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

(+) Yeah! (+)

Khive running wild.

Also her reign is already over, but still

---

Presidential Harris-ment

---

I wish I had known you were around.

---

someone check on Tony

---

Sorry to be a stickler for terms but presidents in this country do not reign, ever. Reigning is what kings do and we haven't had one in a long time.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...
I do not work in the legal system however it is a recreational activity for me. The law has always interested me! You may have confused me with Biscuit since him and I have been discussing this in similar tones for awhile now.

Ah, sorry for the mixup. I usually tell you by your sig and forgot to look.

The legal system is rigged and bad, you are correct. Secondly I don't feel like the events that night back up what you are saying. I have stated multiple times I think Rittenhouse is fairly shitty, but also judging him based off the actions of that night it seems to me like he was all talk about being that gun blazing type of guy. He says a lot of shit, a lot of really bad shit, but that night he acted from my point of view based on the evidence... about as properly as I would expect someone to behave themselves. He said some shit, but the way he carried himself... frankly he showed more restraint than a lot of cops I've seen shoot people. Yes, that's not a defense of Rittenhouse but just so we're clear.

I don't dispute the facts of the night or the legal interpretation of them. My point was that I find the drive to go out and play vigilante in this situation so monumentally a bad idea that it casts a shadow over the whole thing. This kind of white vigilantism as an excuse to shoot Black people (yes, I know the vicitims here were not actually Black) is deployed often enough that it deserves larger scrutiny. It happened before (Zimmerman, Hurricane Katrina aftermath) and it'll happen again. Again, our legal system can't handle this. Justice here would be if no one got hurt, criminal liability once they did is a separate issue.

My broader political opinion on this is I don't want 'the left' to fall victim to what the right does - which is bullshit. The right is pure bullshit in our country. I want us to be outraged that the kid went there, and hammer people who prop him up... but also realize this is the law. I am comfortable meeting on the grounds of 'should it be this way' or 'outcomes aren't equal.'

I agree, I think all the shit about the biased judge or his stupid ringtone or whatever are distractions, and people looking to blame individual actors for a massive systemic problem. I just see no reason to celebrate a "legally correct" verdict or defend the sanctity of the law when it's so obviously busted.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Sorry to be a stickler for terms but presidents in this country do not reign, ever. Reigning is what kings do and we haven't had one in a long time.

I am purposefully trolling.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

For the record, the pair of morons testified that they did not ask him to guard their car lot, and the only evidence to the contrary if that is Rittenhouse texting one of them asking if they needed him and them not answering.

Tony, can you stop being grossly wrong about every fact you talk about with this case?

No less than 3 people ALSO testified that these brothers also asked them to be there. There's video and pictures of them hanging out with them for hours. People testified THEY DROVE THEM THERE.

If you think that somehow everyone else is lying and not the guys who can get sued by their insurance company if they admit they asked armed guards to be there, you're crazy.

---

As a foreigner myself I have no idea why state lines matter that much to the narrative.
---

I'll just carry this one over. >_>

Fine he illegally crossed state lines the day before to drive to work without a driver's license. You win.

How does this affect my assertion that he was putting himself in an unnecessary position where he could reasonably expect to be forced to use "his" firearm that his friend purchased for him because he wasn't old enough to own it yet?

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Ah, sorry for the mixup. I usually tell you by your sig and forgot to look.

I don't dispute the facts of the night or the legal interpretation of them. My point was that I find the drive to go out and play vigilante in this situation so monumentally a bad idea that it casts a shadow over the whole thing. This kind of white vigilantism as an excuse to shoot Black people (yes, I know the vicitims here were not actually Black) is deployed often enough that it deserves larger scrutiny. It happened before (Zimmerman, Hurricane Katrina aftermath) and it'll happen again. Again, our legal system can't handle this. Justice here would be if no one got hurt, criminal liability once they did is a separate issue.

I agree, I think all the shit about the biased judge or his stupid ringtone or whatever are distractions, and people looking to blame individual actors for a massive systemic problem. I just see no reason to celebrate a "legally correct" verdict or defend the sanctity of the law when it's so obviously busted.

I think the only celebration is saying 'fuck the DA'

What I will say... if he wanted to play vigilante and shoot black people he did a bad job. There have been a lot of fucked up shootings over the years and this one isn't even top twenty.

---

htaeD posted...

As a foreigner myself I have no idea why state lines matter that much to the narrative.

Typically when crimes involve multiple states they become federal jurisdiction which is seen as more serious

---

GuessMyUserName posted...

someone check on Tony

I posted about it last topic, but it got lost in the Rittenhouse shuffle:

https://twitter.com/daniellamicaela/status/1461702617789313025?s=21
Just as one butthole is penetrated for a routine exam, so too is the glass ceiling

---

I think its clear that if Rittenhouse was black he would be found guilty, and thats where some chunk of the outrage stems from

But the solution is not two wrongs to make a right

Also Jakyl you keep saying shit like this and I just want to make it clear that I don't necessarily think Rittenhouse should have gone to prison. That's also not a just outcome because there can't be one here. There's an argument for it being better purely in terms of outcomes and not process but I don't care enough to make a distinction.

In fact to the extent I think the justice system could be changed to fix this, the most important step would to make it less punishing, but as a society we are nowhere near that part yet.

---

Fine he illegally crossed state lines the day before to drive to work without a driver's license. You win.

How does this affect my assertion that he was putting himself in an unnecessary position where he could reasonably expect to be forced to use "his" firearm that his friend purchased for him because he wasn't old enough to own it yet?

He didn't illegally cross state lines. Yeah, he drove without a driver's license but he wasn't on trial for that. It doesn't affect your assertion, but you're acting like he traveled this long distance JUST to be there and he wasn't. Gaige Grosskreutz for instance drove four times the distance Rittenhouse did JUST to be there, provide no medical help, with a gun he was actually illegally carrying, and he tried to chase down and shoot a kid in the head.

---

A lot of antifa protesters being arrested in front of the courthouse this week

if only they hadn't crossed state lines to get to kenosha

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

What I will say... if he wanted to play vigilante and shoot black people he did a bad job.

Hey, if intent matters for murder I can apply it to my personal interpretation of vigilantism too. That's why I'm ok with Batman but not the KKK.

---

He didn't illegally cross state lines.

Sounds to me like he was committing an illegal activity while crossing state lines. And that he did this on a regular basis.

And again I can cede that the distance travelled is not relevant to the crux of what I'm saying. My main point is that the context leading up to that night's events matter and the fact that any gun enthusiast could just put themselves in situations until they had justification to kill people is a problem that I believe needs addressing.

---

htaeD posted...

As a foreigner myself I have no idea why state lines matter that much to the narrative.

Some of it is a watered down claim from the wrongful claim of his gun. Initially people said he had a gun and crossed state lines with it. Then it was revealed that he got the gun in Wisconsin so it changed to just he crossed state lines. The implication is that it's a foreign place, which would suggest it's a different reason. The fact that it's his dad's home, is 30m away, or that he worked there run counter to that is all.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Tony, can you stop being grossly wrong about every fact you talk about with this case?

No less than 3 people ALSO testified that these brothers also asked them to be there. There's video and pictures of them hanging out with them for hours. People testified THEY DROVE THEM THERE.

If you think that somehow everyone else is lying and not the guys who can get sued by their insurance company if they admit they asked armed guards to be there, you're crazy.

Theres so much cherry-picking and gish galloping I cant even argue against it.

It was testified in court that the insurance company isnt even paying for the damages, something that could be easily disproven and put the guys straight in jail for perjury. To think THEY would be the ones lying instead of the people looking for a reason to be somewhere they shouldnt have (Im not talking about legality here) is ridiculous and shows your bias.

We dont have to continue this discussion if you dont want to, because its entirely conjecture based on who is lying.

---

I think its clear that if Rittenhouse was black he would be found guilty,

Incorrect. He would've been shot dead by cops on that very same night

---

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

What I will say... if he wanted to play vigilante and shoot black people he did a bad job. There have been a lot of fucked up shootings over the years and this one isn't even top twenty.

He didn't care if they were black. As long as they were BLM people, he wanted to shoot them. I mean right-wingers often dream of killing us. Just look at Gosar, or how they react to Liz Cheney of all people. They wanted to hang Mike Pence!

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Incorrect. He would've been shot dead by cops on that very same night

Hours earlier, even.

KamikazePotato posted...

Incorrect. He would've been shot dead by cops on that very same night

I actually think that's much more likely than a guilty verdict assuming the trial plays out the same in this particular instance. I can't emphasize that last part enough.
---

Kamala Harris nothing.

Edith Wilson held presidential power for months after Woodrow had a stroke.

---

AxemRedRanger posted...

Kamala Harris nothing.

Edith Wilson held presidential power for months after Woodrow had a stroke.

Not on paper.
---

Charge thrown out because it's not illegal in Wisconsin.

Driving without a driver's license is not illegal in Wisconsin? That doesn't sound right.

---

Details from the Defense attorney Mark Richards' interview:

- They did mock trials and the one where they had Kyle on the stand had a significantly better result. I guess I can't knock them for putting him on then.
- Is very disgusted by Binger's actions, and says he never thought he would stoop so low after doing so many cases with him before. Particularly pointed to him putting the Indian brothers who ran the car lot for clearly lying and still allowing them to testify.
- Kyle's first attorneys wanted Kyle to be a cause, and Richards says he doesn't think Kyle wants to be anything like that, which is why he represented him.
- He said that everything they argued about that drone footage that appeared out of nowhere was an outright lie.
- Says Kyle has PTSD and doesn't sleep at night, and that they couldn't discuss certain things when prepping him for testimony because he would break down. Says you can't fake his breakdown.
- Kyle has had 24 hour security and plans to move away from here.
- Richards says that he stopped answering his phone at his office when he got his third death threat.
- Kyle plans to become a nurse.
- Apparently 3 of the 6 jurors who were alternates were the strongest ones they thought would vote to acquit.
- "What do you say to the politicians in Wisconsin who claim that Kyle was out there to be a vigilante?" "That maybe they should have watched the trial."
- He thinks the Jury deliberated quite a bit to come to their decision, and he could feel how tense it was with them yesterday when they asked to leave early.

---

He's talking about the gun.
Because the "state lines!" Thing is often said with that. Every so often people think Kyle shot 3 black guys too, that was in the Independent just today.

---

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict/index.html

Cue the right wing attacks on Biden saying hes a left wing extremist who wants to allow thugs to burn our cities

---

He wasn't charged with driving without a license. Don't know if he was or not but it's up to the prosecution to charge an offense. It is long settled law that no one can be convicted of a crime that has not been charged.

---

kevwaffles posted...

Not on paper.

Sure, but Kamala Harris only had power on paper. I'd say Edith Wilson having actual presidential power is much more impressive.
---

I'm talking about the gun, but thanks for your response. It proves you and your ilk didn't watch the trial and have no clue what you're talking about. You're clearly going by talking points you saw on the internet somewhere.

Incorrect. I have stated from the very beginning that this verdict was correct, based upon the rules as they exist, and the situation as it unfolded. I have not wavered on this. Additionally I have never stated that he carried a gun across state lines. This was originally rumored, but was not supported by the facts of the case.

I have been making a separate point that I feel it's a problem that situations like this can be allowed to legally happen, but I understand that nuance is lost on some people.

---

https://twitter.com/kurteichenwald/status/1461782287541059593?s=21

great thread

---

Xeybozn posted...

Sure, but Kamala Harris only had power on paper. I'd say Edith Wilson having actual presidential power is much more impressive.

If it's not on paper, did it really happen? How do I know she wasn't just cosplaying as president and nobody stopped her?

---

Oh, hey. I missed this.

Technically this is a Mistrial with Prejudice. After the verdict, the Judge granted the Motion for Mistrial and now he gets to file a bar complaint against Binger and Kraus.

Small hope they get what they deserve for their part in everything too!

---

https://twitter.com/anacabrera/status/1461695903148957701?s=21

this sounds bad for them, if true

---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict/index.html

Cue the right wing attacks on Biden saying hes a left wing extremist who wants to allow thugs to burn our cities

Cue the left wing attacks on Biden saying he's coming down with the National Guard on people who want to protest injustice.


---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/anacabrera/status/1461695903148957701?s=21

this sounds bad for them, if true

Haven't watched the trial but from the reporting I've seen it sounded like one of the defendants basically confessed?

---

I also haven't followed the Arbery trial, but I had heard it was pretty open and shut.

---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I have been making a separate point that I feel it's a problem that situations like this can be allowed to legally happen, but I understand that nuance is lost on some people.

I think this topic is a rare case where the lefties, even admitted socialists, aren't reacting like the rest we see online. That I can only attribute to biscuit, though at the same time he may be a bit more aggressive because that's what you can see online, as a couple of you already have noted. Media isn't helpful - independent saying he shot 3 black men in their verdict article - and politicians are repeating shit that's factually wrong. So while there's nuance, there aren't many places to express it because it's a mess and neither press nor politics want it.

Personally I got no problem with him having a gun to protect himself in a riot and I can't complain about anyone who does. My view is that if you go there to shoot, you should get shot back via firing squad. But if you defend yourself from people who are violent, that's just defending yourself from aggressors and you're the victim.

To that end, I do hope Kyle goes after Gaige too, at least in civil court. But only if he wants to, no way that kid is okay.

---

Kyle will be okay financially after this. If he ever wants to make some money all he's got to do is paint a few paintings and sell them like George Zimmerman and Hunter Biden.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I also haven't followed the Arbery trial, but I had heard it was pretty open and shut.

I assumed guilty to begin with but also haven't kept track. Just seems like a VERY different self defense case.

The trial I'm keeping track about next is Chris Chan. Because that's activity happening and I don't know wtf to expect.

---

Let's stop calling it the Arbery trial. Ahmaud Arbery isn't on trial. McMichaels/Bryan are on trial. And their lawyer is a real skeezbag.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

- Says Kyle has PTSD and doesn't sleep at night, and that they couldn't discuss certain things when prepping him for testimony because he would break down. Says you can't fake his breakdown.

lmfao

Hope he's too traumatized to ever so much as touch a gun ever again

---

Him becoming a Gun Control advocate as a result of this would be the best possible face turn.

---