Fate of the Union (Conservative Politics & True Crime)
Fate of the Union (Conservative Politics & True Crime)
Episode 27 - Correcting the Record for Kyle Rittenhouse; Diversity in Football
In this week's episode of Fate of the Union, Franklin covers a recent video from The Young Turks who are pulling out all the stops in order to lie about the facts of the Kyle Rittenhouse case to suit their agenda.
After that, we review Vanderbilt University's football team falling victim to the woke curse, in employing the kicking services of a female soccer player and comedy ensues.
If you enjoyed this video, please subscribe on YouTube for more videos, as well as iTunes for the Fate of the Union podcast. You can also find out more about the show and its host on Twitter at Fateoftheunion_, searching Fate of the Union on Medium, and at franklinfotu@gmail.com.
Hello and welcome everyone to the fate of the union podcast, a weekly review of the biggest issues in national politics. Given from a conservative perspective, the show also periodically address current true crime cases from across the country. If you like, what you hear, please hit subscribe and leave a review on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts. Now let's talk about the fate of the union. Wanted to go over this video from the young Turks, as you can see, it's pretty recent November 20th, um, just a couple of weeks ago. And in this video, the young Turks review the recent development, as I'm sure many of you know that Kyle written has, has been released on bond. Um, there were a couple noteworthy celebrities or used to be celebrities. A few higher profile public figures contributed to the$2 million bond that was set, uh, for his, of course, momentary release until the first date of trial. And this video is particularly interesting because it, again, read iterates a few points that I've heard, not only on the media in the media, but certainly in just personal and private conversations with others that are either firmly on the left or not really have a particularly strong political leaning either way. But nevertheless have been led astray by a lot of people in the media and a lot of outlets as to what the true facts of this case are. So all of those issues are going to come into play here. Uh, as you can see, for those of you watching on YouTube, it's about an eight and a half minute video, um, which will speed up a little bit for the YouTube viewers out there, but without further ado, let's get to this video. And of course set the record straight on a bunch of misconceptions about this case that I'm sure a lot of you are aware about, but it'll still be interesting to go over what others, uh, again, strongly on the left, how they view this case. What did they think of this case? And we'll of course file our responses.
Speaker 2:17 year old, Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot and killed two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin over the summer has been released on$2 million bond, which means he's no longer in jail. He's no longer in custody.
Speaker 1:And of course there are still terms the release on bond. He, yes, he's not in physical custody, but it's not as if Kyle Rittenhouse has resumed a completely normal life pre shooting incident. He still has the trial that's coming up. So yes, understood. He's not physically being watched. He has physically in a facility like the jail or being overseen by the, by the government, but the case is not over clearly.
Speaker 2:He drove from Illinois to Kenosha, Wisconsin, and proceeded to, uh, open fire shooting. Three people in total, one person was injured. Two people died and as a result, uh, he was arrested and is facing multiple serious charges, including first degree, intentional homicide, first degree, reckless homicide attempted first degree, intentional homicide and other charges, but those are the most serious.
Speaker 1:And that's going to be interesting because that's one of the few things that Ana Kasparian actually gets correct about this case is that that's basically the overview of the charges as Kyle currently faces on, on the criminal side here. But we'll see how this commentary very quickly, uh, it takes the turn South.
Speaker 2:Um, now the protests that were taking place last summer, uh, occurred after the police shooting of Jacob Blake. He was shot in the back and, uh, that
Speaker 1:Shot in the blood in the back. Of course, as we know now reaching for a knife after already resisting arrest and fighting back in so far as escaping the officer's hold and resisting a taser shot, which we've seen in a couple of cases now, uh, recently across the country. But nevertheless, the, the framing there just as a quick aside is of course you paint Jacob Blake as a victim. If you're shot in the back, then you automatically with the omissions here in, by the young Turks, we're not posing a threat to the officer, which we now know to be absolutely not true.
Speaker 2:Uh, video was certainly jarring. It was something that we covered in detail on this show, two victims who died as a result of this 17 year old opening fire with an illegal weapon, an AR 15, that he had no business in possession of being in possession of
Speaker 1:According to who, according to who who's, who, whose business is it to say whether he should have had it or not. I mean, there's a fair argument to be made that if Kyle Rittenhouse was there administering first aid as he was, as he's on video doing, and the rest of the events play out as they did. And he was not armed, he very well may be dead today. He, he had the, at least one gun pointed in his face, in a compromised position on the ground. So it's not as if he didn't face danger and didn't wait until the last possible minute to discharge his firearm. So while you can disagree with whether or not that particular weapon was necessary, whether that's something that a 17 year old kid should have, if we just look at the series of events, post administering aid to those in, in Wisconsin, he certainly had the need for some kind of fire on firearm, on him. And there's a completely conceivable and tenable argument to say that that saved his life. At the end of the day,
Speaker 2:Two victims are 36 year old Joseph Rosenbaum and 26 year old Anthony, uh, Huber. And how did he purchase that gun? Well, he admitted to the press that he purchased that AR 15 by using a Corona virus stimulus check, and that a 19 year old friend of his helped him purchase the gun because of course, he's too young as a 17 year old to purchase an AR 15, when he was asked about it, he said, no, I don't regret it. I would've, I would have died that night if I didn't. I feel like I had to protect myself.
Speaker 1:That's of course what I just said. I had a lot of you watching and listening probably came to the similar conclusion when you actually watched the video, which again, this is the ultimate Axiom with Alex, like the young Turks, you get to the final fork in the road for commentary like this. And you get to the point where you go lying or lazy, the commentary that's put forth in this video, you have to see it through the lens of, have they seen the video? Did they watch it in its entirety? See the real threat that Kyle Rittenhouse was under without posing any himself and are nevertheless concealing that fact and lying about the case, or did they see that they got their boogeyman, a young, kind of a dorky looking white kid, Midwestern white kid, obviously from the other side of the political spectrum, from those at the young Turks, heard of him shooting someone else in a politically charged environment. And that was enough. We didn't bother watching the video because that 30,000 foot cursory view of the case is enough for us to go on. We're not, we know which team we're on already, if we're from the young Turks. So did we even watch the video at all here? I think it's the latter. I, I really find it very hard to believe that Ana Kasparian or the woman who is going to come on in a few moments here, or a lot of the higher profile people at the young Turks watch the video. I very much doubt that they watch the video. I think they found the perfect boogeyman in, again, the very superficial cursory review of the case and the individuals involved. And so a lot of characteristics that they really dislike in others that they really like to castigate in others. And that's really got the ball rolling on their commentary, and it's simply too late to go back. At this point, they've drawn themselves into a corner, even if they were interested in giving a fair view of this case and actually watching the video, there's no way to do so without admitting themselves. In addition to us, knowing just by viewing the video, that they've completely lied about the case from the jump.
Speaker 2:Now, again, he drove from Illinois to Wisconsin, so he put himself in what he considers a dangerous situation. He was in possession of an illegal weapon. He was the one who opened fire first.
Speaker 1:Well, he was open fire and Ana Kasparian is, is an interesting case study because she is, well, if you forgive me for one brief ad hoc, she's a blithering idiot. She's a moron. Yes, he did open fire first because he had a gun pointed in his face. Kyle Rittenhouse did technically sh shoot the first shot, but obviously the narrative, that real story behind this case is that if he didn't do so, the individual with a gun pointed, Kyle Rittenhouse would have been the first person to shoot. And the shot would've been fired at Kyle Rittenhouse.
Speaker 2:And, you know, I mean, we'll see how this all plays out in court, but the, the point of this story, the point of this update is that he is free on$2 million bond. I have a couple of thoughts about this first and foremost, the circus that's happening today. Um, we can credit the mainstream media forth because they continue to give shine a light, give a microphone and continue to amplify the voices of all the circus, right? Uh, people are dying every day. All kinds of things are happening all over the world. And the Washington post is having a fit down what Kyle, cause we want to know what a murderer is thinking. And
Speaker 1:Just a ridiculous statement. He's not a murderer. He's, hasn't been convicted of murder and nobody here has the intellect or the know-how to know that not every killing necessarily a murder, a killing just means that some act that an individual did towards another led to that other's death. There are killings that are, that are murder, that are manslaughter that are justified and self-defense so to call him the murder is obviously not only legally untrue, it's factually untrue by the set of circumstances we have here and notice here how the real crux of this initial statement from this woman at the young Turks is that the Washington post simply talk to Kyle Rittenhouse and let him explain himself. That's the real issue here. They sat down with him and ask him questions. That's too much, never, never mind. The fact that Kyle red house is going to get acquitted of at least the murder, the killing related murder charges here. That's a whole nother can of worms where everyone at this network is going to blow their top when that never possibly happens. But for now the simple conversation with Kyle Rittenhouse is even too much to bear.
Speaker 2:And then we, we wonder why the world and our country is in disarray because the media mainstream media is constantly adding fuel to the fire. We shouldn't
Speaker 1:Fuel to the fire. And if anybody isn't subscribed already, you should go donate patriarch and go view a Devin Tracy's videos at atheism is unstoppable. Fueling the fire. We can have a whole nother episode or series of episodes on Gavin long. There's a whole history of Gavin long in response to Chank Ugur and others at the young Turks saying you should quote, fight back when approached by a police officer. And then he did exactly that and murdered several police officers and permanently brain damaged another. So there's no one at this network who can earnestly and honestly say that others aside from them should not add fuel to the fire. I mean, even more recently, look at their coverage of cases like Rayshawn Brooks that we went over of Jacob Blake, that we went over, all of them outright false hoods, and they have the young Turks are in a particularly interesting position because they have a lot of younger, more impressionable viewers. If you look at the metrics and if you get the responses, especially on Facebook, you can see this to their videos. A lot of their engagement on social media comes from individuals who are college, age or younger. And the relevant portion of that is because it's more likely that those individuals are a more impressionable, but B don't have a background in basic civics, don't have a background certainly in legal or criminal procedure. So this kind of emotional lies, highly intense rhetoric is more influential on them. And to this point, I think that the jury is in that the young Turks are totally knowledgeable of that. And I think there is a nature of at least those like maybe Chank and Anna who are definitely knowledgeable, that they have very, uh, impressionable kind of blank slates watching their content. And that gives them leeway to get away with a lot that otherwise you couldn't get away with with a more educated, with a more knowledgeable, more mature audience.
Speaker 2:I don't want to hear what he has to say, right? I don't want to hear what he has to say. And he's a criminal, a cold-blooded murderer if he would've been in a dollar bond, which means that, and you know,
Speaker 1:A murderer he's, he's cold blooded murder, and somebody brought this up. And I think it's interesting if you go back to look at the outlets that were sued for their commentary, for the Covington Catholic escapades and the outright outlandish commentary, there wasn't really any indication that online, only publications and, and content creators were brought into the mix. And a lot of that is because at the end of the day, if it's just some person on YouTube, you even with a decent following, they don't have the kind of deep pockets that really even make it worth filing a lawsuit and going through the motions both in time and money and securing a legal representation. So maybe that's a reason why that wasn't really involved in the Covington Catholic cases, but here, I mean, the[inaudible] Turks are very well-funded organization, despite the fact that they are becoming more and more reliant on begging for money and the VPN subscriptions and the grifting and the what have you for various sponsors that were not present in the publication of TYT videos even five years ago, probably even three years ago. That's really a more reason addition. And I think it's because they've seen a hit at least in so far as the rate of growth, as far as subscribers, as far as engagement on their videos. If you go back and watch, I know Sargon of a Cod did a video at the time, way back when at the RNC, I think it must have been 2016 when Alex Jones had his run in with Chank Ugur and the young Turks. The ironic part about that underlying some of their back and forth is that Alex Jones had surpassed the young Turks in subscribers and engagement. So while they still do have 5.606 million subscribers, the video is arguably not really that well viewed. I mean, I know it may sound rich coming from me, but 166,000 views for an hour for an account that has over 5 million subscribers is not grade, does that a great attrition rate for viewing based on the entire subscriber base of the channel. But nevertheless, I think the rate of growth has slowed down in recent years and this kind of, of, of rhetoric and losing a lot of battles, losing battles to, um, again, to Alex Jones, anytime any one of these people show up for public debate, they get the entire auditorium mopped. They get completely ragdolled around the stage by whoever they face, whether it's Jake, you were rank aspiring or silent piker. Um, no, none of them ever go well for them. So you're getting kind of normy, progressive commentary, and they don't really put up a good showing when they go up against someone on the rare occasion, someone who disagrees with them
Speaker 2:Become the poster child of one of the talking points of this ridiculous coat that follows.
Speaker 1:I wanted to partner with 1-800-FLOWERS because I wanted to bring my aesthetic to give it my,
Speaker 2:Yeah. You know, to your point about the false equivalency between protesters who are, um, you know, fighting back against a two tier justice system and all sorts of injustices that we've seen with our very eyes and various videos featuring police shootings to acquaint them with right wing gang members, because that's what they are, is pretty, uh,
Speaker 1:There's no indication whatsoever, a nice freeze frame on it. There's no indication that Kyle right now is, was a part of a gang or any proud boys like affiliation or any politically or socially motivated group or organization relevant to the facts of this case. They're completely unfounded,
Speaker 2:Painful, and disgusting. And these are the same people who enabled Donald Trump's denials of the out outcome of the general election people who are essentially enabling him to dismantle, uh, our democratic process to say that black lives matter protesters are, uh, basically like the left wing component of whatever Kyle written houses is incredibly embarrassing and pathetic for anyone
Speaker 1:You're right. It is pathetic because they're by orders of magnitude, worse orders of magnitude worse. Um, you have not only Gavin long, which by the way, Adda, your network helped influence and incense him to murder the three police officers and brain damage a fourth. If you go back and watch it just so happens that this Gavin long kid, no following whatsoever on social media, but once he got taken into custody, the young Turks LLC copies, right, strike his account into oblivion, and it's no longer operating. Isn't it interesting that when Gavin long got taken into custody after making almost exclusively young Turk followup commentary videos, I believe he was featured on a young turret broadcast as far as his response in tweets. Isn't it interesting that the young Turks LLC files a copyright strike on him? Why him who cares Kevin Long had no following, never a copyright strike on Devin. Tracy never the biggest, the biggest Lampoon of this network's buffoonery never a strike on him on Sargon of a Cod of Steven Crowder of actual justice warrior, never once. But the one time they did just so happens to be Gavin long. It's suspicious to say the least
Speaker 2:News organization that tries to, um, draw that false equivalency. You know, it's one thing to take a comment or a statement from Kyle Rittenhouse. He's going to want to defend what he engaged in. But I do think it's important for these media outlets to be incredibly clear about what he did wrong. It's not like he was in his front yard. And he was approached by a group of individuals who posed an imminent threat to his life. He drove across state lines with his family intending to go to this protest, armed with a gun that he did not have. He was not legally in possession of he opened fire and as PR protesters were chasing him to get ahold of his gun. So he didn't hurt anyone else. He opened fire again, injuring one more person
Speaker 1:Is, I mean, this is, and this'll be the last thing that we say that's a bold face lie. The woman that you see on your screen right now is lying to your face. And for anyone who watched the video, which obviously excludes our friend, Anna knows that that's not true. They didn't chase him once he shot someone, they chased him first. And then when he got knocked to the ground, he had not only, uh, a skateboard swung in his head, he also had a gun pointed straight at him while he was in a compromised position. This is a purposeful blurring of the lines of the timeline of this case to get their facts across. They may be right, that this woman may be correct. If the sequence of events were the way that she lays out. But we have in controvertible video evidence to show that what she is telling you right now is simply untrue. It has nothing to do with political affiliation or a legal argument, or the rights afforded to defendants, whether they're white, black, green, or orange, this is a purposeful misstatement of the sequential order of events of this case. In order to show that Kyle Rittenhouse from these people's view was in the wrong. Anyone who's viewed this case who has a sufficient background and knowledge of this case will know that that's not the way that this happened. He didn't open fire and then run away. He shot his gun when it was absolutely necessary and he was resorting and it was relegated to the fact that he simply had to discharge his firearm or face and even more significant or certain death from those around him and those chasing him. So let me know what you think in the comments. If you're watching on YouTube, otherwise we'll see you for the rest of this episode over on iTunes and Spotify.
Speaker 3:The other story I wanted to get into more briefly is I'm not sure how many of you out there have kept up with college football, especially recently, but over this past Thanksgiving weekend, you saw Vanderbilt play Missouri in a game in the Southeastern conference of college football. And on an initial view of the matchup, this doesn't really seem to be a very influential game. And in fact, in the overall scheme of things in either the sec or certainly college football as a whole, it's not Missouri is an okay team at best, either in the context of the sec conference or college football as a whole and Vanderbilt to be quite blunt is terrible there, Oh, in seven, many of their games have not even been particularly close. They for a team that in recent years has put forth, at least an okay season have really had a season in shambles this year from the very beginning. And this weekend leading up to the game, we heard reports that Vanderbilt's kickers, uh, were either injured and, or on a COVID list either because of testing positive or being in close contact, or what have you. The ultimate crossroads that Vanderbilt was that heading into prep for this past weekend's game was they simply did not have a kicker. And for a team that struggles to score points, certainly struggles to get anywhere near the end zone. A field goal kicker may be useful because in certain stretches of the game, if God, in the overall view of the game as a whole kicking a field goal may really be this team's only chance of getting any points on the scoreboard. And ironically, and we'll finish at the end here and circle back to where we are now. They lost 41 to nothing. They didn't score a single point. I believe they only reached past the 50 yard line past the midway point of the field either once or twice for the entire game. And one of those times they got a penalty that sent them back to their own half of the field. So it was even adding insult to injury. But nevertheless, we heard this week that Vanderbilt was going to sign the goalie from the women's soccer team, Sarah Fuller to be their kicker, both the place kicker and the field goal kicker. And this was an interesting decision, not only in having a woman beyond a power five conference, college football roster, but also Vanderbilt doesn't have a men's soccer team. And you see this a lot in high school is that one of the real studs of the soccer team of the boys or men's soccer team is either the football team's kicker or could serve as a kicker if injuries or other things come up and things get dicey on, on the roster and the teams in need of a kicker. But here Vanderbilt was left with taking one of the individuals still on the roster and trying to fashion him as a kicker or go the route of Sarah Fuller. They went in with Sarah Fuller goalie for the Vanderbilt women's soccer team. And this was of course lauded as an absolutely heroic effort by ms. Fuller number one and a true inclusionary and, uh, at the pinnacle of diversity and inclusion, progressive values by Vanderbilt as a whole, to even employ this stunted from the beginning. So we get to the game. The first half goes by and as previously mentioned, Vanderbilt is absolutely nothing short of a Bismal. They are terrible. They struggled to really even string a few positive plays in a row, getting a decent amount of yards. Each it's, it's a really a struggle to even hold the ball in their possession for a decent amount of time because they so quickly exhaust their downs. And so quickly have to give the ball to the other team. So the first half goes by, it was not even within the realm of possibility was really never even entertained that Vanderbilt got into field goal range for Sarah full it's for fuller to try an effort and get three on the board. So now we break from halftime and wouldn't, you know, it, Missouri gets the ball first at the start of the second half, which means that Vanderbilt has to kick the ball. Uh, the majority of the length of the field to the other polar opposite end of the field and Missouri will catch the ball and start their progress and effort to go down the other side of the field and score touchdown,
Speaker 4:Right?
Speaker 3:She lines up for the cake and the cake is a wow,
Speaker 4:Hmm,
Speaker 3:Almost a 45 degree angle kick towards the sideline. It goes about to the other teams, we'll say 35 yard line. It is a, it is not a good kick. It goes about 30 yards, give or take. And that's the start and end of Sarah Fuller's contribution. Unfortunately, for those of us who, for whatever reason, we're interested in seeing what the outcome of this stunt would be. And really you could say, unfortunately for Sarah Fuller, who never even got the opportunity, there was no field goal opportunity to be had for the remainder of the game. Vanderbilt proceeds to be pulverized for another half of football until the game mercifully ends In the wake of the Vanderbilt massacre that was there Saturday's game versus Missouri. You saw outlets certainly in the sports media, but then those who kind of blends their sports coverage again with politics, not only the ESPN, but the yahoos of the world, just heap praise on Vanderbilt and Sarah Fuller. We heard explanations that this was really a squib kick. A squib kick is a, a hard hit kick that dribbles along the ground. And the reason why you do this is that the other team has to be more cautious in picking up the ball. It's harder to catch wall a, the oblong shaped football is, is ricocheting along the field than if it was just kicked in the air, right to you. So in a combination of a bigger chance of fumbling it of not picking up cleanly and just more cautiously going about catching the ball, it's used to give the kicking team and advantage and getting just even that little bit more time in progressing down the field to tackle that receiver of the ball on the receiving team. The thing about a squib kick is it usually goes the majority of the length of the field, the one of the last two lines of defense or hear of possible receivers of the ball on the receiving end still usually pick up a squib kick, but here it goes to really the first or second line of players. It goes about maybe about 40% of the distance that ideally you'd like the squib kick to go. It was a botched cake. It was a mistake. It was no judgements against Sarah Fuller as it as a soccer player or as a female athlete. But the kick was not good. It was not a script kick, no coach in, if you were to hook them up to a lie detector or get them in a quiet moment, just the two of you would be happy with that outcome because it's just simply not. What's contemplated by calling a squid kick. But nevertheless, we heard that this was a miraculous, uh, Donald Trump apparently was leading the PR efforts of Sarah Fuller. It was the best script cake. You've never seen a script cake like this before. They're saying it's the best script kick ever. Multiple outlets like out cake, the coverage, clay Travis's outlet, Jason Whitlock, who's over there as well. We're quick to point out that again, no judgments towards ms. Fuller, but the cake was not executed as planned as you would want it to go. And the commentary and, and pleading with the general public otherwise is just simply not backed up by anyone with a base level knowledge of football, which you would hope that nationally syndicated sports media companies would have. But alas, we are, you also heard an in the wake of this game more recently this week that Sarah Fuller really demanded to give a halftime speech to the Vanderbilt players. And you could imagine Vanderbilt is still an sec school to division one school. These kids, these guys are on the team on scholarship. So they may be having a rough year this year, but they've been at the pinnacle of athletic achievement up until now. They're certainly not happy with the way this year is going. And, um, the first half of the Missouri game made it just all that much worse, but her main contention with a team in the locker room was that they needed to be more active on the sidelines, cheering on their teammates. That was the missing link in their, in their teams deficit. At that point at halftime was simply cheering on their teammates and knowing that they're doing a great job, you could imagine that this would was not taken well by a bunch of the guys in the locker room, who again, are not happy with how things have transpired this year or in this game. And now in the days that have followed, we'd heard that at least there are rumors starting that some of the players on the team given the fact that the season is a lost cause they have to face a perennial, a Superbowl team in the university of Georgia Bulldogs. Next weekend, a combination of the circumstances there combined with the clear PR stunt that this was in, in having a woman kicker has led at least again, reports say anonymous players hinting at the fact that they simply don't want to play next weekend. It's a combination of a terrible season, um, horrendous odds of beating university of Georgia. The last time I saw it was about 35 and a half points. That means that Vegas, the gamblers are predicting the most likely or reliable result is that Georgia wins by about five touchdowns, which is an extraordinary margin of defeat. So that combined with the players feeling disrespected by this stunt and thinking that well, not only is the season going poorly now our own athletic director and coach are not even really taking our chances of success or really our aspirations towards winning at least one game seriously right now. So why even bother? So we'll keep an eye on that. Um, as of now, Sarah Fuller is actually on the roster still and by all accounts, unless something changes between now and, uh, the game, if it is played this weekend, uh, she is, uh, scheduled and slated to be the kicker for Vanderbilt again. So we will keep an eye on that and give you any updates for that going forward.
Speaker 4:So
Speaker 3:That does it for this week's episode of fate of the union. You can reach me Franklin, the host of the program on Twitter or medium.com by searching fate of the union, and please visit our new YouTube page over at fate of the union as well. You can also reach us by email@franklinfothueatgmail.com. This has been the fate of the union. Thanks for listening to everybody. Bye bye.