Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 382: Kamala Harris has Presidential Powers Today

(+) Yeah! (+)

turbopuns3 posted...

I chuckled. But do you really think Rittenhouse would be viewed as a villain in this hypothetical?

I mean with all testimony and video being equal up to the interaction where Grosskreutz was shot.

In the real world where Grosskreutz was shot, a jury found Rittenhouse to be acting in self-defense.

Do you think the part of the video of them chasing him down as he's clearly running away, knocking him over the head with a rock, skateboard, then (new version) busting a cap in his skull would be viewed as justified behavior?

Yes. The media spin would be saying he was a right wing lunatic that needed to be put down and Gaige Grosskreutz would be getting his 15 minutes and not even be going to trial so we wouldn't get testimony or anyone putting the pieces together.

They certainly wouldn't be shouting HE CROSSED STATE LINES WITH A WEAPON HE LEGALLY WASN'T ALLOWED TO CARRY at him.

---

I'm a little surprised that the Waukesha massacre isn't getting more discussion in here. The toll is now at 6 killed and 62 injured.

Maybe it's not getting much attention because everyone agrees the murderer is beyond worthless trash and there isn't much to discuss. Maybe a possible motive?

---

There's not much to discuss, there's no disagreement on it, and guessing at a motive is pointless.

---

cyko posted...

I'm a little surprised that the Waukesha massacre isn't getting more discussion in here. The toll is now at 6 killed and 62 injured.

Maybe it's not getting much attention because everyone agrees the murderer is beyond worthless trash and there isn't much to discuss. Maybe a possible motive?

I've seen a couple places online people saying that the motive was because of the Rittenhouse verdict and the guy was mad and wanted to take it out on white people. This is, as far as I know, completely unsubstantiated and sounds like lies to stir the pot.

I do wonder what he was doing though. His recent activity showed that he was probably an unhinged man who wasn't in his right mind. It seems likeliest that he just had a psychotic break of sorts.

---

guffguy89 posted...

I've seen a couple places online people saying that the motive was because of the Rittenhouse verdict and the guy was mad and wanted to take it out on white people. This is, as far as I know, completely unsubstantiated and sounds like lies to stir the pot.

I do wonder what he was doing though. His recent activity showed that he was probably an unhinged man who wasn't in his right mind. It seems likeliest that he just had a psychotic break of sorts.

My understanding is that he was out on bail for running a woman over, so it seems like hes just a piece of shit whos into vehicular assault

---

guffguy89 posted...

I've seen a couple places online people saying that the motive was because of the Rittenhouse verdict and the guy was mad and wanted to take it out on white people. This is, as far as I know, completely unsubstantiated and sounds like lies to stir the pot.

I do wonder what he was doing though. His recent activity showed that he was probably an unhinged man who wasn't in his right mind. It seems likeliest that he just had a psychotic break of sorts.

Nothing on the local news has shared any evidence or indication that the murderer was motivated by anything related to Rittenhouse. I agree that people of any political or cultural opinion that try to use tragedies like this to further their agenda are despicable people.

That being said, the murderer's social media and music showed that he clearly despised white people and police. Would he have showed an equal lack of regard for human life if it was a parade of black people that he drove into? His record does seem to indicate that he had no regard for any life beyond his own - black or white. So maybe he would have. Was racial hatred motivation in these senseless killings? Maybe, maybe not.

Either way, The whole thing just doesn't make sense. Intentionally running over dozens of people is beyond a psychotic break.

---

Yeah, it's impossible to try to understand what was going through this guy's mind, but as someone mentioned, he ran over someone else recently and its possible that gave him a feeling of power or control or whatever, and it caused him to want to do it again. Ultimately, as someone else said, if it is something like that, there's no point in dwelling on the interworkings of a depraved mind. It's something that can't really be rationalized.

I did hear one of the children who got hit recently died in the hospital. I feel very bad for that family.

---

Indeed. The 12 year old brother of the kid that died was marching next to his brother when they got run down. The 12 year old had surgery to repair a fractured skull. I can't imagine how that family is feeling right now.

---

Earlier this week, we had a guy getting probation for raping multiple women.

Now we have a cop getting home confinement after raping two women because the judge said the women (one of whom is in therapy for the incident) 'suffered no psychological damage')

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/maryland-police-officer-convicted-rape-sentenced-home-detention-rcna6416

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Yes. The media spin would be saying he was a right wing lunatic that needed to be put down and Gaige Grosskreutz would be getting his 15 minutes and not even be going to trial so we wouldn't get testimony or anyone putting the pieces together.

Out of curiosity - is there prior precedent for "person who specifically isn't allowed to have a gun was seen shooting someone to death in public, but we let the whole illegal possession thing slide because justice"

turbopuns3 posted...

Out of curiosity - is there prior precedent for "person who specifically isn't allowed to have a gun was seen shooting someone to death in public, but we let the whole illegal possession thing slide because justice"

He followed the laws regarding the gun.

---

I mean that's probably happened but depends on the specifics and shouldn't be viewed as precedent but as matters to the case itself. People have gotten slap on the wrist sentences for worse in the name of justice - look up Gary Plauche. Shot a guy in the head on live tv and the judge basically went "fair, next."

So I'm sure some cases exist but are largely unique, has circumstances that would make the possession at the time irrelevant, or enough money/information to buy community service.

---

Arbery case, all guilty.
Pretty straightforward there.

... meanwhile Waukesha has media outlets calling it an accident. Funny, that.

---

Corrik7 posted...

He followed the laws regarding the gun.

Which laws? I'm just looking at surface level Google results but everything seems to indicate that it's illegal in Wisconsin for a felon to even attempt to possess a firearm.

Corrik thought you were talking about Rittenhouse, not Gaige.

---

Yeah, the Arbery case was pretty straight forward and obvious, from what I understand about it. Not surprised at that result there.

---

Kinglicious posted...

Arbery case, all guilty.
Pretty straightforward there.

... meanwhile Waukesha has media outlets calling it an accident. Funny, that.

Yeah - I think that's what's really bothering me about the Waukesha Massacre. I live in the area - I know the area well. Based on the videos, the police report and Witness accounts that have been broadcast on television and local newsfeed, this was no accident. Even if the motive is unclear, the murderer clearly attacked all of those people with his vehicle intentionally.

This was an intentional, awful act - significantly worse than Rittenhouse or Arbery or anything else currently in National news, but the majority of the media has just shrugged their shoulders and doesn't seem to care.

---

The media has gotten to be extremely dishonest and anything they write that isn't a verifiable fact needs to be regarded with suspicion. Basically, filter out all the adjectives they use as well as all the opinions.

---

Are they literally calling it an "accident"? Because a very quick search is getting me hits on "OUTRAGE over media calling attack in Waukesha a CRASH" and um...

..."the media" (ABC, Fox, CNN, etc.) described what happened in Charlottesville a car crash too so like this isn't something out of the ordinary. Or even inaccurate insofar as "car crash" doesn't mean it has to be accidental.

And from the bigger outlets I'm seeing terminology like "rampage," "[car] plowed," "attack" more than anything else from the top search results. Which is stronger language than they used back then! (Note I think this stronger language is more appropriate I just wish it had been used for Charlottesville too)

---

Speaking of the media reaction, have they started using this case as a springboard to talk about mental health issues like they do when the murder weapon is a gun? This sounds snide but I am at least a little curious since there seems to be rampant speculation about motive.

---

The media only cares about what they can milk. This is a clearcut case with no real twists and as such they're doing whatever they can to put it in the rear view mirror because it's not going to do numbers for them.

---

Was MSNBC who had someone call it an accident on TV and NBC had this video on YouTube that was posted yesterday:

https://youtu.be/TjoI33r5IQ0

And this is what it says right now.


At the very least MSNBC and NBC have called it that in the past day. There's also as usual a Wikipedia fight over it but who knows how that goes. I just really dislike the framing and it's just screaming double standard.


---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Speaking of the media reaction, have they started using this case as a springboard to talk about mental health issues like they do when the murder weapon is a gun? This sounds snide but I am at least a little curious since there seems to be rampant speculation about motive.

Haven't seen any, in this case I'm not sure how many are going to care because he literally ran someone over last month. That kind of overwhelms anything else and honestly i just see this as his "thing." I mean maybe he had an episode of some kind but all I've seen focused by people looking into it is his lengthy criminal history. With that I'm sure he has something, either he had it or developed it, but this is mainly state negligence.

---

I cannot imagine caring about anything less than if the media said the word crash or accident.

---

Kinglicious posted...

Haven't seen any, in this case I'm not sure how many are going to care because he literally ran someone over last month. That kind of overwhelms anything else and honestly i just see this as his "thing." I mean maybe he had an episode of some kind but all I've seen focused by people looking into it is his lengthy criminal history. With that I'm sure he has something, either he had it or developed it, but this is mainly state negligence.

Well...it's state negligence either way. The only interesting thing about the media response is which part of the state is being blamed!

---

BTW bringing up something old that seems to have been completely forgotten about. If you remember way back with the old stimulus bill Joe Manchin killed several things to give people money in exchange for making 10k of unemployment untaxable retroactively...after many people had already filed taxes.

The IRS was going to pay people back that money, but said later they wouldn't be giving people tax credits that this exemption now made them eligible for and thus they'd have to file an amended return to receive those tax credits. So I filed an amended return in early June.

It is now late November. That return has not been processed. Now, I'm not hurting for money, but an extra $1000 would be nice either way. But if you look at things like the EITC, some large families could theoretically be shorted over $7000 in this situation right now.

The IRS went from mentioning that it takes about 12 weeks to process an amended return to "over six months" to now not even giving any sort of a time frame. Don't know if it is in forever limbo or what.

---

red13n posted...

BTW bringing up something old that seems to have been completely forgotten about. If you remember way back with the old stimulus bill Joe Manchin killed several things to give people money in exchange for making 10k of unemployment untaxable retroactively...after many people had already filed taxes.

The IRS was going to pay people back that money, but said later they wouldn't be giving people tax credits that this exemption now made them eligible for and thus they'd have to file an amended return to receive those tax credits. So I filed an amended return in early June.

It is now late November. That return has not been processed. Now, I'm not hurting for money, but an extra $1000 would be nice either way. But if you look at things like the EITC, some large families could theoretically be shorted over $7000 in this situation right now.

The IRS went from mentioning that it takes about 12 weeks to process an amended return to "over six months" to now not even giving any sort of a time frame. Don't know if it is in forever limbo or what.

Uh me and everyone I know already received thus money and the IRS said not to file an amended return and they would do it themselves.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Uh me and everyone I know already received thus money and the IRS said not to file an amended return and they would do it themselves.

Did you become newly eligible for a tax credit?

There is no need for taxpayers to file an amended return unless the calculations make the taxpayer newly eligible for additional federal credits and deductions not already included on the original tax return,

I fell under this and thus filed an amended return, for reference.

---

red13n posted...

BTW bringing up something old that seems to have been completely forgotten about. If you remember way back with the old stimulus bill Joe Manchin killed several things to give people money in exchange for making 10k of unemployment untaxable retroactively...after many people had already filed taxes.

The IRS was going to pay people back that money, but said later they wouldn't be giving people tax credits that this exemption now made them eligible for and thus they'd have to file an amended return to receive those tax credits. So I filed an amended return in early June.

It is now late November. That return has not been processed. Now, I'm not hurting for money, but an extra $1000 would be nice either way. But if you look at things like the EITC, some large families could theoretically be shorted over $7000 in this situation right now.

The IRS went from mentioning that it takes about 12 weeks to process an amended return to "over six months" to now not even giving any sort of a time frame. Don't know if it is in forever limbo or what.

Yes, it is forever limbo.

I spend my entire shift telling people the amended returns are very backed up.

And I have no time to actually process amended returns because I'm answering calls about amended returns.

It's a disgusting negative feedback loop.

---

God I wish there had been another stimulus check under Biden

PerfectChaosZ posted...

God I wish there had been another stimulus check under Biden

Or the full promised amount, mirite?

---

Would have been pretty swell

Don't worry, a politician can't uphold all of their promises.

But at least Biden is working hard to uphold most of his promises he's made.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Yes, it is forever limbo.

I spend my entire shift telling people the amended returns are very backed up.

And I have no time to actually process amended returns because I'm answering calls about amended returns.

It's a disgusting negative feedback loop.

Btw it is worse the website for checking on the status of your amended return now gives a number to call if you want more information.

It has always done that.

The standard "maximum" time for Amended Returns was 16 weeks. It used to be rare that we would hit 16 weeks, and thus if you hit 16 weeks it was an indication of a problem. Thus the website was programmed to give the "call us!" message any time it detected it's been longer than 16 weeks.

But currently 16 weeks is impossibly fast. (7 months is more like the minimum right now)

But the website still has the same programming to tell people to call.

So everyone who checks calls.

And thus the problem is exacerbated.

---

Rittenhouse had another really interesting interview.

https://youtu.be/i2JnCYU7KgY

He said he didn't know the people in the bar where that picture was taken were Proud Boys and he said if he knew, he wouldn't have gone. He said his former attorneys, Lin Wood and John Pierce, were the ones who set it up.

Rittenhouse: Thats a good question. I didnt know that the OK hand sign was a symbol for white supremacy, just as I didnt know that those people in the bar were Proud Boys. They were set up by my former attorney, who was fired because of that, for putting me in situations like that, with people I dont agree with, by having them set up for security without telling us their background. And if I would have known they were Proud Boys, I would have said absolutely not.
Banfield: So, to be clear, which attorney put you in that bar?
Rittenhouse: John Pierce.
Banfield: He took you to that bar?
Rittenhouse: He arranged it. He wasnt there. But he set it up and arranged it.
...
Rittenhouse: I definitely dont think it looked good to hang out with people who are now known to be Proud Boys. I definitely wouldnt do that again.
Banfield: Did they identify themselves to you while you were there? Was it a complete mystery until the headlines popped up later?
Rittenhouse: I found out they were Proud Boys when I saw the headlines. I thought they were just a bunch of, like, construction dudes based on how they looked.
Banfield: And that was a meeting ostensibly to set up security for you going forward.
Rittenhouse: It was for that hearing. For them to watch over my attorneys office.
Banfield: For a hearing?
Rittenhouse: Yes.
Banfield: I just want to be very clear. Those men who you met with were going to help you in a security situation.
Rittenhouse: Yes.
Banfield: And you never hired them?
Rittenhouse: No.
Banfield: Why not?
Rittenhouse: I dont associate with the Proud Boys.
Banfield: You found out what they were, and you decided against?
Rittenhouse: I dont want anything to do with (them).

So far the interview has been good. I don't think this kid is anything like anyone made him out to be at all.

---

If this actually true I will admit to being wrong. Those pictures are primarily what I based my opinion of him on prior to the trial.

---

For what it's worth, one of the first things Rittenhouse did after the verdict was apparently go visit Trump.

---

By personal choice?

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

By personal choice?

Apparently so.

https://twitter.com/henryrodgersdc/status/1463346574067744773

Between that and choosing Tucker to go on, I think this kid is playing a lot of people for fools.

EDIT: I probably shouldn't say "a lot" since most people aren't actually buying it, but

---

I'm okay with him playing people for fools as long as he's playing the conservative for fools as well. Things would be a lot worse if he openly went "yeah, fuck BLM lmao".

---

Eh, I'd bet money he'll be a MAGA activist by the summer.

---

What exactly is meant by playing people for fools in this case?

You mean like if we searched his bedroom, his private diary would be full of white supremacist thoughts, or what?

If he's conservative, I have no trouble with him wanting to meet Trump. It doesn't mean he's obviously a scumbag or whatever.

Well, I mean, I have no issue with him meeting Trump regardless of his leaning. I just mean it isn't surprising in the least.

Man, if I'm 18 years old, my life was almost over entirely and came back to me, and I just went through the most stressful thing a human could go through and spending millions of dollars for it, I'd have an obscenely expensive lunch with a former president, even if he's as completely shitty as Trump.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Eh, I'd bet money he'll be a MAGA activist by the summer.

The entire MAGA brand is "we arent this wink wink nod nod". So hes perfect for them.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Man, if I'm 18 years old, my life was almost over entirely and came back to me, and I just went through the most stressful thing a human could go through and spending millions of dollars for it, I'd have an obscenely expensive lunch with a former president, even if he's as completely shitty as Trump.

Just marry Rittenhouse already, dude. I don't even think he's actually a total scumbag, but your posts read like a smitten schoolgirl.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Just marry Rittenhouse already, dude

Very funny, very mature response.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Very funny, very mature response.

Thank you. I hope you enjoy your tea time with him and Richard Spencer.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

Just marry Rittenhouse already, dude. I don't even think he's actually a total scumbag, but your posts read like a smitten schoolgirl.

Right?