Maddow’s Blog | 8 years later, Trump is haunted by rhetoric about candidates, crimes

Eight years later, some find it easy to forget some of the more ridiculous elements of the 2016 presidential campaign. Young voters, for example, may not appreciate the absurdity of the political world. obsessed for months about Hillary Clinton’s Email Server Protocolsas if they were one of the most important issues on the planet.

The then-Democratic candidate even faced a criminal investigation, which ended with a predictable whimper, only to be revisited as early voting was underway across much of the country.

It was at this time that Donald Trump made some pretty bold statements about his rival.

Just days after then-FBI Director James Comey announced that he had reopened the investigation into Clinton, the future president of the Republican Party told an audience in Nevada:

In the same week, Trump told an audience in North Carolina:

He added that Clinton, given the circumstances, had “there is no right to compete” to the highest office in the country. It was at the time when Trump addedin reference to the former Secretary of State, “[S]he shouldn’t be allowed to run.

Three days before Election Day 2016, the Republican Party began to insist that Clinton was “the prime suspect in a far-reaching criminal investigation,” which in turn would make it “virtually impossible for her to govern.”

In context, the strategy behind the rhetoric certainly made sense. In fact, in 2016, the idea seemed strange to many voters. An American presidential candidate under a legal cloud? Being investigated for crimes? Facing the prospect of a criminal charge? How could the electorate risk putting a criminal suspect in the White House? How could such a person expect to be effective while in office?

Eight years later, the politician who vigorously promoted these issues is the same politician who was found guilty of 34 crimes – and counting, as he still faces three other criminal charges.

According to the reasoning stated by Trump himself, his candidacy creates “an unprecedented constitutional crisis” and he “has no right to run”. I wonder how he would respond if asked about his past standards.

This article was originally published in MSNBC.com