Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:04 PM

RAB910 (2,127 posts)

Congressman Nadler calls for a DOJ review of the Rittenhouse verdict

Link to tweet

?s=20

16 replies, 1321 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

16 replies	Author	Time	Post
Congressman Nadler calls for a DOJ review of the Rittenhouse verdict (Original post)	RAB910	Nov 2021	OP
Congresspeople need to pass some laws and stop talking shooting after shooting.	Hoyt	Nov 2021	#1
easier to pass State laws.	WarGamer	Nov 2021	#7
I certainly prefer Nadler's take	notinkansas	Nov 2021	#2
Agreed	RAB910	Nov 2021	#4
Same...	regnaD kciN	Nov 2021	#12
armed persons crossing state lines	janterry	Nov 2021	#3
Are you saying he's in error?	Igel	Nov 2021	#8
Yes, that he's in error	janterry	Nov 2021	#9
The people who keep repeating falsehoods	madville	Nov 2021	#10
I'd rather the DOJ deal with TFG and his allies post haste	msfiddlestix	Nov 2021	#5
The	Faux pas	Nov 2021	#6
The police encouraged Rittenhouse and there should be a civil rights investigation	LetMyPeopleVote	Nov 2021	#11
Absolutely	RAB910	Nov 2021	#13
Kyle Rittenhouse Could Face Federal Charges As Rep. Nadler Calls For DOJ Review	LetMyPeopleVote	Nov 2021	#14
"a wide variety of federal charges" including "civil rights charges"	onenote	Nov 2021	#15
Yeah, it's never gonna happen	Polybius	Nov 2021	#16

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:22 PM

Hoyt (54,770 posts)

1. Congresspeople need to pass some laws and stop talking shooting after shooting.

Reply to this post

Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 05:09 PM

WarGamer (6,181 posts)

7. easier to pass State laws.

In NY, KR goes to prison based on the law of the State.

Federal enforcement is dubious at best.

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:23 PM

notinkansas (1,027 posts)

2. I certainly prefer Nadler's take

to Biden's 'the jury has spoken'.

Reply to this post

Response to notinkansas (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:24 PM

RAB910 (2,127 posts)

4. Agreed

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 06:03 PM

regnaD kciN (25,207 posts)

12. Same...

...even if I'm being accused of being a dangerous radical who wants to stir up trouble by some here for saying it.

And, sadly, I don't see how the DoJ can credibly take action after the President has said he stands behind the verdict and we have to accept it.

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:24 PM

janterry (4,429 posts)

3. armed persons crossing state lines

Since KR was not an armed person who crossed state lines.....this statement lacks considerable gravitas.

We DO need changes to the law. This is just insufferable, though. Perhaps Nadler could champion change to our gun laws and the loopholes that allowed that AR rifle to be legally carried by KR.

Reply to this post

Response to janterry (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 05:28 PM

Igel (32,858 posts)

8. Are you saying he's in error?

He is, of course, on that point. Goes to credibility.

Sometimes it's playing to the base (take that how you will), sometimes it's just not paying attention and being too certain to engage in any self-doubt. Power requires the first and produces the second.

Reply to this post

Response to Igel (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 05:37 PM

janterry (4,429 posts)

9. Yes, that he's in error

I expect better of our leaders, tbh. I want a focused convo on WHY he got off, what is wrong with laws that allow a 17 year old to carry an AR 15. And how to change them.

we might not achieve reform - but I want to be clear about the direction we need to be going in.

Reply to this post

Response to janterry (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 05:54 PM

madville (6,878 posts)

10. The people who keep repeating falsehoods

Will never accept the facts of the case, it’s already cemented in their minds. Even if the DOJ says they can’t prove he broke any federal laws, they won’t accept that either.

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 04:26 PM

msfiddlestix (4,918 posts)

5. I'd rather the DOJ deal with TFG and his allies post haste

that's just me..

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 05:08 PM

Faux pas (12,712 posts)

6. The

effing judge needs to be investigated and removed imho.

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 06:01 PM

LetMyPeopleVote (115,653 posts)

11. The police encouraged Rittenhouse and there should be a civil rights investigation

The local police both encourage Rittenhouse and steered protestors towards is group of assholes. This could be an interesting civil rights case

Reply to this post

Response to LetMyPeopleVote (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 20, 2021, 06:09 PM

RAB910 (2,127 posts)

13. Absolutely

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sun Nov 21, 2021, 01:24 PM

LetMyPeopleVote (115,653 posts)

14. Kyle Rittenhouse Could Face Federal Charges As Rep. Nadler Calls For DOJ Review

I hope that the DOJ brings some civil rights charges against this asshole

Link to tweet

Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jerry Nadler is calling on the DOJ to review the Kyle Rittenhouse shootings for potential federal charges.

Link to tweet

There are a wide variety of federal charges that Kyle Rittenhouse could potentially face that include civil rights violations and potential hate crimes. The Rittenhouse trial was so tainted by the judge’s behavior that the case deserves a federal review.

The idea that a person can show up at a protest with a loaded assault weapon, killing two people, and then claim self-defense flies in the face of logic and common sense.

Reply to this post

Response to RAB910 (Original post)

Sun Nov 21, 2021, 01:35 PM

onenote (37,540 posts)

15. "a wide variety of federal charges" including "civil rights charges"

Another person claiming that there are multiple ways that DOJ could prosecute Rittenhouse without citing to any specific law.
And, the relevant civil rights laws, such as 18 USC 242, are quite clear: they only apply where the injured party was singled out based on their race, gender, religion, etc.

The author, Jason Easley, isn't a lawyer so I urge folks to take his unsubstantiated assertions with a significant grain of salt.

Reply to this post

Response to onenote (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 21, 2021, 02:50 PM

Polybius (10,123 posts)

16. Yeah, it's never gonna happen

If they tried, he's only be acquitted again. Not liking the results and challenging them makes us look like a certain someone.

Reply to this post

General Discussion (Forum)