Kyle Rittenhouse predictions

My apologies. I have been watching the Livestream of the court proceedings and was taking my information directly form that. I should know that you may not have done that as well. Am I right to guess that you did not see the pre trial hearings regarding what was and was not allowed?

It's not about intelligence. Being informed verse being on informed or being slightly informed or whatever you want to say. So the judge is not allowing the people shot/killed to be called victims however they may be called rioters protesters and other such names or by their actual names. Both parties have kept to using their actual names. So far the evidence has shown that Mr Rosenberg came out from behind a vehicle and followed Kyle Rittenhouse and began to chase him. He then screamed FU and went for Kyle's gun. While being chased someone else fired a shot into the air. Of course Kyle has no way of knowing if he was the target and who did it. Mr Rosenberg screamed FU and went for Kyle's gun. Who's at this point Kyle shot him after trying to get away first. Kyle did not immediately flee he was seen on his phone over Mr Rosenberg. Then the crowd began to scream various things that implied to kill hurt or severely injure Kyle and to chase him down. It was at this point Kyle began to run. The next time Kyle ever fired a shot was when he was on the ground and people were running by and kicking his head and hitting him with skateboards. To me this is one of the clearest cases of self-defense I have ever seen. So far the prosecution has not proven that Kyle was in any way threatening or unstable prior to being threatened chased or beaten.

Also I apologize if there's any spelling errors I'm not really double checking and I'm using speech to text let me know if anything doesn't make sense.

A lot of people are giving the prosecution flack for not doing a good job, to be honest the prosecution given everything that they have is actually doing pretty good. It only looks like they're grasping at straws because they're literally isn't enough evidence to convict Kyle on any of the charges besides the under 18 having a gun charge.

Nah, it's good. I'm a typo magnet myself. Okay, so far as I've cross referenced a lot of coverage, and I think New York Times does the best job at contextualizing the scene. Who was who, who was where, the sequence of events before and during. It should help since a lot of these witnesses were subpoenaed into the trial. And they're an unaffiliated independent source, so it's hopefully a little more objective and concise. Less likely to spin things like Fox or CNN. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpTW2AJE9MQ And yeah, the Rosenberg stuff lines up with reality so far. The dude just showed up, having never been at a protest before. He had a bag full of meds from the hospital, I believe. That was what he threw. The guy who fired up in the are could be seen behind him. He didn't really stick around. Can confirm that Kyle hung out before that. And then he ran off. Most of what I heard was "Why did you shoot him!" and things along those lines. Couldn't parse for death threats. Afterwards, everyone who came afterwords to get him only heard gun shots and then saw an armed kid running down the road. Looked like two of which were gun carriers themselves, and one drew, but never fired or even pointed the gun at him even after being shot.

In the court proceedings they get a lot more precise and you can hear specific things. Mostly the death threats can't after the initial why did you shoot them, Then it said again when he's later walking down the street they ask why did you shoot him but that was a separate person. Honestly I've looked at different media cuts from both Fox CNN and MSNBC and they all do not do it justice regardless of which side they're representing. Some of the sides are clearly trying to make Kyle out to be the bad guy here in completely misrepresenting the facts. Honestly the way the court proceedings have gone with the clips being shown and everything and having things contextualized in court where objections can be made has been super helpful to understanding the case. Multiple times now even the prosecutions owned witnesses have basically helped the defense at this point. I can tell the prosecution is saving their closing arguments after everything's presented for making their point on why Kyle's guilty but I just don't see it working. To be fair it's probably their only chance of getting a conviction on most of these charges and it's probably not going to work with a reasonable jury.

That's Fox, CNN, and MSNBC for you. Fox news: The Murdoch family who also own the wall street journal, Washington Post, the New York Post, Harper Collins, and roughly 120 news papers world wide. They love their boogeymen. CNN: The ultimate owner of CNN is AT&T. The CNN parent company is Warner Media LLC, which also owns HBO, Otter Media, Warner Brothers, and Turner Broadcasting System. MSNBC: The owner of NBC and MSNBC is Comcast. NBC’s parent company is NBCUniversal, an umbrella company that also owns Fandango, Hulu, Universal Pictures, and Telemundo. NBCUniversal is then owned by parent company Comcast. Those are some powerful industry tycoons, and generally like to put more entertainment into the news in order to keep viewers coming back. Fox especially has been malicious in warping the facts. They always gotta make everything as scary as possible. CNN just uses outrage. MSNBC? "Oh, we're centrists, and bend over backwards to serve all ideologies, except the super far left progressives. But hey, mister neo nazi! Look how normal you are! Look how normal he is, everybody! Oh, mister anarcho-antifa activist! You're looking very normal too! How many neo nazis did you hit with your bat, and was it before or after they drove a car into you?" So who are you currently following for the live coverage?