Hillary Clinton tries to delegitimize the 2016 and 2018 election results, again
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Hillary Clinton is a threat to democracy — at least according to Hillary Clinton.
The two-time failed presidential candidate commiserated with failed 2018 Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams this week, claiming they were both robbed of their respective elections.
Just ignore the vote counts — electoral in Clinton's case, popular in Abrams'. Also, ignore the part where Clinton herself claimed in 2016 that questioning the results of American elections constitutes a direct attack on democracy.
-------------------------------------------
"You can run the best campaign. You can have the best plans. You can get the nomination. You can win the popular vote. And you can lose the Electoral College and therefore the election," Clinton said Tuesday at the Defense of Democracy Conference at Georgetown University. And she would know, because she did exactly three of those five things.
Clinton continued, adding that there are four specific reasons why someone with a perfect plan (har! har!) can still lose an election. “Number one,” she said, “Voter suppression. We saw what happened in Georgia where Stacey Abrams should be governor of that state.”
Clinton repeated several of the myths that we've been debunking repeatedly ever since the election. “Registered voters were kept off the rolls," she said. "Their registrations just piled up in some back office with no intention ever enroll them so that they could actually vote.”
For starters, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp won the 2018 gubernatorial election with 50.2% of the vote, compared to Abrams’ 48.8%. She lost by approximately 54,723 votes. It wasn't actually that close. But it could have gone to runoff, so let's look at it a bit more closely.
Was turnout down because of voter suppression? No. Were there irregular or unusual purges of legitimate voters? No. These are urban legends, carefully planted before the election in order to delegitimize its result in advance. As I have written over and over again since 2018:
---------------------------------------------
The saddest thing about this is: Clinton almost certainly keeps banging on about Abrams because it gives the former secretary of state an excuse to complain about her own "stolen" election.
---------------------------------------------
It’s funny. It was just a few years ago that Clinton said it was “denigrating” and “talking down our democracy” when then-GOP nominee Donald Trump declined to say whether he’d accept the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. It was just a few years ago that Clinton said, “That is not the way our democracy works,” when Trump suggested he might protest the outcome. Back then, Clinton said questioning the results of U.S. elections posed a “direct threat to our democracy.”
Wow — a Clinton preaching one thing while practicing another? Now I have seen everything.
Tags
Who is online
441 visitors
She just won't go away !
Hillary still doesn't understand how the electoral college works. She thought shitting on fly over country, by not campaigning there, was a given. She didn't need them. Raising money on the leftist coasts for her reelection war chest was far more important.
Of course the Democrats and their sheeple haven't accepted the election results either; so she is in good company.
Her and the rest of the left.
If she had spent as much time campaigning as she does complaining and whining about her loss, she may have won.
She will always be known as the biggest sore loser.
Trump won and yet he spends more time complaining about not winning the popular vote, and lying about his crowd sizes, than Hillary has ever spent whining. I'm no fan of hers, but Trumpp is the biggest snowflake and crybaby ever.
The two parties gave us the worst candidates ever to choose from at the same time.
Given the insane exploding clown car of Democratic candidates running ever further left; you might get to enjoy 4 more years of "...the biggest snowflake and crybaby ever."
Ever notice that Dems cannot concentrate on their candidates? If anyone even looks at what a Democrat says or does; all the left can do is scream, "but Trruuuummmmppppp!!!!!!!"
Shows even the left knows just how unpopular their candidates are; despite the bogus polls trying to frantically state otherwise.
He's a pussy ass bitch.
What's that ?
President Pussy Ass Bitch.
he does ?
"and lying about his crowd sizes"
I guess the media "Photoshops" when they show the "Crowds" at Trump Rallies ?
Seems all the seats are FULL !
HERE ARE THE CLINTON RALLIES !
Didn't help !
No, you are mistaken.
Hillary did not win and was never POTUS.
And it's well past time to get over that.
Some will never get over Abuela Hillary losing, or Kavanaugh being confirmed.
She must have seen that UK poll that gives her the best chance of all Dem's to win in 2020.
Polling by Christopher Steele
Again, to date, what has been proven wrong from the dossier,
as most has deemed out , at this current chronological increment . ?
Not that this thread is about that dossier but how about almost everything:
i read your link and THIS is what it said;
"Two years later, Mueller came to the same conclusion: Steele’s intelligence alleging a conspiracy was never verified."
.
What is 'The Hill' ?
blanks don't mean 'proven wrong', and i love the little footnote as to when to use this article.
i'm pretty sure you can do better than 'The Hill' that doesn't amounto beans.
i read a little on the Hill
and it was given a better review than what context you exposed me to, and actually i have seen it sourced before. they have editorials from oth sides i must presume
.
Does not change my thoughts stated in my post
from The Hill,
"Two years later, Mueller came to the same conclusion: Steele’s intelligence alleging a conspiracy was never verified."
I'm pretty sure you can comprehend this article better than the small snippet you managed to glean from it that "marginally" supports your preferred narrative. This link is from the "left leaning" The Hill so you can also do better than attacking a left leaning source.
It is true ...... you can lead a horse to water but you can make it drink.
I suggest you take a real long pull on this one .....
FBI's spreadsheet puts a stake through the heart of Steele's dossier
He was hired to be a reporter and his accuracy was so poor that The Hill puts a disclaimer on every single one of his stories saying it is Solomon's personal opinion.
BY JOHN SOLOMON — 07/16/19 07:00 PM EDT 5,288
He is an editorialist and executive vice president of digital video for The Hill .
That's not VP of the Hill.
Phillip Rucker is a reporter for the Washington Post. See if you can find a disclaimer on any of his stories saying they are Rucker's "personal opinion".
They dont do that to legitimate reporters who write facts.
They put that on all their opinion writers' articles as do lots of publications.
You still hanging your hat on that ass-wipe of a document John?
Over three years, multi-millions of tax dollars later and still none of the major collusion claims are proven. Not one.
That dossier is some weak-assed shit that's for sure. Pretty sad that after all this time, that's the best you got.
That said, The Hill, a documented left leaning publication and is likely not going to print this piece if it wasn't accurate. The irony of all this is the document that's really full of shit is the Steele dossier you appear to be defending.
Hilarious!
This is the very first article I clicked on after I read your comment Pat.
No disclaimer. They DO NOT put a disclaimer on all their stories.
They put a disclaimer on their entire Opinion section and after each opinion article.
Opinion
Not all publications do that but many do.
I am not disagreeing with you other than for the fact that Solomon was not hired to be an opinion writer.
well, i'm sure that matters to the 199 who WERE INDICTED
199 bottles of beer on the wall, 199 bottles of beer, take one down and pass it around 198 bottles of beer on the wall.
and Trump said 10,000 lies
12,000 and counting,
and
R U stating 199 WEREN'T ?
Citation for your 199? Thanks
i am wrong on that number
as i recall after a refreshment, it was thirty four, i believe, but not sure how you quantitate three separate companies, or a Russian troll farm.
See how that is done, if you mispeak or quote,
YOU OWN UP TO IT, then correct it;
further details, from that lil investigation, many around here claim produced 'nothing'!
A total of thirty-four individuals and three companies were indicted by Mueller's investigators. Eight have pleaded guilty to or been convicted of felonies , including five Trump associates and campaign officials. None of those five convictions "involved a conspiracy between the campaign and Russians" [9] and "Mueller did not charge or suggest charges for [...] whether the Trump campaign worked with the Russians to influence the election". [10] The investigation was, however, more complex. On May 29, 2019, In a press conference, Muller stated that "If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime... A president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view – that too is prohibited." [11]
Lieutenant General Michael Flynn , who had been appointed as National Security Advisor by the incoming Trump administration, was convicted of making false statements to FBI investigators about his conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition, and he was dismissed from his position. [12] [13] Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was found guilty on eight felony counts of tax evasion and bank fraud , [14] pursuant to his earlier lobbying activities for the Party of Regions of former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich . [15] [16] He later pled guilty to conspiracy to defraud and obstruction of justice; [17] [18] in total, he was sentenced to over seven years in jail. [19] In February 2018, Mueller's team indicted thirteen Russian citizens and three Russian entities, including the Internet Research Agency (IRA), for conducting social media campaigns about the U.S. elections, [20] and twelve members of the Russian GRU cyber espionage group known as Fancy Bear , for hacking and leaking DNC emails . [21] In June 2018 Konstantin Kilimnik , Manafort's business partner in Ukraine, was indicted for witness tampering at the behest of Manafort; [22] Kilimnik is suspected of working for Russian intelligence . [23] Trump's personal lawyer Michael Cohen pled guilty to making hush payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal in violation of campaign finance laws , and was convicted for several unrelated counts of bank and tax fraud. [24] [25] Campaign adviser George Papadopoulos was convicted for making false statements to the FBI. [26] Russian gun activist Maria Butina was interviewed by Special Counsel investigators, then prosecuted by the National Security Law Unit and imprisoned for spying. [27] [28] Longtime Trump advisor Roger Stone , who had met with a Russian person offering to sell derogatory financial information about Hillary Clinton , [29] was indicted on seven charges and has pled not guilty. [30] Dozens of ongoing investigations originally handled by the Special Counsel's office were forwarded to district and state prosecutors, other Department of Justice (DoJ) branches, and other federal agencies. [31]
The investigation was officially concluded on March 22, 2019, with the Mueller Report submitted to Attorney General William Barr . [32] Barr had been critical of the investigation before he became Attorney General. A redacted version of the report was released to the public on April 18, 2019. The report concluded that the IRA's social media campaign supported Trump's presidential candidacy while attacking Clinton's, and Russian intelligence hacked and released damaging material from the Clinton campaign and various Democratic Party organizations. [33] The investigation "identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign", and determined that the Trump campaign "expected it would benefit electorally" from Russian hacking efforts. However, ultimately "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities". [34] [35] [36] The evidence was not necessarily complete due to encrypted, deleted, or unsaved communications as well as false, incomplete, or declined testimony. [37] [38] Mueller later said that the investigation's conclusion on Russian interference "deserves the attention of every American". [39]
this one claims over 100 charges, 34 indictments, and 3 companies www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/us/politics/mueller...
He didn't have to, they were rigged in his favor.
By whom ?
Aw, Hillary isn't the only sore loser.
Kinda hard to "Feel" sorry for someone that keeps slapping themselves the same way, hoping for a different result !
Kind of reminds me of when GOP leaders said they would ruin Clintons election chances by holding endless hearings on Benghazi.
Karma is hitting them now.
Comrade Comey did it, Comrade Comey did it !
Thank Goodness Trump fired Commie/Comey like Democrats wanted huh !
Nothing like having "Feelings" for a whiney loser doing EXACTLY what she said she found repulsive of her opponent.
What would she know about running the best campaign?
This bitch is like an STD. She just won't go the fuck away.
Like a bad penny or a nasty quarter no vending machine will ever, accept .......... absolutely worthless!