Once again the two greatest investigators who ever shit between detective shoes pose the question. Which one of these (photos above) is not like the other? One of these guys is in possession of a firearm contrary to Wisconsin law. Can you spot which one?
If you chose the guy with the rifle, Kyle Rittenhouse, you would be wrong. A judge decided that Rittenhouse did not violate the law. Gaige Grozzkreutz, on the other hand, was carrying a pistol without a license to carry, a criminal violation. He used to have a license, but he let it lapse. The District Attorney decided not to pursue charges in exchange for Grosskreutz’s testimony. That turned out to be a bad bargain. There is a difference between a judge’s move to dismiss and a prosecutors decision not to charge.
A funny think happened on the way to the courthouse. According to the MSM, Grozzkreutz has a history of arrests. He might even be a convicted felon. He might have been convicted of domestic violence. All of the stories I chased relate past charges. None of the stories nail down a conviction. The closest I came to finding a felony conviction is that one story claimed that his felony conviction was expunged. All of those reporters combing all those court documents and booking slips and none of them could put Grozzkreutz’s criminal history together. In the words of Hilary Clinton, “What difference does it make?
If Grozzkreutz has previously been convicted of a felony or domestic violence, then he is prohibited from possessing a firearm under federal law. 18 U.S. Code § 922 – Unlawful acts | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu). A prior arrest, deferred adjudication or an expunged record does not ring the bell. That is, trigger a federal crime. So it makes sense that the MSM would have a vested interest in not probing Grozzkreutz’s past. A convicted felon, feloniously possessing a firearm, committing an aggravated assault on an otherwise law abiding person, just doesn’t meet their narrative.
So just what is Grozzkreutz’s status as a felon? Beats me. However, I can make a guess. Grosskreutz used to be a paramedic. But no longer and not recently. Paramedics are licensed by the state. The state, to meet national reciprocity agreements, adheres to the policies of the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians. Here is their policy on EMT’s with criminal convictions GetAmazonFile.aspx (nremt.org) My guess is that he is illegible to meet licensing requirements.
Grozzkreutz used to have a Wisconsin license to carry a pistol. According to the MSM it lapsed. Did it lapse or was it revoked? A simple lapse could probably be fixed by writing a check. If it was revoked, one couldn’t write a check that was big enough. A criminal conviction could cause a revocation of a license to carry. Since it is a license, issued by the state, one could run afoul of regulations that do not involve criminal conduct. If one relies on the MSM, we’ll never know. Sounds Holmesian. The curious case of the dog that didn’t bark.
I suspect that prior to the events in Kenosha, Kyle Rittenhouse was a classic liberal. He had good intentions, based on a faulty premise and followed them with really bad execution. He had a right to volunteer. He had a right to be where he was. He had a right to carry a weapon. He had a right and need to defend himself. Everybody is a hero in their mind’s eye.
The mob didn’t see a hero. Keep in mind that Kyle was not alone. He was in the company of other armed individuals. None of them were isolated, then attacked. There’s a reason. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.
Kyle is like the homecoming queen who decides homecoming was a snap. She is now ready for a weekend ride with the local chapter of the Bandidos. The train is leaving the station. Oops!
EXPERIENCE IS A MOTHERFUCKER….FIRST YOU GET THE TEST AND THEN YOU GET THE LESSON.
