Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

#3,051
#3,051
Sandman 423 said:
If you don't think there were enough idiots out there to put President Biden in office, then you should talk to more people. You will be amazed with how few "smart" people have a clue about anything other than what they do everyday.
Click to expand...
No . I don’t believe there are enough idiots. That’s why he relied on dead people turning democrat. Which is also why he needs the boarders open and no voter ID so those dead democrats don’t have to vote again.
 
#3,052
#3,052
Franklin Pierce said:
EXCLUSIVE: 'Jump-kick man' who was filmed kicking Kyle Rittenhouse in the head before the teen shot at him is revealed as a career criminal with an open domestic violence charge for 'throwing his girlfriend to the ground and attacking her'
Click to expand...
I thought this was known.
 
#3,053
#3,053
Franklin Pierce said:
EXCLUSIVE: 'Jump-kick man' who was filmed kicking Kyle Rittenhouse in the head before the teen shot at him is revealed as a career criminal with an open domestic violence charge for 'throwing his girlfriend to the ground and attacking her'
Click to expand...
I’m sure most of them are. It’s the dregs of society that make up the armies of Antifa and BLM. The Democrat leaders know who they’re recruiting to carry out their acts of violence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood and Franklin Pierce
#3,057
#3,057
SGMVols said:
The judge was a fool to not order sequestration of the jury. Least shocking news ever that the leftist media tried to doxx jurors.
Click to expand...
It’s definitely a little off, but maybe he did that in hopes of a mistrial so that everyone can walk away from this.
 
#3,059
#3,059
KB5252 said:
How does one tell peaceful protesters who just want to shout at them and bang on the hoods of their cars from protestors who shout at them and then drag them out their cars and assault them?


The answer to that question is you can't, so a being it impossible you bet on the side of self preservation or roll the dice and hope your decision doesn't put you or your kids in jeopardy. It's a horrible decision to have to make. Who is ultimately to blame for putting one in that position?

Simple strategy is stay out of the road. If you don't you invite the decision the drivers are forced to make.
Click to expand...


Do I understand you correctly to be saying that because a driver doesn't know who is protesting and who is rioting then that means that the solution is for there to be no protesting? So much for the 1st amendment! And so much for taking responsibility for one's actions. That driver in Charlotte knew damn well what he was doing.
 
#3,060
#3,060
1vol8 said:
No . I don’t believe there are enough idiots. That’s why he relied on dead people turning democrat. Which is also why he needs the boarders open and no voter ID so those dead democrats don’t have to vote again.
Click to expand...

I didn't think there were enough idiots to vote Trump in to office in 2016. Surprise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandman 423
#3,061
#3,061
lawgator1 said:
Do I understand you correctly to be saying that because a driver doesn't know who is protesting and who is rioting then that means that the solution is for there to be no protesting? So much for the 1st amendment! And so much for taking responsibility for one's actions. That driver in Charlotte knew damn well what he was doing.
Click to expand...

In the streets? Yes. There should be no protesting on streets unless approved before hand (I believe Charlotte actually had a permit to shut the street down).

Your first amendment doesn’t allow you to prevent the free movement of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and W.TN.Orange Blood
#3,063
#3,063
lawgator1 said:
Do I understand you correctly to be saying that because a driver doesn't know who is protesting and who is rioting then that means that the solution is for there to be no protesting? So much for the 1st amendment! And so much for taking responsibility for one's actions. That driver in Charlotte knew damn well what he was doing.
Click to expand...

Charlotte or Charlottesville?

The road that people were standing on in Charlottesville was closed, but the traffic cop had been relocated without being replaced and somebody had moved the barricades. Other cars had gone down the street and none of them felt the need to run people over. None of them were pulled out of their cars and beaten. Fields went around those cars to ram protestors.

I don’t think you can ascribe any fault to the victims in that case, which is why he’s serving multiple life sentences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#3,065
#3,065
Vol8188 said:
In the streets? Yes. There should be no protesting on streets unless approved before hand (I believe Charlotte actually had a permit to shut the street down).

Your first amendment doesn’t allow you to prevent the free movement of others.
Click to expand...


Does that rule apply to Republicans too? Does it apply to marches for gun rights or against abortion? Does it apply to the crowd of Trumpsters whose actions on 1/6 certainly physically restricted a lot of people.
 
#3,066
#3,066
lawgator1 said:
Do I understand you correctly to be saying that because a driver doesn't know who is protesting and who is rioting then that means that the solution is for there to be no protesting? So much for the 1st amendment! And so much for taking responsibility for one's actions. That driver in Charlotte knew damn well what he was doing.
Click to expand...
What I am saying is if the road is being blocked by protestors and those protestors are showing aggression towards you of any kind, shouting banging on your hood etc then you'd be stupid to sit there and wait.

My understanding is the street in Charlottesville was blocked for the protest specifically. That is fine, police safely put the protestors in an area where they should have been safe.

The vast majority of the incidents you referred to happened because protestors on a whim decided they would block a road and intimidate commuters. Those would be the group my post was referencing, 1st amendment doesn't apply when you are effectively holding people hostage.

The loon in Charlottesville got what he had coming. Those people did not deserve what happened to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and Sandman 423
#3,067
#3,067
lawgator1 said:
Does that rule apply to Republicans too? Does it apply to marches for gun rights or against abortion? Does it apply to the crowd of Trumpsters whose actions on 1/6 certainly physically restricted a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. But if we are being honest only one side is known for intentionally blocking crowded streets. There’s a black mother in GA still grieving over the loss of her young daughter from one of those groups of thugs who blocked traffic
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#3,069
#3,069
lawgator1 said:
Does that rule apply to Republicans too? Does it apply to marches for gun rights or against abortion? Does it apply to the crowd of Trumpsters whose actions on 1/6 certainly physically restricted a lot of people.
Click to expand...
Yes, anything not approved beforehand and steps taken to keep people safe.... It is common sense. Unless the road is blocked off by police don't get on it. I mean didn't our parents make this abundantly clear as kids?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, W.TN.Orange Blood and Ttucke11
#3,070
#3,070
KB5252 said:
Yes, anything not approved beforehand and steps taken to keep people safe.... It is common sense. Unless the road is blocked off by police don't get on it. I mean didn't our parents make this abundantly clear as kids?
Click to expand...

That’s how I feel about bicyclists. If your kid were to ride their bike on the hwy you’d beat them. But some 40 year old with autism can forget to put pants over his boxer briefs, and a go pro on his helmet, and now I have to share the road with him?
 
#3,074
#3,074
Anti-Rittenhouse protester Body-Slams Reporter outside Kenosha courthouse, Arrested for Battery

Anthony Chacon also facing Bail Jumping Charges, meaning he has a prior Criminal Record

One of the two protesters arrested outside the Kenosha courthouse – the man seen wearing a "F--- Kyle" T-shirt as officers took him into custody – is facing charges related to bail jumping, meaning he has a prior criminal record, Fox News Digital has learned.

The 20-year-old male suspect, Anthony Chacon, has been charged with felony bail jumping, misdemeanor bail jumping, battery, resisting and disorderly conduct, Sgt. David Wright, a spokesman for the Kenosha Sheriff’s Department, confirmed to Fox News Digital.

anthony-chacon.jpg

Anthony Chacon, 20, has been charged with felony bail jumping, misdemeanor bail jumping, battery, resisting and disorderly conduct. (Kenosha County Sheriff's Department)

Wisconsin court records show two open cases for someone matching Anthony Chacon's name and age – one from Sept. 2020 for domestic abuse and disorderly conduct, and a second from Jan. 2021 for substantial battery-intend bodily harm, party to a crime and misdemeanor bail jumping.

Anti-Rittenhouse protester body-slams reporter outside Kenosha courthouse, arrested for battery
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and BreatheUT
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top