936
Kyle Rittenhouse storms off stage after being confronted by students
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
936 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19136 readers
3238 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
He claims he was there to protect businesses and help injured people. To claim he went there to kill people is literally just fabricated.
No one asked him to defend their business.
Which has literally absolutely nothing to do with point.
So you're cool with armed vigilantes wandering around and deciding when someone needs to be shot?
No
Why wasn't he up on top of those businesses like his friends? Why was he roaming the streets looking for smoke?
Whether I can answer these questions has no bearing on if your claim that he was there to kill people is true, so I'm not sure why you're asking them.
What a fucking weird hill to die on that You've chosen.
Maybe your little piss baby rittenhouse can help you with that 😆😆
I think he's a huge idiot. If you think he's my boy, it's because you aren't very bright and can't think beyond black and white.
Me, the "not very bright one" is calling you out for being a blind fool.
How does it feel to give up on reality?
The only one actually making an argument here is me. The other just made up some bs claim that I know is wrong because it's about me. It's clear who is comfortable in reality.
READ UP:
https://apnews.com/article/trials-f19acb6b4f1e4128610d2078105db1ce
Interesting. Any more context of this video? Although let's me clear, this is him saying he wanted to shoot someone for an unknown reason. Not him saying he wanted to go to Kenosha to shoot people.
The video wasn't allowed because rittenhouse shot no looter, legal eagle explains it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxoYNpBMaCg
I'll watch the video when I get a chance, can't right now at work.
But I did want to say I appreciate you actually providing stuff respectfully instead of just attacking and misrepresenting my position.
Yeah it is crazy how misinformation spreads, if you actually go back on reddit and check /r/news the day the ruling happened everybody pretty much knew that was going to be the result because of how much of a shitshow the trial was and that the prosecution had nothing in their case.
But yeah the fact that people still spread blatant lies like "he drove across state lines with the rifle" is very chilling.
It's the same thing with the Zimmerman/Martin. The facts don't matter, just the narrative the originally caught on. Any deviation from this is met with derision. And I'm not saying one side only, I've been attacked by both the people who think Rittenhouse is completely innocent saint that is the victim of biased system, and those who think he is a cold blooded murderer that went there that day with the intent of murdering people. No room for nuance.
The point is that he WANTED to kill people that weren’t a threat. Looting is not a punishment by vigilante murderer offense.
Nobody he killed was doing any looting. So whats the point? He deserves jail sentence for something he didnt do?
Had he opened fire on people that were looting, the trial would have been a totally different thing, they simply attacked him for holding a weapon which is insanely stupid and you are mad that he defended himself lmao.
You’re defending a murderer. Stop it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxoYNpBMaCg
And this is something every lawyer will tell you is reasonable btw.