Now for Part II of the Rittenhouse Saga

Part II means protecting the Second Amendment and attacking head-on the leftist establishment’s escalating lies about Rittenhouse.

Phase I of the Rittenhouse saga, his unjustifiable trial for murder, is over. That trial, which was about self-defense and Kyle Rittenhouse’s Second Amendment rights — was decided in a Wisconsin jury room. Now we are in Phase, II, in which the neo-Marxist progressive left wants to extinguish all other Americans’ rights to self-defense and the Second Amendment on the national stage, at least when those rights are exercised in opposition to the neo-Marxist, progressive left conquest of this nation.

One of the few non-radicalized Dems still in the public eye is Tulsi Gabbard, and she addresses the Rittenhouse verdict with intellectual honesty:

She is, to say the least, a lone voice in the highly radicalized Democrat wilderness.

The neo-Marxist, Democrat left in America has made the Kyle Rittenhouse case a cause célèbre, injecting race into the heart of the case where none actually exists. The neo-Marxist left is interested only in the usefulness of the Rittenhouse narrative they have created. They are not interested in justice based on the actual facts of the case. Little could be clearer than the situation in Chicago, where the left is using the Rittenhouse verdict to call for a Marxist revolution.

The reality is, as Matt Taibi writes: The Rittenhouse Verdict is Only Shocking if You Followed the Last Year of Terrible Reporting.

The neo-Marxists are calling Rittenhouse…a “white supremacist” and “domestic terrorist” (since deleted by this race hustling Congresswoman):

a “vigilante”:

and a “murderer”:

Of course, all of these radical, evil, neo-Marxist garbage want something very different from justice under our Constitution and laws:

And then there are the many who baldly claim blacks cannot claim self-defense in a criminal trial. These race-hustling scum need to wake up and smell the Coffee.

These race hustlers are aiming at a facto fundamental change to our Constitution and laws, painting both as illegitimate because of some completely ahistorical dark fantasy of “systemic racism” built into the Constitution at our Founding, and an equally slanderous and false fantasy that the U.S. today is nothing more than Democrat-controlled 1952 Selma Alabama writ large:

They want to change our nation into a world where to resist leftist violence is illegal. They want to change our nation into a world where to show up armed anywhere the left chooses to riot and burn is illegal. And indeed, that is precisely the change to the law Jennifer Rogers at CNN advocates:

Without question, Rittenhouse did not have to be in Kenosha with his weapon strapped across his body as he ran around the streets in what was clearly an unpredictable and ultimately dangerous situation. If he had exercised better judgment and decided not to go that night, Rosenbaum and Huber would almost certainly still be alive. But in Wisconsin, that initial decision, as poor a decision as it was, does not constitute a crime, and the jury found his later actions justified.

Those of us who don’t want to have to worry about whether people like Kyle Rittenhouse will continue to brandish guns at public gatherings, thereby greatly increasing the danger of violence, should direct our energy toward changing the open carry laws in Wisconsin. [emphasis added]

Public gatherings?! When Kenosha’s entire business district is laid waste by rioters from across the nation, that is a simple “public gathering”?

What a lying piece of garbage.

The violence in Kenosha on August 25, 2020, would not have occurred had the Democrat Governor of Wisconsin, Tony Evers, stopped the BLM and Antifa rioters stirred into action through a series of media and political lies about Jacob Blake’s shooting and arrest. Instead, Evers played politics while neo-Marxist and anarchist rioters burned Kenosha, causing “$50 million in property damage and dozens upon dozens of businesses destroyed,” injuries from which Kenosha might never recover.

Regardless, Ms. Rogers perfectly illustrates how the neo-Marxist progressive left wants to change our nation into a world where it is illegal for normal people to exercise their Second Amendment rights to go armed, particularly in response to neo-Marxist threats of violence. 

And lastly, they want to change our nation into a world where even challenging violence when they are rioting is to invite justifiable violence in response. Indeed, that was the crux of the prosecution’s closing argument at the Rittenhouse trial; namely, that Rittenhouse’s mere presence with a weapon was a provocation to the rioters who then acted reasonably:

“You cannot claim self-defense against a danger you create. If you’re the one threatening others, you lose the right to claim self-defense.” Binger told the jury.

It should be noted that many on the neo-Marxist hardcore left want a second bite at the Rittenhouse apple, demanding the DOJ now investigate Rittenhouse. Cue Jerry Nadler, the worthless Democrat Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee who apparently wants to ignite a civil war in this country:

But as Jonathan Turley writes:

The Justice Department does not have an office for the prosecution of “miscarriages of justice” due to errant jury decisions. Rittenhouse was acquitted on state charges by a state jury. . . . It is a dangerous precedent to investigate jury decisions simply because you disagree with their decisions.

Rittenhouse was a private citizen who was not acting under color of state law on August 25, 2020, so there is no federal law implicated in what happened in Kenosha on that night. And that is even before pointing out that there is no protected First Amendment right to violently protest and destroy property. Yet given that the FBI and DOJ are currently operating as an unlawful and corrupt arm of the Democrat party, anything is possible.

As former NTY reporter Nellie Bowles writes at Bari Weiss’s Substack:

. . . The reality that brought Kyle Rittenhouse into the streets was one we reporters were meant to ignore. The old man who tried to put out a blaze at a Kenosha store had his jaw broken. The top editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer had to resign in June 2020 amid staff outcry for publishing a piece with the headline, “Buildings Matter, Too.”

If you lived in those neighborhoods on fire, you were not supposed to get an extinguisher. The proper response — the only acceptable response — was to see the brick and mortar torn down, to watch the fires burn and to say: thank you.

These people are evil, dangerous, deadly, and a fundamental threat to our Constitution and way of life. They must be fought every step of the way for they want nothing less than to destroy our country and to rule over the ruins. There is no middle ground here. (And that utter failure to fight these people is why I am so disgusted by Mark and Patricia McCloskey, two people who never should have capitulated to the Soros-backed St. Louis District Attorney. Their plea bargain was an obscenity.)

As a threshold matter, Kyle Rittenhouse should never have been charged or prosecuted for his actions on the night of August 25, 2020. Within a month, all relevant facts were known and all relevant facts supported his claim that he acted in self-defense. There were zero facts to put that into challenge beyond any doubt, let alone any reasonable doubt. As Andrew Branca wrote at Legal Insurrection:

The State never had anything even close to disproving self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt, no case that a reasonable jury could possibly convict on, and despite that they brutalized this poor kid for a second time in this trial, after the initial series of murderous attacks on Kyle Rittenhouse.

As Glenn Reynolds writes at Instapundit:

I hope the prosecutor in this case will face ethics charges for his disgraceful behavior. There need to be consequences.

I couldn’t agree more. That the Kenosha DA’s office prosecuted this case should lead to its own civil and criminal punishment, a punishment reaching to every individual in the office who even touched the Rittenhouse case — and that is even before reaching the despicable and actionable misconduct of the prosecutors in their nuts and bolts conduct of the case. Moreover, it is particularly imperative to hold the DA’s office to account when the Kenosha prosecutors applied a two-tiered system of justice, not prosecuting two of the people who attacked Rittenhouse that night, one of whom Grosskreutz, testified that he pointed a weapon he unlawfully possessed at Rittenhouse.

Moreover, we should all support some form of “Kyle’s Law” to stop politically motivated prosecutions of people who arm themselves for self-defense.

Now to Candace Owens, if for no other reason than I appreciate the visual of this tweet:

Actually, I think little could be more important for this nation than driving all of the neo-Marxist leftists who libeled and slandered Rittenhouse into penury and ousting them from the public square. That may take a change to the law in this case, but it is one that is sorely overdue.

As it stands, under the law since New York Times v. Sullivan, it is virtually impossible to hold any entity or person liable for defamation if you can be labeled a “public figure” — and every leftist scum who defamed Rittenhouse will be arguing today that that is what Rittenhouse is for purpose of defamation law. That very much includes the censors at Facebook as well. This, from Legal Insurrection:

Tony Katz: . . . Does Kyle Rittenhouse have that kind of case against news outlets that have referred to him as a white supremacist and a murderer?

William Jacobson: Well, I think you’ll have to look at the words that were said, if they made false statements of fact knowing that those statements were false, potentially you do, but you gotta remember he was a very public figure. Maybe not before this, but for the purpose of this case certainly, what I think is often referred to as a special purpose public figure. So you’re going to have to show actual malice. You’re going to have to show more than negligence. And so there probably are some people out there that would be potentially subject to suit, but there probably are also a lot who just had sloppy opinions and those people probably will not be subject to anything.

Bullshit. If there was ever a reason for the Supreme Court to overrule New York Times v. Sullivan, this is it. Justice Thomas, now is your chance. And frankly, getting rid of NYT v. Sullivan would go a long way to cleaning up what is now a completely out-of-control mainstream media more interested invested in ensuring the dominance of left-wing politics and driving a narrative that is often fact-free, if not outright lies. Thus, as Jonathan Turley writes at USA Today:

From Kenosha riots to Kyle Rittenhouse trial, biased media coverage makes everyone angrier

In our age of rage, Rittenhouse had to be convicted to fulfill the narrative. Acquittal has to be evidence of a racist justice system.

Indeed, who does not believe that if the media was being punished for their slanders and libels, we would have a much more sane nation with Biden and his puppet masters nowhere near the levers of power.

(Bookworm here regarding Wolf Howling’s excellent defamation argument: Two things. First, regarding whether Kyle is a public figure, keep in mind that he was a private citizen whom the media itself turned into a universally known figure of infamy. Having done that, those same actors cannot now turn around and say they’re insulated from defamation lawsuits because he’s a public figure. This argument embodies the old joke defining the Yiddish word “chutzpah.” “Chutzpah” means murdering your parents and then throwing yourself on the mercy of the court because you’re an orphan.

Second, the left’s attack on Nick Sandmann for daring to smile nervously at a deranged leftist drumming in his face saw settlements in Sandmann’s favor in unknown, but undoubtedly significant, amounts. Back then, there was no criminal case involved. They simply wanted to smear and embarrass Sandmann.

With Rittenhouse, though, by calling him a “white supremacist,” the leftists are drawing a giant target on his back. He’s had to have 24-hour a day security for over a year. If he’d been sent to prison, he would quickly have been killed. And even now, his family must relocate and there’s a good likelihood he’ll still be a target — and all because of the media’s lies that he is a very specific type of bad guy: “A White supremacist.” When you defame someone either knowing or not caring that your lies may get him killed, that should be highly actionable.)