the united states military maintains a large number of contingency plans. they have like a whole unit of game theorists and propaganda experts working together to devise strategies to react to any conceivable scenario. for example, they had a contingency plan to launch an invasion of montreal should quebec vote to separate. clinton actually had the jets on stand-by.
what if there's a contingency plan to stop hillary clinton, and even bill is acting on it?
the e-mail thing just seems so orchestrated. it's centralized. scripted. this is a show trial. but, what is orchestrating it?
hillary's tenure at the state department was apparently rough on an interpersonal level, many times over. worse, she seems to be for sale to foreign interests through her foundation connections. if the system has self-disciplining algorithms - error-correction - then it would just be doing it's job in picking this up. maybe. this is a half-baked idea, remember.
i don't know the plot line of this tale, but it seems like it's going to be narrated for us. i just find the idea of the deep state reacting to a presidential candidate on national security grounds to be intriguing. great theatre, at least.
-
see, i think there's recent precedent for this, too - although, now i'm stacking baked ideas on top of each other, so extreme caveat lector.
i think that this is basically what happened in russia around the ukrainian issue. western-backed factions in ukraine were calculated as such an existential threat that they launched the deep state into a security operation, and the military has taken over.
i don't want to get too far ahead of myself in assigning prescriptions to a scenario i invented out of whole cloth, but perhaps it demonstrates the dangers of allowing intelligence agencies control over any kind of state machinery. democracy becomes an impossible illusion, as flawed as the (coerced) choices may be. even the facade is a distraction for the naive.