Kyle Rittenhouse Acquitted On All Charges

[grarpamp]

A Tale Of Two Cities: Kenosha Vs. Waukesha

https://amgreatness.com/2021/11/28/a-tale-of-two-cities-kenosha-vs-waukesha/

Both Wisconsin towns, Kenosha, and Waukesha, about 50 miles apart by
car, were the recent sites of multiple deaths. The violence in both
made national news. Yet in contradictory ways both reflected the
common themes of America’s current legal, media, and societal
corruption.

The relevant public prosecutors in both were in the news for alleged
ideological bias. Specifically, they habitually calibrated the
charging, indicting, and trying (or not) of defendants through
ideological lenses and community pressure rather than on the basis of
the facts and the law.

Kyle Rittenhouse was a 17-year-old armed youth who volunteered to
protect business properties at the height of the August 2020 arson,
riots, and looting in Kenosha. He was pursued and attacked by three
members from a larger group who chased the armed youth, presumably
either to disarm, injure, or kill him—or perhaps all three.

Rittenhouse variously was assaulted, kicked, and had a firearm pointed
at him. In reaction, he fatally shot two of his pursuing attackers and
wounded a third. Kenosha prosecutors reviewed videos of the
altercations. They saw clearly that Rittenhouse was running away from
his assailants. He was variously rushed by one assailant, kicked by
another, and struck with a skateboard by still another. Again, a final
pursuer pointed a gun at him at close range.

No matter. The Kenosha district attorney’s office charged Rittenhouse
with several felonies including two first-degree homicide charges. All
four whom Rittenhouse fired at—whether he missed, wounded, or fatally
shot—had lengthy arrest records. Three were convicted felons; the
fourth had a long arrest record.

Given the lengthy and quite horrific rap sheet of Rittenhouse’s first
attacker Joseph Rosenbaum (including multiple counts of pedophiliac
rape), it is difficult to understand why the latter was not in jail
(he had been released earlier that day from a mental facility to which
he had been committed after a failed suicide attempt). The common
denominator to the various prior convictions of his other three
assailants was that they should have led to consequences far worse,
given that many of their arrest charges were dropped, or bail was
sometimes waived, or plea bargaining turned serious charges into
merely bothersome ones. The release of violent offenders on little or
no bail seems now thematic in Wisconsin.

Shortly after the August 2020 shootings, the media, Joe Biden, and
most of the left-wing commentariat had claimed Rittenhouse was a
“white supremacist,” even though there was no evidence of such a
libel, then or now. Remember, the Kenosha shootings took place just
nine weeks before the November presidential elections, at a time when
the Left was framing the incumbent Trump as a “white supremacist” and
Joe Biden a “healer.”
The Racist Construct

The shootings were immediately declared to be “racial.” Yet both the
shooter Rittenhouse and all of his attackers who were wounded or
killed were white (a fourth assailant, an African-American who kicked
Rittenhouse while he was on the ground escaped without injury).

What followed in the media was the most egregious example of concocted
fictions since the Russian collusion hoax. Rittenhouse was falsely
accused of crossing “state lines” (plural), while unlawfully armed
with an “illegal automatic weapon.”

In truth, he did not buy the Smith & Wesson semi-automatic rifle, much
less bring it into nearby Kenosha, Wisconsin from nearby Antioch,
Illinois. It was legal for Rittenhouse to possess and use the firearm.
The gun itself was not unlawful. He did not purchase it but had been
given it by a friend. And Kenosha was his alternate home in that it
was where his father and other relatives lived. Rittenhouse, then, was
constructed as the proverbial white supremacist of the sort warned
about by the likes of Joe Biden, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and
Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley.

At various times during the trial, the prosecuting attorneys called
Rittenhouse a coward. They claimed he should have faced the pursuing
mob of at least a dozen and willingly taking a beating from them
face-to-face, in at least one case at gunpoint. The jury inter alia
was told that the ongoing arson and other violent acts were not
serious crimes, and that the three who attacked Rittenhouse were
near-heroic victims.

Protestors outside the courthouse tried to intimidate the defense and
jurors. A journalist sought to follow the jury bus, ostensibly to
divulge their identities or to intimidate them (MSNBC was subsequently
banned from the courtroom).

The piece de resistance was the lead DA’s pointing an empty
semi-automatic weapon at the jury, with his finger on the trigger—all
in the aftermath of Alec Baldwin’s accidental shooting with an “empty”
loaded gun of two bystanders on a film set.

The DA apparently wished to scare the jury into a guilty verdict
through the sensation of having a rifle pointed at them. Given the
jury appears post facto to have been made up of reasonable people,
that puerile gambit probably backfired. All that the imbecilic DA
confirmed by his actions was the same recklessness as those in state
and city government who had permitted parts of Kenosha to burn in the
first place.

There were lots of suicidal prosecutorial stunts such as these in what
turned out to be a circus of sorts. The DAs also sought to deprecate
the constitutionally protected Fifth Amendment right against
self-incrimination. They bizarrely saw their key witness admitting
under cross examination that he had first pointed a handgun at Kyle
Rittenhouse who then understandably fired at him. And they
deliberately released an inferior version of the video record of the
shooting to the defense while keeping the superior one to their
perceived advantage.

So, the state’s madness raised strange questions. Were the incompetent
DAs simply a window into a dysfunctional Kenosha County district
attorney’s office where bumbling was an institutionalized
force-multiplier to bias? Were the state prosecutors deliberately
inept in order to prompt a mistrial and thus a retrial/second chance
of their botched case? Or were they lazily going through the motions
to satisfy the mob, but did not really believe Rittenhouse was guilty?
Or were they just mediocre camera-hungry wannabe celebrities, who
wished to win cheap media attention for as long as the bewildered
judge would put up with their bizarre antics?
The Message of Acquittal

A jury unanimously cleared Rittenhouse of all charges. It apparently
concluded correctly that if law enforcement and the state either could
not or would not protect lives and property in Kenosha, and if because
of that dereliction of duty some citizens stepped up to take up the
role that the police had utterly abandoned, then as citizens they had
a right to defend themselves if attacked by those committing violence.

For some time, media demand has exceeded the available supply of
clear-cut cases of white oppressors and black victims, at least if the
Jussie Smollett hoax, the “hands up don’t shoot” lie, and the
photoshopped pictures and edited tapes of George Zimmerman are any
indication.

Yet the real reason the Left strained to gin up the theme of
white-on-white violence as an example of racism was their larger
agenda of sending a message to middle America: no American, in times
of riot, arson, and looting, should have the right to use firearms to
protect property. And under no circumstances could a citizen use a gun
to ward off those intending to maim or kill him. Had Rittenhouse been
found guilty, there no longer would be recourse for citizens living in
cities where criminals were freely given the streets.

In other words, had such a clear-cut case of self-defense morphed into
a successful murder conviction, then the most powerful figure in the
nation would become the local district attorney. De facto, a DA could
empower a mob to loot, burn, steal, and injure by refusing to indict
those arrested—even if an increasingly politicized mayor and police
chief chose to allow their officers to keep the public safe. We would
then assume that in this state of nature anyone protecting property
during a riot would be fair game for the mob, given the target would
know he could become a convicted felon by defending himself from
attack.

So, the Left understood well the messaging of attacking the open city
and undefended town of Kenosha and the conviction of a “murderer”
Rittenhouse: accept our political agendas and premises or otherwise
your culpable community will be torn apart with impunity, and any who
chose to combat the violence with violence will be charged with
capital crimes.
Those Criminal SUVs

Not long after one Rittenhouse was acquitted, one Darrell Brooks, Jr.,
an African-American with a 20-year record of serious felonies,
allegedly drove his car deliberately into a Christmas parade in
Waukesha, killing 6 innocents and injuring over 60.

Unlike the dishonest media reaction lying about Rittenhouse, who had
no criminal record, there was initial careful restraint not to
identify the career criminal Brooks as the murderous driver who
weaponized his vehicle against parade-goers. Despite first-hand
accounts from bystanders that the lethal driver was an
African-American with dreadlocks, the media, feigning unaccustomed
professionalism in this instance, withheld rush-to-judgment
identification and culpability. Joe Biden—for a moment—was commendably
quiet in editorializing about the racial motivations or ideology of a
suspect.

For a while the media ran with its own concocted rumor that Brooks
merely was fleeing from an “altercation” and apparently had mistakenly
turned the wrong way into a crowd—despite videos showing the driver
deliberately ramming through street barriers repeatedly to seek out
targets. Intent likely explains why he killed and injured so many
innocents.

Finally, the news settled into the present narrative of a “car
crash,”—as if a driverless vehicle on autopilot had simply bumped into
various people in the street—before burying the murders altogether on
their back pages and dropping the crime from the evening news. Or as
the Washington Post put it, “Here’s what we know so far on the
sequence of events that led to the Waukesha tragedy caused by a SUV.”

That media-generated ruse continued even when details of Brooks’
lengthy felony record were finally released. At the time he was mowing
down strangers, he had five open arrest charges, including two
felonies. Brooks had been released on $1,000 bail just two days
earlier, in another eerie “coincidence” after being arrested for
attempting to run over a woman and her child—the same modus operandi
reified at the Waukesha Christmas slaughter.

An alien from Mars who examined Brooks’s life of crime, his recent
violence, and the ease with which he was serially let loose upon the
public might have concluded some sort of “privilege” as the cause of
exemption.

Brooks posed on social media as an incompetent but narcissistic
rapper. He left a video trail not just of his mediocre recordings, but
of clear evidence of virulent anti-Semitism and anti-white racism, “So
when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it…the
old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD.”

As pundits strained to deny any connection between the climate of BLM
anger over the Rittenhouse verdict and Brooks’ murders, Brooks’ own
testimonies point to a connection, at least in the sense of hating
people on the basis of their race. Indeed, regional Milwaukee BLM
activist Vaun Mayes quickly alleged that the Rittenhouse acquittal had
earned the homicidal payback.

A low-level Democratic functionary tweeted that the dead children of
Waukesha were proper karma for Rittenhouse walking free: “I’m sad
anytime anyone dies. I just believe in Karma and this came around
quick on the citizens of Wisconsin.” Or as Mayes further elaborated:
Brooks was an insurrectionist whose violence had jumpstarted a
supposed “revolution,” his apparent euphemism for mass murder. “But it
sounds possible that the revolution has started in Wisconsin. It
started with this Christmas parade.”

Brooks is, for a while, in jail. Yet for some crazy reason he can be
freed on a $5 million bond. He awaits charges of mass
homicide—although one never quite knows. The Milwaukee County District
Attorney John Chisolm is a controversial “reformer” DA, whose
campaigns have been funded in part by the George Soros conglomerate.

Creepier still, in the past a prescient Chisolm had boasted about his
own future to the Milwaukee Sentinel, namely that his prosecutorial
and bail policies would eventually release career criminals onto the
street who would “inevitably” kill some innocents. Yet he riffed that
such carnage was acceptable collateral damage from his
decriminalization agendas: “Is there going to be an individual I
divert, or I put into [a] treatment program, who’s going to go out and
kill somebody? You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen. It does
not invalidate the overall approach.”

One wonders whether Chisolm will take that argument to the families of
the Waukesha deceased—that the loss of their loved ones was a
reasonable sacrifice to ensure that misunderstood 20-year criminals
like Darrell Brooks, Jr. were not kept behind bars.
So, what are we left with from these horrors of two cities?

In Kenosha the media and the Left ginned up race when there was no
such component in the trial. But in Waukesha they perpetuated racial
arson and smothered the truth. That is, they kept largely silent when
there clearly was racial hatred—given Brooks’ own record of anti-white
and anti-Semitic venom. Again, the media can turn from creation to
suppression on a dime, given the common theme of ginning up racial
strife and hatred.

An amoral media and Left, so far, have kept an inconvenient Waukesha
“car crash” out of the mainstream news—reversing their wild
sensational obsessions with Kenosha. After all, in their unhinged
racialized worldview, the demonization of a 17-year-old white male,
who shot three other white males, still could be squeezed for racial
juice, given the larger contextual landscape of a riot over a police
wounding of an African-American male.

The shooting of Jacob Blake that set off the Kenosha riots was later
determined to be justified, given the armed suspect was heading toward
his car, after fighting with police, who were called to the residence
to protect a woman who had a restraining order against the career
violent felon.

    In sum, Rittenhouse had no criminal record; all four of his
assailants had lengthy arrest records. Three of them were ex-felons.
He had no record of the racial hatred of which he was accused.

    In contrast, Brooks was an abject violent racist whom the media
sought to shield. And he was a career felon, who both long ago and
quite recently should have been kept behind bars so that he would not
murder innocents.

How a Wisconsin ex-felon received a $1,000 bail bond and freedom to
mow down innocents, after trying to run down two with his car, while
another juvenile without an arrest record, with good grounds to claim
self-defense, was required to post a $2 million bond (and so stayed
incarcerated pending charges without running water in his cell) is a
commentary on the abject implosion of the American justice system.

Rittenhouse should have never been charged; Brooks should not have
been out of jail. The effort to make the former a beneficiary of white
supremacy and the latter a victim of it required a level of amoral
media deceit that finally was unsustainable even in this bankrupt age.