Curious about political views about two different trials

[BackAgain]

Let’s say this is in very broad strokes a left bs right topic.

I am not sure why the left felt it important that Kyle Rittenhouse be convicted and were so distraught when he was instead fully acquitted. So, now I’m wondering if the left thinks the right has some predisposition on the Abery trial defendants?

I assume the left still wants a bunch of convictions.

But as a political matter, does anybody on the right feel like it would be unfair for those three guys (or at least the shooter) to get convicted? I don’t. From what I’ve seen, there should be at least one conviction.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Kyle Rittenhouse said he supports BLM and that he only shot whites. He said this on the Tucker Carlson show.

I'm sure that's improved Kyle's standing with the left by a great deal.

 

[Winston]

Kyle Rittenhouse said he supports BLM and that he only shot whites. He said this on the Tucker Carlson show.

I'm sure that's improved Kyle's standing with the left by a great deal.

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old. Not old enough to drink, not old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Not old enough to vote. But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration. Look, I get it. He "had" to shoot those people, he was afraid for his life. But he is the jackass that took the gun to the demonstration. He put himself in that position. He does bear some responsibility here.

And here is the thing. Had he any real remorse, well he would have walked away with his not-guilty verdict and disappeared from the public's attention. But no, he goes on Tucker Carlson, he threatens legal actions against networks and politicians. Truth is, he loves the attention and I am here to tell you, his day is going to come. Karma is a bitch, and she gets what is coming to her.

 

[Billiejeens]

Let’s say this is in very broad strokes a left bs right topic.

I am not sure why the left felt it important that Kyle Rittenhouse be convicted and were so distraught when he was instead fully acquitted. So, now I’m wondering if the left thinks the right has some predisposition on the Abery trial defendants?

I assume the left still wants a bunch of convictions.

But as a political matter, does anybody on the right feel like it would be unfair for those three guys (or at least the shooter) to get convicted? I don’t. From what I’ve seen, there should be at least one conviction.

The Lunatic Left was distraught because someone stood up against their movement.
That's a problem for them.

the other one has no political value, really.

 

[Winston]

Let’s say this is in very broad strokes a left bs right topic.

I am not sure why the left felt it important that Kyle Rittenhouse be convicted and were so distraught when he was instead fully acquitted. So, now I’m wondering if the left thinks the right has some predisposition on the Abery trial defendants?

I assume the left still wants a bunch of convictions.

But as a political matter, does anybody on the right feel like it would be unfair for those three guys (or at least the shooter) to get convicted? I don’t. From what I’ve seen, there should be at least one conviction.

I agree, the Arbery trail should come back with a conviction. But, this is Georgia, the prosecutors sucked ass, and it is practically an all white jury, IN GEORGIA. Things could get really nasty if no conviction comes down. And once again, like in the Rittenhouse case, some fool has a gun, and then claims he is afraid for his own life because someone is trying to take his gun. I mean here is a thought, if you carry a gun you don't get to use the excuse that you are afraid for your own life from your own gun. If you can't reasonably be expected to protect access to YOUR OWN GUN, without the use of deadly force, then YOU DON'T GET TO CARRY IT.

 

[night_son]

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old. Not old enough to drink, not old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Not old enough to vote. But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration. Look, I get it. He "had" to shoot those people, he was afraid for his life. But he is the jackass that took the gun to the demonstration. He put himself in that position. He does bear some responsibility here.

And here is the thing. Had he any real remorse, well he would have walked away with his not-guilty verdict and disappeared from the public's attention. But no, he goes on Tucker Carlson, he threatens legal actions against networks and politicians. Truth is, he loves the attention and I am here to tell you, his day is going to come. Karma is a bitch, and she gets what is coming to her.

Maybe don't throw "jackass" accusations while living precariously in glass houses? Nor, jackass, were the countless seventeen year-olds who stormed the beaches at Normandy, Iwo Jima, Midway, Guadalcanal and on and on and on . . . qualified or old enough, right?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Kyle Rittenhouse said he supports BLM and that he only shot whites. He said this on the Tucker Carlson show.

I'm sure that's improved Kyle's standing with the left by a great deal.

The left should have recognized this well before Kyle said it.

 

[B. Kidd]

Non-politically, Kyle didn't provoke while Arbury defendants did.
Anyone throwing politics into this mix is looking for a .

 

[BluesLegend]

I am not sure why the left felt it important that Kyle Rittenhouse be convicted and were so distraught when he was instead fully acquitted.

Because the left love a good witch hunt and MOB justice.

 

[Ringtone]

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old. Not old enough to drink, not old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Not old enough to vote. But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration. Look, I get it. He "had" to shoot those people, he was afraid for his life. But he is the jackass that took the gun to the demonstration. He put himself in that position. He does bear some responsibility here.

And here is the thing. Had he any real remorse, well he would have walked away with his not-guilty verdict and disappeared from the public's attention. But no, he goes on Tucker Carlson, he threatens legal actions against networks and politicians. Truth is, he loves the attention and I am here to tell you, his day is going to come. Karma is a bitch, and she gets what is coming to her.

Bullshit! Rittenhouse had every right to be there, to be armed, and to defend himself against the criminal vermin who tried to kill him. You are a clueless imbecile of a degenerate drool puddle. You shut your piehole, and take your shameful ass to the closet.

 

[fncceo]

But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration

I would support age limits on Constitutional Rights ... as long as it keeps teenagers from speaking in public.

 

[Oddball]

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old. Not old enough to drink, not old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Not old enough to vote. But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration. Look, I get it. He "had" to shoot those people, he was afraid for his life. But he is the jackass that took the gun to the demonstration. He put himself in that position. He does bear some responsibility here.

And here is the thing. Had he any real remorse, well he would have walked away with his not-guilty verdict and disappeared from the public's attention. But no, he goes on Tucker Carlson, he threatens legal actions against networks and politicians. Truth is, he loves the attention and I am here to tell you, his day is going to come. Karma is a bitch, and she gets what is coming to her.

 

[Ringtone]

Maybe don't throw "jackass" accusations while living precariously in glass houses? Nor, jackass, were the countless seventeen year-olds who stormed the beaches at Normandy, Iwo Jima, Midway, Guadalcanal and on and on and on . . . qualified or old enough, right?

Sadly, leftists are perpetual two-year-olds.

 

[Winston]

Maybe don't throw "jackass" accusations while living precariously in glass houses? Nor, jackass, were the countless seventeen year-olds who stormed the beaches at Normandy, Iwo Jima, Midway, Guadalcanal and on and on and on . . . qualified or old enough, right?

Well, there is a difference, those guys in WWII were TRAINED.

 

[Winston]

Bullshit! Rittenhouse had every right to be there, to be armed, and to defend himself against the criminal vermin who tried to kill him. You are a clueless imbecile of a degenerate drool puddle. You shut your piehole, and take your shameful ass to the closet.

Bullshit. What right did he have to be there? Was he defending his property? No, he went looking for trouble and now wants to scream innocence because he found it. I mean I got to ask, what if that guy would have gotten his gun away from him, and Rittenhouse was the one that ended up dead. Does the victim not get to proclaim self-defense too? I mean it seems he has a better case, he didn't bring a gun with him, and he was probably in fear of his life. I mean is not what is good for the Goose also good for the Gander?

 

[Papageorgio]

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old. Not old enough to drink, not old enough to legally buy cigarettes. Not old enough to vote. But yet he was somehow qualified, even justified, in taking an AR-15 to a street demonstration. Look, I get it. He "had" to shoot those people, he was afraid for his life. But he is the jackass that took the gun to the demonstration. He put himself in that position. He does bear some responsibility here.

And here is the thing. Had he any real remorse, well he would have walked away with his not-guilty verdict and disappeared from the public's attention. But no, he goes on Tucker Carlson, he threatens legal actions against networks and politicians. Truth is, he loves the attention and I am here to tell you, his day is going to come. Karma is a bitch, and she gets what is coming to her.

From what I saw it was a full blown riot, not a demonstration. Rittenhouse was just as justified to be there as anyone else. Really dumb idea to be there but it looked like Kenosha has lots of dumb people. Whether Rittenhouse is remorseful, no one has a clue and you are anti-Rittenhouse so you would make those claims even though you have no idea what he is thinking. He should sue people like Biden for making such irresponsible statements. You defame someone, you have a right to sue.

 

[Papageorgio]

Bullshit. What right did he have to be there? Was he defending his property? No, he went looking for trouble and now wants to scream innocence because he found it. I mean I got to ask, what if that guy would have gotten his gun away from him, and Rittenhouse was the one that ended up dead. Does the victim not get to proclaim self-defense too? I mean it seems he has a better case, he didn't bring a gun with him, and he was probably in fear of his life. I mean is not what is good for the Goose also good for the Gander?

He had the same right to be there as anyone else. Now, had he been smart, he would not have been there, the same is true with the guys that chased him. Had they not been there, they would be alive today, but they weren't very bright either. Anyone at a riot is looking for trouble.

 

[Winston]

From what I saw it was a full blown riot, not a demonstration. Rittenhouse was just as justified to be there as anyone else. Really dumb idea to be there but it looked like Kenosha has lots of dumb people. Whether Rittenhouse is remorseful, no one has a clue and you are anti-Rittenhouse so you would make those claims even though you have no idea what he is thinking. He should sue people like Biden for making such irresponsible statements. You defame someone, you have a right to sue.

I am not anti Rittenhouse, I am anti dumb people. I am especially anti dumb people with guns.

 

[Papageorgio]

I am not anti Rittenhouse, I am anti dumb people. I am especially anti dumb people with guns.

I'm anti-dumb, and the only one you singled out was Rittenhouse. I think anyone that was there was dumb and they paid a price, really dumb to go to a riot, isn't it?

 

[struth]

Let’s say this is in very broad strokes a left bs right topic.

I am not sure why the left felt it important that Kyle Rittenhouse be convicted and were so distraught when he was instead fully acquitted. So, now I’m wondering if the left thinks the right has some predisposition on the Abery trial defendants?

I assume the left still wants a bunch of convictions.

But as a political matter, does anybody on the right feel like it would be unfair for those three guys (or at least the shooter) to get convicted? I don’t. From what I’ve seen, there should be at least one conviction.

I haven’t seen all the facts on the other case…but from i have seen there should be convictions