Joe Biden and Kamala Harris make asses of themselves after Rittenhouse verdict

If Joe Biden were a normal president, he'd be praising and thanking the jury for serving in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial.  They consented to their citizens' duty to serve on that jury.  They sacrificed weeks of their time to hear the court testimony; evaluate considerable evidence carefully; check to see how that evidence could apply to U.S. law; and then issue their fair, impartial, and unanimous verdict, which was for a full acquittal.  They did so under the high pressure of the public spotlight, which included leftist death threats.  That was patriots who came together in their common democratic duty.

When Biden was first asked about the trial, he came close to doing that.  According to The Hill:

"Well look, I stand by what the jury has concluded. The jury system works and we have to abide by it," the president said when asked about the decision by reporters at the White House.

It was bland, but it could be respected.  Not too long after that, he came up with a very different kind of statement, from someone writing from the White House masthead.


While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken. I ran on a promise to bring Americans together, because I believe that what unites us is far greater than what divides us.  I know that we're not going to heal our country's wounds overnight, but I remain steadfast in my commitment to do everything in my power to ensure that every American is treated equally, with fairness and dignity, under the law.

I urge everyone to express their views peacefully, consistent with the rule of law.  Violence and destruction of property have no place in our democracy.  The White House and Federal authorities have been in contact with Governor Evers's office to prepare for any outcome in this case, and I have spoken with the Governor this afternoon and offered support and any assistance needed to ensure public safety.

This was weird stuff, given that the jury did its duty and, unlike the prosecutor, brought no misconduct to the table as it rendered its verdict over four days.  A minor child had been attacked by four violent adult career criminals, at least two of whom were armed with loaded weapons thrust into Rittenhouse's face, at least one stated his intent to kill, and at the trial, the jury concluded that the child had acted in self-defense, which is one of the oldest rights recognized in Western civilization, with comparable laws affirming it in every state and every nation derived from British law.

"Heal our country's wounds"?  "Every American treated equally, with fairness and dignity, under the law"?  He says that as though it never happened at this valid jury trial, marred only by repeated instances of prosecutorial misconduct.

What "wounds" is he talking about?  And what's his claim of "unfairness" about?  The jury weighed the evidence, which is something he didn't do (he didn't even watch the trial), assessed the evidence, including considerable video evidence, weighed it against the law, and rendered a verdict, which required an acquittal.  They did so under rather frightening pressure from both baying mobs outside threatening them and a despicable MSNBC reporter who attempted to stalk them, running a red light to keep his tail on the jury bus, likely to illegally determine their identities so he could doxx them for the baying mobs who wanted to know where they lived.

That sudden shift in statements is significant, as it suggests clearly that someone else is running the show.  The first response was Joe's own point of view, stated what most people were thinking — that the jury had spoken, and was mainly informed by Joe's fear of riots, given that riots have dragged Democrat approval ratings down.  During the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots (of which Kenosha was one), Democrats learned that sticking up for rioters had consequences for their poll numbers.  Once that happened, the cheering stopped.

The second statement seems to have been written by someone else, someone with access to a White House letterhead and the password to the White House website.  It was far more conventional MSNBC-style left-wing thinking on the jury's verdict.  The main thing it tells us is that someone else is calling the shots at the White House, because it's not senile Joe.  That someone has enormous sympathies with Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters, given the point of view taken.

It's a sorry thing, given that Joe's the one who's supposed to be running the country.  Someone behind the scenes actually is.  According to the Conservative Treehouse, it's actually a two-headed monster comprising AME activists and former president Obama's control on the Democratic National Committee.

The Obama/Clyburn strategy succeeds through advanced Astroturf operations; that's why they need BLM and ANTIFA.  Additionally, to attain maximum benefit for their domestic transformation, they need to keep the DEMOCRAT Party base voters focused on social issues, race etc.  All of this is by design…. including the emphasis on distracting things…. while everything that really matters is happening somewhere else.

Meanwhile, Biden's running mate, Kamala Harris, made this puppet-regime dynamic even more obvious.

When the verdict was rendered, Harris said this:

She was sticking to a script.  She had smeared Rittenhouse as an "extremist" and "vigilante" a few days earlier:

This was strange stuff coming from her.  What is this "work to do" you speak of, Kamosabe?  The one thing that went wrong in that trial was the extraordinary bad behavior of the prosecutor — who was caught hiding evidence, sassing the judge, pointing a gun straight at the jury, Alex Baldwin–style, without checking if it was loaded, his finger on the trigger, questioning the accused's right to silence, and smearing the kid with false characterizations that have no place in a courtroom.  This isn't the half of it.

But Harris has just that kind of record herself as prosecutor.

Remember this?

Harris was a prosecutor not very different from that Binger fellow who showed such disrespect for a fair trial and the rule of law, a guy who ought to be disbarred for his atrocious behavior.

She fits right in with the mysterious forces that seem to be controlling Biden, the Treehouse argues.

Biden smeared Rittenhouse a couple months before he "won" the presidency:

When he was asked about it, and whether he'd issue an apology for trying to slant the trial and smear the defendant, he didn't seem to know that the tweet had been sent.  Perhaps that was because the Other Forces were in control.

So now Biden and Harris have been told to disparage the valid trial and by implication the citizen-jury which did its best to render a fair verdict in a bid to keep their Antifa and Black Lives Matter allies happy, with racial grievance-mongering still at the forefront of the news.  It's irresponsible as it gets.  It's also very unpresidential.  Show zero respect for the little guys on the jury and the independent judge, and it ultimately shows that one has no respect for the other branches of our representative republic with its necessarily divided government.  Biden now expects American to respect his role in the presidency?  If he's going to be going around disparaging other branches of government, he should not be surprised to see that come back to bite him.  It demonstrates his unfitness for the office he holds.  Who's really running things in this Joe Biden-Kamala Harris "presidency"?

Image: Screen shot from Fox Business video via shareable YouTube.

To comment, you can find the MeWe link for this article here.

If you experience technical problems, please write to