“Enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue.”
I’m not claiming that anti-Christian bias is fabricated, or that protecting religious worship isn’t a legitimate concern for government. I’m also not defending the disruption of a church service as a valid form of protest.
But I am claiming something narrower, and verifiable:
We are watching a prosecutorial playbook in real time. An incident gets reframed through a civilizational lens (”the intimidation of Christians”), then escalated via federal enforcement machinery, and finally sealed with official state-produced meme imagery, designed to shape public perception of the defendant before any evidence is presented in court.
The Timeline (Dates Matter)The Timeline (Dates Matter)
Sunday, January 18:
Protesters entered Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, and interrupted a worship service. They chanted “ICE out” and “Justice for Renee Good.” Reporting indicates the protest targeted an alleged conflict of interest: Pastor David Easterwood also held a leadership role at ICE in Minnesota.
Thursday, January 22:
The Department of Justice announced arrests, Amber Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen, and William Kelly. Officials publicly invoked language around “physical obstruction of houses of worship” and other civil-rights-style legal theories.
Then the communications layer activated:
The Department of Homeland Security posted an arrest photo in which Armstrong appeared composed. Shortly afterward, the White House posted an altered version in which she appeared to be crying, and, according to analysis, darker-skinned. When questioned, the response was:
“The memes will continue.”
The Context That Shapes the EnforcementThe Context That Shapes the Enforcement
This is where the “anti-Christian bias” Executive Order becomes critical.
The EO doesn’t create new crimes. What it does create is an incentive structure: a task force chaired by the Attorney General, with DHS and FBI embedded, explicitly tasked with treating “worship disruption” cases as showcase enforcement and messaging opportunities.
The task force was framed from the outset (official record here) as a mechanism to “eradicate anti-Christian bias”, a broad cultural mandate now driving narrow legal cases.
The AP noted that the initiative positions federal enforcement as a response to a perceived civilizational threat, not merely isolated criminal acts.
The QuestionThe Question
If the goal is lawful order, the focus should be on transparent charging documents, narrowly tailored statutes, and judicial review—not culture-war framing paired with state-produced memes.
So here’s the test:
What evidence would change your mind that this is not a messaging-first enforcement pattern?