The Peaceful Transition of Power?

The Peaceful Transition of Power?

Derek Hunter for Townhall

Let’s hop in the way-back machine for a minute, shall we? We don’t need to go far … just a few months back to be exact.

It was a different time. Hairstyles were different. Fashion was different. Kids were listening to a different type of music their parents couldn’t understand. It was a crazy time. It also was a time marked by the Democratic Party insisting that what made this country great was the “peaceful transition of power.”

Like I said, it was a different time.

It was Oct. 19 when Donald Trump would not give in to Chris Wallace, the moderator of the final presidential debate, on the question of whether he would accept the results of the election. In the few remaining weeks of the campaign, that became one of the most talked about moments of the entire years-long ordeal. Little did we know that moment would come into play more than a month after all the votes were counted.

Hillary Clinton wasn’t asked the question herself, but she never stopped feigning outrage from that moment forward at the concept. Not to the concept of her team committing the very offense which so horrified her, but to the idea there was any circumstance under which the oafish Trump would not bow down and admit her superiority to the world.

Of course, it was Hillary who, on election night, refused to concede to the clear victor. Few could blame her for needing a couple of hours to soak in the fact that she’d duffed a tap-in putt on the 18th hole in The Masters and would not be sliding into the Green Jacket. When your dream slips away for a second and final time, it’s understandable composure would elude you.

Pulling herself together, she did admit defeat the next morning, but she and her team don’t seem to have accepted it.

In the ensuing weeks there has been nary a Clinton campaign veteran who hasn’t made a grousing public statement or bitter, unfounded accusation about how a “rigged election” denied the queen her throne.

FBI Director James Comey’s two letters cost her votes; sexism denied Clinton the White House; the Russians interfered with the election. You name, they’ve blamed it.

In all those accusations was an undercurrent of not only denying Donald Trump won but denying his coming presidency its legitimacy. Rooted in all of it, especially the Russian “hacking” story, is a hint of the idea that were it not for nefarious forces, Hillary would be president.

The FBI and sexism charges held no water, one having been of her own doing and the other overplayed by her campaign. So those unwilling to accept the constitutional order of things hung their hats on Russia.

The bitter grumblings were just that, grumblings of losers. But when those grumblings came from the mouth of the CIA director, another level was achieved.

Director John Brennan, who ironically voted for the Communist Party candidate for president in 1980, was now pointing an official finger at the Kremlin for interfering with the election.