But... sorry, a direct attack on a joint session of congress that forces the lawmakers and VP to be evacuated is WORSE than what happened in Portland.
This country can tolerate another bunch of fires and broken statues outside the Portland Federal Courthouse. I don't think anyone serious can imaging the idea of congress being sacked again.
Actually in a way it's good that it happened; exposed some major security holes. Not good that they shot an unarmed woman, though.
Then why was congress evacuated? Why are multiple people on camera screaming "Where is Pence?!" and threatening to hang him? Why was that cop killed?
That's ridiculous, sorry. It was a chaotic attack, sure. And surely there were some people there who just wandered in with the crowd and didn't want to hurt anyone. But this is an attack on congress. Be real.
Certainly didn't last as long, it cost less in property damage, less people died, and less neighborhoods burnt down.
Maybe we can ban both sides from social media and have no Twitter.
They also seriously injured another FPS Officer during the first attack.
It was exactly an attack
> it was a bunch of protesters, trespassing into the building during a very important session.
No, it was a large armed mob targeting legislators; as well as many of them stating that legislators were their targets (some saying that they would be back for them), this is clearly shown in the video of the context around Ashli Babbitt getting shot, where the violence of mob at the barricades entrance to the Speakers office escalates with shouts of “They're leaving” as the legislators and staffers visible through the windows depart through another exit, shortly before the officers being threatened on the same side of the barricades as the mob withdraw toward the tactical team advancing up the nearby stairs and the crowd begins breaking through the barricades.
> Not good that they shot an unarmed woman, though.
She was part of an armed, violent mob breaking through the last physical barrier keeping them from a large group of high government officials with only small number of armed security forces who could not possibly protect the officials from the mob in the event of a general breakthrough; even so, the security forces waited as long as they could before shooting to prevent a breakthrough (and if they'd had only a few more seconds it's likely that the arriving tactical team would have turned back that particular arm of the mob.)
There are no firearms visible in the mob in the video; there are weapons in active use in the video (against the barricades, but if you are responsible for protection of life you can't assume that that will be abandoned once the barricade is down).
> much less training it on the police.
The police aren't the main people that the police were protecting. (That some of them were acting as literal human shields at the barricades makes that clear.)
What would you have had them do? Allow a breakthrough, reassess the intention of the mob, and if it was still an active threat start firing then, without the passive defense of th barrier? As well as endangering the lives they ought to be protecting most urgently (the ones not engaging in a violent crime), and their own lives, unless the crowd instantly became pacific after breaking through the barricade, that would have resulted in a whole lot more dead insurrectionists, because there would be no choice but to fire as fast as aim can be switched to a new target until the crowd stopped.