3 ms·
She herself says that they were "indiscriminate" and that they didn't care whether she was media or not. You are trying to make a big narrative that your video
by im3w1l 6y ago
She herself says that they were "indiscriminate" and that they didn't care whether she was media or not. You are trying to make a big narrative that your video doesn't support.
- dragontamer 6y agoThe first thing Police Officer#1 does when the line breaks is rush over to the cameraman and punches the camerman in the face. Its pretty clear from Officer#1's actions that he did not like that camera. ---------- Here's an alternative angle, in case you're confused by the 1st person perspective: https://www.abc.net.au/cm/rimage/12312456-16x9-xlarge.png?v=6 https://www.abc.net.au/cm/rimage/12312456-16x9-xlarge.png?v=... It is very clear that this officer is attacking the cameraman. The only two people on that corner are the cameraman and the reporter, and given their equipment and press-badges, it is very obvious that they're media. (Not "little blogger on random website". Its obvious that they are big-media, ABC 7 to be specific). ----------- It should be noted that Trump was clearing the area to give a press briefing. The press belonged there, if only to cover the President's new announcement in a few minutes. The protesters had a right to be there too (but I realize this is a harder point to sell to conservatives and am willing to keep this as an aside). But it was clear that Trump chose to clear this particular group of protesters as an intimidation factor. There was no need for Trump to give a press briefing in this location (when he was already giving a briefing from the White House). Trump knew there were protesters here and wanted to physically intimidate them with a police clearing.
- im3w1l 6y agoThis angle is much clearer, yes.