In Monday night’s debate, a funny thing happened amid the tag-team effort by Hillary Clinton and debate moderator Lester Holt to paint Donald Trump as a racist: Hillary revealed she believes the entire nation is biased.

“Last week you said that we have to do everything possible to improve policing to go right at implicit bias. Do you believe police are implicitly biased against black people?” Holt asked.

“Lester, I think implicit bias is a problem for everyone,” Clinton answered. “Not just police. I think unfortunately too many of us in our great country, um, jump to conclusions about each other. And therefore I think we need all of us to be asking ourselves hard questions about, you know, why am I feeling this way.”

Jump to conclusions? What could be a greater leap than the assumption everyone in America is implicitly biased? And since Clinton used the word, one is left to ponder to which definition of “implicit” she referred. The first definition of implicit is “capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed,” or “involved in the nature or essence of something though not revealed, expressed, or developed.”

In that sounds somewhat familiar it’s because the American Left has taken it upon itself to define a plethora of terms as racist. An unintentionally hilarious 2014 column by Thomas L. Scott entitled, “The N-Word, Updated: 6 Code Words or Terms That Often Mean the Same Thing,” reveals just how far leftists are willing to go along the same route Hillary traveled Monday evening.

The six new N-Words? Thug, which “doesn’t disguise the negative association with Black people;” Urban/Inner City, a term used when “people are uncomfortable talking about Black people or where they live”; States’ Rights, a “racially coded” term used during the Civil Rights Movement “to try and capitalize on the racial anxiety during that time”; Welfare and Food Stamps, a “stigma” first employed by LBJ who “wanted welfare to include a racial component,” so as to make it possible to “associate welfare with helping minorities”; Law and Order, which is the “need to control blacks”; and last but not least Cut Taxes, which is “racial code for not using tax payer money to help Black and brown people.”

Thomas is hardly an outlier. During the 2012 Republican convention, MSNBC host Chris Matthews noted the word “Chicago” sends a message that Barack Obama is “helping the poor people in the bad neighborhoods, screwing us in the ‘burbs.” He also jumped on the “law and order” bandwagon this year, stating the phrase “carries a racial tone to it.” Former MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry topped Matthews — twice. In 2013 she insisted the N-word and ObamaCare are interchangeable terms. Two years later it was the idea that one had to be careful when describing someone as a “hard worker” because it demeaned the effort put forth by slaves.

No doubt Clinton buys into much or all of this code-speak, if for no other reason than it accomplishes what the American Left wants most from expanding the field of so-called racist verbiage: the silent acquiescence of those who disagree with this contemptible nonsense.

Yet earlier this year, at the NAACP Convention in Cincinnati, Clinton undercut her own assertion when she stated that white Americans “need to do a better job of listening when African-Americans talk about the seen and unseen barriers” they face, and that whites must also recognize “our privilege.”

That statement reveals Clinton’s implicit bias, as in the color of one’s skin — irrespective of countless other socio-economic factors — determines whether one is to be seen as a victim, or a person of privilege. Moreover, someone should ask Clinton why it is the exclusive obligation of white Americans to listen to black American grievances, absent reciprocity.

Those who know how this game is played already know the answer: For the American Left, the nation’s Legacy of Slavery grants every black American some sort of dispensation — while saddling every white American with collective guilt. No less than the UN just certified this view.

This contemptible double-standard allows many leftists to assert that black Americans cannot be racist because they don’t control the levers of power, and whites cannot be non-racist because they do. Hence, the burgeoning popularity of the “white privilege” phenomenon infesting college campuses, and the rise of a Black Lives Matter movement that is simultaneously segregationist-based and, as the latest riots in Charlotte indicate, willing to add policemen of all ethnicities to the roster of those who must be held in contempt for their “privilege.”

Such machinations can only be enabled by revisionist history that ignores the reality every country, culture and ethnicity in the world engaged in the buying and selling of slaves, and the reality that America was one of the first nations on earth to end the practice. Yet if collective guilt must be assigned, a Democrat Party who established the Ku Klux Klan and whose “Dixiecrat” element fostered Jim Crow segregation through the 1960s, would be a good place to start.

As for Clinton, how many Americans know she referred to the late Democrat Senator — and former KKK recruiter — Robert Byrd as her “friend and mentor” at his funeral? Or that husband Bill Clinton also used to the word “mentor” to describe his relationship with J. William Fulbright, a segregationist who signed the “Southern Manifesto” in 1956 opposing the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and joined Byrd and other Democrats in their 83 day filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

There’s nothing remotely implicit about that.

Which brings us to the second definition of the word, as in “being without doubt or reserve.” There is no doubt whatsoever regarding how Clinton feels about millions of Trump supporters. “To just be grossly generalistic, you can put half of Trump supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables,” Clinton said at a Sept. 10 fundraiser — to an appreciative crowd, no less. “Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it,” she added.

That statement was followed not only by Leftmedia affirmation, but columnists such as Washington Post attack dog Dana Milbank insisting Clinton “might have low-balled the number.” Clinton subsequently “apologized,” characterizing her statement “grossly generalistic,” but ambiguously adding that she shouldn’t have said “half.”

But the assertion that every American is afflicted with implicit bias is not? And implicit bias — according to whom?

Americans saw many things on the debate stage Monday night. But unless they were comatose they saw an elitist politician once again advance the increasingly shopworn progressive agenda that presumes Americans are fundamentally flawed people who can only be “healed” by a coalition of self-aggrandizing leftist elites, black American racial arsonists stoking anger and resentment in their own communities, and an arrogant and condescending mainstream media, all whom believe they are the sole arbiters of “proper” thinking.

A quote by former “Calvin and Hobbes” cartoonist Bill Watterson aptly illuminates the motives of such people. “There’s no problem so awful, that you can’t add some guilt to it and make it even worse.”

Manufacturing guilt has been the American Left’s stock in trade for decades. Here’s hoping decent Americans — on both sides of the color line — have had enough of it.