{"id":4999,"date":"2020-01-21T14:24:25","date_gmt":"2020-01-21T18:24:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=4999"},"modified":"2020-01-21T14:24:25","modified_gmt":"2020-01-21T18:24:25","slug":"plausible-deniability-the-real-name-of-comey-lynch-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=4999","title":{"rendered":"PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY: The Real Name of Comey-Lynch Game"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0<\/span>The Comey-Lynch\u00a0 <\/span>Plausible Denial Game<\/h1>\n

by Renee Parsons<\/p>\n

As the structure and form of institutions continue to breakdown offering new perspectives and unexpected revelations, it is fitting that former FBI Director James Comey continues to be scrutinized regarding his behavior on multiple aspects of the HRC email scandal, Russiagate and other adjacent activities<\/p>\n

Still under a dark cloud is the lack of a satisfactory explanation for Comey\u2019s unprecedented decision to usurp the announcement (away from AG Loretta Lynch)\u00a0 <\/span>that HRC would not be\u00a0 <\/span>prosecuted for her mishandling of classified material as Secretary of State. Related to that decision, the DOJ is currently reported to be\u00a0 <\/span>investigating whether Comey, who has a history of leaking \u2018sensitive\u2019 data, also leaked a classified Russian intel document to reporters in 2017.<\/p>\n

To better understand the depth of Comey\u2019s malfeasance, it is worth nothing that the IG Report \u201dInvestigation <\/i><\/span>of Former<\/i><\/span><\/a><\/span> Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey’s Disclosure of Sensitive Investigative Information and Handling of Certain Memoranda<\/i>\u201d of August 2019 determined that Comey willfully violated FBI rules and policies and was in violation of his Employment Agreement as he leaked \u2019sensitive\u2019 information including his personal communications with President Trump. The Report concluded that<\/p>\n

\u201cF<\/i>ormer Director Comey failed to live up to this responsibility<\/i><\/span>. By not safeguarding sensitive information obtained during the course of his FBI employment, and by <\/i>using it to create public pressure for official action, Comey <\/i>set a dangerous example.<\/i><\/span>.<\/i>.\u201d \u00a0 <\/span>and<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have previously faulted Comey for acting unilaterally and inconsistent with Department policy. Comey\u2019s unauthorized disclosure of sensitive law enforcement information about the Flynn investigation merits similar criticism<\/i><\/span>.<\/i>\u201d<\/p>\n

The Report\u2019s conclusions were forwarded to the DOJ which declined to prosecute Comey.<\/p>\n

Fast forward to the current DOJ investigation which again questions Comey\u2019s penchant for the disclosure of \u201csensitive\u201d information while opening a Pandora Box of unexpected proportions.<\/p>\n

According to the Washington Post, in 2016, the Dutch secret services obtained a Russian intel document <\/span><\/a>which contained a copy of an email in which then-DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz assured Leonard Bernardo of the Soros Open Society Foundation that Attorney General Loretta Lynch would not prosecute HRC for use of her personal server for classified government documents. In the email, DWS also informed Benardo that Amanda Renteria, Clinton\u2019s National Political Director, had spoken with Lynch who offered further assurance that the FBI investigation \u201cwould not go too far.\u201d<\/p>\n

While the document was forwarded to the FBI, it was dismissed as an unreliable Russian propaganda effort to influence the outcome of the HRC investigation.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nAs the FBI claimed the Russian document had no \u2018investigative value,\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>the Washington Post found that<\/p>\n

\u201c<\/span>Comey\u2019s defenders<\/i><\/span> still insist that there is reason to believe the document is legitimate and that it rightly played a major role<\/i><\/span> in the director\u2019s thinking<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Even in denial of its veracity, the document was taken seriously enough for Comey to use its existence as an excuse for making his extraordinary announcement, according to the Washington Post, \u201con his own, without Justice Department involvement<\/i>\u201d or informing the Attorney General <\/span>that he was closing the case and that HRC would not be criminally prosecuted.<\/p>\n

Comey\u2019s announcement came days after Lynch met with Bill Clinton<\/span><\/a> on the tarmac in Phoenix and days before HRC was to be interviewed by the FBI and days before Comey made his shocking announcement.<\/p>\n

June 29th Lynch – Bill Clinton meeting on tarmac in Phoenix;<\/p>\n

July 2nd FBI interview with HRC;<\/p>\n

July 5th Comey announced \u2018no prosecution\u2019<\/p>\n

Existence of the email provided the perfect foil for Lynch to avoid having to make and announce the decision as if it were on her own volition.\u00a0 <\/span>Allegedly, Comey decided to move forward with the announcement which was intended to prove that the no-prosecution decision had been made without any bias or interference. If, so the thinking goes, Lynch had made and announced the decision after her meeting<\/span> with Bill, she would have been accused of corruption or having been compromised and that a deal had been cut in HRCs favor. IG Horowitz found that Comey displayed a \u201ctroubling lack of direct substantive communication with AG Lorretta Lynch.<\/i><\/span>\u201c\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In other words, it was Lynch\u2019s responsibility, as Attorney General, to retain sole authority over a decision of such national significance and be willing take the heat, whatever the outcome.\u00a0 <\/span>One wonders if Lynch ever protested to Comey that, without her approval, he usurped her job<\/span> and made a highly controversial decision that the entire country was watching.\u00a0 <\/span>Where were the women libbers when a man on a lower rung of the totem pole, seized a significant function away from its rightful superior authority which, in this case, was a black female<\/span>.\u00a0 <\/span>In other words, Comey saved Lynch\u2019s butt from charges of corruption by skillfully appropriating the announcement which otherwise would have been problematic for her to defend after having been caught publicly meeting with the defendant\u2019s husband. \u00a0 <\/span>Does anything about this strike you as credible?<\/p>\n

Not surprisingly as the email was dismissed, the Bureau never pursued routine investigative tools that would have been second-nature in any such top-level investigation<\/span>.\u00a0 The FBI, as it dismissed the email as a fake, did not conduct a forensic exam to verify the document\u2019s origin just as the FBI never subpoenaed the DNC server to conduct a forensic exam to determine the source of the WikiLeaks emails. <\/span><\/p>\n

While all the parties involved denied that any of them ever knew each other, the Bureau apparently never confirmed that or pursued obtaining a copy of the email from any of the parties and, most importantly, the Bureau never interviewed any of the parties –<\/span><\/p>\n

In May, 2017, President Trump fired Comey as \u2018no longer able to effectively lead the Bureau.<\/i>\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Here\u2019s one version of how this scam could have played out. It\u2019s called plausible deniability and is used routinely to shield a high level public office from public accountability. it is an old political trick and most of the public remains blind to how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.\u00a0 <\/span><\/span>Here\u2019s how it works: public official #1 is protected from \u2018knowing\u2019 the truth about a certain political reality and since #1 is never informed, they can honestly say\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cI didn\u2019t know\u201d \u201cNo one told me\u201d \u201cWe never talked about it\u201d \u201cit came as a surprise to me.\u201d\u00a0 <\/span>The invocation of plausible deniability is intentionally set up to allow an event to occur and yet allow #1 from \u2018knowing\u2019 the facts thereby being publicly and legally immune from accountability since no hard evidence exists proving that #1 had any foreknowledge of the matter at hand.<\/p>\n

Since The Big Bottom Line was protecting HRC from prosecution and Comey alleged that he had not discussed the matter with Lynch, he did the AG a huge favor and she owes Comey a Big One as does HRC.\u00a0 <\/span>After Comey bit the bullet and saved Lynch from criticism that might have ruined her career, Lynch was free to play the plausible deniability game:\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Golly Gee, since I might be accused of favoritism toward HRC after the meeting with Bill which coincidentally led to a favorable decision for his wife,\u00a0 <\/span>it was best for\u00a0 <\/span>Comey to announce the decision thereby avoiding any claim of bias or favoritism. \u00a0 <\/span>I had no idea the charges against HRC would be dismissed.\u00a0 <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

See how that works?<\/p>\n

To sum up:\u00a0 <\/span>with the FBI blowing off the DWS email as a fraud and without Comey stepping up and bailing out the AG and HRC,\u00a0 <\/span>it would have looked bad, the deal would have been questioned, everyone wondering\u2026but this way, with plausible deniability in play, every one is cool..right?<\/p>\n

Renee Parsons<\/b>\u00a0 <\/span>has been a member of the ACLU\u2019s Florida State Board of Directors and President of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. \u00a0 <\/span>She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist with Friends of the Earth and staff member in the US House of Representatives in Washington, DC. \u00a0 <\/span>She is also a student of the Quantum Field.\u00a0 <\/span>If you are able to support Renee in her efforts to provide a different perspective on current events, you may do so through PayPal at reneedoveparsons@gmail.com<\/a>. \u00a0<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u00a0The Comey-Lynch\u00a0 Plausible Denial Game<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4999","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4999","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4999"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4999\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4999"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4999"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4999"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}