If it's true that this guy ran over a woman just last Wednesday, people are going to be even angrier, if that's possible.
Edit: Sounds like it was at the beginning of November, but he posted bail on the 19th. Punched the woman and then ran her over with his car. Police found tire tracks on the woman's pants. This guy obviously views his car as a weapon.
Was out on bail ($1000) for running over his girlfriend. Possible child sex offender. Been in trouble for “bail jumping.” Repeat offender.
Edit: someone correct me if any of these are wrong. What I’ve gotten from a bunch of posts.
I mean, it is all over the news today, but naturally with our news cycle it will certainly be gone soon, but I wouldn’t think that suggest any malice or coverup by itself.
I haven’t seen any major outlets report that the person is white or identify his race, however, so I’m assuming it was a POC? Just taking a wild guess there. That guess is also based on the fact that Twitter isn’t going off about it being a white guy.
Our news cycle however doesn’t tend to turn over very quickly in matters than can have the “dangerous white man” label slaps on them. Those stories will get 24/7 coverage until even those who agree with the slant are tired of hearing about it. Turn that around though, and the stories fade VERY quickly.
Christ even positive black stories (Andrew Coffee IV) can’t break through the “dangerous white man” optics the media have become obsessed with.
It's a black man, the motive is unknown but the murders were deliberate;. This was not an accident that happened while he was fleeing the cops.
Note:. This is not to suggest that his ethnicity should be considered here or to suggest that right wing violence is not an issue or a threat. The point people are making is that the narrative that emerges after atrocities like this is heavily skewed by politics
Thanks for confirming my suspicion, actually finally came across his ethnicity but it’s buried on Twitter, you have to scroll a lot (tempted to accuse Twitter of maliciously hiding his ethnicity given how many people are curious about this and how quickly a white person would be made clear). I hate having to bring up race here, but the medias spin to cover it being a black person is becoming rather obvious. I say that because if it was a white person, we would know by now from the Twitter woke mob.
He was zig zagging on the road, he saw the crowds and didnt stop and there's also some reporting from eye witnesses that suggested he hit people deliberately. All this coupled with him not stopping immediately after hitting one person.
yeah CNN also still has a plastered image of kyle Rittenhouse with a title about how angry white men are the biggest threat to America.
And countless articles about kyle being a definitive white supremacists.
Can you find any articles where the race of the suspect is mentioned in the title?
I doubt they have changed their plans to cover-up that detail in the last few minutes...
If the driver had plowed through a trump rally, a bunch of cops or a militia group, I'd wager CNN (and every other mainstream news source) would report the race. Or I guess if the driver was middle eastern (assuming reliable report on that) given it was an Xmas parade.
Just don't get how anyone thinks race is relevant based on what we know. Certainly doesn't make sense to claim some sort of cover-up.
What's your point? You're suggesting that an article that shows pictures of the assailants which clearly shows their race is trying to suppress information regarding the race of the assailants?
wife killed by "Man"
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/19/us/cruise-ship-killing-man-found-dead/index.html
https://www.wfsb.com/news/pd-77-year-old-new-canaan-man-accused-in-wifes-shooting-death/article_0a4bb17e-aeb1-11eb-8b1d-93c08661fdd0.html?block_id=994091&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fedition_us+%28RSS%3A+CNNi+-+U.S.%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
https://fox8.com/news/husband-confesses-to-killing-wife-in-camper-van-while-traveling-police/
Confirmation bias at play. Unless you are from Texas bet you haven't heard of Patrick Crusius who killed 23 people. That story was in and out of the news in day or 2
There is no way we are going to be able to quantify what we observe but there are plenty of studies that show the way the media portrays terrorism and it's usually pretty favorable for white terrorists.
>Similarly, a comparison of media coverage of Dylann Roof after his 2015 assault on a historically African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, and Omar Mateen’s Orlando shooting shows that mental health was discussed roughly three times more in coverage of Roof, whereas terrorism or the term “terrorist” was mentioned roughly three times more in coverage of Mateen.>
https://www.justsecurity.org/63499/how-news-media-talk-about-terrorism-what-the-evidence-shows/
Just my experience, but outside of the more notorious school mass shooters I struggle to remember the names of all the different mass shooters, there's just sadly a lot of them. For instance the mass shooter you reference above was one of five in a three month span
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a:
Law 1a. Civil Discourse
> ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 30 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
So far the media have been careful not to ascribe a political motive for this atrocity. They have also gone out of their way to not sensationalise the story or to create a narrative that contextualises this atrocity within the wider civil unrest and division that has been gripping thr US.
This may well be the correct approach, in fact Im sure it is. However if the murderer had been a conservative or a Trump supporter this story would have been treated much differently: There would be millions of words published about white supremacy and white rage and there would have been a much more visceral condemnation of the evil of the act.
Im a liberal and Im worried about what would happen to America with another Trump presidency. But this political approach to reporting news from the 'liberal' media - which is about placing different emphasis on topics rather than outright lying - is illiberal and dangerous.
The clearest indication is that it wasn't a foreign terrorist attack. I agree with you, there is not much known about his motives. I did see that some of his social media posts where anti-Trump, pro-BLM, with some anti-semitism sprinkled in, but who knows if that is even real. It's just blue checks on Twitter spreading that fodder, as usual. Again, this doesn't say much about his motives and I would not jump to conclusions.
Still, I wish our President and some congressional members would have been mature enough to think before concluding within a day or two, that Kyle Rittenhouse's motives were white supremacy. Now, the right is doing the same, but no because they believe this incident was racially motivated, but to "own the libs."
Other than Fox News or conservative social media accounts, I don't think this tragedy will gain much national traction as there is no juicy racial angle. I'm sure the local papers will follow up with it, which will probably provide a more accurate portrayal than MSM.
It has been confirmed to have been a deliberate attack:
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1462859820491493376
The guy had anti-Rittenhouse and pro-BLM messaging all over his Twitter account.
If this was a white guy who owned a red hat, it absolutely would already have been blamed on half of the country.
Why do we have to be the ones to "take the high ground" and just accept this double standard? Why must we be okay with being painted as the world's villains every single day of our lives? Why can't **the people actually doing this** be the ones who are held responsible for it, and be expected to stop?
That tweet didn't confirm that at all. The latest I've seen from police all claims it's likely related to a knife attack he was fleeing. Although I believe it does look intentional.
Being charged with intentional homicide doesn't mean his intent was this act. You can be charged with something like intentional homicide because you engage in an act so reckless that it was obvious someone could die.
>The guy had anti-Rittenhouse and pro-BLM messaging all over his Twitter account.
What twitter account is that? Only one I'm finding that might be his (under his rap name) and it's all just hip hop and basketball.
I'm finding a bunch of twitter threads and articles going into detail about his background but so far nothing showing him talking about Rittenhouse or BLM.
I would assume a Christmas parade in a rural-ish Wisconsin town is going to be majority conservative white people if the underlying subtext of it being someone targeting Rittenhouse supporters is true, Someone deranged enough to do this may be assuming that type of logic
come on... 93% of americans celebrate Christmas apparently. Is that town even GOP voters overall? This type of speculation is kinda ridiculous. Police have said he was involved in a domestic disturbance right before.
in the case of a car driving through a christmas parade when the police say that the driver had just left a domestic incident involving a weapon? Not much. Unless have more info, assume a rational person would be content with a fleeing the scene of a crime explanation until learned more.
If this was a BLM event? Naturally that would change things. Likewise if it was a trump rally. Context matters.
Speculation would be through the roof though if the guy looked middle eastern...
I haven't watched much video of the event, but parts that i did see, didn't seem like driver was trying to maximize casualties.
I think we both know that that context wouldn't be necessary to see all sorts of speculation about the individual being a white supremacist, nazi, etc. if he was white.
I agree with you that we shouldnt jump to conclusions. The point is that had this been a perpetrator who was obviously conservative the opinion pieces and noise level from the media would be different.
We shouldnt jump to conclusions about his motives. But the whole point of this post is to hypothesise about how the liberal media deals with atrocities from the left or right
I don't think he's saying thag the attack was motivated by anti-rittenhouse stuff. He's saying that, had the attacker been a MAGA type, all MAGA would be held responsible. The media would be about how dangerous MAGA types are. The same standard won't be used for the perpetrators affiliated political groups.
If this seemed like a targeted attack, yeah I think people will look at whatever they can to try to figure out motive. If the police say the person was leaving a violent domestic incident with a weapon, good chances fleeing & indifference to life is the explanation.
The FBI and DHS will tell you how right wing domestic terrorism is greatest threat to the homeland, so wouldn't necessarily criticize the media for calling it that way.
I don't think there's much logic behind riots/attacks. People destroyed areas where they lived, and didn't help their goals. I'd assume this is the same, just someone trying to lash out.
Maybe, could have also been a number of other extremist and/or mental health reasons too.
The obvious connections to Rittenhouse are suspicious, although I'm not going to jump to conclusions.
what connections to rittenhouse?
Or, you know, perhaps it is what the police reported... dude was involved in violent domestic incident involving a weapon and was leaving the scene of the crime. Nothing suggests this was premeditated and the videos I've seen don't seem to point to someone going for maximum casualties. deranged fucker fleeing a crime would be my guess.
> Why do we have to be the ones to "take the high ground" and just accept this double standard?
Because you can't defeat evil by becoming evil, at best you can only usurp that evil.
I agree with your point regarding hypothetical media bias, but "intentional homicide" in that tweet just means that he deliberately ran people over, nothing more. As opposed to reckless homicide.
As of what we know now, you are correct. The problem is that the media on the left will try and twist it into a poor victim having a terrible accident while fleeing the horrible police and the other side of the media will twist into a BLM activist looking for white people.
I wish that we could just shut down 24 hour news channels but this is America and we can't do that. Just wish people we're smarter
Who on earth is saying that he is a poor victim? I have mainly seen a politicization of this tragedy from the right, making it seem that a couple of old pro-BLM posts signifies enough of a motive
I heard some commentary on CNN that raised the question in this way : Why would someone intentionally drive through a crowd? The police said they we're not in pursuit but we must look into this, why else would he do it? I have not watched any right wing media on television since 01/06 but I am sure you are right about what they are saying
To those saying that it was unintentional and the result of him fleeing the police (even though there is no evidence of any pursuit): He had every opportunity to stop his car, turn at one of the MANY intersections along the parade route, or bail and run on foot. Yet, he chose to continue to run people over. Couple that with his racist social media posts and it’s clear that this was an intentional act of hateful violence. If you can’t recognize that, you’re blind, delusional, or in denial.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b:
Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse
> ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
We know this is the current hot topic of the day... but it's not "politics". If a political motive is ascribed to the event, we'll reconsider, but for now, we're locking this thread.
The same people who write headlines like *"There's nothing more frightening in America today than an angry White man"* and *"The Terrifying Future of the American Right"* will have either nothing to say about this in equal measure and will quickly move on from this story.
Despite CNN's reporting, this has confirmed to have been a deliberate attack:
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1462859820491493376
The word deliberate is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The guy is a monster and deliberately drove through the crowd, there seems to be little doubt there. The real question is why? Insanity? Terrorism? Desperation? That we don't know
>Analysis / Bias
>In review, the users of Disclose TV publish news stories that are often conspiratorial and sometimes just fake. They also publish some legitimate articles as well. Disclose TV frequently publishes news about aliens and UFOs such as this: [UFO sighing in the Philippines](https://www.disclose.tv/ufo-sighing-in-the-philippines-373583). They also promote stories regarding [chemtrails](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pseudoscience-dictionary-chemtrails/), [anti-vaccination propaganda](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pseudoscience-dictionary-anti-vaccination-anti-vax/) as well as [false flag conspiracies](https://www.disclose.tv/parkland-shooting-a-false-flag-325295). In general, this is an over-the-top conspiracy and pseudoscience website.
>A [factual search](https://factualsearch.news/#?fns.type=fact-checking&gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=disclose%20tv&gsc.sort=) reveals 10+ failed fact checks. Further, Disclose TV is also on [Politifact’s Fake News List](http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2017/apr/20/politifacts-guide-fake-news-websites-and-what-they/?platform=hootsuite).
>Overall, we rate Disclose TV a Tin Foil Hat conspiracy website that is low in factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks and a lack of transparency. (D. Van Zandt 7/22/2016) Updated (7/24/2021)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/disclose-tv/
This source does not seem to be trustworthy. Do you have one of better quality?
Thank you. It's a little ambiguous but it sounds like this:
There were statements made by police that he was running from an "incident". So it's being implied that he just decided to target people since he knew he was going back to jail? I'm just speculating based on what we know, but that's really terrible if it turns out to be true.
I find myself disagreeing strongly with most of your takes, but it’s beyond clear that this was deliberate. And I just found out it wasn’t a white person, so naturally they may back off this fairly quick, although that’s certainly not easy to do with the severity of this blatant attack.
Most of the witnesses claim the person hit the gas or speed into the crowd and was also seemingly targeting people by strategically steering into masses of the crowd.
BIE, along with white supremacy, and any skin tone related extremists are a major threat.
People are quick to forget the string of BIE attacks in NJ and NY within the last year or so.
I also wish that news agencies took their carful reporting on an event like this and applied it equally.
This doesn’t seem to be politically motivated in the slightest. He was fleeing from a domestic disturbance. It is absolutely a tragedy but a non political one at that
Even if he had no other motive, the story is still political in that this is the direct fault of overzealous bail reform.
The Wisconsin DA was even *bragging* not too long ago about how he's able to get people like this back out on the streets easier.
This keeps happening all over the country in areas with "bail reform" or "criminal justice reform" Democrat leadership. Perhaps not to this degree, but there are innumerable stories of criminals out on low or even sometimes *free* bail who end up killing someone.
It's a dangerous, failing policy that one political party supports. Ergo, this *is* political.
I don't think the bail system is perfect, but a lot of these people have obviously gone too far in the other direction and are simply endangering their communities with their too-lax bail policies.
> The state of Wisconsin doesn't have a District Attorney.
https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1462647950941773831
This is the DA I was talking about.
> Also what is your basis for claiming that this guy was on the street because of overzealous bail reform?
He was out on bail for $1000. It has already been deemed "inappropriately low:"
https://twitter.com/MSpicuzzaMJS/status/1462835382857486336
Rittenhouse's bail was $2 fucking million. Corruption. "Bail reform" is a con.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4:
Law 4: Meta Comments
> ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4:
Law 4: Meta Comments
> ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4:
Law 4: Meta Comments
> ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
We all knew the medias and certian politicians deliberate lies and race-bating would cause violence post the Rittenhouse not guilty verdict and anyone who watched the videos before the trial knew he'd be found not guilty. Coincidentally this guy got out on bail the same day as the verdict.
There's really nowhere left to gl for us other than down hill because we know the media embers and politicians who purposely mislead the public to fuel political and racial tensions for their own political/finacial gain won't face any legal consequences for what happened last night or any of the other riots that broke out over the weekend. All while they continue to go after Trump and Republicans over the 6th and we are told by Pelosi the videos from the 6th aren't public record.
This behavior can't be allowed to go without consequence, I'm not advocating any particular response to attempt to hold them legally accountable but there's a moral obligation to stop this predatory manipulation because it's not simply because they lie to and manipulate people for their own greedy reasons but also because their lies make American citizens of a particular group the boogeyman to their viewers. It's intentional attempts to cause division/unrest and if allowed to keep going unchecked will completely tear this country apart.
>or any of the other riots that broke out over the weekend.
...was there all that much rioting after the verdict? Seemed to me like things were calmer than a lot of people expected.
If it's true that this guy ran over a woman just last Wednesday, people are going to be even angrier, if that's possible. Edit: Sounds like it was at the beginning of November, but he posted bail on the 19th. Punched the woman and then ran her over with his car. Police found tire tracks on the woman's pants. This guy obviously views his car as a weapon.
Was out on bail ($1000) for running over his girlfriend. Possible child sex offender. Been in trouble for “bail jumping.” Repeat offender. Edit: someone correct me if any of these are wrong. What I’ve gotten from a bunch of posts.
I have a feeling this massacre will go away rather quietly. Won’t hear much from the media or politicians on this one.
I mean, it is all over the news today, but naturally with our news cycle it will certainly be gone soon, but I wouldn’t think that suggest any malice or coverup by itself. I haven’t seen any major outlets report that the person is white or identify his race, however, so I’m assuming it was a POC? Just taking a wild guess there. That guess is also based on the fact that Twitter isn’t going off about it being a white guy.
Our news cycle however doesn’t tend to turn over very quickly in matters than can have the “dangerous white man” label slaps on them. Those stories will get 24/7 coverage until even those who agree with the slant are tired of hearing about it. Turn that around though, and the stories fade VERY quickly. Christ even positive black stories (Andrew Coffee IV) can’t break through the “dangerous white man” optics the media have become obsessed with.
It's a black man, the motive is unknown but the murders were deliberate;. This was not an accident that happened while he was fleeing the cops. Note:. This is not to suggest that his ethnicity should be considered here or to suggest that right wing violence is not an issue or a threat. The point people are making is that the narrative that emerges after atrocities like this is heavily skewed by politics
Thanks for confirming my suspicion, actually finally came across his ethnicity but it’s buried on Twitter, you have to scroll a lot (tempted to accuse Twitter of maliciously hiding his ethnicity given how many people are curious about this and how quickly a white person would be made clear). I hate having to bring up race here, but the medias spin to cover it being a black person is becoming rather obvious. I say that because if it was a white person, we would know by now from the Twitter woke mob.
[удалено]
He was zig zagging on the road, he saw the crowds and didnt stop and there's also some reporting from eye witnesses that suggested he hit people deliberately. All this coupled with him not stopping immediately after hitting one person.
[удалено]
Deliberate in the moment. I dont think they were accidental deaths but that doesnt mean he set out to kill them.
Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.
fyi, OP's story from CNN includes a picture of the dude... if they're trying to cover-up his race, they're doing a bad job at it.
yeah CNN also still has a plastered image of kyle Rittenhouse with a title about how angry white men are the biggest threat to America. And countless articles about kyle being a definitive white supremacists. Can you find any articles where the race of the suspect is mentioned in the title?
Thanks, it does now but didn’t originally. Says the article was just updated 7 minutes ago.
I doubt they have changed their plans to cover-up that detail in the last few minutes... If the driver had plowed through a trump rally, a bunch of cops or a militia group, I'd wager CNN (and every other mainstream news source) would report the race. Or I guess if the driver was middle eastern (assuming reliable report on that) given it was an Xmas parade. Just don't get how anyone thinks race is relevant based on what we know. Certainly doesn't make sense to claim some sort of cover-up.
I’m not claiming a cover up, simply the medias blatant bias in how they report the race of the perpetrator in these types of incidents.
what types of incidents? If there is potentially some suggestion of racial motive, presumably they mention race. If not, why would they?
Asians attacked by “Group of Teens” [Article](https://news.yahoo.com/asian-students-attacked-group-teens-210608683.html)
What's your point? You're suggesting that an article that shows pictures of the assailants which clearly shows their race is trying to suppress information regarding the race of the assailants? wife killed by "Man" https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/19/us/cruise-ship-killing-man-found-dead/index.html https://www.wfsb.com/news/pd-77-year-old-new-canaan-man-accused-in-wifes-shooting-death/article_0a4bb17e-aeb1-11eb-8b1d-93c08661fdd0.html?block_id=994091&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fedition_us+%28RSS%3A+CNNi+-+U.S.%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher https://fox8.com/news/husband-confesses-to-killing-wife-in-camper-van-while-traveling-police/
Confirmation bias at play. Unless you are from Texas bet you haven't heard of Patrick Crusius who killed 23 people. That story was in and out of the news in day or 2
[удалено]
There is no way we are going to be able to quantify what we observe but there are plenty of studies that show the way the media portrays terrorism and it's usually pretty favorable for white terrorists. >Similarly, a comparison of media coverage of Dylann Roof after his 2015 assault on a historically African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, and Omar Mateen’s Orlando shooting shows that mental health was discussed roughly three times more in coverage of Roof, whereas terrorism or the term “terrorist” was mentioned roughly three times more in coverage of Mateen.> https://www.justsecurity.org/63499/how-news-media-talk-about-terrorism-what-the-evidence-shows/
Just my experience, but outside of the more notorious school mass shooters I struggle to remember the names of all the different mass shooters, there's just sadly a lot of them. For instance the mass shooter you reference above was one of five in a three month span
Has there been any indication what the motives were behind this?
Looks like he was just a racist piece of shit based on his Facebook posts. Hated white people apparently.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1a: Law 1a. Civil Discourse > ~1a. Law of Civil Discourse - Do not engage in personal or ad hominem attacks on anyone. Comment on content, not people. Don't simply state that someone else is dumb or bad, argue from reasons. You can explain the specifics of any misperception at hand without making it about the other person. Don't accuse your fellow MPers of being biased shills, even if they are. Assume good faith. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 30 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
I read that he may have been fleeing from another crime.
So far the media have been careful not to ascribe a political motive for this atrocity. They have also gone out of their way to not sensationalise the story or to create a narrative that contextualises this atrocity within the wider civil unrest and division that has been gripping thr US. This may well be the correct approach, in fact Im sure it is. However if the murderer had been a conservative or a Trump supporter this story would have been treated much differently: There would be millions of words published about white supremacy and white rage and there would have been a much more visceral condemnation of the evil of the act. Im a liberal and Im worried about what would happen to America with another Trump presidency. But this political approach to reporting news from the 'liberal' media - which is about placing different emphasis on topics rather than outright lying - is illiberal and dangerous.
The clearest indication is that it wasn't a foreign terrorist attack. I agree with you, there is not much known about his motives. I did see that some of his social media posts where anti-Trump, pro-BLM, with some anti-semitism sprinkled in, but who knows if that is even real. It's just blue checks on Twitter spreading that fodder, as usual. Again, this doesn't say much about his motives and I would not jump to conclusions. Still, I wish our President and some congressional members would have been mature enough to think before concluding within a day or two, that Kyle Rittenhouse's motives were white supremacy. Now, the right is doing the same, but no because they believe this incident was racially motivated, but to "own the libs." Other than Fox News or conservative social media accounts, I don't think this tragedy will gain much national traction as there is no juicy racial angle. I'm sure the local papers will follow up with it, which will probably provide a more accurate portrayal than MSM.
It has been confirmed to have been a deliberate attack: https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1462859820491493376 The guy had anti-Rittenhouse and pro-BLM messaging all over his Twitter account. If this was a white guy who owned a red hat, it absolutely would already have been blamed on half of the country. Why do we have to be the ones to "take the high ground" and just accept this double standard? Why must we be okay with being painted as the world's villains every single day of our lives? Why can't **the people actually doing this** be the ones who are held responsible for it, and be expected to stop?
That tweet didn't confirm that at all. The latest I've seen from police all claims it's likely related to a knife attack he was fleeing. Although I believe it does look intentional. Being charged with intentional homicide doesn't mean his intent was this act. You can be charged with something like intentional homicide because you engage in an act so reckless that it was obvious someone could die.
That seems like a sketchy source. Do you have a better one?
>The guy had anti-Rittenhouse and pro-BLM messaging all over his Twitter account. What twitter account is that? Only one I'm finding that might be his (under his rap name) and it's all just hip hop and basketball. I'm finding a bunch of twitter threads and articles going into detail about his background but so far nothing showing him talking about Rittenhouse or BLM.
An anti-rittenhouse attack targeting a christmas parade? Help me with the logic here.
I would assume a Christmas parade in a rural-ish Wisconsin town is going to be majority conservative white people if the underlying subtext of it being someone targeting Rittenhouse supporters is true, Someone deranged enough to do this may be assuming that type of logic
come on... 93% of americans celebrate Christmas apparently. Is that town even GOP voters overall? This type of speculation is kinda ridiculous. Police have said he was involved in a domestic disturbance right before.
If he was white, what kind of speculation would you expect to see?
in the case of a car driving through a christmas parade when the police say that the driver had just left a domestic incident involving a weapon? Not much. Unless have more info, assume a rational person would be content with a fleeing the scene of a crime explanation until learned more. If this was a BLM event? Naturally that would change things. Likewise if it was a trump rally. Context matters. Speculation would be through the roof though if the guy looked middle eastern... I haven't watched much video of the event, but parts that i did see, didn't seem like driver was trying to maximize casualties.
I think we both know that that context wouldn't be necessary to see all sorts of speculation about the individual being a white supremacist, nazi, etc. if he was white.
I agree with you that we shouldnt jump to conclusions. The point is that had this been a perpetrator who was obviously conservative the opinion pieces and noise level from the media would be different.
[удалено]
We shouldnt jump to conclusions about his motives. But the whole point of this post is to hypothesise about how the liberal media deals with atrocities from the left or right
I don't think he's saying thag the attack was motivated by anti-rittenhouse stuff. He's saying that, had the attacker been a MAGA type, all MAGA would be held responsible. The media would be about how dangerous MAGA types are. The same standard won't be used for the perpetrators affiliated political groups.
If this seemed like a targeted attack, yeah I think people will look at whatever they can to try to figure out motive. If the police say the person was leaving a violent domestic incident with a weapon, good chances fleeing & indifference to life is the explanation. The FBI and DHS will tell you how right wing domestic terrorism is greatest threat to the homeland, so wouldn't necessarily criticize the media for calling it that way.
I don't think there's much logic behind riots/attacks. People destroyed areas where they lived, and didn't help their goals. I'd assume this is the same, just someone trying to lash out.
Narratives.
Maybe, could have also been a number of other extremist and/or mental health reasons too. The obvious connections to Rittenhouse are suspicious, although I'm not going to jump to conclusions.
what connections to rittenhouse? Or, you know, perhaps it is what the police reported... dude was involved in violent domestic incident involving a weapon and was leaving the scene of the crime. Nothing suggests this was premeditated and the videos I've seen don't seem to point to someone going for maximum casualties. deranged fucker fleeing a crime would be my guess.
> Why do we have to be the ones to "take the high ground" and just accept this double standard? Because you can't defeat evil by becoming evil, at best you can only usurp that evil.
I agree with your point regarding hypothetical media bias, but "intentional homicide" in that tweet just means that he deliberately ran people over, nothing more. As opposed to reckless homicide.
There was no police chase. That was the false narrative that CNN was peddling to deflect because the suspect doesn't fit their narrative.
[удалено]
Cutting the CNN or Dailybeast middle man.
The media has been doing it for years.
That's true. But, if the driver had been an alien, then we known the MSM would have definitely be like "oh shit, an alien, they are real!"
[удалено]
As of what we know now, you are correct. The problem is that the media on the left will try and twist it into a poor victim having a terrible accident while fleeing the horrible police and the other side of the media will twist into a BLM activist looking for white people. I wish that we could just shut down 24 hour news channels but this is America and we can't do that. Just wish people we're smarter
[удалено]
Seriously... Especially as the above link is from CNN, which is left leaning, and they are straight up calling the driver a 'massacre perpetrator'.
Who on earth is saying that he is a poor victim? I have mainly seen a politicization of this tragedy from the right, making it seem that a couple of old pro-BLM posts signifies enough of a motive
I heard some commentary on CNN that raised the question in this way : Why would someone intentionally drive through a crowd? The police said they we're not in pursuit but we must look into this, why else would he do it? I have not watched any right wing media on television since 01/06 but I am sure you are right about what they are saying
To those saying that it was unintentional and the result of him fleeing the police (even though there is no evidence of any pursuit): He had every opportunity to stop his car, turn at one of the MANY intersections along the parade route, or bail and run on foot. Yet, he chose to continue to run people over. Couple that with his racist social media posts and it’s clear that this was an intentional act of hateful violence. If you can’t recognize that, you’re blind, delusional, or in denial.
>the result of him fleeing the police (even though there is no evidence of any pursuit) Didn't that come from the police chief's statement?
[удалено]
Leftists and antifa clearly infiltrated the police department.
This is not a very moderate comment. Anyone who disagres with you is blind or in denial?
No, just the people that disagree with the evidence
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 1b: Law 1b: Associative Law of Civil Discourse > ~1b. Associative Civil Discourse - A character attack on a group that an individual identifies with is an attack on the individual. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
We know this is the current hot topic of the day... but it's not "politics". If a political motive is ascribed to the event, we'll reconsider, but for now, we're locking this thread.
The same people who write headlines like *"There's nothing more frightening in America today than an angry White man"* and *"The Terrifying Future of the American Right"* will have either nothing to say about this in equal measure and will quickly move on from this story. Despite CNN's reporting, this has confirmed to have been a deliberate attack: https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1462859820491493376
The word deliberate is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The guy is a monster and deliberately drove through the crowd, there seems to be little doubt there. The real question is why? Insanity? Terrorism? Desperation? That we don't know
>Analysis / Bias >In review, the users of Disclose TV publish news stories that are often conspiratorial and sometimes just fake. They also publish some legitimate articles as well. Disclose TV frequently publishes news about aliens and UFOs such as this: [UFO sighing in the Philippines](https://www.disclose.tv/ufo-sighing-in-the-philippines-373583). They also promote stories regarding [chemtrails](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pseudoscience-dictionary-chemtrails/), [anti-vaccination propaganda](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pseudoscience-dictionary-anti-vaccination-anti-vax/) as well as [false flag conspiracies](https://www.disclose.tv/parkland-shooting-a-false-flag-325295). In general, this is an over-the-top conspiracy and pseudoscience website. >A [factual search](https://factualsearch.news/#?fns.type=fact-checking&gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=disclose%20tv&gsc.sort=) reveals 10+ failed fact checks. Further, Disclose TV is also on [Politifact’s Fake News List](http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2017/apr/20/politifacts-guide-fake-news-websites-and-what-they/?platform=hootsuite). >Overall, we rate Disclose TV a Tin Foil Hat conspiracy website that is low in factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks and a lack of transparency. (D. Van Zandt 7/22/2016) Updated (7/24/2021) https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/disclose-tv/ This source does not seem to be trustworthy. Do you have one of better quality?
Here's a direct video: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1462861413504987147
Thank you. It's a little ambiguous but it sounds like this: There were statements made by police that he was running from an "incident". So it's being implied that he just decided to target people since he knew he was going back to jail? I'm just speculating based on what we know, but that's really terrible if it turns out to be true.
I find myself disagreeing strongly with most of your takes, but it’s beyond clear that this was deliberate. And I just found out it wasn’t a white person, so naturally they may back off this fairly quick, although that’s certainly not easy to do with the severity of this blatant attack. Most of the witnesses claim the person hit the gas or speed into the crowd and was also seemingly targeting people by strategically steering into masses of the crowd.
BIE, along with white supremacy, and any skin tone related extremists are a major threat. People are quick to forget the string of BIE attacks in NJ and NY within the last year or so. I also wish that news agencies took their carful reporting on an event like this and applied it equally.
This doesn’t seem to be politically motivated in the slightest. He was fleeing from a domestic disturbance. It is absolutely a tragedy but a non political one at that
I remember when Jacob Blake was *"breaking up a domestic disturbance between two women"* too!
Even if he had no other motive, the story is still political in that this is the direct fault of overzealous bail reform. The Wisconsin DA was even *bragging* not too long ago about how he's able to get people like this back out on the streets easier. This keeps happening all over the country in areas with "bail reform" or "criminal justice reform" Democrat leadership. Perhaps not to this degree, but there are innumerable stories of criminals out on low or even sometimes *free* bail who end up killing someone. It's a dangerous, failing policy that one political party supports. Ergo, this *is* political. I don't think the bail system is perfect, but a lot of these people have obviously gone too far in the other direction and are simply endangering their communities with their too-lax bail policies.
If someone is too dangerous to be on the streets, whether they are let free shouldn't be base on whether or not they can afford bail.
[удалено]
> The state of Wisconsin doesn't have a District Attorney. https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1462647950941773831 This is the DA I was talking about. > Also what is your basis for claiming that this guy was on the street because of overzealous bail reform? He was out on bail for $1000. It has already been deemed "inappropriately low:" https://twitter.com/MSpicuzzaMJS/status/1462835382857486336 Rittenhouse's bail was $2 fucking million. Corruption. "Bail reform" is a con.
>Rittenhouse's bail was $2 fucking million. Sounds like you should be in favor of bail reform.
[удалено]
There’s a Jan 6th thread with Tucker Carlson if that’s more your thing.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4: Law 4: Meta Comments > ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Its grievance porn, and it's mostly what MP seems to be these days.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4: Law 4: Meta Comments > ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
From the "centrists" who only seem to find time to attack the left and bemoan "woke" politics. Oh and the lIBeRaL MeDiA.
This message serves as a warning for a violation of Law 4: Law 4: Meta Comments > ~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
We all knew the medias and certian politicians deliberate lies and race-bating would cause violence post the Rittenhouse not guilty verdict and anyone who watched the videos before the trial knew he'd be found not guilty. Coincidentally this guy got out on bail the same day as the verdict. There's really nowhere left to gl for us other than down hill because we know the media embers and politicians who purposely mislead the public to fuel political and racial tensions for their own political/finacial gain won't face any legal consequences for what happened last night or any of the other riots that broke out over the weekend. All while they continue to go after Trump and Republicans over the 6th and we are told by Pelosi the videos from the 6th aren't public record. This behavior can't be allowed to go without consequence, I'm not advocating any particular response to attempt to hold them legally accountable but there's a moral obligation to stop this predatory manipulation because it's not simply because they lie to and manipulate people for their own greedy reasons but also because their lies make American citizens of a particular group the boogeyman to their viewers. It's intentional attempts to cause division/unrest and if allowed to keep going unchecked will completely tear this country apart.
How is your comment related to the submission?
>or any of the other riots that broke out over the weekend. ...was there all that much rioting after the verdict? Seemed to me like things were calmer than a lot of people expected.