Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It'd be a civil matter if April (or the real nanny) were to break a hypothetical NDA with Lord Balldo-mort. It would be completely doable in Minnesota. Does Nick have the funds to go after them, ie would mommy pay for it? Because Nick can't practice law! (I guess could he go pro se? That gets ... murky. Plus he's too retarded to actually practice law, what with pre-existing dumb brain and current drug-induced holes in said brain.)How enforceable would that be, anyway?
I hope you're right. What sucks is now this woman is either going to have to go get a restraining order or deal with a lawsuit. I don't feel bad when someone like Amanda Morris has to put a restraining order on Ralph and I'm less sympathetic to someone like Monty who actively engages with shit flingers online (still hopes he wins of course). This is different though. Normal people shouldn't have to deal with this shit.Nick is fucked six ways to Sunday and he's done it to himself.
It’s a busy thread and people asking for information they could find out for themselves is annoying.No need to be so rude about it![]()
NDAs are disfavored at law and generally have to be handled in a very specific way to be valid. What are the odds Nick could draft one that wouldn't be tossed out of court like a Barneswalker motion for a Franks hearing? A lot of NDAs are basically just to intimidate the person forced into signing them and are nearly worthless.If April fell off the lumbercart, Nick 100% had her sign an NDA.
NDAs cannot be used to prevent someone from reporting crimes/illegal activity. If Chaney or April had seen crimes/illegal activity and signed an NDA, and Nick is relying on their ignorance of this fact to prevent them from saying something, he's fucked.How enforceable would that be, anyway?
He claims to have messaged an employer of hers to tell him about alleged criminal activity. I'm pretty sure there's laws against employers doing something like this to former employees.He's clearly trying to damage her financially, he's mentioned going after her current job
Not really anymore even for corporate cucks. See Board in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (Feb. 21, 2023)NDAs are disfavored at law and generally have to be handled in a very specific way to be valid. What are the odds Nick could draft one that wouldn't be tossed out of court like a Barneswalker motion for a Franks hearing? A lot of NDAs are basically just to intimidate the person forced into signing them and are nearly worthless.
Where you often see them upheld is in employment termination settlements involving severance pay, where you might sign a non-disparagement clause and non-disclosure as to trade secrets and other proprietary information and, while this is generally the law anyway, such agreements will include something like a liquidated damages clause agreeing that, for instance, every violation is $5,000 without having to litigate the exact value.
An NDA that you agree to help a criminal conceal his crimes is probably pretty worthless.
The timing is very obvious. Let's pretend he's telling the truth and he only "found out" about these claims a couple weeks ago. He still spent weeks of the trial stream mainly not commenting on the trial but complaining about Kurt for days but suddenly as soon as he's guesting on that podcast he starts bringing up his nanny, and on the same podcast he changes his tune about the likelihood of the footage being released. Now he's talking even more about the nanny.I'm with the folks that think he's setting up the Nanny to blame for the state of his home when the bodycam comes out.
By talking about how they begged the nanny to stay until the end of the school year, that her leaving made things impossible, he seems to be setting himself up to say that the situation in the footage looks bad but as soon as the school year ended everything would have magically resolved itself.It will be really funny for Nick to try to explain to the average person after the body cam footage comes out why a nanny who left in February is somehow responsible for the state of the house she's not in up to three months after she'd already left (in May, when he was arrested). This is the exact kind of argument that I'd expect a fucking retard with no self-awareness to make.
- He was paying her over "well north of " $50K/yr
- Extra "expenses" were $30K. He later clarifies that these were GROCERIES AND FOOD FOR THE KIDS.
The nanny worked full-time or close to full time hours and also did a lot of the driving.30k probably also includes other things than just food and snacks. Like clothes, school supplies and so on. Does Nick or Kayla look like parents that do that sort of shopping every single time? 5 growing children go through surprising amount of clothes. And then if you add up even more discretionary spending like toys... I can really see that total hits 30k knowing the spending habits of Nick at least...
Things Nick actually knows the cost of:I just think nick has no sense of what actual things cost and is pulling numbers out of his hole riddled head.
Why is he going after his former nanny now? Are the holes in his brain rewriting history? His pickle brain is once again going to get his boney nonexistent ass into trouble again. Is it because the body cam footage might be released so he’s trying to pin the mess of his crackhouse all on her leaving?- Quotes the email that she would "never ever" do this
- Aaron was contacted via email today. He was asked to give a statement. Someone from the County wants to talk to Aaron.
- Aaron would "kick in" if Chaney needs to raise money for a case
- Laughs that it's another lawyer and tells Nick to "tread lightly" because there are a lot of people in "that town" who want a "piece of his ass"
Cocaine addicts will fuck people who give them free cocaine.But that being said; the one thing I can give Nick is was able to steal April with a lifeless dick. Don't get me wrong, I get she's low IQ; but imagine a dude having to pop pills that may not always work and deciding you're gonna be his side piece. Good job Nick, it's actually kinda impressive.
Say what you want about Aaron. I will believe him over Nick every single time.Aaron has addressed the Chaney issue:
- Calls it a narcissistic cope from Nick
- Says Nick admitted to the bullet of coke on the sofa
- Chaney was "the best parent they ever had"
- The "parasocial broads" are "cloud boblins" who should never have platformed Nick
- She never gave a kid alcohol
- She "just couldn't take it anymore", that was told to him by someone else
- Chaney is a "really good person" who "kept the house together" and "she knew [about the drugs]." Aaron told Nick that she knew.
And the James Roberts email issue:
- Quotes the email that she would "never ever" do this
- Aaron was contacted via email today. He was asked to give a statement. Someone from the County wants to talk to Aaron.
- Aaron would "kick in" if Chaney needs to raise money for a case
- Laughs that it's another lawyer and tells Nick to "tread lightly" because there are a lot of people in "that town" who want a "piece of his ass"
That's an administrative agency decision and not really binding on any court (or even the agency itself). It can change as soon as Trump gets to replace the 5 year members of the Board.Not really anymore even for corporate cucks. See Board in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (Feb. 21, 2023)
But none of that has anything whatsoever to do with the nanny. Those are kid expenses. That is not money to her, for her, or otherwise relevant at all. In fact, he should have given her a credit card to use for all of it, not had her charge it then be at his mercy while he decides what looks right and when to reimburse. I can only imagine the inquisition.The nanny worked full-time or close to full time hours and also did a lot of the driving.
He previously claimed that the so-called "snack budget" is in excess of $2,000/month, which is already 80% of the annual expenses. That leaves $6k for other expenses like driving.
While I do agree, that's just Aaron winning a gold medal at the special olympics.Say what you want about Aaron. I will believe him over Nick every single time.
Now watch this faggot say:The timing is very obvious. Let's pretend he's telling the truth and he only "found out" about these claims a couple weeks ago. He still spent weeks of the trial stream mainly not commenting on the trial but complaining about Kurt for days but suddenly as soon as he's guesting on that podcast he starts bringing up his nanny, and on the same podcast he changes his tune about the likelihood of the footage being released. Now he's talking even more about the nanny.