In self defense he killed two violent thugs who attacked him. If he had not had the rifle to protect himself he would be dead.

Or… the others would not have died or got injured if THEY have not been there… works both ways. Hindsight is 20/20.

...

Wow....

Still no condemnation for the people who had no business being in Kenosha rioting and destroying private property. (Rittenhouse does have family and friends who lived there-how many of the rioters can say that?)

Still no condemnation for the FOUR ADULTS who attacked Rittenhouse (don't forget "yellow pants", the FELON who kicked Rittenhouse in the face), putting his life in jeopardy.

Still no condemnation for MSM for the deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.

Recognizing that for some, there is no room to admit that maybe, to put it politely, they were misinformed, they would rather still refer to being a "supposedly" country of laws. In effect, that statement ignores the PROOF presented at trial. IMO, that thinking is COUNTER to the rule of law.

We will now see our population and it will be a diverse reaction. On one side Rittenhouse will be made VERY wealthy with all that SHOULD BE sued. One the other side RIOTS.

As I've said before, there is right, there is wrong and then there is our legal system.

Coincidence? It took the jury almost a week to find Rittenhouse not guilty. The verdict on friday. All three shot have records as being criminals. The police were close by, they didn't hear the shots? Or did they chose not to hear the shots?

It had to go to trial. Trial by riot. I hope I will be surprised by our people, by our news people and our leaders.

So the post you referenced was originally in a different thread I started in Current Events, prior to this thread being moved to Current Events, and my thread was initially consolidated into this thread. No problem. Not sure why now that initial post was removed from the thread all together. There were no political comments and no misstatement of facts, nor name calling. I agree that as a private "board" they can set the rules, but it sure would help if they explained what rule was violated that necessitated the post being removed?

this is what drives me nuts. I simply pointed out it will have an effect on him for killing people and that I personally don't feel a 17 year old should have been there, if he were my son he never would have been. YOU assume I condone the rioting????

I don't agree with the rioting. the people he killed were not model citizens. some of those who attacked him, believed him to be an active shooter and were trying to prevent more shots. that's the problem when non-police are walking around with guns.

I don't routinely go to MSN for news so I can't speak to whether they were biased. I would guess that the people that have shows lie Rachel, Joy, Ari, just like Tucker, Sean, Laura et al, would be protected because they are considered opinion shows. or in the case of Tucker, a court decreed no reasonable person would believe what he says.

that was the reason for the trial....so the facts could come out. the jury decided it was self defense. isn't that what trials are for?

I guess he could sue the city for bringing the charges but frankly, he should take the win and do something positive with the rest of his life.

Not surprised at all. Poor judgement is not against the law and everyone has the right to defend themselves when the situation warrants it.

The "active shooter" narrative was a hail Mary pass, added by the prosecution, at the last minute... No one testified to that...

In a perfect world ADA T Claire Binger and his sidekick ADA Lunchbox should be required to hand over Kyle's AR-15 to him in court. After they restore the sight they removed for their little courtroom Baldwin imitation.

Actually I never said that the rioting was condoned, but that it was not condemned. I similarly pointed out that there was no condemnation of the adults that attacked Rittenhouse, nor was there condemnation for the MSM that reported misinformation as facts, such that other posters on TOTV repeated those "facts" in their attacks on Rittenhouse.

However, I did see posts inferring that Rittenhouse was "flashing the "OK" sign — a gesture that has been co-opted by known white supremacist groups", and that "he was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest....he was there illegally carrying a weapon now he was again breaking the law by drinking in a bar"

So apparently up until the cited post above, it was a protest (not a riot) and the weapon was illegal, which turned out to be.....an incorrect statement that was made in advance of the trial and the facts of the trial.

As far as MSM being "protected" from lawsuit, two different media outlets that I know of, settled out of court in the Sandman case. Sandman, and now Rittenhouse, were NOT public figures and my understanding is that as such, there is a different standard the media can be held to in their "reporting".

The two dead people should not have been there either.

About as long as a thread about how COVID cases in Florida have dropped

WHAT A GLORIOUS DAY.......:clap2::a040::bigbow::boom: