The Prosecutor in the Rittenhouse Trial Reaches Peak Absurdity With Closing Argument

Sean Krajacic/The Kenosha News via AP, Pool

The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager who killed two men in self-defense during the Kenosha riots, is coming to a close. Jury instructions are already going out and closing arguments are being made.

To the impartial observer, the prosecution has done an absolutely terrible job at presenting their case. Perhaps that’s because the case never should have been brought in the first place, but the result is the same — a mockery of the justice system.

But in all the idiocy that’s flown out of ADA Thomas Binger’s mouth, I think we finally reached peak absurdity today. It was a long slog to the top, filled with irrelevant questions about video games and laughable commentary about ammo types, but ladies and gentlemen, we’ve made it.

While giving his closing argument, Binger made several outright false assertions and attempted to make the case that self-defense with a gun is essentially never allowed.

Binger attempts to make the argument that you can not claim self-defense against an “unarmed” man. But that’s not at all how this works. More people are killed with fists every year than AR15s, and the idea that the other individual must also have a gun of his own to represent a deadly threat is clearly not true. Rosenbaum had threatened Rittenhouse multiple times earlier in the night and was chasing down the teenager, and no serious person would argue that it was to have a friendly chat. There is no legal requirement that a person has to allow another person to physically beat them, risking the possibility of serious injury or death, before trying to defend themselves.

Secondly, Binger makes the absolutely asinine argument that you “lose the right to self-defense” if you have a gun. Under no law that I’m aware of, much less in Wisconsin, are you barred from defending yourself if you happen to be carrying a gun. Heck, the entire point of carrying a firearm is to be able to defend yourself in the event a threat rises, and Rosenbaum, by his own admission, was a deadly threat.

Lastly, even amid all the incorrect statements, Binger actually makes Rittenhouse’s defense case for him twice, repeating that the teenager feared Rosenbaum would shoot him when the latter went for the gun. Well yeah, that’s why it’s self-defense.

I don’t know what’s going to happen from here, but I’d be shocked and dismayed if Rittenhouse were found guilty after all this. And to be sure, this goes past just his individual future. If someone can be convicted of murder for so obviously defending themselves, on video no less, then the right to self-defense truly doesn’t exist anymore. This prosecutor is a joke, and he should be ashamed of himself. This is the classic situation where a political hack is trying to throw someone in jail for life in order to bolster their profile. He knows he has no case, but he doesn’t care. This is all a game to him, and hopefully, justice prevails.