gate]

You're right that if Nick retracted his statement that Monty is a pedo, I think few people would have held it against him. Sometimes people say shit they shouldn't. We've all been guilty of that. The terms of any settlement could have been kept confidential too. Nick doesn't seem to know how to do anything other than keep digging though.

Nick was trying to talk shit, was drunk, and went too far. He could have just apologized and let it go away. Even after he was sued, he could have apologized and paid a settlement less than he's spent in attorneys' fees.

He himself probably wouldn't show up more than a couple hours on a bill, unless you're a needy bitch and pester him.

Well, it's not like Nick pestered him to take a phone call with one of his moderators, @Spectre_06....

I think what Spaded is talking about is that Rekiata is claiming he's at the 100K mark right now, when he should be only at about the 40K mark. The checks shouldn't have been written for the depositions and trial yet. Randazza was giving itemized figures for an entire defamation trial.

I think there a couple issues here. The first is that Randazza said his Minnesota client was $40k in the hole back in March (according to the date in the video), and some things have happened since then. I believe the hearing on the motion to dismiss was in April, and then there was some drama where Randazza took issue with certain characterizations made by Schneider at the hearing (which has the air of another "pestering" incident, and was something the judge appears to have totally ignored). At $1000/hour, I don't doubt at all that Rekieta is well over the GSG goal of $50k (which is the only claim I heard Rekieta say - I don't know the source of the $75k or $100k claims)

 

[Retink Retunk]

Randazza breaks down the costs.

I don't get why Nick chose Randazza with how expensive he is. It just seems like a way to burn money at a rapid rate for a case that's probably not that interesting all things considered.

 

[sneedem&feedem]

I don't get why Nick chose Randazza with how expensive he is. It just seems like a way to burn money at a rapid rate for a case that's probably not that interesting all things considered.

Same reason he bought his Mustang, it's a big expensive thing he can brag about. He has more money than brains at this point.

 

[Kheapathic]

What does the collective in thread think Nick's reputation is worth these days? Before the Balldo, I would say he probably would have ill-advised to make the statements he did about Monty, but it was worth defending. Now? I wouldn't think Nick's reputation is worth a thousand dollars.

Rekeita going full mask off with degeneracy and being a spokesman for quite possibly one of the dumbest fucking sex toys (and I don't even want to call it that); what reputation? I hope his kids get bullied because their dad's the Balldo guy; your dad's so gay he has to put his balls in a cage to fuck your mom.

I don't get why Nick chose Randazza with how expensive he is. It just seems like a way to burn money at a rapid rate for a case that's probably not that interesting all things considered.

If I'm remembering correctly, it's because Randazza is some sort of big name for First Amendment cases.

 

[Captain Manning]

At $1000/hour, I don't doubt at all that Rekieta is well over the GSG goal of $50k (which is the only claim I heard Rekieta say - I don't know the source of the $75k or $100k claims)

Yeah, I'm not entirely sure either. I'm just taking Spaded at his word about the 100K thing. Guy is usually right, and seems to have a better memory than I.

Again, I don't think it really matters much. It's not just that Rekieta is over the GSG goal. He's well over what the GSG had brought in. That GSG is a bust. It's made only $12K since it went live. Basic math suggests Monty is eating into his other revenue sources at this point. Whereas Nick thought he was gonna make money off all this, the evidence seems clear that Monty has been a net drain. None of this is, thus far, working out the way Rekieta envisioned.

I don't get why Nick chose Randazza with how expensive he is. It just seems like a way to burn money at a rapid rate for a case that's probably not that interesting all things considered.

Two reasons:

1. Randazza is a big name, and it would draw attention to the case in a way Nick could grift off it. Nick envisioned this whole thing as a revenue source. Not a revenue drain.
2. Randazza, in particular, wanted to try that Colorado thing (which didn't work).

 

[feral cat #6385]

This guy has some nerve calling anyone a "retard" or "faggot."
Here's Balldo Man dancing like a retarded faggot, wearing a midieval helmet, at the Minnesota Make-A-Wish Gala in April '22, courtesy of Bob Rekieta's YouTube channel.

Spoiler: local copy

View attachment 5228410

Nick's mother is a crazy eyed, slatternly whore.

 

[HodgePodgeRogerDodger]

The Dick thing is amazing for how Dick was defending basically open pedos. There’s a difference between someone who is terrified of their potential to cause harm if they don’t restrain themselves vs someone like Vito or Digi who seem to basically get off on publicly signaling they are a pedo.

Like the most humane thing I could think of for an open pedo who wants help would be putting them into isolation on an island if they have value to society. Keep them far the fuck away from kids so that the urge can’t manifest.
They aren’t alcoholics were they can eventually tolerate being around the object of their desires through group therapy.

Has Nick done that show with Dick and Ralph, yet? Did Nick let the pedo on?

 

[Captain Manning]

Has Nick done that show with Dick and Ralph, yet? Did Nick let the pedo on?

He had Vito on a few nights ago. Along with Adam and Stich.



I admittedly haven't watched much of it, because even time I see or hear Vito, the bile rises, and I just don't have the time to watch multi-hour steams like I once did. Skipping through it, it does appear that Nick gives Vito some shit for the Rumble logo thing. Which is kinda unexpected. I'm sure Dick ain't gonna be happy.

Link the full video if anybody wants to do a rundown. Vito comes in at about the 4:10:00 mark.

https://rumble.com/v312i8e-censorship-rumble-free-speech-hate-speech-incitement-fuentes-limits-of-spee.html

 

[AnOminous]

I think what Spaded is talking about is that Rekiata is claiming he's at the 100K mark right now, when he should be only at about the 40K mark. The checks shouldn't have been written for the depositions and trial yet. Randazza was giving itemized figures for an entire defamation trial.

He could be (dishonestly) counting retainer money as already spent. Or he was just lying.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

It's also possible Randazza knows his audience. A lot of people in the FSP wouldn't consider pedo a actionable slur.

But then that (pedo) would have been a good example to make the point that defamation suits are a blight and usually unwarranted. I think it's the opposite. When he used "retard" as the reason for the suit he said, "that's not actionable." So I took it that he changed the sued-over word to make it less clearly offensive/potentially damaging to a reputation. I would bet those folks might think they shouldn't be able to be sued for making the (good faith but unproved) allegation/reference but would react differently if publicly accused of same. Because no one really cares if their competent doctor/lawyer/plumber gets called a retard (because they know otherwise, and it doesn't carry moral implications), but if they get called a pedo, many people will assume smoke = fire.

Either that, or Randazza forgot what the suit was about.

Eta @AnOminous, usually a retainer gets spent down and is required to be replenished (so they'll issue a bill for, say, 30k, and say 20k applied from retainer, so now pay 10k for bill and also 20k to retop the retainer. Accounting tricks. Either way, safe to say you can kiss a retainer goodbye.

 

[Not Who You Think]

Nick being best friends with Drexel really tells you all you need to know about Nick. With the shit Drexel is willing to say in public, I don't even want to imagine the kind of fucked up shit he says in private. And Nick lets this guy hang out with his young children, some of which are daughters. Disgusting.

Woman-hating incels like Drexel are almost always pedophiles btw, because adult women see right through them and want nothing to do with these losers. They have to go for young immature girls who don't have the life exprience to see all the red flags this pathetic melinated manchild gives off.

Pedophiles projecting their own degeneracy onto children and therefore thinking children are being "seductive" or "kinky/degenerate" or whatever is also typical for these disgusting fucks. Young girls are totally unaware of how adult predators look at them and what is "sexy" to those predators. If a child is TRULY acting hypersexual (not just as projected from the dirty mind of a man) then it is because that child is already being sexually abused.

And speaking them going after young women instead of fully grown women, it's pretty apparent that all that talk they have about the wall unironically refers to them not being able to climb up and get actually ladies but focus on children, it's almost a dog whistle for people who want women that are 21 or less.

Drexel and Nick's take on what constitutes a high value male/female speaks volumes to this. I made a post on this earlier this year (see Drexel's Values section). It addresses "the wall" as well. The clip used in that section is long for context and to demonstrate that they were discussing this seriously and not joking.

The high value male is older (they use age 40 as an example) with higher resources/disposable income. The high value female has low standards due to lack of life experience, young (18 years), virginal, easily impressed by trinkets, and has a lack of resources. Nick even compares these high value females to children. An apt comparison given that Drexel's submissive, whom he knew since 13 (possibly younger), is his example of what a high-value relationship should be.

These are the values of a sexual predator. Unfortunately, this approach has proven effective in some cases (which is why sexual predators employ these tactics in the first place), though some take success as validation for these values.

There are also the clips below to consider. Here, Drexel explains a feminist conspiracy that claims older men produce offspring with a higher chance of autism. He refutes it by saying that older men have had children, though he skips over the condition of the children, as if the fact they were born meant there were no problems.

The claim that much older males have always been with younger females is repeated while asserting that pairings closer in age were an anomaly. Claiming it has always been this way across the world, throughout history, regardless of class, is an odd position to take. Seems like overkill for Drexel to normalize his relationships with females much younger than him.

Drexel also claims that men and women never shared the same workplace in history and that was a recent convention. It would be helpful if the term "workplace" was better defined to help verify the veracity of that statement (corporate/factory/farm/street markets/lodgings/education/restaurants, etc...) or if historical and geographical context was provided. For example, if he means working together in large corporate offices is a recent convention, Drexel should then consider how recent of a convention large corporate offices are in the scheme of history.

 

[Swole McPole]

Nick was trying to talk shit, was drunk, and went too far. He could have just apologized and let it go away. Even after he was sued, he could have apologized and paid a settlement less than he's spent in attorneys' fees.

I'm absolutely certain Rekieta could have made the whole thing go away with a retraction, an apology and paying Monty's costs. $5k? $10k at most when the writ first landed?

Monty would have seen it as a moral victory and it would have given him the ability to crow over Rekieta -- which I think is primarily what he wanted.

Rekieta couldn't do it. He couldn't do it because he thought his audience would laugh at him and think he's weak.

Well guess what, Nick? We're laughing and we think you're weak anyway. Even worse, we think you're STUPID. You could have made this whole thing go away for nothing, but your fragile ego wouldn't let you do it. So now you get to play chicken, with your bank account acting as the train. How much will you spend before you jump into a settlement?

 

[fluxeon]

I'm absolutely certain Rekieta could have made the whole thing go away with a retraction, an apology and paying Monty's costs. $5k? $10k at most when the writ first landed?

Monty would have seen it as a moral victory and it would have given him the ability to crow over Rekieta -- which I think is primarily what he wanted.

Rekieta couldn't do it. He couldn't do it because he thought his audience would laugh at him and think he's weak.

Well guess what, Nick? We're laughing and we think you're weak anyway. Even worse, we think you're STUPID. You could have made this whole thing go away for nothing, but your fragile ego wouldn't let you do it. So now you get to play chicken, with your bank account acting as the train. How much will you spend before you jump into a settlement?

I would have totally apologised and sent him at the very most £20 for a night out. All this $10,000's of nonsense is insane. Fuck off USA with your crazy litigious system.

 

[Not Who You Think]

Does he really believe it? I dunno. I feel like he wants to leave some wiggle room with the whole "I'm not sure" thing, and is hoping what he said is just enough to keep Dick off his back. To me, that shows a lack of backbone though.

The note got cut off.

He thinks that people with those thoughts need to take measures to keep themselves away from children. He did not seem to think that merely admitting those urges should carry punishment, but monitoring and restriction form interacting with children for those people is an appropriate restriction on their freedom.

I took it as the lolbert NAP take on the issue. It is interesting to me because he is in the camp of 'you never get over it', and that seems to be an exponential risk with an increased paedo population--even under surveillance. Eventually SOMEONE will do SOMETHING. Seemed wishy-washy and no real solution.

He is not in the 'kill all people with paedophillic thoughts' camp, and stopped short of advocating for punishment or delineating what kinds of restrictions were appropriate.

If you're wondering what Nick really believes about pedophilia, this is Nick from mid-October of 2022 concerning people who even think about it or can't help it. Clipped out his further ranting on various painful methods of execution/torture (it goes on for awhile), but the punchline is that they should all die horribly.

Nick's personal priority at the end of last year was cooming, a trend that appears to be continuing. This unfortunately makes him more likely to make allowances for anything that gets him off. Boundaries are crossed to maintain excitement for those who use degeneracy like a crutch for their marriage/sex life. Nick also has a history of not taking his own advice and crossing boundaries set in his marriage when convenient (notably the infamous lewdposting).

As far as Nick's current public position is concerned, contrasting with the clip above with Nick's current "I don't know" position (possibly to provide himself with "wiggle room") actually has him "wiggling" closer to accepting MAP/NAP types than he did previously. Make of that what you will.