If there is any one person in the world of American politics who is less qualified to throw around accusations of electoral tampering than Hillary Clinton, we have yet to meet them.
The former First Lady was soundly defeated by Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election for a myriad of reasons, but topping that damning list is Clinton’s own penchants for pilfering, collusion, corruption, and fraud.
In early polling among the democrats, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont looked to hold a rather sizable advantage over Hillary Clinton when Americans were asked who would fare better in a one-on-one election against republican candidate Donald Trump. Despite this, Clinton’s own arrogance and air of inevitability led her down a path of collusion in which she and the DNC worked hand in hand to stymy Sanders’ chances for victory in the primaries. Once this piece of the Clinton corruption puzzle was unearthed, a massive swatch of democratic voters abandoned Hillary, and to a lesser extent, the democratic party as a whole.
Further scandals discovered during Clinton’s ill-fated and ill-advised campaign included debate-rigging diatribes from Donna Brazile, her infamous State Department pay-to-play scenario, and a number of instances in which Huma Abedin was instructed to research treatments for Hillary’s mysteriously denied, yet obvious, illness.
Now, even after all of these ridiculous realities have been cast upon the American people, Clinton still has the gall, the audacity, to come out and publicly refuse to believe that the 2016 election was a proper and legitimate contest.
“Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton did not rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election in an interview published Monday.
“‘As more and more information comes out about the depth of Russia’s interference in the election, do you think, at some point, that it would be legitimate to challenge the legitimacy of the election?’ NPR’s Terry Gross asked Clinton in a wide-ranging interview.
“‘I don’t know if there’s any legal constitutional way to do that. I think you can raise questions,’ Clinton responded.
“‘Would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?’ Gross asked.
“‘No. I would not. I would say—’ Clinton began.
“‘You’re not going to rule it out,’ Gross interjected.
“‘No, I woudn’t rule that out,’ Clinton said.”
This gross negligence of reality has been at the heart and soul of the Clinton conundrum for decades, but has become laser-like in its focus over the course of the last 9 months.
The democrats have all but accepted the fact that they ran the wrong horse in the race, yet Clinton continues to be at odds with the organization. In her recent book, What Happened, the former Secretary of State made wild claims about what truly caused her defeat in November, including two cockamamy jabs at Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders – both politicians who would likely have given Donald Trump a much more legitimate run for his money.