T. Greg Doucette / Thomas Gregory Doucette / greg_doucette / TGDLaw / fsckemall / lawdevnull / TDot - Super Lawyer, Failed Politician, Captain of The Threadnought, Drowning in Debt

WarJams said:
Okay. That makes more sense. Thanks @HarblMcDavid.

I don't think he is actually interested in helping at all either. I think this is literally him sperging out so hard about being called a shitty lawyer on twitter that he is looking to attempt the Texas bar just for the worthless token """advantage""" of claiming to actually be a lawyer in Texas for when people tell him he doesn't know a fucking thing about Texas law. That's the kind of sorry ass person he comes off as.
Click to expand...

He somehow thinks getting a piece of paper will prove the utterly stupid shit he says isn't stupid. If he gets it, he will still be stupid. The things he says will still be wrong. He might slightly impress some people slightly dumber than he is.

More specifically, Nick will still be right. The things he says will still be correct. Nick will still actually read all the papers in a lawsuit before commenting on them. Therefore, Nick will still actually know what is going on in the case. Meanwhile, Greg still will not. Greg will still be a moron. He will then be a moron with a piece of paper which nowhere on it says he actually knows what he's talking about.

He will still be a stupid motherfucker, and everyone will still laugh at him and his fat pumpkinhead.
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: ColtWalker1847, Kosher Salt, Jub-Jub and 14 others
I'm not sure what CPAPi Chulo's end goal here. Other than twitter cred.

Most of Law Twitter seems to be infected with TDS and Woke-titus-C.
I curious to find out what their opinions were on the Oberlin case or if they had any
 
3dguy said:
I'm not sure what CPAPi Chulo's end goal here. Other than twitter cred.

Most of Law Twitter seems to be infected with TDS and Woke-titus-C.
I curious to find out what their opinions were on the Oberlin case or if they had any
Click to expand...
From what I understand from a site covering the case most thought Oberlin was going to win and we’re shocked when they lost.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Allanon, Kosher Salt, ConSluttant and 2 others
I find it funny that he uses a picture of HMS Dreadnaught, after all she was designed for use in a naval strategy which was already obsolete.
Beavis said:
From what I understand from a site covering the case most thought Oberlin was going to win and we’re shocked when they lost.
Click to expand...

IIRC, it was the same when The Hulkster sued the living shit out of Gawker, the Twatter spergs were convinced that Gawker would win the lolsuit, yeah, well, we all know how well that ended for Gawker.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Questioning_Huggers
Wilhelm Bittrich said:
I find it funny that he uses a picture of HMS Dreadnaught, after all she was designed for use in a naval strategy which was already obsolete.


IIRC, it was the same when The Hulkster sued the living shit out of Gawker, the Twatter spergs were convinced that Gawker would win the lolsuit, yeah, well, we all know how well that ended for Gawker.
Click to expand...
like when Killary was polling at 99% chance to win
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Allanon, Kosher Salt, ConSluttant and 5 others
HarblMcDavid said:
I posted this in the weebwars main thread yesterday but that moves pretty fast, so here it is for posterity:

Texas Board of Law Examiners - Frequently Asked Questions

TEXAS BOARD of LAW EXAMINERS
ble.texas.gov

He's trying to do Admission Without Examination (AWOX) which is a somewhat different process, basically be practicing for 5 of the last 7 years, have an MPRE score of 85 or more, probably some other shit I'm missing, and submit a bunch of info about yourself so they can do a character/background check. Within 270 days of this the board will reject or accept your application and if accepted you can say you're a Texas lawyer on twitter. The linked FAQ explains it pretty well.

One thing I did not catch yesterday which I think speaks volumes is the timeframe for acceptance or denial by the board:



Max 270 days for an answer assuming everything is properly submitted, average 3-4 months turnaround. So faster than the BATF but slow enough that by the time he knows one way or the other literally everyone will have forgotten who he is.

So again, if he was actually interested in helping, he'd have started this process weeks ago.

Edit for outside observers: no, you can't bribe your way into making it happen faster, so additional funds are literally fun money for Greg to buy additional CPAP machines and nothing else.
Click to expand...

Just to put this in perspective, this is roughly the same amount of time that it takes to "Credential" a Physician for a new facility or practice. This is pretty common for the sort of background and reference checks that will be going on. This sort of thing is not generally a formality. It says much that his first thing was to admit he now has to try and think up where he is going to get 12 credible references from. I mean lets be upfront about this, from everything we know of Doucette he would seem to be more or less unemployable as a staff attorney by a typical law firm, which is why he is private practice. His dead broke deadbeat criminal clients are more employable than him. At least Waffle House would hire them on the belief that everyone deserves a second chance. I think the Waffle House founders would have immediately flagged Doucette as the snake he is and told him to kiss off.

AnOminous said:
He somehow thinks getting a piece of paper will prove the utterly stupid shit he says isn't stupid. If he gets it, he will still be stupid. The things he says will still be wrong. He might slightly impress some people slightly dumber than he is.

More specifically, Nick will still be right. The things he says will still be correct. Nick will still actually read all the papers in a lawsuit before commenting on them. Therefore, Nick will still actually know what is going on in the case. Meanwhile, Greg still will not. Greg will still be a moron. He will then be a moron with a piece of paper which nowhere on it says he actually knows what he's talking about.

He will still be a stupid motherfucker, and everyone will still laugh at him and his fat pumpkinhead.
Click to expand...

It will be even more hilarious when they kick his application back seeking more information. Or outright reject it on some background problems. ("tax returns? What do you mean you want Tax Returns?")

Wilhelm Bittrich said:
I find it funny that he uses a picture of HMS Dreadnaught, after all she was designed for use in a naval strategy which was already obsolete.
Click to expand...

It's not HMS Dreadnaught. It is the USS Texas. The last surviving (sort of) pre WW2 "Dreadnaught" type Battleship. It's a (barely) floating museum outside Houston.
https://tpwd.texas.gov/state-parks/battleship-texas

It's actually an even more hilariously unintentional bit of allegory to Doucebagette here. The Texas is decaying badly, the bottom has largely rotted out. It suffers major flooding. It can more or less be considered sunk in its berth. And plans to build a dry berth around it to preserve it and prevent further deterioration have been cancelled because the main support structure was discovered to be 90% rust. Such that they doubt it can still support its own weight out of the water. In other words it's a complete broken down wreck hidden from view by a few coats of paint. Sound Familiar?
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: Ken Jennings, BBChannel, Kosher Salt and 7 others
The context surrounding this goes back quite a ways, given that "law twitter" (and by extension Tgreg) is basically an extension of Popehat's ego and accomplishments manifested as orbiting twitter homunculi, I'd argue a good deal of this goes back to his writing on the topic of law and the internet especially pre-trump and pre-gamergate (this is all kind of by my memory of things but this is a while ago so if you think I missed something tag me and I'll add it in).

So, back at the tail end of the internet's golden age, when corporations were still delightfully amoral, internet lawsuits were almost exclusively crazy people suing over getting laughed at, and social media was in its infancy.

Popehat did a lot of writing and legal networking via the "popehat signal" for people being maliciously targeted by assblasted insane people. Marc Randazza is a relevant name in these sagas. Also the word "bumptious". He used that a lot. Also coined the phrase "snort my taint" in response to lawsuit threats. Ultimately he did a lot of good for free speech hooking up clients without 30k to drop on a competent lawyer to file anti-SLAPP motions to shoot down bogus lawsuits. In fact, if I recall correctly that is usually about all they had to do.

The general attitude he held at the time was a pretty hard line "internet speech is free speech and defamation probably isn't a thing here, also I may moderate or delete some comments that's because my blog is my living room" or something like that.

As one might imagine his, and thus his reader's (arguably proto-law-twitter) prevailing set of experience with defamation were not too many competence levels higher than Null's mountain jews; crazies with enough legal understanding or the resources to hire lawyers who had understanding and skills (sometimes) which meant that judges often weren't dismissing these things without a hearing, but again, ultimately defeated at anti-SLAPP. The prevailing legal attitude at the time was a very pre-social media attitude based on non-written communications which Nick has detailed in a general sense before as to why defamation suits generally have a poor reception in law circles, and Popehat wasn't wrong a lot back then, especially when it came to whether lawsuits could be nuked from orbit with an anti-SLAPP.

The parallels with Nick are interesting, because Popehat's, and thus law twitter's, credibility rests on these laurels of built up credibility from past good works and "being right" from the days of yore, and built in a similar manner to how Nick has built his reputation on being correct in the present day. Their choice of medium differs...also their beliefs most divergently, but I'd almost call Popehat a bit of a proto-Nick, though he largely kept his day job where as Nick has turned what he does into his day job.

Back to law twitter itself, shockingly, most of the attitudes of law twitter towards defamation appear to have not evolved since this period of time damn near 10 years ago, back when the "job lynch mob" and total war defamation strategy on political enemies had not really gone mainstream, and it seems to me like major contributing factor to the reason a lot of them continue to hold on to this set of beliefs regarding defamation, especially on the intertubes, is because after several people stopped blogging on popehat (would it shock you to learn this was around when Gamergate started?) it became a bit of a center-left echo chamber in line with Popehat's beliefs, causing either apathy at best or cheering at worst because it typically wasn't "their side" on the receiving end of anything which could be considered defamation. Which is fine I guess...but when you no longer have contradictory ideas in your sphere you can get left behind and that appears to be what has occurred with law twitter, and why they could get Gawker and Oberlin wrong.

Now, in fairness to Popehat, despite his obvious seething hatred for Dick Masterson and Co., he did throw out a popehat signal for that LOLsuit generally but with primary goal of helping Asterios. So there are principles buried in there somewhere, also that LOLsuit was exactly the kind of thing he'd been seeing for years prior.

tl;dr:
Not surprising law twitter has been wrong a lot about defamation lately, they haven't meaningfully updated their resume since the early 2010s.
 
  • Informative
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: SHITTAHS CLOGGED!, ColtWalker1847, Dilligaff and 14 others
HarblMcDavid said:
The context surrounding this goes back quite a ways, given that "law twitter" (and by extension Tgreg) is basically an extension of Popehat's ego and accomplishments manifested as orbiting twitter homunculi, I'd argue a good deal of this goes back to his writing on the topic of law and the internet especially pre-trump and pre-gamergate (this is all kind of by my memory of things but this is a while ago so if you think I missed something tag me and I'll add it in).

So, back at the tail end of the internet's golden age, when corporations were still delightfully amoral, internet lawsuits were almost exclusively crazy people suing over getting laughed at, and social media was in its infancy.

Popehat did a lot of writing and legal networking via the "popehat signal" for people being maliciously targeted by assblasted insane people. Marc Randazza is a relevant name in these sagas. Also the word "bumptious". He used that a lot. Also coined the phrase "snort my taint" in response to lawsuit threats. Ultimately he did a lot of good for free speech hooking up clients without 30k to drop on a competent lawyer to file anti-SLAPP motions to shoot down bogus lawsuits. In fact, if I recall correctly that is usually about all they had to do.

The general attitude he held at the time was a pretty hard line "internet speech is free speech and defamation probably isn't a thing here, also I may moderate or delete some comments that's because my blog is my living room" or something like that.

As one might imagine his, and thus his reader's (arguably proto-law-twitter) prevailing set of experience with defamation were not too many competence levels higher than Null's mountain jews; crazies with enough legal understanding or the resources to hire lawyers who had understanding and skills (sometimes) which meant that judges often weren't dismissing these things without a hearing, but again, ultimately defeated at anti-SLAPP. The prevailing legal attitude at the time was a very pre-social media attitude based on non-written communications which Nick has detailed in a general sense before as to why defamation suits generally have a poor reception in law circles, and Popehat wasn't wrong a lot back then, especially when it came to whether lawsuits could be nuked from orbit with an anti-SLAPP.

The parallels with Nick are interesting, because Popehat's, and thus law twitter's, credibility rests on these laurels of built up credibility from past good works and "being right" from the days of yore, and built in a similar manner to how Nick has built his reputation on being correct in the present day. Their choice of medium differs...also their beliefs most divergently, but I'd almost call Popehat a bit of a proto-Nick, though he largely kept his day job where as Nick has turned what he does into his day job.

Back to law twitter itself, shockingly, most of the attitudes of law twitter towards defamation appear to have not evolved since this period of time damn near 10 years ago, back when the "job lynch mob" and total war defamation strategy on political enemies had not really gone mainstream, and it seems to me like major contributing factor to the reason a lot of them continue to hold on to this set of beliefs regarding defamation, especially on the intertubes, is because after several people stopped blogging on popehat (would it shock you to learn this was around when Gamergate started?) it became a bit of a center-left echo chamber in line with Popehat's beliefs, causing either apathy at best or cheering at worst because it typically wasn't "their side" on the receiving end of anything which could be considered defamation. Which is fine I guess...but when you no longer have contradictory ideas in your sphere you can get left behind and that appears to be what has occurred with law twitter, and why they could get Gawker and Oberlin wrong.

Now, in fairness to Popehat, despite his obvious seething hatred for Dick Masterson and Co., he did throw out a popehat signal for that LOLsuit generally but with primary goal of helping Asterios. So there are principles buried in there somewhere, also that LOLsuit was exactly the kind of thing he'd been seeing for years prior.

tl;dr:
Not surprising law twitter has been wrong a lot about defamation lately, they haven't meaningfully updated their resume since the early 2010s.
Click to expand...

Fascinating. Thanks for the write up on "Law Twitter." I had no idea what it was.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Boss Bass
If anyone is interested, this is the initial sketch I did of Greg when coming up with ideas for Rekieta's Cuck Lightyear Mug

cucklightyear-idea.png
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: ColtWalker1847, Dilligaff, Allanon and 10 others
This must be the highest of high brow comedy that is lulz......George Carlin eat your heart out....a bankrupt lawyer getting licensed in TX--to say that he acquired it. **BAZINGA**

Stitch me up, this is "hilarious." The Douche is a comedic genius. Thomas, don't stop. This is funny to me for purposes you didn't intend and I like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Questioning_Huggers
Wilhelm Bittrich said:
I find it funny that he uses a picture of HMS Dreadnaught, after all she was designed for use in a naval strategy which was already obsolete.
Click to expand...
akshualy... sorry Dreadnaught was a revolutionary design of battleship that completely changed the face of naval warfare. Up to that point, warship designs had included batteries of large and small calibre weapons arranged along the sides of the upper deck, sticking to the general view that more guns on each side = better, a view that had hung over from the days when ships of the line arrayed thirty or forty cannon in the sides of their hulls. Dreadnaught's design did away with the multiple calibre armaments, replacing them with a smaller number of large calibre guns that could easily traverse (except the turrets amid, which were dropped from the next generation of designs and disappeared during the great war). She was also more heavily armoured and faster than any of her contemporaries.

The problem with Dreadnaught and her immediate descendants wasn't her design, but the doctrines they were forced to fight under, which still harked back to the ship of the line: to wit, sail in a straight line with all your guns on one side pointing at the enemy, preferably with the wind on your rear quarter so you have the most latitude to manoeuvre, and maintain a higher rate of fire than your target.

In the age of sail, that was the high ground of naval warfare that everyone tried to reach. In the age of the Dreadnaught, it was suicidal, and is the reason the RN was utterly walloped at Jutland. It's understandable that they stuck with existing doctrine; it had been winning the English wars for centuries, from Agincourt onwards, and had become a point of national pride. The RN hadn't had to face anything more than skirmishes between the invention of Dreadnaught and the Battle of Jutland, so their doctrinal assumptions weren't challenged.

Anyway, the point is, Dreadnaught was a beautiful ship, of an advanced, revolutionary design that brought about fundamental change. Even sharing a referential name with Douchette's fifty-foot floater is an insult to a proud naval heritage. Seems to have set off my 'tisms something awful...
 
  • Informative
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Ken Jennings, Dilligaff, BBChannel and 8 others
teriyakiburns said:
akshualy... sorry Dreadnaught was a revolutionary design of battleship that completely changed the face of naval warfare. Up to that point, warship designs had included batteries of large and small calibre weapons arranged along the sides of the upper deck, sticking to the general view that more guns on each side = better, a view that had hung over from the days when ships of the line arrayed thirty or forty cannon in the sides of their hulls. Dreadnaught's design did away with the multiple calibre armaments, replacing them with a smaller number of large calibre guns that could easily traverse (except the turrets amid, which were dropped from the next generation of designs and disappeared during the great war). She was also more heavily armoured and faster than any of her contemporaries.
Click to expand...

Yes, I fully agree, from a design point she was revolutionary and made all other battlefleets of that time obsolete, almost over night. I would say she was one of the high lights of british (naval) engineering.
teriyakiburns said:
In the age of sail, that was the high ground of naval warfare that everyone tried to reach. In the age of the Dreadnaught, it was suicidal, and is the reason the RN was utterly walloped at Jutland. It's understandable that they stuck with existing doctrine; it had been winning the English wars for centuries, from Agincourt onwards, and had become a point of national pride. The RN hadn't had to face anything more than skirmishes between the invention of Dreadnaught and the Battle of Jutland, so their doctrinal assumptions weren't challenged.
Click to expand...

I would go as far as I would say that the Royal Navy had nothing more than minor skirmishes between the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the Battle of Jutland.

TBH, The First Sea Lord should sue Douchnozzle for the utter insult he commited to the Royal Navy, its members active and past and its heritage.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Questioning_Huggers, Botchy Galoop, Boss Bass and 1 other person
TardBows said:
View attachment 834525

That is straight up delusional, even for the douche lawyer. Soye fucking believed every single statements made by PULL, for gods sake.
archive.fo

T. Greg Doucette on Twitter: "Doesn't matter how bad Toye's depositio…

archived 10 Jul 2019 13:41:17 UTC
archive.fo archive.fo
Click to expand...
LOL even Douchebaguette can't defend Toye's depo :story:
And what points would Vic have fucked up that would render his case moot? Yeah Vic is a Christian. Yeah he cheated on his wife. Yeah he was a pussy-slayer at cons. SO???? What does that have to do with Ron furiously defaming him while fapping in his cage?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kosher Salt, TardBows, Exterminatus and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back