Rittenhouse pleads 'Not Guilty'

[tackdriver]

View attachment 168428
View attachment 168429

Well Cori... If you and yours had traveled to Kenosha, spent the day scubbing graffiti, cleaning up debris, talking kindly with people on all sides, handing out water, and offering aid... then you too could have been attacked by angry criminals, forced to defend yourself, and gotten your "not guilty" badge.

You don't get the badge if you won't do the work.

 

[KG1]

I've read several post acquittal tirades by various social media darlings and "celebrities" and they've all united on one "truth"; Kyle Rittenhouse opened fire on unarmed protesters". Did they not see the same videos and listen to the same testimony that I did? The other "truth" they've all settled on is that KR is a "white supremacist". I guess "racist" has been overused so it's being retired? Oh and one more, by him shooting in self defense "innocent, peaceful protestors that were marching in support of a black man" and was exonerated this is simply another example of white privilege.

MAN these people don't give up!

They were spreading lies before the trial even started. without even waiting to hear any evidence. I think the craziest one I saw is when that lying msnbc peace of trash Joe Scarbrough said that Rittenhouse crossed state lines with an AR and fired 60 rounds at "protesters"

 

[drillsgt]

These Hollywood leftists are something else, at least there was Adam Baldwin and Nick Searcy but they are few and far between.

Hollywood Celebrities Take To Social Media To Share Their Thoughts On Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Verdict

As Kyle Rittenhouse is found not guilty on all charges, Hollywood celebrities take to social media to express their opinion on the verdict.

boundingintocomics.com

 

[tackdriver]

Now that the left's narrative has been proven wrong in the courtroom, there is now a proliferation of articles that the right is dangerous for making Rittenhouse a model citizen.

I googled "Rittenhouse a hero" and found article after article from the left about how the right is horrible for making him a hero, but I was unable to find any articles from the right saying such a thing. Did I just miss it, or is this just the latest false narrative?

Typical left - No, typical evil. 1. think about what I've done, or would do, in similar case. 2. accuse them of THAT. 3. Repeat it vigorously.

George Floyd, Micheal Brown.......

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Another trial for what?

Civil rights violations.

If the feds use it . . . open question.

 

[Ingomike]

Violent on campus riots pretty much died out (no pun intended) after the National Guard shot some rioters.

Those were natural events not the bussed in astroturf of today, big difference…

 

[tackdriver]

View attachment 168508

Who paid this guys medical bills? Did he get it from the tax payers he hates, or does he need to go burglarize a few more homes?

 

[Doug]

Those were natural events not the bussed in astroturf of today, big difference…

Good point.
I suspect the Burn, Loot, Mayhem organizers are Socialists-in-name-only (SINOS) looking to get rich off the fund raising for "revolutionary" causes and the "canon fodder" in the streets are useful idiots.

 

[DragonGunner]

Because FBI is too busy looking for Americans to hang.

 

[MCgrease08]

We need to remember that last summer there was a permissive attitude towards the BLM post-parties. AFAIK, the daytime BLM protests really were "mostly peaceful" but then the support of those protests made it politically unpalatable for law enforcement to stop the crime that followed them. People who dismissed and excused that violence might bear as much responsibility as a 17 yr old who put himself in a risky situation.

I think this last part is key. We've gotten to the point where politicians, city managers, activist media and the like have either convinced or conditioned people to step back and allow violent actors to take control of communities and wreak havoc on them.

While I can sort of see the logic behind the notion that it was a bad idea for KR to be there, that plays right into the narrative that we all should just lay back and take it while communities are being violated. And ultimately that narrative is nonsense.

We NEED to flip the script and get back to the reality where it's a bad idea for violent actors to be out in the streets causing destruction. This ultimately is what all of this is about. The activists and TPTB want to have a monopoly on use of force and power. We cannot allow that to happen.

 

[thunderchicken]

Like everyone here, I'm happy the jury came back with the right verdict. I'm glad they didn't allow outside sources to influence their decision.

Something that I keep seeing are people referencing is the accusation that KR is a white supremacist. I haven't seen anything to justify that accusation. But, even if he were how would that have effected the actions he was on trial for? I just can't begin to see the world through the lens these clown use

 

[jamil]

That’s what Pete Buttigieg says… “Long posts make my thumbs tired.” Hope your thumbs aren’t tired from doing the same thing with posts as Pete. If so though you may want to disinfect your screen (and clear your browser history).

Well the context was INGO. I mean, c’mon people, you’re not that hot.

 

[Twangbanger]

Somewhat. I laid out the facts, thoroughly and completely. I must have succeeded, because his response was to delete the thread and replace it with one declaring that although the acquittal was just, the right is disgusting for making Rittenhouse a hero. I responded to that by laying out how disgusting the left has been in this whole thing. We'll see how that goes.

That is the best you can do: shoot down the bad arguments, one at a time. You're never going to get a "victory acknowledgement." It's like the New York Times or WaPo, they'll just quietly take it down. That's all you're going to get, and that's fine!

It's going to take a heck of a long time to unpack and individually shoot-down all the bad arguments that are arising from this one. The ones who say "guns chill free speech" are my favorite. That is a hysterical panty-wetting overreaction if I ever heard one. No, they just chill vandalism, burning, looting, and (actual) murder.

 

[Twangbanger]

That is extraordinary illogical if we presume innocence rather than guilt. At least we know where their presumptions lie.

Well, given the kind of platform they're running, I can understand if they don't want to be presented with the logistical problem of taking in a bunch of money, then getting accused by the Southern Poverty Law Center of being a terror-funding platform when someone is found guilty and the money isn't all given back within 15 minutes.

Frankly, given how things are going on "social platforms" these days, I'm just pleased they reversed themselves, and have a policy standard requiring them to do so upon acquittal.

I just hope they apply it consistently. For example, if the defendant is black, I hope the same standards apply. There is a "No Cash Bail" group out there raising money to turn alleged criminals loose back into society before their trials. Obviously, THEY'RE not waiting to see some is guilty or innocent before helping put them back on the street. I think the line between "legal defense" and "bail funding" is pretty thin to non-existent. You can make the argument either way, and I just hope whatever these funding platforms ultimately do, it's done fairly and in a completely race-blind mannner. I think many CRAs would have no problem with denying someone like Kyle Rittenhouse funding before his trial, then turning right around and helping raise bail money for a black defendant to get back on the street (and the stats show the quantity of crimes committed by people out on bail is not insignificant, so it's not like this is a decision without social consequence).

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Similar thoughts here

I'm seeing the more reasonable people admit that he was not guilty. They also state with something I basically agree with: that it was bad judgment for him to go there. Their next step though is to worry about more people exercising such bad judgment.

This is the point where it's acceptable to point out that all 4 people that attacked Rittenhouse had criminal records and had the most significant role in this violence. We need to remember that last summer there was a permissive attitude towards the BLM post-parties. AFAIK, the daytime BLM protests really were "mostly peaceful" but then the support of those protests made it politically unpalatable for law enforcement to stop the crime that followed them. People who dismissed and excused that violence might bear as much responsibility as a 17 yr old who put himself in a risky situation.

I know about the three that he hit, what is the name of jump kick guy and what has he been charged/convicted with?

 

[BigRed]

WTH at -32:00 on the video if you scroll back.. View attachment 168416

Somebody wanted to **** that beast?

Must have been a lot of whiskey involved.

 

[HoughMade]

Civil rights violations.

If the feds use it . . . open question.

He's not a government actor. He didn't deprive anyone of an enumerated federal right. He wasn't on federal property, etc., etc. etc.

 

[Twangbanger]

I think this last part is key. We've gotten to the point where politicians, city managers, activist media and the like have either convinced or conditioned people to step back and allow violent actors to take control of communities and wreak havoc on them.

While I can sort of see the logic behind the notion that it was a bad idea for KR to be there, that plays right into the narrative that we all should just lay back and take it while communities are being violated. And ultimately that narrative is nonsense.

We NEED to flip the script and get back to the reality where it's a bad idea for violent actors to be out in the streets causing destruction. This ultimately is what all of this is about. The activists and TPTB want to have a monopoly on use of force and power. We cannot allow that to happen.

Exactly. The "City Manager" types thought they had settled-in on a nice policy that allowed them to take an easy path of least resistance: BLM protests are "politically sanctioned," therefore we can tell our Police to stand back, wait for the smoke to die down, have city workers come in the next morning and bulldoze the city block on Sunny Saturday Time-and-a-Half Overtime, and the victims of violence have no choice but to just accept it and file an insurance claim afterward.

Now - the realization that an armed person has a right to go there, and can permissibly shoot someone if attacked - and a jury might support it - throws a wrench into the "mostly peaceful" policy resting-position they created. This is a real inconvenience, because it suggests that in the future, City Managers cannot simply sit on their asses, and will have to actually do their job of enforcing public safety and order, regardless of the skin-color and social-justice status of the protesters.

This was all made possible, because juries now contain people who believe in 2A rights and self-defense (including with AR-15s), and will go to the mat for it - instead of "Sportsmen Fudds" who say things like "Ah own gunz, but ah don't think he should take an AR-15 there."

It is up to us, folks. Remember, this verdict was likely made possible because there was at least one person "like us," who was willing to sit on a jury and stick to the facts.

 

[JCSR]

One short statement on the trial. Pretty sad they haven't stopped begging for my money but can't do better than this. I'm not sure I'll stay a member.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

https://twitter.com/NRA

 

[jamil]

Civil rights violations.

If the feds use it . . . open question.

If the feds use it? Then. They’d be bat**** crazy. And they are anyway. But that would just be a deterministic manifestation of what they are. People burning the city and destroying people’s property are not exercising their civil rights. Self defense IS a civil right.