Mainstream and Social Media 1

Biden's White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, is a disgusting liar. If not everything almost everything she says in this specific case is a lie. Read it and you will see that it is so. Quote: "Psaki: No Apology for Biden Calling Rittenhouse 'White Supremacist'. When asked by a reporter Tuesday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said President Joe Biden would not be apologizing for characterizing Kyle Rittenhouse as a "white supremacist." "This is about a campaign video released last year that used President Trump's own words during a debate as he refused to condemn white supremacists and militia groups, and [former] President [Donald] Trump, as we know from history, and as many of you covered, didn't just refuse to condemn militia groups on the debate stage, he encouraged them throughout his presidency," she said during the press briefing Tuesday. "So, you know, what we've seen are the tragic consequences of that – when people think it's OK to take the law into their own hands instead of allowing law enforcement to do its job," she said. "And the president believes in condemning hatred, division, and violence. That's exactly what was done in that video."

        Rittenhouse was acquitted for killing two rioters and injuring a third in self-defense during the Kenosha, Wisconsin, riots in August 2020. During the 2020 campaign, Biden used the video to attack Trump for not condemning white supremacists, the main reason Biden said he entered the race for and alleging Rittenhouse was part of a "militia" that went across state lines to be part of the riots. He later doubled down on that characterization of Rittenhouse, although admitting he was not "exactly sure what" Rittenhouse did. "I don't know enough to know whether that 17-year-old kid, exactly what he did," Fox News reported Biden said in August 2020. "Allegedly he's part of a militia coming out in the state of Illinois. Have you ever heard the President (Trump) say one negative thing about white supremacists? Have you ever heard it?"

       Biden's claims were contradicted by evidence and testimony at the trial where a jury found Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges last week. At first, Biden told reporters America should "respect" the verdict, but later walked that back in a statement. "While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken," his statement Nov. 19 said. "I ran on a promise to bring Americans together, because I believe that what unites us is far greater than what divides us."    WH Press Secretary Psaki: No Apology for Biden Calling Rittenhouse 'White Supremacist' | Newsmax.com   

       It is obvious the lies she told. Biden is one of if not the most divisive president in American history. And, to clam that he "believes in condemning hatred, division and violence" is so far from the truth it is laughable. That defines him and the Democrat party. Ask yourself why Biden has never condemned Black Lives Matter and Antifa?  Because he condones their hatred, divisiveness and violence. That is the hallmark of his and his party's allegiance to Marxism.  And, Biden is deaf and dumb if he never heard Trump's condemnations of white supremacy. And, this man once said Antifa is nothing but an idea. Talk about disgusting human behavior. Both Psaki and Biden are prime examples.

This is an excellent assessment of the corrupt political left's mainstream media's totally incoherent reaction to the jury's acquittal in the Rittenhouse trial. As is my habit as a commentator, I do more than absorb news reports – because they are generally unreliable.  If you want to weigh the facts of a situation, you have to get to primary sources.  In the Rittenhouse case, that means listening to the actual testimony and view the videos. Based on what I saw and heard, I previously expressed my belief that Rittenhouse would be acquitted – and acquittal was the just outcome.  In fact, I found the evidence overwhelming in his favor.  I believed that any objective observer would see this as a clear case of self-defense.  But objective observers of politicized cases are few and far between. I believe that was why virtually all the pre-verdict television analysts expressed their belief that Rittenhouse would be acquitted – even those who said they would be unhappy with that outcome.  But once the verdict was in, the media talking heads spun the case beyond the borders of reality.         

        Interestingly, their original assessment that Rittenhouse would walk, was not based on the actions of the judge.  Most of those who were lawyers and prosecutors said he was a good judge, and his calls were proper.  That was not the post-verdict view. Initially, they did not call the jury a bunch of racists.  In fact, as the jury deliberations carried on for several days, most observers opined that they were doing a good job by taking their time and considering all the evidence and the jury instructions very carefully.  The left-wing media opinion flipped after the verdict. I was most impressed by those with legal backgrounds and courtroom experience – not so much the jaded political pundits and race baiting activists who wanted a conviction regardless of the evidence – and were poised to use an acquittal to fuel their false narratives.

       Unfortunately, once the verdict was in, it was the jaded political pundits and the race-baiting activists who dominated the news.  They reacted as if this was one of those kangaroo court deals that typified the old Democrat southland.  They played the race card even though neither Rittenhouse nor those he shot were minorities. The most provocative and incendiary responses came from MSNBC … of course.  The Joy Reid show was hosted by Morgan State University Professor Jason Johnson — with Reid making a guest appearance on her won show.  The panel included Al Sharpton, former federal prosecutor Paul Butler, and Elie Mystal.  Not only was the panel all black, but it was composed of the most strident race card players – using MSNBC’s accommodating platform and outright misrepresentations of fact to stoke racial anger. They presented the verdict as empowering white males to go around willy-nilly shooting peaceful black protesters indiscriminately — and then plead self-defense.  Anyone who followed the case and educated themselves on the self-defense laws would know that is totally untrue.  Self-defense is not an easy case to win unless the facts are compelling – and it never applies unless there is a clear case of aggression on the part of those killed.         

       The problem with the left is that they do not seek justice but insist that their side must always win — evidence be damned.  Most Americans – white and black – saw what happened in the George Floyd case – and called it a murder.  And police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted of murder based on the FACTS.  This case was different. The FACTS established that Rittenhouse met the legal requirements for self-defense.  And the jury correctly acquitted him. But those on the left refuse to accept a just decision in a court of law.  Suddenly, it was the judge putting his thumb on the scale in favor of Rittenhouse.  Suddenly, the verdict was attributable to the failure of the prosecutors.  Suddenly, the three rioters were public servants sacrificing their lives and bodies to stop a shooter.  Had they not attacked Rittenhouse, no one would have been shot. The riot, itself, was referred to as a peaceful protest. In our justice system, the criminal background of the three thugs cannot be entered into evidence.  But in response to those on the left making heroes of them in the court-of-public-opinion, it is reasonable to actually look at the character of the three. 

       On CNN, Chirs Cuomo said that none of the individual involved had records of violence.  What?  All three of those shot by Rittenhouse had convictions for an array of serious felonies – assault, domestic violence, and even sexual abuse of children under the age of 10 in the case of Joseph Rosenbaum. Still unanswered is whether authorities will charge Gaige Grosskreutz.  He was the fellow who pointed gun at Rittenhouse and established the strongest case for self-defense. As a convicted felon, Grosskreutz was not allowed to possess a gun.  He could get up to 60 years on that charge.  But will he be above the law based on prosecutorial discretion?    The aftermath of the Rittenhouse verdict - The Punching Bag Post