I don't even know why I'm still on X.
- Tweets 183
- Following 70
- Followers 672
- Likes 288
Translation:
Grant Smith Ellis is not getting along with the rest of the media covering the Birchmore case, so he is inventing preposterous federal investigations into his defamatory accusations, trying to tie his new enemies into it, and also trying to whip up engagement that he will promptly use to e-beg into revenue while still collecting the SSDI his mother and father accused him of faking disabilities to obtain.
7
2
39
1,087
Oh, man. The "freedom fighter" and warrior for free speech you were literally JUST fundraising for would report this as a crime and demand an arrest, @RekietaLaw .
In fact, he did so to his ex-girlfriend not even two months ago. The same exact scenario. I wonder if @AaronImholte has the same impulses.
Since you're cool with that behavior maybe you should just report yourself for breaking your no-contact order.
8
5
49
1,744
Turn over that discovery,
@BostonDefender. God help you if you "lost" or destroyed it. We will never let you hear the end of it. Ever.
34
12
122
4,085
All these internet people spreading rumors about my family and making vile assumptions about my children....
Really have no clue.
💅
38
1
133
4,133
Kate Peter retweeted
Imagine writing this in an affidavit as a 45 year old man? What a life.
12
2
67
1,093
We had the same problem when Grant was pro-prosecution in the Read case. He picks a spin, commits to it, disregards all nuance and contrary facts, and embellishs to the point of dishonesty. It's not helpful. It actually hurts the position he tries to take, and his positions are quite malleable, as he is a shabby grifter.
He's using quotation marks for shit they didn't say and leaving out the parts that hurt his narrative. That's not passion for exposing corruption. That's a fucking grifter counting on you not checking @GrantSmithEllis
22
7
126
4,436
Save and share, ladies and gentlemen. (Unlike Rekieta and Kearney my audience is not 99% cat infested wine moms).
I have a soyjak for @realkatepeter fans who are trolling @RekietaLaw while he copes about his child's positive cocaine test and admits sobriety is agonizing for him.
4
8
88
2,060
The PLAINTIFFS have a better attorney than you could ever be. You spend an awful lot of time running your mouth on YouTube. Mattei and Tuxbury try cases. Not even close.
1. Calling someone a murderer is defamatory per se. Damages are presumed.
2. Her Anti-SLAPP argument already failed in the lower courts. Falsely calling someone a murderer is not protected speech. I'll bet you $100 right now that the denial is upheld by the SJC.
3. Shes in her 40s, plenty of time to garnish her earnings. ~40 more years minimum unless her rampant alcoholism takes her early.
4. She's literally in messages engaging in conspiracy with Aidan Kearney.
5. Most people who saw A Body In The Snow did not walk away finding Karen Read sympathetic. Just wait until a global audience is exposed to the truth about it. You won't have to wait long.
You don't practice law in Massachusetts. Honestly it is dubious whether you practice law at all.
Seeking legal recourse against those who have harmed you is not "seeking revenge". It is how we deal with these types of harm in America.
If the house defendants would be able to think clearly or get good legal advice they would drop Karen Read from their defamation case and just proceed against turtle boy. (And I acknowledge that TB has a number of strong defenses too but thats not the point of this post)
1) The only statements that arguably have any chance are the statements made to Terry Meurer which according to my understanding were never published. So very minimal damages.
2) Her Anti-Slapp argument is very solid
3) She is uncollectible.
4) They will have a very difficult time legally tying her to turtleboy to satisfy a conspiracy theory and even if they do again she is uncollectible.
5) The jury would have much more sympathy for them if they just proceed against TB instead of trying the whole trial to convince them that Karen who is a much more sympathetic defendant was somehow involved.
However if their point is just to satisfy their own personal animosity toward her by keeping her named as a defendant regardless of the merits or negative effect on the dollar amount they can potentially recover, they would keep her in the lawsuit despite the detriment to their own case.
72
26
182
13,591
RT @TheSpiciestLRQ: Jeff Pyle looking at Adam's bank account like
1
18
Lmao yeah, I'm sure that the high powered, high profile former federal prosecutor who took on Alex Jones and won the highest defamation award in history AND took on the federal government, with the army of prestigious attorneys across 2 firms is reeaaaallly worried about a handful of lawyers whose professional calendars are empty enough to allow them to be on YouTube all day.
Chris Mattei is going to fuck around and find himself with an army of LawTubers with large followings to fight against.
Is he going to go after ALL of the Attorneys who think MA is full of bad cops, corruption, injustice and most importantly - don’t believe John was killed by Karen?
Chris Mattei is going to succeed but not for the McAlberts.. he’s going to succeed for being the most hated attorney by other attorneys.
Chris Mattei is gay, hates free speech and hates the truth.
39
14
136
6,459
Oh, my.
Respectfully, @RealNurseKim , you really shouldn't be debating the facts of the Read case. You were completely out of your depth and your overall ignorance on the actual evidence and facts of the case really highlighted the absurdity of the " Karen is Innocent" camp.
Side note, but calling him "Officer John O'Keefe" repeatedly is not the sign of respect you think it is as you continue to support the man who torments his family and calls his mother names.
You gave me secondhand embarrassment 😳
85
12
276
17,831
I am not spying on any media overflow rooms. I am in bed, coughing like a Victorian child, because I have been extremely sick for two days now. Respectfully, I am far more concerned with breathing right now than I am Matthew Farwell's trial.
Barring any untimely death, I'm still streaming about this shit tonight at 9pm.
youtube.com/live/UwTEuvOeJgM…
69
2
135
9,036
Tomorrow at 9pm @Bdog579489 , @NonExpertWitnes and I are going to get a little petty. 💅
youtube.com/live/UwTEuvOeJgM…
16
24
141
7,971
Kate Peter retweeted
In less than a half hour, the Kandiyoshi County courts will have a hearing on Our Wife Kayla @RekietaLaw vs Aaron, in the matter of two HRO requests against both Aaron and his company.
Our Wife totally filed this under her own volition, and not at the behest of her c-ck husband Nick Rekieta (below).
Nick has been on a blood vengeance against Aaron for the past two years following Nick's drug arrest and defrocking as a degenerate swinger who turned the home of his children into a drug den.
He blames Aaron for everything, because nothing is Nick's fault.
Of course, Aaron's situation is not without fault on his part. Allegedly, Aaron showed nip-pick of Our Wife to another streamer on his show, which ran afoul of MN's RP laws.
Instead of hiring good counsel, Aaron plead to a misdemeanor charge and 50 dollar fine on a photo that no one else ever saw, or confirmed existed outside of Aaron and the other streamer.
Nick himself sent SIX NUDES of Our Wife to the police to try and identify the photo Aaron shared, only to discover this was a picture that Aaron had that Nick did not, and was allegedly posed for purely for Aaron.
Between over-zealous prosecution and Aaron's apathy, he is under a strict probation regarding the mention of Our Wife, which he has abided by within reason.
This is despite Nick calling up Aaron's PO on every perceived infraction and using AI tools to data mine all of Aaron's content and leaving Nick seething at the PO's inaction.
Nick's obsessive behavior has left him under a restraining order taken out by Aaron for over a year, and despite this he has chosen to represent Our Wife in her totally self-driven desire to seek an RO against Aaron.
Twice they have sought a TRO and been DENIED because Aaron's probation (justified or not) is sufficient protection and he is abiding by it.
Nick is seeking a fifty year HRO against Aaron, and plans to use the paper-trail generated by it in a civil suit against Aaron claiming Our Wife's reputation was irreparably harmed, despite Nick seething at Potentially Criminal weeks before he even met Aaron about how people were talking about Our Wife.
And ultimately, winning or losing, Nick's goal is to bankrupt Aaron with his law license, filing frivolous litigation that Aaron has to respond to.
Nick has alluded to the idea that his campaign against Aaron will continue "because he's still breathing."
13
8
106
3,946
