Nick's work ethic never ceases to amaze me.
Let me get this straight: he skipped his show two Fridays ago, did only one complete night stream last week (plus the one where he got interrupted by losing power) and then he skipped tonight as well?
Has he even given an excuse this time?
Unless it's something serious like stealing client money or even commingling client retainer money with personal money, they generally start out small, with something like a private reprimand that doesn't show up in a public record of discipline, reprimand with no actual penalty but on the record, a fine, a temporary suspension, an indefinite suspension (until some corrective action specified by the Bar happens), and disbarment, sometimes theoretically reversible after some period of time but often effectively permanent.
Sometimes this is accompanied by a requirement the lawyer get psychological counseling or attend rehab for substance abuse issues. Imagine the sheer raging FUCK YOU DAD levels of tard rage that would cause Nick.
The ethics complaints issue is interesting. As far as I know, the last mention of them was when Nick read out his response to Schneider's ethics complaint. At that time, I believe the line Nick had for reading out the response then was that he hadn't heard anything from the OLPR in a while, so he assumed that the complaints were effectively dead. That seems like a weird assumption to make, but whatever.
I would guess that he would probably announce triumphantly if he actually got formal word from the OLPR that they were closing the investigations which makes me think they're still in limbo. (If he has, I haven't seen it; someone can point me to it if he has.)
Schneider's ethics complaint was interesting in that, beyond the fact that Nick said that the guy was acting like a "cunt" or whatever, it also ropes in the whole weirdness surrounding when Nick was represented by counsel, which complicates any investigation. It's of course possible that it's in limbo because the OLPR doesn't really care to devote resources to deal with it because it's basically beneath them. Their role is to protect the public and maintain standards in the profession, and Nick is barely in the legal profession at this point. His status as a lawyer is a prop for him to point to when he isn't drunkenly insisting that he never ran a law channel.
I understand that this question is pure speculation, but the Ethics Board must be getting quite tired of him, right? If Nick is struck with a judgement, on top of his frequent complaints and open alcoholism/drug abuse, I'm wondering if the Ethics Board will begin applying pressure on him or escalating. They seem keenly aware of him and his bragging about skirting of ethics and professional standards.
I don't see any reason why a civil defamation judgement would pose any difficulties for him.
With respect to the open drug use, Nick's talk on that apparently did a 180. He started claiming that he only consumed drugs where they were legal. Here's a summary:
He talks about drugs, but adds in a long story about how he only does drugs outside the united states where they are legal and only at times when his children are being watched by child care professionals.
Either he was lying when saying that or lying when he claimed to have an MDMA hangover when returning from his Minneapolis birthday trip last December.
Why did his tune change? I don't know. I guess it could be the wife or parents telling him to knock it off.