The aftermath of the Rittenhouse verdict
As is my habit as a commentator, I do more than absorb news reports – because they are generally unreliable. If you want to weigh the facts of a situation, you have to get to primary sources. In the Rittenhouse case, that means listening to the actual testimony and view the videos.
Based on what I saw and heard, I previously expressed my belief that Rittenhouse would be acquitted – and acquittal was the just outcome. In fact, I found the evidence overwhelming in his favor. I believed that any objective observer would see this as a clear case of self-defense. But objective observers of politicized cases are few and far between.
I believe that was why virtually all the pre-verdict television analysts expressed their belief that Rittenhouse would be acquitted – even those who said they would be unhappy with that outcome. But once the verdict was in, the media talking heads spun the case beyond the borders of reality.
Interestingly, their original assessment that Rittenhouse would walk, was not based on the actions of the judge. Most of those who were lawyers and prosecutors said he was a good judge, and his calls were proper. That was not the post-verdict view.
Initially, they did not call the jury a bunch of racists. In fact, as the jury deliberations carried on for several days, most observers opined that they were doing a good job by taking their time and considering all the evidence and the jury instructions very carefully. The left-wing media opinion flipped after the verdict.
I was most impressed by those with legal backgrounds and courtroom experience – not so much the jaded political pundits and race baiting activists who wanted a conviction regardless of the evidence – and were poised to use an acquittal to fuel their false narratives.
Unfortunately, once the verdict was in, it was the jaded political pundits and the race-baiting activists who dominated the news. They reacted as if this was one of those kangaroo court deals that typified the old Democrat southland. They played the race card even though neither Rittenhouse nor those he shot were minorities.
The most provocative and incendiary responses came from MSNBC … of course. The Joy Reid show was hosted by Morgan State University Professor Jason Johnson — with Reid making a guest appearance on her won show. The panel included Al Sharpton, former federal prosecutor Paul Butler, and Elie Mystal. Not only was the panel all black, but it was composed of the most strident race card players – using MSNBC’s accommodating platform and outright misrepresentations of fact to stoke racial anger.
They presented the verdict as empowering white males to go around willy-nilly shooting peaceful black protesters indiscriminately — and then plead self-defense. Anyone who followed the case and educated themselves on the self-defense laws would know that is totally untrue. Self-defense is not an easy case to win unless the facts are compelling – and it never applies unless there is a clear case of aggression on the part of those killed.
The problem with the left is that they do not seek justice but insist that their side must always win — evidence be damned. Most Americans – white and black – saw what happened in the George Floyd case – and called it a murder. And police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted of murder based on the FACTS. This case was different.
The FACTS established that Rittenhouse met the legal requirements for self-defense. And the jury correctly acquitted him.
But those on the left refuse to accept a just decision in a court of law. Suddenly, it was the judge putting his thumb on the scale in favor of Rittenhouse. Suddenly, the verdict was attributable to the failure of the prosecutors. Suddenly, the three rioters were public servants sacrificing their lives and bodies to stop a shooter. Had they not attacked Rittenhouse, no one would have been shot. The riot, itself, was referred to as a peaceful protest.
In our justice system, the criminal background of the three thugs cannot be entered into evidence. But in response to those on the left making heroes of them in the court-of-public-opinion, it is reasonable to actually look at the character of the three.
On CNN, Chirs Cuomo said that none of the individual involved had records of violence. What? All three of those shot by Rittenhouse had convictions for an array of serious felonies – assault, domestic violence, and even sexual abuse of children under the age of 10 in the case of Joseph Rosenbaum.
Still unanswered is whether authorities will charge Gaige Grosskreutz. He was the fellow who pointed gun at Rittenhouse and established the strongest case for self-defense. As a convicted felon, Grosskreutz was not allowed to possess a gun. He could get up to 60 years on that charge. But will he be above the law based on prosecutorial discretion?
Whatever happened in those few minutes of confrontation, the dead and the wounded were not nice guys. They were thugs and worse. They were not peacefully protesting. They were rioting.
What bothers me most about the left-wing media reports is that those who produce those shows and appear on those shows are not stupid. They can see the same facts as everyone else. They are even more informed than the average citizens – and maybe that is the problem.
They twist and spin the story to reinforce their false narrative that white folks in America are hopelessly – even genetically –racist. These media personalities are intentionally stoking racial division for political and personal reasons. Virtually all the black personalities on CNN and MSNBC played the race card – all the way up to the Vice President of the United States. Booker T. Washington was spot on when he said:
“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
Those who propagandize rather that report are the profiteers of prejudice – achieving fame and fortune by stirring the pot of racism. They cause the unrest and divisiveness they purport to oppose. Their gross misreporting of the facts and they fraudulent spin have converted too much of the so-called news media into a propaganda mill. They are not journalists. The Rittenhouse case is just the latest example.
So, there ‘tis.
The aftermath of Kyle Rittenhouse being found not guilty isn’t as bad as the aftermath of innocent people having their homes and businesses destroyed by lawless thugs. But the three stooges wasn’t shot for the destruction. They were shot while trying to murder Kyle. And the aftermath of police officers being ambushed also doesn’t compare with the totality right decision from the jury.
Larry starts with, and I will paraphrase: “News reports are generally unreliable.” That’s either a bold opinion or a remarkable factoid. It sounds like Larry is saying that a a minimum of 51% of all news reports are unreliable. I would love to see that source. Or he’s about to give us another anecdote laced with his feelings.
I am all for primary sources. It seems that the ever-focused Larry will spend most of the rest of his article commenting on those unreliable news reports and commentators as if they were more important than primary research. Except when he conflates the media to the entire liberal demographic or the Democrats to the entire media establishment, seems to swing both ways.
So we have YAKRS, pronounced yackers for Yet Another Kyle Rittenhouse Story where truth, justice, and the Amerikan way is all served best by blowing two people away and blowing the arm off another only to be terribly maligned by the evil liberal and media cultures and somehow, based on the primary court testimony and tapes, Larry concludes: “Those who propagandize rather that report are the profiteers of prejudice – achieving fame and fortune by stirring the pot of racism. They cause the unrest and divisiveness they purport to oppose. Their gross misreporting of the facts and they fraudulent spin have converted too much of the so-called news media into a propaganda mill.” I am sorry. Where’s Waldo? Where’s Kyle? Where’s the transcripts? Where’s the tapes? Wasn’t this a very white guy, a guy who might break down at any moment, a guy who gives Proud Boy signals cuz his lawyer said to, a white guy who shot three other white guys, killing two and blow the arm off the other. How did you get from “primary sources” to focus on cable-casters who declare this is racism when your point was to focus on primary sources and research.
Frank let’s you and I call a truce of agreement. A great verdict came out of Brunswick Georgia today. Those 3 bastards are going away forever. And I hope that they put them in the general population. Karma is a bitch. Happy thanksgiving.
And just where are the half-dozen articles about the Ahmaud Arbery case? When it fits the “good guy with a gun” is let go because of self defense, PBP is all over it. When “good guys with a gun” are “protecting” their neighborhood and claiming self defense, but they get convicted, nary a peep. These two cases are exactly the same, with two different legal outcomes (unfortunately, for the victims, they’re still dead).
A guy in Tennesee was told he’d have to wait 10 minutes for his “hot and ready” pizza (which apparently the shop had run out of). So he went outside to wait, and came back in with an assault rifle, threatened the staff, held an employee at gunpoint, until a customer who had pre-ordered a pizza gave him hers. This 63-year old guy is being held for $90K bond, and is now facing at least 15 years in prison. I’d bet he’s not vaxxed either…
Can PBP legitimately tell me that there there should be no limit on who owns a gun, or what kind of guns they should be able to own, and that there should be no laws regarding guns? Does it not make sense that when there are so many guns around, they will be used in situations where it was not called for? Why is it the “conservative” position to let every nut in the country own any kind of gun they want?
John, I know three families and many, many friends that might hold life above property damage.
The young man was failed by the “adults” in his life, and now he will be used by the radical right as a poster child for vigilantism.
If his mother truly cared for the teen, as she claimed, she would not have driven him into a chaotic scene of civil unrest. He would not have been allowed to be in the situation and lives would not have been ended or turned upside down for no reason. I’ll be damned if I let my teens go protect some used car dealership of someone who we don’t know and didn’t ask for our help.
This entire situation could have been avoided if the adults in his life would have adulted instead of giving into the whims of a wanta be child soldier.
I agree with you Ben. I was shocked at all of the truth the media did not report an they way they spun the whole thing. So as for Larry’s post, I think he is correct about media in general. And based on the way the laws are written, acquittal was the correct jury decision. What shocked me most was the lack of parenting in this child’s life. Based on the later reporting that the gun was never transported across state lines and was in fact in the home of Kyle’s family member in Wisconsin, I was horrified at the thought that any parent would allow a child to take an AR-15 out of the house to to “help out the police” at a violent demonstration, much less that they would allow Kyle to become a verbally contracted security force for a car lot. From my many years of high school teaching, this kid has issues that I call “programming issues” which start years before the final incident. This kid had grandiose views of himself and his abilities and place in life which led him into what I call a “hero complex”. Kyle most likely had been fed a steady diet of parental views, news, movies, music, and opinion over the years that supported his mental development of grandiosity and that he could make the difference where the police could not. Unfortunately there is no law on how one should parent their child and I do not think we want to go there. But I agree with you that at the root cause of this entire sad incident is parenting.
I would be proud of him if he was my son. And why should the laws tell us how to parent? I’m also glad that he knew how to handle it gun
Joe, I guess that’s the problem with our society right now.
I’d prefer to teach my kids to avoid intentionally putting themselves in a situation with a high probability of unrest.
But you do you, I’m sure your kids will eventually pay dearly for having a brain washed wannabe vigilante as a father.
I really doubt that this verdict change who you are , how you act, and how I will respond to racism, name calling, and the other stupid things done to control the discussion. Bullies suck, even trollish virtual ones.
Ok. I tried to be supportive. All I get is bullshit from Marxist assholes. But know this. I don’t go around shooting people and I’m keeping my guns
Any thoughts about the armed colored militia hanging around the court house in Georgia? Or the colored boy running down the people in Wisconsin? That son of a bitch should hang. And why was he out of jail? But I guess he was getting even with whitey. But that’s a two way street
So quit being a trolling bully you moron. We aren’t going to cave to your kind
Great effort! Sure am glad you really tried. What a righteous task. You can feel justified that you’re the better man and it’s them, not you. As you say, it’s just “ bullshit from Marxist assholes..”. Not that sincere olive branch you put out to join together in your Christian joy of retribution for three life sentences for three racists like yourself. I really didn’t know why I didn’t leap for that little piece of holiday cheer.
Thanks for the win. I had less than 24 hours in the pool for the childish name calling to resume. Others thought you would make a day.
I wasn’t offering an olive branch. Not to you leftist fools. I was only saying that the three assholes in Georgia were rightfully convicted. Murder is murder. And it wasn’t any of their business what the guy was doing in their neighborhood. I say only shoot people if it’s absolutely necessary to save innocent lives. The idiot rednecks were wrong.
“Frank let’s you and I call a truce of agreement.”
“I wasn’t offering an olive branch. Not to you leftist fools.”
Sorry that I misread the word “truce” as an possible olive branch, you know: truce=white flag=olive branch versus someone just acting like the same ole ass-wipe he always does, given the actions he takes. That’s right, ass-wipe, or better known as the toilet paper ground under Donald J. Trump’s foot.
And Phillip, I am not asking anyone to “cave to my kind,” that would most certainly be farthest from my thoughts. This is America after all. I am truly sorry you feel threatened on an anonymous website when seeing differing ideas. Oh, the horror of it all.
The principles in all this, including Georgia, seem confused by many who see it as a struggle between good and evil as represented by the left and the right. You have got to realize the left owns guns, owns guns for protection only, not hunting, and knows how to use them. The left is no for burning down homes and businesses anymore than the right wants to come out an shoot people are are doing that. This IS about a number of issues:
– 2nd amendment rights and controls
– self defense and stand your ground laws
– shooting unarmed people
– systemic and overt racism
And in those battles, in that war, we did not lose. We just did not win. Even Georgia is a pyric victory for liberals, it changes nothing until something changes. Nor is it reason for the right to say: “see, there’s no racism or systemic racism in America.” And to the right, the affirmation of the law, via the jury system, is not a win, it changes nothing until something changes. Affirmation of what is and what it should be is good; affirmation of what is, and perhaps should not be, is not as good, but not necessarily bad.
I just don’t see left and right expressed in Kenosha. What I do see is affirming of open carry for younger ages under 18, affirmation of self defense and underage gun purchases albeit with some flaky laws, and affirmation of systemic racism in the Kenosha police department resulting the shooting of an Black man armed with a boxcutter knife seven times in the back. With guns already drawn by two cops facing Blake, the first four shots hit Blake in the back as he turned towards them with a knife in his hand. The next three shots were aimed at his back but hit just over in his side as he fell. What the cops didn’t know was that Blake had already been tazed, twice that night and was probably pretty fuzzy still. Bad luck, bad information flow.
Sure, the world, especially the protestors should have waited for forensics, but this shit keeps happening and one might see how people might think that’s a lot of bullets, too many bullets, a hailstorm of bullets that the State said proudly: “but he didn’t empty the clip so he was prudent.” As prudent as the 1/6 tourists, but shit happens and this crowd of protestors got out of control and broke the law, many laws. A total of 100 buildings damaged, 40 of which are destroyed, about $50M in damages. So far, 250 Protestors arrested, none with help from Kyle Rittenhouse and the other patriots, mostly rightfully arrested I would imagine. There are still arson suspects out there. Blake has a number of active civil suits. The DOJ is involved given the civil suits touch on their criminal investigation of something, probably not Blake himself.
At $50M, 250 arrests, average fine of $20K; that covers the $50M, can we move on? That’s before insurance payouts.
So I just don’t see the right and left here, I only see what I think is right and wrong.
– most agree in self defense, we might disagree what these tapes show, what the witnesses said, and the amount of shooting young Kyle pulled off, but hard to imagine that anyone disagrees in self defense. We may want better laws, more specifics, so that a 17-year old can’t roam the streets looking for trouble during a troubled time, and get away with murder, but the law is the law, for now.
– most agree that shooting unarmed people raises the bar on any defense where someone is injured or worse; i mean if the folks they are facing don’t have guns, why does the gunslinger need to kill them.
– I think we all agree racism is not just bad, it’s so wrong as to be intolerable. Like child pornography wrong. There is no doubt that there is systemic and overt racism in the Kenosha police force, the chief speaks it every day; the statistics and complaints support it. For years.
– second amendment is in The Bill of Rights, it’s constitutional. The states do what they do, according to the Constitution. I think though we all agree there’s something wrong when a 17-year old taking to the street with a assault rifle to become the police. No one has to be against the 2nd to be against that. This case seems to follow the law, but I think questioning how the law allows that, either the gun purchase or the open carry by a minor during civil unrest, or both could probably be enhanced to the benefit of all. I mean if this is what gunowners define as the Second Amendment working, we have another discussion. Again, the Second Amendment stands, the Wisconsin interpretation should not allow a repeat of this.
I really do think it’s about right and wrong, it’s not about left and right
If no 2nd amendment crime would be worse. People are waking up. Becoming woke. I carry a gun because I don’t carry a cop And gun control doesn’t stand much of a chance since millions more people are arming themselves. And we are expecting a victory in the recent scotus gun case. We just don’t know how broad it will be. Carry license will probably stay but be made easier to obtain. Hopefully
And yet you did not feel compelled to go to Kenosha or any other disturbance but think the second amendment specifically allows a 17-year old crybaby killer to suit up in body armor, load his assault rifle with full metal jackets, and roam the streets during urban unrest looking for trouble?
How young of Kyle’s does the second allow? 12 year olds with glocks?
Somehow, I just don’t see Kyle as the embodiment of the founder’s desired outcome of the second.
Kyle is a good role model for young people
It’s hard to see anything with your head up your ass.