*Briahna Joy Gray* looking mad grifterish

[MischievousMonkey]

I'm perplexed by some of her moves and thoughts but maybe more by the fact that they sometimes somehow mirror mines.

Edit for clarity: for example, her interviewing Andrew Sullivan or caping for Greenwald. I didn't know much about Sullivan at the time and just thought he was one of those conservatives some deem "reasonable", but after reading his own words about Charles Murray and differences in intelligence between races, after watching him on Jon Stewart ignorantly dispute white supremacy, I couldn't help but wonder wtf was she really doing kekeing with these types of folks. Last excerpt I checked from her after the Buffalo shooting, she was talking about how she did her best to cleanse her vocabulary from terms such as "white supremacy" and that falls in line with her disdain for identity politics.

But on the other hand, I agree on the idea that racist chips don't necessarily fall along political lines and that many liberals view Black people as little more than a tool in an agenda. I also think that a significant part of identity politics is unreasonable and deeply flawed conceptually. White supremacy is not the best conceptual tool to describe some of what Black folks go through neither; I said that. Etc etc...

That's interesting because she, as some other do, help me confront my own contradictions. The shyt she does I abhor sometimes reminds me of the shyt I think myself.

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

What happened?

She's lost her damn mind. Giving life to Tucker Carlson and his ideology is reason enough.

 

[mastermind]

She's lost her damn mind. Giving life to Tucker Carlson and his ideology is reason enough.

The Rising clip?

She didn't give any life to it from what I heard. If anything, she pointed out that this is what he wants, brehs. He want to paint himself as a victim, and the attention he has received will do that.

Citations Needed did a better job of explaining Tucker than she did, but she did not defend Carlson at all in that video. She gave a very nuanced takedown of that ideology and what needs to be done to defeat that thinking. Who is saying otherwise?

 

[Pressure]

The Rising clip?

She didn't give any life to it from what I heard. If anything, she pointed out that this is what he wants, brehs. He want to paint himself as a victim, and the attention he has received will do that.

Citations Needed did a better job of explaining Tucker than she did, but she did not defend Carlson at all in that video. She gave a very nuanced takedown of that ideology and what needs to be done to defeat that thinking. Who is saying otherwise?

Means nothing when you make a provocative title that actually does give life as if replacement theory needs a nuanced breakdown.

 

[mastermind]

Means nothing when you make a provocative title that actually does give life as if replacement theory needs a nuanced breakdown.

TBF, I don’t know if she had any control over that title. If anything, that’s the video and content team which I would find it hard to believe she is part of. I also hate this Rising Show because it’s a trash new age Crossfire which was also trash. The Hill is probably loving this discourse.

The poor title leads to people not watching and instead forming opinions based of what they didn’t watch, which seems like a lot of the reactions in this thread.

And again, if we can’t discuss why things are what they are on a nuanced level the we will continue doing the same fukked up situations, which is America from 1776-present.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I gave her too much credit here.

here's my problem.

I dont fukk with Glenn Loury, but he even made her look NUTS here.

She legit thinks any affront to bernie is de-facto people voting against their interests, and not the realism of black voters pushing for policies they see as realistic. She thinks democrats aren't "the left" instead of people trying to stop republicans by trying to make the necessary negotiations. She thinks not voting for Nina turner is bad instead of Shontel Brown who is actually electable.

She has NO internal regulator and sees conspiracies everywhere. She really might be the new Candace Owens of the left. She really believes this shyt.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I mean seriously. How the fukk do you ignore the fact Tucker uses dog whistles then claim tucker uses "race neutral language" as weight to your arguments?!

He's fukkin lying, Briahna.

Goofy broad is all over the place.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

The Rising clip?

She didn't give any life to it from what I heard. If anything, she pointed out that this is what he wants, brehs. He want to paint himself as a victim, and the attention he has received will do that.

Citations Needed did a better job of explaining Tucker than she did, but she did not defend Carlson at all in that video. She gave a very nuanced takedown of that ideology and what needs to be done to defeat that thinking. Who is saying otherwise?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Means nothing when you make a provocative title that actually does give life as if replacement theory needs a nuanced breakdown.

its hilariously stupid

even Joe Scarborough has more nuance than her

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Come the fukk on. She’s gloating about this. This is shameless grifting and unearned arrogance

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

People are chewing her up right now

She’s TERRIBLE

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[jj23]

I gave her too much credit here.

Lol , no retractions

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

She’s pathetic