Lessons Learned From The Rittenhouse Trial

Attention. You're listening to the Todd Huff radio show America's home for conservative, not bitter talk radio. Be advised the content of this program has been documented to prevent and even cure liberalism. And listening may cause you to lean to the right here's your conservative, not bitter host, Todd Huff.
That is right, my friend. You're listening here to the homeless, conservative, not bitter talking. Yes, I'm your host, Todd Huff, you can email me. I welcome it. In fact, Todd, the Todd huff show.com Send us your thoughts or questions or feedback. Whatever it is that you want to share with us just make it count. I most of the time you all do. But every once in a while. Every once in a while I get someone that I think Man, you missed a great opportunity. Todd the Todd huff show.com. Also connect with us on our online community. Totally free community, the Todd huff show.com where you don't have to be worried. Don't be worried about being censored by the Facebook excuse me meta Nazis. So the jury for the call Rittenhouse case is has been sent home. And we'll be reconvening this morning 10am Well, 9am Central 10am In the eastern time zone to reconvene. And to begin, we'll continue I should say their deliberations. Right deliberations began yesterday. And they the big news of the day was they requested instructions from the judge. At first it was like the first six pages or some such thing. And then it was the next 36 pages. And everybody's, of course, analyzing this and telling us what this means. And they've got some sort of insight, folks. I don't understand I do I guess I entered I understand the human nature. But this to me is like predicting, predicting elections or predicting. You know, folks just want to be they want to be right. They want to be out there saying I told you this was gonna happen. Right. I just that doesn't that's not my thing. I don't care about that. I don't know what any of that means. But I will tell you this. From my experience sitting on a jury, it's again, it was nothing like the media attention of this one, although there was some some media fact I believe the trial where I set as a juror was i i want to say it was was written about it people. I think it was people i May I have that messed up, but is a fairly well known publication and there were TV media, outside the courthouse, not when we broke, but they were reporting during the trial from what I I'm pretty sure that they they did that anyway. That's not the point. The point is the when you go to deliberate and for those of you that have served on a jury, you especially have a sophisticated, complex, I guess, series of charges and definitions. And that sort of thing. The judges instructions are incredibly important to understand and follow, right. I mean, that's pretty basic. In fact, we I don't know if we asked, I know, we asked for clarification on something. I believe this is what happened. We asked for clarification, because of how something was written in the law. But the judge would not elaborate. Basically, that's the laws, the law, you interpreted this as your job to interpret the law. And to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty or not guilty, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or not guilty. Right. So that's what's going on. And I I mean, good, right? Good that they're requesting this information good that they want to understand and look at what the technical components of the judges can instructions and what I'm presuming the description of the charges are and that's what we had in our packet of information. And they just want to get it they want to make sure that they're interpreting it, presumably, correctly. So that seems like a good, good sign to me. But the point is, as I've been thinking about this, what have we learned from this? I think there's a ton of stuff that we can learn from the cow Rittenhouse trial. I think there's a whole lot of lessons and some of these things we knew. But I think it's important. We don't know, folks. We don't know where people are in their journey to realizing truth and understanding the beauty of our constitutional republic. And the ideology, the worldview of constitutional conservatives, and we don't know where they are on that continuum as they might be tuning in, and welcome to the program. And I should say, too, I don't sound like this normally.
I think I'm getting better. I don't feel bad. It's just, my my voice isn't working in this the, the least desirable problem for a talk show host to have, I don't like to not be able to project my voice, or to feel like I'm going through puberty from time to time when my voice is like this. So what have we learned from this? Right? I think, again, some of these things we've already known. But here's a case. Here's a case study of sorts. What have we learned from the Kyle Rittenhouse case, I think one of the things I've got, I normally don't have notes, I get some, I've got eight things jotted down here on a piece of paper. And I'm going to talk about these things, to varying degrees as I feel I should as the program unfolds. But the first thing I think we need to recognize is there for anybody who wants to see anybody who wants to see is there's a reason why we have the right to keep and bear arms, what we would refer to as the Second Amendment. Now I can hear some folks who didn't like the fact that cow Rittenhouse even went to Kenosha, and I hear you I mean, I that's that's a perspective, but going there is not breaking the law. In fact, I would say how angry how angry are you? At the folks that were already setting the fires the 30 some fires that night, the damage done to more than 100 buildings, I believe is what I saw. How angry? Are you at those posts, what about the lives that they created massive problems two, or four, I should say individuals who could were no longer allowed to operate, who lost property, if they were business owners, they suffered greatly if they their homes or whatever was damaged, their place of work was damaged, when they go to the grocery store was looted. These things are massive problems. You know, some of these folks who live I know this from dealing. I know this just because I have been around these sorts of things, but also in my dealings with a communication with Shepherd community. Who's, you know, our, well, a nonprofit that we really believe in what they're doing and what they tried to do as far as break the cycle of poverty by getting people instead of government involved in helping folks become self sufficient and get out of that cycle so that their situation improves. And hopefully they can even then extend that help to the next person. It's a beautiful model. Right? I think it's a wonderful thing. So. But one of the things that you realize when you're dealing with inner city communities, for example, there are things I'm gonna mess the name up, I'm gonna mess up the term. But there are I think they're called food deserts. I think it's what they're called food deserts. So there's a lot of places in inner cities where they are deemed food deserts, meaning residents in a particular area don't have easy access to grocery stores, I think in general, or specifically fresh fruits and vegetables and healthy foods because they don't have vehicles. Taking a bus to get groceries is a massive problem, especially if you've got to buy for a family. How do you do this and get your stuff on a bus? These are real problems that that exist within all of our inner cities. And so imagine these idiots in Kenosha last year, who burnt down places, potentially I'm not even just if you're just burning down buildings indiscriminately, as they clearly were because there's over 30 fires that were started no matter what the well, the jokers that CNN or was it CNN, CNN I saw maybe it was MSNBC.
Had the ticker at the bottom that said mostly, mostly peaceful. Right. Protests and there's fires burning in the background, right? I mean, just totally. And that's something else we've learned as well which we already knew about the media. But you burn down places who are you hurting as my point you're hurting all sorts of people that have nothing to do with the problem. And so, cow Rittenhouse cow Rittenhouse if he did not have his weapon that evening, in all likelihood would probably be gravely injured or more than likely in my estimation dead. And so to me, this is a case study as to why it is important that we have the right to keep and bear arms. It is right there for anyone to see he wasn't shooting anyone that wasn't trying to attack him, harm him, hit him with a skateboard, kick him shoot him anything like that. He only shot those who pose a direct, immediate threat to his to his person, right great bodily harm or death could have certainly been the response or the result. Especially when you factor in the chaos, the lack of law enforcement and the number of people and the emotion behind it. There's no doubt that place was Kenosha, Wisconsin, the night of those riots and the nights of those riots, I think they that happened a couple of nights or for some period of time was how on earth folks was how on earth and a gun saved the life of Kyle Rittenhouse the right to keep and bear arms is incredibly important. Incredibly important in our ability to defend ourselves from an individual or anything up to an including the government who tries to harm us or to take away our God given freedoms and the right to life, liberty and property which was clearly what happened to Kyle Rittenhouse that night. So I think this is a case study. For that we also see an ad take a break here. We've also seen the reason why judges why courts in general do not like all of this media fanfare, right? We have seen. We have seen a circus, right? This is a circus all these trials. I'm not saying the trial itself, although the prosecutor was acting like he was leading a three ring circus at times. But I'm saying the process going around this the environment that was created in that community in outside that courtroom as we're seeing now tensions flaring up and so forth, which of course is predictable. And to a certain degree, you know, understandable a lot of emotion. On the line here, a lot of emotion involved. This the fanfare it taints the jury pool, it makes it harder for people on the jury with all that pressure. I am telling you they know, they know the pressure they don't make they may not know the specifics. They're not supposed to be watching information about this trial. I mean, I hope that's true. But would it surprise you if someone was watching it? Would it surprise you if someone saw a Google headline that said Wisconsin National Guard has been called to the courthouse or you know called to be standing at the ready because of what may ensue after the verdict is delivered? Could that possibly possibly impact someone's way of thinking remember after the the trial of the officer completely just forgot his name? Shogun Shogun, officers Shogun remember.
There were there was an alternate juror who made a comment during an interview who said You know, she didn't want to see bath. I'm paraphrasing, but she was she expressed some degree of concern about what might happen if they did not deliver that verdict. And that, my friends, is not anything you ever want to hear coming out of the mouth of a juror or an alternate juror or what have you, because that is not justice. That's something else I want to get into. Justice is justice. I'm a little sick of the whole social justice, climate justice. You know what justice is justice. And justice can involve things that are social or racial, but justice or I don't know about climate that they may be a reach, but justice is justice. We don't need some term in front of it. And we certainly don't need social justice warriors out there who are woke, who were trying to reestablish or change fundamentally change the way that a nation the way that our nation interprets and understands, I should say understands, because it's not it's not interpreted. It's understanding the way that God made the universe and natural law, and that rights come from God and not from government. Incidentally, I just saw a poll that said 7075 76% of Americans actually agree that government excuse me, their rights come from God, and not from government. What about that? That's some great news for conservatives out there, you ought to applaud that. I'm applauding that. Anyway, this is, there's a lot of things we've learned in this trial, I've gone through a couple, it should be obvious why there's a second amendment while we have the right to keep and bear arms and to protect ourselves from imminent threats that could harm us or potentially kill us. And judges don't like media fanfare because it taints the jury pool, it puts pressure on a jury, it makes it harder to get an unbiased result. And when we're seeing the recipe, I'm not making a definitive claim that that's happened and that jurors are thinking that but my Oh, my, if there's ever been a case where that's, I'm not justifying it, and they've got to stick to what is the right thing to do. But it's certainly, certainly we have to understand that it's impacting there, it's at least there for them to understand it to see. So there's other things that we learned from this situation, this trial a lot more actually. But a timeout is in order. So sit tight. We'll continue this when we get back back in just a minute.
back my friend, so we're going through actually I went through three, I told you, I only did two, just, that's all and I guess, uncommon it is for me to have any sheet of paper here while I'm doing this program, but I jotted down some things and some things that we should learn. And I will say learn I mean, we already should have known this. But let's say recognize relearn, maybe learn depending upon the person number one, it's important that we have the right to keep and bear arms and that self defense. Self Defense is where that idea comes from. That freedom and liberty comes comes from God. But it comes from the concept that I have the right to protect myself and my family from an imminent threat that could inflict serious bodily harm or death. Number two, the court system doesn't like a lot of media fanfare, especially if that fanfare. What I want to say ignites emotions, and really drives people to make a predetermined decision. Right? So there are plenty of people out there who have called Crowd cow written has a back there's been there's been tweets, was it a tweet from I think it was NBC. And I want to take that back. I don't care if it's in NBC, MSNBC. I'm not saying it was I don't remember who it was. But there was a media source and the tweet, or maybe the article. It said, it said basically that cow Rittenhouse was what to say his victims, two of his victims which implied or maybe even use the term. I'd have to look it up now that I started to say it but basically the media has inserted itself in this and they're saying things that are not factually true to call Kyle Rittenhouse a murderer to declare. Before we hear his trial, see his trial that Kyle Rittenhouse is a is seeking vigilante justice. And that stuff is not there's there's not been evidenced even remotely and again, I didn't sit down and watch the whole thing. But that's not even the case. Right. I mean, the case basically says he went there with the intention of shooting people up. The problem is the problem is that video the testimony of one of the folks that were that were shot and I would maintain one of the folks who was actually the aggressor who got his bicep vaporize, which is one of my new favorite phrases, I guess. But anyhow, I don't take play. Look, if you're gonna do that you're lucky you didn't get entirely vaporizes the way that I look at it. Anyhow. Other point I think we should learn from this is that there's only justice there's not this concept of climate justice, social justice, whatever other justice, there's just justice, right there is doing things that are the right thing to do. Having the law applied fairly, regardless of whether cow Rittenhouse is this was a 17 year old, white young white man, or whether he was an 18 year old, black man or whatever
it needs to do. This is so obvious, right? This is patently obvious, but there is there's just justice. These other concepts have political connotations, and they usually take us down the path of some sort of government interaction that well, that takes away our freedom or liberty, our choices, our money and redistributes it or taxes somewhere along the way. That's, that's where all these climate justice malarkey sort of arguments come from and where they take us. Fourth point at trial by a jury of your peers is a beautiful thing. This may surprise some of you, but I've actually heard people make the case that they think jurors should be basically professional. So you should be a professional juror. And that is I, I know, I think some people, some people make that assertion because I think they mean, well, they think, Hey, if you're someone who understands how court proceedings happen, and you understand the law, and you understand the flow, you might be better. But what's beautiful about, I reject the idea, by the way of professional jurors, what's beautiful about a jury of your peers, it's someone independent of the government, someone who's just out living there live in the same general vicinity, where you are, where you live, appear someone that's in your county, at least in most, most cases, unless a truck gets moved because of because of a biased jury pool because of again, the media coverage and fanfare. But but the idea is that you have people who are living there who don't have any, you know, they're not, in theory, they're not rooting for you or against you. They're going to listen to the evidence, they're going to say, look, this is a person that I can relate to, at least in the sense of, you know, we live in the same community. And this is something that violates the law. And it's clear, and unless that's the case, unless you can say they clearly violated the law. That's the only logical explanation I can come up with. You have to then though not guilty, but a trial amongst a jury of your peers is incredible. The other thing that a professional jurors would do, by the way, let me pause. Am I gonna lose my train of thought here on the professional jury thing. But I know that many folks are in favor of term limits. I'm not against term limits, right. I think term limits actually address the symptom and not the root problem. The root problem is that Americans have been asleep at the wheel for too long, we're disengaged, we have not held our representatives, our senators, our elected officials accountable. And I want to point this out, because this is precisely what's going to happen even with term limits, and I'm not against them. I would probably support them to be quite honest with you. But it's not addressing the real problem. Case in point. Patrick leaky Leahy Yes. That's a hat tip to the great rush limbaugh leaky lay he has announced his retirement after six terms, six terms in the US Senate, you know, many years. That is, that's that's as many years as Biden's been there. That's 4848 years. 48 years. And guess who they think is the front runner for the replacement? He's from Vermont. The replacement to leaky Leahy? Yes, it is the I think it's 74 year old. Single they have one House of Representative member of the House of Representatives. He's now going to be the front runner, supposedly, if you believe analysis and so forth. For Vermont's set open Senate seat because leaky lay, he's not going to run, presumably, because this is not shaping up to be a good year for Democrats next year because of the midterms and this unmitigated disaster brought upon us by the Biden ministration. But and leaky lay he is a Democrat.
Now why do I bring that up? I bring that up, because it is a political Insider's game, our system itself, our foundation, our Constitution, those things are solid and pure and good and actually a fantasy tastic base that we've built this nation upon, what we have is a problem that's created by the Joker's who were in Washington DC, the bureaucrats, the elected officials on down the road, or on down the road, I should say, of all these individuals who are making the system bad. And so if you add to the list of people who are professionals, or insiders, if you add to that list jurors, you're going to have more of the same and there's going to be those folks. If there were professional juror, and again, this is actually argued, this is argued by some radicals, I'm telling you take, you can look it up, but take my word for it. And so the idea, the idea that having a professional juror would somehow make for better outcomes that actually, in my estimation would put more political pressure on them to find Kyle Rittenhouse guilty and Mio my what an atrocious situation to be in and I for 1am glad that we're not in that situation because we have a jury of his peers. Now there's certainly pressure. But that's caused by other factors not because of DC insiders, that's well and bureaucrats. This is caused instead, instead by the media fanfare, and the mess that these clowns and professionals deceivers have wrought upon co written houses trotting timeout is in order. I'll continue this discussion of the things that we can learn from the cow Rittenhouse case. And we'll do that when we get back to tie back in just a minute.
Just reading here, I was asked me, I was asking me about Peter Welch, who is, again, I'm just telling you what political scientists are saying in the state of Vermont, but Peter Welch is he's been he had been in office, he first held office, state senator in 1981. Reminds me of Angela in the office, the senator. Anyway, 1981. He served a base it took a decade off and he became a congressman for the state of Vermont, in 2007. And he was appointed by none other than Howard Dean. Wow, you guys remember that? I don't have time to play that clip. Oh my gosh, that Howard Dean, radical. I mean, someone who is just entrenched he is. He's almost one of the poster children of today's modern radical Democrat Party. And now this is this was he was appointed by him. So anyway, I don't want to get sidetracked too much. I was just asked me during the break about him. Folks, self defense already mentioned, this is a God given right. And we see that in the written house case, any fair minded person watching as he's getting stormed, and struck, and skateboards swung at him and jumping kicks and people running at him with firearms. I mean, it is clear that any reasonable person, especially dealing with a mob, we're dealing with a mob at that point, who has set fires in a city who believe in utter chaos and lawlessness this is probably have a bunch of Antifa members running around out here, the radicals, the radical wing or the radicals of the Black Lives Matter movement. And fortunately, you can say this, even if you don't think Rittenhouse should have been there. Unfortunately, he did have a weapon to protect himself, which is a God given right now. I think one of the biggest lessons here and it's something again, that we know most of these things we know but these are just reminders. These are this is a case study as to why these things are so important, but the media can be downright evil and wicked. It is responsible for this violence to a large extent, and for the accompanying tension that goes along with it. And I'm going to make a statement or asked us before the program. She agreed or disagreed with us. So I'm going to make a statement here. The media is more responsible for what we've seen in places like Kenosha and by extension, what we've seen during this Rittenhouse trial debacle and I'm talking about the media I think the judge has done some good things. Again, I'm not watched every second of this thing, but I have paid attention. I think the media is more responsible for what's happened in Kenosha and other places and in the Rittenhouse trial, then Donald Trump could ever, possibly remotely be blamed for what happened on January 6, and they're having hearings thing about this. They're having hearings in Congress. And some point we'll get to the Steve Bannon thing, executive privilege, what's really going on their constitutional battle. I mean, there's a legitimate battle being separation of powers situation here. It is different with Bannon because he was not an active member of Trump's inner circle or advisor at the time of January 6, he was in the media with his own, whatever he's doing over there. He was in the media at that point in time. So anyway, I don't want to get into that today. I'm just I'm telling you, that the media has fueled so much of this and I'm going to go back and remind you hit some high points as to why we're even here with Kyle Rittenhouse. But I got to take a break. So tag my friends back here in just a minute
Welcome back, my friends, by the way program brought to you in part by our friends at Jones movers Jones movers.com. Visit them online and check them out. But folks, why? When it's time to move, I mean, that's that's a hassle, right? Whether it's the office, whether it's my goodness that you're upsizing downsizing your move. I mean, whatever the reason, whatever the reason you're moving, it's a hassle. Why not at least see what it costs to get someone to take care of that burden for you, you could call Jones movers 317-353-9217 317-353-9217 Or visit them online, Jones movers.com. For folks, we get to know I mean, I've sat down and had conversations visited the facility. Got to know these folks as well. So check them out. If you're in the market for fear even considering moving, it's worth your time just to see if that makes sense for you and your family or you and your business for that matter. So let's get back to these these lessons. And I said before the break the media is more responsible, infinitely more responsible, in my estimation for what has transpired in the wake of while in Kenosha and other cities around the country. And by extension, this trial, then Donald Trump could ever be remotely held accountable for or held responsible for. Regarding the January 6, so called insurrection, when our nation almost fell almost, we almost fell like chairs and chop in the city of Seattle. We were almost no longer the United States of America. That's what they want you to believe it's patently absurd and ridiculous. But that's the stupid narrative that they're pitching. And it's the next be ready. It is the next campaign thing. Republicans are too dangerous. In 2022, we've already heard him say it's, at least they're testing that that campaign slogan. It's why they want to pursue with the Steve Bannon thing. They're okay with the pushback. They just want to see drama. They want this to be front and center. They want the optics of this to look like Republicans have, you know, I don't know, conspired and colluded with one another to overthrow the government at the request of Donald J. Trump. So anyway, the media is responsible for this. And as I said the other day, Jacob Blake, they this entire thing. Everything that we saw erupt in Kenosha, was caused by the Jacob Blake, lies in the media, out and out lies in the media. And that happened, what August 23 of last year 2020. And they wanted to frame that as another example, of white officers just arbitrarily shooting unarmed, an unarmed black man which again, if that ever happens, I'm even going to go as far to say I don't care race of anybody. If a police off I do care. It's part of someone's identity, but I'm saying white officer shoots black victim black officer shoots black big none of that's acceptable, right. I mean, and those folks should be held accountable. Everyone. Everyone agrees with this. There anyone that doesn't agree with this is on the fringe of society. And we candidly don't care what they think anyway, because that is so disturbed and stupid and indefensible. So we're talking about a situation that was portrayed in the media. Deliberately. We had we had NBA players, I think it's hard to keep up because it's hard to, you know, keep track of all these stupid comments that people like LeBron James, made to LeBron James, which I'm not a person I know. It's been famously said, I didn't agree with this at the time, shut up. And dribble is what someone has said in the past. I don't subscribe to that. I think we have a country that if you want to interject, that have added I mean, this is a free country. I mean, I also think, at some point, when you continually say things that are not lining up with reason, logic, common sense or facts, I don't really pay attention to you, other than other other than potentially having fun with some of the silly things that are on your Twitter feed, or that are on your television show, as in the case of Don Lemon and tough guy, Chris Cuomo, the jokers over at MSNBC who are completely off the rails as far as insanity. And well, as far as insanity is concerned. But
I even think that there was a moment where I mean, comments were made by players in the NBA, and what the positions they were taking, and what they were alleging happened was not even remotely close to what we learned about Jacob Blake, it was so bad. Keep in mind, the same city, the same city that is charged Kyle Rittenhouse and put on this ridiculous trial, cannot find any reason to charge Rustin Chesky. That's the officer who shot and seriously injured. Jacob Blake. I think Jacob Blake is or at least was I think he paralyzed. They didn't this this side show that we've watched in Kenosha with this district attorney, that same office, same team didn't find enough evidence for rusty or excuse me for for to charge rusty Chesky who Ruston Chesky. The officer who shot allegedly shot Jacob Blake. So anyway, they are the ones that are there. They're complicit in the not in the crime, but in the fuel the emotional fire that has led to this stuff. The emotional fire that led to the literal fires burning on the streets in Kenosha, were incited because of the the stupidity and the irresponsibility of the media, which then in turn caused car Rittenhouse to decide to go to that city and now we know what happened from there as well. I'm gonna take a break sit tight back in just a minute Welcome back, my friends that all the time we have but there's one other thing I want to hit on something else that we should learn from this entire mess that we've found ourselves in with this Britain house trial and of which of course is an extension of this Jacob, Jacob Blake thing, his identity politics, identity politics bears so much of the responsibility here and who are the Joker's who are the cast clowns who are constantly constantly preying upon the emotions and feelings of people based upon identity politics. You know the answer to that is it is in fact the radical left. I gotta wrap it up for the day. Thank you so much for listening, folks. Have a great day. SDG see tomorrow. Take care