Hillary Clinton just can’t let it go.
It’s not enough that she suffered the humiliation of losing the White House to Donald Trump in 2016, thwarting her anointed place in history as the first woman President of the United States. Clinton also has to drag the country through that election again and again, trying to convince everyone that her defeat wasn’t the result of incompetent campaigning or her intensely dislikable persona, but rather the result of evil machinations that have usurped our democracy and denied Democrats their rightful control over all levers of government.
Since the Clinton camp first hatched the idea on the morning of November 9, 2016, the former Secretary of State—who was, in Barack Obama’s humble estimation, the most qualified person ever to run for the presidency—has implied that dark forces within the Kremlin colluded with the Trump campaign to get him elected, not just because of personal animus the Russian president Vladimir Putin bore against Clinton, but also because Moscow had gathered compromising information on Trump himself. Now, with the Muller investigation into such collusion reportedly winding down—and with the same media outlets that have excitedly flogged the story as Trump’s downfall for the last two years solemnly preparing everyone for disappointment—Clinton is still out there, talking about how the country is in a uniquely dangerous position with its democracy.
Via The Hill:
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Sunday at a reception in Selma, Ala., that Americans are facing a “full-fledged crisis in our democracy,” likening its importance to the civil rights movement from decades ago.
“This is a time, my friends, when fundamental rights, civic virtue, freedom of the press, the rule of law, truth, facts and reason are under assault,” Clinton said at an event commemorating the 54th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday.”
“And make no mistake, we are living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy,” she added.
What’s ironic here is that Clinton is essentially correct, but not for the reasons she would have you believe. Fundamental rights are indeed under assault—such as the right to life, threatened by abortion extremists who advance infanticide as their next policy goal, or the right of Christians to not have the state impose its views of marriage and sexuality on them. And civic virtue is indeed suffering, as Americans are increasingly pitted against one another by a Democrat party that frames policy differences not just as matters of opinion, but a clash between good and evil.
Freedom of the press is also in danger, but not because of government censorship. The systematic self-destruction of the left-wing media’s credibility has more to do with Amercans calling them out over their fake news, as we recently saw with the coverage of the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax and the Covington teens, not to mention the Brett Kavanaugh debacle. As for the rule of law, the more we find out about how the Obama administration walked weapons to Mexican drug cartels, used the IRS to intimidate conservative groups, spied on journalists, and deployed the intelligence assets of the United States in order to spy on a rival presidential campaign, the more we realize how the bedrock principles of the law have been upended.
And Hillary oughta know. After all, she broke the law when she mishandled classified information on her private email server—but never faced criminal charges.
A crisis in our democracy? You bet.
Clinton did not explicitly mention President Trump in her remarks, but lamented that “racist and white supremacist views” had been lifted up by the White House. She further cautioned that civil rights and voting rights are at risk.
Mind you, this is the same Hillary Clinton who once deemed Trump a threat because he declared that he wouldn’t necessarily accept the results of the 2016 election if he lost. As I recall, most of the media and the whole of the Democrat Party nearly lost their minds over that one—and yet here they are, curiously silent as Clinton continues her crusade to undermine faith in democratic governance, all because Donald Trump is in the Oval Office.
Which leads me to ask the question: How is this any different than what Vladimir Putin attempted to do, when Russian bots flooded social media attempting to divide the electorate?
This isn’t to say that Clinton should go gently into that goodnight. She has every right to rage about the election and who won it as much as she likes. There’s a big difference, however, between detesting the current president and denouncing as illegitimate the process that put him there. The entire foundation of our democracy depends upon the peaceful transition of power from one administration to another. When faith in that starts to erode, the system starts to break down—and those bonds that hold us all together as American citizens weaken and break.
Which, ultimately, is what Putin wants. He couldn’t have cared less who won. He just wanted to stoke the anger of the losing side, whoever it was, to create strife and unrest.
Kind of like what we’re seeing today.
Could it have worked out any better if Putin planned it this way? Maybe somebody should ask Hillary about that.