Hillary Clinton does not have a reputation for honesty. Indeed, ever since she burst onto the political scene, the one guarantee with Hillary was that you couldn’t trust her. Whole articles have been published about the whoppers she’s told over the decades (see, e.g., here and here). One thing, though, that’s always seemed to be true is her claim to have graduated from Yale Law School. After hearing her latest pronouncement, though, I must admit to having my doubts about that statement, too.

One of the things that’s pretty clear in the United States Constitution, which has traditionally been part of the curriculum at American law schools—or at least, that was still the case in the early 1970s—is that it guarantees free speech. There are, of course, limitations on that speech. You cannot defame someone, although there is latitude when it comes to public figures like Hillary herself. You cannot threaten people with murder or bodily harm, because the threat is a criminal act. And you cannot defraud people or engage in conspiracies to commit crime.

However, the one area where free speech is pretty darn near absolute is in the realm of political ideas, including accusations against public figures. Thus, I can freely contend that prominent members of the Democrat party conspired with foreign nations—say, England—to perpetrate a hoax on the American people to the effect that a presidential candidate conspired with Russia to game the election.

It would be a dirty lie, and provably so, but I wouldn’t be sent to jail, unless I violated the law in other respects (e.g., abusing government access to secrets, setting up illegal servers in my bathroom to feed information to geopolitical enemies, etc.). That’s because the idea—that a presidential candidate is unfit to serve because he conspired with Russia—is protected political speech, no matter how foul and untrue it is. It’s propaganda and, in the rough and tumble world of American politics, it’s rebuttable, but not actionable.

But that’s not how Hillary Clinton operates. As always with Democrats, sauce for the goose isn’t sauce for the gander.

If they protest, no matter how violent that “mostly peaceful” protest may be, it’s righteous speech and assembly, with everyone walking free. If conservatives protest, and some (possibly encouraged by Democrat activists) get violent, it’s an insurrection, and the largest dragnet in American history gets launched. If a Democrat official has an unsecured server in the bathroom through which she runs all the State Department’s correspondence, it’s a big yawn. If a Republican official is anonymously accused of allowing his wife to see a Signal chat, he must be fired.

That’s why, for Hillary, despite that alleged Yale Law degree, free speech works only in one direction. She can drop whatever vile propaganda (that is, political lies) she wants, but conservatives who do so must be imprisoned:

America dodged an extraordinary bullet when Trump beat Hillary in 2016. While Biden’s interregnum usefully exposed the leftists’ totalitarianism, Hillary would have been infinitely more effective than Biden. He inadvertently exposed the rot, but she would have brought down our entire constitutional system—and, as we’ve seen, all those other law school grads sitting on the federal bench would enthusiastically have helped her do so.

Image: X screen grab.