Hillary Clinton becomes direct threat to democracy, questions legitimacy of Trump’s election — Video

In an interview with the left-wing Mother Jones, Hillary Clinton, the most evil person ever nominated to the White House by a major party, became a direct threat to democracy by her own definition, and questioned the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s election.

Of course, she cited debunked left-wing fake news and liberal propaganda talking points, claiming Russian interference and non-existent GOP voter suppression.

According to Mother Jones:

Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?

In an interview with Mother Jones in downtown Manhattan, Clinton said Russian meddling in the election “was one of the major contributors to the outcome.” The Russians used “weaponized false information,” she said, in “a very successful disinformation campaign” that “wasn’t just influencing voters—it was determining the outcome.”

Republican efforts to make it harder to vote—through measures such as voter ID laws, shortened early voting periods, and new obstacles to registration—likewise “contributed to the outcome,” Clinton said. These moves received far less attention than Russian interference but arguably had a more demonstrable impact on the election result. According to an MIT study, more than 1 million people did not vote in 2016 because they encountered problems registering or at the polls. Clinton lost the election by a total of 78,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

“In a couple of places, most notably Wisconsin, I think it had a dramatic impact on the outcome,” Clinton said of voter suppression.

Of course, because Russians and voter registration obviously kept Clinton from campaigning in the state.

“It seems likely that it cost me the election [in Wisconsin] because of the tens of thousands of people who were turned away and the margin being so small,” she whined.

Clinton, Mother Jones said, “stood by a claim she made during a presidential debate last year, that if Trump were elected president, he would be Putin’s “puppet.” Asked if she still felt that way, Clinton said, ‘I do.'”

“I don’t know how the president of the United States, with all of the concerns about the integrity of our elections, could meet with Putin just recently and basically say, ‘Well, you know, he told me again he didn’t do it,’” she told Mother Jones. “I can’t believe that he’s so naïve. I think that he hopes or expects the rest of us to be naïve, or at least the people who support him to be naïve. But this is a serious cyberattack on America.”

Here’s video of her interview:

Reaction from many was pretty much what you’d expect.




Bingo.  As we reported last November, Clinton — responding to suggestions that Trump may not accept the result of the election if he felt it wasn’t fair — said that not respecting the results would be a direct threat to our democracy.

To say you won’t respect the result of the election, that is a direct threat to our democracy,” she said.

So, by her own definition, Hillary Clinton is now officially a “direct threat” to our democracy.

The fact remains that Clinton lost because she was an evil, lousy candidate with more baggage than a freight train can carry.  For more than forty years, she clawed, scratched, lied, plotted and schemed her way to the White House and didn’t care who got hurt in the process.

Her entire career is riddled with one scandal after another, from Whitewater and “Hillarycare” to Benghazi and her email server.

Since the election, she’s gone from being a lousy candidate to a sore, lousy loser incapable of accepting the fact that she was rejected.

Of course, she’s being a hypocrite, but as Twitchy observed: “Holding yourself to your own publicly professed standards is for the little people.”


If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.  And be sure to check out our new MeWe page here.

If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon.

And if you’re as concerned about online censorship as we are, go here and order this book (Remember, half of what we earn will be donated to Hurricane Harvey relief):

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

Joe Newby

A 10-year veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, Joe ran for a city council position in Riverside, Calif., in 1991 and managed successful campaigns for the Idaho state legislature. Co-author of "Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad," Joe wrote for Examiner.com from 2010 until it closed in 2016 and his work has been published at Newsbusters, Spokane Faith and Values and other sites. He now runs the Conservative Firing Line.

Related Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×