Kyle Rittenhouse Legal Proceedings - Come for the trial, stay for….

[BlueSnowman]

Democracy is a time bomb. People eventually forget the chaos and tyranny that came before it and grow complacent, allowing corruption to thrive without proper accountability and oversight as people give up power and personal responsibility for convenience, and then everything comes crashing down, the cycle repeats.
It's hard for me to put into words, but I'm really disillusioned with the idea of democracy.
Benevolent dictatorship doesn't sound so bad at this point.

I'd say a democracy needs to be a republic with a meritocratic element, in the strictest, old Roman sense of the world. So not very democratic as it is understood in our time period, but all people holding office connected to the military, having served and having earned their merits. Trust me, you would love female leaders then. Otherwise what you describe happens and I too feel we are at the end of that cycle of decadence or very near to it.
Another way is with a strong religious underpinning like in Israel. Church for morality, university for science. The church serves as the immoveable anchor of the more flexible political system that has science to answer all technical problems, who shift in complexity in contrast to moral problems, that don't. All brilliant scientists like Einstein amd Heisenberg, albeit not in an institutional sense, were deeply religious after all. Problem for me is I like degeneracy, racemixing and fastfood, violent video games, all the pleasures of liberal democracy which could be wiped off the table very quickly here.
A third way would be decentralization to the max, which in America would sadly result in a shattering of the country. Peaceful and perhaps the best solution for you, but I would have to learn Russian. Might work in Germany or France, works perfectly in Switzerland. A strong gun culture, castle doctrine, very strong local institutions with direct and explicit responsibilities and senators beign ousted on simple majority vote. Sadly also needs a religious or cultural underpinning or you have Ancapistan.
Otherwise democracies are doomed, I agree.

 

[MrHoneyBadger]

POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA (THC)

Domestic Abuse

Are there any BLM protestors that are not felons?

oh no this thread is now political sperging isn't it
fuck off

 

[Allanon]

The first mistake was letting the media rebrand itself as unbiased and truthful. Rejecting the lie that anyone can 'just report the facts' would protect people from huge swaths of propaganda techniques.

 

[BlueSnowman]

so if a white guy calls a jewish person a kike, they send the Gestapo?
but if a Muslim or black person does it, they look the other way?
at the rate of immigration, we'll be back to hitler levels of basedness within 50 years.
Just like how based it was when Kyle by pure chance happened to shoot a pedophile.

Nah, the blacks here a usually mixed with an American father or African mother. They are as spineless as the other Germans and get the baton. Only the Africans are safe, the mulattos who join the left get a pass, though.

 

[Overly Serious]

The prosecution in this trial reminds me of Billie Flynn in the musical Chicago. Oh, they're less slick, less charming. But they do the same thing where they take a case where there are zero facts on their side and just start creating a narrative from whole cloth, like "they both reached for the gun" in the musical. Only difference here is that Flynn was trying to convince the court a murderer wasn't one and the prosecution are trying to convince them that someone who isn't one was. They even both sneak in disputed evidence at the last minute when things aren't going their way!

I hope the jury have found or kept their courage over night and come back with a Not Guilty. Honestly, I can't see how this could ever breach Reasonable Doubt and they're talking about a traumatised young man being put away for years of his life if they vote Guilty. The only reason I could see them voting guilty is either fear of consequences or personal politics / anti-gun feelings.

 

[Friedrich4231]

Don't care still annoying faggot

Maybe his relative success has gotten to his head. I do agree with him that right wingers need to fight harder in the court of public opinion. For years they’ve just been letting faggots in the media smear them unopposed.

 

[Astro Galactic Megalul]

I hope the jury have found or kept their courage over night and come back with a Not Guilty. Honestly, I can't see how this could ever breach Reasonable Doubt and they're talking about a traumatised young man being put away for years of his life if they vote Guilty. The only reason I could see them voting guilty is either fear of consequences or personal politics / anti-gun feelings.

I concur, I don't see any other reason for deliberations to take this long when facts are so evidently clear.
There's a reason Barnes is making a big deal out of jury choice. It was critical to ensure that this wouldn't happen.

 

[Allanon]

I'd say a democracy needs to be a republic with a meritocratic element, in the strictest, old Roman sense of the world. So not very democratic as it is understood in our time period, but all people holding office connected to the military, having served and having earned their merits. Trust me, you would love female leaders then. Otherwise what you describe happens and I too feel we are at the end of that cycle of decadence or very near to it.
Another way is with a strong religious underpinning like in Israel. Church for morality, university for science. The church serves as the immoveable anchor of the more flexible political system that has science to answer all technical problems, who shift in complexity in contrast to moral problems, that don't. All brilliant scientists like Einstein amd Heisenberg, albeit not in an institutional sense, were deeply religious after all. Problem for me is I like degeneracy, racemixing and fastfood, violent video games, all the pleasures of liberal democracy which could be wiped off the table very quickly here.
A third way would be decentralization to the max, which in America would sadly result in a shattering of the country. Peaceful and perhaps the best solution for you, but I would have to learn Russian. Might work in Germany or France, works perfectly in Switzerland. A strong gun culture, castle doctrine, very strong local institutions with direct and explicit responsibilities and senators beign ousted on simple majority vote. Sadly also needs a religious or cultural underpinning or you have Ancapistan.
Otherwise democracies are doomed, I agree.

I do believe John Adams outright stated "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and is wholly inadequate to govern any other", and another founding father, I believe Thomas Jefferson? He also stated that attempting to legislate morality will only result in an endless web of new laws, none of which will ever actually solve the problem. The founding fathers themselves believed the church was a necessary part of keeping the country and all the systems of checks and balances they created in place. An atheist and immoral country inherently fails to protect the ideals the country was founded on and weakens the systems to the point of collapse.

But to be fair the founding fathers also believed there should only be one term for presidents, all relatives of previous presidents should be very critically examined if running for president - if not outright banned - were against the very concept of political 'parties' instead of individuals running for president (vice president was originally the one with the second-place number of votes, meaning that rather than Kamala we would have Trump as VP, and rather than Pence we'd have had Hillary) , were against paying congress anything in fear of people running for congress to get rich and powerful, believed banks and journalists were some of the greatest threats to freedom and the population, and Washington himself said that a two party system where people had a 'team' and hated 'the other guy' would be the most dangerous and fatal thing that could possibly happen to the democracy. Were you to bring them back to life today they'd immediately return back to the grave via stroke if they saw the state of the country now.

For real, though, you could quote Washington's farewell address without attribution and no one would know it isn't just someone ranting about how the feud between the left and the right will destroy society.

 

[Overly Serious]

I do believe John Adams outright stated "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and is wholly inadequate to govern any other", and another founding father, I believe Thomas Jefferson? He also stated that attempting to legislate morality will only result in an endless web of new laws, none of which will ever actually solve the problem.

This is at the essence of it. The US Constitution is the most solid, well-thought out attempt to provide for a country's basis that I have ever seen. It has safeguards built in which have done a great deal to help the USA preserve democracy for a long time. But no matter how sublime the blueprints, the building materials must be good. Everything the US people need to preserve their republic is laid out for them. But they must act and act together. Without that, the USA will go the way of the rest. We can see it happening. There are forces out there that know full well that to suborn the Republic they must first subvert the people. That is why they always go for the media and educational system first and foremost. This is always the beachhead. You want the country to continue as a free country? That's where they have to be fought first. If you wait, you lose.

 

[BlueSnowman]

I concur, I don't see any other reason for deliberations to take this long when facts are so evidently clear.
There's a reason Barnes is making a big deal out of jury choice. It was critical to ensure that this wouldn't happen.

Lends more and more credence to the guilty holdout theory. I first thought two former social science majors when they said wealthy white women, but now I think its just intimidated wealthy locals in my book. Travesty. Even here in leftist Germany he'd be not guilty...well, as I said, on his way to juvenile prison for brandishing and carrying.
It would have been like this:
1. Provocation/committed vrime during selfdefence- check
2. Thus has to exhaust all reasonable ways to diffuse/run away/defend himself non lethally- could be problematic with Rosenbaum but would still fly. An unstable man grabbing your deadly weapon and cornering you in combination with the fact that aiming non lethally at a violent chimp at close range is difficult- nah law student says pass
3. If no pass in and of itself- he's still a minor in what is essentially a battle- skipping to offensive selfdefence is still reasonable pass
4. Kyle acquitted on the serious charges and off to juvenile prison as said above (boarding school with bars in front of window, record wiped after exit)
5. Kyle gets treatment he needs and might even be allowed university, definetively jobtraining

I do believe John Adams outright stated "our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people and is wholly inadequate to govern any other", and another founding father, I believe Thomas Jefferson? He also stated that attempting to legislate morality will only result in an endless web of new laws, none of which will ever actually solve the problem. The founding fathers themselves believed the church was a necessary part of keeping the country and all the systems of checks and balances they created in place. An atheist and immoral country inherently fails to protect the ideals the country was founded on and weakens the systems to the point of collapse.

But to be fair the founding fathers also believed there should only be one term for presidents, all relatives of previous presidents should be very critically examined if running for president - if not outright banned - were against the very concept of political 'parties' instead of individuals running for president (vice president was originally the one with the second-place number of votes, meaning that rather than Kamala we would have Trump as VP, and rather than Pence we'd have had Hillary) , were against paying congress anything in fear of people running for congress to get rich and powerful, believed banks and journalists were some of the greatest threats to freedom and the population, and Washington himself said that a two party system where people had a 'team' and hated 'the other guy' would be the most dangerous and fatal thing that could possibly happen to the democracy. Were you to bring them back to life today they'd immediately return back to the grave via stroke if they saw the state of the country now.

For real, though, you could quote Washington's farewell address without attribution and no one would know it isn't just someone ranting about how the feud between the left and the right will destroy society.

No shit...that would have been good. Hillary as Vp would be hilarious but the left couldn't pull a lot of the shit it did pull. Trump Biden even more so. One term is ideal in my opinion. Im a fan of short terms for the legislative and executive branch.

 

[Happy Fish]

The right seems spineless and weak and obsessed with optics and 'being better than the left' now, but if they were to get into power and legitimately become the uniparty, that would disappear. It might take time, it might happen overnight, but the end result will still be 'corrupt blob of government that no longer represents Republican values because there is no one around to keep them on the rails'.

Its hard to be about "law and order" and then justify fighting back when those things fail, but something has to give.

 

[DumbDude42]

The right seems spineless and weak and obsessed with optics and 'being better than the left' now, but if they were to get into power and legitimately become the uniparty, that would disappear. It might take time, it might happen overnight, but the end result will still be 'corrupt blob of government that no longer represents Republican values because there is no one around to keep them on the rails'.

that's because the republican partys core values are near indistinguishable from the democratic partys values. both parties are committed to corporate neoliberalism, both parties support constant expansion of the state for its own sake, both parties support large scale immigration, both parties support feminism, both parties support racial equality, etc. a DC politician of the republican party and a DC politician of the democrat party have much more in common with each other than they do with their respective voter base.

a republican ruled USA would do almost all the same ugly shit that a democrat ruled USA currently does. probably a bit less shilling for trannies and a bit more shilling for israel, but those are minor trivialities, all the big issues and decisions would remain the same.

 

[Ceral Funt]

I fully admit that I haven't been keeping up with the Rittenhouse trial, and that I'm honestly not at all interested in getting involved with following the ongoing drama -- but information is never useless, "there is no knowledge that is not power". Also, a bit of powerleveling: I'm not an American citizen, so I don't quite know how the law works in this sort of situation.

With all that said, to me, an ostensibly "objective" third party, things look like this (please correct me immediately if I misinterpret or completely miss out on any facts):

1. KR, as a minor, crossed state lines with an illegal firearm.
2. KR, as a minor, fatally shot two people, and non-fatally wounded a third.

Based strictly on these self-contained facts (which, from my perspective, should be the working premise here), and disregarding any sort of background of the KR or the victims (again, presumed working premise), it seems to me that the logical conclusion to this case should be a clear-cut conviction -- but I know life is a bitch and likes to play us all like so many worthless pawns, so I'd appreciate a tl;dr of why my view of things could potentially be wrong, again, strictly for the sake of information, and not because I want to involve myself in following this SNAFU any more than I need to.

 

[Not Really Here]

I don't think he has fully grasped that he is talking directly to "his audience" yet. Rekieta is very close to the "right wing" crowd for sure and this gives Branca access to the /k/ crowd whom otherwise would never have heard of him. Plus the random people just stumbling into the Youtube livestream.

In case it wasn't clear, the first time he was on Nick's show was a year ago.

Clarity edit: At some point in this video Nick was all 'yo bro, come back on to talk more lawyer shit.' and little Andy went full Jew(never go full Jew) and said 'I don't like doing free shit.'
Yesterday Andy was told by Vimeo that his videos on their platform were being viewed so many times, they had to invent a new payment level just for him, and he would be banned in 7 days if he doesn't paypigggy to them.

I think he's now fully aware of the audience he's reaching.

 

[Vecr]

crossed state lines with an illegal firearm

The firearm was already in Kenosha. It was not illegal.

 

[Gehenna]

I fully admit that I haven't been keeping up with the Rittenhouse trial, and that I'm honestly not at all interested in getting involved with following the ongoing drama -- but information is never useless, "there is no knowledge that is not power". Also, a bit of powerleveling: I'm not an American citizen, so I don't quite know how the law works in this sort of situation.

With all that said, to me, an ostensibly "objective" third party, things look like this (please correct me immediately if I misinterpret or completely miss out on any facts):

1. KR, as a minor, crossed state lines with an illegal firearm.
2. KR, as a minor, fatally shot two people, and non-fatally wounded a third.

Based strictly on these self-contained facts (which, from my perspective, should be the working premise here), and disregarding any sort of background of the KR or the victims (again, presumed working premise), it seems to me that the logical conclusion to this case should be a clear-cut conviction -- but I know life is a bitch and likes to play us all like so many worthless pawns, so I'd appreciate a tl;dr of why my view of things could potentially be wrong, again, strictly for the sake of information, and not because I want to involve myself in following this SNAFU any more than I need to.

Both your facts are entirely wrong. He got the firearm in Wisconsin and that charge was dismissed. Additionally, crossing state lines with a firearm is not a crime.

Also, Self-defense is a thing.

 

[Happy Fish]

I fully admit that I haven't been keeping up with the Rittenhouse trial, and that I'm honestly not at all interested in getting involved with following the ongoing drama -- but information is never useless, "there is no knowledge that is not power". Also, a bit of powerleveling: I'm not an American citizen, so I don't quite know how the law works in this sort of situation.

With all that said, to me, an ostensibly "objective" third party, things look like this (please correct me immediately if I misinterpret or completely miss out on any facts):

1. KR, as a minor, crossed state lines with an illegal firearm.
2. KR, as a minor, fatally shot two people, and non-fatally wounded a third.

Based strictly on these self-contained facts (which, from my perspective, should be the working premise here), and disregarding any sort of background of the KR or the victims (again, presumed working premise), it seems to me that the logical conclusion to this case should be a clear-cut conviction -- but I know life is a bitch and likes to play us all like so many worthless pawns, so I'd appreciate a tl;dr of why my view of things could potentially be wrong, again, strictly for the sake of information, and not because I want to involve myself in following this SNAFU any more than I need to.

Self-defense is a thing and the firearms charge wasn't valid and has already been thrown out. (ninjad)

 

[Overly Serious]

that's because the republican partys core values are near indistinguishable from the democratic partys values. both parties are committed to corporate neoliberalism, both parties support constant expansion of the state for its own sake, both parties support large scale immigration, both parties support feminism, both parties support racial equality, etc. a DC politician of the republican party and a DC politician of the democrat party have much more in common with each other than they do with their respective voter base.

a republican ruled USA would do almost all the same ugly shit that a democrat ruled USA currently does. probably a bit less shilling for trannies and a bit more shilling for israel, but those are minor trivialities, all the big issues and decisions would remain the same.

The purpose of the Republican party is to prevent the arising of a true Right Wing party.

However, a necessity of serving that purpose is that the Republican party must remain semi-open to Right Wing supporters. Meaning if there is a sufficient Right Wing populist push then it may be possible to "retake" the party. As Trump and his supporters did. What if Trump isn't Jesus. What if Trump is merely John the Baptist?

 

[MrHoneyBadger]

PLEASE GIVE US THE DUMB RATING BACK NULL

 

[BlueSnowman]

This is at the essence of it. The US Constitution is the most solid, well-thought out attempt to provide for a country's basis that I have ever seen. It has safeguards built in which have done a great deal to help the USA preserve democracy for a long time. But no matter how sublime the blueprints, the building materials must be good. Everything the US people need to preserve their republic is laid out for them. But they must act and act together. Without that, the USA will go the way of the rest. We can see it happening. There are forces out there that know full well that to suborn the Republic they must first subvert the people. That is why they always go for the media and educational system first and foremost. This is always the beachhead. You want the country to continue as a free country? That's where they have to be fought first. If you wait, you lose.

Problem is, that this is already firmly conquered. Its in their bag. Black and Jewish people get a lot of unjustified hatred around here, but both populations are firmly within the grasp of the left's tentacles, a lot of jews in the centre of the kraken. Hispanics and Asians less then even white people, women here indeed most affected.
Most of them are victims, not deserving of scorn, just as the krakens enemy, white males are. Interracial (and gender) relations would be fine without the left (in Europe also islamic clerigy as a subversive third party), I stand firmly on that. Germany got an influx of Turks in the 17th-18th century, pows during some prince's battle with the Ottomans. They were integrated without problems and the reason you find ethnic Germans with Turkish surnames. People are people, no matter the lower average iq scores or bigger noses.
All of that aside you have a subverted population, you need to unsubvert it. That only works with force now.
You defeated Germans subverted by a toxic ideology before and did so permanently. I say the right has to utilize a political victory resulting from leftist failure (or as getting more and more likely military victory in a civil war) FELT BY THE MASSES (riots, inflation, STARVATION, FREEZING) to its fullest as I said above. Many antifa footsoldiers need to die, a lot of college professors and office clerks need to be in jail or hung at the gallows for the ravens, the worst offenders (most ardent marxists and influencers like Vaush, Cenk and Hassan Piker) need to be in Guantanamo or Vaush in the general population of a random prison, heaven for supposed, likely pedos like him. Beign a marxist should be made a crime, just like beign a nazis was, so should be wearing marxist insignia. Social sciences abolished or remade from the ground up on a firm empirical, positivist basis. I meab, most sociology studies don't hold up to repeatability and use very litttle math as it is, the emperor is naked as the day he was born. Nuremberg trials, guys!
The people, especially the blacks, should be treated kindly on the other hand. That might put communism on the dustheap of history where it should have been shortly after Marx was torn apart by Alfred Stuart Mill with marginalism and Böhm Bahwerk and put in the ground by Okishio and his theorem disproving Marxian crisis theory. Popper has firmly demolished dialectics as it is.