Let Me Address the Absurd Conspiracy Theories About the Clinton/Lynch Airport Meeting

It’s really easy to be a conspiracy theorist. As John Oliver hilariously mocked a few weeks ago, it doesn’t take much skill (or intellect) to concoct a conspiracy or even convince gullible people to believe it. Especially in politics where emotions often run high and seeking out confirmation bias is “all the rage.” So it doesn’t surprise me that the big “story” on Thursday was anti-Clinton people losing their minds over reports that Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch met at an airport in Phoenix, Arizona. Clearly, this get together was orchestrated so that Hillary’s husband and Ms. Lynch could discuss the current FBI probe into the former Secretary’s private sever to coordinate with one another on the best way to “fix” the investigation, so that the presumptive Democratic nominee for president won’t be indicted.



Here’s a “fun fact”: Unless Hillary Clinton is indicted (which most rational people who’ve been following the facts of this situation know is likely not going to happen), anyone who’s anti-Clinton is going to claim that the only reason she wasn’t is because the entire investigation was a sham and the Obama administration is protecting her. It doesn’t matter what the facts actually are, these particular people will never believe that she’s not guilty. 

It’s just like Benghazi. Even though the latest GOP-led “investigation” debunked all the right-wing conspiracies against Clinton, and Ambassador Chris Stevens’ family has said that they don’t blame Hillary and it’s “unjust” to continue to criticize her, many Republicans are still pushing the same debunked lies they have for years. I’ve even seen some on the right now suggesting that Stevens’ family is being paid by Hillary to not speak out against her.

Again, it’s very easy to be a conspiracy theorist.

Now, were the optics of this smart? No. Then again, when you’re not contemplating doing anything unethical, the first thought going through your mind probably isn’t, “Wow, this looks shady.” Usually it’s people looking for an excuse to make a big issue out of something, or to attack someone else, who are the ones blowing things like this non-scheduled “meeting” out of proportion.

That being said, I love the “logic” of those who think Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch meeting in an airport is part of some dastardly plan to keep Hillary Clinton from being indicted.

Yes, because arranging a private meeting in a private room where no one might have known that it ever occurred clearly didn’t make as much sense as meeting up at a public airport where people would almost certainly see them — which means the entire world would instantly know about it.

After all, nobody goes to airports, right? Obviously a public airport is the best (and most private) choice to discuss the illegal fixing of an FBI investigation of a presumptive presidential nominee and former Secretary of State.



Personally, I’m “shocked” that anyone ever found out about this. Clearly Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch went to great lengths to try to keep this face-to-face encounter a secret — by meeting in a public airport where everyone there (most with some sort of camera in their possession) could see them speaking to one another.

Or maybe … just maybe what Lynch said about the meeting was true. That it wasn’t planned, and the two just happened to be at the Phoenix airport as Bill Clinton was set to leave Arizona around the same time Lynch’s plane was landing. After seeing each other, the two discussed golf, grandchildren and former Attorney General Janet Reno.

You have to believe one of two things. Either you:

  • Take Lynch at her word that the meeting wasn’t planned and nothing email or Benghazi related was discussed. – or – 
  • Believe two highly intelligent individuals who you believe are working together on an elaborate scheme to illegally fix an FBI investigation to keep Hillary Clinton from being indicted were dumb enough to set up a planned meeting at a public airport where everyone would see them talking as opposed to holding the meeting in private, where it was possible no one would have known it ever happened.

It’s fairly obvious what I think, but I’ll let everyone decide for themselves which of those two sound more sane, rational and logical.




Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • ja29

    It could be worse. There are people who believe that if a man and a woman are alone in a room, they are having sex.

    • Linda

      Oh that will start circulating, any theory those people can come up with in their sick little minds will always be blurted out. It makes me sick!!!

  • Barb McMahon Boulette

    This article seems totally biased for the Clintons…. I would put nothing past Bill Clinton….my opinion

    • Carol Lynn

      And you seem to be *exactly* the kind of ‘sees conspiracy when people you don’t like do anything‘ nut this article is talking about. Do try for a little perspective.

  • SClayton

    I don’t know this for a fact, but I bet both Pres. Clinton and General Lynch have cell phones and that both their phones work when they’re not close to each other.

    When either one wants to discuss nefarious topics, I bet they use phones.

    • DoILookLikeACatToYouBoy

      No way. At that high of a level you use a trusted proxy or, if it is simply too risky to trust anyone that doesn’t need to be involved, you meet face to face. Most forms of electronic communications are just too vulnerable and it can be very difficult to establish worthwhile secure communications protocols with someone if you don’t have a lot of support and coordination – techniques that might work for drug dealers, such as fake gmail accounts or burn phones, probably will not prove so reliable for the AG and if anyone is under high-level electronic surveillance in the US, it is high-level politicos.

      It is much safer to arrange a face-to-face or proxy meeting, make sure there are no press or crowds with cellphone cameras around, then if it somehow leaks out just try to spin it as Person 1 somehow running into Person 2 on their private plane (conveniently parked 75 meters away from Person 1’s private plane in Phoenix) on a secured, private tarmac at an international airport. At worst you have to deal with negative press and not someone releasing recordings or copies of emails. From a purely logistical viewpoint, discussing nefarious things should almost always be done in person.

  • Edward Krebbs

    Kept the meeting secret by doing do in a public place….. Is that such an absurd idea ?

    After all, Obama hid his birth certificate from the birthers by posting it on the WhiteHouse Website. And you know how the web keeps everything secret ! Many are still propogating on Facebook that he never produced his birth certificate.

  • Chase

    The “Fun Facts” claimed in this piece are just nonsense opinions and brazen spin. Lol…

  • greg nichols

    So let me intervene on the madness. Bill held his plane. It occurred to him that a little Bill Clinton charm with Loretta couldn’t hurt his wife’s case. A classic dumb idea by Bill. Loretta was a little overwhelmed that he wanted to see her, but after talking with aides, she decided it would be okay. Very not smart for the AG to do, but Bill has a way about him. She talked with him. She waited for him to broach something improper, but he never did. Instead, he was his usual charming self, it was a charm offensive. Did he advise her to duck taking responsibility for the indictment, which she later did, but then had to walk back? Maybe, he was feeling fatherly, part of the charm offensive. That’s what happened!