\
At least he has some talking points, instead of the same old Faux News drivel. yawn.

Do you realize that Gaige only pointed his gun at Rittenhouse after Rittenhouse shot the first two individuals? You don't get a self defense to murder if you're the first to use deadly force.

Wow-clearly no concept of the law, and clearly no attempt to actually read THE FACTS from the trial transcripts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but given the actual facts of the case, I could not disagree more.

Yeah, I do see a LOT of MSM drivel. No facts to support the drivel, but hey, it is "their truth". Remember, "Facts don't matter, "truth" matters".......

He defended himself from being attacked by three thugs, duh! Good thing he had the weapon with him and knew how to use it or he would be dead.

Clearly the laws of self defense are not understood.

You are in effect saying that a person has to have deadly force applied to them first, BEFORE they can protect themselves. Really? Ummm...that is so, politely, illogical that just the statement alone is damming in and of itself.

Because you argue about the 'facts' doesn't mean you actually know them or read them. Rittenhouse shot un-armed people, Gaige heard other people saying Rittenhouse was an active shooter and pointed his gun at him to thwart him and Rittenhouse shot him as well. Those are facts from the trial.

Actually, I have watched the trial and read transcripts from the trial. I even posted a link to the transcripts in an earlier post to support my posts. Pray tell, where are the links that support your statements? Again, one also needs to understand the self defense laws.

"Gunned down"...

You spelled "defended himself from" wrong...

What he wore at a bar after being released from jail is irrelevant...

Those first two attacked Rittenhouse BEFORE he shot them. Grosskruetz used deadly force by pointing his gun at Rittenhouse. It was only AFTER that threat did Rittenhouse shoot.

In other words, you're wrong...

Praying won't even help her stick to the facts. :a040:

Complete and utter BS...

You don't need a gun to be armed. Grossbaum made verbal threats and then physically attacked Rittenhouse, trying to get his gun. THAT is not being "unarmed"...

The 2nd guy (forgot his name) used his skateboard as a weapon, stomped Rittenhouse in the face and went to grab his rifle. Again, not being "unarmed"...

Here is another example of a skateboard being used as a deadly weapon...

Skateboard used as weapon in alleged San Francisco hate crime

There was ZERO testimony from Grosskreutz that he was trying to "thwart" Rittenhouse...

He did testify that when he put his hands up (while still holding his gun), that Rittenhouse lowered his weapon and that he was not shot until he then advanced on Rittenhouse and pointed his own gun at him... So there's that...