Article

2021-11-16 -Short Attention Span Theater-

[Powerlineblog] The jury is out in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, but the verdict is in on one point: Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, the lead prosecutor, is a dope. Some would say that was already apparent from his performance in the case, but today, during his closing argument, he pointed an AR-15 into the crowded courtroom gallery with his finger on the trigger. Unbelievable:

Liberals on Twitter are saying it was OK for Binger to violate every known rule of firearm safety because he was told the gun was unloaded. Have they not heard about Alec Baldwin? The most basic rules of firearm safety are 1) you treat every gun as a loaded gun, 2) you never, ever point a gun at anyone you don’t intend to shoot, and 3) you don’t put your finger inside the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot. Binger broke all of them.

Actually, the instinct against pointing a gun at another human being is so strong in a normal person that it would take a real effort of will to do it. But Binger apparently is oblivious to the most basic principles of safety. The world is a safer place with a gun in Kyle Rittenhouse’s hands than in Thomas Binger’s.

Posted by Abu Uluque 2021-11-16 00:00|| || Front Page|| [15 views ] Top

#1 EXCLUSIVE: Prosecution's star witness in Kyle Rittenhouse case is a career criminal with a history of domestic abuse, prowling, trespass and burglary - but had charges DROPPED just six days before trial began and jury never learned of his past

Posted by Skidmark 2021-11-16 00:28|| 2021-11-16 00:28|| Front Page Top

#2

I guess he and Baldwin both never seen any Gun safety videos?

Or was the point to instill bias Panic and Fear in the Jury?

Posted by NN2N1 2021-11-16 08:04|| 2021-11-16 08:04|| Front Page Top

#3 This idiot prosecutor is trying to put Gun Violence in trial. The defendant was carrying a gun -- ergo he "provoked" a bipolar, off-his-meds, serial child rapist who had directly threatened to "get you alone and fucking kill you," as well as "cut your fucking heart out."

But guns are evil. Guns provoke. KR is Mr. Gun Violence and must be locked up for life.

So that we may make America safe for bipolar violent child rapists and violent maniacs who try to strangle and kill their families and burn the house down. And safe for violent foot soldiers of the "People's Revolution."

Because white 17 year-old lifeguards bearing guns and fire extinguishers are the source of all the arson and violence and terror afflicting our cities. Because gunz. And rayciss. Your Honor, the Prosecution rests.

Posted by Merrick Ferret 2021-11-16 08:43|| 2021-11-16 08:43|| Front Page Top

#4 Had I been on the jury and he pointed it at me, there would have been a disruption coming out of the box.

Posted by Besoeker 2021-11-16 08:50|| 2021-11-16 08:50|| Front Page Top

#5 ^ my sentiments exactly.

If I'd been in the jury box I'd have have stood up and demanded that the guards immediately disarm this moronic asshole who clearly hasn't the faintest clue as to how to safely handle a weapon

Posted by Merrick Ferret 2021-11-16 08:56|| 2021-11-16 08:56|| Front Page Top

#6 He's either directly threatening the Jury by point a gun at them or looking for a mistrial.

- or both.

Posted by CrazyFool 2021-11-16 09:31|| 2021-11-16 09:31|| Front Page Top

#7 The face of the juror in the top left seems to show some concern. The rest of them appear to be oblivious.

Isn't district attorney essentially a law enforcement type of a gig? You'd think the guy would know better but all throughout this trial he has shown himself to be a big jerk and a total idiot. He should be prosecuted himself for malfeasance in a public office.

Posted by Abu Uluque 2021-11-16 11:48|| 2021-11-16 11:48|| Front Page Top

#8 Ignorance is a job qualification in this instance.

Posted by M. Murcek 2021-11-16 11:50|| 2021-11-16 11:50|| Front Page Top

#9 So are we to understand from that 2nd photo that several jurors' faces have now been publicized?

Won't be hard to ID them now w facial recognition software. Heaven help those poor people. Heaven help us all

Posted by Merrick Ferret 2021-11-16 12:09|| 2021-11-16 12:09|| Front Page Top

#10 #7 The Supreme Court in Berger vs US (1935):

"The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor-- indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one."

Posted by Matt 2021-11-16 12:29|| 2021-11-16 12:29|| Front Page Top

#11 Or was the point to instill bias Panic and Fear in the Jury?

So tin eared, its the only explanation.

I don't care if he checked battery and showed everyone clear, the booger picker does not go on the bang switch.

And where is our Safety Officer, with a firm and sturdy, "Hey Asshole!"?

Posted by swksvolFF 2021-11-16 12:31|| 2021-11-16 12:31|| Front Page Top

#12 The prosecutor has been trying to tank this to a mistrial since his lead witness reversed his testimony. The defense made a motion for mistrial at that point, but the judge didn't want to because 'it would give undue advantage to the state on retrial' (IIRC).
Binger's been steadily pushing the envelope, hoping for a do-over.

Posted by ed in texas 2021-11-16 15:26|| 2021-11-16 15:26|| Front Page Top

#13 NO info whether or not Binger is a Federal attorney.
Friend of mine who used to be a cop once told me that simply pointing a firearm at someone is an "assault" which numerous laws and previous cases have dealt with.

Posted by Bubba Lover of the Faeries8843 2021-11-16 15:34|| 2021-11-16 15:34|| Front Page Top

#14 What is a "federal" attorney? One employed by the federal gummint? One admitted to practice in federal courts?

This is from the AVVO Legal Advice forum:

Attorneys are licensed to practice law by one or more states. Attorneys cannot appear in any court, state or federal, without being admitted to that court. Admission is not automatic -- an attorney must apply for admission and pay an application processing fee and/or admission fee. The application process can include submitting a questionnaire under penalty of perjury, providing multiple references, submitting to background checks including fingerprinting, sending law school transcripts, and more. Attorneys must be sworn in to practice before that court.

Usually, state courts will admit attorneys who pass the bar exam of the same state and meet all the other requirements. Some courts will admit an attorney licensed in certain other states without requiring them to pass another bar exam. California does not admit any attorney who has not passed the California Bar Exam.

Courts also admit out-of-state attorneys for one specific case. This is called a pro hac vice admission. It usually requires an attorney within the state to sponsor the out-of-state attorney plus payment of a fee.

Note some states, including California, allow attorneys to practice law in-house for one particular employer, often a large corporation, without having to pass another bar exam.

Attorneys can appear before federal agencies anywhere on the same basis anyone else can. However, attorneys are still held to the requirements of an attorney with respect to their clients.

*** All legal actions have time limits, called statutes of limitation. If you miss the deadline for filing your claim, you will lose the opportunity to pursue your case. Please consult with an experienced employment attorney as soon as possible to better preserve your rights. *** Marilynn Mika Spencer provides information on Avvo as a service to the public, primarily when general information may be of assistance. Avvo is not an appropriate forum for an in-depth response or a detailed analysis. These comments are for information only and should not be considered legal advice. Legal advice must pertain to specific, detailed facts. No attorney-client relationship is created based on this information exchange. *** Marilynn Mika Spencer is licensed to practice law before all state and federal courts in California, and can appear before administrative agencies throughout the country. She is eligible to represent clients in other states on a pro hac vice basis. ***

Posted by M. Murcek 2021-11-16 15:38|| 2021-11-16 15:38|| Front Page Top

11:41 M. Murcek
11:31 Skidmark
11:31 M. Murcek
11:29 Glenmore
11:27 Skidmark
11:25 M. Murcek
11:25 Skidmark
11:24 Skidmark
11:22 M. Murcek
11:20 Tom
11:19 Grom the Reflective
11:18 Tom
11:17 Skidmark
11:15 Skidmark
11:14 Tom
11:13 Skidmark
11:11 Tom
11:07 Skidmark
11:06 Tom
11:00 Skidmark
10:55 Skidmark
10:53 Besoeker
10:44 Deacon+Blues
10:44 Skidmark