Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

grapedrink

Duke status
May 21, 2011
26,283
15,052
113
A Beach
No one has. Your biased little brain won't let you see that.
LOLZ, here’s another example:

IMG_1324.jpeg
:roflmao:
Phrasing KR defending himself as him killing people for breaking windows at car dealerships is another way of deflecting and saying that he wasn’t defending himself. Holy crap dude.

I don't dignify stupid questions by answering them.
So you didn’t read through the whole thread and were lying about what was said in it. Got it :roflmao:
 

estreet

Miki Dora status
Feb 19, 2021
5,089
4,407
113
Southern Cali
LOLZ, here’s another example:

View attachment 167438
:roflmao:
Phrasing KR defending himself as him killing people for breaking windows at car dealerships is another way of deflecting and saying that he wasn’t defending himself. Holy crap dude.
Again, we don't know what KR was thinking when he chose to strut around with an AR-15 at a riot. It's reasonable to speculate that he was looking for a fight. Could be that he's just extremely stupid. You should be able to relate to that. Or it could be that on some level he was looking for a fight, and to execute some vigilante "justice" on the hated rioters. He was celebrated by the MAGA cult for doing the latter.

So you didn’t read through the whole thread and were lying about what was said in it. Got it :roflmao:
The thread is three years old. Do you remember everything you've read three years ago? No.

I knew that no one said that KR didn't have the right to defend himself because that's too stupid of an idea, even for you.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

sirfun

Duke status
Apr 26, 2008
17,925
7,114
113
U.S.A.
Yeah, At this point I think I am done engaging with you on this topic. You are using the same limpdick tactic you've used many times before where you are proven wrong, then pivot/red herring/change the subject and ask me a new group of questions while leaving other questions posed towards you unanswered. Why should I bother responding to you if you use those tactics over and over? At least GromsDad has enough sense to ghost a thread and start another one when he gets owned :roflmao:

You were proven painfully wrong and a liar about statements made in this thread that you claimed never happened. Now you are off on a vigilantism tangent. I'm over it.
I believe you !! :) )
 
  • Haha
Reactions: $kully and estreet

ElOgro

Duke status
Dec 3, 2010
32,299
12,299
113
Again, we don't know what KR was thinking when he chose to strut around with an AR-15 at a riot. It's reasonable to speculate that he was looking for a fight. Could be that he's just extremely stupid. You should be able to relate to that. Or it could be that on some level he was looking for a fight, and to execute some vigilante "justice" on the hated rioters. He was celebrated by the MAGA cult for doing the latter.



The thread is three years old. Do you remember everything you've read three years ago? No.

I knew that no one said that KR didn't have the right to defend himself because that's too stupid of an idea, even for you.
You never will know.

Bummer you weren’t here three years ago.

You may be the smartest guy to post here since Gaysin.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

grapedrink

Duke status
May 21, 2011
26,283
15,052
113
A Beach
cstreet said:
The thread is three years old. Do you remember everything you've read three years ago? No.

I knew that no one said that KR didn't have the right to defend himself because that's too stupid of an idea, even for you.
Again- the quotes I posted clearly minimize KRs reaction to being pursued. By calling it an execution it is by definition saying that it not self defense. By saying that KR killed them for breaking windows, you are also saying that he did not kill them in self defense. For someone of the ilk who has gone on and on about “dog whistles” this should be pretty basic stuff.

Plus, the poster who said those things is actively replying in this thread and is welcome to clear the air and say that KR had every right to defend himself . . . . Yet he hasn’t :roflmao:
 
Last edited:

estreet

Miki Dora status
Feb 19, 2021
5,089
4,407
113
Southern Cali
By calling it an execution it is by definition saying that it is not self-defense.
An execution can be made to look like self-defense, and it is in the executioner's right to self-defense that the possibility of exoneration lies. You're confusing the right to self-defense with the act of self-defense. This is why I was trying to get you to think through what you were saying.
 

estreet

Miki Dora status
Feb 19, 2021
5,089
4,407
113
Southern Cali
No comprende, señors?

The resident leftist may agree that KR has the right to self-defense.

The resident leftist may disagree with the trial verdict or that KR acted in self-defense.

Numbnuts has been endlessly claiming that the resident leftist insist that "KR had no right to defend himself." I tried from the beginning to get numbskull to clarify his meaning but he never did.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: grapedrink

estreet

Miki Dora status
Feb 19, 2021
5,089
4,407
113
Southern Cali
Alrighty then, now that that’s cleared up, what grape is saying is that the resident leftist disagree with the trial verdict, that KR was acting in self-defense.

Why haven’t the resident leftist’s denied that they disagree with the verdict? I imagine it’s because they disagree with the verdict.
 

ghost_of_lewis_samuels

Phil Edwards status
Oct 27, 2019
6,531
4,296
113
ok, so if instead of shooting the guy, Rittenhouse grabbed him by the face and kissed him (tongue and all) - and the guy recoiled and ran.

then files for a sexual assault charge.


could rittenhouse use the kiss as a self defense argument ?