Why a Rittenhouse Federal Investigation Is a Non-Starter

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

As we’ve all seen by now, the process is the lawfare Left’s punishment. That’s certainly the situation in the Kyle Rittenhouse case. Now the Left is calling for more punishment.


The obvious case of legal self-defense was brought by a hyper-political district attorney and assigned to a deputy—another politician— as the saying goes, was so crooked he could hide behind a corkscrew.

But, try as prosecutors might, a Kenosha jury followed the facts and the law to acquit the 18-year-old for killing two men and shooting another as he tried to get away from them during the Kenosha Antifa and BLM riots on August 25, 2020.

Now the Leftist lawfare crowd is baying for another bite at Rittenhouse’s hide. Some in their numbers are nursing the hope that the federal government will now grind him to dust for, er, something.

But that’s likely a non-starter.

And why is that? Because the FBI already investigated the case more than a year ago. Witnesses during the trial, including Grambo and Ryan Balch, testified that the FBI pounded on their doors and interrogated them a long time ago. An FBI agent testified in secret. The FBI ran surveillance and provided aerial footage of the riot, showing that Joseph Rosenbaum lay in wait for Rittenhouse before the pedophile chased the 17-year-old and then grabbed his gun.

If the FBI had a case, the Department of Justice would have brought charges against Rittenhouse a long time ago.

Related: Did Kyle Rittenhouse Signal A Potential Lawsuit Against Joe Biden?

Former Rittenhouse attorney Robert Barnes says the chances of the feds going after the kid now is “extremely low … because … they already cleared him before that. There’s no clear federal claim to even be brought here, period. So, it’s not like every state trial you can retry people on.”


The guy who’s the head of the House Judiciary Committee, Jerry Nadler, who should know better, said he wants Congress to look into Kyle Rittenhouse because “this heartbreaking verdict is a miscarriage of justice and sets a dangerous precedent whih [sic] justifies federal review by DOJ. Justice cannot tolerate armed persons crossing state lines looking for trouble while people engage in First Amendment-protected protest.”

Obviously, Nadler hadn’t watched the trial because there were no “crossing state lines” with guns. Nor was First Amendment-protected activity involved in the incident, unless you believe Chris Cuomo when he says that the Constitution protects rioters. And, Nadler forgot about Americans possessing the God-given right to life and the ability to protect it from someone who wants to kill or maim you.

His Twitter replies should have cleared things up for him, but it’s uncertain if he can read, either.

Nadler may be confusing civil rights cases involving law enforcement with Rittenhouse. He’s gifted at confusion.

As Barnes said, “on cop cases, you can be re-prosecuted. Not in this case. It would be a ridiculous reach. The Eastern District of Wisconsin is not going to do it and the FBI already decided a year or so ago not to bring any charges on this. Remember, they were investigating. That came out in trial. The upside is that Kyle doesn’t face real risk of any criminal case at all. The downside is his case of recovering for defamation are very, very low.”


Related: How Unethical Were the Prosecutors Trying to Put Kyle Rittenhouse in Prison? Let Us Count the Ways…

It’s assumed that the families of the men who were shot that night may try to sue the 18-year-old.

Whether they’ll be successful is another matter.

All three attacked Rittenhouse first. One man tried to grab his gun; another beat him with his skateboard and tried to grab his gun; yet another pointed his gun at the teen before he shot back. It might be a bit difficult to explain to a judge or jury in a civil trial why attacking the teen first should be compensated. But if we know anything, the Left will keep trying.


Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member