Kyle Rittenhouse is doing well

[Hollie]

Yes, just like it grated me when 12 angry women sitting in judgement of OJ Ignored evidence and acquitted him of two murders. And they didn't even have him on video committing them.



That's not where he lived. He lived in Antioch. He wasn't driving there every day, his Mommy had to drop him off at the riot.



Yes, but WHY he was there should have been admitted into evidence. If he was there to shoot him some Darkies, as he expressed a desire to do in a video tape, then that should have come into evidence.



Um, okay. So the DA didn't believe him, a Grand Jury indicted him. Then a senile judge suppressed evidence and sandbagged their case. Now you've set a precedence that if I feel mildly threatened by you, even if you are unarmed, I can argue self-defense.


If he was a child, he shouldn't have had a gun. The police have shot ACTUAL black children for playing with toys that look like guns. Rittenhouse gunned down three people and the police just let him walk home for his mommy to pick him up.

"...his Mommy had to drop him off at the riot.''

Wait, what? I thought these were peaceful protests? As the city was plagued by leftist arson, theft and mayhem, I didn't know there were, you know, riots taking place.

 

[JoeB131]

"...his Mommy had to drop him off at the riot.''

Wait, what? I thought these were peaceful protests? As the city was plagued by leftist arson, theft and mayhem, I didn't know there were, you know, riots taking place.

Well, he thought it was a riot. But frankly, he's the only one who actually murdered anyone there. So everyone else was peaceful.

 

[Hollie]

Well, he thought it was a riot. But frankly, he's the only one who actually murdered anyone there. So everyone else was peaceful.

You're obviously fact-challenged. 'Murder' has a specific legal definition. It's a part of your ideology to be sloppy with terms and definitions but can you point to any court that has adjudicated Rittenhouse as a murderer?

I guess your definition of 'peaceful' is burning, looting and physical attacks.

Leftist ideology. It really is an affliction.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Yes, just like it grated me when 12 angry women sitting in judgement of OJ Ignored evidence and acquitted him of two murders. And they didn't even have him on video committing them.



That's not where he lived. He lived in Antioch. He wasn't driving there every day, his Mommy had to drop him off at the riot.



Yes, but WHY he was there should have been admitted into evidence. If he was there to shoot him some Darkies, as he expressed a desire to do in a video tape, then that should have come into evidence.



Um, okay. So the DA didn't believe him, a Grand Jury indicted him. Then a senile judge suppressed evidence and sandbagged their case. Now you've set a precedence that if I feel mildly threatened by you, even if you are unarmed, I can argue self-defense.


If he was a child, he shouldn't have had a gun. The police have shot ACTUAL black children for playing with toys that look like guns. Rittenhouse gunned down three people and the police just let him walk home for his mommy to pick him up.

He was as much a part of that community as anyone else there.

That was not relevant evidence because he did not go there to shoot " darkies " we know this because he did NOT shoot any " darkies" .

He did not shoot anyone until he was attacked with lethal intent aqnd force.

Sorry you fool but we do not convict people because someone else did something at one time or another. That is not how justice works you idiot



You are a bald faced rac ist liar . The FACT is that there was NO evidence suppressed.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Well, he thought it was a riot. But frankly, he's the only one who actually murdered anyone there. So everyone else was peaceful.

You are a liar

It was a violent riot and nothing else. Riots do not require murder


He only killed people in self defnese and that is fact and you know it

 

[Soupnazi630]

The crowd went after him because they just saw him gun down an unarmed man. If Grosskuertz had shot him, your Ammosexuals would have called Rittenhouse a mass shooter and praised the action of a "good guy with a gun".


He should be. Besides the fact that he's going to lose his shirt in civil court, he's going to be pretty much unemployable for the rest of his life.

He can't even get on-line scam universities to take him as a student.

Another University Has Denied Admitting Kyle Rittenhouse

Texas A&M refuted Rittenhouse’s claims that he will be attending college there.

www.thecut.com

Oh, sorry, you ended your post in a wet fart, so I can now ignore you again.

You keep repeating proven lies.

The crowd was going after him before he shot anyone. He was defending himself. Your predictions are weak and stupid

 

[Muhammed]

Bob, are you still obsessing over my sex life?



Oh, a Model? She does charge by the hour.

Or she is just trying to raise her profile knowing being pictured next to a mass murderer is going to get her picture out there.



Uh, Bode is a woman. Also, my Girlfriend is a very attractive Asian woman... probably too good for me

Anyway, you are right, I can't see any decent woman saying, "Wow, you gunned down a homeless man and two good Samaritans in cold blood! I want some of that!"

I'm sure that this is one of your wank fantasies, though.

That is some super stupid spin, scumbag.

 

[Muhammed]

The vigilante twerp came from out of State with his gun.

Quite obviously, that is what the fake news media told you that disinformation repeatedly, and since you have such a low IQ, and therefore you're very easily brainwashed, you were gullible enough to guzzle down the leftist fake news media's grape kool-aid.

You're a moron.

 

[Polishprince]

Yes, just like it grated me when 12 angry women sitting in judgement of OJ Ignored evidence and acquitted him of two murders. And they didn't even have him on video committing them.

The shooting may have been on video- but so was the rioting that Rittenhouse was confronted with and the obvious Self-Defense that he was engaged in.

The judge was very pro-prosecution, and didn't permit any evidence of Rosenbaum's Child Molestation conviction to be brought out as further proof of Rittenhouse's justification of wasting him. Remember, Rittenhouse was a minor child, the exact group that Rosenbaum had a record of assrapery with.

 

[hadit]

The crowd went after him because they just saw him gun down an unarmed man. If Grosskuertz had shot him, your Ammosexuals would have called Rittenhouse a mass shooter and praised the action of a "good guy with a gun".

Obviously, you didn't watch the trial, because he was never charged with "gunning down an unarmed man". In fact, that was ruled legitimate defense. Oh, I know, your legal acumen is so much greater than all the lawyers, the judge, and the jury that you know better than they all did after hearing all the facts of the case. Because, as is often the case with you, your belief trumps reality despite having no support whatsoever.

He should be. Besides the fact that he's going to lose his shirt in civil court, he's going to be pretty much unemployable for the rest of his life.

In 5 years, there will be maybe 15 people like you still obsessed with trying to destroy him. No one else will care, and that will chap your drawers to no end.

He can't even get on-line scam universities to take him as a student.

Another University Has Denied Admitting Kyle Rittenhouse

Texas A&M refuted Rittenhouse’s claims that he will be attending college there.

www.thecut.com

He doesn't have to, but if he wants to, he'll get a secondary education, which will again chap your drawers to no end. You want him living in a cardboard box under a bridge somewhere so you can sooth your fantasies that somehow he's an evil racist that got away with it, despite reality.

Oh, sorry, you ended your post in a wet fart, so I can now ignore you again.

Oh, I'm sorry, do you need to change your underwear again? While you're doing that, consider the truth that Rittenhouse shot no black people that night, despite your desperate fantasy that he's a racist out to hunt down and kill black people, and your need to craft and maintain a narrative despite reality. I mean, I understand your total need to keep the narrative alive to avoid believing that he was just a kid that protected himself, but again, when you spew your fantasies as if they were fact and refuse to back them up, no one believes you. You know, like your fantasy that the gun industry intentionally markets to crazy people, the one you should be able to easily prove by just showing some of these ads and how everyone can see them. A TV or radio commercial will do.

 

[Jarlaxle]

No it wasn’t. It was a case of a little boy going somewhere he never should have been so he could play “action hero” for one night. He didn’t expect to get himself in as far over his head as he did and that led to him doing something that he can never undo or make right; no matter what a jury says about it.

The "little boy" was a year older than my uncle when he enlisted. He did nothing wrong.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The shooting may have been on video- but so was the rioting that Rittenhouse was confronted with and the obvious Self-Defense that he was engaged in.

The judge was very pro-prosecution, and didn't permit any evidence of Rosenbaum's Child Molestation conviction to be brought out as further proof of Rittenhouse's justification of wasting him. Remember, Rittenhouse was a minor child, the exact group that Rosenbaum had a record of assrapery with.

Joey does not care. He simply wants blood.

Obviously, you didn't watch the trial, because he was never charged with "gunning down an unarmed man". In fact, that was ruled legitimate defense. Oh, I know, your legal acumen is so much greater than all the lawyers, the judge, and the jury that you know better than they all did after hearing all the facts of the case. Because, as is often the case with you, your belief trumps reality despite having no support whatsoever.

In 5 years, there will be maybe 15 people like you still obsessed with trying to destroy him. No one else will care, and that will chap your drawers to no end.

He doesn't have to, but if he wants to, he'll get a secondary education, which will again chap your drawers to no end. You want him living in a cardboard box under a bridge somewhere so you can sooth your fantasies that somehow he's an evil racist that got away with it, despite reality.

Oh, I'm sorry, do you need to change your underwear again? While you're doing that, consider the truth that Rittenhouse shot no black people that night, despite your desperate fantasy that he's a racist out to hunt down and kill black people, and your need to craft and maintain a narrative despite reality. I mean, I understand your total need to keep the narrative alive to avoid believing that he was just a kid that protected himself, but again, when you spew your fantasies as if they were fact and refuse to back them up, no one believes you. You know, like your fantasy that the gun industry intentionally markets to crazy people, the one you should be able to easily prove by just showing some of these ads and how everyone can see them. A TV or radio commercial will do.

Joey does not care. Joey simply wanted a show trial, followed by a witch-burning.

 

[JoeB131]

You're obviously fact-challenged. 'Murder' has a specific legal definition. It's a part of your ideology to be sloppy with terms and definitions but can you point to any court that has adjudicated Rittenhouse as a murderer?

I guess your definition of 'peaceful' is burning, looting and physical attacks.

Yes, it has a specific definition, which Rittenhouse met, if the jury got to hear the evidence.

 

[JoeB131]

Do you hear a wet fart?

In 5 years, there will be maybe 15 people like you still obsessed with trying to destroy him. No one else will care, and that will chap your drawers to no end.

Hey, what's George Zimmerman doing these days? It's been 10 years since he murdered Trayvon Martin, how is his life going?

 

[Polishprince]

Yes, it has a specific definition, which Rittenhouse met, if the jury got to hear the evidence.

What do you think about Rosenbaum's Child Molestation conviction?

Why wasn't that evidence told to the jury?

Rittenhouse was a child, and facing a known child rapist, I think that's relevant testimony.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Yes, it has a specific definition, which Rittenhouse met, if the jury got to hear the evidence.

You’re a fucking lunatic.

Hey, what's George Zimmerman doing these days? It's been 10 years since he murdered Trayvon Martin

I see the problem. You live in a different universe. In this one, when some asshole attacks you, you can legally shoot them in self-defense. So like, when Trayvon Martin lost his shit and tried to beat someone up and got his clock cleaned. He should have gotten a Darwin Award.

It’s even dumber when just flat out attacking an actual cop and not a neighborhood watch guy, like Michael Brown did - what a rotten piece of shit that guy was. Good riddance.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Yes, it has a specific definition, which Rittenhouse met, if the jury got to hear the evidence.

No he did not.

There was no eviden e whatsoever which proved murder.

 

[Hollie]

Yes, it has a specific definition, which Rittenhouse met, if the jury got to hear the evidence.

Instead of babbling on with silly conspiracy theories, tell us what evidence was kept from the jury.

We both understand you will rattle on with your nonsense claims that testimony irrelevant to the material facts of the case should be allowed but that is just a failed argument that no one takes seriously.

 

[JoeB131]

What do you think about Rosenbaum's Child Molestation conviction?

That he made a dumb mistake as an adolescent and went to prison for it.

Why wasn't that evidence told to the jury?

Because it wasn't relevant to Rittenhouse's action. Rittenhouse didn't know he had been convicted of anything.

I see the problem. You live in a different universe. In this one, when some asshole attacks you, you can legally shoot them in self-defense. So like, when Trayvon Martin lost his shit and tried to beat someone up and got his clock cleaned. He should have gotten a Darwin Award.

Uh, he didn't lose his shit... he was shot by a drug addled racist.

 

[Polishprince]

Because it wasn't relevant to Rittenhouse's action. Rittenhouse didn't know he had been convicted of anything.

Why would you think that?

Rittenhouse seemed well informed, and Rosenbaum's history of Paedophilia was well publicized.