Hillary Clinton’s plausible deniability defense is old

Washington DC has long been the harbinger of scandals and scandal makers. But none so prolific as Hillary and Bill Clinton

DonkeyHotey for Flickr Hillary Clinton - Painting
DonkeyHotey for Flickr Hillary Clinton - Painting

WASHINGTON, Aug. 30, 2015 — Hillary Clinton is often hailed and promoted by the left as the smartest woman in America. A former attorney and Sal Alinsky disciple, this is a woman who is guilty of perpetuating one of the most blazoned of national travesties: ignoring established security protocol on the handling of classified material.

But what she claims, over and over, is plausible deniability, defined as  “the ability for persons (typically senior officials in a formal or informal chain of command) to deny knowledge of or responsibility for any damnable actions committed by others (usually subordinates in an organizational hierarchy) because of a lack of evidence that can confirm their participation, even if they were personally involved in or at least willfully ignorant of the actions.”

This is the woman who is held up as the quintessential icon of the feminist movement and the proud poster girl of the progressive/socialist movement in America.

And yet, she would like for people to believe that the notion of her having any role in a cover-up is absurd, almost laughable.

After all, she is also a former First Lady.

The Clintons: As tainted as the Animas River

The Founding Fathers warned us that our future leaders should be virtuous. Hillary, along with many others who sought the presidency, is the antithesis of virtue.

As head of the State Department, Clinton knew that setting up a separate server, in the privacy of her home, where classified information was bound to find its way, was outside the boundaries of the written law. What is more disturbing about this arrangement is that there was no known or secured chain of custody when it came to what information she received and where and to whom this information went.

Or that she considered this to be something to be concerned about.

And what clearance did her personal attorney have to keep a copy of the files on a flash drive? Does her attorney have a security clearance?

Be mindful that foreign spy agencies are constantly monitoring American signal communications and electronic data traffic of our government agencies and our government leaders.

The question is not whether classified information made its way to Hillary’s server — the woman was secretary of state, and it would be impossible for classified information — marked or not marked — not to have made it to her server.  So the question is not whether classified information was at risk, but to what extent that information was compromised.

The bewilderment of most Americans is Hillary’s weak defense for why she set this up in the first place and why she erased and cleaned her drives, if she had nothing to hide.

Every other day she appears to get caught in a lie, like saying she and her husband corresponded via email while Bill declared that only on two occasions has he ever sent off an email and those two were ceremonial in nature (one to our astronauts in space).

With unbounded arrogance, during a recent interview Hillary attempted to laugh away her situation. What cover-up, she asked? The only persons that seemed concerned are those annoying media types.

This is what we are expected to believe, and rally around, as if Hillary has been wronged by dubious forces out to get her.

Who is she fooling with her plausible deniability defense?

Barack Obama’s phony issues to cover up those ‘phony’ scandals

Sadly, this country has a heritage rich in cover-ups and political blackmail, which Mrs. Clinton should be quite familiar with.

Has she not heard of Joseph Alon and John P. Wheeler, both Washington insiders, who were murdered, their mysterious deaths covered up?

Has she ever heard of Watergate, which brought down an American president, the only president ever to resign from public office?

Other infamous Washington cover-ups include the Bobby Baker scandal, which Bobby F. Kennedy and John F. Kennedy had hoped to use to get rid of then Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Once he assumed the presidency, after Kennedy’s death, he quickly moved to quash the investigation that would have been his downfall.

President Kennedy, whose legacy was left intact by his assassination, was in serious political trouble, as well. There is little doubt that the fallen president was facing a major scandal that would have killed his re-election bid had he lived. That scandal involved his extramarital affairs, some of the women having close ties to foreign leaders who were our adversaries.

But one affair in particular gave both JFK and his brother Bobby, the attorney general, something to be worried about. It involved a 19-year-old girl named Mariella Novotny, from England, who wound up going to New York as a prostitute, where she was discreetly introduced to the president-elect by his brother-in-law, Hollywood movie star Peter Lawford.

During JFK’s short term as president, articles began to appear in prominent newspapers about a high-ranking official in the executive branch who was allegedly involved in a scandal so large it promised to rock, not only Washington, but also the entire world, once revealed.

Anyone living inside the beltway understood the unnamed man in the article was JFK himself, who, through his sexual escapades, was linked directly to the notorious Profumo sex and spy scandal that brought the British government to the brink of collapse.

Names were going to be named, secret trysts were going to be revealed and JFK’s name was prominent in this. Had the facts come out surrounding his affairs with numerous women, some suspected of being foreign spies, all of this would have surfaced too. His death stopped the information from being revealed and revived the cover-up for all time.

Washington is plagued with cover-ups and political blackmail, and Hillary Clinton is no more credible or removed from them, than any other powerful person who wielded power and influence in Washington. And most of them would do almost anything to protect themselves, their family name and their public image.

Even our government agencies are guilty of cover-ups, as in the recent IRS scandal and the Justice Department’s involvement in the gun-running “Fast & Furious” scandal.

Jackie Kennedy believed Lyndon Johnson killed JFK

More nefarious is that the final shot that caused JFK’s head to explode in Dallas may have been delivered, accidentally, by a Secret Service agent riding shotgun in the backup car when he was forced backwards and down after the car sped forward seconds after the initial shots were fired.

This would explain the Secret Service’s unwavering and adamant insistence on immediately returning the president’s body to Washington after the assassination when by law, Texas had absolute jurisdiction in all homicides committed in the state.

Many in the forensic community believe that, had JFK’s body remained in Texas, the truth would have been exposed about the agent’s involvement. After all, the Secret Service’s job is to protect the president, not kill him.

Closer to Hillary’s home, lest we forget, is the possibility of a Vince Foster cover-up and the more recent Benghazi cover-up.

And now there are those emails….thousands of them. Why would we ever think that any of them would be classified in nature? Why would we not take her word at face value that this outrage is nothing more than a right wing conspiracy to “get” Hillary?

How silly the thought.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.