• 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!

You can clearly see "JoJo" Throw a moltv and chase Kyle Rittenhouse down (1 Viewer)

It is not what the OP claims in the title. Poor lighting can play a trick on the camera. It is a white object (bag) not a Molotov being thrown.
 
It is not what the OP claims in the title. Poor lighting can play a trick on the camera. It is a white object (bag) not a Molotov being thrown.
Yeah, there's no flames. It's a fake claim.
 
Yeah, there's no flames. It's a fake video.

Doesn't stop some from trying to slip something by. I would bet a number of people would believe the OP>
 
It is not what the OP claims in the title. Poor lighting can play a trick on the camera. It is a white object (bag) not a Molotov being thrown.

how do you know it's a bag? looks like a molotov to me, what else would he be throwing? lol a bag? seriously?
 
Ok a mod can change it to "throws flaming object at Kyle" if they want because I cant prove its definitely a moltv.
 
how do you know it's a bag? looks like a molotov to me, what else would he be throwing? lol a bag? seriously?

There are other pics of a plastic bag lying on the ground at the scene. No sign of any kind of fire or broken bottles.
 
Ok a mod can change it to "throws flaming object at Kyle" if they want because I cant prove its definitely a moltv.

They can also change it to completely debunked several times over. There is no flaming object. What you're seeing is the light reflecting through the plastic bag Rosenbaum threw. You can read the criminal complaint which also points it out.
 
how do you know it's a bag? looks like a molotov to me, what else would he be throwing? lol a bag? seriously?

It was debunked by not only video (slowed frame by frame) as well as noted in the criminal complaint. If you've watched the videos of Rosenbaum you'll see him with the same bag.
 
Ok a mod can change it to "throws flaming object at Kyle" if they want because I cant prove its definitely a moltv.

Still doesn't explain what he was doing tgere brandishing a gun. Now if someone was walking around with a gun and all you had to defend yourself was a molotov, what would you do? It seems like that was an act of self defense to me.
 
how do you know it's a bag? looks like a molotov to me, what else would he be throwing? lol a bag? seriously?

The video shows that as they cross the parking lot, Rosenbaum appears to throw an object at the
defendant. The object does not hit the defendant and a second video shows, based on where the
object landed, that it was a plastic bag.
Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed for the duration of this
video. A review of the second video shows that the defendant and Rosenbaum continue to move
across the parking lot and approach the front of a black car parked in the lot. A loud bang is heard
on the video, then a male shouts, “**** you!”, then Rosenbaum appears to continue to approach
the defendant and gets in near proximity to the defendant when 4 more loud bangs are heard.
Rosenbaum then falls to the ground.

Do you really think his lawyer wouldn't have mentioned something like a molotov in his "why this child isn't guilty" article? I mean really? :lol:
 
how do you know it's a bag? looks like a molotov to me, what else would he be throwing? lol a bag? seriously?

Looks can be deceiving. What does the rest of the evidence at the scene tell you? See flames? See smoke ? What other evidence do you have to prove it was a molotov?
 
Ok a mod can change it to "throws flaming object at Kyle" if they want because I cant prove its definitely a moltv.

Cudos for being honest, but as the far left has proven time and again, they will just use your honesty to shame you. It's how they roll.
 
Now if someone was walking around with a gun and all you had to defend yourself was a molotov, what would you do?

Explain to me how being the aggressor and chasing someone down with a molotov constitutes defending one's self?

.
 
Cudos for being honest, but as the far left has proven time and again, they will just use your honesty to shame you. It's how they roll.

Except the Molotov claim has been proven false in several ways already at the beginning of the week. The is absolutely nothing flaming when it lands and you can see it laying on the ground when Rittenhouse is making the call to his friend to say he just killed somebody.

It started as Molotov and when that fell it was quickly changed over to a bag with a brick. Which also doesn't work. But again, don't you think that would have been a big moment for his attorney to state in his article?
 
Except the Molotov claim has been proven false in several ways already at the beginning of the week. The is absolutely nothing flaming when it lands and you can see it laying on the ground when Rittenhouse is making the call to his friend to say he just killed somebody.

It started as Molotov and when that fell it was quickly changed over to a bag with a brick. Which also doesn't work. But again, don't you think that would have been a big moment for his attorney to state in his article?

I'm not claiming it was or it wasn't a molotov. Personally, I don't think it's relevant because whatever was thrown at him wasn't the reason Rittenhouse turned and shot him.

.
 
Except the Molotov claim has been proven false in several ways already at the beginning of the week. The is absolutely nothing flaming when it lands and you can see it laying on the ground when Rittenhouse is making the call to his friend to say he just killed somebody.

It started as Molotov and when that fell it was quickly changed over to a bag with a brick. Which also doesn't work. But again, don't you think that would have been a big moment for his attorney to state in his article?

Oh I didnt know it was a brick in a bag. If thats true thats just as bad. If I got a rifle and a dude throws a brick at me and comes for me in melee im not gonna wrestle with him im gonna shoot him right in his foot at 8 feet away and if hes not stumbling and still commin' for me then sorry pal he gets blown away at about 2 or 3 feet. Not gonna let him grab the rifle. Thats if I was being purely defensive and criminals were coming after me.
 
I'm not claiming it was or it wasn't a molotov. Personally, I don't think it's relevant because whatever was thrown at him wasn't the reason Rittenhouse turned and shot him.

.

Maybe for you but for some others in here it's what they based the initial shooting on. Things like: omg he literally just tried to burn that poor kid alive so of course he was justified to shoot him.
 
At 2:39 seconds into this youtube video. (assuming it stays up)

The Cause of the Kenosha Shooting + Grosskreutz POV Talking to Kyle While Running - YouTube

Kyle doesn't shoot him until "JoJo" gets within melee distance so he was obviously "chased down".

Here is a better video of the original incident and then the running follow-up:



We can clearly see Rosenbaum is the aggressor, throwing a weighted plastic bag (which flares up in the lighting looking like it's aflame); then continuing to chase Rittenhouse until he is shot.

Note: Rittenhouse does not flee initially. He clearly tries to go back to render help, and is told by another person to move back he can't help.

Then he makes a call. People start to yell he is the shooter, to get him.

That starts his running down the street.

When asked by the videographer why he is running, he says someone was shot and he is getting the police.

The rest of the video shows the mob chase and various attacks.

Here is a twitter series with 2 videos of the preceding period when Rosenbaum and crew are trying to push a burning trashcan toward a gas station, and someone puts the flames out. I believe that this is the same gas station featured in earlier videos when the "guards" Rittenhouse was with first encountered Rosenbaum.

https://twitter.com/livesmattershow/status/1298558424213594118

Simply select "view" to see the videos on this twitter feed.
 
Last edited:
Oh I didnt know it was a brick in a bag. If thats true thats just as bad. If I got a rifle and a dude throws a brick at me and comes for me in melee im not gonna wrestle with him im gonna shoot him right in his foot at 8 feet away and if hes not stumbling and still commin' for me then sorry pal he gets blown away at about 2 or 3 feet. Not gonna let him grab the rifle. Thats if I was being purely defensive and criminals were coming after me.

You're making the same mistake the others did. There was no brick in the bag either. They were just dead set in making that bag a villain to justify why Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum.
 
Except the Molotov claim has been proven false in several ways already at the beginning of the week. The is absolutely nothing flaming when it lands and you can see it laying on the ground when Rittenhouse is making the call to his friend to say he just killed somebody.

It started as Molotov and when that fell it was quickly changed over to a bag with a brick. Which also doesn't work. But again, don't you think that would have been a big moment for his attorney to state in his article?
It's hard to tell who started what. All we see is someone scream "he's got a gun" and Kyle starts running with Rosebaum chasing after him.

Little does it matter. Had Kyle not brought the assault rifle, there would have been no confrontation. He wanted one and made a choice to go find it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom