Thom Hartmann asks: "Who's Lying, BLM or Hillary Clinton?"

[AtomicKitten]

After Thom Hartmann expressed support for BLM in an emotional statement, the worm turns.

He is now asking an interesting question.

What happened with Clinton campaign and BLM?

BLM preannounced coming to disrupt Clinton campaign event. BLM intercepted at event and put in overflow room.

BLM has private meeting with Clinton afterwards. Clinton campaign claims BLM asked for no press coverage; BLM says not true.

Who's lying?

[cherokeeprogressive]

1. Best rhetorical question ever asked. n/t

[Zorra]

4. [phone]!!!

[AtomicKitten]

13. heyo

[billhicks76]

57. Clinton Tricks

[AtomicKitten]

14. I honestly don't know what to think about this.

[orpupilofnature57]

16. And I don't want to keep the piss-match going but " It's always something " .

[Bobbie Jo]

150. In the interest of transparency

This is what you guys are supporting? Really?

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert
On Mon Aug 17, 2015, 07:16 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

I got in trouble for saying "Thugs " Cohorts would have been more accurate, And they don't speak for
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=522623

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Referring to African Americans as "thugs" is never okay, why bring this here?

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Mon Aug 17, 2015, 07:20 AM, and voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Thugs is code and this poster has been around long enough to know that.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I'm really getting tired of the racists being allowed to stay at DU and spread their filth. DU is dying a well deserved death. You can thank the admins for allowing it to continue. Juries hide their racist garbage and they are allowed back time after time.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Rude
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Seems a bit "in you face" to refer back to the word thug.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you.

How is this guy still here??

[deathrind]

25. Yep...

Be carful here on DU about how u comment about BLM and their tactics. Form "hosts" here are quick to drop the ban hammer if comments are not completely favorable to the "movement" or their pov.

[Bubzer]

55. I noticed that too.

Got banned from the Hillary group, courtesy of William769, for a largely benign comment. It didn't fit in with his narrative I suppose.

[billhicks76]

63. Hillary "Group" Bans Many

[RoccoR5955]

69. Hillary group bans ANYONE who says the slightest thing against their candidate

I was banned months and months ago, for something that I said in jest, and stated so.
They didn't like that I was not being serious about their candidate, I guess, so they banned me.
Oh well, their loss.

[arcane1]

88. I got banned for voting to hide a newbie's post that used the term "Berniebots"

Last edited Sun Aug 16, 2015, 08:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Thin-skinned bunch over there. Serves me right for posting the jury results.

[billhicks76]

103. They Aren't A Discussion Page

They are an advertisement.

[Duckhunter935]

105. I think I got blocked

Like two years ago, did not even remember. Asked the host and the lead host ignored. PMd another and got a snarky, nasty responce.

[billhicks76]

122. DU Juries

I've been on so many DU juries lately for comments that should never have been flagged. They were flagged simply for disagreeing with a Clinton supporter. I have arrived at a point where I've seen so much crap now from both that candidate and her supporters that I can hardly look at them or listen to them any longer. Not surprising given what a huge supporter of the Bush family her and Bill are. They must really think the People are stupid.

[Duckhunter935]

130. I have had a lot of jury calls

most are not worth an alert and are dismissed, usually 6-1. Some people just do not like another point of view and see things in their protected group bubble. One of the reasons I accept jury requests. I have to admit at times it can be hard if I disagree with the person alerted on but I do my best to be faithful and honest.

[billhicks76]

144. I Defend Free Speech

At this point I cannot stand Hillary and do not trust her to not collude with the Bush family. I recently served on a jury where someone alerted against a Hillary supporter for a reason not rising to the bar and I of course chastised and dismissed the alert as it was pure censorship. But I see Hillary supporters flag at a ratio of 10:1 for no good reason compared to Bernie or undecided commenters.

[billhicks76]

192. Oh Boy...Another Jerk Flagged Me

Last edited Thu Aug 20, 2015, 06:36 PM - Edit history (1)

I got flagged for saying don't vote for someone like Hillary just because they are a woman. I didn't say that's why everyone is. I got flagged for even the idea. Wow. 4-3. Vote for Bush if you're that petty. I view some here as beneath contempt. I have no pity for them when they see their antiquated, myopic, static, shallow, obfuscating, bamboozling, hoodwinked insulting point of view losing the executive for us. Thank God Obama kept her away from power. Self entitled Bush praisers should be kept out. I've never seen so many vindictive whiners who would put their own personal ambitions or choices before the party. It's selfish, greedy and elitist. They can't even suffer discussion. Bernie wants to talk about everything. Hillary wants to talk about nothing...unless it's a staged, choreographed set up like BLM. How nauseating was that? The irony is someone pulled the sexist card saying that suggesting anyone who would say people might vote for Hillary as the first woman president is sexist. How low is that? Really? Get a life. It happens. So people who voted for Obama just to have the first Black president are racist? Really? I know many of them personally and they are Black. They told me he was kind of conservative and centrist and they agree more with the further left but because he's Black they had faith. That's racist? Clintonites will suffer loss because of their toxic attitude.

[billhicks76]

193. Oh The DU Irony

Last edited Thu Aug 20, 2015, 06:35 PM - Edit history (1)

So Clintonites censored me on a thread I got going about their flagging comments they don't like. That thread expanded into 50 responses. About 20 people said they had been flagged by trigger happy Clinton supporters too...for no valid reason. The funny thing is yes if I voted for her it would ONLY be because she was a women and my hope for promoting women's issues. If I were to vote on the issues she would get a 0/100 as she votes like a republican, wall st, military , cop loving supporter. Is this the Twilight Zone? Are our own despondent DUers going the Orwellian route like their Republican counterparts? Maybe bringing around centrist Republican apologists is rubbing off. Tom Tomorrow's This Modern World needs to do a cartoon about this corrosive hypocrisy. How backward can you get? It's rivaling Republican rationalizations.

[Blue_In_AK]

191. I've had a ton of jury calls, too.

It makes me wonder just how big the jury pool is when just a few of us get called for so many - or, on the other hand, maybe there are just that many alerts, which is kind of disgusting, really.

[Smarmie Doofus]

136. A lot of today's "Berniebots" were 2008's "Obamabots".

Or.... in some cases... "Obamatons".


One thing they are NOT in that camp is original.

[merrily]

143. By the same token, I see during my searches of DU that many who hated Hillary in 2008, said

very nasty things about her, are all in for her now and despise Bernie and/or his supporters.

It doesn't surprise me that people who favored Obama over Hillary last time are for Bernie or O'Malley this time. The other phenomenon, however, sparks thought.

[cascadiance]

166. My guess is that those that you mention shifting from Obama to Hillary were also very anti-Edwards..

... in 2008 too, as they want to shut down the voice of dissent against corporate owners of the party. Edwards started as that voice in 2008 and Bernie is that voice this time around. When Edwards left, then many that you mention here as shifting from Obama to Bernie I think were former Edwards supporters that supported Obama then as he was a bit more nebulous on things like supporting war in the middle east the way that Hillary was, and he touched on though not in great deal other progressive issues that would be enveloped in the message of "have hope and I might change these things", which in many cases like free trade reform, bankster accountability, etc. he didn't when in office.

[billhicks76]

145. I Agree But...

I was accused of being a republican for using the word Obamabot. I'm a Bernie supporter now. I used the word before because I was dismayed Obama flip flopped on NSA spying and telecom immunity and criminal justice reform at the time. Honest questions.

[PatrickforO]

135. Not sure what 'banned' means as I'm fairly new here

But I was asked to delete an inadvertent post I'd made in the Hillary room. It offended the sensibilities of those on the thread, it seems. Honestly, I try and stay out of that room because it is their sanctuary apparently. To each their own, I guess.

[senz]

115. They banned me July 12, shortly after I started commenting (after long-time lurking).

"You have been blocked from posting in the Hillary Clinton group by William769. If you believe this is an error, you may contact William769 for more information."

A few days later, out in the real world, they hid one of my comments because it was "paternalistic."

Never been called that before.

And in both cases, I was trying to be nice. But now that I've seen what they're like, it's no loss, none whatsoever.

[Bubzer]

153. Pretty sure that's the same guy who banned me...

I even sent him an internal mail to ask what his justification for the ban was... he never replied.
I guess he's too good to reply to us little folk.

[senz]

156. Maybe he's their bouncer. Who cares?

If we want to talk with them, they'll just come out here and harass us as usual.

[orpupilofnature57]

127. I know I'm one .

[merrily]

142. I have zero problem with that.

It's for people who want Hillary to win the primary. Bernie supporters do not belong there, just as Third Wayers don't belong in Populist and those who want Hillary to win the primary don't belong in the Sanders group. Plenty of other places on the board exist for debate and raining on people's personal political parades. That is not what groups are for, though. I don't know why that is so controversial.

[billhicks76]

146. Because It Comes Up In Trending Now

And popular threads. I had no idea it was an invite only or special club different than any other thread. The shouldn't come up there if they don't expect anyone to walk in clueless.

[Bobbie Jo]

149. Bernie "Group" Bans 74

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1280



You were saying.....

[senz]

155. Hillary "Group" Bans 147

That's about twice as many as the Hillary "Group"



Funny how that works....

(Edit) For your pleasure: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1107

[Bobbie Jo]

158. I'm guessing

That if I were to so much as post "." in the Bernie group, I would be banned.

Wanna see how this works?



Yes, 74 is a LOT. Period.

[senz]

160. Well, I don't recall

having any interactions with you. But it's becoming clear that you hold the Bernie group to a far higher standard than the Hillary group.

Because no matter how hard you try, 147 is just about TWICE as much as 74.

Live with it.

[Bobbie Jo]

161. Yeah

I don't recall you either.

I can live with that.

[senz]

162. LOL!

Hillary supporters are so .... LIKABLE. Just like the candidate, I guess.

Have a nice day!

[Bobbie Jo]

163. Gibberish.

You have one of those nice days yourself.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

178. How better to promote Hillary v5.0? Not a bad strategy - can't let facts interfere with their version of the "truth."

[deathrind]

66. Yea-

Little fiefdoms...

The power to ban / exterminate opposing views in a debate. Views that are not insulting or personal just opposing (which is the entire point of having a debate on an issue) can go the head quickly.

[Bubzer]

74. I kinda thought the point of a political website was to have discussions about this stuff...

And if an agreement can't be reached, agree to disagree and move on to other topics.

Its not like the average person is gonna look at this site and think "My whole world view has been changed! Now I must vote Hillary/Bernie/Cthulhu!" So, having an argument just to try and one up each other? Is ego that important? Or that fragile?

I mean, I don't think everyone in the Hillary group is like that guy. At least I hope not. I don't mind debating with Hillary supporters...but lets keep the personal stuff out of it.

Anyway...enough of my mini-rant.

[deathrind]

83. No, you are correct...

In your thought process. This site has been slowly drifting away from a place to maturely discuss all points of view on issues for sometime now without a course correction.


Cthulhu

[senz]

119. Hey, bmus, an excellent commenter, might vote for Cthulhu.

Ask her sometime...

[Qutzupalotl]

85. In fairness, protected groups are for refuge for hard-core supporters

who get tired of the constant assailing against their candidate, and just need to regroup and post positive things for each other. I can understand that. While I think it is too easy to ban and get banned, we have the whole rest of DU to talk about anything freely.

But I got tired of seeing the Bernie-bashing soft racism in their headlines, so I trashed the whole group. I can still keep abreast of what's going on via LBN and GDP.

[Agschmid]

92. Yup, and it goes both ways.

And is true of every protected group... that's the point of them.

[artislife]

106. Yes this.

I don't understand why anyone would go into a protected group to debate. That is what the GDP is for.

[Agschmid]

109. We agree.

That's a first for us, kinda nice huh?

[artislife]

111. I have agreed with you before

I like you. Sometimes I need to be brought back down to earth! Sometimes I may not like it but hey..


I get excitable and post when I should pause


.

[Agschmid]

114. We all do it.

Even me...

See you around.

[cascadiance]

167. My guess is that some see what they feel is a false story that needs a response to correct it...

.... in the protected group, so there's an inclination to go in there and respond to it. Sometimes people don't look at the group it is posted in when they see it on Greatest or Latest thread links and post before seeing that it is a protected group. I've self-deleted a post when I did that a couple of times.

But the answer in these cases, is not to go in to that thread and respond, but to either go to a different protected group (like the Bernie or populist group when feeling the need to respond to a Hillary Group thread) and making a post there if you feel a lot of internal discussion is needed on that issue, or to post in GD-P if you think that such a discussion line needs to be moved directly to a thread where a debate can occur. That way, if you feel incorrect information is being put forth in a private group thread, you can get discussions to counter those notions on DU, but still respect the closed group boundaries.

[artislife]

168. Yes, make your own OP in GDP

and argue your side of it.

I really respect that a closed group is where you can kick off your shoes and put down your boxing gloves. I do believe when others read there, it should be more about understanding the differing viewpoints and to ponder. If one can contribute in a positive way, not a teaching way or a condescending way or even a debate, then go ahead and post. But be a guest, don't put your feet on the tables and respect the hosts.

[billhicks76]

181. Really?

Because it comes up in Trending Now and most popular threads. They should keep it out of there. Most people wander in by mistake. Why even have a public private group? It's stupid.

[artislife]

183. It shouldn't go in the Trending now or greatest or latest.

I agree.

[billhicks76]

186. IT Help!!!

Because that is the only problem here. No one knows it's a private group until they are banned. It doesn't belong on the front page.

[Rilgin]

97. That is the Problem

They are both protected and public. If a group wants to just talk amongst itself, it's threads should not go to latest or greatest threads posts. That way they really have a protected place without being able to push unopposed arguments or opinions into the public domain.

BTW I was banned for just stating this. I brought it to the DU administration board as well. I did not get banned but they do not seem to realize the disparity. Ultimately you could give a protected group the choice both generally and on specific threads. If they want the thread title to show and be assessable from public type boards which should be subject to discussion and contrary positions, they lose the ability to ban or block on that thread.

[billhicks76]

182. It's Called Logic...Duh!

Whatever happened to common sense. Your analysis is spot on.

[Bubzer]

100. I actually spent some time reading through some groups to get a feel for what they're like.

Of the groups I read through, the majority of discussion was really really negative. I couldn't imagine being in a group and staying objective very long. I've seen a few people complain about Democratic Underground, and have noticed quite a few of those people are in those groups, making those really negative comments.

[billhicks76]

131. Shouldn't Be Listed In Trending or Greatest Threads

People don't realize they are commenting in a "protected group". Or as I refer to them...Free Speech Zones. If they are for hardcore supporters to have a sanctuary to regroup then list it on the back page.

[davidpdx]

189. That's a Skinner problem

Only he can fix something like that. I had an issue with the same thing the other day with anyone protected group.

[billhicks76]

190. Yes It's Logistical

[sabrina 1]

141. You see that in their headlines because it is a very expensive talking point, most likely paid

for with Super Pac money, which is what that money is used for. It's a lie, a huge lie, and it is getting no traction at all, though they will keep trying. Because Bernie has the record that proves it to be a lie, and people are not stupid.

Just ignore it, when a memo goes out, you know, because you will see the same old garbage repeated and repeated over and over again, and you cannot stop it. So best to leave them alone with those talking points and focus on FACTS.

Nothing destroys a talking point like ignoring it.

[billhicks76]

184. Exactly...Hillary Is Not Genuine

And what a contrived phony joke watching Hillary with Black Lives Matter. She has done nothing but support mass incarceration and using the NSA to run the domestic Drug War. I can't believe anyone has the intestinal fortitude to even listen to her talk anymore.

[Agschmid]

90. I would review the group SOPs, and the about page for this website.

You seem to be miss informed.

[BuelahWitch]

84. To be fair, the groups are "safe havens"

where attacking the subject of the group, whether it be Hillary, Bernie or astrology, is off limits. You are new, so you may not know that. Arguments and differences of opinions are for the Main groups like GD or GDP.

[Bubzer]

91. Ahhh. Well that makes it even more strange since there was no attack...

Unless mere difference of opinion counts as an attack. And if that's the case, who's gonna challenge wrongly held beliefs? I could easily see being in a group and buying into a narrative to the point where I would think the whole non-group community was anti my philosophy...whatever that might be... all because of hearing only what I want to hear, in a small cliquish group. Weird. That almost seems the opposite of democracy to me.

[RoccoR5955]

117. Don't you know

that if you disagree with the party line in that other group, it is considered an attack, no matter how it is posed to them?

[billhicks76]

185. Then Remove Them From Trending or Popular Threads

[Smarmie Doofus]

133. "Extortionists" works well.

I can think of a lot of other names for people who deny other people their constitutional right to free speech and and constitutional right to freedom of assembly.

Political extortionists in Europe in the '20s used to bust up socialist rallies and labor union meetings. They felt they were entitled to do this because of various race-related grievances.

These extortionists were called "Nazis".

"We are going to shut you down."

[eridani]

147. Never, ever EVER use the term 'thugs' when referring to black people. Not ever

All kinds of words are available to criticize behavior which work perfectly well.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. I was told that happened

they weren't allowed to speak at the even and then met with Clinton privately in an adjacent room.

[AtomicKitten]

5. I can't get past preannouncing their intent to disrupt nor the claim they wanted no press coverage.

Doesn't seem very activist-y to me.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. There was no uproar however

if they weren't allowed to speak you would have thought they would gone ballistic.

[AtomicKitten]

9. I'm looking for consistency and having a tough time finding it. Consistency=sincerity.

sorry, I misread your post

[roguevalley]

95. jeb did the same thing with blm. but then they are siblings. so ...

[Cleita]

7. Makes you wonder if they pre-announced their intent to disrupt Bernie in Seattle and Net Roots.

Or is Hillary just speshul?

[AtomicKitten]

11. It does beg an answer.

[Bubzer]

59. I suspect any answer given would compete with a sudden bunch of disinformation.

Its annoying that the truth is so darn difficult to get.

[AtomicKitten]

64. Thom Hartmann was wonderful when he came out with an emotional defense of BLM.

Now that he has some legitimate questions, he's pegged a boring partisan hack.

Oy.

[virtualobserver]

8. the after meeting tweets from #blacklivesmatter were not favorable to Clinton

I believe #blacklivesmatter

[AtomicKitten]

10. Refusing press coverage makes no sense.

[orpupilofnature57]

18. Not if you have an allergy to light .

[AtomicKitten]

75. .

[orpupilofnature57]

128. I know .

[jwirr]

58. So do I.

[hootinholler]

27. There was also the claim that Hillary asked for them to be let in

And her Secret Service detail said no.

[Enthusiast]

12. I only know what it means to me.

[sufrommich]

15. Where is this "preannouncement"? nt

[Cleita]

17. ...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/11/hillary-clinton-private-meeting-black-lives-matter-activists

[sufrommich]

21. There is nothing in your link that shows the Clinton campaign

knew in advance that blm was coming or that blm announced that they would be there before the fact.

[AtomicKitten]

20. "Wily Hillary Clinton Thwarts Planned Disruption"

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2015/08/11/wily-hillary-clinton-thwarts-planned-disruption/

Disclosure via tweets and interview BLM gave to New Republic.

[sufrommich]

22. Again,where is a link to blm "preannouncing" their intentions? nt

[AtomicKitten]

24. #HollupHillary

https://twitter.com/hashtag/HollupHillary?src=hash

https://twitter.com/blm_boston/status/631206632484159489

Here ------> https://storify.com/burkelyh/what-really-happened-with-the-interruption-of-hill

[sufrommich]

36. Those tweets are literally during and after the event,not before. nt

[AtomicKitten]

47. The first three tweets precede the event.

Plus the New Republic reporter was given the story beforehand and was with BLM, all preceding the event.

[Quackers]

93. This is a link from the Twitter thing you posted

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/08/12/clinton-campaign-shuts-down-black-lives-matter-protest

Is this what everyone is looking for?

[AtomicKitten]

94. good link, thank you

[virtualobserver]

32. #BlackLivesMatter Activists Plan to Disrupt Hillary Clinton Event

That was the original name of the article, and it mentioned that Hillary staffers read the mention in the New Republic and were therefore expecting them

The article has been updated multiple times since then

[sufrommich]

35. The New Republic article was after the event. nt

[virtualobserver]

38. the initial version of that page was before

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/black-lives-matter-protesters-attempt-disrupt-hillary-clinton-2016-event-121269.html#ixzz3j1FDMcwe

[AtomicKitten]

40. A reporter from New Republic got the story beforehand and accompanied BLM to the event.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/11/1411095/-BLM-Boston-shut-out-of-Clinton-event

The group had initially told The New Republic that they had planned to interrupt Clinton’s event and ask her about her drug platform, and campaign staffers inside the room were aware of those intentions due to the magazine’s publication.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/black-lives-matter-protesters-attempt-disrupt-hillary-clinton-2016-event-121269.html

[sufrommich]

43. So you're accusing New Republic and BLM of feeding info

to the Clinton campaign? That certainly sounds like an accusation.

[AtomicKitten]

46. Read the "proof" vis-a-vis links you asked for and stop playing games.

[sufrommich]

49. I'm not the one playing games,this "we're just asking questions"

about BLMs "preannouncement",which then changed to tweets and an article in New Republic are par for the course with the conspiracies that some Bernie supporters have been floating around the internet for weeks,constantly trying to "prove" that they are working for the Hillary campaign.You do your candidate no favors by keeping this crap going.

[AtomicKitten]

52. Are you calling BLM liars? Are you saying it was BLM that refused press coverage and not Hillary?

[sufrommich]

56. I didn't comment on whether press coverage was refused.I asked about the

"preannouncement" Did BLM make a "preannouncement"? Yes or no.

[virtualobserver]

60. campaign staffers inside the room were aware of those intentions due to the magazine’s publication.

sounds "pre"

but the real conflict is that #blacklivesmatter says that they did not request that journalists be excluded

Hillary campaign says that they did. who is telling the truth?

that is the point of the op

[sufrommich]

67. The point of the video went far beyond the question of

the journalist request,you should probably watch it. I believe #blacklivesmatter refused media pictures with Clinton and the Clinton campaign kept the media out,which seems to put into question the whole "they're secretly working for Clinton" crap,which is what Bruce Dixon,the man Hartmann quotes in the video,accuses BLM of with every oppotunity he gets:

https://twitter.com/brucedixon

[virtualobserver]

71. I just wanted to resolve the conflict between what #blacklivesmatter was saying.....

and what the Clinton campaign was saying.......it was #blacklivesmatter that I believed ,
not the Clinton campaign.

I did not believe that it was a coordination,

[virtualobserver]

42. from the politico article

The group had initially told The New Republic that they had planned to interrupt Clinton’s event and ask her about her drug platform, and campaign staffers inside the room were aware of those intentions due to the magazine’s publication.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/black-lives-matter-protesters-attempt-disrupt-hillary-clinton-2016-event-121269.html#ixzz3j1I5RrWD

[cherokeeprogressive]

34. "The group had initially told The New Republic that they had planned to interrupt Clinton’s event"

"... and ask her about her drug platform, and campaign staffers inside the room were aware of those intentions due to the magazine’s publication."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/black-lives-matter-protesters-attempt-disrupt-hillary-clinton-2016-event-121269.html#ixzz3j1FDMcwe

[WillyT]

80. They Pre-Announced It To New Republic...

When they arrived at today’s Clinton event, which focused on substance abuse and the heroin epidemic, after first sharing their talking points and questions exclusively with the New Republic, the activists found the entrances closed by U.S. Secret Service who said the venue was at capacity. Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, who was in contact with the five activists, later told the New Republic that the activists were eventually let into an “overflow room.” Following the event, Clinton met with the group for about 15 minutes in a private meeting that they claim turned contentious at times, and featured Clinton giving unsolicited advice for the direction of the movement.

Link: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122524/blacklivesmatter-activists-disrupt-hillary-clinton-event

[SonderWoman]

19. Full disclosure: Hartmann is campaigning for Bernie.

[Cleita]

29. That's a lie. Stop repeating it. He allows Bernie to spend an hour a week on his show taking

unfiltered calls from listeners. He has announced over and over again that if the candidates, any of them on our side or the other side, want to spend an hour a week on his show taking unfiltered calls from listeners he will give them equal time. So far none have taken him up on it. He has announced that although he and Bernie are friends, that if Hillary is the candidate he will do everything in his power to promote her election as President. You would know that if you actually listened to his show or read his website.

[dsc]

70. He has admitted that Bernie is his first choice in the primary

I have heard him say that quite often.

[Cleita]

79. Yes, he has. Is that a problem? The accusation was that he was campaigning for Bernie

which is not true. He's not campaigning for anyone. He has opened his radio show to all candidates to have equal time if they desire it and if Bernie doesn't win the primary, he will work for and support our Democratic candidate of choice. He's not campaigning for Bernie and he doesn't have anything to do with Bernie's campaign. As a media person I don't think he can. I think there is some kind of regulation about it.

[dsc]

81. No it isn't

he is up front about it and the fact he favors Bernie is one part of the mix. I do think he is campaigning for both Bernie and Hillary at times on his show. He has every right to do so, but I do think he is doing so. When you say I am voting for so and so and would vote for so and so in the general, that is campaigning for them.

[Cleita]

82. That's a stretch but I guess if you believe it, I can't change your mind.

[sadoldgirl]

31. Yes, he is, however this does not

in any way disqualify him from asking the question.

I would like to hear the true answer to that too.

BTW, Thom has not made negative statements about
Hillary, and tries to tell his audience not to do
so either.

[RoccoR5955]

72. That is a bald-faced lie.

I listen to Hartmann every day, and he has stated many many times that he wants ANY Democratic candidate for president. He has said positive things about most of them too. Well with the exception of Jim Webb I think.

[L0oniX]

98. So since TH is on RT then Putin must love Bernie.

[senz]

107. Wrong again. Hartmann supports whoever wins the Democratic nomination -- and

he goes out of his way to say nice things about Hillary. For which I don't envy him.

[still_one]

23. yeah Thom, it's a conspiracy, sure. I haven't listened to his show for years, he is BORING. The

only interesting segment he had was Brunch with Bernie, and that was because of Bernie, not Hartman

[Cleita]

37. Yeah, all those facts and information are boring to some. Best to turn on Rush Limbaugh for the

fake outrage and Obama slamming of the day.

[Bubzer]

61. +1

[L0oniX]

99. ^^^this^^^

[still_one]

126. That is more your style I suspect

[Bubzer]

62. He's one of the smartest talk-show hosts out there... so I don't mind if he's boring.

I'd rather he focused on boring facts and evidence based assertions rather than hyped up fluff any day.
If I want infotainment, I can watch the MSM.

[navarth]

73. your comments are pretty bad. you might be interested to know that

I heard Thom shutting down a caller that was trashing Sec. Clinton...I remember the caller was saying things that I agreed with and pretty much agree with now. But Thom shut it down.

I remember thinking 'I'll be damned, Thom is for Hillary! Didn't see that coming at all. And he's going to be talking to Bernie still? Wow.'

It sure seems to me you're insulting Thom because he said something unfavorable of your candidate. Thom's a fair man and your comments do not serve you well.

[L0oniX]

101. "insulting Thom because he said something unfavorable of your candidate" Nailed it!

[navarth]

108. Thanks L0onix

I always enjoy your FDR stance of welcoming their hatred.

I myself don't particularly like to tweak HRC supporters for the most part...I just see them as members of the family that need to readjust their viewpoint.

But sometimes I just have to speak out. Being down on Thom Hartmann is just plain wrong, for multiple reasons.

Keep doing what you're doing bro. (I assume 'bro' is accurate)

[still_one]

129. He called Hillary a liar according to the OP, and fails to present proof one way or another

Last edited Sun Aug 16, 2015, 11:10 PM - Edit history (1)

and I still think he is boring, and it isn't became he is on Bernie's campaign, Ed Schultz is for Bernie, but I find it much more interesting. Never fell asleep listening to Schultz. Can't say the same thing about Hatman

Really sad that M$NBS is letting him go. At least he still has his radio program

[Bubzer]

154. Take it you didn't watch the video? How can you know if there's proof if you don't watch?

Thom questions who's not being honest, Hillary, her campaign or BLM. If you watch the video, you'll understand why.

[still_one]

157. nope, just read the text. I have to run now, but I will watch it later tonight, thanks

[JackInGreen]

165. He's boring?

Ok Donny...he a loser too?

[seabeyond]

26. all that. drum rolls.... film or not film. really? that is what the big deal is. benghazi

[olddots]

28. it means a failure to communicate creates mystery

Mystery creates a subterfuge and yada. yada yada evertbody is talking about talking and nobody is really talking = news

[ismnotwasm]

30. Good God

Google is your friend. BLM activists met with Hillary and were NOT overly impressed. They did say the meeting was "respectful"

[sufrommich]

39. They're trying to accuse BLM of being in cahoots with the Clinton campaign....again.nt

[ismnotwasm]

124. I know--this is just incredible

I'm at a loss at the depth of...whatever drives this.

[uponit7771]

132. it sounds desperate

[jeff47]

164. And?

The story that was released at the time (mostly from Clinton's campaign) was:

-BLM activists arrived too late, and Secret Service kept them out.

-Clinton heard of this, and asked Secret Service to let them in anyway. Secret Service supposedly said no.

-BLM activists agreed to meet with Clinton privately after rally. Kinda dismantles the previous point, since a private meeting would be much more dangerous than shouting across a room. So if the Secret Service was behind the previous point, it makes no sense for them to allow this meeting.

-BLM activists requested no reporters. Activists claimed to have filmed the meeting, but haven't released footage yet.

-BLM activists not impressed with Clinton.

Now, the BLM activists are claiming they were not behind the 'no reporters' part. There are also claims that the Secret Service was not the ones behind blocking BLM activists entry into the rally.

The fact that the BLM activists were not impressed does not make those questions moot.

Also, where's the footage, BLM activists?

[questionseverything]

169. indeed where is the footage?

[Picking Dem]

173. Footage was posted

in LBN and GD-P

[elana i am]

33. i'm completely and utterly confused

i was confused before i read this thread, but now???

i was under the impression that #BLM was more a motto that various independent and non-related activist groups were adopting (or maybe usurping), not that it was an actual overarching organization, and that's why we are getting disparate messages and methods from them.

that said, if these were the same women who interrupted in seattle, from that extremist group, then yes i would question the truthfulness of their statement. accusing an audience of social security and medicare activists of being white supremacists, and the event organizers and sanders of being violent, doesn't really give me faith in their honesty.

and is this clinton trying to get off on a technicality? if these activists were intercepted and sequestered then what would have been the point in asking for press? i don't know about clinton, but in my mind it's generally understood that if you are an activist then press is your animus.

don't know what to think about any of this now...

[MisterP]

50. different individuals

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122524/blacklivesmatter-activists-disrupt-hillary-clinton-event

[jalan48]

41. It's too bad Hillary hasn't managed her emails as well as she has BLM.

[L0oniX]

102. Bwahahahahah

[Bubzer]

44. Interesting.

I wonder what the answer is.

[SoapBox]

45. I find the entire situation confusing...

So were they the only persons in the "overflow" room?

Because initial reports were that they arrived to the event late...and SS had already closed the event to new persons entering because that is what they do, once she has entered the venue.

Now the stories have gotten all different with, they were "intercepted" and then "placed" into that room.

Truth...it might be nice.

[JDPriestly]

48. This story makes both Hillary's campaign and BLM look suspicious.

Is Hillary using her Secret Service detail for political purposes?

Did she specifically instruct her Secret Service staff to screen the BLM supporters, or did BLM just show up late and have to go into the overflow area for that reason?

That is, to screen her audiences in a subtle way?

And is BLM going easier on Hillary with regard to her stances on race than it is on other Democratic candidates?

If so, why?

Have backroom deals been made with the Hillary campaign?

Does BLM plan to demonstrate at future Hillary events?

Will the Secret Service be used to prevent those demonstrations?

Why does one candidate have a Secret Service detail protecting her and the others don't? I know she is a former president's wife, but she is running on her own merit, not as a former president's wife.

I hope that the answers to these questions will make Hillary and BLM both look like sincere, honest parties to this controversy. But these facts raise issues.

[sufrommich]

51. "Have backroom deals been made with the Hillary campaign? "

And there it is.

[billhicks76]

68. Shocked I Tell You!!!

Who could ever think such a thing? Those silly conspiracy thinkers.

[AtomicKitten]

54. The lack of consistency in going after the pols is what resonates.

Who declined press coverage of their brief meeting? Clinton campaign says it was BLM. BLM says not true. So, who's lying?

Announcing their intent to disrupt beforehand and then arriving late to a planned protest. WTF?

There's some weird shit going on here.

[Marr]

53. Huh. A few days ago, he was being hailed by the pro-Hillary crowd for his condemnations of Sanders

supporters on DU specifically, for their speculating about possible cooperation between the Clinton Campaign and some activists who have claimed to be operating solely on behalf of BLM. He was insightful. He was brave. He was honest! Smart!

But suddenly he's not to be trusted, he's boring, he's naive, he's a conspiracy theorist... lol.

This is what I hate about in-groups. Their group think turns on a dime whenever it has to.

[SusanCalvin]

65. In my limited experience

(listening to a small portion of his show on the way in to work), he's pretty sensible and even-handed. And asks any questions that come into his mind.

[Bubzer]

76. He's a pretty smart guy. I've been listening to his shows for quite some time.

I've learned a lot thanks to him.

[Marr]

87. I agree, generally. I do think he seems a bit

naive at times, but I suppose if you're on the radio and don't want to spend half your time issuing apologies, you can't indulge your cynical impulses very much.

[L0oniX]

96. Attack the messenger when ever it isn't favorable to ones chosen candidate ...standard DU.

[senz]

121. +1000

This is why I believe group-think turns individuals into pre-human beings, i.e., herd animals.

[BlueStateLib]

77. Wouldn't don't take my photo with her include video too

"We said that we did not want to take a photo with her," Yancey said. "The only thing that we were asked about was whether we wanted to include photos."

The #BlackLivesMatter members filmed their meeting with Clinton, however, and plan to put the video out.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-new-hampshire-black-lives-matter-2016/

[cantbeserious]

78. Caught Again

eom

[tavernier]

86. Why are doing this on DU?

Aren't there enough freeperville threads to take us apart?

I don't see posts that devastate the republicans as much as the anti Hillary or Bernie posts.

Geesh. Beware your friends!! (Or the trolls on the board).

Please, guys, let it play out a bit and then choose the strongest candidates. Don't disintigrate our players before the games begin.

[AtomicKitten]

112. doing what? discussing events relevant to the primaries?

in a forum labeled GD: Primaries ????

[uponit7771]

134. I'm thinking some of these people are from freeperville

[riversedge]

137. sure seems like it.

[Juicy_Bellows]

89. Where's the video?

BLM said they planned on releasing the video but I can't find it. Anyone?

[KoKo]

116. Wondered also about where that video is. n/t

[kenn3d]

123. Yes. I am also still anxious to see this BLM/HRC meeting video...

The #BlackLivesMatter members filmed their meeting with Clinton, however, and plan to put the video out.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-new-hampshire-black-lives-matter-2016/

It seems clear enough now that BLM is a somewhat loosely organized movement at best, with fairly autonomous chapters that operate independently (if not anarchically). I believe that Bernie and his supporters fully support the concept that Black lives matter, and want to support the BLM movement despite any angst generated by the protest methodology used at NRN and in Seattle. FTM I suspect that the supporters of all the Democratic candidates are on BLM's side as regards ending racism in America, even the many many white-privileged ones who can't fully understand or appreciate the plight of Black citizens whose families are in danger every single day.

But the BLM movement as an organization needs to strive for consistency of action by the chapters to avoid the appearance of bias, or worse, reverse racism within their own ranks. Doing so will hasten the changes we all want in our society, and lessen the fears and tensions felt by us all during this difficult process.

All my children are black, my beloved wife of 43 years is black. I fear for them and for our country everyday. But I cannot accept the actions of the Seattle BLM protesters, and the recent confrontation with Hillary seems inconsistent to say the least.

[Juicy_Bellows]

125. Very well said. I agree completely. nt.

[kenn3d]

171. BLM/HRC meeting video found and posted...

here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=525845

[Juicy_Bellows]

172. Just watched both parts.

Part 2 is pretty interesting. She seemed genuinely agitated.

[kenn3d]

174. Yes I found the other thread also and saw you on there...

I'm still processing my thoughts about all this ... but
I would not be happy with her response... at all.
and
The Boston BLM folk were so overly respectful toward Hillary as to dull the power and even the very point of their intended message to her... I really don't think she understood or took much of it on board.
As compared to the Seattle protesters who were utterly rude, disrespectful, and contemptuous to both Bernie and thousands of innocent onlookers at the rally. Most of those white folks did not learn anything about their white-privilege and those misguided protests only widened the breach of misunderstanding.

I guess I'm still agitated too ... sorry.

I just want progress towards peace and equity amongst the races in America... not political theatre and agitation.

So far I feel we're getting very little progress, and way too much agitation.

If this thread falls away I may join the other one.

Thanks for your reply Juicy_Bellows

[Juicy_Bellows]

175. Yes. I agree.

There is some political theater going on and very little cooperation. Lots of poo flinging from all sides. She seems to get a little hot at the young man and then it basically ends. That's a short meeting, and what a contrast between Seattle and Boston BLM representatives. I hope you have a good evening. Cheers!

[kenn3d]

179. I see the other thread was locked

The original edited Part 1&2 videos have been removed from youtube, but I've re-linked the MSNBC interview which contains additional footage of the meeting not shown in the deleted clips. See my post in this thread below:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=525845

[NorthCarolina]

104. Has Hillary apologized to BLM yet for locking them out of her rally?

Just curious.

[L0oniX]

110. ^^^this^^^

[Cleita]

113. +10

[SMC22307]

138. Where's the hashtag for them being locked out?

The Twitter fury?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

118. BLM isn't just about disrupting.

[Uncle Joe]

120. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, AtomicKitten.

[sabrina 1]

140. Why didn't they pre-announce their disruption of Bernie's events? Why didn't the ambush her,

the way they claimed they would do to 'all of Bernie's events'.

Maybe they agreed, the Hillary Campaign and the protesters to do it the way they did it.

They are under pressure for targeting only the candidate with the best record of anyone in this race and people wanted to know why they have not gone to Repub events, and to Hillary events.

So they pre-announced their intentions, re Hillary? Said they were late to the event didn't they? Now, it was the pre-announcement that caused them to be stopped and then given a private, sedate, comfortable session behind closed doors??

Not buying it at all, and neither are a growing number of people.

[Zorra]

151. The pattern has never broken since it was established.

But why worry about it?

Not everyone has the same code of ethics, and sense of justice and fairness. It is what it is, and critical thinkers will see things for what they are. Working on what we have real possibility of gaining will be more productive than wasting our time playing a rigged game in the Clinton Casino.

Not saying we shouldn't call out bullshit when it's obvious, just that squirrels are overpopulating the park and causing too much distraction.

[slipslidingaway]

176. If it quacks like a duck ... First do an interview with a media outlet and then tweet it ....

on BLM Boston hours before the event, arrive late, because who knew there might be secret service involved?

Sounds strange to me as well.

If you are not questioning, then you are not thinking IMHO.

[Control-Z]

148. Who the hell cares what Coulton has to say

about anything at this point? Seriously.

[Vattel]

152. probably neither. Probably just a miscommunication.

[Demeter]

159. Why do I have to choose between them? I pick both.

[kenn3d]

170. The Video of BLM/HRC meeting posted today...

Hillary Clinton Talks With BlackLivesMatter Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=J9CPMR4NdOo
and
Hillary Clinton Talks With BlackLivesMatter Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLUgRTD1mpwSXbaOTCPcGb5znT10fgVmMm&v=U8loxAq9Stc

Black Lives Matter Organizers Are Unsatisfied With Hillary Clinton's Response

Edit - The Hillary Clinton Talks With BlackLivesMatter Part 1 & 2 videos linked above have been removed from youtube by the poster (Good.is)

The complete Melissa Harris-Perry interview (Black Lives Matter Organizers Are Unsatisfied With Hillary Clinton's Response) excerpted above can still be seen here:
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/when-hillary-clinton-met-black-lives-matter-507155523571
This longer MSNBC segment includes the beginning portion of the BLM/HRC meeting not included in the 2-Part Good.is edited videos, which have been taken down.

[moondust]

177. Did they tell her to bow down or anything like that?

Take over any microphones or get up in her face making demands?

Nothing? What kind of protest movement is that?

[Juicy_Bellows]

180. This should be its own OP.

Thank you for posting!

[KMOD]

187. No one is lying Thom.

And this is not a political game.

[KMOD]

188. Oh, and by the way,

Thom Hartmann avoided this thread.

I don't blame him.