It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The upcoming lawsuit involving Joe Biden

page: 2
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

Yeah, I will admit it's a stretch, even for a conspiracy site.
The foot thing is one. The woman who popped into the midfle of the frame wearing fishnets and walking out the door was another crazy anomaly.

Haven't seen the sh connection, that's new for me. They clearly recycle actors like Gabby Petito who made a sh music video shortly after.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: IAMALLYETALLIAM

He? You used the word he several times, but did not associate a name with it.



If you use some basic comprehension skills and read the thread you’ll see I was talking about Australian journalist and reporter for Rebel News Avi Yemeni.

Or does gendered language offend you?



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Calling an innocent young man exercising his constitutional rights a "white supremacist" is right up there next to using racial slurs and should be treated as such.


By all means, let us know when a federal government official or one running for the highest office in the land uses his public platform to throw racial slurs and we will talk.


I may be wrong, but I had assumed that poster was referring to Biden's allusions to white supremacy in discussing Rittenhouse during his 2020 campaign, which TzarChasm denounced, and I agree with them.

IMHO those running for POTUS or a sitting POTUS should never weigh in on pending/ongoing criminal cases, until the trial is over, lest their comments influence jurors.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

I was alluding to any media platform trying to tie Kyle to a white supremacist agenda.


edit on 23-11-2021 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Big problem for the lawsuit "respondents" like Biden is they made many of the Public comments when Rittenhouse was a minor. Joke's on them in the end 😃



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

I was alluding to any media platform trying to tie Kyle to a white supremacist agenda.



Yeah, I'm with you on that.

The problematic part is that our POTUS seems to have made similar biased comments, but as usual, he is not held accountable or questioned on it.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Trump said there are good people on each side of the
" bring down the statue " debate. It was not ever about skin heads or nazis...just selective editing and propaganda.
It's disgusting how many people fell for that and still believe that one


originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Calling an innocent young man exercising his constitutional rights a "white supremacist" is right up there next to using racial slurs and should be treated as such.


Yep. Far worse than saying there are good people on all sides.

edit on 23-11-2021 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I know you were aware of that


originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Calling an innocent young man exercising his constitutional rights a "white supremacist" is right up there next to using racial slurs and should be treated as such.


Yep. Far worse than saying there are good people on all sides.

edit on 23-11-2021 by fringeofthefringe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Mandroid7

I watched a sizable portion of the trial and was more focused on the lack of any professional prosecution.

Can you send specifics?



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

Can you or some other folks kindly educate me on rittenhouse being involved in sandyhook?

One would imagine crisis actors have a short career and are not recycled to avoid being noticed. I say that, but clearly whoever is making decisions, or whatever, doesnt care if the narrative is believable anymore and/or want to be noticed.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 07:57 PM
link   
As I just stated in another thread, I have no source for this so am unsure if it is true but, have just seen a post on LinkedIN asserting that Rittenhouse has retained Todd McMurty to represent him in multi-million dollar defamation suits against CNN, MSNBC and ABC,

Godspeed young fella, how many defamation suits do you have to lose before you stop with the crap, activist reporting?

ETA: for those unaware, Todd McMurty is the lawyer who successfully represented Nick Sandman.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMALLYETALLIAM
As I just stated in another thread, I have no source for this so am unsure if it is true but, have just seen a post on LinkedIN asserting that Rittenhouse has retained Todd McMurty to represent him in multi-million dollar defamation suits against CNN, MSNBC and ABC,

Godspeed young fella, how many defamation suits do you have to lose before you stop with the crap, activist reporting?

ETA: for those unaware, Todd McMurty is the lawyer who successfully represented Nick Sandman.


Ironically grifter attorney Lin Wood actions at the beginning of Kyle Rittenhouse representation will probably nuke Rittenhouse chances on any defamation lawsuit.

Unlike the Sandman case, Wood started going on interviews and putting Rittenhouse on interviews in the early going of the case. This basically denies him the chance of filing the lawsuit as a “private person” and instead will have to file any lawsuit as a “public figure”.

The standard to prove “malice” which is the legal term on defamation lawsuits is much much higher on people the court determine are “public figure” than “private person” because public figures are out an about doing interviews or having their reps doing interviews and the media can react to those what ever way they want basically absolving them of the “malice” liability.

So once again Lin Wood causes a disaster for those who he is charged to represent.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Bunch

Which early interview was the most damaging? 🦇



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

I get that. What I didn't get was the punish the same as "racial slurs" portion. As it stands right now, I'm not sure there would be grounds for financial restitution over any of the myriad of examples of a public figure using a racial slur primarily because nobody sitting in a position of policy making has been stupid enough to utter such in public (yet). So my issue is that I find a figure in a position of authority slandering the character a figure awaiting trial using a racially motivated, demonstrably false and unproven characterization to be worthy of much, much sterner punishment and restitution than any previously observed case of a "racial slur."



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Bunch

Which early interview was the most damaging? 🦇


To be honest I don’t know. I’m going by the latest Rittenhouse interview. I’ve been wondering for sometime now about the animosity that Rittenhouse and his current team has against Lin Wood. Then on the interview Rittenhouse said this:


"Lin Wood was raising money on my behalf, and he held me in jail for 87 days, disrespected my wishes, put me on media interviews which I should never have done. He said, 'Oh, you're going to go talk to The Washington Post' which was not a good idea," Rittenhouse said.

Source: www.newsweek.com...

Any attorney worth their salt would had never placed their client in that position. So many things could have gone wrong for him in jail from a safety standpoint. And no criminal attorney would have their client doing interviews due to potential material information that can be given to the defense. And to add insult to injury the moment he began doing interviews he becomes a public figure.

That’s what I deduce from this entire Lin Wood vs Rittenhouse drama.

Edit to add: was able to track down the Nov 19 2020 Rittenhouse Washington Post interview.

Source: www.washingtonpost.com...


edit on 23-11-2021 by Bunch because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Calling an innocent young man exercising his constitutional rights a "white supremacist" is right up there next to using racial slurs and should be treated as such.


When it comes to the left, you're "guilty" until proven innocent.
edit on 23-11-2021 by Kromlech because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude
Putting Kyle on a national news station and giving him a chance to address the sitting resident in regard to spewing falsehoods is like a shot heard all around the world. 💡 moment for a lot of people.
A bunch of people in far away places heard of Kyle, a smile for Kyle for speaking truth to power!
Joe's only dignified recourse is rendering resignation.... dignified used loosely.

🙏❤



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: JonOnTheJohn
a reply to: Justoneman

Can you or some other folks kindly educate me on rittenhouse being involved in sandyhook?

One would imagine crisis actors have a short career and are not recycled to avoid being noticed. I say that, but clearly whoever is making decisions, or whatever, doesnt care if the narrative is believable anymore and/or want to be noticed.
Link to some info
ETA

I don't endorse this theory. I am also not saying it is total trash because this whole "crisis actor" theory has some basis in reality. We are all Psyop victims it will surely be proven one day. I feel that whatever is the truth with liars around us like a pack of wolves is going to be hard to absorb mentally for a lot of folks not ready for it.

edit on 23-11-2021 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2021 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: JonOnTheJohn
a reply to: Justoneman

Can you or some other folks kindly educate me on rittenhouse being involved in sandyhook?

One would imagine crisis actors have a short career and are not recycled to avoid being noticed. I say that, but clearly whoever is making decisions, or whatever, doesnt care if the narrative is believable anymore and/or want to be noticed.
Link to some info
ETA

I don't endorse this theory. I am also not saying it is total trash because this whole "crisis actor" theory has some basis in reality. We are all Psyop victims it will surely be proven one day. I feel that whatever is the truth with liars around us like a pack of wolves is going to be hard to absorb mentally for a lot of folks not ready for it.
Well gosh is the judge also a crisis actor ? Because it’s implied with the green screen theory that the entire trial is fake.




top topics



 
31
<< 1   >>

log in

join