With the fate of Kyle Rittenhouse still in the hands of a jury, it’s becoming clear that nearly everything the prosecution and the establishment media promulgated during the trial was either false or misleading — even down to the most basic geographical assertion.
Rittenhouse is on trial for killing two men and wounding another, Gaige Grosskreutz, after traveling from his home in Antioch, Illinois, to Kenosha, Wisconsin, during the rioting that took place there in August 2020.
The teen’s detractors have emphasized that he crossed state lines to get to Kenosha, insinuating that he was clearly out for blood.
Because it was only about a 20-mile trek, the correlation between distance and motive is tenuous at best — and considering that Grosskreutz traveled twice as far to join in the mayhem, the narrative is turned on its head.
The prosecution’s star witness hails from West Allis, Wisconsin, 40 miles from Kenosha, according to The Associated Press, and brought an illegal firearm with him to the riot that night.
Perhaps he was hoping to add to an already illustrious criminal history that includes domestic abuse, drunk driving, burglary, possessing a loaded gun while drunk, trespassing and other offenses — but the fact is he was 40 miles from home and carrying an illegal weapon.
By comparison, Rittenhouse traveled half the distance and rightfully possessed his firearm, a point that conservative podcast host Allie Beth Stuckey illustrated on Wednesday.
“He drove over 40 miles with a gun he possessed illegally,” Stuckey tweeted. “He said he was in Kenosha as a medic but it seems he had an intent to kill.
“His troubling history is enough to ask: but why was he there? And by he, I mean Grosskreutz,” she concluded.
He drove over 40 miles with a gun he possessed illegally. He said he was in Kenosha as a medic but it seems he had an intent to kill. His troubling history is enough to ask: but why was he there? And by he, I mean Grosskreutz.
— Allie Beth Stuckey (@conservmillen) November 17, 2021
Another Twitter user shared a striking visual that would be quite helpful if, as the left insists, the distance from each man’s home were relevant to the case.
True, Grosskreutz drove way longer to get to Kenosha, BUT……..he didn’t cross state lines.
— It’s Devon Tracey (@itsDevonTracey) November 17, 2021
If this point seems, well, pointless, that’s because it’s exactly the kind of gross distortion that has riddled the Rittenhouse case from Day One.
The evidence, including Grosskreutz’s own admission that he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse before the young man fired at him, seems to support Rittenhouse’s self-defense claim.
But this case is all about the narrative, not facts, which is why so much emphasis has been placed on Rittenhouse’s commute to Kenosha while Grosskreutz’s has been ignored.
The prosecution’s case was a house of cards on the verge of collapse all along, and now their only ace has turned out to be another dud.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.