Kyle Rittenhouse trial & updates [Verdict: NOT GUILTY]

I'm sorry they lost their son, sincerely I am. But their son bashed a person over the head in an act of vigilantism, and it just so happened that this person was armed and defended himself.

Don't show up to a gun fight with a skateboard, I guess.

I'm not.

My milk of human kindness turned bitter, rancid and sour, late last year sometime, when I heard the call to genocide me and family, for the 1000th time or so, in the public square.

Fuck them and fuck their filthy Bolshie son.

Hope he's rotting in hell.
 
Last edited:
259426047_396629648655741_3678803208848226383_n.jpg
 
They keep saying he "crossed state lines".

They keep saying he "committed murder".

They keep saying "it was an illegal gun".

They keep saying "he opened fire and shot 60 times".

They keep saying...

Facts and truth and logic and objective justice are all racist and symbols of white supremacy.

Keep it up Marxists...I hope you come un-fucking-manufactured.

You're going to go too far, you're gonna step on your own dicks and you are going to get wiped out.

Critical Theory and all this double speak is necessary for their revolution. Many smarter progressives know that Critical Theory is waking people up, but they need it, and thank God.

I was wishing people could wake up that those in power want communism without having their faces rubbed in Critical Theory, but Critical Theory and "free stuff" go hand in hand. If free stuff and excessive government doesn't make them suspicious, at least all the double speak is waking them up.
 
Based Thomas Massie has receipts::

https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1461781992979238914


"He also exhibited incredible restraint and presence and situational awareness," Massie said on WVHU [MENTION=10399]tom[/MENTION]Roten, a talk radio station in Huntington, West Virginia. "He didn't empty a magazine into a crowd."

"I think the strongest thing he has for him is the actual video evidence. And if I were on a jury and all I had was the evidence that I have been able to acquire through social media and the videos that are out there, I would not convict him of a single one of these charges."

"What does it say about our country where this lawlessness is going on to this extent that a 17-year-old feels compelled to stop it?" Massie asked. "To be the one to turn the tide? I think it says a lot for the 17-year-old."
 
Is there a clip of them actually saying that? Or is this just somebody's interpretation of something else they said?

msnbc said:
​​The jury had to decide whether in this situation Rittenhouse was trying to prevent great bodily harm or imminent death, and whether they were persuaded by the prosecution’s attempt to prove that Rittenhouse wasn't acting in self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. It appears they weren't.

Given the complexity and fast-moving nature of the encounters and the high burden of convicting Rittenhouse under Wisconsin law, I'd argue that the decision might be distasteful but isn't unreasonable; at the very least it's not right to read it as a stamp of approval of Rittenhouse's behavior.

In a more sane world with a different legal and cultural landscape, Rittenhouse would've been punished for his reckless behavior in some fashion, but that's not the world we live in.

But there's nothing incompatible between believing Rittenhouse's acquittal made sense given the legal constraints and also believing that Rittenhouse behaved inappropriately and represents nefarious aspects of our culture.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/kyle-rittenhouse-s-not-guilty-verdict-symptom-bigger-sickness-n1284130

What happened? Did Peking get your duckduckgo?
 

That's more in line with what I expected. They really didn't say what that tweet alleged. It was an inference he drew.

Notice that this MSNBC person is not saying they believe Rittenhouse should have been found guilty of any kind of homicide, only that he should have been punished for "reckless behavior." I don't agree on that point. But it's not nearly as useful of a quote as the way the previous tweet made it sound.
 
This is the best outcome possible. Obviously, there shouldn't have been a trial in the first place, but given that there was, the end result couldn't have been better. If the judge would have dismissed with prejudice, that would have caused all sorts of uproar and accusations of rigging. Without prejudice, and there's a chance he gets convicted after another trial. The prosecution wouldn't make the same mistakes again. If they had gone back and returned a not guilty verdict in three hours, there would have been definite criticisms about a biased jury. The days of deliberation gives the decision a kind of resonance and finality. They obviously debated this a lot, and at least one juror was reluctant to acquit at first.

All that being said... This is not over. There will be a concerted effort to ruin Kyle Rittenhouse's life. It's inevitable. He got away, but the left have so many other ways to get him. They're also going to go after the judge; I've already seen media apparatchiks call him a white supremacist. They may also go after the jury, as MSNBC clearly tried to do already.

And there's going to be crackdowns. Crackdowns on alt-media. Crackdowns on videos like this on social media platforms, crackdowns on the kind of commentary like Rekeita and Crowder were doing. The left plays long, and has a way of turning temporary defeats into long term victories. Yes, it's a great thing that he got acquitted, and tons of fun to see the blue checks seethe. But this will continue, in some form or another. Stay vigilant.
 
That's more in line with what I expected. They really didn't say what that tweet alleged. It was an inference he drew.

The tweeter (Karlyn Borysenko - a she, not a he) was referring to live on-air/real-time commentary on the MSNBC cable news channel, not the content of a written article posted at the msnbc.com website. (You surely must know this, given that you previously asked for a video clip, not an article link.)

Notice that this MSNBC person is not saying they believe Rittenhouse should have been found guilty of any kind of homicide, only that he should have been punished for "reckless behavior." I don't agree on that point. But it's not nearly as useful of a quote as the way the previous tweet made it sound.

Notice that Borysenko did NOT claim (as you put it) "that [someone at MSNBC said] Rittenhouse should have been found guilty of any kind of homicide"; she claimed that someone at MSNBC said (in her words) "that the fact that the burden of proof was on the prosecution was the biggest problem in this case" - which is not even remotely the same thing. IOW: You are doing the very thing you are accusing her of doing - namely, mischaracterizing what someone else said or implied.

Frankly, you are inclining me to trust her assessment of what was said - at least compared to your assessment of her assessment.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
Back
Top