Quite the contrary, if the jury had heard about how he beat up a teen girl, they might not think he was just some innocent waif defending himself. The judge in that case pretty much tied an anchor around the neck of the prosecutors, while allowing evidence of Rosenbaum's mental issues to come in.
No credible evidence that Mr. Rittenhouse did any such thing. Just a very poor-quality video of several young people in a fight, with an unsubstantiated claim that Mr. Rittenhouse was one of the participants. Are you capable of understanding why such a claim, such shoddy
“evidence” would not be admissible in a court of law?
Funny, I didn't see you condeming [sic] the thugs who stormed the capitol as "criminal shit".... but they were white.
I have to admit that I have no idea what to make of that event, other than to be fairly certain that what the media has told us about it is, for the most part, lies. Things just don't add up. Whatever happened, I do not defend the actions of those who participated in it. It's very likely that if I thought I understood what really happened, that I'd condemn the participants just as I condemn the
left wrong-wing
Black LIES Matter criminals and terrorists whose side you are happy to take against that of any actual human beings.
I do have to wonder about the manner in which they are being treated. They've been held prisoner, now, for nearly a year, without trial, in a manner that clearly violates their Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy and public trial, and their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. They're being kept hidden away, in a manner more consistent with how we would expect to see political prisoners treated in some place like North Korea, than how defendants in a legitimate criminal case would be expected to be treated in this country.
And the one fatality in that incident, Ashli Babbitt, shot in the back from a distance, in a manner that seems very far removed from any circumstances under which police are allowed to shoot at citizens, even those suspected of being actively involved in a crime.
You keep harping about how you claim that police are shooting too many black criminals; yet the vast majority of those whose deaths you decry were shot with much more justification that can possibly exist for the way Ashli Babbitt was shot. To be consistent and honest (not that I would ever expect either of you) you would either need to admit that Ashli Babbitt's shooting was murder, or else admit that many of those black criminals who you claim were murdered, were, in fact, killed justifiably.
Of course, your support of the savage practice of abortion puts the lie to any concern you may claim to have for human life, other than how it fits into whatever malevolent political agenda you with to promote. Even if we assume that every black person who has ever been shot by a police officer was shot unjustifiably, and that every such shooting is nothing less than first-degree murder, it does not come anywhere close to the scale of the number of black people who have been murdered, with your approval, via abortion.
you also defended David Koresh, who murdered four ATF agents.
Koresh was a whacko, and I won't defend him or his bizarre cult.
But it was the ATF and other government-based criminals who murdered him and his followers, not the the way around. Whatever Koresh and his followers were accused of doing, none of it called for the way government attacked them.
Oh, yeah, and you belong to a cult started by a pedophilic con-artist.
Your persistent malicious lies about my religion are not relevant to this discussion. The only thing you could ever possibly accomplish by continuing to repeat them would be to destroy your own credibility; but that's not possible because you've never had any credibility in the first place, to destroy.
It's very easy to imagine that if there was any religious group that was all gathered into one place, that you would be very pleased for the opportunity to burn that place down and murder as many members of that religion as you could, just as the government did to the Branch Davidians. You'd be happy, I think, to murder women and children, and claim that you were doing it to
“protect” them.
Because we have stupid laws in this country that give some rights to blobs of flesh.
So if I punch a pregnant woman on her way to the abortion clinic, that's murder, instead of saving her $300.00. That's crazy.
That's how twisted and depraved you are. You deny the very humanity of the most innocent and defenseless of all human beings, and strongly support the
“right” to murder them in cold blood for no better reason than that their existence is inconvenient to someone else; yet you demand that violent destructive, subhuman
“Black LIES Matter filth be considered and treated as human, no matter how profoundly their behavior proves them to be anything but human; and you openly take their side against that of any actual humans.
Actually, that's not true. I was mugged on a CTA bus by five thugs in 1978.
Still my position stands... murdering people over property or even a minor physical altercation isn't justified. You can ask any soldier who has killed someone in a war, that it still nags at them for the rest of their lives.
That's a choice to be made by those who seek to unjustly deprive others of their rightful property. By making that choice, they are valuing their victims' property over their victim's lives as well as over their own lives. If they don't want to be killed over property, then there's a very good way to avoid that, which is to keep their filthy thieving hands off of that which is not theirs.
And the value of property is not as isolated form the value of life as you want to treat it.
For one thing, rightfully-earned property represents the portion of one's life, one's labor, one's efforts, that went into earning it.
To deprive one of one's property is to take that part of his life form him that went into earning it.
And in many instances, property represents the ability to survive. The roof over one's head, the clothes on one's back, the food on one's table. The vehicle that allows one to get to his job, and the tools that allow one to perform his job, in order to earn his living—you take that away, and you're taking away part of his life.
Of course, you'd have to be a productive, working citizen who contribute to society and earns an honest living by doing so, rather that, as you clearly are, a worthless parasite who is only a burden on others; in order to understand this. But your inability and unwillingness to understand it does not, in any way, refute it.
