Ever the victim, poor Hillary Clinton still needs someone to blame for losing to Donald Trump in the 2016 election. And her designated villain, since way back in October, is former FBI Director James Comey because he sent a letter to Congress saying he was reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private server due to new emails “pertinent to the investigation” that may have been discovered.

Hillary has been blaming Comey’s letter ever since the returns started rolling in a month later. In fact, she’s apparently even had a friend write a book about it called (just in case there was any confusion about who’s to blame), “The Unmaking of the President 2016: How FBI Director James Comey Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency.”

Well that just gets straight to the point. The author is an old friend of Hillary’s from their time together at Yale, Lanny Davis. And Hillary made an appearance Monday at an event in Washington, DC to promote the book.

“The most important thing I can say about you, Hillary, is that this book is because going back to law school, I remember your focus on the word ‘facts,’” Davis told the crowd gathered at the Georgetown home of former U.S. Ambassador to Portugal Elizabeth Frawley Bagley.

Calling Clinton a “wonderful friend,” Davis said, “As a candidate, she knows the difference between truth and alternative facts. So this book is about indisputable evidence — I will leave the conclusions, the rhetoric and the argument to others.”

“James Comey impaired the electoral process,” Davis, a contributor to The Hill, said.

In the days before the 2016 election, then-FBI Director Comey notified Congress that the FBI had uncovered additional emails potentially related to the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State. Comey disclosed a week later that the batch of emails contained no new info.

So now it’s Comey that impaired the election process and not the Russians? Is that because Mueller’s collusion investigation is turning into something of a dud? And anyway, what does it matter now? Except, of course, that Comey’s in hot water with the Trump administration over his role in the Carter Page/Steele Dossier FISA warrant mess so why not capitalize on that and try to salvage a little of the Clinton name, I guess. He’s an easier mark now than back in November when he still had some credibility.

According to reporters who were in the room, Hillary made no remarks — even when one questioner asked if it was still possible to install her in the Oval Office — but that her decision to attend spoke volumes about what she thinks cost her the election.

While it’s a pretty fascinating wrinkle in the unbelievable drama of the 2016 election that Comey reopened the email investigation and then closed it again shortly thereafter, it’s a bit odd that the lady would hold such animus toward her former buddy Comey. Remember, he chose not to indict her even though he acknowledged there was likely enough evidence to do so.

And Comey’s decision to write the letter at all was certainly a befuddling one (was there some reason he needed to put distance between himself and the Hillary campaign? Because that is effectively what he did).

But Comey as the bad guy in Hillary’s myth about why she lost to Donald Trump doesn’t hold as much water as her decision not to make campaign visits to rust belt states; nor does it carry as much weight as the decision by whomever had the Billy Bush tape (was that the Clinton camp, too?) to make that sucker public. My personal assessment is following the release of the Access Hollywood tape, Donald Trump got serious about beating Hillary Clinton. He told America that she had a lot of hate in her heart. The worm had effectively turned.

But keep blaming Comey, ma’am, if it eases your mind that America would rather have had Donald Trump in the venerated White House than you. Maybe, now that you’re both civilians again, you can meet over coffee and discuss it.