Kyle Rittenhouse...

[CivilDiscourse]

Here’s a bit of good, old fashioned, carved in stone, first rank racism:



That look quite a bit of leverage to get him out.

[firstfloor]

You rn:

Here’s a bit of good, old fashioned, carved in stone, first rank racism:

Strickland was convicted of the 1978 murders of Sherrie Black, 22, Larry Ingram, 21, and John Walker, 20, even though no physical evidence linked him to the crime scene, family members provided alibis and the admitted killers said he was not there. The case was built on the testimony of Cynthia Douglas, the sole survivor and eyewitness, who later attempted multiple times to recant her testimony because she said she was pressured by police.

That look quite a bit of leverage to get him out.

[Cow Poke]

Poor Peppermint Patty - she's trying her best to defend Biden's false accusation of Rittenhouse being a "White Supremacist" by blaming Trump for not doing enough to denounce white supremacists.

[Cow Poke]

CBS Caught Pushing Major Lie About Kyle Rittenhouse, Forced to Publish an Embarrassing Correction

The liberal media continues to spread misinformation even as Kyle Rittenhouse has been acquitted of all charges.

Constitutional scholar and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has said the media is responsible for publishing deliberate and willful lies about Rittenhouse.

CBS reporter Mark Strassman of “Face the Nation” falsely claimed that Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines “armed for battle.”

The network issued a correction as they admit to engaging in “oversight in language.”

CBS was attempting to provide coverage of the recent jury ruling over 18-year-old Rittenhouse. Strassman failed to understand basic facts about the case.

“Lots to unpack here, this country’s ongoing moment of racial reckoning, vigilantism, and self-defense claims from armed people who deputize themselves,” Strassman said.

Strassman described Rittenhouse as having been “drove in from Illinois armed for battle.”

This lie about Rittenhouse has been frequently pushed by the left-wing media to smear the teenager.

The statement is blatantly false. It was proven false in court.

[Sparko]

I'm not to sure an argument based on you should have arrested them in order to keep them from getting hurt later on would hold water. Folks who sue the police for failing to protect them (including those not engaged in criminal activity but who were threatened) don't fare very well in court.

Yeah, the car dealership would probably have a case, arguing the police didn't protect his property like they were supposed to. But rioters can't argue that the police should have stopped them from burning down the city and so they are responsible for what they did. That would be stupid. "You shouldn't have let my son burn down the town and attack Rittenhouse and get killed!"

[Sparko]

No, he's clearly implying that the police should have apprehended Rittenhouse ("Were the police too cozy with vigilantes walking the streets enforcing their own justice?") even though the "vigilante" narrative was demolished during the trial.

Even if Kyle were the crazy shooter they want him to be, the police couldn't have arrested him until after he shot Rosenbaum, and the facts are he was trying to turn himself into the police when Grosskreutz and Huber attacked him. So they are not going to have much of a case.

[Cow Poke]

Yup. That's why he said he had to fire Rittenhouse's first two attorneys.

And I think that had a LOT to do with the Jury's verdict --- it wasn't a "cause celeb", but the defense of Kyle.

[rogue06]

And a down-to-earth practical guy who doesn't seem to have an ax to grind.

He had indicated that Kyle's original defense team seemed more out to use Kyle for a cause, than to represent his best interests.

Yup. That's why he said he had to fire Rittenhouse's first two attorneys.

[tabibito]

I'm not to sure an argument based on you should have arrested them in order to keep them from getting hurt later on would hold water. Folks who sue the police for failing to protect them (including those not engaged in criminal activity but who were threatened) don't fare very well in court.

I believe you. If it was a likely scenario, your administrations wouldn't be so eager to let rioters rampage.

[Cow Poke]

Rittenhouse's own lawyer suggested he change his name and disappear.

Richards said, “I think there’s a lot of people want to use Kyle for their own means. I think the way the Rittenhouse name right now has trended on Twitter – and that’s what we live in, is a Twitter society – people want to use his name, get it out there so they can get some publicity. I think it’s cheap. That’s what I think.”

MacCallum said, “What’s your advice to him about how he should live his life from now?”

Richards said, “Yeah, my advice would be to change his name and start his life over. He’s very recognizable right now. There’s a lot of people who I don’t think have his best interests at heart and probably want to make him a symbol of something I don’t think he wants to be necessarily associated with. And once you give up your name and your likeness and you join those causes, I think a lot of people will use you for their own purposes, and you won’t be able to control it.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021...art-life-over/

I really like that lawyer. He seems like a genuinely decent human being.

And a down-to-earth practical guy who doesn't seem to have an ax to grind.

He had indicated that Kyle's original defense team seemed more out to use Kyle for a cause, than to represent his best interests.

[rogue06]

Actually ...

I think that would be a reasonable argument.

I'm not to sure an argument based on you should have arrested them in order to keep them from getting hurt later on would hold water. Folks who sue the police for failing to protect them (including those not engaged in criminal activity but who were threatened) don't fare very well in court.

[Mountain Man]

I thought he did well. And I'm glad he did it - he cleared up a lot of misconceptions and out right lies and it humanized him. Now he needs to fade away...

Rittenhouse's own lawyer suggested he change his name and disappear.

Richards said, “I think there’s a lot of people want to use Kyle for their own means. I think the way the Rittenhouse name right now has trended on Twitter – and that’s what we live in, is a Twitter society – people want to use his name, get it out there so they can get some publicity. I think it’s cheap. That’s what I think.”

MacCallum said, “What’s your advice to him about how he should live his life from now?”

Richards said, “Yeah, my advice would be to change his name and start his life over. He’s very recognizable right now. There’s a lot of people who I don’t think have his best interests at heart and probably want to make him a symbol of something I don’t think he wants to be necessarily associated with. And once you give up your name and your likeness and you join those causes, I think a lot of people will use you for their own purposes, and you won’t be able to control it.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021...art-life-over/

I really like that lawyer. He seems like a genuinely decent human being.

[tabibito]

So they are going to argue that police should have arrested Rosenbaum and Grosskreutz, so they wouldn't have been shot?

Actually ...

I think that would be a reasonable argument.

[Mountain Man]

So they are going to argue that police should have arrested Rosenbaum and Grosskreutz, so they wouldn't have been shot?

No, he's clearly implying that the police should have apprehended Rittenhouse ("Were the police too cozy with vigilantes walking the streets enforcing their own justice?") even though the "vigilante" narrative was demolished during the trial.

[CivilDiscourse]

Shepherd Smith? Good grief... Perhaps Bret Baier...

Honestly? Lost track of Fox News anchors. I don't watch news often, I couldn't tell you who is or isn't on the air anymore.