Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty

Started by roughrider43 pages

Some posters are overlooking this, yes.

Originally posted by roughrider
Some posters are overlooking this, yes.

It's triggered some truly strange reactions. The rhetoric that the trial was going to collapse and that he was going to be fully acquitted on the basis of the guy who got shot in the arm's testimony when his testimony related to 1 of 6 charges...bizarre. This was not only from members on here but from some supposedly knowledgeable, respected commentators too.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
It's triggered some truly strange reactions. The rhetoric that the trial was going to collapse and that he was going to be fully acquitted on the basis of the guy who got shot in the arm's testimony when his testimony related to 1 of 6 charges...bizarre. This was not only from members on here but from some supposedly knowledgeable, respected commentators too.
yup
Originally posted by roughrider
Some posters are overlooking this, yes.
yup

Yeah, she is such a racist b*tch I agree.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Yeah, she is such a racist b*tch I agree.
These foul, unsorted rants you guys post... weird as ****.

Unsourced

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Yeah, she is such a racist b*tch I agree.

She really is pathetic.

Yeah, and so hateful and mean.... not to mention not very bright. And she is one of those "enlightened" leftists with a college degree apparently... looks like her degree was in "How to be a racist 101."

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
These foul, unsorted rants you guys post... weird as ****.

And accusing a 17 year old kid of "White crocodile tears" isn't racism, or hate?

He's a kid who got scared. Even calling him an "alt-right icon" is a smear, he's just a kid who was trying to do what he thought was right.

He's a gun owner and a Trump supporter and White; so he's obviously a White Supremacist Nazi.

2009: When I didn't support the President; they called me Racist.

2017: When I did support the President; they called me Racist.

More from article:

Originally posted by cdtm
And accusing a 17 year old kid of "White crocodile tears" isn't racism, or hate?

He's a kid who got scared. Even calling him an "alt-right icon" is a smear, he's just a kid who was trying to do what he thought was right.

The "right thing" according to leftists is letting a bunch of hoodlums burn shit down and tear shit up and attack people who disagree with their leftist ideology. Oh, and of course bailing criminals out of jail who engage in these things..

Oh, and let's not forget killing defenseless, innocent unborn babies.

Those are all "the right things" in leftists' minds.

Here's more:

Originally posted by cdtm
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)

Nah, your mask slipped again.

That's you talking out of your ass, you have no idea if an unarmed Rittenhouse would or would not have been confronted by any of his victims. Pure speculation. What we do know, assault rifles are 100% confrontational, skateboards are not.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Unsourced

Since when have they ever relied on facts to support their claims.

Originally posted by Robtard
Nah, your mask slipped again.

That's you talking out of your ass, you have no idea if an unarmed Rittenhouse would or would not have been confronted by any of his victims. Pure speculation. What we do know, assault rifles are 100% confrontational, skateboards are not.

No, this is me talking based on video. First they chased him down, then he shot them.

The gun is irrelevant to the fact they hunted him down as he was fleeing.

If this was a home invasion and the armed home owner chased and shot a fleeing invader, would you be siding with the home owner?

Yet Rittenhouse is the one chased. How is this any different?

Pure speculation still. You don't know what any of Rittenhouse's victims would have done if he was unarmed.

Originally posted by Robtard
Pure speculation still. You don't know what any of Rittenhouse's victims would have done if he was unarmed.

The fact they chased him is not speculation.

Again, would you support a home owner chasing after the person who broke into their home as they were fleeing?

Originally posted by cdtm
No, this is me talking based on video. First they chased him down, then he shot them.

The gun is irrelevant to the fact they hunted him down as he was fleeing.

If this was a home invasion and the armed home owner chased and shot a fleeing invader, would you be siding with the home owner?

Yet Rittenhouse is the one chased. How is this any different?

It's "different" because of "muh fee fees!"