Roshanak's Political Peepenscheíßeschau

[Roshan]

We really--and I mean really--have to talk about Kyle Rittenhouse.

[Roshan]

After all I am Belle Case (too). Part of my heart is in Wisconsin..

[Roshan]

You will most likely be privy in your Facebook feeds to claims that Kyle Rittenhouse faked his panic attack when he took the stand.
These claims are being made by members of what is now the hypnotized, personality disordered left. This left is seized by low Six paranoid projection and splitting oscillating wildly between 9 awareness blocking and 3 deceit, and by low Two high horse sitting between 4 self-absorption and 8 aggressive power lust. It doesn't matter 'what type' they are, they're in a culture of low 6/2--though the squeakiest wheels may well lead with those types. Their perhaps socially engineered minds (and that may be what Allen was trying to get at) wander addled yet eloquent somewhere between a children's nursery and a movie set, and the real question is not whether Kyle was faking--because there there is no question--but what is to be done about them?

One thing one might consider doing is telling them that you watched the testimony and it didn't seem like that to you. This is not an assumption of a stance on politics or even on the trial verdict, and surely to assume it is itself contains a kernel of lunacy.

[Roshan]

Facebook old Bernie campaign contact Linda OP:

Why the jury must find Kyle Rittenhouse guilty:
"Remember, under Wisconsin law, if you’re in the commission of a crime, self defense is not a valid excuse for the use of deadly force. You see, Kyle was a minor, and minors aren’t allowed to posses firearms in public in Wisconsin. If it’s unlawful for you to posses a firearm in public, it’s also unlawful to use it against another person, even in self defense. In Wisconsin, you can also be charged with murder if anyone dies as a result of your crimes even if you didn’t actually pull the trigger. For example, two men were robbing a store, police shoot and kill one suspect, and the other is charged with murder because, if he hadn’t been committing a crime, nobody would have died. If Rittenhouse hadn’t been illegally carrying a firearm, nobody would have been shot that night, so he is culpable for those deaths."
-Christopher Aaron



Me:


So you want him convicted of murder because someone who just got out of a psych ward for a suicide attempt lunged at his rifle two minutes after he was shouting friendly, friendly, friendly, and you want this because he was a few months too young to legally open carry? I'm not saying whether he should or shouldn't be found guilty. I'm just clarifying if when you say he 'must', do you mean you WANT him to be convicted as an adult for murder BECAUSE he was technically legally a child?

[Roshan]

It went on:
Linda (OP)
Robin
Rittenhouse killed two people and wounded another...
Like
· Reply · 54m
Rita
Rittenhouse got to be their trial, jury and executioners. Went there with a AK 15 WITH INTENT.
Like
· Reply · 24m
Active
Robin
Linda he killed two people because the first one lunged at his gun in an open carry state after being let out of a psych ward for a suicide attempt and the second person thought what one might indeed think and was bashing him in the head with a skateboard. The wounded person was pointing a gun at him, which he initially lied about (not saying Rittenhouse hasn't been heard lying too, such as about being an EMT). I know he killed two people and wounded one and I think you know I know that, Linda. What I'm seeking here is clarification: when you say he MUST be found guilty, you mean he must by LAW, or you mean you WANT him to be found guilty--and you mean of murder as an adult, right? And you want this (and/or believe the law demands it) BECAUSE he was technically legally NOT an adult?
Like
· Reply · 22m · Edited
Active
Robin
Rita and he was going through the crowd shouting Friendly! Friendly! Friendly! while Rosenbaum pursued him, two minutes before Rosenbaum lunged at his rifle, because they taught him in Nazi school that that's how you get people to lunge at your rifle?
* * *
So far nuthin' else.

[Roshan]

Mark
Robin so in your humble opinion Wisconsin laws on minors and the possession of firearms should be ignored.
Because a 17yr old kid decides he wants to play policeman in another state.
The mental issues of the man your referring to play no part in whether young Mr Rittenhouse should have been there in the first place.
Just by bringing a firearm across state lines to try and show what intimidation is intent right there.

4
Like
· Reply · 2h
Beverly
Robin …Because he is a murderer.

2
Like
· Reply · 2h
Active
Robin
Mark but he's not on trial for whether he should have been there in the first place. He's on trial for murder. And he lives fifteen minutes away from Kenosha, has his father and other family members there, the close friend who went out with his sister who he FIRST cleaned graffiti with, and was also working there. (I believe you may be aware of some if not all of his ties to Kenosha and may be being disingenuous about this state lines thing, of course I don't know this). According to his testimony the friend was holding the gun for him there but let's assume he did bring it over. The psychological state of Rosenbaum has everything to do with this in informal discussion (outside of the courtroom, where it was ruled out) because it's by no means impossible this was a suicide by cop proxy. It seems plausible Rittenhouse would have NOT expected someone to attack him because of the rifle let alone lunge AT the rifle. So Rosenbaum's psychological state points to Rittenhouse having been right in making an assumption that if he open carried, he would be able to put out the fires, deter arsonists from property, and give first aid WITHOUT being attacked by the NON-peaceful protesters. But you want to speak as though this is a court of law, NOT an informal discussion. So, for clarification, you believe that in a court of law his crossing the state line to the open carry state with a firearm proves intent? Do you believe that he 'shouldn't have been there' is part of the charges? (ftr the breaking curfew charge was thrown out, perhaps because it would apply to every eye witness who testified).
Like
· Reply · 2h · Edited
Active
Robin
Beverly And? I am discussing, you are sloganeering.
Like
· Reply · 2h · Edited
Linda
According to Wisconsin law, Rittenhouse broke the law and he must be punished. It is up to the jury to decide what that punishment will be.

3
Like
· Reply · 1h
Gregg
Robin Love the little racist killer don't you.

1
Like
· Reply · 1h
Active
Robin
Gregg ad hominem baby cakes.
Like
· Reply · 1h
Active
Robin
Mark coincidentally Youtube just coughed up the complete prosecution cross-examination I'd been looking for for a while, and from around five to eight minutes you can see that the prosecution accepts that he did not cross state lines with the gun, as you contend, but that his friend had it at his house. Are you sure you're acting in good faith? It feels really weird that you'd preach to me about Rosenbaum's mental state being unacceptable speech, so to say, because court of law, without even knowing this most BASIC thing about the defense's case regarding the gun. Why do you do this?
Like
· Reply · 54m · Edited
Gregg
Robin Oh, you're insulted, "babycakes"? I just told the truth. He's a little racist killer, and you love him.
Like
· Reply · 52m
Active
Robin
Linda I agree he should be convicted of some charge but here's a link from NPR. NPR, not NRA magazine. This is NOT an open and shut case, and the argument of murder as an adult because minor rubs me the wrong way. If Rittenhouse gets convicted of murder, this is not unlikely to go to the Supreme Court. It seems to me that a better investment of time and energy would be to work on getting open carry outlawed in Wisconsin. Mark should note the closing of the article, which is the most vehement expert quote against Rittenhouse: cross state lines, arm himself. In that order. (And yes, Gregg I meant some lesser charge, what can I say, get a voodoo doll and stick pins in me to save the world from racism). https://www.npr.org/.../what-we-learned ... e-2nd-week...

Robin
To clarify, if this were to go all the way to SCOTUS, it will be Trump's SCOTUS. Neoliberal Dem (Clinton) sellout brought Trump in, in the Midwest, in the Rust Belt specifically. It is what it is and I'm not sure you'd really want a murder conviction for Rittenhouse to go to that court on a 2A self-defense argument with all that video footage and have the verdict codified there.
Like
· Reply · 18m · Edited
Active
Robin
Gregg no, I don't feel insulted. If I took your comment seriously as insulting I would not have called you baby cakes. I found your comment childish actually.
Like
· Reply · 7m
Active
Robin
I'll also throw in to the people making laughing emojis at me that this is no laughing matter. That said, baby cakes was tit for tat because the comment I responded to was SILLY.

[Roshan]

What a frigging Peepingshitschau.

But Linda is very high profile and well-connected on fb and she also made a shockicon when I said he was shouting Friendly friendly friendly right before Rosenbaum lunged at him. So I do think I made a dent.

I think Kyle should be convicted for carrying the weapon underage and POOOOSSSIBLY reckless endangerment because he placed himself in way over his head. However that's very very iffy because Wisconsin IS open carry, though Kenosha is very liberal left, and if Kyle'd turned 18 he would have been completely in his legal right to carry that rifle.

[Roshan]

Well, I was thinking since he clearly and knowingly, (edit ? I think he claims he didn't know that but whatever he didn't check) by his own admission, broke the law in Wisconsin by carrying underage, this implies reckless endangerment. There's a reason minors are only allowed to use rifles in rifle ranges and for hunting in Wisconsin. So I think I don't have any problem personally with that conviction as long as it wouldn't be a maximum sentence and he was protected so he didn't wind up someone's jailhouse bitch. (It's really gross btw to see left wingers on YouTube hoping that happens). But the right-wingers surely would have a problem with it. But the judge and the lawyers aren't even looking at the reckless endangerment implicit in violating the age law in such a volatile situation. They're looking at the thought processes and actions at the time of the shootings. This is very interesting.

[Anthony]

Well, I was thinking since he clearly and knowingly, by his own admission, broke the law in Wisconsin by carrying underage, this implies reckless endangerment. There's a reason minors are only allowed to use rifles in rifle ranges and for hunting in Wisconsin. So I think I don't have any problem personally with that conviction as long as it wouldn't be a maximum sentence and he was protected so he didn't wind up someone's jailhouse bitch. (It's really gross btw to see left wingers on YouTube hoping that happens).

So the same people that hope he ends up a jailhouse bitch also accuse him of faking his panic attack?

[Roshan]

Like I said, Anthony, this is the age of 'the hypnotized, personality disordered left', so yeah you'll see these MeToo-ite defund the police activists clamoring for him to get raped in prison. So as you can see, it's better to focus much more on the hypnotized >> personality disordered ones. Linda (OP) is one of those.