She has called Trump a danger to democracy, but hear her call for a rigged election.
When Donald Trump warned about a rigged election, Hillary claimed he was undermining democracy.
How is a warning of election fraud a danger to democracy?
According to Hillary and the media, Trump undermined democracy by raising doubts about the reported election results.
By making that criticism, Clinton was claiming implicitly to value democracy. Her attack on Trump for undermining the perceived legitimacy of someone coming into office assumed that winning a vote did, indeed, legitimize the ruler.
In 2006, she advocated a rigged election.
According to the Observer,
Speaking to the Jewish Press about the January 25, 2006, election for the second Palestinian Legislative Council (the legislature of the Palestinian National Authority), Clinton weighed in about the result, which was a resounding victory for Hamas (74 seats) over the U.S.-preferred Fatah (45 seats).
“I do not think we should have pushed for an election in the Palestinian territories. I think that was a big mistake,” said Sen. Clinton. “And if we were going to push for an election, then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.”
[Editor, Eli] Chomsky recalls being taken aback that “anyone could support the idea—offered by a national political leader, no less—that the U.S. should be in the business of fixing foreign elections.”
So, Hillary doesn’t think that only a real election gives a government legitimacy. She thinks a rigged election is just as legitimate and, in some cases, preferable. Elections then exist as PR for the regime.
If Clinton thought it was important to do “something to determine who was going to win” in Palestine, there can be no doubt that she would like to do something to determine who is going to win the next presidential election in 2016.
This should settle the question beyond reasonable doubt: If Clinton had a way to get a rigged election would she use it to win? YES.
Indeed, she obviously did all she could through the DNC to do just that in the Democrat primary.
So the only question that remains is: Could she get away with it?
Andy Schlafly writes,
Less that a month ago, Obama’s secretary of homeland security Jeh Johnson publicly warned about the potential for cyberattacks from overseas could disrupt the administration of this year’s presidential election. “In recent months,” Johnson said, “we have determined that malicious actors gained access to state voting-related systems.”
Cyberattacks get headlines, but there are many other ways our elections can be stolen. One of the most common is the risk that your vote could be cancelled by the votes of people who are legally ineligible to vote.
Felons are one large category of people who, in many states, are prohibited from casting a ballot unless they regain that privilege by going through a process of application and approval. But that didn’t stop felons from illegally voting in close elections, including the 2000 presidential race in Florida (decided by 537 votes out of 6 million cast) and the 2008 U.S. Senate race in Minnesota (decided by 312 votes out of 3 million cast).
And there are other ways as well, including illegal aliens.
How can there be any doubt that Hillary will do whatever she can get away with?