• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense fund.

leisureexpress

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Feb 27, 2008
22,578
48,599
113
253578561_5232475563445739_9027376033220397830_n.jpg
 
J

Jaynelson

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
5,006
5,542
113
Nelson BC
Whether or not you agree with the motives to be there (neither side had good ones IMO)....it seemed pretty clear from the footage that KR was within the boundaries of the pertaining laws during the actual moments of the shootings.

You can argue whether the laws are good ones, or whether the before/after actions are moral, or whether the people involved have been good or bad in the rest of their lives....I have all sorts of great opinions on all that, but with regard to the verdict it's mostly fluff.

I see lots of arguments online that if he were not-white he would have been convicted. There's a pretty good chance that's correct, and points to the discriminatory systems in place..... but that still doesn't translate to a requirement to make him guilty if it doesn't fit.
 
Last edited:

Mafesto

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 26, 2007
12,288
10,428
113
Northeast SD
Regarding laws, the verdict was indeed proper and correct.

Now, I hope he begins defamation legal actions against media outlets and power figures starting with joe bidden, for using their platforms to push slanderous lies about Mr Rittenhouse and his character.

The settlement will likely be in the 8 figures.
 

IDspud

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,670
4,096
113
Oakley, ID
He was hired to be there to protect the car dealerships, backed by several sources.

How is that not a valid reason to be there?

The trial info was much different than what you’ll get from the media.
 
C
Sep 8, 2014
266
95
28
Crested Butte
He was hired to be there to protect the car dealerships, backed by several sources.

How is that not a valid reason to be there?

The trial info was much different than what you’ll get from the media.
The owners of the dealership testified that they didn't ask anyone to protect their place, and they had removed the cars from the lot
 

IDspud

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,670
4,096
113
Oakley, ID
Their testimony was they never PAID him. The others involved testified they were hired, then the owners refused to pay and backed out because of fear of liability of hiring which was a smart move.
 
Premium Features