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.

[Strix454]

Barnes: "The fact that a judge says something tells you nothing about the law! It tells you what people in power do, nothing about principle!"

The judge wrote a lengthy reasoned and technical response to the arguments made in Nick's motion. It told anyone who read it quite a bit about the law and why Nick's arguments don't legally work.

That Barnes has reached a point where he doesn't accept the position of judges within the legal system or their role in deciding questions of law at trial says quite alot about him.

I don't really think that Barnes believes in any system of law or government anymore. He believes in a system where everyone decides individually for themselves what the law is and settles their disputes by force.

 

[AnOminous]

tl;dr - barnes' argument is basically that the judge is wrong and people who think he is right do so only because they defer to his power and believe that all decisions by all judges are right. according to barnes, there is no principled reason why anyone would think the franks hearing should have been denied.

And yet somehow everyone except this fat Boss Baby looking cocksucking grifter came to exactly the same conclusion as the judge did, for EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS, apparently because we're mind-readers and were somehow using our preternatural powers to agree with the inevitable decision beforehand.

Does this faggot have so sense of embarrassment whatsoever?

One thing I do know is this moron also knows that since this is a decision not subject to interlocutory appeal, he can continue to hold his utterly insane opinion without worrying about having to deal with an appellate court opinion saying he's utterly retarded, because that won't come until after Nick loses and appeals.

And if he pleads, it will never come. And then this gaggle of fuckups, leafkikes, retards, and jerkoffs and cokeheads can claim he only did it because the evil corrupt "bias judge" (to quote Russell Greer) made a horrible corrupt ruling against him and he just couldn't fight it off, because he was too weak in the face of The Man.

This gay expression looks like something Commodus might have thrown down.

Look how imperial he is! He's about to throw a thumbs-down to the life of a gladiator. Despite being a weak faggot who can't actually do anything at all.

 

[Watching Rekieta]

Viva and Barnes are coping and seething about the case.

The denialism in Barnes is just incredible. With a straight face he was carrying on about principle and power. His defense of Nick isn't based on principle. It's based on some power he has endowed with Rekieta as "law pope." He has stated that people that have criticized Nick's legal arguments, purely on legal principles, showed not have done so because they "owe" Nick. Barnes is completely without principle. What a joke.

Barnes now seems to believe the government should drop the case because Nick has shown he is going to fight it and the return for the state to pursue is small. Here's a news flash: The state NEEDS to pursue this case on principle. Nick doesn't get off because he has pricey lawyers. The state can't choose who to prosecute based on whether they pursue legal remedies or not. Per usual, Barnes is seeking the least principled outcome simply because he likes Nick.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

The denialism in Barnes is just incredible. With a straight face he was carrying on about principle and power. His defense of Nick isn't based on principle. It's based on some power he has endowed with Rekieta as "law pope." He has stated that people that have criticized Nick's legal arguments, purely on legal principles, showed not have done so because they "owe" Nick. Barnes is completely without principle. What a joke.

Barnes now seems to believe the government should drop the case because Nick has shown he is going to fight it and the return for the state to pursue is small. Here's a news flash: The state NEEDS to pursue this case on principle. Nick doesn't get off because he has pricey lawyers. The state can't choose who to prosecute based on whether they pursue legal remedies or not. Per usual, Barnes is seeking the least principled outcome simply because he likes Nick.

On the contrary, the state should pursue people who waste the states times and with it tax payer money over a marginal drug case that could have ended with a run of the mill plea bargain that judges and lawyers see hundreds of every year.

The case is not special, only NICK is making it special by being an obstinate moron. And that needs to be punished.

 

[Desktop User2]

Pure rage is always lurking underneath the surface of the Cuckpope.

"Heeeey now, mister sister. I´m gonna punch soooo haaaard! I´m gonna fuck you in the mouth!"

 

[ChromaQuack]

Did Rekieta hint he was going to stream and back out after the Franks denial?

No, he did however entirely disappear from the internet at large (no xeets, no streams) for exactly 3 days after the DENYCAUST happened. Three days or the length of an involuntary psych hold.

 

[Gorton Colu]

Barnes' irrational defense and support for Balldo-Skelly makes me wonder if Nick was providing Barnes with some access to the polycule.

 

[prolapsed_cranium]

Viva and Barnes are coping and seething about the case.

"It was a longshot to start with"...............Barnes is a dickless faggot. Give it another 6 months, and it'll be "Nick, who? Never heard of him."

 

[AnOminous]

"It was a longshot to start with"...............Barnes is a dickless faggot. Give it another 6 months, and it'll be "Nick, who? Never heard of him."

More like he'll be trying to explain what he was doing with a basement full of captive boy scouts.

 

[ChromaQuack]

I don't really think that Barnes believes in any system of law or government anymore. He believes in a system where everyone decides individually for themselves what the law is and settles their disputes by force.

That's really funny because in such a system Barnes would never win; he's a fat faggot with bitch tits whose only 'skill' is overloading retard brains with technical babble until they somehow listen to him and his only career feat is being the only lawyer that I know of who's so retarded as to have gotten served a C&D for zealously pretending to represent someone who wanted nothing to do with him.

 

[Nate Higgers]

the only lawyer that I know of who's so retarded as to have gotten served a C&D for zealously pretending to represent someone who wanted nothing to do with him

Rittenhouse? I know he’s got a few fucked over people in his wake, well the only main one I know of is Blade (Wesley Snipes)

 

[Sharpeteer]

I hated the stupid toasts to random people/wine moms I don't give a shit about, and since he's a terrible show host that has no clue how to run a show, he would interrupt the show every what, 3-5 minutes or so?

And he couldn't just say "a toast to you and your dog" or something like that, no, he has to ramble on for several minutes each. Terrible viewer experience, so I left.

It wasn't until the Eric July drama happened that I started going back and looking up all the stuff I missed. That's when I came here and lurked for a while.

 

[Strix454]

Barnes now seems to believe the government should drop the case because Nick has shown he is going to fight it and the return for the state to pursue is small.

Barnes is utterly wrong. The survival of the warrant means that Nick has almost nothing to fight about at trial. They will produce the police, the evidence of the drugs, someone from the lab to talk about the drugs and that is about it. Attacking the police will go nowhere. Without some specific known mistake by the lab, that will go nowhere too. His only other options are longshot defenses that would require him, April or Kayla to testify (and destroy themselves). Its a short trial and a rather easy trial.

 

[Owlbear]

I don't really think that Barnes believes in any system of law or government anymore. He believes in a system where everyone decides individually for themselves what the law is and settles their disputes by force.

The denialism in Barnes is just incredible. With a straight face he was carrying on about principle and power. His defense of Nick isn't based on principle. It's based on some power he has endowed with Rekieta as "law pope." He has stated that people that have criticized Nick's legal arguments, purely on legal principles, showed not have done so because they "owe" Nick. Barnes is completely without principle. What a joke.

The second time I watched a Barnes stream, he went on for an extended period about how the CIA assassinated JFK and the whole government conspired to cover it up. He then went on to talk about the FDA going after the Amish and I think he had some conspiracy theories about people going after Trump in the same stream. While I have some sympathy for people who believe those things, I may not trust your legal analysis if you haven't met a conspiracy theory that you didn't agree with and you base your legal analyses on the fact that the legal system will back you up on it. On the other hand, that's a perfect match for Rekieta, who is also into conspiracy theories.

I used to think Barnes might have been an okay lawyer aside from the conspiracy theories, but his analysis of Rekieta's case really shattered that one. The conspiracy theories are all that's in his head. I feel bad for Viva's wife and kids, who he dragged to Florida because he thought Canada was going to go fascist any day now.

I hated the stupid toasts to random people/wine moms I don't give a shit about, and since he's a terrible show host that has no clue how to run a show, he would interrupt the show every what, 3-5 minutes or so?

The toasts were a huge moneymaker for him, but they were so hard to sit through. He routinely pulled down hundreds of dollars in toasts a night at his peak.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Long drama Short, Nick has a cope stream and any allusions I had to Nick being a well-meaning but now boring man are gone. I genuinely believe that first july rant stream he did was the end of the Rackets

That was the minute I realized that no matter what depths Nick had sank to, he was devoted to diving deeper and deeper. What a legendary stream.

Per usual, Barnes is seeking the least principled outcome simply because he likes Nick.

That's the worst possible reason to espouse these views. What is there to like about a child abusing junkie cuckold whose name is synonymous with a testicular torture sex toy? There must be some real skeletons in Boss Baby Barnes's closet.

 

[Not Who You Think]

Is it just me or is haveing your first drink or cigar with your kid just strange? Maybe it is because I don't drink or smoke, but I don't understand why you would want to introduce your children to booze or smoking, even in a controlled environment of 'just a sip of whiskey' or 'one puff of a cigar.' How is that cool at all?

It seems to vary from person to person in terms of firsts with cigars and alcohol. The idea seems to be that the kid will be able to bond with the parent over something in a controlled environment under the supervision of someone who ultimately knows what is best for them. Age is a big factor of course, as is the parent.

If your father is responsible, dependable, and someone you respect then having your first beer with him (especially his brand) can be something of a right of passage or sign of respect from him. More of a "you're old enough to handle this" than "it would be so cool if you drank this". Sometimes this is how the kid/young adult learns they don't like beer/whisky/cigars. Sometimes this is how the parent might use the experience to steer the child away from these vices. Still, the moment (and the memory) is still considered special. Essentially, the cigar/whisky are secondary and the experience and the experience is entirely optional as there are plenty of other "firsts" out there (fishing, sporting events, getting your first pocket knife).

Having your first drink be with your alcoholic father who gets blackout drunk and screams at your mother can hit a lot differently because it's a wellspring of the misery in your home-life. Addiction can taint anything. It just feels like the start of something that will cripple you like it did your parent. The kid can end up resenting the experience because they don't even like their parent, let alone respect them.

Regarding drugs, I have never heard of a responsible parent who got high with their kids. Most kids that I knew who were introduced to drugs early ended up on a much harder road in life (similar to the people who got into it as an adult). I'll leave it at that.

 

[AnOminous]

Rittenhouse? I know he’s got a few fucked over people in his wake, well the only main one I know of is Blade (Wesley Snipes)

Nicholas Sandmann one of the so-called "Covington Kids" who got their reputations nuked from orbit by SJWs for simply appearing in public and opposing abortion, like Catholics ususally do, because an alcoholic Indian scammer got in their face and banged a drum in his face, and he smiled, therefore proving he was a Nazi [THIS IS WHAT SJWS ACTUALLY BELIEVE].

Barnes grifted around this case so much, especially about Sandmann's case, that Sandmann had his actual lawyer who actually was representing him, issue a C&D because this dipshit Boss Baby mother was all but pretending to represent him, and tell him to quit doing that shit or else.

Barnes is a total grifter.

Nobody should take this weirdo seriously.

 

[Owlbear]

Indian scammer got in their face and banged a drum in his face

To clarify, feather, not dot.

Nobody should take this weirdo seriously.

He puts on a good veneer, much better than Nick Rekieta, but he is still an online lawyer. If his clients have any say, he'd be a non-practicing one, too.

 

[TrainWreckWatcher]

The gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Regarding drugs, I have never heard of a responsible parent who got high with their kids. Most kids that I knew who were introduced to drugs early ended up on a much harder road in life (similar to the people who got into it as an adult). I'll leave it at that.

"Here son, here's how you rip a fat rail of cocaine! It's fun, do it like I'm doing! Once we rip some rails, I'll show you how I use the balldo on your mother and my mistress. Don't give me that face, I didn't raise my son to be a prude! I bought you that balldo for a reason!"

Oh wait, that's from the universe where Nick doesn't give children cocaine. For all we know he offered all his kids coke but could only convince his daughter to do it with him.