The state of things…
Tag: kyle rittenhouse
How Unethical Were the Prosecutors Trying to Put Kyle Rittenhouse in Prison? Let Us Count the Ways…
Let’s go over just a few of the things these weasels did to Kyle Rittenhouse.
District Attorney Michael Gravely chose to bring a case against someone with a clear-cut case of self-defense. Voters should do something about that guy in the next election.
Gravely’s hand-picked attack dogs, Binger and Kraus, lied throughout the process and never resisted and revised the charges to reflect new information uncovered in their case.
The case was overcharged. Even Daily Caller reporter Ritchie McGinnis, who appeared to be hiding behind a car when Rittenhouse shot Joseph Rosenbaum to preserve his life, thought reckless endangerment charges on his behalf were uncalled for.
Defense attorney Mark Richards told reporters after the verdict that putting on the Khindri brothers, the owners of Car Source, was a lie to the world — and they knew it — so that Binger could further the fiction that Rittenhouse and his buddies were never asked to come and protect the buildings that night. PJ Media’s Megan Fox does a total takedown of this outrage. We were on to them the whole time.
Kyle Rittenhouse lived in the area. He was not a “chaos tourist” or “vigilante.” He was a good kid who came to help his, yes his, community. Rittenhouse worked in Kenosha. His dad lived in Kenosha. His friends lived in Kenosha. He lived 17 minutes away in a border town in Illinois. More than half the people who work in Washington, D.C. don’t live there. Let’s ban them, those damned chaos tourists.
The gun used in the shootings was purchased with Rittenhouse’s money by a good friend, Dominick Black, who kept the gun in his dad’s gun safe in Kenosha with the plan to sell it to Rittenhouse when he turned 18. That young man is on trial in Kenosha for procuring that gun. He testified that if he helped the prosecution he might get a better deal from Thomas Binger in his case. Do tell.
The gun was legal. Prosecutors kept up the farce that it was not legal for more than a year until the last possible moment — before the jury got the case. That lie launched a thousand Leftist conspiracy theories. It needn’t have. They could have read the law and learned the truth. Looking at you, Bill de Blasio, you big tub of goo, and Jerry Nadler.
Thomas Binger and Jim Kraus withheld witnesses from the night in question. They lied. LIED — about the name of the man who provided drone video of the shooting of Joseph Rosenbaum. They knew who it was the whole time and then lied straightfacedly to the judge saying, “Gee, your honor we had no idea.” Of course, we later found out that the man’s name was on the witness list the whole time.
Kyle Rittenhouse Not Guilty Verdict Breaks Hollywood: ‘I Weep for This Country’
Left-wing Hollywood celebrities experienced a collective meltdown after a jury in Kenosha, Wisconsin, acquitted 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse of all charges on Friday. “I weep for this country,” one star lamented, while another claimed the verdict represented a victory for “white supremacy.”
Celebrities including Sophia Bush, Patton Oswalt, and Josh Gad took their cues from the establishment media by insisting on a racial angle to the verdict, even though all the parties in the case were white. Other celebrities simply vented their rage, like Alyssa Milano, who hurled expletives at her TV as the verdict was read.
“This is white supremacy in action,” Sophia Bush tweeted.
“So…the white guy goes free. Is that the message?” author Stephen King wrote.
“Fucking not guilty,” Alyssa Milano despaired.
In one bizarre instance, ABC’s Scandal star Kerry Washington paid tribute to the two men Rittenhouse shot and killed out of self-defense — Joseph Rosenbaum, a pedophile sex offender, and Anthony Huber, a habitual woman beater.
Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of all charges on Friday following three days of jury deliberation. The 18-year-old faced two charges of murder, one charge of attempted murder, and two charges of reckless endangerment stemming from last year’s Black Lives Matter riots that saw large parts of Kenosha burn to the ground.
Rittenhouse’s attorneys argued their client acted in self-defense when he was attacked while helping to defend property against violent rioters. Rittenhouse shot and killed two rioters after they threatened him — Joseph Rosenbaum, who reached for Rittenhouse’s rifle, and Anthony Huber, who hit Rittenhouse in the head and neck with a skateboard, and reached for the rifle.
Hollywood celebrities didn’t appear concerned with the details of the case when they reacted with rage to the jury’s decision.
One Tree Hill star and left-wing activist Sophia Bush called the verdict a “miscarriage of justice,” adding: “This is white supremacy in action.
GoFundMe Denied Rittenhouse Fundraising While Crowdsourcing Funds For BLM Rioters
The crowdsourced fundraising service GoFundMe sought to justify their early decision last year to terminate campaigns for Kyle Rittenhouse after the teen shooter was acquitted on all charges Friday.
“GoFundMe’s Terms of Service prohibit raising money for the legal defense of an alleged violent crime. In light of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, we want to clarify when and why we removed certain fundraisers in the past,” the platform wrote on Twitter with a link to a company statement.
Yet while Rittenhouse was denied crowdsourced funds for a political show trial charging the shooter with first-degree homicide in a case that was clearly self-defense, the website is still hosting campaigns soliciting donations for Black Lives Matter activists charged with violent crimes.
Facebook and Twitter Silent on Whether Kyle Rittenhouse Support Is Still Banned
Facebook and Twitter banned support for Kyle Rittenhouse across their platforms shortly after the Kenosha riots. After a jury in Wisconsin found Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges brought against him, those same platforms refuse to say if support for the teenager is still banned.
Rittenhouse was found not guilty on five charges including first-degree reckless homicide, two counts of first-degree intentional homicide and two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment. The presiding judge, Bruce Schroeder, also dismissed two additional weapons charges.
As Breitbart News recently reported, Big Tech companies continued to censor statements of support for Rittenhouse, even as the prosecution’s case fell apart:
Over a year old, the ban is still in place on both Facebook and Instagram and is even catching GOP Senate candidates like Josh Mandel in its net.
Facebook says supporting Rittenhouse violates its guidelines on “violence or dangerous organizations.”
Users on Twitter also report that the platform is still suspending them for supporting Rittenhouse.
The Rittenhouse Verdict Is Only Shocking If You Followed The Last Year Of Terrible Reporting
Kyle Rittenhouse was found innocent on all six felony charges today, already causing a great exploding of heads in the pundit-o-sphere. Unrest wouldn’t be surprising. How could it be otherwise? Colleagues in national media spent over a year telling the country the 18-year-old was not just guilty, but a moral monster whose acquittal would be an in-your-face affirmation of systemic white supremacy.
It used to bother me that journalists were portrayed in pop culture as sniveling, amoral weenies. Take William Atherton’s iconic portrayal in Die Hard of “Thornburg,” the TV-news creep who gasps, “Tell me you got that!” with orgasmic awe when an explosion rocks the Nakatomi building. I got that — I’d seen that face on reporters.
But risking the life of hero John McClane’s wife Holly by putting her name on TV, and getting the info by threatening the family nanny Paulina with an immigration raid? We’re bad, I thought, but not that bad. I got that it was a movie, but my father was a local TV man, and that one stung a bit.
MSNBC Thursday pulled a Thornburg in real life. Police stopped a man named James Morrison who was apparently following a jury bus, and said he was acting at the direction of a New York-based MSNBC producer named Irene Byon. Even if all you’re after is a post-verdict interview, if a jury gets the slightest whiff that the press is searching out their names and addresses, that’s clear intimidation. People will worry about the safety of their spouses and children as they’re deliberating. Not that it matters to anyone but the defense, prosecution, judge, jury, and taxpayers, but you’re also putting the trial at risk. I’ve covered plenty of celebrity trials, from Michael Jackson to the Enron defendants, and know the identifying-jurors practice isn’t unheard of. However, in a powder-keg case like this, it’s bonkers to play it any way but straight.
We’ve seen Die Hard-level indifference to social consequence from the beginning of this case. The context of the Rittenhouse shootings involved a summer of protests that began after the police killing of George Floyd, and continued in Kenosha after the shooting of Jacob Blake. We saw demonstrations of all types last summer, ranging from solemn candlelight vigils and thousands of protesters laying peacefully on their backs across bridges, to the burning of storefronts and “hundreds” of car thieves stealing “nearly 80” cars from a dealership in San Leandro, California. When the population is on edge, and people are amped and ready to lash out, that puts an even greater onus on media figures to get things right.
In a tinderbox situation like this one, it was reckless beyond belief for analysts to tell audiences Rittenhouse was a murderer when many if not most of them had a good idea he would be acquitted. But that’s exactly what most outlets did.
This is separate and apart from the question of whether or not you like Kyle Rittenhouse, or agree with his politics, or if, as a parent, you would want your own teenager carrying an AR-15 into a chaotic protest zone. The huge media error here was of the “Walls are closing in” variety, except the context was far worse. The “Walls are closing in” stupidity raised vague expectations among #Resistance audiences that at some unfixed point in time, Donald Trump would be pushed from office by scandal. In this case, the same people who poured out onto the streets last summer were told over and over that Rittenhouse was guilty, setting the stage for shock and horror if and when the “wrong” verdict came back.
Media figures got every element of this story wrong. As documented by TK contributor Matt Orfalea, the Young Turks alone spat out all sorts of misconceptions with shocking inattention: that Rittenhouse was “shooting randomly at people” after falling down, that he’d fired first, that there was no evidence that anyone had raised a gun at him, among many, many other errors. Belatedly, the show conceded some of these problems. However, they had access to the correct information in most of these cases on the night of the shootings.
Social Media Companies Suppressed Claims of Kyle Rittenhouse’s Innocence
Social media platforms rendered a verdict on Kyle Rittenhouse long before he went to trial, suppressing claims that he was innocent and blocking users from searching for details of the case.
Immediately after the anti-police riots that thrust Rittenhouse into the national spotlight, social media companies began to block users who expressed support for the Illinois teen. Twitter suspended the accounts of users who called Rittenhouse innocent, including the defendant’s own lawyer. Facebook said it “designated this shooting as a mass murder and … removed the shooter’s accounts from Facebook and Instagram.” The platform also blocked searches for “Kyle Rittenhouse.”
Social media platforms often intervene to suppress posts expressing a particular stance on controversial issues. Both platforms censored news stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop in the month before the 2020 election. Facebook blocked a Gold Star mother’s criticism of President Joe Biden and suppressed a song that criticized the president. Twitter and Facebook also suspended users who oppose vaccine mandates.
The fundraising platform GoFundMe also removed a page set up to support Rittenhouse, which the company said violated its ban on fundraisers involving “the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance.” GoFundMe supported fundraising for the family of one of Rittenhouse’s assailants, Anthony Huber. The site regularly hosts fundraisers for individuals associated with Black Lives Matter.
When smaller platforms began raising funds for Rittenhouse, hackers breached the donation lists. News outlets doxxed paramedics and police officers who gave small donations to Rittenhouse’s defense.
Twitter is still banning or suspending users for supporting Rittenhouse, even as the trial proceeds. Facebook searches for Rittenhouse’s name turn up no results. Neither platform responded to requests for comment.
Progressives, Democrats erupt over Kyle Rittenhouse acquittal: ‘This is disgusting’
Prominent Democrats, progressives, and left-leaning groups erupted Friday following Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal on all charges in his closely watched trial in Kenosha, Wis., calling it a miscarriage of justice.
The 18-year-old Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all five counts, including the two most serious of intentional homicide, in last year’s shootings during violent unrest in Kenosha. Rittenhouse successfully argued he acted in self-defense when he wounded one man and shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, D., fumed over the verdict.
“Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum are victims. They should be alive today. The only reason they’re not is because a violent, dangerous man chose to take a gun across state lines and start shooting people. To call this a miscarriage of justice is an understatement,” he said.
Democratic Rep. Adriano Espaillat, N.Y., called Rittenhouse a “murderer” whose “white tears” prevented justice, calling “our system is terribly broken.” Rittenhouse was widely mocked on the left when he cried on the stand while testifying about the shootings last week.
Left-wing MSNBC contributor and former Obama aide Ben Rhodes weighed in, calling it a “very dark message” to other “heavily armed would-be vigilantes.” Rittenhouse was repeatedly called a vigilante and even a murderer by left-leaning pundits in the volatile coverage of the emotional case.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee staffer Dyjuan Tatro tweeted, “No justice, no peace,” and added that the “American legal system is rooted in racism and functions to uphold white supremacy.
San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin criticized the verdict as well, and a “heartbroken” Democratic Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., called the verdict “white supremacy in action.”
“Depressing. And pathetic,” said former Biden deputy press secretary TJ Ducklo.
Vice President Kamala Harris’ niece Meena Harris wrote, “I have no words. This is disgusting.”
10 heinous lies about Kyle Rittenhouse debunked
Of all the willful lies and omissions in the media’s coverage of the Steele dossier, Brian Sicknick, the Covington kids, Jussie Smollett, the Wuhan lab, Hunter Biden’s laptop and so on, nothing beats the evil propaganda peddled about Kyle Rittenhouse.
They try to make the Rittenhouse case about race, but it’s about class, punching down at the white working-class son of a single mother because they don’t see him as fully human, and it makes them feel good.
They lie about him because they can.
The central media narrative is that Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist whose mother drove him across state lines with an AR-15 to shoot Black Lives Matter protesters. All lies.
“A white, Trump-supporting, MAGA-loving Blue Lives Matter social media partisan, 17 years old, picks up a gun, drives from one state to another with the intent to shoot people,” was typical from John Heilemann, MSNBC’s national affairs analyst.
Kyle Rittenhouse, Project Veritas, and the Inability to Think in Terms of Principles
On Monday night, we produced an in-depth video report examining the FBI’s targeting of O’Keefe and Project Veritas and the dangers it presents (as we do for all of our Rumble videos, the transcript will soon be made available to subscribers here; for now, you can watch the video at the Rumble link or on the player below). One of the primary topics of our report was the authoritarian tactic that is typically used to justify governmental attacks on those who report news and disseminate information: namely, to decree that the target is not a real journalist and therefore has no entitlement to claim the First Amendment guarantee of a free press.
This not-a-real-journalist tactic was and remains the primary theory used by those who justify the ongoing attempt to imprison Julian Assange. In demanding Assange’s prosecution under the Espionage Act, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wrote in The Wall Street Journal that “Mr. Assange claims to be a journalist and would no doubt rely on the First Amendment to defend his actions.” Yet the five-term Senator insisted: “but he is no journalist: He is an agitator intent on damaging our government, whose policies he happens to disagree with, regardless of who gets hurt.”
This not-a-real-journalist slogan was also the one used by both the CIA and the corporate media against myself and my colleagues in both the Snowden reporting we did in 2013, as well as the failed attempt to criminally prosecute me in 2020 for the year-long Brazil exposés we did: punishing them is not an attack on press freedom because they are not journalists and what they did is not journalism.
What is most striking about this weapon is that — like the campaign to agitate for more censorship — it is led by journalists. It is the corporate media that most aggressively insists that those who are independent, those who are outsiders, those who do not submit to their institutional structures are not real journalists the way they are, and thus are not entitled to the protections of the First Amendment. In order to create a framework to deny Project Veritas’s status as journalists, The New York Times claimed last week that anyone who uses undercover investigations (as Veritas does) is automatically a non-journalist because that entails lying — even though, just two years earlier, the same paper heralded numerous news outlets such as Al Jazeera and Mother Jones for using undercover investigations to accomplish what they called “compelling” reporting.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.