Clinton: 'Nobody's Talking About Contesting The Election, Including Me'

[onenote]

46. And here are the rest of Hillary's words

Last edited Thu Sep 21, 2017, 02:10 PM - Edit history (2)

Not the misleading partial report you are relying on:

GROSS: Democrats have said that they think there was Russian interference in the election, but that they're not challenging the results of the election. As more and more information comes out about the depth of Russia's interference in the election, do you think, at some point, that it would be legitimate to challenge the legitimacy of the election?

CLINTON: I don't know if there's any legal constitutional way to do that. I think you can raise questions. In fact, I think part of the reason Trump behaves the way he behaves is that he is a walking example of projection. Whatever he's doing and whatever he thinks is happening he will accuse somebody else of. And there are examples during the campaign when he did just that, like when he called publicly on Russia to hack my personal emails.

****
GROSS: I want to get back to the question, would you 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?

CLINTON: No. I would not. I would say —

GROSS: You're not going to rule it out.

CLINTON: No, I wouldn't rule it out.

GROSS: So what are the means, like, this is totally unprecedented in every way —

CLINTON: It is.

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

CLINTON: 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.

By the way, as Clinton herself makes clear, questioning and challenging are two different things. If you still don't think so, consider the following: After the SCOTUS ruled in favor of Bush in 2000, there was no way to challenge that decision. But the fact it couldn't be challenged did not, and has not, stopped many of us from continuing to "question the legitimacy" of Bush's "win" in 2000.