In Dem-ruled state it's fine for BLM to put tens of thousands in the streets, but won't let GOP hold a rally

If you pay attention to current events you probably noticed that many Democrat governors have an outrageous double standard when it comes to lockdown orders:  They continue to ban religious gatherings, people attending weddings and funerals, but they're fine with 20,000 BLM protesters massing shoulder to shoulder in the street as they break, burn and loot.

After the Supreme Court signalled that was unacceptable, the Democrat got more clever:  The Dem who rules Illinois, governor J.B. Pritzker, has said that since mass protests are fine, he'll now graciously allow religious groups to convene in "large gatherings."  (Note: a big "religious gathering" might have 2,000 people, compared to 20,000 or more for protests.  But hey, same thing.)

But when Republicans asked permission (!!!!) to hold a political rally, the Dem governor said no.

Let's review:  He has no problem with mass demonstrations by BLM and their supporters, but bans political rallies.  By what conceivable logic is one fine and the other banned?

Of course you're not supposed to ask that question.  Cuz the system is rigged:  Democrats and BLM rioters can put tens of thousands in the streets, but da Democrat gov won't let Republicans hold a political rally.  No logic there, just pure power at work.

Source.