This week the National Crawford Roundtable examines the Kyle Rittenhouse case, the 18-year-old who is accused of killing 2 protestors and injuring another during the unrest in Kenosha, Wisconson.  Rittenhouse, then 17 years old, claims he was present to defend the property and lives of the citizens there, and that the shootings were done in self defense. What is it about this case that has conservatives overwhelmingly siding with Rittenhouse, while liberals overwhelmingly oppose Rittenhouse?  Was Rittenhouse wrong to go there?  Was he being couragous or noble?  Regardless of whether he was right or wrong to go there, wasn't it still self defense?  Why is this considered a racially explosive case when Rittenhouse and the 3 people he shot are all white? And what about the prosecutor, pointing an AR-15 rifle at the jury, calling the rioters who were shot "heroes"?