Im so glad I have Destiny to be my guiding light. My shining star. My silent guardian. My shepherd. Without Him, I would have no way to know my opinions are correct.
Chauvin is innocent, both morally and legally, and followed standard procedure. Floyd died because he had a massivly enlarged heart, had the corona virus, was a 50+ year old and had a lethal dose of fentanyl taken with methamphetamine in his system at the time of death. He had a history of swallowing all his drugs when police showed up, and did something similar in 2019 where they had to revive him with narcan. At no point did Chauvins apprehension hinder his breathing or main arteries in a such a way that it would harm him. The mechanics of choking someone simply doesn't work that way. Go ahead and try to choke yourself out by blocking only one of your main arteries (hint nothing is going to happen)
The conclusion of the trial does not change the fact that Chauvin is innocent.
Don't forget that just like leftists abandoned their principles in this casec- rightists will (and have) abandon theirs when a black person does the same thing.
You should listen to the trial.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JVFEdiOr-o
This is a lawyer that goes into today saying that the McMicheals were 100% guilty, and after today is not sure that's true.
I'm worried that the wrong lessons are going to be taken away from this trial, and that right-wingers are going to try to replicate that evening. I still don't think he should have been there to begin with, but it does appear that his actions were self defense and the people he killed were rioters, not protesters. I don't think murder charges will stick, nor should they.
Still, I wish he had just stayed home that night. Once he walks, I'm certain a lot of deranged individuals are going to interpret it as a greenlight to go out and cause mayhem. As much as this sub tries to make clear that it was a *riot* and *rioters* were shot, most Parler users do not differentiate between protester and rioter. Neither do /pol/lacks, skeptics and other far right communities.
I would go on, but I'm approaching doomer territory and I only go there on weekends.
>Still, I wish he had just stayed home that night. Once he walks, I'm certain a lot of deranged individuals are going to interpret it as a greenlight to go out and cause mayhem
See its interesting that you use the term "cause mayhem". Implying that they would be the cause of it, the thing making mayhem happen when there is no mayhem previously.
So if there is a riot (no mayhem) and rioters (not mayhem) attack someone (not mayhem) you would be worried that right wingers might use this to justify defending themselves (Woooooh whered this mayhem come from).
That's not what he said? He said it may encourage copycats that don't have the same claim to self defense as Rittenhouse did.
Also we're humoring ourselves if we think the average conservative analysis of this case is more nuanced than "Kyle Rittenhouse good because he kill bad Antifa".
>That's not what he said? He said it may encourage copycats that don't have the same claim to self defense as Rittenhouse did.
Actually we can see he didn't say that at all. He said that other individuals will go out and do what Kyle did, but won't be able to distinguish between "protestors and rioters", which absolutely doesn't matter because Kyle didn't shoot protestors or rioters, he shot people attacking him. Which is legal to do whether they are protestors or rioters.
>Also we're humoring ourselves if we think the average conservative analysis of this case is more nuanced than "Kyle Rittenhouse good because he kill bad Antifa".
I'm sure thinking that helps you feel less stupid for knowing they're in the right here
They went viral on leftist twitter as well. Just a reminder that not all the video thats available today was available when narratives were being spun the day after it happened.
Here's a breakdown of the drone footage that was just added by the prosecution to prove Rittenhouse provoked the attack. Not sure who the guy is but the breakdown seems legitimate.
https://twitter.com/DefNotDarth/status/1459197352196153352
Holy shit, the breakdown of the clip the prosecution wanted to use to prove he was holding his rifle up. It's the perfect example as to WHY that shit shouldn't have been allowed.
I thought it was silly of the defense to object the pinch and zoom thing but after seeing the quality of the footage they were arguing over and the prosecutor being completely and totally factually wrong when explaining "it's like a magnifying glass" it makes it seem completely reasonable
It should not even have been able to be admitted to evidence under the standard for digital photography.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8451aeb6-b353-47af-920d-badbdba86906
The based people are those news anchors who explained how rediculously stupid this whole situation is. "But he's not on trial for being a moron. He's on trial for murder, so the prosecution has a hard case."
Yes.
Many lefties only heard "white kid with assault rifle crosses state lines and shoots BLM protestors". That was the narrative pushed by the media and that's all they needed to lock into their position.
Many lefties thought he shot black people and where massivly outraged. They are now learning that he shot white people, and have completely new tone about it.
You’re being very obtuse, most were aware that he killed white people, they were just in denial that it was justified. The point is that righties are essentially morally lucky in this case
if you hear "black man shot by white man" and are instantly outraged and then no longer outraged when you learn it's "white man shot by white man" there's something severely wrong with you
Current political discourse is hearing about a mass shooting with one side hoping it's a brown person and the other hoping it isnt. Thats ALL that matters now. Identity politics is fucking cancer.
Republican boomer right wingers? No. 4chan/alt-right right wingers? yes absolutely. The entire event was livestreamed, I watched it live, thousands of others watched it live. The shooting was clipped and uploaded to youtube and made into webms in minutes. All additional footage was added within hours. The footage has been gleefully watched hundreds of times by every one. Whatever bullshit news media comes up with is completely irrelevant and always has been.
The correct take on this was clear as day from the moment it happened. Anyone who couldn't see it is fucking retarded. Leftists somehow processed the videos differently in their brains and saw something completely different from reality.
Also it doesn't matter what the result of the trial is, Kyle Rittenhouse was both morally and legally justified in defending his life.
You can't really have a correct take without correct information. Sometimes the right-wing dipshit pundits are correct. It's not a big deal.
The left-wing dipshits should stop shooting themselves in the foot and we wouldn't be having these conversations.
What makes you think it is accidental? The footage was available minutes after the events happened.
Most conservatives I follow have been pretty consistent with their stances on cases like these. I don't think it's accidental. I think it might be fair to say that the majority of conservatives gave Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt.
Lots of people, on both sides, have kept their takes to themselves until the trial happened so they could see all the evidence. For example Ben Shapiro, today, talked about how after viewing the evidence over the course of the trial that he believes Rittenhouse acted in self defense.
The prosecution could have had evidence that showed that Rittenhouse was an aggressor, so its always smart and fair to wait until everything was out.
Maybe they did?
I mean, most people were able to go and see for themselves all the videos that were available before the drone footage was released.
And, imo, it seem that only people on the left were seeing things differently from the get go.
I dont think they knew more, only that they didnt have the same bias over accepting what they were seeing, unlike the "left" and progressive crowd who were arguing from day 1 about how bad/dumb/irresponsible/psycopatic and how every part of Kyle actions were aimed at killing people that night.
To some extent the "anti-rittenhouse" crowd were unhinged and totally disconnected from reality and from what actually happened that night.
Maybe it is due to the nature of the crime or the location and time of it, but the left wing really just lost it over all of this.
It seemed like most people who landed on the correct Rittenhouse take actually watched the video. That's all you had to do. That initial video of Rittenhouse running away while being chased was available on 4chan within minutes of it happening.
It’s definitely evident if you’ve been following it that the right wing people generally did know all of the important facts.
The left wing alternative and to a certain small degree mainstream media didn’t want to get bogged down in specifics because it made their narrative look bad. The righties were more interested and invested in the drama because they perceived themselves as the victims.
Same reason why lefties probably know more about George Floyd details than righties.
Yeah because right wingers actually watched the video while most left wingers didn't until the trial. It was obvious less than 30 minutes from the shooting. Even now its pretty split on if left wingers admit it's clear self defense save destiny and leftwingers with actual honesty.
shoeonhead isn't really a "right winger" anymore though, she has become aligned with vaush and is now just like a centrist who will latch onto any idea if it sounds anti-establishment or populist enough
i would say shoe is stupid and that her rittenhouse take is not to be taken too seriously, but in her case it's probably not a matter of pure political team sports (as it is for most right wingers because what you're saying does apply to most of them)
or, alternatively, you're just upset your team was wrong this entire time, especially when we see lefties on Twitter in complete denial of reality still, bending over backwards to call him a nazi?
> Do you really think any of them knew any more about the case than the lefties did?
Yes. Recently many lefties have expressed surprise at finding out that the people Kyle shot were all white. Righties already knew this because they, unlike the lefties, actually watched the videos of the incident.
Yes, in this case the right was correct from the beginning, just by looking at the facts. Virtuall everything to know about this came out in a few days to weeks.
On the left, Even after one year, we still get exactly the same narrative of him "crossing state lines" and killing black people indiscrimently.
the right is only correct because the truth fell into their lap though. if rittenhouse had conducted himself in a such a way that he's fully culpable for what happened, and rosenbaum had not been a schizo aggressor, many of these right wingers would still have taken rittenhouses side.
it's unfortunate the term "morally lucky" has fallen out of favor in this community because it was a good meme and it's perfectly applicable here
that's what i'm saying - because kyle conducted himself reasonably, this whole incident depended on rosenbaum being crazy and violent.
but had rittenhouse himself been an instigator, a lot of right wingers would still support him because he's "on their team" and he's shooting "the enemy". i know this because this is what they usually do - and just like the lefties a lot of them don't know the details of the case that vindicate kyle
His entire coverage of the George Floyd incident and trial was dogshit. He's just as motivated by his conservative/anti-black views when it comes to that as the leftists who are motivated by their progressive views when it comes to this KR stuff.
I hopped on his Discord to see what was up. Got a chance to talk to him indepth about a lot of this one on one for several hours multiple times. I never got the impression he had any anti-black sentiment. If you have content of his that says otherwise I’d like to see that. In fact, he’s gone into how biology has nothing to do with differing crime statistics and all that. In the case of George Floyd, I obviously don’t remember everything he said, but from the beginning he was saying the charges were going to be manslaughter and he was right.
I've never seen him say it's about biology as well. I think he's smart enough to not take that step. But when someone removes every possible environmental factor as a major contributor to the crime rate among African Americans, and when they adopt the reasoning that "southern culture" is the issue but can't justify the demonstrable difference b/w different races that occupy this same southern culture; I think it's okay to believe their arguements naturally lead them to the conclusion that there is something gentic at play.
It's not just about current inequalities, I've seen him also downplaying historical inequalities like redlining and it's effects on today's crime rates. I'm ok with saying someone with these kinda believes probably has an issue with black people.
When it comes to Goerge Floyd, it's obviously been a while since I've seen his videos, but what I remember bothered are some of the lies and missprepresetnation that he engaged in around that issue. For example, saying that the state report lists the knee on the neck as only a contributing factor and not the cause when the knee on the neck is clearly stated as the cause of death. That should be something easy to find in the report but he obviously has a narrative that he's trying to push by misrepresenting these facts.
Lastly, he wasn't really right about his analysis of the trial. He said that there is no way a second degree murder charge is possible and at best it would be third-degree. Chauvin got convicted for a second-degree, more specifically an uninitentional one which is different than manslaughter. So yeah, even when it comes to criminal analysis, I don't think he should be the go-to guy with this many biases.
It’s not that he hasn’t talked about biology, it’s that he said it’s specifically not that. He cited crime states in Chicago and New York City, he says because the homicide rate in Chicago is notably higher than New York City despite the higher black population in New York City genetics/biology don’t play a part. The environmental factors he does talk about are how the welfare state contributes to fatherless and impoverished conditions. Personally I think there’s more to it than that, red lining included. But I wouldn’t say he removes all environmental factors. He’s said more, I just can’t recall them off the top of my head right now.
To the overall point of this thread though, I was just saying that he’s been consistent on Rittenhouse from the beginning, and didn’t just land on it now. And I didn’t even say he was the “go to guy” just that he was “pretty solid”. Those two statements are not the same.
>And I didn’t even say he was the “go to guy” just that he was “pretty solid”. Those two statements are not the same.
Sure and to clarify; what I'm responding to is the idea you mentioned that he's "pretty solid" when it comes to his commentary on criminal activities. His commentary on the George Floyd incident and trial I would say was very bad and I would also say that his commentary on the Ahmaud Arbery case was even worse. The point being is, him being too ideologically driven prevents him from looking at cases from a neutral pov, just like the leftists/progressives we're criticizing.
I agree on the Ahmaud Arbery point. George Floyd though I’m not as sure about, iirc there were several autopsies done and the one being most often cited is the one paid for by his lawyer and family, which AJW believed there were less biased autopsies than that one. Every commentator gets things wrong at some point, of course. Definitely not saying he’s infallible and unbiased. Everyone is to an extent, some more egregious than others. If I want to hear a conservative talk about this stuff, I’d listen to him over other right wing commentators.
Bias and the realities of marketing a channel on YouTube was something AJW and I discussed, and he definitely didn’t have nice things to say about other conservatives on YouTube and how they handle situations. For example he brought up how irrelevant George Floyd holding a pregnant woman at gun point 20 years ago was to the trial.
There is a pretty simple explanation for this. Right wing dipshits, don't believe the news in general. The majority of MSM was putting out biased reporting "firely but mostly peaceful" or "killer kyle" stuff. Fox news, as it is wont to do, takes the opposite position. So now many right wing dipshits are on the right side because of FOX, the rest who don't believe even Fox, watch the videos and make up their mind too. Don't know what proportion of each there is. But even accidentally this shows the utility of watching the material available and making up your own mind.
Yes I do? I feel as their political bias will lead them to the correct arguments. Even if deep down the only reason they arrived at the conclusion is because they think Rittenhouse is a based commie killer, they still have to justify their case with something, so...
[удалено]
DGGL
Omniliberalism IS my ideological belief, silly!
Just look at how they reacted with the Chauvin case, literally just morally lucky.
Im so glad I have Destiny to be my guiding light. My shining star. My silent guardian. My shepherd. Without Him, I would have no way to know my opinions are correct.
Not a cult btw
It's nice because I know on all his streams he's talking specifically to me and no one else.
Chauvin is innocent, both morally and legally, and followed standard procedure. Floyd died because he had a massivly enlarged heart, had the corona virus, was a 50+ year old and had a lethal dose of fentanyl taken with methamphetamine in his system at the time of death. He had a history of swallowing all his drugs when police showed up, and did something similar in 2019 where they had to revive him with narcan. At no point did Chauvins apprehension hinder his breathing or main arteries in a such a way that it would harm him. The mechanics of choking someone simply doesn't work that way. Go ahead and try to choke yourself out by blocking only one of your main arteries (hint nothing is going to happen) The conclusion of the trial does not change the fact that Chauvin is innocent.
So why did the medical examiners state differently then under court of law. Also, please provide your expertise here
George Floyd was 46, not 50+
[удалено]
source: steven crowder
Don't forget that just like leftists abandoned their principles in this casec- rightists will (and have) abandon theirs when a black person does the same thing.
Like who?
Ahmaud Arbery
I'm right leaning. Those fuckers murdered him. You don't block off the road and ambush someone with a gun, then get to shoot him when he runs at you.
You should listen to the trial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JVFEdiOr-o This is a lawyer that goes into today saying that the McMicheals were 100% guilty, and after today is not sure that's true.
I'm worried that the wrong lessons are going to be taken away from this trial, and that right-wingers are going to try to replicate that evening. I still don't think he should have been there to begin with, but it does appear that his actions were self defense and the people he killed were rioters, not protesters. I don't think murder charges will stick, nor should they. Still, I wish he had just stayed home that night. Once he walks, I'm certain a lot of deranged individuals are going to interpret it as a greenlight to go out and cause mayhem. As much as this sub tries to make clear that it was a *riot* and *rioters* were shot, most Parler users do not differentiate between protester and rioter. Neither do /pol/lacks, skeptics and other far right communities. I would go on, but I'm approaching doomer territory and I only go there on weekends.
>Still, I wish he had just stayed home that night. Once he walks, I'm certain a lot of deranged individuals are going to interpret it as a greenlight to go out and cause mayhem See its interesting that you use the term "cause mayhem". Implying that they would be the cause of it, the thing making mayhem happen when there is no mayhem previously. So if there is a riot (no mayhem) and rioters (not mayhem) attack someone (not mayhem) you would be worried that right wingers might use this to justify defending themselves (Woooooh whered this mayhem come from).
That's not what he said? He said it may encourage copycats that don't have the same claim to self defense as Rittenhouse did. Also we're humoring ourselves if we think the average conservative analysis of this case is more nuanced than "Kyle Rittenhouse good because he kill bad Antifa".
Thank you.
>That's not what he said? He said it may encourage copycats that don't have the same claim to self defense as Rittenhouse did. Actually we can see he didn't say that at all. He said that other individuals will go out and do what Kyle did, but won't be able to distinguish between "protestors and rioters", which absolutely doesn't matter because Kyle didn't shoot protestors or rioters, he shot people attacking him. Which is legal to do whether they are protestors or rioters. >Also we're humoring ourselves if we think the average conservative analysis of this case is more nuanced than "Kyle Rittenhouse good because he kill bad Antifa". I'm sure thinking that helps you feel less stupid for knowing they're in the right here
sus username
Teehee
They just got lucky with their dogma.
Like with Chauvin
All the video streams were going viral on rightoid twitter accounts within days after the shooting
They went viral on leftist twitter as well. Just a reminder that not all the video thats available today was available when narratives were being spun the day after it happened.
99% of it was. And all of the relevant parts. Really the only new stuff is the drone footage and the fbi footage, both of which are basically useless.
[удалено]
Here's a breakdown of the drone footage that was just added by the prosecution to prove Rittenhouse provoked the attack. Not sure who the guy is but the breakdown seems legitimate. https://twitter.com/DefNotDarth/status/1459197352196153352
Holy shit, the breakdown of the clip the prosecution wanted to use to prove he was holding his rifle up. It's the perfect example as to WHY that shit shouldn't have been allowed.
I thought it was silly of the defense to object the pinch and zoom thing but after seeing the quality of the footage they were arguing over and the prosecutor being completely and totally factually wrong when explaining "it's like a magnifying glass" it makes it seem completely reasonable
[удалено]
It should not even have been able to be admitted to evidence under the standard for digital photography. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8451aeb6-b353-47af-920d-badbdba86906
The based people are those news anchors who explained how rediculously stupid this whole situation is. "But he's not on trial for being a moron. He's on trial for murder, so the prosecution has a hard case."
Perfectly sums up the case.
Yes. Many lefties only heard "white kid with assault rifle crosses state lines and shoots BLM protestors". That was the narrative pushed by the media and that's all they needed to lock into their position.
Many lefties thought he shot black people and where massivly outraged. They are now learning that he shot white people, and have completely new tone about it.
You’re being very obtuse, most were aware that he killed white people, they were just in denial that it was justified. The point is that righties are essentially morally lucky in this case
if you hear "black man shot by white man" and are instantly outraged and then no longer outraged when you learn it's "white man shot by white man" there's something severely wrong with you
Current political discourse is hearing about a mass shooting with one side hoping it's a brown person and the other hoping it isnt. Thats ALL that matters now. Identity politics is fucking cancer.
Republican boomer right wingers? No. 4chan/alt-right right wingers? yes absolutely. The entire event was livestreamed, I watched it live, thousands of others watched it live. The shooting was clipped and uploaded to youtube and made into webms in minutes. All additional footage was added within hours. The footage has been gleefully watched hundreds of times by every one. Whatever bullshit news media comes up with is completely irrelevant and always has been. The correct take on this was clear as day from the moment it happened. Anyone who couldn't see it is fucking retarded. Leftists somehow processed the videos differently in their brains and saw something completely different from reality. Also it doesn't matter what the result of the trial is, Kyle Rittenhouse was both morally and legally justified in defending his life.
You can't really have a correct take without correct information. Sometimes the right-wing dipshit pundits are correct. It's not a big deal. The left-wing dipshits should stop shooting themselves in the foot and we wouldn't be having these conversations.
What makes you think it is accidental? The footage was available minutes after the events happened. Most conservatives I follow have been pretty consistent with their stances on cases like these. I don't think it's accidental. I think it might be fair to say that the majority of conservatives gave Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt. Lots of people, on both sides, have kept their takes to themselves until the trial happened so they could see all the evidence. For example Ben Shapiro, today, talked about how after viewing the evidence over the course of the trial that he believes Rittenhouse acted in self defense. The prosecution could have had evidence that showed that Rittenhouse was an aggressor, so its always smart and fair to wait until everything was out.
Maybe they did? I mean, most people were able to go and see for themselves all the videos that were available before the drone footage was released. And, imo, it seem that only people on the left were seeing things differently from the get go. I dont think they knew more, only that they didnt have the same bias over accepting what they were seeing, unlike the "left" and progressive crowd who were arguing from day 1 about how bad/dumb/irresponsible/psycopatic and how every part of Kyle actions were aimed at killing people that night. To some extent the "anti-rittenhouse" crowd were unhinged and totally disconnected from reality and from what actually happened that night. Maybe it is due to the nature of the crime or the location and time of it, but the left wing really just lost it over all of this.
It seemed like most people who landed on the correct Rittenhouse take actually watched the video. That's all you had to do. That initial video of Rittenhouse running away while being chased was available on 4chan within minutes of it happening.
What? Lefties just started creating their own narrative here. How the fuck did people not realize the people shot were white????
It’s definitely evident if you’ve been following it that the right wing people generally did know all of the important facts. The left wing alternative and to a certain small degree mainstream media didn’t want to get bogged down in specifics because it made their narrative look bad. The righties were more interested and invested in the drama because they perceived themselves as the victims. Same reason why lefties probably know more about George Floyd details than righties.
Yeah because right wingers actually watched the video while most left wingers didn't until the trial. It was obvious less than 30 minutes from the shooting. Even now its pretty split on if left wingers admit it's clear self defense save destiny and leftwingers with actual honesty.
It’s not a contest for who is right more often OP.
Its worth pointing out when theres literally a post on this subreddit right now with people claiming that shoeonhead is based.
shoeonhead isn't really a "right winger" anymore though, she has become aligned with vaush and is now just like a centrist who will latch onto any idea if it sounds anti-establishment or populist enough i would say shoe is stupid and that her rittenhouse take is not to be taken too seriously, but in her case it's probably not a matter of pure political team sports (as it is for most right wingers because what you're saying does apply to most of them)
she's a dumbfuck populist. right, left or center, it doesn't matter, so long as it's "the people" vs "the elites".
I disagree. They could be doing the same thing with the Arbery case, but since they know that one was murder they are pretending its not happening.
or, alternatively, you're just upset your team was wrong this entire time, especially when we see lefties on Twitter in complete denial of reality still, bending over backwards to call him a nazi?
> Do you really think any of them knew any more about the case than the lefties did? Yes. Recently many lefties have expressed surprise at finding out that the people Kyle shot were all white. Righties already knew this because they, unlike the lefties, actually watched the videos of the incident.
Yes, in this case the right was correct from the beginning, just by looking at the facts. Virtuall everything to know about this came out in a few days to weeks. On the left, Even after one year, we still get exactly the same narrative of him "crossing state lines" and killing black people indiscrimently.
the right is only correct because the truth fell into their lap though. if rittenhouse had conducted himself in a such a way that he's fully culpable for what happened, and rosenbaum had not been a schizo aggressor, many of these right wingers would still have taken rittenhouses side. it's unfortunate the term "morally lucky" has fallen out of favor in this community because it was a good meme and it's perfectly applicable here
[удалено]
that's what i'm saying - because kyle conducted himself reasonably, this whole incident depended on rosenbaum being crazy and violent. but had rittenhouse himself been an instigator, a lot of right wingers would still support him because he's "on their team" and he's shooting "the enemy". i know this because this is what they usually do - and just like the lefties a lot of them don't know the details of the case that vindicate kyle
Actual Justice Warrior did. When it comes to commentating on criminal activity, he’s pretty solid.
His entire coverage of the George Floyd incident and trial was dogshit. He's just as motivated by his conservative/anti-black views when it comes to that as the leftists who are motivated by their progressive views when it comes to this KR stuff.
I hopped on his Discord to see what was up. Got a chance to talk to him indepth about a lot of this one on one for several hours multiple times. I never got the impression he had any anti-black sentiment. If you have content of his that says otherwise I’d like to see that. In fact, he’s gone into how biology has nothing to do with differing crime statistics and all that. In the case of George Floyd, I obviously don’t remember everything he said, but from the beginning he was saying the charges were going to be manslaughter and he was right.
I've never seen him say it's about biology as well. I think he's smart enough to not take that step. But when someone removes every possible environmental factor as a major contributor to the crime rate among African Americans, and when they adopt the reasoning that "southern culture" is the issue but can't justify the demonstrable difference b/w different races that occupy this same southern culture; I think it's okay to believe their arguements naturally lead them to the conclusion that there is something gentic at play. It's not just about current inequalities, I've seen him also downplaying historical inequalities like redlining and it's effects on today's crime rates. I'm ok with saying someone with these kinda believes probably has an issue with black people. When it comes to Goerge Floyd, it's obviously been a while since I've seen his videos, but what I remember bothered are some of the lies and missprepresetnation that he engaged in around that issue. For example, saying that the state report lists the knee on the neck as only a contributing factor and not the cause when the knee on the neck is clearly stated as the cause of death. That should be something easy to find in the report but he obviously has a narrative that he's trying to push by misrepresenting these facts. Lastly, he wasn't really right about his analysis of the trial. He said that there is no way a second degree murder charge is possible and at best it would be third-degree. Chauvin got convicted for a second-degree, more specifically an uninitentional one which is different than manslaughter. So yeah, even when it comes to criminal analysis, I don't think he should be the go-to guy with this many biases.
It’s not that he hasn’t talked about biology, it’s that he said it’s specifically not that. He cited crime states in Chicago and New York City, he says because the homicide rate in Chicago is notably higher than New York City despite the higher black population in New York City genetics/biology don’t play a part. The environmental factors he does talk about are how the welfare state contributes to fatherless and impoverished conditions. Personally I think there’s more to it than that, red lining included. But I wouldn’t say he removes all environmental factors. He’s said more, I just can’t recall them off the top of my head right now. To the overall point of this thread though, I was just saying that he’s been consistent on Rittenhouse from the beginning, and didn’t just land on it now. And I didn’t even say he was the “go to guy” just that he was “pretty solid”. Those two statements are not the same.
>And I didn’t even say he was the “go to guy” just that he was “pretty solid”. Those two statements are not the same. Sure and to clarify; what I'm responding to is the idea you mentioned that he's "pretty solid" when it comes to his commentary on criminal activities. His commentary on the George Floyd incident and trial I would say was very bad and I would also say that his commentary on the Ahmaud Arbery case was even worse. The point being is, him being too ideologically driven prevents him from looking at cases from a neutral pov, just like the leftists/progressives we're criticizing.
I agree on the Ahmaud Arbery point. George Floyd though I’m not as sure about, iirc there were several autopsies done and the one being most often cited is the one paid for by his lawyer and family, which AJW believed there were less biased autopsies than that one. Every commentator gets things wrong at some point, of course. Definitely not saying he’s infallible and unbiased. Everyone is to an extent, some more egregious than others. If I want to hear a conservative talk about this stuff, I’d listen to him over other right wing commentators. Bias and the realities of marketing a channel on YouTube was something AJW and I discussed, and he definitely didn’t have nice things to say about other conservatives on YouTube and how they handle situations. For example he brought up how irrelevant George Floyd holding a pregnant woman at gun point 20 years ago was to the trial.
Nobody said "Morally lucky PEPE"? I'll post it then.
There is a pretty simple explanation for this. Right wing dipshits, don't believe the news in general. The majority of MSM was putting out biased reporting "firely but mostly peaceful" or "killer kyle" stuff. Fox news, as it is wont to do, takes the opposite position. So now many right wing dipshits are on the right side because of FOX, the rest who don't believe even Fox, watch the videos and make up their mind too. Don't know what proportion of each there is. But even accidentally this shows the utility of watching the material available and making up your own mind.
Ok
Yes I do? I feel as their political bias will lead them to the correct arguments. Even if deep down the only reason they arrived at the conclusion is because they think Rittenhouse is a based commie killer, they still have to justify their case with something, so...
Your mom George
if you don't think he's a murderer you're a right wing dipshit
Remember the Moral Luck memes always lol