Clinton opens door to questioning legitimacy of 2016 election

[Le Gaucher]

Source: CNN

NPR's Terry Gross asked Clinton directly during the interview whether she would "completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?"
"No. I would not," Clinton said.
Gross asked: "You're not going to rule it out?"
"No," Clinton said. "I wouldn't rule it out."

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politics/hillary-clinton-russia-2016-election/index.html

---

This tells me that something big is coming down the pike

[2naSalit]

1. I hope...

and suspect you may be on to something there. I hope there is a big change coming and really soon.

[FakeNoose]

40. We were all saying this last November!

It's too damn late now, Trump has already been sworn in.

They'll never nullify the election now because it would mean Obama is still POTUS.
We'd have Civil War if that happened. They will never do it.

We have to impeach Cheeto and it has to happen as soon as possible.
Come on Mueller! We need a home run.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

60. We have absolutely no Constitutional way to nullify an election.

It's incredibly important to keep that in mind.

Yes, it may well be possible to impeach Trump and various others in his administration, but there will not be an election do-over. Nor a simple installation of a President Clinton.

[Baitball Blogger]

2. Good for her.

Tired of complacent Democratic presidential candidates.

I think it's been obvious that something was wrong since Gore.

[BadgerMom]

29. Amen.

[tecelote]

36. Gore and Kerry.

Hillary... be our hero. Fight for what is ours. You won.

[onetexan]

44. second that

i would like Hillary to challenge it in court. The DNC needs to back her up given clearly this was a stolen election.

[madokie]

3. You go Hillary

many of us will follow you.

[iluvtennis]

4. And she should question his legitimacy. If Russia helped him win, Hillary should be

installed as President. Yes, I recognize there are no Constitutional provisions for such a thing, but Trump and his entire admin should be kicked out if the election was illegitimate. Either have a re-vote or put Obama and Biden back in office. Enough is enough

[BigmanPigman]

6. YES, YRS, YES!

And do not stop there. Roll back all election results for Congress and their decisions since the election since people vote down ballot. We are stuck with Gorsuch and no ACA due to this. If the situation were reversed we all know that the GOP would do this in a heartbeat.

[CrispyQ]

34. And kick Gorsuch off the Court.

I mean if we're going to dream, dream big, right?

[onenote]

35. If you're going to dream, why not just dream that what happened Nov. 8 and since then

was all a nightmare and if we try really hard we can wake up and find out none of it really happened.

Dream big....

[Little Star]

70. Bingo!

[onetexan]

45. you're absolutely right, this is an unprecedented situation

and a precedent needs to be set that should such an event happen again the future, the courts should rectify it by giving the rightful winner the win.

[bluestarone]

5. i support 100%

if she decided to do WHATEVER she chose to do (EVEN RUN AGAIN IN 2020) Man i feel she really got uprooted by RUSSIA and LYING REPUBS Time for action AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!

[lunamagica]

7. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!!!

Justice needs to be done!

[onetexan]

8. +1

[avebury]

9. I don't for one minute believe that Trump's win was

legitimate.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall when he hears that Hillary might actually contest the results based upon what Mueller is able to come up with. For people to question his right to sit in the Oval Office may push him over the edge.

[RiverStone]

24. Whats the best we could hope for?

So (when) the tRump regime is proven not legitimate, then what?

Will there be an election re-do? The SCOTUS hands Judge Garland a seat? Even if we throw tRump in jail, what is our restitution for a stolen election?

[delisen]

51. I,d settle for the end of the Republican Party. We will

still have a two-party system-but the republican party will have played itself out.

[RandomAccess]

53. By what mechanism could she possible CONTEST the election?

There's absolutely no way.

She can QUESTION - call the legitimacy into question -- but no way in hell to CONTEST it.

You're not the only one dreaming, so don't take this personally, but I really thought DUers were more knowledgeable about such things.

[msdogi]

10. This is how I keep my sanity

Glimmers of hope, nuggets that there reasons to think this nightmare might end, and we can save our democracy and maybe our world

[NastyRiffraff]

11. This is BIG news

Hillary has been criticized for thinking before she speaks. I imagine she gave that a lot of thought; she didn't just blurt it out.

[freddyvh]

12. did trump

ever say he was going to accept the election results?

i know a couple times he didn't answer

[sandensea]

13. From the horse's mouth:

DHS Confirms That Optical Scan Vote-Counting Machines Easily Hacked by Russians or Otherwise

June 28, 2017

In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, the head of the Department of Homeland Security confirmed what citizen election integrity activists have been saying for many years: that the type of optical scan vote-counting machine in use across much of the country can be hacked, and vote totals can be changed in ways which, absent manual counts of the paper ballots, cannot be detected.

*https://soapboxie.com/us-politics/DHS-Confirms-That-Optical-Scan-Vote-Counting-Machines-Easily-Hacked-By-Russians-or-Otherwise

[Promee]

14. I'm with her...

...and always will be.

But it doesn't matter if she's willing to call the election into question pending further evidence. I call it into question now, but so what?

There's no Constitutional mechanism for a do-over and The Monarchy of Nine would vote 5-4 to prevent it.

So it's great if she wants to speak up. It just doesn't make any difference.

[onetexan]

63. There's a first time for everything

The constitution doesn't spell out exactly what needs to be done. This can and should be legally challenged in court.

[Still In Wisconsin]

15. Question for those who know more about constitutional law than I do re: illegitimate elections:

Suppose that some how, some way, the election is found to be, for lack of a more legally accurate term, illegitimate. What remedies exist?

My understanding is that there is NOT a provision for having a new election at this point in time, and that there is definitely not a provision for making HRC President. If the election is somehow overturned, I would assume that means Pence is out too. So who becomes President? Is it the Speaker of the House? Or is the whole thing moot because there's no provision for voiding an election, period, full stop?

[hamsterjill]

18. My opinion is (like I know anything!!!)

I have a sense that THIS is the reasoning behind the fact that some of those in power have not made public the fact that they KNOW the election was hacked.

I draw attention once again to Diane Feinstein's press conference months ago when she walked out of a Senate Intelligence briefing ashen and shaken. I think they were told that the election had been hacked, but since there is no precedent for countering that in a civil and legal manner, they are fearful of civil war and chaos should that fact be learned by the populace.

I know this is all just my gut, but my gut has been bothering me since the night of the election. Something just was not right, and we all know that.

[dottie66]

49. I like your gut theory

Every state should be required to audit the presidential election results. If there is no longer a 77,000 win vote margin, maybe recall the Electoral College for another vote.

[AwakeAtLast]

58. Just like DU being hacked

was just not right. Totally agree with you!

[Promee]

19. The Monarchy of Nine....

...can and does make law up as it goes along.

If, by some miracle, they determined that 2016 was a fraud, they could order a new election. Republicans would call that judicial overreach, but that's another issue.

If they did, succession kicks in and Ryan becomes POTUS, I imagine.

[wryter2000]

22. Welcome to DU

[Promee]

28. Thanks.

[Jim Lane]

41. Here's my considered legal opinion: We're screwed.

And we're gonna stay screwed.

Not only is there no mechanism for rerunning the election, there's not even a mechanism for removing Trump/Pence as a ticket. Trump can be removed through impeachment/conviction or through the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Either way, Pence becomes President. Pence then has the power to nominate a new VP, subject to Congressional approval. If Pence is removed, he's replaced by the new VP if one has been confirmed, or by Ryan otherwise.

Caveat: I aced both semesters of Con Law in law school but that was decades ago and I haven't practiced in the field. I know more about constitutional law than the average person but I'm certainly no expert.

[Still In Wisconsin]

50. You know a heck of a lot more than I do on the subject, so thank you!

[lunamagica]

52. Hillary is a lawyer. A brilliant one. If she said that is because she believes there is a way

[onenote]

56. Actually, she said there is no way.

Not that its stopping folks from fantasizing.

[onenote]

68. I agree Hillary is a smart lawyer. And here's what she had to say about challenging the election

Gross: What would be the means to challenge it, if you thought it should be challenged?

Hillary: Basically I don't believe there are. There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be, but I don't think they're on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don't think we have a mechanism.

[Enoki33]

16. Add to this we have some Russian politician asking in

reference to trump "Why did we elect him?" That really hurts.

[NutmegYankee]

17. Good for her.

I'm doing my part to question the patriotism of Trumpers every day.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

20. if you listen to the whole conversation...

she said she doesn't see the mechanism in place to do this. She pretty much ruled it out, but left a window open because of Russia.

[jaxind]

21. Good! If...

Good! If tRUMP can doubt Hillary winning the popular vote and want to investigate that without any reason to support his suspicions, well then she can certainly look into the the legitimacy of this election when there are a ton of reasons to support the integrity of it!

[YOHABLO]

23. I've always had that gut feeling that this election was a huge scam. Go for it Hillary.

[jimlup]

25. Great and all but...

why didn't she pursue the recounts? We might have learned a great deal more about irregularities had she done that.

[onenote]

26. Questioning the legitimacy of the election and doing something about it are separate things

The fact that Hillary (or others) may "question" the legitimacy of the election based on what information comes out in the future doesn't mean that they have any particular remedial action in mind that they think could be taken, short of impeachment, which would be in play if what comes out shows not only that there was Russian interference that "is deeper than we know now" (whatever that means) but that Trump himself had knowledge of whatever that interference was.

I wouldn't read as much into this as some here are doing.

[bucolic_frolic]

27. I am preparing

my "GOD BLESS THE FBI" bumperstickers

[Paladin]

30. If Kenya can re-do their corrupt elections, why can't we?

Go Hillary!

[onenote]

32. Because the Kenyan Constitution has an express provision allowing the Court to order a re-do

Article 140 of the Kenyan Constitution:

(1) A person may file a petition in the Supreme Court to challenge the election of the President-elect within seven days after the date of the declaration of the results of the presidential election.

(2) Within fourteen days after the filing of a petition under clause (1), the Supreme Court shall hear and determine the petition and its decision shall be final.

(3) If the Supreme Court determines the election of the President- elect to be invalid, a fresh election shall be held within sixty days after the determination.


Our Constitution doesn't have such a provision.

[Paladin]

39. Thank you, Captain Downer.

If impeachment is the only tool available to us, let's get on with it. The sooner the better.

[onenote]

42. "captain downer"??

You asked a question and I answered it.
What is your problem?

[Honeycombe8]

31. Finally someone says it! It probably wouldn't gain traction, but ...

but the question SHOULD be asked!

[Progressive2020]

33. Questioning Legitimacy

Questioning the legitimacy of Trump's "election" is a good propaganda tool, but I don't think in and of itself it provides a mechanism for a remedy, ie, removing Trump, new election, etc.

That said, if it can be proven that Trump personally colluded with the Russians, he might face criminal liability and impeachment. Tampering with elections must be a crime.

Any legally minded folks here who know about election law and associated fraud? Anyway, it is all fuel for the fire. I am sure that the Mueller Investigation will look at all of these questions.

[truthisfreedom]

37. That will push 45 over the edge.

He can't handle the truth.

[PatrickforO]

48. Well, I still want to see Trump's birth certificate. I want proof he's not

an orangutan.

[CCExile]

38. I think our lords and masters fear finding the election illegitimate.

If Trump/Pence were booted were booted, that would be one thing, but if the entire election was tossed the right wing would go nuts. It would probably lead to a civil war. If we have a civil war, we will win, because we are smarter, but the toll might be horrific. Removing a bunch of right wing genetic code might be worth it in the long run. Who knows.

[Amaryllis]

46. We might not win. THey have guns.

[ck4829]

69. They're not the only ones.

[Scurrilous]

43. K&R

[PatrickforO]

47. Let's hope!

We'll see what happens. Trump...well...he cannot even come close to Clinton. She's smarter, people the world over respect her, and she has an in-depth understanding of an amazing number of issues. In short, Clinton is highly qualified for the presidency.

Trump is...not.

He is a traitor, and certainly not my president.

[Botany]

54. Boy that will put a bee in Trump's bonnet

[Le Gaucher]

61. Would prefer a was in his pants

[onecaliberal]

55. We'd be stuck with the one who can't sit with women other than mother.

God I wish it could be turned around, however, the founders never envisioned a foreign government INSTALLING a foreign agent into the White House.

[Wordilocks]

57. Keep this discussion about the election's legitimacy alive in your social media...

It's something.

[bonniebgood]

59. I believe that if you stole something and its proven that its not your you

should give it back.

[Exultant Democracy]

62. Awesome, she should "hire some investigators to look into it."

[Alice11111]

64. Go for it if the evidence is strong. So what if we lose, whichl

Will probably happen because it, of necessity, will wind up with SCOTUS, and MM stole Obama's appointment.

It will still weaken the DT administration. It will show them that when they cross the line, they will be called out,
rather than just getting away with all thei cheating while we wring our hands. The founding fathers contemplated necessary implied powers. A stolen election contest is that kind of power.

[onenote]

66. If she brings a court challenge and loses it will not weaken the trump administration

You give the media and public too much credit. When the SCOTUS rules 9-0 against such a challenge (and by the way, what statutory or constitutional provision would Clinton cite if she brought a court challenge), she will be branded a loser, Trump a winner. In the meantime, any effort to impeach Trump will grind to a halt while the court case is pending.

[Loubee]

65. Well come on in sister!

It's a big crowded club, but there's always room for more!

[KPN]

67. Wouldn't that be great!

Keeping my fingers crossed.