Rittenhouse Trial. Anyone watching the live streams?

[Great-Kazoo]

So, I know there is a reason behind some of the questions being asked, but daaaaaaaaaang some of them just seem like such nonsense. Then they go and ask the same question several more times just worded different. Now I know why I didn't want to become a lawyer like my father and grandfather. LOL. I will start watching again when they get into the meat and potatoes of the trial. Enough about asking the car dealer owner what time and when and what damage was done to his building. And how much damage. And the cost. And if he had insurance..

They do that to see if a story changes, as well as time lines. Compared to original statements.

[Vic Tory]

I don't know what the prosecutor goofed on this time, but it's good to see Kyle smile ... if discretely.

https://gettr.com/post/pg61iu419d

[FoxtArt]

The angle is "he was protecting a store that didn't need protectin' cause it was fully insured, there was nothing that could've happened to the store and he knows it, he was stopping them peaceful protestors from obtaining property they was lawfully entitled to cause it was insured"

[Gman]

Should have never gone to trial. Mischaracterized chain of events has fallen apart under prosecution witness testimony. The media screed about Kyle bringing a gun across state lines got destroyed in the first day.

Pretty interesting to know the FBI is probably watching us from drones.

[Ramsker]

Should have never gone to trial. Mischaracterized chain of events has fallen apart under prosecution witness testimony. The media screed about Kyle bringing a gun across state lines got destroyed in the first day.

Pretty interesting to know the FBI is probably watching us from drones.

Yup . . . has been a political prosecution from the jump. Some of the DA's own witnesses have punched serious holes in an already ridiculously poor case. And that's aside from the completely obvious video evidence that Rittenhouse was attacked.

(Paraphrasing)

Witness: "The pedo felon manlet said 'if I catch any of you alone tonight, I'll kill you'."
Prosecutor: "But he didn't say that to Rittenhouse, right?"
Witness: "Well, Rittenhouse was standing right there with us . . . so, yes, he did."


Prosecutor: "How do you know what was happening when pedo felon manlet caught up with Rittenhouse?"
Witness: "Well . . . he yelled 'f**k you!' and reached for the gun."

[Aloha_Shooter]

Should have never gone to trial. Mischaracterized chain of events has fallen apart under prosecution witness testimony. The media screed about Kyle bringing a gun across state lines got destroyed in the first day.

Pretty interesting to know the FBI is probably watching us from drones.

The prosecutor should face disbarment for even bringing this case forward. Won't happen of course but this is nothing but a politically motivated show trial, nevermind the fact that it's going to ruin his life for years (if not forever).

[theGinsue]

Rittenhouse put himself in a bad scenario that had a strong likelihood of blowing up, but that isn't a crime and he's a kid so he doesn't have enough experience to have the wisdom to avoid such situations.

What I saw on the numerous videos that came out after the night of these events was someone who was attacked and protected themselves from those attacks.

Does it suck that people had to lose their lives? Yes. But the lesson here is not to attack someone else - especially if you know they are armed. Stupid games/stupid prizes and all that.

Why we should all care about this case is because this is about our right to self defense. If Rittenhouse is found guilty of murder, how the rest of us protect ourselves from attack in the future will be subject to the same criteria used against Rittenhouse.

[Seamonkey]

Interesting to see the feds actually released footage from their fixed wing drone, but "lost" the HD version

Pretty interesting to know the FBI is probably watching us from drones.

FBI drones, lost footage.... pucker factor x10
https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2...ticing-n470901

"Lost footage" is beyond by ability to comprehend in these situations. How does one keep faith in the integrity of the system or entity in question?

[FoxtArt]

"Lost footage" is beyond by ability to comprehend in these situations. How does one keep faith in the integrity of the system or entity in question?

I'm guessing this is a rhetorical question and it's easy to infer and we all know the answer.

It isn't lost, they just don't want the U.S. public to shit their pants over the surveillance capabilities. I personally doubt there is a low-def version, they likely created a low-def version for this court, but they certainly aren't going to blow their load all over this court proceeding for a shooting they care little about. It shouldn't be a surprise that laws/regulation don't truly apply to the government itself.

[Grant H.]

It isn't lost, they just don't want the U.S. public to shit their pants over the surveillance capabilities. I personally doubt there is a low-def version, they likely created a low-def version for this court, but they certainly aren't going to blow their load all over this court proceeding for a shooting they care little about. It shouldn't be a surprise that laws/regulation don't truly apply to the government itself.

100% this...

I can't share any details/specs, but I can tell you that fixed wing UAV surveillance capabilities weren't in "low-def" a decade ago, and they haven't gotten worse...

Despite the assertions and assumptions in the redstate article that was linked, concerning the number of UAV's or the ability to be "in the right place, at the right time", there might have been multiple UAV's, but they didn't need multiples to be able to capture "right time/right place".