• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rittenhouse Defense Team Implodes

Aunt Antifa said:
I”m sure at some point this seemed like a good argumentative tactic. How’s it working out for you?
Click to expand...
I assume you were talking about yourself since it's already been pointed out to you multiple times that Rittenhouse did not cross state lines to Kenosha with a weapon prior to the shootings. You're obviously talking about yourself or you're completely clueless about the facts of the discussion and incapable of basic reading comprehension. Prove to me you're not a racist who crossed state lines to murder people. I'll wait.
 
jaeger19 said:
And witnesses that say that he did point firearms.
Click to expand...

I. DO. NOT. CARE. About your trumped up "witnesses." They're not credible sources of information, due to being members of the mob.

Unless you've got some actual proof that this occurred, it is not even worth discussing; full stop.

his stated purpose of being there and being armed which was to "protect private property"
Click to expand...

This is not a crime.

of course it would justify trying to defend yourself from the kid. "calling the police". Yeah.. lets wait for the police when a guy is pointing his firearm at you. I am sure the response time is what "moments".
Click to expand...

You don't get to just randomly attack people because you, personally, feel their behavior is inappropriate, or you THINK they might be looking at you funny. That's not how the law works.

Yeah. the problem was that Kyle would represent the fascists.
Click to expand...

No, I'm pretty sure I had it right. The "fascists" here would be the violent mob of jackboots, motivated by extremist political ideology, attempting to curb stomp by-standers for daring to be an inconvenience to their urban raiding.
 
Rhakron90 said:
I. DO. NOT. CARE. About your trumped up "witnesses." They're not credible sources of information, due to being members of the mob.

Unless you've got some actual proof that this occurred, it is not even worth discussing; full stop.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, the defense will surely be using “LYING LIBTARD MOB” and man it’s gonna be the thing that makes sure lil Kyle isn’t used as a semen sponge for the rest of his life in prison.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
Ah, yes, the defense will surely be using “LYING LIBTARD MOB”
Click to expand...

Which is simply one of the many, many reasons they will inevitably lose this case.

and man it’s gonna be the thing that makes sure lil Kyle isn’t used as a semen sponge for the rest of his life in prison.
Click to expand...

Something we need to know about you? This fixation you seem to have with seeing minor boys sexually assaulted by grown men is rather disturbing, I must say.

Is that why you are so adamant on defending Rosenbaum?
 
GummyVitamins said:
I assume you were talking about yourself since it's already been pointed out to you multiple times that Rittenhouse did not cross state lines to Kenosha with a weapon prior to the shootings. You're obviously talking about yourself or you're completely clueless about the facts of the discussion and incapable of basic reading comprehension. Prove to me you're not a racist who crossed state lines to murder people. I'll wait.
Click to expand...

Sure: I’m not about to stand trial for any such thing.

Kyle Rittenhouse? About to stand trial for those things.
 
Rhakron90 said:
Which is simply one of the many, many reasons they will inevitably lose this case.



Something we need to know about you? This fixation you seem to have with seeing minor boys sexually assaulted by grown men is rather disturbing, I must say.

Is that why you are so adamant on defending Rosenbaum?
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
Sure: I’m not about to stand trial for any such thing.
Click to expand...
That's not evidence you're not a white supremacist who murders people. Just means you haven't been caught. Please provide evidence you're not a racist and a murderer. You started this game. Provide evidence you're not a white supremacist at the very least. Surely you can do that as you've asked about Rittenhouse. If you can't prove you're not a white supremacist then you are one as per your previous statements.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
Well, then I’m gettin’ away with it. While poor Kyle fights for his life. :(
Click to expand...
The only thing Rittenhouse has to fear is being lynched by people like you who keep mistating basic facts of the case and have shown a failure to attempt to find any information that doesn't fill the whole white supremacist white kid who shoots white people for sport.
 
GummyVitamins said:
The only thing Rittenhouse has to fear is being lynched by people like you who keep mistating basic facts of the case.
Click to expand...

I kinda think he should probably fear the criminal justice system as they’re probably going to be doing the “lynching”. Folks like me are just gonna point and laugh.
 
GummyVitamins said:
Only because he's white, right? If it were a bunch of white guys chasing down a black kid and he defended himself you're be using it as an excuse to riot in protest of the black kid.
Click to expand...

Add the words “nationalist murderer” after “white” and yup. Bigly.
 
Rhakron90 said:
By which you mean the prosecution, of course...



So then you admit, that you do not actually care about the law, and are concerned only with ideologies and racial backgrounds of the persons involved?
Click to expand...

then you probably should have read what I had written closer. If you care to change your statement, that’s your poor judgment. You were right the first time tho. ;)
 
Aunt Antifa said:
then you probably should have read what I had written closer. If you care to change your statement, that’s your poor judgment. You were right the first time tho. ;)
Click to expand...

Attempting to rely upon the unverifiable testimony of people with motive to be untruthful, in a case where actual video evidence is readily available, is a sure-fire recipe to lose that case.
 
Rhakron90 said:
Attempting to rely upon the unverifiable testimony of people with motive to be untruthful, in a case where actual video evidence is readily available, is a sure-fire recipe to lose that case.
Click to expand...

I hope the prosecution is reading this!!
 
GummyVitamins said:
Only because he's white, right? If it were a bunch of white guys chasing down a black kid and he defended himself you're be using it as an excuse to riot in protest of the black kid.
Click to expand...


What a racist comment


Please pick an instance where this has happened.
 
Rich2018 said:
What a racist comment
Click to expand...

How in the Hell is that "racist?"

Please pick an instance where this has happened.
Click to expand...

We've literally had race riots this year because black suspects shot themselves before the police even had a chance to lay hands on them.
 
jaeger19 said:
Rittenhouse IS CHARGED WITH FELONY HOMOCIDE.
Click to expand...
No, he isn't. The word is actually "homicide," and there is no "felony homicide" law in Wisconsin. The proper term is "felony murder," but he's not charged with that. He's charged with intentional and reckless homicide. Both are felonies, but "felony murder" is something different.

That means both the DA and a Judge..felt that there is evidence he violated the law.
Click to expand...
It means the DA thinks he can get prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt (or he has/wants to bring the charges for political reasons), and the judge thinks there is enough evidence to go to trial.

And you are telling me I "don't know the law"
Click to expand...
Based on your fundamental errors in just this post, that's not at all an unreasonable assumption.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
So he crossed state lines with a gun to go to a “mob” zone so he WOULDNT shoot anyone.

Is “He did NOT want to commit mass murder” the arg now? No one ever painted the loser as anything other than another loser with a gun that shit his pants and used it to **** things up even more.
Click to expand...

For probably the 20th time, Rittenhouse did not cross the state line with the gun.

It was kept in Wisconsin by Dominic Black at his step dad's home.

That said, he did intentionally grab that weapon and take it with him that night.


GummyVitamins said:
You don't even understand the very basic facts of this case. You should actually research what you're talking about because this proves you are wholly ignorant of the facts. Making such a statement at this point is just pure ignorance.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the "crossing state lines with the gun" belief has been brought in repeatedly by many people from both ends. I still believe that the presence of the weapon did at least three things in regards to Rittenhouse.

First, it gave him the balls to walk around and give orders to people. He's even seen on video doing that after one of the interviews.

Second, it put him at odds with the protesters who weren't there to cause destruction or be violent.

The third thing was likely due to looking like a kid, but being in a group of militia members who weren't attending their first rodeo, but he clearly caught the attention of the ones live streaming that night. The only other video I've seen that was involving the militias was the one with Balch discussing what police supposedly told him. But there are what? Three interviews with Rittenhouse? Look at McGinnis. He literally was trailing him while live streaming.

Had Rittenhouse been unarmed and simply walking around offering Band-Aids and whatever I'd bet big money he wouldn't have had the attention of anybody and he most certainly wouldn't have told Rosenbaum to do anything. Or anyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom