Rittenhouse to Biden: “Watch the Trial and Understand the Facts Before You Make a Statement”…He Can’t

Rittenhouse Biden

Newsmax.com reports that

In a stunning interview, the acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse assailed President Joe Biden for showing “actual malice” and “defaming my character” in likening him to a white supremacist during the 2020 presidential campaign.

“Mr. President, if I would say one thing to you, I would urge you to go back and watch the trial, and understand the facts before you make a statement,” Rittenhouse, 18, told Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

“It’s actual malice, defaming my character, for him to say something like that.”

Rittenhouse says he has “really good lawyers” who will be seeking to hold those who are perceived as defaming him accountable. That includes many in the news media.

“It’s quite hysterical how nobody can go back and look at the facts of the case,” a now-upset Rittenhouse, acquitted of various homicide and other charges by a Wisconsin jury late last week, told Carlson.

“‘He crossed state lines.’

“False.

“‘He’s a white supremacist.’

“False.”

“None of that is true, and the lies that they can just get away with spreading is just sickening, and it’s a disgrace to this country.”

Rittenhouse was on trial over the shooting three men, two fatally, at a Black Lives Matter rally in Kenosha in August 2020, but a jury found him not guilty, apparently accepting defense arguments that Rittenhouse, who was carrying a firearm, was defending himself against aggressors.

The teenager told Carlson he supports the right of groups like Black Lives Matter to protest. But he also expressed sorrow about rioters “taking advantage” of and corrupting the purposes of such demonstrations. In the case of his trial, that night in Kenosha arose out of the shooting of a Black man, Jacob Blake, in the summer of 2020.

“I think it was opportunists taking advantage of the movement,” Rittenhouse said of the riots; the violent unrest inspired him to go out into the streets of Kenosha. “I agree with the BLM movement. I agree everybody has a right to protest and assemble, but I do not agree that people have the right to burn down – I don’t appreciate that people – are burning down American cities to try to spread their message.

“I think there are other ways to go around and do that.”

In the wide-ranging interview, Rittenhouse ripped his first lawyers, including Lin Wood, said he was kept in jail without a shower for weeks, and noted he had to talk his mother into his turning himself in to the authorities.

“She was in shock,” Rittenhouse said. “She was like, she wanted to go into hiding. I said, ‘no, the right thing to do would be to turn myself in. I didn’t do anything wrong.'”

Rittenhouse said he knows the video from the attacks and self-defense arguments likely saved his life and made his case in court.

“I can’t even imagine,” he told Carlson when asked where he would be without the video shown in media and in court.

“I don’t think we would be sitting here right now having this talk, Tucker.”

Rittenhouse said he was sad that the case has been framed by race instead of self-defense. Although the shooting episode was not interracial, Rittenhouse’s most vocal critics have contended that a Black man, armed and acting as he did on that night in Kenosha, would hardly have been acquitted,

“To be honest, Tucker, this case has nothing to do with race,” he said. “It never had anything to do with race. It had to do with the right to self-defense.”

In a way, his comments echoed some of the points of social justice warriors.

“It’s amazing to see how much a prosecutor can take advantage of somebody,” he said. “Like, if they did this to me, imagine what they could have done to a person of color who maybe doesn’t have the resources I do or widely publicized like my case.”

Kyle Rittenhouse makes a very good point.

As I have written before…and as history itself shows, the first thing that totalitarians and fascists to, Marxists or otherwise, when they attempt to take over a country, is to take away to ability of the citizens to resist them.

I am not just talking about violent resistance, I am talking about the ability to talk to your governmental representatives face-to-face and your ability to communicate freely, not only with them, but to have your views be heard by others, period.

Did you know that the MSM was attempting to make it seem like Rittenhouse shot Black Americans in cold blood, instead of three White guys in Self-defense?

The Main Stream Media and others who seek to gain political power for themselves, like politicians, political pundits, BLM, and Antifa have attempted to make what happened at the Kenosha Riots into a Racial Incident, even though Rittenhouse and the three men that he shot were of the same race.

This effort began right after the incident occurred.

Biden, who can not put two sentences together coherently, was told by his Handlers to make something racial out of the shooting incident, and to cap it off by referring to Kyle Rittenhouse as a “White Supremacist. 

But why?

At the time of the shooting , Biden was running for the office of President of the United States, against Donald J.. Trump, whom the Democrats and their MSM Minions has already erroneously painted as a racist.

Like Democrats before them, they thought that the more that they could stoke the fires of racial division, the better their chances to get their puppet, Biden, into office.

And now, they are continuing the false narrative of Kyle Rittenhouse being a White Supremacist in order to distract from Biden’s horrible poll numbers resulting from his devastating failure to do his job as President.

This has resulting in two problems for President Joe Biden, his Handlers, and the Democrat Elite:

  1. Nobody is buying the false narrative about Kyle Rittenhouse and his act of self-defense in Kenosha.
  2. Americans are witnessing Biden’s poor job performance and are having to live with the debilitating effect of it on our economy and our daily lives.

I, for one, would love to see Rittenhouse not only sue Biden, but CNN and MSNBC as well.

They certainly deserve to suffer for what they have said and done.

Lord knows that we already are.

Until He Comes,

KJ

DONATIONS ARE WELCOMED AND APPRECIATED.

 

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Rittenhouse’s Lawyers Release Statement Claiming Self-Defense, Liberals Go Crazy Ignoring the Fact That He was Attacked First

54840-kyle-rittenhouse-is-facing-170-years-heres-a-comparison-of-charges-to-video-coverage-of-the-events-that-night

https://twitter.com/DrNealHouston/status/1299859548371550208?s=20

OANN.com reports that

On Friday, an Illinois judge agreed to delay Kyle Rittenhouse’s extradition hearing until next month. This followed a request from the defendant, which stated he needed more time to find a lawyer.

The 17-year-old has been accused of killing two people and injuring another during a recent protest in Wisconsin. He is facing six criminal counts, including first-degree intentional homicide, which could result in a life sentence.

In addition to felony charges, Rittenhouse has been charged with possession of a dangerous weapon while under the age of 18.

The charges stemmed from Wednesday night’s protest in Kenosha. Rittenhouse allegedly shot several people while defending local businesses from rioters.

Shortly after the incident, a criminal complaint surfaced. It alleged he called a friend, 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum, just after the shooting and said, “I just killed somebody.”

The complaint further claimed he went on to shoot and kill 26-year-old Anthony Huber. Huber reportedly chased Rittenhouse down and attacked him with a skateboard following the first shooting.

Rittenhouse then allegedly fired at 26-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz, hitting him in the arm.

Despite these allegations and the charges against him, the 17-year-old maintains he acted in self-defense. According to officials, he will remain in custody in Illinois.

Friday night, Pierce Bainbridge, Rittenhouse’s attorneys released a statement in his defense. Here is an excerpt:

Upon arrival, Kyle and others stood guard at the mechanic’s shop across from the auto dealership to prevent further damage or destruction. Later that night, substantially after the city’s 8:00 p.m. curfew expired without consequence, the police finally started to attempt to disperse a group of rioters. In doing so, they maneuvered a mass of individuals down the street towards the auto shops. Kyle and others on the premises were verbally threatened and taunted multiple times as the rioters passed by, but Kyle never reacted. His intent was not to incite violence, but simply to deter property damage and use his training to provide first aid to injured community members.

After the crowd passed the premises and Kyle believed the threat of further destruction had passed, he became increasingly concerned with the injured protesters and bystanders congregating at a nearby gas station with no immediate access to medical assistance or help from law enforcement. Kyle headed in that direction with a first aid kit. He sought out injured persons, rendered aid, and tried to guide people to others who could assist to the extent he could do so amid the chaos. By the final time Kyle returned to 2 the gas station and confirmed there were no more injured individuals who needed assistance, police had advanced their formation and blocked what would have been his path back to the mechanic’s shop. Kyle then complied with the police instructions not to go back there. Kyle returned to the gas station until he learned of a need to help protect the second mechanic’s shop further down the street where property destruction was imminent with no police were nearby.

As Kyle proceeded towards the second mechanic’s shop, he was accosted by multiple rioters who recognized that he had been attempting to protect a business the mob wanted to destroy. This outraged the rioters and created a mob now determined to hurt Kyle. They began chasing him down. Kyle attempted to get away, but he could not do so quickly enough. Upon the sound of a gunshot behind him, Kyle turned and was immediately faced with an attacker lunging towards him and reaching for his rifle. He reacted instantaneously and justifiably with his weapon to protect himself, firing and striking the attacker.

Kyle stopped to ensure care for the wounded attacker but faced a growing mob gesturing towards him. He realized he needed to flee for his safety and his survival. Another attacker struck Kyle from behind as he fled down the street. Kyle turned as the mob pressed in on him and he fell to the ground. One attacker kicked Kyle on the ground while he was on the ground. Yet another bashed him over the head with a skateboard. Several rioters tried to disarm Kyle. In fear for his life and concerned the crowd would either continue to shoot at him or even use his own weapon against him, Kyle had no choice but to fire multiple rounds towards his immediate attackers, striking two, including one armed attacker. The rest of the mob began to disperse upon hearing the additional gunshots.

Kyle got up and continued down the street in the direction of police with his hands in the air. He attempted to contact multiple police officers, but they were more concerned with the wounded attackers. The police did not take Kyle into custody at that time, but instead they indicated he should keep moving. He fully cooperated, both then and later that night when he turned himself in to the police in his hometown, Antioch, Illinois.

Kyle did nothing wrong. He exercised his God-given, Constitutional, common law and statutory law right to self-defense.

You have no doubt seen and experienced on social media and Main Stream Media the same thing I have: Liberals are calling 17-year old Rittenhouse a cold-blooded murderer, ignoring the fact that the crowd of paid and unpaid “protesters” (i.e. rioters) attacked him first.

In the eyes of the “New Bolsheviks” whom the MSM and the Democrats (but, I repeat myself) call “peaceful protesters” Rittenhouse had to be gotten rid of because he stood between them and their objective of burning every shop and home in that area to the ground.

In the eyes of the new fascists of the Far Left, average Americans, when being assaulted by wild-eyed rioters, have no right to defend themselves because they “have it coming”.

These bratty new Bolsheviks have been programmed through our educational system and the Main Stream Media to forfeit all traditional faith and values in order to replace those teachings with the “wisdom” of the political ideology which has been taught to them as the “New Gospel”: Marxism.

When you are taught that righteousness comes from your political belief system instead of your faith in God and the saving grace of His Son, then you are free to lie your head off without any reservations or feeling of shame.

That is why the Liberals who you engage with on Social Media have no compunction about calling this 17-year old kid a murderer who carried out a double murder with no reason to whatsoever, while actual reality says otherwise.

Of course, these are the same “useful idiots’ who claim that Joe Biden is not “impaired” at all.

But, I digress…

Kyle Rittenhouse will get his day in court.

I believe that Kyle will be ruled upon to have acted in self-defense

And, I believe that if these unhinged protesters do not stop attempting to destroy America, that more of these types of incidents will occur.

It is up to them to stop all this mess and to leave Americans alone.

You play stupid games, you “win” stupid prizes.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Gun Control Town Hall: “Giving Up a Little Bit of Liberty For a Little Bit of Security”

But-one-Life-600-LIThe President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, continued to display his “great disconnect” from average Americans last night in an Internationally-televised “Townhall Event, featuring a hand-picked audience, selected by CNN and the White House.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama doubled down on his push for gun control Thursday at a televised town hall meeting in which he said that sales of guns have soared under his presidency because gun rights groups have convinced people “that somebody is going to come get your guns.”

“Part of the reason is that the NRA has convinced many of its members that somebody is going to come get your guns,” Obama said after admitting that his presidency had been good for gun manufacturers.

The town hall came just two days after Obama announced executive actions designed, among other goals, to broaden the scope of gun sales subject to background checks.

Obama said that he has never owned a gun but would occasionally shoot one at Camp David for skeet shootings.

He also said he would “be happy” to meet with the National Rifle Association — which has vocally opposed to the president’s gun control proposals — and that he had invited them to the White House multiple times. Obama criticized the NRA’s decision not to attend the event, and took aim at their fiery language in response to his actions.

“If you listen to the rhetoric, it is so over the top, and so overheated,” Obama said.

At the town hall, which was hosted and televised by CNN, Obama took questions from Taya Kyle, whose late husband Chris Kyle was depicted in the film “American Sniper.” Kyle told Obama that gun ownership was at an all-time high while murder rates are at an historic low, and defended her right to own a gun.

“I want the hope — and the hope that I have the right to protect myself; that I don’t end up to be one of these families; that I have the freedom to carry whatever weapon I feel I need,” Kyle said.

“There is a way for us to set up a system where you (as) a gun owner … can have a firearm to protect yourself but where it is much harder for somebody to fill up a car with guns and sell them to 13-year-old kids on the streets,” Obama replied.

Obama also took questions from Cleo Pendleton, whose daughter was shot and killed near Obama’s Chicago home, and from Sheriff Paul Babeu, an Arizona lawman and congressional candidate who has accused Obama of unconstitutional power grabs on guns.

He also took questions from controversial Chicago Catholic priest Rev. Michael Pfleger.

“The reality is that I don’t understand why we can’t title guns just like cars,” Pfleger said. “If I have a car and I give it to you, Mr. President, and I don’t transfer a title, and you’re in an accident, it’s on me.”

“Issues like licensing, registration, that’s an area where there’s just not enough national consensus at this stage to even consider it. And part of it is, is people’s concern that that becomes a prelude to taking people’s guns away,” Obama replied.

Also in the audience was former Rep. Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly. Kelly and Giffords became prominent gun control advocates after Giffords was shot in 2011.

Obama has come under heavy fire from Republicans and Second Amendment advocates for his actions, which they say infringe on Americans’ right to bear arms.

The NRA fired back at Obama while the town hall was still going on. NRA Director Chris Cox told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly: “This is an attempt to distract the American people away from his failed policies.”

“The NRA does more to teach safe and responsible gun ownership than this president ever has or ever will,” Cox said.

The president also published an opinion piece in Thursday’s New York Times in which he pledged not to support any candidate who is opposed to gun control.

“I will not campaign for, vote for or support any candidate, even in my own party, who does not support common-sense gun reform,” Obama said, a move that could make Democratic candidates in Republican states feel unable to request the political support of the two-term president.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said before the event that Obama hoped the forum will spur a “serious conversation” about the Second Amendment as well as the administration’s new push to tighten gun control rules.

So, let’s have a “serious conversation” about the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, found in the section known as the “Bill of Rights”.

The Second Amendment states that

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Why did our Founding Fathers, in all their wisdom, include this Amendment?

Dr. Nelson Lund, Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment at George Mason University, wrote the following in an article posted at Heritage.org

The Founding generation mistrusted standing armies. Many Americans believed, on the basis of English history and their colonial experience, that central governments are prone to use armies to oppress the people. One way to reduce that danger would be to permit the government to raise armies (consisting of full-time paid troops) only when needed to fight foreign adversaries. For other purposes, such as responding to sudden invasions or similar emergencies, the government might be restricted to using a militia, consisting of ordinary civilians who supply their own weapons and receive a bit of part-time, unpaid military training.

…Thus, the choice was between a variety of militias controlled by the individual states, which would likely be too weak and divided to protect the nation, and a unified militia under federal control, which almost by definition could not be expected to prevent federal tyranny. This conundrum could not be solved, and the [Constitutional] Convention did not purport to solve it. Instead, the Convention presumed that a militia would exist, but it gave Congress almost unfettered authority to regulate that militia, just as it gave the new federal government almost unfettered authority over the army and navy.

This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that federal control over the militia would take away from the states their principal means of defense against federal oppression and usurpation, and that European history demonstrated how serious the danger was. James Madison, for one, responded that such fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the new federal government was structured differently from European governments. But he also pointed out a decisive difference between America and Europe: the American people were armed and would therefore be almost impossible to subdue through military force, even if one assumed that the federal government would try to use an army to do so. In The Federalist No. 46, he wrote:

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.”

Implicit in the debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions: first, that the proposed new constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and the militia; and second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. The disagreement between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was only over the narrower question of how effective an armed population could be in protecting liberty.

My purpose in reviewing history is quite simple:

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

Make no mistake, if President Barack Hussein Obama had his way, we would live in a country comprised of restrictive gun laws, which would be modeled after those in Europe.

And, as recent events have plainly shown, those restrictive gun laws have allowed Islamic Terrorists to kill innocent people unchallenged, because none of those innocent people were allowed to carry a weapon with which to defend themselves.

In fact, in some cases, even the police officers, who first arrived on the scene, were unarmed, and had to call for additional forces, thus giving the perpetrators more time to murder and maim the innocent.

One of our Founding Fathers, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, once wrote,

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Like Dr. Franklin and the rest of those who have fought for our freedom, average Americans realize what the president does not.

Until He Comes,

KJ