Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

Demonstrating your lack of knowledge as to the facts of the trial but that doesn’t stop you from posting nonsense, eh? Be smarter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

This is not true.
Please refrain from commenting of you are just here to spread lies.

"We hate him because he's a dumpy, white, working class, flyover kid! Yuck!"

- DCUM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope he files a suit against Biden and members of the media (like Joy Reid) for slander.

Yes I’m waiting for this.

They will probably settle though, just like the other case.

I really hope he takes it all the way to a public trial.

I hope that the families sue Kyle and his mother in civil court. His mother sucks. She failed him and the rest of us. She chose to drive him to the scene with a f*** AK-47. OJ got off but we all know he's guilty as hell. She should have been charged. I hope Kyle and his sorry excuse for a mother get sued and lose. Everyone on social media saying pray for Kyle? Yeah, y'all better pray that he doesn't burn in the fieriest depths of hell.

The rest of us now have to worry that other awful moms will do a crap job raising their kids and say take this weapon and go shoot people in another state. Maybe you'll get a looney, biased judge on your trial too.

This statement alone tells us that you know very little about the evidence in this trial and that you are getting your talking points from some left-wing source.
His mother never went to Kenosha. Learn about the evidence and the sequence of events. You might even find that Rittenhouse was, indeed, not guilty.

When will you guys realize this person is either a troll or a media plant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

This is not true.
Please refrain from commenting of you are just here to spread lies.

Honestly, at this point, if someone doesn't know the basics like the type of gun and whether or not he crossed state lines with it should not be commenting on this topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

This is not true.
Please refrain from commenting of you are just here to spread lies.

"We hate him because he's a dumpy, white, working class, flyover kid! Yuck!"

- DCUM

Nah, he just a racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this kid sues broadly and gets settlements that make Nick Sandman’s look like pocket change.

Sues broadly for what? It's indisputable that he shot and killed two people and injured another. Whether it was a crime was an open question. That's the point of a trial. Would you prefer gun deaths in general not get prosecuted?

DP Oh I don’t know, defamation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this kid sues broadly and gets settlements that make Nick Sandman’s look like pocket change.

Sues broadly for what? It's indisputable that he shot and killed two people and injured another. Whether it was a crime was an open question. That's the point of a trial. Would you prefer gun deaths in general not get prosecuted?

Can the family sue Rittenhouse into forever poverty?

[Anonymous]

How long before he murders again?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he was black he would have been found guilty. No doubt in my mind - signed, a white person

Agreed--signed another white person

+1. Latina

Maybe? Signed another human.

Possibly true but that has no impact on what his verdict. This was the right verdict. The POC who would’ve been found guilty is the wrong, racist verdict. There is absolutely no rationale to hating on a right verdict just because someone else likely wouldn’t have been entitled to it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Truth!

only if you're white

Yep. Totally. Minorities really aren’t flocking to CPAC.

Funny, one of my best friends there is retired CIA and black

[Anonymous]

The moral of this story is to shoot first. If, as the jury determined, Rittenhouse had a right to shoot Huber and Grosskreutz, those two similarly had the right to shoot Rittenhouse dead. Once Rittenhouse fired those first shots, both sides had the right to shoot the other.

Rittenhouse had a better weapon and a quicker trigger finger. So, he wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope this kid sues broadly and gets settlements that make Nick Sandman’s look like pocket change.

Sues broadly for what? It's indisputable that he shot and killed two people and injured another. Whether it was a crime was an open question. That's the point of a trial. Would you prefer gun deaths in general not get prosecuted?

Can the family sue Rittenhouse into forever poverty?

Given that the adult felons chased the teenager through the night while the teen was yelling "Friendly" and they drew their weapons on him, it would be heavy lift for civil court. Lesson, don't chase and then aim your gun at an armed teen. You just might get shot. I mean, duh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And especially his white trash mother, who drives a 17 year old with an AK-47 across state lines.

This is not true.
Please refrain from commenting of you are just here to spread lies.

Honestly, at this point, if someone doesn't know the basics like the type of gun and whether or not he crossed state lines with it should not be commenting on this topic.

Since when has ignorance of the facts stopped anybody from posting on this site? It’s teeming with imbeciles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he was black he would have been found guilty. No doubt in my mind - signed, a white person

Agreed--signed another white person

+1. Latina

Maybe? Signed another human.

Possibly true but that has no impact on what his verdict. This was the right verdict. The POC who would’ve been found guilty is the wrong, racist verdict. There is absolutely no rationale to hating on a right verdict just because someone else likely wouldn’t have been entitled to it

Again, I reiterate. A black person would have been acquitted under much less controversy. See Roderick Scott. For those that think a black person would have been found guilty, please find ONE EXAMPLE of a black man claiming self defense under similar circumstances that was found guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope this kid sues broadly and gets settlements that make Nick Sandman’s look like pocket change.

Sued for what? Kyle's the one who's going to get sued for damages, by his victims' families and the guy who survived with a maimed arm.