You posted several obvious lies and non-arguments here.
“He did not have to be there”
You don’t get to decide that in a free country. Going to the extreme, nobody needs to do anything, not even sleep or eat.
“he had no buisness there”
That’s for him to decide. When a mob is trying to destroy the basic social order of the country they live in, I’d say that’s everyone business. Also, do you live in Wisconsin? 98% chance you don’t. I could just as easily ask you why you’re interested in state trial in a place you almos certainly don’t live in.
“he owned none of the property being “in danger””
And pretty much none of the “protestors” are Jacob Blake or have any meaningful connection to him. Your point?
“Not it was not, his very presence there was unlawful”
You only say that because you support the mob doing whatever they want unopposed. It has no merit.
“He had no right to direct people verbally nor to interact with the protesters in any way or form, since he did, Rosenbaum had every right to try and push him back.“
He wasn’t “directing” anyone and for the rest of your concerns, read the 1st amendment. You’re being in blatant opposition to it right now if you think he has “no right to interact with protestors”. Tip: Maybe before you call people “fundies” you should: 1. not be fundie-like yourself 2. learn what the word means, it was used years ago to mock hyper-religious people making hyperbolic and outlandish statements, using it merely a slur against anyone who’s not a progressive fools nobody outside your small circle of 10 people
“Hell, how about that bitch who got shot by an actual serviceman during the riots? Did she deserve it exactly like Rosenbaum, because she was very clearly attacking people there?”
The response I have might surprise you, but then again why bother responding to someone who clearly hates women? I’ll respond when you have apologized publicly to the women of the world for using that word.