There’s so much evidence that Google was in the tank for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 elections that it’s hard to keep up with it all. As time goes on, the evidence begins to look even worse as researchers who are provenly pro-Clinton even begin to turn against her over it.

On Monday, Trump tweeted about a report that shows Google manipulated 2.6 million to 16 million votes in favor of Clinton during the election, making his victory over her even bigger. He also suggested she should be sued.

Wow, Report Just Out! Google manipulated from 2.6 million to 16 million votes for Hillary Clinton in 2016 Election! This was put out by a Clinton supporter, not a Trump Supporter! Google should be sued. My victory was even bigger than thought! @JudicialWatch

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 19, 2019

Clinton fired back by claiming that study had been “debunked.”

“The debunked study you’re referring to was based on 21 undecided voters. For context that’s about half the number of people associated with your campaign who have been indicted,” tweeted Clinton.

The debunked study you’re referring to was based on 21 undecided voters. For context that’s about half the number of people associated with your campaign who have been indicted. https://t.co/0zHnWvGjSv

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) August 19, 2019

Enter the study’s author and “strong” pro-Clinton supporter, psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein, who wasn’t exactly keen on Clinton telling the world that his study is illegitimate.

Epstein began his own Twitter response by correcting Trump’s assertion that the study said Google was intentionally manipulating search results, but then turned his sights toward Clinton, saying it hurts him to do it but Clinton should be ashamed of herself.

Epstein noted that Clinton relied on Google for “money & votes” with the largest donor being Alphabet/Google. He also noted that people associated with Google offered to run her tech campaign and even created companies for the sole purpose of putting Clinton in office. What’s more, nearly all Google employees at the time donated to Clinton’s campaign.

Now, switching to Hillary Clinton: This is going to hurt me to write, because I & my whole extended family have been strong supporters of the Clintons for decades. I have a framed, signed letter from Bill on the wall near my desk. But Hillary should be ashamed of herself.

Hillary has long depended on Google for both money & votes. Her largest donor in 2016 was Alphabet/Google. Her Chief Technology Officer during the campaign was Stephanie Hannon, a former Google exec. And then there’s Eric Schmidt, longtime head of Google …

A leaked email showed that in 2014 Google’s Eric Schmidt offered to run Hillary’s tech campaign (see pic). In 2015, Schmidt in fact funded The Groundwork, a highly secretive tech company, the sole purpose of which was to put Clinton into office.

About 96% of 2016 campaign donations from Google employees went to Hillary. And Elan Kriegel, Hillary’s Chief Analytics Officer, credits his 2012 tech team, informally supervised by Eric Schmidt, for half of Obama’s win margin: nearly 2.5 million votes.

Now, switching to .@HillaryClinton: This is going to hurt me to write, because I & my whole extended family have been strong supporters of the Clintons for decades. I have a framed, signed letter from #Bill on the wall near my desk. But #Hillary should be ashamed of herself. pic.twitter.com/FKyLiKonyw

— Dr. Robert Epstein (@DrREpstein) August 20, 2019

#Hillary has long depended on #Google for both money & votes. Her largest donor in 2016 was Alphabet/Google. Her Chief Technology Officer during the campaign was Stephanie Hannon, a former Google exec. And then there's #EricSchmidt, longtime head of Google – the guy in the pic: pic.twitter.com/dSV8wOPwAH

— Dr. Robert Epstein (@DrREpstein) August 20, 2019

A leaked email showed that in 2014 #Google's #EricSchmidt offered to run #Hillary's tech campaign (see pic). In 2015, Schmidt in fact funded The Groundwork, a highly secretive tech company, the sole purpose of which was to put Clinton into office. https://t.co/rXMNH9bLYV pic.twitter.com/MRjGpCJcvr

— Dr. Robert Epstein (@DrREpstein) August 20, 2019

About 96% of 2016 campaign donations from #Google employees went to #Hillary. And #ElanKriegel, Hillary's Chief Analytics Officer, credits his 2012 tech team, informally supervised by #EricSchmidt, for half of Obama's win margin: nearly 2.5 million votes. https://t.co/vEaufq3M11 pic.twitter.com/tSI05RS3uu

— Dr. Robert Epstein (@DrREpstein) August 20, 2019

After all these blows to Clinton, Epstein’s finisher came in the form of asking Clinton why his work is being quoted by prestigious venues across the globe if it’s been so debunked.

#Hillary: If my work has been "debunked," why was it included in a volume just published by #Oxford U.? Why have I been invited to speak about it at prestigious venues worldwide: #Stanford U., #Yale Law School (where both you & Bill went), even our #Senate (where you served)? pic.twitter.com/rmMeB1oJn3

— Dr. Robert Epstein (@DrREpstein) August 20, 2019

Somebody get Clinton a rag to wipe all that egg off her face.

Stories consistently emerged even before the elections that there were clues to Google rigging results in favor of Clinton, beginning with a video that went viral that showed Google’s search results offering positive results about Clinton, even when negative things were typed in.

There were also stories behind the scenes with suggested claims from YouTube personality Phillip DeFranco that he wasn’t included in that year’s YouTube rewind after refusing to make a pro-Clinton video via his channel for Google.