Yes thanks! I remember that one...it was pretty much the only one. "Could" was just hopeful thinking from one attorney "associated with the case."There ya go, here's two,
What to know about Wisconsin's open-carry laws, self defense and more in Kenosha protest shootings
Answers to questions like does Wisconsin have a stand-your-ground law and other relevant information on the fatal Kenosha shootings.www.jsonline.com
Yes thanks! I remember that one...it was pretty much the only one. "Could" was just hopeful thinking from one attorney "associated with the case."
And it confirms what I posted.
Yeah and back then I posted several links that showed that's an incorrect interpretation by posters here. The links I posted were from legal sites interpreting the law.
What is your source that says otherwise?
Greatest terror threat. Not the greatest criminal threat. I live in Baltimore. I’m often in Memphis, Cincinnati and Rochester. There’s murders and assaults by the thousands. Not much in the way of “right wing terrorism “. Lol^^
Funny how the article doesn't contain "BLM" or "ANTIFA", but PoS *just knows* the parties responsible are those Trump told him to hate.
Back in reality, we understand that the greatest terror threat - identified by Trump's own government - is right wing terrorism.
Many of us, you included have stated that for years - and look at how well DOJ handled it^^
Funny how the article doesn't contain "BLM" or "ANTIFA", but PoS *just knows* the parties responsible are those Trump told him to hate.
Back in reality, we understand that the greatest terror threat - identified by Trump's own government - is right wing terrorism.
I do not recall Obama interfering in the DOJ.C'mon, Kelly Ziminski had BLM on her backpack. They weren't hiding their allegiances. Not that they truly believed in The Cause, but still useful idiots for it.
In my mind, the injection of politics by both sides into criminal cases as demonstrated in these threads is what is pushing the narrative farther and farther from the truth. It isn't the left, it isn't the right, it's us and our stupid blame game. Ignore that game and these events are much easier to analyze and come to the correct conclusion, which shouldn't always align with your politics.
I don't recall saying he did.I do not recall Obama interfering in the DOJ.
Perhaps there will be something?
There are other statements in the source you posted that said what I did.THATs what you posted....and yet when faced with interpretations AGAINST what you posted, you say it confirms what you posted lol.
Ok.
ONE lawyer, representing or associated with Rittenhaus said it.Are you confused? Lawyers have said the law is poorly written and there is a case,
THAT confirms what you posted? Except that you said you posted 3 lawyers who said he's guilty etc.....
You are all over the map like normal.
ONE lawyer, representing or associated with Rittenhaus said it.
The other opinions in the article disagreed.
Rosenbaum tried taking his gun away before he shot anyone.
Huber died pulling on the barrel of someone else's rifle. Rosenbaum died chasing and attempting to disarm someone illegally (strongarm robbery, assault). Grosskreutz got shot in the arm after misreading the situation and not backing down when other people did and they didn't get shot. There was no murder.And Rittenhouse is being tried for the murder of Rosenbaum and Huber. After allegedly murdering Rosenbaum, Rittenhouse fled the scene of the murder and then allegedly murdered one of his pursuers, Huber.
Huber died pulling on the barrel of someone else's rifle. Rosenbaum died chasing and attempting to disarm someone illegally (strongarm robbery, assault). Grosskreutz got shot in the arm after misreading the situation and not backing down when other people did and they didn't get shot. There was no murder.
No, murder is not the charge in WI. The charge is 1st degree intentional homicide.Murder has yet to be determined. But the trial is for murder.
A conservative hero: a kid who crosses state lines with an illegal firearm in order to cause trouble; ends up killing two people in "self defense".
I'm not conservative, he's not a hero, he never "crossed state lines with an illegal firearm" and there is exactly zero evidence he went there to cause trouble, unlike his attackers who were there to break stuff and light fires.A conservative hero: a kid who crosses state lines with an illegal firearm in order to cause trouble; ends up killing two people in "self defense".
I don’t how bad it can get when BLM and Antifa can demand a “seat at the table” and the electee is too cowardly to tell them “NO, we don’t give arsonist thugs a seat anywhere except in prison”.The truth is finally coming out: BLM and antifa are the real terrorists in these riots.
A liberal who can't read, doesn't know the facts, and still espouses an opinion....... go figure.
I'm not conservative, he's not a hero, he never "crossed state lines with an illegal firearm" and there is exactly zero evidence he went there to cause trouble, unlike his attackers who were there to break stuff and light fires.
I admit I'm not married to the story. Which part did I get wrong?
Sure looks that way. Even if it isn't, it is irrelevant to his self defense.So Kyle was allowed to possess that firearm?
After he had murdered his first victim.He was trying to flee a mob of progressive Democrats chasing him down to murder him.
Why was the first victim chasing him?After he had murdered his first victim.
If you fascists think this is going to get Rittenhouse off you're even more out of touch with reality than we thought.This strengthens the case that Rittenhouse had reason to fear for his life and was acting in self defense when he shot and killed two rioters.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?