A story was published on Frank Report entitled Investigating the Data With Two Lawyers.
In that post, Two Lawyers use their legal knowledge and display a rare command of Latin, from which much of the law is derived, to argue why Keith Raniere will be ultimately freed by the US Supreme Court, why prosecutors in his case will be imprisoned, the judge may be sought by Interpol if he tries to leave the USA, and advise readers who slander them or any lawyer that they can be targeted for prosecution, or individually haled into court to determine if they should be imprisoned.
Their no-nonsense approach to the law brought forth arguments from the erudite and learned commenters of Frank Report with some of them risking the serious legal jeopardy Two Lawyers warned of by discussing whether Two Lawyers are really lawyers at all.
As Two Lawyers warned, as “officers of the court, it is our duty to inform you that joking and degrading lawyers admitted before the bar can result in writs of habeas corpus delicti and also bills of attainder at state, federal and even international courts since we also know Mexican law.”
Here is some of the debate:
As for Two Lawyers – I suspect they are either not very good ones or not lawyers at all. Not because of the use of “data”. It’s the writing style. It is, well to be polite, let’s call it simple. It has a simplicity of style that skilled lawyers are incapable of suppressing because years of education and experience have evolved it to that point. Their arguments don’t even come across as lawyer-like. It’s almost a series of opinions but not really. It reads almost like a stream of consciousness without clear organization.
Retired Appellate Counsel
There is nothing in what “two lawyers” write that even smells like they are attorneys. Just one example, they write “it is our duty to inform you that joking and degrading lawyers admitted before the bar can result in writs of habeas corpus delicti.”
This is absurd. A writ of habeas corpus is the pleading someone files when they are alleging they are wrongfully imprisoned or wrongfully on probation or parole. A writ of habeas corpus cannot be used against a civilian like one uses a lawsuit. These aren’t attorneys, just NXIVM posers.
Shadow State, actively deriding Two Lawyers, mocked:
“I’m not a lawyer but I play one on the Frank Report.”
Pea Onyu has claimed in the past that her name is a combination of Aleutian and Bavarian royalty and said that educated people will not think of the vulgar when they read her name, adding that it is pronounced Pea [Pie-eeh-ah] Onyu [Juan- ah-ooh-Yah]. She came forward to defend what she knows to be true.
Pea wrote: At this point it should seem pretty obvious that Two Lawyers are just who they say they are. How would they know so much law and all the Latin words for the law? They realize Keith is innocent. I can assure readers that the Two Lawyers are real.
Shadow State, challenging Pea, wrote,
Are they as real as Hookers peeing on Joe Biden?
At this point, Two Lawyers stepped in to confirm Pea’s insights.
Pea Onyu, we always appreciate the objective data you contribute to the robust conversationalization on this so-called website. We graduated from Law School with the esteemed Mr. Apox Onyu, are you related by any chance?
In any case we certainly hope you take care of the principle of illegitimi non carborundum a fortiori. We look forward to reading your wise contributions to the discussionizations here in the near future. Q.E.D.
Two Lawyers again put forth their weighty legal arguments, adding a term of endearment for Pea:
Sweet Pea, we duplicate your objective data on this matter.
Having reviewed the constitutions of the United States and New York, we verify that neither document guarantees a right to knowledgify with what initials one is branded both ipso facto and eo ipso. Women who are raising so-called objections on this basis in televisualized and printed media should take care to avoid countersuit for slander and manducans nimis.
Shadow State promptly challenged them once again, almost daring them to file a writ of attainder against him:
“Both ipso facto and eo ipso.” Two Lawyers. We aren’t lawyers but we spout off some Latin and play lawyers on the Frank Report.
This incurred the wrath of Two Lawyers, and this time they were not messing around. They not only showed their legal and Latin muscle, they dazzled readers with the ability to use mathematics to predict probabilities:
Mr. or Miss or Mrs. so-called Shadowstate1958, our co-worker, Anthony, has informated us of the hate bias you have perpetrated by questioning the objective data of our legalistic qualifications. We insist you take care to note we tied for first place in our high school 12th grade Latin spelling bee. Res ipsa loquitur you should consider this a de facto refutation of your positionally.
We further submit that you are being terribly mean to Keith Raniere and should consider tabula rasa that subsequent international torts can be filed for so-called emotional distress debitum hurt feelings in forma pauperis.
Having carefully reviewed the detailed legalized argumentations Mr. Raniere presents here, we now calculate a 93.284028% data probability that he will be released on appeal bond ex parte post haste.
By this time almost everyone was silenced. With this kind of stupendous knowledge, who could continue to dispute Two Lawyers qualifications?
Only Shadow State. In reply to Two Lawyers he wrote, showing a little of his own command of Latin and the law.
“Res Ipso Loquitor” means “it speaks for itself”, a notion for tort or personal injury law, not criminal law.
Editor’s note: We await a response from Two Lawyers on these allegations made by Shadow State and if they plan to file a writ of mandamus to the International Criminal Court of Justice to have him apprehended by Interpol on behalf of the Mexican authorities.