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

He won't have to work another day the rest of his life, except he wants to go into medicine and law anyway.

If Nick got $800 million, the sky's the limit for Kyle right now. Without even walking into another courtroom, Rittenhouse could probably settle for over a billion between all the parties in question. I hope he starts with the View's Joy Behar (unlike the fake meme circulating)

In 2019, Nick Sandmann, a high school kid from Kentucky, was accused by several major news outlets of aggressively confronting a Native American man during demonstrations in Washington, D.C. Their videotaped faceoff was described by CNN, ABC, CBS, The Washington Post, The New York Times and others as a confrontation instigated by an obviously racist teen wearing a Make America Great Again Hat. The full video revealed Sandmann had done no such thing.

Sandmann eventually sued seven media outlets for more than $800 million. After out-of-court settlements he is now presumed to be a multimillionaire. Sandmann recently wrote an op-ed saying, “The corrupt liberal media came for me, just like they came for Kyle Rittenhouse, and if he decides to sue I say go for it and hold the media accountable.”


I can tell you with certainty that right now attorneys for newly acquitted defendant Kyle Rittenhouse are working overtime. They are combing through every slanderous statement made about this young man. Every defamatory comment offered up before any facts were presented in a court of law is now under the microscope for possible litigation.

Who is at risk of being sued? Politicians, including President Joe Biden, then a candidate without presidential immunity, was the first high-profile person to declare that young Kyle was a member of an Illinois militia. He ran a campaign ad condemning “white supremacists” featuring a photo of the then 17-year-old. Several members of Congress, such as Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., took up the anti-Rittenhouse “white supremacy” chant, and even after the acquittal Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., called Rittenhouse a “murderer who is once again walking free.”

Yes, politicians can be sued for slander for public statements made “outside their seat,” and it will be interesting to see if Rittenhouse’s team goes that route.

But it is media organizations that are the obvious prime targets for lawsuits. Many reporters and TV pundits pronounced Rittenhouse guilty from the get-go. This despite readily available video showing the young man being chased, knocked down and violently attacked that fateful night. The camera also followed Rittenhouse after the shooting as he immediately tried to surrender to police.

Long before the trial facts emerged, MSNBC and CNN frequently repeated the theory that Rittenhouse acted as an “armed vigilante,” a “domestic terrorist” and “a racist.” Even after the verdict one MSNBC host called Rittenhouse “this little murderous white supremacist.” Sounds like slander to me.

Despite media reports from CBS and others, Rittenhouse did not cross state lines “armed for battle.” (CBS, likely sensing legal liability, has now issued a correction.) Rittenhouse lived with his mother in nearby Antioch, Illinois, but had a job, his father and relatives in Kenosha. The law said he was legally allowed to carry the rifle he had that night.

Facts matter. The three older men, each with a violent criminal history, who attacked Rittenhouse that night were white, not Black. And as open-minded people learned during the trial, Kyle was none of the derogatory things the media claimed. He worked as a lifeguard and was a dedicated police cadet studying to be an EMT and a nurse. Before the fatal shooting he had gone out to erase lewd graffiti spray-painted on a public building. Does that sound like a terrorist to you?

The false descriptions took on a tsunami quality on social media and in the public consciousness. Facebook, that so-called beacon of free speech, blocked any posts sympathetic to Rittenhouse.

“We’ve designated the shooting in Kenosha a mass murder and are removing posts in support of the shooter,” Facebook said at the time. Any post with the words “Free Kyle” was blocked.

Remember this when you hear Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg claim his platform doesn’t censor content.

This kid never had a chance in the tainted court of public opinion. It’s a wonder Kenosha was able to seat an impartial jury.

Your assumption that Nick Sandmann got $800 million or even $1 million is completely false. I doubt the kid got much money at all since his case was slim and none.
 
If he sues, he gets nothing. He killed those people.

In self defense. That’s why he was acquitted and is also why he just might get some money out of this.

The media and whiners were passing judgment on this kid and calling him a white supremacist even before they knew all the facts and before it went to trial. Having been acquitted and found not guilty of the charges, he just might have a libel case.
 
So you couldn’t find any evidence?

I'm sure you think Nancy was sane... she was probably your pin up girl. Ms. Prepper, 2011.

The rest of us look at someone stockpiling weapons and dehydrated foods, and think 'crazy person'.

No, they don’t. It’s not their responsibility to determine who the crazies are. That’s a job for law enforcement or the courts.

Actually- strict liability standards... If the gun industry KNOWS they are marketing to crazies, they pander to them directly.

You see, back in the day, the NRA actually supported common sense gun laws. Ronald Reagan signed laws against open carry in California, and the NRA was completely behind him.

1648549599840.png


Then this funny thing happened. Hunting fell out of fashion when people started to realize that murdering small animals for fun wasn't really a sport, it was animal cruelty. I blame Bugs Bunny. Nobody wanted to be Elmer Fudd.

1648549677787.png


So then the gun industry had an idea. Flood the streets with weapons so that everyone else would get all scared and want weapons to. When you see a crazy prepper like Nancy Lanza, enable her!

I wouldn’t count on it. I can’t say he’ll win but I wouldn’t be surprised if they settle.

Why would they settle? the film clearly shows him murdering people.

It's not like Smirky McBitchslap, who can be really sympathetic when his image handlers tell him to wipe that smirk off his face and take off the racist MAGA hat and look really sad on TV, and maybe CNN will pay us go away money. Nothing an image maker can do will erase the fact that he's out there on tape shooting three people.

In fact, CNN has to fight this. Otherwise, they couldn't report the news, if you define any new report as "libelous".

The bigger problem Shooty McFlopsweat has is that the people he killed or maimed have a pretty good civil case against him, and they'll get a better lawyer than 'the worst civil servant in Kenosha".
 
In self defense. That’s why he was acquitted and is also why he just might get some money out of this.

The media and whiners were passing judgment on this kid and calling him a white supremacist even before they knew all the facts and before it went to trial. Having been acquitted and found not guilty of the charges, he just might have a libel case.

actually, they called him a white supremacist because he was hanging out having a beer with the racist Proud Boys. Stuff the jury never got to hear about. Just like the jury didn't get to hear about how he fantasized about shooting rioters the day before or the video of him beating up a 14 year old girl.



Judge Senile ONLY let them consider the moments of the shooting, not everything that led up to it. In a civil trial, we will get the whole story of what a little shit this guy is.
 
Just like Remington, their insurance companies will force them to settle. Punitive jury settlements tend to be huge in cases like this. Insurance companies like certanty, not crapshoots. Jury trials are always crapshoots.

Not just their insurance companies, but their legal departments as well. If they go to court, even if they win, they've endured months if not years of bad publicity over it and they look like horrible corporate bullies overpowering this one little dude. Also, they open themselves to all the investigation and discovery that goes along with a lawsuit, and who knows what the hell might come out? Then, if they lose, the judgement against them and the amount of money they have to pay is all over the news, encouraging lots of other people to sue them.

On the other hand, they can pay him a percentage of what he's asking to settle, and make a non-disclosure agreement part of the settlement. It's a healthy amount of money to him and comparatively small to them, the story goes away, and there's no blood in the water to attract other claimants.
 
In self defense. That’s why he was acquitted and is also why he just might get some money out of this.

The media and whiners were passing judgment on this kid and calling him a white supremacist even before they knew all the facts and before it went to trial. Having been acquitted and found not guilty of the charges, he just might have a libel case.

AND they deliberately lied - repeatedly - about the facts of the case in order to poison the jury pool and influence the outcome.
 
Your assumption that Nick Sandmann got $800 million or even $1 million is completely false. I doubt the kid got much money at all since his case was slim and none.
I would say defamation of character to the extent that he can't go anywhere in the world for the rest of his life without being recognized and threatened qualifies as a pretty solid case.
 
I'm sure you think Nancy was sane... she was probably your pin up girl. Ms. Prepper, 2011.

Just try to stay on topic, okay?
The rest of us look at someone stockpiling weapons and dehydrated foods, and think 'crazy person'.

I really don’t give a fuck what “the rest of you” think. This particular point is irrelevant because she’s not the one who shot those kids.
Actually- strict liability standards... If the gun industry KNOWS they are marketing to crazies, they pander to them directly.

Car manufacturers know they are marketing to drunk drivers and idiots who do stupid shit on the road that kill people along with responsible drivers, so?

Look at the recent I-81 pileup. Somebody did something stupid by driving in a snowstorm and now three people are dead.
You see, back in the day, the NRA actually supported common sense gun laws. Ronald Reagan signed laws against open carry in California, and the NRA was completely behind him.



Then this funny thing happened. Hunting fell out of fashion when people started to realize that murdering small animals for fun wasn't really a sport, it was animal cruelty. I blame Bugs Bunny. Nobody wanted to be Elmer Fudd.

Jesus please us...
So then the gun industry had an idea. Flood the streets with weapons so that everyone else would get all scared and want weapons to. When you see a crazy prepper like Nancy Lanza, enable her!


The gun industry can’t “flood the streets” with guns if no one buys them dumbass. They respond to a demand, that’s it.
Why would they settle? the film clearly shows him murdering people.

The video clearly shows him defending himself and the jury agreed.
It's not like Smirky McBitchslap, who can be really sympathetic when his image handlers tell him to wipe that smirk off his face and take off the racist MAGA hat and look really sad on TV, and maybe CNN will pay us go away money. Nothing an image maker can do will erase the fact that he's out there on tape shooting three people.

Nothing can erase the fact that these people attacked him.
In fact, CNN has to fight this. Otherwise, they couldn't report the news, if you define any new report as "libelous".

All I can say is to repeat what you said about gun manufacturers reviewing their practices: Perhaps these liberal outlets will take a closer look at their reporting practices and stick with reporting facts rather than contributing to a narrative.
The bigger problem Shooty McFlopsweat has is that the people he killed or maimed have a pretty good civil case against him, and they'll get a better lawyer than 'the worst civil servant in Kenosha".

That may be difficult given that the video clearly shows them trying to stomp his ass into the street and shouting “kill him!” and “Beat his ass!”
 
actually, they called him a white supremacist because he was hanging out having a beer with the racist Proud Boys. Stuff the jury never got to hear about. Just like the jury didn't get to hear about how he fantasized about shooting rioters the day before or the video of him beating up a 14 year old girl.

Bullshit. They were calling him a racist and white supremacist long before that picture came out.
Judge Senile ONLY let them consider the moments of the shooting, not everything that led up to it.

You mean like Rosenbaum attacking him unprovoked?
In a civil trial, we will get the whole story of what a little shit this guy is.

You’re a fucking unrepentant liar so you have no moral standing here. You’re a much bigger shit than Rittenhouse ever could be.
 
So you couldn’t find any evidence?


No, they don’t. It’s not their responsibility to determine who the crazies are. That’s a job for law enforcement or the courts.


Irrelevant. All sales were legal.


I wouldn’t count on it. I can’t say he’ll win but I wouldn’t be surprised if they settle.
Joey doesn't do evidence.
 
Your assumption that Nick Sandmann got $800 million or even $1 million is completely false. I doubt the kid got much money at all since his case was slim and none.

Yes, that's why they settled with him: because he had no case whatsoever and no chance of winning. :rolleyes:
 
Just try to stay on topic, okay?
This is the topic. It's too easy for crazy people to get guns. You start holding the gun industry responsible, they won't sell to crazy people They'll put a shrink in every gun store.

I really don’t give a fuck what “the rest of you” think. This particular point is irrelevant because she’s not the one who shot those kids.

No, she just raised a kid in a crazy environment, drilling into him every day that violence was acceptable, and stockpiled guns he was easily able to access.

Car manufacturers know they are marketing to drunk drivers and idiots who do stupid shit on the road that kill people along with responsible drivers, so?

Look at the recent I-81 pileup. Somebody did something stupid by driving in a snowstorm and now three people are dead.

Except, no. IN fact, the Car Industry every year does things to make cars safer.

The gun industry can’t “flood the streets” with guns if no one buys them dumbass. They respond to a demand, that’s it.

They are CREATING the demand. They make it easy for the bad guys to get guns so that everyone else will be scared and want guns, too. And when you get a particular crazy like Nancy Lanza stockpiling guns, that's a bonus.

The video clearly shows him defending himself and the jury agreed.

The jury was given confusing instructions by a judge who wouldn't even let prosecutors called the people he murdered "victims".

Nothing can erase the fact that these people attacked him.

Except that he provoked the situation by driving 22 miles to participate in a riot with a military-grade weapon.

1648636424409.png


All I can say is to repeat what you said about gun manufacturers reviewing their practices: Perhaps these liberal outlets will take a closer look at their reporting practices and stick with reporting facts rather than contributing to a narrative.
What narrative. We had video of Shooty McFlopsweat doing exactly what he was accused of doing. Just like we had video of Smirky McBitchslap mocking those people of color.

So showing video of white people acting badly is contributing to a narrative?


That may be difficult given that the video clearly shows them trying to stomp his ass into the street and shouting “kill him!” and “Beat his ass!”
You mean after he shot someone. What I heard them yell is, "he just shot two people. Arrest him!!!" Of course, the cops let him walk on by, because he was white.

1648636093430.png


You mean like Rosenbaum attacking him unprovoked?
After he drove 22 miles to insert himself into a riot?

You’re a fucking unrepentant liar so you have no moral standing here. You’re a much bigger shit than Rittenhouse ever could be.
Wait, wait, checking how many people I've murdered recently... oh, wait... it's zero. Also known as two less than Shooty McFlopsweat did.
 
This is the topic. It's too easy for crazy people to get guns. You start holding the gun industry responsible, they won't sell to crazy people They'll put a shrink in every gun store.



No, she just raised a kid in a crazy environment, drilling into him every day that violence was acceptable, and stockpiled guns he was easily able to access.



Except, no. IN fact, the Car Industry every year does things to make cars safer.



They are CREATING the demand. They make it easy for the bad guys to get guns so that everyone else will be scared and want guns, too. And when you get a particular crazy like Nancy Lanza stockpiling guns, that's a bonus.



The jury was given confusing instructions by a judge who wouldn't even let prosecutors called the people he murdered "victims".



Except that he provoked the situation by driving 22 miles to participate in a riot with a military-grade weapon.

View attachment 623328


What narrative. We had video of Shooty McFlopsweat doing exactly what he was accused of doing. Just like we had video of Smirky McBitchslap mocking those people of color.

So showing video of white people acting badly is contributing to a narrative?



You mean after he shot someone. What I heard them yell is, "he just shot two people. Arrest him!!!" Of course, the cops let him walk on by, because he was white.

View attachment 623326


After he drove 22 miles to insert himself into a riot?


Wait, wait, checking how many people I've murdered recently... oh, wait... it's zero. Also known as two less than Shooty McFlopsweat did.
You do not have any such video.

You have cideo clearly showing him acting in self defense proving the accusation false.

Also preppers are not crazy
 
This is the topic. It's too easy for crazy people to get guns. You start holding the gun industry responsible, they won't sell to crazy people They'll put a shrink in every gun store.

Your juvenile caricaturing of me as a Nancy Lanza prepper Superfan are not the topic.
No, she just raised a kid in a crazy environment, drilling into him every day that violence was acceptable, and stockpiled guns he was easily able to access.

Another lie.
Except, no. IN fact, the Car Industry every year does things to make cars safer.

And yet still more people die every year in auto accidents than by firearms. Also, no amount of safety features can make up for human stupidity. This is why drunk driving is still against the law.
They are CREATING the demand. They make it easy for the bad guys to get guns so that everyone else will be scared and want guns, too. And when you get a particular crazy like Nancy Lanza stockpiling guns, that's a bonus.

There’s no easier way to get guns than by stealing them which is where most criminals and gangbangers get them.
The jury was given confusing instructions by a judge who wouldn't even let prosecutors called the people he murdered "victims".

There’s a reason for that: the trial was to determine if the shootings were murder or self defense. Referring to them as “victims” would have tainted the jury’s objectivity.
Except that he provoked the situation by driving 22 miles to participate in a riot with a military-grade weapon.

Another lie. He never participated in the riots you dumbass.
What narrative. We had video of Shooty McFlopsweat doing exactly what he was accused of doing.

If that were the case then the jury would have found him guilty.
Just like we had video of Smirky McBitchslap mocking those people of color.

Another lie.
So showing video of white people acting badly is contributing to a narrative?

Actually, no. Showing the video is fine and is what news media is expected to do. The narrative is in the things they say or don’t say that leaves room for idiots like you to make idiotic assumptions.
You mean after he shot someone. What I heard them yell is, "he just shot two people. Arrest him!!!" Of course, the cops let him walk on by, because he was white.

I’ve seen the videos and some very clearly said to kill him and beat his ass.
After he drove 22 miles to insert himself into a riot?

You mean like Rosenbaum did? Or Grosskreutz? Grosskreutz probably traveled farther than Rittenhouse did.
Wait, wait, checking how many people I've murdered recently... oh, wait... it's zero. Also known as two less than Shooty McFlopsweat did.

Wait, wait, checking how many lies you’ve said just in your last post: Three.

You’ve lied in every discussion we’ve ever had, even in those about cases where no one died (Sandmann). So don’t give me that “At least I never murdered anyone” bullshit. You lie as easily and as often as gangbangers murder each other and you ignore it just as much.

You’re a lying piece of dogshit with no scruples and I’ll hold Rittenhouse’s and Sandmann’s moral character higher than yours any day.
 
Your juvenile caricaturing of me as a Nancy Lanza prepper Superfan are not the topic.
Sure it is. You apparently think that her behavior was normal. I think it was the kind that would produce a mass shooter.

Except- it produced a mass shooter, so I win!


And yet still more people die every year in auto accidents than by firearms. Also, no amount of safety features can make up for human stupidity. This is why drunk driving is still against the law.

As it should be. So should gun ownership if you aren't a soldier or a policeman.

There’s no easier way to get guns than by stealing them which is where most criminals and gangbangers get them.

You just made a great argument as to why private gun ownership should be banned. Good work. Oh, wait, that's probably not what you were going for.

There’s a reason for that: the trial was to determine if the shootings were murder or self defense. Referring to them as “victims” would have tainted the jury’s objectivity.
Right. So what do we call them, "Unwilling bullet recipients"? This judge was a dipshit who tanked the trial. From allowing the victims to be demonized to excluding evidence showing what a racist POS Shooty McFlopsweat was.

Another lie. He never participated in the riots you dumbass.

Really? because I checked, there were not riots in Antioch that day. He had to get into a car and go to a riot in Kenosha.

If that were the case then the jury would have found him guilty.

That's like saying the jury in the Emmet Till case made the right decision. Or that the jury in the OJ SImpson case did. All that proves is that when you have inept lawyers and judges, you can have really bad results. Although often, the opposite is true... innocent people going to jail for crimes they didn't commit.

Actually, no. Showing the video is fine and is what news media is expected to do. The narrative is in the things they say or don’t say that leaves room for idiots like you to make idiotic assumptions.

The video spoke for itself, a flopsweaty white boy shooting people because he got in over his head. He shot an unarmed man. Then he shot his way through a crowd trying to hold him for the police.

You mean like Rosenbaum did? Or Grosskreutz? Grosskreutz probably traveled farther than Rittenhouse did.

Rosenbaum was homeless living on the streets of Kenosha. Grosskreutz resided in West Allis, which is a suburb of Milwaukee...

He went there to help people as a paramedic. Shooty McFlopsweat went there to shoot people. He even said as much on video before he did it.


“Bro, I wish I had my fucking AR,” the 17-year-old allegedly says on a video some 15 days before the fatal incidents that occurred during a Black Lives Matter protest. “I’d start shooting rounds at them.”

In the footage, Rittenhouse and others who appear to be inside a car are referencing a Black man seen jogging out of and away from a CVS Pharmacy. According to prosecutors, Rittenhouse expressed his desire to shoot at “several” such individuals at the drugstore because he believed they were stealing.


Yeah, Jury didn't get to hear about that, either. Puts the thing is a whole new light, doesn't it?

You’ve lied in every discussion we’ve ever had, even in those about cases where no one died (Sandmann). So don’t give me that “At least I never murdered anyone” bullshit. You lie as easily and as often as gangbangers murder each other and you ignore it just as much.
Opinions that aren't yours aren't lies, buddy. Sorry you don't get that.
 
Sure it is. You apparently think that her behavior was normal. I think it was the kind that would produce a mass shooter.

Except- it produced a mass shooter, so I win!




As it should be. So should gun ownership if you aren't a soldier or a policeman.



You just made a great argument as to why private gun ownership should be banned. Good work. Oh, wait, that's probably not what you were going for.


Right. So what do we call them, "Unwilling bullet recipients"? This judge was a dipshit who tanked the trial. From allowing the victims to be demonized to excluding evidence showing what a racist POS Shooty McFlopsweat was.



Really? because I checked, there were not riots in Antioch that day. He had to get into a car and go to a riot in Kenosha.



That's like saying the jury in the Emmet Till case made the right decision. Or that the jury in the OJ SImpson case did. All that proves is that when you have inept lawyers and judges, you can have really bad results. Although often, the opposite is true... innocent people going to jail for crimes they didn't commit.



The video spoke for itself, a flopsweaty white boy shooting people because he got in over his head. He shot an unarmed man. Then he shot his way through a crowd trying to hold him for the police.



Rosenbaum was homeless living on the streets of Kenosha. Grosskreutz resided in West Allis, which is a suburb of Milwaukee...

He went there to help people as a paramedic. Shooty McFlopsweat went there to shoot people. He even said as much on video before he did it.


“Bro, I wish I had my fucking AR,” the 17-year-old allegedly says on a video some 15 days before the fatal incidents that occurred during a Black Lives Matter protest. “I’d start shooting rounds at them.”

In the footage, Rittenhouse and others who appear to be inside a car are referencing a Black man seen jogging out of and away from a CVS Pharmacy. According to prosecutors, Rittenhouse expressed his desire to shoot at “several” such individuals at the drugstore because he believed they were stealing.


Yeah, Jury didn't get to hear about that, either. Puts the thing is a whole new light, doesn't it?


Opinions that aren't yours aren't lies, buddy. Sorry you don't get that.
He was not an active shooter.

Gunownsership should be legal and uninfringed as it always has been.

The judge was fair and correct in his rulings

You are lying through your fingers like a coward NO ONE was trying to hold him they were all assaulting him.

This while thing is the fault of BLM and progressive fools and liars like you
 

Forum List

Back
Top