Another thing that's overlooked about the summer protests vs the Capitol Insurrection:

When protests turn into riots, it's usually spontaneous, and caused by some spark. The protest is planned; the riot is not.

But as we're seeing more now: the Capitol Insurrection was planned.

FWIW, this is also why there's such a disconnect between who "condemned" which events and whatnot. Lots of public figures encouraged the protests, for good reason!

But riots often start when, say, a SWAT cop shoots a flash bang through someone's car window, and people react.

When they say "So-and-so didn't condemn the riots!" they mean that So-and-so didn't talk *exclusively* about the riots. But So-and-so DID publicly say it was bad!

People start to obsess over the "riot" and stop paying attention to the reason for the protest.

That's intentional.

I've seen SWAT training where cadets are ENCOURAGED to do this, for this exact reason. They destroy something/push someone, knowing it'll cause it spark. That way, they justify the use of force. That way, they shut the protest down. That way, the riot overshadows the protest.

And this is the significant difference between the (rhetorical, bad faith) comparisons between the Capitol Insurrection and other protests:

The MAGA Militia didn't BECOME a riot because of an unexpected spark. It was specifically designed to be an uprising (inc. the costumes).

That's what the MAGA Militia is missing when they try to appropriate and bastardize this MLK quote.

MLK specifically says that you can't condemn the riots UNLESS you condemn the conditions that lead to them.

(he also specifically calls out Whites Normalcy for complicity)

Folks on the right who say "THEY didn't condemn the BLM riots!" are deliberately ignoring that "condemn the conditions" part. They don't condemn the initial act of police brutality; they don't condemn the violence from SWAT that sparked the protest into a riot.

IF we accept Kaitlin Bennett's MLK appropriation as good faith (which it's not, but), we would also need to "condemn the conditions" that lead to the "riot."

AKA, condemn the lies of the narcissistic con-man who swindled his way into office and told them to do it.

…Uhh, Okay?

In case it's not clear: there's no "both sides" in this situation. There was no riot sparked as a reaction to something that someone else did. It is, quite literally, the bicycle meme. It's the Eric Andre meme.

It was not a reaction to a spark. It was an intentional fire.