Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Our Public School Put A Man With Fake Breasts In Our 10-Year-Old's Classroom

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Coup Attempt Is Disqualifying

While none of John Durham’s filings have directly implicated Hillary Clinton to date, they raise questions about what she knew, and when.


As Hillary Clinton reemerges out of the ashes of a failed presidential campaign for a potential bid in 2024, questions remain about what she knew and when she knew it regarding her operation’s collusion crusade with crimes far beyond the worst transgressions of the Watergate scandal.

On Saturday, U.S. Special Counsel John Durham revealed in his probe’s latest filing the Clinton campaign hired tech workers to spy on then-businessman Donald Trump both during and after the 2016 election to frame the GOP president as a Kremlin agent. The narrative concocted by Democrats and adopted by deep-state actors in the Obama administration would eventually cement among the left-wing base and undermine the first years of the Trump presidency with the help of a complicit media.

According to Durham’s filing in the criminal case of Michael Sussmann, a Clinton campaign attorney indicted in September on charges of lying to federal officials, the defendant and Rodney Joffe contracted tech researchers at Georgia Tech “to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia.” The assignment aimed “to please certain ‘VIPs’ at the Clinton campaign and Sussmann’s law firm, Perkins Coie. Targets of surveillance included an unnamed health care provider, Trump Tower, Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and the Oval Office.”

The data, Durham alleged, was then manipulated and turned over to the CIA to frame Trump and the president’s associates with engaging in suspicious activity on Russian cell phones.

The revelations are earthshattering. Clinton campaign operatives colluded with government officials to subvert the will of the American voter through made-up narratives hoping to provoke impeachment.

One can easily imagine the consequences had Trump engaged in such conduct. The former president would likely be impeached by the same Democrat Congress which already passed a snap impeachment of the outgoing commander-in-chief over a two-hour riot that Trump condemned.

Clinton’s political operatives didn’t just spy on low-level political opponents, as President Richard Nixon’s deputies did in the 1970s. The Clinton campaign successfully harvested data from its rivals, weaponized it with deep-state actors, and continued espionage operations well after the election to undermine the Trump presidency. Clinton came far closer to overthrowing the integrity of American democracy than the horde of Antifa LARPers did on January 6.

The Clinton Spygate saga is disqualifying. After Nixon’s imminent impeachment led the president to preemptively resign in 1974 over the surveillance of junior Democratic National Committee employees, it’s inconceivable a candidate who took modern wiretapping operations even farther would be sworn into the very office from which Nixon was rightfully purged.

While none of Durham’s filings have directly implicated Clinton to date, they raise questions about the former secretary of state’s involvement, questions the American people deserve answers to before she mounts another run for any high office.