Concerning the murderer Kyle Rittenhouse...

[Pluvious]

Last edited Sun Nov 27, 2022, 02:38 PM - Edit history (1)

(see post 4 for full view of the posted text)

Link to tweet

[Wild blueberry]

1. Thank you

[UTUSN]

2. K&R

[GreenWave]

3. He crossed statelines to "stand HIS ground".

[keithbvadu2]

33. Claimed he was asked to guard a car sales lot.

Claimed he was asked to guard a car sales lot.

The owners called him out as a liar.

[tblue37]

4. Text image without tweet:

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. Thanks. Saved hundreds of us from give clicks to the Mollusk! . . .nt

[erronis]

22. I wish DU would start to recommend that posters put up some of the content instead of just a twit.

I'm going to skip pulling any content from twitter, including the linked images that are used as sucker-bait to get people to click into the twitter site.

If the original poster thinks it worth posting something that only came from twitter then they should have the courtesy to synopsize (or screen grab) some of the content.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Been asking for a long time. And DU software could convert twitter URLs into ordinary text, not link

[erronis]

26. Not so sure how easy this is. Twitter is quite adept at making objects non-copyable

I believe much of the "textual" content is actually images that are fed out dynamically. I've tried a few methods half-heartedly and found that just doing a screen capture of interesting content is the easiest. And then the capture has to be stored online as a .jpg for DU to accept it (won't accept a directly upload.)

If this is the biggest of my worries, I have a great life!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

27. No, I did not say content text or objects. I was specific about the URL

If DU blocked all Twitter URLs, nobody could click through. But blocking only the hot link aspect, then anyone who really really need to go there could easily copy-paste the URL from text and get there. In the meantime, there would be almost totally reduced traffic from DU to Twitter.

It would be easy for the code that converts a URL into a hot link to detect "twitter" in it and convert it to simple text instead. DU is already doing checking on URLs for hacker busting. DU already scans the text to detect all URLs and convert proper ones to hot links.

Not the content. DU and other sites do not automatically copy Twitter content because that is illegal. It is copyrighted content. If it is not explicitly copyrighted or assigned, then there is the implicit copyright held by the creator.

[orleans]

38. du is on twitter

https://twitter.com/demunderground

Link to tweet

[calimary]

28. That's a good idea.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

29. DU wouldn't have to recommend, members would do it IF DU made ...

If DU made twitter links cold, (not clickable, but copy-able) then people would copy-paste text or make screen pictures because their thread or post would mostly be ignored with a cold link and no image/text.

Users doing that is "fair use" for purposes of news, education, and the public interest; and it is a pittance.

Sites can't and don't copy content automatically because that is a direct violation of copyright since there is advertising by the site and quickly becomes a torrent.

[republianmushroom]

5. Nailed it

[Mr.Bill]

6. He left out the fact that the

gun was purchased illegally.

[Sympthsical]

12. Untrue

We're a year past the trial, and false information about the case just never dies. As someone who watched the trial, I gave up on it long ago. A narrative became the truth, and it just gets repeated endlessly.

But, no. There were no illegal gun instances in anything that happened. The gun was purchased by Dominic Black and held in trust. Because of goofy Wisconsin gun laws, Rittenhouse did not possess the gun illegally - that charge was dismissed. Once that happened, the prosecution knew charges against Black wouldn't stick, so they let him go with "contributing to delinquency" which isn't even a criminal offense.

Rittenhouse is a right-wing goober, but the facts aren't really even in dispute anymore. It all came out at trial. Just the false information that never went away no matter what evidence was produced.

(I see state lines is making a comeback upthread).

We can dislike someone intensely and yet value true things.

[Mr.Bill]

14. If you want to take the side of a judge

who acted more like Rittenhouse's defense attorney than the judge at the trial, so be it. That gun was a straw purchase and it was in his the hands of a 17 year old the night he killed people with it.

[Sympthsical]

19. I take the side of true things

Not everything in this life is Red Team vs. Blue Team. It's reductive and doesn't make for clear thinking processes.

I thought he was guilty as sin before the trial started. However, I watched the whole trial while working from home and came away with a much different feeling about what happened once all the evidence was presented.

Other people relied on highly biased Twitter reports for their "facts" and here we are. Still. A year later.

[Mr.Bill]

20. I watched it, too.

I'll bet you believed his crying act, too.

[Sympthsical]

42. I bet people got mad

Because the internet told them to expect certain things, and when it didn't happen, they created new motives and conspiracies for why real life wasn't comporting with what the internet kept telling them to expect.

Which is the problem, and it remains a problem in many areas with many stories, but we somehow have to keep having these debates when facts are sitting. right. there.

Anyway. I'm done. I hadn't thought about the case in ages, and I'm going to return to doing that.

[inthewind21]

56. It's a HUGE

problem. And I agree with you 100%. I watched the trial as well. And as much as I didn't like the result, it was
inevitable based on the law. As was the OJ trial, the Casey Anthony trial, the George Zimmerman trial and A whole lot of others.

[SlimJimmy]

36. Don't waste your time.

DU has decided what the facts are and nothing will convince them otherwise. See my sig line for why I stand with the facts in this case. I may not like Rittenhouse, and I may not condone his actions, but the facts are fairly clear in this case.

[inthewind21]

55. Nothing

to do with the judge. It's about what the LAW is. Like it or not, he walked based on the laws.

[niyad]

24. JFC. Going from Antioch, IL, to Kenosha, WI IS "crossing state lines".

Even walking in a tight circle in the Four Corners is "crossing state lines".

STOP. JUST STOP.

[Sympthsical]

40. He worked in Kenosha

He lived along the border.

It. Does. Not. Matter.

But once the whole "Gun crossing state lines!" thing got shot out of the sky a billion times (because it took that many times), people keep repeating it to intimate something was done that was not.

I know, I know. I know where I am.

[plimsoll]

31. I recall reading about that ruling.

There are plenty of lawyers who felt that this interpretation of those gun laws would make it legal for convicted felons to have a friend purchase a firearm and "keep it in trust" for them. That would eliminate a lot of pre textual arrests and provide a lucrative business model for someone.

But the original posters point remains valid. He was a willing combatant who went there looking for trouble. The fact that there is a legal basis to indemnify his killing spree legal doesn't make it right.

[ShazzieB]

32. But he DID cross state lines.

I didn't think there was any question about that.

I know some charges didn't stick because of screwy Wisconsin gun laws, but that's a whole separate issue. The kid deliberately went from one state to another to do violence. Was it legal? I don't know. It wasn't right, either way.

[Dr. Strange]

48. Yes he did.

Although I don't know why people think that's illegal. I've crossed multiple state lines.

[KPN]

8. Nice to see this. I hope we continue to see

reality checks about Kyle Rittenhouse frequently and consistently in the future. At the same time, I pity the poor boy. He will — and frankly should — be hounded until justice is served. One day, he will get his own.

[MyOwnPeace]

35. But we've been hoping......

the same for George Zimmerman, and yet...........

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/florida-teen-trayvon-martin-is-shot-and-killed

[KPN]

39. He'll get his comeuppance in time as well.

[Tickle]

9. But the government did what they were supposed to do

Rittenhouse was arrested and put in jail. He was charged with multiple murders along with other charges. When his day in court came and a "Jury of his peers" were assigned to look at all his evidence they found him not guilty.

[Takket]

10. that and a HORRIBLY written law, which the jury considered, is why he got off.

[Amishman]

43. This is what DU struggles with, the ruling appears correct under letter of law

I said as such a few days after the killings, and predicted the outcome based on watching the videos and reading the relevant statutes. The video evidence that he was being chased prior to each shooting was all that mattered under the wording of the law. Quite a few here harshly criticized me for my conclusions

We have a lot of really badly written laws in this country, this case was a particularly painful example.

[stopdiggin]

46. Sympthsical makes a good point upstream

We (many of us) 'buy in' to an internet narrative of what happened, and what will happen as a result. Then when it doesn't transpire as we've been assured it should ... It's because of 'betrayal' and 'corruption.'

Rittenhouse is a scummy little low rent, low functioning wanna-be - who made perilously bad decision to go out and play soldier in the streets one night. But - the fact still remains that once the video and the true narrative began to be unpacked in the courtroom (with the most salient being that he was being chased down in those streets by other actors) - there was little chance that he was going to convicted of murder. It's just that simple. And that holds true no matter what we were told to expect prior to the trial - or how loudly we scream and cry about it afterwards.

You want a different outcome to this story? Change the laws!

[Pluvious]

11. Just like OJ Simpson

And, obviously, what you said is absolutely true.

Our system of justice is not perfect, and making it so it seems unobtainable, sadly.

[Tickle]

45. You are so right on both comment's! NT

[Tommymac]

13. Fuck the legalities. Morally, Rottenlouse is and always will be a murderous terrorist.

May he rot in Hell, and may his life's ride on this rock be full of fear, uncertainty, ridicule, and pain every single day he is here. Year after Year.

[sellitman]

16. What you said. N/T

[h2ebits]

17. Yes!!

[yardwork]

15. We all know why this common sense was ignored with Rittenhouse.

[sarisataka]

18. Why are we giving his name publicity

Based a a tweet originally sent over two years ago?

[Dr. Strange]

50. If you read the comment, he doesn't reference Rittenhouse by name.

The original comment may have in fact been referring to Gaige Grosskreutz.

[malaise]

21. He is an RW terrorist

That is all

[SYFROYH]

25. I don't agree with McCain, but Rittenhouse got lucky.

[3catwoman3]

30. And now this little shit is meeting with...

...Republican leadership.

This makes me want to vomit.

[HardPort]

34. Are there any civil actions against that little shit? Seems like a wrongful death case would be ...

... a slam dunk, but I haven't heard that the families have sued the punk.

[Martin68]

37. Excellent points.

[Initech]

41. You don't cross state lines with a loaded semi automatic to hold hands and sing kumbaya.

[Kaleva]

51. He didn't cross state lines with a gun

[packman]

44. Remember George Zimmerman?? Time will give him his karma

[czarjak]

52. Otherwise, he's probably a REALLY nice guy.

[Blue Owl]

49. Someday I hope that little fuck gets what is coming to him

[Evolve Dammit]

53. The poster child of the right. He's being groomed. "My next President" per Ann Coulter

[Bluethroughu]

54. Clearly correct, thank you for sharing.

What does that make the GOP, who invite this terrorist insurgent into their political fold?

[onecaliberal]

57. Boom!