I haven't received any information telling me his trail was unfair.
Which has been my whole damn point. He got a lot of benefit out of being who he was. He got a lot of benefit out of contradictory laws that were designed to punt on stuff like this for white people. He got a "fair" trial in as much as the system is designed to give him a "fair" trial.
The difference with his mom is a lot of reporting said she drove him. That's bad information, not a "fair" or "unfair" system.
Tamir Rice.
Trayvon Martin.
Eric Garner.
George Floyd.
Breonna Taylor.
Muhammad Aziz and the late Khalil Islam
And so many many more. All received outcomes that were based on the system working as it was designed. So the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse also received an outcome that was as the system was designed is not shocking.
One would hope its clear that the outrage is not aimed at Rittenhouse's outcome but all those others.
I'm saying that a system that railroads people of a certain color over and over and over is, itself, a major problem. I'm saying a system that's designed to ONLY function for a certain combination of skin pigment and gender is a problem. And I'm saying IGNORING the disparate outcomes of that system you agree with what that system delivered today today is a grave moral error.
I don’t think open carry laws go well with people intentionally putting themselves in harm’s way, which is really what happened here. This violated every responsible gun owner rule in the book, even if it was lawful ... I see no problem drawing a line between having a weapon to protect yourself and going out of your way to arm up and join the insanity.
You really don't want to grapple with the meta here, do you?
Rittenhouse got all sorts of positive outcomes because of both his race and gender. Prosecutors may not have tanked the case intentionally, but they didn't withhold exculpatory evidence either. Rittenhouse got a fully functioning criminal law system because the system is designed to work for white men. The two men exonerated yesterday in the Malcolm X slaying had to wait 53 years for the system to function for them in anything close to the same way. One of them died waiting for the system to function for them in the same way.
That's a systemic problem, not an individual actor problem.
The Malcolm X convictions being over turned because the FBI withheld evidence is no hypothetical
The re-investigation found that the FBI and police failed to turn over evidence that cast significant doubt on Islam and Aziz as suspects, according to a court filing.
Well last I checked Bill Cosby had nothing to do with Malcolm X's murder, or the wrongful convictions of two people in that murder. And best I can tell Cosby wasn't any more wrongly convicted then Harvey Weinstein . . . .
I expect better of all of you, but since everyone appears to want to be lazy about this . . .
Clean cut white boys carrying firearms at a riot don't generally get wrongly convicted. Nor do they spend 5 plus decades dealing with said convictions, or die still wrongly convicted.
Clean cut white boys don't have the FBI intentionally withhold exculpatory evidence. And in this case clean cut white boys didn't rate the prosecution's A team.
And this on the heals of the exoneration of two of the convicted killers of Malcolm X . . . decades later. But remind me again why structural racism isn't a thing?
If history holds, it will be white anarchists and/or ultra right wing agitators who will do the burning. One hopes the police will actually arrest them this time.
Committees get reshuffled, but its not usually acrimonious. The Ranking Member almost always becomes chair, and the former chair almost always becomes Ranking member due to seniority unless there's a retirement.
About the only way Republicans can really reshape committee is decreasing the number of seats the Dems would get in the minority. The Republicans don't - yet - have the ability to keep people off committees if they get power as the Republicans don't determine which Dems get a seat, except on Select Committees like the January 6th one. And remember that Speaker Pelosi agreed to three of the five people McCarthy proposed, but that wasn't good enough so he took his members and stormed off.
Apparently the GOP’s individual reps are busy trying to claim credit for things in the bill they voted against so surely the people who actually passed the bill should be able to get credit too.
Indeed they are. My Trumpian Congress critter has tried to claim all the benefits of the BIF, and has been publicly (well on facebook anyway) derided by hundreds of his constituents for voting against it. He did the same thing today messaging on the BBB, and again got slammed 4 to 1 with pointing out he didn't vote for bills he claims will bring benefits.
No idea yet if that translates into electoral changes at the ballot box next year, but its fun to watch.
On “Kyle Rittenhouse Found Not Guilty On All Counts”
You are looking at the trees. We are looking at the forest.
"
That sort of proves my point. Even the local Wisconsin outlets aren't reporting charging or trials or please or convictions.
What conclusion do you draw from that?
"
You tell me. The reporting of the trial seems spot on.
"
no - we've been complaining for years. Its what the protests in Kenosha were all about.
"
How many of the arrestees from last year have been?
"
Trayvon Martin agrees with you. Or he would if he were still alive.
"
I haven't received any information telling me his trail was unfair.
Which has been my whole damn point. He got a lot of benefit out of being who he was. He got a lot of benefit out of contradictory laws that were designed to punt on stuff like this for white people. He got a "fair" trial in as much as the system is designed to give him a "fair" trial.
The difference with his mom is a lot of reporting said she drove him. That's bad information, not a "fair" or "unfair" system.
"
Tamir Rice.
Trayvon Martin.
Eric Garner.
George Floyd.
Breonna Taylor.
Muhammad Aziz and the late Khalil Islam
And so many many more. All received outcomes that were based on the system working as it was designed. So the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse also received an outcome that was as the system was designed is not shocking.
One would hope its clear that the outrage is not aimed at Rittenhouse's outcome but all those others.
"
Well since that's not what I'm saying at all . . .
"
I suppose it does, but that means a whole lot of news outlets on both side of the aisle need to issue retractions.
"
I'm saying that a system that railroads people of a certain color over and over and over is, itself, a major problem. I'm saying a system that's designed to ONLY function for a certain combination of skin pigment and gender is a problem. And I'm saying IGNORING the disparate outcomes of that system you agree with what that system delivered today today is a grave moral error.
"
as a liberal gun owner, I agree.
"
You really don't want to grapple with the meta here, do you?
Rittenhouse got all sorts of positive outcomes because of both his race and gender. Prosecutors may not have tanked the case intentionally, but they didn't withhold exculpatory evidence either. Rittenhouse got a fully functioning criminal law system because the system is designed to work for white men. The two men exonerated yesterday in the Malcolm X slaying had to wait 53 years for the system to function for them in anything close to the same way. One of them died waiting for the system to function for them in the same way.
That's a systemic problem, not an individual actor problem.
"
I really want to know why the prosecution has never gone after his mom for taking him.
"
See Martin, Trayvon . . . .
"
The Malcolm X convictions being over turned because the FBI withheld evidence is no hypothetical
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/exonerations-men-convicted-malcolm-xs-1965-death-81249311
"
Well last I checked Bill Cosby had nothing to do with Malcolm X's murder, or the wrongful convictions of two people in that murder. And best I can tell Cosby wasn't any more wrongly convicted then Harvey Weinstein . . . .
"
I expect better of all of you, but since everyone appears to want to be lazy about this . . .
Clean cut white boys carrying firearms at a riot don't generally get wrongly convicted. Nor do they spend 5 plus decades dealing with said convictions, or die still wrongly convicted.
Clean cut white boys don't have the FBI intentionally withhold exculpatory evidence. And in this case clean cut white boys didn't rate the prosecution's A team.
Now, is that clear enough?
"
Once the judge tossed the weapons charges this became inevitable.
"
And this on the heals of the exoneration of two of the convicted killers of Malcolm X . . . decades later. But remind me again why structural racism isn't a thing?
"
If history holds, it will be white anarchists and/or ultra right wing agitators who will do the burning. One hopes the police will actually arrest them this time.
On “Congress Will Vote On Censure, Stripping of Committees of Representative Paul Gosar”
Committees get reshuffled, but its not usually acrimonious. The Ranking Member almost always becomes chair, and the former chair almost always becomes Ranking member due to seniority unless there's a retirement.
About the only way Republicans can really reshape committee is decreasing the number of seats the Dems would get in the minority. The Republicans don't - yet - have the ability to keep people off committees if they get power as the Republicans don't determine which Dems get a seat, except on Select Committees like the January 6th one. And remember that Speaker Pelosi agreed to three of the five people McCarthy proposed, but that wasn't good enough so he took his members and stormed off.
On “Kyle Rittenhouse Found Not Guilty On All Counts”
The law may be correct, but justice is nowhere near served. Expect more armed white men to attack more social justice protests with believed impunity.
On “Kevin McCarthy Feels The Pain, Fails To Refrain”
Indeed they are. My Trumpian Congress critter has tried to claim all the benefits of the BIF, and has been publicly (well on facebook anyway) derided by hundreds of his constituents for voting against it. He did the same thing today messaging on the BBB, and again got slammed 4 to 1 with pointing out he didn't vote for bills he claims will bring benefits.
No idea yet if that translates into electoral changes at the ballot box next year, but its fun to watch.
"
in this case that's actually pretty reasonable, and points back to the larger problem Dems seems to have messaging their successes.