Clinton won't rule out questioning legitimacy of election

[mystery-ak]

Clinton won't rule out questioning legitimacy of election
By Jordan Fabian - 09/18/17 01:34 PM EDT

Hillary Clinton said she wouldn’t rule out challenging the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election if Russian interference turned out to be deeper than previously thought.

“No, I wouldn't rule it out,” she said in an interview with NPR published Monday.

The defeated Democratic nominee stressed, however, that she does not believe there is a means to officially challenge the election’s outcome.

“I don't know if there's any legal, constitutional way to do that,” Clinton said. “I think you can raise questions.”

Clinton has repeatedly blamed Russia’s efforts to intervene in last year’s election for her loss to Donald Trump, but her latest comments reflect the depth of her frustration with the Kremlin’s efforts.

more
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/351189-clinton-wont-rule-out-questioning-legitimacy-of-election

[Applewood]

Another day, another Clinton embarrassment. 

If she thinks her daily whines will help sell her book, she is badly mistaken.

Don't go away mad, Hillary.  Just go away.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

We keep hearing speculation about Russia "interfering" in the election.  Has anyone actually heard what specifically they are accused of doing?

[Concerned]

We keep hearing speculation about Russia "interfering" in the election.  Has anyone actually heard what specifically they are accused of doing?

@InHeavenThereIsNoBeer - Here's what I read last fall and what's been widely reported since:

"What was Russia’s role in the election?

• Russian security agencies infiltrated Democratic National Committee email servers last year and again this spring, according to American intelligence assessments and several independent security firms. The Russians also hacked a private email account belonging to John D. Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

• This summer, intermediaries linked to the Russian government passed the emails to WikiLeaks and to an anonymous WordPress blog called Guccifer 2.0. Those outlets released the emails publicly, generating weeks of unfavorable coverage of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.

• Initially, many analysts believed that Russia’s goal was to sow confusion and undermine Americans’ faith in their government — a common Russian tactic — rather than to steer the election’s outcome.

• However, after the election, the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that Russia had released the emails with the primary goal of bolstering Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign.

• No information has emerged suggesting that the C.I.A. believes that Russia’s involvement decided the election’s outcome."

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/world/europe/russia-trump-election-cia-fbi.html

Then more recently it's come out that firms with "ties to the Kremlin" bought ads on Facebook under fake ids to "amplify" social and political division:

"Here’s what we know, so far, about Facebook’s recent disclosure that a shadowy Russian firm with ties to the Kremlin created thousands of ads on the social media platform that ran before, during and after the 2016 presidential election:

The ads “appeared to focus on amplifying divisive social and political messages across the ideological spectrum,” including race, immigration and gun rights, Facebook said.

The users who purchased the ads were fakes. Attached to assumed identities, their pages were allegedly created by digital guerrilla marketers from Russia hawking information meant to disrupt the American electorate and sway a presidential election.

Some of those ads were pushed out to very specific parts of the country, presumably for maximum political effect. Facebook has identified some 2,000 other ads that may have been of Russian provenance, although, as CNN reported last week, it can’t rule out that there might be far more than that."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/business/facebook-russia.html

Hope that answers your question.

[driftdiver]

Yeah the 100k in advertising that Russian firm did countered the other billion dollars spent.  Yep they are just that's good.  /s

[truth_seeker]

We keep hearing speculation about Russia "interfering" in the election.  Has anyone actually heard what specifically they are accused of doing?

1. Being the Republican.
2. Not establishment candidate.

Combined, that "justifies" a never-ending fishing expedition.

[austingirl]

What mechanism would her Heinous employ to question the legitimacy of the 2016 and what remedy does she propose?

[libertybele]

Her political career is over.  What does she have to gain, especially since so much time has passed?  The time to challenge or question the legitimacy of the election would have been before she conceded.  Perhaps she's so clueless that she's contemplating another run?   

[Oceander]

Yeah, right.  What does she think is going to happen, that the Supreme Court is just going to undo everything that's happened since Jan. 20, 2017, and give her a clean slate?

This is just red meat for the brainless gits who support her (sort of like blathering on about walls is for a certain other politician who shall remain unnamed).

[DB]

Her political career is over.  What does she have to gain, especially since so much time has passed?  The time to challenge or question the legitimacy of the election would have been before she conceded.  Perhaps she's so clueless that she's contemplating another run?   

This is all about making her feel better about herself. To shift blame to someone else for her failures. It is all about her and always has been.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Let her bray like the mule she is.  It only shows how bad she is and the bullet we dodged

[DCPatriot]

I'd arrest this bitch on sedition charges.  Tomorrow!

[Oceander]

I'd arrest this bitch on sedition charges.  Tomorrow!

And punch her in the face so she has to drink through a straw for six months, right tough guy.