But there is at-least one video, that I have seen, no such thing takes place. They just allow the terrorists inside.
Stop spreading lies.
Edit : The video.
https://mobile.twitter.com/justinjm1/status/1347174957613199...
https://v.redd.it/tl6j5jo2lz961
Couple this with upcoming news that DC police guard were severely restricted from acting or keeping a presence around the capitol, its really concerning.
https://www.businessinsider.in/international/news/some-among...
What caught me off-guard was how few officers were present, considering months of rhetoric and weeks of rioters gathering into DC.
It makes sense that key positions in the Pentagon were shuffled just a few weeks prior.
All this could be avoided if the president is made powerless to make such drastic decisions and the period of "lame duck" presidency is reduced.
"at least one video" I will take you at your word (more than you seem to have done for me). As it turns out, police officers are individuals, who make individual decisions. The question that is important here is whether they were following orders in doing so, and what the intent of those orders were. Leaping to conclusions seems premature.
Not make "individual" decisions and allow them in, considering the context.
And God willing there will be investigations (see Karen Bass’, Claire Mckaskill’ tweets), but shouldn’t we wait for those before we proclaim the police guilty here? By all accounts they were woefully outnumbered at the barriers, the chief resigned under pressure already for the clusterfuck he oversaw and so let’s hope more heads roll if they did wrong, but let’s not say people are spreading lies when we don’t have the full picture. Doesn’t make “us” any better than the obviously-lacking-the-full-picture rioters and insurrectionists when we do that.
But, that needs an investigation.
However, emotions are high because there is an obvious difference between treatment of BLM protesters and those who rioted yesterday.
Is it because of orders or individual decisions?
The original poster tried to shift the blame from the police as an entity / institution, to individuals taking decisions.
That is an obvious tactic of trying to cover-up the complicity of the institution. Happens always.
edit : Another video showing a police officer guiding rioters into the areas.
Second, even if in some instances police were letting protesters through, why they were letting them through is a question that must be answered. The most pressing question, from the perspective of the interested public, is whether there were standing orders to let them do so or that there was some kind of conspiracy among the officers to disobey orders in order to do so.
So, do you see the disconnect? you have some (dubious) evidence that some group of police officers let people approach the capitol building, and on the other you have an accusation that the Capitol Police Department took the side of Trump and made a decision to endanger the lives of Congress.
This is not covering up the complicity of an institution. Neither is it shifting blame, because blame hasn't yet been assigned. It is simply a requirement that accusations be backed up by evidence.
I think it is fairly obvious that wrt BLM, the police officers responded the way they did because they the protests were directed at them. BLM threatens police legitimacy, police power, and demanded that those same police be held accountable for the wrongs they commit.
Explanation is not justification.
Because you have chosen to take a tunnel vision and look at some videos to declare the possibility of police being complicit just a "meme"
You fight fire with fire.
If you choose one video to "prove" they are not complicit, I choose another video proving my point.
But if someone has a broader view that includes possibilities and probabilities, I speak their language.
Why? Because I feel the only way to talk to a person with a set point of view is to outright refute them with evidence or ignore them entirely.
No use of trying to show the whole picture.
I said that it was a meme, and that the evidence in video footage does not unambiguously substantiate the meme. I didn't deny the possibility of the police being complicit. A few confusing videos of a few officers acting in ways that I don't understand in stressful situations (in a police department with over 2000), or the speculation of (so-called) experts that it might have been, just is insufficient for me to accuse that police department of participating in a coup.
In fact, I am urgently concerned that there was a conspiracy by the police department to commit insurrection. I am desperately afraid that it was a coordinated coup. Trump's reticence to provide National Guard support, and the fact that Pence actually gave the order, is very troubling. But I'm not gonna believe catchy easy narratives that push all the buttons. That's how millions of Trumpers got to believing that the election was stolen in the first place.
They did edit their response to post a video, here:
https://mobile.twitter.com/justinjm1/status/1347174957613199...
as evidence that the police let them in. But I don't think that that video supports his contention that police just let these people into the capitol building. Do you?
Especially since it's a tweet with a quote from the guy who shot the video explaining that it's not a video of the police "just letting them in"