|Insight into Bill Clinton's meeting with Loretta Lynch?|
The question is answered and it appears, on the surface, to be a straight forward lie.
Let's look more deeply at the response.
Here the wording is changed, and the dependent word, "else" is removed.
A. "The same time the public learned of it" was also not said. Here is an even clearer way of answering the question.
Remember: the simplest answers are often the most reliable.
A. "I learned about it through media."
This one would, psychologically, put the subject, himself, into the sentence with the pronoun "I", increasing the strength or commitment to the sentence.
It is not what he said.
"The same time everybody else learned it through the news reports."
Although some may say that the President of the United States only learning this through the media without media first telling him strains credibility of which I reply: this is statement analysis and we look for a reason for the opinion of deception. For our reports, and for prosecution, we must be able to clearly articulate why we have concluded deception.
The word "else" is a dependent word. It is unnecessarily added, meaning it violated the law of economy, took extra effort, leading us to know that it is very important to the subject. Effort equals sensitivity. The brain told the tongue to add this word to the sentence, and where to put it in the sentence, in less than a micro second in time.
This rapid processing means:
The subject did not stop, pause and ask himself, "Should I answer with the word "else", or should I just say it without the word "else"?
Here the disruption of the editing process would have been severe, instead, we have a signal of proficiency within the answer. This is a strong signal that the subject is well accomplished and life long in deception.
Not only did the subject not use the pronoun "I", which would have placed himself within the answer, but we know his baseline is to use an overabundance of the pronoun "I" in most every speech given, from funeral speeches that were intended to be about someone other than himself, to any announcement in which success is claimed. Some journalists have learned to literally count the number times he uses the pronouns "I", "me" and "my" in speeches, suggesting self-aggrandizement and narcissism.
Note: "else" is a dependent word that is not necessary to use here. It is why we consider this 'coming close to an admission' of knowledge. "Else" only works when it shows dependence upon a person who is being separated from "everybody" (that is, all) in his sentence.
The question was, "When did you learn...?" in March of 2015.
Analysis Conclusion: Deception Indicated
Most people are uncomfortable with a direct lie, and here we see that he removed 'self' from the sentence by avoiding using the pronoun "I", yet he still, unwittingly, identified himself, as one separate and distinct, unnecessarily, from "everyone else."
"Else" refers to himself, and although those who felt that it was not credible were correct, we seek to, within language, find the source of the deception. This becomes vital in not only seeking justice, but in a case like this, gives insight into personality and experience in deception.
Mothers of a 8 year olds who come home from school with a touch of trouble recognize this dependent word.
Most people are afraid of lying to authority. It is, therefore, concerning when one is bold enough to lie to a police officer.
What about someone who lies to two or more police officers? In early Casey Anthony analysis, she showed fearlessness in the event of lying to several police officers, telling them that she worked at a specific company in which she did not.
They drove her to the company.
Think about this car ride and why she allowed this to continue.
She actually allowed them to do so, without interrupting them and saying, "No, don't bother. I lied. I don't work there."
She then got out of the car and walked to the building with them.
She could have stopped this at any point and admitted the inevitable: they will see that she does not work there.
Why did she do it?
This was a very strong indicator of a sociopathic liar; one who lies so often that she lies even when there is no cause to lie. She lies as she breathes and has become so successful in her lies, that her confidence told her "I'll think of something..." as time elapsed.
Most people would fear lying to a single police officer.
What about lying to the FBI? This is now to lie to a federal agent.
Think of the confidence in one's own ability to deceive to be willing to lie, with the consequences well known, to a federal agent.
Now think of one who has the confidence in his own abilities to lie to Congress, under oath to God.
Lastly, think of one who has the utter blind confidence in his or her own ability to deceive and "put one over" (the element of contempt) to...
an audience of 300 million Americans.
Liars hold the world in contempt.
They believe the world at large is beneath them, and without the capabilities to discern their words and catch their lies.
Where one quickly folds and admits lying to a teacher, or a mother, or someone in authority, we should take note of what a tender conscience looks like.
When another has no fear of being exposed, we are looking at an entirely different display of human nature within personality traits and the language will reveal itself.
"I will not allow anyone to impugn my record, just because I misspoke a few words..."
Richard Blumenthal revealed himself as 'god-like' with his ability to control others, outside himself, by refusing them the ability to impugn his record.
He had talked about what it was like for him, as a young man, when he was in Viet Nam, to a group of Viet Nam vets.
He had never stepped foot in the country of Viet Nam, nor any country near Viet Nam, nor any country that resembled Viet Nam. He had not left the United States.
What is missed in this is right within his language when he introduced the word "record."
As a prosecutor, his "record" (note he calls it "my record") of successful prosecutions entered his language while talking about lying, which he minimized by using the word "mistruths" (signaling inability or refusal to take personal responsibility).
He was concerned about his professional record under the topic of lying.
How many convictions did he obtain using deception?
We will never know.
We do know this, however:
The people of Connecticut read his "apology" (as media reported it) and elected him to office.