Then, in a stunning turn of events, the City of Seattle made the decision to abandon the East Precinct and surrender the neighborhood to the protesters. “This is an exercise in trust and de-escalation,” explained Chief Carmen Best. Officers and National Guardsmen emptied out the facility, boarded it up, and retreated. Immediately afterward, Black Lives Matter protesters, Antifa black shirts, and armed members of the hard-Left John Brown Gun Club seized control of the neighborhood, moved the barricades into a defensive position, and declared it the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone—even putting up a cardboard sign at the barricades declaring “you are now leaving the USA.”
So why didn't Capitol Police on January 6 behave in same manner, and enforce the law equally, and "de-escalate" and abandon their position and hand over the equivalent of six blocks to January 6 protesters?
How can a January 6 defendant be held to maximum penalty for action when he was led to believe that this action was allowed and tolerated because democrats had shown that you can take over capitol buildings and entire blocks and barricade against police without punishment?
And is this not CLEAR EVIDENCE, jury, that the law is being SELECTIVELY ENFORCED which means that the DEFENDANT is NOT TREATED EQUALLY UNDER THE LAW and therefore you must ACQUIT. Government had shown by example that this behavior and these actions were tolerated and not prosecuted. The Defendant relied on the behavior of government and relied on the civil rights legislation that he be held to equal standards under equal laws meant to apply equally to all. When corrupt government CHOOSES AND PICKS WHO IT CONVICTS, YOU MUST ACQUIT
Seattle’s hard-Left secessionist movement has claimed its first territory: six blocks in the Capitol Hill neighborhood. https://www.city-journal.org/article/anarchy-in-seattle
So why didn't Capitol Police on January 6 behave in same manner, and enforce the law equally, and "de-escalate" and abandon their position and hand over the equivalent of six blocks to January 6 protesters?
How can a January 6 defendant be held to maximum penalty for action when he was led to believe that this action was allowed and tolerated because democrats had shown that you can take over capitol buildings and entire blocks and barricade against police without punishment?
And is this not CLEAR EVIDENCE, jury, that the law is being SELECTIVELY ENFORCED which means that the DEFENDANT is NOT TREATED EQUALLY UNDER THE LAW and therefore you must ACQUIT. Government had shown by example that this behavior and these actions were tolerated and not prosecuted. The Defendant relied on the behavior of government and relied on the civil rights legislation that he be held to equal standards under equal laws meant to apply equally to all. When corrupt government CHOOSES AND PICKS WHO IT CONVICTS, YOU MUST ACQUIT