Not a big fan of him shilling for the BLM movement and also bringing up the 'POC' comments, but from an optics perspective I can see why he did it. He was probably advised to do it by the family spokesperson. But he needs to realize that there's no camaraderie to be had with these people. They want him and everyone he loves dead. There's no amount of caving in that will ever please them.
I'm 99.9% certain that it's just a combination of him being coached by his lawyers in preparation for the lawsuits they're launching against the press, and him still being a naive young man who has yet to dig into the true nature of BLM (whether on the .win sites or others which go against the narrative).
Rittenhouse did say immediately after first mentioning BLM that he's only supportive of peaceful protest, and has got no tolerance for violent rioting at all (as if him showing up to protect the Indian brothers' car lot and later being attacked by the rioters wasn't proof enough). I guess we won't know for sure unless he's enough of a fool to donate some of his future winnings from the MSM to them, but that and his FBI comment (despite being or having been a Blue Lives Matter guy) indicate to me that he's not that naive about the organizations he used to believe in - including BLM, and almost certainly opposes them a lot more strongly than he seems on the surface.
That's basically my take. When I was his age I wasn't even thinking about politics at all. It wasn't until I was ~25 years old that I started paying attention. I started watching Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in the run up to the 2007 election and I eagerly voted for Obama. I had no idea that the information I was digesting was carefully curated propoganda.
It's for the 'normies'. He has to appear reasonable, and then it's up to BLM themselves to bite the hand that feeds, publicity wise, and appear to be the aggressor to people who are barely paying attention. BLM would win some positive PR if they accepted the olive branch - but they are consistently terrible, angry people and have been baying for vengeance. So they'll cast it aside. Then it's up to the undecideds to figure out what to make of this.
There's too many fucking undecideds and fence-sitters out there, so strategic moves to make things really freaking obvious to people who are either too scared or apathetic to dig into things are, to an extent, necessary. It won't reach all of them but if it reaches some of them, something has been gained. Anything that makes it clear to spectators that BLM are rabid crazies is of value. We're not the audience, BLM themselves aren't the audience, it's that nebulous uncertain person who might be swayed if presented with a glimmer of truth.
He was probably advised to do it by the family spokesperson.
Or, you know, he could actually be a compassionate person.
I like how people have to make up a bias for their reality in order to feel comfortable about what they have seen. He's a Christian with lots of volunteer time in his community. Do non-compassionate people put that much time forward to help people they don't know in the spirit of God and community?
Imagine being prosecuted by literal incarnation of reddit and still parroting their lines. Sure hope BLM he pledged allegiance to crowdfunds his next defense lawsuit. Or just take the beating, I heard everyone takes a beating sometimes. It's the moral thing to do, as kyle seems to attest to
Now, he could be salty about not getting first dibs on an interview, entirely possible. But given that he was on the ground and been in contact with him throughout, I think it's more probable that Kyle's PR team was swayed by Fox to do and say this.
Not a big fan of him shilling for the BLM movement and also bringing up the 'POC' comments, but from an optics perspective I can see why he did it. He was probably advised to do it by the family spokesperson. But he needs to realize that there's no camaraderie to be had with these people. They want him and everyone he loves dead. There's no amount of caving in that will ever please them.
I'm 99.9% certain that it's just a combination of him being coached by his lawyers in preparation for the lawsuits they're launching against the press, and him still being a naive young man who has yet to dig into the true nature of BLM (whether on the .win sites or others which go against the narrative).
Rittenhouse did say immediately after first mentioning BLM that he's only supportive of peaceful protest, and has got no tolerance for violent rioting at all (as if him showing up to protect the Indian brothers' car lot and later being attacked by the rioters wasn't proof enough). I guess we won't know for sure unless he's enough of a fool to donate some of his future winnings from the MSM to them, but that and his FBI comment (despite being or having been a Blue Lives Matter guy) indicate to me that he's not that naive about the organizations he used to believe in - including BLM, and almost certainly opposes them a lot more strongly than he seems on the surface.
That's basically my take. When I was his age I wasn't even thinking about politics at all. It wasn't until I was ~25 years old that I started paying attention. I started watching Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in the run up to the 2007 election and I eagerly voted for Obama. I had no idea that the information I was digesting was carefully curated propoganda.
It's for the 'normies'. He has to appear reasonable, and then it's up to BLM themselves to bite the hand that feeds, publicity wise, and appear to be the aggressor to people who are barely paying attention. BLM would win some positive PR if they accepted the olive branch - but they are consistently terrible, angry people and have been baying for vengeance. So they'll cast it aside. Then it's up to the undecideds to figure out what to make of this.
There's too many fucking undecideds and fence-sitters out there, so strategic moves to make things really freaking obvious to people who are either too scared or apathetic to dig into things are, to an extent, necessary. It won't reach all of them but if it reaches some of them, something has been gained. Anything that makes it clear to spectators that BLM are rabid crazies is of value. We're not the audience, BLM themselves aren't the audience, it's that nebulous uncertain person who might be swayed if presented with a glimmer of truth.
I'm pretty sure they'd accept his skull caving in.
Or, you know, he could actually be a compassionate person.
I like how people have to make up a bias for their reality in order to feel comfortable about what they have seen. He's a Christian with lots of volunteer time in his community. Do non-compassionate people put that much time forward to help people they don't know in the spirit of God and community?
Imagine being prosecuted by literal incarnation of reddit and still parroting their lines. Sure hope BLM he pledged allegiance to crowdfunds his next defense lawsuit. Or just take the beating, I heard everyone takes a beating sometimes. It's the moral thing to do, as kyle seems to attest to
lol.
To touch on the BLM bit, Elijah Shaffer on "You Are Here" gives an alternate take on how the Fox interview came about and why Kyle might have been encouraged to say these things. Starts around the 59 min mark.
Now, he could be salty about not getting first dibs on an interview, entirely possible. But given that he was on the ground and been in contact with him throughout, I think it's more probable that Kyle's PR team was swayed by Fox to do and say this.
Here's another link to the video - https://www.bitchute.com/video/HYyRQzfBVTU3/