So, what's the current belief among most people here:
1. Rekieta used to be at least somewhat decent, but made stupid decisions
2. Rekieta has always been an entitled, manipulative asshole
3. Other (please elaborate)
I lean towards #2. When Nick's streams centered around big trials (Rittenhouse, Johnny Depp, etc.), it allows for the focus to be on the action while Nick would riff on it. But, once Nick had to carry the show by his own merits, more & more of his true self seemed to came out.
The Kyle Rittenhouse interview might be a good example of this.
I stopped watching Nick before this, but seeing how he handled the interview turned me off his content, because Nick decided it would be a good idea to ask Kyle Rittenhouse how he felt "knowing you are the cause of someone being dead. Two people". Mind you, Kyle
had an emotional breakdown on the stand when testifying, which Nick saw, live on stream. Kyle has to remind the lawyer that he cannot comment on this, because
he is facing ongoing civil suits which may use anything said in the interview against him. I cannot fathom how Nick thought this was a good question to ask, even out of morbid curiosity. A normal person would have that little voice in their head that says, "Asking a young man who had a breakdown when talking about taking a life, about that topic might not be a good idea". Nick still decided to ask, for whatever reason:
-Add to this, Nick asking Kyle "Did anything from, like, watching, either my stream, or online commentary, like, play into any of the legal strategy?" Nick hoped to hear that his content helped Kyle win his case, which in retrospect, just screams egotistical grifter hoping to profit off of the worst moments of Kyle's life:
View attachment 6066928
He got the dog on camera for sympathy, but it looks like he's mercilessly choking it so hard its eyes are bulging out.
The pug's lack of nose infuriates his owner, to no end, & he must suffer for it...