As I had stated prior, I did not follow him in any capacity, just the same for all others. The fallout after I had seen only light of, mostly ignoring it because it has no relevance to me; the only incident that mattered was the assault. Wherever he pledges his loyalty is his own error there.

With regard to debating with him, I do not mean a literal debate, but baiting him into conversation or answer. Cornering him into speaking isn't likely to be effective as you saw. In order to do these things properly or in a way that matters, turning their own admissions against them are the best way to do so if they wisely stay out of an in-person encounter. The reason I say this is because that has become the go-to tactic and one that works exceptionally well. 

All I had seen in the end was the referring to how he "Deserved to be attacked for being a racist." and how instead of capturing him in his own words, they went about it by showing his history and gloating.