Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[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?

DP Oh I don’t know, defamation?

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It doesn’t get to that point because the cops shoot them. Not give them water and thank them for being around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Isn’t it to shoot last? Whoever shoots last and lives won’t be sentenced as long as that person is white. Shooting is apparently the only acceptable form of self defense. Charging at someone with a gun to try and disarm them is not. That’s worthy of murder.

[Anonymous]

Very thankful that justice prevailed today. America is not dead yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

The moral of the story is to not aim your gun at people and yell F U. Particularly if the other people are armed. Those adults had like two brain cells, At least Rittenhouse is a teen boy. We all know their judgement call capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Hear are the first 10 bases on which Kyle’s lawyers can sue (and win):

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

Gee dems, do you now realize the mainstream news you believe is extremely biased and full of lies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

An adult who chases a minor through the streets while armed shouldn't win in civil court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel so sorry for the victim's loved ones. This is disgusting.

That judge must go.

Kyle was the victim here, watch the footage.

Kyle was in the wrong. He had no business being in the middle of that riot. He provoked people, waved his gun at them, escalated and it resulted in him shooting two people and injuring another.

One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

[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.

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.

Hear are the first 10 bases on which Kyle’s lawyers can sue (and win):

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

Gee dems, do you now realize the mainstream news you believe is extremely biased and full of lies?

I don't see anything in here that would mount a credible "defamation" case. He's a public figure when all these statements were made. You're still allowed to express opinions in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel so sorry for the victim's loved ones. This is disgusting.

That judge must go.

Kyle was the victim here, watch the footage.

Kyle was in the wrong. He had no business being in the middle of that riot. He provoked people, waved his gun at them, escalated and it resulted in him shooting two people and injuring another.

One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

How long do you plan on riding this “if Kyle hadn’t been there this never would have happened” train?
This can basically be said about every criminal trial. Ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel so sorry for the victim's loved ones. This is disgusting.

That judge must go.

Kyle was the victim here, watch the footage.

Kyle was in the wrong. He had no business being in the middle of that riot. He provoked people, waved his gun at them, escalated and it resulted in him shooting two people and injuring another.

One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

He ran away, he yelled friendly, friendly, friendly. They chased him down. And then they aimed their guns at him. They were the adults. He was 17.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Hear are the first 10 bases on which Kyle’s lawyers can sue (and win):

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

Gee dems, do you now realize the mainstream news you believe is extremely biased and full of lies?

I don't see anything in here that would mount a credible "defamation" case. He's a public figure when all these statements were made. You're still allowed to express opinions in this country.

Re-read all 10. The media reported these as fact. In so doing, they defamed Kyle (a minor, no less).

Time to make them PAY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel so sorry for the victim's loved ones. This is disgusting.

That judge must go.

Kyle was the victim here, watch the footage.

Kyle was in the wrong. He had no business being in the middle of that riot. He provoked people, waved his gun at them, escalated and it resulted in him shooting two people and injuring another.

One should not be allowed "self defense" claims when one is the person who provoked the fight in the first place. That is then just an excuse to murder.

Just watch the actual footage, not someone else's take on the footage.

[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?

It’s not an open question. A jury of his peers decided that it is, in fact, not an open question.