Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[PhaelixWW]

"My client went to the protest with the intend of protecting the property of fellow Americans".

That's not a crime. There was no criminal intent prior to the events in Wisconsin.

There's no real benefit to the prosecution to even attempt to argue that there was, either. They want the charges to stay in Wisconsin, too. Illinois doesn't seem to want to argue it, either, based on his extradition.

[Endus]

That's not a crime. There was no criminal intent prior to the events in Wisconsin.

There's no real benefit to the prosecution to even attempt to argue that there was, either. They want the charges to stay in Wisconsin, too. Illinois doesn't seem to want to argue it, either, based on his extradition.

The issues with the claim have many layers, though.

First, demonstrate that your client was asked to protect the property of those fellow Americans. I don't mean some militia buddies said so, I mean a direct request from those property owners, to Rittenhouse specifically or (more likely) to the leader of a militia of which he was an official member (is he even entitled to be, at age 17?). If there is no such request, then they weren't there to protect anyone's property; that's just a straight up lie. If it was to a militia group that Rittenhouse wasn't a recognized member of, then he wasn't part of that request.

Second, justify how Rittenhouse was armed, to engage in that "protection". Justify the training he has with that weapon and how to handle himself, etc. We're gonna need actual records, here, not "my son's good with a gun" bullshit. If he's not proficient, he couldn't possibly be considered "protection" for anything.

Thirdly, we've now discovered that Rittenhouse has A> deliberately (and illegally) armed himself, to B> go into what he knew was a dangerous situation (if anyone/anything needed "protecting", that's a given), and he clearly was not prepared or ready to deal with that. Congrats; by establishing that the account is true, you've demonstrated Rittenhouse had intent to engage in lethal force. If you hadn't, you'd be in an even worse legal position, of course.

Fourth; now we get into the specifics of the actual shootings.

That's going to be the big problem with his defense; showing up armed to a dangerous situation is a demonstration of intent. It's like if a wife grabs a gun before confronting her husband and provoking an argument, and then shooting him. Her choice to grab the gun first is considered, under the law, a demonstration of intent. She can't later claim that the argument escalated and she panicked; she deliberately armed herself in preparation. The only way to escape a murder charge, in this circumstance, is by demonstrating that your husband posed a direct and immediate threat to you and was likely to kill you at any moment, and if you're the one who initiated and escalated the argument, that defense isn't gonna fly.

Intent does not mean you need to have a specific victim in mind. If I climb a clocktower with a sniper rifle, planning to shoot a half-dozen random people, I have clear intent, even if I have no specific target in mind.

[Paranoid Android]

Pennsylvania Republican press conference if FUCKIN NUTS!

First they are equating this to the Battle of Gettysburg, where the press conference taking place. Second he rants about about again some conspiratorial voter fraud from voting machines, votes being thrown out, added votes, etc. With no evidence. Next would be you would need 100,000 plus "voter fraud" to overturn. With of course all going to Biden. Last but not least Biden would still win without Pennslyvania.

Republicans are pieces of shit. This if from a purple state. Not frikin Alabama. Don't ever tell me that this party as a whole represents America.

[Redwyrm]

Pennsylvania Republican press conference if FUCKIN NUTS!

First they are equating this to the Battle of Gettysburg, where the press conference taking place. Second he rants about about again some conspiratorial voter fraud from voting machines, votes being thrown out, added votes, etc. With no evidence. Next would be you would need 100,000 plus "voter fraud" to overturn. With of course all going to Biden. Last but not least Biden would still win without Pennslyvania.

Republicans are pieces of shit. This if from a purple state. Not frikin Alabama. Don't ever tell me that this party as a whole represents America.

Watching it now. Guiliani is supposed to speak

[masterhorus8]

Don't ever tell me that this party as a whole represents America.

Nah, just 74 million people.

[Paranoid Android]

Oh I guess Giuliani is giving us witnesses. More to come!

- - - Updated - - -

Nah, just 74 million people.

Ooh edgelord, you got me! Obviously don't get I'm talking about them trying to overturn our Constitutional process of voting.

Okay @masterhorus8, I take it more as snark with your reply to Endus. I apologize if this was the case then. But I stand by my reply and the people who voted they have motives too long that I won't post here.

[Endus]

Nah, just 74 million people.

The real issue is how can the divide possibly be crossed, between reality and those 74 million, who are clearly willfully divorcing themselves from reality?

What possible argument or plea can you make, to get them to abandon their extremist propaganda and return to reasonable grounds for discussion and compromise?

You can't compromise with them as they are. They're not acting from a sense of justice, just power. The unjust will ask you for compromise, and when you take a step towards them, they'll take a step backwards, and then demand compromise once more. All you can do is resist and oppose them, and pray that you've got enough strength in the legislature to keep a cap on things.

Long-term, I'm not sure there is a solution. At least, not one that isn't horrendously evil, like slaughtering your opponents. Like a lot of these nutcases believe, ironically. And if there isn't a solution, it may be that the only real option is to find a way to salvage what can be saved. Cut off the diseased bits of the country and try and save the rest. Split the USA into two nations, with much debate of course and some leeway for a few years to allow individuals to migrate to where they want to be.

[Breccia]

First they are equating this to the Battle of Gettysburg

Wow that's stupid.

The Battle of Gettysburg was fought in mid 1863. Lee surrendered in April 1865.

Also, you said there's a bunch of people talking about a vast conspiracy. Okay. Are they taking it to court? Because if they're not taking it to court, then it doesn't really matter what they say.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh I guess Giuliani is giving us witnesses.

In court? Because otherwise they're not witnesses. They're just people saying stuff.

[Paranoid Android]

Two witnesses so far are crying about the distance they were from the ballot counters. Throwing shit to see if it sticks from anything to they are just counting it as Biden, counting "illegitimate" ballots, etc. Again, NO EVIDENCE, just projection and conspiracy.

- - - Updated - - -

In court? Because otherwise they're not witnesses. They're just people saying stuff.

Alright you got me there.

LOL! Third witness first sentence admits she is in the cult of Trump. Saying 4 years ago "I watched Donald Trump come down and an escalator and joined the cult". I'm sorta paraphrasing.

[masterhorus8]

The real issue is how can the divide possibly be crossed, between reality and those 74 million, who are clearly willfully divorcing themselves from reality?

What possible argument or plea can you make, to get them to abandon their extremist propaganda and return to reasonable grounds for discussion and compromise?

You can't compromise with them as they are. They're not acting from a sense of justice, just power. The unjust will ask you for compromise, and when you take a step towards them, they'll take a step backwards, and then demand compromise once more. All you can do is resist and oppose them, and pray that you've got enough strength in the legislature to keep a cap on things.

Long-term, I'm not sure there is a solution. At least, not one that isn't horrendously evil, like slaughtering your opponents. Like a lot of these nutcases believe, ironically. And if there isn't a solution, it may be that the only real option is to find a way to salvage what can be saved. Cut off the diseased bits of the country and try and save the rest. Split the USA into two nations, with much debate of course and some leeway for a few years to allow individuals to migrate to where they want to be.

I agree with the first part. It's absolutely disgusting at how many people actually go along with this crap. As for how to deal with, ideally, it's to educate people. But due to just how many people there are and that it continues for generations, it just feels pointless.

[PhaelixWW]

Thirdly, we've now discovered that Rittenhouse has A> deliberately (and illegally) armed himself, to B> go into what he knew was a dangerous situation (if anyone/anything needed "protecting", that's a given), and he clearly was not prepared or ready to deal with that. Congrats; by establishing that the account is true, you've demonstrated Rittenhouse had intent to engage in lethal force. If you hadn't, you'd be in an even worse legal position, of course.

The charges of violating open carry laws are entirely state charges. If he was carrying illegally (which he was), then those are two separate crimes and thus separate charges in each of the two states. More importantly, there's no federal counterpart to those laws.

Even more importantly:

[Kyle Rittenhouse] will not be charged with gun crimes in his home state, an Illinois state prosecutor announced.

Lake County, Ill. State's Attorney Michael Nerheim's office said in a statement that an investigation conducted by local police "revealed the gun used in the Kenosha shooting was purchased, stored and used in Wisconsin."

"Additionally, there is no evidence the gun was ever physically possessed by Kyle Rittenhouse in Illinois," the state's attorney's office added.

The only charges in this case are from Wisconsin.

Fourth; now we get into the specifics of the actual shootings.

That's going to be the big problem with his defense; showing up armed to a dangerous situation is a demonstration of intent. It's like if a wife grabs a gun before confronting her husband and provoking an argument, and then shooting him. Her choice to grab the gun first is considered, under the law, a demonstration of intent. She can't later claim that the argument escalated and she panicked; she deliberately armed herself in preparation. The only way to escape a murder charge, in this circumstance, is by demonstrating that your husband posed a direct and immediate threat to you and was likely to kill you at any moment, and if you're the one who initiated and escalated the argument, that defense isn't gonna fly.

Intent does not mean you need to have a specific victim in mind. If I climb a clocktower with a sniper rifle, planning to shoot a half-dozen random people, I have clear intent, even if I have no specific target in mind.

There's plenty of time for the criminal intent to have started in Wisconsin before the shooting. After all, if the firearm wasn't possessed until he was Wisconsin, then even by your argument of when he made his "choice to grab the gun first" is objectively confined to Wisconsin, as well.

This is also all moot if the DA isn't arguing criminal intent all the way back to Illinois. Who's going to argue this, then, the defense?


EDIT: But this is going way far off-topic. Trump can't pardon Rittenhouse, as the charges aren't federal, whether or not anyone thinks they should be.

[Breccia]

Two witnesses so far are crying about the distance they were from the ballot counters.

My goodness, the outrage! They should challenge that in court and oh wait they did.

Also, this OP ED brings up a possible option to handle Trump being a fat obese fatass fat fatty obese fatass obstacle to the transition: President Pence.

It fits what we talked about before -- Trump wanting a pardon and also wanting to leave for Thanksgiving Christmas and not come back.

[Endus]

EDIT: But this is going way far off-topic. Trump can't pardon Rittenhouse, as the charges aren't federal, whether or not anyone thinks they should be.

I was primarily speaking against the idea that we can't determine intent off Rittenhouse's choice to arm himself and attend the protest, given the circumstances, not whether resulting charges would be in any particular jurisdiction or not. FWIW.

[UnifiedDivide]

Watching it now. Guiliani is supposed to speak

Is this the thing Trump bailed on?

[Breccia]

Is this the thing Trump bailed on?

It's the thing I said Trump bailed on, but I haven't actually checked the feed.

[Redwyrm]

Is this the thing Trump bailed on?

That's the one. Trump canceled his appearance. Now it's just Guiliani, almost every republican PA state senator, and witness testimony

[solinari6]

I gave up watching. Witness testimony seems to be mostly: "I saw something that I didn't understand, so it must have been those tricksy democrats committing fraud!"

[Thepersona]

I gave up watching. Witness testimony seems to be mostly: "I saw something that I didn't understand, so it must have been those tricksy democrats committing fraud!"

PA has already certified its results.... this is a colossal waste of time

[Resurgo]

Good lord...

PA Judge halts further election certification...

[zorkuus]

What's the point of this kangaroo hearing? Why don't they take their case to court? Oh wait.