Wack 100 Threatens Jailbird Big U Lawsuits Over Snitch Allegations

Big U accused Wack 100 of working with the feds, and now Wack is threatening a lawsuit if those claims are not retracted.

Buckle up…and recap this real fast.

Big U went live with fire in his voice and the FBI on his tail. Just hours before turning himself in, the longtime Los Angeles figure jumped on Instagram and accused Wack 100 of the worst of the worst. He claimed that when federal agents raided his properties, they were asked specifically about “Wack” and “Luce Cannon.” And the internet went hog wild. Then he went even further.

According to Big U, “Wack said 100 times he was going to take my contracts. He working with the FBI.” While on the run, he alleged that federal authorities went to city officials and celebrities telling them not to give him money or support. “They going around scaring and intimidating everybody,” he said, framing the situation as a coordinated effort to isolate him financially and politically.

Big U, currently in the big house, insisted he had done nothing wrong and described the raids. He said doors were kicked in and his son was contacted at football practice.

“This the price of being black and trying to help somebody, trying to help your community,” he said, framing it as an attack. “I’m going to go turn myself in though cuz I ain’t did nothing.” Well, people were not in agreement with that.

Wack 100 does not agree either.

Responding on social media, Wack flatly denied the claims and said his legal team has been urging him for months to take action.

“We need a statement retracting what he said, what you know is false,” Wack stated. He also claimed that in federal court it was put on record that authorities have “never talked to, dealt with, communicated, spoke with Wack 100 or 600 regard any of these things.”

Wack made it clear that if a retraction does not come within the next 10 to 30 days, his lawyers will move forward.

“I’m going to be forced to go at any and everything. Catalogs, real estate, whatever he might have any type of possession of ownership of,” he warned, framing the situation as business protection, not personal vendetta. Some said that this was an effort to further bleed Big U of resources to fight his real case, which is the R.I.C.O., but who knows.

Will there be a retraction?

Related