> meanwhile ignore the thousands of people literally massing in the streets spreading Covid in Democrat-run states...
Those protests were in open air, with a very large majority wearing masks, with people constantly moving about so if you did come near an infected person you probably weren't near them long enough to get an infectious dose.
Also, in some of the cities officials did heavy testing of people at the protests or after they attended. In Minneapolis they got 1.8% positive among 3200 people they tested at the protest, and 1% among 8500 people who sought tests afterwards citing attending the protests as their reason for concern. Seattle had less than 1% positive among the 3000 protestors it tested. Boston had 1.1% among the ~1300 it tested.
As mentioned above, when you encounter an infected person in passing in an open air event with both of you wearing masks, you probably won't get an infectious dose. And with only 1-2% of the people at that event infected, you probably won't encounter enough of them to get an accumulated infectious dose either.
Yes, it is better not to have these protests during a pandemic...but at least they held the protests in places that minimized the risk and the attendees took steps to protect themselves.
Contrast this to groups that are holding their mass gatherings indoors in places where attendees will be relatively static for hours, where most attendees will not take any protective steps, and where they are discouraging even social distancing.
Also, many of the attendees will have not been taking any protective steps in the days or weeks before, so I'd expect the percentage infected going into the event to be higher than it was for the people going into the protests.
The big difference between these events and the protests is that in the later case the organizers recognized the risk and tried to limit it. They may have underestimated the risk of overestimated the effectiveness of their mitigations (although so far the numbers look like they were probably right), but if so that's a quantitative error not a qualitative one.
Those indoor, don't move around, don't mitigate the risk events, are not even trying to mitigate the risk. They are making a qualitative error.