this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
927 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19241 readers
2259 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Kyle Rittenhouse abruptly departed the stage during an appearance at the University of Memphis on Wednesday, after he was confronted about comments made by Turning Point USA founder and president Charlie Kirk.

Rittenhouse was invited by the college's Turning Point USA chapter to speak at the campus. However, the event was met with backlash from a number of students who objected to Rittenhouse's presence.

The 21-year-old gained notoriety in August 2020 when, at the age of 17, he shot and killed two men—Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, as well as injuring 26-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz—at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

He said the three shootings, carried out with a semi-automatic AR-15-style firearm, were in self-defense. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest where the shootings took place was held after Jacob Blake, a Black man, was left paralyzed from the waist down after he was shot by a white police officer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Derek Chauvin was charged and convicted, had he been acquitted of any charges, you bet your ass he would've been doing speeches for the alt right group.

You're making my point for me. When these people get booked to speak it speaks volumes about the people booking them and the people going to listen to them.

What if it was about being in one of the most famous cases of all time?

Then a lawyer, a legal expert of some kind, would be a better choice than the guy sobbing on the stand that apparently didn't understand "if I go to this place and bring a gun I might end up shooting somebody."

You understand the difference between a typical felony charge and the killing of two individuals and wounding another during a civil right protest, right?

Yup, that's why if it would be absurd to invite someone to speak for being charged with robbing a store, then it is insane to invite someone to speak for being charged with the killing of two individuals and wounding another.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You're making my point for me. When these people get booked to speak it speaks volumes about the people booking them and the people going to listen to them.

I can't say that some individuals aren't praising Rittenhouse for what he did, which is odd behavior, but what he did wasn't illegal and was justified in the eyes of the law. I haven't defended those entities, such as Turning Point or Daily Wire, whatsoever - just merely challenging your feigned incredulity about why someone would want to have him speak or appear as a guest in their show. And like you said "it speaks volumes about them" which I agree with. Doesn't necessarily mean anything about the individual they book.

Then a lawyer, a legal expert of some kind, would be a better choice than the guy sobbing on the stand that apparently didn't understand "if I go to this place and bring a gun I might end up shooting somebody."

Again, I don't know what you're arguing here. You don't like Rittenhouse, some people do and they want to listen to him talk. I know you understand why someone would like to hear this kid speak - you and I don't like it or really get it but I don't give a shit. Why do you care so much?

Yup, that's why if it would be absurd to invite someone to speak for being charged with robbing a store, then it is insane to invite someone to speak for being charged with the killing of two individuals and wounding another.

This is so sad, dude. Do I really have to restate the importance of this case? We can have a good conversation but you're just trying to win a dumb internet debate - and failing.

Let me simplify it lil bro:

  1. me no likey Rittenhouse but me no care
  2. he involve in mucho famous court case
  3. he so popular and some people, good and bad, want to hear he talk
  4. he be innocent so he no murder no body, he self defensed.
  5. you no likey outcome of case? 2bad so sad. U objectively wrong 🤷‍♀️
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Back to your original comment

before we start losing more people due to your virtue signaling bull crap 😂

And I made the simple point that having Rittenhouse as a speaker is far louder "virtue signaling bull crap" than anyone calling him a murderer.

Why do you care so much?

Says the guy responding with multiple paragraphs.

you're just trying to win a dumb internet debate

No, I'm just making a straight forward point. The fact that you think this is something to "win" really explains a lot.

Let me simplify it lil bro:

  1. me no likey Rittenhouse but me no care
  2. he involve in mucho famous court case
  3. he so popular and some people, good and bad, want to hear he talk
  4. he be innocent so he no murder no body, he self defensed.
  5. you no likey outcome of case? 2bad so sad. U objectively wrong 🤷‍♀️

Ya, I'm not going to bother trying to parse any of that.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago

Lol are you down voting my comments? 🤣😂