Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 11, 2021

Rittenhouse Trial Exposes The Democrats' Reliance On False Narratives

In August 2020 I wrote about the riots in several U.S. cities.

'Mostly Peaceful' Rioting And Looting Is Helping Trump's Campaign

The piece attracted 610 comments which made it the longest Moon of Alabama thread ever.

The immediate starting point of my thoughts had been the riots and shooting in Kenosha:

Last Sunday police in Kenosha, Wisconsin proved to be too incompetent to arrest a man they had already had under control. They shot him 7 times into the back when he was trying to get into his car. Nights of rioting followed. Buildings were burned down and businesses were looted.

Yesterday a white teen with a semi-automatic weapon had the stupid idea to join others in 'protecting the businesses' in Kenosha from further looting. He ended up killing two people and wounding more after he was attacked by some of the rioters. The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.

Many of the regular commentators disagreed with my conclusion.

The white teen, Kyle Rittenhouse, is now standing trial. Of note is that the casualties in this case were all white and had criminal records, something that the media at the time of the incident intentionally neglected to say.

Yesterday Rittenhouse testified and was cross examined by the prosecutor Thomas Binger. I watched a stream of the trial and was not impressed:

Moon of Alabama @MoonofA - 20:12 UTC · Nov 10, 2021

Watching the Rittenhouse trial.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=si9YXq0A1Vk
That prosecutor is ridiculous.

The judge seemed to have the same impression:

The Kenosha County, Wis., judge presiding over Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial clashed with the lead prosecutor several times during the teenager’s cross-examination on Wednesday, while defense attorneys requested a mistrial alleging prosecutorial misconduct.

The defense objected to Binger’s questions about Rittenhouse’s decision to remain silent about the shootings until taking the witness stand Wednesday, arguing that this line of inquiry infringed on Rittenhouse’s Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

While Binger said he was making the case that Rittenhouse had tailored his testimony based on what other witnesses had said before him, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder appeared to agree with the defense, ordering the jury out of the room before rebuking the prosecutor.

“The problem is this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant’s silence,” Schroeder yelled. “You're right on the borderline, and you may be over it. But it better stop.”

Later on in the cross-examination, Schroeder admonished Binger for attempting to question Rittenhouse about evidence that the judge had previously deemed inadmissible.

It was not only that misbehavior by the extremely arrogant prosecutor which caused me to call him ridiculous. It was the way in which he questioned minor decisions Rittenhouse had taken during the incident implying that they showed this or that malicious intention even when that was clearly not the case. A prosecutor should not behave like a child playing gotcha.

I may well be, as the defense implied, that Binger tried to provoke a mistrial. His chances to win the case are by now practically zero.

The videos prove that Rittenhouse was under attack when he fired his gun. The man who had been wounded in the incident, and who was the prosecution's main witness, admitted under cross examination that he had pointed his handgun at Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse aimed and fired at him.

A clear act of self defense:

In an account largely corroborated by video and the prosecution’s own witnesses, Rittenhouse said that the first man cornered him and put his hand on the barrel of Rittenhouse's rifle, the second man hit him with a skateboard, and the third man came at him with a gun of his own.
...
Rittenhouse said he “didn't want to have to shoot” Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man to fall that night, but he said Rosenbaum was chasing him and had threatened to kill him earlier.

“If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it," he said, "and probably killed more people.”

But Rittenhouse also acknowledged that the strap holding his gun was in place and that he had both hands on the weapon. And Binger suggested that Rosenbaum might have been trying to bat the rifle away.
...
Rittenhouse testified that he then shot and killed protester Anthony Huber after Huber struck him in the neck with his skateboard and grabbed his gun. Then he wounded Gaige Grosskreutz, saying the protester had lunged at him “with his pistol pointed directly at my head.”

The trial thus confirmed my August 2020 analysis:

The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.

Some prominent voices are agreeing with me:

Tulsi Gabbard @TulsiGabbard - 0:01 UTC · Nov 11, 2021

The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people.

---
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald - 19:29 UTC · Nov 10, 2021

I never commented on the Rittenhouse case until I started watching large chunks of the trial, and all I can say is that anyone who has done the same and denies that there's a huge gap between the media narrative about this and what actually happened is not telling the truth.

Greenwald also points to this video report by rising which includes video clips from the trial, including the prosecutor witness admitting that he pointed his gun first.

Rittenhouse is not on trial for bad judgment or offensive behavior. He is on trial under murder charges and will likely be acquitted of them. That will of course cause outrage by the usual suspects.

Michael Tracey @mtracey - 11:38 UTC · Nov 11, 2021

Even if the prosecution fails to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crimes alleged? Telling statement from the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus

Hakeem Jeffries @hakeemjeffries - 21:30 UTC · Nov 10, 2021
Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key.

Jeffries' hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. See this June 2020 tweet by him.

Hakeem Jeffries @hakeemjeffries - 16:17 UTC · Jun 29, 2020
End. Mass. Incarceration.
Defund The Prison Industrial Complex.

The riots in Kenosha were part of the Democrats strategy of tension campaign aimed at increasing the turnout of 'progressive' democrat voters. 'Black life matters', 'abolish the police' and the riots and looting were all part of it. It was what I had earlier sarcastically called the Civil War of 2020. 

Begun The Civil Wars Of 2020 Have

The campaign had the obvious but unintended effect of also increasing the turnout of republican voters for Donald Trump's law and order policies. The campaign was not successful. In the end Joe Biden barely won by some 60,000 votes in three swing states.

With Russiagate exposed as fraud, Rittenhouse getting acquitted and with many of the Democrats campaign promises unfulfilled a majority of midterm voters may well conclude that the Democrats are crooks who do not deserve their vote.

Posted by b on November 11, 2021 at 17:20 UTC | Permalink

Comments
next page »

So killing people is OK as long as they criminal records. That's so pathetic B

"The white teen, Kyle Rittenhouse, is now standing trial. Of note is that the casualties in this case were all white and had criminal records, something that the media at the time of the incident intentionally neglected to say."

Posted by: Gazza | Nov 11 2021 17:34 utc | 1

The demorats deserve extensive and inclusive enhanced corporal punishment.

Posted by: par4 | Nov 11 2021 17:38 utc | 2

thanks b... i think i am intentionally not following this on some level.. it is more american political soap opera - aka - all star mud wrestling ) with some individuals used to further an agenda.... it seems it doesn't matter who the characters are - because it is the main them of soap opera or all star mud wrestling that is the main priority.. in this regard the msm, and many media pundits continue on with it all....

for me it is a reflection of a society that has gone off the rails.. the proliferation and ready availability of guns is one more of the many aspects of this story on display here for me as well.. when a society glorifies anything - they have to watch out for it not to bite them in the ass.. i think that is happening here...

@ 1 gazza... b didn't make that conclusion.. you did... might want to reflect on that for a minute and try to understand what b is communicating...

Posted by: james | Nov 11 2021 17:46 utc | 3

b quote "
.....with many of the Democrats campaign promises unfulfilled a majority of midterm voters may well conclude that the Democrats are crooks who not deserve their vote." i very much doubt that... i can't imagine a democrat or republican thinking their politicians are anything but crooks! nothing has changed here in any of this!! go team blue or red!!! lets stick with the all star mud wrestling theme forever!!

Posted by: james | Nov 11 2021 17:50 utc | 4

Yes, they are going to wind up letting him walk away. This "we make our own reality" stuff is just not working like it used to.

In other news I hear Manchin is thinking about nixing Biden's BBBW bill because of inflation ...

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 11 2021 17:50 utc | 5

Posted by: james | Nov 11 2021 17:50 utc | 4

Mud wrestling is a great analogy. It is real people and real events, real mud and everything, and yet it is all fake, a contrivance. Show business. The entire justice system here is like that, a grift pretending to be a public service.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 11 2021 17:56 utc | 6

Jeffries is emblematic of the "facts and the law don't matter" modern "left" politician: is the accused on "my side" or is he an enemy? If the former, he is by definition innocent; if an enemy, by definition guilty, burn the facts. This is utterly corrosive to rule of law, the basis of any decent civilization.

Posted by: Caliman | Nov 11 2021 18:02 utc | 7

@Gazza 1

You seem to ignore the fact that he was being violently attacked BEFORE he pulled the trigger.

Posted by: Fractional Ownership | Nov 11 2021 18:02 utc | 8

I find it interesting that the judge ruled, before the trial started, that no one will be allowed to refer to the shooting victims as "victims," though they may be referred to as "terrorists" or "looters."

Rittenhouse, meanwhile, cannot be mentioned in connection with the "Proud Boys" that he associates with.

It's no wonder that the prosecutor has to go to such lengths to make his case, with such a prejudiced person on the bench.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Nov 11 2021 18:06 utc | 9

".......the Democrats are crooks who not deserve their vote."

The way things are going (mandates, judgements, etc, etc), the Democrats may just decide that the Judicial Branch is hampering progress and is part of the problem of "systemic racism" and needs to be cancelled and done away with. This may also be deemed to be true about voting.

Another interesting finding in the court case can be found here about the use of AI in evidence: https://www.rt.com/usa/540005-rittenhouse-judge-zoomed-video-trial/

The AI menace of videos on IPADS........zooming in on the video gets you created content.

We are inching closer to the overlords "Meta-verse" and the Proteus Effect.

Posted by: James Cook | Nov 11 2021 18:13 utc | 10

It's hard to extrapolate the faith of whole nations based on one single and small event. Unless it's in hindsight, but then it is more an illustrative case used by the historian (who must have read thousands of documents of the same era) than anything else.

The kid is clearly a guilty murderer. The video shows that the battle lines were already clearly drawn and he was safe on his side of the battlefield. He then made an incursion into enemy territory on his own initiative (and, apparently, under instructions of two adults), with the clear intent either to play Saving Private Ryan (which, in a non-war scenario, is equal to intent of murder, as those kind of missions are sure to involve killing) or with the simple intent to freely kill under a made-up alibi. The fact that one of the survivors pointed a gun to him is irrelevant, as he killed other people. He behaved like if he was in a war, when it was not; he played make-believe.

In the greater scheme of things, it will be up to the judge to decide which aspect of the American civilization he will protect. In my opinion, it is highly unlikely this trial will decide the fate of the American Empire for the simple fact the stakes are too high. There is no place for Lucretias in the 21st Century.

Posted by: vk | Nov 11 2021 18:19 utc | 11

I thought the prosecutor was trying to provoke a mistrial.

Posted by: spudski | Nov 11 2021 18:24 utc | 12


Both the Republican and the Democrat parties ought to be cancelled. That would go a long way to helping solve most of the US's problems.

Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Nov 11 2021 18:29 utc | 13

The liberal media as an extension of the Democrat controlled security state has been trying to brainwash the world into seeing anyone who is not onboard the Democrat bus as brownshirts. Ever since the Bush family lost control of the GOP to the Tea Party and Trump the security state has shifted to full support to the Democrats. That is why liberals so easily call everyone not onboard the Democrat bus as a Nazi, a White Supremacist, etc. They have a clear problem with someone like Tulsi Gabbard because she promotes progressive political policies but is clearly against the Democrats and their culture war. Because she is becoming a bigger problem for them recently expect to see them go after her more, but they will likely fail as so many will come to see her as what she is--a truly heroic figure. Tulsi Gabbard: The End Times

Posted by: El | Nov 11 2021 18:31 utc | 14

I expect this thread will degenerate rather quickly, but ...

No doubt this kid is a dumbass, a wanna be cop, and certainly not a hero.

At the end of the day the question is: Can you take the law into your own hands? Can you travel to a place far from your home, insert yourself into a dangerous situation, and then use deadly force to extricate yourself from that dangerous situation? I would say no.

There is a lot of nuance here, too much to get into without writing a essay length comment, but the kid is clearly, at the very least, guilty of manslaughter.

That said, do I think he deserves life in prison? No. Does he deserve to walk away scot free? No.

Either way half the country is going to be pissed off at the result.

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 18:33 utc | 15

David F - If the law, under threat by politicians and the MSM, is sitting on their hands and watching as cities burn, I do not fault vigilantes for attempting to provide some measure of deterrence to looters.

At any rate, as long as one is acting within the law himself, as in his gun is registered and he does not initiate violence, a person is entirely entitled to attempt to freely participate and act. And if he feels credibly endangered for his life, he can take action to protect himself. He is not guilty of anything under that circumstance, if it's true of course.

His actions may be unwise, for his own safety as well as others, and still not be illegal.

Posted by: Caliman | Nov 11 2021 18:43 utc | 16

The sheer number of fake progressives willfully misstating the facts, deliberately misconstruing the law, and venting nasty sentiments about Rittenhouse makes me think there is a substantial streak of sadism among that demographic, in seeking to ruin the life of an innocent young victim of three vicious attackers.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 11 2021 18:46 utc | 17

"manslaughter in self defense". Manslaughter is a criminal offense in the US. Involuntary usually meaning unintentional killing of somebody due to some negligent act. Voluntary meaning it occured as some sort of provocation of the deceased or somebody around the person who provoked the reaction... and the person didn't intend to kill or use deadly force.

Self defense is a justified killing to project yourself or others (the legal meaning varies from state to state).

In this case Kyle intentionally tried to kill or seriously wound his attackers to prevent them from attacking him. Once the attacks stopped Kyle ran away. This is clearly self defense. He purposefully pulled the trigger so I don't know how this could be argued as manslaughter.

Posted by: goldhoarder | Nov 11 2021 18:48 utc | 18

So it comes down to people who think destruction is justified in the name of protest and others who think property should be protected.

I'm actually surprised there wasn't more shooting that night.

Posted by: dh | Nov 11 2021 18:48 utc | 19

RE: Caliman | Nov 11 2021 18:43 utc | 16

". . . as in his gun is registered . . ."

Guns aren't registered in the U.S. unless they're fully automatic or of military-only calibers i.e. greater than .50 caliber.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Nov 11 2021 18:53 utc | 20

People who watch the proceedings uniformly agree that the shootings were in self-defense. Partisans who refuse to watch and simply scream like the Red Queen "OFf with his head" are illustrating Caliman's observation:
"Jeffries is emblematic of the "facts and the law don't matter" modern "left" politician: is the accused on "my side" or is he an enemy? If the former, he is by definition innocent; if an enemy, by definition guilty, burn the facts. This is utterly corrosive to rule of law, the basis of any decent civilization."

Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 11 2021 18:54 utc | 21

Agree, the Rittenhouse affair is mud wrestling. Thanks to b for having been on the right side of the issue and being vindicated.

IMO the more interesting trial is the one taking place in Charlottesville.
"Integrity First for America", the 501C3 seed-funded by ADL, stated on C Span that 1. they have assets deep within FBI; 2. their goal is to bankrupt the defendants so to silence them and "cause them to spend the rest of their lives" not being able to be employed, and having bank accounts and the like garnished. That's not what US legal system was supposed to be about.

The situation of the Jan6 people who are imprisoned is also of huge concern.

Posted by: ChasMark | Nov 11 2021 19:06 utc | 22

The jury will announce Kyle guilty. AntiFa has been outside the court house filming the jurors. They know that their lives are being threatened. Maybe hung jury, but no innocent verdict. However, the judge has the power to over rule the jury which could happen. Or judge let's guilty verdict stand with the results going to appeal. Judges let Bill Crosby go as his rights were violated. Maybe something here.

One thing to realize about the prosecutor is that he is mostly likely incompetent made worse by arrogance. Most criminal cases at local and federal level are plead bargained at rates at and above 90%. Prosecutors simply have no trial experience and are used to getting their way through bully tactics against defendants who cannot afford good lawyers. Bring in high powered experienced criminal lawyers and those prosecutors will show their incompetence or resort to blatantly illegal actions.

Posted by: Erelis | Nov 11 2021 19:12 utc | 23

Kyle was 17 yrs old, not legally old enough to own that weapon or possess it in public in WI. He knew this, which is why he had his friend buy it for him.

He is 17 yrs old, what the fuck is wrong with his parents? Why did his mother allow him to do this?

Kyle wants to be a cop, hence his attendance at some sort of police academy.

He wanted to play hero which is why he armed himself and drove 20 or 30 miles to insert himself into a situation that wasn't any of his business. Neither his life, nor his property was at risk.

Once he was attacked, it seems he had no option but to defend himself. But here's the rub, he put himself in that situation intentionally, and now he has to pay the price for his actions.

If he had not put himself in that situation, he would not have been forced to defend himself, and he would not be on trial right now.

He is not an innocent young man, he is not a hero, he had no right or obligation to get involved in this affair; and now that the situation has spun out of control, it is too late to say sorry, I didn't mean to do that.

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 19:12 utc | 24

Cameras in the courtroom. It is a show trial.

Rittenhouse is not just some kid. Pay attention to the name. This affair is orchestrated beginning to end.

Posted by: Oldhippie | Nov 11 2021 19:13 utc | 25

Kyle is a great example for all Americans. China is stealing Taiwan's stuff and the US needs to go and shoot them. I saw china doing these horrible things on the TV! America needs to get off its couch! now!

this episode is probably not the gmo-corn filled turd that bursts the national port a poopy, except we do learn who thinks rioters need to be shot.

hey, if we can shoot people for property destruction, the board of PG&E sounds like a good place to start. it's kind of funny what kind of destruction gets the inner vigilante worked up, ain't it?

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 19:15 utc | 26

Sometimes riots are necessary.
Rittenhouse should go straight to hell. Should not pass go, should not collect $200.

Posted by: Joe | Nov 11 2021 19:19 utc | 27

people defending Rittenhouse are cowards. period.

there is far worse destruction going on all around you. life, property, air, water, children. children's ice cream, Mandrake.

nice applauding some kid. David F is right. people defending Rittenhouse are seriously screwed up.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 19:23 utc | 28

If Kyle had people around him that loved him; they should have advised him to use his concern and become a lawyer instead of cross state lines with a weapon. The pen is mightier. He is a boy being used. He needed someone in his life to channel his emotions to study and become a lawyer.

Posted by: Anon | Nov 11 2021 19:29 utc | 29

the judge, the prosecutor and, in this case, the defense are not on different teams. it's not an adversarial proceeding. b/c that's not the way trials work in the US.

enjoy the show, if that's your thing. there's book deals and tv rights to be churned from these corpses. and this kid's life. he's a very disturbed person, who'll find out very quickly how ready his chums are to sell him out for some time w/the media sharks.

oh, and one more thing. It's Antifa's fault.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 19:31 utc | 30

Rittenhouse put on a well-rehearsed show. The fact is - as a private person he had no reason or right to interfere in what was happening. Especially not heavily armed. It is a case of dangerous usurpation of authority. Recently in France, a former bodyguard of Macron was sentenced to several years in prison for impersonating a police officer and beating people.

It is ridiculous to invoke self-defence when you yourself provoked the situation. In reality, those he hates for ideological reasons felt threatened by him and his weapon. And rightly so, he used it without restraint, as if he were playing a video game. His adversary may have been aiming at him, but Rittenhouse pulled the trigger.

He shows no remorse or sorrow for his victims. He clearly remains convinced that he was justified in shooting people. He is a danger to the public and it would be a bizarre mistake with probably fatal consequences to acquit him.

Posted by: pnyx | Nov 11 2021 19:36 utc | 31

It is interesting how the "woke" are distorting facts to suit their narrative. Rittenhouse was already in Kenosha during the riots because he had just gotten of work at his job as a lifeguard there. It is further interesting how these "woke" side with criminal adults who were assaulting a child.

I will admit that I never shed a tear for the thugs who got themselves shot. They asked for it.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 19:42 utc | 32

pnyx | Nov 11 2021 19:36 utc | 31
you just described the youth of America. the non-diabetic ones, that is.

proud boys aren't into "everyone gets a trophy day" are they? more like "trophy kill" day, amirite?

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 19:43 utc | 33

At the time, I didn't necessarily agree or disagree with b's analysis of the situation. In retrospect, I do now agree that while Rittenhouse was clearly defending himself, he put himself in that situation out of partially ignorance and partially stupidity. I predict he'll be convicted of lesser charges such as manslaughter and crossing state lines with an illegally obtained firearm.

The bigger issue is that what happened in Kenosha - regardless of whether his victims (something that the prosecution is not allowed to say) were white or had criminal records - is that America is gun crazy and not in a good way. The murder rates are shooting up and lack of police are being blamed despite unclear or non-existent data that accurately correlates it to the number of police on 'the beat.' The answer is simple - every gun in the hands of a 'bad guy' was once in the hands of a 'good guy' and there are more guns than civilians in the USA.

o/t - b, would you consider putting out a piece on the Evil Empire's coup in Guinea? It ties in directly with the usual anti-China themes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6O2T_-4Wls&t=23s

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 19:44 utc | 34

rjb1.5 @26: "...we do learn who thinks rioters need to be shot."

Sure, when you get attacked by rioting criminals saying they will kill you if they catch you, then you are certainly better off having a gun and shooting them before they can try and make good on their threats. I'm good with that.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 19:45 utc | 35

When authorities fail to act and injustice is happening, it is up to good and decent citizens to step in, as long, of course, as the good citizens themselves are not breaking the law. Did Rittenhouse break the law? He should be punished if yes and not if not. The concept that he should not have interfered is meaningless ... we live in this society and our choice to interfere and not to interfere are both choices open to any citizen.

An example that should be familiar with the lefty barflies, during the Spanish civil war, idealistic young men and women from all over the world volunteered to defend the republic against fascism and killed and died for the cause. What right did they have to interfere, David F?

Posted by: Caliman | Nov 11 2021 19:48 utc | 36

Unless Gruff has other evidence (and I haven't been following the trial, so this isn't an attack on him), Rittenhouse *wasn't* a lifeguard who had just gotten off work in Kenosha.

Court records indicate that Rittenhouse worked as a lifeguard at a YMCA in suburban Lindenhurst. A YMCA spokeswoman told the Tribune that Rittenhouse was a part-time employee who has been furloughed since March because of the pandemic.

But feel free to call me 'woke' as that's the insult du jour among the proto-fascists these days.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 19:48 utc | 37

When a 17-year-old takes a weapon like that into a situation like that the most likely outcome is that somebody is going to take the weapon away from him and use it on him. The kid put himself into a situation where he was going to have to shoot people and then he shot people. But I guess that's legal

Posted by: Guest | Nov 11 2021 19:49 utc | 38

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 19:45 utc | 35

But doesn't that viewpoint rely on the assumption that ALL of the protesters who were out past curfew were "rioters" and negate the fact that Rittenhouse and ignore that all the "defenders of property" that wasn't their own were also out past curfew?

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 19:50 utc | 39

One of the guys killed by Rittenhouse was a convicted paedophile, the funny thing is that he shot 3 people and all of them turned out to have some sort of criminal records. Tells you a lot of the human capital possessed by the scum who go by the moniker "antifa"

This poor kids life will never be the same again, even if he gets acquited. He will be constantly harassed, perhaps even physically!

All for being a law abiding citizen who put 2 communist b#stards 6 feet under.

Posted by: Z | Nov 11 2021 19:51 utc | 40

I respect the vast majority of what you say, but on this topic and related ones you sound like the pack of grifter fools around Greenwald and Gabbard. No wonder you quote them.

Posted by: Cesare | Nov 11 2021 19:53 utc | 41

William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 19:42 utc | 32
nice Gruff, nice. coming home from his lifeguarding job...heavily armed...for the sake of the kiddies...he needs his own superhero movie. R2P in action.

i don't delude myself that my opinions about this subject mean anything. i'm pretty sure the people who run the show are laughing at us heavily armed sheep who shoot each other over "property destruction" and b/c of how much we love love love the kiddies. don't our bullets prove our concern?

ugh.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 19:54 utc | 42

Posted by: Guest | Nov 11 2021 19:49 utc | 38

Pretty much sums it up other than the fact that there is question around the legality of that particular kid's gun. Muricah!

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 19:55 utc | 43

When the law abdicates its responsibilities, as it did in Kenosha, it’s game on.

Answer me this:
Why and How does legal authority get to call itself a timeout and stand down? As the cops in Kenosha did.
And after the fact, that same institution gets called on to prosecute crimes that occurred during the timeout?

That makes no sense to me.

Kenosha should have been under Martial Law, if the cops won’t/don’t stop the rioting.
But no, the legal authorities LET IT HAPPEN
Declare Martial Law and start shooting looters and arsonists.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 11 2021 20:02 utc | 44

Tom_Q_Collins @37

Rittenhouse was working at the Pleasant Prairie RecPLex, which is in Kenosha.

Why are you lying to maintain a false narrative?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:03 utc | 45

Tom_Q_Collins @39

No, the viewpoint only relies upon who actually attacked who. The rioting thugs who attacked Rittenhouse got shot. The rioters who did not attack Rittenhouse did not get shot. It is not clear where your confusion on this matter is coming from.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:06 utc | 46

Why are you lying to maintain a false narrative?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:03 utc | 45

For one thing, I'm not lying. I'm going off the public record. Your link took me to a water park's website. For another thing I added the parenthetical aside that I wasn't attacking you, rather, stating you might have different information than I do. That link doesn't qualify as such, but - unlike you - I won't immediately accuse you of lying; rather I'll ask if you have better information.

I get the proclivity to accuse others of lying to promote an agenda or propaganda, but that's not why I'm here. I genuinely prefer to have discussions in which it's possible for one side or the other to change their mind. IOW, civility and discourse. So if you have better info, I'm happy to change my mind and would expect that you would too if presented with info that's countervailing.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:07 utc | 47

Caliman - "What right did they have to interfere, David F?"

In a nutshell? None. Fucking, Duh!

Further, " The concept that he should not have interfered is meaningless ... we live in this society and our choice to interfere and not to interfere are both choices open to any citizen."

Quite the contrary, I would say it is very meaningful, and I would agree that we all have choices. Kyle chose to interfere and now he must suffer the consequences.

When I was a lad, I was lamenting the fact that I could not do something because it was illegal. My wiser, older companion said to me that I could quite literally do whatever the hell I pleased as long as I was willing to suffer the consequences of my actions.

None of what I have said should be construed to mean that I am "woke", whatever the fuck that means, nor that I think that people should have been destroying anyone else's property.

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 20:09 utc | 48

@David F 24

Why are you citing some many complete irrelevancies? What is your interest in punishing Rittenhouse for being the victim of multiple attackers?

The legal question is did he reasonably believe he was under threat of imminent harm. His reasons for being there, whether you like them or not, don't matter in assessing his guilt or innocence. Any attempt to appeal to such questions demonstrate an ulterior motivation: animus, either political or personal.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 11 2021 20:11 utc | 49

Rittenhouse employment from the New York Langley Times. They wouldn't lie, would they?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:12 utc | 50

Such crocodile tears shed for the men trying to kill Kyle Rittenhouse, who were killed themselves instead.
To comfort those shedding tears I would like to point out that Joseph Rosenbaum dying doing what he loved....attacking a child.
They say it's the best way to go out, doing what you love, amirite?

Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 11 2021 20:13 utc | 51

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:12 utc | 50

Thank you. I will say that even the Langley Times article doesn't include any information as to whether Rittenhouse was actually at work at the water park which bordered Kenosha on the day of the incident. Once again, I'm not calling you a liar or antagonizing you. I just read a few recaps of the trial to date and nothing I saw mentioned anything about him being *at work* on *that day* - do you know of a better source? I honestly checked quite a few and couldn't find that, so I apologize if I'm just not that good at Googling.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:15 utc | 52

Someone said, "show trial".

The prosecutor knows that he has lost at this point.
However, "the show" will still go on.

If a mistrial is declared the MSM will say variations on this:
Rittenhouse is walking the streets due to a technicality
or this:
Trump expresses pleasure with Rittenhouse release

The MSM is likely to come up with headlines with even more stench
than the above. Rittenhouse will have a shadow hanging over him.

The show must go on
and on
for every political drop that can be squeezed from it.

If the trial continues to the phase where the jury
declares him innocent
there will be some mighty unhappy politicians and MSM
yet you know the MSM will still cast suspicions of all sorts.

Posted by: librul | Nov 11 2021 20:15 utc | 53

If the cops had done their fucking job, we wouldn’t be talking about this.
Looters, arsonists, and rioters aren’t protestors. They are criminals.
Arrest them.
Let the people gathering and protesting in a legal manner do their thing.

Instead, the cops stood behind a line and let the criminals burn the town.
Disgraceful

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 11 2021 20:17 utc | 54

Trying hard to ignore this farce but just saw that Rittenhouse took the stand. WTF? In a murder trial. Early in a murder trial. And with competent counsel. This does not occur. Show trial all the way.

Posted by: oldhippie | Nov 11 2021 20:20 utc | 55

@ pnyx 31

"as a private person he had no reason or right to interfere in what was happening"

Well, that's utterly illogical.

What was happening was numerous private citizens were out either rioting or exercising their right of assembly. How can you consider Rittenhouse to have any less right to be there than them?

Just a modicum of intellectual honesty from fake progressives would go a long way toward improving public discourse in America.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 11 2021 20:20 utc | 56

Gruff,

I think I have found an article that backs you up.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/11/19/kyle-rittenhouse-says-he-doesnt-regret-bringing-gun-to-kenosha-hes-not-part-of-a-militia/?sh=3cd7c6e0429f

Prior to the shootings, Rittenhouse had spent the day working his lifeguarding job in Kenosha, and then volunteered to clean graffiti at a local school and protect a car dealership that had been burned the night before, where he says he met other armed men and women.

Hence I have changed my mind and we can proceed with the 'debate' as adults if we so choose.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:21 utc | 57

the people "rioting" were not protesting injustice?

nice to see that care for children includes getting kids to shoot each other over the property values of adults, any adults, but esp ones they have zero relationship with. this is just such a perfect metaphor for the US. go shoot someone cuz of some shit you saw on the tv, you lifeguard hero you.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 20:22 utc | 58

wagelaborer @51

Very true! And as David F points out @48, actions have consequences!

It is odd how the "woke" seem to think consequences should only go one way.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:24 utc | 59

Man, I'm still not finding any testimony or "journalism" that confirms Rittenhouse was actually working that job near Kenosha on the day of the incidents. Does anyone have proof that he was actually clocked in and working that very day and that he left his job and went directly to the car dealership?

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:27 utc | 60

@ Tom_Q_Collins 60

See your own post @ 57

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 11 2021 20:31 utc | 61

rjb1.5 @58: "the people "rioting" were not protesting injustice?"

No, they were rioting, exactly the way that the protesters at the US Capitol on January 6 were not.

Where was the arson on January 6, by the way? Would it have been "Fiery but mostly peaceful" had the protesters on January 6 burned the Capitol? Just wondering if there is enough of your mind remaining after all of the laundering for you to be able to tell the difference between protests and riots.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:32 utc | 62

i heard the rioters were part of QAnon!

or were they crisis actors?

if only it had been some cops just doing their jobs who gunned down those evil pedophiles, we could all applaud and cheer. "proud to be an american".

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 20:33 utc | 63

rjb1.5 @63

Wow! You're in bad shape! Maybe you should go to your "safe space" for a little bit and try to find your center?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 20:37 utc | 64

I'm still not seeing any actual evidence that Rittenhouse was clocked in and working on the day of the incidents. Even his mother said that he had gone to Kenosa not to work, but to clean graffiti.

Mother says he drove to Kenosha to clean graffiti, nothing about his having been working on that day

So, once again, I think Gruff is mistaken in his claims that KR simply left his job and went straight to the streets.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:39 utc | 65

I strongly disagree with your analysis, b. the judge, prosecutor and defense have all been on the side of the defendant as is usually the case to varying degrees of right wing killers. The judge refused to characterize the killed and injured as victims, the prosecutors are serving the interests of the defense, and the defense is defending. Some form of manslaughter should have been included in the charges since the boy was obviously looking for trouble even if he did not want to kill people. He wore a shirt in a bar flaunting the trope 'Free as Fuck'

Maintaining that the boy is innocent will encourage other young kids to take up the gun and kill demonstrators. This is becoming the operative purpose of the Rule of Law. I don't think anyone should be executed or be in prison more than ten years unless they are still justly considered dangerous, but functionally encouraging killing protestors, which is favored by many police, prosecutors and judges, is influencing dissidents as well.

Posted by: Mathew | Nov 11 2021 20:42 utc | 66

Since the real looting takes place on a completely different level why do we give a shit about some petit-bourgeois white-trash shoot-out? Let 'em thin out the herd a bit.

Posted by: Patroklos | Nov 11 2021 20:45 utc | 67

Antifa loves to say, “Fuck around and find out”
Well, the shit was on that night. The cops let it happen.
And the 2 dead men, and the guy with no bicep,
“Fucked Around And Found Out”

Poetic justice, imo.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 11 2021 20:46 utc | 68

I have watched parts of this trial live on YT for about 4 days. Judge's instructions to the jury should be interesting. Here on twitter I see lots of references to the pasts of the people shot, as well as references to the shooter's past, as each tries to prejudge what the outcome should be. So, I'll do the same.
Former Clinton WH aide says woman soothing Ms R during the weeping scene was jury consultant for the defense in the OJ trial. (By the way, rewatch the clip of the defendant weeping in court. Notice at about 35 to 45 second mark the side long glance at the jury)
Strikes me that going somewhere else with weaponry and shooting people in self defense looks like a basis for foreign policy.
When, first day report, I read that the judge declared that people shot to death could not be called victims, but could be called rioters or looters, I had a rough idea what the outcome of this trial would be.
(I notice today the witness from Arizona, the "journalist," insisted on repeating the terms rioters and rioting.)

Posted by: dave constable | Nov 11 2021 20:46 utc | 69

gruff, i'm not anti riot. when cops gun people down in the streets, as they do routinely in this country, then people have the duty to riot. when their lives are stolen from them so the US can rape VZ, then they have a duty to riot. different subject, but that doesn't sound the perspective of anyone from Jan 6. all of you are with Kyle R.

clearly americans have a huge problem knowing which way to point their guns. protect the kids from the pederasts! by shooting them w/your assault rifle. Hilary clinton agrees. that's the Libya policy right there. save the village by napalming it.

there was a big article in WaPo the other day about the vast undercounting and underreporting of police violence in the US. kind of like rape, suicide, coronavirus, etc. people who haven't lost anything in this diseased shithole of a police state have very itchy fingers. big brother rolls his eyes and laughs at these pee shooters. go shoot some more Kyle. more cops will protect us. cops who were once Kyle. what's not to applaud?

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 20:48 utc | 70

Posted by: Patroklos | Nov 11 2021 20:45 utc | 67

On the balance I'd have to say I agree. Let's take note of how such a minor incident in Kenosha, WI overshadows any coverage of US drone strikes in Afghanistan killing an innocent family of 7 including children with no charges filed or jail time faced by anyone involved; rather commendations. Or any of the other (probably at least) 50 such incidents that took place during Trump and Obama's administrations. This is tabloid level shit compared to that and yet it drives record number of comments at MoA. I plead guilty and your post has convinced me this is a pointless news item to argue about.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 20:50 utc | 71

So far the thread has gone about as I had expected, which is why I usually don't bother to comment, and am largely going to refrain from the rest of this thread.

But I want to point out a few things that really bother me because they prohibit anything but childish, puerile arguments.

Gruff will always write "the XNew YorkX Langley Times" (not sure why the strike-through format didn't copy) the clear implication being that they are not to be trusted, except of course, when they back up his point of view. It has to be one or the other, they are either trustworthy or not. A liar is a liar, whether they agree with one's point or not, and as such are not a source to back up one's argument. He's not the only one who does that, but it is very frustrating.

Others who assume that because I think Kyle did something wrong and should be punished, that I automatically am taking the side of pedophiles, looters, and other assorted scum. Is it not possible to find that both parties acted improperly and that both parties should be punished, and likely would have been if they were still alive?

Calling anyone who disagrees with one "woke". Are they tired of calling me a libtard, or commie, or fascist? Defend your position instead of acting triggered and calling me names.

The projection of one's own opinions onto others and then expecting them to defend those projected opinions.

The quality of commenting here used to be so much better, I used to love reading the commentary and the comments because it was of such high quality. Now it is mostly ideologues and binary arguments. Sadly, this is literally one of only two places I even read anymore and I generally am finding this one to be less and less interesting.

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 20:54 utc | 72

Below is a quote from the beginning of this posting by b

"
Last Sunday police in Kenosha, Wisconsin proved to be too incompetent to arrest a man they had already had under control. They shot him 7 times into the back when he was trying to get into his car. Nights of rioting followed. Buildings were burned down and businesses were looted.
"

My question is what ever happened to the police that shot the man 7 times in the back? Since this was the precipitating event, shouldn't it get at least equal, if not more public emphasis and coverage? What does it say that this is not the case?

Humanity in the West has the best shit show money can buy. You are enjoying the brainwashing aren't you?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 11 2021 20:57 utc | 73

@70
We don’t need more cops.
We need cops and their bosses, who do their fucking jobs.
I don’t think we are too far apart on this.
The established legal authority failed to do its job, and Kyle was trying to fill the void
Yeah, shit is fucked up here. But blaming the public for trying to take up the slack leaves you in a difficult position argumentatively.
You’re against a police state, but don’t accept the public taking up arms to replace it?

If you can stop portraying people who oppose you as being pro cop or pro shooting people, you’d do better.

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 11 2021 21:00 utc | 74

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 20:54 utc | 72

I have to say I pretty much agree, but people will comment on what the bar owner has on offer and the tone will follow as such. I commented the other day that this place has gotten much 'rowdier' than I can recall since the days of _____ (I think the name sparks bans). There used to be a much more thoughtful and philosophical lean and it's become highly partisan and argumentative much like society at large, especially in the disease-ridden USA.

That said, you're falling victim to the logic you are complaining about when you don't realize that even the Langley Times will print the truth on occasion depending on the subject. Same with any journalistic outlet in the USA and the West. So long as they aren't straying from the over-arching primacy-of-private-capital orthodoxy and all that follows suit (war, poverty, privatization, etc.) they can often be relied upon to convey at least the objective reality of events even if they can't be trusted on more important matters. The Times has always been a warmongers rag, though.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 21:00 utc | 75

Tom - How do you determine when a liar is telling the truth? When that liar says something you agree with? Liars are liars and not to be trusted under any circumstances.

Period!

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 21:06 utc | 76

The prosecutor intentionally fubared the case. The judge, according to witnessess who heard it in the courtroom, had Trump's campaign theme song as a ringtone, and OFC the charges were known to be unconvictable. IOW it was a show trial.

Stupid with a gun is called BRANDISHING btw, and is a felony in most states.

Posted by: Leigh Meyers | Nov 11 2021 21:09 utc | 77

Posted by: David F | Nov 11 2021 21:06 utc | 76

In the case of American journalism writ large, I go by the motto "somewhat trust but always verify by other means."

There's nothing logically inconsistent with a person or organization lying through their teeth about one thing, but telling the truth about another. Many times that's a psyop in itself. The effective psychopath knows to tell the truth occasionally so as to lend credence to his lies. The NYT is no different. So long as the stories or opinions they publish aren't a real threat to the dominance of Western private capital (including their owners), reality often slips through.

Here's an example I picked up on from Wall Street on Parade. The NYT and Bloomberg have made a practice of regularly trashing Wells Fargo of San Francisco, CA as an evil bank, but the real news is in what they don't cover: the even more evil JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup which are based - you guessed it - in NYC.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 21:11 utc | 78

Rittenhouse said in an interview with the Daily Caller's Richie McGinniss before the riots that night that he had left work at the RecPlex and was cleaning graffiti prior to helping stand watch against arsonists. There were two Rittenhouse interviews before the riots, one in the daytime and another in the evening. The daytime interview seems to have been purged from the internet, or at least hidden by search engines. That was the interview in which Rittenhouse detailed events of the day up to that point. Odd that it is so hard to find now.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 21:13 utc | 79

@ many

From the point of view of bourgeois law, the aelf defense argument doesn't make any sense.

The key here is that he was not inside a private property, but public property.

Inside a private property, the police cannot enter without judicial authorization. US Law permits self defense in the name of defense of property in such cases.

In public property, you have to have, unless literally in a do or die situation, police power in order to apply violence. If Kyle Rittenhouse was a policeman, he would certainly be acquitted (or there would be no trial to begin with).

The video shows he was clearly not in danger. He was safe at the outer ring of the city, the rioters occupying downtown. He then came up with the idea of going through a "searching mission", to find if someone was in danger in enemy territory or, presumably, if the other side of the militia-held territory was in need of backup. He was instigated or instructed by one or two other militiamen.

Such action was clearly beyond Kyle Rittenhouse's authority. It's not in his right as a non-policeman to execute policial-military actions.

I think Rittenhouse will not get life, but he will not be acquitted too. He will probably get some time in prison for manslaughter and that's it. The Woke movement has clearly failed in its initial mission to substitute Marxism through the Left and the liberals are already starting to dismantle the circus. One more Cold War era center-leftist chimera gone.

--//--

@ people claiming Rittenhouse's killinkillings were justified because he "killed communists";

You're missing the point and not realizing how the real world works.

Once you kill, you automatically put your own life on the table. Those "wokes" won't keep beeing cute forever. It will lose the fun once they start picking off some alt-rightists.

Posted by: vk | Nov 11 2021 21:13 utc | 80

Shouldn'tve included Citi. I think they might actually be based in NC and it's Jamie Dimon and Chase who are the indicted felons who'll never see the inside of a courtroom much less jail cell.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 21:14 utc | 81

BTW, the judge was absolutely right to prevent calling the people who got shot "victims".

The term "victims" prejudices the question of whether Rittenhouse was right to shoot them, which is the very issue for the jury to determine.

The consistent and unified mischaracterization by fake progressives of the issues in this trial cannot be accidental. There's a deliberate element to what that side of the discussion is engaged it -- a sadistic desire to punish Rittenhouse for what they project on him.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 11 2021 21:14 utc | 82

The three guys who were shot were not "victims", they were perpetrators.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 11 2021 21:20 utc | 83

I agree with Mathew at 66.

Posted by: Michael Weddington | Nov 11 2021 21:25 utc | 84

@ vk
“It’s not in his right as a non policeman to execute political military actions”

That is the foundation of my argument, in a sense.
Who is supposed to take that mantle when the legal authorities stand down, as they did in Kenosha?
The people, of course.
.The cops abdicated their authority. There is zero question of that.
So it’s game on, imo.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and Kyle filled the vacuum.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 11 2021 21:27 utc | 85

Thanks b, I saw a headline attracting clip somewhere of the judge chewing out the prosecutor. Without the context it meant little as I wasn't across this US centric issue outside of the headlines and your earlier article. This follow-up fully enough informs me of the situation.

james@3. My thoughts exactly.

Posted by: Dim sim | Nov 11 2021 21:32 utc | 86

If you yourself have not been in a gun fight, is any opinion you may entertain material? If one's naive, then let him ask those who have had to shoot. The kid was silly but he only did as his circumstance made necessary. I dare say most everyone actually in such circumstance would do the same. Otherwise they be dead.

Posted by: Walter | Nov 11 2021 21:34 utc | 87

Rittenhouse will most likely be acquitted of murder because he acted in self defense. If the guy he shot who pointed a gun at him should have been a little quicker on the trigger, he would most likely be found to have acted in self defense if he killed Rittenhouse. That’s the way American laws work.

Concerning 2022 Congressional elections, the Dems will get smoked because all the people they made false promises of defunding the police and creating a Green New Deal to will sit the election out when they realize they were lied to. In the US, great wealth has been preventing necessary changes for decades. As a result, the future will be hell.

Posted by: TimmyB | Nov 11 2021 21:37 utc | 88

Both the Republican and the Democrat parties ought to be cancelled. That would go a long way to helping solve most of the US's problems.

Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Nov 11 2021 18:29 utc | 13

No argument there!
And you apply that sentiment to most democracies at this point.

Posted by: JPC | Nov 11 2021 21:39 utc | 89

It’s mystifying to me, that people such as vk, who are clearly against the police state (rightfully),
Will invoke the authority of the police state when it is politically convenient, such as with this Rittenhouse case.

The system, the law, shut itself down in Kenosha.
And when a citizen, a prole, stepped up to fill the void, he’s subverting the law?
You can’t have it both ways.

Stay consistent, please.

Posted by: Cadence c | Nov 11 2021 21:44 utc | 90

Rittenhouse will obviously be acquitted. But he was an idiot to insert himself into such a situation with a rifle.

Posted by: GT | Nov 11 2021 21:52 utc | 91

Posted by: TimmyB | Nov 11 2021 21:37 utc | 88

Not so much the "defund" or the Green New Deal. More that the corporate Democrats will be wiped out as usual (and as planned) because they are merely elected every other cycle to serve as the pretend opposition party and bulwark for the Republicans against the left.

IOW, Give Capital What it Wants or Else"

A Jacobin Take

The second story is right-wing (so-called “moderate”) Democrats’ gutting of the bourgeois Build Back Better bill (B4). As the social democrat Ben Beckett writes from (fittingly enough) Vienna, Austria, in Jacobin:

To everyone’s chagrin, negotiations drag on among Democrats on the Build Back Better Act, Joe Biden’s signature social spending bill. While we don’t yet know what the final bill will contain, the media has reported, blow-by-blow, as one progressive proposal after another has been cut, in a drawn out and seemingly futile effort to appease conservative Democratic senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona…It didn’t have to be this way. The bill started as a $6 trillion social spending proposal from Bernie Sanders, what he called “the most consequential piece of legislation for working families since the 1930s.” Days later, Democrats announced they would spend no more than $3.5 trillion, but there was still a lot for progressives and working-class people to like: tuition-free community college; expanding Medicare to cover dental, hearing, and vision care; lowering Medicare eligibility to age sixty; paid family leave for new parents; and subsidies for childcare.

Now, virtually all of that is off the table, and the spending is down to $1.75 trillion. It seems all but certain that whatever new programs make it to Biden’s desk for his signature will be minimal, temporary, means-tested, difficult to explain, and even harder to access — and will still lag far behind every other highly developed country. Because they had to appease two conservative senators, Democrats missed a critical chance to instead develop the kind of highly visible, popular programs that create deep-seated voter loyalty. More important, millions of people have been robbed of the sorely needed relief Biden campaigned on.

Okay, yes but hold on. “To everyone’s chagrin?” Not to the chagrin of capital, which does not wish for an expanded social safety net or any other victories, no matter how small, for humane public policy supported by progressive taxation. Not to the chagrin of the Republifascists, who hate “socialism” (a label they put on any program that might help the poor) and who want the Democrats to fail in their effort to expand “voter loyalty.” Not to the chagrin of the eco-extremist fossil fuel industry, which was uncomfortable with the bill’s initial green provisions. Not to the chagrin of Big Pharma, which does not wish to see its Mafia-like pricing and profits power rolled back to any degree.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 21:55 utc | 92

@ Posted by: Cadence c | Nov 11 2021 21:44 utc | 90

That is not what it looked like in the video. Yes, the situation had deteriorated, but the police was far from collapsed. They were well into a process of containing the rioters and taking back control of the streets - even if at a high cost in damage to property.

Kyle Rittenhouse was able to infiltrate deep into enemy territory, barely facing serious confrontation and frequently communicating with his militia colleagues while walking through downtown Kenosha. After he killed those people, he had a very easy time to literally cross the entire downtown and surrender himself to the police, who was safe in the other side of the city. Those riots were not impressive at all, by world standards.

The police also (usually - I don't know how things are in the First World) has specialized material to contain riots without deaths (rubber bullets, gas bombs etc. etc.), among other specialized equipment. It's literally their job to deal with such situations in the public space.

Next day, the riot had already completely died down, as we can infer from Kenosha's main newspaper. It is right-wing hysteria to claim it was a pre-revolutionary situation that was bravely stifled by some random militiamen.

--//--

@ Posted by: Walter | Nov 11 2021 21:34 utc | 87

This is irrelevant to Law. You either committed the crime or you didn't. There are attenuating factors which lower the sentence, but the crime is the same.

Posted by: vk | Nov 11 2021 21:58 utc | 93

This is also a fitting excerpt to explain the real reasons that the corporate Democrats will lose as planned in the 2022 and 2024 cycles.

Standard Dominant Media Narratives to Keep Attempted Decency at Bay

Bourgeois class rule is written all over the dominant media coverage of the B4’s tribulations. Corporate media talking heads insist on blaming supposedly “too left” and “excessively woke” progressive Democrats for wanting too much when the real barriers to passage have been the reactionary, capital-funded recalcitrance of Republicans and right-wing Democrats– and the officially unmentionable right-wing apportionment of the Senate itself. With lonely exceptions like Medhi Hasan, the media has absurdly insisted throughout the drama on calling the reactionary and corrupt Democrats Manchin and Sinema “moderates.” It has bleated on and on about the “massive” bill’s supposedly exorbitant “price tag,” deleting the fact that it would have been paid for by modestly increased levies on the nation’s absurdly under-taxed rich. Also beyond the parameters of acceptable reportage and commentary has been comparison of the proposed social spending with the giant sums regularly invested in the nation’s destructive Pentagon System, a colossal public subsidy to high-tech “defense” (war) corporations with the capacity to blow the world up many times over. And now the media and pundits trumpet the predictable defeat of the Democrats’ dismal, dollar-drenched gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe in Virginia as “proof” that most Americans don’t want “woke” and “Marxist” programs like paid family leave and free community college.

Isn't it 'funny' how the "liberal" "woke" "leftist" media always seem to really be on the side of capital and the right?

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 22:02 utc | 94

@ Posted by: TimmyB | Nov 11 2021 21:37 utc | 88

That's the problem: Rittenhouse killed a man with a handgun with an AR-15. If he's acquitted, it will be implied by jurisprudence that it is legitimate to use AR-15 to impose your ideology over the other.

The man with the handgun is forever gone, but the next man will also have an AR-15 because handguns are not enough anymore.

And when everybody has an AR-15, nobody has an AR-15. Like I said before, taking one's life is the absolute limit of negotiation: once you take one life, you're automatically offering your own life for the other to take, it's ultimate "gloves off". On a larger scale, this is what we call a war.

Posted by: vk | Nov 11 2021 22:12 utc | 95

We've got two qualifying candidates for Darwin Awards. The first is the guy who tried to take a rifle from someone by grabbing it by the barrel when it was pointed at him. The second is the guy who used a skateboard to attack someone with a rifle. The third guy did not achieve Darwin Award status, but very well could have by pointing a pistol at someone with a rifle. We can hope they have not spread their genes even in the shallow end of the genepool.

Legal age for a rifle is 18 and Rittenhouse was 17 at the time. Looks like he is guilty of underage possession of a firearm.

Posted by: Lefty665 | Nov 11 2021 22:13 utc | 96

@AntiSpin #20

Seven states and the District of Columbia required individuals to register their ownership of certain firearms with local law enforcement agencies including pistols.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 22:18 utc | 97

Following the media's presentation of this case and learning the actuality of what happened has been a great case study in how the media fabricates realities to match their own ideology.

A steady stream of lies and misrepresentations. I know it is hard to shake the American People from their stupor, but the Rittenhouse Case has done just that for two friends I never thought would see the light.

Posted by: Haassaan | Nov 11 2021 22:26 utc | 98

It never ceases to amaze me how many ways Americans can find to defend and justify their tragic gun culture.
If a 17 year old is killing people with an automatic weapon right there is the problem. For that young man, for the people he murdered and for society.

It's sick and desperately sad and it exists no where else on earth at the level of the US.

And no, destruction of property does not make it ok to take human life. Whether that's the police or regular people.

Jeez. No wonder the world is in such a mess under the US Empire.

Posted by: K | Nov 11 2021 22:26 utc | 99

at least Kyle gets a trial.

he will still remain another kid destroyed by this society. he can go become all American hero Chris Kyle style, aim his guns in the acceptable direction, or go do the G Gordon Liddy celebrity circuit. or both.

or he can go to prison and have some fun there. get what he "deserves". Americans execute retards and minors, why can't he get some hard pounding time for at least manslaughter?

people getting what they deserve is a very small state of mind to be in. who will escape gunshot? not the guy stealing a TV, that's for sure.

this is a scary country. "one shot one kill" allows for none of that fire a warning shot bullshit, does it? we don't take prisoners in this country, don't you know? when the cops see a child in the back seat of a car fleeing their thieving murdering asses, that doesn't stop them from unloading on that car, does it? so why should Kyle R think twice about who he shoots under the pretext of this or that convenient reasoning he can pull out of his lawyer's ex post facto ass, like "child welfare"?

hey, MoA, what's the difference between "child endangerment" and "child welfare"? let's keep it simple. the subject is: guns. Lord knows we don't eat food here, but we sure have run out of ammo at WalMart already.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Nov 11 2021 22:28 utc | 100

next page »

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...