Kyl;e Rittenhouse will be a billionaire by the time his lawyers are done.

[Jarlaxle]

AR-15s are only "intimidating" to you pussy Moon Bats.

What was intimidating" was the crowd of BLM thugs that had been destroying the city.

Many of them were armed.

Notice anything interesting about this piece of shit that Kyle shot?

View attachment 614611

The round was placed eight inches off target laterally?

 

[Jarlaxle]

It is really mystifying how these idiots can still be arguing their nonsense so long after the case is over.

I had clients that did this. Long after their case had been decided they would call or write carefully detailing how they could not possibly lose. Reality just doesn't have a grip.

It's not complicated: they are disciples of Goebbels and Alinsky. One tactic they favor is The Big Lie. They hope to repeat it endlessly until it is accepted as truth.

 

[Jarlaxle]

People who firmly believe they know more than the judge are always amusing.

It's not like there aren't plenty of crooked or incompetent (or crooked AND incompetent) judges on the bench...

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sure I can.

I can call RIttenhouse a murderer
I can call OJ Simpson a murderer
I can call the Boston Strangler a murderer.

That our justice system fails to hold people accountable is sad, but doesn't get to redefine reality.

Boy, you wouldn't know reality if it crawled up your ass and did the can-can.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Lacking proof of guilt is not proof of innocence.
The not guilty verdict does not prove he was innocent or justified.
It just means the jury was not positive enough of guilt to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

That was never an issue. He shot those men. Admitted that he shot those men. There was never a trial to determine guilt. He was guilty. Period, Full stop.
Now, the issue. Did he have a right to shoot and kill. The jury agreed that he did have that right,

 

[Toro]

People who firmly believe they know more than the judge are always amusing.

People who firmly believe they think Nazis are better than Democrats are always amusing and aren't Nazis themselves.

LOL

 

[Jarlaxle]

Grosskreuz was armed, but had a MedTech uniform on, and was pointing the pistol up, with hands raised in surrender.
He never pointed his pistol at Kyle.

Out and out lie. He did, and he stated so under oath.

We can watch the video over and over.

Please do...it shows clearly that you just lied!

The defense lawyer just deliberately confused the testimony.
He had originally pointed his pistol at Kyle, but then decided there was insufficient threat, so raised his hands and pointed up.

Out and out lie.

THAT is when Kyle shot him, when his hands were raised and pistol NOT pointed.
And that is unequivocally proven by the fact the bullet path through the arm was perpendicular to the arm.
If he had been points at Kyle, then the bullet path would have to have been parallel to the arm.

And more lies.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

People who firmly believe they think Nazis are better than Democrats are always amusing and aren't Nazis themselves.

LOL

Nazis ARE better than democrats. KKK is better than democrats. The Taliban is better than democrats. Demons from the 7th circle of hell are better than democrats. Now, find another thread and give me a chance to find something else that's better than democrats.

 

[Jarlaxle]

If the magazine was inserted, I would assume you were intent on mass murder, call the police, get my rifle, and be prepared to shoot you.
But I would select one with a scope and 7mm magnum, for superior range.

The safest thing in the county would be what you are aiming at.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Actually, Rosenbaum would have had a built in defense of being mentally ill and lighting a dumpster on fire isn't really much of a crime.

Nobody’s talking about the criminality of starting the dumpster fire.

"Mommy, the mean midget yelled at me and I shot him!"

Ghosty has never met a case of white privilege he didn't like.

There were no minorities involved in this incident you moron.

 

[westwall]

Sure I can.

I can call RIttenhouse a murderer
I can call OJ Simpson a murderer
I can call the Boston Strangler a murderer.

That our justice system fails to hold people accountable is sad, but doesn't get to redefine reality.

No, you can't. That would be slander. Look it up. If he can identify you, he can sue the ever loving shit out of you.

Moron.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Everyone wanted to attack Rittenhouse because of the provocative rifle.

Bullshit. You pulled that one straight out of your ass.

There’s nothing in the videos or court testimonies to suggest that people attacked him just for being armed or that they even wanted to. Even if they did, it wouldn’t change the fact that they struck first and he still would have been justified in defending himself.

But clearly what made the rifle provocative was that it was threatening, so almost no one had the nerve to attack him, since they were unarmed.

1.) They had no reason to attack him just for having the rifle in the first place.

2.) You presume to speak for the people who were actually there. I don’t believe any of these people ever said or implied they wanted to subdue Rittenhouse at any time before he fired at Rosenbaum.

3.) No one attacked the the three or four other guys with him just for being armed and in fact, paid them no attention at all.

But once he shot Rosenbaum, no one had any choice any more, and had to attack him, since he was murdering everyone around him.

“Murdering everyone around him”? Let’s stick with the facts, shall we? He shot one person and that was in self defense.

The only reason more did not attack him is that he ran away.

More didn’t attack him because he successfully defended himself. That is precisely why he had the gun in the first place.

I have never seen video of the early part with Rosenbaum, so I am not sure how it started, but Rosenbaum was unarmed and Rittenhouse still shot him 4 times, at close range, with a high powered rifle.

1.) I have seen the video and Rosenbaum attacked him for putting out his dumpster fire.

2.) Rosenbaum being unarmed is irrelevant because Rittenhouse had no way of knowing he wasn’t. Also, Rosenbaum attempted to take the rifle from Rittenhouse and it’s anybody’s guess as to what he was prepared to do with it if he managed to wrest it from Rittenhouse.

That is NOT self defense.

I’m afraid it was self defense and the jury agreed.

The castle doctrine and stand your ground, do NOT allow for an escalation.

You mean like Rosenbaum escalating the situation by attacking someone merely for putting out his fire and by attempting to take Kyle’s rifle?

So you can't use a weapon on an unarmed attacker unless you are an invalid or something like that.

You can use a weapon to defend yourself if you are being attacked without provocation and if you do not know if your attacker is armed or unarmed.

I understand that folks like you have a problem with what you see as gun culture but your opinions on that issue are null and void in a textbook case of self defense such as this.

 

[hadit]

Wrong.
A jury hand picked to be entirely white and racist.

If someone is chasing you and you want to get away, you do not stop to shoot 7 times, with 4 bullets hitting the person.
With a rifle at close range, 4 hits is deliberate murder, not an attempt to escape.
One shot would have been enough to escape.

Ah, yes, the old racist gambit. You know he shot white people, right?

 

[hadit]

Sure I can.

I can call RIttenhouse a murderer
I can call OJ Simpson a murderer
I can call the Boston Strangler a murderer.

That our justice system fails to hold people accountable is sad, but doesn't get to redefine reality.

No, by your own standard you can't call Rittenhouse a murderer. Did you forget that you said you can't accuse someone of something unless you can prove they did it? Rittenhouse stood trial for murder and was not found guilty. Therefore, your standard insists you can't call him a murderer.

 

[Rigby5]

Yes you do if it’s democrats that want to lynch,, you need to protect your self

It had nothing to do with democrat or republican.
It has to do with police falsely stopping people for things like air freshner hanging from the mirror, and shooting them.

 

[Rigby5]

That's a lie. One of the people Kyle shot was attempting to bash his head in with a weapon. Another threatened him with a pistol.

Wrong.
Someone hitting you with a skateboard is NOT a deadly weapon and does NOT give you the authority to shoot them.
And you do not kill them with a high powered rifle at close range.
Hubner was legally trying to stop an out of control shooter, and is a hero.
Grosskreutz was NOT aiming at Kyle when Kyle pulled the trigger.
Otherwise Kyle's bullet would not have penetrated Grosskreutz's arm perpendicularly.

 

[Rigby5]

Ah, yes, the old racist gambit. You know he shot white people, right?

Does not matter if he shot white people because most people in Kenosha are white.
But the whites who were demonstrating were considered traitors by the racist whites.

 

[Rigby5]

No, by your own standard you can't call Rittenhouse a murderer. Did you forget that you said you can't accuse someone of something unless you can prove they did it? Rittenhouse stood trial for murder and was not found guilty. Therefore, your standard insists you can't call him a murderer.

There is no question Kyle did it.
He admits he shot all 3 people.
The jury did NOT find him innocent, but found him not guilty by reasonable doubt.
They were not sure enough of his guilt.

 

[Rigby5]

It's not complicated: they are disciples of Goebbels and Alinsky. One tactic they favor is The Big Lie. They hope to repeat it endlessly until it is accepted as truth.

No need for propaganda.
Kyle really did bring a high powered rifle to a political demonstration.
That is literally insane.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Wrong.
I never said it would not have happened if he had not been there.

No, but you did say he wouldn’t have been at risk if he hadn’t been there. So are you now admitting he was at risk? If not then what do you mean? If so, wouldn’t that mean that everyone was at risk, both armed and unarmed?

I said that it was the deliberate intimidating presence of the rifle that caused the violence.

Then why were the other armed guys with him not attacked or, why was there no violence associated with them?

And your argument is obviously false because Rittenhouse did not just shoot Rosenbaum, but 3 people.

At the time he was attacked by Grosskreutz and the others, Kyle had shot one person. Therefore, Grosskreutz et al did not attack him because he started “murdering everyone around him”, as you so blithely and erroneously claimed.

So obviously many were upset to see him carrying the rifle, and he likely carried the rifle deliberately to get as many people upset as possible.

On what do you base this claim?