Insane: Hillary Clinton Compares Russian Election Interference to 9/11
In her comments to a London audience on Sunday, Hillary Clinton showed two things. One, that she has lost her clear memories of that dark September day in 2001, where she presided over the recovery effort as a New York senator. And two, that she has allowed her intense anger and resentment over losing the 2016 election to cloud her sense of perspective to such a degree that she should think long and hard before doing anymore press appearances. Because this is worse than her usual babble; in comparing Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee to the worst terror attack in American history, she has veered completely off the stage of sanity.
“I think there are a lot more connections that have yet to come to light,” Clinton said of the Russian interference. “We had really well-respected security, intelligence veterans saying this was a cyber 9/11, in the sense it was a direct attack on our institutions. That may sound dramatic, but we know that they probed and tried to intrude into election systems — not just the social media propaganda part of their campaign.”
Clinton said that the Russians were “not done” interfering in our democracy.
“This is an ongoing threat,” she warned.
3,000 Americans died in the 9/11 attacks, so Hillary’s allusion to that event is not just “dramatic,” it’s disrespectful and dangerous. It weakens the very memory of that dark day, trivializes the thousands who were killed or injured in the attacks, and makes a mockery of the U.S. soldiers who sacrificed so much in the subsequent war on terror. Even if Vladimir Putin’s interference in the 2016 election was exactly as bad as the worst intelligence reports say it was, it doesn’t come even CLOSE to Osama bin Laden’s grand symphony of destruction. And in an era where we should still have our eyes sharply trained on Islamic extremists around the world, the idea that Russia is now an equivalent threat is wrongheaded and bizarre.
To make matters worse, it is transparently obvious that Clinton would not be saying anything like this if Moscow had interfered on HER behalf. It’s doubtful she would be saying it even if things had gone as they did, but she won the election. Her thoughts on Russia have no sense of perspective or resonance because they reek of sour grapes. These are not ideas guided by reason and logic; they are guided by emotion and resentment. They are, in other words, another example of why she would have made such a terrible president and why, to the extent he WAS responsible for Trump’s victory, Vladimir Putin inadvertently did the U.S. a tremendous favor.