The biggest story of last week was obviously the many Republican victories in key elections which showed the unpopularity of the Brandon agenda. But there was another story being told at the same time, which went less talked about because of the elections: Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial.
The idea that he has to be in a trial charged with two counts of homicide and one count of attempted homicide is an abortion of the law, as anyone with even a single-digit IQ who paid attention to what happened in Kenosha in 2020 could tell you that Rittenhouse acted entirely in self-defense while he was trying TO HELP protesters who might be hurt, while protecting businesses from being utterly destroyed as was the pattern in other BLM and Antifa-led terrorist attacks throughout the country.
But, of course, Leftists tend to have a negative IQ, so the young man was arrested and charged and is currently in trial over it.
His case for self-defense was exceedingly strong even before the trial, and I have already talked about that, but new evidence came to light during the trial which makes his case EVEN STRONGER.
For a quick recap of the events that unfolded last year, Rittenhouse was seeking to protect businesses in Kenosha while also trying to attend to people’s wounds regardless of whether they were victims or protesters/rioters. At one point, he began to be chased by a rioter who threw what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail at the young man and gunshots could be heard being fired from behind Rittenhouse. Specifically, gunshots from a 9mm handgun. This is important because Rittenhouse was protecting himself with what appeared to be an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle.
Rittenhouse was attacked by multiple people, eventually falling down on the street (where he kept being attacked), with him having to kill two of them and injuring another.
But there is new footage out now which shows not only what happened in the moments before Rittenhouse was attacked, but even has Forward Looking Infra Red (FLIR) footage which showed who was where and roughly what happened. For those unfamiliar with the term above, if you’ve ever seen a military movie where they showed an image of people silhouetted in white with other things being either gray or black, that’s basically what FLIR is, and it’s used to detect heat signatures usually to find where people are.
Say the police are looking for a suspect, but the suspect is well-hidden in foliage, or something; FLIR would easily be able to find them.
What the FLIR footage does here is show us where Rittenhouse was and where his attackers were. But more importantly, it shows shots being fired behind Rittenhouse.
And that goes a LONG way to exonerating the kid, since he was running and had no idea whether or not the shots were directed at him. Seemingly, the shots were fired into the air, but again, Rittenhouse had no way of knowing this because he was being chased by a terrorist. As far as the case would go, he reasonably could have assumed the shots were at him and that he was defending himself from that (not to mention that, again, he was still being attacked otherwise and this has been known since last year).
Thankfully, Rittenhouse’s judge seems to be logical, having even barred the prosecution from calling the terrorists that Rittenhouse killed “victims”, so with the evidence we already have, plus this new evidence, it’s entirely likely that the kid will be rightfully acquitted of all charges.
But this does beg the question as to why we are only NOW seeing this footage, and with a better camera (FLIR) than what was used to record the already exonerating evidence of Rittenhouse being attacked?
Well, the answer is obvious: the communist FBI has an agenda, knew that Rittenhouse was innocent, and sat on this evidence because they hoped the fake news media and others would demonize the kid sufficiently.
In my opinion, there should be a law which forces the police agencies to release all exculpatory evidence as soon as they get said evidence, or at least before the damn trial commences. Because the only thing that protects them right now is that the Brady Rule applies only to trials.
For those not in the know, the Brady rule is a rule established following the 1963 Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland, in which prosecutors (including entities like police departments and FBI) are required to turn over any material exculpatory evidence they have to the defense. They don’t always do this, however.
Most famously, the case of Senator Ted Stevens, who was charged with making false statements, particularly for his failure to report on his Senate Financial Disclosure Forms gifts he received from Bill Allen, the CEO of VECO Corp. (who pled guilty to corruption charges and became a witness against Stevens), as well as others. The government made a motion to file ex parte an unredacted whistleblower complaint which raised allegations of misconduct relating to the investigation, but only provided a redacted copy to Stevens’ defense, which redacted exculpatory evidence for Stevens.
The defense, before and during the trial, alleged many other discovery violations and prosecutorial misconduct, and while the District Court (in D.C., so he was never going to get a fair shake being a Republican and being a seat standing in the way of a Democrat Super Majority in the Senate following the 2008 election) remedied some of these things (for example, they forced the government to provide an unredacted copy to the defense), they ultimately did not dismiss the case or declare a mistrial, leading to a Stevens guilty verdict. Even after the verdict, more whistleblower complaints came out about federal employees violating policies, procedure, discovery, etc. regarding the investigation into Stevens and his trial.
The law firm John T Floyd’s website has an entire section on Brady violations and general prosecutorial misconduct happening in numerous circuit and state courts, and offer some summary of the Brady case and other similar Supreme Court cases.
At any rate, the FBI ultimately did what they are required by law to do in releasing the footage, but maliciously sat on exculpatory evidence surrounding a case in which a young man was demonized by the evil fake news because he stood in the way of terrorists destroying yet another city.
There are MANY criminal actions committed by the fake news and the FBI surrounding this whole thing, but that the FBI can sit on exculpatory evidence until the trial is unacceptable. Because of a technicality, they are allowed to not reveal what they have surrounding this case and so allow a young kid to be maligned and demonized by people who are the real demons.
Thankfully, Rittenhouse’s self-defense case was already pretty strong beforehand, but that doesn’t excuse this bullcrap. Imagine if the FBI sat on evidence this entire time which exonerated someone and that was the ONLY piece of evidence which showed someone’s innocence. The defendant would be character assassinated and personally destroyed because of political and ideological goals.
And the whole justice system is so inconsistent as well. OJ Simpson walks free from committing double-homicide because of a glove he didn’t necessarily have to have worn which didn’t fit his hand. And yet, we have a young kid whose entire life has been destroyed and maligned even despite ALL the evidence showing his innocence?
JFK is attributed with saying that he “wanted to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” I’d say “throw the FBI with them too.”
“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.”
We bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...