Rittenhouse trial
 

Anyone following this?

The shooter and all three people he shot, were white. But somehow the media says he’s a white supremacist.

The prosecutions star witness ( the surviving person who he about) admitted in court that he first pointed a gun at Rittenhouses head from a few feet away, and then Rittenhouse shot him.

This kid is being tried for murder to placate the mob. There’s no conceivable case. This case, makes the Duke lacrosse case, look like an open and shut case of gang rape.

All to placate the woke mob. And sensing that things aren’t going their way, the woke mob is threatening the jury now.

It’s beyond stupid for a 17 year old to take a rifle to a riot ( where the hell were his parents). But there’s no case for murder, not even close.

Multiple prosecution witnesses are saying Rittenhouse was being attacked before he fired. And you’re allowed to do that in this country. Even white teenagers surrounded by black rioters, are entitled to defend themselves.

As usual, the media narrative bears zero resemblance to reality.

I've been avoiding this forum due to the endless circular threads and stupidity, but thought I'd respond to this one, as I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim. So while this actually may have been self defense and maybe it's not premediated murder, do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying. If you go marching into that situation with an assault rifle, you are just asking for trouble and while he may be able to get off on the most serious charges of premeditated murder, he should be charged at least to the same level as some drunk running down and killing an innocent pedestrian.

Spin on Jim, your the best at it.

Would those people have died if they weren't marching down to a riot and attacking a well armed boy? Would Grosskreutz have been shot if he wasn't marching down to a riot with a gun for which his license to carry had expired?

He's not on trial for murder.

Jim's discussing Wittenhouse, if you want to spin it to others breaking the law feel free, never said there wasn't blame to go around. Jim is ready to go on one of his quests and I wanted to give him a good running start. Wittenhouse shot and killed two people, carrying a weapon he wasn't able to buy for himself and was carrying illegally and he should be held accountable. That is up to the courts and a jury of his peers to decide, but Jim will paint him as an innocent victim and I'm sure he will bring a full barrage of whataboutism into it at some point.

Still trolling this site I see crappie fisherman from the midwest, running out of people to debate with on this forum.

Yup.

Amazing you can read minds, such talent. Does it upset me others broke the law, certainly but this thread started about Rittenhouse and that was my focused response. Are others guilty of crimes, they probably are and if so, I hope they are charged and afforded due process as well. And yes I'm painting him as a guilty culprit, I'm not on the jury so I am entitled to my opinion, not saying he is guilty of murder, but he is a long, long, long way from being an innocent victim.

"I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim."

An interesting conclusion, since I said this...

"It’s beyond stupid for a 17 year old to take a rifle to a riot"

With the exception of rockhound, you guys are all identical. When faced with a compelling argument (believe it or not, conservatives stumble upon those once in awhile), you all resort to the identical practice of pretending that I said something which I never even came close to saying. Every single time. What's in that Kool-Aid, I wonder, which makes you think that it's OK to ignore what I actually said, and respond instead to nonsensical gibberish?

"So while this actually may have been self defense"

It was obviously self-defense. If this wasn't self-defense, there's no such thing as self-defense.

"do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying"

They'd also be alive, had they not given Rittenhouse reasonable cause to fear for his life. And that's what matters here.

And where's the "white supremacy" angle here, which the entire media stirred up? Everyone involved is white.

In the future, if you can respond to what I actually say, rather than pretend that I said something I never said, we will get along better, and you'll look much less foolish.

"I've been avoiding this forum"

If you're going to lie about what I say, you should have stuck with your instinct.

no case for intentional homicide. The prosecution witness admitted he was only shot after he pointed a gun at Rittenhouse.

Does the right to self-defense get waived, when a white person attends a BLM riot?

Someone has been watching Tucker again

We will be way better off when the current SCOTUS says the 2nd amendment is without limits, probably could really defund the police then since vigilantism is now ok
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like a good idea. Trump should tweet about that. Recommend it. Wait . . . Trump packed the Court. Aha . . . I see where you're coming from. His selected bootlickers on the Court will do exactly that. Be afraid, "our democracy" is in deep trouble. Trump is going to destroy it. Trump, Trump, Trump . . . .

By the same token, if Jim believes, as you're sure he does, that Rittenhouse is a "poor youth being the innocent victim", he is entitled to his opinion. So what's the point of throwing what appears to be a zinger at him.

i’d really like to know where Rittenhouses parents were that night.

The judge tore the prosecutor a new azzhole in court today, my god he tore into him.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...ttenhouse-face

FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESS HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As always, when the facts aren't on your side, invent some new facts, respond to something that nobody is saying.

I'm not wrong, they changed the definition.

The video in this article does a nice job of a reconstruction.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...s-down-crying/

So an underage kid carrying illegally is marching down the street like he's the boss, a guy with mental health issues throws a bag at him and even though he's armed with a semi automatic rifle he's so afraid he shoots him several times and then sprints away. The other people think he's an active shooter and try to intervene so he take them out as well.

This is lunacy, not self defense. Immature kid making very bad decisions needs to have some consequences.

No they didn’t
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Funny how you left this part out

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For a murder charge they would have to show Rittenhouse came there with intent to hurt or kill people.

That’s first degree murder, there are other degrees of murder that don’t require intent

“ Typically, second-degree murder is defined as murder that is not premeditated, or murder that is caused by the offender's reckless conduct that displays an obvious lack of concern for human life.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If a vigilante is pushing a gun in your face don't you have a right to self defense?

You have no facts
It’s a trial to establish the facts
Your supposition assumes that teenage vigilantes are a good thing for our society.
I will vehemently disagree
Any reasonable human would
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sure, but that’s not what happened

“Bystander video shows Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through a parking lot and throwing a plastic bag at him. Rittenhouse flees behind a car and Rosenbaum follows.”

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”

If a mentally unstable man chases you and tries to take your gun away, you’re well within your rights to shoot him
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you chose to leave that out, and got caught. what are you afraid would happen exactly, if you stopped putting a pro-liberal spin on every single thing you post? Seriously, what are you afraid of?

Rittenhouse didn’t go on a crazy shooting spree. the guy he shot who survived, testifies ( with supporting photo evidence) that rittenhouse had his rifle in his hands, but didn’t shoot the guy until
he pointed his gun at Rittenhouses face.

It was beyond stupid for Rittenhouse to go there with a rifle ( was he carrying illegally? is he charged with that?).

it’s also very dangerous to engage in violent riots for no good reason. that created the situation. maybe, just maybe, if prominent liberals
told the rioters to stand down instead of encouraging them, we also wouldn’t be having this conversation. if liberal
mayors and governors cared enough about public safety and less about political optics, they’d have called in the national guard to quell those riots, and vigilante wannabes wouldn’t have felt any need to step up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this prosecution is a joke. a politically motivated joke. and they already saw someone taking photos of jurors, that’s not any kind of bad sign. they should dismiss the jurors and drop the charges.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

in this case, I have all the facts. the reality of what happened bears no resemblance to how the media covered this. you guys are also desperately and laughably trying to spin this.

fact: a prosecution witness admitted that he pointed his gun at rittenhouse BEFORE Rittenhouse fired. If that’s not self defense, nothing is.

don’t you get tired of hitting yourself in the face with eggs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Let’s be clear
If a black teenager had crossed state lines, armed himself with an illegally acquired assault rifle, attended a MAGA rally, ignored the curfew, picked a fight and killed two people.
The trial would be a formality and he’d be heading for prison for life.
Oh yeah, he was a vigilante
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Rosenbaum had also threatened to
kill Rittenhouse, then later tried to grab his gun. Self defense.

again, this was all made possible by elected officials who did nothing to stop the riots.

Joe Biden, naturally, called him a white supremacist. because he #^&#^&#^&#^& three white people. And biden gets a pass for lying. as always.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your little heroes mother drove him across state lines with a gun.

When Kyle told the cops he had just shot someone, the officer ultimately tells him to “Go home! Go home! Go home!”

He did.

Is that what it’s like for people like KyleRittenhouse in America?
Explain further how white privilege doesn’t exist
Clown
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i said he was very stupid. from that, you interpret he’s my hero.

you don’t get invited to too many MENSA picnics, do you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

can one of the liberals here, comment on the notion spread by the left, that Rittenhouses actions are the acts of a white suoremacist? He shot theee whites people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You were fed that by who?
I would surmise that it may have been said by A talking head on TV
Then amplified by right wing media
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well Mr Mensa?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re responding to your own posts now? that’s not weird.

investigate the cop who told him that. but that summer, we kind of stopped enforcing laws. rioters allowed to riot, looters slowed to loot, arsonists allowed to burn buildings. liberals are the ones willing to forget about the law when there’s political capital to gain.

Duh.

If there was white orivilege, he would t be facing BS charges that could imprison him for life.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’ll never catch up to you in posts, little girl

Nobody was not enforcing laws, that’s why cops were all around when Kyle Rittenhouse was walking around with a gun, though they failed to ask him any questions.
Wonder why

Just what would you suggest an appropriate response from law enforcement to rioters would be?
Would that same response have been appropriate on January 6th?

Two people are dead and one misguided kids life’s all f’d up

You’re blaming it on liberals, I suppose they bought him a gun and drove him there
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no surprise, since you were banned from starting them. did you ever ask yourself why that happened? how deranged and obsessed you are?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There's not enough information in that little sketch to determine anything about "white privilege," but it's skimpy enough to jump to a conclusion if you want to.

I remember being on Jury in Detroit several years ago in a trial of a small group of black teens in a black neighborhood just outside of Grosse Pointe who had observed a white man in a Cadillac coming from the direction of Grosse Pointe daily passing through their neighborhood down that street always at about the same time. They decided to place a fallen tree across the road around that time to block him. When he stopped and got out of the car to remove the tree they jumped him, beat him up, and the upshot was that he died as a result of their attack.

We, the jury, were given the facts, then, I can't remember, either the trial commenced awhile or just after it did, the judge, a famous black judge in Detroit at the time, put a halt and ordered us back into the jury room where we waited to find out what was up. After some time, the Judge came in, smiling, and informing us that we were not going to go through the inconvenience of a trial. That he had made the decision, because of the unjust racist conditions that the teens had experienced all their lives they could not be truly culpable, that they did not understand the gravity of what they had done. And he had given them a good stern lecture on how what they did was wrong and that they could ruin their lives and spend the rest of their life in prison if they continued down that path. He was convinced that they understood and told them if they did not change and if they ever did such a thing again, he would see to it that they would spend the rest of their lives in prison. And he released them.

He was obviously pleased with how he handled it and happily gave us the news, probably thinking we would understand and be satisfied and happy as well that we could go home.

It was a long time ago, and I've forgotten the details and my account is probably not accurate in the details. But I remember that I felt something was not right. That, though the judge was right that I would be glad not to go through a trial, I didn't feel that justice had been served. But, apparently, he being a longstanding and important judge, there must have been a valid reason for what he did.

Poor victim
Ranting in a new thread daily about the horrible things Tucker tells you are happening to you.
Life in white suburbia that bad?
If these last few years have taught us anything, it’s that entitled folks like you are a lot easier to turn into domestic terrorists than those that have faced actual adversity and oppression. The comforts of consumerism have bred such contempt and lack of empathy in so many Americans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good luck with all of that!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device