I don't often comment on editorials I read, but felt compelled to write here given my respect for Bari, her mission and body of work. I strive to always listen to what writers are saying and work hard to avoid knee jerk responses that can get triggered by jolting words. Having said all of this, I feel that this commentary on the Rittenh…
I don't often comment on editorials I read, but felt compelled to write here given my respect for Bari, her mission and body of work. I strive to always listen to what writers are saying and work hard to avoid knee jerk responses that can get triggered by jolting words. Having said all of this, I feel that this commentary on the Rittenhouse trial (i've watched my share of it live) is quite biased and unfairly criticizes media outlets who simply are analyzing things differently. I also found some of the verbiage to be exaggerated and unnecessarily disparaging of those Bari doesn't agree with; things I thought her new outlet was set on avoiding.
Just a few examples from the piece:
1. "...you would have been served a pack of lies about what happened during those terrible days in Kenosha." -- Why such vitriol? Is it to attract a new audience? I was really hoping you would maintain a calmer and unbiased voice that most of us are seeking in our opinion leaders.
2. Agree no evidence of white supremacy in Rittenhouse, but you conveniently neglect his social media posts. He immediately asked police to delete his FB because it was filled with pics of him gun-toting and predicting fame for himself using guns. Your white supremacy line is a straw man meant to distract from ample evidence of a self-proclaimed gunslinger.
3. Your points about driving to Kenosha and the gun. Are you seriously trying to distract us from the fact that he knew he couldn't buy the gun and actively went to his friend's house to pick it up for the night's activities? If not, what's your point?
In addition, I'm sure you are well aware that the Wisconsin gun law is extremely contradictory (I read it in whole) and the count of illegal possession stood until right before jury deliberations when the judge threw it out because he saw it as poorly written but technically unambiguous. Does this really fall into the category of 'pack of lies' by the media?
4. You correctly point out that there were violent protesters causing damage and acting violently. What you never acknowledge is the potential for self-appointed 'deputies' running around these agitated protesters with AR-15's to cause mayhem. There is great footage of protesters just telling these 'deputies' to stay on the property they're guarding. Did you consider that no other killings took place notwithstanding all the 'angry mobs' of protesters? Is it unreasonable to think that these all white men with AR-15's and no affiliation with law enforcement in Kenosha were viewed negatively by the crowd?
I think the prosecutors did not do a great job and i'm guessing Rittenhouse will walk. He blasted 3 people with full metal jacket bullets from an AR-15 at close range. Whether he provoked the violence is something for the jury to decide and there may not be enough evidence to prove the case. But do you for a minute believe this 17 year old with clear heroic aspirations (see his social media) weilding a known mass-killing weapon on the streets in a volatile situation at night did nothing wrong and deserves no punishment?
Bari, I write this with the hope that you can appreciate that I come to you from a perspective of utmost respect. I love all of your work unmasking the unfairness of cancel culture in our universities. But I could not let this below-standard piece go without comment. I was quite surprised to see how one-sided your piece was and seemed more to advance an agenda of disparaging mainstream media than to stay true to your mission.
Not sure why you think I’m a partisan or why this needs to be a case of right vs left. There was rioting in Kenosha and the whole defense revolves around Rittenhouse saying he was there to protect property. So why not stay on the property with your assault rifle instead of running into the chaos with this deadly weapon? Do you believe Rittenhouse did everything right and that he’s a hero as many on the right are depicting him?
whole defense revolves around Rittenhouse saying he was there to protect property. no the defense was based on he was being assaulted and he defended himself..the 'he shouldn't have been there ergo he's guilty of murder' trope is a left trope.
Nothing to add. Everyone wants to look at this as right versus left instead of right versus wrong and the justice system. Our country is in a very dark place. There are so many issues here to unpack that I can’t blame the jury for acquitting this one kid for being an idiot but having enough lack of evidence on the other side to save him. I hope he learns from this horrible experience and doesn’t just fall in with the ultra right wing crowd if you think his actions define heroism instead of stupidity
It is Right v. Left. The Left politicized this case by retailing a long, deliberate string of lies, as detailed by Ms. Weiss. And in fact the lying continues, e.g. on MSNBC.
Well, of course this child accidental killer with his ar-15 runs right to tucker carlson to gloat about his action. He couldn’t stop smiling the entire interview. Says it all. Sad sad sad
If you’d just been acquitted of murder, wouldn’t you be smiling? As for sad, that’s a word better applied to much of the media’s relentless lying about the facts of the Rittenhouse case. Sad—and outrageous. So are you outraged by that?
Thomas, it is not possible to debate someone who is on an extreme point in the political spectrum. By definition, you are dug into your positions and have learned from your almighty leader that admitting any error is a sin. Yes, that is sad.
No, I would not be gloating to a far right hack on foxnews after I killed two people and severely crippled another as a 17-year old using a weapon of mass destruction. I'd be on my knees thanking the good lord for saving me from the punishment I know I deserve for having been so stupid. Justice was done in this case given the provable facts and a few significant errors by the prosecution, but no, i would not be going on foxnews and gloating. It is very revealing behavior.
Try this. Can you openly write down anything you think Kyle did wrong that night? Please try to control your urge to say something sarcastic or belittliing while we're discussing an event that destroyed 3 families.
Yes, it does become tiresome to point out the facts of life, over and over again. For instance, we now have a bunch of progressive Democratic members of Congress demanding a Justice Department investigation of the Rittenhouse verdict. I have a hard time believing that even the hapless Merrick Garland would do such a stupid, counterproductive thing—but then he's the guy who tried to turn fed-up parents mad at their local school boards into "domestic terrorists."
Now, does anybody thing that said members of Congress are concerned with right and wrong and justice? Don't make me laugh. These are the very people who've been describing an incident involving four white guys as an example of "white supremacy." So having politicized the trial, they're now trying to politicize the verdict. Perhaps you should direct your pleas for grace and comity to that quarter.
So much anger and digging in. I can’t go anywhere with your perspective. Just sad for our once great experiment in democracy. Would be encouraging if you could make legitimate criticisms of the left while admitting your guys have been really dishonest with just one important thing. It would be a healthy first step. I hope some of you can try this exercise.
I don't often comment on editorials I read, but felt compelled to write here given my respect for Bari, her mission and body of work. I strive to always listen to what writers are saying and work hard to avoid knee jerk responses that can get triggered by jolting words. Having said all of this, I feel that this commentary on the Rittenhouse trial (i've watched my share of it live) is quite biased and unfairly criticizes media outlets who simply are analyzing things differently. I also found some of the verbiage to be exaggerated and unnecessarily disparaging of those Bari doesn't agree with; things I thought her new outlet was set on avoiding.
Just a few examples from the piece:
1. "...you would have been served a pack of lies about what happened during those terrible days in Kenosha." -- Why such vitriol? Is it to attract a new audience? I was really hoping you would maintain a calmer and unbiased voice that most of us are seeking in our opinion leaders.
2. Agree no evidence of white supremacy in Rittenhouse, but you conveniently neglect his social media posts. He immediately asked police to delete his FB because it was filled with pics of him gun-toting and predicting fame for himself using guns. Your white supremacy line is a straw man meant to distract from ample evidence of a self-proclaimed gunslinger.
3. Your points about driving to Kenosha and the gun. Are you seriously trying to distract us from the fact that he knew he couldn't buy the gun and actively went to his friend's house to pick it up for the night's activities? If not, what's your point?
In addition, I'm sure you are well aware that the Wisconsin gun law is extremely contradictory (I read it in whole) and the count of illegal possession stood until right before jury deliberations when the judge threw it out because he saw it as poorly written but technically unambiguous. Does this really fall into the category of 'pack of lies' by the media?
4. You correctly point out that there were violent protesters causing damage and acting violently. What you never acknowledge is the potential for self-appointed 'deputies' running around these agitated protesters with AR-15's to cause mayhem. There is great footage of protesters just telling these 'deputies' to stay on the property they're guarding. Did you consider that no other killings took place notwithstanding all the 'angry mobs' of protesters? Is it unreasonable to think that these all white men with AR-15's and no affiliation with law enforcement in Kenosha were viewed negatively by the crowd?
I think the prosecutors did not do a great job and i'm guessing Rittenhouse will walk. He blasted 3 people with full metal jacket bullets from an AR-15 at close range. Whether he provoked the violence is something for the jury to decide and there may not be enough evidence to prove the case. But do you for a minute believe this 17 year old with clear heroic aspirations (see his social media) weilding a known mass-killing weapon on the streets in a volatile situation at night did nothing wrong and deserves no punishment?
Bari, I write this with the hope that you can appreciate that I come to you from a perspective of utmost respect. I love all of your work unmasking the unfairness of cancel culture in our universities. But I could not let this below-standard piece go without comment. I was quite surprised to see how one-sided your piece was and seemed more to advance an agenda of disparaging mainstream media than to stay true to your mission.
This post is littered with partisan bias, but let's just focus on this line:
"There is great footage of protesters just telling these 'deputies' to stay on the property they're guarding."
You seem to think that these "protestors" deserved to be able to dictate everyone else's behavior. What an absurd perspective you have!
Not sure why you think I’m a partisan or why this needs to be a case of right vs left. There was rioting in Kenosha and the whole defense revolves around Rittenhouse saying he was there to protect property. So why not stay on the property with your assault rifle instead of running into the chaos with this deadly weapon? Do you believe Rittenhouse did everything right and that he’s a hero as many on the right are depicting him?
whole defense revolves around Rittenhouse saying he was there to protect property. no the defense was based on he was being assaulted and he defended himself..the 'he shouldn't have been there ergo he's guilty of murder' trope is a left trope.
Nothing to add. Everyone wants to look at this as right versus left instead of right versus wrong and the justice system. Our country is in a very dark place. There are so many issues here to unpack that I can’t blame the jury for acquitting this one kid for being an idiot but having enough lack of evidence on the other side to save him. I hope he learns from this horrible experience and doesn’t just fall in with the ultra right wing crowd if you think his actions define heroism instead of stupidity
It is Right v. Left. The Left politicized this case by retailing a long, deliberate string of lies, as detailed by Ms. Weiss. And in fact the lying continues, e.g. on MSNBC.
Well, of course this child accidental killer with his ar-15 runs right to tucker carlson to gloat about his action. He couldn’t stop smiling the entire interview. Says it all. Sad sad sad
If you’d just been acquitted of murder, wouldn’t you be smiling? As for sad, that’s a word better applied to much of the media’s relentless lying about the facts of the Rittenhouse case. Sad—and outrageous. So are you outraged by that?
Thomas, it is not possible to debate someone who is on an extreme point in the political spectrum. By definition, you are dug into your positions and have learned from your almighty leader that admitting any error is a sin. Yes, that is sad.
No, I would not be gloating to a far right hack on foxnews after I killed two people and severely crippled another as a 17-year old using a weapon of mass destruction. I'd be on my knees thanking the good lord for saving me from the punishment I know I deserve for having been so stupid. Justice was done in this case given the provable facts and a few significant errors by the prosecution, but no, i would not be going on foxnews and gloating. It is very revealing behavior.
Try this. Can you openly write down anything you think Kyle did wrong that night? Please try to control your urge to say something sarcastic or belittliing while we're discussing an event that destroyed 3 families.
Sigh. So tiresome. Impossible to convince people to take a long breath and reset to a kinder time. Go in peace…
Yes, it does become tiresome to point out the facts of life, over and over again. For instance, we now have a bunch of progressive Democratic members of Congress demanding a Justice Department investigation of the Rittenhouse verdict. I have a hard time believing that even the hapless Merrick Garland would do such a stupid, counterproductive thing—but then he's the guy who tried to turn fed-up parents mad at their local school boards into "domestic terrorists."
Now, does anybody thing that said members of Congress are concerned with right and wrong and justice? Don't make me laugh. These are the very people who've been describing an incident involving four white guys as an example of "white supremacy." So having politicized the trial, they're now trying to politicize the verdict. Perhaps you should direct your pleas for grace and comity to that quarter.
So much anger and digging in. I can’t go anywhere with your perspective. Just sad for our once great experiment in democracy. Would be encouraging if you could make legitimate criticisms of the left while admitting your guys have been really dishonest with just one important thing. It would be a healthy first step. I hope some of you can try this exercise.