NPR: Clinton Won't Rule Out Questioning 2016 Election, But Says No Clear Means To Do So
Hillary Clinton says she would not rule out questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election if new information surfaces that the Russians interfered even more deeply than currently known. In an interview with Fresh Air's Terry Gross about her new memoir, What Happened, Clinton acknowledges that such a challenge would be unprecedented and that "I just don't think we have a mechanism" for it.
Russia is only one aspect of the tumultuous campaign that Clinton reflects on in What Happened, 10 months after losing her bid for the presidency. She also discusses her experiences as the first woman running for president as a part of a major political party and her view on the direction that the country is headed.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: She can't be serious?
More News On Reports That Hillary Clinton May Contest Last Year's Election Results
Hillary Clinton won't rule out questioning Trump's legitimacy, pending Russia probe -- Chicago Tribune/AP
Clinton won't rule out questioning legitimacy of election -- The Hill
Hillary Clinton says she might question whether Trump beat her fair and square if Russian interference is proven – after ... -- Daily Mail
Clinton leaves question mark over 2016 election legitimacy -- BBC
Clinton considers contesting election results -- Fox News
Hillary Clinton refuses to rule out challenging legitimacy of Trump's election win -- The Independent
Clinton won't rule out challenging legitimacy of 2016 election -- Politico
Hillary Clinton may question legitimacy of 2016 election if further Russian meddling uncovered -- The Telegraph
3 comments:
....because the hole just won't dig itself deep enough.
DO,
IT,
R
There's 3 things going on here:
1. Her book. This is partially a publicity stunt.expect coverage to be high and sell more. Sound strategy from a financial perspective regarding the book (it might have even been agreed with the publisher early on to have this kind of media stunt. .it's not uncommon)
2. The presidency. She has burned so many bridges and tried everything to become president. There's never been a woman more entitled than her. She's played every card from the "I'm super qualified/the most qualified person ever"(with Obama even repeating these lines of utter BS lol) to the gender card "how can you as a woman or liberal man not vote for me? I am a woman! It's time for a female president"(completely leaving aside how sexist this behaviour was). So this is at least to a tint extend her very last attempt. She knows it will go nowhere. It would deeply divide an already divided country, BUT in the unlikely case that criminal conduct can be proven @Trump, she wants to position herself
3. Her hate and despise for Trump. She wants to get back at him in any shape and way possible. This is just one of those ways.
This is irresponsible "sound bite" journalism. It is all hot-air and bluster--there are no legal grounds for contesting the election and no means for her to contest it, beyond a lawsuit which would be quickly dismissed. Yet everyone treats this as a legitimate news story. Blech! This is journalism in 2017--how low it is now.
Post a Comment