Only in America... | Page 59 | Vital Football

Only in America...

For anyone that is aware of the Kyle Rittenhouse case. Not guilty on all charges. A true result for justice delivered by a brave judge and jury in the face of unacceptable intimidation.

Disgraceful behaviour by Biden, his administration, main stream left wing media, abdication of and dereliction of duty by the local mayor in protecting his local community and shameful tactics by the prosecution.

America is indeed a very strange place but on this occasion at least the jury did it's job under incredible pressure and justice has been served.
 
For anyone that is aware of the Kyle Rittenhouse case. Not guilty on all charges. A true result for justice delivered by a brave judge and jury in the face of unacceptable intimidation.

Disgraceful behaviour by Biden, his administration, main stream left wing media, abdication of and dereliction of duty by the local mayor in protecting his local community and shameful tactics by the prosecution.

America is indeed a very strange place but on this occasion at least the jury did it's job under incredible pressure and justice has been served.

So it is all right for people to use violence to defend themselves?

No, wait, it's ok for white people to use violence, right?

I thought you were a pacifist.

Never has your political allegiance and utter hypocrisy been more evident.*
 
PART 1

For anyone not familiar with the Rittenhouse case these are the facts.

In August 2020 Kenosha police shot and wounded a black suspect as they attempted to arrest him. This resulted in several nights organised rioting, damage, arson and violence by BLM and their supporters. Over 50M worth of private property and businesses were damaged and destroyed, plus a further 2M of local authority property.

On the second night of rioting 17 year old Rittenhouse shot and killed two protesters, wounded another and fired rounds at a fourth that missed. He was arrested and charged within 48 hours of the incident without the facts being established.

Within 48 hours and without knowing any of the details, Joe Biden (ahead of the presidential elections) labelled R a white supremacist whose behaviour and others of his ilk caused him great concern, and was the reason why he was running for office.

The progressive media, again without knowing the details immediately labelled R a white supremacist responsible for racist killings (The three men shot were all white for reference). They painted a narrative of R as somebody having no connection or cause to be in Kenosha that night, having crossed state lines to be there, taking an illegal firearm with him. They asserted that he had gone there armed to deliberately seek out protesters to randomly kill in the course of an active shooter spree and had murdered two men and attempted to murder two others.

Unfortunately for Biden and the propaganda media the overwhelming majority of the events and circumstances surrounding Rittenhouse were captured from numerous angles and sources including over head drones. This is really who R is and what actually happened that night.

R lives just over the state border with his mother in a commuter town, 20 minutes from Kenosha. His father, granny, extended family and friends reside in Kenosha itself which also happens to be the place where he was working as a lifeguard at the time of the riots. He had more reason and connections to be in Kenosha and travelled less distance to be there than many of the rioters that had travelled in.

Rittenhouse is not a white supremacist. In spite of the smears and attempts to label him such, the prosecutors found no evidence whatsoever in spite of an extensive search into the lie. He even voluntarily submitted his encrypted phone with password for examination.

What was established is that R was a 17 year old with an unblemished record and impeccable character. He was a former fire service cadet, a serving lifeguard with considerable first aid training and is currently at college training to be a nurse/paramedic.

In spite of the pleas from local law enforcement and the community, the Democrat Kenosha administration refused to bolster police numbers or deploy national guard to protect their city from the much trailered organised riots. R watched in dismay on the first night as the city burned, and the overwhelmed and under resourced law enforcement stood by and watched.

R during the next day wanted to help his community and went to the local school where he spent about an hour and a half cleaning Antifa graffiti from that location. He was deeply moved by the emotional distress caused to the people surveying their devastated businesses. When the administration still refused to act ahead of the anticipated second night of rioting R felt that he could help that night with his fire and first aid training.

Concerned for his safety and the existence of firearms amongst the rioters during the first night, he decided to avail himself of a legally held firearm as a deterrent and for protection. He did not bring it over the state line, it was acquired from a friend in Kenosha and he ensured the barrel length was over 16" to comply with his age restriction.

During the evening and before events unfolded he was coincidentally interviewed by a local new team. He was seen with his first aid equipment, fire extinguisher and rifle which was strapped across his chest. He was also seen by many people offering his first aid services and putting out fires as the evening progressed. He was not seen brandishing or threatening with the rifle.

R public spirited actions did not go unnoticed by the protestors and he began to attract unwelcome attention.

A white protestor and convicted violent child rapist (later deceased 1, and seen armed with a 4 foot length of chain and acting aggressively during the evening) approached Rittenhouse who at that time had a friend with him. The protestor told R that if he caught him by himself that night he would kill him. Sometime later that opportunity arose. The protestor spotted R and chased him down the street. R did not stop, threaten or fire, he ran away. Unfortunately R was driven towards a mob who were in the process of destroying cars in a car lot. The protestor hid behind cars and took his chance to ambush R at that location.

R was chased down and it was only as he was caught by protestor 1 that he turned at the last moment with his rifle. Just before the protestor made a grab for R, a firearm was discharged in the vicinity nearby. The identity of the shooter has never been identified but it is undisputed and R having heard a gun shot, and having the man who said he was going to kill him upon him discharged his rifle at the last possible moment, fatally shooting his attacker.

R realised the predicament he was in and ran off towards police lines and was heard saying 'I've got to get to the police, I had to shoot him'.

The assembled mob were out to get R and the call went up to 'get him'. R kept running and did not threaten anybody with the gun. He was chased down and knocked to the floor from behind. He was then on the floor surrounded by a baying crowd who quickly attacked him from several angles. Unidentified protestor 2 (we'll come onto that) launched a flying drop kick into the face of R as he lay on the ground and made a grab for the gun. As he did R fired and missed. Another protestor moved in from the front so R saw him coming. R had the presence of mind to point the gun at him but did not fire when the protestor put his hands up and stopped. Distracted by that protestor another man (deceased 2 with previous convictions for violence including against female family member) took the opportunity to attack R (still on the floor) from behind and smashed him over the head with a skateboard before trying to take the gun. R discharged a round killing him a that moment.

Finally a fourth protestor (previous convictions) moved in towards R a second later. R still from his prone position was able to see him and pointed the gun and did not fire. The man instead of backing off slid his hand to his waist band and pulled out an illegally held Glock pistol and pushed down on R rifle. He moved the pistol to within a couple of feet of R head, pointing it directly at him and at that point R shot the man causing a wound to his arm.
 
Last edited:
PART 2

R managed to defend himself from a number of violent attacks from several angles, carried out in quick succession over a matter of about 5 seconds. He was then able to get to his feet and fired several warning shots into the ground to dissuade anybody else from attacking him. He then ran to the police line and handed himself in.

R was charged within 48 hours before the evidence was gathered. As aforementioned he was labelled a white supremacist active shooter, out for blood and that narrative was pursued from the offset by the media, Biden, local mayor's office and BLM without knowing the facts. Astonishingly as the facts and video footage emerged none of the groups and individuals backed down from these false, politically fuelled and hateful lies. They continued to double down even as the trial fell apart before their eyes.

The prosecutor was professionally incompetent at best and it has been strongly suggested was deliberately trying to achieve a mistrial so badly was his case going. The judge at one point was apoplectic with rage and had to clear the jury to admonish him for making adverse comment about R constitutional right to silence when interviewed, and trying to sneak in prejudicial opinion based evidence when the judge had already ruled it inadmissible. The prosecutor even laid a charge of illegal possession of a firearm knowing full fell that was false (apparently he didn't have a tape measure to establish the length of the barrel) in an attempt to make R actions look premeditated in the eyes of the jury. Obviously the judge threw it out.

It didn't stop there, after the jury rested it emerged that the prosecution had with held high resolution drone footage that assisted the defence case and knew all along who the protestor 2 (remember him) was. The man was a convicted violent felon with outstanding felony charges, prosecution daren't call him and didn't want to risk the defence calling him in evidence, even though they had charged R with his attempted murder.

The judge was appalled by the behaviour of the prosecutor and media reporting throughout the trial and was so perturbed that he is seriously considering ever allowing TV cameras into his court room again. His mood was not helped when it emerged that an MSNBC (they make CNN look impartial) employee had been caught running a red light and admitted he had been tailing the jury bus. They were summarily barred from the court house for the remainder of the trial.

Meanwhile the judge and jury had been exposed to a combination of vociferous verbal, plus written death threats and more riots if guilty verdicts were not returned.

The judge made it clear that after the jury returned unanimous NG verdicts that whilst he could not comment, he praised the jury for upholding the finest traditions of the founding constitution of the USA. In case you are wondering what the political leanings of the judge are he is in fact a political appointee of the Democratic Party. That tells you how horrendous this case was.

Are guns abhorrent (absolutely). Was R a stupid, naive yet well meaning 17 year old boy (absolutely). However in Wisconsin people are allowed to use self defence with a legally held firearm in extreme circumstances, whatever anybody's views are about that. Ultimately it is their law and that is what the case should have been about.

What it should never have been about was trying to sacrifice a stupid kid on lies at the altar of an ideological political agenda. R was never a racist white supremacist, Hell bent on a violent and random shooting spree. Shame on Biden, Kenosha Democrats, BLM, the media, and the District Attorney Office.

There are other contemporary cases out there that people should really highlight for anybody that wants to pursue that agenda. For example check out the case of Ahmaud Arberry, a black man who was mercilessly pursued and gunned down by white vigilantes for simply jogging through their neighbourhood. Those are the types of incidents that the 'mob' should hang their case on, not a sacrificial 17 year old kid who inadvertently got in over his head.
 
Last edited:
I thought you said you were a pacifist - very recently, in fact?

How does killing two people square with that?

You're also OK with armed, completely unregulated vigilantes roaming around and shooting people? That's your model of society?

And all because it was a BLM protest.

Wow.

The fact you think any of this is OK is a reflection on your extreme right-wing views and your racism.

Nobody is fooled by your dismal apologetics. Your defense of Ritthenhouse utterly condemns you as a man beyond ethical and moral norms.
 
And I ask again: it's OK for white people to use violence to defend themselves but not black people?

Christ, you even don't like black people taking the knee but Rittenhouse can shoot 2 people dead?

You're seriously fucked up.
 
In case anybody is confused about what the agenda in the Rittenhouse case was, I respectfully would ask them to avoid the noise and rhetoric that came from the people and organisations seeking to gain political advantage and cause racial division.

The facts have been established and if anybody is in any doubt there is plenty of real footage out there that does not lie, unlike certain repeated media reports.

Rittenhouse was not a protestor or vigilante, ergo he was not armed for unlawful purposes. He simply went to put out fires and provide first aid. He did not have a gun to threaten or intimidate or for any unlawful activity. R was not looking for trouble.

This is not and never was an issue about race, that is just another smoke screen and deflection. He took a gun in the event that it was required as a deterrent or to protect himself from violent criminals. As it turns out that is exactly what it was needed for.

Rittenhouse was targeted and attacked by a violent criminal mob who were out for blood; certainly not happy at his public spiritedness at putting out their fires.

One male threatened to kill him, pursued, ambushed and attacked him thereafter. Another person knocked him to the floor from behind and while he was on the floor a mob piled in. One stamped on his head, another backed off when the gun was pointed at him and another smashed him on the head from behind with a skateboard. Finally a protestor moved in with a Glock pistol and was stopped at the last possible moment with a gun shot wound to his arm.

People lawfully defending themselves from violent criminals should not be twisted to deflect away from the actions or to justify the criminal violence and disorder of protestors.

In my opinion, within a better society guns should be all but banned and the frequency of the events that unfolded in the Rittenhouse case would occur with much less frequency. But that is another argument and not the issue directly here.

This was about a 17 year old boy who should never have put himself in the situation he found himself, stupidly got out of his depth but ultimately acted in self defence to save his life. He didn't seek trouble, he went to provide aid and was attacked by violent people who couldn't accept that he was interrupting with their violent unlawful protests.

Thankfully in the face of extreme duress, the jury did not bow to intense pressure or interference, nor lose sight of the issue being about whether R acted with legitimate self defence when he was the victim at the hands of violent protestors.

The truly disgusting side show of all this was the behaviour and lies of Biden, certain media (CNN, Guardian and MSNBC I'm looking at you amongst others), the Kenosha Mayor's office and DA in trying to relentlessly scape goat a stupid boy, to push their own brand of political gain and racial division.

Some of those individuals and organisations will no doubt at least pay a professional or financial price for their behaviour sometime down the line.
 
Last edited:

Rittenhouse ambushed and chased by the man who had earlier threatened to kill him if he saw him by himself.
 
Last edited:

Rittenhouse chased and attacked by the baying mob. Note how he shows the discipline to not fire at anyone who is not in immediate proximity and/or in the process of attacking him.
 
Last edited:

This the cross examination of the protestor who initially 'forgot to mention' in his statement (until confronted by the video footage in court) he was illegally carrying a concealed Glock pistol which he produced and pointed at the head of the prone Rittenhouse having chased after him.

It's really quite powerful and self incriminating stuff.

What this clip doesn't show as it is cut off, is the immediate reaction of the prosecuting attorney who literally face palms when the would be victim drops this bombshell, on top of having earlier admitting in his cross examination that he had lied about the Glock in his initial statement to the police.
 
Last edited:
'Jump-kick man' who was filmed kicking Kyle Rittenhouse in the head is revealed | Daily Mail Online

Some quite damning background about the 'mostly peaceful' protestors that attacked Kyle Rittenhouse.

For context - Rittenhouse has been portrayed by Biden, BLM, and the prosecution case as a white supremacist vigilante, active shooter who was illegally armed whilst looking for trouble. There was precisely zero evidence that the 17 year old boy of previous good character, was any of that. The only evidence adduced is that he was putting out fires and offering to dispense first aid for anybody that needed it having earlier assisted in cleaning up graffiti at a local school.

On the other hand the motley crew of protestors that attacked Rittenhouse were portrayed to the jury by the prosecutor as wholesome heroes trying to take down an active shooter - The one that was trying to run and hand himself into the police following the earlier attack on him. I can't imagine why they didn't want to release details of 'jump kick man' to the defence even though they knew who he was.
 
Last edited:
For me the race of the people involved is irrelevant what seems odd to me is that in America they feel it is acceptable to go some distance to a place you don’t live armed with a weapon to apparently do a job the law enforcement people are there to do.

They need to put America on trial as well as this chap
 
For me the race of the people involved is irrelevant what seems odd to me is that in America they feel it is acceptable to go some distance to a place you don’t live armed with a weapon to apparently do a job the law enforcement people are there to do.

They need to put America on trial as well as this chap
His Dad, Granny, extended family and friends live there. He lives 20 minutes away and was working as a life guard in the city on the days of the riots. Meanwhile many of the rioters had no connection with the city and were coming in to carry out their 'mostly peaceful protests'.

He never carried the gun for law enforcement, he was not there for any form of enforcement; it was there for protection. The previous night the rioters had been carrying guns (look up reports at the time). One of his assailants pulled an illegal loaded Glock and pointed it 2 feet from his head before he was shot.

It has been established he was offering first aid, cleaning up graffiti and putting out fires. Naive and stupid in the circumstances, but have we really reached the point where we condemn a kid for that, yet seek to exonerate and justify the actions of people carrying out over 50M $ worth of damage and suggest they have more rights to be there. Perhaps America should be on trial for that in addition to it's crazy gun laws.

I completely agree that the US needs it's gun laws completely over hauling; it is beyond the pale. However that is not the issue for Rittenhouse. He was going about his lawful business trying to mitigate the carnage being perpetrated on the community in which he has a lot invested. In the course of that he used self defence to prevent himself from being murdered by a mob.
 
His Dad, Granny, extended family and friends live there. He lives 20 minutes away and was working as a life guard in the city on the days of the riots. Meanwhile many of the rioters had no connection with the city and were coming in to carry out their 'mostly peaceful protests'.

He never carried the gun for law enforcement, he was not there for any form of enforcement; it was there for protection. The previous night the rioters had been carrying guns (look up reports at the time). One of his assailants pulled an illegal loaded Glock and pointed it 2 feet from his head before he was shot.

It has been established he was offering first aid, cleaning up graffiti and putting out fires. Naive and stupid in the circumstances, but have we really reached the point where we condemn a kid for that, yet seek to exonerate and justify the actions of people carrying out over 50M $ worth of damage and suggest they have more rights to be there. Perhaps America should be on trial for that in addition to it's crazy gun laws.

I completely agree that the US needs it's gun laws completely over hauling; it is beyond the pale. However that is not the issue for Rittenhouse. He was going about his lawful business trying to mitigate the carnage being perpetrated on the community in which he has a lot invested. In the course of that he used self defence to prevent himself from being murdered by a mob.

oh that’s ok then they should let him out go kill some more. This whole incident is wrong and shows what America is. They are no better then the taliban