Erwin Chemerinsky of the LA Times is a liar


The verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial sends a chilling message

Rittenhouse, then age 17, went to Kenosha, Wis., where protests were expected after police officers shot and seriously injured Jacob Blake. Rittenhouse had an AR-15-style rifle, which he was too young to legally possess. A teenager carrying an assault-style weapon in a tense situation is a recipe for disaster, and that is exactly what happened. Rittenhouse shot and killed two people and seriously wounded a third.

Rittenhouse testified at the trial that he went to the city on Aug. 25, 2020, to provide protection for local businesses and patrol as civil unrest developed. There is so much that is disturbing about that: a teenager deciding that he needed to provide law enforcement, when he lacked training or experience, and illegally arming himself with a semiautomatic rifle.

Not surprisingly, Rittenhouse’s presence with a big weapon provoked a reaction. Joseph Rosenbaum, a person with a history of mental illness who had been released from the hospital that day, allegedly grabbed at Rittenhouse’s gun and then was shot four times and killed. Anthony Huber apparently struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard. Huber then was shot and killed when Rittenhouse thought Huber was reaching for his weapon. Gaige Grosskreutz felt his life was in danger when he saw Huber killed. Grosskreutz reached for a weapon and then was shot and wounded by Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse was not too young to legally posses the rifle.

Rittenhouse did not decide to be there on his own. He was asked to help defend private property after the police watched it burn the previous night.

Not surprisingly, Rittenhouse’s presence with a big weapon provoked a reaction.

The reaction of normal people is to be polite and not commit crimes such as igniting a dumpster on fire and pushing it into a gas station. That Rosenbaum chased and grabbed (not allegedly, the coroner confirmed muzzle blast marks on his hand) at Rittenhouse’s rifle. Perhaps that his usually victims were young boys caused him to generalize that no serious resistance is to be expected. Regardless, this shows a catastrophic failure of his victim section process and does not reflect poorly on Rittenhouse.

“Huber apparently struck Rittenhouse with a skateboard”? The video and stills are very clear that it happened.

“Grosskreutz reached for a weapon and then was shot..” Lying by omission. Sure, he had to “reach for his gun” before he could use it. But the video shows, and he testified under oath, that he was not shot until he actually pointed his gun at Rittenhouse.


10 thoughts on “Erwin Chemerinsky of the LA Times is a liar

  1. Since the facts came out during the trial, a reasonable person will conclude that any falsities published at this point must be intentional.

    Fact: Rittenhouse’s rifle was possessed legally.
    Fact: Rittenhouse was not performing law enforcement. (Private security is not law enforcement.)
    Fact: There was no provocation on the part of Rittenhouse or his rifle.

    And so on and so forth.

    Almost everything this doofus wrote is a lie. Since the facts are now known (and widely so), there’s no excuse.

    Eventually the media will learn they can’t hide behind the First Amendment when they knowingly print defamatory lies. It might take a few more nine-figure settlements in civil court, but they’ll eventually learn, right?

    • “Since the facts came out during the trial, a reasonable person will conclude that any falsities published at this point must be intentional.”

      That presumes said reasonable person has looked for other sources of information, including much closer to the source.

      We can debate whether doing so is what a reasonable person would do, but at the end of the day, there will be many people who have not done so and will continue to believe the lies. I can only conclude there are enough of them out there that the newspaper thinks it worthwhile to do this instead of issuing corrections and apologies.

      On another note though, at this point in time it’s certainly grist for a defamation lawsuit. I’d love to see one of the settlement terms be a full front-page spread saying “WE LIED ABOUT KYLE.”

    • He, along with John Eastman, was one of the “Smart Guys” on Hugh Hewitt’s radio program. In all the years I heard him (Erwin) speak on the radio about the Supreme Court decisions he was called in to opine on, he NEVER was against overreach by the Federal Government. I do not recall if the Smart Guys ever opined on state-level decisions.

  2. When did “assault-style rifle” enter the anti’s lexicon? Seems like an attempt to say, “looks scary” in legalese.

    • So, a “racing-style” car is one with a spoiler on the back and a stripe on the hood, regardless of how street legal it is in reality.

    • Frog, exactly. The best definition of “assault rifle” (or “assault-style rifle”) I can construct is “a gun that makes Sen. Feinstein pee her panties”.

  3. ” Not surprisingly, Rittenhouse’s presence with a big weapon provoked a reaction.”

    No. You know what really provokes reactions? Domestic terrorism, i.e. rioting, smashing and looting, burning whole sectors of cities and taking over and occupying police stations, etc., and threatening to murder people, all for the expressed purpose of affecting political change.

    And so we are seeing the grand misdirection. No one should be looking at K.R. All eyes should be focused on the organizers and promoters of these riots, and the politicians and media personnel, and their network of associations who’ve been providing aid and comfort to them.

    Instead what we’ll see is, the calls for “law and order” which are ringing out across the land will be accepted eagerly by the power-hungry perpetrators, and they will indeed enact more laws (which we don’t need at all) and those laws will serve them to go after, not the criminals, but us. And we will have supported these measures, and the Republicans will gladly help them along, offering bills of their own and happily taking credit for it just as they did with the Patriot Act. And the conservative pundits will support it, and claim victory for themselves when it goes through into law. Same as it ever was. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    And then it will get worse, as it always does when the shitbags pass new laws in response to our reaction to their refusal to enforce perfectly good existing laws.

    And in response to that, we’ll do it all over again, and then it will get worse again, etc., and it’s a downward, accelerating spiral into hell.

    And why should it ever stop when it’s working so well?

    America; stop falling for it!

  4. Not surprisingly, the gentleman’s presence with Mercedes provoked a reaction from the carjacker
    Not surprisingly, the child’s presence on the playground provoked a reaction from the pedophile.
    Not surprisingly, the woman’s presence in the apartment building provoked a reaction from the rapist.

    Victim shaming at its finest. Well done Mr. Chemerinsky!

  5. His only beef was who Kyle shot. If Kyle was shooting up the defenders that night you wouldn’t be hearing anything out of him.
    You would think the Bolsheviks would at least change their names? I mean Chemerinsky doesn’t sound communist at all, right?
    I guess we should be thankful. If he wasn’t using a laptop. He would probably be trying to use an AK on us.

Comments are closed.