The capital police helped them break in, so they don't exactly have much reason to believe otherwise.
If Trump told them to this, which pretty much the entire media has been saying, then it then wouldn't it be entrapment to charge them?
If Trump told them to this, which pretty much the entire media has been saying, then it then wouldn't it be entrapment to charge them?
That's the relevant point, not whether or not the cops removed the barrier. The cops knew that hundreds of protesters were planning in on breaking into the capital building to assassinate senators, and purposely didn't send anyone to stop them. The whole thing was literally planned in public on social media.
In the very scene where the girl got shot, if you look from a different angle, you see there were a dozen riot police behind them doing basically nothing [0]. I have yet to find a satisfying explanation for it, considering the protesters were literally smashing doors and windows. [1]
And, let's be frank here: people were protesting the police, and the police took it personally. They felt threatened.
I have personally witnessed police brutality in my community. Have you?
To say that the police felt threatened by protests aimed at the police, and that because of that, the police acted more brutally than they otherwise might have, is not a justification of police brutality. It is an explanation.
But sure, some short video of cops removing a 3' tall baby gate, circulating on social media without context, makes a great basis for suggesting that the police and these hooligans were collaborating.
Edit: this sibling comment has a better angle on the barricades, https://mobile.twitter.com/justinjm1/status/1347174957613199...
We don't know what went through that officer's mind. If you're standing watch and someone stands next to you and clicks a photo, is there anything you can and should do? Should you, as the officer, wrestle him to the ground, knowing there's a riotous mob right behind him?
But even if it's the case that the officer enthusiastically posed for the photo, it's probably best not to understand police like a monolithic entity operating perfect information, but rather as a group of heterogeneous actors working in a fog that limits their awareness. Otherwise, if you extend the "one officer did X therefore the motives of all officers are established" logic you quickly get really stupid contradictions. Over the summer, I saw several photos of officers kneeling in solidarity with BLM protesters -- I guess that means all police everywhere support the aims of the BLM movement now?
Probably not, because police aren't a monolith, and subsequent police actions contradict that solidarity. Likewise, police teargassing, manhandling, and shooting these other protesters also paints a more complex landscape than "one officer took a selfie, therefore they're all collaborating."
I'd have no concerns had that selfie pic been taken outside at the original rally, but once that group had broken into the Capitol building everyone there was present illegally. That is not the time to pose for pictures, even if the situation or orders are such that you're not able to make arrests or expel them.
During the protests, the police had no issue shoving people to the ground [1], but at the capitol it looked very different [2].
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PAVTZIM5ks
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bX7j3xUB3A
[2] https://twitter.com/alafairburke/status/1346940066812276738
I believe there was a situation in Seattle, for example, where they broke into and destroyed a police station.
You must be blind.
Now you are aware.
I also don't recall BLM protesters threatening the leaders of our government in a real and material way.
Accepting your description of events for the moment -- is it your real, sincere belief, that this is the distinction that matters? I find it very hard to believe that, if these protests had been relocated around the corner to the Supreme Court -- or maybe to the DOJ building, or the Lincoln monument -- yet producing the exact same results, that you or anyone would just shrug their shoulders and write it off.
But that's what I'm reading from your comment. And if that's right, it's fucking insane.
Political violence is political violence, full stop. If your instinct in this moment is to rationalize how the violence going towards ends you support is different from that which goes towards other ends, put your phone away and seek help. You're part of the problem.
It's impossible for me to believe you are unaware of the circumstances surrounding her death.
Rand Paul says hi. [0]
Seems like Capitol police should have covered that in their first day of training.
Either way, my point is that it is that there isn’t evidence to support conspiracy theories that the capitol police were somehow in on it, which are circulating.
If he tells you to do something illegal and you do it, he’s an accomplice.
No, see for instance: https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrori...