re: Kyle Rittenhouse says he's going to Texas A&M but the Aggies disagree

quote:

---

wow this thread got hijacked in spectacular fashion

---

Hanks been lying. He doesn’t like that he has been caught. Maograth came to support him.

This thread has been fun.

Lying Hank is very entertaining!

quote:

---

How could I have said from the VERY BEGINNING that he was exercising his right to self-defense, if I thought he had not been attacked?

quote:

---

You didn’t. Lie some more.

---

---

Apparently, we cannot search threads back to 2020, because I ran a search on my use of the phrase "young Rittenhouse" and it returns nothing. That phrase is important, because the usual cast of characters lost its mind that I used that wording a LONG time ago, rather than (I suppose) calling him "Kyle."

I assure you that I was arguing he would prevail on self-defense within the first day or two of the shootings. It was back when most of us (me included) misunderstood that Rosenbaum's plastic bag was lit on fire and thrown at Rittenhouse.

EDIT

Found a Google syntax to do the search, and HERE is a thread FOUR DAYS after the shooting, in which I am reiterating prior statements that I thought he would be acquitted.

quote:

---

Because every college is run by virtue signaling dirtbags. It's why the current college model should die out.

---

It wouldn't be the end of the world for him not to be accepted by what ever propaganda mill. He'll never want for anything.

Unless this new, developing freedom-loving system we have now in this already reeling Republic would prevent him from doing it digitally.

OK, you found two threads earlier than the one I found on the 29th.

On the 26th, I said:

quote:

---

There is no doubt in my mind that he was ACTUALLY defending himself. The question I raise is whether the LAW will allow him to present that defense

---

and the remainder of the thread was an analysis of the LEGAL defense, based upon the VERY little factual data available on the next day after the events at issue and the possibility that Rittenhouse would be painted as the initial aggressor.

On the 28th, I said:

quote:

---

I have stated REPEATEDLY that it looks like factual self-defense and that the defense will likely be effective UNLESS the prosecutor is successful in painting young Kyle as the initial aggressor and thereby removing the self-defense submission from the jury charge

---

By the 29th, enough facts had developed that I was also opining that the defense would be effective and that he would not be convicted.

quote:

---

AGAIN I think young Rittenhouse prevails on self-defense

---

Those threads provide damned-good examples of the utter lack of rational thought from many posters here. I was clearly stating that Rittenhouse would prevail, but thought it interesting to discuss which of the three shootings would be hardest for him to make his case. The response could be summarized as "Why do you hate Kyle?"

quote:

---

Imagine the situation in which you (again, NC_Tigah) and I thought it "obvious" that a suspect was GUILTY, yet the DA exercised prosecutorial discretion to NOT pursue the case.

quote:

---

That happened in Denver

---

would lose its collective mind. I suspect that you would be among them.

quote:

---

Interesting.

---

---

Yes, Dolloff is a very good example.

Did you agree with the dismissal of those charges? Did you rail against the dismissal? Honestly, I don't remember your every post.

But this forum as a whole lost its mind

quote:

---

Apparently, we cannot search threads back to 2020

---

You are going to these extremes to deflect?

You lied...period.

It’s in THIS thread.

Take your L.

quote:

---

Cool. I've seen that, but never tried it. Thanks again.

---