Kyle Rittenhouse meets with House GOP members | The Hill
By: Emily Brooks
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager acquitted of homicide related to the killing of two people in Kenosha, Wis., during a 2020 protest there, met with a group of House Republicans in the Second Amendment Caucus on Thursday evening.
Rittenhouse joined the lawmakers at a gathering at the Conservative Partnership Institute office near the Capitol, a common gathering hub for conservative Republicans. Rittenhouse shared his story and held a question-and-answer session with members of the group.
Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) are the co-chairs of the Second Amendment Caucus. Those in attendance at the Thursday event also included Republican Reps. Andrew Clyde (Ga.) and Byron Donalds (Fla.), according to a source.
"It was an honor to have Kyle join the Second Amendment Caucus. He is a powerful example of why we must never give an inch on our Second Amendment rights, and his perseverance and love for our country was an inspiration to the caucus," Boebert told The Hill in a statement.
The meeting with Rittenhouse comes nearly one year to the day after a jury unanimously found him not guilty of all the charges that he faced, including intentional homicide and endangering safety. Rittenhouse's lawyers argued that he acted in self-defense.
Rittenhouse had shown up at a night of unrest in Kenosha following the police shooting of Jacob Blake, armed with an AR-15-style rifle and saying that he intended to help out as a medic. The night turned violent, and Rittenhouse, after being chased, shot and killed Joseph Rosenbaum and then Anthony Huber, who struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard, as well as injuring Gaige Grosskreutz, who was holding a pistol.
"I'm 19 and just got to speak with leaders of the greatest country on earth! This was an amazing evening where I got to share my story and discuss the importance of the Second Amendment. Even while the radical left continues to sue me and disparage my name, I know these great leaders have my back," Rittenhouse said in a statement.
Kyle Rittenhouse shakes hands with Rep-elect Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.). (Courtesy of Second Amendment Caucus)
He was referring to a civil suit brought against him earlier this year by the parents of Huber.
Since the trial, Rittenhouse has become a Second Amendment advocate. The month after his trial, elaborate pyrotechnics accompanied his entrance at a Turning Point USA conference.
Right-wing lawmakers embraced Rittenhouse around the time of his trial. Republican Reps. Madison Cawthorn (N.C.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.) and Paul Gosar (Ariz.) all floated making him a congressional intern.
Tags
Who is online
85 visitors
So go to a place he really had no business being, have someone hold and give him a gun, shoot people, then run for congress on the GOP ticket.
Something is really wrong with some aspects of our society.
Yeah, protecting yourself is really, really wrong. /S
So I guess you would have let your seventeen year old be there, with a gun?
Is this the kind of person you want in a future caucus?
I am going to guess yes.
Loved by the right wing when his only claim to fame is killing someone.
hopefully he used protection with blowbert...
Not just someone, he killed scumbags who assaulted and tried to kill him. That’s why it’s called self defense. And he had as much right to be their as the pieces of shit who were burning other peoples property down.
So yes, you all want him in the republican ranks.
Somebody that knows how to use a firearm for protection? I do.
I guess you need to look up the definition of "Self Defense". Here, I'll get you started:
Call it what you will. I posted this as he is some kind of right wing darling for the more extreme caucus of the party.
I have my opinion too. He is a scumbag little fat pig that is convinced by the people around him that he is some kind of hero.
He has never once showed any remorse for what he did, just like you all are doing.
I know how to use a firearm and just so happened to never kill anyone. So is that part of the initiation process? I must kill someone in order to get right wing praise?
Where did I say that? What I said is he was found not guilty and is as free to be a member of any political party, the democrats elected a man who molests his daughter in the shower. Why not let an innocent man join the GOP?
I call it what it factually is. Self Defense. Now, because you disagree with actual facts, you (and the rest of the left) have demonized this kid all because he protected himself during a riot you all supported.
Well go to the bakery and get your self a cookie. Have you been in a situation where you had to protect yourself with that firearm? My guess is no.
You are not going to make this about conspiracy theories so stay on track. You all want him and you all have him, willingly.
Says a lot more about the right wing than me....
Actual facts? No, you have your opinion.
He was a little shit that had to put himself in the situation.
The case has been settled and he is being embraced by the gop.
For what exactly? Because he killed some damn libs?
Have you shot your gun at anyone? Killed anyone? Had to shoot it in self defence?
[deleted]
I am not going to let you go off the rails on bullshit. It will be flagged from now on.
Don't let any of these guys get away with their bullshit, Ender. My trigger finger is getting itchy
They say ignorance is bliss, One person had their day in court and was found to have taken out the trash, nothing more. the other is literally trash.
They say wearing blinders one can walk off a cliff....
So you think it is ok for people to take out the trash so to speak.
You are judge jury and executioner.
Sigh....There was a judge and a jury, he was found not guilty. It was either because the Jury felt there were no humans killed, or it was self defense and 2 scumbags proved Darwin correct....They weren't the fittest.
No humans killed. So you could care less about people being killed. I suppose you call yourself a Christian too.
I sure hope he doesn't
Who ever said that obviously has no clue what blinders are.....
The link I provided you is not opinion. It's fact. LEGAL fact. Now because that goes against what you THINK is not my problem.
So that is your problem. He killed rioters, you apparently support, who were attacking him and was acquitted. AND he supports the 2nd Amendment.
Yes. 1 tour in Iraq and 3 tours of Afghanistan. Yes, I've shot at people, I've killed people. And at times it was in self defense.
I know the facts of the case. I can still have a valid opinion whether or not you want to hear it.
I see you haven't answered some of my questions.
Would you have let your 17 yr old son go there? With some people that looked like a biker gang and they gave him a gun.
Would you allow that to begin with? He knew there were protests going on and decided, with help, to arm himself and put himself in the situation.
All I am hearing is excuses. Stop acting like every case is decided the way you want it.
So I take it you have never felt remorse? I don't call being in an active war zone the same as self defence at home.
What you are only doing is trying to equate the protests to a war zone.
and your welcome to it , problem is when facts get introduced .
fact , he didnt shoot until he was attacked or threatened in all 3 instances , the one he shot that lived even admitted in court that he pointed a handgun at him . all indications of lawful self defense use . and there is no age limit of when one can or can not use deadly force in self defense .
fact. his right to be there was irrelevant , even though he has immediate family that live there ,believe its his father, grandparents and other extended family.
No, the scumbag is Rittenhouse. They were protesting peacefully when Rittenhouse murdered them.
That is my opinion also. All people with good sense and decency have this opinion.
Well... his aquittal is actually a fact.
Granted. 100%. He should not have been there.
But neither should the rioters.
He wasn't attacked or threatened - rittenhouse - they were trying to stop this fine young republican from killing someone else
So you are willfully ignorant of the case.
Because they are irrelevant.
As you said. This case is settled. I agree with the result. It was the correct verdict.
I never equated a riot (yes, it was a riot) to a war zone. You ask if I ever shot at or killed anybody. And I answered.
He does not have immediately family that live there.
Everything you're saying is false.
I saw the videos and can still form my opinion. You all are ignoring the simple fact that he himself put himself into the situation.
Because of the handgun was the only reason he got off Imo.
If I was attacked and threatened would I stay around? No. Would you? Yet he did, he almost wanted want happened.
The fact of the matter actually is, the article is about the gop embracing him and wanting him in the ranks yet no one wants to talk about that.
And he was partying at a bar afterwards with the same biker killer scum I believe - so no, he showed no remorse whatsoever
good points.
Everybody should have stayed home and got drunk
I agree about the rioters but the protestors had an actual grievance that seems to be ignored.
Just because I do not agree with what you say does not make me ignorant of anything.
If that is the way you want to play yes, I can insult too.
Shall we play a game?
So did Joseph Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber and Gaige Grosskreutz. Why are you ignoring that?
Rioters are criminals and should be shot, Legitimate protestors who follow the law are fine.
Anyone who was rioting, looting, or setting fires were not legitimate protesters - I don't know why I have to keep pointing that out - not to you ender - but to others.
But willfully ignoring the facts shows willful ignorance. And it's all to fit a narrative.
I am not. I look at them as what they are, adults.
No one is innocent in any of it, including the boy.
What facts have I been ignorant of?
If you are just going to insult get lost.
Obviously you didn't see the video, he did run away, they chased him down and assaulted him again, the only thing he did wrong is not center mass the 3rd attacker.
I obviously didn't see the video? Uh huh. I saw all of them. Just because I do not agree with your stance that he was some poor innocent victim doesn't mean I am blind.
The net accomplishments for racial equality would have been exactly the same, people would have had a better time, three people would be alive today who are not, and dozens of innocent small business owners would not have seen their life's work go up in smoke.
So yeah. Pretty much.
Yes, he grew up and lived 20 miles away. His grandmother, an an aunt, uncle, and cousins live in Kenosha.
I completly agree and burning these businesses was environmentally irresponsible.
I don't know. I have seen some drunken trailer park brawls. More people might have been killed...
What were you doing there?
“Yes, he grew up and lived 20 miles away.”
Proximity somehow equates to opportunity and thus absolution?
We all taught our kids to avoid dangerous situations, and if confronted in a dangerous situation to walk, run, sprint away.
That this misinformed young man escalated the situation by marching along with a weapon no less, and even worse…that he has become a cult hero and feted by those using him for their partisan gain is beyond despicable.
A simple question, did he run away? and did they chase him down and attack him?
Which time....
Almost sounds like 'grooming'...
I don't understand your question.
Perhaps his parents failed him with that.
That's more on the media and there supporters that both demonized him and viewed him as a hero.
“Perhaps his parents failed him with that.”
Undoubtedly. And yet getting rich in their transgression.
The times he shot 3 people,
we have a difference of opinion then .
i saw the videos as well, as well as have stills i posted here while the trial was all going on . what you saw
and your opinion is yours , i tend to agree with what the jury decided .
that picture sure looks like an assault to me one with the intention to cause severe injury or death , still seconds before a shot to the chest ended the threat. thats called self defense .
the hand gun was the only reason the jury aqquitted ? "Lefty" testified he approached Ritterhouse with his hands up , and ritterhouse lowered his weapon because there was no threat , lefty testified he then drew his handgun and pointed it in ritterhouses direction at which time ritterhouse recognized a threat and fired , again self defense you do see what is in "leftys" right hand right ?
Now there is no good video of the first shooting but there was enough eye witness testimony to piece things together . and there is enough credible testimony of the threats made by the first person shot .
stick around ? he didnt stick around , immediately after the first shooting , he ran TOWARDS the cops to report what happened , they disregarded him at first more intent on what they believed was a still active shooter situation .
Now im not a 17 -18 yo kid , im longer in the tooth and been around the block a few times , but if faced with the same things testified to and what i have shown , i would have shot the mother fuckers myself .
Now , do i care if he runs for congress or not? is he running to represent my state is my question then, if not none of my business , if so he likely wouldnt get my vote ., frankly i dont give a rip who either of the parties decide to endorse or welcome since i dont belong to either of them .
Biden’s daughter is off topic.
It was always going to be ignored. Because modern protests are stupid, and most people engaging in them are doing so because they're too lazy to figure out how to do something that actually matters.
Are there legitimate grievances? Oh hell yeah. But absolutely none of those are solved by burning down the local car dealership.
Please don't lower yourself to that level, Ender. You have a right to your own opinions, thoughts, and views just like everyone else here on NT. Don't cave to the 'game playing' like they do. Stand your ground and let them make a fool of themselves.
Time in this world is short, don't let anyone steal your time with their stupid games.
Where have we heard that before?
If i remember right , this particular protest was because a black man was shot under the premise of violating a protection order and being armed with a knife , which was denied by and in the media right up until it was admitted he was armed as stated .....which came out after the events involving ritterhouse , and rather quietly.
BUUUT , it was the summer of love 2020 right after george floyd and protests and riotous behaviour was not looked down on by some people .
the "unarmed man" myth was kept alive even after his admission.
ever wonder why the violence and anarchist behaviour didnt spread outside the little "safe " enclaves they carved out ?
for sure we had protests here in this little burg for BLM, they tied it to another case that was local though , actual "really peaceful rpotest marches and gatherings , but they garnered little to no attention and there was no violence or destruction .
Luckily, the courts see it differently.
You all just keep on with these wonderful new prospects for your party.
I am sure he will do spectacular on a national stage...s/
He will be better than AOC, Ilham Omar, and the rest of the "squad" (I'll bet ge doesn't marry his sister)
He's got you in freak out mode. That's always fun to watch.
Freak out mode? Seriously dude, get a clue.
I am not the one here rabidly defending the little prick.
Maybe if you hop online now you can spend your money and buy his new crappy video game.
No. Your the one making unfounded claims despite all facts surrounding the case. But unfounded claims aren't all that alien to you now is it.
It must really burn your ass that despite all your crying, foot stomping and hair pulling he's still free to live his life.
Sad that differing opinions bother you so much.
It appears that, unlike you, opposing opinions Don't bother me one bit.
I'm just calling out your willful ignorance on it while you rabidly try to convince me you aren't.
The only thing you have shown is the ability to insult people.
Keep it up. trump showed it is a winning strategy...s/
You should be unless you don't believe in the Constitution, the rule of law and and our system of justice.
Oh, your insulted. Not that I care.
So you think the courts never get anything wrong. That no matter what just be faithful little puppies and do as told.
Yet here you are...
No courts get things wrong all the time and people appeal their decisions and get them corrected if need be. The Constitution, however, is clear that once a man is acquitted by a jury he is found not to have committed a crime. He can not even be prosecuted again even if he admits to the crime. Do you not believe in the the Constitution?
What the hell. So you admit some cases are decided wrong, as we all know, yet somehow that equates to me not liking the constitution....
This one it got right and you are bitching about it. Yeah sounds to me your against the constitution. There are other reasons I think liberal hate the Constitution.
Good Times.
Any time you meet a payment.
Good Times.
Any time you need a friend.
Good Times.
Any time you're out from under.
Not getting hassled, not getting hustled.
Keepin' your head above water,
Making a wave when you can.
Temporary lay offs.
Good Times.
Easy credit rip offs.
Good Times.
Scratchin' and survivin'.
Good Times.
Hangin' in and jivin'*
Good Times.
Ain't we lucky we got 'em
Good Times.
source:
Not for at least 6 years.
Is he running for congress? It seems like he's just at this conference to speak.
He said he is going to when he turns of age. He was at more than this one conference....
That seems to be the requirement for today's gop/gqp.
The Republicans/conservatives accuse the Democrats of being soft of crime while they venerate Kyle Rittenhouse. Is that called an oxymoron or just plain hypocrisy?
You might have a point if Kyle was a criminal. But since he isn’t, your comment is pointless.
In my opinion, ALL your comments are pointless.
he was charged with crimes but the prosecution couldn't make the case convincing enough for the jury to convict. justice was served.
Oh, yes, I know. Personally I think the judge was Kyle's secret lover.
It amazes me the rabid defence they pile on for this one person. Just because he killed someone.
He actually killed two drains on society. He offset his carbon foot print +1
Such Christian values the right wing espouses...,
Who said I was Christian? A swing and a miss.
So just out to troll. Got ya.
It amazes me the rabid attacks on this one person just because he defended his life as proscribed by law and the Constitution and was found not guilty as he should have.
If an armed black kid who found himself in the middle of January 6th fearing for his life shot and killed MAGA rioters, would you give him the benefit of the doubt, too?
You certainty don't seem Christian to me!
i love it when they do that , and then act offended .
Would you condemn the black kid like you do Rittenhouse?
would have been better if you simply changed the shooters race but kept the same situation , instead of just playing the "race " card , you turned it political.
That being said , under THOSE criteria , with the same things that transpired and the kid did the same things , i would side with the kid and self defense, ok shatsi?
What difference would it make. Oh that's right your all hooked up on race. It all you got. Besides Rittenhouse was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. He has committed no crime.
What crime
did he commit? I seed to have missed it. He was arrested and held on $2,000,000 bail just as he should have. Went to trial and was found not guilty by his peers. Just like we want for all people accused. (the amount of bail may differ depending on the crime) the liberals and the democrats keep proposing to eliminate bail. For all offenses.
What crime? Actually you're right. Using guns to kill people has become such an everyday occurrence in America it's not even newsworthy, let alone criminal. You should be very proud.
You do understand that here one is innocent until proven guilty right. He was acquitted of any wrong doing that means he committed no crime. What part so you not understand.
Well buzz , using a gun to defend yourself from someone trying to harm or kill you , should become an everyday occurance , wait , i think it is , there are just as many reports of people defending themselves now than have ever been reported , so maybe , just maybe the problem is the criminal element that think people wont defend themselves if forced to .
killing some one trying to harm or kill you , is not criminal , even as a barrister you have heard the term , justifiable homicide . what ritterhouse did in defending himself was as was found in trial , JUSTIFIABLE. and thus allowable by law . no matter who disagrees with it or their petty opinions . .
What a way of life - HAVING to have a gun to defend oneself in a civilian situation.
What I DON'T understand is why was it his fucking business to take a rifle into a different State to get involved in something that it was up to the police to deal with.
well some people do suck dead donkey balls
he didnt cross state lines with the rifle, more misinformation that was cleared up during the trial , it was already there in kenosha , he had already paid for it but wasnt suppose to pick it up from the person he bought it from until he was 18. as for why insert himself ? anyones guess really but irrelevent since he was aquitted . besides he was charged under wisconsin law anyway and i believe because of the court of public opinion already convicting him , the prosecutor over charged him with charges , that wouldnt stick .typical over reach on his part.
the distance from where he lived and kenosha is a 20 min drive , and he has immediate family that lives there(grandma for one ) , just happens its on the state lines .
hell i lived in a place here in Wyo , if i stood in the middle of the street faced north south , one foot would be in wyoming , the other would be in idaho.
Yes, it was all an elaborate plan from the very beginning.
But then Rittenhouse and his lawyers screwed everything up by having a jury try the case.
Liberals will have to find another dead horse to flog.
He's a powerful example of how to get away with murder.* Yeah...I want my grandkids to see this asshole as a role model.
*this is my opinion and I'm entitled to it. The jury was wrong in OJ Simpson's case, too
Somehow if the roles were reversed, I don't see these same people being on his side.
how do you mean reverse the roles? i am curious actually.
He murdered no one.
Better roll model than Michael Brown
It looks he has political ambitions, which fits right in with the dumbing down of America.
Notice all the deflection. Not one word about him being a darling of the extreme right wing as they parade him around.
So I am taking that as they endorse him.
Yes, indeed, you should take it as an endorsement by the gqp - killer scum are welcome and embraced!
He is going to become a Democrat?
I don't see Kyle Rittenhouse as either a hero or a white-supremacist vigilante. That night in Kenosha, a 17 year old boy should not have been armed and downtown. That he was, is probably a mixture of growing up poor, insufficient parental guidance, some ambition to be a paramedic or cop and the lack of common sense that teenagers can exhibit.
The media, both left and right wing and their supporters turned this kid into the caricature that he became after that night. Likewise both sides took the opposite stance on who was shot. The left saw them as BLM martyrs and the right as worthless criminals.
I have no reason not to accept the jury's verdict and I'm not surprised that a poor, undereducated kid, is taking advantage of his current right-wing fame. The people to blame in this tragedy are those that fanned the flames in Kenosha and those on both sides that immediately assigned a narrative to meet their agenda.
Perhaps the bigger victime here that both sides have quickly forgot is Kenosha. An automotive rust-belt town that lost so much during the protests, and now a town polarized 50-50 without the funds to quickly rebuild.
This happened because Rittenhouse was in love with his gun. Since when are people allowed to shoot someone who is chasing them? To people who love guns and love "stand your ground", everything is a reason for "stand your ground".
In his mind Rittenhouse is a hero. He's not a hero he's a deluded punk. I do agree though that they didnt have the evidence to convict him of murder.
Apparently, the extensive video evidence and witness testimony persuaded the jury that each was in self-defence.
Self defense in our legal system predates the modern English language.
Running away is the opposite of stand your ground.
Remember the PA got caught tampering with the video evidence?
It's always fun to watch when the facts don't fit the talking points that some are fed.
He stopped running
He can punch someone chasing him, he shouldnt be able to shoot them and kill them just because he was afraid.
When you believe guns solve all problems you "stand your ground".
Whether he finally stopped or not, he tried to flee and then tripped. That, again, is the opposite of stand your ground. Trying to run away to deescalate a situation is a laudable thing.
Rittenhouse pointed his gun at the guy because he claims the guy was going to kill him. There is no evidence of that.
He is the opposite from a hero.
He wasn't just "afraid" the guy chasing him tried to grab his weapon (eye witnesses testified).
You can't make up your own story.
No. Rittenhouse pointed his gun at the guy. What was he supposed to do, let Rittenhouse shoot him?
The standard is whether he was reasonably afraid for his life. He should never have been charged to begin with given how lopsided the evidence was. But if you hate the concept of self defense, change the laws in all 50 states.
Wisconsin isn't a "stand your ground state," and that wasn't part of his defense.
Rosenbaum was the aggressor. Why didn't Rosenbaum leave instead of chasing Rittenhouse when he knew he had a weapon?
He stopped running , from a guy that didnt have a weapon, and turned to face him, with his gun pointed. I call that standing his ground. You can call it anything you want.
A violent criminal (Rittenhouse saw him committing crimes) threatens his life and starts chasing him as someone else fires a gun in his direction behind him. What more evidence do you need?
As a rule of thumb, don't tell someone you are going to kill them and chase them. People have the right to take you at your word.
Why should Kyle have to run away from a piece of shit?
That was certainly part of it.
John, if ever you find yourself in a situation where somebody is trying to bash your head in with their skateboard, I hope you will shoot them. You would absolutely be within your rights to do so, and should feel no remorse whatsoever over it.
I don't think he's a hero. I think he's a sad young man who went looking for trouble and....unfortunately.... found it.
sorry John but that was testified to during the trial that rosenbaum did threaten to kill him , and that rosenbaum was angry that the group ritterhouse was part of had put out a dumpster fire he tried to start ., even the people rosenbaum was with reported that rosenbaumhad become "unhinged " with anger .
and as before during and after the trial , your claims and opinions have not been supported by the presented facts or testimonies given .
you lost then and your losing now .
I know , bitter pill , i suggest a spoon full of sugar .
I call it that the jury found him not guilty, what do you call it?
“I call it that the jury found him not guilty, what do you call it?”
Not guilty as well.
But that he has become a quasi-celebrity, paraded around to feed the need, only to eventually be jettisoned when his usefulness is spent, makes him but a tool in the hands of even greater tools.
Kind of like the idiot family of Michael Brown? Used and then tossed aside.
“Kind of like…”
Pick the tragedy, exploit the victims, promise change, discard after use, deliver nothing.
Tiresome is too kind a word to describe the self-serving vultures picking on the all too available fresh carcasses.
The lawyers get richer. Or if you are a big enough scumbag you go to jail, waving at you Avanatti.
it doesnt sound to me like john is actually against self defense , it sounds more to me since he has stated that if it came to it it should have come to fisticuffs , but since one was armed with a rifle that gave an unfair advantage , so there should be a clear duty to retreat if one is armed before the use of a firearm becomes justified .and there are some states that have that law on the books , that one has a duty to flee or retreat before they can use a firearm in self defense , even in their own homes . I dont live in one of those states .
problem with that thinking is ritterhouse did try to retreat and get away from his attacker in the first shooting ,, could say he was as far as he could go after tripping and being attacked with a skateboard while lying on the ground the attacker wasnt showing any mercy because he was down , fact is he looked to be actually more intent to press the attack because ritterhouse WAS down on the ground , "lefty" .... typical snake like actions appear unthreatening then try and use the element of surprise .when he pulled his gun .
least we forget , lefty has petitioned the court to be allowed to change his name and keep his new name unpublished and anon .....ritterhouse is still ritterhouse .
Since . . . Always? If people are chasing me, am I supposed to let them catch me? Beat me? Shoot me? You don’t have to have a high opinion of this guy, but he has a right to defend himself. If he happens to be armed, that just sucks for his attackers.
When they are out to cause you great bodily harm. One of those he shot had already hit him with a skateboard showing their intent and another had a weapon also.
He fell down