Why we dont agree on Rittenhouse Case

Well...the jury knows more than you do Lesh. They sat there through the whole thing knowing there were people threatening their lives and lives of their families and promising riots if Rittenhouse was not found guilty. Your president says the jury system is good and we gotta go with it. Now. Are you gonna agree with that or are you organizing a late night christmas shopping spree.
 
"Kyle went there with the intent to shoot people"

My question is rhetorical because no liberal has the competency to actually answer it........so here it goes

If thats the case, why did he ONLY SHOOT the 3 people that attacked him? Why didn't he just keep on shooting. If he went there intending to just murder innocent people, why did he stop with THOSE THREE ONLY?

You leftists truly are fucking stupid.
 
What we have Taz is White Justice White folks vote for pos like Gaetz Greene Trump and the judge in kyle case
Can you tell me the skin color of those that were shot?

Then can you explain if they were peacefully protesting and if one was carrying a firearm then are they truly protesting in a peaceful manner?

Finally, Kyle stupidity is well noted but you can not claim those that died were actually innocent victims in this at all.

They threatened a teen that was armed with a firearm and I will tell you this if you come chasing me, well my weapon is a shotgun, so they will be pulling buck out of your ass after I am done…

Let be clear the media sold this case to be about a young racist male that killed innocent people but what the case was truly about to me is:

1. A mother stupid decision to take her kid there.

2. A friend who gave the kid the firearm.

3. A stupid kid where he should have never been.

4. Three idiots that got themselves killed because they were STUPID!

So as all you debate this I feel the kid need to be slapped hard upside his head and thank his lucky stars the verdict didn’t go the other way and he need to shape up and get real with his damn life!

As for the three idiots, well tough!
 
This is off topic. The topic point is WHY can we not agree on things such as the kyle Rittenhouse verdict. What keeps the left and right from agreeing on basic issues of truth, justice, 'fairness' etc.
 
"Kyle went there with the intent to shoot people"

My question is rhetorical because no liberal has the competency to actually answer it........so here it goes

If thats the case, why did he ONLY SHOOT the 3 people that attacked him? Why didn't he just keep on shooting. If he went there intending to just murder innocent people, why did he stop with THOSE THREE ONLY?

You leftists truly are fucking stupid.
Because he didn’t go there to kill people and when provoked he defended himself…
 
When you say fairness, the left thinks in terms of Equality of Outcome. There are 2 dead criminals. The left wants Rittenhouse dead too. am i right?
 
This is off topic. The topic point is WHY can we not agree on things such as the kyle Rittenhouse verdict. What keeps the left and right from agreeing on basic issues of truth, justice, 'fairness' etc.
The media spin it so that people will not listen to another opinion to hear both sides of the story.

Most of society believe their news source is never corrupted but all of us is worthless unless you are read all opinions on the subject!
 
A sneeze in your face??

Why is Joe keeping illegal criminals here?​

seems illegal criminals are less dangerous than our regular criminals - haven't seen an illegal criminal yet try to cross the border with an AR-47 100 shot repeater- hanging around their neck - yet we have them walking all around the streets in every community - now even more so - did you know if somebody accidentally sneezes in your face you can shoot them because you gotta defend your self from a deadly virus - believe me- a jury of 100 would clear ya of that shooting today and with all the asshole judges - dingbat donny put in place - it would be a cakewalk to beat that charge of murder
 
Rightist conceptions of fairness place more emphasis on equality of rights, of protection under the law, and of opportunity—or at least see fairness along these lines without the admixture of equality of outcome. Further, newish leftist ideas of cultural and moral relativism, again a result of presumed liberal compassion, result in a reluctance to see moral distinctions or to see anyone as moral inferiors, except for the cultural Marxist oppressor class (white people) and heretics (especially right-wingers). With regard to non-harming, the left appears to be more inclined to include even inadvertent hurting of another’s feelings under that heading, especially if the hurt feelings are of a leftist.
 
A sneeze in your face??

Why is Joe keeping illegal criminals here?​


seems illegal criminals are less dangerous than our regular criminals - haven't seen an illegal criminal yet try to cross the border with an AR-47 100 shot repeater- hanging around their neck - yet we have them walking all around the streets in every community - now even more so - did you know if somebody accidentally sneezes in your face you can shoot them because you gotta defend your self from a deadly virus - believe me- a jury of 100 would clear ya of that shooting today and with all the asshole judges - dingbat donny put in place - it would be a cakewalk to beat that charge of murder
Waah waah waah poor mistreated Polly Parrot. If the illegal wants to gain citizenship legally then he can purchase a weapon legally also and own it like we American citizens have a right to. Does that make you mad Polly???
 
Guess it was ok for our capital police to take down a few 100 white power republicans threatening their lives and our capital Too bad
Not sure about that but it was evidently ok for the capital police to murder an innocent citizen. Does that make you happy Polly?
 
Nothing matters.... No matter what the information.....there is only one RIGHT
to them and it didn't happen. I fear that you have made the mistake of thinking they can be reasoned with.....trust me...they cannot be.

Jo
Your post hit home Jo with a recent conversation I had with an extended family member who is a self-labeled leftist. Her opinion is that the public at large should embrace the angry protestors to talk with them about their anger. So, this good hearted cousin lacks good judgement and common sense imo. She believes (although not stated, so partly assuming here) that protestors should be rewarded for their anger and receive what they’re asking for due to that anger, as if that’s some kind of solution? Insert face palm here. If anger is rewarded you can bet the farm that angry mobs and violence will continue to increase and expect being rewarded for it.
 
This is off topic. The topic point is WHY can we not agree on things such as the kyle Rittenhouse verdict. What keeps the left and right from agreeing on basic issues of truth, justice, 'fairness' etc.
Why do people still believe Kyle's mother drove him to Kenosha?
 
Today there is cascading nonsense.
KR STARTED the riot in Kenosha so he could shoot innocent black people.
I just heard Biden say that KR is a member of a white supremacist militia that went to Kenosha from Illinois.
KR killed Jacob Blake and three other blacks.
Jerry Nadler thinks the federal government can represented.
Dozens think the families can sue KR because OJ was sued.
There's more. The communists intend destroying truth and justice the way they eliminated the American way.
 
Republicans are angry
they are angry because they wish he was black - so he would have gotten four life sentences with a chance for parole when he's 897 years old
 
The whole reason why there were riots was because the Yellow Press hyped and exploited the Jacob Blake case to help Joe Biden's campaign.
If Jacob Blake had been white you would have never heard about him and there would have never been any left wing crackpot riots.
 

Forum List

Back
Top