Read on Twitter
The contrast between Obama's response to the occupation of Malheur NWR by armed militias (step back, wait a month, they fall apart and leave) and Trump's response to unarmed protestors in Portland (paramilitary agents with tear gas and riot control weapons) couldn't be starker.
And we saw exactly how that affected public sentiment. There was no overzealous militarized siege and no bloodshed (until the end, sadly, when a couple of them fled with weapons and tried to run a roadblock). Instead, the protest was allowed to burn itself out.
I'll admit at the time, I was a little annoyed. I thought "these armed chumps are making a mockery of the law and our public lands, why isn't the FBI going in?" And they were. But what they were doing, the damage done, the work disrupted... was not so important as human lives.
The risk that human lives would be lost in a shootout? Too damn high. So the FBI, OSP, FWS... they did the right thing. They let the militias get bored and cold, they let the American people see how utterly ridiculous their ideas were, and let them fall apart into the snow.
Do I think smashing windows of a courthouse is good? No, I don't think it's helpful. But when the response to spray paint and broken glass is a paramilitary force wantonly beating and maiming peaceful protestors... well, there's no moral equivalence to be found here. It's unjust.
Never forget that the revolution which launched our independence was sparked by a bunch of protestors destroying $1.7 million worth of British government tea.
