This is an awful post.
It doesnt even actually refute any of the instances of what transpired on the night. Castle Doctrine??? loooool has literally zero to do with what happened, not even sure why it was brought up.
What crimes had Rittenhouse previously committed prior to the shootings? He says there were two but doesn't name them. Rittenhouse's LAWYER says that according to Wisconsin laws he was within his right to carry the gun, I side with a lawyer over paralegal every day because one is actually allowed to practice law.
He tries to minimize the position by stating it was a little scuffle he was afraid of, yet accounts state a shot was fired in the air while he was being chased, doesnt sound like he was afraid of a little scuffle to me, but that is up for a jury it would seem at this point, unless the DA reverses course.
You seem to want to take this guys post as fact because it supports your view. Thats fine, but that is just that guys opinion, it is not a fact like it is presented.