“I think it’s important to indict the Russians, just as Muller indicted a lot of Russians who were engaged in direct election interference and boosting Trump back in 2016. But I also think there are Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda. And whether they should be civilly or even in some cases criminally charged is something that would be a better deterrence, because the Russians are unlikely, except in a very few cases, to ever stand trial in the United States.”
—-Ethics Villain Hillary Clinton, on MSNBC (of course) this week, as Rachel Maddow nodded in agreement.
The irony and hypocrisy in Hillary’s statement are striking. After all, it it was her campaign that funded the infamous Steele dossier and spread false stories of Russian collusion during her failed 2016 Presidential run, culminating in the investigation Democrats used to cripple and delegitimize the Trump Presidency. Meanwhile, Hillary remains an icon to the same party that claims Donald Trump is a threat to American liberty, and much of the insane hate the Axis has been focusing on Trump since 2016 was inspired by his “crime” of stopping Clinton from becoming President.
__________
Pointer: Jonathan Turley
Ethics Alarms 
Why does no one call on her to defend that statement publicly?
She herself needs to be challenged to defend her statements instead of us just calling out the statement. Calls for her to defend her tyrannical anti-free speech position will be ignored and that point her hiding from the challenge will render her an insignificant demagogue. Her voice needs to be marginalized because it has limited value.
When the Dems speak of “Russian interference” in the 2016 election, they are referring to some [imaginary?] work online by some Russian funded disinformation groups who were trying to disrupt the election. Supposedly. They keep talking about this alleged effort but ignore their own obvious and successful efforts to buy Russian disinformation. Absolutely stunning. And they get away with it. Complete projection. Amazing.
We already knew that Hillary Clinton is a shameless political hack, transparent hypocrite and a morally bankrupt individual but it’s always nice that she takes the time from her busy schedule to remind those that may have forgotten.
Well put.
Is there a strict, rigorous definition of election interference?
Absolutely.
If it helps the Republicans, it is election interference and you should go to jail.
It it helps the Democrats, it is not election interference.
Hillary Clinton knows what she’s saying is a lie. She’s not misinformed and she’s not repeating disinformation out of ignorance. She repeats these lies because she knows that not only will no reporter – at least no reporter she speaks to – question the veracity of her statements (while presenting the evidence that overwhelmingly disproves the lies), the media gleefully broadcasts her statement, reports them as true, and brings in panel “experts” to essentially lick her boots in support.
The vast majority of “the system”, in all its various forms, is completely corrupt and untrustworthy.
Last week, the FBI stated that Iranian forces hacked into Trump’s campaign and delivered private information from the hack to the Biden-Harris campaign.
In 2016, it was alleged that the Russians hacked the DNC and delivered information to the Trump campaign.
The difference is that in 2016, it was a suspicion of the DNC that they were hacked, that they were hacked by the Russians, and that the Russians delivered information to Trump. The DNC would not allow the FBI to inspect the ‘hacked’ servers and the FBI relied upon what the DNC said about them. The only information that was delivered to Trump was found to be publicly available information. This time, it is the FBI releasing the information, and FBI that is not friendly to Trump.
Election Interference!?! Sorry, it isn’t. I just read Diego’s comment. Never mind. Carry on…