We’ve learned two major things regarding Hillary Clinton’s character since her election loss. The first is that she’s the political equivalent of the house guest from hell. If the 2016 election was like “What About Bob?,” America is kind of like Richard Dreyfuss and Clinton is like Bill Murray.
Except that, unlike Bob Wiley, Clinton doesn’t have any particular insights and she’s not funny.
The second thing? She’s more obsessed with Russia than the John Birch Society.
According to her reasoning, Russia cost her the election by spending a few thousand dollars via a troll farm, which somehow managed to negate the $1.2 billion in campaign spending she burned through as a down payment on a four-year lease at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. They colluded with the Trump campaign, even though Robert Mueller — not exactly suspected of unrevealed sympathies toward the 45th president — cannot find any evidence of Russian collusion aside from the ramblings of a drunken braggart.
Oh, and they wanted her to lose, even though some analysts believe the Russians simply wanted to sow discord in the American electoral process — something Clinton has been very good at doing on her own.
It’s been 16 months now, though. Has she taken Princess Elsa’s advice and let it go? Don’t be silly.
During a speech at Yale, the woman who replaced Thomas Dewey as the most ignominious loser in Electoral College history decided to don a Russian-style hat with a Soviet era hammer and sickle emblem to prove … well, we’re not quite sure.
As the New Haven Register reported, Clinton doffed the Russian fur hat called a ushanka during her speech to graduating students at her alma mater’s Class Day.
“I brought a hat too — a Russian hat,” Clinton said as she put the ushanka on. “Look, I mean, if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em!”
“Right now we’re living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy,” the 1973 Yale Law grad said. “No, there are not tanks in the streets, but what’s happening right now goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, and I say this not as a Democrat who lost an election but as an American afraid of losing a country.
“There are certain things that are so essential they should transcend politics. Waging a war on the rule of law and a free press, de-legitimizing elections, perpetrating shameless corruption and rejecting the idea that our leaders should be public servants undermines our national unity. And attacking truth and reason, evidence and facts should alarm us all.”
Before we go through Clinton’s farrago of nonsense seriatim — and reveal the biggest mistake she made — let me just state the obvious: This is a woman talking about a putative crisis in our democracy as she’s repping the Soviet Union via the very symbol of communism. Aside from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, the USSR represented the greatest existential threat to America’s freedom in the past 100 years. They slaughtered millions of their own people. And now, it’s apparently a hilarious joke that can be made about “Russian collusion” that doesn’t really exist.
So, let’s start with the “full-fledged crisis in our democracy” part. What “full-fledged crisis in our democracy?” President Donald Trump isn’t being impeached. He’s likely not going to be impeached, at least for anything substantive (there’s always the chance that if the Democrats retake the House, they end up impeaching him for eating too many Big Macs and watch the whole thing go down in flames in the Senate).
The special counsel has found no evidence of collusion. The whole thing has collapsed down to an alleged minor campaign finance violation that nobody seems to be able to find a motive for or a precedent which would enable Congress to remove someone from office.
So what’s the crisis in our democracy? The fact we didn’t elect her, I guess. To Clinton, anything that happens that doesn’t quite go her way is a crisis in our democracy. She insists she says this “not as a Democrat who lost an election but as an American afraid of losing a country.” So, how are we losing the country?
Well, Trump is “(w)aging a war on the rule of law and a free press, de-legitimizing elections, perpetrating shameless corruption and rejecting the idea that our leaders should be public servants undermines our national unity. And attacking truth and reason, evidence and facts should alarm us all.”
Excuse me while I remove my jaw from the floor.
Firstly, Trump’s “war on the rule of law and a free press,” inasmuch as you want to pretend it exists, is a skirmish compared to the utter carpet-bombing perpetrated by the Clinton administration. Former President Clinton did everything in his power to delegitimize special counsel Kenneth Starr in spite of the fact Starr had actual evidence of a crime the president committed — namely, perjury. Hillary herself was suborned to wage a war on the liberal media, accusing them of buying into and/or being a part of a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” (This was at the same time that every network was fawning over the Clintons, it must be noted.)
As for de-legitimizing elections, Clinton has spent almost a year and a half actively suggesting that a small, poorly-executed, poorly-financed Russian effort to deepen divisions in American politics on social media cost her the election. I cannot picture any other way that a major party candidate could de-legitimize free and fair elections more than she’s already done.
The sad thing is, I’m sure she’ll find a way to top that. Like wearing a hammer and sickle on a hat even though she was the Democrats’ standard-bearer and a former secretary of state.
Oh, and as for “attacking truth and reason, evidence and facts,” there was plenty of that in the 20 years between Bill Clinton and his fixers attacking Gennifer Flowers as some fabulist bimbo and Clinton blaming the Benghazi attacks on a low-rent YouTube video. In fact, the attack the Clinton family has perpetrated on “truth and reason, evidence and facts” falls under what George W. Bush might have termed “shock and awe.”
This disregards the biggest gaffe Clinton made, though: “Look, I mean, if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em!” Clinton said as she put on the hat. The phraseology implied she — not Donald Trump — was the one in league with the Russians.
Yes, it was a joke, but there was a lot more truth in it than she probably realized. As the investigation into Russian meddling drags on, it’s becoming more and more clear the Russians didn’t think Trump could win. What they wanted to do was create discord. They wanted Bernie voters to defect to Jill Stein and Trump supporters to believe that Clinton was an amoral hypocrite (something voters didn’t need the Kremlin to figure out for themselves, I’d wager).
This strategy didn’t seem to work, at first, anyway. Now, approaching the midterms and well past the 2016 upset, we’ve got Clinton putting on the hammer-and-sickle and attributing her loss to Vladimir Putin. In other words, if you can’t beat Trump, join the Russkies.
Oh, and by the way — wearing a ushanka is also cultural appropriation. Check your major party nominee privilege, Hills. Your feminism will be intersectional or it will be garbage.
Either way, you aren’t president, and Russia has nothing to do with it.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.