This content, in its online form, is intended for the OIG Hotline only.
All others are asked to exit this post at this time.
This post will be made available for a short time before being removed from this blog.
Lane MacWilliams
**********************************************************************************
Answer: Yes, I have.
2. What is your response to this information?
Answer: I find it disappointing, given that I messaged Dr. Chan the day after I consulted her, on Monday, May 29th, to disclose that I am a whistleblower of FBI malfeasance, and, as a result, she might come under pressure to attest to falsehoods concerning my character.
3. What did you tell her about the falsehoods that FBI personnel typically advance concerning female "targets of interest"?
Answer: I told her that the FBI attempts to discredit women as psychologically unstable and promiscuous in their personal lives.
4. And did Dr. Chan follow your communication by falsely alleging these very things of you yourself?
Answer: That is my understanding.
5. What are your thoughts about her lies in this regard?
Answer: If she did, in fact, extend them, they are indefensible.
6. Do you find that there is a substantive conflict of interest in the fact that Txx Lxxxx is dictating falsehoods from an urgent care physician at the very point when you have identified his participation in serious crimes against your family?
Answer: Yes, the conflicts of interest in the case of Txx Lxxxx are stunning.
But I find it just as remarkable that the FBI would render a "target of interest" ill through intentional exposure to contaminated food and water, and then follow up by demanding lies from the physician consulted in the matter.
7. Do you have concerns that LabCorp could potentially falsify GI lab test results at the behest of a threatening FBI?
Answer: One would like to believe this would not be possible. However, I do have concerns.
8. Why, specifically?
Answer: My idea was to pair LabCorp testing with an at-home test for GI schistosomiasis, which is available within the United States.
9. Is this the test you have been prevented from obtaining?
Answer: Yes, it is.
10. So, do you believe that that obstruction in and of itself may signal an intention to falsify lab results through LabCorp?
Answer: This needs to be considered, yes.
11. Was your husband present with you during your appointment with Dr. Chan on May 28th?
Answer: Yes, fortunately, he was.
12. So, can't the two of you prepare notarized affidavits of your own about that consultation and provide them to the OIG Hotline?
Answer: Yes, but it will take a few days.
13. Do you remember anything odd about your consultation with Dr. Chan?
Answer: It was strange that she feigned a lack of knowledge about the IgG test for IG schistosomiasis. It was odd that she pretended that she was unable to order the test due to technical problems with her computer.
Otherwise, there was one strange topic of conversation she introduced, apropos of nothing.
14. What topic was that?
Answer: She asked whether I had any symptoms of pinworms, a question which I found quite surprising.
15. Why?
Answer: Because she introduced the topic out of the blue, without reference to any justification for her query.
16. How did you answer her?
Answer: I think my exact response was, "No, nothing like that at all."
17. Did she persist with the subject?
Answer: No, she dropped the topic altogether at that point.
18. Why do you think she raised that subject?
Answer: I think Txx Lxxxx instructed her to do so. Dr. Chan was supposed to enter the exam room with a five minute delay, according to her assistant, but instead she took fifty minutes to do so. I think she was on the phone with Txx Lxxxx during the interval.
19. Why would Txx Lxxxx instruct her to bring up this subject?
Answer: Honestly, I have no idea. But I could make a guess that people who have pinworms sometimes have them as a result of exposure through intimate partners.
20. And you believe Txx Lxxxx was sufficiently motivated to intercede with Dr. Chan immediately prior to your appointment with her?
Answer: These things can be determined from phone records, and they should be. I cannot conjecture about Txx Lxxxx' state of mind except to say that he is likely to be highly motivated to discredit me, given that I identified his commission of several serious crimes toward my family over recent days.
As to his state of mind, I'm sure investigators will wish to ascertain that for themselves.
21. Would you like to reiterate for me the number of intimate partners you have had over your lifetime?
Answer: One.
22. Has that number changed over the last thirty-three years of your marriage?
Answer: No, it has not.
23. Did Dr. Chan ask you how many intimate partners you have had?
Answer: No, she did not.
24. Would you like to be able to read Dr. Chan's falsified witness statement about you?
Answer: I most certainly would.
25. She signed a secrecy agreement, so you have no access to that information through FOIA.
Answer: This is the heart of the threat to our democracy posed by the FBI's unconstitutional "target of interest" program. The Constitution states that I should have the right to face my accuser in a court of law. Yet, the FBI's claims that "targets of interest" represent a "national security threat" deprives law-abiding Americans of these Constitutional guarantees.
26. Do far right FBI agents like Txx Lxxxx serve the interests of a foreign adversary?
Answer: The societal harms perpetrated by a lying FBI agent can be profound. As such, the foreign contacts of an FBI agent who has sought to discredit law-abiding American citizens should be closely evaluated.
27. What happens if the agent in question denies all such influences?
Answer: Sometimes, proof of direct communications is available.
28. In the form of the "epidemiological map" you have referenced?
Answer: Quite so.
29. Do you hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct?
Answer: I do.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment