Those are simply disingenuous examples on your part.
What has to conscious effort to conflate and thus muddy issues. The specifics such as with the Michael Brown case, the hands up dont shoot false meme has been established forensically then decided in court of law to be false. This versus your, for example, "Trump hasn't done anything wrong and should be immune from any and all prosecution!".
What you are attemping is what a lot of the " " fact checkers" " often do. First, yours has two elements instead of the one, both of which have to be right to get a passing score. If only one is right, even 100% right, you get a failing grade of 50%. Subtle, clever, or rather cunning perhaps, tactic.
The Michael Brown one, already proven beyond shadow of doubt, against the two that have not been even properly investigated much less adjudicated one way or the other.
And if the first in your example were to ever be found true the second would be false in the overwhelming majority of cases. I know for myself, have said it plenty, to you even, specifically, that if Trump were ever credibly found to be traitorious that he need get the proper consequences.
Problem is, after 2 years of illegal and legal shennigans there is not a single item in evidence with which to prove that. So, WE argue, on this side, the both which go together with the current set of provable facts.
Not the same, NOT at all the same.
Disingenuously so not the same.