Hillary Deletes Embarrassing Tweet After Mixing Up the Facts of Democrats' Senate Defeat
Getting the numbers wrong was the least of her problems.
Democratic power figure Hillary Clinton decided to weigh in on Wednesday’s vote in the Senate to defeat her party’s latest power grab, but had to delete one of her own Twitter posts, apparently over some embarrassing math.
But there was so much more to be embarrassed about — even for a Clinton.
As sharp-eyed Twitter monitors noticed, Clinton took down a post in the middle of a thread about the Senate showdown that resulted in a united Republican Party and two Democratic senators combining to keep the filibuster in place in the upper body of Congress.
A woman who’s spent her entire adult life in politics misstated the voting tally:
deleted, but the List comes for all, @HillaryClinton.
— Siraj Hashmi (@SirajAHashmi) January 20, 2022
????Hillary Clinton seems to have DELETED a tweet responding to last night’s filibuster vote…. and in it she accused “forty-eight Republicans and two Democrats” of blocking the right of Black Americans to vote.
Screenshots attached. pic.twitter.com/DnHnwg05Ww
— crabcrawler (@crabcrawler1) January 20, 2022
“Forty-eight Republicans and two Democrats are in the history books for using the filibuster to do what the filibuster does best: block the right of Americans, particularly Black Americans, to vote,” Clinton wrote in the deleted tweet.
As just about anyone who’s followed the months-long dramatic Democratic efforts to put the federal government in control of state elections — a violation of the Constitution as well as common sense — knows, the voting breakdown was 50 Republicans with two Democrats voting to support the filibuster.
The two Democrats supporting the filibuster were West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema.
It was 46 Democrats who voted to kill it, along with two independents — Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine — who caucus with the Democrats.
But hey, why should anyone expect a former first lady, senator, secretary of state and Democratic presidential candidate to be careful about little details like that?
But it isn’t just Clinton’s math that was wrong. Her facts about the filibuster were too, along with the implication that the GOP is the party that’s traditionally opposed voting rights.
The reality is that it was only about five minutes ago that Democrats started talking about how “racist” the filibuster is.
During the Trump administration, when they were the minority party in the Senate, Democrats under then-Minority Leader Chuck Schumer made copious uses of the parliamentary maneuver that requires most substantive measures to win the approval of 60 senators before passing.
As conservative commentator David Harsanyi noted in March, the party of Hillary Clinton employed the filibuster more than 300 times during Trump’s term.
That puts the current rhetoric to get rid of the allegedly racist filibuster into a little perspective — the perspective of Democratic hypocrisy.
But even more to the point was the attempted jab in Clinton’s tweet about the filibuster’s use to “block the right of Americans, particularly black Americans, to vote.”
Which political party did the good lady have in mind when she wrote those words?
As every American should know, it was the Democratic Party’s Southern segregationists who launched the filibusters that tried to block civil rights legislation (those same Southern segregationists Joe Biden kissed up to in his early days in the Senate).
The filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the longest filibuster in the Senate’s history, according to the Senate’s website, was orchestrated by Democratic segregationists.
A politician with even a twinge of intellectual honesty would have been ashamed of that Twitter post. Since the subject is Hillary Clinton, though, that point is moot.
It’s almost certain she deleted the post because of the embarrassing error in Senate math. But the faulty math was the least embarrassing thing about it.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
