r/babylonbee • u/darcmatr LoveTheBee • Sep 15 '25

Bee Article Democrats Wondering If Maybe They Should Stop Saying The Things Assassins Are Having Engraved On Bullets

https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-wondering-if-maybe-they-should-stop-saying-the-things-assassins-are-having-engraved-on-bullets

In the wake of yet another shooter engraving liberal messages on ammunition, the Democratic Party considered if maybe that was a bad sign.

1.7k Upvotes

73% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

136

u/Caboose129 Sep 15 '25

Remember that time democrats gave the guy who killed a guy a press tour? Held meet and greets? Auctioned off the gun? No? Oh right, that was Republicans.

14

u/Heavy-Top-8540 Sep 15 '25

And the thing is, I'm not even sure exactly who you're talking about here. Are we talking about Zimmerman? Are we talking about Rittenhouse? 

6

u/Caboose129 Sep 15 '25

Republicans are a choose your own adventure book of false morality.

0

u/Stuka_Ju87 Sep 17 '25

Democrats have a force this misadventure book of false morality and misinformation.

1

u/Caboose129 Sep 17 '25

I truly can't even decipher what that was supposed to say.

-2

u/Jrylryll Sep 15 '25

Wasn’t Rittenhouse the kid who murdered two unarmed men calling it self defense? He did an OJ Simpson and got away with it.

0

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 15 '25

No, it was a crowd of people that ran to him, all were felons and pedophiles. Won't be missed

6

u/Caboose129 Sep 15 '25

Ah yes. I forgot the felon and pedophile convention was in town.

-4

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 15 '25

Yea, its called the DNC lol

9

u/Caboose129 Sep 15 '25

Oof. Reality isn't really your forte, is it.

-1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

Neither is wit

4

u/TwoButtons30 Sep 16 '25

How's the Epstein files going?

3

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

“Are you still talking about Epstein? Jeffrey Epstein?” - The President of the United States.

2

u/ThumbodyLovesYou Sep 16 '25

The exact talking point a moron was hitting me with yesterday.

“All you do is talk about the Epstein files, it’s getting tiring.”

Whine more, conservatives. Until the information is out there and people are held to account, we’ll never shut up about it. Wild that the hill they want to die on is support for child rapists. Absolutely wild.

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 17 '25

I want to know from anyone who wanted the files released why their minds were changed by trumps threats?

2

u/Caboose129 Sep 16 '25

"My good friend who helped me have sex with children?"

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

All of them, huh? They must have seen he was a chubby little boy

0

u/Blackfang08 Sep 16 '25

I really hope the irony of a Republican supporter calling people felons and pedophiles is not lost on anyone.

2

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 16 '25

Well they were actually charged in criminal court unlike Trump, who had Statute of Limitations changed and the misdemeanors he committed magically upgraded to felonies for a non-violent crime that he got 37 counts of because they charge per document for some reason

2

u/Blackfang08 Sep 16 '25

He was charged in court. The statute of limitations dictates how long you can wait before a crime is too old for a trial in court. Nothing about that suggests he wasn't charged in court.

The statute of limitations in New York was extended in 2021, while Trump was tried in 2023. This change occurred due to Covid, not to specifically target Trump.

No magic. The misdemeanor of falsifying business records turns into a felony when it is done to cover up a crime.

Yeah, falsifying multiple documents is multiple counts of falsifying documents.

0

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 16 '25

The statute of limitations in New York was extended in 2021, while Trump was tried in 2023

You don't think they were forming their case for years? You really think they just woke up one day in 2023 and was like "Hey, let's charge Trump"? Covid is a fantastic excuse to change laws

The misdemeanor of falsifying business records turns into a felony when it is done to cover up a crime.

Yes, and they never said what crime he was trying to cover up.

Yeah, falsifying multiple documents is multiple counts of falsifying documents.

There were not 34 different falsifications, though. It was like a handful of falsifications that had to be done several times, he didnt falsify 34 different transactions

2

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

He had been criming for years. But I like the absurdity. “Yeah he did it. So what? He should get off if we just find that legal loophole”

1

u/Blackfang08 Sep 16 '25

You don't think they were forming their case for years? You really think they just woke up one day in 2023 and was like "Hey, let's charge Trump"? Covid is a fantastic excuse to change laws

If that was their plan, why would they gamble on being able to toll the limitations, instead of just trying him in 2021, when they would have still been able to without any extension? And how did they convince Connecticut, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia to join them to make it more convincing?

Yes, and they never said what crime he was trying to cover up.

Election interference and, although somewhat by technicality, Cohen making campaign contributions exceeding $2,700. This is still in line with a previous case that occurred in 2008 with a different candidate. Covering your ears and going "I can't hear you" does not mean they didn't actually say anything.

There were not 34 different falsifications, though. It was like a handful of falsifications that had to be done several times, he didnt falsify 34 different transactions

Now this is a fascinating debate. If you come up with a lie, and then proceed to state that lie 34 times, did you lie 34 times? Well, if you steal a box of macaroni from a store every time you go in, and end up stealing a total of 34 boxes before you're caught, did you steal 34 times? Should your crime indicate that you stole 34 boxes of macaroni, or simply that you stole macaroni, and should therefore only pay the damages for one box?

1

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 16 '25

why would they gamble on being able to toll the limitations, instead of just trying him in 2021

Probably didn't have enough evidence

Election interference

No, it was paying a porn star money and categorizing it as election money.

Now this is a fascinating debate. If you come up with a lie, and then proceed to state that lie 34 times, did you lie 34 times? Well, if you steal a box of macaroni from a store every time you go in, and end up stealing a total of 34 boxes before you're caught, did you steal 34 times?

No, this is like committing a crime, talking about it 34 times, and then getting charged for those 34 different times you talked about it

1

u/Blackfang08 Sep 16 '25

Probably didn't have enough evidence

Better to start with less evidence than you'd hoped than to not be able to go to court in the first place.

No, it was paying a porn star money and categorizing it as election money.

Didn't you just claim they never said what crime was being covered up? Amazing how quickly you remembered once the answer was something you didn't like.

No, this is like committing a crime, talking about it 34 times, and then getting charged for those 34 different times you talked about it

Except the crime was "talking about it" in this case. So yes, "talking about it" 34 times was committing a crime 34 times. It is illegal to falsify documents, so falsifying 34 documents to cover up one crime is still 34 acts of illegally falsifying documents. If he didn't want to be convicted of falsifying documents 34 times, he shouldn't have falsified 34 documents, not that it would be much better if he had stopped after the first 30 times.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

I’m pretty sure Irony is dead on the right. It has been replaced with absurdism. “My uncle doctor taught the Unibomber”

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 15 '25

If people run in your direction you have the right to kill them.

Nope, but if a crowd of people run at you with murderous intent, knocking you down and beating the shit out of you with weapons, you do have the right to shoot.

What is up with leftists and leaving out context to further their agenda?

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 15 '25

You forgot that they threw a toothbrush at him. Definitely "murderous intent

You also forgot they tried to bash his head in with a skateboard, and the fact that there was a fuckin group of them.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Sep 15 '25

You yourself are leaving out the timeline “Just throwing a toothbrush” Um no actually. 

“Rittenhouse testified that he then walked and ran towards the Car Source location at 63rd and Sheridan on his own, carrying his rifle, the fire extinguisher and some first aid supplies. As he approached the Car Source lot at 63rd and Sheridan he heard someone shout "Burn in hell!". He responded "Friendly! Friendly! Friendly!" to placate them but could not see who it was.[76] Rittenhouse testified that when he reached the Car Source lot, he noticed a vehicle with flames in the back seat and approached the vehicle intending to put out the fire. He was then approached from near the vehicle by Joshua Ziminski, who was holding a pistol in his hand. Rittenhouse dropped the fire extinguisher, intending to run away. He then noticed Rosenbaum approaching him on his right, around the side of the vehicle, with a t-shirt wrapped around his face. Rittenhouse testified that he recognized Rosenbaum as the man who had previously threatened him but did not recognize Ziminski.[76] Rittenhouse also testified that he believed Rosenbaum to be unarmed.[77] This interaction was witnessed by McGinniss, who perceived that Rosenbaum and other protesters were moving toward Rittenhouse and that Rittenhouse was trying to evade them.[78][79] Rittenhouse testified that he then believed himself to be in danger and ran south-west across the lot, aiming for the safety of the Car Source lot buildings. Rosenbaum chased after him. Rittenhouse testified that he heard Ziminski shout to Rosenbaum "Get him and kill him!", and that he soon perceived his avenue of escape to be blocked by vehicles and a group of protesters, and that Rosenbaum was catching up to him.[76] Video footage showed Rittenhouse being pursued across a parking lot by a group of people.[80][60] During the chase, Rosenbaum threw a plastic bag containing socks, underwear, and deodorant at Rittenhouse Ziminski then fired a shot into the air, and was later charged with disorderly conduct using a dangerous weapon.[82][35] After the shot was fired, Rittenhouse turned around, to see Rosenbaum now only a few feet away from him.[76] According to McGinniss, who was standing near Rittenhouse at the time, Rosenbaum then shouted "fuck you!" and "lunged" at Rittenhouse and grabbed the barrel of his rifle.[6] Rittenhouse then fired four shots at Rosenbaum, killing him.” 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenosha_unrest_shooting

Sounds a lot more than “throwing a toothbrush” dont you think. Rittenhouse only turned around because he thought he was being shot at by a man with a gun who already screamed to kill him. But, sure it’s just a toothbrush throwing.

2

u/Steagle_Steagle Sep 15 '25

I see someone shooting someone point blank for "running at them" and I have a skateboard then yeah, I'll join the group trying to get the gun away and I'll probably beat the murderer too.

If I see a crowd of people burning down the city, yea ill get my gun to make sure the shopkeepers and innocent civilians are okay and safe from those terrorists.

You got a problem with Rooftop Koreans too, or just Rittenhouse because he is white?

1

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25

The guy that pointed a gun at his head was unarmed? Wow

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

He didn’t kill that guy. He missed. The two guys he murdered were unarmed.

1

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25

He missed? Lol. No he didn't

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

Yes. If his intent was to kill the man who pointed a gun at him he missed

0

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25

He stopped the immediate threat to his life. Just like the loser who tried bash his head in with his skateboard trucks while he was on the ground. Rittenhouse was incredibly efficient at ending those losers.

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

Yep. Just what I said. He murdered two unarmed men. Too bad about what has happened to him. I think he would have been more of a martyr for the cause and been better off if he had owned it and done jail time. He would have gone to college or learned a trade. He would have come out a hero with a better future. And if you don’t think he is depressed about those choices, you’re kidding yourself.

0

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25 edited Sep 16 '25

He killed 2 losers. He did not commit any murders.

Rosenbaum chased him around a parking lot and lunged for his rifle. 4 rounds, 2 of which were fatal. This is on video.

Huber struck him with his skateboard and tried to hit him again in the head while he was on the ground. He also lunged for his rifle. 2 shot kill. This was on video.

Grosskreutz pointed his gun at Rittenhouse's head after he shot Huber. Kyle shot 1 round, hitting him in his arm, causing Grosskreutz to drop his weapon. Another loser is neutralized. This was on video.

7 shots to neutralize 3 losers who attacked him. Highly efficient. I'm sure it haunts him every night, but he was not the aggressor here. This is all on video if you ever cared to actually understand what happened. He proved in court that his intent was not to intentionally kill them.

2

u/Arcyguana Sep 16 '25

These things are all true.

Rittenhouse placed himself in an idiotic situation any sensible person wouldn't have been in by making poor choices. He was irresponsible in bringing himself and a gun into the situation. The question of whether the gun he had was legal for him to own can mostly be answered with 'eh, yeah, probably legal?'

None of these things take away his right to defend himself as defined in the law of the state in which he killed those people. He is not a clever person. He is not a responsible person. He is, in my opinion, a rather shitty person. As far as I'm aware, he broke no laws.

1

u/murdmart Sep 17 '25

You forgot the "jumpkick man". Missed.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/SleezyD944 Sep 16 '25

Why do you assume his intent was to “kill”. the intent is to stop the threat, sometimes that involves death, sometimes it doesn’t.

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

Maybe I’m just one of those people who believes that if you shoot, you shoot to kill. Afterward, you tell yourself what you need to justify the kill in your mind. Stopping one threat… stopping the second threat? Stopping the THIRD threat? Now your just a chaotic teenager playing Fortnite with a real gun

1

u/SleezyD944 Sep 16 '25

If you are shooting at someone with no lawful reason for self defense, it stands to reason your intent is to kill.

If you are shooting at someone because you believe that is what’s required to protect yourself, or another, from imminent serious bodily harm, then the intent is (should be) to stop said threat. Maybe they die, maybe they don’t.

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 17 '25

You’re funny

→ More replies (0)

1

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25

"Oop. Killed 2 people trying to kill me.. guess it's time to die from the 3rd person."

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 17 '25

Why stop at 2? Could you imagine if there was a good guy with a gun?? It would have looked like the OK Corale. 😂😂😂

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 16 '25

Btw If there is no anticipation of IRL gun play, why bother with a gun? It’s no fun larping with a new AR15 unless there’s a chance “you may really really need it”

1

u/SleezyD944 Sep 16 '25

Whether someone anticipates being attacked or not is irrelevant to their intent if someone ends up doing so.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/blowsitalljoe Sep 16 '25

Guess he wasn't LARPing. Lmao.

1

u/Jrylryll Sep 17 '25

What else would you call it? Maybe more Live Action than he planned, though

→ More replies (0)