Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

And I can't wait.

The media was lying for a year about how things went down and now we know a lot more.

Edit: here's Glenn Greenwald talking about the media narrative.

I've always known the prosecution had no real case.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
I've always known the prosecution had no real case.

Rittenhouse should sue the State and the Media, (two sides of the same coin), for millions.

We'll see. The drone footage and Binger sneaking in the words Rittenhouse spoke in the car isn't going anywhere.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
We'll see. The drone footage and Binger sneaking in the words Rittenhouse spoke in the car isn't going anywhere.

TBF, they always claim vindication whenever one of their Rightist heroes is on trial, eg they did it with Derek Chauvin not all that long ago. They're bound to get one right at some point.

I don't know if Rittenhouse is a legitimate brainlet or if his defense coached him to act like one, but he's coming off like one when testifying, that will pull on the sympathy strings of the jurors.

This dude's going to be the next Zimmerman. Going to get off pretending to be a decent person, then once he's off he'll show his true colors, that he is indeed a worthless pile of shit.

Rittenhouse is a decent person.

Cool. Gonna be amusing when in a year he's caught posting white supremecy on snapchat or something.

Originally posted by BackFire
Cool. Gonna be amusing when in a year he's caught posting white supremecy on snapchat or something.

We all know what you consider to be White Supremacy.

Originally posted by BackFire
This dude's going to be the next Zimmerman. Going to get off pretending to be a decent person, then once he's off he'll show his true colors, that he is indeed a worthless pile of shit.

He's already done that, January of this year he was in a bar drinking with Proud Boys and posing for pictures.

Originally posted by Klaw
We all know what you consider to be White Supremacy.

White supremacy. Dude's gonna get caught wacking it to Hitler.

Which I don't appreciate. That's my unique gimmick.

Anyone that fights against Leftism is a "White Supremacist."

This was expected by anyone who actually watched the videos and wasn't blinded by political bias. Pretty much the only arguments I saw raised against him were "muh state borders" and "he was asking for it". Now where have I heard similar arguments before?

The kid is an idiot, no arguments from me there, but just because he is an idiot doesn't mean he deserves to be locked up for twenty years.

An idiot who murdered two people and wounded a third because he wanted to role-play as a vigilante with an assault rifle.

Yes. Yes. The very "he was asking for it" argument I mentioned earlier.

Never made that claim.

What I said: He put himself in this situation when he decided to play vigilante with an assault rifle and it ended up with two murders and an attempted murder. (Yes, he's not been found guilty of murder thus far)

He's also on audio claiming how he'd like to shoot at rioters/looters prior to the night of the killings. Clearly, no connection.

Originally posted by Robtard
An idiot who murdered two people and wounded a third because he wanted to role-play as a vigilante with an assault rifle.

Self defense (which that clearly was) is not murder no matter how many times you keep repeating that it is.

Now, that MF'er who shot and killed the unarmed Ashley Babbit? Yeah, he's a murdering bastard who deserves to burn in Hell forever.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Self defense (which that clearly was) is not murder no matter how many times you keep repeating that it is.

Now, that MF'er who shot and killed the unarmed Ashley Babbit? Yeah, he's a murdering bastard who deserves to burn in Hell forever.

I don't believe it was self defense, Rittenhouse was playing vigilante.

Ashley Babbitt was a domestic terrorist and part of a hostile mob who broke through a reinforced glass door while ignoring the demands of the police officer to stop. That was self defense.

Seems Rittenhouse broke down crying today while on the stand, it's a smart tactic, he's got a baby face, he's White and that pulls at the jurors emotions. "Ah, he's just a kid!"

https://i.imgur.com/C3Zh7BI.png

The defense is requesting a mistrial.

"He's White."



Racists are terrible at hiding their Racism.

Originally posted by Klaw
"He's White."



Racists are terrible at hiding their Racism.


Which is why they try so desperately to deflect away from it by projecting it onto others.

Originally posted by Klaw
"He's White."



Racists are terrible at hiding their Racism.


If you want to ignore the US' long history of crime and punishment in regards to skin color and racial background...

Gifs of him crying are going to make so many memes.

https://i.imgur.com/aUr2Kgq.jpg

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Which is why they try so desperately to deflect away from it by projecting it onto others.

They think crying "Racism" all the time = automatic win.

Originally posted by Robtard
Seems Rittenhouse broke down crying today while on the stand, it's a smart tactic, he's got a baby face, he's White and that pulls at the jurors emotions. "Ah, he's just a kid!"

https://i.imgur.com/C3Zh7BI.png

The defense is requesting a mistrial.
Looks like a truly exceptional individual.

He's just a kid, ffs... unlike the bastard who murdered Ashley Babbit.

Yup.

Originally posted by Robtard
https://i.imgur.com/aUr2Kgq.jpg


Channelling larper K laughcrycrylaugh

Gonna be sweet watching all the leftists lose their shit and throw little crybaby hissy fits after Rittenhouse is rightly found not guilty of murder.

You can see how distraught he is over having to "defend" himself from violent attackers.

https://i.imgur.com/b3YOZOU.png

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
He's just a kid, ffs... unlike the bastard who murdered Ashley Babbit.

Would it have been too much to at least ask for a few tears? Tears usually poor down unrestrained when someone is so emotional they start sobbing and sputtering and shaking uncontrollably.


G54ylg--I9E

The Media, and many on here, painted Rittenhouse as a gun loving, White Supremacist.

Now with the trial underway, we're learning that isn't the case at all.

Knew before trial even started that it wasn't the case.

"He was just there to specifically shoot da black people yo!"-- dumbass leftists

Much prefer a 'not guilty' verdict over a mistrial. If there's a mistrial they could just try him again.

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't believe it was self defense, Rittenhouse was playing vigilante.

Ashley Babbitt was a domestic terrorist and part of a hostile mob who broke through a reinforced glass door while ignoring the demands of the police officer to stop. That was self defense.

Rittenhouse might have put himself into a situation where risk was elevated, but that doesn't mean he did not, when in that situation, encounter a genuine risk to himself to which a legitimate response was the use of deadly force.

As far as I can tell- and reporting quality is very poor- it is not at all clear what precisely happened and where one can ascribe legal culpability. One might be inclined to say that this chap went into a battlezone looking for trouble and he got what he was looking for- so he should pay the consequences for the negative situation which ensued. However, I suspect there would be some problems applying that reasoning universally.

I would say that even if it were true that he went there to shoot people it is not necessarily the case that when he did in fact shoot someone that was a manifestation of the prior 'intention'. That might sound like quibbling but its highly significant. A man might go to a house intending to kill someone and when they get there find the person actually was planning to kill them and they attack, unprovoked, first. If the man defends himself with lethal force he hasn't committed murder, and we can never know that he would not have renieged on his intention when he got in front of the person...

Regarding Babbitt, personally I don't think the term 'domestic terrorist' is particularly aposite, though that is more to do with the term 'terrorist' itself. Certainly she was a criminal and her behaviour amounted to insurrection/treason. It is probably a good thing that more people were not shot to death in that incident, a testimony to the maturity of the police in that incident perhaps, though I don't think it would have been wrong if they had decided to open fire the moment people started to storm into/smash the windows/access points of the building. I see it in terms of 'lese majesty'.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Rittenhouse might have put himself into a situation where risk was elevated, but that doesn't mean he did not, when in that situation, encounter a genuine risk to himself to which a legitimate response was the use of deadly force.

As far as I can tell- and reporting quality is very poor- it is not at all clear what precisely happened and where one can ascribe legal culpability. One might be inclined to say that this chap went into a battlezone looking for trouble and he got what he was looking for- so he should pay the consequences for the negative situation which ensued. However, I suspect there would be some problems applying that reasoning universally.

I would say that even if it were true that he went there to shoot people it is not necessarily the case that when he did in fact shoot someone that was a manifestation of the prior 'intention'. That might sound like quibbling but its highly significant. A man might go to a house intending to kill someone and when they get there find the person actually was planning to kill them and they attack, unprovoked, first. If the man defends himself with lethal force he hasn't committed murder, and we can never know that he would not have renieged on his intention when he got in front of the person...

Regarding Babbitt, personally I don't think the term 'domestic terrorist' is particularly aposite, though that is more to do with the term 'terrorist' itself. Certainly she was a criminal and her behaviour amounted to insurrection/treason. It is probably a good thing that more people were not shot to death in that incident, a testimony to the maturity of the police in that incident perhaps, though I don't think it would have been wrong if they had decided to open fire the moment people started to storm into/smash the windows/access points of the building. I see it in terms of 'lese majesty'.

There's where we have different degrees of murder/manslaughter.

If Rittenhouse is found guilty over one or more of the deaths he caused, it will likely be manslaughter and not murder, I'd guess involuntary manslaughter, but it could be voluntary.

As for him shooting someone with deadly force but not killing them, that's another set of crimes.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Much prefer a 'not guilty' verdict over a mistrial. If there's a mistrial they could just try him again. with a judge who allows all the evidence and doesn't have Trumps entry music as his ringtone eh, Methneo

So the narrative has already shifted to blaming the judge. lmao

Anyway, if it's a mistrial it will likely be with prejudice meaning they can't try Kyle again. Anyway, I half way expect that the prosecution intends for that to happen just so they can twist the narrative in such a way to blame the judge rather than their own incompetence as well as the fact that they had almost no case in the first place. The media certainly will run with it.

That's disingenuous. People have been talking about the judge's very selective dismissal of the evidence that doesn't favor Rittenhouse from the start, before the trial started.

And of course the defense is asking for a 'mistrial with prejudice', that favors their client. You'd think a case with a claimed "almost no case" wouldn't need that.

And those people are talking form ignorance. I'm certainly going to put far more faith in a judge than some internet pundits.

Originally posted by ares834
And those people are talking form ignorance. I'm certainly going to put far more faith in a judge than some internet pundits.

Or some Leftist on an obscure Internet forum.

Of course you are, you believe Rittenhouse is innocent of all crimes.

Based on all evidence presented, yes. I think almost anyone could come to that conclusion. The only real issue was whether there were some unknown intricacies to the law and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Originally posted by Robtard
And of course the defense is asking for a 'mistrial with prejudice', that favors their client. You'd think a case with a claimed "almost no case" wouldn't need that.

Why wouldn't they? It's a guaranteed win if they get it rather than relying on the jury.

I'm agreeing it's legally a smart move. But also shows a lack of faith in their own defense case.

Not really. Even if they thought their case was open and shut, it would be better to go for the dismissal with prejudice. I hope they don't get it. But we'll see.

But it does.

Rittenhouse being found not guilty would be the most ideal outcome for the defense and Rittenhouse.

Originally posted by Robtard
That's disingenuous. People have been talking about the judge's very selective dismissal of the evidence that doesn't favor Rittenhouse from the start, before the trial started.

And of course the defense is asking for a 'mistrial with prejudice', that favors their client. You'd think a case with a claimed "almost no case" wouldn't need that.

I disagree. Yes, Kyle being found not guilty would be better but, if I were him, I go with the sure thing every time. Even if they were 99% certain they would win, I'd still try for the mistrial.

I still would like to know why an audio recording of Rittenhouse professing a desire to shoot people with his AR rifle days before he shot and killed people with his AR rifle was not allowed.

Audio recordings of the accused have been used against the accused plenty of times.

Originally posted by ares834
I disagree. Yes, Kyle being found not guilty would be better but, if I were him, I go with the sure thing every time. Even if they were 99% certain they would win, I'd still try for the mistrial.

Fair enough. As I said, legally it's the smart move, even if dirty. Just looks bad, especially in a case of this notoriety.

Originally posted by ares834
Based on all evidence presented, yes. I think almost anyone could come to that conclusion. . And therein lies the problem of the judge.

Pot

Kettle

e_nlg037mks

Saucepan

Bucket

Vagina

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
And therein lies the problem of the judge.

I'm assuming you are talking about the video the judge deemed inadmissible. That video is propensity evidence and, from what I understand, it is generally not admissible in court.

The people who believe Rittenhouse to be innocent should be the ones asking why the audio evidence and such was dismissed.

Probably because it has nothing to do with the case?

Rittenhouse is a SAINT

Gene Hackman / Todd Facesick

ClQRWgzXJLo

wEH5J1fORTE

There is no problem with the judge, wittle pooty. We could use more judges like him, crybaby.

QtFFD-Hrkgw

Originally posted by Klaw
Probably because it has nothing to do with the case?

Someone expressing a desire to commit a crime days before they're accused of committing that very same crime they spoke about is irrelevant now?

Good thing robbie or pooty isn't judge in this case. Rittenhouse would never get a fair trial then.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
There is no problem with the judge, wittle pooty. We could use more judges like him, crybaby. mmmMethneo go reeeee! durmask

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Good thing robbie or pooty isn't judge in this case. Rittenhouse would never get a fair trial then.

If KMC had their way, White people would all be guilty of "White Supremacy."

Originally posted by Klaw
If KMC had their way, White people would all be guilty of "White Supremacy." Yup.

And on your discord, anti-abortion virgins are not "anti-woman"

What does "anti-Woman" mean?

Originally posted by Klaw
If KMC had their way, White people would all be guilty of "White Supremacy."

No. Only the actual white supremacists would.

==

Also, the trial is a ****ing joke. I haven't even seen the shooting video so I don't know how innocent or guilty the guy is, but that is some inept bullshit in that courtroom.

Originally posted by -Pr-
No. Only the actual white supremacists would.

Originally posted by Klaw


Glad you agree

Seems the judge scolded the prosecution in front of the jurors. Oh my.

It's fine to do if the prosecution did something wrong, but the judge should call for a short recess and do that berating in their private chambers, as to not poison-the-well for the jurors.

Hmmm....

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't know how innocent or guilty the guy is, HCwb-bK2848

The prosecution went after Rittenhouse for playing COD.

https://v.redd.it/qj3jisr12yy71

Originally posted by Robtard
Seems the judge scolded the prosecution in front of the jurors. Oh my.

It's fine to do if the prosecution did something wrong, but the judge should call for a short recess and do that berating in their private chambers, as to not poison-the-well for the jurors.

Hmmm....

When? He asked the jury to leave the courtroom before admonishing the prosecutor. He did this twice.

This whole trial is a joke.

Originally posted by ares834
When? He asked the jury to leave the courtroom before admonishing the prosecutor. He did this twice. Seems like he started the scolding before breaking the court one of the times? If he kept his demeanor and only scolded after they had be sequestered, cool. If not, the prosecution should call for a mistrial and reset.

Looks like Bob and weave coach Ian I mean Max holloway

Back then, when this hocus pocus trial got it's hatorade to get all bloated like this, I didn't even know how to fight compared to me now, the new mui.

Now with El Toni, if he really has this ultra ego form, were ready

https://genesiustimes.com/breaking-kyle-rittenhouse-found-guilty-of-murdering-prosecutors-career/

Lol.

The prosecutor bringing up Rittenhouse playing CoD was just retarded. Is this guy legit stupid or purposely trying to shit on his own case.

Simple.

The prosecution has no case.

Originally posted by Robtard
The prosecutor bringing up Rittenhouse playing CoD was just retarded. Is this guy legit stupid or purposely trying to shit on his own case.

Making himself look like an out of touch Boomer with that one.

Tbh, I'm shocked anyone under the age of 70 would go there in this day and age.

Originally posted by Robtard
purposely trying to shit on his own case.

this.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
this. is not au current

New HD video footage of Rittenhouse shooting:

https://youtu.be/16Ti_SoAZwI

https://i.imgur.com/Z5Tlloc.jpg

Cry more, boy. He will be acquitted. Don't cry too hard when it happens lol.

You better make sure you have the suicide line on speed dial before it happens.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Cry more, boy. He will be acquitted. Don't cry too hard when it happens lol.

You better make sure you have the suicide line on speed dial before it happens. mmmMethneodurmask

Crybaby liberals demand new judge after his phone rings with patriotic ringtone.

https://teamtuckercarlson.com/news/liberals-demand-new-judge-in-rittenhouse-case-after-his-phone-rings-during-trial-with-patriotic-ringtone/


lol what a bunch of whiney snowflakes.

"Waah, waah, waah, that is literally the MAGA song! Waah, waah, waah, we want a new judge waah, waah, waah, waah!!"-- snowflake lefties

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
"Waah, waah, waah, that is literally the MAGA song, waah, waah, waah, we want a new judge waah, waah, waah, waah!!"-- snowflake lefties mmm Methneo durmask

MMZj68qujuo

https://i.imgur.com/paJWHBB.jpg

Originally posted by cdtm
Making himself look like an out of touch Boomer with that one.

Tbh, I'm shocked anyone under the age of 70 would go there in this day and age. He plays CoD games?! Well shit, guess that proves he's guilty then!

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
https://i.imgur.com/Z5Tlloc.jpg Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
https://i.imgur.com/paJWHBB.jpg @Hogfvcker County.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
He plays CoD games?! Well shit, guess that proves he's guilty then!


It gets worse.



Kyle exercised his right to remain silent!


How on earth did this guy become a prosecutor?

Was probably hired by Soros lol.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
New HD video footage of Rittenhouse shooting:

https://youtu.be/16Ti_SoAZwI

That's HD?

I don't even like CoD games... they're boring to me but it's retarded to use the fact he plays them as some kind of evidence against him. Same thing goes for him exercising his right to be silent.

Originally posted by Klaw
That's HD? According to the person who labelled the video it is. I was just repeating their title.

https://i.imgur.com/MCI8jwD.jpg

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
I don't even like CoD games... they're boring to me but it's retarded to use the fact he plays them as some kind of evidence against him. Same thing goes for him exercising his right to be silent.
The judge was right to admonish the prosecution for this Mickey Mouse shit.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
this Mickey Mouse shit.
https://i.imgur.com/GVY1qjb.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IAj7UxMqiU

-FLbsu5-_II

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
https://i.imgur.com/GVY1qjb.jpg


You're just a duck lover:


0aqLwHP4y6Q

White Leftists when they're Racist against their own race.

He went to Jared


Girl, you couldn't bite my wire

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
https://i.imgur.com/MCI8jwD.jpg what does a pic of a random pudgy lesbian with a gun have 2 do with the Kyle Rittenhouse case?

Hope the judge throws out with prejudice.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
https://i.imgur.com/Z5Tlloc.jpg




For some odd reason, the judge threw the bar pics evidence out too...

Originally posted by Robtard



For some odd reason, the judge threw the bar pics evidence out too...


They're pics.


Meme's aside, not much you can make from an image.

I'm sure the statue is coming next.

Originally posted by cdtm
They're pics.


Meme's aside, not much you can make from an image.

Images and video of Rittenhouse's victims were allowed to be shown by the defense as a means to show the character of Rittenhouse's victims. Why not the same for Rittenhouse and his character?


edit: Wait, the prosecution is not allowed to refer to Rittenhouse's victims as "victims", but the defense can call them "looters", even though we don't know if they were actually looting.

Originally posted by Robtard
Images and video of Rittenhouse's victims were allowed to be shown by the defense as a means to show the character of Rittenhouse's victims. Why not the same for Rittenhouse and his character?


edit: Wait, the prosecution is not allowed to refer to Rittenhouse's victims as "victims", but the defense can call them "looters", even though we don't know if they were actually looting.


I missed that part, what did the pics show?


From the ones you posted here, without the captions it can be literally anything.

Everyone can sht in a man's soup, does that add to the flavour?

If Rittenhouse goes free, he will murder again. Mark my words.

Originally posted by ShrtArmIn
Everyone can sht in a man's soup, does that add to the flavour?
Yes?

Originally posted by Robtard
If Rittenhouse goes free, he will murder again. Mark my words.


You really believe it was murder?


Even CBS writers of color argue he had no business even being there, but that be isn't really a racist or even murderer. The argument seems to be discouraging vigilantism.


You must have seen the videos by now, he was clearly being confronted.

gBKu6u59o5o

Fuk daht

I want somebody who can compare and contrast Karate Kid III to Twin Peaks Season 2.

Otherwise I'm going to call mock-trial.

Also, blue rose

Originally posted by cdtm
You really believe it was murder?


Even CBS writers of color argue he had no business even being there, but that be isn't really a racist or even murderer. The argument seems to be discouraging vigilantism.


You must have seen the videos by now, he was clearly being confronted.

Yup, or at least manslaughter

"Even writers of color" ??? Seems like your mask is slipping again

Going out with an assault rifle to be a vigilante is being confrontational. I have no real problem portraying his victims as confrontational as well, but acting like Rittenhouse was just some innocent kid is disingenuous

Why am I still seeing this

7JBykSS3S4k

Originally posted by Robtard
Yup, or at least manslaughter

"Even writers of color" ??? Seems like your mask is slipping again

Going out with an assault rifle to be a vigilante is being confrontational. I have no real problem portraying his victims as confrontational as well, but acting like Rittenhouse was just some innocent kid is disingenuous it read "psuedo-virgin"


He certainly ain't getting no Trinity or uma therman and if he does get sum it's gonna be a big fat retarded strung gahl from one of daddies milk farms

At this point anyone who is still arguing that Rittenhouse is guilty of murder must be trolling.... either that or they haven't bothered to watch the trial or videos.

500 National Guard troops will be on standby outside Kenosha ready to be sent in at a moment's notice in case of left-wing crybaby riots from spoiled brats who throw a fit when they don't get their way.

Originally posted by cdtm
They're pics.


Meme's aside, not much you can make from an image. dur

Originally posted by Robtard
Yup, or at least manslaughter

"Even writers of color" ??? Seems like your mask is slipping again

Going out with an assault rifle to be a vigilante is being confrontational. I have no real problem portraying his victims as confrontational as well, but acting like Rittenhouse was just some innocent kid is disingenuous


I'm saying activist writers aren't using the word "murder", even if they call him wrong.


You say he was confrontational, yet how did his gun force the confrontation? If he never had the gun, he still would have been chased down, hit on the head with a skateboard, and probably beaten within an inch of his life or worse (You can kill someone with a skateboard)

Gaslighting retards bark that guns are not provocative, but skateboards are dangerous weapons. **** off.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Gaslighting retards bark that guns are not provocative, but skateboards are dangerous weapons. **** off.


That is not what I said.


I said the gun did not provoke the attack. They had no idea he was armed, and would have assaulted him had he not carried a gun.

Edit wrong thread

A local judge once said, " You can't start the fight then claim self defense."

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Gaslighting retards bark that guns are not provocative, but skateboards are dangerous weapons. **** off. Perfect! Better than Bingo!

Maybe young boys wouldn't be so hyped and Jeffrey Dahmer if gun control and ATF white trash male rape culture didn't hog up all the Uma Thurmans, encourage attraction to big fat retarded black gals and hype up being under the meat grinder

YAWN.... H e didn't start shit. He's innocent. I know retard lefies love to gaslight but give it up.

If there's one thing I've learned, it's might makes right, Durr Justice! And good always defeats evil!

Just learned that the judge was appointed by democrats lol. But remember, he's "biased" according to leftists.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Just learned that the judge was appointed by democrats lol. But remember, he's "biased" according to leftists.


This is a show trial, they intend to stick something on him no matter what. The judge showed his hand by allowing lesser charges.


This sham is a disgrace, everyone involved should be disbarred and the judge debenched!

Originally posted by cdtm
This is a show trial, they intend to stick something on him no matter what. The judge showed his hand by allowing lesser charges.


This sham is a disgrace, everyone involved should be disbarred and the judge debenched! They won't get the murder conviction though. That's the big one.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
They won't get the murder conviction though. That's the big one.

Because the prosecution was so incompetent. I think the judge was pissed at the prosecution for destroying their own case and not getting the conviction he wants.

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/wqow.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/0/8b/08bcdc36-2f9f-52cf-bd76-ef9b045e9f41/61410aca887de.image.jpg

"ThEy HaD nO iDeA hE wAs ArMeD!" **** you, stupid.

I was only half joking about a show trial, but this scares me:


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/6393112001



Why would a judge blatantly virtue signal to a side?


Two reasons I can think of:


1. He is unconsciously biased to the right and not fit to judge this case.

2. He is covering for the fact he is biased for the left. Still unfit to judge.