You think its just a coincidence when they finally got around to "disrupting" Clinton they announced the specific time and place? And then got a private meeting with her and released a recorded staged video of after? Or that they say things like this:
"She did acknowledge that there are policies that she has been a part of promoting that have not worked," [Founder of BLM Boston] Yancey added, but said that Clinton's response was a "political" one.
"I am sure she understands. She is a brilliant woman," she said. "I think she gave the answer she wanted to give."
And the Clinton thing is not just some of these people in leadership positions in BLM being in her pocket, its media outlets like Gawker using this as an excuse to skewer Sanders over bullshit.
the article is about how sanders supporters are attacking the black lives matter movement, which they are doing. and you think clinton is involved in this somehow. lol.
"Sanders supporters" are doing this? Which ones? You're using weasel words Jon, just like that article.
Re: Clinton, again, do you think the disparity between the way these people have treated a candidate like Sanders, who has much more credibility on the issues they advocate for than the other candidates, and Clinton, is just a coincidence? Do you think the huge media conglomerates represented by sites like Gawker are interested in a good faith criticism of latent white supremacy on the left? And again, if we want to talk about white supremacy on the left, why is the conversation beginning with Sanders?
