BY ALEXIA JAMES

Hillary Clinton showing up during a UK General Election campaign used to be significant. Not anymore. Nowadays she’s as relevant as King Herod’s first wife, Doris.

Did you know that Hillary Clinton’s speaking fees have plummeted? According to Newsweek, after she left her job as secretary of state but before she declared her 2016 candidacy, Hillary Clinton used to make $200,000 per speech. In 2014, she spoke at eight different universities and banked $1.8 million. No longer:

 “The head of one prominent public speakers’ agency, who didn’t want to be quoted on the record, says Hillary’s fees have come down sharply—particularly after a couple of post-2016 university speaking engagements (for which she was paid up to $300,000) sparked a fierce backlash. Since then, her fees have been as low as $25,000 or $50,000 per event.”

So with time on her hands, and wanting to publicise some book, Hillary pops up out of nowhere to meddle in our election. (Irony, alas, is not something our American friends seem to get). It is “inexplicable and shameful” that the UK government has not yet published a report on alleged Russian interference in British politics, Hillary Clinton told the BBC yesterday. “Every person who votes in this country deserves to see that report before your election happens.” So, how is that not foreign meddling in the UK election? What on earth has a British report got to do with her – an American?

In the UK, Hillary Clinton is increasingly a nobody. She’s the wife of #MeToo Bill and her notoriety – for want of a better verb – trumps her fame. Her failure to win the White House against Trump is as nothing compared to the dark rumours about the Clinton Foundation, a chain of murders linked to Clinton enemies and associates, and about far worse, which I am not permitted to write about here.

Ah, it’s the Russians! It has to be the Russians! Hillary must perpetuate this myth about the Russians to avoid being called a loser. After all why else would this winner lose against Trump in the US elections? There must have been Russian interference, right? Just as for Carole Cadwalladr the Russians delivered Brexit. So the tinfoilers on the Left and other losers of recent public votes seem to have a monopoly on Russian-moulded reality. Their last resort is always the Russians – just ask Dominic Grieve or Christopher Steele.

Sure enough, Hillary Clinton is still banging on about the Russians back in the US. Again, Newsweek referring to a speaker event Hillary attended recently:

“Hillary Clinton alluded, as she did at several of these evening “conversations,” to the election being “stolen” from her—a reference to Russian interference. The audience applauds enthusiastically. Both Clintons nod. Most of their speaker program is legacy-burnishing: how smart they were; how they wanted to unite not divide; how they grew the economy for everyone, not just the rich. They riff about how they ended the war in Bosnia in the 1990s. “Bill, this is boring!” a heckler yelled at the New York event before being hustled out of the Beacon Theatre.”

Exasperating.

It’s strange that Hillary continues to feel compelled to be in the public eye, to make herself heard. The Clintons’ recent tour was by all reports an utter disaster. There were huge numbers of empty seats and large sections of the arena cordoned off by curtains. Ticket sales were slow, and the promoters had to cut prices in half.

Keep out of our election, Hillary. You’re not welcome here. Halloween was a fortnight ago.