Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Verdict returned in Rittenhouse trial

Page 3 of 60 [ 954 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 60  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 1:42 am

Pepe wrote:
Quote:
Rittenhouse lawyer slams Biden for calling teen ‘white supremacist’

https://nypost.com/2021/11/19/rittenhou ... premacist/


Let's be precise. Biden NEVER said, "Rittenhouse is a white supremacist." An opponent's lawyer saying he did is not proof. The incident seems to refer to a campaign tweet with a video. The words of the tweet refer to white supremacists and Trump's failure to disavow them. The accompanying video shows with Rittenhouse's face. The implication in the tweet makes it pretty slimy, but it was never actually said.

Not to excuse the sliminess, but I have some additional questions:

Does anyone know if Biden ran the campaign twitter?

Has anyone seen the full video in the tweet? I know from sharing video that you don't have control over which frame in the video will be used as the display. Is it possible Biden's social media team did not know it would display with Rittenhouse so prominent?


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Last edited by DW_a_mom on 20 Nov 2021, 1:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 1:45 am

Brictoria wrote:
Pepe wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Pepe wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Nicholas Sandmann reaches out to Kyle Rittenhouse
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2021/11/17/n ... sue-media/

First hint that Sandmann became a teen millionaire from suing the Washington post and encourages Rittenhouse to do the same.


Thanks for that. :heart:
I hope he does sue the pants off the suckers. 8)


I have a ton of trouble with anyone trying to make the two cases and teens seem at all alike. Two dead at Rittenhouse's hands was actual news, and not at all like being smeared over what was read as a smirk. When did the news irresponsibly report with Rittenhouse? Differences of opinion and perception are allowed.


Uncle Joe called Rittenhouse "A White Supremacist".
OOPS! 8O


When?

Politicians should be more careful and precise choosing their terms. Biden is known for his gaffs, but making one at the cost of a teen is pretty bad.

Anyway. I believe Rittenhouse has accepted money from White Supremacist groups, so while I am not aware of any evidence he IS one, he hasn't made a point of disassociating himself (that I'm aware of), either, which created quite a bit of confusion on the question early on, and will make sustaining any liable claims difficult.


Where is Brictoria when you need him? :scratch:
I might search for it later.


Ask and you may receive... Will this do for a start?
Quote:
Kyle Rittenhouse is officially in a presidential ad by Joe Biden as an example of “white supremacists” who President Trump “refused to disavow.”

“There’s no other way to put it: the President of the United States refused to disavow white supremacists on the debate stage last night,” Mr. Biden tweeted Wednesday after his presidential debate in Cleveland.

The 17-year-old Rittenhouse was charged with first degree intentional homicide and other charges in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during looting and riots after shooting three men who pursued him; Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, died during the confrontation.

Source: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/30/biden-links-kyle-rittenhouse-to-white-supremacists/


As stated in more detail my post to Pepe's article, let's be precise. Biden NEVER said, "Rittenhouse is a white supremacist." The words of a tweet from the Biden campaign account refer to white supremacists and Trump's failure to disavow them. The accompanying video displays with Rittenhouse's face. The implication in the tweet makes it pretty slimy, but it was never actually said.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 1:52 am

ironpony wrote:
What I don't understand about this case, and situation is that it seems that politically, the republicans believe that Kyle defending himself against being assaulted is good, where as the a lot of the democrats do not believe so it seems.

I am neither of those two political idealogies I don't think when I say this, but I do not understand why democrats are for being pacifist when being assaulted, with the possibly of being killed from the assault. Why be pacifist, or what is with that idealogy exactly?


Democrats are anti-gun and pro-pacifist. The ideology is that violence as a response to violence leads to more violence. There are obviously exceptions, but that ideology is the starting point.

Generally:
Democrats are for gun control.
Democrats oppose open carry.
Democrats oppose the availability of weapons such as the AR15.
Democrats favor diplomacy over war.
Democrats are less likely to believe spanking is appropriate punishment for children.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 40
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

20 Nov 2021, 1:59 am

Oh okay, but what about all these people who were threatening the jury if they return with a not guitly verdict? Are they democrats?

If so, how come democrats believe in possibly murdering jurors out of revenge, but they do not believe in killing in a self defense situation?



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

20 Nov 2021, 2:02 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
The correctness of the verdict and acceptance of how the situation evolved are two different items to me. There is a framework inside the ACLU statement that I agree with: the situation would not have evolved as it did if Rittenhouse had been a black youth instead of a white youth. The likely disparate evolution can be seen from how he was treated as he arrived with the AR15, how the police assumed he wasn't the shooter when he tried to surrender, how much money was raised for his defense, on through the ability to have his self-defense claim validated. It's a charge against the unfairness of the system, not the outcome of the one trial; not blame to the result for Rittenhouse, but for all the results that aren't the same because the defendent was of color.


If that were their argument, they would be saying more black kids should get off, not that Rittenhouse should have been found guilty, but that's not what they're saying, their statement reads like they're upset he was acquitted and are angry at the judge for being too deferential to the defense, a curious position for a civil liberties organization.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

20 Nov 2021, 2:06 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
When did the news irresponsibly report with Rittenhouse? Differences of opinion and perception are allowed.


You're seriously asking after a full year of the media screaming that he crossed state lines with a gun, that the gun possession was obviously illegal, that he shot wildly into the crowd, that he shot black people, that he was a racist white supremacist, that he belonged to a militia, that he fired dozens of rounds, that he was a domestic terrorist, that he was a vigilante, etc, etc?

Here's a small taste:


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 40
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

20 Nov 2021, 2:07 am

So after all this, is Rittenhouse going to move to a netrual country like Switzerland, like Serpico had to do now, or I am guessing something like that?



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

20 Nov 2021, 2:13 am

ironpony wrote:
So after all this, is Rittenhouse going to move to a netrual country like Switzerland, like Serpico had to do now, or I am guessing something like that?


Well, that kinda depends on him and what he wants to do, several members of the GOP are offering him congressional internships, and frankly he could really cash in on his celebrity on the right at the moment, but I don't know that he wants that, he might just want a quiet life after all this trouble. He is going to go on Tucker Carlson's show on Monday, so make of that what you will.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 2:16 am

Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
The correctness of the verdict and acceptance of how the situation evolved are two different items to me. There is a framework inside the ACLU statement that I agree with: the situation would not have evolved as it did if Rittenhouse had been a black youth instead of a white youth. The likely disparate evolution can be seen from how he was treated as he arrived with the AR15, how the police assumed he wasn't the shooter when he tried to surrender, how much money was raised for his defense, on through the ability to have his self-defense claim validated. It's a charge against the unfairness of the system, not the outcome of the one trial; not blame to the result for Rittenhouse, but for all the results that aren't the same because the defendent was of color.


If that were their argument, they would be saying more black kids should get off, not that Rittenhouse should have been found guilty, but that's not what they're saying, their statement reads like they're upset he was acquitted and are angry at the judge for being too deferential to the defense, a curious position for a civil liberties organization.


I agree with your assessment of the statement as a whole. Parts I agreed with and need to be said. The last piece about the remedy being for people of color to get the same considerations was more me than the statement.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

20 Nov 2021, 2:17 am

ironpony wrote:
So after all this, is Rittenhouse going to move to a netrual country like Switzerland, like Serpico had to do now, or I am guessing something like that?


Pretty sure he's a hero to millions of Americans.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

20 Nov 2021, 2:19 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Quote:
Rittenhouse lawyer slams Biden for calling teen ‘white supremacist’

https://nypost.com/2021/11/19/rittenhou ... premacist/


Let's be precise. Biden NEVER said, "Rittenhouse is a white supremacist." An opponent's lawyer saying he did is not proof. The incident seems to refer to a campaign tweet with a video. The words of the tweet refer to white supremacists and Trump's failure to disavow them. The accompanying video shows with Rittenhouse's face. The implication in the tweet makes it pretty slimy, but it was never actually said.

Not to excuse the sliminess, but I have some additional questions:

Does anyone know if Biden ran the campaign twitter?

Has anyone seen the full video in the tweet? I know from sharing video that you don't have control over which frame in the video will be used as the display. Is it possible Biden's social media team did not know it would display with Rittenhouse so prominent?


OK, pick this clean:
Quote:
President Joe Biden said Tuesday he was “praying” for a guilty verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin, as the jury continues its second day of deliberations over the fate of the former Minneapolis police officer who killed George Floyd.

Although the White House sought to downplay the significance of the president’s remarks later in the afternoon, they nevertheless represented some of the most opinionated comments he has offered on Chauvin’s trial since it began in late March.


https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/2 ... ict-483463



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 2:22 am

ironpony wrote:
Oh okay, but what about all these people who were threatening the jury if they return with a not guitly verdict? Are they democrats?

If so, how come democrats believe in possibly murdering jurors out of revenge, but they do not believe in killing in a self defense situation?


This is tough for me. I am a Democrat, and I do get angry seeing how much of the system is unfair. But I also see how vengeful some Democrats can be as a response to that unfairness. I think they want Rittenhouse and people like him to KNOW how it feels to be in the shoes of someone of color. To FEEL what its like to always face deep consequences in court. As I wrote in another post, down the line there was situation after situation where we could expect the outcome to be different if Rittenhouse had looked different: how he was treated as he arrived with the AR15, how the police assumed he wasn't the shooter when he tried to surrender, how much money was raised for his defense, and the ability to have his self-defense claim validated.

Perhaps it feels to people like it might be easier to get the court system to be harder on people like Rittenhouse than easier on people of color. But no matter how you flip it, the case is evidence that down the line, the system favors a Rittenhouse over someone with darker skin. The desire to bring about the fairness through vengeance is a human response, but not in-line with the stated values of the party, IMHO.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Last edited by DW_a_mom on 20 Nov 2021, 2:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 2:27 am

Pepe wrote:

OK, pick this clean:
Quote:
President Joe Biden said Tuesday he was “praying” for a guilty verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin, as the jury continues its second day of deliberations over the fate of the former Minneapolis police officer who killed George Floyd.

Although the White House sought to downplay the significance of the president’s remarks later in the afternoon, they nevertheless represented some of the most opinionated comments he has offered on Chauvin’s trial since it began in late March.


https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/2 ... ict-483463


Reads as basic reporting to me. Praying for a guilty verdict is within the lines; he's allowed an opinion, as long as the jury doesn't hear it.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

20 Nov 2021, 2:28 am

cyberdad wrote:
ironpony wrote:
So after all this, is Rittenhouse going to move to a netrual country like Switzerland, like Serpico had to do now, or I am guessing something like that?


Pretty sure he's a hero to millions of Americans.


Amerians are odd.

Personally, I see Rittenhouse as being lucky that politics didn't pervert justice, rather than him being a hero.
I.E. I don't see him as a hero at all.
I see him as a stupid kid who got himself in a stupid situation. ;)
I strongly suspect he would have been found guilty if the 2 people he killed were POC.

As you can see, unlike Uncle Joe, I don't have much faith in the American judiciary system when it involves "political" situations.

This is simply my *opinion*. 8)



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

20 Nov 2021, 2:31 am

Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
ironpony wrote:
So after all this, is Rittenhouse going to move to a netrual country like Switzerland, like Serpico had to do now, or I am guessing something like that?


Pretty sure he's a hero to millions of Americans.


Amerians are odd.

Personally, I see Rittenhouse as being lucky that politics didn't pervert justice, rather than him being a hero.
I.E. I don't see him as a hero at all.
I see him as a stupid kid who got himself in a stupid situation. ;)


I think most people who've really thought it through without any biases, without throwing in the systemic injustice that others may face, will agree. I do.

One thing still bothers me when I look at this situation with TWO PEOPLE DEAD and the shooter likely to gain some celebrity from it. So many far less damaging "stupid kid" situations gone bad end up have ended with the teen facing far more severe consequences. It isn't just our system that isn't feeling very proportional to me, it's also our laws. There should be SOME consequence to stupidity that ends up with someone dead, but the laws in the state just didn't get there.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Last edited by DW_a_mom on 20 Nov 2021, 2:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,157
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

20 Nov 2021, 2:33 am

I figured not all the charges would stick, but no charges and he walks free I felt was a stretch of imagination...But I guess the nightmare became true.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/