NIcholas Mukhtar Pays "SEO GUY" To Ask Me To Commit a $50 Felony
The Dubious Deal: A Tale of Ethics, Money, and Misdeed
In a twist of events that seems to blend the absurd with the illegal, Nicholas Mukhtar, who has previously been accused of distributing child pornography, found himself embroiled in yet another questionable act. Mukhtar, listed as the Managing Consultant of Tera, allegedly reached out to someone known as Moghees Rehman, also going by the alias Luxeqa, to make a rather unusual request.
The story begins when I received a phone call from Rehman, or Luxeqa, offering me $50 to delete an article from a newspaper website. This proposition wasn't just ethically murky; it was outright illegal. The act of attempting to bribe someone, especially for the manipulation of published content, can veer into several legal gray areas, including:
- Bribery: Offering payment to influence an action, in this case, the removal of an article, is a clear example of bribery, which is a felony under many jurisdictions.
- Obstruction of Justice: If the article in question was part of any ongoing investigation or public interest, attempting to remove it could be seen as obstructing justice, another serious felony.
- Conspiracy: Both Mukhtar and Rehman could potentially be charged with conspiracy if it's proven they planned this act together.
- Computer Fraud and Abuse: Depending on how the article was to be removed, this could involve unauthorized access to a computer system, which is yet another felony.
The audacity of offering just $50 for such a request speaks volumes about the perceived value of ethics versus the cost of potential legal repercussions. It raises significant questions about the ethical standards of Mukhtar, especially in his role as a managing consultant for his own company, Tera. This incident paints a picture of a man willing to risk multiple felony charges for a minor sum, suggesting a pattern of behavior that prioritizes personal gain over legal and ethical considerations.
While no formal charges have been reported from this specific incident in the information available, the implications are severe. This story serves as a stark reminder of how individuals in positions of influence might act when they believe they can control the narrative around their actions. The broader question remains: how many felonies might be committed for such a low sum, and what does this say about the ethical compass of those involved?
Without specific legal outcomes or further details on the incident, it's challenging to count the exact number of felonies. However, based on the described actions, one can reasonably infer there's potential for at least a few serious charges, if not more, depending on the legal jurisdiction and the specifics of the case. This sordid tale of $50, a phone call, and an attempt to manipulate the truth is a poignant example of the lengths some might go to protect their image or hide their misdeeds.