💀 Horrorcow Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta / "u/Early-Leopard-8351" - Polysubstance abuser, child doser, dog killer. "Lawtube pope" turned zesty Dabbleverse Redditor streamer. Swinger "whitebread ass nigga" who snuffs animals and visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold. Still not over his ex Aaron. Wife's bod worth $50.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Luna's expiration date is?

  • <1 year

    Votes: 158 22.6%
  • Around 2 years

    Votes: 278 39.7%
  • 3-5 years

    Votes: 94 13.4%
  • As long as a pug lives, Karen farmer.

    Votes: 170 24.3%

  • Total voters
    700
Legul Mindset and Sean pointed out talking about DM's that even his mods were supportive and worried but he only responded with scorn.

He had lawtube, mods, locals, and even random viewers concerned about him, how many people you can think of that have more people in their corner?

Very few, and he threw it all in the gutter to live as a degenerate. Inexplicable.
 
So is Quover pronounced "que - over" or "cover" ? And what does it even mean? That shit is mad retarded i agree with April.
It's supposed to be pronounced like cover. IIRC Aaron explained it on the Kino Casino, it's supposed to be a combination of quadruple (coz there's four of them) and cover (because they ran cover for each other in hiding their degeneracy) Honestly it's the most white person ass thing I've ever heard, which is an accomplishment since I, and most of my social circle, are so white we make Casper the friendly ghost look tanned.

I'm going to speculate that the "feat. Molly" refers to the drug MDMA, though.
You can't just assume that because they're degenerate druggies that Molly means MDMA. They're also degenerate swingers, maybe Molly is the next target for the polycule.
 
View attachment 6577199
Nick is so kind letting that poor April girl that he rarely sees use his studio.
X | A
Yes, having a $3,000 streaming setup is the only way you can appear for a Zoom court hearing

It's not like you can literally join from anywhere on your phone


1730302859138.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Nick thinking he gave people 6 figure careers is hilarious. He literally owes his YT career to Dick Massasuhn and KF/Josh.
 
It will be due to Nick going full killdozer in Spicer, Balldozer if you would, and Officer Felt is the only man who can stop this non-practicing lawyer with extreme prejudice.
(Obligatory repost)
IMG_9215.jpeg

The first coinage of balldozer was all the way back in 2022, can you believe it.
 
I know he’s lying about the $1000 because his internal definition of charity is “showing up to a charity dinner to give away Grandpa’s money that Mom and Dad me”. I doubt he even tipped them for fucking him ass-to-mouth.

He’s more of a grabbler than Joe.

Seriously, Nick is affluenza in a loser rich kid to a T. @AnOminous, @Himedall All-seeing Waifu , @Captain Manning , or @Balldo's Gate might know of better examples, but he talked about his definition of charity just prior to the Coke stream and it’s the most asshole definition I heard of. Nick’s grandparents were good, hardworking people. His parents seem to be typical boomers who took it for granted and raised a shitty kids.
I think Nick's idea of charity is where he gives money to an organization that gives him a receipt that he he can staple to his 1040.

And while there's nothing really wrong with that, and the IRS agrees, it can not be understated that he does it for the same reason other wealthy people in the U.S. do it: To lower tax liability. I think if the tax code didn't permit charitable donations and 501(c)3 organizations, you'd see a lot less charity in the U.S..

This whole Lawtube thing doesn't really surprise me. He benefited handsomely from the work I (and others) put in during Weebwars, and I never saw a dime. All the claims he made in "Dear John" where he says he offered me help me are patently bullshit. Some of them absurdly and provably so.

Difference being I'm not salty over not receiving any compensation for the work I put in, because at no point was I expecting anything, nor did I ask. I put in the work voluntarily because I believed in Vic's case. Lawtube might have more cause to be bitter because it sounds like Nick made at least vague promises of compensation to them.

If I could go back in time and be given the chance to do it all over again, I wouldn't help him not because I didn't get anything out of it, but because I know Ty Beard would just fuck it up in the end and it would all be a waste of time.
 
Yeah but it isn’t specifically money. For all we know Nick might have got them stuff that he considers compensation and they do not.
If he had he'd have said so. Which he did - he claims he got them their careers.

One of them needs to drop proof he straight said money.
I know people here like to see literal words before a thing is considered settled, but in this case, whether he said "I will pay you OK one million dollars to come on my show" or just implied it, or spoke euphemistically, or didn't "promise," or let them think it, or whatever sloppy or slippery thing, he was disingenuous and is now not only wiggling away from it per usual, but he's being a belligerent head-ass about it, also per usual. No honor and no grace.

He is a lawyer. One should expect it. It’s why when someone promises something you should slways clarify what specifically.
A quality lawyer with integrity would actually go out of their way to be clear on expectations, precisely because they know how misunderstandings happen and would not want to be misleading. Knowing you have the skills to be an exploitative ass makes a good person aim to be over- rather than under-explicit.
 
you know for a moment i really thought this was him saying that he was cooking for his family. i should've known he meant that he was cooking for himself. what a fag. "how can you know if you're cool?" you know from just that nick never understood what was important. he only understands on the surface level. that 'being cool' as nebulous a concept as it is comes entirely from how others perceive you, but he just doesn't know how to manipulate that perception effectively, and he fools himself into think that if he perceives himself as smart, then others must be perceiving him that way too.

maybe that's why it makes him so angry and unable to stop taking bait when people shit on him for posts similar to this, because he has his cognitive dissonance brought to his attention.
 
Last edited:
Yes, having a $3,000 streaming setup is the only way you can appear for a Zoom court hearing

It's not like you can literally join from anywhere on your phone


View attachment 6578033
Weird. I was actually watching that channel last night. Judge Simpson is awesome. There's one where he goes off on a prosecutor, and it's glorious.

Anyways, I made all these arguments the first time. I have done doctor's appoints via zoom on a cell phone. There is absolutely no reason April needs to be on Nick's studio. It's absurd.

Nick thinking he gave people 6 figure careers is hilarious. He literally owes his YT career to Dick Massasuhn and KF/Josh.
More so the latter, IMO.

He got some traction off Maddox, but he got WAY more traction off Weebwars. That's when he really started to take off. And he owes a lot of that to KF.
 
And while there's nothing really wrong with that, and the IRS agrees, it can not be understated that he does it for the same reason other wealthy people in the U.S. do it: To lower tax liability.
This is a nitpick and Nick probably doesn't actually understand this anyway, but looking at just the money, giving money to charity even with the deduction on your taxable revenues still costs more than not giving to charity.

This is a vast over simplification, but still holds true when you add in the more muddy aspects of tax bullshit.

If you make $100,000 in a year and are taxed at let's say 25% you will pay $25,000 in taxes. If you give $25,000 to charity this brings your taxable income down to $75,000 and you then pay 25% on that which will be $18,750.

So you paid $25,000 to charity and then $18,750 to the IRS and have now spent $43,750.00 instead of just $25,000.

Charity should NEVER be done simply to get a tax deduction because it doesn't actually save you any money. Give out of the goodness of your heart and/or because God calls on you to be generous.

If you're a narcissist that uses people like Nick, the point isn't the tax deduction, but so you can flaunt how charitable you are for social capital.

"I gave $1000 to a Jamaican dancer to save her job after she got pregnant. I'm a good person and you've sleighted me! Doesn't that make YOU FEEL BAD!? WHY AREN'T YOU DEAD KALEA!?" - Nick's internal monologue probably
 
The kicker is they could straight up be lying. They lose nothing from doing so and gain everything. Would anyone trust Nick at this point?

It would be real easy to imply they were owed money knowing full well they weren’t just to fuck with him.
True, but Nick has a history of not delivering on promises.
Aaron has talked about him and April living in Nick's adjoining property and Nick wanting to sell it to them, the timeline matches up with Nick kicking out the previous residents, Aprils clothes and other possessions are literally photographed right now on the Realtor account listing of the adjoining property, She's taken photos in the back and front yard of that house, she filmed her first bond hearing from Nick's blurred out studio and her Omnibussin from there, she's getting mail redirected to Nick's house.
How is she even able to claim that she's not living on Nick's property at this point? it may be the adjoining property but does it really matter for the purposes of constructive possession?.
According to Aaron, he and April were living in the house Nick and April currently occupy. Nick wanted to sell Aaron the property which is currently on the market, but he and April weren't living there.

There's no evidence that April lived in the second property prior to the arrests and CPS getting involved. Where she was living at the time of the arrests is what matters in terms of the criminal case and it would have to be where the drugs were found for constructive possession to apply. If the prosecution can't prove she wasn't just a visitor (she doesn't have to prove she wasn't), there's no constructive possession.
I can’t remember 100%, but didn’t Nick say one of the houses was bought under a trust? That could be why “she doesn’t live in my house” is his cope.
The house in which they currently live is owned by a trust.
You can look at the tax records. The crack den is owned by his grandfather's trust. He, I forget if Kayla is on the title, owns April's house. Nick is just lying. His gay lolyer tendency of dancing around wording has just slipped into straight up lying more often than not imo.
Nick's current house is owned by a trust, but it's not one of the trusts set up by his grandparents.

Messages Nick has posted about it have been posted in the last few days. Nick claims that it was set up for the benefit of the kids in a manner that neither he nor Kayla gets ownership of the house in the event of a divorce.

Nick and Kayla are both on the title for the original house. It's how we found out her name.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom