The past two years since the 2016 election have been marred by countless threats and acts of harassment and violence from the outraged left, many specifically aimed at President Donald Trump and anyone who supports him.
This sort of activity has not so subtly been encouraged over the same period of time by prominent Democrat figures and the liberal media who echo and amplify them.
But now, at least at an initial glance, it appears things may have shifted and some of those same prominent Democrats and media figures have now become the target of potential violence themselves, as reports flooded in Wednesday of a series of “suspicious packages” believed to be explosive devices that were sent through the mail to a number of high-level targets on the left.
Failed Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was one of those targeted by a suspected package bomb — it was intercepted prior to delivery by the Secret Service — and she rightly condemned that sort of politically-motivated violence and domestic terrorism.
This is a somewhat significant change in tune from what she had just two weeks ago, as reported by The Daily Wire.
Speaking Wednesday at a campaign event for Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz — whose Florida office was also reportedly targeted by a suspected package bomb — Clinton said, “But it is a troubling time, isn’t it? And it’s a time of deep divisions, and we have to do everything we can to bring our country together.”
“We also have to elect candidates who will try to do the same,” she added, striking a far more cordial and conciliatory tone than she has had at any point in the past two to three years.
Clinton is absolutely correct that we are currently living in a “troubling time,” and we agree wholeheartedly that the “deep divisions” fostered by the ideological left must be overcome so that everyone can get along and help “bring our country together” to live peacefully again as one.
However, just two weeks ago Clinton sang a far different tune during an interview with CNN international correspondent Christiane Amanpour, when she seemed to suggest that Democrats should continue to act in an uncivil manner toward Republicans — at least until American voters wised up and put Democrats back in charge of Congress.
In that interview, Clinton had said, “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.”
“That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again,” she continued.
Clinton added, in what many viewed as a threat of further incivility and an attempt to blackmail voters, “But until then, the only thing that Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”
You can compare those two vastly differing statements for yourself right here:
Hillary Clinton today: "It's a time of deep divisions and we have to do everything we can to bring our country together."
Hillary 2 weeks ago: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.” pic.twitter.com/C1QDS6ZJ4o
— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) October 24, 2018
To be sure, we absolutely welcome any sort of condemnation of this particular act or any others like it from Clinton, as well as from any other prominent Democrat or media figure who similarly would like to condemn politically-motivated violence and domestic terrorism, regardless of which side it emanates from.
What is awfully ironic — and more than a little hypocritical — in this particular situation is that Clinton only changed her tune and backed off her call for further incivility once the sort of incivility she just called for hit a little too close to home for her.
Sorry folks, but you can’t openly encourage politically-motivated harassment and violence for two years and then expect to be viewed as sincere or taken seriously when you suddenly call for calm and peace as the harassment and violence shifts in your direction.
We’ll just have wait and see if these new calls for political calm from the left are truly legitimate or merely a reflexive reaction to their new status as targets of threats themselves.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.