Of course, the race to the bottom in journalism gives dumb and dishonest opinions an environment in which they can truly thrive.
The facts of the case are not really in dispute. An unarmed Austin Metcalf confronted Karmelo Anthony. Rather than treating the situation as any ordinary schoolyard invitation to fight — by walking away, talking your way out of it, or taking your chances in a brawl — he escalated the situation by reaching into his bag and pulling out a weapon… and then plunging it into the other guy.
CNN, like other outlets, has fanned the flames on the racial angle of what seems to most of us like an open-and-shut case. The bar for plunging a knife into an unarmed man is a lot higher than you had words with each other.
That isn’t stopping the TV talking heads from making this first and foremost about the race of the dead teen and the guy who killed him. As if the rest of us would shrug it off as ok if either of the kids’ ethnicities were different.
🔥🤔 UNREAL. CNN ALEADY CALLING IT A SHOCKING VERDICT. Areva Martin insinuating it is because of an all white jury and says Anthony was in FEAR OF HIS LIFE by larger athletes.
She says this will be tough for the black community to accept.
“We don’t know why he had a knife. If… pic.twitter.com/sRwhIS62Vt
— Johnny St.Pete (@JohnMcCloy) June 9, 2026
The verdict really wasn’t that shocking. Guilty, looking ahead at 35 years as a guest of the government.
Their talking point of an ‘all white jury’ is a lie, as evidenced by the retraction placed by the Guardian:
The revised title: “No Black jurors selected for murder trial over killing at 2025 Texas high school”
And the retraction quietly added to the bottom of the story: “The headline of this article was amended on 6 June 2026 to reflect that no Black people were selected for the jury, instead of the jury being all white as it originally stated.”
Funny how they like to throw around the word ‘BIPOC’ when lumping them all in one group serves a preferred narrative but that ‘BIPOC’ is conveniently discarded when making a distinction between ‘BIPOC’ and ‘Black’ is more useful to them.
The allowing of that obvious lie to be pushed without any ‘fact-checking’ dovetails nicely with the other lie about comparing Rittenhouse’s self-defence to Anthony’s.
First off — to this day, the left insists his acquittal was a travesty of justice, so trying to get the same judgment he got shows an insane level of dishonesty even in their basic categories. But there’s more.
Kyle began with less lethal conflict resolutions — including trying to put distance between himself and his attackers. But they kept coming.
One man who had threatened to kill him earlier grabbed the barrel of his weapon. He fired in self-defence. Another chased him, struck him and tried to take the weapon from him. The third had a gun of his own and lunged at Kyle before getting shot in the arm. His attackers had criminal history.
One more thing about the Rittenhouse trial — despite the fact that Rittenhouse and his three attackers were ALL white, we still see people out there who are convinced that Kyle somehow ‘got away with’ and may even have been seeking opportunity to shoot some black people.
The fact that all parties to the conflict were white does nothing to remove diatribes about his supposed ‘whiteness’ from endless opinions written about the trial, both in America, and beyond.
