Connect with us

Here’s The Video Of Hillary Clinton Meeting With #BlackLivesMatters Activists

Published

on

Headlines on the story don’t tell the full or fair version – actually watching the video does. 

“Watch: Wait Till You See What Hillary Just Said In Private Meeting With Black Lives Matter Activists”

“Hillary To ‘Black Lives Matter’ Activists: Maybe I’ll Just Talk To White People”

“Meeting Between Hillary and #BlackLivesMatter Activists Gets Confrontational”

“Black Lives Matter Movement Hijacks Democratic Party… Awkward Exchange with Hillary in New Hampshire”

Those are a few of the headlines today from right-wing or right-leaning sites about Hillary Clinton’s meeting with #BlackLivesMatter leaders last Tuesday. The group released video exclusively to GOOD, which edited it and added some background where necessary.

But do those headlines headlines do justice to the conversation, or to either Clinton or #BlackLivesMatter?

GOOD describes the video as “the exchange between the Democratic candidate and members of the Boston chapter of #BlackLivesMatter, where a somewhat defensive yet candid Clinton responds to several tough questions.”

“Clinton is refreshingly honest and authentic at some moments, and sharply defensive at others,” GOOD observes. “The most uncomfortable: The candidate responds to an activist’s assertion that ‘this is, and has always been, a white problem of violence,’ by suggesting she could talk ‘only to white people about how we’re going to deal with the very real problems,’ a suggestion both Clinton and the activist then acknowledge is not what either want.”

In the video, Clinton says there “has to be a reckoning,” about her support of her husband’s $19 billion Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act, which is responsible for a 60% increase in incarceration for drug offenses. “But I also think there has to be some positive vision and plan that you can move people toward,” Clinton adds.

“Once you say this country has still not recovered from its original sin,” of slavery, Clinton tells the activists, “which is true…the next question is, ‘So what do you want me to do about it?'” Clinton said. “That’s what I’m trying to put together in a way that I can explain it and I can sell it. Because in politics, you can’t explain it and you can’t sell it, it stays on the shelf.”

Clinton also told the group their analysis of institutional racism “is totally fair.”

“It’s historically fair, it’s psychologically fair, it’s economically fair, but you’re going to have to come together as a movement and say here’s what we want done about it,” Clinton said. “Because you can get lip service from as many white people as you can pack into Yankee Stadium, and a million more like it, who are gonna say, ‘Oh, we get it, we get it. We’re going to be nicer.’ That’s not enough, at least in my book.”

One member of the group appeared to take umbrage with Clinton’s response.

“If you don’t tell black people what we need to do, then we won’t tell you all what you need to do,” he told the Democratic former Secretary of State. “This is and has always been a white problem of violence. There’s not much that we can do to stop the violence against us.”

“Respectfully, if that is your position, then I will talk only to white people about how we are going to deal with the very real problems,” Clinton replied. 

“What you just said was a form of victim blaming,” he accused. “You’re saying that what the black lives matter movement needs to do to change white hearts…”

Clinton responded, “I don’t believe you change hearts. I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources. You change the way systems operate. You’re not going to change every heart. You’re not,” she said. “But at the end of the day we can do a whole lot to change some hearts and change some systems and create more opportunities for people who deserve to have them.”

“You can keep the movement going, which you have started, and through it, you may actually change some hearts,” she added. “But if that’s all that happens, we’ll be back here in 10 years having the same conversation. Because we will not have all of the changes that you deserve to see happen in your lifetime because of your willingness to get out there and talk about this.”

Watch the video, in two parts, below. It’s about 10 minutes total.

What do you think? Are the headlines accurate? Was it a productive conversation? Decide for yourself.

 

Image: Screenshot via GOOD.IS/YouTube
Hat tip: CBS News

 

 

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

The GOP’s Secret Weapon? A ‘Known Unknown’ That Could Swing the Midterms: Columnist

Published

on

Some political experts are predicting a sweeping “blue wave” this November, with Democrats poised to reclaim the House — and possibly even the Senate — as Americans grapple with soaring grocery and gas prices, while the Commander in Chief pours billions into what critics call a war of choice in Iran.

But the GOP has what could amount to a secret weapon, a great “known unknown,” that could help dash Democrats’ dreams, according to Henry Olsen, who writes in a Washington Post opinion piece, “there remains an X factor in the race: Trump’s $300 million in campaign cash.”

He calls it a possible “game changer,” especially given just how little cash Democrats have by comparison.

That $300 million belongs to a Trump supporting Super PAC controlled by close allies of President Donald Trump. And it’s not just $300 million. Olsen suggests that with continued fundraising, MAGA Inc., the Trump Super PAC, could be sitting on even more cash.

“Add to that the successes of the Republican National Committee, which had over $109 million on hand at the end of February. That’s so much that in the most recent reporting period, the committee earned over $7 million simply from interest and dividends alone, only a few million less than the Democratic National Committee raised in total during that time.”

READ MORE: ‘Big Embarrassment’: Trump Team Mocked After Admitting Lack of Evidence Against Fed Chair

He says it’s possible Team Trump could have half a billion dollars in total at its disposal by the November election.

Is it a “game changer”?

Olsen writes, “this is the thing we know we don’t know, to borrow a useful category from former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The big question is how much all that money matters given today’s polarized politics, because the winners in November aren’t going to be based on dollars raised but votes cast.”

One option for all that money could be for Trump to use “his cash haul to go big, define his achievements and contrast them with the Democrats via a major, partisan-focused advertising campaign? Essentially: ‘Vote Republican.'”

For that strategy to work, Olsen writes, Trump would need to do two things.

First, “he’d have to place well-crafted, coordinated ads in the largest media markets in targeted states and districts. That would be expensive even with sophisticated analytics helping to target the spots.”

And second, Trump would have to exhibit “unusual personal discipline.”

“His campaign speeches would need to hew to the themes in the ads so that his earned media would support the paid media message,” says Olsen. “He was able to do that in 2024, but his impulsive side seems to have returned in force since he took the oath of office. All that money would be wasted if Trump were giving the media a different story to dissect on a daily basis.”

READ MORE: ‘Doing This for You’: White House Mocked Over ‘Ridiculous’ Pitch to Young Voters

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Doing This for You’: White House Mocked Over ‘Ridiculous’ Pitch to Young Voters

Published

on

The White House is facing sharp criticism over its latest message to young voters who cast a ballot for President Donald Trump based on specific campaign promises.

Journalist Gabe Fleischer told White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday that in his reporting, he speaks a lot to young voters, “many of whom voted for President Trump for the first time in 2024, who were hoping to have no more wars and to have lower prices.”

“Now, with a war taking place, and with gas prices going up, I’m curious what President Trump’s message would be to those voters who kind of swung into his coalition in 2024, but maybe don’t feel the administration’s going as they’d expected.”

Leavitt did not pause before saying to those young voters, “President Trump is doing this for you.”

“He’s doing this for young people, so that we are no longer threatened by a rogue terrorist regime in the Middle East that seeks to kill the brave men and women who serve in our country in the Middle East, many of them young people themselves, young men and women who serve this country honorably in uniform and have been threatened, killed, and maimed by the rogue Iranian terrorist regime for 47 years,” she said.

READ MORE: ‘Big Embarrassment’: Trump Team Mocked After Admitting Lack of Evidence Against Fed Chair

Leavitt added that, “President Trump finally had the courage to step up and do what’s right for our national security, our homeland security.”

She called the spiking price of gas a “temporary short-term fluctuation,” which, “the president has said, once these combat operations are over, this administration is going to continue to unleash American energy dominance.”

Leavitt also referred to Trump’s war in Iran as a “short term combat operation,” and promised gas prices are “gonna go right back down when this is over.”

Some experts predict gas prices will not return to pre-war levels until at least the end of 2027.

Critics slammed the press secretary’s statements.

“She’s lying. It’s all they have left at this point. Lies,” said former Republican U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh.

“The best thing you can do for young people is not send them to die in a stupid war,” commented U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), a former Marine who served in the Iraq War.

“Trump is sending young Americans to die in a pointless, unnecessary war for you. He’s doing this to help young people. Ridiculous,” remarked Navy veteran Jared Ryan Sears, who writes at The Progressive Capitalist.

READ MORE: ‘Trump’s Intern’ Fetterman Under Fire — ‘Needs to Go’ Say Critics

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Trump’s Intern’ Fetterman Under Fire — ‘Needs to Go’ Say Critics

Published

on

U.S. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) is once again under fire — this time for his vote confirming Markwayne Mullin to become the Homeland Security Secretary — and among his critics are those who helped send him to Capitol Hill.

“John promised that he was going to go to D.C. and be Democrats’ 51st vote. And instead he’s gone to D.C. and is behaving like Donald Trump’s f— — intern,” Pennsylvania Democratic State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta told The Philadelphia Inquirer in an interview. Kenyatta had endorsed Fetterman’s Senate bid after losing to him in the primary.

“He punches down at his constituents and refuses to hold accountable the one person we elected him to hold accountable,” Kenyatta also told the Inquirer. “What I see from John Fetterman, unfortunately, is that he’s a weak man’s imitation of a tough man. A tough man doesn’t name-call his neighbors and the people that elected him when they’re asking him genuine questions.”

Kenyatta, the Inquirer noted, is part of a “growing chorus of Pennsylvania Democrats who say Fetterman has not only abandoned” his constituents, but he “is actively doing the opposite of what he told them he would do in a divided Washington.”

READ MORE: ‘Big Embarrassment’: Trump Team Mocked After Admitting Lack of Evidence Against Fed Chair

Former U.S. Rep. Susan Wild (D-PA) expressed her disappointment with Senator Fetterman after his vote to confirm Mullin.

“People worked so hard for Fetterman and he kicked them in the teeth,” she wrote last week on X. “On to 2028 when we elect a real Dem.”

Two days later, she asked, “Has Fetterman said one word about Trump’s horrible Truth Social post about Robert Muller dying? Numerous prominent Rs have commented about [Robert] Muller’s lifetime of public service.”

President Trump had commented, “Good, I’m glad he’s dead,” upon learning of the late special counsel’s passing.

The Inquirer added that U.S. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA), “after taking the rare step of asking her social media followers to call Fetterman’s office to urge him to oppose Mullin — said in a central Pennsylvania forum on Thursday that it was easier to work with Pennsylvania Republican U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick than with Fetterman.”

“Once again Sen Fetterman shows why he is Trump’s favorite Democrat. He needs to go,” U.S. Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-PA) said of Fetterman.

READ MORE: ‘Heightened Threat’: New Memo Demands DHS Return to Preventing Terrorism

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.