loader image

Hello my friends and welcome back to yet another episode of a Watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert Gruler. Today we’re talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. It’s verdict time. We’re watching for the jury waiting for that puff of smoke to come out of the chimney so that we can all be relieved. Finally, we’ve been waiting for many weeks, many months, well over a year, in some cases to get an answer as to the Kyle Rittenhouse case and outcome, what is the jury going to say? We’ve got a lot to get caught up on today. Now the jury was out of court most of the day deliberating, but we still have some things that we can take a look at that happened in court this morning. And so we’re certainly going to do that. We have several different clips from judge Schrader today that was detailing what the jury was about to go do.

Kyle Rittenhouse, you may have seen clips of this actually stuck his arm into the merry-go-round the bingo box and pulled out the juror numbers of the people who were no longer going to be on the jury, the individuals that were going to be excused. And so we’re going to take a look at those clips, and then we’re going to take a look at some of the reaction from around the community because the protestors are already bubbling up in Kenosha. We’re seeing, uh, people out there calling for peace. We’re seeing some other people look like things are getting a little bit tense over there. And this has been a story that has had national attention for the better part of a year. And so we’re going to see what is happening on the streets. We also have a special guest appearance on the streets of Kenosha, from another person who was charged with a gun crime and actually pled guilty to it.

Some people say erroneously. So we’re talking about mark McCloskey, who is, I think, running for Senate. And so he showed up there on the streets of Kenosha and we have a clip of him as well. And then in our final segment, interesting questions surrounding Thomas bingey binger over there, who was pointing a gun at some people in a courtroom, some questions surrounding that was that reckless endangerment. I mean, Kyle Rittenhouse is on trial, uh, for reckless endangerment for something similar to that. So some people are pointing to different statutes from Wisconsin and saying binger, uh, clearly you are in violation of the law. We’ll see if he gets indicted though, but I pulled the statutes and we’ll be able to go through those and more, if you want to be a part of the sheriff, the place to do that is over at watchingthewatchers.locals.com, where a lot of people are chatting away in our beautiful community over there.

Shout outs to rata. See we’ve got soul Viking, we’ve got Vegas. Patriot mom is in the house. Shout out to Vegas, Patriot mom, we’ve got speech unleashed over there. Uh, I think I said, Radison news now, Wyoming, and many others all chatting away. We’ve got a lot of new people to welcome to the community. And we’re going to do that at the end of the show. If you’re looking for clips or different segments from this stream, they’re over on our clips, channel clips, channel Robert ruler, Esq clips. And I appreciate it. If you share those links around, it’s a good way to spread the news, spread the word about what we’re talking about here. And so without any further ado, let’s get into it. Kyle Rittenhouse waiting for the jurors, render a verdict. The first question of course is what the hell is taking so long.

It’s been several hours now, and this is pretty easy case. And so they are obviously going through a lot of materials. I’m being a little bit facetious. The general school of thought that I have been ascribing to is as the idea that if it takes a long time, that means that we’re more inclined to see a guilty verdict or at least a hung jury, because that means that they’re watching the video and they’re really buying into a lot of the prosecutor’s arguments here that the entire ordeal needs a piece by piece moment, by moment analysis of all the minutia, all the red herrings that Tom is binger was introducing to the jurors. Remember that the framework Thomas banger wants to show this was a big long series of events that was criminality after criminality that compounded into murder. And what the defense wants to do is narrow this puppy down into four minutes.

Was it justified right then? And there, that’s the only thing that matters. So what we’re seeing here is a here, this is the court board that we’re looking at. And, uh, Thomas binger is of course the prosecutor, Kyle Rittenhouse is the defendant. And now we have a number of different jurors who were picked today. The number of jurors, uh, who were excused today were I think we got 12 left. And so we lost a number of them. We’ll take a look at them here in a minute. We’ve also got the defense, uh, that the prosecution’s case in chief here, we have the defense team here and then we’ve got our opening clips. So we’re going to start off by taking a look at a good morning, hello from the judge. And, uh, he’s going to introduce us into, into the coming events of the day, which is going to be a lot of sitting around and waiting.

But as to my prior point, I needed to finish that prior point. The idea being that if the juror takes a long time, if the jury takes a long time to consider the case, and that means they’re thinking about it, they’re moving a bunch of stuff around and they’re trying to decipher the case. The prosecution was expanding this out. The defense was not. If the jurors are, are, are debating over every single detail, likely that we might see a hung jury or a, you know, an actual guilty, which would blow my stinking mind. But if it’s, if they’re not doing that, if they’re going in and they’re just saying, oh, it’s self-defense well, they don’t even have to really spend much time thinking about any of the lesser included charges because self-defense is a privilege that applies to everything. Kyle Rittenhouse was privileged. He was authorized to do what he did and everything else is inconsequential.

I mean, everything else is, is details that are not really necessary to the final equation about innocence or guilt. So that’s sort of how we’ve been teasing this out. That being said, you have to consider a lot of the other factors that jurors might have just bouncing around their heads. Like, you know, they want to do their due diligence and they want to be a part of a solution and they want to give this critical thought, and you’re going to have individuals in there that really want to talk it through. You’re going to have, you know, just like in anything, you know, think about having lunch at your office. There’s, there’s a good half of the sitting around the conference room that say, I don’t really care what we have. Sandwiches sounds good. Pizza, whatever salads, that’s fine too. You know, that’s kind of me.

I don’t really care if it’s food, then I’ll eat it, but I don’t necessarily care. There’s other people, you know, they want to be intimately involved in the situation and then they need to have discussions about it. And they would like to ideally come up with a pen and paper and get orders and names and condiments and all that stuff. And that that’s, that’s perfectly valid. You know, everybody needs both people, I think, in a company. But when you’re talking about jurors, just think about the time that’s going to be spent on just figuring out how the process goes. You know, who’s in charge, who talks first, are they going to go around the table? Okay, what’s your thought now? Okay. Two minutes for you and now you’re next. And now you, and you know, are they going to make it like democratic? If somebody’s going to take charge, we don’t know much about this jury at all.

Honestly, we got a lot more information about the Shovan jury. We knew at least what the professions were, and at least we could speculate about that and have fun playing around with those, uh, those identities saying, well, this police officer, uh, might take charge or this, you know, this, this, uh, you know, there wasn’t a police officer there, but you know, this doctor or this teacher or somebody, and don’t have any of that here. So it’s kind of, we’re just kind of blindfolded. The case gets handed off to the jury, but not before the judge lays down some instructions today. Here’s what that sounded like. Uh, this is judge Schrader kind of saying a good morning and letting the rest of the court know how this is all going to go.

Uh, the, um, we’re going to select the jurors to deliberate on the case. The, um, six of you who are struck, I mean, you used the word dismissed is a better word. Uh, six of you who are dismissed will be kept here in the courthouse. Um, just as the deliberating jurors will do. And you’ll not be permitted to discuss the case in any way. Um, there was a request, uh, if you could use laptops in the answer, that is yes, but of course under the same rules that you’ve had all along, which is you’re not to, uh, communicate in any way or access any site respecting, uh, the case. And, um, let’s take the, uh, expect the jurors as necessary. The, all of the jurors numbers have been, uh, exhibited to the defendant, I believe. And they’re paper-clipped together now. And then please put them in the tumbler and the bailiff will rotate it. And then the defendant will draw out six of the numbers. No, just separate them. And

Okay. So they actually gave Corey cheer, FEC the numbers, and then he put them in the look at his face there. He’s sort of confused a little bit. He’s like, this is interesting. Okay. And, um, it is interesting. That’s not something that, uh, that I’ve ever seen before that the defendant actually reaches in there and draws the own, uh, his own alternate basically selecting his own jurors because he’s pulling the people who were about to get booted. And so, uh, know curious, interesting. Now, oftentimes, you know, the courts will sort of handle this for you. They’ll, you know, the judge will, you know, uh, take care of this, but I have heard I’ve never done this personally, but I have heard of one attorney, friend of mine, uh, told me, uh, you know, much more practiced attorney. Somebody who’s been practicing a lot longer than I have.

She said that, that she asked at one, uh, at one session like this, where they were picking the alternates to see, to actually open up and see the other numbers, because she didn’t think that the judge wrote them all on there accurately. And so she went up and said, I want to see them open them up. And you know, that’s a pretty, and of course they were all there, thankfully, but this is how skeptical some attorneys can be. So this judge was just, was very proactive. Just turned it right over to Corey says, look, I wrote, you know, numbers one through 18 on there and, uh, examine them if you’d like, make sure you can show them to the prosecution, to Kyle. And then all of those are going to be put up in there. And then Kyle himself is going to pick it, probably because the judge, at some point in his career, got asked by a defense attorney, like my friend who walked up and said, I don’t, I don’t believe you, which has kind of been the catchphrase of this entire trial. Sorry, Thomas. I don’t believe you. So they actually gave Corey the opportunity to inspect the little numbers on there before he dumped them into the tumbler. So then we take it over. Kyle, uh, Rittenhouse now is actually going to reach his arm in there and pick it out. So the court clerk is sealing that puppy up one, spin one spin. Do you see that

Check? See if anything got stuck? She said, Okay, move off to the side behind you so that we can see Kyle, we’re going to get a camera change. And Kyle is just pulling those puppies right out of that tumbler one by one, Which is just a surreal thing to watch, you know, you sort of picking his fate right now.

I mean, it might be a fun game if you’re at a carnival or a circus, but not when you’ve got a couple of decades of prison hanging out. So the clerk just grabs those numbers and then walks them on back over to the judge and actually hands them to, I think it’s the bailiff or somebody else, uh, there, I’m not sure who the woman is exactly. But she is now going to read off that these jurors are gone 11 58, 14 45, 9 and 52. So that’s six. Yeah. We had two that got booted previously making that eight. That leaves us 12 for the total of 20 here. Is that clip from court today?

Yeah. Will you please stand up number 11, number 58, number 14, number 45, number nine. And number 52. Then if you’ll follow the bailiff into the backroom,

Follow the bailiff. Now I see several people in the chat have one bingo. And that’s congratulations on that. Yeah. I won also myself. I won also when I was playing earlier, too. We’re all winners here, everybody. It’s the new America. It’s 20, 21. Don’t offend anybody. We’re all winners. So, uh, that is, uh, judge Schrader. Now he is now going to be sending off those jurors. So the other jurors, the people who remain on the island, they get up, they go into a deliberate and the judges now I think we’ve got about two minutes of judge Schrader. Who’s going to talk to the final juror saying, Hey, look, we appreciate you being here. You’ve been outstanding. Sorry. You’re not going to be able to be involved in this decision, but you never know something might happen and we might need to call you back. So, uh, this is judge Schrader, kind of the last thing we hear from the judge today. So let’s listen in

One and a Shakespeare wrote parking, as they say is such sweet sorrow. Um, you’ve been wonderful jurors. And did we couldn’t have asked for a higher quality jury, better jurors, Martin of jurors, more prompters. And, uh, it is, uh, yeah, with this.

Um, and then when you take them up, you can take that up to, um, there have been rare instances sometimes in cases you’d recognize by their importance, uh, where jurors have been restored to the jury, uh, after having been dismissed. So that is conceivable, that would happen in this case. It’s not likely, but it’s in fact it’s quite unlikely, but it’s possible. Um, I, uh, uh, so I’m going to ask that you continue with the instruction that you not discuss the case with anyone, not even amongst the six of you, you can’t elaborate at all or discuss about it anyway, you can’t read, watch or listen to any kind of the trial. Did some of you bring laptops? No, no. I feel badly about that because I had a jury some years ago that was, is in a similar situation in the extra jurors where all they had to watch was daytime TV. And I’m afraid I can’t even arrange that for you. Oh, no. Um, but, um, I don’t know, maybe there was something about some movies or something, wasn’t it? I hope they appeal to everyone.

Um, well, anyway, we’ll see what we can do to, uh, give you some kind of, uh, uh, entertainment. And, um, but in the meantime, please, uh, adhere to those rules and, um, um, you will be, we’re not going to sequester anybody or anything at this point. So, um, uh, and I hope that they have a comfortable place arranged. I understand they do hang tight. So, um, any questions? Yes. Ma’am yes. I, in fact, I’m having the bailiff escort you up there now, and while you’re there, you’re not to have any conversation with the other jurors. Okay. Anything else? Okay, fine. Thank you very much.

All right. So it sounds like they’re going to hang tight. Judge is going to, you know, keep them around, but they’re not going to be part of the deliberations with the rest of the, the winners of the selection. And so you heard the judge there, his voice sounds a little bit off doesn’t he? I think he might be getting a little sick or a little bit tired. It is early in the morning, of course. And so sometimes your voice loosens up throughout the day. I know mine does, but he did sound a little bit different than, than normal. And I listened to this stuff pretty close. I can hear him in my ear ball right here in the side of my head. And so he sounds a little bit different today. Sort of like he’s a little bit, congested has a little bit of that, that tense voice to some, to some amount.

So, uh, we saw that now we have more happening. So that was judge Schrader, judge Schrader, of course, excused, the jurors, the jurors are going to deliberate for however long it takes until we get a verdict. And then we’ll get some notice about that. If they actually do, uh, come back and render a verdict, somebody scream at me in the chat or come throw something at me so that we can cut over to that. But I’m doubtful that we will. They’re probably going to be wrapping up for the day and come back tomorrow. Last I heard that judge was going to pull them and sort of ask them, how close are you to a verdict? If they are close, then they may just continue to go throughout the night. But if they’re not close, they may just decide to break and come back fresh tomorrow morning.

So we’ll continue to follow that. Of course, I appreciate you subscribing sticking around the channel. As we cover Kyle written houses, verdict, and many more. There’s a lot of criminal law coming down the pike very soon. All right. And so now that we have an understanding of what is taking place in the courtroom, we have to take a look at what’s happening outside the courtroom in Kenosha, we have protests are already starting to bubble up. We have some scenes that look like this. We can take a quick snapshot of some of the names on the signs we see here. Uh, two dead in Kenosha. We see this gentleman down here in the bottom left, uh, with a picture of that looks like Rosenbalm. We have justice for the victim, somebody from the rainbow push coalition. We have, uh, somebody holding a sign that says heroes on it in this top left that it looks like has Anthony Huber on it?

And Joseph Rosenbalm same images over here. Uh, refuse fascism.org says in the name of humanity, we refuse to accept a fascist America. Okay. So it must be a compatriots of their comrades, BLM and Antifa. Somebody has here with an American sign, American flag hat on says, BLM and Antifa are here to intimidate. I think is what her sign says. We have killer. Kyle must not go free. This is from a refuse fascism.org. So it sounds like that’s the name of the organization that, uh, I guess, printed these signs for these people, all wearing masks, which is very convenient except this guy. And then we have, uh, more of the same signs, you know, heroes, heroes, heroes, Anthony Huber, and Joseph Rosenbalm. We’re just, you know, just a couple of guys who were not up to no good. They were up to good, according to this narrative. So here is what that scene looked like from Kenosha.


Anthony and Joe, Joe is what they’re saying. Like they’re like they’re bros, which is nice. It’s very nice that they’re out there, uh, you know, fighting for them. So we heard you heard what they said though, right? No justice, no peace, no justice, no peace refuse. fascism.org. Our heroes are Anthony and Joe, Joe. All right. So, uh, that’s, what’s taking place out there on the streets of Kenosha. We have another fella now look at this one. So if you saw over here, there was no water stamp on this video, but over here we do, it looks like BG on the scene. Oh, we had some video from this fella actually in the trial, if you recall, and then they have this little selfie sign that’s um, somebody made, it says con convict killer Kyle. It’s a selfie. Uh, welcome to the selfie station, the justice for Anthony and Jojo with these BLM fists that are being raised in the air, which is just one of the most wild things that you’ve ever seen, because of course, uh, Joe, Joe, uh, the BLM that’s the BLM fist, right? Sort of the Antifa fist kind of a deal going on right there, which is weird because Joe, Joe was walking around screaming the N word at everybody, which was, um, I, I don’t think that those are compatible, but what do I know? So, uh, we have another fellow who’s out here on a Bullhorn and we have a lot of people who want to apparently go take this picture with a, with a selfie Kyle. Here’s what this guy says.


So seven shots in the back, seven shots in the back. I think it’s a, she saying that I it’s hard to tell. I really don’t know. I think it’s, she who says, uh, it’s hard to pronouns complicated. I screwed that up. I’m in big trouble now. But the point of this individual is they’re saying seven shots in the back. Who are they talking about? Well, it’s Jacob Blake, that fella who got seven shots in the back, uh, the same fellow that, that juror made a joke about, which got him excused, I think on day one of the trial. And so we see the scene, uh, you know, black lives matter apparently in this Christmas t-shirt or sweater that this person is wearing. And again, this has turned into this racial, political case where it was all white people, Rittenhouse didn’t shoot any black people. Joseph Rosenbaum was saying the N word all up and down the street that entire night, but now it’s a BLM, uh, Antifa stop fascism movement. Where did this even come from? I have no idea, but, uh, they’re very excited about it. Obviously they’re out there protesting and things get a little bit contentious over here, court TVs out there, and this fellow is walking his dog. Let’s check in what’s happening outside the courthouse.


All right. So you can see that was earlier today. And, you know, it’s just sort of warming up now, to be honest, it’s, it’s not as actually big as I thought, if you take a look at this, you know, the, the, the density of the crowd is not, not, not that big, you know, I mean, it, it sort of feels like a different scene. I think then maybe a Shovan verdict. And that’s probably because they can see the writing on the wall to some degree, they know that this is not going to be a big resounding victory. And so you don’t have a lot of people down here stirring the pot and, you know, they don’t really want to be associated with a losing case. And, uh, you’re, you’re seeing a lot of the backtracking for many people in the media jar, Scarborough yesterday was, you know, correcting the record.

We had Annika Sperry and from the young Turks correcting the record, and everybody’s coming around to this Tucker, Carlson’s rubbing all their noses in it. Megan Kelly, I was on her show by some weird coincidence. And you know, she’s now talking about these case. Some of the people in the mainstream, you know, more of the mainstream media are now covering this story. And so they’re not there right there. They’re not actually there. I mean, you’ve got a couple of cameras, but it’s not that big media circus Fest every day, dripping all over, you know, New York times and MSNBC about Shovan murdered, you know, a black person and therefore Donald Trump needs to be eviscerated. It’s just not the same thing. It’s a different political environment. Arguably, this whole thing never would have happened in this political environment. It was something that was manifested out of the need to continue a political narrative on the back of a 17 year old kid.

He’s the scapegoat. They needed a story to run with in August of 2020 in the middle of an election cycle. That’s all it was now not so useful. Unfortunately, their wreckage has caused a lot of damage in the wake. Kyle Rittenhouse is now facing decades in prison because of the situation that was exacerbated by a lot of the unrest last year. So we have, uh, people in, in the midst of all of this calling for peace. We have this woman, her name is Tanya McLean. She’s the executive director of leaders of Kenosha. She’s also from, it’s hard to tell. Now I can’t tell if she’s from the rainbow push coalition, because if you recall, when we backtracked over here, uh, this guy who was just screaming, no justice, no peace is standing next to this person. And maybe even holding a sign that says rainbow push coalition. So if that woman is going to give us a narrative about, you know, peace and calm, and this guy is screaming, no justice, no peace. That seems like it might be incompatible here. Here’s him again? Yeah. He’s holding that sign. Okay. So the camera’s to pan back over

No justice justice. Okay. Okay. So now we’ve got that. Now. Now we have his name and his, his identity. Now let’s take a look at who this person is and see what she’s asking for, because it seems like she’s part of the same organization, the rainbow push coalition. And we saw here, uh, Tanya McClean, spectrum news said, despite a divide, one common hope was for no violence following a verdict. Hmm. So she says, as we await the impending verdict of the written house, we as Kenosha activists call for peace. As we always have executive director of the leaders of Kenosha, let’s see what she says,

Verdict of the written house trial. We asked Kenosha activist called for peace. As we always have we’ve out to continue to prioritize the safety of our community. We did announce those wouldn’t be invited in by the murders of Anthony and Jojo.

Okay. So, you know, calling, so look, she may actually not be from this rainbow push coalition. I don’t know. It’s hard to tell according to this organization, uh, spectrum news, they’re saying she’s with a director, she’s a director of leaders of Kenosha. So maybe it’s just bad positioning, but you know, calling for peace while the organization who signed you’re standing in front of is saying no justice, no peace. You know, so it’s sort of a mixed message there. But, uh, we heard from her now we had another special guest appearance from mark McClaskey. Remember the McCloskey is they were also caught up in the summer of unrest and they were charged with crimes for pointing their guns at protestors who broke through their community gate and actually smashed a gate down and then sort of came upon their mansion and we’re, we’re getting aggressive with them.

And so they went and they got guns. I think, uh, the, the female McCloskey, the wife, she had a gun that was inoperable. He, he grabbed some sort of, uh, I think it was an AR style, uh, you know, rifle. And they went out there and they dissuaded or discouraged the protestors for coming upon their property. Then we had, I believe her name was Kim Gardner. The prosecutor charged them with offenses and he pled guilty to the whole thing, walked in and pled guilty to a misdemeanor. I think he paid a $1,500 fine or something like that. And the whole case went to bed, turns out he’s running for Senate now. So as somebody who is the recipient of, uh, very aggressive prosecutions, uh, trying to stop people from protecting themselves with their own weapons or their own, uh, Firearms self-defense is, is now no longer popular. And so you’re seeing different prosecutors from different parts of the country go after individuals. We saw it here with Rittenhouse. We saw it over in, uh, where was it? Were they from Georgia? I think Missouri they’re from Missouri where Kim Gardner was now charging them. So mark McCloskey, he’s running for Senate. He shows up in Kenosha. Here’s what he had to say today.

The people’s rights to defend themselves. What do you expect to happen today? I suspect we’ll get a verdict today. Well, you know, I don’t know if we have a balloon that we hear all the evidence we are, from what we understand and what I’ve seen. I’m hoping for acquittal on all counts. Are you going to be out here all day? Or what are your plans? We’re going to be out here until you get a verdict. I suspect I have no relationship, I guess, NERC and citizens. Um, I’m mark McCloskey from St. Louis, and we’re just here to support people to exercise their second amendment rights. She decided to take the government advocate, steps that duty fails to reflect the citizens programs, to defund the police all over the place. But if you defund the police and the government is not there to protect the citizen, citizens has to protect.

All right? So that was mark McCloskey. And I think that’s his wife over there. She didn’t say much, but she joined him. Of course. Now he’s running for Senate. So a little bit of camera time and you know, fighting for, I think a good cause that people have a right to defend themselves against people that are trying to kill you or trying to break into your property, which is where the situation with the McCloskey is, was going. And we saw a lot of this. They, they used the, the second amendment and they got punished for it. They got indicted, they got charged with crimes, same thing happening with Kyle Rittenhouse. And so these two now are joining forces, which of course is a good thing. We have another clip from this gentleman. This guy is a, just a random guy. Fox had him. Let’s see what he had to say from Fox news. Digital he’s walking around here was his take on the case

Support Kyle Rinella cause I’m a constitutionalist. I believe that he is here. He defended himself. I believe all, this is a popular opinion. It’s all a popular opinion. And I watched the video 50 million times, the man slipped and he defended himself. I wouldn’t even run on a person. I wouldn’t even run up on a person with a knife. Why would you want to have a person? Yes, I get that in 17. Should’ve been out there. I get that. But he defend himself. Why run up on somebody with that gun?

It’s a good point. My friend, and just like him, you and I also watched the video about 50 million times. The jurors watched it for about 50 million times and it’s a pretty clear cut and dry case. And so I think that a Parrish nation over here had a good take on that. We’ve all seen it. Why would you be chasing after somebody with a gun? So more reactions now the white house kind of God asked about this today. Jen Sakhi is recovered now from, COVID glad she’s doing better. She’s back in charge. I know some people in the chat will be happy about that. She is delivering the good news, the press briefings from the byte administration to the rest of us America. Here’s what she had to say about this. When she was asked about Rittenhouse earlier today,

And then just something tied to an ongoing court case. Why did president Biden suggest that Kyle Rittenhouse on trial and Kenosha is a white supremacist?

So Peter, what I, I’m not going to speak to right now is anything about an ongoing trial, uh, president’s past comments. Uh, what I can reiterate for you is the president’s, uh, view, uh, that we shouldn’t have broadly, speaking of vigilantes, patrolling our communities with us. We shouldn’t have opportunists, corrupting, peaceful protests by writing and burning down the communities that they claim to represent anywhere in the country.

Let’s see if we can pick up that volume, just a smidge here,

As you know, closing arguments in this particular case, which I’m not speaking to, I’m just making broad comments about his own view. Um, there’s an ongoing trial. We’re waiting a verdict beyond that. I’m not going to speak to any individuals or this.

Oh my goodness. Well, they use Kyle Rittenhouse, his photograph when they were calling him a white supremacist back during the election. And it was pretty clear that he was being charged with a crime then. So it’s very interesting that they were willing to make a bunch of comments about him being, you know, sort of a militia member or white supremacist, or at least by implication, they were saying, oh, you know, well, you know, he made that okay, symbol, you know, with those guys in the bar that time, therefore he’s a white supremacist. And they were using that narrative. They were running with it for a very long time. They knew the case was going to go to trial or at least, you know, trend that way. And they were perfectly okay, commenting on a criminal case then, but now not so much. So, uh, of course the right move, they shouldn’t be commenting on this stuff.

They shouldn’t have been commenting on a lot of things, but they, you know, that didn’t stop them. If this were going to be going, I think a different way. Maybe you’d hear a little bit more, um, commentary from some of that class. But the point was that nothing really has been learned has it? We have Jen Psaki who is still still calling Kyle Rittenhouse, this, this armed vigilante, this guy who’s running or not Kyle Rittenhouse specifically because she can’t comment on an active, ongoing criminal case. But the broad point, the big picture idea from Jen Saki is we don’t want armed vigilantes running around. Not that I’m talking about Kyle Rittenhouse, I’m not talking about something totally different.

Well, I guess we’re going to see what the jury has to say about that because if he gets acquitted, as I hope he does, then maybe that’s not what the jury thought he was. So are you still characterizing that type of behavior in that regard? Now this has been sort of a clear cut case where I think this administration and many people in the media have just been burying their heads in the sand. They’re not recognizing this. People are seeing the government fail around them. They’re watching their cities like what happened in Kenosha burned to the ground. There is no alternative. Thomas binger, James Crouse. They’re arguing that individuals should just call 9 1 1. Well guess what? There wasn’t any 9 1 1 to call. Then we heard from many police officers that it was a literal war zone, that things were melting down, that they were overrun that they were under capacity.

There was no way that they could respond to anything. It was a war zone, pepper already said that. So if you’re in that environment, what choice do you have? But to defend yourself with a firearm to do what mark McCloskey did to do what Kyle Rittenhouse, you don’ts. Now these people like Jen Saki, they live in little bubbles with armed guards all over the place. And you know, oftentimes people like Thomas binger don’t even really know how to hold or use a gun. They’re scared to death of it. They think that even having one is a provocation just by simply having it on your person, you’re provoking other people out there. They are so diluted and detached from reality. And I, I’m not sure that they’re going to learn their lesson. I don’t want to put the cart before the horse here. We still have not gotten a verdict. Nobody has communicated to me that, that they have decided. And they, they, they probably won’t. They’re probably going to be released for the day. Uh, the judge is talking right now. Somebody says, so let’s pull this up. Let’s see if, uh, let’s see if we can do a quick check-in and see what’s going on with the Rittenhouse case over on YouTube, interrupting my little, uh, tirade. We still have a little bit more to get to on the show, but let’s take a quick look and, uh, see what’s happening here.

Fred, we bet you, we bet you know that the Truckee river winds its way through this Nevada city Reno, that sounds right. Yup.

Okay. So the judge is taking questions now, jeopardy questions and they just cut the audio out again. So, so, so I don’t. All right, so the mic came on and then the mic went back off. So now we can’t hear, uh, we can’t hear anything again. All right. Well we’ll just go back to the show and if they come on back, then we’ll go back. We’ll cut back over to do the stream. All right. And so, uh, that was Jen Sakhi. And back to my point, the point was, you know, even if Kyle Rittenhouse hopefully is completely exonerated, I don’t think that this is going to change this administration’s posture on firearms or self-defense at all. I think that they’re going to chalk this up to a bunch of white people on a jury saying the whole thing was rigged and that, you know, property rights, firearm, uh, self-defense rights.

All of those things are just an afterthought and the jury got it wrong here. I think that they really believe that most of America is still situated on their side of the aisle. In spite of the fact that there’s been a huge, tremendous outpouring of support and interest in this case, on behalf of Kyle Rittenhouse and many people who were similarly situated. Okay. And so that was Jen Psaki and many other people out there in the media talking about Kyle Rittenhouse. We’ve got one final segment that we’ve got to get to. Let me swap my screen back up here.

All right. We’re going to pull this back, open the screen just shifted on, uh, the stream, but then it went, uh, way again. All right. Let’s take a quick look while this is loading up. All right, Jen Psaki we played her already. So let’s go on into our next segment. And, oh, this is right. Thomas binger also the subject of a lot of criticism and some praise. Some people are pretty happy with the fact that he’s helping Kyle Rittenhouse, uh, exonerate himself, been a very good defense lawyer. And a lot of people were wanting his opinion after this whole thing closed out. People want to say, are we going to hear from Thomas binger? We know we’re going to hear from Kyle Rittenhouse and his defense team at some point, but what about Thomas binger? What about the guy who was leading the charge, who was prosecuting Rittenhouse thinking that he was on this glorious crusade fighting for justice in America, going to write the wrongs that were done against all those three alleged victims.

We’re going to hear from him, right? This is a guy who loves to talk was out there, you know, doing, uh, rhetorical flourishes, every opportunity he got and was very excited to be in the limelight. So now at the conclusion of the trial, you would expect to be hearing from Thomas binger, wouldn’t you? Unfortunately, you’re not because according to Kristin and Barbara resi, who is a blue check mark over on Twitter, says, Justin Thomas binger will not comment after the jury reaches a verdict. Oh, he’s citing ethical rules, which is very nice. That’ll be the first time he’s following those, I think in this trial. So that’s really good. Somebody must’ve sent him a book or something full statement below. And so let’s go through it. He says, our office has received requests from several media organizations for an interview or a press conference after the jury reaches its verdict.

In this case, I want to thank you for your inquiries and let you know that I understand and appreciate your responsibility to report on the case and provide information to the public in your request. I’ve reviewed Wisconsin Supreme court rules, 2030 0.6 and 2030 0.8, which set forth the ethical responsibilities of attorneys. And in particular prosecutors with regard to trial publicity in light of these ethical guidelines, I have concluded that it would not be appropriate for our office to comply with your request. And he says, thank you for that. Now I think it might be appropriate to take a quick look at those rules. So we’ll say, well, hold on a second. Let’s go into the next point here because we have another statute that we need to take a look at here. We saw this yesterday, uh, Thomas binger in his closing arguments also grabbed that AR and held it up and pointed it at some individuals.

These are two pictures that we took from the actual courtroom. You can see Thomas binger here with the firearm on his right shoulder, sort of a sloppily placed to their finger is actually on the trigger. Everybody knows this is not a good thing to be doing. It’s called trigger discipline. Even though he had these two detectives that you can see seated here, swap this pen back on these two detectives down here were there. They both checked the firearm before he actually did this little maneuver, but he’s still picked this bad boy up. And we can’t see exactly at whom or where he is pointing the firearm. But we, uh, we do know it’s kind of, sort of in the direction of some people you can see this fellow over here is, uh, kind of in the line of sight, watching it, being pointed that direction.

And if you recall, if you compare and contrast this with what Mark Richards was doing, Mark Richards said, I’m not actually going to shoulder the rifle. Remember he said that he came out and he said, now, listen, this is a right-handed gun. Because if you hold it this way, then you’re going to see that the shell actually gets ejected this direction. If, if Kyle is holding it on the other side of his body, on his shoulder, the other direction, then the shell casing is going to be spent right into his face. So it doesn’t make any sense. If the gun is right here, it’s going to shoot right into his face. So that was the point that Mark Richards was making. And he said, it’s, it’s a right-handed gun. It’s not a left-handed gun. And he objected to this very, this very point saying, he’s holding it wrong.

If they’re saying according to their blurry BS pixel image that was dropped off by the magic evidence fairies, then that is how it would have to be on the other shoulder. That’s what they’re alleging. So it just doesn’t make any sense. So that’s a whole separate issue, but a lot of various commentators have been pointing out. It wasn’t Rittenhouse charged with, for something very similar to this. I mean, it wasn’t the crux of the prosecution’s case is that he was pointing a person pointing a gun at people, which is provocation. That’s what their argument was. That’s what pops the self-defense bubble. If Kyle Rittenhouse actually provoked somebody, all the self-defense privileges, just evaporate like that. And the basis for that happening was the pointing of the gun at Rosenbaum. And so many people are saying, well, that’s curious, so why is this guy doing it here in court openly, Mark Richard certainly didn’t do that.

And so some people went through some of the Wisconsin statutes and they found the following. Let’s take a quick look at it. Weapons statutes from chapter 9 41. Specifically, we can take a look at the statute 9 41 0.20 says endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon. Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a class, a misdemeanor in dangers and other safety by negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon. So I don’t think you could say that because it kind of, it kind of depends on how you define endangering. Another safety is pointing a gun at them, endangering their safety, or even in the general vicinity. I don’t know. A lot of people might say that it did, right. A lot of people might say, look, look, I don’t trust anybody pointing a gun at my direction. We just got done watching what all the professionals over at that scene on rust with Alec Baldwin, what happened with them?

I don’t care if you think it’s safe. I don’t care if there’s five officers who look at this, if you’re pointing a gun in my general direction, not happy about that. And there, there, there was a packed courtroom. It was closing arguments. It was the final day. It was the big, big reveal. And so endangering another safety. Some people might, you know, they might be on there and they might be literally triggered by that. They might have a reaction to that. So that’s a loose definition. Also under subsection B operates or goes armed with a firearm while they’re under the influence of an intoxicant. I doubt that’s true.

Probably not under the influence of drugs or anything. We have BM, which is operates or goes armed with a firearm world. There’s a restricted controlled substance and they identify a bunch of these. So THC marijuana, that type of stuff. Then we have subsection C says, except as provided in sub one M which is down here. So we’re going to take a look at this part. Part of the statute in a second says intentionally points of firearm at, or towards another, toward another. Ooh. So then you can get very Mincy with those words. You might not actually point it at somebody, but you might point it kind of towards them awful a little bit, not directly at that person, but if you slipped like Joseph Rosenbaum and your finger was on the trigger, like Alec Baldwin, while then maybe you fire off the gun and kill somebody like Anthony Huber or a juror who’s sitting there in the jury panel. So it’s toward kind of sounds like it might fit in there and listen, the reason why you can be kinda crappy with this right. Kinda kind of se about this is because they are, oh, do you hear that?

Let’s check the audio. I heard a noise. Let’s check the court session. Oh, judges coming back. No audio on my end. Here it comes.

No, she was asking me a question. I didn’t hear it. Not yet. I talked to them separately,

Judge saying, he’s talking to people separately. Audio is coming in and out.

Um, by the way, while we’re waiting for the jury to come down, um, the media, somebody asks from the media and I have no idea who inquired about the method of selection of those to be struck from the jury. Just now this, this afternoon, this morning, whenever this morning, um, that’s been the practice in this court for, I’m going to say 20 years, at least that I’ve been doing that, uh, that the defendant in a criminal case is the one who makes the selections from the tumbler as to the jurors to be dismissed. So


All right. So the audio cut out again. Sounds like they’re waiting for the jury to come back in. Thomas binger is cracking jokes. They’re all laughing. They’re all smiling. I wonder what that’s about. So it doesn’t sound like there’s a verdict there waiting for the jurors to come back. The judge might pull them. Let’s see,

Just in case [inaudible].

So on Twitter, they’re telling us that somebody told the media that they think that the jury is going to be retiring for the evening While we’re waiting. We can take a look at this.

Uh, I you’re in, you’re in the first class seats now. Um, all right. Um, I understand that you wish to break for the evening, which is, uh, uh, certainly your prerogative. You’re in charge at this particular point. And I also understand that I was told that I, I’m not clear on whether you decided you wanted to come back at nine or if that was conveyed to you though. That’s what we wanted, but I’m going to take a vote just to make sure how many want to report at nine. Okay. That makes it easier. And, uh, so we’re going to break for the evening. Uh, I know you’re in deliberation and the rules are the same as they were before with the additional provision that you can’t talk with anybody about the case, even if all 12 of you by happenstance end up at the same place, uh, some, uh, a bowling alley or a, or a restaurant or something.

You’re not allowed to talk about the case even with all 12. Uh, and when you get here in the morning, if you come a little early, or somebody is late and there are 11 of you or 10 of you or whatever, you can’t talk about the case, the only way you can talk about the case, any aspect of the case is when all 12 of you are together in the jury room. So please keep that in mind, don’t read, watch or listen to any kind of, of the trial, no talking with anybody who was not involved in the trial. Any question, anybody. All right. Thank you very much and have a wonderful evening.

All right. Oh man. Well, so it sounds like nothing is going to happen tonight. They’re going to go home and they’re going to come back tomorrow and they’re going to have to pick up all of the, uh, all of where they left off. Let’s make sure before we cut out of here, let’s make sure that they’re done.

Got a sign there.

Nope. I come on up. I can’t see it. And I’m sure it’s a fine, but let’s just make sure Little closer. You’re all right. I’m here have no fear. Um, Okay, thanks. No, it’s all right. I just want to make sure there’s there are rules about it and you’re seemed to be in compliance. So don’t worry about it. No reason to apologize.

He was looking at his laptop, broke the rules.

Um, okay. Um, and then I’m going to, I will be talking now with the alternates, uh, and, um, or they’re on their way up, I assume. Yeah. Down wherever they were coming from, we gotta call her, call her and tell her. Yeah. Okay.

So the judge was, um, the judge called that guy up. Didn’t like what he saw on his laptop. The laptop had a bunch of stickers on it. You know how people put a bunch of on a bunch of ’em on there? Uh, come up here, sir. Can I see those? Uh, can I see that sticker? That’s on your laptop. So that guy just had a heart attack and walks up. Judge says, let me see it. He says, okay, judge, I will not come back with that. And he says, no, no problem at all. And the judge is now calling the alternate. Cory cheer Feesey looks ponderous big sigh from him, uh, waiting for the data. And So we’ll wait for those alternate jurors to come back. The judge will give them probably the same talk. Hey, you guys are also excused. Also got to come back tomorrow. Also, don’t talk about the case. What I really want to see if they’re going to address anything. I’ve heard some people talking about, uh, you know, hanging on to the motions for directed verdict and those things. I’m not sure where we’re at on any of that, but we’ll see if the judge has anything to say, audio is coming back

Before that happened. I was going to show you this picture. So see Davis posted this on Twitter. Great Kenosha standoff. We’ve got, we’ve got, uh, Tom is banger with the mish shouldered AR and then we’ve got Mark Richards with, uh, it looks like he’s, he’s, he’s better suited to use that. So we’ll see what’s going on with the judge. Yeah. So still no audio here. Sounds like they called for those alternates.

Let’s go through some of these super chats while, uh, while I’ve got these up, we’ve got the start of the show. We had B Harris. Love it. B Harris says, love your channel. Wish you lived in Massachusetts. So I could hire you for my federal second amendment lawsuits against them. Maybe I’ll shoot you an email free Kyle and us flag love. That’d be Harris. Yeah. Feel free to shoot me an email. I am not, of course licensed in Massachusetts, but I’m plugged in with some pretty good networks of people. And so if you’re looking for somebody like that, I might be able to at least throw your name out on the listserv and see if anybody would respond. We’ve got a Dawn of America, also chimed in with a Superchat, says, heard two are holding up the not guilty verdict because they are scared of the mob.

We’ll see if that happens. We’ve got, I thank you for that. Don of America, we’ve got Joseph Saslow. He says, how many times will the state retry the case before they give up? Well, if it’s an acquittal, they can’t do it right. Jeopardy attaches. And, uh, they’re, they’re out of, uh, out of shots. We’ve got assuming the jury keeps coming back. Hung, is there a limit? Keep up the awesome work. I mean, not, not really, you know, not really. I mean, they run out of political capital. They run out of the energy to actually continue to prosecute. The political willpower will just go away and especially if they lose again or they get a hung again, I think they just kind of lose steam. Good question though. Joseph, we have blahzay. [inaudible] says I really, the judge, uh, really liked the judge. He’s like a nice old grandpa.

I think Richards is a weak presenter. Cheer. FEC has a stronger presence. A binger is a great presenter and Krauss has all the charisma of soggy bread, poor Kraus. You know, I honestly, folks, I was feeling a little bit bad about him yesterday. We were all kind of hard on him yesterday. You know, he is a human being too. And I think everybody deserves some empathy. You know, even these prosecutors, yes. Even them deserve a little bit of empathy. Everybody’s trying to do their best as a horrible situation. And it’s just a sad state of affairs that this entire thing is being conducted on the back of an 18 year old kid who is, who was trying to do the right thing. What a joke. All right. So they’re still, they’re still talking. We’ve got, see, read in the house as we ever going back to look at the David dad Elian case. I’m not sure what that one is. Let me take a quick look, downloaded California based, uh, center for medical progress. Anti-abortion activist release videos showing planned parenthood dropped criminal charges in Texas criminal charges in California. Interesting On appeal. I’ll have to take a look at this. So what I am, uh, when I’m, uh, there’s no audio, come on, judge. Turn it on. So he’s talking about the audio is still off. There it

Goes. Yeah, that’d be really frightening. Um, all right, good evening folks. And,

Uh, thank you for your patience and, uh, your participation and you’re still at work and will be tomorrow. Um, we were retired for the evening and we’ll return at nine tomorrow morning. And even though you, well, you’re under a continuing obligation not to talk with anyone about the case, not a fellow juror, uh, not even all of the fellow jurors and certainly not with anybody who’s going to see, certainly it kinda downgrades the prior statement, just don’t talk with anybody about the case, read, watch, or listen to any account of it. Um, and, um, we’ll, we’ll, you know, uh, yeah. Uh, we’ll start at 9:00 AM and any questions anybody? Oh yes. Thank you for saying that. You’re welcome to bring some thing. Uh, if you want to bring a laptop or a, or some other device, uh, obviously nothing that you would use to access, uh, uh, anything about the case. You already know that, but if you want to bring a, uh, movie or, or something like that, or, um, whatever device would entertain you, I actually, I have started here.

I was a movie recommendation,

Several thousand jeopardy questions. Any questions seriously, if you want them sent down and I’ll get them to you. All right anybody else? Anything, any questions? I mean, all right. Thank you. Have a wonderful evening. All right.

All right. So we’ll wait for them to leave and we’ll see if they wrap up, um, th that, that David [inaudible] case. Yeah. I’ll take a look at that. And if it’s an active criminal case, we may, uh, we may add it to our docket over here. The disgruntled moderate says for the sake of argument, let’s say we agree with the prosecution and guns aren’t needed. How do we stay safe? Orange

[inaudible] okay. Thank you. See you in the morning.

All right. So that’s it. So the judge is adjourning. Everybody for the evening. Audio went back out. Kyle is out of there. All right. So they’re going to come back tomorrow. Morning, 9:00 AM. The alternates are going to be back. The jurors are going to be back and we’ll pick it up from there. So that is, uh, the camera’s zooming outs wrapping up for the day.

And, uh, and we’ll, we’ll pick it up from there starting tomorrow. So no verdict today. Unfortunately, immediate reactions are, that’s not exactly how I wanted this to go. I thought it would be a little bit of a quicker decision that we get through a lot of the administrative stuff, a lot more aggressively, and that we might just get a verdict. I was even hoping that the jurors would be a little bit, uh, willing to, to almost almost punish the states, right? Punitive damages are things that you hear about in, uh, civil cases. Like if in a medical malpractice case, if a doctor really screw something up, you might punish that doctor or that pharmaceutical company more likely and hit them with punitive damages here. We don’t really have anything like that. You can’t really punish the governments in a criminal case. You could, if you were suing them civilly, but in this case, the way that oftentimes the jury will punish the government is with a quick verdict.

And with just not guilty is across the board because they’re dissatisfied with what the prosecutors did. They’re all disgusted by what was presented and they want to come out and just lay a heavy hand down. Now that obviously is not happened. The jurors got this case fairly early this morning, and they’re still deliberating it. Uh, what I talked about prior to the day was if it does happen in a, in a longer period of time, that means, in my opinion, my thought is that the jurors are watching more of the evidence. They’re actually scrubbing through the videos, looking at the photographs, holding the weapons, reenacting the whole scene and coming to their conclusions accordingly. Whereas, as I mentioned at the start of the show, if it was all about self-defense, all you need to do is invoke self-defense and the rest of the criminal liability evaporates.

You don’t need to go through bit by bit and actually analyze everything. But I think about this again, the jurors may not know that there’s something like 30 pages, I think 37 pages of jury instructions that they’re all going to have to go through. And that is a lot of work. And all it takes is one person who says, I think we should all probably read it first and really think about it before, you know, before they come up with a decision. And I’m not saying that that’s a bad thing, but it is important that we get to, you know, uh, I think the right outcome in this case and it, the longer it takes, the more I think they’re thinking about it and that’s what the prosecution wants. But again, folks, this has been a two and a half week trial, more or less.

And the jury taking a couple of days on this thing is not, I think, anything outside the realm of possibility, they want to do the right thing. They know the magnitude of this case. And so just because it’s taken a little bit longer than many of us would have wished I don’t think that that’s necessarily a bad sign. So, uh, back tomorrow, again, with much more jury selection, uh, jury deliberation coverage, but we have to finish up this segment on Thomas binger because Thomas binger, uh, might’ve broken the law himself rewinding back to chapter nine 40. One of the Wisconsin law says that if he intentionally points of firearm at, or towards another, that might be a problem. We do have some additional, uh, uh, adjustments that the law provides under section one M says that, uh, whoever intentionally points a firearm towards a law enforcement officer or a firefighter or anybody acting in official capacity, like other fellow officers, it’s going to aggravate this.

It’s going to actually make this more severe. It’s going to turn it from a misdemeanor. As we can see here, a class, a misdemeanor, if you’re charged under subsection one, all the way up to a H felony. So it’s an aggravating factor. If you point a gun at a random person on the streets, it’s a misdemeanor. But if that random person on the street is not a random person, it’s a police officer or a firefighter aggravation. So what we’ll then turn it up into a much more serious offense. So if Tom is binger was doing that towards anybody in the courtroom, that was a police officer, or, you know, somebody who was a, an official person might be a problem. We also can see that we have some judicial notes, some historic historical notes about how to interpret that statute. The mental element of the offense under subsection one is changed from reckless to criminal negligence.

And so this means if the defendant acts recklessly, then the conduct is prohibited by a different section. So if you thought that Thomas binger was being reckless, you’d look at 9 41 0.3 30, but if you thought it was just criminal negligence, then it would be in this current subsection. So you have to sort of gauge what you think about that post pointing a firearm, he says is not a lesser included offense, a jury instruction about shooting into a building that doesn’t apply police officers. Now, I think this is important, right? Many people might say that Thomas binger is privileged. He can point the gun at whoever he wants. He’s right in the middle of a trial. And this says police officers, which is not obviously what he is, but he is somebody who is sort of a credentialed officer of the court. Most prosecutors have badges and they wave it around like they’re really neat or something, but, uh, police officers do not have an absolute right to point their weapons, but privilege may be asserted as an affirmative defense.

So prosecutors, they don’t just get to go around and point their weapons either, but maybe as an affirmative defense, it might apply. Although intentionally pointing a firearm at another constitutes a violation under the section, a person is privileged to point another gun in self-defense. If they reasonably believe the threat of force is necessary to prevent or terminate what she reasonably believes to be unlawful interference sounds a lot like the same law that we were talking about in the Kyle Rittenhouse case. And so Thomas being a binger, uh, did he break Wisconsin criminal law? I don’t know if he were the prosecutor in charge of his own investigation. He’d probably say yes. And he’d probably spend untold resources from the Kenosha county attorney’s office to make sure that Thomas banger serves justice. So those were the highlights of the day. Kyle Rittenhouse, as we saw live in real time, no verdict today, coming back tomorrow for that, let’s take a look at some questions and super chats over from our friends at watchingthewatchers.locals.com.

And let’s see what we’ve got here. A lot of questions coming in. I know we had a sort of bouncing around on the screens. Okay. So that court is now gone. News now is here, says today was the first time I’ve ever seen a defendant pulling names out of a hat. This is more common than I think really weird that Kyle was doing it himself. And not one of the court staff in front of the defendant. Yeah, it was a little bit weird. Now we talked about that earlier. I think that, uh, yeah, I think that that is a little bit of an aberration here in this, in this court, but the process itself is not an aberration. Just the way this court did it. It’s a little bit weird. Just cows says, Rob, how are you feeling with deliberation time is the jury allowed to leave court after today?

So, uh, we just saw that just, yeah, I think it’s a little bit, and I was hopeful for a quick verdict, but obviously that’s not going to happen. So yeah, they’re going to go home, rest up and come on back tomorrow. News now says, I must admit. I’m scared for Kyle had a conversation with my mom yesterday, about to trial. She’s adamant that she would convict because he shouldn’t have been there shouldn’t have had a gun. She doesn’t care that the law doesn’t say that that is a feeling she has in his unmovable. When we discuss what the law actually is, she kept going back to feelings. I’m afraid of even one of those people on the jury, it’s a good point. Their news now keep working on your mother. If prosecution knew the identity of jump kick, man, but withheld it from the defense.

Would that be a Brady violation? One of the charges directly relates to that guy. Yeah, it would because that would, that would preclude the defense from investigating that portion of the case and building a defense that guy might provide information that could make or break their case. And without knowing who it is, they don’t have that opportunity. The Antica says, I spent the day watching Arbery posted a synopsis over on locals. You should all take a look in a moment to join in watchingthewatchers.locals.com. Thanks again, to kiss. It appears Michaels will be testifying tomorrow. I wonder how many people will be paying attention to that while waiting for a verdict? Well, we might actually change gears and start covering Arbery and, uh, and may pay close attention to that. So thanks for the summation there. VNT KIS major says, Rob, the only thing this jury is debating is the fallout for what decision they make and the threats made to their safety and livelihoods, not the case.

This is not justice according to major. I’m sure there is a lot of that pressure coming down to bare on everybody. No doubt about it. Uh, I feel pressure. Did you, did you feel, did you, when that judge came on the screen, did everybody’s heart just go a little bit of a Twitter, a little bit of flutter. Oh, okay. Here it comes. It it’s common in that an interesting feeling thunder seven says it looks like it might be a hung jury. That’s okay. Kyle, we’ll take that. Not a complete exoneration, but anyone who looked at the videos, nosy acted in self-defense the lunatic left mob media have lied about Kyle since day one, tainted, many people who know nothing about the case. Thanks to you. I know what happened. Hung jury is a mistrial, right? And you said before that the state won’t retry the case still believe that Rob, uh, so I’m not sure that I’ve said that the state won’t retry the case.

I think it’s probably unlikely, uh, given the evidence that we saw, but you know, listen, man, I wouldn’t put it past a gung-ho prosecutor like Thomas finger to pick this up and try it again. I mean, you saw him in James Crouse, this is their passion project. This is their entire basis for existence at the current moment. And they’re taking it personally. So if they had an opportunity, if they had da Mike gravely who gave him the green light, do you think that they would do probably news now says time for guesses? What do you think the chances are? If it’s a hung jury, does Kyle hire a different attorney? Probably likely. Former Leo says whenever I saw a bunch of Antifa Fest, I used a marker to draw a, uh, male, uh, object in their hands. Yeah. So he said, you probably won’t read the rest of this, which is a, a good, uh, astute observation.

LA medic says internal informants at the courthouse stated there are three jurors that are reluctant to make a decision due to docking and possibly future future implications on their lives. Well, that’s not a good thing. That’s not how this system is supposed to work. It’s not supposed to be a situation where whoever has the bigger muscles wins, wins the outcome of a criminal trial that’s lunacy pronoun police says until you properly affirm vaguely gendered individuals with proper pronouns, you’re going to be required to do 20 extra pull-ups per day in the gym. You know, I can that, that’s not even the punishment, pronoun police. I can do that. No problem. That’s I’m happy about that. We have another one from hyper Patriot says I was thinking yesterday, what are your thoughts about the defense not calling Kyle’s mom or dad or any character witnesses would that have helped with the jury?

You know, probably not. I mean, I don’t think it’s relevant honestly, to the, to the facts of the case. Um, I think by, by allowing the prosecution to make this case about a bunch of other stuff, that was a mistake, all this character witness stuff, you know, ant Huber, allowing this to sort of spiral into all of this was conflating the issues, which is why I was opposed to Kyle Rittenhouse taking the stand because he takes the stand. And now we can talk about a whole slew of a bunch of different stuff, different things that are not really relevant to the issue of self-defense, but they give binger and the government, this opportunity to cut again, to death by a thousand cuts. And so if you just keep giving them more stuff to feed off of, if you bring up Kyle’s mom and Kyle’s dad and they say, oh, so you knew that he was running around with a gun and you knew that he didn’t have a driver’s license and you authorized him to go to Kenosha.

What kind of a psycho parent are you? Right? And just put them on trial and gives them more to latch onto. They do not want to talk about four minutes. They want to talk about every other minute, except those four, because those four look really bad, giving them the opportunity to have that conversation is not good. Strategically. A lot of medics said, judge sounded sick this morning. Yeah. I noticed that too. LA medic. Hopefully he’s doing okay. Uh, Krauss went to the clerk after the drop, most likely to verify the other numbers also also from law medic and the judge is playing a jeopardy V Antica says the whole claim about white people in the jury is ultimately ridiculous. If you really pick the argument apart, it means that white people will always vote in favor of white people. And black people will always vote in favor of black people.

That’s not a path of justice. That’s a path towards division, right? And then you just get people of different demographics elbowing their way onto juries. The whole justice system breaks down. What a bunch of lunacy we’ve got. Brad stone Holtz over on YouTube says WISN radio out of Milwaukee, found a jump kick man, and had a post on Facebook about him. That’s interesting. I wonder why he wasn’t brought into the trial at all. Oh. Mile. Oh, mal lie. Dice says, sorry about that. Says guns and gadgets reported to jurors holding up the verdict, sighting personal safety concerns. I wonder how accurate that information is. I mean, it sounds sounds right, but is it Metallica? Metallica says the prosecution conceded self-defense but claimed it was excessive. How is it legal to change the whole reason for the trial midway through? Well, that’s part of the deal.

I mean, that’s just part of how these things work. You don’t have to convey your strategy at the start of a trial. In fact, many lawyers will try to hide that. There’s a, there’s a concept called a shiny object, right? It’s this sort of like a fishing lore. If you’ve ever gone fishing, you know that you can have these really shiny spinners and lowers that, that you can throw in the water and they’re supposed to attract the fish because everybody’s looking at it. Okay. Remember in finding an email that one big fish with that little technical thing, hanging out with a light bulb and Dory, I think is her name. And she’s like, oh, that’s the shiny object. That’s what you want everybody looking towards. That’s what you want the prosecutor to latch on to. So you take this shiny object and you wave it all over the place, but that’s not really your trial strategy at the very end.

You say, forget all that. That’s all important, but this is the real issue. And that’s basically what Thomas binger did. He said that the provocation, the idea that Kyle Rittenhouse was causing all of this through his little trivial, insignificant breaches of the law, it compounded and it ultimately led to murder. And because of those little compounding, tiny little slices that was provocation, I think it’s a, it’s a disingenuous argument. I think he, uh, is, is using it effectively though. So let’s go back to a couple of other questions we have, uh, Ron B says judges on the bench, Robert and smacked me. Thank you for that run. I appreciate that. I needed that. Fortunately, we got it in time. Thanks for your help on that though. Captain track says, who can Kyle Sue if he is acquitted? So, uh, that’s a good question. I’m not a civil lawyer, but I would start with, uh, everybody, including the media would be the first place to start.

You got to Sue people with the big pockets, you know, Kenosha, maybe for malicious prosecution. They might settle it down the line. I don’t know Ron, be also no question with the donation. Thanks Ron Mackie, kiss, Mackie, kiss me. Ours says, uh, super chatted, $5. You are awesome. You’re awesome. And that name is great. [inaudible] we have Jay with the donation. Nice, super chat with assaults, a lot of salt shakers, salt for days and provided this goes to the right way. You’re going to have a lot of salt on your Turkey for Thanksgiving Turkey. Make sure you get your Turkey salted up. There’s a lot of it going around these days. Here we go says, Def should have asked the jurors, how many of you thought that chase down and attack binger when he pointed AR 15 at them? Clearly Napoleon was the aggressor.

Yeah. Sort of used that towards. He could have jabbed him about that. Well, the prosecutor here just did the exact same thing that Kyle Rittenhouse or they’re alleging Kyle Rittenhouse did at least maybe for the reckless endangerment charge. Uh, Jennifer says firearm safety. Number one, always treat every firearm as if it is loaded. Number two, always point it in a safe direction. Number three, finger off the trigger, unless you intend to fire, which is obvious, but Thomas banger, that might be the first time he ever held a gun, kind of looked like it. Rag junior says, how much do you think it affects the jury that people are already calling for riots. If Kyle isn’t found guilty, it probably has an effect. You know, it, it’s hard to put yourself in other people’s shoes, but you know, if, if I were a juror, it wouldn’t affect me at all.

I’d say, you know, I mean, I, you know, I, I have to do justice here, external consequences be damned, but that’s just, that’s sort of how I, you know, how I think other people are much more global citizens, you know? Oh, I think about all the consequences and all of this and, and you know, their, their moral decision-making is a little bit more malleable. I’m not saying one’s better than the other. It’s just a little bit more malleable. And, and, you know, they may think about all those external factors, whereas I wouldn’t. So like anything, you’re going to see a big, broad range of people, which is what makes this so interesting. We have Chi Rannoch says for, from Canada where we have no second amendment to protect us. Yeah. We still do in the United States for the foreseeable future, miss America, mom, 89 says, is it a bad thing that it’s taking so long?

I think it’s less than ideal. I would have preferred that it gone had gone much more quickly, but of course it didn’t, and it’s not automatically a bad thing. I would’ve liked a very quick verdict because if it was very quick, I think it would have been a not guilty across the board. Whereas a quick verdict with Shovan, we’re all like, ah, that’s a, that’s a hard guilty’s across the board because it was so quick in this case, you know, there was a lot of video evidence, a lot of digital testimony, uh, digital recordings, pixelated images, zooming in, zooming out all sorts of different stuff going on. So the fact that this is taking a little bit longer is not a surprise. And I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing. Independent. Aqua man says seeing the movie runaway jury. No, watch it. LOL. I have not seen it.

Maybe I should watch it. Thanks for the recommendation. See Reed says, just be careful on that David Case, big names seem to be implicating themselves with it. You know, after Camila got her eyes on Willie Brown staff, flawless victory on that one on that comment, uh, I’ll take a look at the case. We’ll see penguin man says, can the judge give a directed verdict? If the jury is hung? Uh, not for that reason, it’s a judgment. Notwithstanding the verdict would have to be like no reasonable juror. Jury could have come to the that. They came too. And so he takes it away from them and a hung jury is not that it’s a, it’s a different type of a remedy. Ben Tomlinson says the risk of a rogue juror, according to Barnes was because the defense only spent a day on jury selection, even though 30% of the population said they found Rittenhouse guilty regardless of the facts. Yeah, I did see that. And um, I’m not, I’m not sure.

I’m not sure how much more void dear jury selection the judge would have allowed. The judge got them seated rapidly. What we saw with Shovan was individual voice. Dear, every single juror we got to hear questions about where are you from? What do you do, teacher school, mother what’d you see in the news, all that stuff. We did not get that in this case, the judge just allowed them a handful of blanket questions. And then the judge picked them one by one. So, you know, I’m not real sure if the judges rules would have allowed for a very robust, very deep voice Deere process. Uh, okay. We’ve got Wolfgang, Dayo says blame, angry battling for all the injustices we’ve got, your pal says, maybe I’m odd, but I would be more afraid to convict. And so clear, cut a case. What if I need to exercise self-defense at some point in the far future, right?

You might be on the hook. And so I think that that’s a very astute observation. The jurors are going to say, what do I want to incentivize? Do I want to incentivize people defending property and trying to stop the destruction of a city? Or do I want to incentivize rioters and looters and people who are causing mayhem and wreckage all around our society? Which one do I want to incentivize? My decision is going to tip the scale one way or the other, which one do I want to pick? And I think that’s why jurors are going to find the way that they find new digital blue says what the prosecution stance on. You need a gun pointed at you to shoot in self-defense how many cops would have to be put in jail for being attacked with a knife bat, et cetera.

I see what you’re saying. Yeah. I mean the prosecution stance on self-defense is sort of fluid and I don’t really think they have a standard. They didn’t like any of the arguments that written houses team put forward. Rosenbalm chasing not self-defense Huber attacking with a skateboard, not self-defense gross crits pointing an actual loaded gun. Still not self-defense. So I don’t think that they actually have much of a standard. Jennifer says the sixth amendment obviously needs to be updated to include protection of the trial from the media, the founders couldn’t fathom this mess, that amongst many other things, I don’t think that they would. I think that they would, you know, their eyes would be rolling in the back of their heads if they saw what has happened to this country. Uh, my address Emory says, if it goes to Friday, chances of a compromised verdict drastically increases guilty on some of the lesser included.

Also a very big concern when they had the weapons charge and the curfew violation. At one point, those were the two. I was concerned that they might split on right, a quick Kyle on the homicide charges, but then allow all of the, uh, convictions on the lesser offenses. It’s kind of a slap on the wrist. We’re not going to get them for murder, but we are going to get him for curfew and for being in possession of a gun. So they can kind of, you know, compromise. Hopefully that’s not the case, but, uh, we’ll, we’ll see, mark Stuber says there should be. Full-time independent prosecutors dedicated to prosecuting ADA’s for misconduct and state witnesses for perjury in every jurisdiction, they try, they try stuff like this. They create these independent counsels, like a five defense lawyers, five prosecutors, five judges, and they’re supposed to, you know, get together and work stuff out.

I haven’t seen much come out of them, but, but it’s a good idea. Um, I am for, you know, for improvements in justice, I’m just happy that people are paying attention to this area of life. Wolfgang says let’s go, Brandon team represent also let’s get Brandon to quit from Wolfgang Dale. Good to see you Wolfgang. Now not letting Kyle go because of fear is ridiculous. People need to do what’s right. Not fear. The mob of idiots. That’s from Ryan. Henahan thank you for that, Ryan. I appreciate you being here. We got that from mark. Let’s see a couple more before we wrap up it is Tuesday. And so we always wrap up a little bit early, but we have Jamesy Jupiter says as an American, the prosecution and the people siding with them should be disgusted that they are standing up for these criminals. I said that yesterday, you know, I’ve been pretty hard on prosecutors, but I think what you’re seeing here is not an anomaly.

This is Kraus and binger are two peas in a pod. And that pod is numerous out there in prosecutor’s offices. Throughout society. Wolfgang Dayo says prioritize self-defense and less rioters will place less people in self-defense situations. Another good astute observation it’s incentives. What kind of society do you want to live in? The jurors have to live in the same society as the rest of us. So if they’re creating an environment where it’s more dangerous, vis-a-vis their ruling. Well, they have to live in that world. News now says, I know it’s not on your list, but you mind covering the defense for Arbery shooting, asking the judge to remove any black pastors. I tried watching it multiple times with an open mind, but it is hard, but you mind covering the defense for Arbery shooting. I have not seen that. Yeah. I’ll take a look at that news now, Wyoming.

That’s insane. Now I did hear also the defense attorney talking about, uh, wanting to silence that other attorney who I think is filing the civil rights claims for the Arbery family, weird stuff happening in that case. I’ll I’ll change gears over there soon. What do you think about when the jury asks self-defense papers one through six. I seriously think that they’re looking at the whole case. The state is presenting. Even if the verdict is biased, the judge can dismiss this case with prejudice. That’s from woods oh eight. Well, thank you for that woods. Yeah. I think the jury asked for all of the jury instructions news now says according to court TV, the gun was pointed at the end of the jury pool at the last few jurors. Seriously, he pointed a gun at the jury. That’s insane. That’s crazy. I mean, there’s gotta be other pictures in there.

Monster one says, according to the Sobek two holdouts are afraid of backlash. They are on talking about it on Nick’s channel. We miss that. I was prepping for the show. Speech on leash says, since binger said that having a gun pointed at someone will make them nervous and afraid for their life. Would it have been okay for someone in the courtroom to clock him over the head twice with a skateboard? That’s a good question. Maybe he should’ve fought him like a man. Maybe James Krauss should have got up there and just duped it out with them and just settled it like a couple of bros out in an alley behind the bar.

Oh, all right. Be brave says decision, worst title ever. You got my hopes up. It looks like Soros. Minions are out in full force. Oh, I see. I might have to change that. Yeah. I might have to change that. I meant that they’re giving it to the jury for a decision. Not that we have a decision. So that’s a good point. A little bit of a bait and switch there. Maybe I’ll leave it so I can just anger everybody. Uh, brig says Rob AR platform has an empty cartridges reflector that keeps the brass out of the face when shouldering it Richards was technically wrong with that. Uh, however, the kind of sling Kyle had to point versus single point makes it pretty hard to do without completely doffing the sling. Pretty much impossible for an individual without training and lots of repetition. The Hocus Pocus focused pic picture shows a shadow or an enhancement aberration, not a shouldered rifle of this.

I am 100% confident. That’s from breaks 57, which is outstanding. Thank you for the clarification there. Briggs, because I was, I was rolling with Richard’s argument and his characterization of this Eden test says, I can’t remember if you pick the over the under, it looks like 2 45 is blown out. John. Also, I wonder if they take some measures to walk jurors out the back door somehow and to obscure their identity. So I think so they have a bus, they have a pickup point and everything sort of shielded and they bused them into the bottom of the courthouse and bring them upstairs. So, um, yeah, th the under is blown out. I don’t know what I had. I think I had multiple different sides of that bet. John Dolores says he’s getting found guilty of at least one charge. It’s the only way the jurors can cover themselves.

Uh, picking up the pace. We’ve got a brick says on the Roadhouse still from yesterday, it was 1989 movie, right? About when binger was in high school. I’ll bet he had posters of Patrick Swayze all over his bedroom and mom won Briggs. Oh, Briggs, LA medics. As I understand your kindness towards crowds, but I think that both of the prosecutors are not great people. They’re showing no integrity, little faith in the process. The lying and disrespect are just too much for me. I know LA medic. I know, I know. I get it. Look, you know, I think that people are broken and I saw a broken person in Krauss yesterday when he was delivering that closing, it was, it was a sad thing to watch. I feel bad for him. I hope he’s, you know, I hope I hope he’s doing okay today. You know, he’s probably getting abused by the internet.

Not that he doesn’t deserve it, but I do feel bad. Maybe I’m just a big softie. Cherry X says, uh, uh, maybe that was, uh, Hey Rob, you ever represented a trespass case? Just wondering what your thoughts are on the rest of swamp squatter, Don quake. Thanks. Uh, I don’t know who that is, but yes, many trespass cases. We get a lot of trespass cases every, every month, because it happens at old town Scottsdale, which is right down the street from us. I’ll actually all over Arizona trespass. Very common speech on leash says, do you have the ability to see if binger was ever cited for doing something really wrong in a court trial? Wonder if his behavior in this trial is a norm for him or something special that he chose to do this for trial I speech. This is just how prosecutors are.

This is just the, the mindset they think they’re doing justice. This is not uncommon. It’s not, I know it’s crazy. All right. Uh, the Vulcan ear says, do you think binger crowds are compromised based on the language during the closing, they seem to be sympathetic to the rioters. I don’t know that they’re compromised. I mean, I think that they’re just genuine. Prosecutors who believe that they’re fighting on the side of justice. They’ve been puffed up for a year saying you’re doing the righteous thing by everybody in the media. Unfortunately, the facts didn’t support them. Wolfgang says one more peace, peace, peace. And Wolfgang says, jury holds until Friday for free lunch. And for jeopardy, they’re having a great time. They’re having fun. What do you want a verdict? We get the day off of work. We get free lunches, Asian food, by the way, according to the judge.

And we also get to play jeopardy with this nice old grandpa all day in court. Oh, we’re not going anywhere. Sorry, Kyle Taurus, Taurus. No question, but with a nice donation and we’re going to have to wrap it up there folks. Cause I got one minute left. If I missed you on locals, I apologize. We’ll see if we can get those tomorrow. I’m going to do a separate, uh, good morning live stream tomorrow on locals. So come check that out and we’ll get through the rest of those questions. If we have nothing else to talk about, I want to welcome a lot of new people to our community. I haven’t updated this screen in a while. I apologize for that. We’ve been doing late streams and I have now done it. So give me one quick minute. We’ve got unsheathed. We’ve got Tucker grab. We’ve got Tommy nukes.

We’ve got Fantasma Gloria in the house. We’ve got black cat Meow. We’ve got Nick McLeod. We’ve got Dr. Brenton in the house. We’ve got ti Blakemore. We have Patriot minute. Welcome Chris. C 1 2 3, Dr. Sammy D we’ve got pub crawl. Julie fluffy is in the house woods. Oh eight. Saw him today. We’ve got karaoke princess. We’ve got not the greats. We have Cora Coco Overton joined us transparency in the house. Miss sin. Lynn, we have desert pirate. Shout out we have BJR. We’ve got Jay boats and that’s just on the first page. My friends I’m so, so grateful and humbled. We have DC gen in the house. We’ve got David Orndorff. We’ve got yo Han nicety. We have miles Braeden. We’ve got time. Lord Stu test her 22 T O G roll. We’ve got, Corona’s a dare. The next unicorn, Jack solely. Yay in the house.

The next unicorn official glitch. Duboeuf custodies P new Robert Emery chip Vaughn, shoulder para LA. We’ve got crime junkie. Geco we’ve got future freedom. Now Briggs 57 in the house. Gecko man, PWS MKZ, CPO for ever. And of course de Dell speed and woo. We’ve got a lot of new people over at watchingthewatchers.locals.com. We’re having a ton of fun. We’ve got a monthly locals meetup coming up in December. I’m going to get a date on that soon enough. And I’ll tell you when that is, but I hope you can join us. We’re building a community over there where we’re sharing information and getting to know people by names and faces and connecting because we know that as the world is sort of, you know, going through difficult times all around us. The thing that really keeps us all grounded is community. And that’s what we’re building over at watchingthewatchers.locals.com. I hope you can join us there that my friends is it for me for the day we are going to be back tomorrow. Timing. I don’t know. We’re going to wait for the jury to come and render a verdict. I hope that you stick around and join us would appreciate before you head out one final reminder for a subscription. If you’re not already subbed to our channel. And of course a like a comment, a share, I really appreciate it. If you would send this to a friend or family member, tell them to come on and join the show. When we go live tomorrow that my friends is it for me. I want to thank you for being a part of the program tonight. Everybody have a tremendous evening sleep very well. I’ll see you right back here tomorrow. Bye-bye.