MovieChat Forums > Kyle Rittenhouse Discussion > Ex-Spokesperson Turns On Him

Ex-Spokesperson Turns On Him

posted a month ago by Ranb (7287)
58 replies | jump to latest

Hancock had this to say about Rittenhouse after the jury verdict.
https://www.fox6now.com/news/david-hancock-kyle-rittenhouse-spokesperson-discusses-not-guilty-verdict

But later on Hancock had much more to say. https://crooksandliars.com/2024/04/killer-kyles-ex-spokesperson-spills-beans#google_vignette

Transforming a middle school dropout who was “angry at the world” with a history of violence and an unhealthy obsession with guns and killing into a respectable young man with a desire for higher education and a promising future was no easy feat.

It was a meticulously crafted facade, which we sincerely hoped he would grow into. Instead, he squandered a full scholarship to study any subject at any university in the country to become a divisive douchebag and antagonize black Americans on college campuses. Kyle failed to learn a single thing. He remains the same uneducated, arrogant, and antagonistic individual, incapable of telling the truth.

Rittenhouse is too stupid for the military and for higher education.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_Rittenhouse

Rittenhouse is a loser and will amount to nothing in my opinion. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kyle-rittenhouse-broke-net-worth-b2453651.html

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

You're mad this kid defended himself?

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

I’m not. Defending himself properly is the best thing he ever did, but otherwise he is a total loser.

I expect a similar path for him as George Zimmerman after the Trayvon Martin shooting.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

You logged into another account to respond to me?

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

Yes. You caught me.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

Why dont you like rittenhouse?

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

I don’t like or dislike him. It’s just that whenever I see him interviewed, or hear any anecdotes about him, he strikes me as lazy and not very bright.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

How long have you been a member of antifa?

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

I am actually right wing. You’d know that if you took a glance at my posting history.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

I'm getting a strong trantifa vibe from you.

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

Because I’m not allowing my political beliefs to cloud my judgements of individual people?

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

No it's because you're wearing a dress right now and have a beard. Dont deny it.

[–] RipRoss (353) a month ago

Nope. I’m wearing a flannel shirt and MAGA hat, but nice try.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

So you support Trump?

[–] strntz (10884) a month ago

No it's because you're wearing a dress right now and have a beard. Dont deny it.

Phew!! For a second I thought I left my web cam on and you were responding to me.

[–] mnphotoguy99 (415) a month ago

Just curious. How long have you been a fascist?

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

what do you mean?

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

You were really going to come at me with some bullshit like "antifa is anti fascist" werent you little bih.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

I'm not mad that Rittenhouse defended himself.

But a child should not leave home and go looking for trouble while armed with a rifle. He was lucky he was not killed. Now he is facing civil suits that may leave him broke for the rest of his life because of decisions he made as a child.

https://apnews.com/article/kyle-rittenhouse-legal-proceedings-kenosha-lawsuits-6879c87cf7147cb4708130039146266c

Rittenhouse claims to support BLM. This will not earn him any points with his racist friends. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kyle-rittenhouse-claims-supports-black-lives-matter-tucker-carlson-int-rcna6311

[–] strntz (10884) a month ago

But a child should not leave home and go looking for trouble ...

But trouble found him apparently. Surprising considering the fine young men that attacked him.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

If Rittenhouse the boy had stayed home, he would have not had to defend himself at trial.

[–] strntz (10884) a month ago

That's true, but if the thugs didn't attack him, they wouldn't have been shot. Since the thugs chased and then attacked Rittenhouse without cause, the guilt must fall squarely on them.

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

> Rittenhouse claims to support BLM.

In that case, you are correct - he truly is a loser.
Isn't it nice to agree for once?

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

I did not say that Rittenhouse was a loser for supporting BLM. I claimed that his position on the matter will not earn him any points with his racist friends. Are you one of his racist friends? Or not?

I'm not sure that we're agreeing on anything here.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

You sure spend a lot of time thinking about this guy. Are you at least charging him rent?

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

I spend less than a minute typing each post. See how little research is in them?

[–] liscarkat (16592) a month ago

Whether or not he's a loser is beside the point. Beside any point that's relevant to him. The only thing that matters is that, on the night when something happened that made him famous, the facts are that he was chased down by criminals attempting to kill him, and he acted legally and morally in self-defense.

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

Yes, well said.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

I'm speaking of events that took place after he was acquitted. At least one of his supporters has turned on Rittenhouse and given us his version of Rittenhouse's character or lack thereof.

Rittenhouse was groomed to appear as something else. A person that was worthy of sympathy by the jury.

[–] liscarkat (16592) a month ago

As for being a middle school dropout who now wants to get higher education--so what? I was a high school dropout. I later went to night school and got my diploma. As an adult, I went to university and got perfect grades, graduating with high honors. There's nothing odd about not doing well in public school as a kid, then wanting to go to college as an adult. If Rittenhouse fails at higher education, then that's another story.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Good for you that you were capable of continuing your education and succeeded. That you did so is not unique in the USA at all.

What I'm getting at is that Rittenhouse was a failure in school and shows no signs of being anything but a failure years later.

[–] Corbell (8413) a month ago

What do you think about the dems in this country that arrested him for defending himself and wanted a 17 year old to go to jail for life, for defending himself?

I mean, a kid who isn't doing well in life, in your opinion, who gives a fuck?

BUT, one of hte two parties in this country, becoming so shitty that they arrest people for defending themselves from violent mobs and murderous madmen,

THAT'S the type of issue that needs discussed.

I mean, we haven't seen ANY sign that the lefties have learned anything from their insanity and bloodlust of that timeperiod.

if anything they are doubling down again and again.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Rittenhouse shot people, he was put on trial for it and acquitted. I was not a witness to the events and did not watch the trial. Rittenhouse was not guilty and that is where my feelings end on the topic.

My post was about Rittenhouse as a person and events outside of the trial and the shootings he participated in.

Why are you trying to derail the topic with issues that have been discussed ad nauseam before?

Do you have names of these people who are not learning from their insanity and bloodlust? Lefties is such a broad term.

Is David Hancock one of those lefties you despise? My original post in this thread was mostly about Hancock.

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

> What I'm getting at is that Rittenhouse was a failure in school and shows no signs of being anything but a failure years later.

Okay... and?

He killed a pedophile and a violent thug while wounding someone else who also had it coming while not hurting anyone else.
He did more for society that day than most others over their lives.
What did you do for society, Ran?

You strike me as the type who donates money to abide for their own sins and then shit on kids like Kyle to feel better about themselves. That's really low.
I don't care if Kyle is stupid, a "loser" (classy!) or will never major in Lesbian Dance Theory at some dumb rainbow college because that's the only thing leftists value these days.

He's a person, a human being, he has his demons and you have yours.
Difference between you two is, he wouldn't be such a nasty cunt about it and bash you to feel better about himself.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

And nothing. I'm fairly certain if I told you about my service to my country, then you would find fault with it.

Rittenhouse the boy should stayed home with his mommy. Rittenhouse the man continues to be a loser as far as I can tell.

What has Rittenhouse accomplished since he became an adult?

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

> What has Rittenhouse accomplished since he became an adult?

What does it matter to you?
There are Billions of people across the globe who, according to your method of measurement, did not accomplish anything - so what? These people do not owe you anything, why are you such an arrogant prick about this?

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Rittenhouse does not owe me anything either.

I am entitled to be an arrogant prick; 1st Amendment and all. You are entitled to be offended also.

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

I'm not offended. He's not my boyfriend, unfortunately.
I just don't understand the obsession of leftists with bashing people like Rittenhouse all the time.
It's like it makes you get off or something. This weird obsession... and then all these years after the fact as well. Nobody should even care about Rittenhouse at this point, yet here you are, somehow upset about him having deleted a pedo and a wife beater in flawless, sexy, self-defense.

I wish I'd been there and see the prick bleed out. I would have turned gay for one night just for Rittenstud.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

[–] Kendricks (2040) an hour ago
Nobody should even care about Rittenhouse at this point, yet here you are, somehow upset about him having deleted a pedo and a wife beater in flawless, sexy, self-defense.

You're telling a lie there. I made it clear I was talking about how Hancock turned on Rittenhouse, not about the shootings Rittenhouse was involved in.

You might have more luck lying to other people who are stupid enough to believe you. Your obsession with pedophilia and gay sex seems to have overwhelmed your thinking.

I'm not a leftist. The link I posted about one of his former supporters turning on him was dated April 2, 2024. So three days ago.

David Hancock cares enough to talk about him. Are you saying he should keep quiet?

[–] Blade13 (685) a month ago

I notice you're still not thinking about Rittenhouse.

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

> You're telling a lie there.

Nah.

> Your obsession with pedophilia and gay sex seems to have overwhelmed your thinking.

Nice framing attempt, especially right after whining about me "lying". xD
I am indeed "obsessed" with pedophilia as there's absolutely nothing worse than kiddie-diddlers, so awareness and more importantly ridding society of them does indeed catch my interest!
That this seems to bother you says more about you than it does about me.
But then again, this is hardly surprising for a pro LGBT, woke, Biden-voter.

> I'm not a leftist.

Uhu...

> David Hancock cares enough to talk about him. Are you saying he should keep quiet?

Don't care about Hancock and never mentioned him.
I am mentioning YOU and the obsession of your kind with people like Rittenstud, or rather your obsession with attacking people like him which shows you are still seething over him walking free after shooting a kiddie-diddler, wife beater and the other retard that attacked him.

You'd never make such posts about George Floyd or other scum you leftists hold so close to your heart for some reason.

[–] Martoto (4255) a month ago

I wonder why they felt it was necessary for them to manufacture a false and fictitious persona for Rittenhouse in the first place.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Rittenhouse killed people. They wanted Rittenhouse to appear to be a good guy in order to obtain a not guilty verdict.

When a person is on trial, the right defense will do nearly anything for a favorable verdict.

[–] Phids (317) a month ago

I don't understand the point of this. I never heard of this "spokesman" before. Was he some guy who was hired? Ok, so he turned on Rittenhouse. Why does what this spokesman think matter in the scheme of things?

[–] Kendricks (2085) a month ago

It doesn't.

Ran got triggered again because Rittenstud still lives rent free in his head, so in true leftist fashion, he went on his little ANTIFA crusade and called the guy names.

Yes, it is as dumb and pathetic as it sounds.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

I provided a link that tells you who Hancock is and his role in Rittenhouse getting his not guilty verdict.
https://crooksandliars.com/2024/04/killer-kyles-ex-spokesperson-spills-beans#google_vignette

David Hancock was the spokesman for Killer Kyle Rittenhouse and his family during Killer Kyle's criminal proceedings three years ago. At the time, Hancock was laying it on as thickly as anyone, trying to portray Killer Kyle as a poor innocent waif of a boy just trying to do the right thing and who just wanted to go back to his old life and go on to Arizona State University and study to be a nurse to help people.

But that was then and this is now. And Hancock is, quite frankly, sick and tired of Killer Kyle's bullshit and he's calling him out on it.

When you grow up, you will understand that you are not entitled to be liked by everyone. Yes, Hancock was hired for a service.

[–] Corbell (8413) a month ago

"Killer Kyle"?

WTF?! We can see on the video the insane child molestor leading a bloodthirsty mob to try to KILL Rittenhouse and Rittenhouse, DEFENDING himself from them.

What kind of fag asshole would call the VICTIM names like that?

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Rittenhouse killed two people. He is a killer. So many people are proud of what Rittenhouse did, including some people on this forum.

Why are you trying to take that away from him?

[–] Corbell (8413) a month ago

So, you support the weird spin placed on it by the article you cut and pasted.

I am proud of what he did. He did kill two people. In self defense.

Two members of a mob that were trying to murder him.

When you look at a video of a blood thirsty mob led by a literal madman, trying to murder someone, why do you reflexively identify with the blood thirsty mob led by a madman?

I identify with their intended victim.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

What does that have to do with a former spokesman turning on him?

I am calling Rittenhouse a loser for his actions after the killings. I have not identified with anyone.

[–] Corbell (8413) a month ago

You are talking shit on this guy, BECAUSE of him defending himself.

That is what it has to do with it.

[–] Phids (317) a month ago

There is nothing that I saw in that article that states Hancock was in any way responsible for Rittenhouse getting the not guilty verdict. I realize that Hancock was evidently a spokesman (among several?) for KR, but he was clearly not very prominent.

So I repeat - why does it matter what this guy Hancock thinks about Rittenhouse?

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Hancock claims to have helped craft an image that would help Rittenhouse get a not guilty verdict.
From the link in the OP;

It should also be noted that Hancock also pointed out a simple fact that he and Killer Kyle's other handlers made damn sure never saw the light of day was that just months before the fateful and fatal evening, Rittenhouse had applied for the Marines, but he was too stupid to even pass the aptitude test:

[–] Phids (317) a month ago

Perhaps stop to think that maybe Rittenhouse got the "not guilty" verdict because the law was on his side. This guy Hancock can claim whatever he wants, but he's just dishing his opinion, which isn't worth much. Not sure why you're so fixated on what this guy thinks.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Yes, I understand that Ritenhouse was found not guilty.

My original post was about how Hancock thought Rittenhouse was a loser who "failed to learn a single thing. He remains the same uneducated, arrogant, and antagonistic individual, incapable of telling the truth".

It is possible for a person to be not guilty of a crime and still be a idiot loser.

[–] Phids (317) a month ago

I think this entire thread says much more about this guy Hancock than it does about Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was a teenager when all this went down. He was thrust into the spotlight. Hancock, who presumably works in marketing, appears to be a much older adult who chose to represent KR. Claiming that Rittenhouse is an "idiot loser" is such a mindless comment that it's basically worthless.

[–] robocat893 (13530) a month ago

When I joined the Army I had no problem with passing the ASVAB test and I only held a GED with trade school training to operate printing presses. I guess Rittenhouse dropping out of middle school was really a bad idea. He will never amount to anything in his pathetic life.

[–] Ranb (7287) a month ago

Unless there is a good reason to leave school as a child, it is almost always a bad idea to drop out. Rittenhouse was probably too stupid to understand this.

[–] robocat893 (13530) a month ago

Conservatives and especially Trump supporters believe that Rittenhouse is some kind of hero. How stupid do they have to be to still support Rittenhouse?