I personally don't think any state spy organization is funded or directed by people making objective decisions. They're not technocratic institutions, even if it feels nice to imagine they are.
It seems to me that the police in question have targeted those groups most likely to insight violent acts. The leftist groups are not innocent, and neither are the right. There are limited resources and those most significant threats need to be targeted first.
As a more libertarian minded person, I see a lot of those outspoken are often lumped in with the "right wing" groups you mention, and that broad brush you speak with does nothing to create progress or foster open discussion.
Which right wing groups are not advocating for things that actively harm working people and minorities? Which leftist groups are out to harm entire pluralities of people out of indifference (at best) or cruelty (at worst)?
I'm asking in good faith because I honestly don't know what groups are being referred to when people say "neither side is innocent". I don't see the dichotomy that is being constructed with this argument.
I would say the Libertarian Party is not advocating for things that actively harm working people and minorities. Libertarians are in favor of equality in opportunity.
For that matter, there's no clear consensus that what most left-wing groups propose doesn't advocate for things that actively harm working people and minorities. Beyond this, groups like ANTIFA typically target violence at those who are not promoting racism, segregation or discrimination on the basis of gender, race or religion. The most violent left-wing groups tend to be environmental and animal rights groups.
Not to mention, so often in recent years it's the left that seeks to silence, censor, shut down and drown out differing opinions in the face of intelligent discussion. One of the most prominent examples would be Ben Shapiro, who has never advocated for violence, and has been a significant target of both the ALT-Right movement as well as the left.
The opportunity for rational discussion is lost when ideologues are so closed minded as to not even be able to listen or consider that they may be wrong. One must ALWAYS consider that you, yourself are wrong as a possibility when trying to push an agenda that would affect everyone.
Since you predictably brought up loosely organized anti-fascist groups taking direct action to de-platform explicitly white supremacist demonstrations, I'll point out that their actions are in defense of minorities from fascist groups who go well out of their way to make the elimination of people of color a topic of popular debate. Advocating for the elimination of a plurality of people is explicitly violence.
If this isn't a rational response to specific points you've made, you've already made up your mind about _first principles_. First principles are not up for debate.