I made a post about this on /r/media_criticism which was deleted in an hour with the following reason given:

I'm removing this because Rittenhouse is a terrorist and I refuse to let him be justified. The AP article is well-written and as neutral as possible.

I will copy the comment I made there here: -

Submission statement: This claimed "fact check" from AP is a mockery of the concept of a fact check. It is a political opinion piece masquerading as a "fact check". Examples:

He’s giving an account at odds with the authorities who charged Kyle Rittenhouse with homicide.

It's not uncommon for prosecutors (which this article misleadingly refers to as "authorities") - especially in politically charged cases such as this - to make claims that turn out to be false. This "fact check" takes the prosecutor's assertions as being factual when they cannot be considered so.

THE FACTS: His implication that Rittenhouse only shot the men after he tripped and they attacked him is wrong. The first fatal shooting happened before Rittenhouse ran away and fell.

This is a lie. Multiple videos show, and witness testimony confirms, that Rittenhouse was being chased by the mob before anyone was shot. Even the NYT's own analysis confirms this.

Trump did not say whom he meant by “they” — the two men he shot or others in pursuit of him. But he spoke in defense of someone who opposed racial-justice protesters

This is one of the most egregious statements in this supposed "fact check". Firstly, this has no business in a fact check or any non-opinion news article, because the statement tries to paint as being bad anyone who would oppose "racial justice protesters", which is a political opinion. Second, it claims Rittenhouse opposed the protests but offers no evidence of such. Third, it misleadingly calls what were riots "protests" (see video above, and others). Fourth, it presumes that the BLM protests are about "racial-justice", and not just baseless media-stoked hysteria, or arguably even a pretext for insurrection.

victim Joseph Rosenbaum was shot and killed first, after following Rittenhouse into a parking lot

Video evidence shows Rosenbaum didn't "follow" Rittenhouse but chased him.

[...]and tried to take the weapon from him.

This contradicts the statement made earlier in this article that Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum before he was attacked.

Rittenhouse then ran down the street and was chased by several people trying to stop him

This description tries to play down and even valorise the intentions of the angry mob that seconds later violently attacked Rittenhouse.

He tripped and fell. Anthony Huber, who was carrying a skateboard, was shot in the chest after apparently trying to wrest the gun from Rittenhouse

As proven by copious video evidence, Huber was shot after he attempted to kill Rittenhouse by smashing him in the head/throat with this skateboard. This "fact check" curiously omits this critical fact.

There's a second part to this fraudulent "fact check" involving the National Guard that is just as deceitful as the first, but I will leave that to the reader.