Biden Labels Kyle Rittenhouse a “White Supremacist,” Lawsuit Coming

Legal Insurrection is reporting that Joe Biden is due to be sued for labeling Antioch’s Kyle Rittenhouse a “white supremacist.”

You can read the article here.


Biden Labels Kyle Rittenhouse a “White Supremacist,” Lawsuit Coming — 29 Comments

  1. Notice what the subtext here is.

    “If you defend yourself from people trying to assassinate you, you are a white supremacist bad guy.”

    Are the people in America so stupid that they believe the media?

    KGB propagandist Yuri Bezmenov described the purpose of ideological subversion this way: “to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

  2. Using Bite Me Bidens logic one could call the rioters, burners and destroyers in Kenosha what?

  3. The lawyer for Rittenhouse in this is the same person who helped represent Nick Sandmann, one of the boys from Covington Catholic High School, who was being smeared as a white supremacist for having the audacity to smirk at a Native American who was being rude to him. Sandmann successfully sued CNN for defamation.

  4. He should sue him.

    There is absolutely nothing to indicate that Rittenhouse is a white supremacist.

    You can think whatever you want about the fact that he shot three white people but I have not seen any evidence that he is a white supremacist.

  5. You are SO right Neal.

    “he shot three white people but I have not seen any evidence that he is a white supremacist”

  6. One wonders if Congresswoman Lauren Underwood, given her statements at House Homeland Security Committee two weeks ago inferring white supremacists/militia prompted Kyle Rittenhouse to do what he did.

    Maybe this is how Rittenhouse becomes the wildcard in the 14th congressional district race, with Underwood sounding closely similar to Biden.

    Different note, the Legal Insurrection reporter Mary Chastain is stating some misinformation of her own, as Rittenhouse, per his attorneys, was already in Kenosha, WI, on August 25, working and doing volunteer work.

  7. Race war coming … your skin is your uniform.

    Think it can’t happen? Wake up.

  8. Yes Cindy….. I’d really cite my news source as a half-baked website that asks you to pay for what you just read.

  9. Big, can you please put your crack pipe down.

    Ayou should resign as a school teacher. Quit infecting children’s mind.

  10. Big – Cindy is a crackpot, that being said, why is this article any different than Rachael Maddow, Don Lemon and Keith O

  11. Doctor Who – Am not, never was and never will be a school teacher.

  12. Biden-Rittenhouse story covered on FOX cable news this morning.

    Not unexpected that the “standard bearer”, the self proclaimed “I am the Democratic Party” Joe Biden falsely calls a young man from Illinois a White supremacist. Joe has a history of making derogatory, racist and reckless comments. A sampling:

    In 2007 he said that presidential candidate Barak Hussein Obama was the FIRST African American that was clean and articulate. He said: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

    In the 2012 presidential campaign, Biden said about Mitt Romney to a primarily Black audience: “In the first hundred days, he’s going to let the big banks write their own rules — unchain Wall Street. They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

    Back in May, 2020, he told Black radio host Charlamagne about 2020 support and voting:
    “Well, I’ll tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t Black.”

    In 2006 Biden insulted owners and customers of 711 and Dunkin stores who are of India descent.
    “You cannot go to a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent.”

    How does this guy Biden manage to stick around the Democrat Party for years? Why is he not in the dustbin of history? Why has the Democrat Party tolerated this goofball? When will Americans and the Fourth Estate finally be fed up with this old man stories of Scranton and train rides?

  13. Yeah, good luck with that lawsuit, legal eagles.

    I’ve represented media in defending defamation lawsuits.

    Watch how fast any such lawsuit gets dismissed.

    Whatsamatta, don’t like the First Amendment ?

    By the way, is calling someone a white supremacist defamatory ?

  14. Every Democrat that attempts to use these tactics to cause people to hate one another absolutely should be sued.

    These are the same tactics that the Marxists and Nazis used to cause people to want to kill their neighbors.

  15. Big Orange and Porkboy just outted themselves as brainwashed followers of the extreme left. They hate the truth. Carry on with your jousting for political reasons. Makes no diference. Except that you are all wasting your time while showing your true allegiance. Bread and circuses are big on Cal’s agenda.

  16. “don’t you like the first amendment”

    The 1st does not protect against slander and libel.

    Nick Sandmann successfully sued CNN with the same lawyer Rittenhouse has for similar smears and accusations of white supremacy.

    How is NOT defamatory if it is false information?

    You’re a lawyer bro?

    That is difficult to believe.

    What proof do you have that Rittenhouse is a white supremacist?

  17. Go get’em Kyle…. he still has some dirty funds hidden i’ m sure… he can part with..

    if not Soros will come up with the payments…

  18. Get a jury in Tennessee, Utah or Louisiana.

    The libel was nationwide, so they can be sued there.

  19. False information doesn’t equate to being defamatory.

    I could falsely report that you like “Seinfeld” more than “Everybody Loves Raymond”.

    Sue me.

    Simply because a statement is false doesn’t mean it’s defamatory.

    A defamatory statement is

    (1) a false statement of fact (not opinion),

    (2) susceptible of being objectively proven false,

    (3) that “exposes a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt, causes him to be shunned, or injures him in his business or trade”.

    So, are you saying that reporting that someone is a white supremacist is a statement of fact (not opinion) susceptible of being objectively proven false that “exposes a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt, causes him to be shunned, or injures him in his business or trade” ?

    And those Sandmann suits.

    By way of example, in the suit against The Washington Post the federal judge dismissed, I believe, multiple claims (thirty of them, or so it was reported) that such statements were defamatory and only permitted discovery to go forward on three (3) assertions of factually inaccurate reporting (for example, that The Washington Post falsely reported that the Native American stated that the student blocked his path).

    Even assuming the Native American didn’t say that, that’s defamatory ?

    And then those suits were settled for undisclosed amounts — I’m bettin’ for nuisance value.

    You think any of the defendants in those lawsuits ponied up millions ?

  20. I am saying that calling someone a white supremacist with no proof is irresponsible and evil for journalists to do and yes it does expose a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

    Perhaps you haven’t been paying attention to what has been going on in this country for the last few years.

    CNN settled the Sandmann suit.

    That guy is getting paid.

    I see your people are already changing their tune on Proud Boys, changing the narrative from them being white supremacists to just being general far right extremists and sexists.

    I’m sure the threat of lawsuits had something to do with that.

    You posted zero proof Rittenhouse is a white supremacist.

    People generally don’t like lawyers and journalists and you’re showing us why.

  21. What it boils down to, it seems, is that you don’t approve of the Constitution or the founders’ views.

    They prized a free press, irresponsibility and all. (Read some of the newspapers back then !)

    That’s how the First Amendment came about. (By the way, there’s also a recent case out of Tennessee in which a lawsuit for defamation for labelling someone a white supremacist was tossed.)

    You seem to bemoan “what has been going on in this country for the past few years”.

    I share that view — all of the divisiveness.

    But then you go on and say “your people” and berate lawyers and journalists.

    Physician, heal thyself.

  22. You brought up the history of this country, but didn’t mention that it used to be EASIER to sue people for libel until the 1960’s when the Supreme Court created the “actual malice” standard.

    When one says “this person is a white supremacist” is that expressing an opinion?

    To any normal person, that’s a declarative statement. It’s being presented as a fact.

    But then you will default to “prove that they KNEW what they wrote was false!”

    How can you ever prove that?

    It’s a bullshit standard and everybody knows how it can be abused. Everybody sees it being abused by the media every day, and this is part of the reason why the media has so little trust from the public.

    Lawyers are detached from reality. You only think about your legaleese abstract nonsense which flies in the face of all that is good and decent.

    And, once again, you posted zero proof that Rittenhouse is a white supremacist which is really what is important here.

  23. Innocent Primate: Is this defamatory?:

    In my opinion, “Innocent Primate’ is complete and utter fool, a leftist turd, and a selfish human-prawn.

  24. No, Gary Puckett, that’s a statement of opinion and, hence, not capable of constituting defamation for purposes of legal liability. The same way that calling someone a libtard or a socialist isn’t defamation for purposes of legal liability.

    Which is why whether Rittenhouse is a white supremacist or not is irrelevant; it’s an opinion.

  25. Because Nicholas Sandmann’s lawsuit has been referenced, for edification purposes I’m providing a link to Judge Bertelsmann’s order of July 26, 2019, dismissing Nicholas Sandmann’s complaint. (Sandmann vs. WP Company LLC, d/b/a The Washington Post, No, 2:19-00019 E.D. Ky.).

    Of present interest, note on page 34 of the opinion (pages 5-6, row 24 of the table appended to the opinion): “Labeling someone a racist is a matter of opinion.”

    Hence, not actionable defamation.

    Sort of like labeling someone a “white supremacist”, huh ?

    Judge Bertelsmann later reinstated three of the claims (10, 11 and 33), but not the claim referenced in row 24.

    (The three reinstated claims referred to Omaha Nation elder Nathan Phillips being blocked or impeded by Sandmann, a student at Covington Catholic High School, during their encounter at the Lincoln Memorial stairs — that is, statements of objective fact.)

  26. Nicholas Sandman smiled at Nathan Phillips. Smiling isn’t a crime. 🙂🤓😊🤗😊

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *