Aaron Imholte / Steel Toe Morning/Evening Show / "The Toe Boys" / r/steeltoeboringshow - Disgraced Minnesotan radio host turned racist Internet shock jock. Cuckold chef de Spaghetti-os, "2-2" boxing "coach". Has a legion of a-logs. Lost his wife to a coke addict he played "Strip Twister" with. Fined $50 for sharing nudes of Kayla Rekieta.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Aaron indicated he paid for Robert's (and presumably Celeste's) meal as a thank you for taking care of the 5 kids for a week.

What exactly did the Rekieta matriarch and patriarch think their son and daughter-in-law's relationship was with the Imholtes?
You assume Bob and Celeste weren't part of the Qver. Nick has expressed A LOT of interest in his parent's sex lives.
 

I don't know who Chad Zumock is, but this video of him mocking Aaron's live reaction to finding out about Nick Rekieta allegedly poisoning his child with cocaine gave me a good laugh. He nails Aaron's fake reactions before seeing them.

By the way, did Aaron ever prove he donated all those superchats to Rekieta's children? Because I doubt it!

Chad is a failed stand-up comic/radio guy from Cleveland.

If Nick is the successful shock jock, then Aaron is the stuntboy that staples his scrotum to his own leg. Chad would be the down syndrome fan that drinks bleach to get tickets to white snake.

Chad is the guy Aaron tried to A-Log when he first started trying to crowbar himself into "The Dabbleverse" because he was feuding with Chrissie Mayr. Steel Toe tried to land some jabs on Chad while he was "distracted" with other comedians, and had been warned prior that Zumock was pretty much a mental patient who would start attacking family members if provoked enough. Aaron ignored it, Chad did exactly what everyone warned he'd do, and Aaron and April were fucking shocked that a lunatic they had been fucking with for months for no reason turned around and did some lunatic shit to them.

They had since buried the hatchet, but that's a good summation of Aaron as a person; jump into someone elses dogpile trying to get cred, not realize the situation he's in, get blindsided, act like he doesn't understand what's happening.
 
I don't get the attraction of Cumia but I guess I'm not 15. He's got so many unfunny clones crawling around.
When O and A were having their beef with Stern, and back during the peak of their show it was pretty fucking good, and they nailed the shock jock shit. They had norton and patrice on together sometimes, or just patrice and Cumia had really good chemistry with him. Some of those old shows were really good. A lot of people try to ape the funny and they just don't have the skill to be funny. It's a damn shame what Cumia ended up doing and being, but that swarthy fuck was quick witted and just funny.
 

I don't know who Chad Zumock is, but this video of him mocking Aaron's live reaction to finding out about Nick Rekieta allegedly poisoning his child with cocaine gave me a good laugh. He nails Aaron's fake reactions before seeing them.

By the way, did Aaron ever prove he donated all those superchats to Rekieta's children? Because I doubt it!
 
When O and A were having their beef with Stern, and back during the peak of their show it was pretty fucking good, and they nailed the shock jock shit. They had norton and patrice on together sometimes, or just patrice and Cumia had really good chemistry with him. Some of those old shows were really good. A lot of people try to ape the funny and they just don't have the skill to be funny. It's a damn shame what Cumia ended up doing and being, but that swarthy fuck was quick witted and just funny.
I’ve only ever seen modern Cumia and he makes my skin crawl with how fake he is. Everything is just one bad performance. I didn’t realise he was human once.
 
I’ve only ever seen modern Cumia and he makes my skin crawl with how fake he is. Everything is just one bad performance. I didn’t realise he was human once.
Anthony Cumia is a different race in every picture you can find of him.

1719174800669.jpeg1719174825646.jpeg
1719174846687.jpeg1719174886213.png

OldNana.PNG
 
Aaron, per your show this morning, you stated that on Kiwi Farms that "we are losing our shit" and that infighting ensues. There may be disagreements, but we collectively despise you. Here's a superchat: Go fuck yourself. Just because the people you were complicit with haven't admitted to their faults doesn't make you any better, you fucking retard. I wrote it in the other thread, and I will write it in this one. This is hilarious, as he is falling into the same trap that Rekieta found himself: reading his own thread. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

As a caretaker, YOU WERE COMPLICIT. Per your own description of your relationship with those who lived in the house, you were a caretaker, as defined by the Minnesota Criminal Code Statute. Legally, he was aware of a state of conditions that were dangerous and he not only did nothing, he continued in participating in the fuckery. He proclaims he was providing oversight of the children, all the while participating in drug use. This isn't contended. Aaron has flailed the flag as the white knight. With great power comes great responsibility. So answer for it. Why didn't he do anything, despite being well aware the children were in the middle of a destructive environment?

Per Minnesota Criminal Statute 609.378 Neglect or Endangerment of Child
Subdivision 1. Persons guilty of neglect or endangerment.

(b) A parent, legal guardian, or caretaker who endangers the child's person or health by:

(1) intentionally or recklessly causing or permitting a child to be placed in a situation likely to substantially harm the child's physical, mental, or emotional health or cause the child's death; or…”


This isn't a crazy theory. This is a Minnesota Criminal Code Statute , you dipshit. You may want to supplement your client IOLTA account with your attorney. You have made yourself a public figure and have spoken about this issue openly and proudly. You have grifted off of it, which is probably the only reason why you have had any subscriber increase. Your general content is mediocre, at best, and overall the "dabbleverse" detests you. You're an idiot to think no one will speak about this publicly in your small town, especially when you have made it a topic of discussion. Everyone is talking about it, more importantly you and Nick. If you don't like the attention, then shut the fuck up and stop inviting the fodder.

Me thinks Aaron needs a reel of all of the time he has said "this is my life, I have to talk about it" as a reminder. Challenge accepted, you complicit reprobate.
 
Last edited:
Look, man, I know you're very proud of yourself for your groundbreaking analysis here, but you're just wrong. And writing novels about it in at least two threads doesn't change that.

Aaron was not a caretaker for purposes or MN criminal law. He is not family, and he did not assume general responsibility for the Rekieta children. He was not paid to watch them, and he had no relationship of responsibility toward them. Playing chess with a kid or getting them breakfast does not put a person in a caretaking role. It is a familial or voluntary assumption of responsibility. An assumption of responsibility for the care of a child is not a casual or incidental thing.

And you running around and bolding the statute that everyone already has memorized because it's the same statute under which the Rekietas are charged is embarrassing.
 
Look, man, I know you're very proud of yourself for your groundbreaking analysis here, but you're just wrong. And writing novels about it in at least two threads doesn't change that.

Aaron was not a caretaker for purposes or MN criminal law. He is not family, and he did not assume general responsibility for the Rekieta children. He was not paid to watch them, and he had no relationship of responsibility toward them. Playing chess with a kid or getting them breakfast does not put a person in a caretaking role. It is a familial or voluntary assumption of responsibility. An assumption of responsibility for the care of a child is not a casual or incidental thing.

And you running around and bolding the statute that everyone already has memorized because it's the same statute under which the Rekietas are charged is embarrassing.

Yeah retard. Sometimes people use bold for assholes like you who don't read the "if, thus, then" explanation of legalese. Rekietas were charged with it because they are the parents. Again, Aaron did act as a caretaker at times. He self admittedly assumed responsibility because he stated no one else did. That makes him a caretaker. He has propped himself up to be the person who kept the trains on the track. There is room for interpretation, and either way he was complicit in the behavior that ultimately led to the mandatory reporting. You don't like me comments? Then skip over them and keep being awesome, champ.
 
I can't hate Aaron right now. If someone is fucking up, the best you can hope for someone is that they stop fucking and and maybe, hopefully do better and try to make amends.

* He has admitted to what he has fucked up.
* He stopped fucking up.... (we will have to see when it comes to relationships. He has a history of screwing other people while in a relationship so he isn't learning on that count.).
*He has been fully cooperative with the police, even at the risk of being put in jail himself.

Then take Nick as a comparison.
* He takes no accountability.
* He blames everyone else.
* He denies that he has a problem.
* He tries to gaslight and deceive everyone around him.
* We assume he is continuing with his substance abuse. He isn't submitting to drug testing for CPS to grant him access to his children.
* He lashes out against anyone trying to get him on a good sane path.
* He is burning away any chance of a good plea deal.

I hate to see anything bad happen to Nick, but in proper lolcow fashion he refuses to do the simplest and most common sense things to help himself out. The ton of bricks that is about to land on Nick is purely of his own creation. The only thing worse than the governmental punishment that is about to befall Nick is what his fucktardary is going to do to his kids. Some may never forgive him. I wish Nick was acting a lot more like Aaron in order to give those kids half a chance.
 
Last edited:
Yeah retard. Sometimes people use bold for assholes like you who don't read the "if, thus, then" explanation of legalese. Rekietas were charged with it because they are the parents. Again, Aaron did act as a caretaker at times. He self admittedly assumed responsibility because he stated no one else did. That makes him a caretaker. He has propped himself up to be the person who kept the trains on the track. There is room for interpretation, and either way he was complicit in the behavior that ultimately led to the mandatory reporting. You don't like me comments? Then skip over them and keep being awesome, champ.
Oh, my dear. I'm quite comfortable with "legalese" and have parsed and explained it all over these threads. Spare the ignorant efforts at insult.

Nobody skipped over your bolded words. They just don't say what you want them to.

But serious question: did you sit next to Russell Greer in paralegal school?

He was not a caretaker for purposes of 609.378. Caretaker has a legal definition, which I provided you, and "any adult in a dwelling where children reside" or "any visiting adult to a home who plays a game with or makes a pb&j for kids residing there" is not it. I gave you the legal definition, and you just keep repeating your assertions ("it's right there in the words!") with no support in law or practice. But I'll take that back if you can show me that prevailing law in MN indicates that giving kids food or talking to them transforms an unrelated adult visitor to the home who has not assumed responsibility for their care, either by virtue of familial relationship or formal decision, into a caretaker for purposes of criminal child endangerment under MN law.

Assumption of responsibility for the care of children is not gee, kid looks hungry, parents are MIA, I'm functional, poor kids, better find a can opener. Responsibility means obligation. It was not his job, paid or unpaid, to provide for those children nor ensure them access to anything. Not food, not clothing, not healthcare, not education, nothing. He had no legal obligation to do any of those things; a caregiver does. If they were enrolled in public school and stopped showing up, no one would be calling Aaron to explain why or enforcing on him the obligation to get them there. No obligation = no violation. No one else was feeding them, so he did; that does not mean he assumed a legal obligation as a caregiver. No more than a neighbor stopping by with a pot pie for kids always begging for food at her door becomes a "caregiver" of those kids.

And no amount of self-aggrandizing comment post hoc will retroactively alter his lack of legal duty at the time. Same for the pot pie lady who regrets she didn't say something earlier.

You think any random can come in and declare they are now your kids' caretaker? Or at least until they drive home? That's not how it works.

It's all fine to have some argument for an expansive reading of something, supported or not, but running around like it's some kind of pronouncement from on high and an epic own is goofy. Especially when your amateur reading skips over fundamental concepts.

"PWND, fucker, I declare you guilty" is lol. But keep at it, Russ lil guy.

You might have had a better argument that he qualified as a "person responsible for the child's care," which would have made him a mandatory reporter. That term is far broader than "caregiver" of a child under MN law:

260E.03:

Subd. 17.Person responsible for the child's care.​


"Person responsible for the child's care" means (1) an individual functioning within the family unit and having responsibilities for the care of the child such as a parent, guardian, or other person having similar care responsibilities, or (2) an individual functioning outside the family unit and having responsibilities for the care of the child such as a teacher, school administrator, other school employee or agent, or other lawful custodian of a child having either full-time or short-term care responsibilities including, but not limited to, day care, babysitting whether paid or unpaid, counseling, teaching, and coaching.

That still doesn't work, but it would have been a little better argument.
 
Back