Update: Fax documentation has been added to the end of this post.
OIG Hotline investigators, I recognize that it is important that you have tangible evidence of an individual's honesty or lack thereof prior to delving further into a given matter. You have many initiatives on your plate, and it is important that you not be unnecessarily distracted from them.
Given these facts, I would like to share with you a few excepts of email communications with Jay Gans over recent weeks.
It is important for me to state that I believe Mr. Gans to be a fundamentally good person whose dishonest actions in this particular matter are being compelled by others.
The pattern of the dishonesty demonstrated by Mr. Gans is interesting, in that it fits a pattern of "I never said that" denials that seem to be characteristic of FBI protocol within the agency's attempts to discredit the psychological stability of "targets of interest." Some psychologists use the term "gaslighting" to describe these denials and reversals on the part of perpetrators. The objective is often simply to frustrate a "target," although, as in this case, there can be materially damaging objectives driving this type of behavior.
In this particular situation, my insurance company MPIUA has required that I install handrails on a set of railroad tie landscaping steps on my family's Cape Cod property. MPIUA representatives have given me conflicting information about the requirements for the installation.
If the installation of handrails does not meet MA state building code by early March 2023, when MPIUA requires completion, my home insurance policy could be cancelled. Because FBI affiliates have sent me myriad threats of arson, flooding, and vandalism/theft at this property, serious damage to the home, accompanied by a cancelled home insurance policy, could force property divestment.
Mr. Gans' deceptions, taken by themselves, may not seem particularly damaging. But in the aggregate, they can result in the loss of my home.
Here is an example of Mr. Gans' dishonesty in writing, regarding the question of whether contractors' quotes include one or two handrails:
Email sent to : jaygans@juno.com. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com. Date: October 30, 2022 at 10:22 PM 11:51
(excerpted)
Thank you, Jay. Please let me look at the side-by-side estimates (Justin Sawyer and New England Home Improvement) tomorrow. I will circle back to you with any questions.
******************************
Email sent to: jaygans@juno.com. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com. Date: October 31, 2022 at 11:51 AM
(excerpted)
Jay, is this for two handrails? It seems as though the insurance company may have misled me on the question of whether one or two handrails are required.
*******************************
Email sent to: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com. From: jaygans@juno.com. Date: November 1, 2022 at 4:13 AM
Morning..... Yes both quotes are for Two hand rails... installed to the correct code requirements....both licensed and insured contractors.
*********************************
Email sent to: jaygans@juno.com. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com. Date: November 12, 2022 at 2:19 PM
(excerpted)
Please have the job quoted with two handrails.
*********************************
Email sent to: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com. To: jaygans@juno.com. Date: November 12, 2022 at 5:16 AM
(excerpted)
I asked you at the beginning of the project if we needed hand rails on both sides of the stairs, you checked with the insurance company and told me "we only needed handrails on One Side (sic) of the stairs. (end quotes missing)
So I was asking from the beginning to call me to discuss your requirements, you chose not to call me...
**********************************************************************************
Commentary: Jay Gans has been lying about many aspects of this project, in my opinion. The above email exchange demonstrates one such deception.
But again, it is important to recognize that, without external influences, Mr. Gans generally conducts himself as an honest and forthright person, in my view.
His prevarication on the matter of the handrails is a reflection of direct instruction from his FBI handler, whose presence I understand he is now denying.
Given that I am three thousand miles away, it is fairly easy for Mr. Gans to create obstacles to my attempt to fulfill my insurance company's requirements.
It would appear that MPIUA is signatory to Infragard, unfortunately, as are the specific contractors involved: Justin Sawyer, New England Home Improvement, and Phoenix Landscaping and Construction.
When all of them begin extending lies and disinformation, a "target of interest" is simply blocked from progressing in any meaningful capacity in the quest for home insurance compliance.
I would just like to reiterate my belief that all human interactions are based on a fundamental presumption of trust and goodwill. Whether we're buying a cup of coffee or waving to a neighbor on the sidewalk, we all depend upon the humanity of the person with whom we're interacting. We assume we are not being deceived or misled.
The FBI attempts to destroy this necessary presumption of goodwill for those it wrongfully designates as "targets of interest."
I restate the obvious in observing that the FBI's predations toward "targets of interest" in no manner contribute to our national security interests. Quite the opposite. They undermine the bonds of human fellowship within our families, our neighborhoods and our nation in order to better establish a form of totalitarian control that stands in direct defiance of the Constitution.
If a "target of interest" becomes a whistleblower, as I have, it would appear that the FBI's predations are accelerated. Within that process, there appears to be a concerted attempt to coerce "witnesses" into falsely alleging that "targets of interest" are unstable, unbalanced or unreliable testifiers to the truth.
I have been told that Mr. Jay Gans has attested to these falsehoods himself, alongside denying his communications with his FBI handler.
I simply think that, in order for our democracy to be defended, the problem of the FBI's predations needs to be fully illuminated.
People like Mr. Jay Gans need to be free to convey the truth to investigators when asked to do so.
Perhaps investigators can persuade Mr. Gans to engage in full disclosure in this matter, as is his lawful responsibility.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct,
I hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment