The real ‘tainted’ elec­tion

The Washington Times Daily - - EDITORIAL -

Don­ald Trump won; Hil­lary Clin­ton lost. Democrats now say it was be­cause the elec­tion was tainted by out­side in­ter­fer­ence. The irony is de­li­cious to the many Amer­i­cans who re­mem­ber an­other elec­tion re­sult that was truly tainted: the one between Mrs. Clin­ton and Bernie San­ders. In that con­test the Clin­ton cam­paign col­luded with the Demo­cratic Na­tional Com­mit­tee to en­sure that Mrs. Clin­ton would win. Once the col­lu­sion be­came pub­lic knowl­edge there was jus­ti­fied out­rage, but not from Clin­ton sup­port­ers. For them, ev­i­dently the ends jus­tify the means.

To add to the irony, there are sto­ries that the Clin­ton cam­paign col­luded with sup­port­ers in the main­stream me­dia to in­flu­ence the se­lec­tion of the Repub­li­can nom­i­nee. The the­ory goes that if the Clin­ton cam­paign could get a weak Repub­li­can nom­i­nee, Mrs. Clin­ton’s vic­tory was as­sured. Don­ald Trump was one of the three “weak” nom­i­nees that Hil­lary wanted to face.

Be care­ful what you wish for. You just might get your wish.

GREG PARKER Austell, Ga.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.