Wife just showed me a post (maybe FB?) from a friend of ours. Thought it was worth sharing.
If you are not happy with the Rittenhouse verdict, with everything else being equal, the only difference is Kyle Rittenhouse is your son – your decision switches to self-defense immediately. You are a champion for his defense. Since he is not your son, you had what the media gave you. And they gave you a doozy.
Before charges were even filed, the media labeled this 17-year-old kid as a white-supremacist. A troublemaker. A far-right terrorist. A racist. They didn't even know who he was yet, other than a name.
GoFundMe halted and erased any effort to fund-share his expenses. Social media censored pro-Rittenhouse posts, and in some cases blocked or banned users that made such posts.
The year leading up to the trial went fairly quiet. Once it started though, the media was back on their destructive rampage. Taking shots at Kyle as though they were at war trying to assassinate his character and mold public opinion to their favor. But it wasn’t only the media. Once again, the White House took a stance on a high-profile case. This time they post from Joe Bidens’s social media account a picture of Kyle and speak to ending white supremacy. Like the finely tuned propaganda and divisive machine they are, they set the stage like they have so many times before for us to choose a side. You’re either on the side of the Wisconsin law or you hate Kyle.
Once the trial begins it is painfully obvious, he acted in self-defense on all accounts. The prosecution bumbled over any type of case they had, which was none. If you watched 30 minutes of the trial, you knew this. Yet the media doubled down. Kyle was the aggressor, Kyle was there looking for a fight, etc. Top media lies proven false in the court:
1. Kyle drove across state lines with an illegal firearm. [Family Feud wrong answer buzzer sound here]. Wrong. The firearm was already in Kenosha locked in a safe at a buddy’s house
2. Kyle was too young to have the weapon. [Buzzer] Wrong. Wisconsin law allows 17 years old to possess said weapon.
3. The weapon was illegal. [Buzzer] Wrong. Legal rifle, legal length, legal ownership, therefore the judge presiding over the case dismissed this charge.
4. Kyle had no business in Kenosha [Buzzer] Wrong. Kyle lived 20 miles away in Illinois but worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha. The day before the shooting he drove across the border to go to work and stayed the night in Kenosha at a friend’s. Went to town the next day to help clean up from the previous night’s rioting. What a scumbag.
5. Kyle went to town that night armed, looking for trouble. [Buzzer] Wrong. Kyle went to town that night armed to try to help protect private owned businesses. Trouble found Kyle.
When there is any sudden loss of life, in most cases that is a horrible event and should be investigated thoroughly. In doing this investigation we found that the 1st man Rittenhouse shot and killed had a laundry list of reasons to not even be there. He was a convicted child rapist on numerous accounts. Why he’s not under the prison is beside me. He had just overdosed in a McDonald’s parking lot and was released that day from a mental ward. He was witnessed pushing a literal dumpster fire towards a gas station. Witnessed in the face of Rittenhouse and other concerned citizens, being very vocally aggressive. None of these actions beg to get shot and killed, but it was what happened next that ended up there. Again, if you’ve seen the footage you should be on the side of Wisconsin law.
The 2nd shooting: After being chased down the street while being threatened verbally, knocked over, kicked in the head and struck with a deadly object (skateboard) multiple times Kyle fired the next fatal shot. Don’t even try to argue a skateboard isn’t deadly. Have you ever held a skateboard? Swing that with force at someone’s head while they lay on the ground and tell me if it’s deadly or not. I’ll wait. Again, after seeing this in court you should be on the side of Wisconsin law.
The 3rd shooting happened mere seconds after the 2nd shooting as an armed assailant pointed a pistol at Kyle’s face. All 3 are clear examples of self-defense, but if you had to rank them in any kind of order, this one wins the day. I remember a few days after this happened I was chatting with some buddies about it. We all agreed it was almost as though Kyle was very disciplined with his moves here. The man with the pistol, Gaige Grosskreutz, halfway presented his pistol to Kyle and Kyle presented his rifle in return, bringing it back to rest after Gaige lowered his pistol, no shots fired. It was then the sworn testimony of Gaige Grosskreutz that Kyle only shot after Gaige presented his pistol in a threatening manner. The round from Kyle’s rifle tore through Gaige’s right bicep, leaving him rendered as a non-threat while Kyle ran away yet again trying to find police. Speaking of traveling to Kenosha with an illegal firearm; Grosskreutz traveled further than Kyle did to get there, and due to his criminal record, should not have been armed. Why isn’t Gaige being rung up on charges? Hopefully that is coming.
The fact of the matter is this trial should have never happened. All three instances were documented by digital video recordings, and by eyewitnesses. Did media pressure get to the state? Remember what was happening at the time. Coming off a nationwide set of riots stemming from the George Floyd incident, and more locally the police-involved shooting of resident Jacob Blake, the U.S. was nearing powder keg status. Kyle seemed to be a reason to maybe get some closure to this stained era in time. Crucify him in the media and let the court of public opinion be the jury.
The 12 jurors in the Rittenhouse case saw another avenue: let justice win. Certainly they felt the pressure of the outside world. They weren’t sequestered, you know they all have smart phones and can see what’s going on. But the simple fact in this case is Kyle Rittenhouse acted on 3 separate occasions in self-defense as Wisconsin law is written. It better be written the same way in the 49 other states. If there was only one right on the planet, it would be the right to defend yourself from harm. Why Kyle was standing in front of the business armed with a rifle is every much his right as it was the right of the people to be in front of the business screaming at him. Why do the rioters that are burning buildings to the ground and doing millions in damages get a pass, but those protecting the local businesses are labeled racists, and white supremacists? The media has turned into a propaganda machine, and people are all too quick to listen to them and parrot their sentiment without having all the facts first.
If you read this entire piece, thank you. Until the next civil unrest, my friends….