Rittenhouse situation

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
It was made by his defense attorney, who is an actual lawyer.
Yes, I realize that.

I didn’t present it as unbiased or present it as anything. It’s a narrative about the situation. Whether it is accurate will be decided by a jury, but don’t be surprised if you narrative turns out to be totally wrong.

Seems to me it will be easier to prove him guilty of killing them vs. self-defense, especially a they have clear vided of one of the killings.

These three facts are undisputed -


  1. He was 17 carrying a firearm in WI; unless they can somehow sell the exemption that he was going hunting - that is a Class A misdemeanor in WI. Obviously the hunting exemption is just a loophole the lawyers are looking to exploit _ i doubt hunting is legal within the city limits (never has been anywhere I lived) and also would like to know what hunting season was open at that point as well.
  2. He wasn't employed to protect any of those businesses - being a former lifeguard in the city of Kenosha provides him with no standing and is simply irrelevant.
  3. He is not a resident of Kenosha - doesn't matter if "it is a suburb." It is not where he resides and is also in a different state.


And regarding my monicker, do you know what Jerry Kill’s nickname was?

Sorry Country Jer aka Couldn't Recruit a Brian Cupiro level QB to save his life.
 

WAGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
384
Points
83
> Who produced this propaganda?

As stated several times, this compilation of video evidence was put together essentially by his legal team, or at least some sort of Kyle-anti-defamation team that is putting the facts out there to try to counteract the millions of lies told about the situation involving Kyle in Kenosha.

One may call it propaganda if one wishes, but everything in this set of videos is factual, as opposed to the lies told by the leftist mainstream media (and supported by many leftists on GH OTB since those lies prop up their misinformed memes). And also, none of these facts that support the conclusion that this was self defense, were taken into account by the Wisconsin DA that filed 1st degree murder charges before even looking at a fraction of the evidence. The problem is that there are no doubt additional pertinent facts that are as yet unknown, so we should have a nuanced interpretation of the events so as to allow for what we do not yet know. But one thing is clear: everything in the videos was a factual recording of the events, and only the accompanying narrative was particularly aligned toward supporting the claims of the Rittenhouse legal defense team.

> ... travel across state lines ...

> ... a community that isn’t his ...

As noted by others, he lived only about a 15-minute drive away. This is analogous to someone living in Hudson, WI traveling down I-94 across state lines to an event in St. Paul. If perhaps the kid went to a private school, then that school might well be over the border in Wisconsin instead of Illinois. The school on which they tried to scrape off graffiti, was probably a school that some of his friends went to. It might have been the nearest big school. He and his friends might have regularly gone to football games there. It was his community in the sense that he lived in a small suburb of that community (which coincidentally was over the border into Illinois).

> What compels a 17 year old to arm himself ... attempt to protect [his] community ... and end up killing people?

The cause is two-fold.

First, he did have an interest in police and policing. He had a fund-raiser for police on his 16th birthday. It's fairly obvious that he might have had career ambitions in the area of police work. The actual police weren't doing their jobs adequately. The Wisconsin governor didn't bring in sufficient national guard, nor soon enough. [A mistake of the same caliber as the mistake Walz made.] Some acquaintances wanted to protect their mutual community, and so obviously he was in, as that cause aligned perfectly with his morals and career ambitions. As a minor aside, he (at least thought he) knew a little bit about first aid, so he grabbed his EMT bag and put it to good use. That explains the "protect [his] community" part.

Second, the "end up killing people" part is a bit more complicated. To at least partially understand that part, you have to both know all the video facts presented in the video compilation starting this thread, and be able to make an educated guess about the remaining facts not explicitly covered by those videos - all in light of the known facts about the most radicalized wings of BLM + antifa.

The above is stated in general terms. To get down to the actual specifics of the events, the key fact is that those BLM + antifa terrorists present at that event had cornered Kyle Rittenhouse (who they now vehemently hated because he was one of several that stopped them from blowing up a gas station) away from his group of peers, and were intent on murdering him, and also had a sufficient number of handguns among them to do so. They took about a dozen or more shots at him but missed. Kyle absolutely had no option but to shoot in self defense. Although the facts are fuzzy enough to allow slight differences in interpretation of the facts, it is undoubtedly true that no just court of law would convict him of any more than manslaughter (or possibly dismiss the charges) [other than the misdemeanor gun charge, which may or may not stick]. The key question is whether he will obtain a just trial in a just court of law, or whether he will (instead) be effectively lynched by the public - just to prevent further mayhem and destruction in Kenosha.

This was a wild-wild west situation in which the leadership of Wisconsin failed as miserably as Walz/Frey failed in Minnesota, and the result was perhaps even more tragic (since I don't believe there were any initial fatalities in Minnesota - the 40+ George Floyd deaths all happened in the following four months). Kyle got forced into a self-defense life-or-death shootout with a bunch of BLM + antifa would-be murderers, and Kyle had the faster draw and more accurate shot.

It's that simple. The ultimate cause of these tragedies in Kenosha thus lies mostly on the terrorist BLM + antifa intent on burning Kenosha down, with partial liability landing on Wisconsin politicians.

Of course, the leftists would argue, "If only do-gooders like Kyle would just stand down and let us burn down their community unchallenged, then we could have avoided this tragedy." I would counter with, "If only the terrorists had just stayed at home (in Portland and Seattle and Minneapolis and other places) and not tried to burn down Kenosha, then we could have avoided this tragedy."

If that last premise had prevailed (i.e., the terrorists had stayed home and not tried to burn down Kenosha), then there would have been no need for community members to try to protect their community and Kyle and his friends would not have been there, and there would not have been any terrorists there to get pissed off that the locals were interfering with their fun of burning down Kenosha, and so there wouldn't have been anyone there trying to kill Kyle because he was one of the ones ruining their fun, and Kyle would not have (even been there or) needed to return fire in self defense, and two deaths plus a rather severe injury wouldn't have happened.

Buy where is the rage at these terrorists who caused two deaths plus a rather severe injury?

I, for one, am enraged at them. If I could have my druthers, I'd for-sure prefer that Kyle had stayed home and left the job to the professionals like the police and the national guard. But given that unfortunately that didn't happen, I am extremely pissed off at these terrorists who caused two deaths plus a rather severe injury. Not to mention the other 40+ deaths that the terrorist BLM + antifa are directly or indirectly responsible for.
CDTN, Thank you for taking the time to explain your positions. We have lots of common ground.

Can you explain why you are mixing BLMers in with Antifa? I haven’t seen any real evidence that the BLM movement is violent or calls for violence.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
It doesn’t matter why he was there. It doesn’t matter if his gun was legal. He was running away from a mob that was armed and he would be absolutely right to fear for his life. Absolute 100% self defense and justifiable use of force. That is not debatable.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
730
Points
113
CDTN, Thank you for taking the time to explain your positions. We have lots of common ground.

Can you explain why you are mixing BLMers in with Antifa? I haven’t seen any real evidence that the BLM movement is violent or calls for violence.
> Can you explain why you are mixing BLMers in with Antifa? I haven’t seen any real evidence that the BLM movement is violent or calls for violence.

I simply can't tell the difference when you see videos containing protesters that are doing the more extreme things like burning stuff down. I suspect it's often a mixture. But I have no certain knowledge of even whether both might be present, or if so, in what proportions.

I also suspect that in Seattle and Portland, there are a higher percentage of antifa since there are just more avowed antifa out there than, say, Minneapolis. Although some may have made a road trip for a specific protest.

And of course, in any given situation, there are lots (the majority, at least before midnight, I suspect) of simple protesters that are marching and chanting and don't even commit a misdemeanor, let alone a felony. And if a storefront window gets broken, probably just some self-interested people who steal stuff. So a big mix, really.

I've come to the conclusion that within the protest crowd, there's almost a normal distribution on various factors such as violence/criminality and degree of dedication to the actual cause, etc.

So when I see a so-called protest that is both a protest plus (especially after midnight) a more serious event with a higher proportion of bad actors than the daytime crowd, and the protest topic is black lives matter, I don't really know what to call those extreme folks - the bad actors (of which there were quite a few at Kenosha). They might be mostly extreme BLM supporters (the long tail of the bell curve on vioence/criminality), but some of them might also be antifa who are just allied with the cause, but who knows what the mix is, plus there's no law that says BLMers can't dress in black bloc - so it's all a linguistic mess.

I haven't come up with a good terminology, so in lieu of that, I've sometimes used BLMers + antifa, or maybe BLM/antifa (meaning BLM protesters and/or antifa or maybe both). I thought about being clever and trying to coin a phrase, but the only thing I've come up with yet I don't like a lot - something like BLaMtifa. Nah, don't like that one.

Plus there's also the huge linguistic issue of distinguishing between the phrase "black lives matter" and the organization Black Lives Matter Global Network (BLMgn or just BLM). Well, I could add a third category, per your question, that we could call the black-lives-matter movement. All three are distinct.

I don't know of anybody that can't agree on the first concept "black lives matter," but I hope not too many folks are donating to the BLM organization, because they are a neo-Marxist, intersectionalist, anti-nuclear-family political organization whose goal is pretty much to overthrow our constitutional democracy and install god-knows-what kind of government thereafter. Although we don't know what they have in mind if they ever "win their revolution" so to speak, we can expect it to look a lot like Stalinist Russia or Maoist China. Unfortunately, lots of dumb CEOs donated to BLM the organization. And BLM the organization has upped their finances based on sympathies for the whole George Floyd thing and follow-ons, and very well may (I honestly don't know) sponsor "black lives matter" protests, but BLM the organization really doesn't care a whole lot about black lives.

In the past, when they collected many millions per year in donations, they only gave about $12K per year to their local chapters to do actual good work on the ground that might help blacks - to the point that at least one chapter quit the organization and other chapters threatened to sue for their fair share of money. Most of the money was spent on the leaders' globetrotting to attend Marxist seminars and spread neo-Marxism to countries around the world. Most people who attend a protest sponsored by BLM the organization, know nothing of this organization and its evils. The whole BLM organization is a Ponzi scheme of sorts. They look for questionable police shootings of blacks, and capitalize on those for fund-raising purposes. Of course, George Floyd would do. Before the George Floyd episode the BLM organization had about $3.4M cash on hand. Already by June 18, they had collected $36.3M in new donations just from people who were concerned about the George Floyd situation and "wanted to help." So that George Floyd thing worked pretty well for them, they raked in the cash. Most of the people donating were suckers that didn't know that they were donating to an organization that is nearly communist in nature, and believes in a number of other wacky ideas such as such as defunding police (so that there can be more violence in black neighborhoods so that there can be more George-Floyd-like events so that they can raise even more cash in their Ponzi scheme), and getting rid of the patriarchal male-led family (so that more black youths can become criminals without the influence of a father in their family).

Most people are too dumb to check whether an organization called Black Lives Matter actually does much to assist black lives. BLM recently took down most of the verbiage on their web site that told the truth about them being a Marxist organization and their other wacky beliefs. And talking about linguistic issues, I actually hesitate to even call them Marxist or neo-Marxist, because it's really an insult to the name of Karl Marx, who actually had good intentions in spite of the fact that most of the subsequent politicians mining his writings really screwed up his ideas and turned it into something completely different. Examples: Lenin/Stalin, Mao, Black Lives Matter Global Network.

Then we have the black-lives-matter movement. That is a hodge-podge. A lot of well motivated people that want bonafide change for the positive. But perhaps, and I suspect at least partially controlled by the wicked Black Lives Matter Global Network organization. And in spite of good intentions by probably most of the participants, on the extreme edge of the actors in protests (the ones that start most of the fires, and hunt down people like Kyle that dare to threaten their fun of burning down cities) you seem to get a lot of felons or ex-felons that may or may not be dedicated to the cause, but certainly are dedicated to having open season on doing violent things. If you go through that video, note that nearly all the victims are felons. If you think that all the protesters are felons, you're way wrong. But the felons among them, plus additional people that may be just mental, seem to do most of the damage. So yeah, the poeple in the movement are a hodge-podge with a wide range of motivations and action patterns.
 
Last edited:

GopherBlood666

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,792
Reaction score
1,216
Points
113
CDTN, Thank you for taking the time to explain your positions. We have lots of common ground.

Can you explain why you are mixing BLMers in with Antifa? I haven’t seen any real evidence that the BLM movement is violent or calls for violence.
LOL, sorry couldn't help it. This is a small recent sample.
 


GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,867
Reaction score
2,657
Points
113
How delusional are you?
During your sabbatical, CRG became a full-time troll. Jamar left him. apparently. He held so much promise too. I miss those made up stories about how lawn mowing contains hidden life lessons.
 


stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
26,377
Reaction score
7,458
Points
113
Another really fine person held in high esteem by all the righties. The best people.


Kyle Rittenhouse accused of flashing white power sign at bar; prosecutors want him to stay away from Proud Boys

Rittenhouse, who is free on $2 million bail, had just turned 18 two days earlier. After the hearing, he, his mother and several other adults went to Pudgy's Pub in Mount Pleasant. He was seen drinking beer while wearing a T-shirt reading Free as (expletive).

Rittenhouse is charged with shooting and killing two people and wounding a third during the Kenosha unrest in the wake of the police shooting of Jacob Blake. Blake was shot in the back and left paralyzed. The officer who fired the shots won't be charged, prosecutors said this month.

Rittenhouse's attorney responded that his client doesn't belong to or associate – even online – with such groups and called the state's motion "a not-so-thinly veiled attempt to interject the issue of race into a case that is about a person’s right to self-defense."

According to the prosecutors' motion, before entering the bar, Rittenhouse posed outside with two men as they all put their thumbs and forefingers together in what looks like an upside-down OK sign, which has become a symbol used by white supremacists. The motion also claims he He was seen making the same gesture while posing for photos inside the bar.

Once inside, Rittenhouse had three beers over 90 minutes, which is legal in Wisconsin because he was with his mother, Wendy Rittenhouse. Prosecutors, however, asked that he be prohibited from drinking alcohol in the future because alcohol consumption often leads to violence.

The motion also states that Rittenhouse was serenaded by five men singing, "Proud of Your Boy," which prosecutors say was written for a Disney film but has become the anthem of the Proud Boys. Members of the white supremacist group have been identified as being involved in the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,251
Reaction score
4,820
Points
113
Mothers who have raised your sons so well. Just kicking hippies’ asses and raising Hell.
 




saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
10,251
Reaction score
4,820
Points
113
He’s not a monster, but the adults in his life have really failed him.
 





WhoFellDownTheGopherHole?

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
2,571
Points
113
> Can you explain why you are mixing BLMers in with Antifa? I haven’t seen any real evidence that the BLM movement is violent or calls for violence.

I simply can't tell the difference when you see videos containing protesters that are doing the more extreme things like burning stuff down. I suspect it's often a mixture. But I have no certain knowledge of even whether both might be present, or if so, in what proportions.

I also suspect that in Seattle and Portland, there are a higher percentage of antifa since there are just more avowed antifa out there than, say, Minneapolis. Although some may have made a road trip for a specific protest.

And of course, in any given situation, there are lots (the majority, at least before midnight, I suspect) of simple protesters that are marching and chanting and don't even commit a misdemeanor, let alone a felony. And if a storefront window gets broken, probably just some self-interested people who steal stuff. So a big mix, really.

I've come to the conclusion that within the protest crowd, there's almost a normal distribution on various factors such as violence/criminality and degree of dedication to the actual cause, etc.

So when I see a so-called protest that is both a protest plus (especially after midnight) a more serious event with a higher proportion of bad actors than the daytime crowd, and the protest topic is black lives matter, I don't really know what to call those extreme folks - the bad actors (of which there were quite a few at Kenosha). They might be mostly extreme BLM supporters (the long tail of the bell curve on vioence/criminality), but some of them might also be antifa who are just allied with the cause, but who knows what the mix is, plus there's no law that says BLMers can't dress in black bloc - so it's all a linguistic mess.

I haven't come up with a good terminology, so in lieu of that, I've sometimes used BLMers + antifa, or maybe BLM/antifa (meaning BLM protesters and/or antifa or maybe both). I thought about being clever and trying to coin a phrase, but the only thing I've come up with yet I don't like a lot - something like BLaMtifa. Nah, don't like that one.

Plus there's also the huge linguistic issue of distinguishing between the phrase "black lives matter" and the organization Black Lives Matter Global Network (BLMgn or just BLM). Well, I could add a third category, per your question, that we could call the black-lives-matter movement. All three are distinct.

I don't know of anybody that can't agree on the first concept "black lives matter," but I hope not too many folks are donating to the BLM organization, because they are a neo-Marxist, intersectionalist, anti-nuclear-family political organization whose goal is pretty much to overthrow our constitutional democracy and install god-knows-what kind of government thereafter. Although we don't know what they have in mind if they ever "win their revolution" so to speak, we can expect it to look a lot like Stalinist Russia or Maoist China. Unfortunately, lots of dumb CEOs donated to BLM the organization. And BLM the organization has upped their finances based on sympathies for the whole George Floyd thing and follow-ons, and very well may (I honestly don't know) sponsor "black lives matter" protests, but BLM the organization really doesn't care a whole lot about black lives.

In the past, when they collected many millions per year in donations, they only gave about $12K per year to their local chapters to do actual good work on the ground that might help blacks - to the point that at least one chapter quit the organization and other chapters threatened to sue for their fair share of money. Most of the money was spent on the leaders' globetrotting to attend Marxist seminars and spread neo-Marxism to countries around the world. Most people who attend a protest sponsored by BLM the organization, know nothing of this organization and its evils. The whole BLM organization is a Ponzi scheme of sorts. They look for questionable police shootings of blacks, and capitalize on those for fund-raising purposes. Of course, George Floyd would do. Before the George Floyd episode the BLM organization had about $3.4M cash on hand. Already by June 18, they had collected $36.3M in new donations just from people who were concerned about the George Floyd situation and "wanted to help." So that George Floyd thing worked pretty well for them, they raked in the cash. Most of the people donating were suckers that didn't know that they were donating to an organization that is nearly communist in nature, and believes in a number of other wacky ideas such as such as defunding police (so that there can be more violence in black neighborhoods so that there can be more George-Floyd-like events so that they can raise even more cash in their Ponzi scheme), and getting rid of the patriarchal male-led family (so that more black youths can become criminals without the influence of a father in their family).

Most people are too dumb to check whether an organization called Black Lives Matter actually does much to assist black lives. BLM recently took down most of the verbiage on their web site that told the truth about them being a Marxist organization and their other wacky beliefs. And talking about linguistic issues, I actually hesitate to even call them Marxist or neo-Marxist, because it's really an insult to the name of Karl Marx, who actually had good intentions in spite of the fact that most of the subsequent politicians mining his writings really screwed up his ideas and turned it into something completely different. Examples: Lenin/Stalin, Mao, Black Lives Matter Global Network.

Then we have the black-lives-matter movement. That is a hodge-podge. A lot of well motivated people that want bonafide change for the positive. But perhaps, and I suspect at least partially controlled by the wicked Black Lives Matter Global Network organization. And in spite of good intentions by probably most of the participants, on the extreme edge of the actors in protests (the ones that start most of the fires, and hunt down people like Kyle that dare to threaten their fun of burning down cities) you seem to get a lot of felons or ex-felons that may or may not be dedicated to the cause, but certainly are dedicated to having open season on doing violent things. If you go through that video, note that nearly all the victims are felons. If you think that all the protesters are felons, you're way wrong. But the felons among them, plus additional people that may be just mental, seem to do most of the damage. So yeah, the poeple in the movement are a hodge-podge with a wide range of motivations and action patterns.

That's a whole lot of words just to say you're racist.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
That's a whole lot of words just to say you're racist.

He also famously defended the Proud Boyz in a thread I started on them to point out what a threat they are; he downplayed it to say they were just man-children who like pranks, despite the SPLC designating them as a hate group based on their lovely misogynistic , Anti-Semite and Anti-Muslim.

He hasn't been on since the end of October, so maybe he was busy with his militia group.

There are racists on here, make no mistake about it, some are more clever than others, but the thread which started on it on the football board proved it. This isn't shocking as this is a little ecosystem of our country which is racist.
 

WhoFellDownTheGopherHole?

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
3,640
Reaction score
2,571
Points
113
He also famously defended the Proud Boyz in a thread I started on them to point out what a threat they are; he downplayed it to say they were just man-children who like pranks, despite the SPLC designating them as a hate group based on their lovely misogynistic , Anti-Semite and Anti-Muslim.

He hasn't been on since the end of October, so maybe he was busy with his militia group.

There are racists on here, make no mistake about it, some are more clever than others, but the thread which started on it on the football board proved it. This isn't shocking as this is a little ecosystem of our country which is racist.

I do have a terrible memory, so perhaps i'm mistaken but for some reason i felt like he seemed like a halfway decent person earlier in the year, but only then when summer came around did he flip. I wonder why that could be...musta scratched something underneath the surface.

I've certainly been prejudiced and still work on prejudices learned of ignorance, but man, hard to respect a grown person who isn't brave enough to work on developing and evolving their true character.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
I do have a terrible memory, so perhaps i'm mistaken but for some reason i felt like he seemed like a halfway decent person earlier in the year, but only then when summer came around did he flip. I wonder why that could be...musta scratched something underneath the surface.

I've certainly been prejudiced and still work on prejudices learned of ignorance, but man, hard to respect a grown person who isn't brave enough to work on developing and evolving their true character.

Nice, thoughtful post - thanks:). I don't remember him prior to the Proud Boyz thread I mentioned; as I wasn't active posting, I would pop up from time to time on the sports side, he stuck in my mind, as I was trying to point out the fallacy of his Tim Cast worship in that thread which I started. IIRC, Tim Poole is some "internet journalist" who purported to be a Sanders admirer/follower and then changed to Dump (I thought that narrative was a too nifty follow the outsider/money ploy and argued about it to him with no avail). Netz commented he was on the same path as Poole and I called horse hockey, as Poole was (still is?) a Proud Girlz fan. He also shot down all my examples of the Proud Girlz bigotry as basically calling into question the validity of the SPLC and other organizations who had pegged them as who they really are. The "good thing" about 1/6 is that it has exposed to all who these people really are.

The scary thing is that radicalization can happen quickly and you as the one being radicalized don't even know it's happening, as you know have the good kind of kool-aid so to speak

I have a older brother who has many blessing and is not really grateful. Luckily, he has a wife who tells him when he/Trump are full of shite and to shut up. She likes Trump too, but it tethered enough to reality to not freefall into another zip code.

We all have our biases no mater how enlightened we are, strive to be. Walking around my semi-bohemian neighborhood (totally different from when I moved here), I have to remind myself sometimes of that line from the Progressive Commercial where the "Don't Turn Into Your Parents" Coach, has to remind his pupils not to start at the person with the blue hair, "We all see it." Funny and insightful as hell. It's almost like we need to see that part in us that has the bias, so we don't say something when we see it - whatever our particular biases are.
 





GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,730
Reaction score
2,142
Points
113
The apron strings are strong on this one. I will say that my Mom is 77 and would still refuse to go out in public with me if a I was wearing a Free as F T shirt. Cuff me upside the head.
Does she often violate your first amendment rights that way?
 



STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,689
Reaction score
960
Points
113

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
2,294
Reaction score
680
Points
113
Kinda long but coverage of pre trial. Prosecution has no case as most know.

 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
26,377
Reaction score
7,458
Points
113


Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
6,059
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
Kinda long but coverage of pre trial. Prosecution has no case as most know.

Your use of dubious sources once again emphatically shows you don’t work in military intelligence!

Keep up the good work in the motor pool Sgt.-
1634033931427.jpeg
Pro Tip - just because someone posted something online that u happen to fancy doesn’t mean it’s accurate/ correct. Journalists actually go to school to learn a professiion.
 
Last edited:





Top Bottom