A judge in California threw out charges against two far-right political agitators, Robert Rundo and Robert Boman on the grounds of selective prosecution. The far-left prosecutor charged the pair for rioting but refused to indict ANTIFA members who did the same thing. The rioting occurred at a pro-Donald Trump “free speech” rally in Berkeley on April 15, 2017. The pair are members of RAM, Rise Against Movement, a white nationalist group. Of course, I do not agree with their beliefs but if they are charged antifa should be, too.
Judge Cormac J. Carney of the US District Court for the Central District of California wrote on February 21:
“Antifa and related far-left groups decided they needed to ‘shut this down.’ … They came prepared for violence, bringing weapons including pepper spray, fireworks, knives, and homemade bombs. And they used those weapons, as well as their bodies, against Trump supporters and law enforcement.”
“No individuals associated with the left, who engaged in anti-far-right speech and violently suppressed the protected speech of Trump supporters, were charged with a federal crime for their part in starting riots at political events. That is textbook viewpoint discrimination. Most telling in this case is the government’s silence as to why it never pursued a case against a single member of Antifa or related far-left groups with respect to their violent conduct at pro-Trump events.”
“Defendants have established selective prosecution. There is no doubt that the government did not prosecute similarly situated individuals. Antifa and related far-left groups attended the same Trump rallies as Defendants with the expressly stated intent of shutting down, through violence if necessary, protected political speech. At the same Trump rallies that form the basis for Defendants’ prosecution, members of Antifa and related far-left groups engaged in organized violence to stifle protected speech.”
“Of the 20 people arrested at the April 2017 Berkeley rally, the government charged only Defendants and other members of RAM under the Anti-Riot Act. The government charged no members of Antifa, BAMN, or other far-left groups under the Anti-Riot Act for their use of violence to shut down the rally.”
VISIT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL“To put it simply, RAM and Antifa, which both appear to use violence to silence protected speech, are identical in material respects—the only difference is their speech and beliefs.”
“By many accounts, members of Antifa and related far-left groups engaged in worse conduct and in fact instigated much of the violence that broke out at these otherwise constitutionally protected rallies to silence the protected speech of the supporters of President Trump. That is constitutionally impermissible. The government cannot prosecute RAM members such as Defendants while ignoring the violence of members of Antifa and related far-left groups because RAM engaged in what the government and many believe is more offensive speech.”
The judge’s order included photographs of Antifa engaging in violence at the same protest for which the defendants were charged.
Evidence showed that left-wing protesters had descended upon the pro-Trump rally to start a fight, and did so. “One man punched a Trump supporter, threw him onto a park bench to continue the beating, and was in the process of striking him until law enforcement intervened… A young woman used pepper spray and hit Trump supporters, explaining that she felt ‘like fighting a white bitch today.’ Police detained one Antifa member who had an improvised explosive device,” the judge wrote, citing reports from local police.
Rundo and Boman said that more than 10 Antifa agitators were pummeling a black man wearing a red hat, and they sought to protect him.
