Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AOC, hollywood, the media et al had better be VERY careful with how they characterise Kyle Rittenhouse and the events. Best not throw around “racist”, “white supremacist” etc without evidence. Attorney Lin Wood made Nick Sandmann very wealthy (not disclosed but assumed). Attorney Lin Wood has announced he will be taking up the case.

https://twitter.com/LLinWood

These charges must be dismissed as video clearly shows justified acts of self-defense. When dismissed, accusers should be held accountable & they should pay.

Really? Care to disclose the term of the settlements? Since you very clearly have first hand knowledge of that . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BREAKING: Kyle Rittenhouse has been charged in Wisconsin.

1st Degree reckless homicide
1st Degree recklessly endangering safety
1st Degree intentional homicide
Attempted 1st Degree intentional homicide
1st Degree recklessly endangering safety
Possession of dangerous weapon

Autopsy shows Rosenbaum (the first vic) had a gunshot wound to the right groin which fractured his pelvis, a gunshot wound to the back which perforated his right lung and liver, a gunshot wound to his hand, a superficial gunshot wound to his thigh, and a graze gunshot wound to his forehead.

Rittenhouse is a thug who needs to spend the rest of his life in prison. He’s a feral animal who can’t be trusted in decent society.

I guess he must have gotten shot in the groin and maybe hand, then started to turn (hence graze to forehead, like he was sideways) and get away (fatal shot to the back).

Self-defense sure isn't five gunshots.

Or the force of the bullets spun him around.

I don't think you can say anything about 5 bullets, self-defense, premeditation, adrenaline, or just a semi-automatic weapon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AOC, hollywood, the media et al had better be VERY careful with how they characterise Kyle Rittenhouse and the events. Best not throw around “racist”, “white supremacist” etc without evidence. Attorney Lin Wood made Nick Sandmann very wealthy (not disclosed but assumed). Attorney Lin Wood has announced he will be taking up the case.

https://twitter.com/LLinWood

These charges must be dismissed as video clearly shows justified acts of self-defense. When dismissed, accusers should be held accountable & they should pay.

Whatever the Washington Post paid Nick Sandmann is literally pennies to Jeff Bezos. He doesn't care. Besides, I'm sure he got an ok settlement. Very wealthy is ridiculous. Either way, Jeff Bezos didn't lose a wink of sleep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

[Anonymous]

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/08/27/aclu-demands-immediate-resignation-kenosha-police-chief-sheriff-and-mayor

ACLU Demands Immediate Resignation of Kenosha Police Chief, Sheriff, and Mayor

this is big

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Right. It IS nuts. That’s why I am not a right winger and why I have not said anything like that at all. I am not sure why you can’t seem to comprehend that.

Because tribalism is the only way. Either he's a cold-blooded murderer or he's a hero. There's nothing in between. Or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/08/27/aclu-demands-immediate-resignation-kenosha-police-chief-sheriff-and-mayor

ACLU Demands Immediate Resignation of Kenosha Police Chief, Sheriff, and Mayor

this is big

How is this big? Seems pretty standard for the ACLU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New York Times actually did their jobs for once

https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/1298839097923063809?s=12

Tired of people talking out of their a$$es on this

+1. That's a great thread. I don't love the right wing nut jobs who need a gun to go to the grocery store, but I also don't like the social justice warriors making up facts to suit their narratives. Centrism feels lonely these days.

there’s nothing in that thread that changes the fact of armed and organized white militias showing up at protests against police violence against black people. your centrism is not as clear eyed and clever as you think it is.

There IS video of the guy that got shot first being aggressive and saying “shoot me” to the armed guys who were backing away. He wasn’t protesting he was trying to pick a fight. He is on video being held back from charging the guys with guns. Centrist means that you look at things without bias. You can not support stupid gun nuts while also seeing issues with a man charging at people using fighting words and chasing people while literally asking to get shot.

it’s so funny I’m crying that you believe this interpretation is factual because you are a “centrist.”

Nothing from my post is an “interpretation”. It’s all on video.

It’s not “all on video.” There is no video showing what led up to the chase and first shooting.

Everything that I said in my post was what I was referring to. There was no interpretation.

Wrong. We don't know WHEN that video of the first victim was filmed. And we don't know if the killer was present for it.

You guys seem to have reading comprehension problems. Nobody is defending this kid. Stating the facts from videos is not defending anything but the truth.

Sure, they are.

Vile POS: Are liberals actually surprised at the shootings? What do you expect will happen when elected officials don’t step in to protect property and lives?
Good people with guns step in to do the police’ job.
That’s what happens.

DP: Wait Rittenhouse is 'good people'?

Vile POS: Yes, and a pretty good shot apparently.
Want your police back now???


http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/60/907636.page#17970287

One idiot from 30 pages and the context of this discussion is centrists citing facts while being called Trump supporters. Do you need me to cite the post where I was misquoted as saying that this kid is a hero?

PP said “nobody is defending this kids”.

Just sharing the facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

I would agree with you if I did not see the videos of what happened. right after the shots with everybody running for life Rittenhouse walks away from where people were shots holding a big rifle, toward the police. he walks by a couple of armed vehicles and is ignored (even though somebody is yelling that he has shot people please stop him), then by a police car with arms up and again he is totally ignored. he is a civilian, well past curfew time, he could certainly be arrested just for that instead he is totally ignored even though he is clearly heavily armed and coming from where people had just been shot. other videos before the mess show the police super friendly with the wackos heavily armed militia, giving them water, even repeatedly thanking them for what they were doing (yes because showing up big rifles and clearly a very empty head to a protest is not a recipe for disaster).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

I would agree with you if I did not see the videos of what happened. right after the shots with everybody running for life Rittenhouse walks away from where people were shots holding a big rifle, toward the police. he walks by a couple of armed vehicles and is ignored (even though somebody is yelling that he has shot people please stop him), then by a police car with arms up and again he is totally ignored. he is a civilian, well past curfew time, he could certainly be arrested just for that instead he is totally ignored even though he is clearly heavily armed and coming from where people had just been shot. other videos before the mess show the police super friendly with the wackos heavily armed militia, giving them water, even repeatedly thanking them for what they were doing (yes because showing up big rifles and clearly a very empty head to a protest is not a recipe for disaster).

It was absolutely insane.

Imagine him walking towards police in that scenario...if he were black. Someone would still be scraping his brain matter off the sidewalk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

the police made no effort to stop the violence here - they actively inflamed it by encouraging the militia

and there were plenty of documented incidents of police escalating peaceful
protest (or just attacking protestors)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Right. It IS nuts. That’s why I am not a right winger and why I have not said anything like that at all. I am not sure why you can’t seem to comprehend that.

Because tribalism is the only way. Either he's a cold-blooded murderer or he's a hero. There's nothing in between. Or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

I would agree with you if I did not see the videos of what happened. right after the shots with everybody running for life Rittenhouse walks away from where people were shots holding a big rifle, toward the police. he walks by a couple of armed vehicles and is ignored (even though somebody is yelling that he has shot people please stop him), then by a police car with arms up and again he is totally ignored. he is a civilian, well past curfew time, he could certainly be arrested just for that instead he is totally ignored even though he is clearly heavily armed and coming from where people had just been shot. other videos before the mess show the police super friendly with the wackos heavily armed militia, giving them water, even repeatedly thanking them for what they were doing (yes because showing up big rifles and clearly a very empty head to a protest is not a recipe for disaster).

It was absolutely insane.

Imagine him walking towards police in that scenario...if he were black. Someone would still be scraping his brain matter off the sidewalk.

And moron cons wouldn’t be offering defenses of him, they’d be saying of a dead black Kyle Rittenhouse “he shouldn’t have been walking toward the police brandishing his weapon like that! You wave a gun around at the police and they have every right to shoot until you’re no longer a threat!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

I would agree with you if I did not see the videos of what happened. right after the shots with everybody running for life Rittenhouse walks away from where people were shots holding a big rifle, toward the police. he walks by a couple of armed vehicles and is ignored (even though somebody is yelling that he has shot people please stop him), then by a police car with arms up and again he is totally ignored. he is a civilian, well past curfew time, he could certainly be arrested just for that instead he is totally ignored even though he is clearly heavily armed and coming from where people had just been shot. other videos before the mess show the police super friendly with the wackos heavily armed militia, giving them water, even repeatedly thanking them for what they were doing (yes because showing up big rifles and clearly a very empty head to a protest is not a recipe for disaster).

He was working with the police. There are pictures of him talking and hanging around the police after curfew. These militia groups all work with the police. I bet there are text messages also. So much for protect and service. More like occupy and oppress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These right wing nuts are a huge threat to our country. Protesters are not. And protesters should not damage property and should be accountable for thre damage they do. But it is nothing compared to the lawlessness of the right wing like Rittenhouse.

You're not wrong, but that's why you can't let this stuff escalate. You ignore the people setting fires, destroying property, and looting because you want to respect the rights of the protesters; it becomes awfully tough to put the genie back in the bottle before the situation escalates to vigilantism like Rittenhouse or his fellow travelers. That's why you enforce content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions on the protesters in the first place.

who is we/you? I have no issue with police effectively maintaining order. They didn’t do so here. They allowed and encouraged the militias. We’ve seen over and over and over how police aggresively escalated the protests.

How are police supposed to effectively maintain order when their efforts to do so are characterized as escalating the protests? For example, in other places, you've had protesters - or at least people in the middle of protests - breaking windows, starting fires, stealing stuff. The police tell the crowd to go home so that the criminal activity will stop. The crowd doesn't do so -- they have the right to protest. Criminals in the crowd continue to use the protesters as cover to break stuff, throw stuff, vandalize. The police then uses pepper spray, etc. to get people to leave so the crimes stop happening. Now it's "escalating the protest." Then the knuckle-draggers with the guns show up & now the police are supposed to be able to control the situation they couldn't control even before that?

I just don't understand what kind of scalpel people think the police can use to remove the criminals and the vigilantes from a restless, protesting crowd without upsetting the crowd and infringing upon the right to assemble.

I would agree with you if I did not see the videos of what happened. right after the shots with everybody running for life Rittenhouse walks away from where people were shots holding a big rifle, toward the police. he walks by a couple of armed vehicles and is ignored (even though somebody is yelling that he has shot people please stop him), then by a police car with arms up and again he is totally ignored. he is a civilian, well past curfew time, he could certainly be arrested just for that instead he is totally ignored even though he is clearly heavily armed and coming from where people had just been shot. other videos before the mess show the police super friendly with the wackos heavily armed militia, giving them water, even repeatedly thanking them for what they were doing (yes because showing up big rifles and clearly a very empty head to a protest is not a recipe for disaster).

It was absolutely insane.

Imagine him walking towards police in that scenario...if he were black. Someone would still be scraping his brain matter off the sidewalk.

And moron cons wouldn’t be offering defenses of him, they’d be saying of a dead black Kyle Rittenhouse “he shouldn’t have been walking toward the police brandishing his weapon like that! You wave a gun around at the police and they have every right to shoot until you’re no longer a threat!”

Exactly. The cops are showing us their true colors here. Don’t miss it.