just turning this idea over in my mind. Obviously the images of selfies being taken with cops and things of that nature paint quite a different picture to what we were seeing during the Northern hemisphere summer, but let’s not forget they did also kill one of them, and they did bust out the tear gas and stuff.
Was this just another strategic retreat type of tactic, where the cops figure “let them come in and bust up the furniture, they’ll tucker themselves out”? Has the difference in police response been exaggerated? I think it’s obvious on its face that a significant portion, if not a majority, of cops share sympathies with the protestors cause, but that doesn’t necessarily equate to mass dereliction of “duty”.
I’m not particularly trying to advance this argument, more just trying to get a discussion going and see what everyone thinks.
It seems like they didn’t really just abandon the politicians, they abandoned the less easy to defend ground and formed a different line of defence around the highest value targets, and made a choice to let the chuds have their fun to save themselves the paperwork they’d have to do if they mowed down 50 people.
You might be right, and in certain areas they seemed to do that, but it also seems like security got really thin in a few places where it didn't have to. I'm not sure. Someone will have to literally map it out on a diagram of the place lol. I suspect the people outside in riot gear took it a lot less seriously than the guys in suits who know the congresspeople.
For sure. And there’s probably so many conflicting different agencies involved, regular cops and security guards, maybe secret service for the higher ups, private body guards maybe.