He’s saying “actual malice” which is the obstacle most face to get around the public figure doctrine.
“To show actual malice, plaintiffs must demonstrate [that the defendant] either knew his statement was false or subjectively entertained serious doubt his statement was truthful.” Christian Research (2007) 148 Cal.App. 4th 71, 84 (citing Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. (1984) 466 U.S. 485, 511).“
He’s been coached on the legal buzzwords. They are drafting civil complaints.
(11-23-2021 07:55 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: He’s saying “actual malice” which is the obstacle most face to get around the public figure doctrine.
“To show actual malice, plaintiffs must demonstrate [that the defendant] either knew his statement was false or subjectively entertained serious doubt his statement was truthful.” Christian Research (2007) 148 Cal.App. 4th 71, 84 (citing Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. (1984) 466 U.S. 485, 511).“
He’s been coached on the legal buzzwords. They are drafting civil complaints.
overcome summary judgement ...
force potus to sit for a civil deposition ...
under oath ...
under penalty of perjury ...
ALL BETS ARE OFF
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2021 08:13 AM by green.)
Rittenhouse's lawyers need to go all in on it. It's bad enough for celebrities and "journalists" to drag someone through the mud with false accusations but entirely another when it's a public figure and the absolute worst when it's supposedly the most powerful leader in the free world. Unfortunately, pedo Joe has the Obama/Clinton protection plan. No matter what they do, they snub their noses at the law and laugh about it.
Quote:Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted of all charges on Friday after he defended himself against rioters in Kenosha, Wisconsin during the summer of rage last year, said Tuesday the corrupt corporate media’s lies about his actions are “sickening” and “a disgrace.”
“It’s actually quite hysterical how nobody can go back and look at the facts of the case. ‘Across state lines.’ False. ‘He’s a white supremacist.’ False. None of that is true, and the lies that they can just get away with spreading is just sickening and it’s a disgrace to this country,” Rittenhouse said in an exclusive interview with Tucker Carlson on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
Rittenhouse said newsrooms around the world promoted false narratives about him that spread quickly despite their lack of veracity.
“To be honest Tucker, this case has nothing to do with race and never had anything to do with race,” Rittenhouse explained. “It had to do with the right to self-defense.”
Rittenhouse turned himself in and said that he believes “part of the reason I think I was arrested just because of the mob mentality.”
Even President Joe Biden smeared him, which Rittenhouse also addressed in his interview.
“Mr. President, if I could say one thing to you, I would urge you to go back and watch the trial and understand the facts before you make a statement,” Rittenhouse said. “…It’s actual malice, defaming my character for him to say something like that.”
Later, Rititenhouse added that he’s “not a racist person” and actually “support[s] the BLM Movement.”
“I support peacefully demonstrating, and I believe there needs to be change. I believe there’s a lot of prosecutorial misconduct, not just in my case, but in other cases. And it’s just amazing to see how much a prosecutor can take advantage of somebody. Like if they did this to me, imagine what they could have done to a person of color who doesn’t maybe have the resources I do or is not widely publicized like my case,” Rittenhouse noted.
As the teen previously recounted in his trial, he was merely defending himself, but he was defamed as a racist and white supremacist by the leftist mob.
“It wasn’t Kyle Rittenhouse on trial in Wisconsin, it was the right to self-defense on trial. And if I was convicted, no one would ever be privileged to defend their life against attackers. Thank God they came to the correct verdict of not guilty,” Rittenhouse said.
Self-defense, Rittenhouse noted, was truly necessary the night he was in Kenosha.
“I didn’t really think [the police] got the support they needed. The national guard should have been called on August 23 but the city of Kenosha failed the community. The governor, Tony Evers, failed the community, and there should have been a lot more resources to help with that,” Rittenhouse said.
When Carlson asked what would have happened if there wasn’t as much video evidence, Rittenhouse said, “I don’t think we’d be sitting here right now having this talk, Tucker.”
Despite the positive outcome in his trial, Rittenhouse said corporate media’s malfeasance needs accountability and hinted that his lawyers will be pursuing further action against outlets that tainted his name.
“This wasn’t a political case. It shouldn’t have been a political case. It was made a political case. It had nothing to do with race and the ways people are twisting this, it’s just sickening,” Rittenhouse said. “…What if somebody snuck their way onto my jury to convict me. So that was something that always went through my head, but I know where I stand, I know I defended myself.”
On returning to normal, Rittenhouse said he worries about getting a job or even going in public without being harassed, but he’s determined to get his degree in either nursing or law.
“I’m hoping that people go back and understand the facts and be like, watch the trial. Watch the prosecutorial misconduct that I believe happened and realize that I was an innocent 17-year-old who was violently attacked and defended myself,” he said. “Apparently, a lot of people on the left, it’s criminal to want to protect your community.”
“Are you confident that the government will protect you from these threats because that’s, of course, the government’s job?” Carlson asked.
“I hope so, but we all know how the FBI works,” Rittenhouse said.
Rittenhouse, who claims he is a naturally calm person, said he believes “God’s been on my side from the beginning.”
Quote:The last couple of days have been…. interesting. An article I wrote in the wake of the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict, regarding acknowledging concerns about the criminal justice system, was met with a flood of hate that I have never before seen here at RedState. This prompted me to write a follow-up addressing the accusation that trying to talk to white people as a white person was somehow, unexplainably, racist. I want to take a moment to thank the people who not only got the piece but more importantly, those who disagreed with it and did so respectfully. I don’t expect every opinion piece I write here to be hailed as amazing content.
Of the biggest things people hated about the first piece was, in particular, this statement:
“However, calling Rittenhouse a “white supremacist” or suggesting that this verdict had anything to do with race, is an absolute lie. This verdict did not. Certainly, this feels like justice to us, but we can understand why this may feel like an injustice to others. As we watched the trial, we all knew this was going to be the result, but had Kyle been black and faced the challenges that young black men in our judicial system face, first, he would have likely never raised the money to afford the defense that Kyle had, and second, never received the level of support from conservatives that Kyle did.”
Despite the litany of examples that support that statement, I was told that I was racist for even suggesting such a thing. I get that people want to think they would have acted the same if it had been a young black kid instead of Kyle, but our record as conservatives isn’t stellar when it comes to this. If you think, however, I am alone in my assessment you are about to be very disappointed and some of you may be changing your views of just how not-racist Kyle Rittenhouse is.
“I believe there needs to be change, I believe there’s a lot of prosecutorial misconduct not just in my case but in other cases and, uh, it is just amazing to see how much a prosecutor can take advantage of somebody. If they did this to me, imagine what they could have done to a person of color, who doesn’t maybe have the resources I do or is not widely publicized like my case.”
I will tell you exactly why Kyle thinks this way: Kyle has been “inside” the criminal justice system. He has seen firsthand the guys who are victims of this system, who don’t have the resources to hire an attorney worth their salt to defend them against bogus charges, let alone legitimate ones. To admit that, doesn’t require that you hang a sign labeling you a racist around your neck for not being aware of it. What it does say, though, is that when people who do have that experience tell you it is a problem, the last thing it needs to be met with is some whataboutism that you believe proves it isn’t. It is counterproductive.
Kyle is right. Had this been a person of color (see: minority) you likely would have never heard of this case. That’s not because it wouldn’t have made the news, it just would have been a mention for a day or two and everyone would have moved on. It is because the left was able to mobilize that miscreants of misinformation (see: media) to spin this case about race, that we even heard what we heard about this case. Had it been a black kid killing white people, this idea he would have never been arrested is conjecture. Had it been a black kid killing black people, you could almost guarantee you would have never heard of this case. Hell, if there wasn’t a video of an AR-15 involved, it might not have even made national news. We all got dragged into the narrative fight, myself included.
Is Rittenhouse saying the system likely would have acted differently upon a person of color, racist? Race-baiting? Woke nonsense? Of course not. It is reality. A reality, mind you, that we will be better off for acknowledging, and one that we can change so the left can’t weaponize it against us anymore.
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2021 10:51 AM by CrimsonPhantom.)
(11-23-2021 07:55 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: He’s saying “actual malice” which is the obstacle most face to get around the public figure doctrine.
“To show actual malice, plaintiffs must demonstrate [that the defendant] either knew his statement was false or subjectively entertained serious doubt his statement was truthful.” Christian Research (2007) 148 Cal.App. 4th 71, 84 (citing Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. (1984) 466 U.S. 485, 511).“
He’s been coached on the legal buzzwords. They are drafting civil complaints.
overcome summary judgement ...
force potus to sit for a civil deposition ...
under oath ...
under penalty of perjury ...
ALL BETS ARE OFF
Biden would have to settle. The myths of President Houseplant’s mental competency would be completely undressed in an actual cross examination. Biden’s handlers won’t get to submit the questions prior to cross nor will they get to restrict the folks asking questions to friendly state propaganda networks. Neither President Houseplant or his administration can withstand that.
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2021 11:12 AM by Attackcoog.)
I think it is absolutely incumbent upon conservatives to do everything possible to see to it that a person of color acting in self-defense has every opportunity to defend himself that Kyle Rittenhouse did. The Rittenhouse verdict is the right answer given the fact situation, no matter whether the defendant is white, black, brown, yellow, red, blue, green, or polka-dotted. And that's where the focus needs to be, not on crucifying a 17-year-old who acted in legitimate self-defense.
(11-23-2021 11:05 AM)450bench Wrote: He’s going to be a very rich kid soon.
And deservedly so. He was wrongly prosecuted and his safety will be in jeopardy for a long time due to the careless and spiteful actions of the media, celebrities, and politicians. They have all taken it upon themselves to destroy his life to push a false narrative of rage just as they did with Sandmann.
That's nice and all that Doocy asked her that but when is the right wing media going to start asking Democrats to condemn black supremacists like Darrell Brooks? He had a long history of anti-white rhetoric on his social media including saying stuff like "we start bakk knokkin white ppl TF out". So why not take the opportunity on a story like that or many others to ask them to condemn black supremacy? Put them on the spot.
(11-23-2021 11:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: I think it is absolutely incumbent upon conservatives to do everything possible to see to it that a person of color acting in self-defense has every opportunity to defend himself that Kyle Rittenhouse did. The Rittenhouse verdict is the right answer given the fact situation, no matter whether the defendant is white, black, brown, yellow, red, blue, green, or polka-dotted. And that's where the focus needs to be, not on crucifying a 17-year-old who acted in legitimate self-defense.
if all lives constitutionally matter, then _________ (I’ll answer)
hold the msm to a strict volumetric std within factual accompanying script … yeah, ain’ gonna happen, Ja?!
That's nice and all that Doocy asked her that but when is the right wing media going to start asking Democrats to condemn black supremacists like Darrell Brooks? He had a long history of anti-white rhetoric on his social media including saying stuff like "we start bakk knokkin white ppl TF out". So why not take the opportunity on a story like that or many others to ask them to condemn black supremacy? Put them on the spot.
when they grow a sack and step out on merit vs. $$$
All Psaki had to do was say that the president believes in deep-throating the liberal establishment regardless of facts, therefore, he will not apologize.
![[Image: FEuhD4eXsAgyv2M?format=jpg&name=large]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FEuhD4eXsAgyv2M?format=jpg&name=large)
![[Image: EjMep0YX0AERWrs?format=jpg&name=medium]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjMep0YX0AERWrs?format=jpg&name=medium)
