He was held in contempt for refusing to turn $15 million in assets over to the court, not for refusing to give "the government" his computer programs. If "the government" or the CIA wanted his software so much, they could have seized it while he was in prison for eleven years.
Part of his plea agreement is he cannot work with any registered financial advisor or institution. Anyone registered to work in finance can't work with him because he can't register as a financial agent.
Why defend a convicted felon who can't work in the finance industry, and when the financial industry avoids him, no matter how good his phony self promotion looks?
I would guess that any mid-average intelligent person can look at what happened to the J6ers and understand that when the government sets it’s eye on you to prosecute you, you have almost no chance of justice. Federal prosecutors are successful more than 97% of the time IIRC. There is a reason.
In the case of Armstrong, it was him or the NYC banks. But his accusations were far more complicated because they wanted the software. He refused. He was held in contempt in solitary for years as a result.
I tried to fill in details people who just read wikipedia do not understand. I’ve learned many conservatives are as close-minded as liberals. I suspect it is human to find an idea that feels comfortable and immediately be closed to any dissonant facts. Unfortunately, when you do this you also simultaneously choose to not seek truth, only confirmation of pre-belief.