[cuban leaf]

I wathce the Richard McGinnis testimony. The guy was amazing. In fact, I had not seen pictures of the players in this courtroom drama and honestly thought the bearded guy asking him questions must be the defense attorney. It took me a while to convince myself that, questioning and answers notwithstanding, he actually IS the prosecution. It became clear as time passed with the direction his questions were “trying” to go but failing miserably.

There is a rule in courtroom law - never ask a question to which you don’t already know the answer. He seemed to violate it with almost every question. Or - he’s doing it on purpose. I have a theory about the prosecution here:

Their job in this particular case is not to win. It is to make it clear to a large enough part of the BLM/ANTIFA/leftist part of the population that, when the case against Kyle loses handily (which is inevitable), this one does not rise to the level of their “righteous indignation” - and subsequent rioting. i.e. it takes the wind out of their sails.

Sometimes when you win, you lose*. And sometimes when you lose, you win.

*A classic example of this would be Pearl Harbor.

[eartick]

The best way to take the communist wind out of their sails is to do exactly what Kyle did. Dirt nap em.

[Fido969]

McGinnis was one cool cat.

[Texas Fossil]

*A classic example of this would be Pearl Harbor.

And Pearl Harbor II, on November 3-4, 2020.

[ClearCase_guy]

Interesting theory.

If the prosecution is obligated to bring the case to court (I’m not precisely sure where the obligation would come from, but perhaps simple political pressure is sufficient) and if the prosecution knows better than anyone what a losing case it is, then maybe they could be almost a shadow defense team and help broadcast to the community “This is not a case that you should riot over”.

But I wonder if that could be perceived as any sort of courtroom misbehavior? “Hey, you didn’t really try to convict that guy at all! What’s up with that?”

[Cboldt]

This is a case of “the process is the punishment.”

I doubt there is any intention to quell the violent activists of the left - if anything this lawyer will come out after verdict and say it was an injustice.

If there is a next time the right properly uses force of violence in self defense, this prosecutor would charge them, too.

[Michael.SF.]

There is another message being sent by the prosecution: yeah we may lose this case but we sure F’d this kids life up didn’t we? We will do the same to you if anyone tries something like this again.

[poconopundit]

I have a theory about the prosecution here:

{The prosecution's] job in this particular case is not to win. It is to make it clear to a large enough part of the BLM/ANTIFA/leftist part of the population that, when the case against Kyle loses handily (which is inevitable), this one does not rise to the level of their “righteous indignation” - and subsequent rioting

* * *

Wow, what you say makes a lot of sense.  The public is being played to prevent another round of burning down cities.

In fact the photo of the prosecutor released today of his reaction to the witness admitting he aimed his weapon at Rittenhouse at the 3-foot range suggests the prosecutor is overacting.