The fix is in, Rittenhouse case...

[gounion]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR-hhat34LI

Interesting unbiased analysis of the court case by Legal Eagle.

And a point similar to what I've been making - At just past the 18 minute mark, he cites a study that shows a white shooter with a black victim is 10 times more likely to be found in self defense than a black shooter with a white victim.

[carmenjonze]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR-hhat34LI

Interesting unbiased analysis of the court case by Legal Eagle.

That was good!

And a point similar to what I've been making - At just past the 18 minute mark, he cites a study that shows a white shooter with a black victim is 10 times more likely to be found in self defense than a black shooter with a white victim.

These guys do not wish to acknowledge it because then it gets into their personal agreement with it.

[carmenjonze]

Rotfl

'I'm not a racist person': Rittenhouse says he supports BLM movement and his case never had anything to do with race - Yahoo News/Insider

Well, I sure hope he significantly steps up his security, then.

:problem:

lmao
__________

Justin Baragona
@justinbaragona

Kyle Rittenhouse and his mom visited with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, Trump revealed on Hannity tonight.

[ProfX]

I knew already that Rosenbaum was trying to get Rittenhouse's gun to disarm him. Not new info.

I didn't hear/read all that testimony about the angle. So it looks like the fatal shot through the back was as he was falling forward, not turning to get away. OK. Good to know.

Still hasn't made me change my position as stated.

Have a nice day.

[Drak]

This and the photo with vile Kim is the upper right is quite something.

[Drak]

Todays GOP, and who the local cons support and vote for:


Aaron Rupar - verified
@atrupar
14h
On Newsmax, Lauren Boebert challenges Madison Cawthorn to a sprint, with the winner getting to have Kyle Rittenhouse as their intern

[carmenjonze]

Todays GOP, and who the local cons support and vote for:


Aaron Rupar - verified
@atrupar
14h
On Newsmax, Lauren Boebert challenges Madison Cawthorn to a sprint, with the winner getting to have Kyle Rittenhouse as their intern

Cawthorn is so self-loathing he’ll just show a bunch of teeth to this fellow neonazi, and laff it off.

[Libertas]

The picture of a mass killer and Rittenhouse, together, is the future of the GOP.

Nothing good ahead.

[ap215]

Marjorie Taylor Greene introduces bill to award Congressional Gold Medal to Rittenhouse

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) introduced a bill on Tuesday to award Kyle Rittenhouse the Congressional Gold Medal for "protecting the community of Kenosha, Wisconsin, during a Black Lives Matter (BLM) riot on August 25, 2020."

The Congressional Gold Medal is the highest honor Congress can award an individual or institution. It is highly unlikely the bill will go anywhere in the Democratic-controlled House and Senate, and it has no co-sponsors.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5830 ... d-medal-to

[Bludogdem]

Interesting piece in “The Atlantic”

“ Universities Try to Force a Consensus About Kyle Rittenhouse

Instead of using his acquittal to promote vigorous discussion, many administrators sent out statements decrying the verdict.”

“ At universities, the recent acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse should be an opportunity to study a divisive case that sparked complex debates about issues as varied as self-defense laws, guns, race, riots, the rights of defendants, prosecutorial missteps, media bias, and more. If administrators were doing their jobs, faculty and students would freely air a wide variety of viewpoints and have opportunities to better understand one another’s diverse perspectives. Instead, many administrators are preemptively imposing their preferred narratives.”

“ The Rittenhouse saga began in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, amid rioting that followed the police shooting of a Black man. Rittenhouse, then 17, armed himself with an AR-15-style rifle and walked into the chaos, claiming that he intended to protect the community. He wound up shooting three men, killing two. Last week, a Wisconsin jury found him not guilty of murder, crediting his claim that, at the moment he fired, he feared for his life and acted in self-defense. This, many analysts argued, was a plausible conclusion to draw from Wisconsin law and video footage and testimony presented at trial.

Adam Serwer: Of course Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted

More than 2,000 miles away, administrators at UC Santa Cruz felt otherwise. Chancellor Cynthia Larive and Interim Chief Diversity Officer Judith Estrada issued a statement that began like this:

We are disheartened and dismayed by this morning’s not guilty verdict on all charges in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse … We join in solidarity with all who are outraged by this failure of accountability.

UC Santa Cruz is a public institution with roughly 19,000 students and 1,000 instructors who, one can safely say, do not all share the same viewpoints. But Larive and Estrada emphasized their personal feelings and openly pledged solidarity (meaning “unity or agreement of feeling or action,” by one definition) with others based on whether they too feel angry. This is posturing, not engagement with a campus community. I wrote to Larive and asked her to clarify why the jury should have found Rittenhouse guilty, if that’s what she meant by “failure of accountability.” A university spokesperson, Scott Hernandez-Jason, responded, “The campus message speaks for itself.”

Indeed, it does. America has never known a time without sensational murder trials that seize the public’s attention and inflame passions. I have an old-fashioned answer to how a university should behave in these cases: It should stay neutral and promote reasoned analysis and debate. But Larive and Estrada made a different choice. And they aren’t the only university leaders who have done so in the days since the verdict. Rather than encourage independent scrutiny, administrators on many campuses have issued statements that presuppose answers to hotly contested questions, and assert opinions about the not-guilty verdict in the case and its ostensible significance as though they were matters of community consensus.

The whole episode is an illustration of a bigger problem in academia: Administrators make ideologically selective efforts to soothe the feelings of upset faculty members and students. These actions impose orthodoxies of thought, undermining both intellectual diversity and inclusion.“

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... se/620809/

[carmenjonze]

“ Universities Try to Force a Consensus About Kyle Rittenhouse

where we go one we go all

[Glennfs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR-hhat34LI

Interesting unbiased analysis of the court case by Legal Eagle.

And a point similar to what I've been making - At just past the 18 minute mark, he cites a study that shows a white shooter with a black victim is 10 times more likely to be found in self defense than a black shooter with a white victim.

Had you bothered to follow the trial you would know the jury reached the correct verdict.
But like all openmined liberals you declared him guilty before any evidence was presented

[gounion]

Had you bothered to follow the trial you would know the jury reached the correct verdict.
But like all openmined liberals you declared him guilty before any evidence was presented

And like all conservatives you know bringing a gun to a protest to kill people is the thing to do. Because we all deserve to die because we hate America.

[ProfX]

And they aren’t the only university leaders who have done so in the days since the verdict. Rather than encourage independent scrutiny, administrators on many campuses have issued statements that presuppose answers to hotly contested questions, and assert opinions about the not-guilty verdict in the case and its ostensible significance as though they were matters of community consensus.

I'd quibble with two presuppositions in that article.

Should university administrators take no position on that verdict? Maybe. Should that always be the case? If they thought the George Zimmerman trial was a mockery of justice, should they have just remained silent on that? Where's the threshold? Is this article arguing they should never take positions on matters of public debate that are controversial and argued or just legal ones? I really can't agree with that. Somebody on that lovely Facebook once told me as an academic I have no right to call Trump an authoritarian. Uh. There's an academic definition, and I can show why he meets it. This idea that academia must stay out of anything that has to do with contemporary political or legal arguments or controversies ... seems silly to me.

Should a faculty member not take a position? Well, my view on this I've stated many times. They can state they think either way, argue for their position (as I've done here), do I think they should refuse to discuss or hear other positions from students? Penalize them for holding a different view. No. But that isn't my pedagogy and I don't think it should be anyone else's. However, I don't agree that professors must remain neutral in all matters of public controversy or debate just because argument around them exists. That is covered by academic freedom. (Distorting empirical reality is not.)

I agree university administrators are prominent figures at their university. However, them taking a position or stance does not silence debate. Students hopefully could and should be free to argue against their position in a newspaper letter to the editor, a blog post on a university blog, whatever. As long as they are not preventing the contrary position from being heard, university leadership taking a position is not stifling debate.

If people who disagree with them are free to make their position known in whatever way on the campus agora, in fact, you could argue it encourages the university community to engage in debate.

[carmenjonze]

Had you bothered to follow the trial you would know the jury reached the correct verdict.
But like all openmined liberals you declared him guilty before any evidence was presented

Rittenhouse 2040!

[Drak]

Does any here believe Glenn followed the trial? He doesn’t even read articles given to him.

[gounion]

Glenn has told me before - of course, it was concerning black people who got arrested - that if they were arrested, they were probably guilty of SOMETHING. But he has CERTAINLY said he doesn't believe that hardly anyone who gets arrested is innocent.

Unless, of course, it's a white kid gunning down liberals.

[carmenjonze]

Glenn has told me before - of course, it was concerning black people who got arrested - that if they were arrested, they were probably guilty of SOMETHING. But he has CERTAINLY said he doesn't believe that hardly anyone who gets arrested is innocent.

Unless, of course, it's a white kid gunning down liberals.

Glenn is a textbook-case white supremacist.

[rainwater]

young kyle speaking on his own, and to fuckerCarlson no less.
using people doesnt always work the way you thot it might and now they can--and will-- turn on one another.


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lin-wood ... 9a42ae7e32
QAnon Believers Rattled After Kyle Rittenhouse Calls Extremist Lawyer Lin Wood 'Insane'--
Prominent figures in the far-right conspiracy group turned on the acquitted gunman after followers had previously embraced him.

QAnon followers were taken aback this week when acquitted gunman Kyle Rittenhouse slammed extremist lawyer and longtime QAnon acolyte Lin Wood as “insane.”

As Rittenhouse and Wood faced off against each other, QAnon backers were speaking out in support of the lawyer — or the gunman — indicating a possible fracture in the far-right conspiracy movement.

Wood, who is known for pushing Donald Trump’s election lies as a member of the former president’s legal team, was one of Rittenhouse’s first attorneys after the teen was arrested last year for fatally shooting two unarmed men and wounding a third with at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Rittenhouse said in an interview on the cable channel NewsNation on Tuesday that he and his mother fired Wood last December
because “he was going on with all this QAnon and election fraud stuff, and just stuff we don’t agree with.”
He added: “He’s insane. ... He thinks he’s God and he just says all these weird things.”

Rittenhouse has also accused Wood of mishandling money the attorney raised to bail him out.
Rittenhouse told Tucker Carlson on Fox News that Wood raised $2 million for bail, but then advised the teen to stay in jail where he
would be “safer” for a total of 87 days. Wood also “put me on media interviews, which I should never have done,” Rittenhouse complained to Carlson.
He added: “I was being used for a cause.”
....
The lawyer is convinced there’s a growing “F-Lin” plot, he wrote on Telegram.

[Libertas]

Glenn is a textbook-case white supremacist.

And that has been clear since day one. He is NOT the only one here, as you know.

[ProfX]

QAnon Believers Rattled After Kyle Rittenhouse Calls Extremist Lawyer Lin Wood 'Insane'--

Well, I still question his judgement in other areas, but I appreciate in this case he has a keen sense of the obvious.

[sam lefthand]

It's been a year since Republicans have claimed Lin Wood as being one of their own.



Anytime Wood does anything crazy, or there's been negative reporting like today's they insist that Wood is actually a Democrat. It was Matt Boyle at Breitbart who started it. This is a link to his story from a year ago:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... -opponent/

When I read that article I noticed that the claims the author makes are poorly sourced, and the ones that are sourced with a link, at that link only partially back up what was said in the article.

There are two donations to Obama, however they list Wood as "POWELL GOLDSTEIN LLP" under occupation, where as all of his other donations are listed as "L. LIN WOOD, P.C." under occupation. That makes me think the two donations made by Wood for Obama might have been made for a client or his employer that Wood was representing.



So I say hell no he's not a Democrat, but that's the story Republicans are passing around. They have a couple factoids and some exaggeration to make it appear that he's ours, and not one of theirs.

[marindem01]

Does any here believe Glenn followed the trial? He doesn’t even read articles given to him.

Hey Glenn believed every word Fucker Carlson says.

[marindem01]

Glenn is a textbook-case white supremacist.

Michael Brown deserved to die, because he "looked" like a suspect.

Tamir Rice deserved to die....well he just plain did.

Trayon Martin had no business visiting his father's condo.

George Floyd was passing counterfeit $20.00 Bills, so he had to die.

They were Black.

They deserved to die.

But poor little Kyle, he was protecting a community he did not live in, carrying an illegally obtained AR-15.

All the difference in the world.

[carmenjonze]

And that has been clear since day one. He is NOT the only one here, as you know.

There's always at least one, yes.