Reflections on the larger anti-self-defense goals of the left in bringing Rittenhouse to trial
It’s waiting time, and I’ve been reflecting on the big picture of where we are right now. I don’t think there’s any way the Rittenhouse trial would have occurred ten years ago and certainly not twenty years ago, and the fact that it’s occurring at all is a bad sign.
Not that we need any more bad signs. But this trial is a reflection of the ways in which the left has gained power lately, despite the fact that there’s been a backlash against it.
The left wants power to be invested in the state and they intend to control the state – and by “state” I obviously don’t just mean an individual state such as Wisconsin, although there’s that too. The preferred repository of power is the federal government and the tentacles with which it grasps the states. That means that the right to bear arms and the right to self-defense must be quashed or at least greatly weakened, and that only certain people will be allowed to have that right.
Someone like Kyle Rittenhouse – a young white man of conservative leanings – is not allowed to have that right. But this trial isn’t even about him primarily; he’s just the vehicle for delivering the message, which has several parts:
(1) Rioters in causes that the left deems righteous are allowed to destroy cities and ordinary citizens must lay low and take it. They may not defend property or even person. The most they can do if attacked is take a beating and hope to not be killed, throwing themselves on the mercy of the mob.
(2) It’s not part of the trial of Rittenhouse, but my guess is that if he had fallen into a protected minority ethnic group or persuasion, he might have been spared the wrath of the prosecutors. Then again, maybe not – ask “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.
(3) The MSM and the left will mount a defamatory campaign against their designated enemies (in this case Rittenhouse, but it could be anyone who meets their criteria). That will taint jury pools so badly that a lack of evidence to bolster the prosecution’s case (in Rittenhouse’s case, a complete lack of evidence favoring the prosecution) won’t matter. This is especially true if the goal isn’t necessarily conviction, because a hung jury will do. The principle is that the process is the punishment, and the state will not relent in its pursuit of its quarry – multiple trials if necessary.
These messages are for the general public and don’t really have much to do with Rittenhouse himself.
Do the prosecutors realize Rittenhouse is not guilty and is in fact innocent? I think they do and simply don’t care about his actual innocence because he is guilty of being who he is, and that’s enough. Plus, he’s useful to them as an object against which to stir up hate and to deter self-defense, which is their larger goal. And they care about usefulness rather than the individual.
Do the prosecutors realize Rittenhouse is not guilty and is in fact innocent? I think they do and simply don’t care about his actual innocence because he is guilty of being who he is, and that’s enough.
Plus they have their own personal political ambitions no doubt. I find the two lead prosecutors to be absolutely appalling, amoral, destructive parasites, the sorts of people who benefit from chaos and human misery. But sadly I’m certain that some percentage of people view them as righteous.
What I suppose is that these outrageous charges were filed only three days after the events in order to placate the mob. It would have been far more appropriate for the charges to be dropped once it became clear that evidence did not support them, but the prosecutors have chosen instead to present this totally unsupported case and to try to redefine law.
” Rioters in causes that the left deems righteous are allowed to destroy cities and ordinary citizens must lay low and take it. They may not defend property or even person. The most they can do if attacked is take a beating and hope to not be killed, throwing themselves on the mercy of the mob.”
I’m going to repeat what I said on the previous thread.
The activist Left have now set the precedent that if they come to your street you have two choices. You can flee your home/business and let them do as they wish, burn, loot, etc. Or if you stay and defend your property and life then you will be charged with murder. Self defense is now equal to murder so, “in for a penny, in for a pound” is the new rule they’ve brought about.
There is no “take a beating and living when it’s a group doin it. You will be killed or injured so badly that you will be disabled for life. In real life once a group gets going on someone they don’t usually stop until stopped by force, especially a mob.
They know he’s innocent. They all do, including good old Joe (Scarborough – Biden is pretty clueless). But they want to send a message for all the reasons you’ve given. It depresses me that I’ve become so cynical, yet so justified.
Heck, he even looks the part of a red neck hick from the Blue Ridge Mountains-nothing slick, elite, nor POC about this one. He looks the part of what their beliefs now say is “evil” without redemption. Almost like he was made for tv
The power of self delusion is such that I assume the two prosecutors believe what they are doing is righteous. The question is whether some jurors agree. I am not optimistic.
The Chauvin trial set the precedent. This kid is more sympathetic but not to the left. No change of venue is the key.
Looking at the way the idiot ADA handled the gun, Kyle is obviously safer to be around then captain dimwit.
Dershowitz says he’s not guilty and should sue the news media outfits that have defamed him. I would love to see Kyle hire him to do the suing.
Neo: Good article. I agree with you.
Could you have imagined, ten years ago, that you would write such an article?
I have the queasy feeling that they genuinely believe the “sometimes you should take your beating” claptrap. Not that they genuinely believe it as it might apply to themselves, but I doubt their ability to crack their own hypocrisy that far open. They would convince themselves that the physical danger they faced was different, that they hadn’t truly provoked it, and so on.
The left would like to do away with the 2nd Amendment but making it illegal to use your gun for protection is the next best thing. I think they really are worried about an armed resistance of “domestic terrorists”. They would like to convict anyone who carries a gun for their own protection (especially during a riot) of the crime of provoking violence.
I hope Rittenhouse is acquitted but the mere fact that this absurd farce of a trial has gone this far is bad enough. Also I don’t think the race of the people Kyle shot really matters that much to the left. What matters is that Kyle is white, he had a gun and he knew how to use it.
I think they really are worried about an armed resistance of “domestic terrorists”. They would like to convict anyone who carries a gun for their own protection (especially during a riot) of the crime of provoking violence.
They insist the police allow Antifa and BLM the run of the place. So, the police do not protect you, then they prosecute you when you protect yourself. Antifa and BLM are Democratic Party muscle.
Pingback:Links and Comments | Rockport Conservatives
You have a feeling that they think that? You are being too modest. There is no doubt about it. Zimmerman, like Rittenhouse, was presumed by the leftists to be where they did not want him to be, looking at what they did not want him to see, and in the case of the latter, interfering in destruction they wished to mete out; even though everything both Zimmerman and Rittenhouse were doing was lawful.
But their being there, provoked a physical assault and mayhem by psychologically and morally troubled people; physical batterings which were on the leftist view, justified.
You lose all presumed rights including your right to life [which you never really had on their view, anyway] once you fail to yield to the whims and wishes of the progressive kind.
From some old Martin-Zimmerman files:
All the quotes above, except possibly the first were originally published or posted by educated white progressives.
Neo –
Serious question for you.
Supposedly according to one article “jump kick man” was identified in June. And they declined to put him on the stand.
Fair enough
But why would the defense still call him “jump kick man” if they knew his actual name? And would this failure to disclose be a reason for either a mistrial or directed verdict due to that fact.
Seems to me that would be enough to throw this whole mess out of court because of the prosecutors failure to adhere to proper discovery.
Its up at ACE’s site but ill post the link the actual article
https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2021-11-16-the-disturbing-story-of-the-rittenhouse-cases-mysterious-jump-kick-man/
The left is now claiming that when confronted by a violent leftist mob our choice is to either risk being beaten to death or be charged and found guilty of murder for defending ourselves.
The denial of reality inherent to ideological fanaticism prevents liberal-leftists from realizing that there is a third choice. Moreover, presenting people with a choice of being murdered or found guilty of murder with life imprisonment guarantees that for almost all veterans and many civilians, that third choice will be made.
Go to war and take as many of the bastards with you as possible.
Hard core leftists are another matter. I wonder if they want a rebellion by the ‘deplorables’… assuming that they can declare martial law and then the US Military, their federal enforcement goons and BLM and antifa thugs will put down the rebellion… doing so with prejudice.
Tyrants always double down when confronted with resistance.
Kyle Rittenhouse asked to step outside and defend the Courthouse while the verdict is being read: https://babylonbee.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-asked-to-step-outside-and-defend-the-courthouse-while-verdict-is-being-read
“Objection, your honor, Rittenhouse does not possess an AR-15 to defend the courthouse; I have the AR-15,” said the prosecutor, swinging the weapon wildly about as onlookers nervously ducked behind benches.
Neo: scary stuff. Very accurate assessment IMHO and thus very discouraging. But as others have said, “In for a penny, in for a pound.” At least we know where things stand.
I particularly like your approach —that this is not (much) about Zimmerman and it is not (really at all) about Rittenhouse. They are pieces in a much larger game of psychological operations that aims to recruit and reinforce the Prog Base and conversely to dishearten and disarm the rest of us.
It’s gotten very ugly.
Defense has filed a motion for dismissal of charges with prejudice. They say the prosecution withheld a better quality version of the drone footage until after the evidence portion of the trial had finished: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10210087/Prosecutors-Kenosha-shooter-trial-WITHHELD-evidence-defense.html
Kate:
If ever such a motion should be granted, it’s in this case.
The dismissal should come for the misstatements of the prosecutors in the closing arguments, if for nothing else. They lied about the evidence and lied about the law. This goes way beyond strong arguments in favor of their theory of the case.
Robert Shotzberger: “Looking at the way the idiot ADA handled the gun, Kyle is obviously safer to be around then captain dimwit.”
Robert, I was thinking the same thing – and if I had been on that jury I would have asked to speak to the judge about teaching lawyers about good gun safety.
Never in all my years of growing up near guns did any of the adults let anyone get away with “mishandling” a gun.
Two basic rules which that idiot Binger broke:
1. Never assume a gun is unloaded.
2. Never point a gun (if you think it is okay because it is unloaded see Rule 1) at someone unless you intend to shoot him.
Several years ago I served on a grand jury. One of our cases involved a shooting. I don’t recall why, but the prosecutor did allow the gun to be shown as evidence to us. But, he said that it was “up here by my desk and anyone who wishes to see it may do so, one at a time.” When the jury foreman asked that he pass it around the prosecutor said no; and then he told the story of when he first started he did just that and a juror, as a joke, pointed the gun at his head like he was going to commit suicide. Holy Cow! What a stupid thing to do. So, our prosecutor said, nope he wasn’t going to ever have an accidental shooting in his grand juries!
I wonder what the judge, and especially the jury, thought of his bad gun handling? Will it show what an idiot he is about guns? and maybe discredit everything he said in the eyes of the jury?
Mythx:
I don’t know the answer.
DNW, et al:
I find it very interesting that no one here, and none of those commenters various people have mentioned (who said that Zimmerman should have just taken the beating), remembers that Zimmerman’s testimony was that Martin was trying to get his gun.
Here’s the story
I find it very interesting that no one here, and none of those commenters various people have mentioned (who said that Zimmerman should have just taken the beating), remembers that Zimmerman’s testimony was that Martin was trying to get his gun.
Actually I did mention that, in the “Law According to ADA Binger” thread:
I posted this before but here’s the case of a cop who “took his beating” from a man with a rock
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/weymouth-officer-injured/1966257/
End result was a dead cop and another person killed.
The Rittenhouse fiasco is yet another example..or should i say Exhibit( as we are talking about a legal proceeding ) of the two sets of rules for leftists/democRATs and conservatives who oppose them.
Leftists have captured all US public institutions and have been engaged in relentless lawfare/warfare against average Americans for the last 80 years atleast.
As someone who wishes well for the US and lived in the country for a decade (once upon a time), i dont think this can last for a long time.
You guys should very seriously consider the idea of Partition as long as you have the power to do so
Pingback:Hump Day: In Today’s Media, ‘If It Leads It Bleeds’, Dammit! | The Universal Spectator
The conduct of the prosecutor in this trial is not at all uncommon with prosecutors. Both the prosecution for political reasons and the emotive arguments in absence of evidence are common with politically ambitious prosecutors on both sides of the aisle, although their targets will obviously differ. But all prosecutors are far too willing to stretch the law to cover cases they think should be crimes even when the law does not clearly support them. The DA position has needed to be depoliticized for decades, even before Soros started backing prosecutors to intentionally apply the law politically.
This is why I personally will not vote for or donate to anyone who has served as a prosecutor for any other office, either in a primary or general election, regardless of party. There may be a unicorn prosecutor out there who always applies the law strictly and is thoroughly ethical in his or her conduct, but I’ve never seen one.
This is exactly right. Trying to negate a physical defense is the flip side of censoring a verbal one.
The left has a self entitled right to censor, destroy and assault. They are our betters after all and it enrages them when one defends himself in thought or deed. They seek to disarm opposition in all manner.
The left hates Rittenhouse for defending himself. They hate him for symbolizing self defense as a concept.
BTW, the demise of their violent comrades is of little concern.
Consider the case of Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who were charged for facing a mob with guns. There was even evidence tampering by the prosecution (her pistol had been incorrectly reassembled in the past, and had been inoperable at the time of the incident; the prosecution “fixed” that).
If the Duke Lacrosse players had been lower middle class jocks at NC State or East Carolina depending on court appointed public defenders, they would be in jail now and Niphong wouldn’t be a verb.
The move to disarm the populace is the announcement that the national train has arrived at Nothing Left to Loseville.
You will make the salute. You will say the pronouns. You will pay the Danegeld. You will ride the cattle car.
Your choice.
Note that a convicted felon with illegal firearm attacking Kyle with an intent to kill not only remained free and unindicted, but braggs about it openly and is treated as a saint.
The message is “nobody has the right to resist centralized government, and the idea of law is dead”. They have legal power as MSM and FBI for “legal” persecution, illegal shocktroops (BLM brownshirts) for maiming and murders, working hand in hand and insisting on complete obedience not only in deeds but also in words and thoughts.
The only way out is the wave of strong local resistance going higher and higher.
Any attempt to destroy this machine from above is doomed to fail, see Trump.
they have set the stage that when this rioting craze continues and spreads it will end up bloody. Sooner or later some older vet will see his home, business, and neighborhood threatened. After confronting the mob to stop, and not having success, the mantra in for a penny, in for a pound. Try for one or try me for many. To the state the result will be the same. For those in the mob not so much.
If the Duke Lacrosse players had been lower middle class jocks at NC State or East Carolina depending on court appointed public defenders, they would be in jail now and Niphong wouldn’t be a verb.
Perhaps. It took close reading of disorganized Brady material for the three lawyers to discover that super-sensitive DNA tests had ruled their clients out.
Both KC Johnson and William L Anderson delineated the structural, cultural, and personnel problems attending the court system in North Carolina and in Durham in particular. Per Johnson, two of the three judges who presided over hearings in the case were in essence Nifong’s enablers and one was once his supervisor at the Durham DA’s office. That man (while still a sitting judge) was a character witness on his behalf at his disbarment hearings.
Note, the city manager and the chief of police were implicated as they had allowed Nifong to take over direction investigation from the upper echelons of the police department (telling the two investigators assigned to report to Nifong, something quite irregular). The Mayor of Durham (whose main duty is to preside over the city council) attempted to set up a panel to investigate who made certain decisions and why, but was thwarted by other elected officials. And, of course, Duke is a consequential part of the establishment in Durham, as was the Durham Herald-Sun. The president of Duke (with the acquiescence of the president of the board) and the editor of the paper were antagonists of the lacrosse players. So were about 120 faculty members at Trinity College, Duke.
This is a great example of why prosecutions immunity needs to go.
If prosecutors and their government employer enablers could be sued, they would take less risks. Right now they have almost nothing to lose if they abuse their office with prosecutions misconduct, where the process is the punishment, over charging to force a plea bargain, etc.
The Seems to be a lot more behind the Kenosha riots than has been reported.
With an fbi drone in Kenosha and what happened in Michigan and Dc with the FBI, and these criminals helping the rioters, and All the coincidences I wonder.
The link is on the conspiracy side, but he has the hypotheses that Rittenhouse was set up. The link mentions that Rittenhouse buddy, a 40 year army vet disappeared leaving him isolated, allowing him to be targeted by various Brownshirts, and other facts.
https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/news-briefs-11-16-2021/
Neo,
A+ Blog post, very insightful, and terrifying.
Thanks!
Durham is a highly leftist town, anchored by Duke University and Duke Medical. And the university has a culture which is known. When the news first broke about the alleged lacrosse team rape, a young guy we know who went to Duke said he was inclined to believe it because he knew the fraternity, knew the house where the party was held, and thought it was the kind of thing that could easily have happened. To this day, the Duke professors who signed a statement condemning the lacrosse program have not recanted, so far as I know.
I am really thrilled that with redistricting I will no longer be voting for (or rather, against) a congresscritter from Durham. Of course, I will be voting along with the city of Raleigh, which is a problem, but not quite as bad.
because he knew the fraternity, knew the house where the party was held, and thought it was the kind of thing that could easily have happened.
See KC Johnson’s reporting on the views of the girls lacrosse team, who were acquainted with the three men accused. You’re trading in calumny.
The Left is evil. As are the people who vote for their policies and support their candidates.
Is there anything more demeaning than to excuse well-educated, grown adults from responsibility and accountability for what they do than by figuratively patting them on the head and explaining they are just children who don’t understand the import of their actions?
“Is there anything more demeaning…?”
Actually for them it’s a no-holds-barred power-play.
And it seems to be working…until it—perhaps (or should that be “inevitably”?)—collapses from the weight of its own massive contradictions, unreality And extraordinary dishonesty:
https://quillette.com/2021/04/09/georgetowns-cultural-revolution/
No, I’m not “trading in calumny,” I’m merely reporting what some people in this area thought at the time. The young guy I knew didn’t know the particular players who were accused, but he knew the reputation of the fraternity and the campus, having recently graduated. Sensible people accepted the truth once the evidence was produced; leftist ideologues never gave up.
That is, Duke fraternities had been known to have wild parties at the house where the lacrosse team hosted the one in question. The campus has a reputation with which its graduates were quite familiar.
That is, Duke fraternities had been known to have wild parties at the house where the lacrosse team hosted the one in question.
You do know the difference between a loud and alcohol steeped party and a gang rape, don’t you?
No, I’m not “trading in calumny,”
Oh, yes you are.
Pingback:Hump Day: In Today’s Media, ‘If It Leads It Bleeds’, Dammit! - Patriots' Soapbox 24/7 News Network
Nonsense, AD. I know perfectly well the lacrosse players were falsely accused of rape, that the woman lied, and that she later killed her boyfriend and is in prison for that crime.
Further, I know the difference between initial impressions, which is what I referred to, and more informed opinions based on evidence as it emerged. The same thing happened in the Zimmerman case, in the Chauvin case, and in the Rittenhouse case. Initial impressions were spread widely in the media and many people never even heard about the facts.
“Antifa and BLM are Democratic Party muscle.”
Just like the KKK used to be. The Dems have always used extra-legal muscle.
This is great, but could be rejected from posting on FarceBook because it’s too intelligent.
Lemme run that through the Stupomitron translator and give it a try.
Nonsense, AD. I know perfectly well
Which is irrelevant, Kate. You were passing off as an informed opinion something that is anything but. A creature like Sarah Deutch of the Duke History department may fancy that it’s unremarkable for a trio of well-to-do late adolescents to gang rape black women. It’s a fancy, not something grounded in empirical observation. It’s actually a sociological ivory-billed woodpecker, something so rare a prosecutor will go from one end of his career to another and never see a case.