If a liberal went to a MAGA rally and did what Rittenhouse did...

[Eliot Rosewater]

Last edited Fri Oct 29, 2021, 02:17 PM - Edit history (1)

1.MSM would describe that person as a murderer and radical.

2. GOP would demand life in prison and anything less would result in more violence.


BTW


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15995195

[Cobalt Violet]

1. no doubt.

Double standard.

[Gore1FL]

2. I think We all would also call for imprisonment.

But your point is well taken.

[Walleye]

3. And the judge would allow the victims to be called victims

[Bev54]

5. This is not because of the judge, it is because his defense lawyers are claiming

self defense and in most self defense cases, they do not call the victim a victim until determined whether self defense or not. We know it was not self defense but the Judge is handling it as self defense case, because that is what he claims.

[Walleye]

6. Well, it makes more sense now that you explain

I have watched enough Perry Mason that I should know that

[Eliot Rosewater]

7. I dont know about that, can you provide a credible link to prove that?

If so why would everyone make a big deal out of this judge doing this and always has but the reporting of it is as if it is not usual, at all.

But I am not a lawyer, YOU may well be and if this is a fact with most courts, I would like to know.

I will immediately change my info here if you prove this to me, I want to be accurate.

[Bev54]

14. That was a comment by a law expert on MSNBC and agreed by others.

[Eliot Rosewater]

15. So no.

So no. I don’t think it is accurate.

[Bev54]

16. Well I think it is perfectly accurate and makes a lot of sense.

If someone kills another in self defense because someone is attacking and threatening them, you would not call the agitator the victim in a court room. Just because we all know that he does not have a case of self defense (he still has pleaded self defense) and he must be treated the same. If not, then they will surely look to overturn on appeal because the judge allowed the word "victim" to be used. Look it up yourself, I am not doing your research for you, but if you disagree go looking.

[Eliot Rosewater]

17. But it wasnt self defense, in reality and that is what the prosecution would say..

What you and these folks are saying is whatever the defense wants they get, that is not how it works.

So all anyone has to do is claim self defense in ANY trial and the prosecution cant use those words?

Nah...

If there is a criminal attorney here on DU they can be the final word and tell us.

[Bev54]

19. That is their defense, not mine or anyone else's and yes they can claim self defense.

Let me put it another way, if a woman is getting beaten and raped and picks up a knife and kills the perp, do you think the perp should be called a victim? We may not like that Rittenhouse claiming self defense but the legal system allows them to and I am simply pointing out that is what is happening. I am not going to argue whether the laws of the country are right or wrong but as long as you guys are happy to ignore what is evident and are happy with your opinion, so be it. I am not going to argue the obvious anymore.

[ForgedCrank]

20. You are missing the points here.

This is a court - a criminal trial. If you are to make a claim about someone (such as calling them a victim in court) that is not a fact, and it cannot be allowed. The reason this cannot be called a fact is because no court has ever determined the victims here to be actual victims (again, not the common description, but an actual judgement or ruling). That would automatically assume a lot of actions on the part of the defendant, and trials have to be based on facts. It might suck in this case, but that's the way it works. That's what the upcoming trial is all about anyway, and at the end, the victims WILL be determined to be victims by the court. The judge is playing it safe here to make sure there are no shenanigans that defense can use to invalidate the entire trial.
We may not like it, but this kid also enjoys the same presumption of innocence as anyone else. I've little doubt regarding the outcome of this trial, but I have to be patient and let the system work. It'll happen, I'm confident.

[Dr. Strange]

18. It does have to do with this judge specifically, at least somewhat.

From what I've read, this isn't universal in every court. Some judges try to limit prejudicial language in their courts, but some don't. This judge in particular does have a history of policing what terms are used in his court, so the decision isn't surprising in this case.

[TheRealNorth]

4. Didn't a guy shoot an alt-right person with a paintball gun last year?

And the Justice Department under Trump rounded up a posse of local law enforcement that killed him.

So thats what happens to liberals that do what Rittenhouse did.

[Eliot Rosewater]

8. I am not familiar but it sounds normal. If you are liberal or a POC but mostly a POC

you will be treated differently.

[Dr. Strange]

22. You mean Michael Reinoehl?

Cause that wasn't a paintball gun. It was the real deal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_and_Michael_Reinoehl

[TheRealNorth]

23. Thanks for the correction.

Reinoehl was the case I was thinking of.

[Caliman73]

9. Take a step back and look at the Macro

The reason that right wing violence is treated very differently than left wing violence is because while people generally do not support violence, Right wing violence is an extreme measure that REINFORCES the current power dynamic.

Right wingers hate the "government" because the government is elevating mongrel races and women to the level of a White man.

Left wing actions, including violence, is typically about disrupting the current power dynamic. People on the far left do not like or want Capitalism. They want a flattened out society.

This is why Antifa, which has extremely little influence on our political structures, is seen as this horrific anarchical, juggernaut, while these right wing organizations that regularly take over wildlife refuges, have armed standoffs with law enforcement, and invade school board meetings, are just seen as "passionate" actors from the right.

[Eliot Rosewater]

10. That is part of it, but the main reason the MSM treats the right like the red-headed step-child

needing extra care and excuses, is the successful lie in the 60's claimed by the repubs that the MSM is liberal.

As a result, ever since, mainstream media journalists have to give a republican ten chances to respond for every one chance a Democrat gets for any issue, or mainstream media outlets must call Democrats on any action or comment by a Democrat like it's the end of the world and routinely ignore crimes by Republicans.

Journalists were accused of being liberals because they were liberal minded, i.e. educated, mature, worldly, the typical journalist is exposed to much more than your average right winger obviously and is therefore going to be liberal minded because liberal minded is what all decent human beings aspire to be.

And the end result of this is for instance Merrick Garland may well want to charge trump and MTG and Brooks and Boebert and Gohmert and the others who are already proven to be guilty of insurrection, but he KNOWS the MSM will say it is political which will give the right an excuse to go insane and make governing impossible.

[Caliman73]

12. That is part of it too.

Also, the media companies are owned by wealthy people whose economic goals align with the Republicans policies even if most of the staff on the ground are liberal.

As you said, the concept of journalism, science, and other fact finding endeavors are typically liberal because the philosophy of liberalism is about progress as a result of new information and ideas.

The specific funding and rise of right wing media has done immeasurable damage because it is simply propaganda.

[Vinca]

11. For some reason Rittenhouse is being given the benefit of the doubt because of his

young age. Misguided youth and all that baloney. I mean really. Doesn't every teenager have their mom drive them to a rally with a semi-automatic rifle? If we "libtards" showed up to one of the GOP/Klan events and did the same, they'd shoot first and ask questions second.

[Eliot Rosewater]

13. Some reason LOL, that reason is called he shot Black people or liberals so he is AOK with them!

I dont even know who he shot, I should I guess.

I know he was there to shoot Black people and liberals.

[ForgedCrank]

21. This "benefit of the doubt" is called

presumption of innocence, something we all enjoy equally. Even Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. That is the system, and I'm thankful that's the way it is written. Maybe not in this case, but overall it is proper.
Don't worry, this punk is going to prison for the rest of his life, the judge just needs to keep this squeaky clean for obvious reasons. It's ALL on video, there is little to dispute regarding the sequence of events here.