Is anyone actually advancing some suggestion of what equipment this 75 year old was supposed to be wielding that could "black out" police communications? Or explaining why it wasn't found or confiscated if that's what the police thought?

This is anedcotal, but I've heard he was trying to return something that a police officer had dropped. If true, then the object he was waving would presumably have been whatever the cop dropped, to try and get his attention.

That seems specious, he was coming from where the crowds were...not where the cops were. If it was something they dropped, they must have "dropped" it several feet into the crowd.

"A cellphone-like device" you mean a cellphone? Furthermore, any kind of "police scanner" to "block communications" that requires you to get up right next to a cop and stand there for several seconds sounds like a pretty shitty "police scanner".

@DJClayworth the OANN report claims that it was a police tracker.

For the record, I'm only calling it a cellphone-like device because, while it looks exactly like a cell phone, I don't want to make any assumptions on what he's carrying when approaching them - especially since the accusation is that he's carrying something other than just a cell phone.

Perhaps this would be better on the electronics site? While I am not a professional EE, I do have some background, and AFAIK a handheld device that could black out police communications is about as technically credible as injecting disinfectant is as a coronavirus treatment.

@user2647513 If you have credible evidence that can back up these claims, you should post it as an answer, including references to your source.

Just to disambiguate the title and maybe narrow the answers you get, are you asking if he provoked the police in any way, or in a way that the police's response would be considered proportionate? If the former, I'm not sure we have proof of what he did or didn't say.

@Flater The former. And his exact wording would not be the only proof possible to present - evidence of his intent beforehand or evidence that his approach was not peaceful would also be some proof. Mostly, I'm looking for whether any news source is offering any collaboration to OANN's story.

I know this site does not like Trump, but I really see no way how this question can be answered. "Provoked" can mean he looked at them or it could mean he said to police office: "I am gonna grab your gun and kill you"

@NoSenseEtAl Or, simply, the cop line was moving to enforce the curfew and he just walks directly toward them, instead of clearing out.

@NoSenseEtAl One simple reason might be that Trump does not appear to like facts. Don't shoot the Skeptics messenger.

@F1Krazy - He had a helmet that looked like a police riot-gear helmet in one hand, and I think some people assumed he was returning it. If he's an experienced protester, I'd guess it was actually his helmet. However, the claim of the "device" would be his cell phone, in his other hand. As he was talking to them he was moving his hands around, like many people (Trump included, as pointed out by his defenders in the "mocking the disabled" controversy) do when they talk. I think the claim is that he had a secret dark-ops device disguised as a cell phone. Funded by George Soros, no doubt.

@NoSenseEtAl - I'd agree that the claim of "provocation" would be hard to evaluate, however, we can evaluate the specific items pointed to by Trump as indications or evidence of provocation. I'm also not aware this web site having any kind of animated sentience that would allow it to have independent political or personal opinions.

Does it matter?

@fredsbend - Then the police would be within their authority to cite and/or arrest the person. Assaulting him still doesn't enter into the picture as a first-choice option for the police.