Hillary Clinton mulls challenging legitimacy of 2016 election, cites Russian influence

Hillary Clinton on Monday would not rule out the possibility of challenging the results of the 2016 presidential election, saying it’s clear the Russians influenced the outcome and that the legitimacy of President Trump’s victory could be called into question as congressional and independent probes into Russian involvement move forward.

In an interview with NPR, the former secretary of state — who will speak in Washington on Monday evening as part of her nationwide book tour — would not rule out formally contesting the results of the election.

“I wouldn’t rule it out,” she said, though she quickly admitted there’s virtually no legal path forward, and that challenging election results at this point would be unprecedented.

“There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be [possible], but I don’t think they’re on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don’t think we have a mechanism,” Mrs. Clinton said.

Monday’s interview is the latest in a whirlwind of appearances the former first lady has given as she promotes her book, “What Happened.” Over the past week, she’s continued to blame Sen. Bernard Sanders and others for her defeat, and she’s also doubled down on her call to end the Electoral College.

Mrs. Clinton won the popular vote last November but lost to Mr. Trump in the decisive Electoral College count.

She told NPR that, in addition to other factors that contributed to her loss, she believes Russian interference played a role. She charged that Mr. Trump knew the Russians were trying to sabotage her campaign, but that it’s unclear if he can be held accountable at this point.

“I think you can raise questions,” Mrs. Clinton said. “He knew they were trying to do whatever they could to discredit me with emails, so there’s obviously a trail there, but I don’t know that in our system we have any means of doing that, but I just wanted to add to the point you made. There’s no doubt they influenced the election: We now know more about how they did that.”