Why Hasn't Hillary Clinton Been Banned From Twitter?

AP Photo/Seth Wenig

Two-time failed presidential contender and onetime carpetbagging senator and full-time paranoiac Hillary Clinton has repeatedly run afoul — once again — of the social media zeitgeist about election integrity.

Advertisement

Clinton is on video, too, in a resurfaced clip that will make you want to laugh or cry, depending on whether you’ve already joined me in a brunch-time Bloody Mary or two.

For those who haven’t been paying attention since approximately the morning of November 4, 2020, questioning the results of our totally free and fair elections is a big social media no-no.

Crying “Stolen election!” is right out.

A month after the totally above-board/no-questions-asked 2020 presidential election, YouTube announced that it would “ban content questioning the outcome.”

Close on YouTube’s heels, Facebook (now Meta) said that it would squelch all content that mentions “Stop the Steal.” So did Meta-owned Instagram.

It isn’t just social media.

Goya Foods banned its own CEO, Robert Unanue, from any further media appearances after he questioned the results that installed Presidentish Joe Biden in the Oval Office. The magical banning words Unanue uttered were: “With an unverified election, and the big prize is the United States.”

One presumes that if he’d come out in favor of engaging in sex talk with second-graders that he’d get a free weekend pass to Disney World, instead of getting silenced.

Two things are clear.

The first is that our elections are so completely free of taint, corruption, or reproach that no questions ever need be raised about them. The second is that such questions ought to be banned because reasons.

Advertisement

When there are no questions worth asking, comrade, why worry about questions being banned?

And that is why Hillary Clinton must be banned from social media at once until she renounces and removes statements like this one she made in 2019.

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you.”

Clinton’s verboten statement is currently recirculating freely on Twitter.

Shortly after Clinton’s 2016 debacle, she called for recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. She even got U.S. intelligence officials to publicly question whether Russian hackers were behind the results.

In fact, we got three-plus years of RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA — and still do, even long after the whole matter was debunked so thoroughly that Clinton’s campaign got fined for lying about it.

Now that’s what I call questioning the results of an election.

Recommended: What’s Going on in Shanghai?

Nevertheless, Clinton is still posting away on Twitter, never having had to delete or retract anything.

Or has she?

Advertisement

“Republican officials are so determined to transform voter fraud from a flimsy pretense for suppressing votes to an actual phenomenon, they keep committing it themselves.”

I could have sworn it was just practically yesterday that Clinton said that a campaigner like herself — the best one, she assures you — can have an election stolen from her.

But now she tells us that claims of vote fraud are nothing more than a “flimsy pretext” to suppress voters.

Presumably Democrat voters. You know, the ones who either didn’t show up for Clinton in 2016 or who switched parties to vote for Donald Trump.

Before you ask, “Which is it, Hillary, which is it?” please know that I already have the answer ready for you.

It’s whatever it needs to be in the moment.

Voter fraud exists when it needs to exist but is otherwise nonexistent. Elections are stolen except when the correct candidate wins. What is permissible for one person to question is impermissible for someone else.

But whatever you do, don’t even get me started on Stacey Abrams, The Real Governor of Georgia™.

Recommended

Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Advertisement
Advertisement