That's wrong. Regardless of how you feel about the tactics used by the protesters, their dissent is clearly political in nature, and Cotton was advocating stopping their demonstrations with the military. It's a terrible mistake to misunderstand or sugar-coat his message and you shouldn't do it.
Calling the burning of buildings, the vandalism of public buildings and monuments, and the violence we've seen "political in nature" is really quite something. It's very revealing in terms of what the end goal is.
I wonder what "end goal" you believe has been revealed, beyond the obvious: the reduction in unjustified police violence that is the subject of the protests. My sense is that you might have misinterpreted my comment.
Protesting police abuses is a political act, i.e., relating to the government or the public affairs of a country. This is true whether you're talking about a purely nonviolent demonstration or one that gets completely out of control.